Every now and again, we got a comment which defines an attitude. But, it’s rare that that commenter will keep posting, continually proving how narrow-minded was his initial point about our blog, how wrong he was about our ideas and how ignorant he was about gay Republicans.
But, yesterday, not long after I announced that we were opening up nominations for our annual competition to determine the Grande Conservative Blogress Diva, reader John Santos claimed that “all those women” (emphasis added) that we were considering “have at least one anti-gay post on their blogs.” Amused by the ignorance of his statement, I chimed in in his comment asking him to back up his point with actual links.
Something which should be easy given that he had claimed that every single one of these blogresses had posted at least one anti-gay piece.
To be sure, I haven’t read every single post of every single woman I listed. I try to read a few of them regularly. That list includes blogresses whose work I (or Bruce) had read (and admired) at one time or another as well as blogresses whom readers had recommended when we held this competition in past years.
Perhaps, one of them had said something anti-gay–and that post escaped my notice. But, I highly doubt that “all of the women” had posted an anti-gay piece. Several blogresses (on our list) have libertarian leanings. One (Tammy Bruce) is an open lesbian, another has not only become a friend (Bridget Johnson of GOP Vixen), but she also regularly socializes with gay men while several others who have, from time to time, been critical of social conservatives for their extreme stands on homosexuality. I have met at least three others on the list, having identified myself to each as GayPatriotWest. None reacted adversely to this information.
When I challenged Mr. Santos to back up his point with links, he came up with only one, but in that post, Kate (the blogress with the supposed anti-gay comment) only weighed in on the fury of a transgender activist scorned. That activist got upset at the publication of a book nominated for an award by the Lambda Literary Foundation, a foundation which defines itself as “the country’s leading organization for LGBT literature.” Doesn’t sound like an anti-gay group to me.
In eighteen (18) comments posted after my challenge, Santos refused to provide a single post where a single one of the blogresses mentioned in the post made (as he claimed they all did) anti-gay comments.
Upon reading the post, Santos made an assumption about the women we gay conservatives choose to honor. Assuming (as do all too many in our community) we are self-hating hypocrites, this man is certain that we admire anti-gay women.
This man’s not interested in engaging our ideas, but in proving to himself that we are as narrow as he imagines us to be. Only, I–and a number of our regular defenders–fought back, taking issue with his ludicrous claim. Not only that, his failure to provide any examples supporting his point shows that he did not base his assumption on the reality of the situation. He just threw out a statement. Were that statement even close to true, he could have (in a matter of moments) come up with several examples.
What is it about all too many of those who spend so much time on this site that they repeatedly misunderstand our ideas, our arguments, even our rationale for supporting a party which, alas, still promotes policies (on gay issues) that we oppose? I do try to make rational arguments and know that from some of the comments (as well as some of my e-mail) that some liberals do get my points and appreciate (even while not supporting) my commitment to the GOP.
It’s too bad that others don’t take the time these people do to understand the arguments of their ideological adversaries.
All that said, perhaps someone will track down an anti-gay post one of these blogresses has written of which I am (at present) not aware. Such a post would surely lower my regard my regard for the blogress who penned it.
Having read a number of them regularly and others occasionally, I doubt any reader will come up with anything so incriminating. For most of these women appear to be supportive of rather than antagonistic to gay people.
- B. Daniel Blatt (GayPatriotWest@aol.com)