Gays, Others Lead To Earth’s Doom!

Director Rick Stout brings the right-wing movement into uncharted territory with his new flick, Demographic Winter, which firmly points a finger at gays, feminists and lefties for the declining population rates. Because, you know, we threaten marriage and there can be no babies without marriage.

Says one interview subject, “Now we have forty years of social science that makes it absolutely clear that the deterioration of marriage and the encouragement of sexuality outside of marriage is just not good for society.” The scariest part to these people: the decline of developed nations. That means African nations could be on top. Nooooo!

Though this trailer doesn’t spell out any clear answers, the screen does flash this ominous query: “What if the solutions were clear to academia, but weren’t politically correct?” That sounds like the makings of a social cleansing project. And it frightens us.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #film #gay #homophobia stories and more


  • Brandon

    wow this documentary is incredibly misleading. rich nations tend to have declining population rates, it isnt because “families are deteriorating”. and there are social programs to fight declining populations, like providing families with free day care, cheaper education, etc if they have more kids. im pretty sure australia did something like that.

    but its typical that the conservatives dont want to try and fix the solution in a constructive way, they just want to blame everything on the heathens.

  • Jaroslaw

    I could write a novel length reply on the misleading items and distortions in this clip. First, in the main film, are these people making all these dire comments identified and what are their qualifications to be making these assertions? Yes, certain statistics were bandied about that implied scary future consequences but one assumes those doing the measuring know what they are doing. I for one, don’t think it is even POSSIBLE to know WHAT to measure, (at least a good part of the time) because life is dynamic and changing. For only one example, thinkers of yesteryear predicted the demise of the family if women got the right to vote. etc. etc. etc.
    However, there is SOME truth in this – people are definitely more materialistic which means more consumer goods and less children but then we don’t live in an agrarian society and we don’t need 12 kids per family anymore. But there is a point to consider what does society do with lots of elderly and few younger ones to work and pay taxes into the system? However, not addressed is the rape of society by the corporations (see the book The Shock Doctrine) – we always have billions for war, billions often in no bid contracts to give to firms for homeland security etc. As important as “the family” is, it is not the only factor determining a healthy world. Finally, what indeed is the point of this film if there are no answers proposed?

  • Scooter Bangs

    Would it be bad for gay politics if I suggest we eat the old, rich, right wing??
    soylent green is john McCain!

  • George

    I liked the guy who basically said marriage was the answer to every question. Ever. Haha.

  • Turyn

    Haven’t watched it yet, but I’m wondering if a declining population rate is actually a bad thing in the first place, since the world population has doubled since the 1960s. Of course, reaching a rate of no growth is bad, obviously, but that’s not what’s happening here.

  • Sean S.

    What social scientists? I got into a similar argument with a seminarian who asserted the “honest” sociologists had vindicated his (and his Church’s) viewpoint that marriage and the atomic family unit were the basis of a stable society. When I asked him to cite me, exactly WHOM had made these claims, and where, he reneged, and then pointed me to articles that than MENTIONED books (again with no direct citations) that may or may not make these claims. Once I actually checked out the books at the library, and glanced over them, NONE of them made anywhere near as strong of an assertion as the people spinning it claim.

    In fact its doubtful anyone with a legitimate background in any science would make such “slam-dunk” proclamations. Things just don’t work that way. The idea that a “Demographic winter” is occurring in Islamic and African countries is absurd; in fact it flies in the fact of the meme that “non-natives” (what one person in the trailer asserts as the death of “traditional French”, and presumably other Europeans, culture). Birth rates are notoriously high in African and Islamic countries, and further imperil and stress the already overburdened food, health, and government systems in place.

    The reality is, for religious nutjobs, THEY NEVER have to deal with the consequences of their ridiculous social policies. Those of us who work in the civil service, and in broader government and public-oriented agencies and private areas (such as medicine), DO however, have to deal with the fallout of what occurs around us. We can’t just fall on our knees and pray. We actually have to do something about it.

  • reversion

    How absurd. Our machines and computers, in conjunction with efficient mass production, will ensure that growth should continue even if the human population decreases.

    I for one welcome our new robot overlords.

  • polobear

    too many people on this planet and I am tired of our goverment subsidizing people to have children. Plus it is proven when women are educated and given reproductive choices the quality of life rises for the whole community.
    But hey it looks like we might have a president (chances are old man McCain won’t last 8 years) who doesn’t even believe in rubbers.
    she needs to be a good christian wife and stay home and raise that brood

  • Thor

    The video is mainly targeting Europeans who are freaked out by all the Muslims who are moving up in population in Europe. If anyone is going to be cleansed it would be the immigrants.

  • porsha

    Bullshit! Is this more of Murdocks crap? Sounds like it. I don’t buy it!

  • Sean S.

    “too many people on this planet and I am tired of our goverment subsidizing people to have children. Plus it is proven when women are educated and given reproductive choices the quality of life rises for the whole community.”

    I disagree with this, because the government certainly doesn’t “subsidize” people having children, outside of providing basic services and goods that should be accepted anyways (such as health care, education, etc). I believe that women should have the choice to do whatever they want with their reproductive organs, and be supported in either decision; meaning that if a woman chooses to take birth control or have an abortion, this should be taken care of, and if she decides to have a child, that she has paid maternity leave and maternal health care.

    And thats really the nut of it; given equal options the whole demographic issue becomes a wash anyways. Some people will choose to have no children, some to have many, some to have 1, and in the end, it all comes out the same. I certainly don’t buy either the “Demographic Winter” or the “Population Bomb”, and I fear anyone who wishes to make large scale social programs oriented to promoting either. Enforcing a 1 child policy or the 16-child family are not appealing ideas to me.

  • John


    The religious right never cite peer-reviewed articles because they know their so-called “scientists” are considered crackpots by the mainstream scientific organizations.

    In fact, the 13,000 strong membership of the American Sociological Association voted to oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment by a wide margin (joining their counterparts in the American Psychological Association in doing so).

  • Distingué Traces

    Of course this is homophobic, paranoid, and hysterical.

    It’s also mistaken. In Europe, birth rates in general are low. But where are they so low that they are falling below replacement levels? In countries like Italy, where social sex roles remain old-fashioned, and where there is little support for working mothers.

    In the most liberal parts of Europe, such as most parts of Scandinavia, where shared child care and support for working parents are taken for granted, birth rates are well above replacement levels.

    Last, it hardly seems necessary to point out the implicit racism of low-birth-rate hysteria. Of course, the overall human population continues to grow very quickly — there are many, many children across the world who badly need care.

  • polobear

    Excuse me but doesn’t our government give tax deductions for having dependent children plus I could list a whole slew of lower fees for people under a certain age (at my local pool under age swim groups can rent the pool for 1/3 of the price the adults make up the difference )
    that is “subsidizing” a rose by any other name……

  • Sean S.

    True, but its hard to say that the tax “break” one gets from having a child compares with the inordinate expense of having one. Italy, idiotically, once tried to bribe women into having children with a something like the equivalent of 2 or 3K dollars, as if that would make up for the decimation of public services that then traditional right wing government had been busy destroying.

  • gay as life

    Is there some reason why the population must ALWAYS be growing? What’s wrong with a shrinking of population now and then? Ebb and flow.

    If the population always grows, eventually there will be too many people for the Earth to support.

  • Maria

    There is a fundamental problem with the math and statistics, or at least what I see from the preview . . . counting. There is a worldwide population growth constant. The math/stats are purely based on cultural/ethnic level.

    For example; the largest group growing (via procreation) in the United States is not pure Caucasian families (except those who are socially irresponsible religious fanatics with double digit offspring), but the Hispanic.

    The complaint of population grown in France, United Kingdom, United States and other counties (specifically mentioned) is not only based on cultural fear, lost of country identity, and the crying over the slow death of ‘pure bred’ citizen. This film is not about population growth problem, it is about the ‘wrong kind’ of population. Which is about change, fear and self identity.

    The fear of being a minority is great for those who have been in the majority. The fear to loose cultural, country and social status or identity when superiority has been based on just the ideals of such matters can be not only scary but leads to erratic leadership (Holocaust and Hitler, US and Japanese Americans).

    Basically, the population of the world is a constant, and will still grow (with modern estimation) to over 9 billion by year 2050 (see UN website and US Census).


  • Disgusted American

    maybe if gays/lesbians were “allowed” to marry – more would WANT too have children..but why bring children into this fucked up world as it is..without legal protections?

  • Bob R

    “There’s not much quibble, not much controversy among people in the know.” Those in the know are white supremacists who fear the decline in white, western civilization. That’s what this is all about. The decline of “western” (white) civilization. The problem is not declining population, the world population is in fact not declining. It’s growing. If the world population was decreasing over-all, it would not be such a bad thing as natural resources become more scarce and our ability to feed, clothe, house and provide for much of the world’s current population is strained now. The world is a very crowded place.

    The subtle point of this film is that the “right populations” are in decline. Or more accurately the white, western populations are in decline. These racial purists fear the increasing rise of “colored” peoples throughout the world as the white race produces fewer and fewer babies. In just a few years white faces in America will be in the minority. That is what these folks fear. We may even have a “half-breed” President soon, so the balance of power is already shifting in their minds.

    Their point is that western society better get in the bedroom and start reproducing; or French, German, English, Nordic, “white” races will become extinct. I’ve heard all this before. Just a variation on a theme by white supremacists.

    With declining natural resources: fossil fuels, clean water, ocean fish and diminishing farmlands, there will be battles for these scarce and valuable resources. If we don’t have large armies of white, Christian soldiers, we may find the balance of power upset. That’s really what all this is about. They must also have a target to pin this crisis on, and what better than the homosexual? No one really likes homos, and if they can first target us successfully, then it’ll be easier to move on to other undesirables. Once that door is opened…

  • GoodBuddy

    I have read that the reason the birthrate dropped in Roman cultures was because of the use of lead in drinking vessels and water pipes. And it had a greater impact on the wealthiest classes they were the ones who could afford these. The poor would have had to drink out of pottery.

    There has been a large drop in male sperm count in Western countries. Will they blame this on the breakdown of the family or on changes such as hormones in food?

  • Rowen

    During the period that they mention, at the end of the Roman Republic, there was a serious shortage of people and babies, yes. What they fail to mention was that during Julius Caeser’s time, Rome had just been through 50 some years of war, a large number of those being civil wars, and including some very idiotic generals who managed to get entire legions wiped out. Basically, there was a lack of babies because all the potential fathers had been killed off by war. (Also, Rome was rather anti-homosexual. Especially if you were on the receiving end.)

    Furthermore, aren’t we in a baby-boom right now? Sure, when as the Baby Boomer’s retire, Gen-X and Y are gonna have a hard time keeping up, but I know a lot of people having 3 or more kids. (which means that when I retire . . . if we aren’t in nuclear winter, and Social Security is still in place, there’s gonna be a lot of them, and not as much of me. ^_^)

  • vet student

    Sounds like a Win-Win for both the environment and the human condition.

  • Charley

    Having watched the video I thought, “Who the fuck is Rick Stout”. I Googled, and not much came up other than this blog and a hair and nails salon. Wouldn’t you think there would be something, like books, personal appearances, right wing orgs, something ? Nope.
    And the bitch complaining about old people sucking the economy dry. Who the fuck is she ?

  • todd

    Maybe the Gov. should be more family friendly and encourage people to have more kids by reducing health care costs, college costs, and whatever else that makes having kids so expensive.

  • Charles J. Mueller

    Rick Stout???

    Other than being a trombone player for the Cleveland Orchestra, A google search brought little up on his qualificationsthat would give jim reason for being a voice to be harkened to.

    Wikipedia never even heard of him.

    Keep blowing your trombone, dude. That’s obviously the best place to rid yourself of all your hot air!

  • Super Cat

    This is a free world pal. Even straight fertile people do not have to get married and have children if they don’t want to.
    Freedom for childless couples and life-long singles!

Comments are closed.