Gay Patriot Header Image

The Gay Left’s Newest Member

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 10:25 pm - April 17, 2010.
Filed under: Gay PC Silliness,Gay Victimization

Okay. So have you heard of this story where the high school girl who wanted to attend the prom with her “lesbian girlfriend” (I use the quotes because, really. Call me an old stick-in-the-mud*, but are high-schoolers self-aware enough to realize they’re lesbians already? And even if so, are we encouraging kids that young to identify themselves sexually? What ever happened to the innocence and beauty of youth? Ugh, but anyway.) was duped into arriving at some sham event while the actual prom was being held somewhere else?

Well, far be it from me to pick on a kid, so let me just get this straight:

Let’s presume the high school has at least a couple hundred kids, and that a bunch of them likely attended this “stealth” prom, right? And somehow, therefore, they were able to keep this girl completely in the dark about the whole thing? Like none of the high-school kids involved spilled the beans? She was totally unable to figure out that the entire school was in on the joke except her (and, apparently a couple “students with learning difficulties”)?

Hm… Seems to me, she’s exactly the sort of inquisitive, self-introspective, get-down-to-the-bottom-of-it, fact-checker and independent thinker that the gay Left is dying to recruit. Surely they’ll be glad to have her.

Additionally, let’s note that her reaction was to broadcast far and wide to anybody willing to listen that she’d been completely punked and embarrassed through her gullibility in hopes of garnering sympathy, rather than reflecting on how she could have been so credulous. This will likely also find her kindred spirits in the movement.

Best of luck with that!

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from TML)

*And if you do choose to call me “an old stick-in-the-mud”, you’re clearly more of a fuddy-duddy than I am.

UPDATE (from Dan):  This is an issue which I chose to ignore when I first read about it.  I have a different take on this than does Nick, though we do share some common ground.  I had hoped to take the weekend off from blogging to focus on my friends and my dissertation, but do expect to offer up my thoughts.

That said, while I disagree with Nick’s take, I’m amazed (well, by this time, with the gay left I shouldn’t be) at the extent to which our leftist critics refuse to acknowledge our points and so readily rush to the “self-hatred” slur.  Nick may have an unusual opinion.   He may even be wrong in this case, but he is surely not self-loathing, so, guys keep your comments civil and show some respect for “unfamiliar” opinions.

Share

108 Comments

  1. I don’t know in what crazy parallel universe have you lived all your life, but it must be one very different from this one. How long took you to realize that you were really gay to question something that for most of us is so blatantly obvious even before we reach puberty? I mean, that’s something to ponder with your shrink. Not to cast your own troubled shadows upon others.
    At the age of this girl I was well aware of my sexuality and more than capable to love and compromise. What a pity that some people lost the train.

    Comment by Lexxvs — April 20, 2010 @ 9:56 am - April 20, 2010

  2. Your response to the situation totally misses the mark. Whether or not any teenager can be sure about their sexual orientation is beside the point. Were any of Constance’s classmates denied permission to bring their date? No. Why was Constance’s situation different? Duh. By your logic, NO student should be able to bring a date to the prom, because they sexuality is not cast in concrete yet (which is a ridiculous point to argue anyway).

    Comment by Jay — April 20, 2010 @ 11:46 am - April 20, 2010

  3. That is certainly true BUT you haven’t presented a single fact, whereas my own statement that I’ve spent a professional lifetime listening to kids talk IS a fact.

    Correction. You have spent several years listening to kids tell stories about their sexual escapades, which would qualify on any level as “anecdotes”.

    Yet when ones come up that don’t match your predetermined conclusion, you dismiss them as “anecdotes” that have no validity, and “absolutely assure” people that high school kids think of nothing but sex.

    And then your defensiveness about your own endorsement of sex for and with twelve-year-olds got hilarious.

    I did NOT claim it was either normal or rational to “have sex with 12 year old children,” unless you happen to be another 12 year old child.

    I repeat: Gay and lesbian individuals like yourself think it is normal and rational for twelve-year-old children to be having sex with each other. A gay high school teacher has for thirty years taught children that it is perfectly normal and rational for twelve-year-old children to be having sex with each other.

    And why? Because you did it.

    I was enjoying gay sex very actively indeed from the age of 12 all the way to my present time of social security.

    And then you try this hilarious one:

    However, it IS normal for children of that age to engage in various kinds of sexual experimentation – usually of a fumbling variety.

    So this is “abnormal”.

    I’m a defender of Constance, and I never had sex before or during high school, and a firm believer that teens should not have sex.

    So we’re waiting, tobyg. Start babbling about how this individual should “do some research of his own and learn a few of the facts of life,” and that this individual “really appears to have formed (his) opinions on the basis of watching too many episodes of “Leave It To Beaver” and knows nothing about actual child development”.

    By the way, thanks for making it clear that Sadly, No! and Truth Wins Out both agree with you that it is perfectly rational and normal for twelve-year-old children to be having gay sex. It answers so many questions about why Evan Hurst and Wayne Besen are obsessed with gay children and teenagers.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 20, 2010 @ 12:34 pm - April 20, 2010

  4. North Dallas Thirty,
    this has probably been beaten to a pulp by now, but you are honestly telling me that you are siding with a school district who, rather than let the girl go to prom in a tux and a dress were justified in cancelling it, then encouraging a private, discriminatory prom? Jesus.
    Also, I’d like to point out to you, since you seem dumb enough not to have noticed, that there would have been no reason to cancel a prom if they had had a legal leg to stand on re: not allowing her to wear a tux/bring a girl as a date.
    So, you see, this is plain ol’ discrimination, the kind you face from your political party on a daily basis. I guess you like it like that.

    Comment by Rebel — April 20, 2010 @ 2:00 pm - April 20, 2010

  5. Nick, When I first read your article I was so angry, I wanted to say harsh, ugly things just to retaliate. But that doesn’t solve anything. And you seem to have given us enough ugliness in your article.

    Please let me give my 2 cents. For whatever reason I was painfully aware of my sexuality in high school, I had a boyfriend my freshman year (this was over 20 years ago, btw).

    I was pretty much forced out of high school because of bullying from students and physical abuse from high school staff and completed school at an ‘alternative’ high school near by. I was lucky that I lived in an area that actually had an ‘alternative’ high school.

    I knew I was right, they were wrong and I always knew I would be able to get to a place where I would find tolerance and a permanent relationship but getting here was hell on earth.

    Reading your article takes me right back to those days when I questioned whether I’d even make it out of freshman year alive.

    I hope you will reconsider your opinion about this subject and this young lady that is just trying to make her way through high school. So what if the left has embraced her and given her some publicity? That doesn’t meant you can’t be supportive as well.

    Its called bi-partisanship. Give it a try.

    SC

    Comment by Snottyboy — April 20, 2010 @ 4:08 pm - April 20, 2010

  6. this has probably been beaten to a pulp by now, but you are honestly telling me that you are siding with a school district who, rather than let the girl go to prom in a tux and a dress were justified in cancelling it, then encouraging a private, discriminatory prom? Jesus.

    Nope.

    I am siding with a school district that, rather than let a student abuse what is an optional gathering so that said student could make political statements about her sexual preferences, cancelled said gathering.

    Your statement about “encouraging a private, discriminatory prom” is not in the least backed by evidence, and hilariously demonstrates that you believe that gay and lesbian people have the special right to force other people to invite them to private parties.

    You are an advocate of gay and lesbian people having special rights based on their sexual orientation. That is discrimination. But you don’t recognize it as such because you believe that, by virtue of your sexual orientation, you are entitled to special treatment.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 20, 2010 @ 4:12 pm - April 20, 2010

  7. NDT, I call bullshit. Attending prom with a date is not special treatment. It is the same right the school afforded its heterosexual students. Would you also support a predominately white student body that choose to exclude persons of color from prom? Or someone who was handicapped? Or anyone else who possessed an immutable characteristic that made them different from the majority of students? Your comments and your logic are repulsive.

    Comment by Mark — April 22, 2010 @ 3:55 pm - April 22, 2010

  8. TobyG, a little advice…don’t take the bait. I’ve seen NDT play this disingenuous and manipulative game of his for years now.

    It’s a waste of time trying to influence him in any way. He has a warped angry hegemonic point of view and sees anything that challenges his narrow perspective as a personal attack. His typical response to these challenges is to ignore the main point and instead parse the words of the challenger, twisting their meaning in an attempt to denigrate, intimidate and marginalize the other person.

    He is willfully oblivious to any argument or evidence which refutes his position, and will continue to ignore your point regardless of the number of times you try to redirect him.

    It can sometimes be fun to watch or engage him in his game, but it is a futile waste of time to try to have a thoughtful exchange of ideas with him. He will not join in a debate with you. He will not have a conversation with you. He will only slander you and malign your character and beliefs to try and distract from the fact that he cannot rationally support his position without distorting or making up facts and jumping to conclusions.

    So if you enjoy an argument for argument’s sake, by all means, knock youself out. But if you are actually trying to persuade NDT to your position using logic and reason, you’ll only end up exasperated and aggravated in the end.

    Comment by StudioTodd — April 23, 2010 @ 6:01 pm - April 23, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.