Pillory the Post
Update: John has updated his blog with a post containing links to easier-to-download PDF files of the “advertisement,” and a response to the freedom of speech question.
A word about Freedom of Speech
I have two words for those who might suggest that the Post and this anti-gay group have the right to “freedom of speech”: David Duke.
I doubt the Washington Post practices unfettered freedom of speech in its advertising supplements. I refuse to believe that David Duke could run a similar Wash Post supplement about African-Americans, presenting evidence that blacks are physically and mentally inferior to whites, that their struggle was nothing like the struggle of, say, Jews who were killed during the Holocaust, and that therefore blacks don’t deserve the same civil rights you and I deserve, and that blacks can change and become white by simply using skin cream, so they’re not a “real” minority. Think the Post would run that? Of course not.
What we have here is a double standard in the “freedom of speech” the Washington Post offers those who would attack minorities. Attack a gay, a-okay. Attack other minorities, not so okay. If the Post is going to have standards about what bigotry and quack science it will and won’t publish in its advertising supplements, then it should apply those standards equally to all. And I doubt David Duke would get a real friendly welcome from the Post.
Every once in a while I come across something that leaves me speechless. I’d have caught this one earlier, but since I get most of my news online, I missed the magazine insert the Washington Post published yesterday. Fortunately, John over at AMERICAblog caught it, and boy is he pissed. After seeing it, I can’t say that I blame him at all. But don’t take my word for it. See it for yourself. John has posted it it in PDF format on his site. Be forewarned, these files are huge, and the content is pretty offensive.
Shocked? Amazed? Appalled? Yeah, me to. John is calling for people to write the Post ombudsman about this, and I’m joining him.
I’m posting John’s message here in it’s totality, and urging my readers to give the post a piece of their minds on this. As we would say down home, it’s time for a serious beat-down.
ACTION:
Contact the Post’s ombudsman: ombudsman@washpost.com
(202) 334-7582
I want his mailbox FULL of messages by the time he gets back on Monday. This crosses the line of decency.
———————The Washington Post yesterday printed a magazine ad supplement, bought by religious right groups, that is one of the most bigoted homophobic things I have ever read. I am astonished the Post would print this filth.
In it you learn things like the fact that sexual orientation isn’t genetic. Why? Because if it were genetic it would have to be passed by gay parents who don’t have kids! Putting aside a number of holes in that theory, there’s the more general scientific point about recessive genes. My point is that this filth isn’t even scientifically correct, and the Post is publishing it. I didn’t realize the Post had no problems publishing junk science targeting minority groups. Huh.
What’s more, the entire publication is based on race-baiting. It is CLEARLY written for the black community in an effort to piss them off against the gays. Funny, but you’d think the Post would have a problem with a scientifically invalid publication whose sole intent was to enrage one minority community against another. But no.
Oh, and it gets better. The publication informs you that gays die at the age of 41. Yep, all of us. What they don’t tell you is that this little “study” was conducted by Dr. Paul Cameron, an anti-gay nutjob who has even been disowned by the religious right (let alone he was thrown out of various medical associations). But does the Post have a problem publishing junk science that suggests that certain minority groups are inferior to others? Not at all!
Oh, it goes on and on. Then concludes by invoking Martin Luther King’s memory to attack us. Which is again an outright lie since Coretta Scott King has already said that the gay rights movement is part of the larger civil rights movement her husband embraced.
Where the hell is the Washington Post on all of this? Pay them the right price and they’ll publish any crap, no matter how outrageous, no matter how wrong, no matter how hateful and obviously race-baiting (note that the fags in the publication are all white).
This is so beyond the pale. You have got to see this. And we have got to respond. On its face this is publishing junk science meant to attack minorities, and is race-baiting, among other things. I wonder if the Washington Post would publish a magazine insert that, oh, specifically targeted the white community, alerting them to studies suggesting that blacks are genetically inferior to whites, more prone to disease and early death than whites, and that blacks therefore don’t deserve affirmative action and other civil rights protections because, you know, they’re not as worthy as Jewish people? Also, I hear that if they use the right cream, blacks can become white.
I’m serious about this. If the Post refused to run such an ad we could sue their asses off under the DC civil rights ordinance. We need to get the Post on the record explaining the differences between the two ads because there is NO WAY they can defend the science in this ad, on that I’m an expert. This science is the same crap that says blacks are inferior to whites. And if the Post wouldn’t run bigoted race-baiting Aryan science studies about blacks - and they wouldn’t - then they’d better treat gays with the same journalistic standard.
I’m writing, and calling. I hope you will too.
November 20th, 2004 at 6:49 pm
First off, I am truly astounded that the Washington Post would allow this publication. But I do feel more like the many “Christians” who have these points of view *should* come out.
I’ve only read the first article [I have a early-90s computer and dial-up ISP], but already there is quite a lot of shooting-itself-in-the-foot going on. The article says that homosexual men, in longterm relationships, who are NOT infected with HIV have an average life expectancy of 41 years. That ought to be extremely easy to debunk. These are ridiculous charges and spurious reasoning.
I don’t think anyone need panic. This is great! The American people will be uniformly disgusted. The Right is ‘over reaching’ — if that’s the right word. We will witness a hate-based implosion. Plus, the lefties in congress will get some guts. This lights the fuse of a progressive comeback.
But we don’t really need to do much of anything now. It’s time for rope-a-dope. Let the Right throw its punches and expose its hate.
November 20th, 2004 at 8:24 pm
“Let the poisons in the mud hatch out.”
Having now read all four parts, I am amazed. But since a Marriage Amendment is actually being considered, I think it is necessary that the Right put out its argument and make its case.
I do not think that The Post should be ridiculed — or a protest movement against The Post should be launched — for carrying this suppliment.
The arguments in the suppliment are rebuttable. This tempest is one that should be joined! For the most part, in their conclave — the red areas — these arguments have not be confronted. It is good that a direct, national discussion can be had. The compassionate Progressive argument will win out. But, in any case, a Marriage Amendment will never get through the hurdles for passage.
November 21st, 2004 at 2:17 am
Over at AMERIblog, the mob is assembling, and they’re going to lynch … the Post. A pack of real geniuses: Murder the messenger and suppress the message.
We just went through an election when the discussion was diverted 100 times such that people were too confused to listen to Kerry’s message. NOW, the Christian Right has stated their case! We should thank the Christian Right! And God bless the Washington Post! Now the discussion can be had. The Right has put its cards out on the table! The error in their logic can be demonstrated!
THIS, THIS is what democracy is about and our freedoms. I am not glad that BothSides appeared as it did because I believe in “unfettered freedom,” but because gay marriage is an issue. Ten states passed constitutional amendments defining marriage as between a man and woman. [Sheesh, and I thought Noah Webster was in charge of that.] Gay marriage is an issue, and the Christian Right spoke to that issue. Now, there logic and Christianity and kindness and compassion can be examined. And their fears [and fearmongering] and logic [and contradictions] can be knocked around for a while.
ALSO, we should have some compassion FOR THEM. So many of them have had their entire lives revolve around these cult-like churches. They are afraid of the outside world and failing to be obedient and suppressed. This is an opportunity to “open up” the other side. Besides, these red-state folks are just people; their bigottedness is a learned behavior, it can be changed.
November 21st, 2004 at 9:01 am
Thank them? Gays and lesbians are about the last group in America against whom it’s acceptable to utter all manner of slurs and slander, and when people do it we’re supposed to thank them?
November 21st, 2004 at 9:39 pm
Oh, Terrance. I obviously didn’t say we should thank them for slurring gays and lesbians. Are you so blinded by your sense of yourself as a victim that you cannot read?
Rage on against the hate, Terrance. And try not to notice the hypocracy.
November 21st, 2004 at 9:49 pm
Sorry, but I just don’t know how to not be outraged by this, and how to not respond to with outrage.
November 24th, 2004 at 2:45 am
Trackback failed for some reason. My response is here, fwiw.