• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The current Supreme Court is a dangerous, rogue court.

I like political parties that aren’t owned by foreign adversaries.

When I was faster i was always behind.

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

There are no moderate republicans – only extremists and cowards.

This country desperately needs a functioning fourth estate.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

The next time the wall street journal editorial board speaks the truth will be the first.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Baby steps, because the Republican Party is full of angry babies.

Do we throw up our hands or do we roll up our sleeves? (hint, door #2)

Never give a known liar the benefit of the doubt.

I might just take the rest of the day off and do even more nothing than usual.

Let the trolls come, and then ignore them. that’s the worst thing you can do to a troll.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

the 10% who apparently lack object permanence

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

Bark louder, little dog.

I did not have this on my fuck 2025 bingo card.

Not loving this new fraud based economy.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. keep building.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Civil Rights / LGBTQ Rights / Gay Rights are Human Rights / Stephen Fry Shows How It’s Done

Stephen Fry Shows How It’s Done

by Tom Levenson|  October 16, 201311:00 am| 87 Comments

This post is in: Gay Rights are Human Rights, Somewhere a Village is Missing its Idiot

FacebookTweetEmail

Via BoingBoing, I came across a clip in which the Stephen Fry demonstrates how to get an idiot to hoist himself on his own petard:

Seriously.  Not only is this a beautiful sequence, one that can be admired (and dissected) purely for its documentary technique, it’s also a brilliant tutorial on the art of interviewing.  Look at how Fry permits his subject to give the viewer precisely what he or she needs to get the point — with never less than perfect politesse from Fry himself.  You could call it interlocutory murder — but there’s nary a scrap of blood on our Stephen’s hands.
A masterclass.
Enjoy.
FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Important News for His Many Fans Here
Next Post: Could pooping in one’s chapeau have consequences this time? »

Reader Interactions

87Comments

  1. 1.

    aimai

    October 16, 2013 at 11:10 am

    I tried to watch, because I love STephen Fry, but it was so painful just watching the set up interview with that poor guy who bought the book and the treatment that I couldn’t do it. You’d have to have such detatchment to do the NARTH interview after watching how these assholes had harmed that poor gay christian guy.

  2. 2.

    Patricia Kayden

    October 16, 2013 at 11:16 am

    Can you imagine a world where gays tried to provide “ex-straight” therapy to heterosexuals? I bet Dr. Joseph Nicolosi and his ilk would find that bizarre.

  3. 3.

    Comrade Mary

    October 16, 2013 at 11:21 am

    OT but OMG: Miley Cruz.

  4. 4.

    Tom Levenson

    October 16, 2013 at 11:21 am

    @aimai: You should watch to the end. Christian gay guy returns. Powerfully.

  5. 5.

    ? Martin

    October 16, 2013 at 11:25 am

    So it sounds like the plan now being floated by the extremists is to do nothing, let the nation default and then impeach. Why? Because the public just isn’t getting it that this is all Obama’s fault.

    Obviously they think they can get 90 Democrats on board for impeachment, because Kenya.

  6. 6.

    Hillary Rettig

    October 16, 2013 at 11:30 am

    A beautiful movie, but I do not see where Nicolosi got hoist on his own petard. Fry, at the end of the interview, basically implies that he’s a closet case, which to me came across as a weak personal attack, and also violated the otherwise compassionate and rational tone of the interview.

  7. 7.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 11:30 am

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Can you imagine a world where gays tried to provide “ex-straight” therapy to heterosexuals? I bet Dr. Joseph Nicolosi and his ilk would find that bizarre.

    Not at all. It actually fits very well into their worldview. They believe that sexuality is strictly a choice or a matter of upbringing, and that people can be changed from straight to gay or vice versa. That’s the whole point of conversion therapy. That’s also why gay “recruitment” shows up in their anti-gay propaganda. “Ex-straight” therapy for heterosexuals would just be a formalized version of what they already believe gays are doing. FWIW, I think therapy might actually be a good idea for some of the closet cases who are ruining their lives by denying their sexuality.

  8. 8.

    sherparick

    October 16, 2013 at 11:33 am

    Speaking of hoisted on petards, I found this story from Crooks and Liars about ranchers in South Dakota bemoaning the lack of assistance after the recent blizzard. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/ranchers-want-know-where-government-t

    They have not quite gotten their head around the concept of reciprocity. Or the fact that their heroe, Ted Cruz, help engineer the shut down. Somehow the Magical Negro in the White House should have all made it better. Its not their fault for voting for idiots.

  9. 9.

    dmsilev

    October 16, 2013 at 11:36 am

    @? Martin: Who is floating that idea? Just curious.

