• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bret Easton Ellis attacks 'culturally correct gay elite'

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Bret Easton Ellis attacks 'culturally correct gay elite' - latimes.com

The Out rant, titled "In the Reign of the Gay Magical Elves," was prompted in part by the media response to the recent coming out of basketball player Jason Collins, whom Ellis writes is being treated "as some kind of baby panda who needs to be honored and consoled and -- yes -- infantilized."

Ellis goes on to criticize "gay self-patronization in the media," which in his opinion celebrates "the Gay Man as Magical Elf, who whenever he comes out appears before us as some kind of saintly E.T. whose sole purpose is to be put in the position of reminding us only about Tolerance."

At fault, according to Ellis, are organizations that marginalize the gay man "who doesn't want to represent, doesn't want to teach" and who "makes crude jokes about other gays in the media (as straight dudes do of each other constantly)." This, Ellis writes, amounts to "corporate PC fascism."

Here is a gay man that absolutely gets it.

I can't agree with him more, that "being gay" is treated as some sort of achievement worthy of adulation and reward, and that it comes with some inherent responsibility to promote and normalize the gay lifestyle. I'd bet a lot of gay people agree with him.

The gay "in" community judges its own more harshly than outsiders it seems. It's like a cult.
 
Well i think he and Gus Van Sant sort of have cornered the counter-culture anyway and just see gays as part of that so I am not surprised by his positions
 
I can't agree with him more, that "being gay" is treated as some sort of achievement worthy of adulation and reward....
You preferred it when being outed would cost you your job, your friendships, get you ostracized, and beaten up on a regular basis? ;)

The achievement, by the way, isn't "being gay." It is having the balls to admit that you are gay, in public, in an über-macho environment and a society that is still violently hostile to homosexuals. Even in Manhattan, which is generally very tolerant, gay-bashing still happens: Manhattan Gay Bashing Suspect's Lawyer Says Client Was "Wrong Place At The Wrong Time": Gothamist

Besides, this kind of thing won't matter for long. As homosexuality becomes normalized, the media will pay less and less attention to celebrities who come out. E.g. no one really batted an eye when Zach Quinto or Jim Parsons came out.


The gay "in" community judges its own more harshly than outsiders it seems. It's like a cult.
Nah, it's just an insular community that has been attacked for a few hundred years, and developed a community mentality about 40 years ago.
 
When I lived in NYC in the late 50s, it was illegal to serve alcohol to a homosexual.

I've seen this sign with my own two eyes.
images.jpeg
and this:
images-1.jpeg

So it shouldn't be so surprising that we have visibility of the changes that are going on. It takes our inherent bigotry and xenophobias a while to adapt to vague concepts like equality or freedom of choice. In another 50 years, nobody will care much anymore.

You preferred it when being outed would cost you your job, your friendships, get you ostracized, and beaten up on a regular basis? ;)

The achievement, by the way, isn't "being gay." It is having the balls to admit that you are gay, in public, in an über-macho environment and a society that is still violently hostile to homosexuals. Even in Manhattan, which is generally very tolerant, gay-bashing still happens: Manhattan Gay Bashing Suspect's Lawyer Says Client Was "Wrong Place At The Wrong Time": Gothamist

Besides, this kind of thing won't matter for long. As homosexuality becomes normalized, the media will pay less and less attention to celebrities who come out. E.g. no one really batted an eye when Zach Quinto or Jim Parsons came out.



Nah, it's just an insular community that has been attacked for a few hundred years, and developed a community mentality about 40 years ago.
 
You preferred it when being outed would cost you your job, your friendships, get you ostracized, and beaten up on a regular basis? ;)

The achievement, by the way, isn't "being gay." It is having the balls to admit that you are gay, in public, in an über-macho environment and a society that is still violently hostile to homosexuals. Even in Manhattan, which is generally very tolerant, gay-bashing still happens: Manhattan Gay Bashing Suspect's Lawyer Says Client Was "Wrong Place At The Wrong Time": Gothamist

Besides, this kind of thing won't matter for long. As homosexuality becomes normalized, the media will pay less and less attention to celebrities who come out. E.g. no one really batted an eye when Zach Quinto or Jim Parsons came out.



Nah, it's just an insular community that has been attacked for a few hundred years, and developed a community mentality about 40 years ago.

Spock is gay? The reason nobody batted an eye when Jim Parsons came out was because it was pretty effing obvious for all the years before he came out.
 
Spock is gay? The reason nobody batted an eye when Jim Parsons came out was because it was pretty effing obvious for all the years before he came out.

Yes, he is. Well, the actor is, maybe not the character.
 
No, this is a gay man who is wildly missing the point.
 
No, this is a gay man who is wildly missing the point.

No, this is a gay man who doesn't think his sexual practices deserve a weekday talk show audience to provide his daily affirmation.
 
Meh, in the current culture and environment, don't necessarily think much praise is truly due for "coming out." 20 years ago, sure, not today.
 
No, this is a gay man who doesn't think his sexual practices deserve a weekday talk show audience to provide his daily affirmation.

Then again, he works in a field where nobody cares if he's gay. Gay writers are a dime a dozen. Capote, Elliot, Lima, O'Hara.
 
I hope the day comes when nobody gives a **** when someone comes out of the closet. And I do think we are getting much closer to that day, as more and more people don't give a ****. But the reason we are getting to that point is because in the past decades people were brave enough to come out when doing so wasn’t as socially acceptable, and would likely result in negative consequences. Hopefully a day will come when saying your gay will be treated the same as saying your favorite color is blue.
 
No, this is a gay man who doesn't think his sexual practices deserve a weekday talk show audience to provide his daily affirmation.

And this is a forums poster who is wildly missing the point.
 
And this is a forums poster who is wildly missing the point.

How am I missing the point if it's HIS point? That's exactly what his complaint is, that if he doesn't jump in lock-step with the "look-at-me" gay movement, he's ostracized as a sell-out.
 
I hope the day comes when nobody gives a **** when someone comes out of the closet. And I do think we are getting much closer to that day, as more and more people don't give a ****. But the reason we are getting to that point is because in the past decades people were brave enough to come out when doing so wasn’t as socially acceptable, and would likely result in negative consequences. Hopefully a day will come when saying your gay will be treated the same as saying your favorite color is blue.

It'll never happen because there's nothing "normal" about being gay. Six billion people didn't get here from gay sex.

A Biology book and a jigsaw puzzle pretty much explains what you need to know.

It's certainly not illegal, and I defend anyone's right to be gay, but calling it normal is just delusional.
 
How am I missing the point if it's HIS point? That's exactly what his complaint is, that if he doesn't jump in lock-step with the "look-at-me" gay movement, he's ostracized as a sell-out.

The goal of the "gay movement" is not "look at me."
It'll never happen because there's nothing "normal" about being gay. Six billion people didn't get here from gay sex.

A Biology book and a jigsaw puzzle pretty much explains what you need to know.

It's certainly not illegal, and I defend anyone's right to be gay, but calling it normal is just delusional.

Something can be normal without being a large percentage of the population.
 
The goal of the "gay movement" is not "look at me."


Something can be normal without being a large percentage of the population.

Yes, it is, and might I suggest a sophomore Biology book.
 
Natural for some, not for most, and abnormal as a whole. Fair enough.

Yeaaa-No.

Homosexuality is naturally occurring. And 'normality' and 'abnormality' are heavily subjective.
 
Yes, it is, and might I suggest a sophomore Biology book.

I might suggest you get an updated one. Homosexuality is displayed in a very large number of animal species.

Do you think being left handed is abnormal?
 
Yeaaa-No.

Homosexuality is naturally occurring. And 'normality' and 'abnormality' are heavily subjective.

LOL.

The vast majority of people do not have naturally occuring gay sex. Though I know you DESPERATELY want that to be true.

It is an abnormality. A DNA mutation among a few of the 6 billion people on this earth.
 
The vast majority of people do not have naturally occuring gay sex.

It is an abnormality. A DNA mutation among a few of the 6 billion people on this earth.

So let me get this straight (Pun fully intended); whether a person is normal depends on what the majority is like?

Though I know you DESPERATELY want that to be true.

You're the one who keeps bringing up gay sex broseph.
 
I might suggest you get an updated one. Homosexuality is displayed in a very large number of animal species.

Do you think being left handed is abnormal?

Here we go, through the fake postulated gay talking points. Complicating the uncomplicated with prescribed and predetermined circular debate tactics. Not in the mood.

As I said before, it is an inevitable DNA mutation when you have 6 billion people on the planet. It's fine with me what they do, but it's not the way the humans were designed to function. Again.....Biology book.
 
So let me get this straight (Pun fully intended); whether a person is normal depends on what the majority is like?



You're the one who keeps bringing up gay sex broseph.

No, normal has to do with what our plumbing was designed for, versus how we use it in practice. There's the "normal" way, and there is the other way.

There's all sorts of strange sexual practices that some people engage in. Some want to be beaten within an inch of their life; others want to be asphyxiated, while others want to just watch. Doesn't make any of them "normal".

The genetic mutations and variances increase with the population, but not to a point of normalcy. Normal just doesn't get all the juicy press, which makes the freaks seem far more everyday than they really are.

And with that, I'm out. This is a boring debate over the obvious.
 
No, normal has to do with what our plumbing was designed for, versus how we use it in practice.

Our 'plumbing' has multiple uses. I piss with the same organ I have **** with. It's obviously a multi-purpose design. But while we're talking about design, mind linking me a website of the designer?

There's all sorts of strange sexual practices that some people engage in. Some want to be beaten within an inch of their life; others want to be asphyxiated, while others want to just watch. Doesn't make any of them "normal".

Doesn't necessarily make them 'abnormal' either.

The genetic mutations and variances increase with the population, but not to a point of normalcy. Normal just doesn't get all the juicy press, which makes the freaks seem far more everyday than they really are.

Ah, so now they're freaks. Good to know.

And with that, I'm out. This is a boring debate over the obvious.

I guess I'll chalk this up as a victory.
 
Back
Top Bottom