RECENT  POSTS:  » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » 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  

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

06/30/2010

The costumes might be funny if they didn't cost-u-&-me

by Jeremy Hooper

With the way the social conservatives handle their anti-open service editorial decisions, we're really starting to wonder if they realize that DADT repeal is actually about people, not clothing. Because over the past few months, we've watched as these "values" groups have adorned soldiers with rainbow headbands...

Screen Shot 2010-06-30 At 9.21.49 Am
[CWA]

...prideful dog tags....

Screen Shot 2010-06-30 At 9.22.12 Am-1
[FRC]

..and now, from Focus on the Family, some sort of weird boot-buttons:

06-29-10
[FOtF]

Not only is it oh-so incredibly childish: In a weird way, it fully highlights just how willfully misleading these folks are when it comes to this issue. Because just like the "behaviors" that they claim will escalate under an inclusive military are complete canards for a military that has certain standards and protocols independent of sexual orientation, the same military also holds dress codes that are strict and unwavering regardless of any individual or group's personal identities. So really, when these "family" groups use this imagery, they are telling us that they don't understand the true matter at hand, and that they only hope to scare people with shorthand graphics which imply that gays are forcibly, visibly "pushing" their "agenda." And in doing so, the Focus on the Familys of the world are showing everyone that their concerns are purely cosmetic, striking at the homo-hostile surface rather than the humane root.

They may think they're clever by altering these graphics. But to us and a growing number of Americans, it's their own "pro-family" camouflage that has been compromised:

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails