Archive for June 29th, 2009

June 29, 2009

How to celebrate the Ricci ruling?

A rare legal victory for heterosexual white guys. Every blogger on the planet has already weighed in, and a notoriously homophobic honky blogger wonders what’s left to say.

Hit the tip jar. You heard me right, cracker. Andrew Jackson is a hero to oppressive white guys everywhere, so hit me with $20.

Tell you what: Let’s have a big party Saturday night to celebrate this in grand style — and you’re invited!

Everyone is invited to the Third Annual Camp FUBAR Fourth of July Fireworks & BBQ Blowout on the shores of Alabama’s beautiful Lake Weiss. (Google map showing approximate location of Camp FUBAR.)

What better way to celebrate this historic Caucasian occasion than to hang out with a bunch of Alabama rednecks and then, just after sundown, watch a genuine white guy shoot off about $800 worth of fireworks?

But you’ve got to hit the tip jar, because I’ve got to pay for my gas to drive down there and also pick up 300 feet of extra fuse. (Advanced redneck fireworks technique.)

What are you? A damned racist like Sonia Sotomayor?

Update: by Smitty
You write a post like this and don’t even throw a bone to your Porch Manqué? I feel thoroghly discriminated against, and will now formally play the race card.

June 29, 2009

Watch your back, Douthat

Ross Douthat today engages in sociological observation of the meritocratic elite in such a way as to infringe on turf claimed by David Brooks. (Via Memeorandum.)

There’s nothing really wrong with this particular Douthat column, if op-ed social criticism is what you’re looking for. But that’s some mighty pricey editorial real estate to be occupied by a latter-day Veblen cleverly commenting on what he sees on TV and reads in magazines when there’s so much important news to be reported.

A simple request, Ross: Call up Joe Lieberman’s press secretary Erica Masonhall and ask her when Lieberman plans to start holding hearings about Obama’s war on inspectors general. Maybe she’ll return a call from a Harvard-educated New York Times columnist. She sure as hell didn’t return mine.

Leave the Veblen trip to Brooks. Even the New York Times can’t afford to support every pompous op-ed windbag in Washington. You start crowding Brooks, and I’m betting he wins that competition. If he outlasted Kristol, he’ll outlast you.

Now, somebody needs to hit my tip jar.

June 29, 2009

‘It takes small people to stoop this low’


PREVIOUSLY: Says Professor William Jacobson regarding Wonkette’s despicable treatment of Sarah Palin’s year-old son, Trig. And I would amend the professor’s sentiments only to improve them by saying, “It takes gay men to stoop this low.”

Yeah, I just wrote that. And put it on the Internet.

We could reference Susan Sontag’s Notes On Camp here, or we could invite comment from various rogue lesbians — Tammy Bruce, Camille Paglia, Cynthia Yockey — who from time to time have criticized gay culture in a way that certainly cannot be denounced as “homophobic.” But rather than make an argumentum ad vericundiam, let me defend my own argument on the basis of personal observation:

  • Gay men have mother issues. This has been a subject of much controversy. Freud’s view of homosexuality as a species of mental illness, and the resulting conception of homosexuality as a psychopathology requiring therapeutic intervention, has wrought much mischief over the years. Yet Freud was certainly correct to think of homosexuality as an matter of development with roots in early childhood, particularly in the parent-child relationship. No need to indulge in elaborate symbolism or references to Greek mythology (Freud was full of crap about that) to say this: It is obvious that most gay men can’t get past the “female = Mom” hurdle in their minds. We could discuss that at length, but this is a blog, not an advanced psychology text, so let’s move on.
  • Gay men are gynophobic. Which is to say, they are repulsed by the basic physical equipment of female sexuality. They’ve got no admiration for your vajayjay, ladies. Sometimes when I’ve shared this observation with gay guys, they deny disdaining distaff genitalia. It isn’t their hatred of nookie that makes them gay, they protest, but rather their phallophilia. Methinks they protest too much, considering how scornfully gay men speak about “fish” and “fag hags” when none of the hags are around to overhear. But again this is a blog post not a psych text, so we’ll move on.
  • Gay male culture is profoundly misogynistic. One of the most absurd claims of feminism is that the fashion industry’s mistreatment of women — its depiction of them as “sex objects” who are only attractive when young, thin, beautiful, glammed-up and dressed like streetwalkers — is a manifestation of oppressive patriarchal sexism. This is a lie that could only deceive anyone so stupid they don’t notice that all men in the fashion industry are gay. To the extent that the Vogue and Cosmo are misognystic hate literature (as all Women’s Studies majors are taught), it is because they represent the typical gay man’s view of women. A blog post, not a textbook, and we move on.
  • The normalization of gay culture requires the derogation of traditional female roles. Let the student of coalition politics cease to wonder about the basis of the tactical alliance between feminists and the notoriously male-dominated gay-rights movement. One reason lesbians like Cynthia Yockey become disenchanted with the Official Gay Movement is the recognition that they’re riding in the back of the Equality Bus, and that the feminist “sisterhood” has made a cynical deal with the misogynistic gay-male Devil.

We’ll extend the rest of the argument from that last point. If they’re wrong about nearly everything else, feminists are essentially correct in saying that in traditional societies women’s status is dependent upon their success in the wife-mother role. Let a woman gain fame and fortune, let her amass wealth and power and, in a traditional society, these achievements will not win her widespread admiration unless she is also a devoted wife and mother.

That there are in contemporary America successful female “role models” who are single and childless (e.g., Oprah) is testimony to how far we are from being a traditional society. Yet it is still the fact that the overwhelming majority of young women, imagining their futures, do not dream of reaching midlife as barren spinsters. (Yeah, I just wrote that. And put it on the Internet.)

Given the choice between being Oprah and Sarah Palin, then, most young women would rather be like Sarah — and not merely because Todd is such a tasty hunk of prime beef.

The best examination of the feminist movement’s implacable hostility toward traditional women who prefer the wife-and-mother role is Carolyn Graglia’s Domestic Tranquility: A Brief Against Feminism. Graglia argues quite persuasively that contemporary feminism’s organizational objective is to make the traditional family — Dad as workplace breadwinner, Mom as domestic goddess — an impossibility.

Many gay men are eager to assist that project, because just as the traditional family model celebrates a certain kind of woman, it also celebrates a certain kind of man — the kind of man the gay man is emphatically not. Furthermore, the domestic wife-mother type of woman is a universal object of horror and ridicule in gay culture.

So we return to Ken Layne and Wonkette’s vicious hostility toward Sarah Palin, a hostility quite sufficient to encompass even one-year-old Trig. Is Ken Layne actively and exclusively homosexual? I don’t know, and it’s irrelevant to the point that this type of hostility toward Palin — a hostility focused laser-like on her maternal qualities — is a classic expression of gay-male “camp” culture.

A hetero swine like Letterman makes “slutty flight attendant” jokes about Palin’s looks. Gay men make tasteless jokes about Palin as a mother. This is a blog, not a textbook, but if you’ve read this far, you can generalize from that observation to consider why Andrew Sullivan has spend months mucking around the fever swamps of Trig-trutherism.

Now, let’s talk “homophobia.” When discussing trends — in politics, economics, art, whatever — it becomes necessary to generalize, to speak broadly about categories of phenomena. The social critic is required to treat human beings in this general and categorical manner and, in so doing, risks offending the subjects of discussion.

If we are discussing gangsta rap, for example, we might generalize by saying that gangsta rappers celebrate criminality, brutality toward women, and to make much of the classic material symbols of pimp life — Benzes, Perignon, da Benjamins, bling, et cetera. This invites the hiphop fan to cite some outlier example, e.g., MC Geek, the gangsta coder whose raps are about HTML, Java and Linxux platforms.

This argument-by-exception technique — where all generalizations are impermissible because in any categories there will be outliers and exceptions who do not exemplify the categorical norm — is the enemy of sound reasoning. I am certain that there must be hillbillies with good teeth who’ve never played a banjo or touched a drop of moonshine; it is nevertheless the case that if you’re looking for moonshine-swilling banjo-pickers with bad teeth, your search will be more productive in West Virginia than in Rhode Island. (Don Surber hasn’t linked me in a while.)

So it is with my gay friends. Just last week, I was hanging out at a Reason magazine event with the proudly gay Bruce Majors and the proudly lesbian Cynthia Yockey. They were the epitome of courtesy and hospitality not only toward me, but also toward my 20-year daughter. whom I’d picked up at Reagan Airport that afternoon and dragged along for the event.

Does Bruce fit the description of the Oedipal-conflicted misogynistic gynophobe hostile to the traditional family? Well, we could argue about gynophobia and Bruce would say no, he’s simply a phallophile, but Bruce is a capital-L Libertarian, which means, hey, whatever floats your boat.

Libertarianism means, or at least ought to mean, that your preferences and prejudices are of no political consequence. If Bruce is prejudiced against the vajayjay, that’s his own business. And if my own preference for the vajayjay borders on the monomanical — I’m a father of six, after all — that’s between me and Mrs. Other McCain.

The anti-Palin agenda of Wonkette therefore expresses the attitude of an extremely un-libertarian type of gay man, a man who is not at all like my friend, Bruce Majors.

So whether or not Ken Layne is actually gay, there can be no doubt that Ken Layne is a vicious cocksucker.

Yeah, I just wrote that. And put it on the Internet.

June 29, 2009

89 miles of guts

by Smitty (h/t The Corner)

God rest this fellow webfoot. The Democrat Herald reports the demise of retired Marine Corps Col. Kenneth L. Reusser.

Reusser flew 253 combat missions in World War II, Korea and Vietnam and was shot down in all three, five times in all.
His 59 medals included two Navy Crosses, four Purple Hearts and two Legions of Merit.
In 1945, while based in Okinawa, he stripped down his F4U-4 Corsair fighter and intercepted a Japanese observation plane at a high altidude. When his guns froze, he flew his fighter into the observation plane, hacking off its tail with his propeller.
In 1950 in Korea led an attack on a North Korean tank-repair facility at Inchon, then destroyed an oil tanker almost blowing himself out of the sky.
In Vietnam he flew helicopters and was leading a rescue mission when his Huey was shot down. He needed skin grafts over 35 percent of his badly burned body.

At this point I refer you to a reply on another post, which applies even more to this man.

June 29, 2009

IG-Gate: The Meme Is the Message

At, a round-up of the inspector general story to date. At the Hot Air Green Room, a discourse on how the media has (and has not) reported the story.

The always insightful Donald Douglas links up, as does that brilliant blogger Track-a-‘Crat, following hard on the heels of leading online communications strategist Dan Collins. Will the Memeorandum algorithm be triggered? Will further assistance be required?

Professor Glenn Reynolds may know the answer, as may blog-fu sensei Moe Lane. But when in doubt, always link Little Miss Attila.

UPDATE: When the Great Scorer comes to write beside you name, he shall record not whether you won or lost, but only how you Heh the game.

June 29, 2009


Mark Sanford sex scandal!

John Edwards sex video!

Everything Kathleen Parker knows about love!

(All via Memeorandum.) If you’re in a hurry, guess which one is the shortest item?