Skip to comments.Enough with the Gay Mania: How about a little old-fashioned privacy for sexuality of all stripes?
Posted on 02/24/2014 9:01:51 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Its one thing to be tolerant of what once were known as alternative lifestyles. Its another thing to be asked to celebrate them, as the exuberant mythologizers of Michael Sam and Johnny Weir ask us to do. And it is way beyond the pale to hold forth on any sort of sex life perhaps apart from self-restraint as if its a form of heroism.
Yet the culture of the professional Left, enthusiastically aided by the establishment media, is going bonkers in pushing active homosexuality (or any one of several exotic variants thereof) as an absolute virtue. One can hardly turn around these days without facing, in fiction or in real life, what amounts to homosexual chic. From the amount of primetime air time afforded to gay Americans, one would think they constitute at least a large minority of the population, rather than the 3 to 5 percent they actually do.
Not that theres anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld wisdom had it. Most Americans assuredly dont much care what other people do as long, as the saying goes, as they dont do it in the street and frighten the horses. And if the Bible tells us its a sin, well, we can leave that issue between the putative sinner and a God famous for both judgment and mercy. Our job, speaking spiritually rather than physically, is to love our neighbor, not from some misguided impulse to charity but instead genuinely, as equals and to worry about not committing our own particular brands of transgression.
Still. Enough already with the in-our-faceness from the homosexual activists and their aggressively enthusiastic cheerleaders. Its not enough, apparently, that they appropriated the perfectly wonderful word gay so that its original meaning is lost to the ages. Its not enough that what many once considered wrong or unmentionable is now largely accepted and broadly discussed in polite society. Its not enough that people now provide homosexuals the privacy that should respectfully be afforded every law-abiding adult. Instead, homosexuality has become a cause célèbre, and those whose faith calls for forbearance from material, ardent support of its practice are themselves bullied and have become the target of discrimination.
So we see football player Michael Sams furthering the cause at the NFL combine by wearing a gay-pride button that read Stand with Sam. And we see that as a result of his coming-out, he reaps financial benefits in clear excess of what his expected draft status would warrant. Despite being projected as merely a fourth- or fifth-round pick, Sam topped sportscasts nationwide last weekend while projected first-round picks were entirely ignored.
If Sam, whose demeanor and public statements in the past month have been nearly exemplary, will continue to let his football skill speak for itself, for good or ill, then more power to him. But the real test of his character will be how he reacts if he is drafted in a lower round than he wants (or goes undrafted at all), or if he doesnt make the final cut for the pro-football season. Would he blame it all on discrimination against his homosexuality (as if NFL teams would actually deny themselves the services of a player who could help them on the field)? Or, worse yet, would he decide to press a civil-rights lawsuit?
One hopes he proves that he belongs in the league or, if he doesnt, that he doesnt make a spectacle of his failure no matter how many leftists might scream for Eric Holders minions to file a grievance against the NFL. In todays gay-friendly environment, Michael Sam is portrayed as a hero for announcing his sexual orientation, but he will be a true hero only if he continues to go about his business, come what may, with understated dignity and old-fashioned professionalism.
Alas, thats not what we have seen from the garish spectacle of figure-skating announcer Johnny Weir. His antics are appalling. The problem is not that hes homosexual; its that he advertises his sexuality to the extent that it makes him (his choice of makeup, jewelry, and extravagant dresses or furs) more of a story than the athletes he is supposed to cover.
For comparison, imagine if sportscaster Erin Andrews reported from the basketball or football sidelines in a bikini. She would rightly be criticized from coast to coast for a lack of professionalism and for playing into sexual stereotypes to the detriment of the games she was covering. (Of course, Andrews does nothing of the sort, instead dressing appropriately and reporting and asking questions with skill and aplomb.) Yet Weir draws fawning media coverage for his sequins and earrings, even though his attention-grabbing behavior would be seen as unprofessional in other arenas of sports coverage, and as validating the worst stereotypes about gay men.
Frankly, male figure skaters should be mighty irked with Weir for validating the image of their sport as one populated by effeminate men. And gay men should be equally annoyed that Weir furthers the stereotype that male homosexuals are flamingly feminine.
Michael Sam and Johnny Weir are not the only homosexuals to benefit from the medias adoring coverage. The latest flash point in the gay-rights legal wars involves refusals by photographers and cake makers to provide their services for same-sex marriages. Can anyone doubt that the Left would rush to the defense of a Muslim photographer who refused to take pictures at a Jewish wedding, or a Muslim caterer who refused to serve pork? But let the person claiming victimhood be homosexual, and religious freedom is suddenly disposable.
Millions of LGBT citizens doubtless are content to go about their lives with modesty and in private not closeted, mind you, merely in privacy, as most things sexual should be. But the activists and media chorus wont let them. The Missouri defensive lineman, for example, may ask at the combine to be treated as Michael Sam the football player instead of Michael Sam the gay football player, but the media will no doubt continue pegging him as the latter. If it werent for the fetishistic politicization of homosexuality, the underlying societal problem would be more obvious: At base, the problem isnt homosexuality, but public sexuality. There was a time, a better time, when the sex lives of strangers were nobodys business. It is a coarser society, and one where interpersonal respect is seriously diminished, when so many people broadcast who is having what sorts of intercourse with whom.
None of us needs to hear Jane Fonda talk about Ted Turners prowess in bed, as Fonda did in an interview a few years ago. No one needs to read Shirley Joness disclosures, detailed in her recent memoir, about threesomes with her former husband or about how much her current husband enjoys her, uh, upper assets. And if one more trampy poptart wants to sex up the stage and airwaves, following in the very-well-worn path of Madonna, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and Miley Cyrus, she will be about the 20th pop star too many to do so. Likewise with the raunch of urban rappers and their imitators. Isnt it all getting mind-numbingly predictable by now?
Whether homosexual or straight, on TV and Facebook and Twitter and in loud conversations at fast-food restaurants, it sometimes seems as if almost everybody these days is dangerously frightening the horses. Its time to stop the stampede.
Quin Hillyer is a contributing editor of National Review.
Earth to gays...we don’t give a flying smelly Obama what you poke into what. STFU, get a room, and get a life.
And no, two married gays are in NO WAY EQUAL to a real couple.
Sorry, but that’s the twuth.
I don't go around yelling what kind of “relations” I have with my wife. It is private!
Nor do I want to hear the same from anyone else including other heterosexuals. Nor, I am betting that no one else cares to know.
Except, for some reason, gays are paraded around like it is some major event, like the 4th of July, when they come out of the closet.
A little tid bit for gays: keep quiet about your private lives and a lot less people will care.
Privacy also means discretion...
In that you don’t wear bondage gear in public, strait or gay or even in a parade...
Gays want and crave public approval and affirmation of their lifestyle.
Funny thing about this whole uproar.
Back when blacks were pushing for equality, it would have been considered pretty classless for a black dentist to put a sign in the window saying “BLACK Dentist!!”
Same with the womens movement. They achieved (pretty much) equality without having to advertise it, yes, they did whine, but hey, they’re women!
This whole concept of “I’m a GAY basketball player” or “I’m a GAY garbageman” or “I’m a GAY guy who thinks his crotch is the most important thing in the universe...” well, it’s just pandering. It’s “bathroom employment”.
I would not go to one.
They are obviously more interested in their sex than their occupation.
Analyze LGBT in light of left wing politics. L, lots of votes for the Democrats. G, more votes,B, some more votes, and finally,T, more votes, but I suspect not many more.
Now, lets look at why we lose. We can’t even support republicans.
I believe, I truly believe, that it’s because most or all of them KNOW IT IS WRONG.
What kid hasn’t watched the birds or the bees? They can see the natural way.
Toleration isn't the answer. Minding one's own business won't satisfy them. This is war, cultural war, and they're looking to outrage.
Ya. So you are suggesting that it is partly propaganda to get votes for the Democrat party? No, you are kidding. /sarc. :)
Sounds sort of like racism and the war on women and so on.
You're asking them to have decency, shame or at the very least modesty. That's the very thing they are rebelling against.
Until there are real penalties for flaunting your perversion, it will continue to get worse.
Everyone is born with sex organs just like they are born with teeth and a nose and a stomach and intestines and eyes, etc.. I don’t need to know what one does with his/her eyes or nose or teeth or stomach or sex organs.
Homosexuals, however, seem to want to show their sex organs to everyone. Their parades show almost nude or nude bodies and grotesque make up, etc.. Their obsession with their bodies reflects an unsettled mind, an inability to live a private life as the vast majority of “straight” people do.
One time I saw a reporter’s report about the section of San Francisco where anyone could go nude at any time and there were the pictures and film of nude men on the streets, at bus stops, and in restaurants. It appeared there were only nude men on those streets and in those cafes - no nude women. The restaurants in that area had “seat covers” to put on chairs so the nude men’s buttocks were not directly on the chair seats and when a man left, the cover was changed and a new cover put on.
Okay, so they were nude, showing their sex equipment to everyone. I think they don’t know that everyone has those particular items on their bodies so theirs is not special.
I think those men didn’t master potty training. :o)
I think they mean the “Gaystapo”.
If bank robbers decided to come out in force supporting Democrats, there would be an overnight effort to make Bank Robbers good guys.
...because of profound guilt. They know they’re going to hell, but they hope that if everybody is forced to say how great they are, it makes them feel better about themselves.
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.