I have had a distressingly large number of reader e-mails on the lines of the following:
So they're against "the Use of Music as Torture?" Really? You mean they've decided to oppose "American Idol?"
Look, that’s not funny!
Okay, if you replace “American Idol” with “The Celine Dion Christmas Album”…
No, it’s still not funny.
Then Steyn tells this horrible joke.
Anyway, Andrew Sullivan walks up to this ethnomusicologist and says, “Do you know Bush is using sleep deprivation at Gitmo?” And the ethnomusicologist says, “No, but if you hum a few bars I’ll play it on my bone flute.”
I think Steyn is self-aware enough to know how mentioning "bone flute" and Andrew Sullivan's name in the same bad joke would be viewed. Ditto John Podhoretz for taking a shot at Sullivan's preference for men with hairy backs. It's no secret in the blogosphere that Sullivan is gay. The question is why go there?
This whole flame war started because Sullivan expressed disgust over the United States use of torture. Steyn and Podhoretz couldn't debate Sulklivan on an intellectual level. They mocked him instead. It's so much easier.
If The National Review really doesn't want to be viewed as gay bashing then why did they print the bile of John Derbyshire. Rob Dreher blamed the priest molestations on the gay community. Dreher's "lavender mafia" comment should not be taken as serious journalism. Jonah Goldberg took a page out of the same playbook and blamed the gays for Mark Foley's morally bankrupt behavior.
The funny thing is that you would think the left — particularly the gay left — would be a bit more interested in not having 16 and 17 year old teenagers classified as young children for legal/sexual/political purposes. If that were the case, then a whole lot of dirty old men would need to be prosecuted for felonies when they pick up street hustlers.
Dear National Review,
Thank you for the link. Please, don't take unkindly to me pointing out your publication gay bashes. I'm just pointing out the obvious.
Cheers,
Michael Hussey
This reminds me of the "racist" ads against Harold Ford; you can't just ask yourself after each ad, "Is this racist?" It takes a serious dissection to figure out how it could possibly be interpreted that way, and, after the accusation is made, a full explanation is necessary.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I could ever be terribly productive at this sort of thing; I might occasionally get some of them by going through each post word-by-word. "How many ethnomusicologists does it take...." Is "how" homophobic? Well, it starts with "ho"; let's put it in the "maybe" pile.
If Steyn was self-aware enough to mention "bone-flute" and "Andrew Sullivan" in the same sentence, don't you think he would have been clever enough to say "*your* bone flute"? Like I said earlier, if we go with the "bone-flute = penis" definition, then the ethnomusicologist is fellating himself, not Sullivan.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be fairly familiar with NRO, but then again, if you think that the "hole flame war started because Sullivan expressed disgust over the United States use of torture," then you can't be very familiar at all. Various folks at NR stopped taking Sullivan seriously almost three years ago, when Bush announced that he opposed gay marriage. Sullivan had a hissy fit and almost immediately turned on Bush and conservatism in general. He's David Brock, but more hysterical and with more barebacking personal ads.
The reason that Podhoretz et al don't bother responding substantively to Sullivan and instead reply with jokes is that they view him as "Excitable Andy," or "St. Andrew of the Sacred Heart-Ache," someone who can't argue in good faith or without bullying. Most of the right, including most of NRO, has decided that he's just not worth the time.
Mark Steyn does not give a hoot if some blogger thinks he's a homophobe, except to the extent that it shows the joylessness and humorlessness of the left. Your charge doesn't have any sting to it. He's been called much worse. So if Steyn takes the time to tell a nobody blogger that he didn't mean his joke as a gay joke, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If you can give those two foul-mouthed bigots who run the Edwards blog the benefit of the doubt when they say they never intened to offend, why not Mark Steyn?
You seem to be fairly familiar with NRO, but then again, if you think that the "hole flame war started because Sullivan expressed disgust over the United States use of torture," then you can't be very familiar at all. Various folks at NR stopped taking Sullivan seriously almost three years ago, when Bush announced that he opposed gay marriage. Sullivan had a hissy fit and almost immediately turned on Bush and conservatism in general. He's David Brock, but more hysterical and with more barebacking personal ads.
ReplyDeleteI'm well aware of the gay marriage feud between NRO and Sullivan. Which only further proves my point about how bigoted NRO is against gays. You and NRO don't talk about the substance of torture. Instead you change the subject to Sullivan's homosexuality.
Those two bloggers Edwards has were bashed by a third-tier columnist who favors internment camps and is xenaphobic towards immigrants. The other basher is Bill Donahue. Do some googling and you find him bashing Jews and gays. Amanda and Melissa were writing about how hateful the Christian Right is. No argument from me.