RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

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

12/31/2012

NOM's Roback Morse: Why can't a 'very masculine woman' satisfy a gay man?

by Jeremy Hooper

After promoting an article headlined "Yes, gay is a choice. Get Over it." six-figure-compensated National Organization For Marriage employee Jennifer Roback Morse proceeds to have this jaw-droppingly reductive exchange about feminism, gender roles, attraction, and associated nonsense:

201212310844
[Jennifer Roback Morse's Facebook wall]

No, Jen (and Tony)—when we say that gender is irrelevant, we mean that it is not the roadblock in terms of abilities (be it in career, parenting, loving bonds, etc.) that the rigid social conservatives have made it out to be. We are saying, rightly, that the portrait of the American family comes in many forms, and that the ultimate relevance is not where you all typically place it: in the groin area, mainly. We are saying that two mothers and two fathers can be just as fantastic (or as bad) at parenting as one of each, not because one half of a same-gender couple has to pretend he or she is of another gendered role but because the traditionally gendered roles are far from the happy home guarantors that the "family values" crowd has insisted they are.

Saying that gender is not a barrier or limitation (or special enhancement, in the inverse) is not even close to saying that gender is detached from attraction and the overall biology of desire. It is the height of anti-intellectualism to suggest that it is.

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