I'm kind of sick of this homophobia on DU.

[jdj]

It's disturbing to me that people think a post saying that someone is gay is insulting to the person so named. Saying a person is gay is not an insult, and implying that someone should be ashamed for pointing out that so&so may be gay is a sign of homophobia, whether internalized or from a heterosexual standpoint.

Establishing that someone is or may be gay while they in fact are getting elected/supported etc. by fanning the flames of hatred of gays is actually a brilliant strategy. So people who gasp "that's homophobic" are just revealing their own homophobia by trying to defend something that needs no defense (homosexuality). I know you mean well, but don't do me, one of the queers in question, any favors.

[Cuban_Liberal]

1. Thank you!

[tx_dem41]

2. But, supporting that someone is gay by saying he is "manly fake"..

..and "weird" just might be offensive to some, no?

[jdj]

4. I've said it before and I'll say it again.

I've been called a freak to my face, why would I care about what innapropriate expression a well-intentioned person tried to use to bring to light something that a party with real strategists would have uncovered 5 or 6 years ago.

I'm willing to take one for the team on this one.

Insult me all you want if it means successfully pulling back the curtain on this admin.

[tx_dem41]

9. They are an anonymous poster on DU. How do I know that their..

intentions are good??? How do you know?

I only know that they appeared to equate being gay with being "weird" and "manly fake". That is ALL I know about them. I know NOTHING about their intentions.

[jdj]

20. 'scuse me but a repuke would not attempt to out Bush.

so I think that it's pretty obvious where that one was coming from.

[tx_dem41]

25. But, a repuke would claim that gay men were "manly fake" and

"weird".

[jdj]

29. I wish.

But just as all gays aren't libs, all libs are not p.c.

So what? If it serves the greater good, I don't care.

[tx_dem41]

31. We will agree to disagee on this, jdj

I don't see how gay-bashing (and that's what it is, inadvertent or not), serves the greater good. It just scores a few cheap political points on a forum on the internet.

[jdj]

35. It's not gay-bashing. If I feel bashed I'll say so.

It's an attempt to deny and bury a very active subculture of the gay community because we just don't want to see it because we can't understand it and we can't control it.

Too bad, it exists, and we, dems and gays, need to accept it and come to terms with it.

[tx_dem41]

38. After reading jn's post further down, I will back off of the

"gay-bashing" charge. It was disturbing to see others agree with her miswording.

[jdj]

40. I can understand that. It has shown some slips but I don't care.

I've got my eyes on the prize, all arrows need to be aimed at the greater good, and everybody not be so sensitive.

[jn2375]

26. There was no gay bashing intended in that post

I was simply trying to say that Bush tries to act like something he's not. What I meant was his tough guy appearance, trying to act like something he's not. it was not a attack on gays I wish I could change the post but it's to late. I tried. Just trying to make the point that Bush is such a jerk. Again I apology for the terrible way it was posted. And no I was not equating weird to gays. It may sound that way but it was never my intent.

[Bluebear]

32. Don't sweat it, please

Who among us has not worded something wrong?

But some people agreed with the sentiment LOL!

[jdj]

33. of course it wasn't. I didn't even read that stuff.

I'm actually taking it as a sign that I am toughening up, it flew over my radar.

I'm more disturbed people are trying to shut down discussion of something like this. Is it embarassment that we dems have shot ourselves in the foot AGAIN, missed something so glaringly obvious because we are convinced we have tacit ownership of the whole gay community? It's definitely something to be embarassed about.

I mean really, how stupid can we be, and I include my own gay self in this, to not see it.

[tx_dem41]

34. I appreciate your response, Jn.

It was disturbing how you linked those two phrases with being gay, and with other incidents over the last few days on DU, it was easy to take offense.

On edit: I agree with Bluebear...it was how easily other DUers jumped on the bandwagon with such glee, that was most disturbing.

Don't sweat the miswording. It happens to us all.

[jn2375]

53. Thanks, I never intended to insult any DUers. I appreciate your

response.

[Bluebear]

24. The poster said they stuck their foot in their mouth

in re: Equating gays to being "manly fake" and "weird". The poster clarified and that was that. Taking offense to those pejoratives is hardly homophobic.

I have no problem speculating that Bush may have been banged by a Bulldog, but ascribing that to 'weirdness' and being gay isn't necessary. He is weird enough on his own.

[Warpy]

50. Hey, same here

You can't win with thinskinned people!

Hell, most of the people on this board wouldn't give a rip if Gannon/Guckert had been summoned to the White House nightly to ply his (rough) trade were it not for a few glaring problems.

First, this is the most rabidly homophobic administration in the history of the country. They've even got Nixon beat.

Second, this guy had a lot of things in his past that should have been major red flags, yet he was hustled (pun intended) past any background check that he had absolutely no chance of passing. He was blackmail bait, and it's just pure luck that bloggers outed him before some foreign agent got hold of this stuff.

Third, clogging the press room with stooges like him and probably a few others has turned press conferences (too few and far between already) from question and answer sessions to right wing propaganda lectures, with softball questions tacked onto the end of the lecture just for show.

Fourth, the fact that this guy was hustled (I know..) past security means that somebody in this rabidly homophobic administration wanted him close very badly. That means there is still some blackmail bait in the upper level of this bunch and that needs to be taken care of before a foreign power does it for us.

Nobody gives much of a rip who sleeps with whom. However, these are the four things that distinguish this case from mere hypocrisy on the part of a bible thumping gang in government.

[Roger Pedacter]

139. I agree! I'd be willing to take one each from the whole team

if that would help!

[progressivebydesign]

8. They were commenting on his EXAGERATED behavior...

.. Nowhere did I see the poster saying that gays, as a group, were "manly fake" or "weird". They were commenting on Bush's over-doing it on the swagger, the cowboy facade, and behaviors. I think it's all in how people take it.

It don't think it's an insult to wonder out loud if someone who has gotten elected by attacking gay rights, could be gay himself. Not a diss on being gay, but it does beg to be answered.

[tx_dem41]

13. So, you can identify gays by their 'exaggerated" behavior?

Amazing.

[benburch]

28. Well, you can identify ME as kinky bi-queer by MY behaviour...

I don't know about you.

[progressivebydesign]

88. If you reread my post SLOWLY and CAREFULLY... you'll find..

it refers to Bush's OVERCOMPENSATING in some behavior HE THINKS (key word is HE) is HETEROSEXUAL behavior. Has NOTHING to do with how homosexuals walk or talk or act... it has to do with how BUSH carries HIMSELF, and HIS idea of what will hide HIS secret.

Get it? Or are you just going to go from thread to thread and snipe at everyone tonight, pretending you don't understand their posts?

[jdj]

90. how can you so easily understand this, and others can't?

thanks for chiming in and saving my sanity.

Bush is aiming for a target and missing because it is un-natural to him, he has to speculate on what would come naturally to others.

It's tragic, and I think that another reason some people aren't understanding this or trying to is because they believe that gayness is something small and remote and on the fringe which couldn't possibly be tied up with something as big as presidents and foreign policy and war.

If only.

[progressivebydesign]

92. This thread is making me crazy! I TOTALLY understand your point!

I try to remember, when I also feel like throwing something at the wall while engrossed in one of these threads, that DU is a community of so many people from all over the world.. with different lives, thoughts, beliefs, pasts, agendas. I try... I try to remember that when I see that people aren't getting my point, and I"m even being attacked for it.

THank you for noticing that I got it. Have a good night... I know your heart is in the right place, and your brain. hang in there!

[porphyrian]

3. Can we make fun of gays for reasons other than being gay? - n/t

[jdj]

5. we who?

[porphyrian]

12. Are you following me or something? - n/t

[jdj]

21. you're on my thread, sweetie.

[porphyrian]

74. Bu..uh...oh, so now I'm supposed to read who posts what, huh? - n/t

[Kilroy003]

134. Probably not...

Although I've always found references to anal sex to elicit more lauhgs during jokes than run-of-the-mill vaginal sex; even if the 'taker's' gender is never specified.

[benburch]

6. It's not homophobia!

It is calling out closeted gay homophobic republicans who seek to destroy the rest of us in the GBLT community.

I'm Bi-queer, and that is not an insult; It's a compliment.

[rzemanfl]

7. I assume this is mostly in reference to Gannon/Guckert. Do you

agree that a whore is a whore whether male, female or bi? That, and hypocrisy is what most of the posts I've seen are about.

[benburch]

11. Nothing wrong with being a whore, either.

My very best friends, most of them, are sexworkers.

[rzemanfl]

42. Why? When for 50 bucks and two days of their time they could

be REPORTERS!

[jdj]

14. No, it's in reference to the speculation that Bush is gay.

And in reference to the people who are aghast at this notion.

I'm growing even more suspicious that it isn't even about them caring about the feelings of gay people, instead I'm getting the feeling it's about denial, people can get their heads around the fact that out of at least 30 million gay people in this country, more than just one or two might be republicans.

After all, they may feel, we've lost African Americans (image-wise, anyway) we've lost hispancis, we can't bear to face the reality that Bush may have millions of gay supporters.

[benburch]

23. Kitty Kelly's book says he's bisexual.

He was called "Lips" at college for his prowess giving blow jobs.

And he has used his power to destroy even the possibility that gay or lesbian people might have marriage open to them.

For that he deserves to be destroyed, politically. And if outing him to his Christian Right followers will do that, I will push that until it takes or they kill me.

[jdj]

27. Holy crap, Batman. I need to get that book.

Careful though, just saying all that you posted may cause you to get called "homophobic."

[benburch]

30. If anybody calls me homophobic...

they have clearly not seen me at a party!!!

[fresnobill314]

56. "Bush may have millions of gay supporters."

I don't know about that, but I'm sure there is more than one Log Cabin Repubican that is firmly behind the President.


P.S. For the life of me, can not understand why any gay man can support the president. But I'm a queer democrat. What the hell do I know?

[jdj]

the Bush gay thread just got shut down for being

"homophobic".

whoever posted it used some un-p.c. terminology, which I didn't even notice, but apparently some other folks got upset and missed the freaking point.

[tx_dem41]

19. FWIW,

I didn't alert it. I like to see people's thoughts exposed for what they are.

[TahitiNut]

10. Yeah, after all ...

... it's not like we don't invest meaningful hours discussing, in hundreads of threads, the sexual habits, preferences, and organs of everyone in government and the media. Right?

[jdj]

15. Does the name Bill Clinton ring a bell?

[tx_dem41]

18. I didn't realize we talked about Bill Clinton's sex life on DU?

Dang, I miss all the fun.

[benburch]

16. If they are closeted in their alternative sexuality...

and use their position of power to destroy the lives and rights of others like themselves, then they should consider that their days of being in their comfortable well-lit closets are numbered. And that applies to anybody of either party.

[jdj]

22. but really, who is going to out them, and why in the name

of Divine has it taken so damn long?

[benburch]

36. The blogosphere seems to have a good handle on how to out them...

Notice the SILENCE of the Religious Right on this topic?

They (for once) are stunned into speechlessness.

[jdj]

39. Good point.

and Gannon seems like a raving egomaniac who won't be shut up.

I really don't understand them letting him talk...If you read Brock's book they pulled a full Amish shunning on him, didn't speak of him or to him, total white-out.

Wonder what has made them change their strategy...unless it is that Gannon is military and could really blow the lid off the whole calvary unless they let him do as he pleases.

[benburch]

46. Yes. I think he has them by the balls.

And it is taking a while to arrange an "accident".

Either that, or Gannon is smart enough to have a "Dead Man's Switch" that will release the goods on them if he does expire.

[jdj]

52. damn, I wonder if that's why he put his site back up.

wow.

He may be trying to stay in the public eye as much as possible.

I bet he's writing down alot of stuff and putting it in an envelope that says "open in the event of my death". He may live a long, long time.

[benburch]

54. If he is really smart...

that is in escrow with an offshore law firm.

[TahitiNut]

43. "alternative"??

I guess that means "other than what I do".

I'll sure be glad when people lose their fascination about who and how other people fuck.

[jdj]

45. never happen.

while they are raving about the sinfullness of it all, inside they are thinking "I'ma get me soma that."

[benburch]

47. In my case, I'm bisexual and into S&M....

So, alternative from what Ward and June Cleaver did...

Meant to be a more inclusive term.

[The Magistrate]

75. Who Knows, Mr. Burch, What Ward And June Got Up To...?

[benburch]

79. True.

I did once hear June complain; "Ward, you were a little hard on the beaver last night!"

[The Magistrate]

93. Thank You For The Laugh, Sir

[grumpy old fart]

17. Fascinating KOS thread on the Houston "velvet mafia"...

and where this gay aspect of the Gannon/Guckert thing may lead.....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/19/204254/937

[DURHAM D]

66. Thanks for post - just read the whole thing. Very interesting. n/t

[Chicago Democrat]

37. Homophobia needs to be called out. But also with compassion.

We are extreme liberals mostly here. So what's the deal with homophobia? I try to help those who are uncomfortable about it to deal with it through compassion.

[luaptifer]

41. kind of a great discussion you've prompted

which you rightly, er, 'correctly', take back to the issue. the issue being addressed in the gannon/guckert pressitution scam is, at core, the willingness of the corpwhore neoCONs to be hypocritical in all aspects of their endeavours as long as they achieve their goals.

furthering the CONservative agenda is what it's all about. if the closeted members can bash gays to do so, they will. if the 'war president' must subvert national security by outting a CIA operative in order to promote the CONs corp agenda, they will.

the issue is outting them -- the moral values crowd -- via their hypocrasy, no matter how they express it.

btw, a forum i've frequented for a long time includes the full-spectrum of political expression from apparent neo-nazi sympathizers to anarchists. you can imagine a bit of homophobia in this environs and i've forced one of the multi-aliased idiots to 'ignore button' me in all his aliases by repeatedly throwing this article at him:

IS HOMOPHOBIA ASSOCIATED WITH HOMOSEXUAL AROUSAL?

by Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright, Jr., Ph.D. and Bethany A. Lohr

New Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
Questions Whether It Is Latent Homosexuality Or A Response to Anxiety

http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/articles/glb/glbtphobia...

hope you all find it equally useful

[jdj]

44. I posted a link the other day to a Souther Poverty Law Center site

that linked to sites run by gay white supremacy guys.

There was even a forum for diapered gay white supremacy guys.

The world is just too diverse to even comprehend.

[luaptifer]

48. dang, sometimes i think i'm nuts to be a proponent of

haute couture designed in tinfoil and other alloys.

...diapered gay white supremacy...how the hell?!?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

49. I mostly agree with your impressions

But I think it depends on the context of the post.
Someone asking if someone is gay is not homophobic to me..and someone making a statement CLEARLY in jest such as Bill Maher did the other night on his program is not homophobic to me...we need a little sense of humor.

BUT..when someone asks if Bush, for instance, is gay and then proceeds to list in a derogatory manner stereotypical attributes...while the question itself MY not be homophobic..the comments and descriptors might in fact be.

I prefer to examine the issue on a case by case basis..I don't think there's a textbook or cookbook way to discern otherwise.

[readmoreoften]

55. yeah, what nothingshocksme just said! n/t

[jdj]

58. in this particular case, the poster theorized Bush is gay.

this is not exactly a republican thing to do.

I'm actually responding though, to the many times I've seen this sentiment about homosexuality expressed since Gannon broke...that there is something bad about the supposition, the thing cannot be spoken, the well of loneliness, the love that dare not speak it's name, blah, blah, blah. Bad high.

It hurts me far more than those comments did, I didn't even read them. But there is something wounding about someone trying to tell me, a gay person, what I should be offended about and how I should be offended...and it is very revealing about people's true opinion about homosexuality, although they don't seem aware of it.

I honestly don't even think I can articulate how offensive that is to me, far more than someone calling Bush "weird" and "manly fake" which, clearly, he is.

[Bluebear]

59. By the same token you don't speak for all gay persons

If someone else is offended that is their reality. Just because you view it as an internalized homophobia doesn't make it necessarily so, don't you think?

[jdj]

60. I'm gonna call it the way I see it.

I'm repulsed at the people saying Bush absolutely cannot be gay because he's a republican, or a militarist, or a whatever. This is delusional and naive.

And having worked through my own fundie internalized homophobia, it tends to be pretty obvious to me.

There is a difference from wanting to protect 'gayness' from being insulted and wanting to bury the diversity of gay culture so that we can continue to live under the delusion ourselves that gay is a subcategory of democrat. The truth will set us free on this one, literally.

[Bluebear]

61. You are taking on too many facets of the issue here

Truly, from the wording of one post to the whole gamut of sexuality and politics. Your right is to call it the way you see it, but because _you_ are willing to 'take one for the team' doesn't mean that all gays will agree with you.

[jdj]

62. From post one I have talked political strategy here.

This is DEMOCRATIC underground.

If people are too stupid to take the long view then that is really sad. Do they actually think things are going to get better under this admin and republican dominance? Do they think an 3rd party is going to spring up and save us? (It isn't). I personally want to be out from under the boots of these thugs and the thrust of my argument is figuring out the best possible way to do that.

[Bluebear]

63. Yeah OK I'm gonna scoot for now

Good luck and thanks for your input.

[readmoreoften]

51. Not every gay person yelling about this issue is

suffering from internalized homophobia. It's such a way of getting the upper hand of an argument between gay people and it's disingenuous.

Listen, when the story on DU first broke there were loads of people saying "What a hypocrite! Gannon is a gay gaybasher!" and a few others making comments like(paraphrase) "Yeah, everyone in the Bush administration are a bunch of freaks stuffing stuff up each other's butts! I bet Bush is a big homo too!"

The first one is a valid comment. The second insinuates that gays are perverted.

The issue of Gannon's hypocrisy is worth pursuing, but only if it leads to wedging open information about the hypocrisy of higher ups and the white house tampering with the 4th estate.

[jdj]

57. This is not about Gannon, it's about Bush.

I don't know how many times or ways I can say this.

I see a scale before me...on one side is the possibility of bringing down this administration and driving a permanent wedge between them and the religious right. On the otherside is my ouchie from innappropriate comments by well-meaning but somewhat unenlightened people. Guess which side the scale tips on?

What I am commenting on also is people's refusal to even consider the possibility that Bush may be gay because we libs want all gay people to be cool. All gay people aren't cool, and saying that isn't homophobic either. Gays can just as big of asshholes as anyone else, remember Cohn?

[Lucid Code]

64. IMO we need to tone it down

The practice of fixating on homosexuality as a source of humor is not necessarily homophobic, but it has its roots there. Gays can be jerks too but they should be made fun of for being jerks, not for being gay.

[readmoreoften]

69. I was assuming you were talking about all the banter

regarding Gannon.

Listen, if someone can prove that Bush is gay or bisexual, I'd love to see it happen because I believe in getting Bush out 'by any means necessary'. But I think it'll be a hard stunt to pull. If we can pull up a huge gay sex gang bang in the white house, I say let's expose these bastards.

But if we can't, then let's push on what we have: a president who is corrupting the system by planting reporters and manufacturing news documents. And those are already crimes and impeachable offenses. Even if he is gay, hypocrisy isn't a crime.

If people think this is fruitful, this queer is all for following any avenue that might lead to getting rid of Bush. But I have a sneaking suspicion that this avenue is not going to pan out and I'd hate to lose our focus.

[ultraist]

78. You are leaving out a LOT of facts about that thread

The problem was NOT really about the speculation that Bush is Gay, it was about all of those other bizarre remarks.

If you want to analyze every Repuke male and speculate whether or not they are Gay, have it. But the type of remarks that are being thrown around about Gays are EXACTLY the remarks homophobics use against Gays to justify their HATE CRIMES.

Funny, you did not even notice the "fake man" "weird comment"!!!

The fact is, creating a hostile environment and social violence is not just about Gays. We ALL suffer from that.

[jdots]

71. an issue on an issue

In the past people have been flamed for calling Condi a sell out souless anti woman anti black piece of shit.I get as a jew come down on for hating right wing jews with a passion.And then there is Ann Coulter,if a male rants on her to certain women he will be called a pig.
Lighten up, we would die for your rights and for equallity for all,we make mistakes and are human , we get bent out of shape about sell outs and evil doers be they who ever and what ever. The people in power now are users,they use religion,sexuality,race,creed and color to gain thier power.
Aren't we all alittle frustrated watching this garbage truck run over us all ? Humor saves our sanity and humor if tracked back isn't funny,it is human to laugh at ourselves or we become like neocons.The politically correct stuff is what bothers me about about DU,our intentions are just but we use bad language and sling name calling around. I would rather visit a site where people are vulgar and into justice and freedom than go somewhere that is P.C. on the outside and evil on the inside.
Please stay on DU

[DuaneBidoux]

65. I get your point...I think the PC thing is a somewhat legitimate

criticism of the right wing. While they whisper under their breath "nigger," "fag," "Dyke," "Chink" and a dozen other abhorrent and hurtful comments we dance around the lilly pond trying to figure out how to make a factual statement about someone's sexuality when that fact is incredibly relevant to the issue at hand--and then we jump on someone who claims to be a progressive but didn't quite live up to our sensibility on the issue.

I believe these are legitimate issues and issues the progressive community should be willing to debate and discuss with respect for differing opinions. I've always believed that one of the things that separates progressives from wing-nuts is this capability to rationally debate and discuss on important and sensitive issues.

Edited to add this thought: watch the Daily show for lessons on how to do it well.

[Padraig18]

67. What??? Homophobia??? HERE????

Perish the thought that DUers would use something like the Gannon affair to indulge their homophobia!

[benburch]

73. I've seen very little of that here, Padraig...

One or two people, yes, but the majority are trying to twit the Right Wingers with their own prejudices.

[ultraist]

76. That thread was not Un PC because it speculated Bush is gay

Many FACTS are being omitted here. This is what was said:

Characteristics of repressed homosexuals (why Bush is gay):
1. A passion to mass murder
2. Drug addiction
3. Needs to please his daddy
4. Needs to prove he is a man to his daddy

Also, the comment, that now has been corrected, that Gay men are "fake men" and "weird." Another comment was, 'Repressed Gay men are very awkward with their social gestures towards other men' (something to that effect). AND, of course, Roy Cohn was mentioned.

In other words, it was a lot of negative remarks about Gay men along with a naked picture of Bush/Cheney in a sexual pose. (again equating gay sex with someone disgusting like that fat ass Cheney).

NO ONE said that asking if Bush is Gay was homophobic, although, considering that we have had threads: Is Rove Gay, Is Rush Gay, Is Scott Gay, Is Ari Gay, etc, this is getting out of hand.

This is not about one or two Gays feeling like they will take a hit, this is about spreading myths about Gays that create social violence.

Having friends and family members who have been victims of homophobia, I am opposed to spreading these types of myths about Gays; it is dangerous. Gays are not violent, nor are they pedophiles because they are Gay.

[Bluebear]

81. Thank you for that presentation

[readmoreoften]

82. Sometimes you gotta call it like you see it.

It is a totally different story if the post was anything like what Ultraist said. Saying that Bush may be gay is one thing. Saying that *'s violence is due to repressed homosexuality and stating gay men are 'fake men' or 'not real men' is anti-gay. Call it want you want, reason it away, have your reasons. But it's anti-gay, no matter what your good intentions or bullshit excuse is.

Listen. If we were talking about Strom Thurmond being a hypocrite who fathered a black daughter while supporting segregation, it would be perfectly reasonable to bring say "Strom Thurmond had interracial sexual relations." Or even, "While he was a public bigot, Thurmond was fucking African-American women." And if anyone called someone a bigot for making such statements, the attack wouldn't have much validity.

But if someone said that "So! Strom Thurmond likes the darkies after all!" or worse "I always suspected Thurmond was a nigger-lover." Then, regardless of whether or not that person is exposing the truth of Thurmond's racist lies, that person is proving himself also to be a bigot and-- if he is claiming to be progressive-- a hypocrite.

There are bad gay people in the world. It is true. But all the bad people of the world are not gay. This myth of the 'repressed homosexual' is getting out of hand. There ARE heterosexual gaybashers out there. Many. And heterosexual mass murderers too. Most of the repressed homosexuals I've ever met do nothing more than flinch when the topic is mentioned.

Most queers, at some point in our lives, have been repressed. Most of us did not gay bash, mass murder, or behave violently. Most of us simply lived lives of quiet desperation.

Yes, there are repressed gays who attack out- gays and that must be looked at. Republican sexual hypocrisy in general must be outed. But there are many straight men who for whatever reason (insecurity, sadism, or stupidity) become gay-bashers . Hating gays is in and of itself not proof of homosexuality!

This 'repressed homosexuals are the ones who beat the queers" meme has outlived its use. It was a great way for straight males to shame other males into not harming gays. Now, non-violence towards gays has become the way to show everyone how straight you are. And that has turned into a weird sort of progressiveness. But I'd like to see us move beyond this.

I don't know if Bush is bisexual or queer deep down inside, but we have SO much hypocrisy to nail this guy on, why focus on this issue?

[jdj]

83. Those are the things I said, and I'm fucking gay.

You are quoting straight from my post, so why the fuck don't you cut and paste it.

thank you for outlining exactly the kind of homophobia I am talking about. You are telling me, a queer, that I am wrong about my life experience and all the dirty laundry and latent behavior and dirt and gossip and bullshit that I have watched witnessed since I came out of the closet.

Excuse me, but I fucking resent the hell out of someone telling me that I don't know what I know about my own people. You can't get more FUCKING HOMOPHOBIC than that, and that is why I posted that comment and that is why I started this thread. I makes me want to throw a fucking book at the fucking wall, and many, many gay men that I know will stand behind me and back me up on this shit.

Unfuckingbelievable, and if you knew what the hell you were talking about you would know that I was talking about the effects of latency in a gay hating culture. Matthew Shepard has been on the business end of it, and it is serious shit. Gays commit suicide at a disproportionately high rate, especially gay teenagers. Gay people have a disproportionately high rate of substance abuse because repression of homosexuality is a killing thing.

It's one more example of homophobia that you read that post as referring to homosexuality instead of what it truly is about, which is about latency and what a self-destructive and destructive force repression of homosexuality is, to ourselves and to society.

edit: one more thought, do you go around telling racial minorities what racism is, or women what sexism is, etc?

what do you think qualifies you as someone whose "best friends are gay" or whatever, to tell a me, a queer, what homophobia is? Save it, stick to something you know a little about.

[ultraist]

86. You are PERSONALIZING this, making it all about YOU

I NEVER said ANYTHING about YOUR personal life. I didn't say you were wrong about YOUR life experience. You never mentioned YOUR life experience.

You said that Bush was a mass murderer and that was an indicator of him being a repressed homosexual.

Do you PERSONALLY know mass murderers who are repressed homosexuals?

Why are you convulding your personal life with your post that was about BUSH? You weren't talking about your experiences, you were making speculations about Bush being Gay because he is a drug addict and mass murderer.

BTW, I said both friends and FAMILY members. And saying crap like that was in your post, puts my family more at risk for MORE HATE CRIMES.

Maybe your measure shouldn't be, "I'm willing to take a few hits" but it should be, will this put OTHERS at more risk for hate crimes.

Fucking chill out.

[jdj]

89. You're really out of your depth.

I absolutely believe as I stated in the previous thread, that all of Bush's sociopathic tendencies come from unresolved internal conflicts and that more and more evidence is coming to the fore to suggest that that conflict is homosexuality that he has been taught to hate by this culture, and that he can't own without losing the approval of Daddy, which is why he has structured his whole life around grasping for unattainable machismo.

It's so obvious.

Telling gay people not to talk about their experience and knowlege and arrogantly shutting us down because you think you know more about being gay than they do is arrogant beyond words.

I don't personally know any mass murderers, so I can't speculate about the sexuality of the ones I know, but I bet you would, and you would probably tell me I am wrong about what I don't know about them.

If you want to protect your family from hate crimes, not to mention nuclear obliteration, then jump on the bandwagon and help blow the lid off this dirty little secret of militaristic latent gay men and the damage they do to the world out of self-hatred.

It slays me that you use the same argument that chauvinists used against feminists in the 70's and 80's when the gals hit a home truth the men didn't want to deal with: 'that doesn't really matter, it's not relevant, it's PERSONAL'. This is why feminists coined the phrase "the personal is political". So I'm getting that when you talk about the gay experience, it's relevant for some reason you have yet to reveal, but when I, the gay one, talk about the gay experience, my gay experience doesn't count, because I am just a lowly gay person, and that, mere gayness, is personal, therefore irrelevant.

And just how is that not homophobic, again?

[ultraist]

99. I didn't say don't talk about Gay issues

Nor did I invalidate your personal experiences.

The fact remains, spreading myths that Gays are immoral and mass murderers does lead to social violence. I'm sure you know this but you are so caught up in taking this as a personal insult, you wont step outside of yourself long enough to see, that it is not wise to sling this shit around a public board of mostly heteros. I am not the only one who noticed this.

Did you see the thread where a few were obssessed with linking Gannon to a 15 year old pedophile case? Helllooo...This shit does happen here on this board and some caution is in order.

I don't know why you are viewing me as the enemy, we really are on the same side. I am not claiming to know what it is like to be homosexual nor would I be that presumptious, but I do have a basic understanding of how homophobia manifests and how heteros spread it.

Homophobia is not just from gays, it's also from heteros! Lots of heteros hate Gays. So, your claim that only Gays can know it, is false. We know the other side of it.

[jdj]

106. you are spreading it.

over and over and over, you are twisting a statement I made about the lengths that latency can drive one to into a statement about how it is the gayness, rather than the latency or repression, that drives a person to those lengths, and produces those results. The fact that you can't separate those two is disturbing to me and the point of this thread.

I "know the other side of it" too, as I grew up a straight fundie.

I also know the side of being in addiction recovery groups for ten years and watching lives get destroyed and people relapse and suicide over this stuff again and again and again.

I see real faces in front of me when I talk about the destructive force of repressiona and self-hatred. It's real people, though now deceased I am talking about.

Bush almost killed himself with drugs apparently in the 70s, but daddy had too much money to let him die. He learned to turn his anger and hatred outward, and 100,000 Iraqis have now paid the price. Only someone filled with self-hate could be such a murderer, Hitler himself was part Jewish. I guess I am handicapped in that I don't believe in the concept of evil, I go looking for answers. This may not be the whole answer, but I believe it is a big chunk of it.

[ultraist]

107. read some of the other posts here

tone it down
pc is needed
there has been homophobia
etc

Try to step out of yourself for a moment and look around. If you think it's safe to spread vile myths about Gays being immoral, you are being really fucking naive.

But go ahead, reinforce the notions in people's minds, that Gays are immoral, mass murderers, drug addicts, pedophiles, liars, and sinners if you like. No one can stop you.

I still stand with my original statements, that it is DANGEROUS to reinforce these myths.

[jdj]

109. Look I have read this thread from top to bottom.

I still don't quite understand why you feel the need to dictate to me what I as a gay person should be offended by and what I as a gay person should not say about gay people, when I have a hell alot more to lose than you do.

Would you please wake the fuck up and stop saying things like "gays are immoral", "gays are mass murderers", etc.

That is so stupid and so vile.

I am not reinforcing myths because I don't believe in myths in general. I personally would like to not see the world blow up over latent homosexuality.

perhaps you should read some posts that don't have Ultraist beside them and notice how many folks here have said "thanks" or "i agree with you". I really shouldn't expect a straight person to get what I am saying, although some apparently do.

But I feel I should be able to expect you to not mistate and twist my words around over and over...I was shocked to do it yet again in this post and truthfully I am starting to suspect you as one of the people who makes DU "not safe" in your words, because of your insistence in mistating my point over and over and being intentionally obtuse when you are obviously intelligent enough to get it. It's obvious you lack the life-experience to understand what you are talking about, but you should at least cease and desist with the homophobic misrepresentation.

[ultraist]

112. please read my other post further down

I think it's post 108 down the thread.

I'm not saying it because I'm concerned YOU lack awareness, I'm concerned because reinforcing these myths in other people's minds is treading on very dangerous ground.

I hope my other post clarifies this. Let me know if we are on the same page here. K?

[Fescue4u]

68. Calling someone Gay can certainly be an insult

Just like calling a man a women, or women a man would be insulting to the person whom you mistaken (intentially or no) for the wrong sex....yet that HARDLY means that there is anything wrong with being a man or a woman.

If you called me gay I would certainly be offended...Although calling a gay person gay would not be an insult.

[readmoreoften]

70. It's true, when people assume I'm straight it pisses me off.

Just because I'm a femme lesbian doesn't mean I'm straight or want to be straight or model myself after heterosexual women.

[jdj]

84. No it isn't.

It's offensive to me that you would be offended by that.

[Fescue4u]

95. oh well

Everbody gets offended sometime for something.

[Behind the Aegis]

97. How do you figure?

Out of curiosity, how would calling a person (or suggesting a person is) gay be insulting? What would be the circumstances in which that assertion, true or not, would be an insult?

Really, I am just curious. I can't think of a situation, so I thought, maybe you had a situation that would explain that rationale. Thanks.

[Fescue4u]

102. Well i gave some examples

of similiar situations.

People like their indentity...immensely. Think about how annoyed you may be when someone misprononces your name.

Your sex, name, orientation, political views are all part of that identity.

Even your party allegience is part of your identity. Would you be offended if someone called you a Republican? I bet it would at least annoy you. Yet being a Republican isnt an insult per se.

Take my message above at face value.. There is nothing really deep. Im just saying that people don't like to be misidentified when it comes to things well engrained in their identity.

[Behind the Aegis]

110. OK...I think I understand where you are coming from

I appreciate you answering my questions. I do love my identities...all of them. However, I cut people slack and gently correct them, but I am not insulted, unless that is how it is intended. E.G. I make an unpopular statement here and someone labels me a "freeper." Well, that is supposed to be an insult. But, if someone mistakes me for being straight, I don't lose my mind, I just correct them. So, I guess, it could be insulting if some kept insisting someone was gay who didn't identify that way. However, I don't think it is the "gay" thing as much as being mislabeled, as you suggested. Thanks for clearing that up!

[UTUSN]

72. Thanks for Your Understanding, from One Who Has Been PC-slapped

from a few DIFFERENT quarters. The eternal question has been: How can ANY minority--Hispanic, women (are women "minority"?), Black, Gay-- be a wingnut. Often, somebody says that it is a sign of non-monolithicism, that individuals within groups have a RIGHT to choose this-or-that (including ideology) for themselves. True. But show me one minority individual--ESTRADA, GONZALES, Clarence THOMAS, GUCKERT--who is a wingnut and we will see somebody who has SCOUNDRELISM at his core. Scoundrelism is at the core of ALL wingnuttiness, by definition. So when we're saying that such-and-such WINGNUT is Gay or a Hispanic/Black SELL-OUT, it is the HYPOCRISY (as is often said) that is the real target. It is essential to NAME the difference between what they say and do.

So when I say "DAN Coulter," somebody is OFFENDED on the grounds that I am maligning her gender. My target is her betrayal of her gender, as defined by the opposite of her gender.

The target is ALWAYS the HYPOCRISY in the WINGNUT being discussed.

I detest EXTREME-PC-ism. When an extreme-PC-ist is "OFFENDED" there is NO communication possible, just bye-bye.

[Cannikin]

77. Just for the record, I've been here for well over a year,

and nobody has ever said anything homophobic to me, who didnt turn out to be a freeper.

DU's been good to me.

[Runcible Spoon]

80. I'm glad you feel welcome....

usually we have a few carefully cloaked bigots who are extremely vocal but they tend to keep pushing the envelope until they get banned. The sadistic part of me is a bit sad when they go since I have a certain fondness for flamefests- debating cleverly cloaked assholes can keep your brain active!

[jdj]

85. I have this little quirk.

People who are truly not freepers but just un-p.c. can be educated about the errors of their ways if they make insulting comments out of ignorance or lack of experience that they truly don't intend or understand the effect of. Like Fitzgerald said, "if you don't learn kindess at home, life teaches it to you with a whip." So I take that stuff with a grain of salt.

But people who for some reason think they are enlightened but who in reality are slinging subtle homophobia all over the place...I have zero patience and tolerance for that. But unfortunately you can't do anything with these folks because they are truly convinced that they are the be-all and end-all of life's experiences, (not coincidentally they are usually straight white males that are used to taking up all the room and sucking in all the air, so they don't understand the concept of 'there are some things you know nothing about').

I find the arrogance of people like this extremely hard to swallow, and that is the thrust of my post. I don't know what it takes to get through to folks like this to shut up and listen, but I won't quit trying, because I am queer that way. I'm glad you haven't experienced either kind of homophobia here, and I hope that continues.

[ultraist]

94. Oh, ok...

Whatever you say...It's my homophobia against Gay males (I'm female) that motivated me to say that spreading negative attitudes and steroetypes of Gay males and the myth that Gays are immoral and mass murders is dangerous. I just made that shit up. Right.

I think you are just pissed that several of us noticed it was out line, so you freaked out.

excerpts:
http://www.bibble.org/gay/phobia/roots_of_homophobia.ht...

But the greatest portion of anti-homosexual bias, psychologists now say, arises from a combination of fear and self-righteousness in which homosexuals are perceived as contemptible threats to the moral universe. Such attitudes are supported, researchers say, by the fact that unlike any other minority, homosexuals still find themselves the target of institutionalized bias. They are barred from the armed services, and in many states sodomy laws make their sexual activities illegal. Until 1980, the official psychiatric diagnostic manual listed homosexuality as a mental disorder, "It's as though our very existence is somehow a threat," said Naomi Lichtenstein, a social worker at the New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project who counsels victims of attacks. One of the most troubling findings for those trying to combat anti-gay bias is data showing the hostility is far more accepted among large numbers of Americans than is bias against other groups. In surveys, about three-quarters of homosexuals say they have been harassed by people calling them names, and as many as one in four say that they have been physically assaulted.

"Anti-gay violence is still acceptable because while leaders decry racial and religious bigotry, they ignore violence against gays and lesbians,'' said Matt Foreman, executive director of the New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project. A 1988 study by the State of New York for the Governor's Task Force on Bias-Related Violence concluded that of all groups, "the most severe hostilities are directed at lesbians and gay men." In "one of the most alarming findings" the report found that while teen-agers surveyed were reluctant to advocate open bias against racial and ethnic groups, they were emphatic about disliking homosexual men and women.

They are perceived "as legitimate targets which can be openly attacked," the report said. In a survey of 2,823 students from 8th to 12th grade, three-quarters of the boys and half the girls said it would be bad to have a homosexual neighbor. The feelings were as strong among 12-year-olds as among 17-year-olds. Many students added gratuitous vicious comments about homosexuals; that was not the case with other groups. Scientists who study attitudes toward homosexuals say the largest group among people who are biased are those for whom homosexuals "stand as a proxy for all that is evil," said Dr. Gregory Herek, a psychologist at the University of California at Davis.

"Such people see hating gay men and lesbians as a litmus test for being a moral person," said Dr, Herek, who has done extensive research on attitudes towards homosexuals. Often they act out of adherence to religious orthodoxy in faiths that hold homosexuality to be a sin. Dr. Herek does not see AIDS as having increased anti-gay feelings as much as offering "a convenient hook on which they can hang their pre-existing prejudices." The affirmation of one's own values through anti-gay sentiment, his research has found, is the most common motive. For instance, in a study of attitudes toward homosexuals in 248 college students, Dr. Herek found this was the source of hostility in just over half those who held an anti-gay bias. Bob Altemeyer, a psychologist at the University of Manitoba who has developed a scale measuring attitudes toward homosexuals, has found that those with the most intense hostility have an extreme fear that the world is an unsafe place and that society is at risk, and a self-righteousness that leads them to judge those who hold different values as morally inferior. "They see homosexuality as a sign that society is disintegrating and as a threat to their sense of morality," said Dr. Altemeyer. "Their self-righteousness makes them feel they are acting morally when they attack homosexuals. It overcomes the normal inhibitions against aggression." Religion Makes Change Difficult Dr. Altemeyer tells his students that he is gay. "For most, over the course of the year it makes their attitudes toward gays more positive, he says. But if their hostility toward gays is based on religion, their views are hardest to change." "Once a person has an anti-gay bias, it is difficult to change," Dr. Herek said, "even when reality contradicts it." Thus the stereotypes of gay men as feminine and lesbians as masculine persist in people's minds even though most gay men and lesbians do not, in fact, conform to those images. In an article to be published later this year in "Homosexuality: Social, Psychological, and Biological Issues," (Sage Publishers), Dr. Herek reviewed a case in point: the tenacity of the belief that homosexuals should not be teachers because they might sexually molest children. Citing studies showing that child molesters are overwhelmingly heterosexual or simply fixated on children, not homosexual, Dr. Herek notes that despite the facts, many people continue to believe that gay men are child molesters. "Once parents perceive a threat to their children," Dr. Herek said, "their emotionality makes them prone to simplistic thinking. It is such emotionality that makes anti-gay stereotypes so hard to change." In a classic study of stereotyping, Mark Snyder, a psychologist at the University of Minnesota, gave people a description of the life history of a woman named "Betty K." After reading the history, some were told that Betty later had a lesbian relationship and lived with her female lover. Others were told that Betty married a man. "It made a dramatic difference in how people remembered and interpreted her life, " said Dr. Snyder. While there was nothing negative in what people remembered, Dr. Snyder found that people selected facts that supported stereotypes about lesbians and ignored those that might contradict them. That normal tendency, he said, can build into a bias. Negative Attitudes Snowball
"If your attitude is negative, it snowballs, and you only notice and remember facts that are negative, until it becomes a full-blown prejudice," said Dr. Snyder. "And you tend to assume everyone feels as you do. As you become more convinced, you are more likely to take the next step and put your beliefs into actions like outright discrimination or violence, whether it's against blacks or gays." Defensiveness about their own sexuality is another common source of people's hostility toward homosexuals. In Dr. Herek's research, for instance, this was the second most common motive, accounting for about 40 percent of those hostile to homosexuals.
This explanation for homophobia is the oldest, dating back at least to a 1914 essay by Sandor Ferenczi, one of Freud's original followers who proposed that feelings of disgust toward gay men by heterosexual men are defensive, a reaction against their own similar attraction to other men. That view stems from Freud's theory that all people are originally bisexual in early childhood, and repress their attraction to the same sex as they grow. "Homophobia has much to do with the stereotypic perception of gays as feminine: the more feminine a gay man appears, the more hostility he evokes in other men," said Dr. Richard Isay, a psychiatrist at Cornell Medical College and author of "Being Homosexual." Dr. Peggy Hanley-Hackenbruck, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health Services University and president of the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists, said, "In insecure heterosexual women, a lesbian can arouse fears of their own latent homosexual feelings, and so provoke hostility."
But Dr. Isay said, "Seeing a feminine man evokes a tremendous amount of anxiety in many men; it triggers an awareness of their own feminine qualities, such as passivity or sensitivity, which they see as being a sign of weakness. Women, or course, don't fear their femininity. That's partly why men are more homophobic than women, and why those biases are so strong in groups where men are selected for their masculine qualities, such as the army or sports."
An exact accounting of such violence against gays is difficult, since many victims are reluctant to contact the police. But there were three times more attacks against gays reported to the New York Police Department Bias Crime Unit in the first half of 1990 as against the same period the year before.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[enigmatic]

104. I understand what you're saying...

And for what it's worth, I agree.

[ultraist]

105. Whatever, you did say those things about Bush

I did not attempt to translate my experience into a gay experience. I am conveying my experience as a hetero, knowing well and fucking good how the hetero bias and prejudices manifest and spread.

What personal experience of yours did I invalidate? You are saying some totally whacked out shit.
WTF?

Take my word for it, even "liberal" hetero Democrats say and do some vile things against Gays. If you think this is a totally safe haven and you don't need to be contientious not to spread myths about Gays, you are being really fucking naive.

[jdj]

108. I'm not "spreading myths" but that is a different angle.

I know what vile things are said about gay people because I used to say them. I grew up an ignorant fundie so I have truly been on the other side.

I hadn't considered it the way you are seeing it, as this not being a "safe haven" because I know I will pay with my body and my heart and my own ass, I don't expect anyone to stick up for me, but if you are saying these things out of true concern then that is to be commended.

No bigot Bush fan is going to own any suggestion of gayness so any speculation he might be gay cannot be used by them for any point. They won't dare bring it up, even in jest, because apparently there is a hell of alot of evidence out there to suggest that it is true, beginning with the close friendship with Victor Ashe.

[ultraist]

111. That is what I have been trying to communicate to you

And I apologize if I did not communicate that effectively. We know that people have ugly preconceived notions (myths) about Gays (immoral, sinners, mass murderers, pedophiles, drug addicts, all like Roy cohn) and when comments are made that reinforce these notions, it is not in our best interest. ("Our" being, those of us who do not condone social violence).

Take my word for it, people cling to these and sometimes, such notions are so entrenched in their thought processes, that they are not even aware of their homophobic *jokes* and *puns* and that leads to worse things. That's why I cringe when I see this stuff. I know how heteros take it and run with it.

Aren't there things that you consider safe to say around only Gays? Or trusted friends? But not in public? That's what I mean. YOU may understand them and see through the layers, but many don't.

[jdj]

117. there's a porno pic on the internet of Gannon

and his member in it's full glory.

That picture is worth a thousand words, and I bet there are a thousand more out there.

I am fully aware of these bigoted folks but I am also aware of what I can and can't control and I take that full risk when I open my mouth.

This is way too important to protect the feelings of me or anyone else, it's way bigger than that, and the world is at stake here, literally.

I've stated over and over I grew up a fundie and i know these people inside and out. I'm not anymore scared of them than I reasonably should be. I won't be silenced, by well-meaning straight people or by overly sensitive gay people when it comes to things like this.

No bigotry or bias can rebut the truth of those pictures of Gannon and what is coming out about Bush. The birthing process for libs is going to be letting go of the myth that gay=liberal when this clearly is not so. We have a whole military engaged in homoerotic militaristic fetishism and that needs to be exposed for what it is. Just about any sphere that is non-domestic and exclusive of women is probably a bastion of closeted male homosexuality...watch some of those old western movies with one eye open for erotic undertones if you want your mind blown,it's a paradigm shifing experience.

I completely disagree that this discussion needs to be hush/hush and kept "among friends". The lid needs to be blown off this, and I don't mean the brave gay people who are out, even the conservative ones, I mean the gay people who don't identify that way and live with all the trappings of heterosexuality. In fact, I think the top may be off of this, or cracked, and it may not be able to be plugged back up. All the better.

[ultraist]

122. I understand you point

I'm just saying that if you do it recklessly, you will inevitably see a bunch of vermin crawl out of the woodwork, to "join" you.

Strategy is important. Would you lay down some lines of coke in front of a bunch of recovering addicts and say, don't snort any of this, we are going to use it to lure other tea toilers out of the closet. People get an adrenalin rush out of gay bashing. Be careful.

I'm NOT saying this issue should be silenced, I'm saying it should be discussed responsibly.

[jdj]

123. I cannot concern myself with that, especially here.

There was absolutely nothing irresponsible about what I posted in that thread and nothing that I absolutely do not believe from the bottom of my heart, in fact, I think that it should be shouted from the roof-tops.

I hate to get on a sour note again, but please don't condescend to tell me to "be responsible" about discussing something about which you have no personal experience while I do. You need to let go of that. Christ, do you really think I would do something to hurt myself, as a gay person? Tsk, tsk. On the contrary I say what I say because I deeply believe it can only help, and my point was anyone reading homophobia into that is homophobic themselves. I think many straight people have been thrown for a mind-boggling loop with the Gannon stuff and the light it sheds on Bush, but it is really nothing that gay people didn't already know. So this is a window into splitting open the whole wall. I'm going to take offense at any attempt to censor it, no matter where it comes from.

[progressivebydesign]

87. I've been here since 2001, I'm straight.. but I've seen none of it either.

You're right. There was a painful episode regarding the faux DUer who attacked after the election.. but I have yet to see any homophobic or attacking behavior here ('cept for the freepers who drop in).

[ultraist]

116. uh, huh... is that why numerous gay people have said it has happened?

If you haven't seen it, you are not paying attention.

[fujiyama]

91. You have a point

The reason I have mostly avoided Gannon threads is for a similar reason - they go off into immature tangents about him being Bush's gay lover or some other such nonsense...

I really don't see why Gannon's sexual preference/orientation has anything to do with anything. It's irrelevant. What's important is that he was possibly paid for the WH for "reporting" what they wanted him to.

[Behind the Aegis]

96. It has been bad in the past.

Right after the election, homophobia was RAMPANT on this board! So much so, my partner stopped reading DU all together (I know a few other gays who did the same). Unlike him, I can be a real bitch, so I stayed and fought. Other queers and allies joined together and we battled back so really stupid opinions and "facts" about homosexuality. I appreciate what you are saying. This is has been an interesting thread!

BTW...you really want to see heads spin off and REALLY expose homophobia? Suggest or even ask if Jesus was gay. There was a thread about that not long ago (should be archived). There was all kinds of homophobia that came spilling out...a few 1000+ persons got banned! It really brought out the hate!

Keep up the good fight!!!

[jdj]

100. I can't decide whether I want to think Jesus was gay or married.

Both are equally offensive to fundies, so I'm torn.

[Behind the Aegis]

103. You so crazy! LOL!

It is interesting that they get all bent out of shape over his possibility of having been married too. I never understood that. I always looked at this way...13 men, trapezing through the desert, sharing their feelings...sounds like some parties I have been too!

[HEyHEY]

101. Where's this been going on?

[ultraist]

114. DON'T FUCKING ASK!

LMAO! I have been TRYING to communicate with jdj but apparently, I was not making my point very clearly, hopefully he understands now where I am coming from.

I'm glad that yet another person has stated that homophobia has been out of control here before. THANKS!

[jdj]

120. The point I am trying to make with you is that there is

more than one kind of homophobia.

And the point I am trying to make is that the kind that is most offensive to me is the patronizing arrogant kind that is well-meaning but suffocating because it overreaches.

And that I find this far more offensive than the kind that YOU THINK I should find offensive, which is the stupid bland garden variety ignorance. I'm over that.

But the kind coming from people who should know better, and the kind that shows especially from people who insist they aren't homophobic but ooze homophobia all over the place, is just extremely hard to swallow.

[ultraist]

125. fine

My Gay family members, with whom I have discussed this, strongly disagree with your approach. Your perspective is not the ONLY one out there. Say all the vile shit you want about Gays and be in denial about the fact that homophobia spreads like wildfire.

If you want to be reckless in your pursuit to out Gays, that's your choice.

If you want to educate people about the vast amount of closeted homosexuality that exists in our society, particularly among power mongers, there are effective and sophisticated ways to do so. But off the cuff remarks that sound like they are out of the mouth of a redneck, is not one of the most effective way to do it.

[jdj]

126. jesus fucking christ.

get a load of this.

well, put an ad in the gay yellow pages: "Straight female looking for work telling gay people how they should talk about their gayness and the gayness of others. No experience, and not willing to learn from anyone with experience, either."

I am so offended by your attitude there are no words. I'd much rather be called a queer and a freak than have someone say to me what you just did.

[ultraist]

131. I did not tell you how to talk about YOUR gayness

I have attempted to tell you from the hetero perspective and asked you to think about how this Roy Cohn type talk affects the heteros having seen some heteros foam at the mouth when this approach is used. Others have also stated, that this shit leads to bad things and that it is not healthy.

You are convulding what I have said, AGAIN. I have never claimed to be speaking from the Gay perspective. I am speaking from a hetero perspective, which I know quite well. If you think that heteros don't say, "Is he Gay?" as an insult, then you are sadly mistaken. If you think, when a hetero says, "oh, probably a pedophille" that they are well meaning, you are mistaken.

You have stated, that as someone who was a fundie, with previous severe internalized homophobia, who is now out, you think it's fine "to take a few hits" or to pursue this in whatever way YOU may be affected or a way in which YOU think is ok. If you think dragging up this Roy Cohn crap again and again and smearing it on a hetero dominated board is cool, have fucking at it. Research shows otherwise.

Whatever, I'd done with this conversation. I attempted to explain to you how this looks from a hetero perspective and you continue to insult me.

Take note, not once did I sling the kind of nasty mud you have slung at me. So much, for civilized discourse.

[noiretextatique]

132. i'm gay...and i think your nemesis makes a valid point

which is evident by the way you continue to protest too much...and shoot the messenger.

[rman]

115. A few threads on DU, a regular occurence.

Though DU polls show homosexuality is a non-issue for the vast majority of people here.
It's just that certain individuals apparently have an interest in trying to frame things so that anything even remotely critical said about gays is in fact anti-gay, which would make DU anti gay.

[ultraist]

119. well...

There are different levels of awareness and sensitivity, I'll give you that.

You also have to consider that for some of us, when we hear *jokes* such as, "Gannon and Rove...first comes love, then comes AIDS" we don't think that's "remotely anti gay" but out of line.

Personally, I am fucking sick of hearing incinuations that Gays deserve AIDS and it's "funny" if they do have it. It's not so "funny" when you have taken care of someone who has died from AIDS.

We all live in different areas and in my neck of the woods, those types of remarks aren't funny, they send up red flags of WARNING, major REDNECK alert, be aware/be careful.

Maybe others don't have to be on guard as much, but in my Southern state, WE DO.

[rman]

130. But would you go so far as to prohibit making such jokes?

I don't care about such jokes, but i do care about freedom of speech.

I'm glad i can agree with you that such jokes are "not remotely anti gay, but out of line".
I wouldn't want to drink beer with a person making such jokes, but i don't think it is worth it making such an issue out of 'bad taste'.

[tx_dem41]

136. Ummm...believe it or not, but

this isn't a free speech zone, its a moderated forum. The moderators have the power to delete anything they deem to be inappropriate.

[readmoreoften]

128. dupe/delete

[readmoreoften]

129. don't bother trying to hijack this thread

we already know that you like to flamebait gay threads.

just a few moments ago you posted:

"I think there can be other reasons besides "courage, self-awareness, heart and soul" to have oneself transgendered. Like, money perhaps. Some people will whore themselves to anything in order to get some wealth and influence."

That was in response to a lovely post of support from another DU member who wrote that transpeople had "courage, self-awareness, heart and soul"

Even after a transperson said she was hurt and offended, you refused to retract your statements and said that 'some trans-sexuals ' probably do it for 'the money'

Maybe you aren't the person to prove that homophobia does not exist on DU. You are obviously very disappointed that we call you on your shit.

[ultraist]

133. And it's precisely comments like that

I am referring to. From my hetero perspective, I can tell you that homophobia does exist (here and everywhere) and often cloaks itself in Bible quotes, "jokes" and stereotypes. BTW, more often than not, when a hetero says, "Is he GAY?" it IS an insult. Sadly, this is the state of our supposed enlightened society.