Jesurgislac’s Journal

December 11, 2008

“It turns us on when you don’t have equality”

Seriously.

The Yes-on-H8-ers have come out of the closet: they get turned on by denying LGBT people equal civil rights. For them, it’s a sexual kink. They can’t get off unless they’re fantasising about how their friends and neighbors can’t get married.

Playful Walrus was the first to admit it Kingfisher agreed that this was their motivation too: and Pearl really gets off on it.

(With regard to discussion at these blogs: Pearl, like Beetle Blogger and PomegranateApple, bans opposing opinions, preferring echo-chamber praise or silence to discussion. Playful Walrus requires full name-and-address registration. Kingfisher initially appeared to welcome debate, but then – as an anonymous troll appeared with the intent of derailing a civil debate with ad hom attacks on me – made a mod’s decision that anonymous ad hom attacks were preferable to informed/polite debate. I guess that would go with KF’s declared sexual kink of denying other people civil rights to get off…)

It’s interesting because I always figured the people who talk about how if same-sex couples can marry this will “destroy” mixed-sex marriage are speaking in code about how they fear closety gay men and lesbians will not want to spend their lives in card marriages when they see long-term same-sex couples getting to marry. How soul-destroying it must be for a person who all their lives denied themselves – to see others who were not so afraid.

But this doesn’t explain why happy hets would oppose marriage. But this admission makes sense of it: they have a kink of their own. They get off on other people’s inequality. A form of BDSM, not safe/sane/consensual, but harmless enough so long as it was merely fantasy – so long as Walrus or Kingfisher or Pearl just wanked themselves off over the idea of two men or two women being denied marriage. No one should be condemned for their sexual fantasies, so long as they don’t impose them on others who haven’t consented. I have no problem with these bloggers having shared sexual fantasies about how they’ll deny marriage to same-sex couples.

But when they want to force their sexual fantasies of denying marriage on to other people…

There’s a word for people who think that satisfying their sexual arousal is more important than sexual consent: words for people who think what turns them on ought to be forced on other people against their will. That’s the kind of person these anti-marriage bloggers are. Not just bigots…

Advertisements

8 Comments »

  1. I’m fairly certain the word you are looking for is “rapist”. There, I said it.

    Comment by Personal Failure — December 11, 2008 @ 1:46 pm | Reply

  2. A Day Without a Difference…

    And I got accused of being a rapist (see below). Looks like yesterday didn’t turn out to be much of a demonstration. Lisa Leff reports.
    A daylong work stoppage for which people were encouraged to call in “gay” to express support for same-sex……

    Trackback by Playful Walrus — December 11, 2008 @ 5:44 pm | Reply

  3. I’m fairly certain the word you are looking for is “rapist”. There, I said it.

    I was actually not going to use that word because it would be a rhetorical use of the word. As below: Walrus gets peeved that the fantasies of getting off on denying others marriage is being identified as a rhetorical endorsement of rape.

    Comment by jesurgislac — December 12, 2008 @ 1:56 am | Reply

  4. I call them as I see them. “Stop hitting me back” is not a refutation of the truth. Besides, I am all about the rhetorical usage of words. You want to see what an argument really is? Push it to the extreme. Take it as far as it will go, and see where you end up. Seems like Playful Walrus didn’t like where his argument went. Poor baby.

    As for the demonstration, there are an awful lot of people in my little corner of the world walking around with money that says “In Gay We Trust” on the back. (I deal solely in cash, and last week, I had my check cashed into a whole lotta ones!)

    Comment by Personal Failure — December 12, 2008 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  5. As for the demonstration, there are an awful lot of people in my little corner of the world walking around with money that says “In Gay We Trust” on the back.

    Hee. I used to have a stamp that said “Lesbian Money”.

    Comment by Jesurgislac — December 12, 2008 @ 2:32 pm | Reply

  6. You realize, don’t you, that Playful Walrus was being ironic? He was using the argument that many gay people use but in the opposite way. You’re smart enough to get that, aren’t you?

    Comment by renaissanceguy — December 13, 2008 @ 11:49 am | Reply

  7. Did you really find my post that confusing, Renaissanceguy? I thought you were smarter than that.

    Comment by jesurgislac — December 13, 2008 @ 12:11 pm | Reply

  8. Renaissanceguy: ironic or not, it was a silly argument. And the way to counter a silly argument is to play it straight and point out where and how the satire fails.

    Comment by Candy Lolita — December 18, 2008 @ 11:49 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: