Saturday, September 24, 2005
The Blade Dulls
Oh sweet Zoroaster. Now Chris Crain, president of the Washington Blade is saying, "Leave Jeff Gannon alone!" Come and pour through the idiocy with me:
One particularly angry reader asked rhetorically if he could expect to pick up the following week’s paper to read an opinion column by an “ex-gay” explaining the way out of homosexuality. “I wish!” was my reply.
The job of any good opinion section is to challenge readers, not just preach to the choir. For that reason, our Forum pages are open to anyone, gay and non-gay, whether or not they support the goals of the gay rights movement.
And when that information is proven to be inaccurate and psychologically harmful? Hell, we devote two pages to it!
But Jeff Gannon doesn’t represent that sort of challenge. He doesn’t oppose gay equality. In fact, he confirmed just this week that he is bisexual.
And in the weeks before that?
My position is that I can't imagine that gay marriage would be something that I would be interested in in the first place. I actually like being alone. I have decided that is how I want to live. I have a dog named Winston. I am still the same to Winston, no matter what, and there is comfort in that. Winston doesn't watch the news. (New York Times Magazine, March 20th, 2005)
This is not to say that I have not made mistakes in the past. Like all of us have at one time or another, I made poor choices and exercised bad judgment. But I believe in a forgiving God who changed my life. It was through that renewal that I went on to have a career as a reporter and further blessed to become a White House correspondent. (Jeff Gannon's blog, February 24, 2005)
Give us two months, and he'll say his name is "Teresa" now.
LET’S SAY, FOR the sake of argument, that the role played by newspapers isn’t enough to justify publication of provocative views by someone as controversial as Jeff Gannon. Let’s say that this man, or his opinions, somehow deserve to be excluded from this “tolerance” about which we all preach so much.
Yes. Yes, let's say that. Mainly because, before this man started writing for your prestigious paper, he was spitting out columns for a GOP newssite that defended DOMA and Rick Santorum and mocked Kerry for his "pro-homosexual" platform. And, unlike David Brock, I don't see him apologizing for those views.
Oh, and here comes the best part:
The growing polarization of American politics has taken root within gay America as well. The explosion of liberal gay bloggers, many of whom spend about as much time on the “gray” of most issues as Rush Limbaugh and his “dittoheads,” has only exacerbated the proud queer tradition of disdain for gay Republicans (“Nazi Jews”) and the caricature of conservative Christians (“religious right,” “religious political extremists”).
Wow. Wow. First of all, I show no such disdain towards conservative evangelicals. I do show disdain for people who want to treat my life like a football to be punted about. Second of all, and most disturbingly, this man, a man who runs a major metropolitan GLBT newspaper... who has heard Focus on the Family propogate the myth that we die at 42... who has heard the Traditional Values Coalition compare our relationships with sheep-fucking... who has heard the Family Research Council talk about how our very presence corrupts children... who has heard James Dobson talk about how we are going to destroy the world... is talking about how "the religious right" is a mere caricature thrown about by us pink pinkos.
I have no problem with the Blade running editorials by conservative gays such as Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch. But when the Blade stands up to defend a man who has sold us out without apology, and then tells us to try and supplicate to those who arguably hate us, that's a whole other issue.
One particularly angry reader asked rhetorically if he could expect to pick up the following week’s paper to read an opinion column by an “ex-gay” explaining the way out of homosexuality. “I wish!” was my reply.
The job of any good opinion section is to challenge readers, not just preach to the choir. For that reason, our Forum pages are open to anyone, gay and non-gay, whether or not they support the goals of the gay rights movement.
And when that information is proven to be inaccurate and psychologically harmful? Hell, we devote two pages to it!
But Jeff Gannon doesn’t represent that sort of challenge. He doesn’t oppose gay equality. In fact, he confirmed just this week that he is bisexual.
And in the weeks before that?
My position is that I can't imagine that gay marriage would be something that I would be interested in in the first place. I actually like being alone. I have decided that is how I want to live. I have a dog named Winston. I am still the same to Winston, no matter what, and there is comfort in that. Winston doesn't watch the news. (New York Times Magazine, March 20th, 2005)
This is not to say that I have not made mistakes in the past. Like all of us have at one time or another, I made poor choices and exercised bad judgment. But I believe in a forgiving God who changed my life. It was through that renewal that I went on to have a career as a reporter and further blessed to become a White House correspondent. (Jeff Gannon's blog, February 24, 2005)
Give us two months, and he'll say his name is "Teresa" now.
LET’S SAY, FOR the sake of argument, that the role played by newspapers isn’t enough to justify publication of provocative views by someone as controversial as Jeff Gannon. Let’s say that this man, or his opinions, somehow deserve to be excluded from this “tolerance” about which we all preach so much.
Yes. Yes, let's say that. Mainly because, before this man started writing for your prestigious paper, he was spitting out columns for a GOP newssite that defended DOMA and Rick Santorum and mocked Kerry for his "pro-homosexual" platform. And, unlike David Brock, I don't see him apologizing for those views.
Oh, and here comes the best part:
The growing polarization of American politics has taken root within gay America as well. The explosion of liberal gay bloggers, many of whom spend about as much time on the “gray” of most issues as Rush Limbaugh and his “dittoheads,” has only exacerbated the proud queer tradition of disdain for gay Republicans (“Nazi Jews”) and the caricature of conservative Christians (“religious right,” “religious political extremists”).
Wow. Wow. First of all, I show no such disdain towards conservative evangelicals. I do show disdain for people who want to treat my life like a football to be punted about. Second of all, and most disturbingly, this man, a man who runs a major metropolitan GLBT newspaper... who has heard Focus on the Family propogate the myth that we die at 42... who has heard the Traditional Values Coalition compare our relationships with sheep-fucking... who has heard the Family Research Council talk about how our very presence corrupts children... who has heard James Dobson talk about how we are going to destroy the world... is talking about how "the religious right" is a mere caricature thrown about by us pink pinkos.
I have no problem with the Blade running editorials by conservative gays such as Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch. But when the Blade stands up to defend a man who has sold us out without apology, and then tells us to try and supplicate to those who arguably hate us, that's a whole other issue.
