I’m Sorry You Suck So Hard

Jesus tits, Peter LaBarbera.

I hate being called a homophobe. It has such an ugly connotation. Its
especially unpleasant because, as a Christian, I’m supposed to have a
reputation for loving people, not hating them. So I’ve worked really
hard over the years to try to get the homosexuals to stop calling me a
homophobe…

As usual with the wingnut welfare set, it’s not what you are, it’s what you’re being called that bothers you. Even racists know being a racist is a bad thing, so they try to make it about you being a name-caller, which is when I stop arguing and start looking for non-mission-critical objects to break. Here’s an idea, Peter: If you want to not be called a homophobe, stop, you know, BEING ONE.

Is it me or is the majority of wingnut commentary devoted to making simple things unnecessarily complicated? I mean, you want to not be called a homophobe, I get that. Why not stop acting like two chicks living together is the end of the fucking world? Wouldn’t that be easier than writing endless screeds about how meeeeeeeeeeeeeen everybody is, going up to people asking them to stop it stop it stop it stop it, yelling ‘LALALALALAPENISDOESN’TBOTHERMELALALA” all the time? I realize getting over your issues isn’t easy; after all, I’m still working on the equivalent of a full run of National Geograpics myself. But it’s got to be simpler than THIS.

A.

6 thoughts on “I’m Sorry You Suck So Hard

  1. You can’t figure out why people would call you a homophobe if you can’t look at yourself with a modicum of objectivity. The problem with guys like this is they don’t have an introspective bone in their bodies.
    They’re never going to get over their issues because they’ll never be able to either recognize them or admit they have them. They’ll go through their lives not understanding why so many people don’t like them and figuring that the problem is with everybody else.
    This is one of the key reasons I feel better with Obama in charge. Because I feel like he’s already gone through a hell of a lot of introspection. He even repeated it publicly with his books.

  2. OK, glad I read all the background on this before asking this question. This guy is really homophobic and being called as such fits the bill for him. That said, here’s the question that always bugged me:
    When it comes to dislikes of certain people or things, at what level are you allowed to dislike someone or some thing without being “phobic” or labeled as such?
    I’m not talking about homophobia. For me, that was never an issue. Gay, straight, bi, trans, whatever, we’re all good. Always have been I’m talking about other stuff.
    If you are an atheist or agnostic and I’m not, it’s likely hard for me to understand how you can not have some faith in some higher being. That said, am I “phobic?” I’d like to think not. If I don’t like religious people, does that make me “faith phobic?”
    It is topical? Is is to the degree to which you dislike something? Is it in the eye of the labeler? I always wanted to know what other people thought of this.

  3. Doc, it’s not about not liking or disagreeing. It’s about being irrationally afraid of something. The threshold is in the word itself: -phobic. Irrational fear.

    As usual with the wingnut welfare set, it’s not what you are, it’s what you’re being called that bothers you

    Which is why Michael Steele is now the head of the RNC.
    As for lack of introspection: I love how LaBarbera starts off lamenting what a bad rap hate is getting lately.

  4. A, if you’re not completely over the edge, Mark Steyn expounds on the reasons the stimulus shouldn’t include STD prevention in a column the Orange County Register carried on 1/30/09. I bet he thinks I’m unpleasant for calling out his misanthropy and misogyny as expressed quite clearly in his most recent rantings there.
    Sarah

  5. When it comes to dislikes of certain people or things, at what level are you allowed to dislike someone or some thing without being “phobic” or labeled as such?
    I’d say the answer to that is when it infringes on the answer to the question “What’s it to you?” In what possible way is Auntie Bea getting married to Auntie Em harming or doinganything whatsoever to Peter LaBarbera? Yet, he feels compelled to make huge public pronouncements about howbadevilwrongnastyBADBADBAD homosexuality is. If you’re an agnostic and you can’t figure out how an atheist can be an atheist (the same way you don’t believe in Thor or Zeus, Ahura Mazda, or Ugg the Rock God, by the way), and you make it your business to go in public and slam atheists over and over even though atheists haven’t done a thing to you except exist, then you’re probably damn near as close to the same kind of bigot about religion as LaBarbera is about homosexuality, whatever you want to call that.
    “What’s it to you?” is a great question for getting past those ingrained “Because Daddy Said So” cultural biases, by the way. Maybe if more people realised that the world was not going to end if other people did things differently from the way they do them, the world would be a saner, more relaxed place…
    By the way, as to the issue of “homophobia,” specifically — I think the term is appropriate in LaBarbera’s case because I think thephobia in question with him is that he’s desperately afraid of his own same-sex attractions. He is, after all, the guy Pam Spaulding calls “Porno Pete,” who makes a habit of going to gay leatherfests so he canogle half-naked gay guys in leather document the atrocities, after all. Look me in the eye, keep your face straight, and tell me that’s not the behaviour of a crazed closet case with a bad authoritarian hang-up…

Comments are closed.