Gay Patriot Header Image

On the Social Benefits of Being a Gay Conservative

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 3:37 am - April 19, 2009.
Filed under: Blogging,Liberal Intolerance

This past week I’ve been working my way through a Clint Eastwood collection I bought on sale last week at Best Buy, so movies haven’t provided the source of humor they normally do.  But, I haven’t needed turn to the silver screen to find a source of laughter.  I just needed follow an “Incoming Link” on our dashboard to a left-wing blogger who tried to pillory a post of mine.

I don’t think his goal was to elicit peals of laughter from me.  But, if it was, then, my hat’s off to him.  He did a swell job.  A Mr. Oliver Willis accused me of sounding “that old conservative woe-is-me song” for pointing out that “all too many [but fortunately not all] on the left seek to insult and otherwise strive to discredit conservatives rather than engage them on the level of ideas.

While comparing conservatives to simians who hurl excrement, Willis called our ideas “the crazed rantings of lunatics” and defined conservatives by our most extreme elements.  I won’t make the mistake of defining all liberals by Mr. Willis’s angry rant.

But, it’s that “woe-is-me” thing that’s kind of sticking in my craw.  You see, it sounds kind of similar to an accusation a reader hurled against me in the comments section not even a week ago, accusing me of playing the victim.  It’s something I got a lot when a left-wing blog linked a post I wrote about the intolerance some gay people harbor for gay conservatives.

What was funny was that, in that post, I wasn’t complaining about the intolerance of a man who proposed marriage to me on learning of my love for mythology, but refused to deal with me after learning of my politics.  I was just using his intolerance as an example of a phenomenon in the gay community:  the animus so many left-leaning gay people harbor against their conservative fellows.

One of the great good things about coming out as a gay conservative is that you get a pretty ready read on a person’s character.  If you come out to a liberal and they act as did that man I briefly dated, then you know they have a pretty narrow view of the world and are likely not to open to those who differ from them on any number of other issues.

But, if they don’t hold your politics against you, then you know that this person has a high enough level of self-regard not to be threatened by difference.  Such a person is likely to stand by you in difficult times.  And truly appreciate you as an individual.  Plus, he’d likely be a good intellectual sparring partner, with both you and he confident that an exchange of ideas won’t threaten the friendship.

So, when we point out that all many liberals (and not just gay liberals) are intolerant of and hostile to conservatives, we are not playing the victim card, we are pointing out a phenomenon of intellectual intolerance common in contemporary culture.  Mr. Willis’s post is yet another example of his phenomenon.  Merely by linking my post, he provided further evidence to support the very point I was making in the very passage he quoted.

And for that, I am most grateful.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  “GPW, your critics are going to not understand you, no matter what you say or do. They are going to not understand, because they *want* to not understand.”

Share

28 Comments

  1. What was funny was that, in that post, I wasn’t complaining about the intolerance of a man who proposed marriage to me on learning of my love for mythology, but refused to deal with me after learning of my politics. I was just using his intolerance as an example of a phenomenon in the gay community: the animus so many left-leaning gay people harbor against their conservative fellows.

    That’s most definitely not a gay thing. I would never date a conservative. That would never work – no use in wasting anybody’s time.

    Comment by Levi — April 19, 2009 @ 5:39 am - April 19, 2009

  2. That’s most definitely not a gay thing. I would never date a conservative. That would never work – no use in wasting anybody’s time.

    Translation: I’m a bigot and I fear and hate, I hate, I HATE anybody who doesn’t agree with me.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 19, 2009 @ 5:44 am - April 19, 2009

  3. Translation: I’m a bigot and I fear and hate, I hate, I HATE anybody who doesn’t agree with me.

    Yeah, that’s it.

    Comment by Levi — April 19, 2009 @ 5:48 am - April 19, 2009

  4. You said it, I just put it in simpler terms without the elitist bloviating.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 19, 2009 @ 5:57 am - April 19, 2009

  5. You said it, I just put it in simpler terms without the elitist bloviating.

    Oh yeah, that’s exactly what you did.

    Comment by Levi — April 19, 2009 @ 6:10 am - April 19, 2009

  6. Here’s a cookie, now scram kid.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 19, 2009 @ 6:37 am - April 19, 2009

  7. GPW, your critics are going to not understand you, no matter what you say or do. They are going to not understand, because they *want* to not understand.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 19, 2009 @ 9:44 am - April 19, 2009

  8. Too funny!

    GPW: You must admit that it’s a numbers game. You know most American lesbians and gays are reflexively leftish. Not to unduly disparage them, but many just picked it up by osmosis. (Am I the only one who read Mollie the pretty, ribboned horse in Animal Farm as this type?)

    Most of my beaus have been liberals and we got along smashingly. But, if the camps were even 50-50, would I rise above Levi’s time-sensitive dismissiveness? Who knows?

    Always has a soft spot for anyone who rises above orthodoxy. Indeed, I once spent a whole evening giddily reminiscing about Reagan with a righty-dyke. She had the temerity to show up to a bar in full Navy dress and I was smitten. Ah, one more drink and I would have asked that woman to marry me… 😉

    Comment by MFS — April 19, 2009 @ 10:12 am - April 19, 2009

  9. Hope this isn’t too off topic, but I went to Mr. Oliver Willis’ site and read his blog. I was particularly struck by this;

    We’re dealing with a conglomeration of people who believe that the earth is 6,000 years old, that cutting taxes for super rich people will eventually trickle down to the rest of us – we just have to wait a few decades for it to really really kick in, and that of course now we’re being marched into Marxism by a secret black militant Muslim who was born in Kenya.

    1.) Among the Republicans and conservatives would be a distinct minority who are adamant about the time of the creation. But I am not so certain these people need to be burned out of existence like the Branch Dravidians. I have a bit more tolerance and willingness for diversity than to write off people with beliefs I find benign. I am on no tear to ridicule and punish the Amish. Radical Islam, does not apply. Tolerating people who believe in executing people who do not fit their religious mold is not my idea of benign.

    2.) “Cutting taxes on the super rich” is to assume that the money of the super rich actually belongs to the government. I was in the Caribbean when Paul Allen’s yacht, the Octopus, came into port. The size of the crew and the size of the yacht and the toys on it astounded me. I counted 38 crew and I am sure there were plenty more inside. These people are there because they are being paid. The helicopters, the speed boats, the jet skis, and all the rest were manufactured by people who come to work to get paid. To scoff at “trickle down” economics is to admit that you do not understand economics in the least.

    3.) America is not being marched into Marxism. It is being seduced by socialism. Socialism and democracy in the form of a republic can coexist. The issue is whether the republic is seeking socialism or being legislated toward it. Obama and Pelosi can claim they have a mandate, but 2010 and 2012 will be tests of that claim. To organize against them is just honest politics.

    4.) The “secret black militant Muslim who was born in Kenya” does describe how a handful people feel. Let’s drop the “black” from that. Where is the cry that Obama is screwing up because he is black? Let’s drop the “militant Muslim” from that. Where is the cry that Obama is a militant Muslim? Let’s drop Muslim. Obama claims an affinity to Muslims because of his early childhood. But he has stated he is a Christian. How being among Muslims as a small child brings on any form of greater understanding of being Muslim is a mystery and psychobabble. But why wouldn’t Obama authorize the governor of Hawaii to produce his birth certificate. It would end the Constitutional debate. That issue is 100% in Obama’s hands.

    I have expressed my conservative views in the above points. I seriously doubt that I would much get along with a person who thinks and talks like Mr. Oliver Willis. Read his comments (in the quote box above) again. Mr. Oliver Willis has resorted to hyperbole and bombast in order to cast his aspersions. His snarky, elitist, self-congratulatory suspender stretching is all too common among liberals. Scoff, snicker and shake your head in utter disbelief while practicing the art of smearing, posturing and manipulating the facts and you too can be a liberal.

    Comment by heliotrope — April 19, 2009 @ 10:50 am - April 19, 2009

  10. Poor Levi,

    Must be so sad to limit oneself to dating an echo chamber.

    I’ve had several friendships, and a couple dating relationships with liberals. They’ve not ended because they were liberal. Indeed, I gave food for thought, and learned things instead

    Comment by The_Livewire — April 19, 2009 @ 11:42 am - April 19, 2009

  11. Hey, if Levi wants to eliminate half of the dating pool based solely on their political affiliation, who are we to not let him?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 19, 2009 @ 11:55 am - April 19, 2009

  12. #9: “Hey, if Levi wants to eliminate half of the dating pool based solely on their political affiliation, who are we to not let him?”

    And if the other half elects not to date Levi for reasons having nothing to do with political affiliation, who are we not to let them?

    Comment by Sean A — April 19, 2009 @ 12:09 pm - April 19, 2009

  13. Levi would not date a guy being they are conservative even though they have so much in common at so many other levels than politics (though ideology may be a by-product of one’s morals and ethics).

    Thats like people who have a fetish and will not have sex with another who does not that share the same fetish.

    Comment by LCRW — April 19, 2009 @ 12:35 pm - April 19, 2009

  14. Honestly, I don’t mind what Levi said. I mean, I’d never date Levi, based on what I’ve seen of him in this forum (his views, behavior, and ‘intelligence’ or really the lack thereof).

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 19, 2009 @ 12:49 pm - April 19, 2009

  15. #9 – heliotrope, interesting and good points. As quoted, Willis sure makes himself sound like the kind of hateful nutcase that he claims others would be.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 19, 2009 @ 12:53 pm - April 19, 2009

  16. I have to laugh whenever anyone on the left accuses a conservative of playing victim. The political left’s raison d’être is the creation and exploitation of victims.

    That’s most definitely not a gay thing. I would never date a conservative. That would never work – no use in wasting anybody’s time. …and there was much rejoicing.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 19, 2009 @ 12:57 pm - April 19, 2009

  17. I have to laugh whenever anyone on the left accuses a conservative of playing victim. The political left’s raison d’être is the creation and exploitation of victims.

    That’s rich. You guys complain about everything – about Hollywood, about the culture, about people making minimum wage at the Wal-Mart that say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas.” The amount of belly-aching done over the big, bad liberal-biased media (that isn’t really biased towards liberals at all) alone outstrips anything that even the whiniest liberals are always on about. More recently, you guys are the victims of George Bush and the GOP. And the tea parties, oh man, the tea parties. You’re whining about tax increases that aren’t happening and that liberals aren’t taking you seriously enough.

    Conservatives are the biggest drama queens on the planet. Someone’s always throwing you poor people to the lions, aren’t they?

    Comment by Levi — April 19, 2009 @ 1:36 pm - April 19, 2009

  18. Levi – most conservatives just want to be left alone. If you can’t recognize the victim-based politics practiced by the left over the last couple of centuries, there’s no point wasting anymore of your time or mine.

    The modern Left was founded on victimhood (the victimized proletariat).

    Someone’s always throwing you poor people to the lions, aren’t they?

    I think you’ve stumbled onto a point here: think about it. It was force of government that threw people (e.g. Christians) to the lions.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 19, 2009 @ 2:12 pm - April 19, 2009

  19. Filter again, darn it.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — April 19, 2009 @ 2:12 pm - April 19, 2009

  20. I am still a Democrat. I realize that in some very deep ways I see the world through a Democrat’s eyes. I support guest worker status for undocumented immigrants; I support civil unions for homosexual couples; I support government-backed universal health coverage as long as it doesn’t involve rationing for seniors or abortion; I support diplomacy over war; I don’t support torture; I’m against the death penalty; I think paying taxes is an important part of being a responsible citizen; I think the New Deal and Great Society were the greatest things ever–all of these things fit better in the Democratic party than the Republican. Yet, I really, really loathe Obama. I am a Hillary person–I believe there is a common-sense and dare I say it? conservative way of being a Democrat and that’s what I wish the party would return to.

    Comment by Ashpenaz — April 19, 2009 @ 2:20 pm - April 19, 2009

  21. Levi, you card!  Dissent no longer patriotic, eh? Pity, I guess. 

    Well, I can’t let leave a demonstrable fable like media bias stand uncommented.  MSM defenders (a shrinking pool if ever there was one) like to say that if they annoy folks on the left and the right then they must be doing their jobs.  Dana Milbank’s piece in the Washington Post today is only the latest.

