I Have Nothing Against People Being Bigoted, But Do They Have To Flaunt It?

The main point:

[I]f the Republican-Majority-Leader-to-be was preempted because he was gay, that is real news. I haven't heard the commentary yet, but several people have reported to me that CNN's Wolf Blitzer stated that Dreier was blocked at the last moment because he was pro-choice, from Southern California, and had "other issues" -- the last part stated in a low and halting voice.

If true, what is that about, Wolf? If Dreier -- who is one of the most powerful and, frankly, capable members of House Republican leadership -- Chairman of the powerful Rules Committee -- was stopped from stepping into the indicted Tom DeLay's seat because he was gay -- can we finally get beyond the blogs and onto the pages of the New York Times and Washington Post about this real news?

Dreier was blocked because he has a long-term, loving relationship with someone of the same sex. This has been documented on many fronts and is widely known by members of Dreier's own caucus. If the reality of this blocked Dreier's ascension, then the news has a duty not to keep this matter hidden.

I attended a forum about sexuality and stuff (our campus having just experienced some queer-baiting incidents) we had at Colby my freshman year (I think spring of '88).  A bunch of icky gays were on a discussion panel in Lovejoy 101, an auditorium-esque classroom where you'd take stuff like General Chem and other survey courses, and where the Student Association showed movies on weekends, etc.

Anyhoo, one of the panel members was a gay black man (I'll call him T) who lived in the senior quad across from my dorm room where I used to hang out alot--he was incredibly funny and a great actor, under whom I was understudy in the only play I ever acted in at the college level.  T was not a super flamer, but he was definitely out and even the most hetero person in the world would probably have their gaydar set off.  I'll never forget an exchange he had with somebody who was generally very reasonable and non-bigoted.

The dude in the audience (I'll call him M) began by saying he liked T a lot--he really did, and I can vouch for that--and admitted that homosexuality made him a little uncomfortable because it wasn't his cuppa, but he was cool with it.  M's question: "why do you have to flaunt it?"

T observed that heteros "flaunt it" all the time.  He'd seen M and lots of other heteros kissing their boy/girlfriends in public, talking about their sexual exploits, wearing clothes designed to attract the opposite sex.  So why can't he kiss a boy in public, talk about getting laid last weekend, and wear a little leather and chains?

I admit that before then, I hadn't really thought about it all that much.  One of my best friends (giggle) wouldn't come out to me until the following year, I wouldn't start running around with all the out queers until well after that, and while I hung out with T a lot (heh, he's the one who introduced me to The Cure) I was more interested in the philosophy of nature and god and government than issues of sexuality at the time.  But that evening really made me aware of just how bigotry "whispers".

Fast forward to September, 2005, and a queer-assed fag from Fagville is living in the closet, sorta, with his boyfriend and is reportedly going to ascend to a hugely powerful position of national significance.  The queers are happy because "one of their own" will be in charge.  The irony, hypocritisy and bigotry is not ignored--perhaps it's an opportunity to stick one in the eye of the Dobson crowd.

So poor delicate flower Kevin whines about making sexuality an issue, or something like that.  What, do we not celebrate the first black person to be elected to Congress, or the first woman?  The hooting and hollering is not about homosexuality per se and certainly not about it "being sordid".  It's that a man belonging to a particular minority--one that his own party goes out of its way to legally constrain, implicitly (and often explicitly) condemn and otherwise squash--was being elevated to a position of power.

Yes, "some people" made some rather sordid jokes about it.  FLOOR ACTION.  Gay agenda.  Toasters.  Teeheehee!  What better way to rub it in, as it were, than to take that stereotype and, well...flaunt it?

Now that it's rather widely known that Dreier is gay, and that might have played a part in his being passed over as Majority Leader, it keeps the message alive: the GOP doesn't care about black people, gay people, or muppets (obscure reference alert).  And that is the truth, isn't it?

ntodd