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


Anti-gay anti-gays in the anti-gayest way an anti-gay can ever anti-gay (because, ya see, she's anti-gay)

by Jeremy Hooper

 Good As You Images  Good As You Images  Good As You Images  Good As You Images  Docs Harvey-1-2 1-1On Monday, we briefly told you about the new web site from Linda Harvey, wherein the extremely anti-gay personality purports to tell the "truth" about homosexuality to school-aged kids and their parents. And basically the whole gist of what we had to say then involved the way Linda has entitled her site "TruthAtSchool.org," making it sound as if she is working from a playbook filled with irrefutable facts, when in actuality it's filled with junk science, baseless claims, one-sided opinions, and outright lies about the LGBT population. While we would still challenge her bias if her anti-gay site were called LindaHarvey'sPersonalOpinionsAtSchool.org, at least then people wouldn't be lured into believing that she has the lock-solid facts on her side. So yea, we were a little annoyed by this new development on the anti-gay Internet landscape.

Well today, Ms. Harvey has gone over to the Concerned Women For America, where she has conducted an audio chat with CWA's Matt Barber and Martha Kleder. And while all three say many annoying things in their quest to paint gays as God-less and diseased, the most annoying part of the chat for us came towards the end, when Harvey tried to explain how and why her encouragement of a gay-less world is "not about people, but unsafe behavior." She says:


Comments that highlight the biggest, most annoying flaw about those who so militantly oppose gay rights: They will never for one second consider that homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is part of one's being. They know that the only way they can get away with their "love the sinner, hate the sin" approach is if they convince the public that we gays made the choice to live a life that would subject us to being shunned by families, beaten up by bullies, banned from legal recognition, and forced to fight for basic human rights. Just like Ms. Harvey so brazenly claims that homosexuality is not genetic (despite no evidence to support her claim), that it is changeable (despite the medical community's non-support for the idea), and that it is high risk [despite the fact that it is risky behavior and the outside introduction of disease that is high-risk, not the orientation (be straight or gay)], she is also bold enough to say gay love lives are "undignified," "harmful," and destructive, yet deny that she is "anti-gay"?! This is outrageous!

Love, dating, sex, intimacy -- these are human concepts. What gives people like Linda Harvey the right to detach these concepts from the internal truths of gays and lesbians?! In her personal opinion (not fact-based truth), "gay behavior" is not something in which people need to engage. But guess what, Ms. Harvey? For this gay male writer (and presumably for yourself), vaginal intercourse is not something in which I need or wish to engage! And before you suggest I could be "changed," know that I have been physically intimate with a number of women. But just as luck would have it, that pesky case of the gay that I was fighting always made those situations less than, shall we say, firm. I, like so many of my heterosexual and homosexual counterparts, have known my actuality for as long as I could remember (even when I didn't fully know what it was all about). Long before there was the "behavior," there was the characteristic. And engaging in the behavior that was "deviant" for me (heterosexual intimacy), did nothing to change my truth!! If you oppose my life being lived as it was intended, then you oppose ME!

It is time we all stand up and stop allowing these anti-gay crusaders to wash their hands of their bias in order to make themselves sleep a little easier at night. If they wish to start websites, propose legislation, host radio programs, issue press releases, and write commentaries that are all geared towards making people look at gay people in a less-than-favorable light, then this is America -- they have the right and ability to do so. However, they must own their bias! No one is "twisting" the "traditional viewpoint" by calling Linda Harvey anti-gay. Perhaps if Linda Harvey was not building her life around twisting information so that it bends in her queer-antipathetic direction, then she would more clearly see the actual truth.

Truth at School [CWA]

**One note for clarity: This writer does not think that any and everyone who is opposed to gay marriage or other gay rights concepts is necessarily "anti-gay." Some need to be educated, some need to grow, and others have certain mental blocks that they need to overcome. However, those like Linda Harvey and Matt Barber who make a living demonizing gay folks -- they can and should be referred to as anti-gay! You can go right ahead and call me anti-antigay if you wish; anti-"pro-family" or anti-"the traditional viewpoint," however, is a misnomer.

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

Your thoughts

The saddest thing about the whole Linda Harvey flap is the straight world's "ownership" of disgust at all things unnatural to their own world schemas. I distinctly remember, years ago when I was younger, seeing the image of two masculine men kissing passionately. I thought it was one of the most beautiful things I had ever seen. The teenagers around me reacted as if they had been hit by a flaming bag of poop. Do I gag and yell and want to beat up a man and woman kissing passionately? No! I am conditioned to accept that. Doesn't do a thing for me, but I'm used to it. The more we are all out and proud as a GLBT minority, the more we will be accepted. Folks like Linda Harvey (and my parents, unfortunately) will literally have to leave this earth before we are truly understood and our population is truly "shameless" (Linda's biggest fear). Linda is trying to pass this lazy, uncompassionate, and unreasonable disgust of hers on to society's children. We cannot allow that to occur.

Posted by: Scott | Aug 2, 2007 12:02:49 PM

Only recently have I noticed the use of this terminology likening what we gay people do to being damaging to both our bodies and our spirits becoming frequent and my chief concern in response is this -- there is nothing we gay people do physically that is not already being done by straight people, and there is nothing being done by gay people emotionally or personality-wise that is not already being done by straight people. So, what's the problem? Is it "damaging" any more or any less because gay people do it? Is it really "damaging" or just something they themselves wish not to do? Claims such as these need to become supported by unequivocal medical facts or they are just finding a new method to stir up hysteria. Yet further exampling of the fact that the straight world is far more upset by the sex we have than anything to do with our orientation. If they want to "heal" us by pointing out this so-called damage, they need to heal their heterosexual brothers and sisters just as much. Where is their outrage toward them?

Posted by: Marty | Aug 6, 2007 4:41:51 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails