Skip to main content

A situation involving South Carolina legislators’ attack on two state colleges over lgbt issues has just gone nationwide.

And it doesn’t bode well for the state.

Originally, the controversy was about the SC State House taking away $70,000 collectively from the College of Charleston and the University of South Carolina Upstate. The amount adds up to the how much the two colleges spent on the gay-themed books which they assigned students. The legislators claimed that the books, Fun Home and Out Loud: The Best of Rainbow Radio doesn’t represent SC community value and were pornographic.

But now the situation is centering around a now canceled lecture at the University of South Carolina Upstate.  The lecture titled, “How to be a lesbian in 10 days or less” is a satirical and comedic one-woman show by Leigh Hendrix which dealt with coming out.

However, lawmakers raised a fuss about the lecture, claiming that it was “recruiting” students to be gay.  One lawmaker in particular, Sen. Mike Fair of Greenville, had this to say:

“That’s not an explanation of ‘I was born this way.’  It’s recruiting.”
So now, thanks to Sen. Fair, various nationwide media have picked up the story and few, including The Huffington Post, are tongue-in-cheek with their coverage. The majority of them are focusing on the ridiculous notion that a lecture could actually make someone gay.

And Sen. Fair, not unlike the main character in the fable The Mischievous Dog, continues to publicly comment about the lecture and homosexuality, totally oblivious as to how ridiculous South Carolina looks every time he opens his mouth.

Recently, he was interviewed by a local independent newspaper, The Free Times. During the interview, Sen. Fair had some very interesting things to say about lgbt South Carolinians:

Fair — a staunch religious conservative who believes homosexuality is morally wrong — says that while Americans have inalienable rights, glorifying homosexuality at taxpayers’ expense is not one of them. When Free Times pointed out that homosexuals pay taxes, too, as do the families of gay college students, Fair suggested they are also lawbreakers. He pointed to an antiquated state law against “the abominable act of buggery.” While the law is not enforced and homosexuality is not exactly illegal, Fair admits, he says it is still immoral and unhealthy.

Believe it or not, Fair was only getting warmed up:

Doesn’t morality extend to teaching tolerance of homosexuality in a free society? Isn’t that what USC Upstate and the College of Charleston were trying to accomplish? “I don’t believe that,” he says. Actually, he said, homosexuals “lack security in their conviction that what they’re doing is okay.”
When Sen. Fair talks about “what homosexuals are doing,” he is talking about sex. Or more specifically, what he imagines sexual intercourse is between two men because usually when folks like Sen. Fair start hinting about “gay sex,” men having sex with each other seems to always be the direction they head to. Apparently to them, lesbians never have sex.

 And when folks like Fair hint that “gay sex” is “immoral and unhealthy,” they are usually speaking in vague terms about either cherry-picked Centers for Disease Control studies from anti-gay sites or junk studies – usually from the same sites – involving anal sex, poop, and gerbils.

That’s right. I said gerbils.

That’s what this issue is all about  – someone’s fevered idea of man-to-man sex and the indignity of having your life reduced to cater to that fevered idea.

If you really gave it some intelligent thought, Sen. Fair’s classification of lgbt South Carolinians is not only unfair and insulting. It’s downright bizarre.  I mean is that what he thinks of a segment of the population he has sworn to serve? That somehow in between wild, passionately immoral, unhealthy bouts of sex, gay male South Carolinians go into a state of suspended animation while normal things such as working, paying the bills, taking care of our families and children, or handling general crises is taken care of for us by robots?

Okay, I admit that’s taking Sen. Fair’s comments too far but it serves to prove my point. In this entire controversy, none of the fault lies with the colleges,  the gay-themed books, lgbt South Carolinians, or even the canceled lecture.

The fault lies with Sen. Fair and those who have his mindset. Certainly Sen. Fair and the rest of the warring legislators have a right to their personal religious beliefs. But that right shouldn’t shield the from criticism when their behavior makes them look like a bunch of braying jackasses and brings mockery on the state.

And there is something more which needs to be said. When any legislator has such an ugly and warped view of any portion of the people he/she has sworn to serve, he/she needs to be called out on it.

I seriously wonder does Sen. Fair or any of his colleagues know any South Carolina lgbt families? Have they spent time with these families? Do they talk to these taxpayers like they would heterosexual taxpayers?

The rest of the nation may be laughing at South Carolina, but I’m not. I don’t like it when those whose salaries are being paid by my money aren’t looking out for my interests because they are busy playing God and judging my life based upon their own ignorance.

Whether or not that ignorance is religiously based is irrelevant. It’s still ignorance and it’s wrong.

The only good thing that will come out of this entire situation is maybe folks will understand the need not only for the gay-themed books at the heart of the matter, but also the lecture.

Because now people can understand what lgbt South Carolinians have to deal with.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  For a bunch of supposedly straight men (23+ / 0-)

    these religious nuts sure do think about gay sex all the time.

    "How come when it’s us, it’s an abortion, and when it’s a chicken, it’s an omelette?" - George Carlin

    by yg17 on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 08:25:10 PM PDT

    •  They certainly think about gay sex more than I do (13+ / 0-)

      and I'm a gay dude.

      I don't buy the idea that they're all secretly gay, though no doubt some are. It has more to do with something else, and here I see this...

      Actually, he said, homosexuals “lack security in their conviction that what they’re doing is okay.
      ...as a rather classic case of projection. It isn't all that common, I suspect, for people (and men in particular) to have anxieties about their sexuality. I've certainly known both men and women who go through that, uncertain whether they're "really" heterosexual when in fact they really are. And for most that have that sort of experience it's about themselves alone and after some period of time they just drop it and move on. But for certain individuals, becoming obsessed with what others are doing is a way of both dealing and NOT dealing with their own personal sense of confusion and inadequacy. That, to me, is where most of the truly raging homophobes come from.

      There is also another aspect to this entirely. I strongly suspect that people like Fair are incapable of comprehending the experiences of others who are different from themselves. While they experience their own sexuality is something they take for granted (though of course I don't doubt that many of them are rather uptight even there), it is beyond them that someone else's sexual orientation could be different from their own. They can't grasp it; it doesn't make sense to them. So what they're left with is nothing but acts devoid of context. That's all they see. It's really unfortunate but what is even more unfortunate is that we allow people with this sort of issue to be in charge of our laws.

      •  This... (4+ / 0-)
        even more unfortunate is that we allow people with this sort of issue to be in charge of our laws.
        Lack of "security" in one's sexuality is morally, culturally, or societally based.  Sexuality is more aptly expressed by the example of a continuum.  At any given time, one may (or may not) traverse any point on that continuum.  The fact I've engaged in heavy petting with women in no way detracts from the relationship I have with my husband.  And it certainly doesn't mean I don't have "security" of my "conviction" in what I do.

        Like so much else with these idiots, IOW, sexuality is not black and white, yet those are the only colors these people see.  They can't deal with all the shades of grey in the world, and so they call it "moral relativism" and spit the words out of their mouths in the same way they spit the words "liberal," "democrat," "pagan," and anything else that differs from what they "know is right."

        By electing these ignorant people, we all suffer from not only their "learned" opinions on how love should be expressed and by whom and how, but they interject and legislate their intellectual and religious ignorance on all aspects of modern society.

        I'm a hetero woman who's not afraid of being close with other women.  Maybe I don't have a right to a strong opinion on this subject, but I'm so damned tired of these hypocritical religious know-it-all's screwing up our world I could scream bloody murder.  

        So I do fight - for you, for women, for animals, for people like me who aren't on the list of "approved" religions, and for the old Democratic platform.

        It ain't easy, and I should know... I live in Kansas.

        •  True. We shouldn't elect them. But perhaps we (5+ / 0-)

          should also recognize that many of them, having nothing but the gift of gab to fall back on, aren't really capable of doing anything else but representin' and politickin'. From the perspective of the corporate elite, they make perfect lackeys because they repeat what they are told by staff, or a party leader. They are the willing minions of power-brokers. In South Carolina, as in much of the South, that still means mainly breaking people. Human husbandry. That's the growth industry, at least for the percentage of the population that's got no other talents and needs to exploit their own kind.
          When it comes to education, they don't teach practical skills; they aim to subordinate and exact obedience. The high drop-out rate is largely a result of kids being expelled or leaving because they don't "behave" as they ought. When discipline comes first before teaching, the teaching never occurs.

          http://hannah.smith-family.com

          by hannah on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:29:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ozsea1, sfbob
            When discipline comes first before teaching, the teaching never occurs.
            You've definitely hit the bulls-eye there, IMO.  And it's not just the schools.  Your entire last paragraph fits the model they use for family life, as well.  Families are the best way to pass on to the next generation knowledge, skills, and a love for learning.  Instead, these families teach the mythologies of their religious sect, and demand blind obedience to it.  The result is a multi-fold winner as far as the 1% is concerned; it leads most often to easily subjugated individuals with very little creativity and an obvious lack of STEM skills necessary for the future.  The "job" of breaking the human spirit is, instead, a built-in feature of "growing up."  This then gives the 1% the excuses it needs to outsource to the lowest bidder, and drives down wages (and intellect) everywhere.  Kansas has become much the same, IMO.  It always was backwards as far as cultural and societal norms are concerned; but it used to be a wonderful place to raise kids who had inherited a sense of wonder and curiosity of the world around them.  That was when Kansas was as much Dem as Rep, and before the great charismatic evangelical "awakening."

            Lord, save us from your followers....

  •  Busy little idiot... (6+ / 0-)

    As Wonkette pointed out, Sen. Fair is the same idiot who is blocking a bill (proposed by an 8 year old) to designate the Wooly Mammoth as the state fossil.

  •  Most "buggery" is committed by straight people. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AJayne, ozsea1

    I can't believe we still have to teach the obvious in this new millennium.

    Dick Cheney 2/14/10: "I was a big supporter of waterboarding"

    by Bob Love on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 04:52:10 AM PDT

  •  Gerbils? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stude Dude, SCFrog, ozsea1

    In answer to these anxieties, can there be, should there be a "Golden Gerbil"awarded for the most anxious? (dropping this here and running away)

  •  Absolutely stolen, slightly modified (0+ / 0-)

    from yesterday:
    if many homophobes are homosexuals, why aren't most arachinphobes arachnids?
    Answer: about half are, the boy ones; justifiably so IMO.

  •  Buggery aka sodomy, right? (0+ / 0-)
    Fair suggested they are also lawbreakers. He pointed to an antiquated state law against “the abominable act of buggery.” While the law is not enforced and homosexuality is not exactly illegal, Fair admits
    It's not that that law is just not enforced, it's that it cannot be enforced. Is he not aware that the Supreme Court ruled anti-sodomy laws to be unconstitutional quite a few years ago? Just because the state of South Carolina hasn't technically repealed that law doesn't make it the law anymore. Despite his homophobic delusions to the contrary, it is totally legal for dudes to buttfuck in South Carolina.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site