First they came for the gays....
Most of us are in the closet, or we get treated like the people in the article.
So says Kesher Talk's Judith Weiss (via PJM), as she reflects on a growing trend noted in the NYT and on the minds of many -- the deliberate shunning and cutting off of friends and relatives because of their political beliefs.

Judith outlines a pattern very familiar to me:

"People just assume you're a Democrat." Boy do they.

Another thing they do which Kornblat doesn't give an example of, but which we all have experienced: They always start political conversations. None of us do. We have learned that no one wants to argue issues on their merits, that the room gets very quiet and unfriendly, that people start screaming at you, or rant the most loopy beliefs and conspiracy theories. We just assume that is not a topic anyone can treat in a dispassionate manner.

But they always provoke political conversations. Well, not conversations, which would be enjoyable and enlightening. They make pronouncements. And look around the room to see if anyone not only doesn't agree, but doesn't agree enthusiastically. As a friend deep in the closet in the theater world put it, you can't just sit quietly and wait for the topic to change. No, you are suspect if you do not vocally endorse the official opinion of the group. You thought you were in a project meeting or a coffee klatch or a dinner party, and all of a sudden it has turned into the Communist Youth League Self-Criticism Session.

And then, after they have assumed, because no one in the room has fangs or horns, that a political support group is what everyone wants (and they do, except for you) - if you express your difference of opinion, they are offended that you spoiled the intimate feeling in the room by being other than they assumed, based on their superficial reading of you. In other words, they brought up politics, but they are the only ones who get to play.

I've noticed this for years, and it seems to have gotten worse. You'd think that none of these liberal activists knew that about half the country voted for Bush, and the other half for Kerry.

Like many people, Judith notices that Republicans don't behave this way towards Democrat friends. I think the reason is that Republicans are very accustomed to keeping their mouths shut, to not telling friends and coworkers how they voted. In some cases, their very livelihood depends on being "in the closet."

While I can't prove my suspicions, I'd even go so far as to speculate that one of the reasons the outing of gay Republicans struck a raw nerve is because so many non-gay Republicans are so used to life in the closet that they were quick to react to the real reason for the outing: what makes gay Republicans so disgraceful is not their homosexuality, but their Republicanism! While Democrats might have missed it, few Republicans missed the fact that they weren't outed merely for being gay.

They were also outed for being Republican.

Thus, the outing generated sympathy in normally unsympathetic quarters.

If you are a Republican surrounded by Democrats, being in the closet is all too familiar, and seeing any Republican -- even a gay one -- being outed is excruciatingly painful.

Why, it's almost as if you could be next!

UPDATE: Thanks to Glenn Reynolds for linking this post.

Welcome all, and Happy Halloween!

posted by Eric on 10.31.06 at 09:06 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/4171






Comments

Yeah, cry me a river. Republicans are stuck in a closet? What planet are you on? Whenever I have observed the intimidating behavior you describe, it has ALWAYS come from Republicans -- including some of my own extended family.

...what makes gay Republicans so disgraceful is not their homosexuality, but their Republicanism!

Not their Republicanism per se, but their refusal to speak up strongly against the pathological homophobia that has poisoned that party's "thinking" at all levels. Sort of like Dick Cheney admitting his daughter is a decent, normal human being, but refusing to take a real stand against the bigots who demonize people like her as unthinkingly as they fart. Or the Republicans who try to blame, first the pages, then their own gay staffers, for their own efforts to cover up and enable Foley's unseemly attention toward male pages.

You HAVE noticed the hypocricy and bigotry, haven't you? That's what the rest of us find "disgraceful," and you'd have to be a blind, clinging Republican puppet to have missed it after all these years.

Raging Bee   ·  October 31, 2006 10:13 AM

Wow, can I relate to this article. It's happened so many times to me and my partner. We once thought that gays would be open minded, but now have no illusions. One particularly memorable dinner party turned into a shouting match - over the war in Iraq and our support for it, initially, and ended with accusations of being "Uncle Tom's" etc.
It was like being the lone holdouts in a jury room. Everyone turned on us. And you are SO right that keeping your mouth shut doesn't help. If you don't vocally agree, they assume you're a turncoat.

Frank   ·  October 31, 2006 10:27 AM

I'm talking about my own experience, and obviously I can't speak for others. I have learned that if I say what I think when liberals are venting about Bush, Iraq, global warming, or especially guns, liberals will hurl imprecations at me. (The last time I admitted I was a member of the NRA at a trendy cocktail party, you'd have thought I'd said I was with NAMBLA. It's tough to forget things like that.) In all honesty I can't remember the last time I saw conservatives do the same thing, although obviously it happens.

I don't agree that the "refusal to speak up strongly against the pathological homophobia that has poisoned that party's "thinking" at all levels" characterizes all gay Republicans.

And yes, I "HAVE noticed the hypocricy and bigotry" and I've commented on it extensively. I don't think it's limited to either party.

Eric Scheie   ·  October 31, 2006 10:39 AM

The first poster above rather proves the point. You cuold not have paid for a more on-point comment.

Name calling, belittling behavior is typical of the left. Refusal to see what they are doing is also typical of the left. This is true from the street corner to the presidential candidate.

Ah, well, still some of my best friends are lefties.

John Fembup   ·  October 31, 2006 10:52 AM

I can relate as well. I'm the sole moderate/conservative (Democrat, actually) in my entire office.

It has gotten to the point where I can't even critique my own party around here. I was actually called a fascist the other day after vocalizing my disagreement with a local congressional candidate's ad. Freaking weird is what it is.

Greg   ·  October 31, 2006 10:53 AM

In my experience, one of the great things about the net is whenever you wish to make a point about the opposition, you can be sure a troll will come along shortly to illustrate the point for you.

celebrim   ·  October 31, 2006 10:56 AM

I'm not in the closet, but I never, ever initiate a political discussion. It invariably shoots my blood pressure through the roof when the liberal I'm talking to (like all conservatives, I have a LOT of lib friends and relatives) goes on a full-blown attack on me personally. It gets way worse when I reveal myself as an apostate (I was a very lefty feminist Dem for 32 years). With my friends and colleagues, we have an unspoken agreement never to discuss politics, but oddly a few relatives enjoy yanking my chain. We've ceased socializing with them except at weddings and funerals, and I dread social or business gatherings in general because of this whole issue.

I've never had a conservative initiate a political discussion with me other than at a Hannity or Levin booksigning. The striking thing is how positive and happy conservatives are, and how angry, nasty and in need of Xanax most liberals are. The interesting thing is, all those years I was a Dem and the Dems were in charge, those people were still nasty! Being in power really doesn't improve them at all.

I wanted to put a bumpersticker on my car this year but it's a Lexus and I do NOT need to be keyed or have my tires slashed. (Conservatives respect property and are very unlikely to do such a thing. ;-) )

Peg C.   ·  October 31, 2006 10:57 AM

It's revealing to compare the calm reasoned tone of Eric's post with the unhinged ranting of the aptly named "raging bee." And I question if Mr. Bee actually knows any Republicans outside his "extended family."

Anthony   ·  October 31, 2006 11:02 AM

The reason conservatives don't bring up political topics innapropriately is that they've mastered discretion.

Since discretion comes with maturity, we can also see why conservatives don't let politics get in the way of relationships.

So if conservatives are mature, does that mean liberals are immature? Well, what do you call cutting off your elderly mother because you didn't like how she voted?

elgabogringo   ·  October 31, 2006 11:05 AM

Right -- the fact that I disagreed with the post proves that leftists shout down opposing views?

And speaking of "Name calling, belittling behavior," I don't remember lefties labelling everyone who questioned Bush's military actions "pro-terrorist." Nor do I remember lefties shrieking about a "culture of death" in relation to medical end-of-life issues. Nor do I remember lefties labelling all criticism of Dear Leader as "irrational Bush hatred," regardless of the substance of the criticism itself. (What about all the conservatives who are now making the same criticisms? Are they "irrational Bush haters" too?)

Nor, for that matter, do I remember ANY liberals questioning the patriotism of those who opposed Carter's or Clinton's military policies.

Funny how this talk of leftist verbal bullying comes out when desperate Republicans are dredging up silly-assed allegations against Democrats to avoid talking about their own miserable fiscal, moral and military failures.

Raging Bee   ·  October 31, 2006 11:06 AM

"But they always provoke political conversations. Well, not conversations, which would be enjoyable and enlightening. They make pronouncements. And look around the room to see if anyone not only doesn't agree, but doesn't agree enthusiastically."

Exactly. I get to see it up close and personal, every day - my wife is just like this. I don't say a word about politics, ever, and get called a "fucking nazi" for my trouble. And yet, somehow, the Republicans are the intolerant ones.

James   ·  October 31, 2006 11:06 AM

I've seen this behavior too.

I think it's one of the reasons the liberals can't figure out why they're losing elections. Everytime they talk, they get confirmation from other liberals of what they believe in, but fail to notice that some people AREN'T agreeing with them. An election happens, they lose, and then the assume that it's because of some trickery because everyone THEY talked to was on their side.

Fact is, a lot fewer are than they believe. It's just that most of us shut up about it, because we're sick and tired of the wild-eyed yelling and screaming and personal attacks when you actually state your beliefs, and dehumanizing them for it.

Party of inclusion my ass. Party of group think is that it is.

Deanj   ·  October 31, 2006 11:07 AM

Oh, this resonates so deeply. My oldest, dearest friend is a liberal - a successful, highly intelligent professional woman in Boston. A group of friends got together for a mini-reunion in the weeks leading up to the election in 2004, and she was enthusiastic about Michael Moore's F9/11. Yes, she was the one who brought politics to the conversation. She clearly expected everyone to agree. When I attempted to speak about Bush, she began to twirl in a circle and say "lalalalalala!" to drown out my words. I couldn't believe my eyes. My oldest friend was behaving like a complete ass.

I realize now that I have to closet myself whenever I'm with old friends, if I want to keep them as friends.

Karen   ·  October 31, 2006 11:08 AM

"Freaking weird is what it is."

Not particularly. My own politics are particularly eclectic, so much so, that depending on my mood and what I want to be contrarian about I can get called a 'bigoted facist theocrat' on one side of the aisle and a 'anti-American socialist moonbat' from the other.

But the really telling insult that I've been hurled was 'Trotskyite'. When someone on the Left hurled that at me after a percieved betrayal, it all suddenly came together for me and I understood why it wasn't wierd that the Left requires ideological purity from you.

Radicals are always utopian dreamers. You are standing in the way of thier just and perfect society, and for a cause such as that, they won't hesitate to cut you down where you stand and tread over your bleeding corpse. It's all for the greater good, you see. I think its likely that any radical movement will ultimately become religious in character - with sour minded defenders of the moral order standing about looking for evidence of dissent and preaching fire and damnation from the pulpit - only without the long history of checks and balances against that sort of thing which characterizes long lasting religious Orthodoxies.

The Democratic party since the late 60's has had a radical wing - and Dean and Pelosi are very much part of it - and the guardians of political correctness do not wish to be outdone in thier zeal for virtue by anyone.

celebrim   ·  October 31, 2006 11:09 AM

Um, "Raging Bee", you're not going to convince anyone by demonstrating the point. I'm sure you've been treated poorly by someone who identified themselves as a Republican. Sorry about that.

Robert Crawford   ·  October 31, 2006 11:10 AM

Dennis Miller has been on both sides of the political fence and he says conservatives are much more accomodating and welcoming of differing views than liberals.

Tell us something we don't know.

Jo   ·  October 31, 2006 11:10 AM

As someone once observed, liberals think conservatives are evil,while conservatives think liberals are crazy. I happen to agree with the latter view, but those who hold the former are capable of almost any form of rudness or bad faith because, after all, they are fighting "evil." As a conservative or libertarian, you just tend to feel sorry for a crazy person.

jimhanavan   ·  October 31, 2006 11:12 AM

"Yeah, cry me a river. Republicans are stuck in a closet? What planet are you on? Whenever I have observed the intimidating behavior you describe, it has ALWAYS come from Republicans -- including some of my own extended family."

On planet Hoboken New Jersey, Republicans are indeed closeted. You cannot run for local office and as a Republican. In the last gubernatorial campaign, not a single sign, flyer, or scrap of paper for the Republican candidate could be found on the street. No one posted a single Bush sign in the last election - even though 6,000 Hobokenites voted for him. Everyone knew that posting such a sign was an invitation to pariah-hood, ostracized and outcast.

That's what it is to be closeted. For all 'Raging Bee's' self-righteous bellowing, the simple fact is that there are closeted Republicans in urban areas all over the country. I've seen examples of what Eric is talking about all around me.

Mister Snitch!   ·  October 31, 2006 11:14 AM

I wanted to put a bumpersticker on my car this year but it's a Lexus and I do NOT need to be keyed or have my tires slashed. (Conservatives respect property and are very unlikely to do such a thing. ;-))

I know someone whose car got repeatedly keyed because it had a couple of totally inoffensive Pagan bumber-stickers on it. Somehow I don't think that was done by a liberal. Nor do I think that liberals cut the tires of two teachers who questioned their school's prayer policy.

Raging Bee   ·  October 31, 2006 11:14 AM

I'm a moderately conservative high school teacher. You'd be amazed with what I have to put up with.

Darren   ·  October 31, 2006 11:15 AM

Appropo of the season---A few years ago, some friends (business acquaintences would be more accurate) in the SF Bay area went to a Halloween Party dressed as Republicans. Everyone got the joke. It was mandatory. They bragged about it to me later by phone, so sure that I also got the joke.

I got the joke. Just not their joke.

Quixote   ·  October 31, 2006 11:15 AM

VERY familiar. I work in an office where most of the staff is either a) ex-employees of a very liberal local paper, b) Canadian.

I'm not even an extreme conservative. For instance, I'm pro-choice and don't object to stem cell research, but I'm pro-Iraq. The conservatives in the office simply fall quiet when the vocal liberals start their crap. Like another poster said, it's amazing to watch normally sane, professional people suddenly start acting like asses.

Faith+1   ·  October 31, 2006 11:17 AM

I actually quit a job last year over this behavior. My liberal boss, with whom I had gotten along fine for a long time, came in one morning steaming mad. She'd been listening to talk radio, and she went off on a tirade about how Republicans are racists and how we hate the poor and referring to me as "you people" etc. When I tried to respond to calm her down she got madder, saying that I was always trying to act smarter than her (I kid you not - I was absolutely flabbergasted) and then took the political tirade to a completely personal level. I left early that day in shock, and after talking to my husband about it, decided it wasn't worth it to work for someone who obviously despised me because I was not a Democrat. I resigned the next day.

I've also been called a "Nazi" by two different family members for the crime of supporting the Iraq war.

Dorothy   ·  October 31, 2006 11:19 AM

Sure...and I can counter that I know those who had their Jesus fish stolen from their cars. But I'm sure it was those extreem Christianists (i.e. Amish) and not an atheistic "liberal" who did the vandelism. It was also probably the Amish who stole my Bush 2004 sign out of my front yard. Just like it was a war-monger who put that British rocker in a coma (oh wait, that was an anti-war "pacifist"...)

J   ·  October 31, 2006 11:21 AM

Living in a small city in the South, I find that my conservative and evangelical Christian acquaintances are much more accepting of me being gay than my gay acquaintances are tolerant of me being conservative. Makes it hard to get a date.

cw   ·  October 31, 2006 11:21 AM

Mister Snitch wrote:
"I know someone whose car got repeatedly keyed because it had a couple of totally inoffensive Pagan bumber-stickers on it. Somehow I don't think that was done by a liberal."

Don't be too sure about that. I am both pagan and a right-libertarian who often votes Republican, and you wouldn't believe the reactions I've gotten when other pagans realize they have a heretic in their midst.

Dorothy   ·  October 31, 2006 11:22 AM

I have always lived in Massachusetts (formerly, between 128 and 495 outside Boston, now in the Berkshires) and have often witnessed the assumption that all are on the left half of the spectrum (Democrats or further left), that there should be no enemies to the left (anti-anti-communism), and that there is nothing worth hearing from a right or conservative viewpoint, and rarely from a classically liberal (or libertarian) viewpoint. And I know that this mindset is common on the Northeastern coast.

But to throw a bone to the other side: Surely the same phenomonen exists in reverse in such places as the Bible Belt and rural Republican areas.

From my limited experience in the South, it seemed that the local equivalent of "what do you do for a living" is "what church do you go to?" -- with my being at least a Christian (if not "born again") assumed. That said, I've never had an evangelical insult or dismiss me while trying to convert me. Not having socialist views, I really wouldn't know how they'd behave to a leftist.

DWPittelli   ·  October 31, 2006 11:28 AM

I wouldn't call myself a closeted Republican by a long shot. Except for the intellectual property rights verbiage in the Eustonian Manifesto which made me gag, I'm more in that ad hoc camp. But even in my intellectual academic clique I need to keep my head down and more importantly, my mouth shut. Anything short of Daily Kos, Democratic Underground and MoveOn.org BDS is not welcome. Strangely, I find myself more comfortable and more able to be me without compromise amongst the evil Karl Rove NeoCon Fascist swine even, and dare I say, especially, on those matters where the Eustonians and Republicans disagree the most. They are the only people with whom I can disagree agreeably and still be friends. Go figure.

When you can debate abortion rights with a Republican with more civility then debating Clinton-Carter-Bush North Korea Policy with a MoveOn.orger, there is a problem.

Bill   ·  October 31, 2006 11:42 AM

Yes, Jo, one should be kind to the deranged, but should they be allowed to vote?

Brett   ·  October 31, 2006 11:52 AM

I think that dude must be an African killer bee with that attitude. He's safe ranting that way in his circle of friends (or those that tolerate him) because they all wear similar tinfoil hats and practice the same Dean YEEEEHAAAAAW! yell. This year, they're all spending Xmas in Cambodia on Kerry Kruise.

Festus   ·  October 31, 2006 11:55 AM

Before the 2000 election, I was in Bourbon Street, a gay bar in San Diego, talking to some friends, and the topic swerved right into politics. This was right around the time Al Gore had said he does not support gay marriage. Not knowing any better, I stated that I was going to vote for Bush. Boy, judging by the looks on their faces, you would have thought I told them their mothers had died, or that I hated Barbara Streisand, which I kinda do actually. There was pretty much no level of conversation or discussion on the reasoning behind my intensions, as I was instantly accosted with hate speech and became a pariah; I suddenly felt very unwelcome in a bar I had been going to for years. It just amazed me how people can be blindly emotionally invested in one political party over the other. And yes, that goes both ways.

PS. In 2000 I switched from Libertarian to Republican, largely because I thought the Republicans were steadfastly the party of small government. I am now once again a Libertarian because the last six years of the current Republican leadership has proven me wrong.

sonicfrog   ·  October 31, 2006 12:04 PM

You know, the more I think about that whole Foley affair, the more convinced I am that it was a deliberate setup and that Mark Foley fell into a trap.

After all, among the pages his homosexuality was an open secret, as was his predilection for handsome pages. But what sort of "boyfriend" turns on the feature to transcribe chat messages, and then turns them over to a political operative one month before the elections?

That is to say, Mark Foley was the victim here. He was stupid not to realize that the whole chat session might be "recorded," but lots of people don't know about that. At least, on the phone, there's supposed to be a warning if you're being recorded.

Now, are Democrats "the party of gays," or what? (The transcripts were turned over to Democrat political operatives, and a Human Rights Campaign Fund was in the chain.)

Oh, the Democrats LOVE gay men! Unless they gay men happen to be Republican, and standing in the way of victory.

As the SDS used to say, "The current issue is NEVER the issue. [e.g. gay rights] The issue is always the revolution."

See, behold, the revolution swallowing its children!

jaafar   ·  October 31, 2006 12:08 PM

I think our society is pretty politically polarized. In my neighborhood, everybody assumes you're a left-liberal or leftist, but in my hobby, everybody assumes you're an evangelical conservative. You do end up "in the closet" to keep lines of communication open with people. It's too darn bad! Not sure what to do to make the world safe for disagreement.

puppy   ·  October 31, 2006 12:08 PM

I have to disagree with all. While Republicans may FEEL they need to closet themselves... I don't. I fight the power... I have an autographed picture of Ronald Reagan on the wall, and I defend my beliefs. If any one were to call me a Nazi or anything else in my office, I would DEMAND an apology, if not, I would be speaking with HR regarding a Lawsuit. Much like Gays... the only discrimination you can feel is that which you allow to happen to you.

Fight the Power.

Cro   ·  October 31, 2006 12:09 PM

As far as I can tell, this sort of behavior happens in any strongly opinionated group that doesn't have the overwhelming majority they think they ought to have. Among apparent friends, the harshness can come out, and to be challenged at that point is embarrassing and leads to more harshness. I don't see that Democrats, Republicans, or right-wing Wiccan Scrabble-players have any greater claim to the behavior than others.

Crazy Diamond   ·  October 31, 2006 12:11 PM

You know, I read this article this Sunday and thought "what a pretentious TWIT. You don't talk to your mother ~ NOT because she BEAT you as a child ~ but because she's a REPUBLICAN?" I'd cry "OH! The humanity!" if I could find any at all in their way of thinking.

tree hugging sister   ·  October 31, 2006 12:17 PM

Those who still call themselves "Liberals", "Progressives" and Democrats are exhibiting all the classic behavioural characteristics of those involved in a cult.

Nahanni   ·  October 31, 2006 12:19 PM

My boss (here in L.A.) is a big Bush hater and he brings it up once in a while out of the blue; without any reason or connection to the topic being discussed at that time. Apparently it never crosses his mind that others might not share his obsession.

The Bush hating issue comes up also at the... music school I attend... Again, out of the blue. Or between two Bach minuets.

Needless to say I never, ever bring up politics.

I read Dr Sanity and Shrinkwrapped regularly, but I still can't fully understand how the minds of those people can malfunction to such a degree.

locked closet   ·  October 31, 2006 12:20 PM

It's what I call "Fear Society Lite" in the Natan Sharansky sense:

"Fear societies are inevitably composed of three separate groups: True believers, dissidents and doublethinkers. True believers are those who believe in the ideology of the regime. Dissidents are those who disagree with that ideology and are prepared to say so openly. Doublethinkers are those who disagree with the ideology but who are scared to openly confront the regime."

Anonymous   ·  October 31, 2006 12:23 PM

It's what I call "Fear Society Lite," in the Natan Sharansky sense. As the great Soviet dissident wrote:

"Fear societies are inevitably composed of three separate groups: True believers, dissidents and doublethinkers. True believers are those who believe in the ideology of the regime. Dissidents are those who disagree with that ideology and are prepared to say so openly. Doublethinkers are those who disagree with the ideology but who are scared to openly confront the regime."

Sissy Willis   ·  October 31, 2006 12:24 PM

If you're Jewish and you told a group of Jews two years ago that you were voting for Bush, you would have unleashed a torrent of vitriol. I wrote a long post right after the election called "The hidden Jewish vote," in which I concluded that the stated Jewish vote for Bush was actually something like 5% higher, because Jews were keeping their vote for Bush secret from other Jews. I can't tell you how many Jews confided in me after the election.

Attila (Pillage Idiot)   ·  October 31, 2006 12:26 PM

Oh, my, those liberal thugs are just awful! Awful I tell you! Why, every day the hippies at my office surround me like a swarm of bees, pelting me with tofu as they call me MEAN names like "fascist" and "rethuglican" and so many other cruel pejoratives. I fear for my life! There's nothing scarier than a vegan, in-your-face, hippy thug. Their foul smell alone could fell a yak ox!

Don't me started on those wretched pro-Evolution atheists either--OH MY!--who constantly shove Richard Dawkins books in my face and threaten to beat me to a pulp with baseball bats if I don't renounce Creationism and Jesus! I have to avoid the break room at work every day because of those roaming, bat-weilding packs of atheist hooligans at XYZ Corporation where I work!

And those jack-booted liberal fags (like, who knew Louis Vuitton made jackboots!) are just the worst! Always demanding their civil rights and castigating those wonderful Christian leaders like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and James Dobson! These God-fearing conservative religious leaders renounce homosexuality and damn us all to hell, sure, but they are ALSO for cutting taxes, increasing defense spending, and getting that evil government off our backs, which is the real issues we Log Cabin Republicans desire. Civil rights? How silly and childish! How dare those uppity liberal fags and their insane desire to seek equality and justice!

So you can clearly see all of the horrible obstacles I must face and surmount every day! Those fascist liberals and their horrible eliminationalist rhetoric, it's just plain scary!

Thank goodness I exercise my 2nd Amendment right to carry a loaded Howizter in my man purse! I know it's not easy being a Republican these days, but this here neoconservative (closeted gay) dude ain't gonna take all that horrible liberal abuse without a fight!

To arms! To arms, my brothers and sisters!

And look how the gun metal of my Howizter matches my new Kenneth Cole shoes!

mat   ·  October 31, 2006 12:26 PM

You think you've got it bad? I'm a Catholic Fundamentalist. You know, believing in the Church and the Bible completely.
When there's a religious or political discussion, and I mention that, it's like everybody in the room wrinkles their nose like somebody just passed gas.
catholicfundamentalism.com will show you lots of ways to get people to look at you that way.

billadams   ·  October 31, 2006 12:27 PM

I agree with this and endured this from my own family. As a reservist soldier who served in Afghanistan for year, I became a baby killer to my mother who has never left the sixties. She be rated me as tool of the Bush regime and I was a fascist. I told her don’t ever call me again. Lots my old friends will say hello, but avoid me like a leper when I tell them what the Taliban and al Qaeda did to the civilian Afghans. I ruin their visions of the world and the evil American. How sad.

Bob   ·  October 31, 2006 12:31 PM

"I know someone whose car got repeatedly keyed because it had a couple of totally inoffensive Pagan bumber-stickers on it. Somehow I don't think that was done by a liberal."

So it must have been a conservative! Sir Arthur Conan Doyle lives.

Jim Treacher   ·  October 31, 2006 12:35 PM

Republicans control both houses of congress, the executive branch, and now have a majority in the Supreme Court.

And you feel like a minority?

Talk about an overblown pathetic sense of victimhood.

jill   ·  October 31, 2006 12:35 PM

Hey, did you stop to think that maybe the reason those on the left are so "abusive" is because your side is trashing the constitution, bankrupting the country, ignoring environmental concerns, and fighting bullshit wars?! I have conservative friends (okay two), but it is increasingly difficult to take them seriously when they refuse to see the mess this country is in due to the policies of the GOP.

polyglycoat   ·  October 31, 2006 12:37 PM

"ignoring environmental concerns"

Heaven forfend! I love how this is equated on the moral-meter with fighting bullshit wars.

I had never stopped to think that I deserved the "abuse" because I supported different polices than the left. Thank you for heightening my conscience.

md   ·  October 31, 2006 12:47 PM

When I glanced casually at the excerpt from the article, I assumed the article must have been about either NYC or Hollywood or some other place deep in the collectivist Cocoon. Actually, when I lived in Manhattan twenty-five years it was suprising how many people I ran into who were libertarians and even Objectivists. As they say, you can find anything you want in NYC. But I suspect many of them have migrated elsewhere, because the reports I get back indicate that the situation for pro-freedom people is much more dismal now and is pretty much the way it's described in this article. And actually it isn't that much different where I currently live, Atlanta. In many ways Atlanta is the "Anti-Manhattan," more of a suburb-surrounding-a-slum than a real city; the slum part of course votes for a living, and so are pretty much loyal to the Democratic Party, while Republicans have pretty good control of the suburban part. But in the real city of Atlanta, the non-slum part, it is amazing how if you're educated, and especially if you're interested in the arts, people just assume you must be some sort of "liberal" and follow the Hive's party-line. I've never understood why arty types, whom one would expect to be independent free-spirits, invariably are the biggest collectivists, but it's certainly true in Atlanta; so one would expect the Cocoon tends to be more hidebound and insular in places where arty types proliferate, such as NYC and Hollywood.

Bilwick   ·  October 31, 2006 12:50 PM

I thought I was a liberal until 9/11. The horrendous behaviour of my very liberal friends and their eagerness to jump on the "blame America first" meme forced me away from that camp. It has only gotten worse since. This notion that we hear from the BDS crowd that "we were all one" and Bush trashed the nation's unity is total bullcrap. There has been a cleansing of history regarding this. The kneejerk contempt of the military (i.e. Kerry's current gaffe), the symapthies given to our enemies, and the obsession with failure and shame have become required psychoses for contemporary liberalism and activist democrats. This disgusts me and insults the republic; therefore, I am forced into the republican camp -- at least this party will fight for the United States. Liberal democrats are intent on producing a country not worth defending.

Prospector   ·  October 31, 2006 01:07 PM

I'm a conservative, and I get this same crap from my friends, but I sure as hell don't put up with it. Why would you? Would you remain silent if they were denigrating some other aspect of your personality - your taste in music or your ethnicity? Bullshit. Just speak your mind -- who cares what people think? Is their esteem worth it?

> In some cases, their very livelihood depends on being "in the closet."

What a load. This really is faux victimhood. Just speak up, for Christ's sake.

brett   ·  October 31, 2006 01:11 PM

"Hey, did you stop to think that maybe the reason those on the left are so "abusive" is because your side is trashing the constitution, bankrupting the country, ignoring environmental concerns, and fighting bullshit wars?! I have conservative friends (okay two), but it is increasingly difficult to take them seriously when they refuse to see the mess this country is in due to the policies of the GOP."

This aligns perfectly to a previous poster's theory that liberal believe that conservatives are "evil", and thus deserving of whatever ill measure one can devise. Sad.

bdog57   ·  October 31, 2006 01:12 PM

"Hey, did you stop to think that maybe the reason those on the left are so "abusive" is because your side is trashing the constitution, bankrupting the country, ignoring environmental concerns, and fighting bullshit wars?! I have conservative friends (okay two), but it is increasingly difficult to take them seriously when they refuse to see the mess this country is in due to the policies of the GOP."

This aligns perfectly to a previous poster's theory that liberal believe that conservatives are "evil", and thus deserving of whatever ill measure one can devise. Sad.

Two "conservative friends", eh? Let me guess, you have a "black friend" as well. :)

bdog57   ·  October 31, 2006 01:13 PM

Polyglycoat, how does abuse change anyone's mind? Honestly... did you ever, even once in your life, change your mind about an issue because someone yelled at you and called you bad names over it? I'm willing to bet that, if that ever did happen to you, it made you all the firmer in your beliefs.

So, if you really want to change people's minds, how can you justify all the vituperation that passes for political debate? Scream at an "eeeeevil Republican" all you want -- in the end, you may feel better, but a momentary good feeling is all you will have achieved.

Mary in LA   ·  October 31, 2006 01:15 PM

It's certainly not unheard of for pagans to get a chilly reception even among people who proudly consider themselves "religious liberals". When I wanted to have a dear friend who was a Wiccan priestess perform my wedding service at the Unitarian church in Iowa City, IA, the church's minister told me that would be unacceptable, even though the state was willing to allow my friend to sign the marriage license. The Unitarian minister told me that even though I was part of the congregation, the church didn't allow pagans to perform services there. It wasn't even allowed for us to have the Unitarian minister approve the service beforehand and then co-officiate (although that was allowed for Christian priests & ministers).

I've since found that there has been a conflict in the denomination over what roles pagans are allowed to play in the church, with different congregations taking different stands, but in 1999 in Iowa, they were expected to play as little of a role as possible.

My current congregation (Baltimore,MD) has had some people who took unpopular stands -- I took a very public stand in favor of the invasion of Iraq, and a former member (he moved away for a new job) took a very visible pro-life stand. While I've felt some discomfort from other members because of my stand, they've also respected my right to hold my position, and have discussed how to make pronouncements that are meaningful and that also express consensus, not just a "majority view".

I am grateful for that, and I know there are groups that wouldn't be so respectful on all sides of the political spectrum. I think it helps that I can articulate a reasonable position, and have a solid record of support for human rights in general. If I were to adopt a position that were as lacking in nuance as, say, Ann Coulter, I might get less respect. If you can't make a case that appeals to beliefs that you know the others share, they may well shun you.

Michael N.   ·  October 31, 2006 01:16 PM

Jill, you've completely missed the point. We're not talking about the elections, where people can exercise their conscience in the privacy of a voting booth. We're talking about the vitriol that we've seen coming from run-of-the-mill liberals who honestly seem to believe that conservatives are evil. I love rational political discussions, b/c they're fun and intellectually stimulating, but more and more, liberals are acting just like the intolerant folks they claim to be against. If we could just have a conversation without being called a facist or nazi, we might actually learn something from each other.

Russ   ·  October 31, 2006 01:21 PM

I think two things are at work here. One is fanaticism, which can be found on both sides, but at the present is more marginalized on the Right. I remember the early 1980s, when the John Birchers and Larouchites were more commonplace, and extreme Leftists seemed less abundant.

Now, though, the right-wing wackos are pushed to the wings. I mean, if the worst thing the Left can point to are neo-conservatives, what does that tell you about the state of really extreme right-wingers?

The other issue is immaturity. Again, there are immature types on both sides, and immature conservatives might have been responsible for the vandalism of Raging Bee's friends' vehicles. But it does seem true that a much larger number of otherwise successful, rational, apparently adult leftist are incredibly immature when politics is brought up. The successful woman twirling in a circle to avoid hearing about Bush sums it up. Or the Democratic activists who slashed tires during the 2004 elections.

Perhaps these two things feed into one another. If, as one poster pointed out, you view the other side as purely evil, it's a lot easier to justify immature or brutal reactions to them.

Dwight from IL   ·  October 31, 2006 01:41 PM

If we could just have a conversation without being called a facist or nazi, we might actually learn something from each other.

But liberals don't believe they have anything to learn from us conservatives. They are so utterly sure of themselves inside their cocoon and they don't want anything to disturb their worldview.

Debate a conservative - never, hector and insult a conservative - ok. Remember to always protect the cocoon.

Hacklehead   ·  October 31, 2006 01:42 PM

I just read your post and have to ask: are you for real?

why are conservatives like bill o'reilly and sean hannity always playing victim?

to compare the party in power with the torment that gays go through being in the closet is truly baffling.

pietero   ·  October 31, 2006 02:01 PM

..but it is increasingly difficult to take them seriously when they refuse to see the mess this country is in due to the policies of the GOP.

How many conservative blogs have you been reading that are still blindly playing along with the current GOP?

Bomb-a-rama   ·  October 31, 2006 02:12 PM

When a cult decides the world will end on a certain date, and that date passes, the cult doesn't end. In fact, the cult membership usually grows by leaps and bounds. Cults that weren't seeking new members begin converting. This is because, given the evidence that their faith is false, the cult members need to recruit others to reassure them that their faith is NOT false.

They substitute one kind of evidence with another. So many liberal policies are just stupid, and so many of them have proved utter failures, that liberals must constantly find converts to keep their house of cards standing. And a conservative can't be borne, lest he bump the table.

Anyway, it's a theory.

Harkonnendog   ·  October 31, 2006 02:34 PM

While I don't consider myself in the closet, I know I have hurt my career by refusing to buckle under to people's prejudices on a variety of topics--just not my nature I guess.

Nevertheless, bullies abound, and those that aren't actually bullies are simply elitists unaccustomed to having their worldview challenged. Have I met these people on the right? Absolutely--two of them. On the left? I'm sorry, I can't count that high.

Mick Stockinger   ·  October 31, 2006 03:17 PM

As a Republican in SF, I am well aware of the dangers in coming out to friends or co-workers. I am surprised, that I find myself surprised at Democrats who talk about being inclusive and non-discriminatory then turn viscious and stupid whenever an idea is challenged or candidate is examined.

Their inability to articulate a position without personality or personal traits is sad. They argue as if they have no mirrors or that the cameras never see them.

It's easier to be quiet, donate my time and money. Then vote for who I choose. "You can't fix stupid"; Ron White said that.

AndyJ   ·  October 31, 2006 03:43 PM

This is funny. You think all these characteristics only apply to Democrats.

eejit   ·  October 31, 2006 04:01 PM

I'm a gay guy in Seattle. As a result of my moderate-center-right views, it is nearly impossible for me to get a date here. I never bring up my political beliefs, but others do and they tolerate nothing short of total intellectual conformity. They aren't interested in discussing issues; instead, they personally attack the character of those who disagree. Sigh.

If I knew of a place where a non-liberal gay man could meet tolerant bachelors, I would move there. Any suggestions? Over The Rainbow?

GayInSeattle   ·  October 31, 2006 04:07 PM

Dorothy: first, I'm the one who wrote the paragraph you quoted, not Snitch. Second, why should I not be too sure of what I wrote? I'm no Republican, but I'm visibly to the right of most of my Pagan friends, and while I haven't changed their minds (that I know of), they haven't shut me out or ostracized me either. The only thing remotely resembling trouble that I got for my politics was from one Naderite brat who simply sounded like an idiot. (There are other (ex?) Naderites among my friends, BTW, but one is quite open-minded and able to argue intelligently, and the others haven't said a word about politics since 2000.)

Raging Bee   ·  October 31, 2006 04:15 PM

This is funny.

No, it's actually very sad.

You think all these characteristics only apply to Democrats.

No, they don't apply only to Democrats, just as they don't apply to *all* Democrats. However, most of them apply mostly to Democrats.

locked closet   ·  October 31, 2006 04:16 PM

The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11

Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism

Godless: The Church of Liberalism

Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism

Bankrupt: Why the Democrats are the party of moral and intellectual bankruptcy

Just a couple Conservative book titles. In addition to this belligerency, Republicans control all three branches of government and I’m supposed to feel like you are being persecuted?

leftbanker   ·  October 31, 2006 04:41 PM

I made the mistake of telling my liberal-diehard-democrat mother that I was changing my party affiliation to Republican. Well, the shit hit the fan! When my parents come over to visit, I sanitize my house by turning off talk radio, and/or turning off Fox News and hiding my Michael Steele or Bob Erlich mail. The last thing I want to happen is cause tension in my family. The problem is THEY ARE THE ONES WHO ALWAYS BRING UP POLITICS IN MY HOME!!! My father starts on his Republican conspiracy theories about oil and 9/11. I'm always the one who has to bite my tongue to keep the peace. I just want to have a good relationship with my parents, but it makes it hard when your parents suffer from BDS! My mother always laments about how she ended up with 3 conservative daughters. Our response... it's because of the way we were raised!

Sharon   ·  October 31, 2006 04:48 PM

leftbanker's argument here misses the mark. We're not talking about conversations in the public sphere between professional pundits who make their living by being combative. Instead, the topic here is how people behave in private, social, non-political contexts towards those with differing views.

leftbanker, do you have non-liberals in your circle of friends? If so, are they prone to assuming that everyone in the group shares their views? Do they denounce as heretics those in the group who are exposed as thinking differently? Or do they behave civilly and work to foster those friendships by focusing on the other 99% of what makes people click with each other?

leftbanker, if you don't have non-liberals in your circle of friends, why do you think that is so? Would you like to?

The non-liberal commenters here are open to having relationships in the personal lives with those of differing viewpoints. Ironically, isn't that a democratic, liberal quality -- one to be admired and fostered when possible?

GayInSeattle   ·  October 31, 2006 05:15 PM

OK, "GayInSeattle," using that same logic of yours, how well would you be received at Falwell's Liberty University, or at Rev. Dobson's Church, in a social situation with fellow Republicans who are also vehemently anti-gay (don't take my word in this, check out their own published views on the subject)? I am sure you'd be treated better at a liberal cocktail party in Seattle than at Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky.

You really think the Republican Party is the party of tolerance and civility? There's a huge difference between a few snotty liberals at the office and Republican-supporting religions that openly damn homosexuals and make it perfectly clear you're not welcome to the civil rights granted to all other citizens.

I mean, really, all you whiny Republicans in this thread, do you have any idea what kind of ultra-right wackos you've gotten into bed with in your party? A few snotty, tree hugging hippes at work or a dinner party deriding you isn't the same as people who openly advocate the death and destruction of homosexuals like the evangelicals do. These freaks want Armageddon to happen, SOONER rather than later! And you're worried about a couple of sneering, disdainful lefties with whom you can't seem to get in a word in edge-wise during a political argument around the water cooler at work?

And remember, Timothy McVeigh was a right-winger. He sat around reading the right-wing wacko manifesto, The Turner Diaries, and the next thing you know he's blowing up a Federal building, killing over 167 innocent people. Talk about Republican tolerance...oh, yeah, he was a registered Republican in New York, folks.

So please get some perspective with all your whining about those mean, intolerant liberals.

mat   ·  October 31, 2006 05:47 PM

I'm 51 and I've seen this hate cycle go around both ways. I remember Dole's plaint just prior to "96 elections "where's the outrage?!" re Clinton. Republicans were so angry at Clinton they could hardly see straight. That year the "soccer mom" vote beat the "angry white male" vote. Now the tables are turned and the democrats are screaming mad at Bush. I may be wrong, but I don't think self-righteous rage is a winning electoral strategy in the end. As for my democrat friends, lighten up, the Republican Party is not as monolithic as you think, and I would even vote for a democrat who was commited to lower taxes(as Kennedy himself was)

Ricardo Rodriguez   ·  October 31, 2006 05:55 PM

mat: I'm not sure about the particular climate at Falwell's university or Dobson's church, but in many religiously conservative contexts, I would probably be pitied rather than shunned, and would be viewed as a potential convert. "I'll pray for your soul." If the left sincerely wants to persuade, they could take a page from the missionary playbook: befriend first. Yes, it's a patronizing attitude, but a better one than being demonized. It doesn't automatically preclude a working relationship. If the lines of communcation are kept open, there's no telling who may end up converting whom. After all, aren't we gays famous for converting the unsuspecting into our midst :)

mat, that you have to turn to examples of extreme views on the right (such as Falwell, Dobson and McVeigh) makes my point. Such demonization of friends is practically the norm among those in the mainstream of the left. How do the non-liberal people in your personal life treat you? That's the relevant case here.

mat writes: "I am sure you'd be treated better at a liberal cocktail party in Seattle than at Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky."

I'm not so sure you're correct about that. My family is overwhelmingly liberal, but I do have a religiously conservative aunt. When I came out to her -- rather matter-of-factly, mentioning a boyfriend -- she thoughtfully and graciously replied that she didn't agree with my "lifestyle." She had her say and I had mine. That's how decent people deal with dissent. I wasn't screeched at or ostracized.

As for Republicans being the anti-gay party, I'll just say here that the Democrats' record on gay rights is not especially good either. This has been argued extensively elsewhere, and it's a little off-topic, but even conceding your point for the sake of argument here, it's not obvious why gay people should always support political parties with the best platform on gay rights. Self-interest is correctly viewed as an unreliable and morally-suspect basis for political action. I mean, isn't that why we critize Cheney vis-a-vis Halliburton?

The influence in the Republican party of the extreme religious wing -- those who advocate for gays, as you mention -- is generally overstated for political gain by those on the left. But why would it be a bad strategy to have a seat at the table and counter their views? You have to be part of the conversation to have an impact.

For what it's worth, I'm not a Republican of any kind. I'm a moderate who occasionally votes Democrat but is not "in bed" with the left-wing wackos, to paraphrase your terminology.

GayInSeattle   ·  October 31, 2006 06:30 PM

correction to my previous post, second-to-last paragraph: should read: "those who advocate *death* for gays" -- not "those who advocate for gays." What a difference!

GayInSeattle   ·  October 31, 2006 06:36 PM

"OK, "GayInSeattle," using that same logic of yours, how well would you be received at Falwell's Liberty University, or at Rev. Dobson's Church, in a social situation with fellow Republicans who are also vehemently anti-gay (don't take my word in this, check out their own published views on the subject)? I am sure you'd be treated better at a liberal cocktail party in Seattle than at Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky."

I believe that this proves my point about the left assuming everyone on the right is 'the enemy of all that is good'.

Look why don't you attend 'Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky' and find out? Better yet, why don't you just not paint people with hateful sterotypes?

My guess is that your average church going 'anti-gay' person, such as myself, would recieve him better than you just did. Unlike you, I don't see him as my enemy. I don't see him as allied with enemy. I just see him as a person who has a problem, to which it should be appended, I've got problems too. Obviously we are going to disagree about the morality of a gay lifestyle, but as long as he doesn't try to shove it down my throat I'm going to out of respect not shove my views down his (what good would that sort of antagonism do anyway?).

My guess is that on a day to day basis, if you are a gay who thinks that small governments, private property, libertarianism, low taxes, and so forth make a good deal of sense, that you've got more liberals in your face about 'your beliefs' than you do people from 'Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky' or even Falwell's Liberty University. Your average church going 'anti-gay' Christian probably is too scared of offending someone who is gay to even breach the topic.

celebrim   ·  October 31, 2006 06:38 PM

Last year at an SF convention here in Boston I encountered a friend I'd known for some 25 years off and on, having known him and his ex, babystat their infant daughter at one convention, and generally liked him. He began pratting on about his desire to see Bush and Cheney put up against the wall and shot. He assumed I agreed with him. I did not try to engage him in a rational conversation.
Generally, my friends and acquantences know I am both gay and Republican (more libertarian/objectivist, but how could I vote for Fat Teddy?) and my boss at work knows I voted for George Bush (he was outraged, but that hasn't gotten me fired.) I do not have any political signs up in my lawn or anything on my car. I'm not crazy.

John H. Costello   ·  October 31, 2006 07:29 PM

And remember, Timothy McVeigh was a right-winger. He sat around reading the right-wing wacko manifesto, The Turner Diaries, and the next thing you know he's blowing up a Federal building

And the unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, was a left-winger. He sat around reading the left-wing wacko manifesto, Earth in the Balance, and the next thing you know he's mailing off bombs to universities and airlines.

Equally pointless as a critique of the left, or even of Al Gore, even though Gore is a mainstream Democratic figure, while the Turner Diaries and their author have never been mainstream Republicans.

DWPittelli   ·  October 31, 2006 08:06 PM

As one of those eeeevil pariahs -- a conservative Democrat -- I get arguments from liberals and Republicans.

But any similarity ends there.

Item: My Republican friends have a much better idea of what's in Michael Moore's F/911 than any of the liberals do of what's in Godless (which I am reading right now, in fact). Bluntly, in my circle, the Republicans are far more cosmopolitan than those who call themselves "progressive," which I take as a code-word for "liberal."

Item: My Republican friends are much more uncomfortable with Ann Coulter than the liberals are with F/911. Hint: It's not because Moore is actually right. (at least Coulter footnotes all of her sources so I can fact-check). In other words, my Republican friends tend to marginalize "their" extremists by saying that "those guys are over the top." But the liberals only point to "the other side." When pushed, they will not -- to a person -- repudiate him. Even when I point out demonstrable lies in his work, they still defend him by asserting things "the other side does." Perhaps the liberals I know do not completely embrace it's whackos, but they will not reject them.

As for religious folks, I lived in the deep South for a number of years. Folk tried to "save" this lapsed Catholic more times than I can remember. Sometimes it got tiresome, even exasperating, since I didn't feel "lost." But not one of my wannabe-saviors ever raised their voice. Not one insulted me. Not one used an obscenity. Not one questioned my intelligence. Not one questioned my innate "goodness" or left me feeling diminished. Not one threw a pie at me. Not one called me "pathological" (breathtakingly arrogant as I am married to a psychologist who can rightly use that term but never has in connection with people she has never met.) Not one accused me of trying to "demonize" them because I disagreed with them.

And people wonder why I prefer the company of the "born-agains" to the company of the True Believers. While the Baptists and their brethren try to be righteous, they aren't as self-righteous as the True Believers.

1charlie2   ·  October 31, 2006 08:36 PM

I can understand conservatives wishing to keep quiet at work if surrounded by loudmouth leftists, but if you can't be honest and comfortable with your friends, why are they your friends?

Karl   ·  October 31, 2006 09:59 PM

As a liberal democrat leading-edge baby-boomer from Massachusetts, I'm very familiar with what conservatives and even moderates are complaining about. It brought back memories of college in the '60's.

The student activists were pretty much the same way: your ideas are evil, therefore YOU are evil. Even if you share the goals, you cannot question the means: "If you're not a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem." (i.e., My way or the highway). Blah blah blah.

The last thing these people ever realized is that they got Nixon elected. Twice. In politics, party ideology comes second to getting your people elected, and to do that, you have to be reasonable, or at least sound reasonable, to attract voters to your side.

It's apparent from my personal experience that the biggest liberal ideologues are not of my generation, but much younger. They must be learning from high school and college teachers, the preferred profession of the student activists (permanent draft exemption for educators).

As a liberal, I get aggravated by these kids, and their inability to see the effect of their ideological rants on their party's electoral prospects. We boomers have a saying: Don't trust anyone under 40.

Lorenzo   ·  October 31, 2006 10:38 PM

Karl asks an excellent question: "... if you can't be honest and comfortable with your friends, why are they your friends"?

In places like Seattle (where I live), we non-liberals are outnumbered. So the social costs of coming out as a non-liberal are great. As a result of our invisibility, we lack a way to identify each other and connect. This is why the analogy with closeted homosexuality fits so well. There are fewer social risks here to coming out as gay than as a political outsider.

In addition, I find liberals to be more interesting people. For whatever reason, they tend to be more engaged in the hobbies, activities (including intellectual exploration) and an urban lifestyle that I enjoy. (Obviously there are exceptions and this is a matter of personal taste.) So I seek the company of liberals despite our political differences.

Finally, I'm a gay guy who is looking to meet that special guy. And my city has a large population of gay men. To paraphrase bank robber Willie Sutton, you go where the gay guys are. There is no place on earth with a geographic concentration of non-liberal gays. Besides, I'm not specifically looking for a non-liberal boyfriend; just one who can tolerate dissent graciously.

GayInSeattle   ·  October 31, 2006 11:05 PM

Gay in Seattle:
"Finally, I'm a gay guy who is looking to meet that special guy. And my city has a large population of gay men. To paraphrase bank robber Willie Sutton, you go where the gay guys are. There is no place on earth with a geographic concentration of non-liberal gays. Besides, I'm not specifically looking for a non-liberal boyfriend; just one who can tolerate dissent graciously."

He's out there somewhere, man. My last boyfriend was Japanese, I'm American, and each of us is VERY patriotic. Our discussions about World War II could get combative, but we respected each other's thinking and there was never any rancor. It was one of the best parts of the partnership.


mat:
"I mean, really, all you whiny Republicans in this thread, do you have any idea what kind of ultra-right wackos you've gotten into bed with in your party? A few snotty, tree hugging hippes at work or a dinner party deriding you isn't the same as people who openly advocate the death and destruction of homosexuals like the evangelicals do."

Basic civility matters within the context of a dinner party (or a bit of flirtation with a cute guy) as much as political positions matter within the context of a social policy debate. I was brought up not to discuss politics socially, but I don't mind when it comes up. It's certainly more interesting than speculations about whether Beyonce has developed an eating disorder. Besides, there's a lot about the GOP I don't agree with, and I'd be more than willing to discuss possible flaws in the compromises I make when voting. That's how you sharpen and clarify your thinking. Unfortunately, it isn't possible when you're talking to someone who's only interested in sharing smirky in-jokes with you under the assumption that you're a fellow traveler...and then haranguing you to death when he discovers you're not. (BTW, those who think American ultra-liberals are bad at home should be glad they're not living abroad. The I'm-so-ashamed-of-my-idiot-Bush-loving-compatriots brigade here in Tokyo is the absolute worst, especially when genuflecting to lefty Germans, Frenchmen, and other EU-nik types.)

Sean Kinsell   ·  November 1, 2006 12:26 AM

Damn. Should have closed that bold tag after mat's name. Sorry for the mistake, Eric.

Sean Kinsell   ·  November 1, 2006 12:29 AM

My son goes to a super crunch public school in Boston. During the '04 election in his little 1st grade class Kerry won 21-2 and he was one of the 2. His teacher took my wife aside and 'had to speak to her because he was speaking out for Bush in class.'

Bandit   ·  November 1, 2006 08:26 AM

But Sean, you did close the bold tag after mat's name! (I just looked.)

What I'd like to know is how the paragraph following it became emboldened. Perhaps the MT software wanted it to stand out, so maybe I should address it.

"A few snotty, tree hugging hippes at work or a dinner party deriding you isn't the same as people who openly advocate the death and destruction of homosexuals like the evangelicals do."

Here's the thing. I've attended both events attended by tree-hugging hippies as well as events attended by evangelicals. Not once did any of the latter advocate the death and destruction of homosexuals, and if they had I would have spoken up. While there's no denying the existence of nutjobs like Phelps, Chalcedon and Michael Marcavage (of RepentAmerica.com), they do not typify evangelicals, and I think it's dishonest to imply that they do.

These comments are a bit overwhelming, and I wish I did a better job of answering them, but I thank you all -- including those who disagree with me.

Eric Scheie   ·  November 1, 2006 10:52 AM

it always amazes me that no liberal would ever deny the reality of a black claiming he experienced some manner of passive racism somewhere, but they immediately deny the reality of 100's of conservatives who claim they feel bias and intimidation in the academy and in everyday life on a regular basis. after the 2004 election i basically had to remove myself from what was left of my circle of friends from my 20's because of this very issue. the last time i saw them i had gone to play quizzo at a bar and a political discussion ensued. a girl i barely knew at our table became absolutely hysterical ove rme stating that i (like over half the country) voted for bush. she was crying!! she got in my face screaming that he was a moron and a fascist and a liar, et al. it was horrifying. at my guitar playing folk sing there was a 60's baby boomer female who consistently brought up politics in the self congratulatory "everyone agrees with me " way they do even though she KNEW my positions and would get just as the aforementioned girl when i politely declined to agree. these are real incidents and they REALLY happened to me. when half the country sees the other MAINSTREAM position as psychoticly and stupidly delusional and evil, its time to break up the union.

dana   ·  November 1, 2006 10:54 AM

I'm with mat on this one. I've heard so much manufactured outrage and fake "persecution" stories from various groups of "conservatives" that I can't take any of them seriously anymore: ID "theorists" can't do any actual science 'cause they might be persecuted by the "Darwinist establishment;" "liberal activist judges" are undermining the "will of the people;" we're all being enslaved by the "radical homosexual agenda;" pornographers are forcing everyone to watch porn on the Web; people who call themselves "Christians" openly refuse to abide by Christ's teachings and cry about "persecution" while chanting "Cut up the concubine!"; halfwit parents cry about "freedom of religion" when their kids have to learn basic biology, or stop bullying gays; halfwit "libertarians" can't tell big-government liberals from Stalin; gays are as bad as a nuclear attack (that's from Keyes); Grover Nordquist wants to drown our elected government in the bathtub; the ACLU wants to "banish religion from the public square" and make "secualrism" our national religion; our entire education system AND mainstream media are run by (unspecified) raving liberals (even when they're clearly not); poor Bill O'Reilly is afraid to go out in public; "environmental extremists" want to drag us back to the Middle Ages; there's a "culture of death" that wants to kill old and sick people, and babies as well; "abortionists" are trying to force innocent women to kill their babies; Bill Clinton "tormented us all" and raped Hillary and Juanita Brodderick, but we can't actually prove anything 'cause of the "Clinton Mafia" (is Chelsea collecting protection-money yet?); Foley was a "victim;" gay Hill staffers are responsible for the recent page scandal (and, I guess, for House Speaker Hastert's ongoing efforts to cover it up); people who criticize Bush "want the terrorists to win"... I'm sure there's more examples I can't remember right now -- they're all starting to sound alike. Oh, and Baby Jesus is crying 'cause there's a "war on Christmas," as Bill "loofalafel" O'Reilly will soon be reminding us...

Raging Bee   ·  November 1, 2006 01:05 PM

While there's no denying the existence of nutjobs like Phelps, Chalcedon and Michael Marcavage (of RepentAmerica.com), they do not typify evangelicals, and I think it's dishonest to imply that they do.

So how many evangelicals are engaging in significant media campaigns to tell the world "These jutjobs do NOT represent us"? How hard are they trying to combat the "dishonest" implication that they, too, advocate such persecution of gays? If someone accused ME of advocating such insane violence, I'd be screaming my denial from every rooftop I could climb on, because I'd be horribly ashamed to be confused for such wackos.

I'm seeing some sense of shame from evangelicals -- but not much.

Raging Bee   ·  November 1, 2006 01:13 PM

Oh, I almost forgot this tidbit: all those "conservatives" who make a point of saying something both ignorant and needlessly insulting, then pretending they're bravely standing up to the "tyranny of political correctness" -- that phrase apparently being their euphemism for "basic table manners."

I can't believe I almost let that one slip. What kind of liberal moonbat am I? I hang my head in shame...

Raging Bee   ·  November 1, 2006 02:10 PM

At my Pentecostal Church, we are frequently reminded not to demonise and hate gays -- 'love the sinner', that sort of thing.

The funny thing is, none of us do hate gays, we all function quite tolerantly within secular society. I've never heard a fellow congregationer denigrate gays, even when (mischievously and before I was baptised) I tried to provoke such remarks.

And yet, we are warned by our ministers to treat gays with tolerance. It's been going on so long that even *we* believe the propaganda against us!

Ki   ·  November 1, 2006 07:43 PM

Like leftbanker, Raging Bee misses the point that this post is about how people behave in private, social situations, amongst friends, co-workers and family. It's about how decently we treat those in our lives with whom we disagree about political matters. It's not about what happens in "significant media campaigns."

As our host Eric said, evangelicals of the sort that Raging Bee puts forward (those who would shout "cut up the concubine!") are not representative, and it is disingenuous to imply they are. In any event, evangelicals do not represent the full spectrum of non-liberals. We're talking about anyone who gets shouted down in a coffee shop for civilly voicing the opinion that perhaps there are reasonable arguments on both sides of many issues. That's a moderate viewpoint.

I think it is significant that the liberals in this comment thread have not yet given examples from their *personal* lives about rudeness and mistreatment by conservatives when discussing politics. By contrast, examples of the opposite sort abound here.

GayInSeattle   ·  November 1, 2006 08:44 PM

Eric:
"But Sean, you did close the bold tag after mat's name! (I just looked.)

What I'd like to know is how the paragraph following it became emboldened. Perhaps the MT software wanted it to stand out, so maybe I should address it."

So MT has been coopted by the Fifth Column liberals, too. Now no one is safe.


Raging Bee:
"Oh, I almost forgot this tidbit: all those 'conservatives' who make a point of saying something both ignorant and needlessly insulting, then pretending they're bravely standing up to the 'tyranny of political correctness' -- that phrase apparently being their euphemism for 'basic table manners.'"

Fair enough, but it's not as if there were any dearth of liberals who like to get all histrionic about what brave dissenters they are. (I've been told with a straight face that I'm lucky I live abroad...in Japan!...because free speech no longer exists in "Bush's America.") Both left and right have their special little persecution complexes and catch-phrases that the partisan faithful trot out, and they're wearisome no matter whom they come from. At least most conservatives I know don't start bleating out of nowhere about the "War on Christianity" before I'm halfway through my first scotch.

Sean Kinsell   ·  November 1, 2006 10:27 PM

This is the biggest laugh I've had in awhile. I'm a bi liberal atheist college professor, and I'm deeply, deeply closeted in damn near every aspect of my life. I can't risk letting on at work that I'm anything other than a neocon...thankfully, I'm in a discipline in which politics doesn't really come up.

You people won. Don't you get it? You evil slimes have won for the past six years.

Just another liberal professor   ·  November 1, 2006 10:42 PM

"You evil slimes have won for the past six years."

Right. If only we could go back to the pre-2000 days, where gay married couples roamed free and served in the military without repercussions.

jason   ·  November 2, 2006 01:02 AM

I think it is significant that the liberals in this comment thread have not yet given examples from their *personal* lives about rudeness and mistreatment by conservatives when discussing politics. By contrast, examples of the opposite sort abound here.

Yes, but most, if not all, of those examples omit one crucial fact: what, exactly, those poor misunderstood conservatives said to get themselves ostracized. Was it a maturely articulated opinion or insight? Or was it the kind of fake-facts, bad-faith arguments, dishonest non-sequiturs, and needlessly insulting ad-hominem attacks we've all been hearing from "conservative" politicians and propagandists since Reagan left office?

Take another close look at the book titles leftbanker listed. Too many of you so-called conservatives have adopted a posture of shameless know-nothingism, anti-intellectual mockery, relentless sloganeering, and implacable, irrational hatred that is -- as in several cases involving a cousin of mine -- clearly intended to shout down and silence debate, not to make any real point or explain any action or policy. My cousin the Limbaugh fan made his position plain: he was not open to argument of ANY sort. Your party has gone out of its way to create this climate of debate, and if you're now feeling isolated, it's an isolation you brought on yourselves. Don't expect any sympathy from me. And don't expect it from the moderates, Republicans and Reagan Democrats (like me)who are starting to defect from the Bush-Rove-Coulter camp, either.

(Here's an example for you: Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill spoke of his nemesis Ronald Reagan with the utmost respect, and sometimes even awe; while Republican propagandists relentlessly trashed him and his party in the vilest terms. Not once did I hear any Republican showing any respect for him.

(And here's another: a GOP freshmen in the house, in early 1995, loudly calling a colleague a "socialist" on C-SPAN, merely because that colleague had asked him to yield the floor in the standard fashion, according to the House's rules of conduct.

(And who can forget James Watt's false dichotomy between "liberals" and "Americans?")

Raging Bee   ·  November 2, 2006 11:35 AM

Wonderful piece.

I'll never forget the day I told a seminar of fellow Berkeleyites that affirmative action was some combination of obsolete, counterproductive and morally problematic.

Bridges were burnt.

Knemon   ·  November 2, 2006 06:47 PM

"Look why don't you attend 'Uncle Bubba's Baptist Supermall Megachurch in Kentucky' and find out?"

Are you kidding? They might get redneck cooties!

Knemon   ·  November 2, 2006 06:58 PM

"The last thing these people ever realized is that they got Nixon elected. Twice"

And Bush. Once.

Wanna go for Romney once? Because he'll be happy to oblige.

Knemon   ·  November 2, 2006 07:00 PM

"I think it is significant that the liberals in this comment thread have not yet given examples from their *personal* lives"

You're forgetting - The Personal Is Political, maaaaan.

Knemon   ·  November 2, 2006 07:03 PM

"Don't expect any sympathy from me."

We don't. That's kind of the point of the thread.

Knemon   ·  November 2, 2006 07:04 PM

Borat creator Sacha Baron Cohen reportedly signs a $42.5m (£22m) film deal starring his character Bruno...

Damon Rash   ·  November 22, 2006 07:34 AM


December 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits