Punching Necks
You know what, liberals? You are ruining a perfectly good sex scandal for me. I'd be perfectly happy to wallow in the hilarity of a conservative reporter revealed to be a hot prosty. I would laugh and make Marine sex jokes for weeks, giggling to myself quietly on the street as I soaked in the majesty of such an event. I'd even, you know, jack off thinking about having hot for-hire-sex with Mr. Gannon.
But no. You won't let me. You liberals are so intent on using homophobia to destroy the President that you can't just sit back and enjoy the ride.
This is the worst fucking website I've ever read. Click on the link only if you totally ran out of internet porn. It is called "Cannonfire" and promises to be written by a proud member of the "X-Files Wing of the Democratic Party." Totally my faves. It would be better if his imagined fantasies involved things other than Bush being gay. For a "straight man," Mr. Cannonfire has an awful fixation on Bush's homosexuality, including intimate discussion of Bush's lovemaking style. Uh-huh. You're straight. Just like Jeff Gannon.
But worst of fucking all, as if it could plunge to such hideous depth, Cannonfire has to "defend" himself from possible charges of homophobia. This is how the trick works, and since liberals and conservatives both feel like they can use it, I feel like you, dear people, should know.
You write a homophobic passage and then say "No, I love the homos." Because gay people are syphillitic, they won't be able to connect the dots. Not at all. You can totally get away with it. Easy town, freaky-deakies.
Mr. Cannonfire goes on and on and on about Bush being a cheerleader (which is, admittedly, hilarious) and about secret gay love trysts in Tennessee of all places and poorly sourced stories about Bush being a "gentle lover." I suppose, like Sullivan's reading of gay Lincoln, if you assume Bush is gay, it's easy to see his own homophobia as a product of self-hatred, his booze-problem as a product of the same, his religious conversion meant to stifle his sexual truth, blah blah fucking blah. You could also say this if you assumed he was half-black, or if you assumed he was born with ambiguous genitalia or a tail or something. This isn't trenchant observation. It's dumb. Of course, this reading (he hates homos because he's a homo) is, itself, homophobic. Cannonfire lists an impressive number of gays involved in the extermination of other gays (Ernst Roehm, for instance) which is true enough, as far as it goes. But by claiming that homophobic straights "require" self-hating gays to do their evil works is to, once again, blame the homos! If they weren't willing to kill each other (with, you know, AIDS and character assassination) then all would be well! Might it be more obvious to say that homophobic straights provide ample opportunity for gays (self-hating and otherwise) to turn on each other -- particularly in a political system where gays might genuinely have mixed interests? One can support Bush for, let's say, gigantor tax cuts and decide that's more important than getting married. Hell, they'd probably even be right.
And aren't liberal homophobes, like Cannonfire, providing the same space in reverse? By feeding the Gannon frenzy, they are opening the door for all his ex-lovers to come scurrying out of the woodwork. They are also feeding a potential witch hunt of Gannon's admirers in the Marine Corps. And, the frenzy would be okay (remember, I like sex scandals, and what's a scandal without a media frenzy?) if the liberal bloggers weren't so steeped in moralizing the issue. Even their jokes ("Did I mention he's a cheerleader?") are lame, trite and hinge their humor on a stereotype, which in the context of a political diatribe about Bush's possible homosexuality is both not funny and offensive.
But, this isn't homophobic becuase "The point is: Human beings are sexually programmed in a wide variety of ways. That programming takes place either in the womb or soon thereafter. And if the Christian Reconstructionist faction of our national leadership were proven to be just as human as the rest of us in this regard, our national psyche could only benefit." Oh good, so now I'm supposed to swallow your homophobic ranting with a nice tonic of shitty science and bland affirmations of the humanity of homosexuals? Wow, thanks! How, exactly, does this differ from Bush's bland affirmations of our worth as people, again?
Oh, I know, because you're doing it for our own good! Because you "support" our "rights," or what The Boring Wing of the Gay Movement tells you are our "rights" (that is, those that look exactly like the things you are wasting your life in pursuit of) we're supposed to accept it. Well, fuck you. I won't accept it. I refuse to give you the control you constantly seek over my life. Heterosexuals have been fucking the world up for thousands of years, and now we're supposed to trust them to make things right for us? I don't fucking think so, fuckers. I would rather eat a diaper filled with diarrhea and pad thai then let hetero liberals use me as a tool in their nasty little schemes.
I'm going back to my cave.
Fuck you.
But no. You won't let me. You liberals are so intent on using homophobia to destroy the President that you can't just sit back and enjoy the ride.
This is the worst fucking website I've ever read. Click on the link only if you totally ran out of internet porn. It is called "Cannonfire" and promises to be written by a proud member of the "X-Files Wing of the Democratic Party." Totally my faves. It would be better if his imagined fantasies involved things other than Bush being gay. For a "straight man," Mr. Cannonfire has an awful fixation on Bush's homosexuality, including intimate discussion of Bush's lovemaking style. Uh-huh. You're straight. Just like Jeff Gannon.
But worst of fucking all, as if it could plunge to such hideous depth, Cannonfire has to "defend" himself from possible charges of homophobia. This is how the trick works, and since liberals and conservatives both feel like they can use it, I feel like you, dear people, should know.
You write a homophobic passage and then say "No, I love the homos." Because gay people are syphillitic, they won't be able to connect the dots. Not at all. You can totally get away with it. Easy town, freaky-deakies.
Mr. Cannonfire goes on and on and on about Bush being a cheerleader (which is, admittedly, hilarious) and about secret gay love trysts in Tennessee of all places and poorly sourced stories about Bush being a "gentle lover." I suppose, like Sullivan's reading of gay Lincoln, if you assume Bush is gay, it's easy to see his own homophobia as a product of self-hatred, his booze-problem as a product of the same, his religious conversion meant to stifle his sexual truth, blah blah fucking blah. You could also say this if you assumed he was half-black, or if you assumed he was born with ambiguous genitalia or a tail or something. This isn't trenchant observation. It's dumb. Of course, this reading (he hates homos because he's a homo) is, itself, homophobic. Cannonfire lists an impressive number of gays involved in the extermination of other gays (Ernst Roehm, for instance) which is true enough, as far as it goes. But by claiming that homophobic straights "require" self-hating gays to do their evil works is to, once again, blame the homos! If they weren't willing to kill each other (with, you know, AIDS and character assassination) then all would be well! Might it be more obvious to say that homophobic straights provide ample opportunity for gays (self-hating and otherwise) to turn on each other -- particularly in a political system where gays might genuinely have mixed interests? One can support Bush for, let's say, gigantor tax cuts and decide that's more important than getting married. Hell, they'd probably even be right.
And aren't liberal homophobes, like Cannonfire, providing the same space in reverse? By feeding the Gannon frenzy, they are opening the door for all his ex-lovers to come scurrying out of the woodwork. They are also feeding a potential witch hunt of Gannon's admirers in the Marine Corps. And, the frenzy would be okay (remember, I like sex scandals, and what's a scandal without a media frenzy?) if the liberal bloggers weren't so steeped in moralizing the issue. Even their jokes ("Did I mention he's a cheerleader?") are lame, trite and hinge their humor on a stereotype, which in the context of a political diatribe about Bush's possible homosexuality is both not funny and offensive.
But, this isn't homophobic becuase "The point is: Human beings are sexually programmed in a wide variety of ways. That programming takes place either in the womb or soon thereafter. And if the Christian Reconstructionist faction of our national leadership were proven to be just as human as the rest of us in this regard, our national psyche could only benefit." Oh good, so now I'm supposed to swallow your homophobic ranting with a nice tonic of shitty science and bland affirmations of the humanity of homosexuals? Wow, thanks! How, exactly, does this differ from Bush's bland affirmations of our worth as people, again?
Oh, I know, because you're doing it for our own good! Because you "support" our "rights," or what The Boring Wing of the Gay Movement tells you are our "rights" (that is, those that look exactly like the things you are wasting your life in pursuit of) we're supposed to accept it. Well, fuck you. I won't accept it. I refuse to give you the control you constantly seek over my life. Heterosexuals have been fucking the world up for thousands of years, and now we're supposed to trust them to make things right for us? I don't fucking think so, fuckers. I would rather eat a diaper filled with diarrhea and pad thai then let hetero liberals use me as a tool in their nasty little schemes.
I'm going back to my cave.
Fuck you.
posted by Joshua at 11:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home