RECENT  POSTS:  » What must drive the anti-gay activists crazy » I can't keep pretending to care about [insert activist] saying [insert ridiculous thing] » NOM president: Marriage ruling is 'Dred Scott decision of our time' » Episcopalians approve ceremonies for all legally-qualified couples » NOM's wishful (and disrespectful) thinking: SCOTUS ruling is 'illegitimate' » Focus on the Family creates itemized price list for 'saving' marriage » Fox News pays this person for his opinions » Pat Buchanan doubles down on 1983 column claiming AIDS is nature's punishment » Is NOM really going to push for a constitutional convention on marriage? » Video: Great piece from 'CBS Sunday Morning' highlights sweet success  

« 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