Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueFaith77
You are the ONLY person I have read commentating on this anywhere on the news or on the internet to actually address what was said, and to respond accordingly. Bravo! Now, let's extend that to GLAAD. Its response was totally inappropriate--as I read it, they basically vilified anal sex as "vile" and "stereotypical." While it is true that not all gay people engage in anal sex (specifically involving men's anuses), it does seem odd to me for GLAAD to characterize appreciation for men's anuses to be "vile" and stereotypical--maybe a generalization, but not stereotypical. And of all groups I would expect GLAAD to respond with some sort of support for sexual attraction to men's anuses, for those who have this attraction. In other words, its GLAAD's Gay Elite Puritanism vs. Duck Dynasty's Moral Victorianism. In this fight, I have to support Duck Dynasty. He makes the better argument. (Though not better than Dex's rejoinder hahaha!)
|
Good to see you.
I think what GLAAD was really objecting to was the reduction of gay men simply to practitioners of anal sex, and how problematic that is. But that's not really what they ended up saying, and their words were pretty abysmal, yes. To have my fondness for anal sex labelled "vile and extreme" from an organisation that is supposed to have my back is bizarre indeed.
I like the idea behind GLAAD, and think an organisation like that has its place, but these days they seem to be consistently misguided. I appreciate they have a tricky role to play which requires a certain finesse, but all I see them doing now is providing fuel for right-wing "political correctness gone mad" rants.