A few Random Thoughts Posts
Maybe it’s the summer, maybe it’s the conversations I’ve been having of late, maybe it’s the time I’ve been spending helping out at Outfest, maybe it’s my renewed focus on my dissertation, but I expect to be doing a number of “Random Thoughts” type of post in the next few days. . . .
So, if y’all feel like it, use the space afforded by the comments here to offer your own random thoughts about whatever it is which strikes your fancy–and please do so without engaging in ad hominem. . .
28 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Where were Senators Sessions and Kyl when then-Justice nominee Samuel Alito made this statement during his confirmation hearing:
“When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”
Along with media whackos Hannity, Ingraham and Limbaugh, they are afraid an Hispanic female might be influenced by life’s experiences but it’s OK for a white conservative male to take life’s experiences into account. What hypocrites!
All four conservatives on the Supreme Court — Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito — are Catholics. Isn’t it possible, even likely that their opposition to abortion and gay rights, for example, is influenced by their experience of being exposed to Catholic teachings?
But, oh, I forgot, it’s only wrong for left of center judges to take life’s experiences into account.
Comment by Lee — July 14, 2009 @ 5:57 pm - July 14, 2009
Outfest, from what I can see on the website, is as foreign to me as a Renaissance Faire or a Civil War re-enactment. People enjoy playing some kind of agreed upon role, as far as I can tell, and that’s all fine, as long as everybody realizes that it’s artificial. If you have to keep reminding people that the Renaissance is over, or that the North won, or that homosexuality has nothing to do with those sorts of events, then you have a problem.
I identify as a Christian man who has homosexual feelings. I don’t use “gay” as part of my self-identification any more than I would call myself Lord Ratcatcher or Robert E. Lee. Homosexual feelings are real. Gay is an artificial, socially constructed, pre-packaged identity. If you need that to bolster a weak ego, that’s good for you, but it’s not something to impose on other people.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 14, 2009 @ 6:23 pm - July 14, 2009
Um, Lee, did Alito ever say that a wise Italian man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic female who hasn’t lived that life? (Emphasis added.)
Note that in probing Judge Sotomayor on that remark, Senator Leahy left out the comparison.
Kind of changes things, doesn’t it?
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 14, 2009 @ 7:03 pm - July 14, 2009
This occurred to me (again) driving home from work: why do people think gummint can fix all our problems, run healthcare, and solve “climate change” when it is not capable of synchronizing two traffic signals a block apart?
Comment by SoCalRobert — July 14, 2009 @ 8:10 pm - July 14, 2009
Lee:
So, Alito says he thinks of those he knows who have suffered discrimination. And it brings it to the fore of his mind.
Sotomayor claims being Latina, makes her Better than other races and the opposite sex. What the law actually states has nothing to do with her rulings far too often (as her overturned rulings show).
Yes, that is EXACTLY the same. . . if you’re small minded.
Alito heard a White Guy(s), and A Hispanic Guy tell a tale of discrimination and ruled on their behalf. Sotomayor made a ruling even the Dissent in SCOTUS said was wrong on the same case.
Sotomayor also claims to be a Catholic. Supporting abortion is antithetical to Catholicism. Supporting Roe is antithetical to the Constitution. There is nothing in the bill that covers it. Except the bit about leaving to the states those rights not enumerated. Overturning Roe would not, in this day and age, ban abortion. How many states would be able to get the votes to ban it?
Having seen what it does mentally to the women I know who have had one, I’m not the big fan of those. Reality tells me I’m not gonna stop them. Too many human societies manage to fall prey to an Infanticide fetish.
Comment by JP — July 14, 2009 @ 8:29 pm - July 14, 2009
Lee, is that the liberals latest lame comeback to criticism of Sotomayors blatantly racist attitudes?
Alito says cases of discrimination remind him of other instances of racism
and you compare that to Sotomayor claiming her sex and race make her decisions better?
Puhlease!
Comment by American Elephant — July 14, 2009 @ 9:12 pm - July 14, 2009
Quoting Ashpenaz: “Gay is an artificial, socially constructed, pre-packaged identity. If you need that to bolster a weak ego, that’s good for you, but it’s not something to impose on other people.”
What?!
Let’s play games with that …
“Christianity is an artificial, socially constructed, pre-packaged identity…”
“Pothead is an artificial, socially constructed, pre-packaged identity…”
“The good housewife is an artificial, socially constructed, pre-packaged identity…”
“Cowboy is …”
“Businessman is …”
“Liberal is …”
“Conservative is …”
All identity is socially constructed.
Do you think all gays are stereotypes? And what on earth does being gay impose on other people?
Comment by DRH — July 14, 2009 @ 9:18 pm - July 14, 2009
As a longtime out gay man who has grown apart from the dominant images, attitudes, values, etc of the gay (and especially the LGBT construct) paradigm, I have some sympathy for Ashpenaz’ strong opinion. I basically agree with Jack Malebranche’s manifesto, Androphilia, that gayness has come to mean a prepackaged identity dominated by group victimism, leftist politics and, paradoxically, anti-male feminism. As a homosexual man who has come to value my identity as a man above all, I can tell you that a lot of gay culture is uncomfortable with that. Masculinity is valued as a sexual marker, but is otherwise suspect as a form of hetero oppression. DRH is right, though, that most identities are socially constructed, which does not make them false.
Comment by EssEm — July 14, 2009 @ 10:30 pm - July 14, 2009
And I’ll remind you, Lee, that your beloved liberals opposed Miguel Estrada BECAUSE he’s Hispanic.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 14, 2009 @ 10:48 pm - July 14, 2009
is as foreign to me as a Renaissance Faire or a Civil War re-enactment.
I was a Civil War reenactor. What of it?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 14, 2009 @ 10:50 pm - July 14, 2009
Being “gay” is not essential or inborn in the way the gay community means it. Gay festivals are like Renaissance Faires which play to a stereotypical, mythical understanding of the Renaissance. Which is fun. Which is fine. But many who identify as “gay” believe that gay festivals are true and authentic expressions of homosexuality.
When I say I am a Christian man who has homosexual feelings, I am aware that I am imposing a social construct on myself. I am a Christian. I am a man. I fully consent to those as markers of my identity. I am not gay. My homosexual feelings are not my primary source of identification any more than my love of pizza. I could identify as a Pizza-lover–but I’m content to be a Christian man who likes pizza.
Coming out within myself, learning to accept and embrace my homosexual feelings, does not mean I have to identify as “gay.” My homosexual feelings do not come with a list of requirements. It’s important for me to affirm that because the gay community wants to capture everyone with homosexual feelings and plug them into the Gay Borg. They don’t want people with homosexual feelings to experience freedom of choice. They want people with homosexual feelings to sign themselves over to the gay community, its myths and its agenda. In return for your soul, they give you a toaster.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 14, 2009 @ 11:38 pm - July 14, 2009
IMHO, Sen. Graham had his finest hour today. Normally, he’s annoyingly squishy, sort of a John McCain without the heroic past, but I’m finding myself really agreeing with the philosophy he seems to be taking on this nomination. I really don’t think there’s much point in trying to derail this nomination, given that the Dems have 60 votes anyway, but I think Americans who saw his questioning of Sotomayor will come away thinking Obama isn’t the sort of person we want picking SCOTUS justices.
Comment by chad — July 15, 2009 @ 12:02 am - July 15, 2009
I upgraded from the toaster and got a new microwave.
Comment by EssEm — July 15, 2009 @ 12:06 am - July 15, 2009
Ash…I have a new found appreciation of your intellectual abilities!!! You should be allowed to “free associate” more often…stretch those philosophical muscles. Thanks for the for new perspective.
Comment by Duffy - Native Intelligence — July 15, 2009 @ 12:26 am - July 15, 2009
#12: “I really don’t think there’s much point in trying to derail this nomination, given that the Dems have 60 votes anyway…”
Wrong, chad. The fact that Sotomayor’s confirmation is a done deal is exactly why Republicans need to fight like hell. This is the time for GOP elected officials to stand up for their principles (if they have any) because they have nothing to lose. AND the people who elected candidates on Republican platforms could use some assurances from their representatives right now that regardless of whether they are outnumbered, they are going to go down unequivocally condemning the liberal agenda. These days, we can’t necessarily count on GOP representatives to vote against the liberals’ bad ideas, much less the WORST liberal idea in history, cap & tax (which would not have passed without 8 GOP votes). If we can’t distinguish between Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate anymore (either by their rhetoric or their votes), then we really are done for.
Comment by Sean A — July 15, 2009 @ 1:04 am - July 15, 2009
Ashpenaz, understand your point about Outfest, will at some later date (maybe this week) share why it is I volunteer for this organization (in the most senior capacity a volunteer can have there)–has a lot to do with the quality of the people who run the organization, a lot different from those who run most of the other gay groups with which I have been involved.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 15, 2009 @ 1:24 am - July 15, 2009
My son is interested in becoming a Cub Scout & I have heard about controversy over them not allowing gay leaders. He just wants to fish, shoot arrows & bb guns,and tie knots, etc. What’s a mom to do?! Any thoughts or opinions about it?
Comment by Annie — July 15, 2009 @ 3:26 am - July 15, 2009
Oooh, 2.86+ million visitors to your blog! Well on your way to 3mils!
Comment by Annie — July 15, 2009 @ 3:38 am - July 15, 2009
Annie, don’t let their policy deter you from signing him up. Become active as a den mother and once you have shown your qualities and dedication to the Scouts, try to work from the inside to change their policy.
Advocate as a supporter of the group, doing so with gentle suasion, not ad hominem argument
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 15, 2009 @ 4:36 am - July 15, 2009
[...] A few Random Thoughts Posts [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » Why Intelligent Conservatives are more tolerant of Liberals(than they are of us)* — July 15, 2009 @ 4:38 am - July 15, 2009
EssEmm,
I’ll stick with my toaster.
Comment by The Livewire — July 15, 2009 @ 7:09 am - July 15, 2009
When I say I am a Christian man who has homosexual feelings, I am aware that I am imposing a social construct on myself. I am a Christian. I am a man. I fully consent to those as markers of my identity. I am not gay. My homosexual feelings are not my primary source of identification any more than my love of pizza. I could identify as a Pizza-lover–but I’m content to be a Christian man who likes pizza.
That’s fine, Ashpenaz. But the same can be said for being a Christian. Other people will identify that a Christian is someone who believes homosexuality is a sin, and as a Christian, you either have to be straight, or be gay and celibate. But obviously, you don’t believe that is true.
Same for being gay. Assuming your perception of the gay community is true, that does not mean that all gay persons subscribe to any gay orthodoxy. Same with Christianity. People more and more are realizing that for both communities. Identify yourself as you want. I’ll call myself gay, as opposed to one who has homosexual feelings, for one, it’s easier to say. But it doesn’t mean that being gay and which gender I am sexually attracted to, makes up my whole being. Far from it. Just like a person who is straight (or one who has heterosexual feelings) is a lot more than what their sexual orientation is.
Comment by Pat — July 15, 2009 @ 7:32 am - July 15, 2009
Pat,
(puts the heritic hat on) Some of us believe that anyone who isn’t married should be celibate. Again, I try and fail at this (well not fail recently, but that’s a lack of oportunity).
Luther wrote .”If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. ”
I think the same holds true for any ‘community’. That it is more fractured the freeer it is (if that makes sense).
Comment by The Livewire — July 15, 2009 @ 9:38 am - July 15, 2009
I think a lot of men who identify as gay expect gay sex to give them something which it doesn’t have the power to impart. I think one reason for the promiscuity in the gay community is that men keep having sex with each other over and over again trying to find something that isn’t there. It’s like eating a whole bunch of potato chips trying to get your fill of fiber. You can have all the chips in the universe, but you’re never going to find any fiber.
I’m not sure anymore that sex is the best way for men to express intimacy with each other. I think men need love from each other, but the more they try to find that love by having sex with each other, the more frustrated they become. I think men are trying to experience sex the way women experience sex. Sex communicates intimacy to a woman in a way it doesn’t to men. Women experience feelings of safety and security with sex that men don’t have. I think men experience their deepest intimacy with other men when they are playing sports with each other. I think that trying to express love to a man using the techniques which work for expressing love to a woman only frustrates everyone involved.
I think the reason I’m attracted to the male/male love of the 19th century is because it is ambiguously sexual. Melville writes about the intimacy on board a whaler. Whitman talks about meeting soldiers. Lincoln slept in the same bed with a man. Thoreau talks about intellectual connections. Tennyson talks about mourning. All of these men expressed deep feelings for other men, feelings that were much stronger than their feelings towards women. But there is no clear indication that they had sex with men.
The desire for male intimacy and love is not the same as the desire for sex. I’m not sure if I can express my deepest feelings for men with sex. I think that these feelings are better expressed in other ways–but expressing love for men without using sex does not diminish the importance or depth of my feelings for men.
But, for the gay community, if you’re not doing it up the pooper, you’re in the closet.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 15, 2009 @ 9:46 am - July 15, 2009
I think the same holds true for any ‘community’. That it is more fractured the freeer it is (if that makes sense).
Livewire, maybe it’s because it is early in the morning and I’m missing something. This statement seems to contradict the quote by Luther.
In applying it to the gay community, is Luther saying, do whatever you want, but make sure you adhere to gay orthodoxy?
I think a lot of men who identify as gay expect gay sex to give them something which it doesn’t have the power to impart.
Ashpenaz, I think men have sex (with someone they are attracted to), is because it feels good. If it didn’t, men would hardly do it.
I think one reason for the promiscuity in the gay community is that men keep having sex with each other over and over again trying to find something that isn’t there.
That could be part of it. For example, if a man is looking to find that special someone, he may feel that having sex with that person off the bat, could lead to it. Once in a blue moon, it does. But usually it doesn’t. Again, I think it’s more because it feels good to have sex. Granted, over time, men realize that having sex only has temporary results. And as someone stated, it can be soul deadening.
Sure, as part of the sex act, men are looking for intimacy. But for many, they’re only looking for intimacy of the moment, not necessarily something permanent, and are able to not develop any emotional detachment with the person they are being intimate with (I personally can’t).
There are men who are looking to find that special someone, but yet continue to be promiscuous. Your potato chip analogy may apply here. They may feel they can’t find it, but by having sex with all these men, they are holding out hope that one encounter may lead to something, and when it doesn’t, well, at least they had a good time. Frankly, I think that strategy doesn’t work.
I think men experience their deepest intimacy with other men when they are playing sports with each other. I think that trying to express love to a man using the techniques which work for expressing love to a woman only frustrates everyone involved.
For the latter point, that may be true for straight men, that is, if they really want to be intimate with another man. But it obviously has nothing to do with sexual attraction.
Sure, gay men can bond with other men playing sports. Many do that, in fact. But I disagree with your latter point. In fact, I believe it’s the opposite. It’s not being able to express love to a man similar to a way a straight man expresses love to a woman frustrates everyone involved.
Now this doesn’t mean that being gay means you’re only goal with other men is having sex with them. There are other attachments that develop. Besides the sex, there are other things that I do with my partner that I would not do with someone who was just a friend (male or female).
I think the reason I’m attracted to the male/male love of the 19th century is because it is ambiguously sexual.
That’s fine. But it seems to me that the known behaviors of those you mention was done out of necessity and/or survival, given the anti-gay culture that existed in the 19th Century. I can’t imagine that most of these men wouldn’t prefer the freedom we have today and (most likely) in the future. Then they wouldn’t have to be ambiguous, which I frankly believed they abhored doing.
But, for the gay community, if you’re not doing it up the pooper, you’re in the closet.
Not sure I believe that. Even if true, I don’t have to take every (or any, for that matter) lead from the gay community.
Comment by Pat — July 17, 2009 @ 7:50 am - July 17, 2009
It’s ok, I was being incohernet too.
Two seperate thoughts at once. It’s been my experience that as a group becomes more mainstream, it starts to fracture even farther.
To use my own community experience… There are at least five D/s groups in Columbus, and we’re not that big of a town. Back when it was much more underground and ‘in the closet’ the groups were tight and there weren’t that many. Now that it’s (slightly) more acceptable. You have the groups sniping at each other. One’s seen as ‘the gay group’ one as the ‘player/social group’ One as the ‘couples group’ one as the ‘snobs preaching the one true way’ group, etc. The infighting, rivalry, etc. is because the spectre of Dick Cheney hunting them down never materialized.
The other thought is Luther said ‘Sin Boldly’ what he meant, as I read it is if you’re going to ask forgiveness, don’t ask for piddly little things you can’t control. To use a Presidential example, don’t ask forgiveness for ‘lust in your heart’ when you’re busy coddling terrorists, racists and advocating the destruction of the Divine’s chosen people, and not asking for forgiveness for that.
Comment by The Livewire — July 17, 2009 @ 9:20 am - July 17, 2009
Thanks for clarifying, Livewire.
Comment by Pat — July 17, 2009 @ 2:59 pm - July 17, 2009
Legos are educational
Comment by The_Livewire — July 17, 2009 @ 9:19 pm - July 17, 2009