Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I'M QUEER, I'M CONSERVATIVE...(A lesson in political correctness)
http://www.etherzone.com/port110201.shtml ^ | November 2, 2001 | Nathan Porter

Posted on 10/27/2001 6:56:49 PM PDT by Curly007

I'M QUEER, I'M CONSERVATIVE... AND I'M IN YOUR FACE!

By: Nathan Porter

WARNING: This article contains a couple of words (and more than a few ideas) that are bound to offend somebody. Proceed at your own risk.

I’ve been conservative for as long as I can remember. For as long as I can remember I have been gay and queer. And yes I am a fag, not a faggot, but a fag. I'm not sure which part of my essence is more despised in today’s society.

So when a rear admiral (is that a slur or a suggestion?) of the U.S. Navy was shamed into sending the Human Rights Campaign (the nation’s largest homosexual political group) a letter apologizing for an “anti-gay” epithet scrawled on a bomb intended for a target in Afghanistan, I was embarrassed. I was embarrassed for the organization that issued the tyrannical demand and embarrassed by our pussy-whipped military brass for feeling the need to respond.

An Associated Press photo shows the phrase "HIGHJACK THIS FAGS" written on the bomb. Was it directed at me? I don’t think so. Was it directed at the millions of homosexuals around the world? Nope. It was directed at Osama bin Laden and his bugger-band of merry terrorists, but it didn’t sit too well with the folks who get paid to act like they represent the opinions of all homosexuals.

"Your concern about the photograph of an inappropriate comment scrawled on a piece of ordnance aboard the USS Enterprise is both understood and shared by Navy leadership," wrote Rear Admiral S.R. Pietropaoli in a letter to Elizabeth Birch, executive director of the Human Rights Campaign.

Now before I get into the absurdity of a rear admiral (who presumably is a “breeder”) spending any amount of time coddling some director of a political action group while our men and women, some of whom are homosexual, are fighting a war, let us spend some time examining what exactly is a fag. As defined by Webster’s a fag is basically a hard working person at a menial task, or a British cigarette. But as any read-blooded American boy knows, the term fag is more nuanced than that.

Can it be used to refer to a homosexual? Sure. More often than not it is used to refer to someone who, for lack of a better word, is being a jerk, as in, “You stupid fag,” which is often shouted by folks during rush hour traffic. It is also commonly used as a good-natured jab against a friend who is known (at least presumed) to be heterosexual. “Hey fag, pass me a beer,” or after a particularly good move on the basketball court, “YOU FAG!”

In the real world the word hardly has any meaning beyond that. So it made perfect sense when one of our brave servicemen decided to scrawl “Hijack this, fag” on an Afghanistan-bound bomb. It was not an anti-gay slur, for it was not directed at homosexuals, it was an insult to Osama bin Laden, nothing more.

Admiral Pietropaoli continued: “There is no written Defense Department guidance governing spontaneous acts of penmanship by our fighting forces. We do, however, expect oversight and leadership on the scene to ensure such actions are appropriate.” Well that’s just great. As if our troops didn’t have enough on their minds they must now worry whether the messages they write on bombs destined for Afghanistan will violate someone’s sense of political correctness. Could this have ever happened in WWII? If the Human Rights Campaign had been around then would they have objected to a bomb headed for Hitler's bunker with a note that read "Gas this, fag"? Probably.

What concerns me most, however, is the loss of acceptable vulgar putdowns from our public lexicon. If “fag” is no longer an acceptable insult what else is on the endangered list? What is to become of the world when we are no longer free to scream “You Cocksucker” at the guy who cuts us off in traffic? Whether or not this person is technically a cocksucker is irrelevant. The point is they made us mad, and based on the chance that they aren’t technically a cocksucker, what better way to insult them than by calling them one? If they were a cocksucker it would hardly be an insult.

Most words have multiple meanings. The words Greek and French refer both to sexual acts and to nationalities. When I acknowledge being a fag, gay, queer conservative I admit nothing more than being a hardworking, merry, lighthearted, odd person who seeks to preserve established traditions. There was a time when I could describe myself using these words without being labeled a homosexual and I rather resent the fact that these words have been co-opted to such an extent that their intended use is seldom understood by a majority of people. And now the same folks who changed the definitions of words like gay and queer want to stop the rest of us from using other words as well. Well that’s just too damn bad. They do not own the language and just because they claim certain words are anti-gay does not make it so.

I reject the notion that people using these words in the manner that was scribbled on the bomb, or as used in traffic or in a pick-up game of basketball, are inciting hatred or violence against homosexuals. These are not the kind of people who stand outside gay clubs with “God hates fags” signs. When we seek to equate one use of the word “fag” with the other we do a disservice to the diversity of our language.

Some of my homosexual friends – yes I have friends who are homosexual – will argue that so-called anti-gay slurs should no more be tolerated than racial slurs. I understand their desire not to be subjected to insults, but c’mon, is being called a fag really the same as a black person being called a nigger? Hardly.

The point is that unlike racial slurs, slang such as “fag,” “bugger,” and “cocksucker” are in continual use in our society in a most un-discriminatory way, and to try and silence their usage because a few people are offended is in itself offensive. It is offensive to the notion of freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and freedom to vent using a colorful or vulgar verbal slam. Of course my homosexual friends have plenty of slang words to use against heterosexuals, but apparently that’s okay. After all, only heterosexuals can hate.

It should come as no surprise to learn that I get a fair amount of hate mail from folks on the political left and right. I have been called a fag more times than I care to recall. As far as I am concerned sticks and stones may break my bones, in which case I want the perpetrator punished to the fullest extent of the law, but words will never hurt me. Never. And if the folks at the Human Rights Campaign really want to reduce homophobia, perhaps they should stop acting like such a bunch of fags.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-164 next last
To: Curly007
don't care if you are purple and orange or as long as you show up at the polls to vote for conservative candidates.
21 posted on 10/27/2001 7:26:29 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
All I can say is I spend a lot of time with kids in various school related activities from the PTA, to room Dad, to
reading instructor and the boy scouts. It's been my observation that all this exposure to "diversity", "tolerance", and
"I'm ok, you're ok, gays are ok" has inevitably pushed the use of "gay", "queer", "homo" to the top ten list of playground
insults. This is in fact good. It proves our kids are healthy, rebellious, and 10 times smarter than the
socialist nazis running our schools. ;-)
22 posted on 10/27/2001 7:26:45 PM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandyEgo
aarrgh!!

it's = its

see?

23 posted on 10/27/2001 7:28:07 PM PDT by SandyEgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
I would think that "pussy-whipped" would be one of the strongest condemnations a homosexual could make.
24 posted on 10/27/2001 7:28:12 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigsigh
I ain't missing you at all!

John Waite
25 posted on 10/27/2001 7:29:13 PM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Renegade
Try searching in a dictionary like the OED at your local library. Or even go on-line with a good search engine - you are just two clicks away. Why sit there wondering? I am sure you will find the answers interesting.
26 posted on 10/27/2001 7:29:18 PM PDT by Gimlet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
It is unfortunate that some of you either don't read the article or misunderstand it.
27 posted on 10/27/2001 7:30:23 PM PDT by Curly007
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
LOL! Hey - what is with this obsession with gays anyway?
28 posted on 10/27/2001 7:30:57 PM PDT by Gimlet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
Thanks! You are doing a great job!
I was about to give it up!
29 posted on 10/27/2001 7:31:12 PM PDT by Curly007
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Renegade
I'm still trying to find out when " gay" became an adjective for a homosexual and not a description of a good time or a happy persona.

About 30 years ago! Maybe you're too young :)

30 posted on 10/27/2001 7:33:35 PM PDT by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
Well, he got part of his life right, being conservative. That shows he can at least think. The rest we don't care about so why bother us with it.
31 posted on 10/27/2001 7:34:03 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
Thank you for spelling out what I was trying to say!!!!!
32 posted on 10/27/2001 7:34:17 PM PDT by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
I don't understand why it is so difficult for others to see what this article is trying to say.
33 posted on 10/27/2001 7:36:48 PM PDT by Gabz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
I disagree. You say you would not read something from the Taliban. Well I agree that there is no point in reading repetitive diatribes but there is always a point in understanding one's enemies. Makes it easier to defeat them! But why equate an American exercising free speech with an autocratic, theocratic, fundamentalist, crazed, misogynist, homophobic member of the Taliban? They are sick and evil people who have no time for women, democracy, gays, freedom, individual liberties, free speech, difference, Christianity. Why behave like them?
34 posted on 10/27/2001 7:37:41 PM PDT by Gimlet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
Why is it that so many homosexuals (I refuse to co-opt the word "gay" which means happy and joyful) always have to be "in your face"? Why is it that heterosexuals are not compelled to go around telling the world about their sexual preferences? If I walked around the streets of Boston wearing a "Proud to be Heterosexual" button and demanding special treatment, people would look at me like I had two heads.
35 posted on 10/27/2001 7:37:50 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
HAHAHAHA! Love it!
36 posted on 10/27/2001 7:39:22 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
He's compaining about the REDEFINITION of perfectly normal English words for political points. Geez. Do you guys need me to read everything for you and explain it as well?

I only knows what it sounds like. We're redefining words all the time. Just ask Church Lady about why her church changed its name from Metropolitan Baptist Church toBible Belt Baptist Church.I'm the one who warned her pastor about his church being associated with homosexiality if he didn't change the name.He refused to listen to me and his church almost died.

He later asked the congregation to approve a name change.Lo and behold ,the church started to grow again.When I asked Church Lady why he finally took my advice after so many years.Church Lady said,"Everyone has to eat crow sometime in their life."I guess the pastor didn't want the advice of a non-member.

37 posted on 10/27/2001 7:42:57 PM PDT by Captain Shady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Curly007
I rather enjoyed the article. How many times have you watched old movies and they are happy and gay? I can be queer at times, but aren't we all? And, sheesh, I wish I could quit smoking fags.
38 posted on 10/27/2001 7:42:58 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
See post #19.

Read it. ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

Now stop being so lazy with the "reading all the article, expecially those from humor columnists"

39 posted on 10/27/2001 7:43:04 PM PDT by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Republicanus_Tyrannus
He is NOT saying he's a homosexual.

your right...if people would READ the article carefully you'll see that this person is not homosexual as seen in the following comment taken from the article

Some of my homosexual friends – yes I have friends who are homosexual

40 posted on 10/27/2001 7:43:41 PM PDT by is_is
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-164 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson