Even the littlest kitties are laughing at this screed! Thanks, madprof98!
Posted on 01/14/2005 7:57:27 AM PST by madprof98
Woo hoo! I've made the big time. Last month, the website Free Republic featured a thread about my Nov. 18 column, "Queers Who Don't Act Right." You probably don't know much about Free Republic unless you are a right-wing lunatic. Free Republic is so far right that wing-nut gay muckraker Matt Drudge and Lucianne Goldberg, one of the architects of the Clinton-Monica Lewinsky brouhaha, both left the site in 1999 because it was too extreme, even for them.
In the years since, the site has become the contemporary version of a marathon meeting of the old John Birch Society and the KKK. Most recently, Free Republic was in the news when John Corsi, one of the Swift Boat Veterans who authored a book attacking John Kerry, turned out to post embarrassingly racist messages there. (Of course, he argued his racist insults were all "a joke." Talk about your Clintonian rhetoric.) The site also was in the news recently because someone correctly posted that Dan Rather had relied on phony documents to impute President Bush's National Guard service.
Free Republic is so extreme that it's a blast to read. Don't bother to explore the site with the idea of posting an alternative perspective or to correct facts. Your post will simply be deleted, despite its owner's celebration of freedom of speech. The site has no hesitation in reprinting copyrighted material, like my column, even though the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times both successfully sued to stop such theft. In other words, as is generally true of the lunatic far right, the truth, free speech and the law only matter when they support their point of view.
Of course, Freepers, as the creepy wing-nuts on the site are called, were not alone in being outraged by my column. I received quite a lot of mail, mainly from other gay people, questioning my argument that LA Fitness at Ansley Mall overreacted when it closed its sauna because of some occasional sex and reopened it with a new picture window overlooking the locker room. As an update, I might add that the window has effectively eliminated unseen sexual interactions inside the sauna and made room for another, more open form of sex between people on either side of the window: exhibitionism and voyeurism.
Most of my correspondents argued that the occasional discovery of sex in the sauna merited involvement by the police and the health department, reconstruction of the sauna and a report by one of the local TV stations. And, as usual, they concluded that because I called that overreacting, I must favor sex in public spaces. No matter that I said I find the behavior annoying. To be righteous, I must find it -- what? -- criminally actionable.
I wasn't surprised by the reaction. Sex troubles people more than anything. That's why Clinton was impeached for lying about a blowjob, while Bush was re-elected despite lying about a war that has killed thousands. Gay people's oppression is the result of their sex lives, so it's not surprising that they are hypersensitive to anything that might add to the picture of deviance. But it has become obvious that the very effort to make all deviance disappear and to assimilate -- to marry, for example -- increases prejudice.
The Freepers, of course, took outrage over my column to dizzy heights, fabricating arguments I did not make. This began with the man who posted it, "madpro98." He said that I dismissed "all sexual conventions, including common decency, as so much homophobia." Actually, I wrote no such thing. Then, of course, the Freepers concluded that the case of LA Fitness means every gay man is a sauna whore. For example, "Sender" writes: "Does anyone else think it's strange that gay men often have sex in a public toilet stall? ... Even if we had unisex public restrooms, somehow I can't imagine a man and a woman eyeing one another while washing their hands, then just jumping in the stall for a go."
The writer obviously has never been to Buckhead on a Saturday night. But what cracks me up is that the Freepers are so anxious to bash someone like me that they don't even realize when they are supporting a contrary argument. For example, "buffyt" quoted my statement that I don't like "stumbling upon any sex scene to which I have not been invited." Then she riffed obsessively about heterosexual couples at Mardi Gras "coupling all over the place" while the police ignore them. Exactly. Heterosexuals spoil the view with public sexual interactions every bit as much as homosexuals, arguably more, when they can find a place to do it. Nobody followed up on that post, of course.
I'm not going to quote the mind-boggling illogics and endless sophomoric fag-bashing (despite arguing they aren't homophobic). But I will thank "Jack Black," who wrote: "I think this was very well written. He is writing for the audience of radical homosexuals as one, so I have trouble twisting my thoughts enough to get to his point of view, but I still think the writing is good." Kiss me, dude!
Cliff Bostock holds a Ph.D. in depth psychology. Write him at cliff.bostock@ creativeloafing.com.
*****************
LOL!
I just plowed through this thread (people were posting faster than my system could update) and some quick folks came up with what it claims to be. Personally, I think your definition makes more sense than the stuff from the school that granted this fruit loop a degree in it.
Well said! :^D
***As a social conservative, I would like to lay down a factual challenge to you. Please read the book, "Jesus, God Ghost or Guru?" by Quentin Hyde, or if you can't find it, a lesser read would be "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. Only deal with the facts you find, ignore any and all religious mumbo jumbo, there won't be much of that.
I would love to oblige at some point, but my reading list is always chock-full right after the holidays, since I never say I want anything and people know I like books. I think I've got about 10-12 books in my queue right now, plus a couple bookstore gift cards. I'll keep them in mind though.
You didn't get the memo? Here is the official list of FReeper stances:
</pointed exaggeration>
You mean the 101st, right? Don't insult the 82nd by associating them with the Screaming Chickens. ;-)
It is not psychotherapy; it is soulwork.
It is also 100% feelgood, "I am special", BS
Cliff? Cliff Bostock? Is that you?
How can you know how much you love this site if you have a sign-up date of January 15?
101st and 82nd at Mannhiem road teamed up under term 101st psyc. battllion at Ohare field Chicao for Nam duty, for the purpose, psyops. Special patches for special forces. I love both designations.
OPS4 God BLess America!
Chicago, mis print. Sorry
Ops4
What is depth psychology? Why, depth psychology is depth psychology. Thanks , that clears it up for me.
Y'all....check out this feeb.
It's his very first post, and he whines about our "extreme" threads and how the folks on FR launch personal attacks.
I was shocked, SHOCKED, to discover that fact about myself and my FRiends here.
I mean, it must be fact: it was in Creative Loafing.
Yeah, we're all from the "dark chapter"...
Nice whine.
Welcome to FR.
INteresting first post.
So, you came here from Bostock's site because of his article, right?
Just checked himout.
Willing to bet he came here due to Bostock's *cough* article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.