Interesting comments are sometimes left on our posts, although there can be a time delay between when the post is written and when comments appear. We assume this happens because someone was doing a search for a topic and up we popped.
So here’s a recent comment on an old post (May of 2011), from someone who signed his name “Matt Stone.” Matt finally explains the storied “gay agenda,” to which conservatives point. The subject of the post, from Jon Ponder, called, Guess What Percentage of Americans is Gay was that the estimates exaggerate the real number.
Matt starts his comment with a quote from the post.
“They claim it’s more like 2 percent — which prompts the question: If there are so few gay people, why all the fuss?”
Because in the late 70’s the gay community realized in order to gain legitimacy for their perversion they would have to re-brand their lifestyle from one governed by licentious behavior to one of social victimization.
Read “After the Ball” a book the gay mob considers their “gay manifesto for the 1990s,” the authors called for homosexuals to repackage themselves as mainstream citizens demanding equal treatment, rather than as a promiscuous sexual minority seeking greater opportunity and influence.
The real tragedy of “After the Ball” is that the great result of this is not a party, but the complete rejection of the very moral foundations which made this society possible! Their agenda is as follows:
1.) “Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible.”
2.) “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers.”
3.) “Give homosexual protectors a just cause.”
4.) “Make gays look good.”
5.) “Make the victimizers look bad.”
6.) “Get funds from corporate America.”It is “militant” because it requires the demonization of anyone who doesn’t agree with their policy of forced acceptance by denigrating anyone through pejorative labeling (i.e. bigot, homophobe, etc.) as a means of discrediting their opinion or any argument against gays or the gay lifestyle and SILENCING their opposition through character assignation.
I can’t begin to know where Matt is coming from or why he feels gay people are a, “promiscuous sexual minority seeking greater opportunity and influence.” I also don’t want to assign his character, or for that matter, to assault it, although someone who throws around terms like “the gay mob” should be prepared for others to do so.
But I hope someday Matt will understand that gay people are neither perverse nor licentious, at least not in greater quantities than all people, and that there is no need for them to secretly “repackage themselves as mainstream citizens demanding equal treatment” because that’s exactly what they are.
Has anyone else read “After the Ball” to confirm that Matt’s assessment is accurate, or is he twisting the authors’ words?
CatBallou, I hadn’t actually heard of this book until now.
I just looked it up. It was written in 1989, nearly a quarter century ago. It proposes the tactics he listed, but I’d never heard of it until now and can vouch for the fact that it was never influential. It started as a magazine article published in 1987, that the authors later expanded into the book. Here’s a snippet that underscores how dated it is:
Johnny Mathis was the only out celebrity the author could think of? To underscore how long ago that was, in late 1989 or early 1990, around the publication date given for “After the Ball,” Page and I were out with friends at the Palms, a lesbian bar in West Hollywood (directly across from the Ramada, Trish). It was crowded so we were hanging out in the back and happened to be blocking the pinball machines. After a while, a polite woman a little younger than us with shoulder-length blonde hair approached and asked if we could shift around so that she and her friends could play a game. Page and I recognized her because she was a hot reportedly gay comic who appeared in stand-up shows on cable — Ellen DeGeneres — but none of the gay women in my party had a clue who she was. Even when we said later, “Hey, guys, that was Ellen DeGeneres,” all we got was blank stares.
The point of this celebrity sighting/name drop is to underscore how outdated the book is. It was published so long ago that around the time it came out, a gay icon today like Ellen DeGeneris was unrecognized in a lesbian bar in West Hollywood. American culture, straight and gay, has gone through a sea change since then.
The DOMA hearings brought a lot of self-hating homophobes like fake Matt Stone out of the woodwork. Just as there are still people yearning for Jim Crow in 2013, like the guy at CPAC, there will always be folks whose twisted sexualities makes so desperate to lash out that they’ll do things like duplicitously presenting a quarter-century-old, obscure manifesto as the very latest thinking on the “gay agenda.”
It’s the Protocols of The Elders of Gaydom. Same tactic.