I Love Being Right, or Why Gays Need the Right

Previously, in response to the absurd "scandal" about one of the founders of the gay sex site Manhunt being a McCain donor, I posted a screed about how we gays need to get over our kneejerk liberalism. The Los Angeles Times just ran a smart, even-handed piece by James Kirchick of The New Republic on just this issue.

This line really stuck out for me: "labeling everyone with whom [gay activists] don't agree a 'bigot' does not help the worthy cause of gay equality." I was reminded of the night I went on a bar crawl with fellow Obama supporters in the Gayborhood just before the April 22 primary here in Pennsylvania. We handed out literature and stickers and buttons, talked with people who were curious or had questions, and generally just put a gay face on the Obama campaign, as it were. On the whole, it was a great experience, but the things that some gays and lesbians we talked to that night believed about Obama were frightening. Many people were convinced he was anti-gay. The Donnie McClurkin incident seemed to have done a lot of damage - never mind that under Bill Clinton, husband of the woman most people we talked to that night supported and supposedly a hero of gays, we got Don't Ask Don't Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act. Most had no idea that Obama's stance on LGBT issues was actually slightly more progressive than Hillary Clinton's. One (rather drunk) Hillary supporter got into a screaming fight with one of us, accusing all of us who were out supporting Obama of being homophobic. And she wasn't the only one.

So I think that experience (and keep in mind, we were out there in support of another Democrat - can you imagine what would have happened if we were McCain supporters?) gave me a greater awareness of our community's tendency to excommunicate anyone with whom we don't agree. We do this to our inestimable detriment. As Kirchick points out, Democrats alone have not been able to move this country forward on gay issues. Like it or not, we need Republicans.

Gays Are Allowed To Be Republicans

I don't know if I'm getting conservative in my old age or what, but it seems like each new Gay Outrage of the Week makes less and less sense to me. To wit: peeps are upset about the fact that the owner of Manhunt (link NSFW) is a McCain contributor. "Log in, get off, get betrayed," fumes Joe, in a play on Manhunt's slogan.

OK. Let me be as clear as I possibly can here: THE OWNER OF MANHUNT IS ALLOWED TO BE A REPUBLICAN. As he himself pointed out, neither McCain nor Obama supports gay marriage. And it's not like Mr. Manhunt gave money to Romney or Huckabee, who are both unambiguous gay-haters.

I think what this whole situation illustrates is that what bothers some of us gays more than anything else is the mere existence of Log Cabin Republicans in the first place. For most of us, they seem to be an elusive species, rarely seen in the wild, even though there are plenty of non-liberal gays out there.

When we find out that a successful, wealthy - and sex-site owning gay, no less - is a member of the GOP, on top of our normal why-would-you-be-a-Republican-if-you're-gay reaction, there is this irrational but real sense of betrayal. "How could HE of all people give money to THEM?" we wonder. But I don't think it's all that shocking, and I don't think it, on its own, merits canceling a membership. The fact that Manhunt totally sucks and is destroying gay culture is a far more compelling reason to cancel one's membership.

(One small disclaimer: I'm all for informed consumerism. If you don't like what the people you're buying stuff from are doing with their money, by all means, don't give them your money anymore. Just don't expect everyone else to agree with you or do the same.)