I need to know what gay DUers think of Sully, Paglia & Norah Vincent...

[devilgrrl]

Personally, these people make my stomach turn but I'd like to hear what the gay folks think and what to do about it. :shrug:

[Occulus]

1. Some additional details

would be most welcome. I'm gay and I don't recognize any of these names.

Should I?

[noiretextatique]

2. DITTO

:puke: :puke: and :puke:

[dsc]

3. I recognize two of the three

and the third rings a bell. First, Sully is Andrew Sullivan, who is about as bad as it gets. He is a first rate hypocrite. He choses to live where he has the protection of the liberals he despises but calls them traitors. He castigates Clinton for reckless sex and then has the most reckless kind of sex imaginable. He is just a low person.

Second, Pagila discusts me. I find her an odious human being. Even if her politics were more agreeable she just rubs me the wrong way.

Third Norah Vincent I think she is a Bush advisor if I am not mistaken. She should have quit when he anounced this marriage clap trap.

[noiretextatique]

8. paglia makes my skin crawl...

and she is a lunatic, imho.

[dsc]

14. I am glad she has that effect on someone else

I feel embarrassed to admit it but I just find her like nails on a chalkboard.

[comsymp]

4. Frankly, I try not to

After all, as the Source of All Evil so profoundly asked, why should I waste my beautiful mind on them?

[Clete]

5. I can't stand Norah Vincent and won't read her diatribes

anymore. I have avoided the other two so I don't know much about them.

[Devlzown]

6. I'm not sure who Nora Vincent is,

but I believe Andrew Sullivan and Camille Paglia are insane.

[roughsatori]

7. What do heterosexuals think of Ann Coulter?

Same difference, yet I have never read a post asking that kind of question of heterosexuals. I have been asked that kind of question many times regarding specific gays and lesbians.

I have met Paglia, and in person, in a private setting, she came across as very bright, extremely educated in regard to the "canon," but self-obsessed, humorless like a speed freak.

[devilgrrl]

9. Sorry, I didn't intend to offend...

The reason I asked the question is that these people bash bash BASH gays left and right and are gay themselves.

BTW, Ann Coulter is a disgusting human being and heterosexual!

[Liberal Veteran]

10. I see no problem with asking a focused question....

It doesn't strike me as any different than trying to get insight by asking what African-Americans think of Clarence Thomas or Colin Powell.

I'd like to think we are get the notion that one's cultural background can provide a perspective.

And to answer your question: I have no use for any of them (except perhaps as an anti-role model).

[roughsatori]

12. I wasn't offended at all, I knew what you meant

particularly since I've read many other posts by you. I wrote that more in reaction to the buildup of seeing similar questions like that many times. I see that someone else wrote that it is similar to asking a question of African-Americans, I agree with that too. And I have seen that asked here to, but I don't remember seeing a thread asking "White Duers what you think of....."

Just something to consider.

[Shakespeare]

11. easy, there.....

It's not really the same thing. We've also often wondered around here how a woman could be a republican (assuming you consider Coulter a woman), because their party philosophy is explicitly anti-woman in so many ways.

The same is true for homosexuals--while I definitely see how there could be conservative gays (primarily on fiscal issues, for example), the GOP's philosophy is downright hostile to gays, and it actively works to limit or altogether prohibit gay rights.

In both cases, the GOP, while probably having some party planks that a woman or a GLBT person would be drawn to, is pretty openly hostile to those groups specifically, so it seems illogical that someone from either group would identify officially with the GOP.

[roughsatori]

13. I see it as a class issue--not a gender or sexual preference issue

As Ron Reagan (Raygun's son) said, "Republicans like gay people if they are rich." And it could be reversed "Gay people like Republicans if they are Rich.

It seems somehow homophobic to me when heterosexuals speak as if Gays and Lesbians should vote Democratic ticket. Again, I don't hear people say: Heterosexuals who vote for Bush have something wrong with them.

When it is said there is a subtle change of one little word: "People" is used not the sexuality. ie: "People who vote for Bush have something wrong with them."

Our use of language is political, more so in that language is taught in a way to insure that the oppressed do not forget their place.

[AntiCoup2K4]

15. ANYONE who votes for Bush has something wrong with them.

Sexual orientation ain't got nothing to do with that one.

[bearfartinthewoods]

17. humorless???

speed freakish, i'd buy but humorless? naaa.

[jumptheshadow]

18. Humorless to the core

From what I've heard. Just takes herself too seriously to allow any wiggle room for humor.

[jumptheshadow]

16. Those people you mentioned

Sullivan sounded like a whimpering dog after Rick Santorum shat upon the gay community. "How could you do this to us?" (My interpretation of what he said.) The guy is either pathetically naive or bone chillingly cynical -- after all, being the house homo is his stock in trade. His defense of the Iraq war verges on the ludicrous.

Paglia is a raging egomaniac whose self-absorption suffuses every essay she writes. The only decent thing she did lately was her anti-war column. My view of her is also affected by the fact that my ex once knew her and had some interesting tales about her. I can't get into them here.

I've read Vincent twice and couldn't care less.

By the way, how did our team disintegrate so badly? Ah, that's a conversation for the lounge.

[Mairead]

19. Collaborators, all three of them. Quisling queers.

Even without listening to them I get more lies foisted on me than I can use, so....

[Plaid Adder]

20. I don't think anything needs to be done, really.

Andrew Sullivan is out of his tiny mind, and any queer with any sense can see that right away. For any who would doubt, I have two words for you: Flypaper Theory. The column in which he 'explains' why we are INTENTIONALLY fucking up in Iraq and that the Bush administration MEANT for the invasion to be a giant fucking disaster and that this is actually GOOD for us and the world is all the proof you need.

As for Camille Paglia, my loathing for her as a political demagogue is fueled by my utter disrespect for her as a scholar, and that's before we even get to the fact that for her entire career she has basically been a shill for Harold Bloom. But frankly, her day is over; her notoriety is gone now that Ann Coulter is doing a much better job of betraying her gender than she ever did, and she never had anything else to go on.

Never heard of Nora Vincent, quite sure I don't want to.

The sad fact is that it is not difficult to find people who take delight in licking the boot that kicks them. For some reason some people are wired to respond to oppression not by resisting the oppressor but by falling in love with him/her, despite or even because of the contempt the oppressor constantly shows to him/her. Sullivan and Paglia have been richly rewarded for licking those boots, and it's no wonder they continue to do it. How they live with themselves is a mystery to me, but I guess a lot of things get easier once you decide you have neither pride nor shame.

There's no way to 'do' anything about this. Andrew Sullivan is clearly a lost cause; so is Camille. For every AS or CP out there you can find 10 queer commentators taking the exact opposite approach. People who cite either as representative of the views of the queer community are wilfully blinding themselves to reality, much the same way the Bush administration did when they convinced themselves Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat despite the lack of any credible evidence.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder