Reply #310: I do agree that he knew what he was writing, but I do not think he was writing what you think he was [View All]

[MADem]

writing. I think your POV is a one-way street, and it impacts your perspective. Let me be quite plain, so you won't feel as though I am "talking around" the topic. This is how you come across to me:

You call the dislike by certain segments of the gay community of certain other segments of the gay community "homophobia." But, from your arguments, I can only conclude that you believe it's only "homophobia" when gay people are disliking the segments that YOU favor. People who dislike the Christian gays aren't "homophobes," why, they have a "good reason" for not liking them, because they aren't "falling in line" and behaving in ways that YOU find acceptable. Same with the fellows who patronize that Bulldog Club--it's not "homophobic" to not care for them, because, after all, they don't like the flavor of gay that you favor.

Your very accusation of homophobia against practicing homosexuals, could, if you wanted to pull the string, be regarded as homophobic conduct by you. You're, in essence, saying if they're not like you, or if they don't like the people you approve of, they're homophobes.

It's not a question of sufficiency, it's a question of perspective. As I have said throughout this thread, where you stand depends entirely on where you sit. Are those Christian gays who want some people to "tone it down" homophobes because they don't care for the particular conduct exhibited? Those down-low fellows who don't like the "sugar in the tank" (as another poster termed it) are homophobes because they don't like the conduct of the Adam contingent? How about those poor bastards in the closet, who don't want to be seen within a hundred yards of what you called a "swish?" They're homophobes, because they don't like the same flavor of homosexual that you do, or they don't care for the "associated conduct," as it were?

Like I said upthread, I believe this guy's thesis does not include the "We Are The World" view. He is saying that "The Gay Community" is, in fact, less of a "community" than the activist wing would like to believe. It's segmented, separate, and quite diverse. And the segment that he was discussing is not going to go along with the activist call of the largely white GLBT community to disparage Obama. He's a source of pride, and they acknowledge and embrace that. They'll wait for him to do the right thing. That's his bottom line. Calling them homophobes because they're willing to wait, and you aren't, isn't going to make them change their tack, either.