RECENT  POSTS:  » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/17/2006

On foxes, henhouses, and mother-in-laws

by Jeremy Hooper

Wa06J33 NormalIn a piece decrying Condoleeza Rice for recognizing the mother of new Global AIDS Coordinator Mark Dybul's partner as Dybul's "mother-in-law" at his recent swearing-in ceremony, Agape Press quotes the Family Research Council's Peter Sprigg as saying:

"We have to face the fact that putting a homosexual in charge of AIDS policy is a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," .... "But even beyond that, the deferential treatment that was given not only to him but his partner and his partner's family by the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is very distressing."

Dual condemnations to which we reply:

Putting a gay man "in charge of AIDS policy is a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse?!?!" Uhm, except unlike the fox, who would be likely to eat or attack the hens, gay men are the ones among us who want to cure, vaccinate, and eradicate this pandemic more than anyone else! The fox/henhouse idiomatic saying would be more applicable if a member of the "pro-family" community, such as Mr. Sprigg, were put in charge of AIDS policy. In that scenario, the name of the disease would likely be changed back to GRIDS, and chastity belts and quarantining are possibilities we can imagine with frightening ease.

So while the topic Mr. Sprigg is wanting to harp on in this
Agape piece is the fact that Ms. Rice referred to the mother of Mr. Dybul's partner as his 'mother-in-law' rather than as 'the woman who birthed his honey but who isn't yet his legal relative,' we'd much rather talk about the sort of thought process that could possibly lead someone to imply that a gay man may somehow exploit his position DEALING WITH A GLOBAL PANDEMIC!!!! Mr. Sprigg's words are just another in a long line of attempts by his community to demonize gays, as they work to exploit public misinformation for their own biased, discriminatory gain. They stigmatize us as wild and crazy perverts, then they turn around and criticize us when our family bonds strong. They blame us for the AIDS crisis, then question our motives us when we steer the cure-seeking ship. Their one and only true goal in terms of our lives is a society where we are shunned, condemned, or non-existent, and to achieve this brass ring of bias, they'll lash out against anyone or anything who so much as farts in a queer-friendly manner.

They are cunning foxes, and they are hungry. Fortunately, we're not chicken.

Be sure to look out for future comments from Mr. Sprigg, wherein we predict he'll criticize us for both "having a chip on our shoulder" and calling our partner's father "Dad."

Rice's 'Mother-in-Law' Comment Raises Conservative Hackles [Agape]

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails