Slog
News & ArtsFriday, March 5, 2010
Politics / Homo / News The Media and Gay Men in Sacramento—Including West Sacramento's Gay Mayor—Knew Anti-Gay Pol Roy Ashburn Was Gay AND SAID NOTHING
Posted by Dan Savage on Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:05 AM
Unbelievable. And what Joe said:
The Californian decided that Ashburn's sexuality wasn't "relevant." The unnamed Sacramento paper apparently did too and never published. To recap: It's not relevant that a state politician with a 100% rating from an anti-gay group is gay himself. Can you fucking BELIEVE that? And it turns out that the openly gay mayor of West Sacramento has known about Ashburn for a long time.... At this moment, I'm not so interested in the detestable Roy Ashburn and his pathetic defense of "I was voting the way my constituents wanted." Because to my mind, the biggest story here isn't Ashburn's closeted homosexuality and anti-gay voting record. As we all know, that is a story we have seen a hundred times. And will see a hundred times more. The REAL story here is the media's collusion and the conspiracy of silence on the part of our own people. Folks, when you know somebody is actively working day and night to thwart the rights of your FAMILY, of your PEOPLE, you fucking say something.
Say something = out the motherfucker. And my friend Scott has a suggestion for the media:
Whenever someone speaks out against gays, the first question they should be asked is, "Are you gay?"
1
soooo you want to shame him into admitting something that you are fighting to be a shameless thing?
you are so dumb 99% of the time mr savage
you are so dumb 99% of the time mr savage
2
@1: He may be dumb, but at least he can put 18 words together so that they make a coherent sentence.
3
@1
No. The point is that we as a community have got to stop giving our enemies full access to being part of the community.
Turn it sideways. If someone was a practicing but closeted Jew, and made a career out of standing up and saying how important it is to recognize America is a Christian nation, passing laws against Jewish people, working explicitly to strip Jewish people of workplace protections, the right to marry, working to unfairly burden Jewish families raising kids, etc, would you think it "dumb" for other Jewish people to get angry about it?
Would you expect the other members of his synagogue to quietly embrace him every Sabbath, welcome him at community events, and then let him go back to publicly bashing them at every turn?
Or would you expect them to make his hypocrisy public, and expect Jews in other communities to be livid when they found that the locals, and the media had knowingly let him get away with it.
We are not fighting for being gay to be a shameless thing. It already is a shameless thing. It already is a normal and natural thing, and it already is a good thing. We don't need to fight to change that, because it is already true, no matter what narrow-minded people might think or say.
What we are fighting for is recognition that it is all those things. And behaving as though toxic assholes like this are automatically part of our community and deserving of our support only reinforces the perception that there is something about being gay that it is appropriate to be ashamed of.
Being a closeted asshole who actively works to harm the people he then turns around and wants to play with is what there is to be ashamed of. Knowingly letting him do it and perpetuating a situation where he continues to get away with it is something to be ashamed of.
We don't need him to "admit" to anything. We need him to stop hurting people. He SHOULD be ashamed. And he should have to deal with the consequences of his hypocrisy.
More...
No. The point is that we as a community have got to stop giving our enemies full access to being part of the community.
Turn it sideways. If someone was a practicing but closeted Jew, and made a career out of standing up and saying how important it is to recognize America is a Christian nation, passing laws against Jewish people, working explicitly to strip Jewish people of workplace protections, the right to marry, working to unfairly burden Jewish families raising kids, etc, would you think it "dumb" for other Jewish people to get angry about it?
Would you expect the other members of his synagogue to quietly embrace him every Sabbath, welcome him at community events, and then let him go back to publicly bashing them at every turn?
Or would you expect them to make his hypocrisy public, and expect Jews in other communities to be livid when they found that the locals, and the media had knowingly let him get away with it.
We are not fighting for being gay to be a shameless thing. It already is a shameless thing. It already is a normal and natural thing, and it already is a good thing. We don't need to fight to change that, because it is already true, no matter what narrow-minded people might think or say.
