Connect with us

Marcus Bachmann: Is It OK To Make Fun Of Him Because You Think He’s Gay?

Published

on

Marcus Bachmann may be receiving even more attention than his addled wife, Michele, for his anti-gay comments, for calling gays “barbarians” that need “discipline,” and some gays, it seems, are fighting back — by calling Marcus Bachmann “gay.” Mr. Bachmann, some think, has certain effeminate characteristics, has made statements that some think reveal a latent homosexuality, and certainly might fit a profile of extreme-homophobes — such as George Rekers — who get caught in homosexual or same-sex sexual incidents.

READ: 10 Questions Bachmann’s Husband Must Answer About “Christian Counseling”

But, absent any proof, or circumstantial evidence, is it OK to call Marcus Bachmann “gay?,” as if it were a bad thing? Isn’t that what the LGBT community has fought against for decades, and more recently, effectively, with campaigns such as the It Gets Better project, GLSEN and the Ad Council’s 2009 ad campaign from thinkb4youspeak.com, “That’s So Gay,” and all the anti-bullying initiatives that have finally been embraced by the federal government?

Right-wing extremists recently have turned the tables on our community, claiming they are “victims,” that gays are “bullies,” and guilty of “hate crimes.” Doesn’t calling Marcus Bachmann “gay,” because he may sound a bit effeminate, feed into their anti-gay hatred meme?

I don’t know if Marcus Bachmann is gay — and neither do you. If he is, the media one day will uncover evidence and he will reach the depths of disgrace, joining the ranks of Ted Haggard, George Rekers, Bishop Eddie Long, etc., etc., etc.

Now, let me be clear: Marcus Bachmann deserves to be vilified — for his anti-gay bigotry and hatred, for mixing his special blend of “Christian counseling” and claiming it’s therapy, for using and possibly mis-using state and federal funds for his Bachmann and Associates business, for even trying to turn people straight who are gay, for his 2005 presentation, titled, “The Truth About the Homosexual Agenda,” which culminated in three people claiming Bachmann had “cured” their homosexuality.

But when gay people and our allies start calling someone gay because he speaks with a lisp, or walks “funny,” or dances “strangely,” how are we any better than the school yard bullies — or the right wing extremists — who use the word “gay,” as a slur, like “f*g,” or the “n” word, or other ethnic or minority-focused rhetoric?

WATCH: Bachmann’s Radical Beliefs A Liability With General Public

Gaydar, which runs an iPhone app, the purpose of which I have no idea, today offered Marcus Bachmann “a complimentary lifetime membership.” Their Gaydar blog states,

“As a rep at Gaydar HQ explains, “Marcus Bachmann is popping up on everyone else’s gaydar, we figure he might want to be on the real Gaydar!”

I don’t think that’s funny. I do think it reinforces old stereotypes and those who do so put old kids even more at risk. When it’s one by those in our community, I am truly ashamed.

Stonewall DFL Chair David Joseph DeGrio, speaking for himself, said to the Minnesota Independent, “I don’t view saying that someone’s gay is a negative thing, but I believe that perceived sexuality was being used as an attack on Marcus Bachmann, and I find it unacceptable to use perceived sexuality as an attack on anybody.”

“The message I see it sending is a bit hypocritical because we’re advocating for policies in schools to stop this exact thing, saying someone’s effeminate or someone speaks with a high-pitched voice or even [saying] someone is gay because this a gay characteristic,” DeGrio said.

The Independent also published a Facebook note DeGrio wrote, which states in part,

“In the past week I’ve had several people, including some from the LGBT activist community, make comments mocking the perceived sexuality of Marcus Bachmann. I find this completely unacceptable. Think about the terrible example being set for kids who overhear such intimations about Marcus Bachmann.

“We oppose this exact kind of mockery and bullying in the schools because kids commit suicide over these exact same jokes and perceptions.

“If, by some chance, Marcus Bachmann is living a lie we should have compassion and understanding. We know what it’s like to live each day hiding truth and fearing discovery by others.”

That last part goes too far for my taste — if Marcus Bachmann is gay, he deserves to be vilified and excoriated until his final day for the harm he has done to the LGBT community. Heck, he deserves it anyway, but more so if he’s been attacking the very people for who they are if he’s one of us.

DeGrio told The New Civil Rights Movement, “I want to reiterate that I have no problem attacking [Marcus Bachmann’s] bigotry, homophobia and clinical practices, he should be challenged. But people also must acknowledge that not all virulent homophobes are closet cases, some people are just bigots.

“I do have a problem assuming, based upon mannerisms, that he’s gay or bi. As an LGBT activist I constantly fight against stereotype-based labels because not all gays are the same. Making an assumption based upon pitch of voice, body language or looks is what leads to kids being called ‘faggot’ or ‘dyke’ on a daily basis. As an educator I try to set a better example for the youth in our society.”

It’s not OK to make ad hominen attacks on Bachmann — or anyone else.

Attack the Marcus Bachmanns of this world for being ignorant. Attack them for being bigots. Attack them for literally causing people harm. Attack them for being unable to make rational, objective decisions about people. Attack them for their anti-gay hatred masked by a veil of religion and traditional morals. Attack them becuse they should know better.

But don’t attack them for the very thing we recoil at — being attacked for being gay — especially when you don’t know if they are. That makes us no better than they are.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Hunter Biden Plans Lawsuit Against Fox News Amid ‘Conspiracy of Disinformation’

Published

2 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

Attorneys for Hunter Biden have notified Fox News he plans to sue the right-wing cable TV network and its digital entities, after lawyers for the President’s son spent more than a year investigating. Among other issues the letter reportedly mentions Fox News citing a now-indicted former FBI informant, and points to “revenge porn” laws.

The letter, NBC News reports, is dated last week and specifically points to alleged bribery allegations as well as “Fox’s airing of ‘intimate images’ belonging to Hunter Biden that his lawyers claim were ‘hacked, stolen, and/or manipulated’,” that they say violate “Biden’s civil rights as well as copyright law.”

CNN, focusing in the intimate images, reports that “Hunter Biden is demanding that Fox News remove from its platforms sexually explicit images that President Joe Biden’s son says are private, according to a letter obtained by CNN, as part of his strategy to publicly fight back against conservative media.”

“The media outlet aired a mock trial of Hunter Biden on the streaming platform Fox Nation in 2022,” CNN also reports, “focused on the unproven bribery allegations, and published ‘intimate images of Mr. Biden depicting him in the nude as well as engaged in sex acts,’ according to the letter, which demands that Fox immediately remove the series from all streaming platforms.”

READ MORE: Noem Doubles Down With ‘Legal Cover’ For Shooting Her Puppy to Death

“’FOX knows that these private and confidential images were hacked, stolen, and/or manipulated digital material,’ Hunter Biden’s attorneys wrote in the letter, which contained several of the explicit images, some of which were blurred,” CNN adds. “Publishing these images, the attorneys said, violated ‘the majority of states’ laws against the nonconsensual disclosure of sexually explicit images and videos, sometimes referred to as ‘revenge porn’ laws.’ ”

In a statement Hunter Biden’s attorney, Mark Geragos, expanded on the apparently pending lawsuit.

“For the last five years, Fox News has relentlessly attacked Hunter Biden and made him a caricature in order to boost ratings and for its financial gain,” Geragos stated. “The recent indictment of FBI informant Smirnov has exposed the conspiracy of disinformation that has been fueled by Fox, enabled by their paid agents and monetized by the Fox enterprise. We plan on holding them accountable.”

Media Matters last week reported, “Fox News has mentioned Hunter Biden at least 13,440 times since January 3, 2023, when Republicans took control of the House of Representatives after promising to use their power to investigate the business interests of President Joe Biden’s son, according to a Media Matters review.”

“Fox’s on-air coverage of Hunter Biden has … plummeted in recent months,” Media Matters added. “Mentions of the president’s son on the network peaked at 2,356 in July, when his federal plea deal on two misdemeanor counts of failing to pay taxes fell apart, and mentions exceeded 1,300 in four other months, most recently in December.”

READ MORE: Peter Navarro’s Latest Attempt to Get Out of Jail Smacked Down by SCOTUS

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

News

Peter Navarro’s Latest Attempt to Get Out of Jail Smacked Down by SCOTUS

Published

3 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

Former top Trump White House advisor Peter Navarro, in prison for criminal contempt of Congress, has failed in his latest attempt to be released early, after the U.S. Supreme Court once again denied his request.

Navarro, 74, the first and only former White House official ever to be imprisoned for contempt of Congress, is serving out his four-month sentence in Miami. His efforts to stay out of jail were first denied by Chief Justice John Roberts, before he reported to the prison in mid-March. He was found guilty in September after a short trial. After his arrest he hawked his book and begged for money on national television.

CBS News reports “15 days into his sentence, Navarro renewed his request to halt his surrender to Justice Neil Gorsuch, which is allowed under Supreme Court rules. His bid for emergency relief was referred to the full court, which denied it. There were no noted dissents. Attorneys for Navarro declined to comment.”

CNN called the decision to petition Justice Gorsuch “a procedural maneuver that has not worked in decades.”

RELATED: ‘Bro, You’re Already Facing Charges’: Protestor Mocks Peter Navarro as He Tries to Grab ‘Trump Lost’ Sign

“Gorsuch referred the request to the full court, which considered it during its closed door conference on Friday. The court denied the request on Monday without comment.”

Navarro’s prison sentence is the result of his refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack. Navarro claims he had executive privilege, but offered no proof, and refused to show up as ordered.

Legal experts accurately had predicted a “quick conviction” after Navarro, called a “conspiracy theorist” who promotes “fringe” economic theories, had called no witnesses. The jury deliberated for under five hours. He faced up to two years in prison.

CBS News adds Navarro “is not the only member of the Trump administration to be convicted of the charge. Steve Bannon, former White House chief strategist, was found guilty of two counts of contempt of Congress and sentenced to four months in prison. The judge overseeing that case, however, put his prison term on hold while Bannon appeals.”

READ MORE: Noem Doubles Down With ‘Legal Cover’ For Shooting Her Puppy to Death

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Noem Doubles Down With ‘Legal Cover’ For Shooting Her Puppy to Death

Published

5 hours ago

on

April 29, 2024

By

South Dakota Republican Governor Kristi Noem has been under bipartisan fire since Friday after an excerpt from her soon-to-be published book reveals her bragging about shooting to death her 14-month old puppy, and later that day, a goat. Noem, considered at least until last week a top contender to be Donald Trump’s vice presidential running mate, is doubling-down defending herself but now she’s serving up some “legal cover” as well.

“I can understand why some people are upset about a 20 year old story of Cricket, one of the working dogs at our ranch, in my upcoming book — No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions, and lessons learned,” she wrote on Sunday, after The Guardian‘s damning report. “The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down. Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did.”

Law & Crime on Monday reports the governor is “providing herself legal cover for the act.”

Noem “acknowledged that ‘some people’ were upset about the story — and she specified that it happened two decades ago, seeming to place the incident well beyond the statute of limitations.”

RELATED: Noem Defends Shooting Her 14-Month Old Puppy to Death, Brags She Has Media ‘Gasping’

“Noem additionally cited South Dakota law in support of her decision,” Law & Crime adds, noting the “reported book excerpt had said that Cricket tried to bite Noem and attacked her chickens.”

“The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down,” Noem wrote, an apparent attempt to preempt any possible legal issues. “Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did.”

Law & Crime explains that “South Dakota notes that an exemption to animal cruelty laws is the ‘destruction of dangerous animals.’ The law specifies that ‘[a]ny humane killing of an animal’ and ‘[a]ny reasonable action taken by a person for the destruction or control of an animal known to be dangerous, a threat, or injurious to life, limb, or property’ are exempt from prosecution.”

Noting that Noem’s attempt “to lean into the right’s embrace of political incorrectness … didn’t fly with members of her own party,” The Daily Beast pointed to well-known Republicans including former Trump White House communications director Alyssa Farrah Griffin and Meghan McCain who publicly condemned Noem’s actions.

READ MORE: President Hands Howard Stern Live Interview After NY Times Melts Down Over Biden Brush-Off

The Guardian’s excerpt from Noem’s book does not state that Cricket bit people, although Noem states Cricket “whipped around” to bite her. It’s possible biting others is in the book but did not make it into The Guardian’s report.

Describing Cricket killing chickens, Noem “grabbed Cricket, she says, [and] the dog ‘whipped around to bite me’. Then, as the chickens’ owner wept, Noem repeatedly apologised, wrote the shocked family a check ‘for the price they asked, and helped them dispose of the carcasses littering the scene of the crime’.”

“Through it all, Noem says, Cricket was ‘the picture of pure joy’,” The Guardian reports. “’I hated that dog,’ Noem writes, adding that Cricket had proved herself ‘untrainable’, ‘dangerous to anyone she came in contact with’ and ‘less than worthless … as a hunting dog’.”

Meanwhile, MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski on Monday said Noem’s pride and decision making surrounding killing the puppy make her unfit to be “in charge.”

Describing how she grew up on a family farm, Brzezinski said they hunted, and “there was absolutely a dense of life and death.” There was “never a joy in killing and there was a respect to it, and a process if you were hunting.”

READ MORE: CNN Smacks Down Trump Rant Courthouse So ‘Heavily Guarded’ MAGA Cannot Attend His Trial

“But this story was more about how she felt killing an animal, and that’s what’s scary about it – the impatience, kind of like a switch flipped in her brain and she decided she needed to kill it? Like this is not someone you want in charge, not someone thinking through the process of life and death.”

“The most remarkable part of it,” Scarborough added, “is that the conservative movement has been so corrupted by Donald Trump and his reached such new lows, that she actually put that in, about the killing of a happy puppy because she thought it would help her with the base.”

Watch below or at this link.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.