    But, Rothman and Lichter have been doing the actual research on this for more than two decades.  The results are damning: 9 in 10 may not be screaming socialists, but they are uniformly Democrat partisans.  This isn’t my opinion.  It’s the reporter’s own.

    I would never deny them their right to keep up the bad work.  But –  and I’m sure most right thinking folks would agree with me – they should just come right out and say it.  What are they afraid of? Let your freak flag fly, Jonathan Alter! Roll away the rock, Katie Couric! Come clean, Matt Lauer!  You never voted Republican in your lives, just admit it!
    The irony of Milbank’s piece deserves a small mention though.  He can understand why righties are so aggravated.  But, the bile on the left makes no plausible sense.

    Levi, you’ve been and great and vocal sport about all this: why are you folks so bitter?

    Best wishes,
    -MFS

    Comment by MFS — April 19, 2009 @ 2:31 pm - April 19, 2009

  22. To scoff at “trickle down” economics is to admit that you do not understand economics in the least.

    And it’s particularly hilarious when you realize that these liberal leftists use the theory that the Federal government must spend massively — because then the benefits will “trickle down” to others.

    To put this in perspective, Levi and his ilk believe our economy is best served by taking money away from honest, hardworking Americans and doling it out so that people like Obama’s illegal-immigrant criminal aunt can enjoy free healthcare, fat welfare checks, no-show government jobs, and subsidized housing — and so she can make illegal contributions to the Obama campaign and cast illegal votes for Obama and the Obama Party. Their entire structure is based on parasitism in the name of social leveling.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 19, 2009 @ 2:36 pm - April 19, 2009

  23. #22: “And it’s particularly hilarious when you realize that these liberal leftists use the theory that the Federal government must spend massively — because then the benefits will “trickle down” to others.”

    An EXCELLENT point, NDT.

    Comment by Sean A — April 19, 2009 @ 3:20 pm - April 19, 2009

  24. It’s worse than that, Sean.

    The entire Obama Party philosophy and ideology is this: a working family, say a doctor and a lawyer with kids, who makes $250,000 a year providing high-quality goods and services to others, should be PUNISHED. Money they earn should be taken away from them so that Obama’s illegal-immigrant criminal aunt can enjoy free healthcare, fat welfare checks, no-show government jobs, and subsidized housing, and make illegal campaign contributions to Obama and the Obama Party.

    In other words, according to the Obama Party, a successful doctor and lawyer who provide valuable goods and services to our society should be punished, and an illegal immigrant who blatantly violates our laws and who contributes no goods or services to our country should be rewarded and subsidized.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 19, 2009 @ 4:41 pm - April 19, 2009

  25. …and there was much rejoicing.

    Yay!

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 19, 2009 @ 6:41 pm - April 19, 2009

  26. I used to think it was possible to have a relationship with someone who was ideologically on the left, but the past four years have made me doubt that. I don’t think that it’s possible for anyone to be an intellectually honest Democrat anymore. It requires too much cognitive dissonance.

    Maybe it’s just a result of too many bad experiences. But as I’ve mentioned before in comments here, four years ago I had a relationship with a liberal activist type, and while it started out well with friendly debates, etc., that stage didn’t last very long, and within a few months, he was completely ignoring my attempts to engage him in discussions about issues. At the very least he didn’t want to try, but I increasingly began to suspect that he was unable to respond to the points I made or the questions I asked.

    It seems to me that in the age of Obama, it requires such a suspension of sense and principle to support what he and his party are doing, that I can no longer imagination how a relationship with someone who actively identifies as an Obama supporter would even get off the ground.

    Comment by Kurt — April 19, 2009 @ 8:02 pm - April 19, 2009

  27. oops… I mean to write “no longer imagine,” not “no longer imagination.”

    Comment by Kurt — April 19, 2009 @ 8:03 pm - April 19, 2009

  28. Ah, yes, Oliver Willis, ole Mr. “like kryptonite to stupid.”

    The poor, deluded soul. He could never actually handle real kryptonite against stupidity; he is stupid. 😉

    Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — April 20, 2009 @ 11:01 am - April 20, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.