I just posted Dan Savage’s smackdown of an Evangelical Christian woman who feigns having her fee fees hurt because people are connecting the dots between children bullying gay kids and anti-gay adults. ”But I would never hurt nobody!” Yes, you would, and you do, no matter how sweetly you think you do it, you do.
Continuing along those lines, here’s Michelangelo Signorile talking with “James,” who swears up and down that he would never hurt gay people, that he respects Mike, etc., but of course he believes all gays are going to hell. He is so dense that he has no clue how this could be a sign that he fundamentally disrespects gay people and thus, is part of the problem.
I agree with Joe Sudbay here: they have no concept of how pissed off we are right now. I have never seen the LGBT writing community so universally pissed off, on such a deep level, about the same thing, and it’s a righteous reason — that of protecting our children.
None of this helps – they believe we’re going to Hell, so out of Loving Xtian® Compassion they must give us Hell on Earth as well.
I really disagree with Michelangelo here. It is NOT just conventional religion that leads to this entirely. It’s the religion of masculinity. Effeminate sissy boys are a huge threat to the status quo, and must be mocked mercilessly.
“It’s the religion of masculinity.”
Which, of course, was fostered by monotheism. When one follows a belief system that says women are inferior because God says so, it’s little wonder that misogyny runs rampant.
I don’t think Michelangelo ever said it was conventional religion that caused all this. I think he was blaming unconventional religion as well.
I love Michealangelo’s totally unapologetic attitude. Good for him. Dan Savage’s response to that letter was similarly free of shame. Good for both of them for not letting these entitled xtians guilt them into apologizing. Xtians like to play victim all the while they destroy those around them.
Michael hit on something quite garish (in a good way) that I would LOVE to see the media and even psychologists explore and answer: how can and do people engage in clearly hateful behavior, yet they declare that they don’t “hate” anyone? For example, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), Maggie Gallagher, and it’s supporters keep screaming, “We’re NOT bigots!” when they are clearly engaging in bigoted behavior! WTF?
“how can and do people engage in clearly hateful behavior, yet they declare that they don’t “hate” anyone?”
Cognitive Dissonance
@Tom Ardans
“It is NOT just conventional religion that leads to this entirely. It’s the religion of masculinity. Effeminate sissy boys are a huge threat to the status quo, and must be mocked mercilessly.”
I’m as anti-religion as the next gay, but, actually, I think you make an important point that cannot be ignored if we are to sucessfully challenge homophobia.
Some countries that have very little religion, (eg China, the old USSR) nevertheless have quite a bit of homophobia. How can it exist if all homophobia comes from religion?
Truth be told, I think a lot of men in every country have no religion. Conventional religions do not affect what they do, value or believe. They couldn’t care less. But they worship (it’s not too strong a word) at the altar of masculinity (eg football, war, boxing). Homophobia (which I loosely equate with the hate of masculine weakness) is simply the converse of the love of masculine power.
The life of these men is dictated by the unwritten rules about masculinity, toughness, fearlessness, cruelty, winning, violence, sex, i.e. power and domination. This is why homophobia has been demonstrated to be stronger in men (especially, I would add, bikers, skinheads, inmates, soldiers, police, etc.) and strongest when directed at homosexual men as opposed to homosexual women.
Personally, I suspect that, for men, patriarchy (ie rule by powerful men) is more important than religion as a source of homophobia. Religion is just an institution that enforces the patriarchy. On the other hand, I suspect that for women, religious rules are the main source of their homophobia (but, again, the rules were put there by powerful men to justify their power).
I’m no expert. There is legitimate research on this, and anyone who wants to seriously attack homophobia should look it up.
Justin, no one says that all homophobia comes from religion, but a vast majority of it does, and religion is the only justification for it. When you take out the religious justification, the logic behind homophobia evaporates.
“I would never want to hurt anyone! That’s why I choose to worship a God who created a supernatural torture chamber and a list of excuses to send people there!”
I agree with Mac, etc. Signorile had a point, but he focused solely on that one point. Religion is just ONE of the reasons why our country coddles a culture of violence toward us.
I’m a former Marine. I can tell you straight out that it’s religion combined with a cult of hyper-masculinity, that’s ALSO fostered within family units. It teaches violence toward us as perfectly acceptable.
Indeed, blind allegiance to patriarchal Christianity (and most Western religions) along with adherence to cafeteria-style belief and worship of testosterone are contributing factors.
You can tell that we’re genetically closer to chimp behavior than to bonobo behavior. Chimps are warlike and have extreme disdain for others. Bonobos are far more socially cohesive because they have sex with any and all of their tribe. Sadly, homo sapiens came first after chimps. Bonobos came afterward. We’d all be far happier if we were closer in temperament to bonobos.
[...] issue, wingnuts are being predictably awful, depraved, smug, evil, mouthy, shocked! shocked!, stupid, mindnumbingly deranged, heterosupremacist, unspeakably vile, and basically smearing the blood on [...]