Guy on the Plane

[Cadaverous Pallor]

After the usual humiliation at the security check and the usual wait for the boarding call, I ended up on the tiny commuter jet next to Mr. Random Stranger. Average height and weight, receding hairline, small round glasses, tie. Two seats on this side of the single aisle, so we struck up the conversation of inconvenience.

First impression - gay. Definitely gay. My gaydar isn't great but this guy lisped like a gay rattlesnake.

Under a minute later we came to the standard question on a Sunday night flight, which is, what did you do in town over the weekend? His response included the words "Republican Committee."

Ok, so maybe he wasn't gay. He was definitely dressed for a political rally. And my gaydar sucks, right? For a split second I saw him checking my reaction to his words. All I could fumble was "Oh, cool."

Most of the rest of the flight I considered asking him to elaborate on his affiliation with the Republican Party. Especially after what happened next.

I explained about my husband's business trip. It is the reason I was in SF, after all. But his response caught me so off guard I completely forget the actual subject of his sentence. All I know is that he mentioned HIS husband.

"Did I hear that right," I thought, "or was that my mental overlay for his words?" Nope, he definitly said the words "my husband". So. Openly gay, Republican Committee, check.

I was about to give up on the guy when we started down the runway. He crossed himself, seriously crossed himself, twice.

This was when my mind shifted from "weird guy" to "poor fcker."

Before the captain allowed the use of my iPod to forget this bizarre person, we talked more idle talk, and he said "Lent is coming up!" as if he figured I followed Lent, and he mentioned what he was doing for Lent very matter-of-factly, and then mentioned his husband again, and even pointed to his very prominent wedding ring. It was almost more than I could stand. I brought up that I had been kosher as a child just to shift the conversation and to get him to shut up.

I was uncomfortable beyond belief. I couldn't deal with this guy. I mean, if he had said Republican, and Catholic, and lisped, then I would have been like ok, he's a self-hater, how awful for him, I hope he wasn't "rehabilitated", or maybe my gaydar sucks, yeah, I'd hope it was shtty gaydar, and let him go on with his life, and whatever. But a fcking wedding ring, and no problem telling people....no closet here. Being a former Republican myself, and a former follower of fully organized religious beliefs, I can somewhat grok where he's coming from, but dude, at that point in my life even I was forced to closet many things about myself in order to make it work.

I felt like I should say something. That sitting here nodding at him like he was a rational person was aiding and abetting. I kept looking out the window at nothing but dark water. I was on the wrong side of the plane for sightseeing.

I mean, what do you say? I realized that if I opened my mouth at all I would give away the turmoil he made me feel. That no matter how I phrased it, it would still come out as "you are supporting groups that do not embrace you." Or worse, "you are supporting groups that want to show you off and say that they are inclusive, even as they seek to wipe you off the face of the earth."

As soon as I could I turned on my music and tried not to think about it, but I was on the brink of saying something the rest of the time I was with him, up until the moment I saw him embrace his husband, who had come to pick him up.

As a person who continually wrestles with my own internalized paradoxes and conflicting irrationalities, this man's existance was nails on a chalkboard.

[€uroMeinke]

There are plenty of "Log Cabin Club" (Gay Republicans) in Long Beach - perhaps they should be Libertarian, but they part of that "big tent" republican ideal that still lives among groups like this - quietly working change from within. The one's I knew, the party affiliation was all about the fiscal responsibility message of the party.

As for gay Catholics, heck I work with at least one them.

In either case, they are the one's most likely to change things.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

In either case, they are the one's most likely to change things.You may be right. Humanizing the opposition leads to acceptance, and working with gays would help, I'd suppose.

I can't help but think that this guy is going to be rejected by everyone that he loves at some point, but he's already openly gay anyway....hmm.

[€uroMeinke]

There's a growing presence of African Americans in the Republican Party - I think they are there for the same reason, though some feel they are traitors to their race.

In some sense they have a greater voice than in a party that expects their support without consult.

[Janie]

At least, his name wasn't Gaylord Focker.

[Not Afraid]

Wierd guy? Sounds pretty much like an empowered person to me. Go dude!

[Moonliner]

Is it possible he was there protesting the republican committee? :confused:

[€uroMeinke]

Is it possible he was there protesting the republican committee? :confused:

Flying home to the OC? Doubtful ;)
(he said invoking a whole other set of stereotypes)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

At least, his name wasn't Gaylord Focker.I never learned his name!

[Janie]

I never learned his name!

Maybe his name IS Gaylord Focker and didn't want to tell you!!!!:eek:

[Not Afraid]

I love this quote, but I think the word "children" is too limiting.

Instead of being presented with stereotypes by age, sex, color, class, or religion, children must have the opportunity to learn that within each range, some people are loathsome and some are delightful. Margaret Mead

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I think that what limits my point of view is that I'm very uncomfortable with hypocracy. It's like how some people freak out over dust mites. I know that I'm riddled with it, and that it's all over the place, but I can't accept it.

When I realized that the political party that I had joined did not believe what I believed, I left. When I found that my new political party did not believe what I believed, I abandoned it too. When I came to terms with the fact that my religion held assertions that opposed my own assertions about life, I dropped it.

It may seem very black and white, but how could I sleep at night otherwise? You can't pick and choose. Either you want the Republican party to succeed or you don't. If the Republican party succeeds, we have bans on gay marriage. Many states already have this in place. Either you believe the bible was written with the influence of God, or you don't. The bible says that homosexuals should be killed. If God wrote it, how could you live with that?

I can see what € said about fighting from within, but after what I've seen the Republicans do in the past few years, I am convinced that there is no changing the basic tenets of the party. For crying out loud, it's 2006, and they're still trying to put religion back into public schools.

If this guy is happy, I guess there's nothing I can say about it. But from my perspective, he is a tool of the right. He is being used. He is not going to fix anything; instead, he is empowering his oppressors.

I'm willing to bet that there are people out there who would feel that I'm a tool empowering my oppressors. It's all about perspective.

[Not Afraid]

For me, I rarely see the world in black and white. It's all about shades of gray and rarely do I actually witness black and white. Maybe it comes with the grey hair, but I see a lot more fascination with shades of grey than I ever did with black and white. (Except for the hair - all grey must go!)

[€uroMeinke]

Political Parties are collective entities made up of individuals - there are both similarities and differences. Look at party platforms over time and you'll see they are hardly as concrete as the pretend to be.

Of course, as an anarchist I reject all collective entities including this one.

[blueerica]

Yes, I hate being a part of an entity, but by being human, I am automatically registered into a collective somehow, am I not?

I abandoned political parties long ago, as I also abandoned my willingness to worry about what strangers do, think, or feel. I'd rather look at the actions of others as quixotic, and leave it at that. Or perhaps plunge deeper into the story and learn where it is that one soul came from that dropped him to where he is today.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I know about the shades of grey, but it's a fact - if the Republicans are in power, lots of things happen that I don't agree with. If the Democrats are in power, same deal. This is why I do not belong to either of them, and could not even accept the Libertarian party to a full degree.

I don't like joining things that I can't fully support.

ETA: I myself AM a shade of grey. I am neither here nor there on a lot of issues, which is why I don't commit to them.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I abandoned political parties long ago, as I also abandoned my willingness to worry about what strangers do, think, or feel. I'd rather look at the actions of others as quixotic, and leave it at that. Or perhaps plunge deeper into the story and learn where it is that one soul came from that dropped him to where he is today.Totally. I found this guy so facinating, I wish I could have questioned him on it. I knew I wouldn't be able to do it though, and wisely kept my mouth shut before I dug myself a hole.

Chalk it up to another episode of people watching.

[Not Afraid]

Yes, I hate being a part of an entity, but by being human, I am automatically registered into a collective somehow, am I not?

I abandoned political parties long ago, as I also abandoned my willingness to worry about what strangers do, think, or feel. I'd rather look at the actions of others as quixotic, and leave it at that. Or perhaps plunge deeper into the story and learn where it is that one soul came from that dropped him to where he is today.

Wise words, woman.

[Capt Jack]

dunno. personally, I think maybe you should have said something/asked. I'm willing to bet you'd be far from the first. I'm also willing to bet the guy has more than one really good comeback/answer to the numerous (and Im sure often substantially less polite) detractors he MUST encounter in any and/or all of his affiliated groups. No way........NO...POSSIBLE...WAY he hasnt had to address exactly your concerns at some point.

Very openly gay catholic republican? yeah, hes had to defend himself/knock someone down a notch or two/educate more than one person Im sure. chances are hes pretty good at it


I'd have been curious to hear what he'd have to say.

[tracilicious]

You have a lot more self control than I do, CP. I would have delved deeper. Not out of judgement, just curiousity. I get myself in trouble with that though. I encountered a Collie rescuer at the Scottish Highland Games last weekend who had her dogs debarked. When I asked how that affected them socially, she said, "They like it because they don't get the crap beat out of them for barking." :eek: I was like, uh...

[BarTopDancer]

I totally see what you're saying CP and while it probably would have been a bad idea to say what you were thinking it'd still be interesting to hear why an openly gay man would support a party that has been hijacked by religious wingnuts. I'd add a comment about religion too, but I suspect it's easier to change political affiliation then religious affiliation.

[Capt Jack]

I encountered a...who had her dogs debarked. When I asked how that affected them socially, she said, "They like it because they don't get the crap beat out of them for barking." :eek: I was like, uh...


oh man, that would have been all but impossible for me to resist getting :mad: over that

[innerSpaceman]

While I can appreciate your not wanting to rock the boat on an airplane, I think you missed a great opportunity for an interesting discussion with a total stranger.

No biggie ... but think about that next time you're presented with a similar situation. If someone you don't know but are stuck with for an hour says things that totally press your buttons .... why not see it as having a purpose, the least of which would be to have the conversation that - you being strangers - risks nothing but expresses so very much?

[Cadaverous Pallor]

While I can appreciate your not wanting to rock the boat on an airplane, I think you missed a great opportunity for an interesting discussion with a total stranger.

No biggie ... but think about that next time you're presented with a similar situation. If someone you don't know but are stuck with for an hour says things that totally press your buttons .... why not see it as having a purpose, the least of which would be to have the conversation that - you being strangers - risks nothing but expresses so very much?
Like I said - I know that no matter what I would have said, it would have come out wrong. And I didn't feel like making this guy feel belittled or labeled. I knew that I'd be at the very least an annoying person to him. That seemed enough of a risk to me to keep quiet.

Believe me (and as many of you know), I sure can mangle delicate conversations. Sometimes I am smart enough to keep my mouth shut.

As an aside, add to that the fact that I was (and still am) plenty sick. By the time the plane landed I was in a good deal of pain from the pressure in my ears. I may not have been in pain when were talking but I wasn't in a feisty mood either.

[jdramj]

You know, maybe he opened up to you because you seemed like a nice person who would listen and not judge and needed to talk to someone?

Or maybe he is just completely confortable in his own skin, in his relationship, in his politics, and in his religion and feels he can freely discuss any of these aspects, a free spirit.

[tracilicious]

oh man, that would have been all but impossible for me to resist getting :mad: over that

I was so stunned I didn't know what to say. I just sort of played it off like she must be joking and said something like, "No, we don't hit dogs," while petting one of her collie's. Then she went into something about shock collars and having fifteen dogs and I just had to leave. Honestly, I've never met a breed specific rescuer that wasn't nuts. And I've known quite a few. [/hijack]

[Janie]

You know, maybe he opened up to you because you seemed like a nice person who would listen and not judge and needed to talk to someone?

Or maybe he is just completely confortable in his own skin, in his relationship, in his politics, and in his religion and feels he can freely discuss any of these aspects, a free spirit.

Maybe but could he be trying for a shock factor to see if CP had something to say about it?

I've known quite few people like that especially at airports while waiting in the line to board the plane.

[Alex]

From one point of view, if you can only join a group you support wholeheartedly then you will either never join any group or can only join small single issue groups.

And I know several gay people for whom gay marriage is not even in the top ten of their personal big issues. They would like to have it but other issues are more important to them. I know one gay man back in Seattle who is essentially a single issue voter. If you're not pro-life you aren't getting his vote. He's not religious at all, but has just reached the personal moral conclusion that after conception, a fetus is something worthy of legal protection and that worthiness is more important than just about anything else he can think of.

Is that hypocrisy to be gay but not consider gay rights the most important issue, or is it just a different prioritization than yours? Perhaps for this man, the Republican position on the war is more important than the position on gay rights. Or he thinks it is an important issue but doesn't agree that one party is more likely to produce the desired result than the other (or perhaps Republicans are more likely to be the tipping point in a kind of "only Nixon could go to China" and my view that only the Republicans could get a black elected president).

While both parties are big buckets containing people with a wide range of views, I do think that overall the left has a bit more of a tendency to say "you're with me on everything or you not with me at all" than the right (though there are plenty of examples of such factions on either side). In the end it all settles down to arguments about which end of the egg to break and whether you can live with the other viewpoint or it means war (figuratively or literally).

[€uroMeinke]

I haven't renounced my citizenship yet - but when I travel abroad, I identify as Californian...

[Not Afraid]

Yes, our nationality is Californian.

[mistyisjafo]

It's not so odd that you met a Catholic Republican Gay man. I hope he's trying to change the Republican party for the better. His beliefs are definately at conflict with his life style but it sounds like he's got it worked out some how. Just remember, not all Republicans are in favor of the Religious Right-Wing .

As for myself, I'm a Straight Agnostic Republican Female, Semi Traditionalist Feminist, with Liberal Tendencies that Extremest Right-Wing Republicans Hate.

Yes, our nationality is Californian. I always say I'm "Native American Californian". Haha

[€uroMeinke]

I embrace cognitive dissonance

[alphabassettgrrl]

I encountered a Collie rescuer at the Scottish Highland Games last weekend who had her dogs debarked. When I asked how that affected them socially, she said, "They like it because they don't get the crap beat out of them for barking." :eek: I was like, uh...
Yeah, that'd be my reaction, too.

I've always found it odd the groups people associate themselves with. All people, but especially people going to groups that hate them.

Then again, the local lesbians aren't thrilled with me and I have been known to still show up.

[innerSpaceman]

It's not a matter of people belonging to groups with which they don't agree. It's a matter of having an interesting conversation with someone about the reasons why, their priorities, how they deal with or rationalize the conflict of interests, etc., etc.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a gay Catholic Republican, but it sure would be fascinating to find out how such a person works it out in his own mind to belong to groups that have a stated desire to erase him from existence.


* * * * * *

And yes, I always identify myself as a Californian when out of state or out of country. The reaction you get to "I'm an American" is blecch, and the reaction you get to "I'm a Californian" is ahhh, wow!

(It's not a pose either; I really think of myself as a Californian rather than an American. Maybe it's the same kind of denial dance I might do if I were a gay Catholic Republican.)

[Gemini Cricket]

So much to say. But I will limit it to this:

Where should you be to cause the greatest change with a close-minded organization? From within that organization or by signing up with an opposing organization?

I ask myself that all the time. Sometimes I regret officially resigning from the Catholic Church. Most times not. But if I were some Catholic leader, my eyebrow would raise if I received a letter saying 'I'm a gay Catholic and I am pro gay marriage.'

Just a thought. Maybe that's his angle.




If not, I would have hit him with my purse.

:D

[alphabassettgrrl]

There's nothing inherently wrong with a gay Catholic Republican, but it sure would be fascinating to find out how such a person works it out in his own mind to belong to groups that have a stated desire to erase him from existence.
I agree with you there.

[€uroMeinke]

While the idea of a gay catholic republican is the most interesting option, I recall that in my company one of our execs who often acts as a political lobbyist is openly talks about his husband. He'd be just the sort attending such political meetings. Was he a short blond guy by any chance?

[wendybeth]

We recently removed a mayor for innapropriate behavior with underage persons, largely done on the public's dime and time. This same person was rabidly anti-gay when a member of the state senate, and even tried to criminalize sex between minors. It turns out that over the years he's abused his political power to solicit sex with very young men, and now he claims to be gay and a victim of descrimination. The gay community refutes this characterisation- they say (and rightly so) that he is primarily a pedophile and they will not accept him. Turns out he hung out with several notorious pedophiles back in the seventies, and there are many accusations against him from his alleged victims. He is a sadistic bastard, and he has hurt the gay community and countless young people. There have been many like him in the past- Roy Cohn comes to mind- and while I don't pretend to understand their motivation, it does seem that eventually they get their karmic payback.

(I'm not saying that this gentleman was in any way like our ex-mayor, but I do understand the confusion that arises when people belong to groups that are hostile to them. Perhaps, like Cheney's daughter, they hope to change things from inside the party, but it seems rather masochistic to me).

[Gemini Cricket]

Perhaps, like Cheney's daughter, they hope to change things from inside the party...
I had to comment on this. Mary Cheney is lame. She wasn't allowed to stand with the rest of the Cheneys during the RNC and she seemed fine with that. Bleh. She has a cozy 100K job working for daddy and the anti-gay Bush Kingdom... Double Bleh.
but it seems rather masochistic to me
:shrugs:
Meh. Some are 'S' some are 'M'.
:D

[Cadaverous Pallor]

While the idea of a gay catholic republican is the most interesting option, I recall that in my company one of our execs who often acts as a political lobbyist is openly talks about his husband. He'd be just the sort attending such political meetings. Was he a short blond guy by any chance?Nope, average height, dark hair.

I guess there are more than one of these guys...;)

[MouseWife]

Question: Was Cheney's daughter asked not to be there or did she decline? Like the Bush girls were a plus. :rolleyes:

Very difficult subject.

[Gemini Cricket]

Question: Was Cheney's daughter asked not to be there or did she decline?
The official word is that it was Mary's decision to refrain from appearing on stage with her family but she did sit in a VIP booth with her partner the whole time. Word is is that she was advised not to go up there. Either way, she caved and is weak on gay rights for helping daddy with his anti-gay agenda.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Tom and I had our first date attending a documentary premiere at the AFI fest called "Gay Republicans"-- about the Log Cabin Republicans Chris mentioned earlier. (One of Tom's friends produced it.) It was a fascinating piece just because I couldn't look away from the car accident, but it made me feel extremely sad for the people featured. They seemed, like Groucho Marx, to want to be a part of a party that didn't want them.

[MouseWife]

The official word is that it was Mary's decision to refrain from appearing on stage with her family but she did sit in a VIP booth with her partner the whole time. Word is is that she was advised not to go up there. Either way, she caved and is weak on gay rights for helping daddy with his anti-gay agenda.

Cheney is even more of a chump for allowing his daughter to be treated that way.

And, Bush even more of a chimp for letting his daughters be a part of the 'show' {from what I remember}.

John John was adorable at, what, 3? They were not.

Am I derailing? Sorry. :blush:

[Drince88]

I didn't see anyone mention this one: It's not just Catholic's that commemorate lent. Episcopalians do, as do many (some?) other Christian groups.

(And many 'heathens' celebrate the blow-out before lent, especially in my part of the country!)

[SzczerbiakManiac]

My Presby friends (as they call themselves) also observe Lent.

[Prudence]

Methodists obeserve Lent in the sense that the banners change, themed devotionals appear, and the Sunday bulletin says "First Sunday of Lent," etc... I've even been to a Methodist Ash Wednesday service. But as far as the "giving up" ritual, that's strictly optional and likely doesn't come up unless you're in a prayer group or home church or whathaveyou.