gay DUers

[ulysses]

I'll admit to not having read much of DemLikr's thread, but misunderstandings continue about why some folks dislike the outing of rightwing personalities (sic) who are suspected of being gay. Anyone care to elaborate some?

(Mods - since we already have one flamewar on the topic, please feel free to lock this thread if it becomes another one.)

[Democrats unite]

1. Why should anyone be outed?

And why does it make a difference if their left or right? By the way my hangs to the left if your interested. And why would sexuality need to play a part, unless you want to lower yourself to the level of the neocons themselves.

EDIT SPELLING.

[WillParkinson]

9. Outing

I believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own sexual identity. I do not think that, under normal circumstances, anyone should be outed.

However....

If a person is in a position to do harm to gays or lesbians and is hiding his/her sexuality and there is definitive proof of it then I'm for outing them.

[arwalden]

12. "A-A-Amen!" (Said The Atheist.)

I agree with you 100%!

Under any other circumstances "outing" political celebrities (sic) is unnecessary.

However, if it could be revealed that the most virulent anti-gay activists or televangelists are themselves gay... then they are fair game. HYPOCRISY MUST BE EXPOSED!

Ralph Reed. Fred Phelps. Rick Santorum. Pat Robertson. Jerry Falwell. Lindsey Graham... consider yourselves warned.

-- Allen

[roughsatori]

2. HILARY CLINTON IS GAY!! !!

It is not the outing so much, it is using "gay" as an epithet
and then pretending that you are outing them. Every scum-bag eventually gets called "gay," on DU: Limbaugh, Hitler, Shrub, Tweety, and more have been "outed."

If someone is gay and votes against or propagandizes against gays I have no problem exposing their sexuality if one has FACTS. But labeling people "gay" with no evidence other then what you perceive from TV is the same as calling someone a "fag" in high-school. It infuriates me when the people who claim they are "outing" someone whose sexuality they have no clue about persist in this ploy.

Imagine if I posted a topic "Hilary is gay," how all of these people would scream because it would be clear it was meant as an insult. That is why Freepers say Hilary is "gay." The DUers who indulge in this same behavior have more in common with Freepers then with me.

They are using "gay" as an insult and then refuse to own up to it. DU

I don't think Hilary is gay; I just wanted to get your attention. :P

[ulysses]

4. thanks

Vividly put. :)

[QC]

5. Good answer.

I can't think of a single knuckledragging reactionary who has not been called gay at DU.

After a while it becomes hard not to suspect that people are using "gay" as an epithet.

[roughsatori]

8. I must have read 5 "sissy" threads today

Odd that I am offended by that. I was not taunted as a "sissy" or "gay," in school. I was in the "cool," politically aware and left group of kids (and I did not even trust them enough to tell my sexuality to since they used "fag" as an insult too. I think that using "sissy" is a covert way of insinuation "fag."

I have known some feminine men who were clearly "sissies" and extraordinarily brave. Conversely, I have known "masculine" men who were cowards. There is an implication in the word "sissy" that only "men" can be strong, brave, and in control--not women, or men who are perceived as womanish. I wonder if "sissy" is not only rooted in homophobia but sexism.

[Christian73]

14. Great post!

As a self-avowed sissy, I really appreciate what you have to say.

I agree with those here who've said that outing is only appropriate when a political figure is using their power to oppress gays when there is proof that they themselves are gay. Think Roy Cohn.

[karlschneider]

6. No sane person gives a ratz ass whether any particular person is gay.

Of course we have to realize there are a lot of peopoe who aren't sane.
:eyes:

[tuck]

21. it comes down to identity

if someone is gay and chooses to identify as straight, you have to respect that.

if they choose to identify to half the population as straight, you have to respect that.

if they choose to identify to JUST YOU as straight, you have to respect that.

identity is not something that will fit your preconceptions 100% of the time. you have to seriously bend your mind up to get it, if "getting it" is possible.

short answer: keep sexual orientaion out of it.

[TheBigGuy]

31. sort of like "Pink Tutu Democrats"

....sort has a homophobic subtext to it, too.

[DarkPhenyx]

3. Definiton of outing.

Invasion of privacy.

enough said.

[Pale Blue Dot]

7. I subscribe to the golden rule theory

But, since you asked, it's easy to spot a gay conservative. How? They have the most homophopic rhetoric. I am very convinced about this. Rick Santorum: gay. Jesse Helms: gay. Even if they have not admited it to themselves. Why am I so sure?

1. Why would you be fearful of gay men/women? Think about it. What is there possibly to fear about homosexuality - UNLESS - you are afraid that gay men/women can "turn" "ordinary" people (such as yourself or your children) gay.

2. I am a comfortably straight man, and I know that no man can "turn" me gay. I know that no gay man will ever "turn" my son gay. He is or he isn't, end of story. I KNOW this because I am comfortable with my sexuality.

3. Anyone that fears gay men/women must be concrened that they can "turn" straight men/women. As I have said, if they were comfortable in their sexuality, they would not have this fear, and therefore not have a fear of homosexuality.

Just my controversial feelings on this subject.

[Plaid Adder]

10. I've explained this before, but since it's you, uly...

Once more with feeling:

1) Nobody ever says "X is gay!" like it's a *good* thing. Nobody ever says, "Hey, do you suppose Clinton was gay? Would that explain why he was so great?" No. The "X is gay" threads are only ever started as a way of bashing someone. Which only leads one to the conclusion that people on DU only enjoy calling someone gay if they dislike him/her. Which suggests that being gay is a bad thing that happens to bad people.

2) It is one thing to out someone who actually *is* gay, and it is quite another to just call someone gay because you dislike them, which is what mostly happens in the "X is gay" threads on DU.

3) The excuse that these people are only busting on the putatively gay right-wing asshole because he's a hypocrite is unconvincing, at least to me and a lot of my gay DU brethren and sistren. If you want to call O'Reilly or Tweety or whoever a hypocrite, just call him a fucking hypocrite.

I get very, very tired of the "X is gay" threads. Very. This is why I never post on them, because I know it would just make me more tired. But I'll tell you what makes me most tired, is watching the people who start these conversations continue to insist that nothing they're doing is at all offensive to anyone. If you're really interested in not offending people, then how about you listen to them when they try to communicate something to you, instead of telling them that you know more about what offends them than they do.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[ulysses]

11. thanks, Adder

:)

[CWebster]

18. When the Repugs threatened to out the Dems,

Barney Franks countered that he would in turn out them...and put the kaboosh on the whole thing.

it is unfortunate that anyone would care either way and the more that homosexuality becomes less of a dirty little secret, the better. But there have been repressed closet-cases who have been on the forefront of gay-bashing- JEdgar Hoover the classic example.

In the case of Tweety, the same commentary would be running if he was drooling over women's bosoms, but he is not, he is gushing over "manliness" and guy's machismo with an almost pathological enthusiam. He seems totally unaware of how inappropriate it is, considering his automatic assumption of representing convention, and how obvious it is to the enlightened observer.

[bearfartinthewoods]

20. your post and others who refer to tweety's failure to 'gush' over

women's breasts ignores a simple fact.

manliness, the stereotypical depiction thereof, is an attribute associated with leadership. bosom's aren't. so while tweety's comments on some attribute with a political significance (manliness)is appropos to a political show, comments on bosoms would hardly be appropriate in any political context.

[CWebster]

22. Good point

It IS the drooling over cocks that is not recognised as inappropriate in that context - when it approaches a sick masturbatory adulation of the lowest attributes of testosterone-driven domination. A real circle-jerk.

;-)

[QC]

23. So "a sick masturbatory adulation...

...of the lowest attributes of testosterone-driven domination" is what characterizes homosexuality?

Edit: On more careful reading, I see that this is not your point. Sorry about that. But it does seem to be the point of the "_____ is Gay" crowd.

[CWebster]

25. Not at this point

it is just Tweety being a stupid white male. ;-)

[QC]

26. He's been working on that for a very long time

and become quite good at it.

[bearfartinthewoods]

27. sheesh......

i'll admit i'm not a constant veiwer of tweety. i sure as hell must have missed a helluva show because i've never seen anything approaching what you describe.

[DemLikr]

29. U mean U missed the show where Tweety wore a black sequined bustier?

On second thought, I'm sure you'd have a rational explanation of why a completely straight man would do such a thing.

[bearfartinthewoods]

36. oh...so now you want to take on crossdressers as well?

i've never met a gay man with as many issues with sexuality as you have. uausally GLB folks are more liberal about such things.

btw...i guess you missed phil donahue wearing a white blouse with a peter pan collar, a navy cardigan and a plaid skirt. ...rather edgy for the era.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[bearfartinthewoods]

39. that will teach me to try humor on the internet

the subject line was supposed to be a joke. my humor always falls flat when people can't see me grinning. but this one was sooooo very obvious, or so i thought, i didn't think i needed to use a :evilgrin:

as to having met you, you set the standards for psyche evaluations.

remember? you decided tweety was gay because of what you perceived
via TV?

if you can judge over the tube, i can judge over the internet.

[theHandpuppet]

38. Well said, Plaid Adder

I'll just add a ditto to your post.

[soleft]

13. It saddens me that people think it can be used as a weapon

When people claim that all they're trying to do is point out the hypocracy, they're also enjoying the torment that any indication a right wing icon is gay will cause the morality sentinels.

But when you say, wow, if Limbaugh was gay, it would really piss off the right, you could substitute gay with wife beater, drug addict, ax murderer.

What would be nice would be if no one ever speculated about anyone's sexuality, and if a Rick Santorium was ever photographed leaving a gay bar and the right wing burst embolisms over it, the left would say, you know, another clear example of right wing bigotry and repression.

[piece sine]

16. DU has not yet reached higher ground

Gays are pretty-much treated here the same as in the real-world, no worse than "on the street" but, alas, really no better. I've ceased to here come in search of solidarity on my homosexuality...I'm here for the progressive political stands that I share with many here.

Excuse my heresy, but I think their are many leftist leaders who are quietly gay who we would never dream of outing for fear of hurting their reputation. When we fancy the act of outing a right-winger (as several do -- even in this thread -- we collectively concede "gay identity" as a weapon to foist upon our enemies. One can't have it both ways.

So we build for a better world. Someday, being gay may have little meaning at all outside of personal dating and relationships. Until then, we who are argue ingnore -- or at best endure -- those who see it as a "negative." Homophobia is a live and well at DU, jsut like in the real world. Straight White men and women have no idea what insults and indignities much been borne in course of reading many threads here. Sure, they are prgoressive but they're not THAT progressive!

[ulysses]

17. thus the attempt at understanding.

Straight White men and women have no idea what insults and indignities much been borne in course of reading many threads here.

I have no reason to doubt that, but I very much doubt that most DUers would want to continue in something that causes insult or indignity to gays. To a sympathetic straight guy like me, some things seem counter-intuitive on their face, as with the objections to the whole outing thing, and I'm indebted personally to dsc for explaining the issue to me a while back.

Fight homophobia, but where there's simply misunderstanding among people of good will, educate.

[Plaid Adder]

19. I've put in a lot of time educating well-meaning straight people.

I have to do it a lot in my regular life, so I get tired of doing it online. I tried to do it all in one big burst in 1996 when I wrote this:

http://www.io.com/~wwwomen/queer/etiquette/intro.html

A Straight Person's Guide To Gay Etiquette

It's out of date and doesn't cover fine points such as this particualr topic but if you want a basic grounding in the indignities that piece sine is talking about, it's a starting point.

I have no reason to doubt that, but I very much doubt that most DUers would want to continue in something that causes insult or indignity to gays.

Well, for you, uly, I'm sure this is true, and that's why I took the time to respond. But I have learned from experience that there are plenty of other DUers who merely want to be told that it is A-OK to keep doing what they're doing. A lot of straight white people, especially if they identify as liberal or progressive, are really very blind about the ways in which they perpetuate some of this stuff, and if you point it out to them, they don't wanna hear it. I have run into all kinds of attitude about this, including, "You're a vulnerable minority and you're going to need the support of straight people like me, so why are you pissing me off by telling me that something I did bothered you?" It's pointless to argue with someone who can't tell how condescending and infuriating that is.

Hence, I avoid a lot of the threads that might appear to offer an opportunity for 'education.' I've been out for 15 years and I've done my time. I still vividly remember the day I went out to lunch with a fellow grad student who I had thought was a friend of mine, only to find out that this 'lunch' was essentially an hour-long interview in which she attempted to find out what made these gentle but misguided homosexuals tick so that she could incorporate that knowledge into her fundamentalist mindset. Outreach is important; but we get tired of being treated like native informants or zoo animals.

I come to the DU forums to blow off steam, relax, have a good laugh, and try to work out some of my ideas for my writing. Fighting the same @#$! battle about the same annoying @#$! borderline gay-bashing behavior is neither entertaining nor useful.

I conclude with an apposite quote from the etiquette guide referenced above:

"For <gay people, combating homophobia> is not simply engaging in a bracing intellectual debate. It is defending themselves and what they believe against the forces of ignorance, darkness and denial. This is not something even Batman wants to do on his day off."

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[ulysses]

24. understood

Especially this: but we get tired of being treated like native informants or zoo animals

On the other hand, much as I inadvisably and poorly tried to do so here, it's damn near impossible for someone with no direct experience on the receiving end of anti-gay stereotyping and bigotry to explain to someone else with a similar lack of experience why something that isn't obviously harmful is, in fact, harmful. That's why I asked for the input here.

This is me now attempting to back out of a conversation I probably shouldn't have dived into in the first place...:)

[TheBigGuy]

32. ROFTL! So true...

"Outreach is important; but we get tired of being treated like native informants or zoo animals."

yes it sure does feel that way sometimes, doesn't it?

[Liberal Veteran]

15. Well, I am of two minds about this....

I don't care for the idea of outing much at all. I completely get the idea that it capitalizes on homophobia.

On the other hand, there are instances where pure hypocracy cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. I want people to be very clear that I would support outing people in a very narrow circumstance and that would be when a closeted gay person capitalizes on homophobia to further his agenda. For instance, if I had proof that Jerry Falwell or Randall Terry were doing guys on the side, I would out them in a heartbeat. You don't get to build a career bashing gays politically while secretly being gay yourself.

Another instance I would probably support outing is any of the so called "ex-gay" ministry leaders that fell off the wagon so to speak. These people also capitalize on homophobia and prey on those who have been victimized by homophobia in our society I do not think I am under any obligation to protect them.

I don't think we should be outing people because they are closeted and on the wrong side of the political spectrum however. In other words, being secretly gay and republican simply isn't a good enough reason to out someone.

[dsc]

28. as numerous others have said

There is a difference between outing people who we factually know are gay and outing people based on stereotypes. One of the problems with the second thing is the logical implications of those stereotypes.

For example. The Bush is gay threads mainly featured two pieces of evidence one was the initiation for skull and bones while the other was his friend Victor Ashe. The first served to associate being gay with depraved sex acts involving coffins while the second served to reinforce the idea that if you are straight you shouldn't have gay friends. I ate alone, I mean all alone, for almost a year in middle school. Not one kid would sit at my table. Because I was thought to be gay. (accurately it turned out). Do you have any clue what that is like? Do you have an idea how I felt? I lost over 10 lbs in a couple of months. Everytime I see posts that reinforce that "if you have gay friends you are gay stereotype" I want to spit I get so mad.

Then there were the Rush Limbaugh is gay threads. Here it was the "he had a gay mentor" stereotype. Just why do you think so many teachers are in the closet? Just why do you think that the gay community has such a tough time reaching out to kids? Just why do you think gay teens had no where to go for years after adults had them? Could it possibly be that stereotype? Could it be that we are accused of recruiting all the time?

Real people suffer from these stereotypes. Everytime people on the left of all places perpetuate them you are writing checks that gay and lesbians have to pay. Especially gay and lesbain teens. Ask yourself, why should they pay your bills?

[ulysses]

guess that'll teach me

I really do get what you're saying here, dsc - you're the one who helped me to understand it in the first place. This thread was meant as a way to try to help KoKo01 understand it as well.

[dsc]

33. I'm sorry

that post was way more personal than I had intended. I didn't mean the singular you. Times like this I wish our language was like Spanish so that the difference would be apparent. I also probably shouldn't have brought up what I brought up. It probably was more predjudical than probabitive.

[ulysses]

34. no need, my friend

I shouldn't have asked without understanding the issues at hand more thoroughly.

[dsc]

35. In all honesty I went too far

Intellectually I know that I wasn't treated that way due to Rush Limbaugh threads. Sometimes I type before I think. This is one of those times. My point was valid to an extent but I went further than was valid.

[hippiegranny]

30. people say gay as if it is a BAD thing

when people say "oh that's so GAY," just respond, "no, actually it's not cool at all."

[dsc]

40. that is really sweet

It is such a little thing but also such a big one.