"Separate but Equal Unless WE Want it Otherwise"

Published on June 18, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Current Events

OK, folks...I'm chokin' on my manicotti here. I don't think I've ever been as taken aback as this since the last State of the Union Speech.

A recent blogger indicated the organized boycott against Kraft Food Company for sponsoring the "Gay Games". Yup, you heard that right: the GAY Games.

Now, don't get me wrong. You're here. You're Queer. I'm used to it. But the fact is, the Olympics haven't really had a history of excluding gay athletes. I really don't think Billie Jean King's coming out surprised anyone, and Greg Louganis' sexuality, while not openly discussed, wasn't exactly a state secret. But we appreciated both for their athletic excellence, and frankly didn't give a rat's ass about their sexuality.

Nor should we. What matters about athletes is they do their job. And these athletes, as well as many others, did just that.

The ONLY purpose I can see in organizing a "Gay Games" is to flaunt and "sell" the gay lifestyle, which is long past asking for acceptance. The selling of the gay lifestyle, as many homosexuals are wont to do, is essentially belittling the values and beliefs of many Americans who don't wish to support that lifestyle. It's unneccessary at best, inflammatory at worst, and most homosexuals who DO want to simply have their lifestyle accepted should be ashamed at the way this makes their lifestyle look like a "cause", and almost an implied handicapped. Segregating "gay games" implies that the homosexual community cannot muster athletes to compete on an equal footing on an international stage, an idea that is fallacious as it is annoying.

And if Kraft wants to sponsor it, so be it. I won't be buying their products anyway (not because of the boycott, because they're too damned EXPENSIVE!)

Comments

MasonM

on Jun 18, 2005

Sooner or later some of these people are going to realize that most people will accept them and view them as simply other people once they stop jumping up and down and screaming about how "different" they are.

It's funny, really. Some gays seem to make their sexual orientation the whole of their self identity as if without it they would have no personality or self concept at all. I take it back, it isn't funny, it's pathetic. As far as I'm concerned, who or what you screw doesn't put you into some kind of special class or protected status and I'm just sick of hearing about it.

I have news for these jerks; I couldn't care less about who or what they sleep with and really would just rather not know. You can go screw a llama for all I care, it doesn't mean I want to hear all about it. Straights don't make a habit of interjecting the fact of their sexual orientation into every little thing, and neither should gays. Who really cares anyway?

ParaTed2k

on Jun 18, 2005

Great Article Gideon. Once again the gay activists come out with yet another means to seperate themselves from society while accusing the rest of us of "exclusion".

If it isn't supposed to matter, why do the Gay activists work so hard at making it the only thing that seems to matter at all.

Gay activists, Gay people can now join the U.S. military. You can be Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors. However that doesn't seem good enough because you can't be known as Gay Soldiers, Airmen, Marines and Sailors.

A few years ago you fought to be able to march in the New York, St. Patrick's Day Parade. The irony is, you were never excluded from the parade, as long as you were of Irish ancestry. That wasn't good enough, you fought for a court order to allow gay Irish men and women to march under a Gay banner.

In Salt Lake City, participation in the Days of '47 Parade was never closed to you, but again, you weren't happy unless you could march under a Gay banner. What on earth does being gay have to do with honoring the Pioneers who crossed the plains and settled the Salt Lake Valley (and much of the West).

Make up your mind, are you People, or are you gay people? Is it supposed to be the defining attribute of your existence, or merely a lifestyle?

Chakgogka

on Jun 18, 2005

Come on, really. Just why does this matter?

The selling of the gay lifestyle, as many homosexuals are wont to do, is essentially belittling the values and beliefs of many Americans who don't wish to support that lifestyle

Hey, wake up and smell the coffee. We have a capitalist free market system that says you can live any lifestyle you can afford to pay for, as long as you're not breaking any laws. Sheesh, now we have right-wing commies trying to take away our freedoms.

. To cure you of this commie madness, I suggest you look into an ideology called Libertarianism, best summed up by the phrase "Mind your own business'" If black people can raise the money for a Black Miss America, why shouldn't they hold it. You don't have to go. If gay people can raise the money for a Gay Games, then they can go for it. I do agree that I don't see the need, but so what? If someone sees the need they are free to fill it.

No, what I think is really going on here is that you don't like queers (fair enough, a free country once again), you have enough decency to know that that is probably wrong and so you're clutching at straws.

ParaTed2k

on Jun 18, 2005

If black people can raise the money for a Black Miss America, why shouldn't they hold it. You don't have to go. If gay people can raise the money for a Gay Games, then they can go for it. I do agree that I don't see the need, but so what? If someone sees the need they are free to fill it.

Fair enough, but if they are going to exclude heterosexuals from their "gay games" (which, as you point at, is their right), then they can't exactly claim to be all about "equality" now can they?

Many organizations protest the Boy Scouts for their "No Gay" poliicies, calling for boycotts and equating the Boy Scouts with the KKK. Why? Because they say The BSA is discriminating against gay people. Well, in the Gay Games, aren't the organizers telling heterosexual atheletes, "you're not welcome".

So which is it, are private organizations free to decide who they want to include in their activities? Or does "discrimination" (once again) only apply to groups that can succefully paint themselves as "the victim".

Do we have yet another example of "victim=respect"???

Chakgogka

on Jun 19, 2005

if they are going to exclude heterosexuals from their "gay games" (which, as you point at, is their right), then they can't exactly claim to be all about "equality" now can they?

True, in a sense. I'm just trying to imagine a 'heterosexual athlete' who would be really upset at exclusion from the Gay Games (assuming that they are; I don't know enough about these games to know).

The problem here is that you expect too much. Gay organisations are as diverse as any other section of society: some are for 'equality' and logically speaking should have little interest in exercises in ghettoisation like the Gay Games; others are simply a lobby group for a particular self-interest, like the gun lobby or tobacco lobby and that is also perfectly legitimate. You can't berate one group of activists for failing to live up to the principles of a completely different set of activists.

So which is it, are private organizations free to decide who they want to include in their activities?

I would think so, yes. There is a clear difference between a private organisation that you are free to join or leave at any time and 'society' in general. The Boys Scouts is an organisation with a particular religious and social ethos that is not particularly 'gay-friendly'. One may or may not regret this, but it is their right...

Many organizations protest the Boy Scouts for their "No Gay" poliicies, calling for boycotts...

And this is their right. This is the 'to and fro' of each side and all trying to mould society in their own image. An essentially pointless exercise. Much better, in my opinion to find ways in which we can co-exist without agreeing. The classical Liberal position.

Thanks for your thoughts

Jason

on Jun 19, 2005

Actually as far at this is concerned "Straights don't make a habit of interjecting the fact of their sexual orientation into every little thing, and neither should gays" I just wanted to point out that straights actually DO interject their sexual orientation into every little thing. Hetero-SEX-ual is the driving force behind our consumerism... from cars and cell phones to banks and burgers. Even when sex has nothing to do with the product, there always seems to be some hint of a man and woman getting together because they bought whatever this thing is they're hawking. It's just that it seems so normal to straights, that it goes unnoticed most of the time. Gays do notice... that's why they grow up feeling "different" and "left out" because what they're feeling isn't being represented.

I agree and disagree with a lot of the other points taken here. It shouldn't matter what you do behind closed doors, just as people shouldn't be discriminated against for who they are... but people do discriminate, so it does matter what you do. The Bush administration is trying to get into straight's closed door business too, so it's going to matter more to everyone going forward.

In my ideal world, we'd all just get along... but we all know this isn't an ideal world... so I'll just have to stick with my opinion.

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 20, 2005

To cure you of this commie madness, I suggest you look into an ideology called Libertarianism, best summed up by the phrase "Mind your own business'"

Oh brother....telling ME to look into Libertarianism...there's a new angle.

Did I issue a call for Congress to ban the gay games? NO...nor would I. Did I insist that as a heterosexual I be allowed to participate? NO...nor would I. I pointed out the ridiculity of the idea of "gay games" (implicitly, they are saying that gays are inferior and need to compete in a sheltered atmosphere to compete on a level playing field...effectively putting themselves down), and the fact that there's nothing wrong with AFA's boycott. This in no way takes away from my Libertarianism (by the way, I'm a PAID party member...so unless you are as well, I invite you to step off that high horse).

IF you think the LP is short of opinions, think again. A quick perusal of the LP website (www.lp.org), or of the LP newsletter will tell you otherwise. Being a Libertarian doesn't mean I'm not entitled to my opinion, in fact, it means quite the opposite.

Sooo, before you lecture me on party philosophy, you better read up on it first. I have.

bakerstreet

on Jun 20, 2005

gay games, negro college fund, miss black america, "women's" rights... no surprises here. Nothing unifies people like paranoia and a deranged need to preserve angst of past offenses. God help us if all the wronged in our nation were to move on, then they'd have no reason to feel special.

drmiler

on Jun 21, 2005

#7 by Jason (Anonymous user)
Sunday, June 19, 2005

Actually as far at this is concerned "Straights don't make a habit of interjecting the fact of their sexual orientation into every little thing, and neither should gays" I just wanted to point out that straights actually DO interject their sexual orientation into every little thing. Hetero-SEX-ual is the driving force behind our consumerism... from cars and cell phones to banks and burgers. Even when sex has nothing to do with the product, there always seems to be some hint of a man and woman getting together because they bought whatever this thing is they're hawking. It's just that it seems so normal to straights, that it goes unnoticed most of the time. Gays do notice... that's why they grow up feeling "different" and "left out" because what they're feeling isn't being represented.

This is just plain old-fashioned baloney! We do NOT interject our sexual orientation into everything. You need to do some research on marketing! The "majority" of people in America are "straight". When you market something you base your ads to appeal to the "BIGGEST" audience possible.

I agree and disagree with a lot of the other points taken here. It shouldn't matter what you do behind closed doors, just as people shouldn't be discriminated against for who they are... but people do discriminate, so it does matter what you do. The Bush administration is trying to get into straight's closed door business too, so it's going to matter more to everyone going forward.

What they do behind closed doors is their business! When they bring it out from behind those closed doors out in the open and make everybody look at and try to "make" everyone approve of it, then it becomes "MY" business!

Gideon MacLeish

on Jun 21, 2005

Thanks for the assist, drmiller...

(still chuckling at the whole concept of "gay games" here....)

drmiler

on Jun 21, 2005

Your quite welcome Gid!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!