Debunking Milo and Candace’s Anti-LGBTQ+ Myths
Truth, Compassion, and Science Over Dangerous Fearmongering
As a gay activist, I approach the recent interview between far-right commentators Milo Yiannopoulos and Candace Owens titled "Candace x Milo: The Rise of the Gaytriarchy," with a heavy heart but a resolute spirit. Their discussion peddles dangerous assertions about the LGBTQ+ community that demand a point-by-point rebuttal grounded in reason, evidence, and lived experience. While Yiannopoulos and Owens may cloak their rhetoric in intellectual bravado, their claims crumble under scrutiny, revealing a lack of empathy and a distortion of reality.
Yiannopoulos suggested that raising children requires two people of the opposite sex, dismissing the legitimacy of gay parenting. This is not only factually incorrect but also dismissive of the countless thriving families led by same-sex couples. Modern reproductive technologies, adoption, and fostering allow gay couples to build families with the same love and commitment as any other. Studies, like those from the American Psychological Association since 2004, consistently show that children raised by same-sex parents are as well-adjusted as those raised by heterosexuals. Yiannopoulos’s claim that gay parenting and supervision of children leads to child molestation is a baseless smear, debunked decades ago during the 1970s with California’s Proposition 6 (when the state proposed to ban gay teachers in schools), which Harvey Milk fought to defeat. The data is clear: sexual abuse is not tied to parental orientation but to individual pathology, and heterosexual households have their own well-documented issues with abuse. Milo’s invocation of childbirth and marriage as a “holy sacrament” ignored by gay parents is equally hypocritical- straight society has hardly treated marriage or parenting as sacrosanct, with divorce rates hovering around 40-50% in the U.S. and child neglect cases overwhelming social services.
Yiannopoulos and Owens perpetuate the dangerous notion that being gay is a choice, comparing it to alcoholism and suggesting society’s affirmation of innate orientation robs individuals of agency. This is not just misleading- it’s harmful. Decades of research point to biological factors in sexual orientation. For instance, Simon LeVay’s 1991 study found differences in the hypothalamus of gay and straight men, suggesting a neurological basis. Twin studies, like those by Bailey and Pillard in 1991, showed that identical twins are more likely to both be gay than fraternal twins, indicating a genetic component with heritability estimates around 50%. More recently, a 2019 study in “Science” analyzed nearly 500,000 genomes and identified genetic variants associated with same-sex behavior. Many of us in the gay community, myself included, recall feeling attraction as early as age five- long before societal influences could “nurture” such feelings. The idea that it stems from trauma, like an absent father, is a tired trope I can personally attest is false. Conversion therapy, which both seem to implicitly endorse, has been discredited by every major psychological organization, with no credible evidence of “successful” conversions- only stories of trauma and self-harm. Their analogy to alcoholism ignores the lived experiences of those who’ve tried and failed to “change,” often at great personal cost.
Yiannopoulos and Owens dismiss transgender identities as a modern phenomenon, but history tells a different story. Trans and gender-nonconforming people have existed for centuries across cultures- from the Two-Spirit individuals in Indigenous communities to the hijra in South Asia. Christine Jorgensen’s 1952 transition brought global attention to trans experiences, but she was not the first. Ancient texts, like those referencing the galli priests in Rome, show gender diversity is not new. Denying this history erases the resilience of trans communities and fuels narratives that delegitimize their existence.
Milo’s claim that gay people are inherently dishonest because they hide their sexuality is a grotesque misplacement of blame. Any secrecy stems not from personal failing but from societal pressures- homophobia, discrimination, and, in many places, legal persecution. When coming out can cost someone their family, job, or safety, concealment is a survival mechanism, not a character flaw. Blaming individuals for navigating a hostile world is not just unfair- it’s cruel.
Owens and Yiannopoulos assert that hate crimes don’t exist, arguing that all crimes are inherently hateful. This oversimplification ignores the unique harm of bias-motivated violence. Hate crimes, as defined by the FBI, target individuals based on protected characteristics like race, religion, or sexual orientation, with the intent to intimidate entire communities. The 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, killed for being gay, wasn’t just a crime- it was a message to silence and scare the LGBTQ+ community. Recognizing hate crimes allows law enforcement to address this broader impact, allocate resources, and deter future attacks. In 2023, the FBI reported over 11,000 hate crime incidents, with 20% targeting sexual orientation or gender identity. Dismissing these as mere “crimes” erases the systemic prejudice they reflect, undermining justice and prevention efforts.
I find Yiannopoulos and Owens’ lack of compassion jarring and extremely disheatening, especially as they are two people who profess to be committed Catholics. Jesus preached love, empathy, and understanding- values absent from their rhetoric.
Their assertions lack the humility and kindness central to Christian teachings, instead weaponizing faith to exclude and condemn. A truly Christ-like approach would prioritize listening to marginalized voices and extending grace, not judgment.
Milo Yiannopoulos is a broken man, his provocations often masking personal turmoil, as seen in his fluctuating public persona and past controversies. Candace Owens, while charismatic and compelling to some, is deeply flawed on these issues and many others. Their platform amplifies harmful myths, but their influence doesn’t equate to truth.
Simply put: Yiannopoulos and Owens’ interview perpetuates stereotypes and falsehoods that harm the LGBTQ+ community. By grounding our response in science, history, and lived experience, we can dismantle their claims and advocate for a world rooted in truth and compassion. Let’s reject their divisive rhetoric and build a society that honors everyone’s right to love, live, have faith and thrive.