I predict that no matter what SCOTUS decides, the contrarian takes on what the decision really means will be epic. There are those who believe that Slate will never again match the week when it told us that Creed is underrated and that Windows 7 is the best operating system on the market, but I think it might. There’s so much potential: the decision to strike down DOMA is bad for gay marriage because it galvanizes Red Staters against teh ghey, upholding DOMA could be good because it galvanizes teh ghey, there’s no end to the possibilities.
If you think I’m exaggerating, consider this: Megan McArdle has already written (via) that widespread gay marriage will usher in a new age of conformity:
I believe we’re witnessing the high water mark for “People should be able to do whatever they want, and it’s none of my business.” You thought the fifties were conformist? Wait until all those fabulous “confirmed bachelors” and maiden schoolteachers are expected to ditch their cute little one-bedrooms and join the rest of America in whining about crab grass, HOA restrictions, and the outrageous fees that schools want to charge for overnight soccer trips.
So giving people more civil rights is bad for freedom of choice. It’s counterintuitive!
Charles Lane says that
The court could reject the (gay marriage) advocates’ arguments, setting a negative precedent. Or it could accept them — triggering a backlash even sharper than the pro-death-penalty reaction to the court’s attempt to strike down 40 state capital punishment laws in 1972.
[….]Such concerns explain why many gay rights lawyers frowned on the filing of a federal lawsuit to overturn California’s 2008 referendum banning gay marriage.
They also explain why even supporters of gay marriage might not want the Supreme Court to precipitate the matter.
Legalizing gay marriage is bad for gay marriage. Also counterintuitive.
Anyhoo, we don’t even have a decision yet, and it’s already good news for conservatives!
Tom Levenson
Hah! ABL/Imani and AsianGrrl have been goading me on Twitter to blog about that McArdle dog’s breakfast, but I just won’t. WON’T, YOU HEAR ME!
You, however, can’t seem to dodge the bait. You have my sympathy.
Truly, though, that was an MM for the ages.
PsiFighter37
Someone really wrote an article saying Creed was underrated? That’s pretty incredible, especially since it was written in 2009, well after all the necessary admissible evidence to the contrary was out there. Bet the same writer thinks Nickelback is God’s gift to modern rock as well.
Tom Levenson
BTW, former Balloon Juice front-pager Michael D. had MM’s point nailed long ago.
Sample:
Shaky
McArdle: “Predictions are hard, especially about the future.” Even for McArdle, even for the Beast — hell, even for the Whole Wide Intertubes – that’s gotta win some kind of award for Outstanding Dumbassery.
dmsilev
@Tom Levenson: Can’t you feel the pull of McArdle’s writing calling to you? Don’t you feel the urge to address it, to finally possess The Precious and take it back from the nasty hobbitsess who stole it from you?
I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
Cassidy
@PsiFighter37: Someone keeps buying those albums. Odds are, some friends of yours.
Spaghetti Lee
Wait until all those fabulous “confirmed bachelors” and maiden schoolteachers are expected to ditch their cute little one-bedrooms and join the rest of America
See, I didn’t know that gay people only lived in apartments and none of them had houses in the suburbs. This is why Megan McArdle is such a brilliant journalist.
BGinCHI
McMegan is right.
Why can’t the maiden schoolteachers just stay in their cute little one-bedrooms and pleasure themselves instead of wanting to have a solid relationship with rights and benefits?
The math demands it!
Suffern ACE
Yes, thankfully New York City condo and coop boards are known for their hands off commitment to rules. Unlike those pesky hoas.
Cassidy
@dmsilev: Great. Now we get another post about birdshit in a beard. Thanks.
The Dangerman
@PsiFighter37:
Nickelback used a local Dude in one of their videos. That Dude was Chuck Liddell.
Nickelback rocks!
(BTW, CL is a super nice guy).
ETA: If you think the shitstorm after Roe v. Wade was something, it will be nothing compared to the reaction if the Court makes the right ruling. Won’t last as long as Roe (mortality’s a bitch), but it will be epic.
PsiFighter37
@Cassidy: I’m embarrassed to admit I bought their albums when I was in high school, too. But they were never one of my favorite artists even then, and I couldn’t stand the real cheeseball songs (“With Arms Wide Open”…ugh).
But, at some point, you grow up, and you recognize the error of your misguided, youthful views and interests. The only ‘Creed’ song that I have any respect for (mainly from a musical perspective) is ‘One’; the rest of their songs can go suck wind.
Spankyslappybottom
Well, before they all start sucking each other’s dicks at how enlightened they are NOW, can we have some reckoning and accountability for how fucking bigoted they’ve been for the past 50 years?
I’m a 51-year-old gay guy, so I’m really happy to see this fast progress. What I’m not happy to see is that those who have been fighting against my happiness (and against my financial security) are going to quietly step over to the other team without anyone noticing.
Fuck that. I will not forget.
dmsilev
McArdle, via Wonkette:
There should be a law against torturing metaphors that badly. Even so, I want to be the guy holding the starting pistol on the moral history track.
Arrik
Thank you Doug. It is awesome to know that Slate did that in the space of a couple of days. Not sure even gay marriage can top those two bravely contrarian emanations.
RSA
McArdle ends with this:
I’m stumped. How would things look if the revolutionaries had won? I’m thinking… maybe a lot like right now. (Or rather, a few decades from now.)
Schlemizel
@PsiFighter37:
Neither will approach the all out awesomeness of the Bay City Rollers!!
Hyped as “the next Beatles” they became a legend to last a lunchtime
Snarki, child of Loki
Come the Revolution, the conservitards that are interned in FEMA camps will be gay-married to one another. Or goats, depending on how they’re doing in the re-education classes.
Those that make it through the Death Panels, that is.
Given McArgleBargle’s documented academic/mathematical abilities, she might as well go ahead and register her name in the goats.cx domain.
Cassidy
@PsiFighter37: I was never a big Creed fan, but I’m not into overly dramatic music (Evanescence, etc.). I never thought they were horrible, just not my thing. Honestly, I think I disliked their fans more than them.
I don’t think poorly of Nickelback. I don’t own an album, but I don’t change the channel when they come on the radio. I’ve got a pet theory I’ve voiced several times, so I’m not going to bore anyone, but I figure if someone tells me they like Theory of a Deadman or Saliva, but not Nickelback, then they’re lying about something.
Spankyslappybottom
The entire positioning of Slate in two words: So Brave.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
The only fear I would have is in the comparison to abortion. I’m too young to know exactly to the timeline on when Loving was decided and most people accepted interracial marriage. I do think a difference between Loving and RoeVWade is the SC and country were acting pretty liberal for the most part, where Roe came right as the country was shifting right. I think we’re shifting left, however hard the Right wants to stop it.
Roger Moore
@dmsilev:
Why? Are you going to load it with live ammo and point it at McMegan?
PsiFighter37
@Schlemizel: The Strokes had a similar flirtation with fame about 10 years ago, and look at how they turned out. I don’t understand why they were so hyped – their music was not very creative, if anything I got the distinct impression the lead singer was bored.
@Cassidy: Aside from sucking, my main problem with Nickelback is they gratuitously rip off their own music, which speaks to a complete lack of originality. Here’s some aural evidence.
ranchandsyrup
may have been posted already, but Omar from the Wire chimes in on SSM: http://instagram.com/p/XV_JSXrzzS/
Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S. (Mumphrey, et al.)
How is it that anybody is still paying those people to shit that stuff out? I really resent it, since I could write better meaningless, brainless drivel than either of those two tools, and I’d do it for a lot less. Hell, for half of what they make, I’d even write something worth reading.
Roger Moore
@RSA:
More like the free love era. Except that the thing that made the difference wasn’t the revolutionaries losing, it was AIDS.
Schlemizel
@RSA:
Right McMoran! It is so evident that the revolutionaries lost because we are just as repressed as we were back in 1959! Condoms are still hidden out of sight, nobody talks about birth control or safe sex, men do not wear pastel shirts, women remain in the home tending the cooking and child raising, Dan Savage writes about knitting patterns and his column are not to be found in publicly available sources. I could go on but whats the point? It is obvious we are right back were we started 70 years ago. Anyone with a ‘mind’ as keen as McMorans can see that clearly
Cassidy
@PsiFighter37: The strokes are still around. I liked the minimalist aesthetic.
Like I said, not a fan of them and have no seething hatred for them. Considering how much music CK writes, I’m not surprised if he’s doubled back a bit.
JPL
@Tom Levenson: Please, there would be fine art accompanying your post.
Suffern ACE
@RSA: I believe Megan was hoping for a way to have national key party day and all the people were hanging out at the Factory with Andy and the gang.
She makes the middle class life sound so unappealing. But I can understand her frustration. It must be so hard to be stuck in a dead end job with no prospects or any way to make a living.
Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S. (Mumphrey, et al.)
@Cassidy:
I thought those were pretty funny. Also the Tragic Tale of the Lost Mustard.
quannlace
All the flurry and tea-leaf reading about this. But when does the decision actually come down? The ruling on Obamacare took 2-3 months after the arguments to be revealed.
Alex S.
Well, I haven’t read Megan’s whole piece, but at least here, she does have a point. Homosexuals are accepted into the mainstream if they accept bourgeois sexual values in return.
As I understand it, not having lived in these times, the sexual revolution of the 60’s was not only about acceptance of a different sexuality, but also about breaking traditional social rules. This was necessary because the mainstream didn’t allow for much deviation from the norm. Shock troops had to be deployed to break the resistance, so to say. However, the societal change that ensued was so enormous that nobody back then imagined that it would be possible for gays and lesbians to marry like every other heterosexual couple.
I don’t know if I get my point across… A part of the sexual revolution did indeed fail. Marriage (between two people) is still an accepted social rite. We did not replace it with, I don’t know, communes, polygamy, ´contract relationships, or whatever… The ‘suppressive’ lifelong marriage has survived. But of course, this was just the second more extreme intention of the sexual revolution. The first intention, the death of the patriarchial society, mostly succeeded or is still succeeding.
Schlemizel
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Loving was (I think) about 1958 – a bit young to remember it but I heard from many well meaning, nominally liberal, types “I have no problem with mixed marriage but the children will suffer because they will be neither white nor black”
I very clearly remember the debate on Roe. Even the Catholic Church was not opposed, they viewed it as a public safety and charitable issue. I remember several debates where people who would today lean strongly on FAUX News bringing up rape and incest as good reasons for abortion and poverty and abuse as reasonable reasons.
The world has changed a great deal. That McMoran can’t see that would be forgivable if she were under 30.
Schlemizel
@Schlemizel:
Or crap – I mentioned a bad word (probably Abby Bortion) and was tossed to moderation hell. Damn I hate that!
Maude
@Zapruder F. Mashtots, D.D.S. (Mumphrey, et al.):
John isn’t done with those topics yet. The mustard hasn’t been found.
chopper
fuck you, megan. seriously, just straight-up go and fuck yourself.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@dmsilev:
So the moral arc of the universe is short and sandy and oval-shaped? Man, MLK really got it wrong, didn’t he? I mean, he wasn’t even close.
Fair Economist
I’ve been quite cynical about people disliking very popular groups ever since way, way back in college all the cool kids switched from raving about Wham! to disparaging them as soon as they got a Top 40 record in the US. Nickelback seems right in line with that kind of thing. I find them relatively enjoyable for that strain of rock. It’s perfectly reasonable to say they’re overplayed (especially as their music has a relatively narrow range) but that doesn’t make them *bad*. I got tired of Beethoven’s Fifth symphony too, but that didn’t mean it was bad; it just meant I was tired of it.
But for some reason it’s become “cool” to rag on a relatively unremarkable and fairly popular rock group. I guess it’s better than a lot of “cool” fad; at least it won’t leave scars like body mod fads. /getoffmylawn
Lulu
@Alex S.:
I don’t know about that. Even straight married couples have managed to change the definition of marriage *dramatically*. It’s not a one way path to boring suburbandom anymore. That revolution is still going on.
I have to question the idea that same-sex couples surrender their sexual freedom in order to get married. Since marriage is a traditionally patriarchal institution as you point out I imagine that it’s those same-sex couples with values closer to the mainstream on sexuality (outside of the whole homosexuality thing) that push harder for marriage…just like straight couples.
I don’t like the whole idea of marriage anyway but I’ve seen good ones that buck conformity. Maybe Megan’s just bitter.
Sentient Puddle
What the hell is wrong with Windows 7?
kindness
I actually preferred Wonkettes abridged version of Megan’s column. It gave me the gist of her train (wreck) of thought without the nausea of having to read it myself. And it was funny to boot.
Sux to be Megan McArgleBargle. Anyday.
Michele C
@Roger Moore: I wanna see Oliver Cromwell chasing Charles Darwin on a race track in some post-apocalyptic race called “The War on Christmas.”
Did any of you actually read the argle bargle? I just tried. It’s less than a quarter longer than Wonkette’s, despite what the Wonkette says about it being long. However, it does seem unbelievably long. It seems long because it’s incoherent. Someone rightfully commented, “Did you write this with word magnets?”
McMegan manages to link Cromwell, women smoking cigarettes, children outside of marriage, the decadence of the poor, how sad gay Republican Congressman are going to be when they find that cheating on their same-sex spouse costs them an election, and that her grandfather hated marriage.
low-tech cyclist
It’s increasingly hard to understand why anyone ever took McMegan seriously.
gbear
Megan doesn’t actually know any gay people, does she?
Mnemosyne
@Alex S.:
I know what you’re saying, because I’ve seen other people make the same argument online. Basically, some people feel that by expanding monogamous marriage, the sexual revolution failed and took us back to square one.
Personally, I tend to think that the anthropological evidence points to humans primarily preferring serial monogamy over polyamory, so I didn’t think that was ever going to become the new standard. IMO in some ways the sexual revolution showed the limits of how much you can change ingrained human behavior.
raven
@Cassidy: And you make fun of OUR music? Give me a fucking break. I don’t know who Creed,Nickleback OR MC Fucking Megan is and I don’t give rats ass. And take “Sully ” with you.
Alex S.
@Mnemosyne:
Yes, thanks. And for the sake of brevity, I omitted that I get the impression that Megan just wants to build up a straw man for the inevitable ‘gays can marry – but liberals lose’ argument.
Roger Moore
@Michele C:
She also managed to confuse the Regency with the Restoration, or at least that seems to be the case. She describes Victorian prudishness as a response to the immediately preceding era, which was in turn a response to Cromwellian puritanism. But that’s confusing the Regency era (i.e. George IV, first as Prince Regent and then as king, and then William IV) with the Restoration era (Charles II and James II). I’m not sure that it undermines her point about oscillations in sexual behavior- the Georgian era was quite a bit more restrained than either Restoration or Regency- but she still managed to get her facts wrong.
Fair Economist
@gbear:
Well, she think that getting married makes them more conformist that 50’s era Father-knows-best families so….
Obviously not.
RaflW
Hey! I was one of those gay rights advocates who, in 2008, was opposed to taking this to the Supremes.
But you know what? Times frunkin’ changed in the intervening five years. In part because people like me and 1,000s of others kept organizing, kept fighting, kept living out in the public eye and making the case for love and commitment.
So, golly, Charles Lane, what looked like the correct cautious path in 2008 was probably not the right one. Thankfully the courts took 5 years to get from teh CA vote to this week’s arguments. Because if this was argued even a few days before Nov, 2012, we’d still be thinking this was a high-risk approach.
Oh, conservatives, so unwilling to admit that November 2012 mattered!
Roger Moore
@low-tech cyclist:
Not at all. This is just dabbling outside the area that really earns her keep. She got and keeps a job because she writes glib, superficially logical columns that justify rentier capitalism, which is a job that will exist as long as there are rentier capitalists.
MikeJ
@PsiFighter37:
I liked the bands they were always compared to and could never hear any of it in their music.
With a big enough push from the record industry behind you, you can be pretty successful. Somebody decided they needed a small indy band to appear relevant and by god they went out and made one to ship some units.
RaflW
@Fair Economist: She knows that her pink salt dealer is gay, but she also secretly knows he dislikes her and thinks she’s bougie & pretentious.
AnonPhenom
Whatever the outcome, you can be sure that it is good news for John McCain.
AnonPhenom
Whatever the outcome, you can be sure that it is good news for John McCain.
AnonPhenom
Whatever the outcome, you can be sure that it is good news for John McCain.
AnonPhenom
Whatever the outcome, you can be sure that it is good news for John McCain.
scav
@Fair Economist: I’m not MM knows a real spectrum of white straight people any deeper than the fibs they tell for up-tight public consumption.
AnonPhenom
WTF?
raven
And from Pat Lang who is still linked here:
Higgs Boson's Mate
@AnonPhenom:
Wait, for whom was it good news?
Bob2
http://web.archive.org/web/20120218163518/http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/005244.html
As a matter of entertainment.
Omnes Omnibus
@Alex S.:
How is that a failure? I would have thought the point of the sexual revolution was to not force people into roles that the do not want. If people want to get married, why should they be forced to be single or participate in polyandry or whatever?
Ole Phat Stu
“Windows 7 is the best operating system on the market” was a 2009 opinion. You need inter alia to date opinions (rhetoric 101).
mclaren
But whichever way the contrarian pundits swing, remember: this decision will be good news for John McCain.
Hal
Very surprised at how many opinions I’ve heard today based solely on the questions posed during oral arguments. Didn’t anyone learn their lesson from the ACA debate when we were assured that the law was going down the tubes because Scalia was just so darned mean?
I’ve also heard the moving too fast argument and it’s pretty dammed depressing that so many “allies” are twisting themselves into pretzels to explain how less equality is really a good thing in the long run.
Higgs Boson's Mate
People like McArdle and Lane get paid for their opinions because doing otherwise would be to admit that they’re full of shit and that their employers possess the good judgement of a rabid skunk. That might open the door to a bunch of talented goddamn barbarians who do get it right more often than not. We can’t have that, can we?
Cris (without an H)
Who’s “we?” I don’t know, I’m asking.
canuckistani
The revolution was a win.
Birth control.
Legal abortion.
Pre-marital sex.
Open homosexuality.
Porn. So much porn.
Much less shame.
We didn’t recreate Stranger In A Strange Land, but we did ok.
jl
@Omnes Omnibus: If you are a certain kind of pundit, anything that does not reinforce arbitrary stereotypes and random bigotry is a failure.
raven
@Cris (without an H): Cassidy and it was just some funny shit he said yesterday.
regional man of mystery
@Schlemizel:
I damn well wish they were. Every month when I go to the Target pharmacy to get my prescription refill, which has the added benefit of being able to talk to the very pretty and very nice lady pharmacist, I inevitably have to stand and wait by the condom display. The boxes with all their lurid and euphemistic cover art stand in silent mockery of my sad social ineptitude.
Then I have to drive all the way back across town to the fucking discount liquor store.
Bob2
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/fashion/weddings/13mcardle.html?_r=0
lol I never saw this. someone at wonkette dug it up
rikyrah
McArdle is exhibit A as to why I don’t tolerate any foolishness about affirmative action and ‘ unqualified’ Black/Latino anything.
That SHE gets a paycheck for anything to do with writing is ridiculous.
RaflW
@RSA:
Wait. Are all the pickup bars closed? Did all the hookup sites on the intertrons get shut down? I know the Catholic hierarchy is trying like mad to get contraception to go away, but really, I’m pretty sure sexual liberation and the choice to live as a happy, healthy, sex-positive person is still pretty possible in the 21st century.
Now, that some people are choosing to marry and settle down, well, Okaaaay then. That must mean liberation is ov-ver!
Or maybe not. Maybe those fighting for sexual freedom were not, as conservatives absurdly believe, wanting to force everyone into an endless summer of love.
Maybe the goal was … (uh oh!) … having different choices similarly valued! Oh, the soft bigotry of moral relativism (Am I scrambling that well enough?)
Anyway, in the obvious observations dept: What a self-spanking moron McArdle is.
Lurking Canadian
@Roger Moore: Usually she is wrong by orders of magnitude. One century error is actually remarkably close, by Megan’s standards.
fuckwit
The privilege! It burns!
Omnes Omnibus
@Lurking Canadian: Lo, the soft bigotry of low expectations strikes again.
LanceThruster
The part about the documentary “Loving vs. Virginia” that really touched me deeply was that Mr. Loving was a man of few words and he detested the thought of having to justify his love of his spouse to anyone. He did not to be a test case or cause celebre'(sp?)…he just wanted the goddamn state to leave him and his wife the f#ck alone.
I think this pretty much applies here (despite all the blather about ‘traditional’ marriage, the damage to ‘opposite’ marriage, etc.).
Effin’ superstitious gits.
If you don’t like gay marriage, then don’t get gay married.
Period.
Lavocat
The level of irony shared by the DOMA case and the Prop 8 case is enough to make the heads of all the pundits in the world explode. Gays might wind up winning on a national level (DOMA), but losing on a state level (Prop 8).
Justice Kennedy seems to be the 5th vote for striking down DOMA – but on states’ rights grounds (beyond ironic itself, given the dark history of the states’ rights doctrine). But, if DOMA is struck down on those grounds, then that means that Prop 8 might be upheld based on the same argument.
Then, of course, there’s the whole issue of standing re DOMA (watch Thomas, Alito, Scalia, and Roberts wail over standing).
So, here’re my predictions (and watch me be wrong):
1. DOMA overturned on states’ rights grounds and NOT equal protection grounds (though I suspect Sotomayor and Ginsburg may join in a concurring opinion, overturning DOMA on equal protection grounds) and
2. Prop 8 upheld on states’ rights grounds.
Hand teh ghey a win; hand teh ghey a loss.
And call it even.
RaflW
@Alex S.:
Mmmm. Gay men may be re-defining marriage, and in this way I think conservatives are sort of right (but still wrong to oppose the change). I know many gay men who are not particularly monogamous or particularly discrete about it.* But they also would like to get married and they love their spouse/future spouse.
The redefinition that gay men are advancing is the idea that you can love your spouse, have a healthy and stable home life … and have sex outside the relationship. Of course, straight men have been having it on the side for literally eons. Look at how much wreckage and cheating there is in straight culture.
Or, they’ve gamed past systems to allow multiple wives and/or acknowledged concubines.
I think there’s a chunk of conservatives who just resent that (some) gay men can negotiate exclusive marriage along with unexclusive sex. See Gingrich comma Marriane & Newt, for one example of it not working. I think it’s quite a bit harder to find a straight woman who would accept that (but maybe Dan Savage can disabuse me of that, too).
*Plenty of other gay men want monogamy. Others in couples or relationships don’t want to marry at all. Surprise, the possibilities are complicated.
NonyNony
@Mnemosyne:
But (and bear with me here because though I am old to my students I was not alive during the sexual revolution), weren’t there many, many different warriors in the sexual revolution that wanted many different things?
I mean we may not have Free Love orgies in the streets, but we do have a society where consenting adults are free to make their own choices about their love lives without much in the way of stigma about it. Isn’t THAT what it was all about for a lot of people – that they wanted to HAVE a choice rather than feel like there was a single path in front of them and their choice was to either conform to that narrow path or be a perpetual outsider forever? The very fact that there isn’t that narrow path anymore and that a wide variety of lifestyles are acceptable across the spectrum in a way they weren’t in the 1950s IS the success – the “making all of this crap a boring non-issue” was the actual GOAL for a lot of people.
Perhaps i’m wrong about all of it though. Like I said, I wasn’t there – I can only see the aftermath and post hoc rationalizations.
Keith G
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09.
As for Megan, wierdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t have.
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
Megan has a point, though I doubt that she has given it the type of thought to develop it into a cogent argument. Let’s say that the Supremes go the full Gay on both decisions (as they should IMHO). What then for the Gay culture that I grew up in? Say want you want about it, it was very interesting and for many of us, exhilaration. Sully wants it to be extinguished. I know it must change as all human interactions do, but it doesn’t mean that I will celebrate being absorbed by the Borg.
Keith
Creed? They’re part of my Holy Triumvirate of Crap, along with Staind and The Offspring (FWIW, I think Nickelback is a better band than all three because at least you can play (and enjoy) some of their songs at strip clubs…like they wrote the songs specifically to be played in strip clubs)
I’m still baffled as to why The Offspring are played so damn much on the radio after all these years. They had a couple of minor hits in the 90s, and 15 years later, they’re daily staples on the radio, played more than Nirvana and Pearl Jam *combined*.
Lavocat
@LanceThruster: Are you a bud of Chest Rockwell?
Roger Moore
@Omnes Omnibus:
McMegan is basically arguing against you here. She’s saying we must deny gays the right to marry to protect sexual freedom. If we let them do what they want, it’s a blow against freedom.
Cassidy
@raven: Someone take your onion? I keep saying you need to attach that shit to your walker when your taking a break.
Keith G
@Spankyslappybottom:
Who has the extra energy to constantly “Not forget”?
As a 55 yr old version of my college Gay activist self, I know I don’t.
To the thread’s focus:
I don’t read Lane, but the block quote of his above does accurately reprise what some legal activists were saying in late 08 and 09. Do with that what you will.
As for Megan, weirdly enough she is countering one of Sully’s persistent hard ons (pls excuse that fore skinned image), to wit: It’s time that Gay culture stop being defined by the bohemian and start fusing with main street American values.
Megan has a point, though I doubt that she has given it the type of thought to develop it into a cogent argument. Let’s say that the Supremes go the full Gay on both decisions (as they should IMHO). What then for the Gay culture that I grew up in? Say want you want about it, it was very interesting, very creative, and for many of us, exhilarating.
Sully wants it to be extinguished. I know it must change as all human interactions do, but it doesn’t mean that I will celebrate being absorbed by the Borg.
with edit
JCT
@kindness: Actually Wonkette was on a wicked tear today — the Bradlee Dean post was fucking hilarious.
RaflW
@NonyNony: “we do have a society where consenting adults are free to make their own choices about their love lives without much in the way of stigma about it.”
Indeed, here’s how I know McBargle is wrong: My dad shacked up with a woman 16 years ago. About a year after my mom died. We were all thrilled – she’s a fantastic partner for him and they are devoted to each other. But not married.
Oh, and she’s the treasurer of her suburb’s Republican Women’s Club. In Texas.
Living in “sin” for 16 years now. We of course love the sinners but hate the sin. (Kidding, we just love them both).
Omnes Omnibus
@Roger Moore: If McMegan is agin’ me, I am probably right. Also too, I tend to view consensual relationships the way Mrs. Patrick Campbell did back in Victorian London: My dear, I don’t care what they do, so long as they don’t do it in the street and frighten the horses.
Mike E
@AnonPhenom: You got caught in the librul echo chamber.
Omnes Omnibus
@Keith G: There is no reason that you need to be absorbed by suburban, middle class culture. Stay boho if you want. I have no desire for a white picket fence myself.
LanceThruster
@Lavocat: No, but Rock Strongo is a good pal of mine.
eemom
OT, an informative link about the standing and other legal issues in the DOMA case in the event anyone is interested in substance and not Lane/McArdle bullshit.
GregB
By the way, it is far past time to equate Paul Clement to Bull Connor, Orval Faubus and George Wallace.
He’s a caveman on the wrong side of humanity over and over.
ranchandsyrup
OT: It must be “Be nice to turtles” day because Ashley Judd ain’t running for Senate. SADFACE.
Omnes Omnibus
@eemom: I found it interesting that the US is arguing that the petitioner lacks standing but that the Court should nevertheless hear the case because of the tax refund issue. Odd shit.
Vivid Blue Dotty
@Sentient Puddle: I wanna know too. When I switched from Vista to Windows 7, I was as euphoric as Farhad Manjoo’s assesment of the “new” OS in the referenced article. And he listed even MORE features in that article that I hadn’t even stumbled upon yet.
I’m always hopelessly out of it when it comes to pop culture references, but this one confounds me.
Keith G
@Omnes Omnibus: Oh, I won’t be.
Obviously, humans need to be able to make their life choices in accordance to their own measurements and goals. I will never entertain the folly of pining for oppression, but being nurtured and growing up inside the belly of a (shall we say) disliked/feared group who possessed a resilient alternative culture was very formative. But in many ways, I was lucky both in timing and situation.
Early on, I knew about Walt Whitman and Truman Capote. Very young, I had Michelangelo’s “number” the first time I saw his David. I was able to figure out, “Hey, this can’t be all bad.” I was part of a very inspiring and emotionally rich group of people who seemed to use the disdain of the outsiders to develop a very strong and creative internal community.
Villago Delenda Est
Charles Lane: yet another Village asswipe whose head would look much better rolling around in a wicker basket, or mounted on a pike, than it is currently on his shoulders.
Roger Moore
@Omnes Omnibus:
I’m certainly not arguing with you there; I’m just trying to condense her “reasoning” to the point its obvious internal contradictions will show.
raven
@raven: You’re my horse if you never win a race!
eemom
@Omnes Omnibus:
You were exactly right when you said earlier that the standing issues are dizzying in this case, as I noted on that now dead thread.
On the other hand, like the insufferable legal pedant that I am, I’m trying to make the case here (pun intended) that Article III standing and limited federal jurisdiction are actual things to be taken seriously and not just some trumped up shit to enable the Court to “punt” (getting tired of that word) on the merits.
Omnes Omnibus
@eemom: This is a trail down which I will try not to follow you. I think much of the viciousness of the ACA arguments last year came out of this kind of thing. Explanations, frustrations, accusations of snottiness, return accusations of obtuseness, anger… And I have no interest in reliving it.
gelfling545
@Hal:
I’ve read this and I don’t get it at all. Is the idea that something will become less unconstitutional over time? Can the justices let a clearly unconstitutional law stand just because they like it?
The Moar You Know
I’m truly at a loss for words here.
Jay in Oregon
@gelfling545:
I think it’s related to the whole “liberal activist judges” claim; that the Supreme Court will “force” same-sex marriage on a country that doesn’t want it, so decent Americans will push for more same-sex marriage bans, for a constitutional amendment, etc. Or possibly worse, that legalizing SSM will lead to and increase in gays & lesbians being harrassed/attacked/killed.
Mnemosyne
@Keith G:
That’s always the trade-off, though. Some people argue that African-Americans were a more cohesive culture before civil rights because black people of all social classes lived side-by-side. Once civil rights happened, upper-class and middle-class African-Americans started moving to better (usually white) neighborhoods and suburbs and a lot of that culture died off.
I can understand some nostalgia for it since it’s the whole “us against the world” feeling, but I’ve seen some people fall into the trap where they think that oppression was somehow better and the civil rights gained weren’t worth the cost to the feeling of community.
Chris
@Keith G:
Eh, I can’t speak for him, but I’m quite comfortable with “not forget,” though there’s no reason it should be “constant.”
Not only moderates but even conservatives have a tendency to quietly slip from opposition to “we were always in alliance with Eurasia!” once they’ve lost the argument. You see this today with the religious right (originally founded by white supremacist preachers to protect their prerogatives) telling anyone who’ll listen that they were totally on board with civil rights (didn’t you know MLK was a Christian preacher? Just like them!) and too many other examples to count. So yeah, I do very much intend to “remember” exactly who was opposing gay rights back when it counted.
eemom
Now that, unlike standing, IS just flat out stupid shit.
Pink Snapdragon
@eemom: Please don’t mince any words there!
liberal
@Vivid Blue Dotty:
Well, it’s a Microsoft OS, so…
liberal
@Jay in Oregon:
The antecedents are actually far, far worse.
Haydnseek
@regional man of mystery:Cole, you should make this guy a front pager.
mike with a mic
Windows 7 was the greatest laptop/desktop operating system ever. Still is. It’s not the best server OS, but it was never sold as it. And it wasn’t the best mobile OS, but it wasn’t really sold as that either. And server 2008 actually is pretty damn good. It’s not Red Hat or Suse good, but it does what it should well.
The only people using a better laptop/desktop OS are people using highly tweaked Linux operating systems around specific hardware. And that’s so rare and requires a good bit of knowledge it’s not worth really getting into.
lojasmo
@quannlace:
June, or so, IIRC.
lojasmo
@Keith G:
I have never seen that iteration of FYWP. Impressive.
Mayken
@Schlemizel: 1967 – six months after my parents married. Their marriage was still illegal in 16 states when they tied the knot.
Keith G
@lojasmo: Yeah I did quite the rabid fuck up.
My mobile device makes it easy to do the unintentional. As I was cutting and pasting for a better flow of my thoughts, the damn thing got sent. I requested deletion. And at first it looked like I saved myself some embarrassment.
BUT, NO!
::Hangs head in shame::
Keith G
@Mnemosyne: Yeah, as I said, although my life’s course avoided the major cliched pitfalls, I would not wish for a return to so-called good old days. Too many people went through too much pain; yet surviving such challenges energizes the building of community like few other things.
I hope we find new ways to be special, creative, silly, and bonded to a new sense of community. In the long run the Borg will win and in just a few decades Gay folk will be invisibly integrated into society and it will mostly be for the good….mostly.
Keith G
@Mnemosyne: Yeah, as I said, although my life’s course avoided the major cliched pitfalls, I would not wish for a return to so-called good old days. Too many people went through too much pain; yet surviving such challenges energizes the building of community like few other things.
I hope we find new ways to be special, creative, silly, and bonded to a new sense of community. In the long run the Borg will win and in just a few decades Gay folk will be invisibly integrated into society and it will mostly be for the good….mostly.
Mnemosyne
@Keith G:
Yep — I was just amplifying your point that there’s often nostalgia for a lost community that lingers behind even after a civil rights advance.