Normally I stay quite away from hot topics I don't understand fully but... no wait, that wasn't me, I was thinking of someone else.
This is something I have no business asking.
Don't you wonder why any group would be a part of a party with policies that are not in their interest or which are vocally against you as a "type" of person? Of course. Well, Lakoff's explanation of conservativism as using a "strict father" paradigm for policy thought explains this a lot.
If you are Condi and prefer this paradigm, even 20 years ago you might have come to the conclusion that the chances of solving racism in the Republican party were greater than getting the Democrats to come around to your sense of identity which is this "strict father" framework.
It's similar to being a Democrat even though Zell and Lieberman are Democrats figuring you have a better chance of getting around or rid of them in the Democratic Party than cleaning the like from the Republicans. The same works for more mild examples like Clinton or Bayh.
So my innappropriate question...
The gay community is Political Target One in terms of groups maligned by the right. According to current right wing mantra: You/them are all bad. None of you/them should be allowed to marry, etc. etc.. Such language about racial minorities is now in the political closet mostly (although it gets loud and quite audible from in there), and individual minority members can even be promoted as "good types" by the right, such as Condi. But you do not see this with the Gay community.
So here you have a community which is actually under vocal persecution by right. Why in the hell would any homosexual take part in the Republican Party?
Well, the answer is still the same... their personal identity is tied up with some Republican frame, and taking Lakoff's lead, that frame is likely the "strict father" model.
If you see where I'm going I'm already ashamed.
Anyway... I am not gay, nor did I ever give being gay much of a try, so please be gentle if you find any latent bigotries, stupidity, or ignorance in my comment, and if you correct these same I will read and learn... but I have noticed, for example, that there seems to be a fem/butch pairing in homosexual couples which while not universal is also not uncommon. Those terms are from the lesbian side of the equation but I think I've noticed something analogous in male homosexuals as well, though I might be biased by too many viewing s of "La Cage aux Folles", the club manager being the butch one and the female impersonator being the fem one. (The version with Robin Williams and Nathan Lane was good, but come on... you can never remake a classic like the original... well, not as well I mean).
Anyway... the question is merely, considering this possible fact... does this explain what sort of homosexual can see fit to be Republican? Granted that there is no doubt a type that just wants tax cuts and isn't afraid of the persecution, but beyond that... is there some form of archetypes that lead certain homosexuals to, well, prefer a strict model, that want a strict model, that somehow enjoy in some perverse way being persecuted? They like the strict model, even though their role in it is to be looked down upon, at least publicly, while simultaneously being able to take part in an exciting underworld... like people that cheat on their spouse not because they want the sex but more because they want the illicit experience itself?
I should not submit this, I know.
But as always,
ready to be educated,
and disabused of false notions,
as necessary,
pyrrho
PS: feel free to discuss "La Cage Aux Folles" instead.