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


Privatized social insecurity: It's not for gays!

by Jeremy Hooper

A resident of Eau Claire, Wisonsin, by the name of Nancy Shafer has written a letter to the editor of her local paper, the Leader-Telegram, asking why gays can't just shut up and live their lives with the doors, blinds, and their neighbors' minds closed. Here's but a sample:

If someone is gay, why can't they keep it private, confined to their homes? I don't hate gay people, just the lifestyle; it's not natural. They and their mates should have the same rights as any couple (man and woman) to have insurance on each other, to be able to care for the other if ill, all but the marriage vows. It just isn't what God intended to be the norm.

They have the right to life and pursuit of happiness like anyone else, but the line should be drawn at same-sex marriages. They are still human beings and should be treated as such, and I definitely do not wish to harm these folks in any way. There is no reason to beat them or kill them like what has happened in the past. We have a right to say how we feel, but not to take it upon ourselves to punish them. This is their choice, not ours. They will have to answer to God, not us.

Oh, well at least she didn't find "reason to beat [us] or kill [us] like what has happened in the past." Personally we would've thought that goes without saying. But then again, we also would've thought it's obvious to everyone why, exactly, we gays refuse to position our lives and loves as negotiations towards which heterosexuals can set whatever parameters make them most comfortable!!

Why can't we just keep our lives and loves private? Well, because our existences aren't covert spy missions, that's why. And Ms. Shafer, with all due respect, we're not wishing, hoping, or filing formal papers requesting that hetero-normative society agree to fold us into the mix. We're demanding that our actualities be respected as what they are: A part of actuality!

Keep homosexual lifestyle private [Leader-Telegram]

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

Your thoughts

I'm willing to keep my "lifestyle" private as long as heterosexuals are willing to do the same. For any willing to give it a go, that means:

1. Never hold hands in public again, or kiss, or act affectionately.

2. Never again refer to your spouse as "spouse," "husband," or "wife." You can say "friend." And don't say it awkwardly, like, "Have you met my ... friend?"

3. Don't refer to your offspring as your children. Call them your "very young roommates." Implying that they are your children gives everyone a mental image of how they were conceived, and really rubs our noses in your lifestyle. If I wanted to think about you as a sexual being, I would rent a porn.

4. Clear your desk at work of all personal effects.

5. No more weddings. No ceremonies, and especially no receptions. A wedding reception makes me ill -- it's like a party where everyone has gathered to celebrate sexual behavior in public. City hall will have to do, until we change the law to allow marriages to be done privately, through the mail.

If you're willing to agree to these ground rules, Ms. Shafer, I'm willing to keep my life "private, confined to the home."

Get to it!

Posted by: Mark | Jul 22, 2008 11:07:19 AM

Funny, this is the exact opposite thinking I have for people of faith. Personally, I think christians should keep their relationship with Jesus private. its okay to pray and go to church and for people to see that. They just can't use their personal faith to influence public policy. I mean there isn't a Separation of Homosexual and State but there, most certainly, is a Separation of Church and State.

Posted by: Sam | Jul 22, 2008 11:28:00 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails