PFOX has responded to Ann Coulter’s recent use of the word “faggot” in a joke about Democrat presidential hopeful John Edwards. While they briefly acknowledge that “no one should be subjected to hateful name calling, either gay or ex-gay,” the main thrust of their comments draw attention away from Coulter and onto Edwards.
“Unlike Coulter, McEwan’s statement was not made in jest or for humorous purposes,” said Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX while calling attention to the recent blogger scandal concerning Edwards.
It seems a simple, no strings attached admonishment for something so obviously hateful and indecent was too much to ask of PFOX. Their reaction is even more incredible considering how many of them must have children who have been hurt deeply by people who called them such names.
“Fulfill their heterosexual potential”
Do they realize how incredibly silly that sounds? They make heterosexuality sound like something to put on a resume, not a cherished life with happiness and family and kids and traditional marriage and all that good stuff.
Alan Chambers posted on his blog on Oct 21,2004 “Will John Edwards the Next Politician to Declare that He is a “Gay American”?
When I saw it, I just thought it was odd, and I think that he was making fun of some video of Edwards combing his hair.
But in the aftermath of Coulter’s “faggot” remark, it seems that questioning Edward’s sexuality was a tactic being used in various ways by his right wing opponents. Alan doesn’t actually post much on his blog, and hasn’t posted anything for quite a while. I wonder why he made this post.
While Melissa’s words were certainly harsh, I didn’t see her use any language that was bigoted towards an entire group of people. Using the F word describes an entire group of people negatively and emboldens those folks that are virulently anti-gay. Melissa’s words were certainly unkind, but they were attacking the person at hand, not all ex-gays in general.
The F-word, used in the context Coulter used it, is the moral equivalent of using the n-word.
Period.
Right…
1) a lowly campaign worker uses some fruity language in her own sphere to describe a man who makes his living out of demonising gay men and women. Ditto comments about Vatican’s behaviour towards gay men and lesbians, women in general, contraception… etc etc. Campaign worker’s views are categorically rejected, and campaign worker quits, anyway.
2) a high profile and experienced media trollop deliberately uses a slur at an official Republican function. One she was invited to, and given a platform from which to speak. A function packed with Republican hopefuls, and in full glare of the media. As is well known, this high profile media trollop has a history of making ugly comments at such events (“ragheads”, anyone?), and then claiming other people are at fault when they are offended.
I’m failing to see the similarity.
Of more concern than Coulter’s own awful viewpoints or her gutter mouth — both well established — is the fact she obviously expected her comments to be well received by the crowd. And they were.
So we could go on: Regina, dear…
3) PFOX officially thinks standing on a stage and calling someone a faggot is merely “over the top” humour. Such humour is apparently much enjoyed at official Republican functions, but this shouldn’t be taken to mean that the Republican crowd is officially anti-gay. Oh no no no, that would be the wrong impression to get.
One could speculate why some people think an anti-gay slur is a bit of light-hearted merriment….
4) Greg Quinlan’s deliberate promotion of anti-gay attitudes and anti-gay behaviour (despite, umm, his questionable “ex”gay credentials)
5) Regina Griggs own deliberate promotion of anti-gay attitudes and anti-gay behaviour, of which that PFOX press release is yet another example.
Anti-gay attitudes lead to anti-gay behaviour: calling someone a faggot is but one example.
I really am bored to my back teeth with these people who constantly beg for God’s forgiveness, but who are also incapable of a simple apology to another person.
You know, it is really fantastically ridiculous that PFOX (or all the various groups on the far right) are attempting to use the “but other people said something similar too!” defense. Even if you accepted the bad premise that statements made about individuals are equivalent to statements that demonize a group of people two wrong statements do not make a right.
I think Ann Coulter had every First Ammendment right to say her hurtful bigoted comment but I think it clearly shows how morally repugnant the Republican Party has become (CPAC is a REPUBLICAN organization, not a conservative one). It used to be that the moral high road did NOT involve belittling someone for their appearance and that name calling was considered inappropriate at serious political conferences.
SharonB was dead on that the F word in this context is EXACTLY the same as the N word. Can anyone imagine if Coulter said “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, Al Sharpton, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘(n-word)’ so….” and then if the Republicans in the room had cheered? The Democratic candidate would win 80% of the vote just on the strength of people not wanting to be called racist! its so insane that people are defending it as a “joke.”
Slightly off topic, but PFOX seems to have a bug up their butt about the intersexed as well:
https://pfox.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=154
I wonder if they’re going to start putting stuff out about “ex-intersexuals?”
Why do people who don’t like the homo lifestyle have to be classified as homophobic. I am not a homophobe i just think there is something wrong with the lifestyle. I have been called honky and cracker and to me these names are just as offensive as the n or f word. Get over it already, you are not the only people with opinions. Keep going Ann you are right on the money.
gator, “people who don’t like the homo lifestyle” are called homophobic because they are. The word, by definition, covers those folks who are anti-gay.
I’ve never understood the reflex of homophobes and racists of denying their homophobia and racism.
Gator….opinions and nasty names don’t stay in a box on the shelf.
They follow gay people in public places and threaten and assault them, torture them in school, separate them from the protection and love of their parents, brutally murder them.
They follow gay children all their days and are the difference between professional success or poverty. Discrimination and unfair destruction of a career, a college career.
Whether you’ll marry who is just like you.
If all these threats followed YOU Gator, I doubt YOU’D get over it.
So you ordering such a thing from the gay community is as loathesome as saying the same to a Holocaust survivor.
WE have to take action and offense and work to prevent this against innocent gay citizens. Considering what you just said…no wonder such torture goes on.
And Gator…it’s not a ‘lifestyle’, it’s an orientation. A normal characteristic and inversion of heterosexuality. You using THAT word shows your ignorance.
And those who are SO fearful of gay people, that they will beat their own children who are even SUSPECTED of being gay, IS a homophobe.
It’s not a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of reality. A grotesque and disturbing lack of respect on the part of straight people to understand that this is THEIR VERY OWN they’d be protecting if they understood homosexuality for what it REALLY is.
What is unforgivable is this resistance to truth and embracing of ignorance. Even if it costs gay teenagers their lives.
Truly moral people don’t require fear and ignorance to teach moral authority. They’d be unafraid to allow for gays and lesbians to live their lives honestly and openly without threat or coercion. This is the ONLY way the truth can EVER be known about gay people.
Don’t you wonder why, regardless of all the evidence that gay folks are in many ways LESS harmful than straight people, there are whole organizations that still want you to be very afraid of gay people and be very cruel to them?
Why don’t you question these organizations like say, FOTF, why they LIE against gays and lesbians?
I thank thee Lord that I have never sunk so low that only PFOX would defend me. May it never be so! Sheesh.
Gator, let me give you an example of the problem. It is completely appropriate for any religion to declare a “lifestyle” as immoral. After all, according to my own religious upbringing, Baptists, Mormons, all evengelicals were considered “psuedo-Christian” cults and any membership in them a grevious sin, just like being gay. However, the Roman Catholic church does not, any longer, demonize these people, or teach that their members must shun these immoral sinners, or declare that they are disgusting for rejecting the one true God.
Robis:
Here is why they can deny who they are at the same time they demonstrate those very characteristics.
In a word, anosognosia. I am being half-serious.