Dykes, Fags and Homophobes

“Damned Breeders!” My father used to say, after he came out of the closet in 1988. He went through an immediate transformation, after announcing he was gay and always had been, a transformation in how he dressed, what he talked about – in fact, that he talked at all was a bit of a shock. But equally as shocking was his often vocal distain for “Breeders”.

We would be out on his sailboat in the Newport Beach Harbor, my dad stretched out in his tight lavender Speedos, the colorful gay flag waving defiantly from atop the sail. A Mozart concerto playing on the stereo, next to a bottle of California Merlot. And a motorboat or a yacht would cruise by, making waves. And the waves would rock his sailboat for a moment. And during that moment of having his world rocked, my dad would mutter, “Damned Breeders!” A Breeder of course was a heterosexual and heterosexuals drive motor boats, because they are insecure in their sexuality – or at least according to my suddenly very gay dad.

I wondered if he knew how that sounded to those of us who were his Breeder boat guests. I wondered how he would feel if the people in the motorboats were to look at his gay flag and mutter, “Faggot”. Although, I think he imagined the motor boaters were saying that anyway. In his world everything about the Newport Beach Harbor was a conspiracy against gay men.

Through my father I met a lot of gay and lesbian people, over the next few decades. And most of them were not bigoted the way he was, against us mindless and uncultured Breeders. But unfortunately a significant percentage of the older gay men often made a few too many jokes, about the female reproductive organ and how repulsive they found it. This is where life comes from, I thought to myself. This is where we all start. Were they angry at life itself?

Unfortunately the lunacy didn’t end there. Many of these same bitter old men made jokes about having sex with underage boys – too many jokes to just be innocent jokes. I personally don’t know if homosexuality is any more of a maladjustment than marrying the right person to please your parents, instead of for love. But I do know that having a phobia about the female reproductive organ, or a preoccupation with eliciting images of pedophilia is a maladjustment for sure. And I would venture to guess that most homosexual people would agree with me on that one.

In the mid-nineties, when I was living off the Sunset Strip, there was video rental shop. It serviced both the Hollywood Hills and what is commonly referred to as “Boys Town” in West Hollywood. As an aspiring film producer I was on mission to watch every movie on the AFI list of the “Top 100 films of all Time”. These were usually easily found in a section called, “Most Popular”. And that is where I found a video tape which made me never go back there gain. The box featured several very young male children, shirtless, in tight black pants and wearing bow ties. The title I think was something like, “Chipendillies: They Will Warm Your Heart”. And basically it was young boys stripping to music.

This really freaked me out and I brought the tape box up to the counter to let the cashier know that they had essentially soft kiddie porn on the shelves. But before I could even express my outrage, his eyes lit up and he said, “Oh honey, we can’t keep that on the shelf. It’s wonderful.” Huh? And then he continued with, “We have several copies. It’s always rented out.” Several copies? Always rented out? When I told the cashier how sick that was, he seemed genuinely shocked, as if no one else had ever complained about this before. I still feel sick remembering that tape box and wonder if people were really renting it to warm their hearts. On a good day I think the world is equal parts darkness and light. That day was just dark.

Now, before I get too carried away with “gay bashing” I would like to point out that I have worked with hundreds of gay people, in media, over the years. And those who are bigoted towards all heterosexuals, or express repulsion about women’s bodies or joke about having sex with underage boys – these are far by far in the minority. I’m sort of neutral on the issue of homosexuality. But I have to point out that, over the years, many homosexuals have told me that the mere thought of having sex with the opposite gender made them feel grossed out. It’s honest anyway. None of them were telling me I was wrong for not sharing their point of view.

Now I personally don’t agree with the Duck Dynasty religious view. I’m actually not a big fan of religion. But I certainly do understand that, on a basic biological level, to most heterosexuals the thought of having a homosexual encounter violates a basic biological instinct. What I just said is not “homophobia”. However, if you say that and you’re running for political office, your approval numbers are going to take a hit and the “Progressive” mob is going to come after you ruthlessly, for not being in lock step with their views. I know because I am a recovering Progressive myself. I spent two years in San Francisco and two years outside of Nashville. Guess which area was more rigid and intolerant.

DuckDynastyIs the homosexual, who finds heterosexual sexuality to be an unpleasant thought, suffering from “Heterophobia”? There seems to be a double standard here. If a person is turned off by heterosexual orientation, I’m not personally offended. I’m not going to demand an apology or try to get them fired. What other people think of me is none of my business. So if a bearded reality show star, tells a magazine that he feels that homosexual activity just doesn’t make any sense to him, so what? He’s not demanding that anyone be harmed. He’s just explaining how the world looks through his eyes.

And here we have arrived at the middle of the article, at the intersection between discussing what is best for the individual and what is best for the collective. This is often a slippery slope for us Conservatives.

From a Free Market point of view, if one bakery refuses to make wedding cakes for same-sex marriages, then another bakery can specialize in that and, arguably, really corner the market and do fabulously well. In fact, people with strong political opinions on this matter might only go to the gay-friendly bakery in order to make a statement about how open-minded they are. In other words, we do not require the government to tell an establishment who they must serve. For the government to do so violates the Liberty of that individual proprietor.

