The New York Times wrote a piece on Saturday about Eve Tushnet under the headline, “A Gay Catholic Voice Against Same-Sex Marriage.”
Tushnet grew up in a liberal home and was an out lesbian as a teenager. However, she attended a conservative meeting at Yale and then became a Catholic. Bizarrely, she now identifies as an out and proud lesbian who abstains from gay sex and is anti-gay.
It turns out Ms. Tushnet also enjoys all the trappings of gay life, while striking a conservative pose.
Get this. She dresses in trendy clothes, like a Park Slope lesbian. She lives in Washington’s uber-gay DuPont Circle…and she listens to gay synth pop.
“I really think the most important thing is, I really like being gay and I really like being Catholic,” she says. “If nobody ever calls me self-hating again, it will be too soon.
“Nothing is quite as great as getting up in the morning, listening to the Pet Shop Boys and going to church.”
Actually, Eve is self-hating. Imagine a black person choosing to live in Harlem during the civil rights era, dressing in distinctly African-American styles — yet adamantly and outspokenly opposing civil rights — and defending the indefensible by proclaiming, “But, I listen to the Jackson 5.”
Eve’s tired schtick is breathtakingly condescending and transparently patronizing. If she wants to be an anti-gay bigot, she should drop the pretentious poseur performance and refashion herself as Anita Bryant. At lease Bryant was honest in her presentation and did not work so hard to appear trendy and, “like, totally rad dude.”
I don’t really care that Tushnet has elected to remain celibate. If she has chosen to embrace a unimpressive, petty, and puny version of God who is a scold on “hole patrol” — well that is her business. Her loneliness and sexual repression is her choice and I respect it.
However, her blog reinforces the negative message that there is something wrong with gay intimacy. Her solution is that millions of healthy LGBT people adopt her obviously unhealthy sexual hang-ups and religious neuroses. This is a particularly egregious message when young LGBT teens are still committing suicide because they are told that there is something wrong with them. Ms. Tushnet’s work feeds into this bigotry and provides the rationalization and justification for harming people who have done nothing to hurt her.
Given the several century sodomy spree by Catholic priests with underage boys, the reshuffling of these reprobates like a deck of cards at Caesar’s Palace and the Vatican excusing those holding the church accountable as purveyors of “gossip” — the last thing we want or need is some self-righteous, sexually dysfunctional Catholic lesbian doling out advice on sex.
When I hear someone from this church opine on sexual morality, I automatically press the mute button and tune them out. After the raping of an untold number of youth, The Roman Catholic Church has lost its way and surrendered its moral authority to lecture gay people — or anyone — about sex. Particularly, when our relationships are healthy, productive, happy and between consenting adults.
Eve Tushnet would not be so angry and bitter if she — to quote her beloved Pet Shop Boys — ended her ridiculous routine found a nice West End Girl.








Catholic, lesbian, celibate, prudish…
so, she’s a nun?
Eve Tushnet seems to lack the ability to think critically. I guess she’s young so she’s still got time to wake up but I’m sure the anti-gay forces will jump right on her and get her lots of bookings on Fox News.
Daniel, I believe Tushnet is actually a very well-educated critical thinker — except where Catholic sexual doctrine tells her not to be.
Such selective rationality unfortunately makes the church’s unhealthy and untruthful sexual doctrine much easier for others to swallow.
Michael, I believe that you and Eve are both well-educated but that doesn’t mean you can think. Her take is resoundingly hypocritical and I believe yours is resoundingly dishonest.
Talk about All About Eve (Tushnet)– how many personalities does this chick have?
Daniel, dishonest how?
I used to read her blog years ago. Disagreed with it consistently, but she was rational — at least compared to the doctrinaire Catholic “ex-gays” of the Courage chastity cult.
Looking again now: http://eve-tushnet.blogspot.com/
I see that there is less thinking now, and more blind acceptance of people like Maggie Gallagher — another woman who used to be conservatively rational but is now illogical, unfocused, verging at times on incoherent.
I was judging Tushnet based on her past, you’re looking solely at what she his now.
Forgive me for nit-picking, Gary, but I think you got you “Eves” confused. It was “The Three Faces of Eve” that centered around a mentally ill young woman with a multiple personality disorder.
“All About Eve” centered around a young woman who presented herself a loyal friend, but was really shallow and self-serving and betrayed the very people who took her in.
come to think of it…
If she wants to live a repressed, Catholic lifestyle that’s her prerogative. She has no right, however, to demand the rest of us follow suit.
I could not imagine living as this young woman does. That being said, I don’t think she deserves being beat up for it, either, and I think it’s inaccurate to maintain that she insists taht others live as she does. Frankly, I wish the entire Religious Right would live as she does, choosing the values that work for them and leaving the rest of us the hell alone. Her case is remarkably similar to an ultra-orthodox Jew in Israel I’ve seen on video who is very publicly gay and who lobbies other ultra-orthodox Jews to accepts gays and who longs terribly for a boyfriend, but who remains celibate because he believes the Tanach forbids such a relationship. I couldn’t ever live like him, but I empathize with his struggle and certainly don’t condemn him.
Yikes–thanks Bill S — I stand corrected. (I’ve seen both films and should have known better).
Michael, I have to apologize. I misread your post. I still think her critical thinking is truly messed up. She seems to be believing whatever she hears at the moment and her stance is totally hypocritical–but I shouldn’t have insulted you. I apologize.
I don’t understand. How can someone participate in classically conservative politics and not see the blatant hypocrisy associated with expanding government power to limit civil liberties?
I have a hypothesis – that people who are at first “live and let live” conform to societal expectations (being celibate while gay). It’s easy to have support because being gay isn’t quite completely “ok” or “at one” with the rest of society. So people tend not to blink an eye at such a lifestyle choice – maybe it’s even preferred by many.
But then, as barriers fall and generations come of age, being gay becomes less of a big deal. marriage is legalized, equality written into legislation, and cultural norms evolve. Being a celibate gay becomes less of a “whew!” and more of a “huh??” And if the person engaged in the celibate conservative lifestyle is somewhat insecure, they begin to feel isolated and even turned-against.
And ultimately, it causes them to lash out at the world so rapidly shifting around them. They must stop it at any cost necessary. But of course, their actions are moot. The arc bends towards justice, inevitably.
This is why I love this site: I had my own ideas where Eve was in error, but reading these comments tests my LSAT logic!
watch the Real L Word cast invade LA Pride on OURsceneTV.com!
http://ourscenetv.com/posts/393/the-real-l-word-cast-invades-la-pride