The real story is the massive increase in LGBT identification across the youth. I strongly believe that a large component of this is biological due to hormonal changes.
But regardless, we can't ignore some major cultural shifts. LGBT is an example where you have real LGBT and what seems to be a cultural version of it. People honestly probably not belonging to that group in a lasting way, but joining in regardless.
It's fits a larger pattern of creating a persona with as many victim labels as possible. These labels creating the self-fabricated identity, which are then used to excuse yourself from your own flaws and bring down the "privileged", those with less labels.
This may be fun for a while but the obvious danger is that this self-obsession over identity gets you nowhere in the real world. Nobody gives a crap about these labels nor can you hide behind them.
You should not read this stereotyping the wrong way. I have empathy for minorities, I loathe the cultural version of it where it's worn like fashion or weaponized.
And I do worry about social contagion. A teenager chronically online in the most gullible part of their lives are absolutely affected. A teenager will believe anything you tell them and they'll copy anything other teenagers do.
Teenagers are idiots. Source: once was one.
Endocrine disruptors [0] are widely distributed by humans within our environment, for use directly or indirectly within food & water resource streams, such as:
- Polymers within plastics, used in food, water, and other human-consumed product containers (and other lifestyle commodities, such as clothing, toiletries, etc.). Example: Phthalates [1]
For more examples google "Plastic polymer endocrine disruptors"
- Herbicides. Example: Atrazine [2] (As well as Pesticides and Fungicides)
For more examples google "Herbicide endocrine disruptors", "Pesticide endocrine disruptors", and/or "Fungicide endocrine disruptors" (Many chemicals in each of the three categories are endocrine disruptors)
You can thank the EPA & FDA for being revolving doors for chemical industry lobbyists, for companies such as Bayer (which purchased Monsanto), Syngenta (which produces Atrazine), and Dow Chemical.
[0] "Many chemicals, both natural and man-made, may mimic or interfere with the body’s hormones, known as the endocrine system. Called endocrine disruptors, these chemicals are linked with developmental, reproductive, brain, immune, and other problems."
National Institute of Health Environmental Services. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/ind...
[1] "Some types of phthalates have affected the reproductive system in animals. Human health effects from exposure to low levels of phthalates are not as clear. More research is needed to assess the human health effects of exposure to phthalates." "CDC researchers found measurable levels of many phthalate metabolites in the general population. This finding indicates that phthalate exposure is widespread in the U.S. population."
CDC. National Biomonitoring Program. https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html
[2] "Atrazine induces complete feminization and chemical castration in male African clawed frogs". Tyrone B. Hayes tyrone@berkeley.edu, Vicky Khoury, Anne Narayan, +7, and Sherrie Gallipeau. University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved January 15, 201 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0909519107
But you went for gender politics.
If you want to identify as black why not simply say you are black? Especially if you can pass as black without further modifications?
Most people’s lineages aren’t even so pure that you can say they are a pure example of a certain “race” anyway. We just accept people at face value. You could be 50% black and say you’re black and people accept it wholeheartedly (i.e. Barack Obama) So why not 40%? Or 5%?