Well, the usual suspects have been up in arms over this. She's ruining him! She'll turn him gay! By the feminizing power of pink and nail polish, she's gender-confusing him! Blah blah etc. The gay agenda is at work here, whatever.
And then there's the recent, and growing, pushback from the self-proclaimed morality police against anti-bullying programs that try to teach kids not to beat up gay/trans/perceived-non-gender-conforming kids. Gay agenda! Indoctrination! Brainwashing! Alarmist nonsense!
I also distinctly remember a hue and cry when some same-gender couples in California brought their kids to anti-Prop H8 protests. It was "shameful" that us pervs would "use our children this way". No links, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers it.
So why are the bigots, who are so keen to label participation of young'uns in pro-gay and pro-equality movements as this horrible brainwashing abuse we're perpetuating on the innocent behbehs, okay with things like Peter LaBarbera's Youth Hate Camp? And why has there been no terrible outcry against these fucknuggets, who have filed about 50 lawsuits against various school districts across Ohio, Kentucky, Florida, and other southern states, for banning t-shirts saying things like "God Hates Whores." and "God Hates Muslims Gays.", when they made their daughter wear those shirts to school? That's a couple who is outright using their daughter to push their hateful right-wing agenda by making her wear controversial slogans and face punishment from her school administrators in order to give them cause to start another lawsuit. I eagerly await the disavowal and condemnation from Faux News and One Million Moms, over this shameful example of brainwashing and exploitation of a child for a degenerate cause.
Bueller? Bueller?
...*crickets*
Yeah. That's what I thought.
7 comments:
I was just about to respond to your response to my comment telling you how much I'd be looking forward to this post. You touched on something very interesting in false equivalency, in my opinion. The right very much likes to make it seem like the children of parents in gay families are nothing but political props. When people on the right actually DO use kids as political props, it's free speech?
That J Crew thing wasn't even a gay issue. Hell, it wasn't even an issue PERIOD 'til they decided to make it one. Most boys with older sisters that I know have worn a dress at some point, whether it was because they themselves wanted to or their older sisters forced them to (for play, or whatever), and you know what? They aren't gay or trans because of it. They're not even traumatized and confused, as Dr. Keith blow would have people believe. They're just straight men with some silly childhood photos.
Did you see the "gay parked my car" thing going around Tumblr yesterday? It was something like, "I am very passionate about the issue of gay marriage. Or as I like to call it, marriage. Because I didn't gay park my car. I parked my car." It's like that. Anything done by an oppressed class - in this case, same-gender couples who have kids - is automatically suspect. They didn't just have kids; they gay had kids. But hetero couples with kids are the norm, even when they actually do use their kids for political purposes.
Also, YES. Such a stupid nontroversy. So a kid has pink toenails. Dude, he's like 4 or something. And he's just having a cute moment with his mama in that pic. What's to freak out about? Ugh gender norms ftl.
I'm actually not on tumblr so I didn't see that, but I think it illustrates the point exactly. If a father says "I love my kids and they love their daddy," it's sweet, but if a gay dad says that, it's politics. It drives me up the wall.
If J. Crew offered anything in DEATHFAT sizes, I would buy from them simply because of this add.
You could always buy the featured pink polish. ;-)
Jon Stewart took this down really well, and brought up a point I didn't think of - Chuck Lidell paints his toenails.
He does? Lol, that's awesome.
Post a Comment