Gay Republicans Support the War {?}

My LTE sent today to the Dallas Voice, "The Community Newspaper for Gay & Lesbian Dallas," after this past weekend's 22nd annual Alan Ross Texas Freedom Parade. That's Gay, Lesbian, Bi, and Trans Pride parade anywhere else in the nation, but The Freedom Parade here in Dallas.

There's lots more, but you have to JUMP for it:

Dallas has lots of good points. But one of the bad traits here is that they don't like to be "controversial" - that's "bucking the system" or "biting the hand that feeds you."  So, in Dallas, we have a gay men's choir that won't use the word "gay" - they are "welcoming." And a parade that is not a LESBIAN PRIDE parade, etc, etc, etc.  

We also have our parade in September instead of June. Something about the date of a Texas Supreme court decision that ended enforcement of the sodomy statute in Texas, except that it didn't.  Finally the US Supreme Court did that for us, and a long time after the parade had been moved to September.

Of course, it is hella hot in June in Dallas, but this year the Sept parade marchers, goers and watchers had to endure nearly 100 degree afternoon heat.  Houston actually has their parade at night (in June) and it's a lot of fun!

Anyway, here's my letter-to-the-editor about one of the entries that caught my eye:

Dear Editor:

The  22nd annual Alan Ross Texas Freedom Parade once again provided a wonderful afternoon of entertainment, visibility and pride for our GLBT community and all our out-of-town guests. While every entry was enjoyable, funny or just plain hot, there was one that raised more questions than answers.

The Gay Republicans were announced as "Supporting Our Troops" in a parade themed  "Dallas Pride 2005: Equal Rights! No More! No Less!"   Well, boys, we all support our troops. No one wants a single one of them to come home in a box.

But what really struck me was the great health of our Gay Republicans. Muscled, shirtless, butch, smiling and already dressed in stylin' camo shorts, they were something to look at!  Honestly, my first thought was, "Why don't they enlist?"  After all, they are young, strong and fully in favor of the Iraqi war. Good old "W" would be hard put to find anyone more qualified and more enthusiastic.

Our Army is running critically short of their recruiting goals. Time to sign up!  Seriously, our troops need reinforcement. They need support. They need YOU, Gay Republicans.

Our fabulous announcer, Paul Willaims, raised many a laugh throughout the parade with his usual witty commentary. But one line was more an after-thought: "Maybe we wouldn't be in Iraq if Republicans weren't driving Hummers" (like the one in the Gay Republican entry).  

The line didn't draw laughs. Spectators up and down the street nodded in agreement, said, "yeah", "you got it", "that's right" and applauded the statement.

Come on, Gay Republicans!  Here's your chance to put your body where your mouth is. Sign up with Uncle Sam. Enlist in the U. S. Army.  Demonstrate your support of the troops in the way that REALLY matters - go yourself and fight for their safety.

Or is your support only hollow words? Your faith in the Commander-in-Chief only lip service? Or is it that you really do support the war, as long as someone else does the dying?

•  Looking for a gay Who Suports the war?

  
  Andrew Sullivan

  by RandyMI on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 08:31:35 PM PDT

  •  Heh! Thanks

    for noticing my diary. I knew it was late and would scroll away in no time, but just wanted to get this letter off my chest, plus share it with KOS-land.  (and write run-on sentences!)

    by YucatanMan on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 10:29:16 PM PDT

•  the gay matrix strikes again

  As a gay man who is very critical of muscle queens, I am not surprised the gay Republicans would publicly display their support for the war in Iraq.  For this is precisely the aesthetic gay muscle culture aims to replicate: a fascist, neo-Classical aesthetic whose twentieth century instantiations  are the Italian neo-Futurists and the Nazis.  And there is nothing more Nazi than a group of overpriveleged, overmuscled men who refuse to engage with anything that deviates from a mirror image of themselves.  To them, all difference and deviation must be erased.  And notice also that these "boys," and I presume they are all "boys," cannot and will not acknowledge the feminine.  But back to the point, there is a cynical dimension to their support that I believe is worth underscoring.  They have a phantasmatic investment in military culture: a fetish, it is precisely what they want, but it is something these dupes will never have.  In other words, it is a site of frustration, a frustration predicated on the loss of a normative masculinity.  Hence the desire to build muscle.  But these fools should enlist.  For not only can they join many men who enjoy sodomizing young Iraqi boys, they can also realize their dystopic fantasy of fraternal love in an environment where explosions are the order of the day and only the fittest and strongest survive.  But these muscle queens, precisely because their bodies are the products of an elaborate and self-imposed ritual of bodily cosmetics, would not know how to wield a gun or actually use their marmoreal bodies in combat.  Remember, most of them are meth addicts who have to stay high so as to have energy in the gym, and the remainder drive to the gym and hire laborers to clean their homes and move their furniture.  If it is not attached to a machine in a gym full of other gay men, they cannot lift it.  
  But what their display reveals is the status of military culture as a national fetish.  Yes, they should enlist, for they are a blight on the gay rights movement and on those of us who truly uphold a radical gay politics.  And what pride is their in war?  Frankly, I believe they affiliate themselves with the war so as to guarantee a cheap lay that evening.  For even as you yourself admit, you found these pitiful excuses of human beings attractive.  Shame on you.  Do not take this personally, but this is an argument I have been having with my academic friends who for one reason or another have decided to become slaves to the gym and not to their books, gay Democrats and gay men who conceive of themselves as radical are susceptible to the same tendency.  In psychoanalysis we refer to such tendencies as overdetermined.  
  I hope you enjoyed the spectacle.

  by formalist on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 09:01:55 PM PDT

  •  addendum

    i, by the way, weigh one hundred and forty pounds.  and i am proud of my thin stature.  no protein enhancements or steroids cycles for me, thank you very much.

    by formalist on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 09:03:06 PM PDT

  •  So, did you get the point of the diary?

    If they support the war, Gay Republicans should enlist.  Otherwise, Gay Republicans are simply liars and hypocrits.

    Diverting the point of my diary to trot off into a tirade against your academic friends who are lifting weights is not really considered productive dialog.  You have a personal pecadillo and you are welcome to it - in your own diary.  

    Also, Rating people's posts a "1" without explaining why OR just rating them a "1" when you simply disagree is not proper behavior. Sure you ~can~ do it, but you shouldn't. IT is called "Ratings Abuse" and will earn you the wrath of many.

    Just sharing a few rules of the road, so that you will have an easier time of it here in KOS-land. Take a look at the FAQs and follow a few other folks' behavior before you start tossing "1" ratings on other people.

    by YucatanMan on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 10:27:42 PM PDT

    •  sorry

      but i do not know what you are referring to, and i do not believe you understood the point of my response.  

      by formalist on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:17:29 AM PDT

    •  response

      i think i pointed out that gay culture fosters this kind of sentiment, that it is not specific to republicans, and that there is a broader problem to interrogate.  i apologize if this is a comment you were not anticipating.  but yes, i understood the point of your diary very well.  i guess i thought the blame should be directed to all gay men and not just the republicans.  i apologize if i tripped upon some fundamental principle.

      by formalist on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:21:33 AM PDT

•  They're banned

  There's a law called Don't Ask Don't Tell that bans gays from openly serving in the military.

  They could go back in the closet, of course, but if you're going to tell gays they should go join the military, then you should tell the full story.

  I don't think gay Republicans are above criticism, as no gay person or gay-friendly person should support the GOP on a national level. But I have to admit that with so many problems in America today, a few gay Republicans praising the Iraq war doesn't register that high on the scale to me. Of course it's your diary and you have a right to talk about what you point, but sometimes when I see these entries, they seem more about finding someone to feel morally superior towards.  

  by JamesB3 on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 11:43:10 PM PDT

  •  Sorry

    I meant "whatever you want to point out".

    Anyway, these guys are idiots, but I have to admit that I do think that on some level, gays have to have a presence in the GOP when the GOP runs almost the entire country. Texas' legislature is completely dominated by Republicans and if not for some of them, a gay foster care/adoption ban would have been pushed through this year. It's important to keep vigilant, because right now being loyal to one party won't do gays any good (just as it didn't back when Democrats controlled Congress and the White House).

    by JamesB3 on Mon Sep 19, 2005 at 11:46:09 PM PDT