One form of conversion therapy is being outlawed, while to even question the latter is to risk being professionally blacklisted.
The homophobic taunts shouted at the Convington boys received scant coverage. Andrew Sullivan writes:
Once the [Black Hebrew] Israelites figured out the kids were Catholic, they offered this about what appeared to be a picture of the Pope: “This is a faggot child-molester.” And this about Donald Trump: “He’s a product of sodomy and he’s proud. Your president is a homosexual. … It says on the back of the dollar bill that ‘In God We Trust,’ and you give faggots rights.” At that homophobic outburst, the kids from the Catholic school spontaneously booed […]
To put it bluntly: They were 16-year-olds subjected to verbal racist assault by grown men; and then the kids were accused of being bigots. It just beggars belief that the same liberals who fret about “micro-aggressions” for 20-somethings were able to see 16-year-olds absorbing the worst racist garbage from religious bigots … and then express the desire to punch the kids in the face.
Andrew Sullivan: "[T]he same liberals who fret about “micro-aggressions” for 20-somethings were able to see 16-year-olds absorbing the worst racist garbage from religious bigots … and then express the desire to punch the _kids_ in the face." https://t.co/iV6Mowq32H
— IGF CultureWatch (@IndeGayForum) January 26, 2019
"Sandmann is a teenage boy who attends high school in small-town Kentucky, but you’re never too young, never too obscure, and never too powerless, apparently, to represent the patriarchy." https://t.co/KjRJnF5S97 #Covington
— City Journal (@CityJournal) January 27, 2019
The press failure on this and other “advance the narrative” stories has been monumental and driven by political bias:
Imagine the coverage if the pro-life, MAGA-capped kids had shouted “faggots” and other insults at that black and Native American protestors, instead of what actually happened.
"This sad affair has allowed political charlatans, axe-grinders, and race baiters to wax poetic and connect the incident to their own personal bugaboos, be they experiences at the hands of high school bullies or racist white cisheteropatriarchy." https://t.co/K8jPiPWChd
— Quillette (@Quillette) January 21, 2019
Black adults to white kids: "F*ggots, crackers, bigots, incest kids."
White kids: [smiling, not responding]
Everyone: "omg did you see that smile?! So disrespectful!"
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) January 21, 2019
A better way:
It actually does not bother me that Karen Pence, a traditionalist Christian, is teaching art at a conservative Christian school in Springfield, Virginia that does not accept homosexual behavior by students or teachers (or parents, it seems). The Pences aren’t saying that all schools should hold these views, whereas those who are protesting Mrs. Pence for her new teaching post seem to suggest that no schools should be allowed with these views.
Via Scopes: “The school does not explicitly bar gay, lesbian or bisexual persons from teaching there, but rather states that homosexual sexual acts (as opposed to same-sex preferences) are considered unacceptable “moral misconduct.” … It is a matter of subjective personal opinion, rather than objective fact, whether the ban on teachers’ engaging in homosexual sexual acts is tantamount to a de facto ban on gay, lesbian and bisexual teachers.”
I disagree with the views of the Immanuel Christian School, but I wouldn’t want to live in a country that did not allow conservative Christians, Orthodox Jews and others to have schools that comport with their faith traditions.
More. Apparently, some who have no problem requiring religiously pro-life taxpayers to help foot the bill for abortions, or with forcing nuns to pay for abortifacients for their employees, are upset that Karen Pence is teaching at a school that’s not accepting of LGBT behavior while receiving secret service protection.
More. Columnist William McGurn writes in the Wall Street Journal:
Now look at the Immanuel Christian School. Those who run it know they and those who think like them are the big losers in America’s culture war. All they ask is to be allowed, within the confines of their community, to uphold 2,000 years of Christian teaching on marriage, sexuality and the human person. …
[But] it isn’t enough for the victors to win; the new sense of justice requires that those who still don’t agree must be compelled to violate their deepest beliefs, whether this means forcing the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraception or dragging a baker in Colorado through the courts until he agrees to make a cake celebrating “gender transition.”
Today’s militant secularists ironically resemble the worst caricatures of religious intolerance of early America.
Leaving aside the woke Gillette ad brouhaha, a related but more high-toned controversy has erupted over the American Psychological Association’s labeling “traditional masculinity” as harmful and even pathological.
