tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post116311427266246235..comments2024-03-27T02:13:58.088-07:00Comments on Integral Options Cafe: Outing Gay Conservatives [Updated]william harrymanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06981478282688361274noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163201483082930452006-11-10T16:31:00.000-07:002006-11-10T16:31:00.000-07:00If Mehlman chooses not to be an out gay man, how c...If Mehlman chooses not to be an out gay man, how can we impose a gay social identity on him? He lives and conducts himself, as far as any of us know, as someone who is not openly gay, which means he has not assumed a gay identity, social or otherwise. We cannot, of course, know what he thinks of himself in private -- though I'm guessing it's some of that self-loathing you mentioned before.<BR/><BR/>If Mehlman is operating in the authoritarian/"truth force" meme/worldview, as he most likely is as a Christian, then what he says and does is perfectly consonant with his worldview. How that impacts his psyche is a whole other issue that probably would need therapy. <BR/><BR/>I tend to agree with you that outing someone is seldom if ever done in the best interest of the person being outed. How many people are there who would out someone with the intent of freeing the gay person from living a lie, or with the intent of helping them in a way that s/he cannot help themselves? Most of the time, no matter the reason given, it's vindictive in some way, or meant to be hurtful.<BR/><BR/>Accepting that, it's hard for me to support anyone outing someone else, no matter how hypocritical the outed person might be. Maybe I'm squeamish in the same way you are, or giving in to idiot compassion. I don't know.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>Billwilliam harrymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981478282688361274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163174594049390222006-11-10T09:03:00.000-07:002006-11-10T09:03:00.000-07:00I guess my main point is that one doesn't get to p...I guess my main point is that one doesn't get to pick and choose at which point one's identity become "social" (i.e., before or after "coming out"). All identities (and particularly being gay in this day and era, alas) are necessarily social whether one owns and recognizes that aspect of identity or not. <BR/><BR/>If you find yourself still resisting that point, go back and consider Wilber's point about Vietnam-era war protestors, and the crucial consideration of WHY they protested. Many because they feared the draft and didn't--blankly and unreflectively--want anyone telling them what to do and where to go; others--fewer--because of genuine antiwar convictions. Similarly, oppposing gay rights, as a heterosexual, because of religious or ideological convictions (odious as that is) differs from doing so as a gay man (for one thing, perpetuating not only hatred, but the vilest sort of self-hatred, which as we all know is harder to resist than external attacks).<BR/><BR/>I don't particularly like the phenomenon of "outing" folks myself, never have and probably never would myself; but I'm coming to recognize that my squeamishness, especially vis-a-vis these right wing assholes, is probably just idiot compassion. Secretly I'm releived that others are made of sterner stuff (not that it's always necessarily done from an evolved viewpoint; but even so).<BR/><BR/><BR/>Kai in NYCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163157834234229212006-11-10T04:23:00.000-07:002006-11-10T04:23:00.000-07:00That was to be expected -- he got his ass handed t...That was to be expected -- he got his ass handed to him in the mid-terms. I like how they always say the decision had been made a month ago, or something similar. Not sorry to see him go. And I'm sure the next person will be just as bad.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>Billwilliam harrymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981478282688361274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163139341602285672006-11-09T23:15:00.000-07:002006-11-09T23:15:00.000-07:00Melhman stepped down from his RNC job. I am sure ...<A HREF="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_re_us/rnc_chairman" REL="nofollow">Melhman stepped down from his RNC job.</A> I am sure that was inevitable, considering the noxious Republican dirty tricks, including the Playboy Bunny ad in TN, and general disaster.<BR/><BR/>Melhman was always very articulate, but, man, his spinning had no real difference from outright lying. It is good that he's gone; but it is unlikely that the GOP will be re-inventing itself such that Melhman's replacement is much less slimey.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13718601770472939313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163127410722499522006-11-09T19:56:00.000-07:002006-11-09T19:56:00.000-07:00Kai, I didn't treat being gay as a social identity...Kai, <BR/><BR/>I didn't treat being gay as a social identity because these guys aren't out and aren't dealing with being gay as a social identity. I agree with you that being gay expresses in all quadrants, but until one is out, it's only into the upper two (individual and not collective).<BR/><BR/>The privacy issue applies because (1) they are not "out" and (2) because this culture is still homophobic and being gay might be harmful for some people in some ways (like being an evangelical preacher). Personally, I think being gay should be about as noteworthy as having blue eyes. <BR/><BR/>I agree about the political aspect. Still, I think it would be hypocritical of me to out them simply because they are assholes.<BR/><BR/>And Tom, <BR/><BR/>I agree with you about the CNN thing to a point -- the Maher comment was speculation, so CNN is not liable or guilty in any way -- only Bill is. Still, it's their show I guess and they can do anything they want.<BR/><BR/>I don't think that gay Republicans/evangelicals can be compared to Jewish Nazis, but I see your point.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/>Billwilliam harrymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981478282688361274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163118317656167252006-11-09T17:25:00.000-07:002006-11-09T17:25:00.000-07:00I have a lot of sympathy with Kai's point. Today,...I have a lot of sympathy with Kai's point. Today, now that antisemitism is wholly unacceptable, Would we think it was OK for some Nazis to secretly have been Jews?<BR/><BR/>Yet, I can imagine good reasons for CNN to alter their transcript. There are some things that when they become talked-about rumours are immediately accepted as true. I think that the media has a responsibility to not be a conduit of hot, unproved, ruinous gossip. CNN isn't acting as a cencor since Maher can repeat his 'accusation' on his own show -- if he thinks the matter is of importance.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13718601770472939313noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13617569.post-1163115296134750442006-11-09T16:34:00.000-07:002006-11-09T16:34:00.000-07:00I'm not sure that your argument hits all the bases...I'm not sure that your argument hits all the bases from my perspective. Is being gay purely and upper left phenomenon? That is, only and exclusively extant "in the privacy on one's own bedroom"? Or is it an identity which necessarily expresses itself in all quadrants (and therefore has consequences with political, cultural, or otherwise extra-individual significance)?<BR/><BR/>Then there is the issue of: if we believe being gay is "ok" why so much emphasis on "preserving privacy"? You're gay, but I won't call you gay? (You're black but I won't call you black? A woman but I won't call you a woman?) Wierd. Disconsonant.<BR/><BR/>Thirdly, his political activities are hypocritical, widely hurtful and oppressive to many, and plain ole wrong. If a mild statement of the truth can ameliorate all that, well...<BR/><BR/>Kai in NYCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com