For those of you who claim my blog is one-issue...
I have seen some gay things in my life. This is far and away without contest the gayest.
Some added commentary, the song is one of those songs that, if written at the right time, like during the 70's, would have been just a big inside joke among the gay community, that no one else got. Like the YMCA was originally. And In the Navy. And just the Village People in general.
posted by Ryan Ringer @ 6/18/2006 01:33:00 a.m.
7 comments
7 Comments:
Oh man, that was weak.
It was like Spandau Ballet meets an amateur videographer.
hillarious! I didn't know you were gay. I like the towel maneuvers at the end.
Well, considering a good 60% of your posts involve some form of attacking people against gay marriage, discussing the sexual orientation of MPs, calling to 'weed out' Liberals MPs who represent their ridings by being against gay marriage, reviewing Jon Stewart one liners on gay rights and putting your support behind the only gay Liberal leadership contender who is generally not even a Liberal by the classical sense....Yes, this is very much a one issue blog.
It's not surprising though, being a gay youth you have that whole obsession with being accepted, which spills out into your political interest. 'Hardcore' social conservatives also often have one or two issue blogs (marriage, abortion), and those are equally as tiring.
I check this blog from time to time because I find it interesting how torn you are between this obsession over gay rights and the fact that you are otherwise not a Liberal. Your views tend to be quite Conservative actually, from your economic views to your support for higher security against terrorists and for the 'war on terror', at least partially. The fact that you support Brison is quite amusing as he is nothing like a Liberal, except for the fact that he is passionate about the gay issue, which a majority (but not all) of his MPs support.
It would be interesting to see if you would stand behind the Libearls with a Bob Rae or Ken Dryden, essentially NDPers, leading the party. I mean if you have a quasi-socialist Liberal in power you may as well join the NDP...More socially 'progressive' and likely equally as fiscally irresponsible.
Hahah, nice.
(Interesting note, just for the record: I thought he should be PC leader before I found out he was gay; and the sexual orientation of a candidate has no bearing on whether or not I support them - I wouldn't vote for John Baird, after all.)
You note that I support Brison, which is true. You go on to infer that his sexual orientation is the only reason I'm supporting him, even though he's "not even a Liberal." (He is, but I'll agree for the sake of argument.) You also say that I myself am not a real Liberal, pointing out that my economic and foreign policy views are actually conservative. (Which they're not, but again, I'll agree for the sake of argument.) If both of those facts are true, would it not make sense that someone who's not a real Liberal would support someone who's not a real Liberal?
Well, either way, the fact remains that I am a real Liberal; my economic views are fairly centrist, torn between an individualist philosophy and the practical reality that laissez-faire capitalism actually diminishes much capacity for individual choice and success. My foreign policy views are nearly identical to those of the current front-runner for the Liberal leadership, Michael Ignatieff. (I guess he's not a real Liberal either.) And then there's my social views, which are to the left of the NDP. (Yet you still call me a Conservative.)
As for my support of Scott Brison, I probably should have written an endorsement post sooner outlining WHY I support him, but nevertheless, it's immensely shallow of you to think that I would support him based on the gender he prefers. What it really comes down to is, he and I share similar foreign policy views, economic views, and social views. There is no other candidate with whom I am so perfectly aligned on the political spectrum. If he were Svend Robinson, I assure you, I'd be supporting somebody else.
I'll thank you not to employ pop-psychology and ridiculous truisms about youth in general and gay youth in particular with respect to me. It's unnecessary, not to mention insulting.
As to the "one-issue" silliness, lots of bloggers concentrate on issues important to them. Shoshana and liberal catnip, for example, are very big on foreign policy (and their dislike of Michael Ignatieff with regards to that.) It just happens that social issues - abortion, gay rights, drug laws, sex laws, etc. - interest me more, and I know more about them. Ergo, it makes sense that I would write more about them, just as others sometimes choose to write more about what interests them.
Though for the record, of my last ten posts before this one, only two had anything to do with "gay stuff." Furthermore, of the last 50, only 15 had to do with such topics. Not bad for a "one-issue" blog, eh?
Anyway, as to the question of whether I'd stand behind Bob Rae, or Ken Dryden... you better believe I would. I would enthusiastically stand behind any one of the eleven candidates currently vying to be Liberal leader. You can take that one to the bank.
I like the "soccer practice" pun.
Oh, and the eye candy.
We finally agree.
The video was hilarious. Thanks for the link. As for being accused of being a one-issue blogger(which you're not)I wouldn't worry about that.Firstly your gayness is just part of your humanity so it imbues everything you write. And secondly if gay people don't write about gay issues who will?
As for the guy who accuses you, and the rest of us of being "obsessed" with our human rights, he makes absolutely no sense. You can't be obsessed about your human rights.It's like accusing someone of being obsessed with breathing.
And yes I think you're right. That video is definitely without a shadow of doubt the gayest thing I've ever seen too. Thanks for the laugh.
Post a Comment
<< Home