Ian Reisner learns what it means to step outside the strict boundaries of the new orthodoxy
Ian Reisner, a New York hotelier who identifies as gay, is pro-gay marriage, and owns gay-friendly hotels with names like “OUT NYC,” has experienced the wrath of the gay marriage absolutists.
What on earth did Mr. Reisner do to cause the threat of a boycott of his properties? Nothing more or less than “hosting a non-fundraising ‘fireside chat’ with Ted Cruz.”
Perhaps I should have written “fire-breathing demon Ted Cruz,” whose besetting crime (at least as best I can tell) is that he opposes gay marriage but believes the issue should be left to the states, and has no problem with gay people whatsoever. I believe that leaving it to the states is at the moment the official law of the land, until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, which it may be about to do but perhaps not. And up until a very short while ago opposition to gay marriage was so common and so commonly accepted that even President Obama and Hillary Clinton had to at least pretend to hold that position.
A few days ago, Ted Cruz said this:
Speaking at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Summit, Cruz said that in the new Democratic Party, there would [not] be any room for Christians. It has “become so radicalized for legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states that there is no longer any room for religious liberty,” he argued.
Borrowing a concept from the National Review’s Jonah Goldberg, Cruz said blamed an incipient “liberal fascism” for the increase in attacks on Christians in America today. “It is heartbreaking,” he said, “but it is so extreme.”
That does seem to be the way this is going—and I say this as a person who does not oppose gay marriage (but believes it should be left to the states) and as a non-Christian. The forces of political correctness are not benign.
But Cruz did not go far enough when he said the attacks were on Christians. They are on anyone who would dare oppose gay marriage, or who fails to spout the leftist political orthodoxy of the day. In fact, they fall on someone such as Reisner, who is in favor of gay marriage and completely PC, and yet who dares to host a chat with someone who differs from that opinion. A person like Reisner must have his livelihood destroyed as punishment.
But first he must be humbled and made an example of, and maybe, just maybe, the PC forces will relent. Reisner has issued an abject apology in hopes of fending off the wolves:
I am shaken to my bones by the e-mails, texts, postings and phone calls of the past few days. I made a terrible mistake. I was ignorant, naive and much too quick in accepting a request to co-host a dinner with Cruz at my home without taking the time to completely understand all of his positions on gay rights. I’ve spent the past 24 hours reviewing videos of Cruz’ statements on gay marriage and I am shocked and angry. I sincerely apologize for hurting the gay community and so many of our friends, family, allies, customers and employees. I will try my best to make up for my poor judgement. Again, I am deeply sorry.
This article makes it clear that many will never forgive Reisner for his transgression. He has fraternized with the enemy. The Purge continues.
I have a dream. It’s a small one, but it’s mine. I dream that, after reasserting his own pro-gay-marriage position, and describing his support for gays in his business and his personal life, Reisner had stood up for liberty and said something like this:
But do you understand what you are doing when, instead of just disagreeing with people like Cruz, you demonize them and also demonize and persecute anyone who would give them a forum in which to speak? You are marching down a road that others before you have trod, and it ends in the killing fields where you murder those with whom you disagree.
You think I exaggerate? Perhaps. But if you study history you will see that most of the movements that end in gulags began in idealism. There are not as many steps along the way from one to the other as you might think. Beware of taking them.
It is a profound shock to a person who knows/believes he/she is on the side of right (in this case, Reisner’s history as a proponent of gay marriage), and who thinks that will protect him, to find out otherwise. But once “liberal fascism” is unleashed it’s hard to stop it. Reisner is probably learning that now, perhaps for the very first time.
Reisner isn’t the only one, either. His partner Mati Weiderpass said his own mea culpa. In a way, Weiderpass’ statement was even more revealing than Reisner’s:
“I share in Ian’s remorse. I, too, lay humbled with what has happened in the last week,” he wrote on Facebook. “I made a terrible mistake. Unfortunately, I cannot undo this. You taught me a painful but important lesson. The people that know me know the work that I have done over the last 20 years for the advancement of gay rights. Today, I came to realize that I might have nullified my past efforts and accomplishments in just one week. On the eve of this momentous legal occasion at the Supreme Court, I dedicate myself to work even harder to advance our cause that I share with the LGBT community; our community. Again, to all that I have hurt, please accept my sincerest apologies.”
In other words, he had thought that twenty years of pro-gay activism was enough to shield him from the suspicion that he had betrayed the cause merely by hosting a discussion with someone who holds a different view. He has since discovered how wrong he was, and he promises to toe the line from now on.
Looking at the comments to that article I just quoted, the very first one I see (I can’t find a way to link to it) says this, which gives you an idea of the flavor of what’s happening:
Let’s face it. You screwed up big time. You made the worst mistake you could have possibly made. You showed your true colors. We ALL now know that you love only yourselves and your money.
You are true wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Your involvement in the gay community is nothing more than a tax write off, done for publicity to further your financial gain and not to truly help, assist, promote or support any gay causes.
You could care less that the gay community is oppressed, discriminated against, harassed, or even if they have equal rights under the constitution.
You BIT OFF the hand that feeds you!
It will be a cold day in hell before you ever see a dime of my money and I believe now that the rest of our community sees you for what you really are, you won’t see any more of their money, either.
I think all Log Cabin Republicans should be burned at the stake. They love only their money, first and foremost and any one that loves their money so much they would sell their own community down the road to keep it cannot possibly know a love of humanity.
Money is a cold bed fellow. Good luck making any more of it from us.
Your apology is to little, to late. We’ve seen your snarl and felt the bite of your fangs, we won’t make the same mistake again by taking you at your false face value. You’ll have to do a hell of a lot better than an apology.
Well, during the Great Purges many people actually were executed. I wonder whether that would be enough for the commenter I just quoted?
[NOTE: The above cartoon is a contemporaneous British commentary on the purges.]
[ADDENDUM: See also this.]
Sooner or later, someone will do something as innocuous as this, and will stand up to the bullies. (Google Larry Correia for a recent example of how this can be done.) And then the bullies will fold, as they nearly always do when faced with determined opposition. They don’t like determined opposition; they like victims.
Who will it be, I wonder?
Incidentally: I also wonder what Sen. Cruz’s response to all this will be. He no doubt knows that his well-wishes to Mr. Reisner are about as welcome now as a pig at a wedding… but I suspect he’ll try to do something anyway.
Neo, I have a dream too — that Sen. Cruz will address Mr. Reisner’s attackers, and call them out for the cowardly bullies that they are. They won’t listen to him — most of them won’t, anyway. But perhaps some small fraction will wake up, and realize just how firmly they stood foursquare AGAINST freedom of speech and AGAINST the freedom to be different.
Lincoln in his famous House Divided speech asked the question, “If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it.” So how did we reach the point where a handful of lawyers who wear black sheets to work, and a tiny fraction of the population, less than 2%, get to decide they can overturn customs that are literally thousands of years old? Where did they get the authority to make the decision against the will of the majority in every state where there has been a vote?
This is not slavery which actually harmed the people who were enslaved. Just what is the harm if there is no gay marriage? There was a time when homosexuality was against the law and they were actually persecuted, but that is long gone. So why do we have to have this shoved down our throats now?
Follow the money, Paul
Gay couples could not get spousal benefits
this is where this *push* came from
legislatures or Congress should have rectified this years ago giving spousal benefits to life partners
& we would have been spared much of this upheavel
we now are subjected to.
Brenden Eich is actually a better example as Cruz is a politician and could have motives of self interest to stir this up.
Eich was going about his private business and was “outed” as having made a small donation to a California ballot proposition on gay marriage. That proposition passed by a large majority but was thrown out by a gay judge who promptly “married” his gay lover.
Eich lost his job.
Shortly after reading about this, I deleted Firefox from all my computers.
This post touches on two things, one explicitly, one implicitly, tangentially, each vitally critical, of just what it is that’s wrong with the country. It is at once, first explicit in detailing ideological paragonism from which we may, more than infer, be certain that the U.S. is now a dysfunctional, dyscivic land, entirely without social bond, consisting of nothing more than political boundaries, borderlines, close perimeters, limits, and ambits.
And second, it is implicit in detailing everything that is wrong with journalism – MSM style. It is, in story and editorial, something which you could not find there if you turned over every rock and excavated deep into the lithosphere.
The behavior of advocates for homosexual marriage have convinced me that there is no good reason for it and quite possibly good reasons against it.
The lawyer’s quip is: if the law is with you, pound on the law; if the facts are with you, pound on the facts; if neither, pound the table.
This persecution and attempted persecution of those who disagree, for whatever reason, with the legalization of homosexual marriage is a clear sign that there is no argument for it. That those not in the forefront do not disassociate themselves and their cause is telling.
Old Curmudgeon:
Actually, quite a few advocates of gay marriage have written about their alarm at the tactics of those who would persecute those who are against it.
I don’t have time to find links right now, but they definitely exist. I don’t know what the percentages are, however. I would guess at this point that even those gay people who disagree with the tactic are now afraid to speak up lest they be tarnished with the same brush.
But you know, if enough people did speak up, there would be so many it would be hard to boycott them all. There would be strength in numbers.
Deviationism is the WORST possible SIN.
MollyNH, I think you may not understand. Anything less that what they want now is totally unacceptable, and what they want later is a MUST.
Ian Reisner must be destroyed; there is no other way. His apology won’t mean anything to such folks.
Nothing less than his complete destruction will do.
It seems to me that when I was in college (many decades ago) the left wasn’t as nasty as it is today.
While I was very apolitical, I did know folks who were on the left as well as some folks on the right. And I don’t remember anyone being as nasty as some folks are today. I remember some on the left being what one might call passionate; but, not so nasty.
There was one conversation in college where some classmates were saying to was wrong for the Pope to call out homosexuality as a sin. It took the out gay guy to speak up and defend the Pope saying that he had every right to do so and we had every right to disagree. Suddenly everyone in class was nodding their head in agreement with him.
I couldn’t imagine such a civilized conversation taking place today. It would have to be all screaming and name calling!
Is it because the anonymous nature of the internet allows people to say things they wouldn’t otherwise say face-to-face; and they are now carrying that over into real life?
Is it because our society has gotten cruder (or is it more crude)? And many folks think that is the only way to act.
Maybe, I just lived under a rock or something and never noticed such hate before?
Diversity – I don’t think it means what they think it means.
“Well, during the Great Purges many people actually were executed. I wonder whether that would be enough for the commenter I just quoted?” neo
“I think all Log Cabin Republicans should be burned at the stake.” fanatical commenter
There’s your answer neo, a quick simple execution is insufficient, they must grievously suffer during their execution. They must pay for their sin.
However, at base I continue to see this as not about gay marriage but about forcing societal acceptance and embrace of homosexuality and any sexual ‘orientation’ the individual may claim. That demand is completely intolerant of any disagreement because disagreement threatens that acceptance and embrace.
I didn’t really expect to find a taint of anti-semitism in all this, but a writer at the Daily Beast calls out Reisner and his partner on another sin they’re guilty of — being pro-Israel — and says that it’s what makes them blind to the awfulness of someone like Cruz.
Regarding the hate we’re seeing. IMO it’s a cumulative result of the Left’s memes and narrative. I well remember conservatives and republicans being painted as evil in Nixon’s time.
This quote by Lenin is illustrative of the Left’s political strategy;
Is that not exactly what has been happening for decades? Is it any wonder that it has finally become the norm on the Left?
“You are marching down a road that others before you have trod, and it ends in the killing fields where you murder those with whom you disagree.” neo’s imagined response
Tragically, the manifestation of that end state may be the only reality, which might awaken the LIVs.
Evil always plants the seeds of its own destruction.
Repent or else!
“The lynch mob is now giddy with success and drunk on the misery and pain of its victims. It is urged on by a compliant and even gleeful media. It is reinforced in its sense of righteousness and moral superiority by the ‘beautiful people’ and the intellectual class. It has been joined by the big corporations who perceive their economic interests to be in joining up with the mandarins of cultural power. It owns one political party and has intimidated the leaders of the other into supine and humiliating obeisance.”
“We have seen how swiftly the demands have moved from tolerance to compulsory approbation of behavior . . . . And now it is not only approbation that is demanded, but active participation. And do you honestly think that we have now reached the endpoint of what will be demanded?”
“If you believe you belong to a group that will be given a special exemption or dispensation from the enforcement of the new orthodoxy — by any means necessary — you will soon learn that you are tragically mistaken. No one who dissents will be given a pass.”
— Robert P. George
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/04/who-will-stand
The tools of the trade: horns and jumping shoes!
Ann:
I didn’t get into the anti-Israel part, because the post was already mega-long, but I saw some of that sentiment in the comments to articles about Reisner.
and, whistles. Forgot whistles …
Geoffrey Britain:
Oh, I’m well aware that the answer was in the comment I quoted. That’s one of the reasons I quoted it.
charles:
I think the phenomenon is the result of two things in the main.
The first is that the left today has a lot more power, and they are drunk on power.
The second is that far fewer American even understand, much less support, the principles of liberty on which this country was founded. The educational system being controlled more and more by the left has taken care of that.
I’m against gay divorce… which must necessarily EXPLODE with gay ‘marriage.’
Folks, let’s get real:
Monogamy is not any part of what gays intend with gay marriage.
Without monogamy, how in creation can one justify ‘spousal’ benefits — which ORIGINATED solely to sustain the widow (not a widower) with dependent children — another item that is absolutely not on the wish list of gays.
My gay BIL wouldn’t have children — and the way was open for him.
Of all the homosexuals I’ve known — as a stockbroker I’ve known quite a few — as gays actually have assets to invest — ALL of them howled at the very thought of getting into a monogamous relationship — especially a sham marriage like my BIL.
( Yes, that marriage works both ways. )
Giving spousal benefits to widowers — it’s freakishly rare — and something only contemplated in the last generation with the hyper-advancement (economically) of females in the earnings space.
Yet, for gay men ALL spousal benefits are identical in function to widower benefits — with the sure knowledge that there are no descendants involved.
&&&&
I’m flatly opposed to gay adoption.
Pederasty is the certain result.
&&&
As for lesbians — give me a break.
If there is ONE thing that dominates the brains of gays and lesbians its their suppressed rage at the opposite sex.
This comes out when the booze is flowing. EVERY time.
This is such a common tick that for the benefit of the children no homosexuals should be permitted to raise children other than their own — and even that’s a bad idea for most.
There are TONS of sham marriages out there — like my sister’s — that gays have used forever to play on the side.
Such convenient marriages end in divorce a huge fraction of the time. Not uncommonly, the wife files because she thinks her husband is seeing other women. As IF!
Again, due to life experiences around the edges of these tragedies, the raging hatred of the opposite sex rears its head.
Gay fathers embrace their sons — and reject their daughters. Yes, it happens all the time… after the divorce this tick is especially pronounced.
As for the children, such angles escape them — and victimize them.
All such marriage ‘advances’ for gays come at the expense of the children.
Children of either sex need both mothers and fathers to reach adulthood without emotional handicaps.
Bitter complaints about young, marriage age, modern American women have their roots in households that had no father.
The result is that the gals don’t know quite how to handle themselves around men.
The full bio on Sulkowicz might prove illuminating on this score.
We already know that the stats are absolutely terrible… for the kids. Why make them worse?
Why should the larger society pamper some young adults at the expense of the children made part of their personal drama?
With gays you’ll have Sulkowicz dynamics — rage against the opposite sex — running absolutely wild.
Rage politics… — neo-Stalinism…
In all of this — will no-one speak up for the children?
blert:
Well, I certainly know quite a few gay people who are monogamous—including gay men, not just lesbians. You are drawing conclusions from a small subset of people you know.
That isn’t to say that many gay couples don’t have “open” relationships. They do. And so do some (a lower percentage, but still some) heterosexual couples.
And your remarks about gay adoption are wrong as well. Do gay people sometimes molest children? Of course (again, as do straight people). Are the rates of molestation higher among gay people? I have done a ton of research in the past in an attempt to discover the answer, and I came to the conclusion that the answer was: slightly more molestation of children among gay people in terms of percentages (not actual numbers, since there are far fewer gay people to begin with) but only slightly. Most adoptions by gay people do not involve sexual abuse.
You can be against adoption by gays for other reasons, but the molestation reason doesn’t wash because the numbers just aren’t there. I would also remind you that being gay does not mean one is a pedophile.
It is very hard to sort out the research on the subject because so much of it (pro and con) has a political agenda. But as I said, when I tried my best to do that, I came to the conclusions I just stated.
The fire has begun. See Baltimore. See all of this stuff. See it over half the world.
The Islamo-Leftist Alliance has never been stronger. It is in full decimation mode. 50/50 between them and civilization.
Make no mistake. The greatest threats to America are fellow “citizens”.
Alinsky? That was the easy part.
@blert,
Most GLBTs are dysfunctional in one way or another. The main push for many of them was imposed social acceptance. Mind you, not tolerance…acceptance.
This whole movement has been 75% fraud from the beginning.
I’ve said it before: Civil disobedience. If they keep pushing after that, then it’s uncivil disobedience.
Matt_SE:
Gee, funny thing, the gay people I know are not dysfunctional at all.
I really wonder how you come to the conclusions you do.
There is no question that some gay people are, as you say, “dysfunctional.” Most are not. Some straight people are dysfunctional, too, in case you haven’t noticed.
Statistics show that various problems (such as depression) are somewhat more common in gay people. But the numbers are not so large as to mean that being gay implies psychological pathology.
See this and this, for example. You can see that although gay people have a slightly increased incidence of emotional difficulties as compared with straight people, the differences are not huge and the majority of gay people do not have such difficulties.
neo, I’m guessing you and Matt_SE know different people–they’re individuals, and not all alike.
Sam L.:
Of course.
But I don’t draw general conclusions one way or the other about ALL gay people being one thing or another from the small number of people I know.
Matt_SE seems to be doing so.
One thing I can say is that the people I know disprove what he is saying. Another thing I can say is that he isn’t relying on statistical facts, and I am trying to do so (as best as such facts can be determined).
blert, 6:02 pm — “Folks, let’s get real: Monogamy is not any part of what gays intend with gay marriage.”
Brother blert, your claim belies my experience.
I am friendly with two gay couples, one couple male and the other female. Monogamy is what they intended and, after many years, have in fact upheld.
Please be assured, I am very familiar with the phenomenon of very loose sexual morals among gays. (I’ve heard straights have that problem as well.)
My only intent in this reply is to record a protest . . . “many but certainly not all”.
Carry on . . .
We are seeing Samokritika.
In America. Or, I should say, the USSA.
Anyone following the Baltimore race riots live?
The National Guard has now been called out, and the baseball game tonight (Camden Yards stadium) has been postponed.
The police are retreating in the face of the criminals, who are looting and trashing and burning cars, including cop cars, with impunity. The usual suspects on the lickspittle media are making the usual excuses.
Everyone’s worried about sundown.
You may not be interested in
warthe activist game, butwarthe activist game is interested in you. It’s the only social cultural/political game there is.Now that statistics have been brought up…
The strip club circuit — and the pr0n industry — are over flowing with lesbians.
The first point was made to me — bitterly — by a straight performer at club — that had ties to the biggest clubs in San Francisco.
(Their Honolulu branch was used as a vacation spot for the gals.)
She asserted:
1) The sexual activity off stage — in the dressing room would make the grade as a pr0n shoot five hours every night.
2) The social pressure on her and the sole other straight performer to play along was intense… w-a-a-a-y beyond anything seen in a frat party.
3) The management (gay themselves) preferred lesbian performers — but couldn’t effectively stop the occasional straight gal from the trade — and new that they’d burn out shortly anyway. ALL long term performers were lesbians.
(A rather obvious conclusion, I’d say.)
4) That this situation was uniform at all of the other clubs in Honolulu. Straight gals were nothing but a headache for the management, as the last thing they wanted was any side action.
Years have passed and the famous owners have gone off and become even bigger names in the SF pr0n community — known nationally within their craft.
And, yes, they are massive backers of the gay rights movement — being in the forefront financially — and in their art.
Oh, lastly, she asserted that the performers HATED their patron clients — objectifying all of them. Taking tip monies was, however, a delightful revenge for them.
&&
As for herself:
Daughter of a broken marriage — her father was a California Highway Patrol officer — long out of the home — the usual family dysfunction in our modern era.
One huge factor in a divorced family:
The wife initiated the proceedings — and is stunned to find out that she is unmarriageable, to a degree that she never imagined. The number of lovers who’d love to help her cheat on her husband is large. Those willing to sign on the dotted line are nil.
So what was bad… became even worse.
&&&&&&&&
I’ve lost track of straights who tell me that gays are very much just like straights — but just have a different orientation.
These very same souls have never had ANY drinking bouts with the gays they’re talking about, have never seen Mr. Hyde come out.
Everything is Dr. Jekyl for them.
Straight men and women don’t hate either sex. It never crosses their minds.
Such issues loom large for a hefty majority of gay men and lesbian women.
This reality only comes — as it is said:
In vino veritas.
As long as the false persona is held up to view — the inner being is hidden.
For those with ‘issues’ their defenses against revealing sex hatred — which they know is taboo to reveal in virtually any social setting — remain sky high.
They do come all the way down to the ground with like minded souls and or plenty of booze.
It’s only then, you discover just how epic their false persona has been.
Needless to say, this reality is no part of ANY statistical survey.
It’s often the case that those holding such attitudes deny holding them even to themselves.
Just as most with NPD refuse to admit that THEY could possibly be narcissistic. Instead, they will see that very trait in you… indeed, in everybody around them.
Gay notions of what a marriage is are entirely different than family formation.
The real solution is a legal template for contractual benefits — much more along the lines of a trust/ trustee scheme.
There is absolutely no need to tear up marriage law and custom to provide all of the economic and social protections that gays are lobbying for.
Yet, that’s the focus of the gay radicals at this very moment.
The Left is like Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria, who is reputed to have said while beating a peasant, “You must not fear me but love me!”
Neoneocon,
Pardon me for going off topic. As I watch Baltimore under assault from thugs and gangs of black people, I cannot help but comment on witnessing the press conference featuring the “leaders” of the Baltimore community:
.
1.) Mayor Blake, a black woman, addresses the crowd and seems confused and overwhelmed by what has occurred today. She denies having said that the authorities were “giving space” to the protestors, even though that’s what she had said earlier.
2. Police Chief DeSousa, a black man, sounds capable as he announces that 15 of his officers have been injured, two of whom are still hospitalized. He too sounds quite overwhelmed by the behavior occurring today.
3.) The president of the City Council, a black man, trips over his words as he tries to convey his disdain for what “thugs” are doing to his city
_______________________________________
So, we have at least three “leaders” of Baltimore, all black, and all seemingly overwhelmed by the blacks who are rioting, LOOTING stores (Ross, Target, Walmart, etc.) in the “MonDawmin” Mall.
So—–how many black officers are on the Baltimore Police force? And how is it that the black leaderhship cannot control the black population in their city?
So many other questions related to the fact that we have leaders who are black, and a certain segment of the population who are black, and still dissatisfied with just how things are being “managed” in Baltimore.
Hmmmmm………..simply scratching my head over this.
I also witnessed Congressman Elijah Cummings, a black man, interviewed by Bob Shieffer on Sunday morning.
I was aghast at his sheer ignorance in assessing the goings-on in Baltimore this weekend. He downplayed the violence
He actually said that, “it could have been worse”—-as if to dumb down our definition of what is acceptable behavior by thugs who make efforts to disrupt city operations, and a Baltimore Orioles baseball game.
Mr. Cummings at no time made it clear that any violent protest was unacceptable, reprehensible.
He basically made it sound as if everything was just fine, as he found it to be.
A confused black leadership—–that is what it is.
And a leadership which sends messages that are not resolute in their condemnations.
Rant over…
clarityseeker: A policeman commented on another blog back during the Ferguson riots. He noted that many people call for a much greater percentage of black police officers, especially in black communities. He agreed that that might help, but he pointed out that there are few black men who could meet the qualifications to become a police officer.
blert’s response at 7:48 is basically my experience. NHIS says that about 2.3% of the population are GLB. The fact that they comprise 1 out of 40 people itself is a cause of dysfunction.
That’s not a problem for me, in theory. They can live their lives any way they want. But recent examples have shown they won’t leave the rest of us alone.
This has hardened my heart against them because their movement is aligned with FASCISTS.
But I’d love to hear how you propose to thread that needle of supporting the good ones while dissuading the bad ones.
Also, in hindsight maybe “dysfunctional” wasn’t the best word to use since it implies psychiatric problems.
Some may have this, but I was more referring to their attitudes…much in the same way I think hard leftists are “dysfunctional.”
I suppose most LGBs are quite sane, and they’re still grossly wrong.
“Statistics show that various problems (such as depression) are somewhat more common in gay people,” writes neo.
Perhaps – I’ve also gone data diving from time to time on into social psychology and sociology of so-called “deviance.” But much of my own experience is testimony to the more unsavory findings truthfulness.
For some years I’ve lived in the inner Denver community best known as a gay “haven.” It’s the home of “Gay Pride” parades. And the neighborhood hosts gay people from Kansas and Montana and similar reaches to the West and South – as well as Coloradans.
Stereotypical dysfunctions like depression and anger are highest among the lesbians. With gay men lagging behind them, to be sure, but worse than people in the straighter ‘burbs.
I believe the lack of intergenerational connectedness, the lack of procreative drive and discipline – evident in the homely suburbs, for example, within which most people find their deepest fulfillment in achieving – is evident here. Gay folks lack this choice.
Think of it, neo. It’s like any all male community, like the frontier gold rush towns – where social life is dominated by exaggerated male dysfunctions commonly found among them, like substance abuse, depression and diverted anger.
Men without women – gay or not – are less rooted, less focused, and less able to give themselves to the greater mysteries, destinies, and meanings in life like one’s inevitable mortality and the consolation that comes from parenting – the gift of life out into the indefinite future.
Sure, there are substitutes. But for most of us, they are inferior substitutes to the commonality found in masculine and feminine led home-life with children.
And more dysfunctionally, they try to claim their deficits as some twisted greater advantage in facing death! Lately (and recurrently), resulting in epidemics of STDs and morbid, self-destructive “bug chasing” unto HIV-AIDs death.
My closest living relative is an accomplished gay man over 60, and on his fourth (or fifth) LTR. And while I admire him and think him a good man, he also exhibits almost ALL of the positive and negative “gay” stereotypes mentioned here. (All that said, he still opposes “gay marriage.”)
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-university-of-baltimore-closes-amid-high-school-purge-threat-20150427-story.html
As expected. Some people thought it was going to be a crisis that generates emergency rule, right.
Others said the military would play a part, although which part is undecided.
But I’d love to hear how you propose to thread that needle of supporting the good ones while dissuading the bad ones.
Breaking the back of the Left is little different from counter insurgencies which separated hardcore AQ from soft core nationalist Sunni tribes.
One way of winning a victory with little loss is by capturing and converting half of the enemy’s army to your side. The fact that the enemy likes to shoot their people in the back for deserting or running away, should be a sign that fear can only control so much.
I have sat in a meeting with over forty lesbians (long story, I was there by mistake) who were consoling one of their members who was literally gagging and retching that her girlfriend had cheated on her with a …. MAN. The chorus of gagging and outrage and revulsion at the idea of having sex with a male — yeah, they were vocal about it — made me think, “This is a lot more vehement than any reaction I’ve seen by straight people about gay sex.” In fact, it was what they imagine and accuse us of doing.
Second anecdotal evidence: I’ve had gay men friends, and three of them I knew and liked for years. Well enough that at some point, I asked each of them the forbidden question: “Is it true that gay men’s culture is misogynist?”
And each one said (three separate occasions; they didn’t know each other, even): “Oh, GOD, yes!!!” and laughed. Yep, that exact sentence.
One more anecdote: a gay man who was in our therapy group came one day wearing a long string of pearls, and he was disconsolate and in tears because he’d dressed femme at a party the night before, and the butches gave him unmitigated sh** for acting like a woman (that wasn’t the word they used, either). He then bemoaned the fact that gay male culture was so intolerant of femmes.
Lastly: just get a copy of “Blue Boy” and read through it. Sorry, Neo, they haven’t been traditionally called “woman-haters” for nothing. Even Stephen Fry, who is such a funny writer, and charming, said in an interview with a gay publication that when he was born, he “took one look back at my mother’s ____, and swore I was never going back into anything like THAT again.”
I lived with a gay theater director for six months in Greenwich Village. Let’s just say it was an eye-opening experience. Before that, I was very much in the live and let live camp (though I found it baffling, it didn’t bug me); my best friend in college was a lesbian.
But it is what it is.
Gay Mafia.
They’re very aggressive in the public and private space.
My experience in the private space has been dismal.
Worse aspect of the overall interactions has been* some of the women going full faghag and egging them [male gays] on …
Nothing else I/we could figure out to do but minimize, endure, deflect, avoid…
*has been, because of the lifestyle excesses early deaths, 45 and 50 respectively resolved the problems.
I still resent the enabling faghagery and the Cage of Folles episodes….
That is all ….
I do believe that this is another instance of the left using gay people for its own ends. Reisner is gay and just happened to color outside the lines of acceptable political behavior and was shutdown by what sounds like a virtual lynch mob. Exchanging ideas with an important political figure, a man who may even win the presidency is a positive thing, no matter how you spin it. I may agree with the idea of gay marriage, but I do think Cruz is right to leave it to the states, that’s the constitution. Ideally I would want civil unions for all and “marriage” for those who want to do so in a religion of their choice, even if that is the Universal Light Church (or whatever that loony ministry is that you can buy with a special fee). But that’s not what has happened. In any case, this response is way out of proportion to anything that actually happened or was going to happen with Cruz. It was not even a fundraising event! It is unhinged and scary. It is all about beating people up who do not conform in lockstep and demonizing them and anyone who is in opposition to this leftist agenda. Obviously, this tactic does not make friends of people who are not inclined to be for LGBT rights. Cruz is about more than a tacit opposition to gay marriage, he has other ideas that are actually more important to the vast majority of Americans and deserve a hearing. And, that vast majority of Americans does also include gays and lesbians who have to live with a sluggish economy, floods of undocumented immigrants, and the thread of a radical Islam gaining ground in a chaotic Middle East. All that… there are actually more important things than Gay marriage and any way – the battle is just about done and won frankly. And it is with the court now… (though I think the constitutional way is best but anyway…) Why all this screaming and hair pulling? Heh — I think it is really about “Liberal fascists” needing to take things over and run things their way — because gay marriage is the least of their agenda, the rest is all the things we talk about here. I mean, the economic agenda and military and so on… this is the left and they are using this issue and this group — they do that with all minorities. Every single minority group, the far left goes in and takes up the cause but it is about more than simple civil rights, though the battle may start there and use that as a subterfuge.
Any way, I wish he had stood up to these loons. I know it is very difficult (I have had some experience though nothing on a national stage) and these people, the “queer left” – are vicious. They do not represent all LGBT people but they are very loud and divisive and they exercise a certain power and control over the media message.
And, yes – as for purges, g_d forbid that these people ever have REAL POWER in this world by government fiat because then, we are in for some actual trouble. They are already talking about burning the Log Cabin Republicans! It is talk but there is real hatred and vitriol behind it.
Beverly,
Interesting comments about lesbians and gay men. My own experience is that while straight people are not supposed to express as much revulsion as they may actually feel about sex with someone of their own sex, because it may not seem PC — many did in the past and still do. And, that’s fine because they are actually heterosexual and not homosexual (or bisexual). I have heard it said by het men I know who are accepting of gay men but certainly not interested in gay sex.
That said, I think that people also not only say things they would not otherwise in groups as a form of bonding. There is an “us-them” mentality in gay groups like with any group. Certainly there is an anti-male bias with many lesbians that is supported by a certain type of feminist culture but also, many of them individually like men and have many male friends. But they are lesbians and do tend to favor women by and large.
As for gay men being misogynist I don’t think they are necessarily more so than many het men, but the flavor is different. Straight men may resent women and feel angry because of their dependence on them emotionally and for sexual gratification but gay men do not have the same resentment. But they have other forms of misogyny particular to being a group of male loving men. Not all do, but many and yes, some do feel an ick about female bodies – though not every single one but yes, they are homosexual. Some also love women and certainly their female friends. So… and most women are not worried about being sexually assaulted or killed by a gay man – so there is that.
It is all about your vantage point. Having been in many different groups, having experienced various vantage points I can see how each perch looks different from that particular angle.
As a straight guy now, I do get crap from lesbians and it is not pleasant and sometimes, I am fawned over by gay men. Before (I am FTM trans) as a lesbian — I got some strange attitudes from certain straight people though I always also fit in with artists and non-conformists generally. Any way, as you say, it is what it is. I just see people as they are and try and avoid the generalizations. It is interesting if a bit disconcerting though to see het people letting off steam here about LGB people. I have started to prefer straight people myself, at least some of the time — but I am one now. So, I guess that makes sense however… I can’t say I don’t enjoy the company of gay people. I guess I am rambling but you might get the point… I really can see the quirks of these different groups and do not necessarily judge individuals.
On another note: my motto is NEVER APOLOGIZE. I mean, to the leftist cabal. NEVER EVER —
They do not represent all LGBT people but they are very loud and divisive and they exercise a certain power and control
The minority of Democrat plantation owners weren’t representative of the majority of Southerners either. That didn’t really matter, in the end.
I feel like I need to offer my own anecdotal experience here. I am a gay man who self-identifies as a Republican. I live in New England, where I am much more likely to get nasty words thrown my way for the latter than for the former identity. My social group is overwhelmingly twenty-something white middle-class people, both hetero- and homosexual.
My experience is that middle-class white people pretty much want the same things, regardless of sexuality. Almost all of my friends, whether they’re gay or straight, want to get married, remain in a monogamous relationship, and have 1-3 children. Yes, I know some gay men who never want to get married–but I also know straight men and women who don’t want to, either. Regardless of sexual orientation, virtually all of us have the same expectations of monogamous, child-rearing marriage, and those expectations are just ours. Just like my straight brother, I get asked by relatives when I’m going to get married and have kids. My pious Catholic gay friend gets the same questions from his very Irish nana.
It’s not fair to make generalizations about all gay men from a sample of gay men who live in inner cities after moving away from their families. Yes, gay men who experience trauma and move hundreds or thousands of miles away from their families experience higher-than-normal rates of psychological issues, because you’re looking at a self-selecting population of people who tore themselves away from their family. If you look at a similar sample of straight, inner-city dwelling people who moved hundreds or thousands of miles away from their families because of rejection, then you’d probably see similarly elevated levels of psychological issues.
In areas where homosexuality is normalized, you see gay people treated like heterosexuals, and in return, they aren’t as alienated from society and behave in much the same way as the straight members of their socioeconomic cohorts.
You can’t stop gay people from being gay. The only thing you can do is hold us to the same standard as you hold our straight family and friends. Whining like Orson that men without women are less rooted does nothing for men who will never love women sexually or romantically.
True Ymarsakar. It is a shame that people as powerful and connected as Reisner and Weiderpass did not take up the mantle of standing up to these bullies. Possibly, being in the hotel business puts them too much in the bull’s eye of public opinion since their business might suffer. Yet, maybe not, and someone has to take the chance.
Possibly Bruce Jenner will be a departure from this norm as an emerging trans person. But time will tell.
I guess there are always the “little people” like myself and each voice counts. Something for people like me to chew on and consider. It would be good to create an organization to come out again this sort of thinking… more than the Log Cabin Republicans though I am glad they exist.
Whining like Orson that men without women are less rooted does nothing for men who will never love women sexually or romantically.
If I were in charge of the Gaystapo or other special forces of the Leftist alliance’s war against humanity, I would break you moderates and normal middle class citizens by first pressuring your families, then kidnapping them, then breaking them. After they are broken, you will obey the Legion of Fanatics, whether you like it or not.
Compared to that, it doesn’t really matter what people like Orson thinks. An army of Fanatics, I guarantee you this, can convert all of you, man, woman, child, or whatever you call yourselves, into loyal, obedient, troops of their ideology.
With enough time in the cells, with enough fire, certainly it can be done. It just takes work. Fanatics can do the work.
Much of this reminds me of Petraeus and all the Counter insurgency methods pioneered and refined in Iraq 2007 or 2005.
The normal citizens like Bryan would prefer food, shelter, and security. They do not mind if it is AQ or the US providing it. However, both sides will pressure them for obedience, and that often rubs the middle class in the wrong way.
Liberty Wolf may become an individual warlord, by taking and holding territory, enough for a single tribe to live well in. That’s how individuals normally set their claim on this earth, through strength of will and a boat load of arms.
So Bryan’s family gets bombed by America. Bryan takes up arms against the hated Americans, yes? But if Bryan gets bombed by America and then the terrorists take his family hostage, Bryan might go to the Americans for help.
It gets complicated, this COIN, where both sides are trying to get allies, while at the same time both sides are intentionally or not killing bystanders.
This hypothetical situation is only that, but it is a minor congratulation to all those people how scorned the war in Iraq. You have what you wished for, now you can fight that same war over here. But instead of being at the mall while US soldiers fight and die overseas, now you can fight terrorists, death squads, rape squads, and bombs right here in the convenience of your family home…. ironic, is it not.
Since I know neo is a night owl, I wanted to add two thoughts.
First to Bryan who raises a valid issue I did consider before my post (above). And a second one which goes to the rank deceptions of John Money of Johns Hopkins University – who contrived to “prove” sexual identity is all about hormones and nothing else, purging mounting evidence of his failures – and has ruined many lives personally and perpetually and impersonally. (And perhaps Liberty Wolf will care to add his two cents?)
Bryan writes: “It’s not fair to make generalizations about all gay men from a sample of gay men” who were traumatized and self-selected. Of course it isn’t – but I’m not doing social science, merely social observation.
The central ‘trauma’ (if that’s what it is) that draws people to cities in the parts of the country I’ve lived most of my life – Denver and Minneapolis (and I’ve lived in both inner and suburban areas in both towns, not to add Salt Lake City) – isn’t really trauma but the common human condition of social isolation. That is, social isolation and disconnection is what unites the North Central region of the US that geographers call The Great Empty.
The Great Empty is that “U” or “V” shaped region roughly from a line drawn between Omaha and Denver containing the lowest population density in the US.
People leave dreary small towns where gossip dominates, and difference divides, hoping for more social acceptance in urban areas and cores.
Thus, the “out of sample” objection Bryan raises is valid, scientifically speaking, but not in term of anecdote. Or at least in the sense that a very intellectual straight man like me does indeed have something vitally in common with the gay ‘rejects’ that he doesn’t have with suburban families.
Because of my own early and extreme childhood-parent abuse issues, and subsequent teenage difficulties with peer group abuse, I have struggled with my sexual identity myself. At one point, I almost entered the University of Minnesota’s renown “Program on Human Sexuality” to explore a solution. Over time, I didn’t – mostly because my own ongoing individual talk therapy eventually resolved that problem, and gave me a practical and productive social and psychological agenda to pursue. Yet I have remained sensitive to the issue of sexual identity – “nature versus nurture?” questions.
In recent days, I saw “Dr Phil” of all people interviewed by a reporter, echoing the common yet false indoctrination,
that Bruse Jenner’s transition has provoked, and the growing misguided “empathy” for finding his True woman – coming out of the closet as a woman instead of the man he was born to be. And this report blithely PRESUMED that ‘gender identity’ = sexual identity, and that both – as per Dr John Money – were entire a social product.
This thesis undergirds much of the feminist and LBGTQ agendas and activism, both scholarly, socially and politically, and it has been soundly falsified. Yet people do not know or understand this, nor doe they grasp its consequences for SSM.
It took the work of Milton Diamond (MD, PhD), and his book “As Nature Made Him: The boy Raised as a Girl” (2000), to begin reversing this pernicious and pervaisive belief.
I’ll just quote from Wikipedia and leave the link for anyone to follow for deeper information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Diamond#David_Reimer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
Now, imagine how much bullying and SJW-thuggery and political conflict would be defused by awareness of the Truth that matters like sexual identity and orientation are probably more about social development than biological pre-determination?
But NO – we can’t have that.
SORRY – I lost control of the relevant valence in this long, poorly edited post, above!
To correct: biology is important to sexual identity and orientation and not wholly optional or changeable by messing with portions of one’s biology – by others or by oneself.
These ARE indeed complicated matters. The dogmas that surround them today would outrage the late great teaching psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz.
One more block quote is called for:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer#Social_legacy
Now, to have a singular case turned authoritative and controlling in fields like psychiatry, anthropology, women’s studies, child development, and biology of gender , fields with sweeping social and political consequence isn’t mere hubris – it is madness.
Orson: I’m having some trouble reading between the lines of your comments. Are you attempting to suggest that because sexual orientation is not wholly biologically determined, that society *should* attempt to change homosexuals’ sexual orientation to heterosexuality? If so, the obvious question is why? Why expend that effort to change people who are doing no harm to anyone?
Ymarsakar: a curious analogy for a gay man, since Al-Qaeda or IS would toss me off a rooftop simply for being gay. Given the choice between fascist co-nationals who would intentionally murder me for being who I am, and an invading foreigner, I would have to choose the foreigner, who would at least probably not intentionally murder me.
Whole Foods learns what it means to make sandwiches.
Sing along!
I blame the voters, very personally, very individually.
Transsexual orientations are a psychosis, but the individuals are rarely sociopaths. The principal concern for society and humanity is if transsexual and tansgender orientations are progressive. Also if trans advocates support selective exclusion, rather than principled tolerance, where the former creates moral hazards for the People and unplanned Posterity.
That said, trans orientations are not limited to homosexual orientation, and include men and women with a “Peter Pan” syndrome, as well as men and women who dangerously delay procreation, which increases risk to both the mother and child, and post-birth development.
It’s ironic that liberals use political, legal, economic, and social shaming and bullying in order to prevent trans-oriented individuals from seeking treatment for their condition in order to sustain the political narrative and their leverage.