Someone is back sticking their orange-tinted nose where it doesn’t belong. 

Your mind has probably started wandering, thinking we are going to rant on and on and on about LGBTQIA+ rights – and you’re not wrong… 

But you’re also not entirely right. 

No, this isn’t about tax returns.

Nor are we alluding to trans rights being entirely stripped and our community slowly being sent to work camps. 

We are talking about our constitutionally mandated right to privacy. 

The Government Needs to Stay in Its Lane

So, recently, Donald Trump stated there would be two genders, but either Americans have become increasingly ignorant, or there’s a widespread misunderstanding of what sex and gender are that’s spreading faster than HIV in the 80s. 

Now, we really don’t want to beat a dead horse, so if you’re interested and want to learn the difference between sex and gender, we’ve got an entire article where we even mention Nemo (yeah, the little orange fish who gets lost). 

To cut to the chase, yes – biological sex and gender identity are different concepts (this isn’t controversial, it’s science), but the government has absolutely no business playing identity police. 

What good is an article without a point of reference? 

Enter Zaya Mekhi.

Let’s talk about her passport debacle. 

After legally transitioning and maintaining consistent documentation across all platforms, Uncle Sam suddenly decides to play gender guardian. 

Before you get ahead of yourself and think we’re not condemning what occurred to Zaya – give us a moment to detail what occurred. 

Afford us a moment to enlighten you on how this extends past the LGTQIA+ community and permeates throughout the USA. 

It is likely to have broader implications which you may not yet be considering. 

The reality is simple… 

When someone has gone through legal and medical processes to live authentically, the government’s job is to maintain consistent documentation – not create bureaucratic chaos. 

There are many in our community who think it’s not a big deal for the US government to mark Zaya’s passport as male because she’s a “biological” male. 

We counter this argument with a simple statement the very people applauding the government live by – “fake it till you make it.”

The exact people caking the decision for the US government to invade Zaya’s personal privacy are those who will vehemently advocate for “making your ways and becoming whatever your want.”

It’s a bit sickening how some can become so spineless simply because they agree with one specific aspect of a choice taken away from a law-abiding US citizen. 

If you’ve read any articles we’ve posted regarding the presidency and administration change of 2025 – you’ll see that considering all aspects of any issue is important to us. 

So, how did the younger generations, specifically Gen Z, start believing that personal privacy and the right to be who you are is wrong?

The Social Media Panic (It Was Planned)

There are two sides to every coin, and social media always plays a hand at the poker table. 

Over the past few years, there’s been an uptick in conservative ideology among Gen Z’ers. 

It’s got nothing to do with their parents but rather the people they interact with daily. 

Joe Mitchell, a 26-year-old Republican in the USA who founded a platform called Run Gen Z, sheds light on why this may be occurring. 

He states that Gen Z is referencing what they see at school and on social media as the prime cause for becoming more conservative. 

His main case is the culture war taking place in K12 settings across all of America – but this extends beyond the classroom. 

Many of them are exposed to rhetoric aimed at persuading them to think or feel a certain way, and Gen Z’ers born after 1996 have begun to reject woke culture. 

While Gen Z’s conservative shift might seem to support government intervention in cases like Zaya’s, it actually reveals a deeper truth. Gen Z values authenticity and personal autonomy. 

The same Gen Z’ers rejecting ‘woke culture’ are also the ones most likely to defend personal privacy online and resist government surveillance. 

They’re not anti-LGBTQ+ – they’re anti-establishment and anti-overreach. 

The irony is that by supporting government interference in personal identification, they’re undermining the very privacy rights they cherish when it comes to their own digital lives and personal freedoms.

So, what’s the link between this information and social media? 

People associate woke with LGBTQIA identities, and on TikTok, there’s an overwhelming amount of woke culture. 

We’d argue our community is a victim by proxy, and people are leveraging this idea to use it against us. 

Think that’s out of this world? 

How Social Media is Serving End-Of-Days Realness

If you’ve been anywhere near TikTok recently, you’ve probably seen the hysteria about gay marriage revocation. 

It’s not necessarily true  – in fact, it’s a bit early to make such statements. 

To what are we referring? 

People think Idaho will revoke gay marriage. 

That could not be further from the truth if you read the research and understand how the US government works. 

The Idaho House passed a non-binding resolution about same-sex marriage. 

Non-binding, honey. 

That means it has about as much legal authority as your New Year’s resolution to finally use your gym membership. 

Yet social media influencers are acting like we’re living in a dystopian novel’s first chapter.

Let’s break down the actual Supreme Court math (because apparently, basic arithmetic is too much to ask of viral content creators):

• You need four justices just to hear a case
• You need five justices to make any changes
• The current court composition makes both scenarios unlikely
• The Respect for Marriage Act provides additional protections

In short, there aren’t enough Supreme Court justices who care enough about gay marriage to overturn or even consider hearing a case about it. 

Let us break it down clearly. 

Currently, the U.S. Supreme Court has three liberal justices who would undoubtedly protect marriage equality – but they’re not even the whole story. 

Among the six conservative justices, the landscape is far more nuanced than TikTok would have you believe. 

Chief Justice John Roberts, ever the institutionalist, has consistently shown his reluctance to overturn gay marriage, which he sees as an established precedent. 

Brett Kavanaugh has no interest in overturning gay marriage rulings which he addressed in his Roe v. Wade concurrence, making it clear that overturning Roe shouldn’t be seen as a threat to Obergefell v. Hodges. 

Then there’s Neil Gorsuch, whose libertarian leanings have already led him to author a major opinion expanding gay rights. Gorsuch sees gay marriage as a protected civil liberty.  

While Amy Coney Barrett remains something of a question mark, that leaves only Justices Thomas and Alito as likely votes to rehear any challenge to marriage equality. 

Simple math – it’s only two votes out of the four needed to hear a case, let alone the five required to overturn precedent. 

The numbers just don’t add up to support the social media panic machine’s doomsday predictions.

Wouldn’t it be swell if we could return to a time when people actually understood how the US government worked?

The Privacy Principle

Now here’s where we truly reach our passion and start to feel a bit rambunctious. 

We’re watching the same government that can’t efficiently run a post office trying to dictate personal identity documentation. 

The same bureaucracy that loses billions annually wants to micromanage how Americans identify themselves on official documents.

We’re not simply referring to Zaya’s passport or Idaho’s virtue-signaling resolution. 

We are worried about a fundamental principle in the USA.

The right to privacy. 

The government has no business in your personal life. 

Period.

When Government Overreach Became Fashionable

Conservatism isn’t what it used to be. 

Do you remember when being conservative wasn’t an identity in America? Rather, it meant you wanted to limit the government and protect your personal privacy. 

When we understood that protecting individual liberty meant keeping government out of personal decisions? 

Pepperidge Farm know the importance of privacy, and so should you.

The current trend of conservative voices suddenly embracing big government solutions to cultural issues isn’t just hypocritical – it’s dangerous. 

Today, it’s passports and marriage licenses; tomorrow, it’s whatever else the bureaucratic beast decides to consume.

Privacy Not Important to You? Follow the Money Instead

Want to know why this matters beyond the obvious privacy concerns? 

Follow the money. 

Every new regulation, every additional layer of bureaucratic oversight, and every government program to “verify” personal information costs taxpayers billions. 

But let’s pretend fiscal responsibility only matters when we’re talking about other people’s pet projects.

What’s The Solution?

So what’s the actual solution here? 

It’s simple, and it would massively increase the likelihood of our rights being protected. 

1. Scale back government involvement in personal identification

• Eliminate redundant documentation requirements for name and gender changes
• Streamline marriage license processes regardless of couple composition
• Create uniform federal standards for recognition of legal status changes
• Remove unnecessary gender markers from non-medical government documents

2. Return to traditional conservative values

• Protect private businesses’ right to serve LGBTQ+ customers (free market approach)
• Maintain religious institutions’ right to follow their beliefs while ensuring civil services remain accessible.
• Support entrepreneurship in LGBTQ+ communities through reduced regulatory barriers.
• Protect private medical decisions between patients and doctors

3. Address actual issues

• Ensure all legally performed marriages receive equal recognition across state lines.
• Standardize adoption and fostering processes based on capability, not orientation.
• Protect employment based on merit and performance, not personal identity
• Maintain consistent contract law regardless of participants’ identities

So what’s our point here? 

Keep focused on what matters most, and stop letting the media divide us. 

That is how they win. 

The Bottom Line

As the transcript shows, social media has become an ecosystem of manufactured outrage. 

From unfounded fears about Supreme Court decisions to misunderstanding basic legislative processes, we’re watching real-time demonstrations of why civics education matters.

And no, watching political TikToks doesn’t count as research.

You can believe in biological reality while still defending personal liberty and privacy rights. 

In fact, that’s exactly what consistent conservatives should do. 

The government’s job isn’t to police identity – it’s to protect individual rights and maintain consistent legal documentation.

Because at the end of the day, true conservatives should be asking:

• Since when did supporting biological reality require supporting government overreach?
• When did we start believing bigger government was the solution to anything?
• How did we forget that personal freedom includes the right to live authentically without government interference?

These aren’t actually difficult questions to answer. 

The path forward is clear.

Protect individual liberty, respect privacy rights, and keep government out of personal matters. 

Whether we’re talking about marriage, personal documentation, or abortion, the solution isn’t more government – it’s less.

And for those panic-scrolling through social media: Maybe spend less time amplifying hysteria and more time understanding actual policy implications. 

What do you think?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments.