Friday, September 07, 2007

Gay Outers: Hypocrisy or Human?

I know a cardiologist who smokes like a chimney. In a consultation with him, should you be unfortunate enough to have heart disease and need surgery, he will recommend, strongly, that you give up smoking. It's bad for your health. Is he a hypocrite?

There needs to be a better understanding of the word "hypocrite". Todays definition is "saying one thing and doing another", but that's not correct. That's a sinner. A sinner knows the ideal, believes the ideal and falls short. A hypocrite, knows the ideal, does NOT believe the ideal yet says he believes the ideal, and habitually ignores the ideal for some ulterior reason. This is a hypocrite:

a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives
Larry Craig would be a hypocrite (as opposed to human and fallible) if he believed that being actively gay was Jim-dandy fine, but got married, had kids, became a Republican, and spoke out against it so he could have power. That would be hypocrisy. Calling out a man of ambiguous sexuality while believing that there is nothing wrong with said sexuality and believing that imposing morality on someone is wrong and then doing just that to achieve political ends rather than benefit gays (Craig fails to display the progressive gay "morality", i.e. being pro-gay marriage) would be hypocritical.

In the comment section over at Gay Patriot, Will from American Elephant says:
I still think Craig should just switch parties–hed go from being a hypocrite to being a victim faster than you can tap your toe.
Gay Patriot notes the Outers hypocrisy; they use the same strident religious zeal that they claim to hate about the religious right:
In yesterday’s Washington Post Marc Fisher wrote that such “work requires” the “outers” to “play God” (Via Michael Silence via Instapundit). As if they know better than the rest of us. An attitude not too different from that of religious zealots. Indeed, the very title of the column, focusing on the actions of blogger Michael Rogers, Who Among Us Would Cast the First Stone? This Guy suggests that Rogers has the same certainty of belief as do those judgmental voices on the religious right whom his allies on the left are ever eager to criticize.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The outers on the left do themselves no favors by outing people who prefer to remain closeted. It strikes honest people as unfair and ruthless. It is off-putting. It is especially off-putting when screwing in public bathroom stalls is defended when it's clearly illegal, while wrecking someone's personal life is fair game. Hello? Maybe gay activists need to be more diverse in their friendships. Would they like a niece or nephew walk in while a couple of men mate in a public bathroom? This base and degrading behavior angers people. There is no logical defense for the activity and yet, it gets defended.

There are gay people who believe that living the lifestyle violates their moral code. They are not hypocrites. They are human. If they believed being gay was fine, good even, professed it sinful and lived the lifestyle, they'd be hypocrites. Just like my cardiologist friend or Peta people who sneak leather shoes, or the devout vegetarian succumbing to a tempting hamburger, these people aren't hypocrites, they're human.

The label "hypocrite" is used to silence opposition. Unfortunately, it works.

Matt Sanchez has more thoughts.

2 comments:

漢美女 said...

(法新社a倫敦二B十WE四日電) 「情色二零零七」情趣產品大產自二十三日起在倫敦的肯辛成人影片頓奧林情色匹亞展覽館舉行,倫敦人擺脫對性的保守態度踴躍參觀,許多穿皮衣與塑膠緊身衣的好色之徒擠進這項世界規模最大的成人生活展,估計三天av女優展期可吸引八萬多好奇民成人電影色情參觀。

活動計畫負責人米里根承諾:「要搞浪漫、誘惑人、玩虐成人影片待,你渴望的我們都有。AV女優

他說:「時髦的設計與華麗女裝,從吊飾到束腹到真人大小的雕塑,成人電影是我們由今年展出的數千A片件產品精選出色情影片的一av部分,a片下載參展產品還包括時尚服飾、貼身女用成人網站內在美、鞋子、珠情色寶、玩具、影片、藝術、圖書及遊戲,更不要說性愛輔具及馬術裝A片下載備。」

參觀民眾遊覽兩百五十多個攤位,有性感服裝、玩具及情色食品,迎合各種品味。

大舞台上表演的是美國野蠻搖滾歌手瑪莉蓮曼森的前妻─全世界頭牌脫a片衣舞孃黛塔范a片提思,這是她今年在英國唯一一場表演。
情色電影
以一九四零年代風格演出的黛塔范提思表演性感的天情色電影堂鳥AV、旋轉色情木馬及羽成人網站扇等舞蹈。

參展攤位有的推廣情趣用品,有的公開展示人體藝術和人體雕塑,也有情色藝術家工會成員提供建議。

sandy said...

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H e l l o . . . N i c e . . . B l o g . . . P U S H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .