Republican Sex Scandals and Slash - Mo's Journal
Republican Sex Scandals and Slash|
Yes, from a slash pov, we should recognize that trying to spot someone's sexual tastes from their behaviour in other spheres of their lives is badly thought-through logic. "He punches like a boy so he can't be a fag!" Is that the logic?
Okay.... public sex. I got into a minor dust-up commenting in another journal yesterday when I suggested that accidentally stumbling on public sex should not be considered a big deal. The person I was arguing with said that if we are forced to see people getting it on, we are non-consenting sexual partners in their act. I said, "if you don't like it, look away."
If you are being harassed to have sex in public by someone who won't take no for an answer, that's a different thing but how likely is that. Guys cruising in parks and washrooms are usually terrified of being beaten up. The notion of the predatory homosexual is hard to imagine in real life, frankly.
I should go read your brother's blog, but I think it will piss me off too much. Sounds like he's separating the rights of queers to live lives equal to those of hets from mere sex acts. There is more to the injustice done to us than just criminalizing gay sex.
|Date:||September 6th, 2007 09:34 pm (UTC)|| |
"He punches like a boy so he can't be a fag!" Is that the logic?
Yes, I think that is very much the logic - it's confusing masculinity with heterosexuality.
Guys cruising in parks and washrooms are usually terrified of being beaten up. The notion of the predatory homosexual is hard to imagine in real life, frankly.
I agree with all that. Still, I do think sex in public places is kind of a nuisance. Most people do consider it a private act. I wouldn't go so far as to say the witness is a non-consenting sexual partner, but I do think a person should be able to relieve himself in an airport bathroom without seeing people having sex, and I don't blame those who complained about that.
Sounds like he's separating the rights of queers to live lives equal to those of hets from mere sex acts. There is more to the injustice done to us than just criminalizing gay sex.
FWIW I don't think he's doing that. I think he's just tying himself into rhetorical knots trying to convince himself that the Republican Party isn't any more homophobic than the Democratic Party. I think he finds it hard being a social conservative on almost everything yet supporting gay rights and abortion rights. You kind of have to metaphorically squint a lot to maintain that stance. So he keeps saying things like Craig voted for DOMA but so did Paul Wellstone, narrowing his eyes enough to ignore the rest of both of their voting records and just ignoring how the Republican Party has demonized queer folk ever since they ran out of Communists to demonize.
Here's what I wrote to him most recently on that score:
I'm not sure why you keep limiting your recap of Craig's record to DOMA, except that it lets you mention Wellstone. It's a national disgrace, I think, that only 14 Senators were willing to stand up to the Republicans and vote against DOMA, and even more of a disgrace that Bill Clinton signed it into law, but it really is only one law.
Although it certainly was disappointing when the late and much missed Senator Wellstone voted for DOMA after consistently supporting gay rights for his entire career, it's hardly comparable to Craig, who not only voted for DOMA but also:
- voted for a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage
- voted against including sexual orientation in hate crimes legislation
- voted against prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation
- consistently opposed letting gay men and lesbians serve openly in the armed forces (On August 17th, just two weeks after his guilty plea, Larry Craig wrote to a constituent:
"It is unacceptable to risk the lives of American soldiers and sailors merely to accommodate the sexual lifestyles of certain individuals.")
Larry Craig has a consistent anti-gay record (and, apparently, a consistent secret sex life). Paul Wellstone had a consistent pro-gay rights record with one unfortunate lapse, a lapse he shared with many others. I wish he had lived long enough to acknowledge his mistake and make amends.
[end excerpt] He has a long response - lots more squinting. I won't answer it. I think it's sad he feels the need to tie himself in knots like that, but I'm glad that with all the move to the right he's done over the past 15-20 years he's maintained his support for equal rights for queer people and for women's reproductive rights.
|Date:||September 6th, 2007 11:24 pm (UTC)|| |
You make a good point about kids. At 9, your son is old enough that people are going to object if he comes with you into the women's bathroom. And surely a men's room in an *airport* is one that any male traveler - even a nine-year-old traveler - ought to be able to use for its intended purpose between flights.
I'm very much in favor of public displays of affection as well as Palm Pilots, so I guess I love PDAs :-). But I truly mean affection, not sexual behavior. I think couples of whatever gender makeup should feel comfortable holding hands, hugging, kissing, etc. But sexual behavior is essentially private, I think, and is intrusive when it isn't. I don't like it when people make out on the subway, either. Although I have to say when it's teenagers I tend to feel more compassionate than disapproving, since it's likely they don't have anywhere to go to be alone together.
Mostly, I think if you want to have sex in a bathroom it should be in a bar, in a hotel (bathroom in a room, not public bathroom) or in your own home.