What if Anjem Choudary, the Islamic cleric who openly supports Al Qeada, came into your bakery? (pretend you have bakery). All he wants to do is to celebrate the breaking of the fast for Ramadhan. He and a few hundred friends are going to pray, chant “Death to America! Death to Israel!” have some Hummus and lamb and then they’d like to share a big cake, with a picture of the Islamic crescent and star on it. If you don’t make that cake, should the government come in and force you to do so?

Whatever your views about homosexuality, that its natural, that it’s unnatural, that it’s a choice, that people are born that way, that it’s a sin, that God does not care, that God is furious, you are entitled to your view. But we are living in a time when a certain point of view is being forced upon us. And the strong hand of the government is being called upon to enforce that point of view upon us. Such is the tyranny of mob rule.

I find the Libertarian point of view and the Constitutional point of view to be more or less the same thing, personally. And I put a lot of stock in the saying that, “Your right to swing your fists ends at my nose”. And I find it more than ironic, that many of the people who are demanding that the government stay out of their lives, are often times the same people who want to use the strong hand of the government to determine which gender, consenting adults can marry. For some, the line gets blurry, between the collective and the individual, on this particular issue. For me it is quite clear. Who two consenting adults marry is none of my business.

There is irony and hypocrisy on both sides. Imagine this: What if I were to produce a television show called, “Normal Eye for the Queer Guy”. The title assumes that I’ve got it right and that certain people need me to correct them. Although, with an estimated 97 percent of people reporting to be heterosexual, there is an argument to be made that this sort of fits the definition of “normal”. Anyway, I could cast a pack of American flag waving, beer guzzling, motorboat driving Breeders. We would show up at a gay man’s apartment and teach him how to lower his voice when he gets excited. We could remove a lot of the mirrors and hair products. In fact, I can think all sorts of ways in which we could make him feel inferior and that our way is by far superior. I’m not a member of any religion myself. But hell, why not replace his GQ magazines with the Bible? Maybe place an NRA decal in the window and hang a picture of Ted Nugent, just to set the mood of the room. Forget about “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy”. How would the media react if the red slipper was on the other foot? I think we all know the answer to that question. And now to Anderson Cooper with some breaking news on what those Right Wingers have done this time…

And while we are at it, have you noticed that nearly every prime time television show not only has a gay character, but they always have to be portrayed as having sage-like knowledge on relationships, fashion, culture and everything that us Neanderthal Breeders are apparently deficient at. Look closely. Have you noticed that nearly every family show on television portrays the father as the butt of every joke, a buffoon, a blowhard? And this extends to commercials as well. Woman knows best and man is useless and an embarrassment. The fictional image on the screen portrays the reality of the collective imagination.

eric allen bell gay wedding cakesThere is more going on here than a brief news cycle about controversial wedding cakes. It’s important that we see the big picture. The so-called “Homosexual Agenda” extends beyond anything having to do with homosexuals. On its own it’s a bit of a red herring. What we are really facing here, when we scratch beneath the surface, is not only an attack on our liberties but also a seldom talked about attack on the American male – and on masculinity itself. To some this is self-evident. To others, what I just said makes no sense at all.

When I was in high school in the 1980s, if you wanted to get a girl, you had a better chance if you were ambiguous about your sexuality, dressed like you were a member of Duran Duran and for extra bonus points, anyone who said they were bisexual had an added mystique. Now I must qualify this by saying that I did grow up in Southern California. But the message to us young men was clear – your emerging masculinity is offensive, unevolved, unattractive, immature, scary to girls and off-putting to Baby Boomer feminist school teachers. Magnum PI was out and Boy George was in. And at my 20 year high school reunion, I had drinks with a generation that had not fully recovered from that.

I’m forty-something now. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in a social situation where the women do most of the talking and many of the men just sit there, in something of a catatonic haze, some of them even holding on to their wife’s purse while she takes selfies. And if the men attempt to congregate in the backyard or the garage, they are often mocked for doing so. I don’t mean to indict all women with this statement as it does not describe all women. I fault the men. As the American male becomes weak, Obama-style appeasement diplomacy becomes popular and the world gets more and more unstable, the emasculation of the American male reaches a crisis point.

If you are a Liberal and you’re reading this – first of all congratulations for making it this far. But if you’ve been wondering why some people get so pissed off about a bakery in middle America, being told they have to make a gay cake – and you’ve felt that people were being too uppity about this – pay closer attention. Some of us see a larger pattern emerging here. And I invite you now to look at the pattern for yourself, because it affects you. The baker is not trying to make homosexuality illegal. He just doesn’t want his way of life to be made illegal either.

If you are a Liberal then you should care about Liberty. And Liberty means you own you. Your right to swing your fists ends at my nose. If someone wants to throw a gay pride parade, I will not stand in their way. But I am not “Homophobic” if I don’t sponsor one of the floats.

This is not an article about homosexuality. This is an article about Liberty. The collective interest is best protected and preserved when the individual remains an individual – and when the individual absolutely refuses to cave in to group think. You own you. And that comes at a price. Liberty always comes at a price. There is a social price. There is a monetary price. There is a political price. And the day we become unwilling or unable to pay the high price of Liberty, that is the day when the Collectivists will win and you will not own you anymore. The social norm will become your master, no matter how abnormal that norm is – it will own you.