What we are fighting for is recognition that it is all those things. And behaving as though toxic assholes like this are automatically part of our community and deserving of our support only reinforces the perception that there is something about being gay that it is appropriate to be ashamed of.
Being a closeted asshole who actively works to harm the people he then turns around and wants to play with is what there is to be ashamed of. Knowingly letting him do it and perpetuating a situation where he continues to get away with it is something to be ashamed of.
We don't need him to "admit" to anything. We need him to stop hurting people. He SHOULD be ashamed. And he should have to deal with the consequences of his hypocrisy.
4
Ask them if they're gay and, like Larry Craig, they'll vehemently deny it, because gay is an identity not an orientation. That's why we say people "identify" as gay, but clinicians in the field use the clunky term "men who have sex with men" or "MSMs" -- a literally literal label consciously emptied of cultural subtext -- if they want to know who's having sex with whom.
This may seem like a nitpicky distinction but you either have sex with men or you don't -- whatever you call yourself -- "queer" "gay" "bi" "evangelical preacher" "Republican" whatever. The distinction also gets to the heart of the issue between liberals and conservatives on the struggle for gay liberation.
There are obviously many, many men who have gay sex and are vehemently anti-gay. What they object to is obviously not the sex, but the gay. They don't want to have to identify as gay -- which mean identifying with a class and a cause with a rich history and a culture -- to partake in gay sex.
Personally, I'm proud to be gay, and have actively sought out that rich history and culture. But these guys aren't gay, Dan. They're sexual opportunists, users, abusers, liars, cheats, hypocrites, and men who have sex with men. There's a difference.
You need to read my blog.
http://mennonnosapiens.com/categories/Th…
I'm way hotter than Andrew.
This may seem like a nitpicky distinction but you either have sex with men or you don't -- whatever you call yourself -- "queer" "gay" "bi" "evangelical preacher" "Republican" whatever. The distinction also gets to the heart of the issue between liberals and conservatives on the struggle for gay liberation.
There are obviously many, many men who have gay sex and are vehemently anti-gay. What they object to is obviously not the sex, but the gay. They don't want to have to identify as gay -- which mean identifying with a class and a cause with a rich history and a culture -- to partake in gay sex.
Personally, I'm proud to be gay, and have actively sought out that rich history and culture. But these guys aren't gay, Dan. They're sexual opportunists, users, abusers, liars, cheats, hypocrites, and men who have sex with men. There's a difference.
You need to read my blog.
http://mennonnosapiens.com/categories/Th…
I'm way hotter than Andrew.
5
*rainbow flag facepalm*
Come on, guys...being civil is one thing, but there are so many reasons to out that sack of shit.
Come on, guys...being civil is one thing, but there are so many reasons to out that sack of shit.
6
@4... Nice job on that description of the sexual vs. identity thing.
I don't know how many times I've tried explaining that to people. Neverending I suppose...
I don't know how many times I've tried explaining that to people. Neverending I suppose...
7
It's like I was saying yesterday--they bash efforts at getting gays full civil and legal rights, they get outed.
Period.
Period.
8
@1: The issue isn't shame, it's hypocrisy. Guys like this try to have their cake and eat it too. By getting married to a woman, he has all of the legal and societal benefits of heterosexuality while decrying gays and removing their rights. At night, he's going to clubs and having sex with the people that he's then oppressing during the day.
I'm not sure how this isn't clear, Swearengen.
I'm not sure how this isn't clear, Swearengen.
9
@2, I'm with you. I still can't parse @1 into anything coherent, so we should just ignore it, although it seems to have a foamy-at-the-mouth tone to it.
Dan's friend Scott's question is perfectly logical. Unless someone is playing matchmaker for a friend, why should they care about their sexual orientation? Being overly fascinated with the subject just seems, I dunno, prurient, unseemly, and suspicious.
As we meet more and more of these supposed moralists who turn out to be nothing more than self-loathing fags themselves, I think we have to start looking at their motivation in a whole new way.
The second question, after "Are you gay?", if they deny it, should be "Then why do you care -- how does it personally affect you, your relationships, or the people you love?"
Dan's friend Scott's question is perfectly logical. Unless someone is playing matchmaker for a friend, why should they care about their sexual orientation? Being overly fascinated with the subject just seems, I dunno, prurient, unseemly, and suspicious.
As we meet more and more of these supposed moralists who turn out to be nothing more than self-loathing fags themselves, I think we have to start looking at their motivation in a whole new way.
The second question, after "Are you gay?", if they deny it, should be "Then why do you care -- how does it personally affect you, your relationships, or the people you love?"
10
The sad thing is that the only shame of being gay is in the minds of these conservatives. While most people- other than religious conservative Republican type people- would have no problem with them being gay, it is them and their cohorts who have the problem. People like this end up hating themselves for what they are and surrounding themselves with people who would despise them if they knew. Rather pathetic group, actually.
12
So the Mayor of SF, and the editors of the Bee, are decent people who understand that outing is psychic rape. You're a vicious man, Mr. Savage.
13
Conservative=Anti-social pathology. What, exactly, do the gay people who kept his secret think the conservative culture war is all about for gay people? It's about fighting ignorance and bigotry. So, to accomplish winning, gay people must inform the public as to the motives, self-righteousness and hypocrisy of the very people seeking to deny them rights. It delegitimizes the conservative agenda.
14
@#9 - And the third question ought to be 'exactly when did you choose the heterosexual lifestyle?'
16
also:
did you take government funding to go to school, and now rail against the gummint?
did you smoke pot and now keep blacks in jail for smoking pot?
did you cheat your way out of air guard, cheat your way into baseball profits, cheat your way into the presidency, and cheat your way into war, after cheating by doing pot and cocaine while in your 40s?
did you commit adultery and now you support allowing adulterers to marry, but you don't support gays having the right to marry?
there's lots of fair questions.
btw if they think it's not a fair or seemly question, they can refuse to answer.
did you take government funding to go to school, and now rail against the gummint?
did you smoke pot and now keep blacks in jail for smoking pot?
did you cheat your way out of air guard, cheat your way into baseball profits, cheat your way into the presidency, and cheat your way into war, after cheating by doing pot and cocaine while in your 40s?
did you commit adultery and now you support allowing adulterers to marry, but you don't support gays having the right to marry?
there's lots of fair questions.
btw if they think it's not a fair or seemly question, they can refuse to answer.
17
@8 -- " At night, he's going to clubs and having sex with the people that he's then oppressing during the day." -- you've just made it sound hot.
18
why does ashburn remind me of strom thurmond--making a career of oppressing the people he loves to go to bed with.
19
Working in the media myself, I can attest that the majority of people in editorial positions, particularly the gay ones, are of a different...shall I say more closeted...generation.
20
Sorry but when you persecute other people for who they have sex with, who you have sex with becomes fair game.
22
Exactly. When you make a career of attacking the private lives of your constituents, then your own private life is fair game - it becomes a public matter.
23
@15, it's not clear from Dan's excerpt, but "the Californian" is not a person, it refers to The Bakersfield Californian, Ashburn's hometown rag. The Sacramento paper is almost certainly McClatchy's Sacramento Bee. Two's collusion, three's an orgy, I guess.
24
Why must all Gays follow lockstep with Dan Savage?
Is Elton John Anti-Gay?
Ashburn, as a Gay man, has as much right to his opinion about what is good for gays as Savage or anyone else.
And the right to vote for and advocate positions he believes in.
Savage is an arrogant narrowminded bigot.
Is Elton John Anti-Gay?
Ashburn, as a Gay man, has as much right to his opinion about what is good for gays as Savage or anyone else.
And the right to vote for and advocate positions he believes in.
Savage is an arrogant narrowminded bigot.
25
@15 the same way that media in general on any level are often afraid to have the balls to do hard hitting stuff on EVERYONE, because they're afraid of loss of access.
Why do you think CNN, Fox, MSNBC, the Stranger, Publicola, et al don't do hard fact checks 24x7 while doing initial reports? It's understandable--if you treat everyone you're covering as someone you have to rip apart for the real truth, they'll eventually freeze you out on other stuff, because you'll be a pain in their ass.
That's the only thing I can think of.
Why do you think CNN, Fox, MSNBC, the Stranger, Publicola, et al don't do hard fact checks 24x7 while doing initial reports? It's understandable--if you treat everyone you're covering as someone you have to rip apart for the real truth, they'll eventually freeze you out on other stuff, because you'll be a pain in their ass.
That's the only thing I can think of.
26
Exactly, @5, @7, and the others who also agreed: Hypocrites—of all stripes—get outed. End of story.
28
Oh Jeez, the National Enquirer let us all down on this one.
You know, the press (newspapers) might not be in such a sorry state if they actually reported the news, like Rush's drug problem, John Edward's baby, and this idiot's sexual hypocrisies. Each of these stories was "private" and "personal" and "not relevant" until it was paired with a powerful figure who was spouting one line for personal and political gain and behaving another way in private. I'm all for keeping private stuff private, but if you fight against gay rights in front of the cameras but visit gay bars after hours, that's news. And if you denounce abortion to your constituents then have one yourself, that's news. If you hire your off-night-backstreet to make a documentary of your campaign, that's news.
You know, the press (newspapers) might not be in such a sorry state if they actually reported the news, like Rush's drug problem, John Edward's baby, and this idiot's sexual hypocrisies. Each of these stories was "private" and "personal" and "not relevant" until it was paired with a powerful figure who was spouting one line for personal and political gain and behaving another way in private. I'm all for keeping private stuff private, but if you fight against gay rights in front of the cameras but visit gay bars after hours, that's news. And if you denounce abortion to your constituents then have one yourself, that's news. If you hire your off-night-backstreet to make a documentary of your campaign, that's news.
29
@24 "Ashburn, as a Gay man, has as much right to his opinion about what is good for gays as Savage or anyone else."
But NOT while pretending to be a straight man. And NOT while taking away other people's rights to act on their own opinions.
What don't you get about this?
"I disapprove of gay relationships and gay behaviors, and wish nobody would have them, but support everyone's right to choose for themselves" is about having and expressing the opinions you have a right to.
"Since I disapprove, even though it doesn't hurt anyone else, I insist on making sure nobody is free to choose it" is not.
But NOT while pretending to be a straight man. And NOT while taking away other people's rights to act on their own opinions.
What don't you get about this?
"I disapprove of gay relationships and gay behaviors, and wish nobody would have them, but support everyone's right to choose for themselves" is about having and expressing the opinions you have a right to.
"Since I disapprove, even though it doesn't hurt anyone else, I insist on making sure nobody is free to choose it" is not.
30
his right to vote for and advocate positions he believes in ceased when he obliged himself to the same positions he opposes
ever heard of hypocrite? if not look it up
i think we know who the arrogant narrowminded bigot is
ever heard of hypocrite? if not look it up
i think we know who the arrogant narrowminded bigot is
32
Out the hypocritical brotherfuckers...then kick their backstabbin' asses to the curb for the garbage men to pick up.
33
@ 32 ..and to add .. since it may well have been a trashy queen who got picked up, how much did he pay ?
34
Dan, the following are on TPMMuckraker:
"CBS13's Koula Gianulias also reports that (West Sacramento Mayor) Cabaldon called out Ashburn in a Facebook posting about six months ago. "It wouldn't bother me so bad to see Roy Ashburn at Badlands with a boy if he didn't have such a bad voting record on gay rights," he wrote."
and
"The Bakersfield Californian, Ashburn's home newspaper, had asked him twice about his sexuality in the past several years. After hearing a rumor that Ashburn was going to be outed by another newspaper, a columnist for the paper asked Ashburn last year if he is gay. Ashburn replied: "Why would that be anyone's business?"
"CBS13's Koula Gianulias also reports that (West Sacramento Mayor) Cabaldon called out Ashburn in a Facebook posting about six months ago. "It wouldn't bother me so bad to see Roy Ashburn at Badlands with a boy if he didn't have such a bad voting record on gay rights," he wrote."
and
"The Bakersfield Californian, Ashburn's home newspaper, had asked him twice about his sexuality in the past several years. After hearing a rumor that Ashburn was going to be outed by another newspaper, a columnist for the paper asked Ashburn last year if he is gay. Ashburn replied: "Why would that be anyone's business?"
35
Outing these guys is a good thing.
But there's one other thing we, as gay men, need to do:
STOP HAVING SEX WITH THESE MOTHERFUCKING HYPOCRITES!
If the well dries up, maybe they'll change their ways. Or let them fuck around with other self-loathing closet cases. But real gay men need to keep it zipped and get off our knees when these pieces of shit come a-calling, looking to get their dicks wet.
But there's one other thing we, as gay men, need to do:
STOP HAVING SEX WITH THESE MOTHERFUCKING HYPOCRITES!
If the well dries up, maybe they'll change their ways. Or let them fuck around with other self-loathing closet cases. But real gay men need to keep it zipped and get off our knees when these pieces of shit come a-calling, looking to get their dicks wet.
39
You would think that the other gay pol(s) here would have at least done some arm twisting behind the scenes... 'quit shitting on us or else' kind of talk. Those sorts of persuasions should be able to politically shut those back-stabbing douchers right up.
40
@27 - There is not a hint of blue in this district. We are probably the reddest of all red in CA, up there with anyplace in the country. As I have described here before, our local City Council was the only one in the entire state to pass a resolution, unanimously no less, in favor urging locals to vote for Prop 8. Which they did, in this city, and in the entire District, to the tune of 75% or more.
Of course this is to our everlasting shame, but there is no shortage of people ready to pick up where Ashburn will leave off.
Of course this is to our everlasting shame, but there is no shortage of people ready to pick up where Ashburn will leave off.
41
Exactly what great victory comes from outing these guys?
Are people supposed to say?
'old Rep Soandso is gay?
Well then it must be ok!'?
I don't think so.
They say
'old Rep Soandso is gay?
Damn. That's skanky-
those faggots really ARE a bunch of disgusting creeps...'
Are they supposed to say
'old Rep Soandso is a dirty hypocrite-
he must be wrong about the gays...'?
Guess again.
The moment he is outed he becomes YOUR hypocrite.
Real people don't fall for the gradients and shades of 'the gay'-
you know;
'there are homosexuals and Gays and Bis and sexual desire and orientation and behavior and blah blah blah.'
Sorry.
From the cheap seats a faggot is a faggot is a faggot.
And this pathetic lying sneaking around weasel is a pathetic lying sneaking around FAGGOT weasel.
Does Dan think the Craigs and Haggards of the world somehow validate some point he is trying to make?
The GOP and Right don't maintain ownership of those guys- the second they're outed they become part of the mishmash of disgusting perversion.
All they prove to that crowd is that the whole homosexual scene is a sad tragic gumbo of broken lives, deceit and perversion.
We have never understood exactly what gave Dan such glee when prominent figures on the Right are outed as homosexual.
Other than the general glee that Dan derives when children are abused or young gays commit suicide or some other horrible human tragedy occurs....
Are people supposed to say?
'old Rep Soandso is gay?
Well then it must be ok!'?
I don't think so.
They say
'old Rep Soandso is gay?
Damn. That's skanky-
those faggots really ARE a bunch of disgusting creeps...'
Are they supposed to say
'old Rep Soandso is a dirty hypocrite-
he must be wrong about the gays...'?
Guess again.
The moment he is outed he becomes YOUR hypocrite.
Real people don't fall for the gradients and shades of 'the gay'-
you know;
'there are homosexuals and Gays and Bis and sexual desire and orientation and behavior and blah blah blah.'
Sorry.
From the cheap seats a faggot is a faggot is a faggot.
And this pathetic lying sneaking around weasel is a pathetic lying sneaking around FAGGOT weasel.
Does Dan think the Craigs and Haggards of the world somehow validate some point he is trying to make?
The GOP and Right don't maintain ownership of those guys- the second they're outed they become part of the mishmash of disgusting perversion.
All they prove to that crowd is that the whole homosexual scene is a sad tragic gumbo of broken lives, deceit and perversion.
We have never understood exactly what gave Dan such glee when prominent figures on the Right are outed as homosexual.
Other than the general glee that Dan derives when children are abused or young gays commit suicide or some other horrible human tragedy occurs....
44
@41: You miss the point entirely, Alleged. Do you realize you're batting about a .103 on that front?
Figures on the right jabber on about how "being gay is a choice, not something that you're born with". A surprisingly large number of these people, then, have obviously CHOSEN to be gay even though they think it's going to make God kill all of us.
And sorry, but he's still your hypocrite; just the fact that he too is gay doesn't connect him to open and proud homosexuals. Otherwise, you and I and all the other heteros out there are in some way responsible for Hitler; he was straight too, right? No matter how gay a politician is, if he's calling for innocent people to be persecuted, he's with you, not with us. In short: don't try to make us pick up your dog's shit.
Figures on the right jabber on about how "being gay is a choice, not something that you're born with". A surprisingly large number of these people, then, have obviously CHOSEN to be gay even though they think it's going to make God kill all of us.
And sorry, but he's still your hypocrite; just the fact that he too is gay doesn't connect him to open and proud homosexuals. Otherwise, you and I and all the other heteros out there are in some way responsible for Hitler; he was straight too, right? No matter how gay a politician is, if he's calling for innocent people to be persecuted, he's with you, not with us. In short: don't try to make us pick up your dog's shit.
45
Closeted gay people (liberal as well as conservative) are as much an enemy as the Christian right. C'mon folks, grow a pair.
47
@46: Do you even know what the one drop rule is? Because your reference of it makes no sense. But then again, you're a fuckwit.
48
No. People in the know around those like Ashburn need to just let him fall upon his own sword for all to see. Their job is to merely facilitate it or say publicly, "Hey, we'll just let him dishonourably fall upon his own sword. In the meantime, you can't really take him seriously. We don't."
That tack neither outs him nor makes those in the know look bad. Rather, it just draws the intense heat of attention upon his person by citizens, constituents, and journalists.
That tack neither outs him nor makes those in the know look bad. Rather, it just draws the intense heat of attention upon his person by citizens, constituents, and journalists.
51
I'm inclined to give the Mayor of West Sacramento a pass on this one. What was he supposed to do? Start every city council meeting with a reminder that he knows that one of the state legislators is gay? Put out a press release? Have it printed on the water bill?
Now, if a newspaper came and specifically asked him about Ashburn, and he denied it, that would be bad. But is it - and I ask this sincerely - a municipal politician's role to out a politician from another jurisdiction? And if it is, just how should he go about doing it? I could easily see it becoming a media he said/she said kind of story, and unless he had absolute irrefutable evidence - not "oh, I've seen him at clubs" sort of evidence - he'd end up looking like a fool or worse.
Now, if a newspaper came and specifically asked him about Ashburn, and he denied it, that would be bad. But is it - and I ask this sincerely - a municipal politician's role to out a politician from another jurisdiction? And if it is, just how should he go about doing it? I could easily see it becoming a media he said/she said kind of story, and unless he had absolute irrefutable evidence - not "oh, I've seen him at clubs" sort of evidence - he'd end up looking like a fool or worse.
52
@50: Okay, I'm game. The "one drop rule" was a policy of Jim Crow in the South. It specified that any person who had so much as one drop of black blood in him (one black ancestor) was to be considered black, no matter what.
I fail to see how this relates to the issue at hand; homosexuality is not heritable as is race, and one's actions and ideology matter far more than one's sexual orientation in determining what kind of person they are. Also, referencing as valid fact a policy that was a linchpin of the Jim Crow regime is definitely a Poor Life Choice. But now that I've explained it to you, why don't you tell me what you meant by it? (Apart from the fact that you obviously don't have a fucking clue, of course.)
I don't see why you say "college boy" like it's a bad thing; I'm damn proud of it.
I fail to see how this relates to the issue at hand; homosexuality is not heritable as is race, and one's actions and ideology matter far more than one's sexual orientation in determining what kind of person they are. Also, referencing as valid fact a policy that was a linchpin of the Jim Crow regime is definitely a Poor Life Choice. But now that I've explained it to you, why don't you tell me what you meant by it? (Apart from the fact that you obviously don't have a fucking clue, of course.)
I don't see why you say "college boy" like it's a bad thing; I'm damn proud of it.
53
Yes, one's actions ...
Engage in homosexual behavior and you are a homosexual.
Ashburn, lying hypocrital cheater that he is, is yours...
Dan rails on closet GOP politicians and "youth pastors" who have sex with 16 year old boys like they reflect poorly on the GOP or church-
but regular people see the story and think
"damn lying cheating homosexual politicians..."
and
"homosexual perverts lying to get a chance to work with teenagers..."
When a closeted homosexual is outed by his scandalous behavior it doesn't reflect on the group/organization he misled- it reflects on him and the behavior he has chosen to engage in.
Ashburn is not a "corrupt GOP" story-
he is a "Lying Closeted Corrupt Homosexual" story.
Why Dan and the "Open and Proud" homosexuals take such glee in that escapes us.
The GOP will vomit him and Craig and the rest up at the first chance and be done with them.
The homo doesn't rub off so easily, however.
Engage in homosexual behavior and you are a homosexual.
Ashburn, lying hypocrital cheater that he is, is yours...
Dan rails on closet GOP politicians and "youth pastors" who have sex with 16 year old boys like they reflect poorly on the GOP or church-
but regular people see the story and think
"damn lying cheating homosexual politicians..."
and
"homosexual perverts lying to get a chance to work with teenagers..."
When a closeted homosexual is outed by his scandalous behavior it doesn't reflect on the group/organization he misled- it reflects on him and the behavior he has chosen to engage in.
Ashburn is not a "corrupt GOP" story-
he is a "Lying Closeted Corrupt Homosexual" story.
Why Dan and the "Open and Proud" homosexuals take such glee in that escapes us.
The GOP will vomit him and Craig and the rest up at the first chance and be done with them.
The homo doesn't rub off so easily, however.
54
@53: You fail to explain anything about the one drop rule. Giving up a losing battle?
Sure, the bad behavior of politicos like this reflects on their behavior. But you know what people see when they look at them? "Wow, another closeted wacko." There's a reason you don't really see openly gay politicians getting into these kinds of scandals; it's because they are comfortable with their sexuality and as such do not resort to sneaking around doing dubiously legal things so as to avoid discovery.
We like seeing these kinds of stories getting noticed precisely because it reflects poorly on closeted homosexuals who delude themselves into thinking they're not gay. If people stopped trying to criminalize homosexuality, then we'd stop seeing these wacko closet cases, as gays would tend to be open and hence far less prone to engage in such immoral behavior.
Let's take a poll a month from now and see whether more people associate him with "Gays" or "Hypocritical Republicans". Bring it, bitch.
Sure, the bad behavior of politicos like this reflects on their behavior. But you know what people see when they look at them? "Wow, another closeted wacko." There's a reason you don't really see openly gay politicians getting into these kinds of scandals; it's because they are comfortable with their sexuality and as such do not resort to sneaking around doing dubiously legal things so as to avoid discovery.
We like seeing these kinds of stories getting noticed precisely because it reflects poorly on closeted homosexuals who delude themselves into thinking they're not gay. If people stopped trying to criminalize homosexuality, then we'd stop seeing these wacko closet cases, as gays would tend to be open and hence far less prone to engage in such immoral behavior.
Let's take a poll a month from now and see whether more people associate him with "Gays" or "Hypocritical Republicans". Bring it, bitch.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (54) RSS