Over the past few weeks I may have read more about same sex marriage than I ever did before. Whether for marriage or against it everybody has an opinion now and they want it to be known so in no particular order here are a few odds and ends that stand out.
I'm putting this one first because I enjoyed reading it. I know, I said no particular order, but I really did enjoy it. In "The county where no one's gay" CNN's John D. Sutter went to Franklin County, Mississippi because the last census said that, well, there were no gays. My favorite part is this; "When I brought up the topic with a gray-haired woman I met in front of the grocery store in Meadville, she basically told me gay people don't exist, like, at all. "I don't believe in them kind of people. I don't believe in it," she said. "We don't need that same-sex marriage. That is wrong!'" A few paragraphs later Sutter adds, "I didn't even get a chance to tell her she was talking with a real, live gay person." The short version is that yes there are gays in Franklin County, it's just very few people want to admit it. The article is a good follow up to the Harvey Milk quote I used in a previous post.
For possibly the first, and hopefully the last, time I found myself agreeing with Bill O'Reilly; "The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. That's where the compelling argument is. 'We're Americans, we just want to be treated like everybody else.' That’s a compelling argument. And to deny that, you've got to have a very strong argument on the other side. And the other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the Bible." Watch the video here.
I've never paid much attention to reddit and now I think I know why. Rules, I can't stand rules, and I'm thinking that until I finished reading reddit's rules and FAQs I'd forget what I had wanted to post. Here is a sample from the reddit LGBT page; "Rule 1: No homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, racism, serophobia, or misogyny. If you are unclear about what may constitute any of the above, please see the LGBT FAQ. If you are using triggering language in an educational or demonstrative capacity, we ask that you please wrap it in a trigger warning, e.g. [](/tw "problematic text"). If you are submitting a post that contains hateful remarks or triggering language, please precede your post's title with [TW]. For example: "[TW] Title of Post."
Matt Taibbi wrote a scathing column in Rolling Stone about a David Brooks column in The New York Times in which Brooks argues that gays are losing their 'freedom' by winning marriage. Taibbi finished with this; "The whole world seems rapidly to be coming to an understanding that this discrimination against gays and lesbians has to end, and the fact that this change is coming is a beautiful thing. You have to be a very unhappy person indeed to feel anything but joy about it, much less this sarcastic depression."
And that line is a fine one to finish this post with.
update - It seems David Brooks has struck a nerve. Here is another column about his thoughts, "David Brooks's Gay Marriage Delusion," by Amy Davidson in The New Yorker. "Brooks’s argument is that it is right and proper that they were (some earlier gay rights goals put aside): now, at last, gays can and should stop worrying about anything but whether their wedding announcement will make it into the Times. They can stop challenging things. They can be smug, too. Brooks, apparently, would consider that only polite."
I'm putting this one first because I enjoyed reading it. I know, I said no particular order, but I really did enjoy it. In "The county where no one's gay" CNN's John D. Sutter went to Franklin County, Mississippi because the last census said that, well, there were no gays. My favorite part is this; "When I brought up the topic with a gray-haired woman I met in front of the grocery store in Meadville, she basically told me gay people don't exist, like, at all. "I don't believe in them kind of people. I don't believe in it," she said. "We don't need that same-sex marriage. That is wrong!'" A few paragraphs later Sutter adds, "I didn't even get a chance to tell her she was talking with a real, live gay person." The short version is that yes there are gays in Franklin County, it's just very few people want to admit it. The article is a good follow up to the Harvey Milk quote I used in a previous post.
For possibly the first, and hopefully the last, time I found myself agreeing with Bill O'Reilly; "The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. That's where the compelling argument is. 'We're Americans, we just want to be treated like everybody else.' That’s a compelling argument. And to deny that, you've got to have a very strong argument on the other side. And the other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the Bible." Watch the video here.
I've never paid much attention to reddit and now I think I know why. Rules, I can't stand rules, and I'm thinking that until I finished reading reddit's rules and FAQs I'd forget what I had wanted to post. Here is a sample from the reddit LGBT page; "Rule 1: No homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, racism, serophobia, or misogyny. If you are unclear about what may constitute any of the above, please see the LGBT FAQ. If you are using triggering language in an educational or demonstrative capacity, we ask that you please wrap it in a trigger warning, e.g. [](/tw "problematic text"). If you are submitting a post that contains hateful remarks or triggering language, please precede your post's title with [TW]. For example: "[TW] Title of Post."
Matt Taibbi wrote a scathing column in Rolling Stone about a David Brooks column in The New York Times in which Brooks argues that gays are losing their 'freedom' by winning marriage. Taibbi finished with this; "The whole world seems rapidly to be coming to an understanding that this discrimination against gays and lesbians has to end, and the fact that this change is coming is a beautiful thing. You have to be a very unhappy person indeed to feel anything but joy about it, much less this sarcastic depression."
And that line is a fine one to finish this post with.
update - It seems David Brooks has struck a nerve. Here is another column about his thoughts, "David Brooks's Gay Marriage Delusion," by Amy Davidson in The New Yorker. "Brooks’s argument is that it is right and proper that they were (some earlier gay rights goals put aside): now, at last, gays can and should stop worrying about anything but whether their wedding announcement will make it into the Times. They can stop challenging things. They can be smug, too. Brooks, apparently, would consider that only polite."
