The Gay Thread

[Chernabog]

Wow I came back to this thread to post a really good must-see Rachel Maddow clip on the right-wing media and now I gotta play catch up After I have some coffee.

PS Gn2Dlnd, your boyfriend John Hodgman is in that clip.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Except for the Daily Show I haven't seen a single opinion piece that HASN'T gone the route of calling him a closet case.

[innerSpaceman]

Really? Um, the most extensive coverage was done by Anderson Cooper over at CNN and on his own show. He never intimated any such thing, much less called him out for that.


(Though of course, many have accused Anderson of it )

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Oh, and despite Alex's handy dictionary definition of hypocrisy, I contend any self-loathing gay is guilty of it.

Well, I'm going to contend he's guilty of clipper ship since apparently what words mean isn't relevant and so we can just pick the ones we like.

As for Shirvell in particular, it doesn't matter if he's a homo-hater not having gay sex - - he IS acting on his homosexuality via his obsession with Armstrong.

And you know this how? If he isn't gay he's doing the exact same thing but apparently being gay is not his motivation for it. Whatever that motivation is would, I presume, be a motivation a gay man can have as well.

If you want to find the technical term for that psychosis, I'll be happy to consider ceding hypocrisy.

A policy of using whatever word happens to be at hand when you don't know the right word for what you're talking about is going to cause pointless debate. I know it is a weird foible, but a lot of people start on the assumption that when someone uses a word they mean the word they say.

[innerSpaceman]

Clipper Ship it is then!

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Alex

I use the dictionary version.

Hypocrisy is to claim values that you don't actually hold. An alcoholic can advocate sobriety without being a hypocrite. A gay man can view homosexuality as wrong without being a hypocrite. A serial adulterer can believe adultery should be punished without being a hypocrite. A Catholic priest can commit sin without being a hypocrite.

Failing to live up to your own values is not hypocrisy. Plus, even if this guy is gay in that he is sexually and emotionally attracted to men, there's no evidence I've yet seen offered beyond he's a bit fey, that he is even violating his own values if he isn't acting on the emotions he feels.

So, I am perfectly well aware of what the word hypocrisy means. Just as I am perfectly well aware of how often it is misused.

Now, to break out the Samuel Johnson quote, which may be less exciting than a Princess Bride quote:

My Webster's New World Dictionary disagrees with you:

Pretending to be what one is not, or to feel what one does not feel; esp., a pretense of virtue, piety, etc.

[innerSpaceman]

Um, wait, what is happening?

Has Alex just been pwned on a dictionary-off?

[Alex]

Well, if we want to dictionary-off:

Random House:
- a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

The American Heritage Dictionary
- the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

Collins English Dictionary
- the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc., contrary to one's real character or actual behaviour, esp the pretence of virtue and piety

Oxford English Dictionary
- assuming a false appearance of virtue or goodness, with dissimulation of real character or inclination, especially in respect of religious life or belief.

But that's moot, because I believe the definition given by JWBear agrees with me more than him.

If simply pretending to be what you're not is hypocrisy then the word has no distinct meaning, it is simply a synonym for lying or misrepresentation. I have no doubt that Shirvell is a hypocrite on many fronts.

Now, denying or hiding homosexuality to avoid the repercussions of your own claimed beliefs would be hypocritical. But if it is your view that being gay is a sin and should in every way be suppressed then in every way suppressing your own homosexuality would not be hypocritical. Being unaware or unable to recognize your own homosexuality is not hypocritical.

To use the definition of hypocrite (as opposed to hypocrisy) from JWBear's preferred dictionary:

1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Being gay, not telling people, and engaging in gay bashing does not inherently meet either of those definitions. That is not to say that many people in that situation aren't hypocrites but it is not enough to simply show that a person espousing anti-gay positions is himself gay. Failing to live up to your own ideals is not hypocrisy, except insofar as we define the word so broadly that it no longer has any useful meaning.

And if simply lying about some aspect of yourself is hypocrisy (to stop the definition JW provided after 7 words) then that is again to broaden the word beyond value as it is simply an synonym for lying.

[innerSpaceman]

No, no, no, Alex, you are, I believe, missing a big point. Shirvell is not gay bashing. His blog and actions are not against homosexuals in general. He is stalking and blogging about one particular gay man. This reeks of obsession in the same way his persona reeks of gay.

Under the assumption he is gay, then his completely gay action of stalking and obsessing over a particular gay man while pretending not to be gay and not to be obsessed with him for that reason is hypocritical.

Granted, we have no real idea whether Shirvell is gay. He may just be, to paraphrase Sulu, a douchebag. But we gays know a gay when we see and hear one so freaking obviously, and Shirvell is not banned from setting foot on campus* because he's a general gay-basher. He's a stalker.



* the ban has been modified to allow him on campus, but he is to have no contact with Mr. Armstrong, his sole and exclusive victim.




As for the meaning of the word hypocrisy, I suggest it has simply morphed over time to encompass subsidiary but highly related concepts. The English language is constantly morphing in this fashion, and that's generally (though not always) a good thing.


Gay used to mean Happy.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Alex

But that's moot, because I believe the definition given by JWBear agrees with me more than him.

Conversly, I think the definitions you posted agree with my point as well. It's all semantics and splitting hairs, and has very little to do with the point at hand IMO.

Originally Posted by Alex

Now, denying or hiding homosexuality to avoid the repercussions of your own claimed beliefs would be hypocritical.

I certainly think that is true in his case.