Gay Patriot Header Image

The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating”

I can no longer remember the first time someone called me, “self-hating” for being a gay Republican. Such language has become a ready response of many of our critics.  While using the comment section of our posts to offer this standard left-wing view of gay conservatives, they rarely address the arguments actual gay conservatives have made.

In a post yesterday, Michelle Malkin reminds us that it’s not just gay Republicans who are so labeled. She finds that some liberals trot out the slur on a regular basis when describing minority conservatives:

Minority conservatives hold a special place of gutter contempt in the minds of unhinged liberals, who can never accept the radical concept of a person of color rejecting identity politics.

The haters have it bass-ackwards. In fact, “self-loathing” minorities love themselves, their families, and their liberty too much to succumb lazily to Big Nanny, race-card ideology.

One-time comedienne Janeane Garofalo used the “self-loathing” slur most recently to describe Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele.  So narrow-minded are these people that they assume that an individual’s skin color, ethnic background or sexual orientation means he or she has to hold a particular point of view.

That’s a pretty prejudiced attitude toward minorities as it assumes individual members of those groups can’t think for themselves.

Once again, I wonder why it is that so many on the left so readily label those holding different points of view rather than respond to (or even recognize) their arguments.  Garofalo thinks there’s “something wrong” with people who “follow” the GOP.  That attitude is not too far removed from that of Soviet Communists who would submit those who disagreed with the regime to psychiatric treatment.

Let me repeat:  why do such liberals choose to insult their ideological adversaries rather than consider our ideas?

Share

39 Comments

  1. why do such liberals [leftists] choose to insult their ideological adversaries rather than consider our ideas?

    ANSWER: Because their own ideas cannot withstand the light of day.

    Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — February 28, 2009 @ 8:16 pm - February 28, 2009

  2. She even went a step further and said that Michael Steele was suffering from “Stockholm Syndrome”.

    Which is ironic, since leftists are the ones trying to enslave us to the government.

    The arrogant self-righteousness is appalling. For someone to paint 50% (approximately) of the population as mentally ill is quite breathtaking in its audacity.

    Comment by jana — February 28, 2009 @ 8:49 pm - February 28, 2009

  3. Simply put, it is because the function of many of those on the left is to pander to minority groups. And, given the strong levels of support that they receive from those populations, it is obvious that they are VERY good at it. If someone such as you and Michelle Malkin do NOT support their views and ideology, because of the high level with which they are working to court you, they view you as the problem.

    Comment by Charon — February 28, 2009 @ 9:04 pm - February 28, 2009

  4. Janeane Garofalo? She’s just trying to shore up her libtard street cred after taking a job on “24”.

    Comment by Seane-Anna — February 28, 2009 @ 9:29 pm - February 28, 2009

  5. I just don’t understand their rationale. Just because you’re a member of a minority group (not by choice) doesn’t mean you lose the right to exercise free will.

    Comment by Nick — February 28, 2009 @ 11:07 pm - February 28, 2009

  6. And, given the strong levels of support that they receive from those populations, it is obvious that they are VERY good at it.

    What they’re good at is playing on people’s fears. They’re good at lying to people often enough to the point where they believe what they’re told. Add an obedient media to do the heavy lifting and there you go. An absurd bald-faced lie becomes gospel truth in one news cycle.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 28, 2009 @ 11:21 pm - February 28, 2009

  7. This victim shtick is getting old.

    Comment by Erik — February 28, 2009 @ 11:32 pm - February 28, 2009

  8. Dan – next time you’re labeled “self-loathing”, you might ask your interlocutor if, being a liberal, he/she is a self-loathing American.

    Erik – accusing Dan of being a “victim” is rich seeing as how liberals delight in victimhood; seeing the nation as little more than a sea of victims desperate for the succor that only a liberal, spending someone else’s money and/or liberty, can provide.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — February 28, 2009 @ 11:59 pm - February 28, 2009

  9. You hit the head on the nail in terms of their motives. So now for the fun part:
    What’re we going to do about it? Do we play the offensive and point out the hyporcrites and freaks within the opposition? Or, do we go on the defensive and try to return the debate to identity-group neutral?

    Comment by Charon — March 1, 2009 @ 12:57 am - March 1, 2009

  10. What they’re good at is playing on people’s fears. They’re good at lying to people often enough to the point where they believe what they’re told.
    You hit the head on the nail in terms of their motives. So now for the fun part:
    What’re we going to do about it? Do we play the offensive and point out the hyporcrites and freaks within the opposition? Or, do we go on the defensive and try to return the debate to identity-group neutral?
    (gah, sorry about that)

    Comment by Charon — March 1, 2009 @ 12:59 am - March 1, 2009

  11. This victim shtick is getting old.

    That’s a good first step. Now you just need to work towards telling the liberal left to drop down, fifth ring, cook.

    You’re well on your way.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 1, 2009 @ 4:53 am - March 1, 2009

  12. whine whine whine whine, kill all liberals, whine whine whine. Yup, conservatives are just so much better than those they trash.

    Comment by a different Dave — March 1, 2009 @ 10:21 am - March 1, 2009

  13. It’s fun seeing people who are obviously from the North or from California where lines are so blurred sometimes between political parties and ideas debate these things. You have it so easy. Having returned back to the South from living in Los Angeles, it’s so apparent that (at least here) Democrats are far far far from liberal. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t mentality…be in the GOP and be a “self hater” or be a Southern Baptist Democrat and not only hate myself but practically everyone else too. Don’t know where I’m going with this but, going strictly by the number of Rep v. Dem voters..and assuming that we ARE being treated like second class citizens there’s NO WAY that a large portion of the Democrat party isn’t voting against us too. At least some dyed in the wool…ultra conservatives who don’t like your lifestyle will tell you so. Democrats…pat your back, glad hand you and don’t admit they hate you until AFTER they’ve got your vote. As a gay Republican people can call me self hating…it hardly matters…but at least they won’t be able to call me a hypocrite.

    Comment by David — March 1, 2009 @ 10:40 am - March 1, 2009

  14. AS a hungarian jew, who lost most of my family in the holocaust, I have been accused of self-loathing for my personal activism and criticism of the state of Israel, being told by people as close to me as my own family that I misunderstand my culture and history. I have my set of conclusions based on my research on the issue, and you will have yours. I think there are ideological elements across the spectrum that will use identity to try and undermine an individual arguement.

    As for this issue of gay republicans, I turn to a recent Michael Steele interview:
    GALLAGHER: Is this a time when Republicans ought to consider some sort of alternative to redefining marriage and maybe in the road, down the road to civil unions. Do you favor civil unions?
    STEELE: No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy? No. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? I mean this isn’t something that you just kind of like, “Oh well, today I feel, you know, loosey-goosey on marriage.” […]
    GALLAGHER: So no room even for a conversation about civil unions in your mind?
    STEELE: What’s the difference?

    As a straight male with a gay mother and stepmother in gay marriage friendly England, i’d have a hard time supporting a party that was so hesitant to enter a discussion about the rights of that minority

    Comment by Scott — March 1, 2009 @ 11:05 am - March 1, 2009

  15. 12. Wow, “kill em all again’ adDave?

    Who says that, no one on the right.

    I think it’s the ‘if we allow them to read/write/think for themselves, they’ll revolt agaisnt us’ fear.

    No wonder Robert Byrd (D-KKK) is so well received on the left, his beliefs never went out of style.

    Comment by The_Livewire — March 1, 2009 @ 11:18 am - March 1, 2009

  16. Personal attacks? I think that I can find plenty of them in here. Y’all keep whining. WAAAAH! Liberals and the Gay moderates don’t include us. WAAAAAAAH!

    Perhaps if Gay patrioters tried to help solve the real problems of employment discrimination, hate crimes, and electoral gay bashing postulated by many GOP elected officials, they might have some credibility. But I see precious little other than changing the subject. Many of your posters have never considered withdrawing support for a GOP candidate because of anti-Gay behavior.

    Intellectual adversaries? What ideas do you have on employment non-discrimination or hate crimes? My guess is that your intellectual idea is to ignore or discount the problem or tell people to just move to some area where, due to Democratic movement on Gay issues, its not so bad for Gay people.

    Comment by Tom in Lazybrook — March 1, 2009 @ 12:37 pm - March 1, 2009

  17. Now you just need to work towards telling the liberal left to drop down, fifth ring, cook.

    And your catch phrase is tired too. It’s spread like litter across the internet.

    Comment by Erik — March 1, 2009 @ 12:54 pm - March 1, 2009

  18. And while we are on the subject of self hate. Are all GOP Gays self hating? Not at all.

    But to support someone like Santorum, or Gilmore, or Vitter, who run on a virulently anti-Gay PEOPLE platform while someone is Gay themselves sends a message that isn’t credible to many people in the Gay mainstream.

    And if a Gay person is in the closet while supporting an anti-Gay politician (not just a Republican, an anti-Gay Republican) it does, in my opinion, lead some credibility towards someone being selfhating.

    Comment by Tom in Lazybrook — March 1, 2009 @ 12:59 pm - March 1, 2009

  19. 14. If you are looking for some Democrats to condemn, you might want to update your list to include someone other than Byrd (yep, he’s an idiot, and a racist, and anti-Gay, but he’s not doing much more than drinking out of a sippy cup now).

    Gov. Beebe of Arkansas, Cong. Artur Davis of Alabama, ten Democrats in the NM State Senate, Cong. Lipinski of Chicago (!), those two anti-Gay idiots in the NY State Senate, Nelson the bad (Sen. Nelson from Nebraska), Cong. Cuellar might be a place to start. And yes, they deserve criticism.

    Comment by Tom in Lazybrook — March 1, 2009 @ 1:05 pm - March 1, 2009

  20. Many of your posters have never considered withdrawing support for a GOP candidate because of anti-Gay behavior.

    That would be because we know, Tom, that gay liberals like yourself define
    “antigay” based on political affiliation. For instance, you don’t consider it “antigay” to say that marriage is only between a man and a woman like Barack Obama, or to discriminate in employment as does Howard Dean, or to call gays “filthy” as does Louis Farrakhan, or to endorse and support bans on gay marriage as do innumerable Obama Party politicians; however, you scream that John McCain supports employment discrimination while employing as his chief of staff an out gay man, or that Rick Santorum hates all gays while having a gay communications director, etc.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 1, 2009 @ 2:41 pm - March 1, 2009

  21. Filter, GPW.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 1, 2009 @ 2:42 pm - March 1, 2009

  22. “why do such liberals choose to insult their ideological adversaries rather than consider our ideas?”

    I suppose it’s because it generally leads us to where we find ourselves now – one of the worst financial crises in the last century, two wars, a systematic dismantling of the government, continued privatization for personal greed over public welfare, ad nauseum. Conservative “ideas” just don’t work. The ideals are very noble, but in practice they will always and continually fail to the detriment of larger society. Everything conservatives/Republicans say sounds really nice and idealistic until you realize that they have been taking advantage of the relaxation into these conservative ideologies for years leading us to things like financial ruin and unmitigated warmongering. Or do you have some real world example of a conservative society that doesn’t devolve into fundamentalism and fascistic ideology?

    So therefore the better questions is why should anyone for one second even give these “ideas” any credence instead of mocking them outright? Why even engage with advocates that have constantly taken advantage of the trust and goodwill of the people to install themselves in a government they so desperately want to render obsolete (and often abuse for personal gain at the same time)?

    See fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, send your sorry butts to jail already. It makes me frankly sick to hear how “intellectually bankrupt” Republicans and Conservatives are when their previous intellectual input only allowed them to gain power for personal benefit, not to help the populace. You were all morally bankrupt long before you became intellectually bankrupt

    The experiment of conservatism, especially neoconservatism,is over gentlemen until we as a society get dumb enough or desperate enough to allow it to happen again. The smartest among us knew it before it started, but the rest of the population has wised up. That is why people don’t “engage” in your ideas. Have you ever hear the fable of the scorpion and the frog? It’s just your nature, and we know the story.

    Comment by george — March 1, 2009 @ 4:23 pm - March 1, 2009

  23. #21: george: do you guys have a keyboard macro that inserts these comments? They’re always the same.

    This thread isn’t the place for refuting your “arguments” but I direct your attention to this September 1999 (before Bush) piece in the NY Times:

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260

    Comment by SoCalRobert — March 1, 2009 @ 5:43 pm - March 1, 2009

  24. […] The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Easy to Demonize Conservatives When You Don’t Know Any — March 1, 2009 @ 6:18 pm - March 1, 2009

  25. I can no longer remember the first time someone called me, “self-hating” for being a gay Republican.

    Heck, I can no longer remember the first time that *I called* you gay Republicans “self-hating”… back in the old bad days, when I was a left-liberal. Needless to say, I’ve since learned the error of my ways… on several fronts.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 1, 2009 @ 8:28 pm - March 1, 2009

  26. Let me repeat: why do such liberals choose to insult their ideological adversaries rather than consider our ideas?

    Unfortunately, left-liberals don’t have a monopoly on that behavior. They have a near-monopoly 😉 but not a total one. In my own recent experience on this blog, for example, I’ve been lied about / pilloried as a “psychopath” and an alleged advocate of human-animal inter-genetics, by a right-winger, essentially because I dare to point out that infertile straight couples and gay couples are equivalent in terms of their reproductive abilities.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 1, 2009 @ 8:34 pm - March 1, 2009

  27. Agreedm ILC. Part of the reason I try not to stoop to that level (note try, I do fail) Also part of the reason that I try to suggest that AE and you keep it civil. I learn more when you don’t lose your temper.

    Tom. I use Bobbie ‘Sheets’ Byrd because he’s an easy and fun target. Unfortunately he’s not alone in the party. As has been pointed out in the past, the Republicans are held to a higher standard, and are more likely to police their own.

    Tom, also your assault on capitalism is off target. Capitalism requires winners and losers. The problem is the housing market went boom because we, as a nation, tried to increase the number of winners. Now with the porkulus plan, we’re trying to subsidize the losers, instead of letting them lose, the market correct, and move on.

    Does it suck to be a loser? Yes, it does. But one of the tennants of capitalism is equality of oportunity, not equality of result. You want equality of result, move to N Korea.

    Comment by The_Livewire — March 1, 2009 @ 9:58 pm - March 1, 2009

  28. one of the tenets of capitalism is equality of oportunity, not equality of result. You want equality of result, move to N Korea.

    Great way to put it.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 1, 2009 @ 10:17 pm - March 1, 2009

  29. Many of your posters have never considered withdrawing support for a GOP candidate because of anti-Gay behavior.

    Really? I wonder if you could provide examples of candidates we support despite “anti-gay” behavior. You can start with me. Which candidates did I support?

    What ideas do you have on employment non-discrimination or hate crimes?

    Call me naive, but isn’t that what a blog’s archives are for?

    And your catch phrase is tired too.

    Wow. I don’t know if I should be flattered or creeped out. Leaning toward the latter.

    #21

    Unmittigated warmongering? Could you please remind me which party has gotten the U.S. into the three largest wars of the last century, notably after they promissed that they wouldn’t?

    Conservative “ideas” just don’t work. The ideals are very noble, but in practice they will always and continually fail to the detriment of larger society.

    Can you explain to me how, if liberalism is so great, why is there poverty in Louisiana (for example) particularly in New Orleans? Why is there such rampant corruption? Why was there such a shitty response to a major hurricane on the state and local levels? Why did we hear about racism there?

    How about DC? How about Michigan? How about California? How about New York? If liberalism is so great, why are these places in the toilet instead of shining cities on a hill? How do states with Republican governors handle disasters better? How do states with little to no taxes fare better?

    Can you explain to me which liberal programs have worked? We can look at “The Great Society” and Socialist Stupidity as two of the greatest failures of liberalism. Why would we want more of the same? Remember when folks went ape over Walter Reed and other VA hospitals? Why should we demand the same for all Americans? Look at your local “projects” and tell me you want the same people determining your healthcare.

    I would love for you to explain what’s so damn great about liberalism and demonstrate how it’s benefitted the American people. Please show us how dependency on Uncle Sugar is the best way to go. Explain to me how letting the State run my life is real freedom.

    Oh and do explain to me how you can be against business, but want more jobs for Americans.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 2, 2009 @ 1:36 am - March 2, 2009

  30. Filtered

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 2, 2009 @ 1:37 am - March 2, 2009

  31. Wow. I don’t know if I should be flattered or creeped out. Leaning toward the latter.

    Actually, I googled it to find its etymology and discovered its etymology was simply… well, you. All the hits on that phrase are attributable to you. So, what is its intended meaning? Besides puffing up your ego and making you feel witty and clever upon repetition, of course. That much is obvious.

    Comment by Erik — March 2, 2009 @ 5:36 pm - March 2, 2009

  32. Actually, I googled it to find its etymology and discovered its etymology was simply… well, you. All the hits on that phrase are attributable to you.

    Did you try Phil Hendrie?

    So, what is its intended meaning?

    Go to hell. Not surprised you don’t get it.

    Besides puffing up your ego and making you feel witty and clever upon repetition, of course. That much is obvious.

    Oh I see. You’re jealous. Not to mention so enamoured with me that you would Google something I wrote.

    Yeah, I’m creeped out.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 2, 2009 @ 5:48 pm - March 2, 2009

  33. The difference between you and I, Erik, is that I don’t give a crap what other people think of me or even what I say. Therefore, I don’t do anything to “puff up my ego” or to sound “witty and clever”.

    I have better things to do with my time than Google what other commenters say for “etymology”. I just don’t care and therefore find anybody who does to be quite pathetic and sad.

    Talk about “puffing up your ego”, well there you are.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 3, 2009 @ 12:38 am - March 3, 2009

  34. I have better things to do with my time than Google what other commenters say for “etymology”.

    I’m sorry for assuming your words have meaning. I won’t presume that they do in the future.

    Comment by Erik — March 3, 2009 @ 3:09 pm - March 3, 2009

  35. […] Submitted By: Rhymes With Right – GayPatriot – The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by Watcher of Weasels » I Wonder If the Media Sees Themselves in the Mirror? — March 4, 2009 @ 7:49 am - March 4, 2009

  36. […] Submitted By: Rhymes With Right – GayPatriot – The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by Cheat Seeking Missiles » Cafferty And Other Weasels — March 4, 2009 @ 10:11 am - March 4, 2009

  37. […] Submitted By: Rhymes With Right – GayPatriot – The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by Bookworm Room » What I’m reading today — March 5, 2009 @ 1:39 pm - March 5, 2009

  38. […] Fourth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – GayPatriot – The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by Watcher of Weasels » Entitlement and Mob Rule — March 6, 2009 @ 1:37 pm - March 6, 2009

  39. […] Fourth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – GayPatriot – The Prejudiced Minds of Those Who Call Us, “Self-Hating” […]

    Pingback by Bookworm Room » Watcher’s results — better late than never — March 10, 2009 @ 11:10 pm - March 10, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.