Posted on 01/14/2005 7:57:27 AM PST by madprof98
Woo hoo! I've made the big time. Last month, the website Free Republic featured a thread about my Nov. 18 column, "Queers Who Don't Act Right." You probably don't know much about Free Republic unless you are a right-wing lunatic. Free Republic is so far right that wing-nut gay muckraker Matt Drudge and Lucianne Goldberg, one of the architects of the Clinton-Monica Lewinsky brouhaha, both left the site in 1999 because it was too extreme, even for them.
In the years since, the site has become the contemporary version of a marathon meeting of the old John Birch Society and the KKK. Most recently, Free Republic was in the news when John Corsi, one of the Swift Boat Veterans who authored a book attacking John Kerry, turned out to post embarrassingly racist messages there. (Of course, he argued his racist insults were all "a joke." Talk about your Clintonian rhetoric.) The site also was in the news recently because someone correctly posted that Dan Rather had relied on phony documents to impute President Bush's National Guard service.
Free Republic is so extreme that it's a blast to read. Don't bother to explore the site with the idea of posting an alternative perspective or to correct facts. Your post will simply be deleted, despite its owner's celebration of freedom of speech. The site has no hesitation in reprinting copyrighted material, like my column, even though the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times both successfully sued to stop such theft. In other words, as is generally true of the lunatic far right, the truth, free speech and the law only matter when they support their point of view.
Of course, Freepers, as the creepy wing-nuts on the site are called, were not alone in being outraged by my column. I received quite a lot of mail, mainly from other gay people, questioning my argument that LA Fitness at Ansley Mall overreacted when it closed its sauna because of some occasional sex and reopened it with a new picture window overlooking the locker room. As an update, I might add that the window has effectively eliminated unseen sexual interactions inside the sauna and made room for another, more open form of sex between people on either side of the window: exhibitionism and voyeurism.
Most of my correspondents argued that the occasional discovery of sex in the sauna merited involvement by the police and the health department, reconstruction of the sauna and a report by one of the local TV stations. And, as usual, they concluded that because I called that overreacting, I must favor sex in public spaces. No matter that I said I find the behavior annoying. To be righteous, I must find it -- what? -- criminally actionable.
I wasn't surprised by the reaction. Sex troubles people more than anything. That's why Clinton was impeached for lying about a blowjob, while Bush was re-elected despite lying about a war that has killed thousands. Gay people's oppression is the result of their sex lives, so it's not surprising that they are hypersensitive to anything that might add to the picture of deviance. But it has become obvious that the very effort to make all deviance disappear and to assimilate -- to marry, for example -- increases prejudice.
The Freepers, of course, took outrage over my column to dizzy heights, fabricating arguments I did not make. This began with the man who posted it, "madpro98." He said that I dismissed "all sexual conventions, including common decency, as so much homophobia." Actually, I wrote no such thing. Then, of course, the Freepers concluded that the case of LA Fitness means every gay man is a sauna whore. For example, "Sender" writes: "Does anyone else think it's strange that gay men often have sex in a public toilet stall? ... Even if we had unisex public restrooms, somehow I can't imagine a man and a woman eyeing one another while washing their hands, then just jumping in the stall for a go."
The writer obviously has never been to Buckhead on a Saturday night. But what cracks me up is that the Freepers are so anxious to bash someone like me that they don't even realize when they are supporting a contrary argument. For example, "buffyt" quoted my statement that I don't like "stumbling upon any sex scene to which I have not been invited." Then she riffed obsessively about heterosexual couples at Mardi Gras "coupling all over the place" while the police ignore them. Exactly. Heterosexuals spoil the view with public sexual interactions every bit as much as homosexuals, arguably more, when they can find a place to do it. Nobody followed up on that post, of course.
I'm not going to quote the mind-boggling illogics and endless sophomoric fag-bashing (despite arguing they aren't homophobic). But I will thank "Jack Black," who wrote: "I think this was very well written. He is writing for the audience of radical homosexuals as one, so I have trouble twisting my thoughts enough to get to his point of view, but I still think the writing is good." Kiss me, dude!
Cliff Bostock holds a Ph.D. in depth psychology. Write him at cliff.bostock@ creativeloafing.com.
bookmark and ping for later discussion
I think that you are trying to get across that you are a "anti-spitball" liberal.
NY doesn't define marraige.
New Paltz and it's mayor will marry gays and lesbians.
The rest of your example can't be too far behind.
The rest of the state tends to say that while marraige isn't defined, they simply will not marry certain groups until a decision is made.
*shrugs*
As they say here Ithaca is the city of Evil.
And New Paltz isn't far behind.
Gosh! Am I in the wrong place? I am just and ordinary Republican just wanting to learn and debate with like minded individuals. I am not hate filled or whacked out or anything. I might be too boring for you all.
Bostock is a completely neurotic homo activist. He has even written articles describing his mental ailments. He is an idiot of the highest order. Creative Loafing has become such a liberal rag that I can no longer read it. Even music reviews have a left-wing bias.
BTW I feel so famous now that one of my replies finally made Creative Loafing! The only thing better would be if John 'I hate the chimp' Sugg himself started bashing me.
Correction - Your post will simply be deleted zotted.
He's a psychoanalyst in the Freudian mold. Wow. I'm impressed!
I was shocked, SHOCKED, to discover that fact about myself and my FRiends here.
I mean, it must be fact: it was in Creative Loafing.
LOLOLOL!!!! Good one,you wing-nut!! :)
http://www.pacifica.edu/dp_phd_humanities.html
So I click that link and get...
The term “depth psychology” evokes many associations and images yet is often difficult to define. In this course we formulate a definition of our field by investigating historical, cultural, and conceptual traditions that shape its identity. Topics include ancient approaches to healing, encounters with the unconscious, and soul-making through literature and mythology. Overviews of Freudian, Jungian, and archetypal psychology are provided, as well as ideas regarding depth psychology’s future in the new millennium.
...and so I STILL don't know what it is. What's the old adage? "To know is to define". They admit in the very first sentence that they can't even define it, and then proceed to link a bunch of convoluted touchy-feely concepts linked only by only the most tenuous and circular definition. This doesn't qualify as "depth" anything -- there's not even a surface for crying out loud. I suspect that if you actually investigate this field of study a better title might be "How to hate straight white males better because we are frothing at the mouth heterophobes".
Mr. "P"iled "h"igh and "D"eep is simply using big lie theory. It does not matter that FR is fair and logical. His homosexual perspective requires the public to disregard FR because it is a danger to his homo-worldview. Thus the lie about kkk and birch society.
Goebles would be proud of his fellow "sister."
Yet another clown in need of a sledgehammer to the head.
Even though I find myself commenting about his "never leave your buddy's behind" lifestyle, it's patently obvious that this guy gets an apparently much-needed ego boost by reading the responses to his drivel. And here we go, indulging his sick little mind.
What a shame. He is a nice looking man.
Or Phishing Democrat!
"He types with a lisp."
Wrong! "He typth with a lipth" is the proper way to put it.
It's "Impugn" you idiot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.