The National Organization for Marriage has every right to get itself into a tizzy over the juvenile and vulgar ad from a group calling itself FCKH8. But I’ll tell NOM the same thing I’ll tell FCKH8: You’re not ever going to stop people from using vile and offensive language — at least not in a country with a first amendment. So stop it.
It is no pleasant thing for me to have to endure NOM’s relentless obliviousness, just as I’m sure it’s tough for them to have to suffer being called haters by enthusiastic twentysomethings, and now, even some of their kids. But that’s part of living in a country that established from the start the invaluable notion that the individual freedom to speak one’s mind is one of the most important fundamentals of a society where the government derives from the consent of the governed. People are a varied and messy lot, and while we can be managed a bit, we can’t be controlled. There will always be people of strong feeling who feel no obligation to manners and social restraint.
Dealing with other people’s bad habits is one of the things that demonstrates true civility. And while ceaseless complaining isn’t exactly uncivil, it’s certainly unseemly. That’s what this whole skirmish boils down to, unseemly whining by NOM and FCKH8. Once you get past the hyperobvious fund-raising potential for both groups in complaining about the other’s rhetoric, you really aren’t left with very much of substance. FCKH8 undermines a sound theme of tolerance with its brash and rude intolerance. NOM, I’m afraid to say, has lost any claim to respectability, but it’s probably best to leave them alone in their ever-shrinking world.
We’re near Christmas, and I’d much rather focus on real things and honorable emotions. To all men and women of good will, have a Merry Christmas and a very happy New Year!
11 Comments for “Naughty and Nice”
posted by Carl on
As long as the media continue to write puff pieces on Brian Brown, NOM will continue to have the veneer of respectability.
posted by BobN on
The National Organization for Marriage has every right
Well, maybe not every right. They can complain a bit, I suppose, but few organizations have introduced more children to the mechanics of gay sex than NOM and its affiliated “pro-family” groups.
I assume the F..8.. whatever thingy is vulgar. I can’t say for sure, cuz I have no interest in watching it. As far as I’m concerned, children are children, and when “art” or “the market” require child characters to say or do unseemly things or, worse, to have things done to them, I say let them use CGI.
posted by Jorge on
Merry/Happy… now F8?
Well, some of those white kl…egbreakers were kinda hunky.
posted by George on
Well put, David. Neither side generates much respect when it uses vitriol. Politeness is a rare commodity in the world these days.
Thanks for a reasoned post. Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
posted by PIL on
Do we always have to use cute guys in our advertising? I mean, that shirtless guy was hot, is that the message we want to send? That we’re all hot? What about people like me? What about hairy chests? Jesus, talk about preaching to the converted.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-physical-education-should-never-be.html
posted by PIL on
I saw the ad, it looked like soft-core porn. Really, do we have to show shirtless men to support same-sex marriage? Is that the message we want to send? That gay marriage is about athletic gays that want to boink each other exclusively? That model wasn’t even hairy, it look like an A&F ad!
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com
posted by Throbert McGee on
Hmmm, interesting that the NOM complaint linked by David’s OP made a fuss about the obscenities that the young children were shouting…
…but not so much about the knee-jerk overuse of the word “hate” …
…nor about grown-up gays exploiting teen suicides for their own grown-up political ends, à la the flaky guidance counselor in Heathers…
…nor, finally, about the dubious juxtaposition of the young children with the shirtless beefcake. (Actually, I agree with PIL that the model was more Twinkie than beef, but in any case, isn’t Our Community Slogan supposed to be that “it’s about love, not just sex”?)
So, it appears that the strategic F-carpetbombing at least had the effect of distracting NOM from all the other dubious shit in this stupid video!
posted by BobN on
“nor about grown-up gays exploiting teen suicides for their own grown-up political ends”
Yeah, cuz no gay adults really care about kids taking their own lives.
posted by Throbert McGee on
To be clear, BobN, I don’t believe that all gay adults who are concerned about gay teen suicides are “exploiting” the issue.
But here’s what the ad actually said (starting at around 1:07):
I very, very, very much doubt that any LGBT teens who try to commit suicide do so because voters in California and Maine rescinded same-sex marriage and said that gays only had a right to domestic partnerships. I also doubt that suicidal gay teens are significantly motivated by the knowledge that, if they chose to join the military, DADT requires them to be extremely closeted; nor by the knowledge that in many states, same-sex couples either can’t jointly adopt at all, or can only do so by jumping through legal hoops that add to the cost of the already expensive adoption process.
All these are legitimate issues for gays and lesbians, but they’re probably not on the radar of significant personal issues for most teenagers, including gay ones.
So what this ad does — with lines like “Fuck you, ballot-box bullies!” — is to use the tragedy of teen suicides as a shame-bludgeon to make people feel bad about voting against certain initiatives that happen to be political obsessions for a lot of ADULT gay people.
Incidentally, gay teenagers may experience suicidal feelings for any number of reasons, but any objective observer ought to wonder whether fear of being associated in the public imagination with drag queens and assless leather pants is at least as big a contributor to gay-teen angst as fear of not being able to marry or fear of not being able to serve openly in the military.
P.S. Is there any evidence for the ad’s claim that “1 out of 3 queer kids have tried to kill themselves”? To the best of my knowledge, this factoid is a distortion of an old study which found that among ALL teenagers who seriously attempt suicide (which is a number considerably smaller than the likely number of “queer teens”), about 1 out of 3 reports having issues with sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
posted by BobN on
I very, very, very much doubt that any LGBT teens who try to commit suicide do so because voters in California and Maine rescinded same-sex marriage and said that gays only had a right to domestic partnerships. I also doubt that suicidal gay teens are significantly motivated by the knowledge that, if they chose to join the military, DADT requires them to be extremely closeted; nor by the knowledge that in many states, same-sex couples either can’t jointly adopt at all, or can only do so by jumping through legal hoops that add to the cost of the already expensive adoption process.
First of all, to whatever extent you fight for gay rights, do you only fight for yourself and your age group? That would make you an anomaly in my experience. Sure, there are folks who fight for partner immigration rights because they have (or are) an immigrant partner and there are folks who fight to serve in the military because they want to serve in the military, but most gay folks also fight so kids don’t have to go through what they went through.
Secondly, for some, suicide is a death of a thousand cuts. Each and every way that society says “you are not worthy” hurts. Also, in recent years, though we may sometimes win in the courts, we have — as our dear friends in the religious right love to point out — lost at the ballot box time after time. Through a filter of depression, that can seem pretty hopeless.
Thirdly, I’m sure there are kids who dread the prospect of growing up and having to dress in drag and engage in all sorts of depravity. The responsibility for projecting the impression that that’s what it means to be gay is not ours, nor does it belong to the drag queens and leather daddies. You can lay blame for that at the feet of the aforementioned religious right.
And, lastly, all chaps are assless.
posted by Throbert McGee on
P.S. Don’t forget to scroll down on the FCKH8 site — I nearly missed the ad for the “STR8 AGAINST H8” 2011 Calendar: STR8 Dudes Take It Off So The Homos Can Get Their Rights On.
Ya know, if any Republican political figure, or for that matter, any opponent of repealing DADT, up to and including some of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — had suggested that gay men have a particularly obsessive fascination with ogling “str8 dudes,” I daresay that they’d be accused of promoting hateful stereotypes.