When perusing the swamp of troglodytic ideas in the "Homosexual Agenda"* area of FreeRepublic.com--something I don't suggest on a full stomach--I am consistently vexed by a contradictory mindset. This in itself isn't so surprising. Cognitive dissonance seems to be a way of life in right-wing world. But when it comes to the gay, the two opposite positions held simultaneously just hurts my head.
On one hand, they'll maintain that gay people choose to be so. On the other, they'll poke (sub-junior high school-level) fun at stereotypically effeminate gays or mannish lesbians. Without getting too wordy here, the one position maintains that gay people are just ordinary heteros who woke up one day and "decided" to be gay. The other one has no problem envisioning (and belittling) that subgroup in the gay population who could never pass as straight people. So which is it, FReepers? Were those gays and lesbians born "swishy" or "bull dyke" or did they choose to be born into particular bodies as well? Just askin'.
Just Askin' is a new feature at Greenlee Gazette I intend to present any time I stumble upon something weird in our daily discourse. These are rhetorical questions, but I wouldn't mind some feedback (from either side of the issue) in the comments section.
*"Homosexual Agenda" is a misnamed section on an already harshly opinionated web site. The term in question is applied by right-wingers to all gay people, as though they are homogeneous and in lockstep on some secret master plan to take over America or perhaps the world! It isn't even remotely true. I don't care if they find some master list of gay bullet points at some pro-gay rights organization. Such organizations don't even agree on issues between each other, and none are supported by all--or even most--gay people. The term is bullshit, but that isn't the worst of it.
Under this banner heading at FreeRepublic, you'll find topics that apply to gay rights issues, and a plethora of other tangentially related or even completely unrelated issues like pedophilia, incest, polygamy, bestiality. . .anything with other-than-missionary-position heterosexual sex involved, no matter how vanilla or outrageous. When reading it, one gets the impression that a) FReepers will believe anything negative about gay people presented, b) FReepers will discount anything positive about gay people, and c) FReepers act as though there are no gay people in their lives at all, and that they are free to say the most demeaning and disgusting things about them with impunity. Which hurts my head almost as much as the question that is the subject of this post!