APA position, per Sullivan: “Men should presumably learn to be the opposite: emotionally inconstant, collaborative, submissive, and passive. If that’s the kind of man you want to be — much more like a sexist stereotype of a woman — an army of psychologists is ready to help you” https://t.co/rw8NsZHwul
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) January 12, 2019
Gay men have various reactions to “traditional masculinity” since while growing up many were bullied and belittled for their perceived lack of masculinity, especially if their behavior and demeanor was, in fact, effeminate. Others, particularly those who came of age in the ’70s and early ’80s, may have fetishized and adopted the hypermasculine clone persona. But you don’t have to defend all aspects of “traditional masculinity” to conclude that the latest round of progressive and feminist-inspired critiques have gone overboard, and that often traditionally masculine assertiveness and even aggression have built and defended a robust, dynamic enterprise culture, while inspiring men to put their lives on the line to save others and to keep us free.
OK, a little snark about the Gillette ad, and an assessment by Jon Gabriel at Ricochet:
Gillette, endorsed by pajama boy for that annoying peach fuzz. https://t.co/aRUxbXmmmK
— IGF CultureWatch (@IndeGayForum) January 16, 2019
Jon Gabriel writes:
Promoting social issues can be effective marketing, but notice the difference. P&G’s female-directed ads make women feel better about themselves. The company tells women “you’re great just as you are” and tells men “you’re bad and need to change.” I’ve yet to complete my Marketing Ph.D., but I don’t think a message of “Women are revolting, buy Secret” would spike profits.
Like other progressive movements, LGBTQ activism has wedded itself to the cultural and financial elites. Recall the Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” comment was delivered at a gala LGBTQ fundraiser in Manhattan featuring Barbra Streisand. The fundraiser reportedly brought in around $6 million, with ticket prices ranging from $1,200 to $250,000, with many paying $50,000, according to reports, which at the time I wrote about here.
Matt Latimer writes:
At first, the film shows [Dick Cheney] lovingly accepting his daughter Mary as she tells him of her sexual orientation and even giving up his presidential aspirations to protect her. But later, in a scene that was clearly invented, the Mary accuses her parents of coldly throwing her under the bus on the issue of gay marriage when it suits their other daughter’s political purposes. The true backstory is this: Liz, running for office in Wyoming in 2013, was being attacked by fellow Republicans for supporting gay marriage, since she had a gay sister. Liz expressed opposition to same-sex marriage, putting her at odds with Mary’s view. While Dick Cheney himself had supported gay marriage since 2000, he issued a statement defending Liz’s differing stance. Same-sex marriage was a difficult topic for many people, so it wasn’t unusual for one daughter to have a different view of it than another and for a parent to still love them both. Not long before that, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party had opposed same-sex marriage, too. It was also perfectly understandable for a father to want to help his other daughter any way he could, and Liz was losing the race badly. This clearly painful, anguishing dilemma is not explained to viewers at all. Instead, we are shown Cheney, looking down absently, while a tearful Mary accuses him of betrayal.
“I think the trans issue gets more attention than it warrants,” says Jamie Kirchick, a center-right gay writer and visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution who opposed Trump’s military ban but who believes “the gay movement has been overtaken by transgender issues affecting a minuscule percentage of the population.”
The unwillingness of many gay conservatives to prioritize the struggle of transgender people comes as little surprise to Richard Goldstein, a gay former executive editor for The Village Voice who published “Homocons,” a scathing book about gay conservatives, 17 years ago.
More. The comments section to the NYT article is full of clichéd comparisons of gay conservatives with Jews supporting Nazis. Well, if you have no understanding whatsoever that there are, in fact, actual arguments for limited government and individual vs. collective rights (not, mind you, that you disagree with such arguments, but that you’ve gone through four years of higher education and think that being conservative (or even libertarian) simply denotes bigotry), then you might assume that ritually reciting this comparison is a game-winner.
Part 2 of this @nytimes focus should include:
• An interview w/ a gay Republican who doesn’t aspire to be a Twitter troll
• More female representation (there’s a larger segment of lesbian Republicans than you’d think)
• An assessment of the replies to this tweet & “acceptance” https://t.co/RJrgbQWJrB
— Rachel Cross (@RachelCrossUTK) January 12, 2019
The Colorado civil rights commissioners and LGBT activists share a set of core beliefs on what is acceptable as religious dissent—and the extent of state power in compelling artistic expression that violates the religious beliefs of a provider of creative services. Meanwhile, conservative Christian artisans have a different set of core beliefs at odds with the progressives. Consider, however, who is supporting cultural diversity here and who supports state-imposed uniformity.