Johnny Weir recently confirmed that the sky is indeed blue when he finally acknowledged that he’s gay, and he made a statement that’s being latched onto by conservatives as some sort of statement in support of their ideology. Here’s what Weir said:
“But pressure is the last thing that would make me want to ‘join’ a community… The massive backlash against me in the gay media and community only made me dig my ‘closeted’ heels in further.”
Oh, whatever. Creating drama where there is none.
So conservative law perfesser Ann Althouse latched onto this, giving her list of deep interpretations for why Weir waited so long:
3. Some people think of themselves as, above all, individuals, and when others think the most important thing is their membership in a particular group, they resist. They don’t want to be defined by a single quality, especially when it’s a quality that makes other people see them in terms of the group stereotype, and not personal uniqueness. There was a special playfulness to this notion in Weir’s case, because he engaged in the very open “flamboyant” style that people think of as stereotypically gay.
4. Just because you’re gay doesn’t mean you like other gay people and want to join their team. Heterosexuals don’t naturally love all the other heterosexuals. Gay men may need to look for their sexual partners in the pool of gay men,* but there’s no reason why you have to like everyone in your category of potential sexual partners, and, indeed, it’s a good idea to reject the vast majority of potential sexual partners. You only need one (at most). You’re entitled to think that most of them are jerks.
Show of hands, please: how many of you, when you came out, did so in order to retain “membership” in the “gay community”? Likewise, how many of you did it as a matter of finally living with honesty and integrity?
And with your hands still raised, please help me smack down the strawman Ann built in #4, with her notion that somehow every gay person is expected to adore everyone in Their Category. Because really, who are we talking about? Speaking from personal experience here, I’m, among many things, a part of The Gay Community — indeed, I’m, I suppose, one of many diverse spokespeople for The Gay Community, writing to you as I am now — but no one on earth would ever accuse me of liking most gay people. I like some of them! Maybe I like you! Maybe I do not! The point is, what in hell does this have to do with Johnny Weir coming out or not coming out?
But we’re not done erecting strawmen yet. Over at GayPatriot, Dan Blatt approvingly linked to Althouse’s post with commentary of his own. Bear in mind, we are still talking about the ice skater who compensates for his lack of gold medals by wearing boas:
It often seem that the gay rights’ movement is devoted to the notion of group rights rather than individual ones. It is why I believe we need develop a conservative message on gays, independent to that developed by the left-leaning gay groups, organizations helmed by men and women with a background in Democratic politics, liberal ideologies and statist theories.
Groups are, um, made up of individuals, and when the individuals in a group are all being denied, individually, the same rights as the other people in the group, it’s common for the, ahem, group of, erm, individuals, to band together to fight for the equal rights of the individuals in the, um, group.
Anyway, to sum up, Johnny Weir didn’t come out because he didn’t want to be perceived as a stereotypical member of the gay community, who only wants rights for groups, but not for individuals, and this is good for conservatives because, oh god, he’s skating to Ke$ha, turn it off, turn it off, turn it off!
But this is resonating with someone because Althouse then returns the link-wank and creates a new post out of a comment on the Gay Patriot post. As Pam would say, protect your keyboards:
“‘Coming out’ doesn’t mean coming to terms with the fact you’re gay — it means publicly identifying yourself so the Gay Police can find you and kidnap you into the Gay Borg. It’s easier for the Gay Police to round you up if you believe that Flyover Country is hostile to gays to you move to a Gay Urban Area. Then, the Borg can save expenses for rounding you up since you jumped into the pen voluntarily. For me, the process of accepting my sexuality meant rejecting the gay community because they didn’t offer a model for sexual behavior which had anything to do with my values. All of my friends are straight since my core identities are masculine, Christian, etc. Gay is way down on the list. I am glad that many gays are refusing to join the Borg, even if it means sacrificing the toaster.”
Okay, now that’s some weird paranoia right there. First of all, gay people live all over flyover country [hi!], but when people in the process of coming out of the closet are simultaneously rejecting others who have taken that same journey, then it bespeaks of personal problems on THEIR PART, not on that of The Gay Community, because as you all know, The Gay Community is made up of many diverse, ahem, INDIVIDUALS. Also, were y’all aware that there was a Borg? Have we all been missing the mandatory meetings? Well damn.
But perhaps we just don’t get it because we’re not conservatives looking for some way to differentiate ourselves as victims in some way or another.
Of course, Tintin at Sadly, No! shortened Dan’s post about “group rights” and “conservative messages on gays” into its purest meaning:
Gay liberals are always shouting about how gay they are. Gay conservatives, like myself, see themselves as unique individuals rather than as gays. Please pay no attention to the name of this blog.
Giggle.
I’m tired of anti-gay bigotry. There are actually times when it makes me yawn. Could we not pass a law by which, anybody who voices anti-gay bigotry will be sentenced to have their mouth stuffed full of Silly Putty?
I enjoy most all of your interesting insights here, but after reading this piece twice, I am not understanding your message clearly. I find myself identifying with those you appear to be accusing of intolerance.
James, Far be it from me to speak for Evan. But what I gather as the central point of this argument is two fold.
A: You don’t come out of the closet to gain some sort of inclusive pass to the elusive yet fantastic gay night clubs. Or by some extension gain access to all these wonderful gay benefits – as the wing nuts would have you believe. You come out to reinforce your self image. You come out of the closet for hope. For reconciliation and to find peace with yourself.
B: Just because I see another gay man in public does not mean that there is some secret handshake and he is part of la-resistance. Simply because he is gay. We have strifes and freedoms being denied to us as a group therefore we stand in solidarity against that oppression. Not because you are my bestest friend in the whole world but because you can understand the pains and tribulations, and hopefully has the same understanding.
Simply put, Just because I fight along side of you does not mean I want to be your friend. After all, I don’t even know you.
And I have a two drink minimum – :-P *sarcasm*
That’s part of it, and the other side is that gay wingnuts seem to be defined by their perceived victimization by All The Other Gays. You see a lot of those weird comments over there about how “my sexuality is FAR down the list of what I’m defined by,” to which sane people would reply, well, it should be somewhere on the list like it is for most of us, but really, if you’re sitting there going “i’m defined by my masculinity and my religion but not my sexuality,” it sounds like YOU have a problem with your sexuality.
Exactly, I don’t let it define me. But if some are going to define me by it then there is really nothing I can do about it. It sounds a lot like. “I’m gay, but not that kinda gay” so that one can save face with friends and so on. Sounds to me like you got one foot out of the door, testing the waters. And that has its own set of issues.
So who’s Johnny Weir?
Gay figure skater.
Wow, there is so much self-hatred reflected in the “I don’t want to be part of the gay community” crap these nuts are espousing.
The fact is that Johnny Weir has not come to terms with his sexuality. For one thing–and this isn’t mentioned at all by these conservative “analysts”–what’s really playing here is that Weir’s following is ALMOST ALL YOUNG WOMEN. Thus there are financial implications of his sexuality. Nearly 100% of his thousands of fans are young women who are obsessed with him, and I mean sexually. I won’t use the derogatory term “fag hag”–oops, I just did. Weir had to weigh the ramifications of having thousands of female fans around the world when he came out. Of course those girls are living in a dream world—and even if he were straight they would be. Nevertheless, to announce he actually is gay is a big step.
Except for his “best friend” Paris, who shows up in Weir’s TV show (the two of them took baths together but appear to have a platonic relationship), Johnny Weir seems almost exclusively involved with women. I am not qualified to psychoanalyze him or anyone, but I have known a lot of gay men who have a similarly strong and almost exclusive connection to women and great difficulty connecting with men, straight or gay. I suspect that Johnny Weir needs to form some strong, close and supportive relationships with men—including gay men. I believe his difficulty in identifying with the “gay community” is actually difficulty connecting with men.
Johnny Weir is on a quest to escape from something–his childhood, himself, his sexuality, or whatever. I’ve seen it a million times in young gay men. Ironically, their narcissism and vanity are a front for their self-hatred. I come to his defense, though, because he does have great talent. I deplored Evan Lycesek’s sarcastic, anti-gay remarks about Weir and can’t stand Lycesek for that reason. I really want to like Johnny Weir, but he doesn’t make it easy. We have to wait around a decade or two while he figures things out and accepts who he is. But it’s hard to wait around for him to get some self esteem (the kind not generated by the adulation of teenage girls) and accept reality. Unfortunately and tragically, he might become irrelevant long before he comes to terms with reality. “Hey everybody, I finally figured it out…” but too late–no one cares.
As for the opportunistic, conservative b******t about “groups” and “individuals” Evan Hurst nails that as complete BS and hypocrisy. Think of it in racial terms–if you are African American, of course you are an individual first and that should be recognized by everyone. But if you are nonetheless very concerned about not being identified with African American history, culture, tradition, or other African Americans, there’s something wrong with you. We are all part of communities and to be ashamed of those communities reveals a fundamental problem with self acceptance and self esteem. For conservatives to exploit that self-hate is an attempt keep the gay, black, Latino or other emerging communities from achieving equality, legitimacy, and empowerment. “It’s fine to be gay, just keep it down and don’t “flaunt” it if you want to be in THIS country club. Oh yeah, and if you can pass for straight, that would help.” We’ve heard that b******t plenty of times from the right.
I’ve been hearing the Victim rant from GLBT conservatives for years. If they aren’t fuming with poutrage that they haven’t been welcomed with open arms, they’re whining about lesbian feminism. Get over it. If you come out,come out because that is what you must do to be a whole person. Just don’t expect a big ol’ welcome for doing something that should be natural.
Let me just chime in here as well. The motive for America’s Dumbest Homosexual™ aka Dan Blatt to say that he’s an individual first and a gay maybe tenth, if that, is to justify the mental gymnastics involved by gay conservatives like Dan that are required to trade my marriage and civil rights for their tax cuts.