From the New York Times:
The five ballplayers summoned before a protest committee at the Gay Softball World Series stood accused of cheating. Their alleged offense: heterosexuality.
Inside a small room, surrounded by committee members and other softball officials, the players said they were interrogated about their sexual orientation. Confusion reigned. According to court records, one player declined to say whether he was gay or straight but acknowledged being married to a woman. Another answered yes to both gay and heterosexual definitions. A third asked if bisexual was acceptable and was told, “This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.”
Ultimately, the committee ruled that three of the five were “nongay” and stripped the team of its second-place finish.
That decision, at the 2008 competition near Seattle, provoked a federal lawsuit against the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance, which governs the softball World Series, and compelled the alliance to change its rules.
Be a hot Muslim SWPL lesbian on the Internet or an ultra-competitive ballplayer in the Gay World Series, what can't a straight white guy do when he really sets his mind to it?
Posts
34 comments:
Oh my God. That's so deliciously funny. Welcome to the party, gays!
Oddly, "Will and Grace" anticipated this with an episode in which a straight guy (Matt Damon) "who just loves to sing" is trying out for the Gay Chorous and becomes Jack's rival. That had to have been about ten years ago.
When you think about it, this post could be copied word-for-word by a lefty fulminating against "privilege" or some post-modern form of "colonialism". Those damn WHAMs!
Off-topic, but since most of you probably don't read sociology blogs, it will be new. Brayden King profiles Frank Dobbin's "Inventing Equal Opportunity" on corporations hiring diversicrats to avoid getting sued. The thing is, the law is so unclear what constitutes discrimination and how one can be immunized to the charge, that these companies have to make it up as they go along. And since the judges don't have any better idea what the law says, they have to take their cues from corporate practices. Quite a self-licking icecream cone those diversicrats have there.
LOL.
Wait until a heterosexual white guy of normal intelligence fakes retardation in order to compete in the Special Olympics.
I can't believe the crap white hetero males put up with in the US. I admit that I used to get some enjoyment out of it as a comeuppance against whites. The- as you sew, so shall you reap- wisdom confirmed over and over again. But, this is beyond parody, now. It is pathetic. I almost wish I didn't know the English language so that I wouldn't have to read and understand what is happening. Better to fight and die in ignorance, than be paralyzed in complete understanding. I mean what do you do at this point? Shoot the dog that's been beat up so much, it doesn't know pain anymore? Join in the fun? Turning away doesn't seem to be an option as this is a global disease. What to do? What to do?
Too funny.
Don't we just get to designate our sexual identity?
Do we have to prove it?
That's so gay!
What point does the insanity have to reach before our heads start exploding?
Funny. When some gay illegal alien from Philippines faked being a American citizen, he got a Pulitzer. But when straight white guys pull a similar stunt, very very bad!!
Btw, these guys might as well be considered as honoray gays since no self-respecting straight guy would play in the gay games.
And how were they smoked out as straights? Haven't gays been telling us that most gay guys are like everyone else and don't conform to fruity stereotypes? But I guess these gays were able to smoke out guys who didn't seem very gay. So, most gays do act fruity and whoopsy doopsy.
Sailer, I get the joke ;).
My own first reaction was: This guy sounds gay. And the first picture I saw of Vargas looked awfully gay. Not surprisingly, of course, he is gay.
Be a hot Muslim SWPL lesbian on the Internet or an ultra-competitive ballplayer in the Gay World Series, what can't a straight white guy do when he really sets his mind to it?
NBA player I can think of was John Amaechi, but he was awful, although that was because he was gay and hated sports)
They will proffer cheery greetings over the picket fence, the one admiring the other's attractive buttock-hugging leather shorts for that day's Gay Pride parade as he prepares to take his daughter to the clitoridectomy clinic.
most of the tiny number of white-collar Mexican men I worked with were homosexuals.
there was also a Venice Muscle Beach / Hollywood / Castro Street gay / Olympic track & field steroids connection to West Coast pro athletes going on.
Does it make sense to define one's identity primarily on the basis of sexuality? I can understand homosexuality being a part of one's life but THE defining thing of one's life? Why such emphasis on sexuality? Influence of Freudianism?
Instead of saying "I am a homosexual", isn't it better to say, "I am a person who is gay among other things?" A person-who-is-gay-among-other-things would be a 'pewigaot'. After all, much of one's life has nothing to do with sexuality whether one is straight or gay. If one defines oneself as gay, everything in his life becomes gay-ified--even non-gay stuff.
But most things in life aren't gay or straight. If you're nice to animals, you're just a decent person. If you like sports, you're a sports fan. If you're proud of your country, you're a nationalist.
But, if you think primarily in terms of 'I am a homosexual', you're coloring all of life around anal sex with other men.
One would think a decent pewigaot would keep the sexual part of his life under wraps since it is on the weird and perverse side. I mean imagine John Wayne and Lee Marvin having gay sex. Instead, we now have a culture where people flaunt the most private, sexual, and lurid part of their lives and define their identity around it.
Sexual passions may be powerful, but people aren't supposed to act sexual for most of the day.
If a person who is gay defines himself as a pewigaot, then he's not just a gay but a well-rounded human being who sexually happens to be gay. He could be a good neighbor, good worker, good cook, good machine operator, etc, etc as well as being gay. But if he goes around saying "I'm a homo", somehow that overrides all the other aspects of his life. So, he's a gay cook, a gay worker, a gay machine operator, a gay doctor, etc, even though sexuality has nothing to do with those things.
Mormoms used to be into polygamy, but a Mormon was a pewipaot, or a person who is polygamous among other things. It was a part of a larger life and culture, not THE defining thing in his life. He didn't go around saying "I am a poly, I am a poly!"
(Btw, why is the Left for 'gay marriage' but not for polygamy? If they're for freedom and equality of all lifestyles, why shouldn't marriages be polygamous?)
Maybe the Left props up gayness cuz it's prone toward multiculturalism. After all, if pewigaots primarily identify themselves as gay, their main compatriots would be gays of all races and nations. A white pewigaot would be more likely to side with a black gay and an asian gay than with straight white people.
Also, the rise of gay culture seems to be aligned with rise of porn culture. Mainstreaming of gay culture and porn go hand in hand since both tend toward excess, shamelessness, exhibitionism, and desecration of Western values, not least because porn has tipped the balance where it's now primarily interracist. And Lady Gaga is like interracist and gay porn tropes combined into one big pomosexuality. There is a sick agenda behind it.
I wonder if some people will primarily define themselves as incestuous in the future and call for incest-marriage. Maybe the phenom will be called 'blood love'. And if you oppose it, I suppose you'd be an 'incestophobe'. The left will moan, 'in this world of so much hatred and violence, what is so wrong about a brother loving his sister or son loving his mother?' Ewww.
Maybe the rest of us could start taking that tack that gays became fond of sometime in the 90s - i.e., claiming that everyone famous was gay (Abe Lincoln? Flamer. Etc.)
We could brazenly claim that every famous gay was really straight: Liberace? A notorious p**n-hound - had a girl in every town. Gertrude Stein? She had affairs with Ernest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald. Etc.
"Wait until a heterosexual white guy of normal intelligence fakes retardation in order to compete in the Special Olympics."
Already been done.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2umhVpCKe4
Image what will happen if the all of the civil rights laws including the appropriate government quotas and set asides are provided to homosexuals at the same time that militant organized homosexuals get to be the ones who determine who is really homosexual.
The organized homosexuals will end up having more power than organized blacks or Hispanics.
Good Lord, how did this turn into a federal lawsuit? This is a very easy question to resolve. I'll even draft the new rule for them:
"Any player of questionable gayness can prove his fabulousness by making out with another man of his choice (one will provided if requested) in the presence of the committee".
Anyone who passes that test is either very gay or so exemplifies the words "take one for the team" that it doesn't matter.
"...what can't a straight white guy do when he really sets his mind to it?"
Give himself an identifier other than "white". Have his own territory and culture. Take control of his and his race's destiny.
Something similar happens in Paralympic games like boccia, where mildly disabled players get dishonest doctors to reclassify them into a more-disabled category of play. They win all the awards.
It's not quite as bad as South Park's parody, but it's still obvious to anyone acquainted with neurology.
(The one-eyed man is king....)
and if a hetero league banned homos? Hate.
They should have just played out their cover...and taken part in the post-championship "celebration."
Minutes taken from HUABC--The Homosexual Un-Ass Bandit Committee...
"Are you now or have you ever been in a sexual relationship with a person of the opposite sex?"
White Hetero Men - they're a dessert topping and a floor wax!
* Ward Churchill - Self-professed Native American Indian activist without any AmIn heritage
* Vincente Fox - Proud Mezitico former Pres of Mexico with >97% European blood
He could be married to a woman and still be gay. I know a man that was married and cohabited with a woman for over a decade, and they had a daughter together and he wasn't very in the closet the entire time.
I know a lesbian now that cohabits with her lesbian lover and is still married to her husband.
This guy is probably married and gay.
"(Btw, why is the Left for 'gay marriage' but not for polygamy? If they're for freedom and equality of all lifestyles, why shouldn't marriages be polygamous?)"
Give it time. They didn't start pushing for gay marriage immediately after having made gay rights acceptable; they waited 20-30 years for the damage to set in before moving on to the next step. Right now the argument that "gay marriage? why not polygamy?" is seen as a homophobic argument against gay marriage. Later once this is forgotten and gay marriage is seen as "normal", they'll push for polygamy on the grounds that it's "unfair" that marriage be limited to only two people.
Today a radio caller explained the reason for the limit on str8s in the gay league. It's a question of depth of talent pool. Teams that plumb the str8 pool get an unfair advantage. Seems to make sense.
They'd better hurry up and find that gay gene all the egalitarians now believe in.
"Confusion reigned."
sounds simple enough.
http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/hbd-human-biodiversity/women-and-the-enlightenment/?print=1&tmpl=component
I can see some logic in this,(tho i am a bigoted homophobe who thinks homosexuals are nasty SOB's)in that these gay teams are very competitive. The "hets' are ringers who,being real men,are better at the sport. To sneak too many hets onto your team is to cheat. What the fools need to do is to get sone black guys!(That is,if you can find any in SF) Being black,they A)Must be treated with kid gloves,B)Have a more,er, fluid sexuality. C)Make good players. What i dont get is why straight guys want to be on a gay team. They couldnt make the lesbian squad??
You know, I'm still not 100% sure if this is serious or satire.
But assuming it is serous, try to imagine the howls of outrage if somebody set up a "Heterosexual Softball World Series". Doing so would be conclusive proof of that crime called "homophobia".
In my mind's eye I can see a scene like any normal (baseball) pre-game, with a bunch of gay guys standing around a batting cage, casually leaning on their bats, as the straight batter mashes some monster shots to the outfield.
"Fabulous!"
"Hit the thtuffing out of that one, big boy."
"Took that one for a ride, sailor."
Sick of This S*** says:
I don't understand why they can't field an all-gay team. Did Smead Jolley explain this?
Whatever, I think a remake of "Some Like It Hot" is in order, except instead of two men in drag in an all-ladies' band, you'd have two straight guys playing gay in an all gay band.
Remember what Joe E. Brown said at the end of the movie, to Jack Lemmon, when Lemmon said, "I'm a man!" -
"Nobody's perfect!"
Female audiences will love it. There is no end to female masochism.
You know, I bet the lesbian softball league never has this problem....
First Anonymous said:
"(Btw, why is the Left for 'gay marriage' but not for polygamy? If they're for freedom and equality of all lifestyles, why shouldn't marriages be polygamous?)"
Second Anon replied:
"Give it time. They didn't start pushing for gay marriage immediately after having made gay rights acceptable; they waited 20-30 years for the damage to set in before moving on to the next step. Right now the argument that "gay marriage? why not polygamy?" is seen as a homophobic argument against gay marriage. Later once this is forgotten and gay marriage is seen as "normal", they'll push for polygamy on the grounds that it's "unfair" that marriage be limited to only two people."
Agree 100% with Anon #2. If gay marriage is legalized in a dozen or two states, you're gonna see a serious push for legal polygamy. Between the Muslims, the break-away Mormons and the secular or pagan polyamory types... you WILL see a push for legl, state-sanctioned polygamy.
NOTA said...
"You know, I bet the lesbian softball league never has this problem...."
Okay, that's the punchline I could tell was out there somewhere, but I couldn't quite come up with.
"Mac said...
Agree 100% with Anon #2. If gay marriage is legalized in a dozen or two states, you're gonna see a serious push for legal polygamy. Between the Muslims, the break-away Mormons and the secular or pagan polyamory types... you WILL see a push for legl, state-sanctioned polygamy."
In it's early stages, this has already started. HBO has (or had) a TV show about a polygamous family. Some may argue that it does not show polygamy in an entirely positive light (I don't know - I've never seen it). It doesn't matter. The only salient fact is that it exists. There is no such thing as bad publicity. I also recently heard a story on NPR which reported on polygamy in a not-unfavorable way. I predict that within five years, there will be at least one sitcom, perhaps several, featuring polygamists and depicting them as being more sensible, more fun, and less uptight than monogamous couples.
Post a Comment