    Looks like most of the GOP and associated conservative infrastructure have raised the white flag. For instance, Heritage Action saying this:

    “Well everybody, understands that we’ll not be able to repeal this law until 2017,” Needham said Wednesday. “We have to win the Senate and win the White House. Right now it is clear that this bill is not ready for prime time. It is clear the bill is unfair.”

    And so forth.

  10. 10.

    Mr. Longform

    October 16, 2013 at 11:38 am

    The ex-gay “philosophy” cleverly (?) plays on the fear in the conservative parent’s heart – did I do something to make my kid gay? They tell you, yes, you were not a good role model, or whatever. This is something these parents kind of want to hear because it provides a reason, an explanation that does not raise the awful possibility: if this is genetic, did it come from my genes and am I going to be outed by the gene police? The whole thing seems (like most right-wing stuff) a combination of paranoia and fear of the other expressed with denial and hostility.

  11. 11.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 11:38 am

    @? Martin:

    Obviously they think they can get 90 Democrats on board for impeachment, because Kenya.

    They don’t need any Democrats to impeach; impeachment is by a majority vote in the House. What they would need is more than 20 Democrats or Independents in the Senate to convict, which just isn’t going to happen in this universe.

  12. 12.

    scav

    October 16, 2013 at 11:38 am

    very odd that there’s a bit of that interview mannerism even in this from A Bit of Fry and Laurie. Having seem this old bit first, my subtext or priors or expectations were, ahh, a little different?

  13. 13.

    ? Martin

    October 16, 2013 at 11:44 am

    @dmsilev: Sounds like a few of the House Tea Party die hards. As if the shutdown wasn’t damaging enough to the GOP, adding in a completely transparent impeachment plan would be lethal.

  14. 14.

    ? Martin

    October 16, 2013 at 11:45 am

    @Roger Moore: Oh, right. I don’t know why I thought it was a 2/3 vote.

    It ought to be.

  15. 15.

    Higgs Boson's Mate (Crystal Set)

    October 16, 2013 at 11:47 am

    @sherparick:
    My heart goes out to those ranchers who did not vote for Rep. Christi “No Aid for Hurricane Sandy Victims” Noem.

    You’ve got to remember that those ranchers who did vote for her are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…

  16. 16.

    dopealope

    October 16, 2013 at 11:48 am

    I’m not gay, but boy do I love Stephen Fry …

  17. 17.

    beth

    October 16, 2013 at 11:50 am

    @Roger Moore: This is where I think they prove how much race plays a part in their hatred of the President. What do they think happens if they impeach him? Do they think Romney gets to be President? Do they really think they’ll like President Joe Biden’s policies any better? It makes no sense at all (I know, I know).

  18. 18.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 11:53 am

    @? Martin:
    I think it’s enough that it takes a 2/3 vote to convict, which reduces the temptation to impeach for things that can’t get the necessary votes to convict. Anyone sensible would realize they’re going to look like a dolt for going through the impeachment circus only to be shot down decisively in the Senate, and the Teabaggers’ excitement about doing so says more about their detachment from reality than it does about the process spelled out in the Constitution.

  19. 19.

    gbear

    October 16, 2013 at 11:53 am

    I watched that video yesterday at Joe My God. I liked Fry’s last comment to the ‘therapist’, but I wondered if the befuddled look on his face was a true reaction or a shot that was edited in; there’s no dialog to tie it to Fry’s comment. I’m glad that they went back to the kid and his mom to learn that they both rejected the ‘treatment’ and accepted that his gayness was just a part of who he is.

    I also like how Fry complimented the ‘therapist’ on what a luxurious office suite he had. Great way of making the point that he’s fleecing his clients.

  20. 20.

    Higgs Boson's Mate (Crystal Set)

    October 16, 2013 at 11:55 am

    @beth:

    Once they successfully impeach Obama and he’s convicted they’ll impeach Joe Biden. When he’s convicted it will be President Boehner and the country will get some real leadership.

    What could go wrong?

  21. 21.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 11:56 am

    @beth:

    What do they think happens if they impeach him?

    They get to be on TV a lot and talk about how much they hate him and why he’s terrible. It’s all about playing to the base and not about accomplishing anything meaningful, just like most of the stuff the teabaggers do.

  22. 22.

    Jockey Full of Malbec

    October 16, 2013 at 12:03 pm

    @Roger Moore:
    Lately, when I think ‘Teabagger’, I get this image of an old white guy in a tricorn hat, mastvrbating into a coffee cup with a Gadsden flag on it.

  23. 23.

    Higgs Boson's Mate (Crystal Set)

    October 16, 2013 at 12:06 pm

    @Jockey Full of Malbec:

    For the sake of all of us who are now reaching for the brain bleach, stop thinking of that word!

  24. 24.

    J.D. Rhoades

    October 16, 2013 at 12:11 pm

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Can you imagine a world where gays tried to provide “ex-straight” therapy to heterosexuals?

    Joe Haldeman did, in The Forever War.

  25. 25.

    fuckwit

    October 16, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    @Jockey Full of Malbec: Really? I think of a white guy having another white guy squat on top of his face and dip his ball-sack repeatedly in and out of the other guy’s mouth.

    When I think of actual teabaggers, though, individually, I tend to more think of this:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4BiHAN8rtg

  26. 26.

    Drexciya

    October 16, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    I wasn’t really impressed by the interview. The moment that was edited to be the climactic “own” was little more than a tacit affirmation of the gender analysis that Nicolosi just engaged in. Nicolosi’s entire theory was founded on the idea that the gay people in question weren’t Real Men, and were traumatized because they didn’t have Real Men to use as role models that normalize the idea of being Real Men or living in a world with Real Men. So, they became “too close to their mothers,” (a quote with distinctly sexist undertones) and sexualized the Real Men that never gave them enough attention. By ending the interview with an insult that wasn’t much more sophisticated “Yeah, well, you’re groomed like a girl so someone can easily call you queer” Fry breezily adopted the often patriarchal emphasis on masculinized/macho gender roles that motivated Nicolosi’s logic (and the logic of most homophobia generally), and he did so both uncritically and unironically.

    Also, this may be vaguely petty of me, but I quite dislike the white male emphasis of gay activism’s standard bearers and I couldn’t really stop staring at (what I assume to be) the ex-ex gay’s house. Nor could I stop myself from wondering what the demographics of the people who could casually afford non-necessary therapy were. It’s particularly striking to me since not only are a higher proportion of gay identifying youths minorities and poor, but, as a consequence of their ethnic/financial status they’re also more likely to be homeless. While conversion/reparative therapy is destructive and disgusting, I think the emphasis it’s given by Fry is misplaced. Organizing around and highlighting what’s likely a white/upper-middle class-centric issue doesn’t adequately capture the challenges of existing in America and being gay and I think the focus on it might be more a reflection of ignorance and blindspots on Fry’s part than the brilliance you casually ascribe to him.

  27. 27.

    Another Holocene Human

    October 16, 2013 at 12:16 pm

    @Patricia Kayden: I love how he said he worked with adolescent because they were caught up in the gay movement and it was premature.

    Yes! Of course! What’s up with the schools imposing a heterosexual cis-gendered identity on kids. All those teen movies… Mormon elementary schools “marrying” little kids… King and Queen of the prom… those kids are just confused–their brains haven’t stopped developing yet–they need to be studying, and they just want to imitate their peers and fit in. What are we doing to these kids?

    //

  28. 28.

    Yatsuno

    October 16, 2013 at 12:18 pm

    It’s such a shame to watch a conservative lose his shit in public. No counter ideas, just Dummocraps BAD!!!

  29. 29.

    Another Holocene Human

    October 16, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    @Mr. Longform:

    This is something these parents kind of want to hear because it provides a reason, an explanation that does not raise the awful possibility: if this is genetic, did it come from my genes and am I going to be outed by the gene police? The whole thing seems (like most right-wing stuff) a combination of paranoia and fear of the other expressed with denial and hostility.

    No, the most awful thing is that being gay is normal and they’ve been flogging a lie all this time. And if they accept that truth they’re going to be pilloried by and eventually isolated and cut out from their social support network. A lot of people aren’t very strong in the face of that fear. Of course, to hurt your own child like that… but religion (not faith, not spirituality, religion) causes people to do some preposterous, inhuman things.

  30. 30.

    ruemara

    October 16, 2013 at 12:21 pm

    @beth: I think the most coherent plan of the impeachers was to cover both Obama and Biden in the proceedings and install Boehner. Once I was done laughing at the lack of knowledge such a plan entailed, I shaved my head and sat shivas for the country even though I’m not Jewish.

  31. 31.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 12:22 pm

    @Yatsuno:
    Shorter Alex Castellanos:

    Squirrel!!

  32. 32.

    raven

    October 16, 2013 at 12:22 pm

    Cruz says he won’t block it.

  33. 33.

    aimai

    October 16, 2013 at 12:24 pm

    @sherparick: I found that one of the most psychologically revealing and thought provoking incidents in this whole shut down. Their basic belief structure is that government should be based on needs, not identity. So rules should be flexible, and even broken, for people who are “really needy” under certain circumstances. A normal person might argue that if you have a pot of money that has been collected from everyone, everyone should benefit from its disbursement equally. That makes sense. And you might even want to put people who are really needy at the head of the line for payouts. But you still need a system of rules and regulations to determine who and under what circumstances people get their payout–that’s what happens when you have laws and the government is open. If the government is not open and there is no one there who can determine who is truly needy then the money can’t be sent out because its just as likely to be stolen by someone who is not truly needy as to go to the “right people.”

    In a large organization, or w/r/t goverment actions, you have to have rules and precedents set up to prevent individuals and groups from taking unfair advantage.

    What’s weird to me is that these guys must know that, in their own work and local government world. But somehow when it comes to the government shutdown they themselves have willed they think that the President can just take the money and hand it over to them because they are the “truly needy” rather than just some among many truly needy.

  34. 34.

    Cervantes

    October 16, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    Speaking of being “vaguely petty” … I’ve always liked Fry but seeing that he rented a Mustang was a bit of a disappointment.

    Agree also that the NARTH interview was not as effective as I’d have liked. (Not that I’d do any better myself, you understand.)

  35. 35.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 16, 2013 at 12:27 pm

    @raven: and steps on McConnell’s floor statement to say it. I’ve been waiting for the crabs to start clawing at each other for years. Looks like Cruz is enough of a narcissistic prick to make it finally happen.

  36. 36.

    dmsilev

    October 16, 2013 at 12:30 pm

    @raven: RINO! Caver!

    On a similar note, here’s Lindsey:

    “This package is a joke compared to what we could have gotten if we had a more reasonable approach,” Graham told the Washington Post on Wednesday. “But live and learn; we’ll be doing this in a couple months.”

    Graham added that Republicans need a different strategy the next time Congress addresses the budget.

    “For the party, this is a moment of self evaluation, we are going to assess how we got here,” he said. “If we continue down this path, we are really going to hurt the Republican Party long-term.”

    Now taking bets on whether they actually do try a different strategy the next time we go down this path.

  37. 37.

    Marmot

    October 16, 2013 at 12:31 pm

    Look at how Fry permits his subject to give the viewer precisely what he or she needs to get the point — with never less than perfect politesse from Fry himself.

    How about a synopsis for those of us at work?

    I assume Fry’s method is ponderous — with a buried lede — indirect to the point of passive-agressiveness, and ultimately lacking much impact. That about right?

  38. 38.

    scav

    October 16, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    @Cervantes: Probably was some tv exec that chose the car, get them anywhere near palm trees and it becomes nigh inevitable.

  39. 39.

    nemesis

    October 16, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    Guess Im not doing it right becaue I failed to witness anyone being hoisted on their petard. I saw a respectful interview where a clown touts his debunked form of treatment. Nothing skillful from the interviewer at all, really.

    And Orange Foolius brings a clean CR to the floor for an up/down vote, the gop reload for the next crisis in a few months and Foolius remains speaker. All this for nothing.

  40. 40.

    Cervantes

    October 16, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    @Yatsuno: Castellanos created some of the most racist campaign advertisements of the last thirty years for such milquetoasts as Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond. Why he (or, for the matter of that, CNN) imagines anyone is interested in his views on “extremism” is … a mystery.

  41. 41.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 16, 2013 at 12:40 pm

    @dmsilev: Reince Preibus should appoint a blue ribbon committee to look at the ways Republicans can re-brand and reach out.

  42. 42.

    Tom Levenson

    October 16, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    @J.D. Rhoades: That would be my colleage and across the hall office neighbor Joe Haldeman. He’s a great guy and getting the chance to talk to him is one of the many ways that I know I’m fortunate way beyond my desserts.

    And any of you who haven’t read The Forever War (gateway drug to his ridiculously copious output), it comes highly recommended.

  43. 43.

    dmsilev

    October 16, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Step one: “Stop fucking that chicken”.

  44. 44.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    @raven:

    Cruz says he won’t block it.

    Proving that he’s ultimately a chickenshit who’s playing to the grandstand rather than somebody serious about gumming up the works.

  45. 45.

    Anya

    October 16, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    @? Martin:

    Obviously they think they can get 90 Democrats on board for impeachment, because Kenya.

    We know they’ll get 17 democrats.

  46. 46.

    Regnad Kcin

    October 16, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    @ruemara: sat “shiva?” or did you mean “chivas?”
    either way, i’m with yez

  47. 47.

    Anoniminous

    October 16, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    O/T

    Reid and McConnell have announced a deal to end the shutdown and raise the debt ceiling.

    Obama wins.

  48. 48.

    kc

    October 16, 2013 at 12:48 pm

    So it sounds like the Senate has a plan that will result in us doing this shit all over again in a few months?

    Yay . . .

  49. 49.

    handsmile

    October 16, 2013 at 12:50 pm

    O/T but…

    Terms of Surrender announced by McConnell; Boehner to bring bill to House for vote:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/16/us-debt-limit-brink-shutdown-senate-deal-live

  50. 50.

    Botsplainer

    October 16, 2013 at 12:51 pm

    Let the teabagger howls of “My Cruz, my Cruz, why hast thou foresaken me?” commence.

  51. 51.

    TS

    October 16, 2013 at 12:52 pm

    @raven:

    Cruz says he won’t block it.

    That’s big of him – he probably expects to be a committee chairman in return. Also too – which personality will be in his brain tomorrow?

  52. 52.

    jonas

    October 16, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    @dmsilev: Now taking bets on whether they actually do try a different strategy the next time we go down this path.

    Put me down for no. Conservatism can never fail; it can only be failed.

  53. 53.

    Anya

    October 16, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    @handsmile: As per your Gaurdian link:

    Here’s a summary of the deal announced on the Senate floor. The bill would:

    • Reopen government and fund it through 15 January 2014.

    • Push the debt ceiling deadline back to 7 February 2014 (but NOT abolish “emergency measures” the Treasury could use to protect against default past that date).

    • Appoint members of a budget conference committee to join the House in trying to pass a budget and end the cycle of standoffs.

    • Institute an anti-fraud provision in Obamacare requiring government to confirm financial need of the recipients of health subsidies.

    Not a complete win but a win for the sane side. I hope and pray that the wingnuts have learned a valuable lesson from this debacle, and they will not subject us to this madness in few months.

  54. 54.

    Anya

    October 16, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    @handsmile: As per your Gaurdian link:

    Here’s a summary of the deal announced on the Senate floor. The bill would:

    • Reopen government and fund it through 15 January 2014.

    • Push the debt ceiling deadline back to 7 February 2014 (but NOT abolish “emergency measures” the Treasury could use to protect against default past that date).

    • Appoint members of a budget conference committee to join the House in trying to pass a budget and end the cycle of standoffs.

    • Institute an anti-fraud provision in Obamacare requiring government to confirm financial need of the recipients of health subsidies.

    Not a complete win but a win for the sane side. I hope and pray that the wingnuts have learned a valuable lesson from this debacle, and they will not subject us to this madness in few months.

  55. 55.

    TooManyJens

    October 16, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    @Yatsuno: So, Castellanos’ proof that the Democrats are extreme leftists is the fact that the New York Times once characterized Bill de Blasio as having “a vision of unfettered leftist government”? OK then.

  56. 56.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    October 16, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    @Botsplainer: along with a whole lot of Democrats gushing about how grateful they are to Mitch McConnell for being willing to compromise, to work with Democrats, to search for common ground with President Obama.

  57. 57.

    TAPX486

    October 16, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    @dmsilev: I don’t know what strategy they will adopt but the agreement calls for a conference committee to create a 10 year budget framework by mid Jan. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to know that the GOP position will be the Ryan budget, which pretty much eliminates most of the federal government while handing out large tax cuts to the 1%. I’m not sure how the democrats can negotiate a compromise on that plan.

  58. 58.

    NotMax

    October 16, 2013 at 12:59 pm

    As a petard is a small bomb that explodes with a concentrated blast pattern, made to be affixed to a gate or placed in a tunnel, saying someone is hoist on it makes little sense.

    Shakespeare used “hoist with his own petard.” Another common variant is “hoist by his own petard.” Both refer to someone impacted and propelled by the backblast of the very bomb he had set.

    /pedant

  59. 59.

    Sly

    October 16, 2013 at 1:00 pm

    Fry’s documentary on manic depression (part 1, part 2) is also really good.

  60. 60.

    Joel

    October 16, 2013 at 1:01 pm

    Stephen Colbert demonstrated this with Dinesh D’Souza so many years back.

  61. 61.

    Dr. Loveless

    October 16, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    @kc:

    So it sounds like the Senate has a plan that will result in us doing this shit all over again in a few months?

    Well, like I just said on Facebook, if the Repugs want to smear poo all over themselves again right as the election season kicks off, who are we to stop them?

  62. 62.

    Patricia Kayden

    October 16, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    @beth: How would they impeach him with a Democratic Senate?

  63. 63.

    handsmile

    October 16, 2013 at 1:15 pm

    @Anya:

    Not a praying man myself, but what I hope is that “the [Democrats] have learned a valuable lesson from this debacle,” and will deal accordingly with the Neo-Confederates in the future (e.g., budget conference committee “negotiations” on Social Security/Medicare).

    The wingnuts, frankly, are incapable of learning; willful ignorance is a badge of honor and virtue. What remains to be seen (nah, not really) is whether the Village media learns anything from this near-catastrophe.

  64. 64.

    Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism

    October 16, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    @Patricia Kayden: Impeachment is bringing charges. We’ve had two Presidents impeached by the House, but neither was convicted by the Senate.

  65. 65.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 1:32 pm

    @Hillary Rettig: I didn’t take Fry’s observation to be an attack at all. But then again I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being gay. Not all but many gay men share the same physical traits. Why is noting “that is a gay man” any different than noting “that is a young woman” or “that is a short man”? We do not have to be, nor do we want to be, all the same. Our differences are part of our identities. Being recognized as gay or female or short or by your ethnic background is not the problem, it’s what the observer does with that information that is important.

  66. 66.

    rb

    October 16, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    @Cervantes: Agree also that the NARTH interview was not as effective as I’d have liked.

    Really? That’s interesting (sincerely).

    To me, to get the guy – without badgering him – to claim that he ‘converts’ people by having them imagine prepubescent girls was pretty damning. Of course, if he were here now the “therapist” would claim he misspoke or that this exchange is (somehow) out of context. But even allowing for copious wiggle room, having him with a straight face advance anything like that approach as in any way legitimate or therapeutic or not-ethically-awful was so humiliating I almost had to pause the video.

  67. 67.

    ericblair

    October 16, 2013 at 1:36 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    along with a whole lot of Democrats gushing about how grateful they are to Mitch McConnell for being willing to compromise, to work with Democrats, to search for common ground with President Obama.

    As far as the goopers are concerned, that’s just sticking the knife in poor old McConnell. Pretty nasty, actually.

  68. 68.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    @Dr. Loveless: But that’s not what’s going to happen because, if nothing has changed on this since I last heard, the Dems caved on the length of the debt ceiling extension. They had been talking about a year, which puts it very close to the election, and then nine months, which would have been during the campaign season. It’s now February. That won’t hurt them nearly as much, although I’m not sure whether two hostage-takings within four months might get people’s attention a little more solidly. I’m a bit annoyed with Dems for caving on that but that goes with the territory of belonging to a party that makes at least some progress forward.

  69. 69.

    Origuy

    October 16, 2013 at 1:38 pm

    @Drexciya:

    Organizing around and highlighting what’s likely a white/upper-middle class-centric issue doesn’t adequately capture the challenges of existing in America and being gay

    Maybe he didn’t try to capture the challenges of being gay in America because he’s English?

    I’ve gotten hooked on QI, the quiz show Fry has hosted for about eleven years. Most of the episodes can be found on YouTube. He asks questions of his guests, usually comedians, and they try to answer them. It’s like watching five smart people play Trivial Pursuit without caring about the scores or whether they stay on the subject.

  70. 70.

    Drexciya

    October 16, 2013 at 1:43 pm

    @karen marie

    Not all but many gay men share the same physical traits.

    Based on what?

  71. 71.

    Roger Moore

    October 16, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    @karen marie:
    There’s also a serious question about what happens in 3 months. The Republicans may go for another relatively short extension that puts the debt limit up for a vote again closer to the election. I’d rather not have any more of these crises, but I’m willing to see the silver lining of them working to the Democrats’ political advantage.

  72. 72.

    Michael G

    October 16, 2013 at 2:03 pm

    I know it’s shameful but damn the free republic threads are giving me some great schadenfreude today.

    Except for the bunches of people posting “Revolt is coming”. That’s pretty creepy.

  73. 73.

    Randy P

    October 16, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    I’m reading Tom McCarthy’s liveblog at the Guardian, and so far I’m not seeing enough to say “yay, we dodged the bullet”.

    – House nutcases scheduled to discuss bill at 3 pm
    – vote not expected till 8 or 9 pm in House
    – Jay Carney says “I should very much refrain from using the past tense here”

    So why are people starting to talk as if Yoho et al won’t blow it up again?

  74. 74.

    DaddyJ

    October 16, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    Far from being an example of good documentary technique, I think the clip is actually a showcase of dishonest argumentation. Note how the beginning of the clip leads you to believe the young man is a proponent of conversion therapy. It’s only after the visit to the therapist that you learn the truth: that the ex-patient is now opposed to his former therapy and actively working against it.

    Fry’s quip, which in schoolyard terms is the I Know You Are But What Am I gag, made me cringe. Really? “You look gay” is the best argument Fry could make?

    And then there’s the “kicker” of the therapist staring in silence at Fry. Is that really his reaction to Fry’s remark? Or was that what his face was doing while watching the sound person adjust Fry’s microphone before the interview began? Even if the therapist was initially gobsmacked by Fry’s comment, did he have a response? We don’t know, because we immediately cut away from the interview.

    Personally I think the therapist is full of crap too, but I hate seeing stuff like this promoted as good discourse.

  75. 75.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 2:55 pm

    @Drexciya: Now you’re just being obtuse. I’m not going to make a list because then your response will be, “Well, but I know straight men with those attributes.” You choose to be argumentative. I decline to participate.

    @Roger Moore: Agreed.

  76. 76.

    grrljock

    October 16, 2013 at 3:10 pm

    I have to join the “Not Impressed” group. As was stated, the reaction shot of the “therapist” (complete with stereotypical limp wrist!) could’ve been edited favorably. And either lesbians don’t exist/don’t qualify as homosexuals, or we are impervious to reparative therapy.

  77. 77.

    Tim C.

    October 16, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    @Tom Levenson:
    YOU KNOW HALDEMAN?!?!? Seriously…… nerdcrush…. must resist urge to squeal like a teenage girl at a Beiber concert.

  78. 78.

    Drexciya

    October 16, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    @karen marie

    I wasn’t trying to be argumentative. I was hoping you’d more deeply interrogate your premises, because I think they’re heavily informed by media representations that rely not just on stereotypes, but on the very essentialism that socially penalizes the expression of gender non-conforming behavior. There’s a range of individuality and cultural distinction (even within gay culture) that gets lost when a homogenous representation is central to the way you relate to and perceive what “gayness” is. And I think that by wedding yourself to that essentialism, you rob yourself of a more dimensional understanding of not just sexual expression, but gender expression in a western context. It’s not a color coded game. You’re not gay for being a metrosexual. You’re not straight for being a hardcore football fan. You’re not gay for speaking with a lisp. And you’re not straight for perfectly embodying western machismo. Gayness is simply an expression of sexual favor for someone of the same sex. We would be remiss to pretend that they have less active diversity and less active potential for diversity than straight people just because you’ve identified a few obvious characteristics on some that ended up being conclusive and determinative.

    Some of those distinctions are regional. Some of them are generational. Some of them are gender-dependent. Some of them are city-exclusive. And some of them are racial. If it seems like gayness and gay culture is one thing or one set of things, that’s a very likely consequence of the entry material and persons you’re using to view it and not an effect of gayness itself.

  79. 79.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 3:51 pm

    @Drexciya: I think they’re heavily informed by media representations that rely not just on stereotypes, but on the very essentialism that socially penalizes the expression of gender non-conforming behavior.

    Actually, my impression is formed not by “media representations” but by living in a “gay” neighborhood in Boston for over two decades (the West Fenway) and having not just a lot of gay neighbors but many gay friends and acquaintances. Again, it’s not whether you can be categorized, it’s what the observer does with that information, how they treat the person they’re observing. I don’t see anything wrong with male or female non-heterosexual orientation, so my recognizing upon meeting someone that they are probably gay (just as if I meet an Egyptian I recognize that they are probably Muslim — again, not that there’s anything wrong with that) is just something that happens as I begin to put together my knowledge of someone I have just met. Gay men and women are often but not always, as I said, have physical characteristics that make them identifiable by others. Just as not all people of African descent do not share all the same physical characteristics but have a tendency to share many. Should I refrain from noticing that one individual is darker and wondering whether his forefathers came from a certain region of Africa? Is it racist or bigoted of me to make suppositions about a person’s narrower identity just on the basis of how they physically appear? I don’t think so. Again, it only becomes a problem if I injure the other person on the basis of that information.

    I appreciate your willingness to engage in dialogue, and I apologize for making a wrong assumption about your intentions.

    P.S.: Almost missed it! Your acknowledgement of the existence of what you call “gender non-conforming behavior” tells me that you could pick out a good many LGBT people in a crowd. The difference between you and me is that you don’t think we’re allowed to acknowledge and celebrate the differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals. There’s nothing wrong with any of them, they’re all people.

  80. 80.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    @karen marie: Reading back over that, I got too many “not”s in some places, because I was cutting and pasting – it’s hard doing a longish thing in a tiny box, for me anyway. I hope you catch my drift despite its inartfulness.

  81. 81.

    Drexciya

    October 16, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    @karen marie

    Um. Wow. I have no idea what to say to any of that. I’m not even sure where to start.

  82. 82.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 4:50 pm

    @Drexciya: So bottom line with you then is everyone should be seen as identical and to distinguish people by physical characteristics is wrong? What about cows? Am I not allowed to acknowlege that while they’re all cows, Jerseys and Herefords have different physical characteristics?

  83. 83.

    Drexciya

    October 16, 2013 at 5:01 pm

    @karen marie

    So bottom line with you then is everyone should be seen as identical and to distinguish people by physical characteristics is wrong? What about cows? Am I not allowed to acknowlege that while they’re all cows, Jerseys and Herefords have different physical characteristics?

    I…wow.

    I’m no longer fit to respond to you right now. I can only continue my request for critical interrogation and hope that you can wonder what, about your arguments, made you shift so smoothly from comparisons about the physical characteristics of gays to opining about the physical characteristics of blacks before you moved on to animals.

  84. 84.

    karen marie

    October 16, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    @Drexciya: I shift because you seem to not understand my contention. Therefore I will assume you think we should all wear blindfolds so that we cannot tell the difference between one person and another. Neither useful nor practical.

  85. 85.

    Cervantes

    October 16, 2013 at 6:10 pm

    @rb: Really? That’s interesting (sincerely).

    To me, to get the guy – without badgering him – to claim that he ‘converts’ people by having them imagine prepubescent girls was pretty damning. Of course, if he were here now the “therapist” would claim he misspoke or that this exchange is (somehow) out of context. But even allowing for copious wiggle room, having him with a straight face advance anything like that approach as in any way legitimate or therapeutic or not-ethically-awful was so humiliating I almost had to pause the video.

    Yes, I noticed that. I also noticed that he said most of his “clients” these days are teenagers.

    Anyway, in my opinion the most damning thing he said (and I don’t see that Fry must be given credit for getting him to say it) was this: “The momentum and the enthusiasm of the gay movement sometimes sweeps up young adolescents into that identity when it’s premature.”

    That “premature” is … interesting.

    Nicolosi apparently has a degree from the New School for Social Research — which institution I know a little about — and another from the California School of Professional Psychology — which I know nothing about.

  86. 86.

    E133

    October 16, 2013 at 6:33 pm

    @karen marie:

    «Again, it only becomes a problem if I injure the other person on the basis of that information.»

    It might not be openly injuring; it is still problematic. Especially because all these assumptions nourish the discriminatory systems we still live in and minorities still suffer from.

    Whether you do it face-to-face or not, your assumptions have consequences from the moment you express them, even in the most implicit inoffensive-seeming ways, no matter how often or how loud you express them.

    Forget about the likeliness of your assumptions being true, forget about the probabilities, forget about the chances; give up the useless prejudices. Think about the wrong your assumptions do.

    Reinforcing the worst aspects of our majority-dominated society starts with as little as spreading this kind of clichés. You should be careful about it, and maybe start reading about it to convince yourself.

  87. 87.

    etseq

    October 18, 2013 at 3:58 am

    Good grief – the post-structuralists have invaded this blog. It’s like a flashback to the mid-90s when pretentious Queer Theorists were “interrogating” discourse and memorizing ponderous passages from Foucault. As an out gay man who proudly fits the “stereotype” I have to agree that recognizing certain archetypes is not the same thing as promoting negative stereotyping. In fact, this rush to denounce the “stereotypes” often has the effect of further stigmatizing effeminate or less masculine gay men and reinforcing the preference for “straight-acting” gay men that plagues gay culture. I always found it highly insulting and slightly homophobic when pomo theorists would lecture gay activists on the evils of essentialism, which is absolutely necessary for any social movement to effect political change. It’s not a question of essentialism vs anti-essentialism but which traits or qualities are being essentialized, which comes back to the difference between archetypes and stereotypes.

    Anyway, I see a poster above me has lectured everyone on the evils of white gay men who exercise their tremendous “privilege” by hogging all the good TV. Oh the horror! . The poster failed to mention that the rest of the interviews in the series take place in India, Brazil, Uganda and Russia. So, drop the oppression olympics. If you don’t think reparative therapy is a big deal, then you are just trolling this thread.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - way2blue - SINALEI, SAMOA—RESPITE EDITION—FEBRUARY 2025.  (second of five) 7
Image by way2blue (7/31/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • Mr. Bemused Senior on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Dance Like the Whole Universe Is Watching (Jul 13, 2025 @ 1:08pm)
  • Chief Oshkosh on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Dance Like the Whole Universe Is Watching (Jul 13, 2025 @ 1:02pm)
  • Captain C on Late Night Open Thread: America’s Fascists Love Alligators (Jul 13, 2025 @ 1:01pm)
  • trollhattan on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Dance Like the Whole Universe Is Watching (Jul 13, 2025 @ 1:00pm)
  • Eolirin on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Dance Like the Whole Universe Is Watching (Jul 13, 2025 @ 12:58pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!