Dear Liberals, Stop Calling Marcus Bachmann Gay
You can’t mock Michele Bachmann’s husband for being effeminate just because you’re a Democrat.
By James Brady Ryan
Oh man, Marcus Bachmann. Nominally a therapist — and potential future first First Husband — he's been in the news of late for running these “clinics,” which don't necessarily promise to turn you straight if you're gay — but will totally help you do so if you're into it. But, here is the funny thing: Marcus Bachmann seems kinda gay. He sways, he lisps, he minces with the power of a hundred Liberaces! With one sibilant S, there is blood in the water, and the sharks have come to feast.
Liberal heroes from Jon Stewart to Dan Savage have picked up on this meme, which — combined with her terrible lady migraines — looks like an issue that could derail Michele’s run for the White House. And it would seem somewhat poetic, if the husband of a super-conservative politician who runs reparative therapy clinics turned out to be gay himself. But in the end, there’s one big problem: calling Michele Bachmann's husband gay is actually pretty homophobic.
I want to get this out of the way early: yes, if Marcus Bachmann is, in his heart of hearts, a homosexual and runs a practice that “cures” gay people, his hypocrisy is astounding. And in the past, I've felt a certain amount of joy when people who actively hurt the LGBT cause — like Larry Craig or Ted Haggard — are revealed to be gay. And the fact that he's gone on the record to say that gay people need to be “disciplined” brings up a host of psycho-sexual issues. And if someone finds him in the arms of a gay lover, please call him out on that! But his potential hypocrisy is not the real issue.
No, the real issue is the willingness progressives have shown to embrace a schoolyard view of what makes someone “gay.” Take, for example, this Daily Show segment, in which Stewart gleefully mocks Bachmann for — get this! — dancing with his wife. The premise of this joke is simply this: Marcus Bachmann knows a bit too much about dance, or shows himself to be a bit too eager about it, to be a heterosexual man. And Dan Savage (who can’t use “I’m a comedian” as an excuse) even went on the air in his podcast to claim that Bachmann's speaking voice reveals his homosexuality — an argument employed by middle-school bullies across the nation. Dan It-Gets-fucking-Better Savage.
Gay baiting is nothing new — but I imagine most liberals would think of it as a Republican tactic. When an attack ad aired decrying Kay Barnes (a Democrat from Missouri) for her “San Francisco values," there was a liberal outcry. Same when the Wall Street Journal ran a picture of then Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan playing softball on the front page. Liberals criticized such moves as childish then; what makes them okay now?
It's like Democrats imagine it’s fine to mock Bachmann for his perceived gayness, because they are Democrats — of course they’re not homophobes. And they're just holding him to his own standard: if he wants to work so hard against gayness, he's practically asking for people to examine his own sexuality. It's fair game because he was the one who brought it up in the first place.
That’s probably politically expedient, and it even feels fair — in a law-of-the-playground kind of way. But it also flies in the face of everything the gay-rights movement, and supposedly, Democrats, support: the idea that your sexuality — perceived or real — shouldn’t affect your opportunities. Making fun of Marcus Bachmann for being fey perpetuates the same negative ideas that any gay baiting does: a man can’t dance and a woman can’t play softball without being gay.
And if Marcus Bachmann is gay? Well, that's pretty much between him and his wife — not us. And anyway, there are plenty (too many) legitimately abhorrent political things that he and his wife have gotten up to. Let’s focus on those.
Commentarium (113 Comments)
The reason we object to the school-yard taunts is that their message, with subtext, amounts to "you're gay [and gay is a bad thing to be]." It's the bracketed bit that's the problem.
In Bachman's case, the message, with subtext, amounts to, "you're gay and that makes you a hypocrite [and a hypocrite is a bad thing to be]." That bracketed bit is rather different.
As to privacy, Republicans can't have it both ways. If they want to adopt a rule of "private lives and politics should be kept separate" then I'd defend it. But, when they bring family life into the political arena it becomes a legitimate topic. It's simply absurd to assert that the Bachman marriage is a private affair --- except where they're using its virtue to advance their public careers.
This, 100%.
This, 0%. What a load. Show one example in which Republicans ridiculed gays. Not agreeing on policy is not the same as bullying, sorry. And please stick with the mainstream or I'm going to cite fringe liberals in response.
Off the top of my head, in 1995 Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey refered to known homosexual Congressman Barney Frank as "Barney Fag". But that's just off the top of my head. I'm fairly certain there are plenty more recent examples that escape me at the moment.
Oh, Doofi. You stepped in it this time.
Every time a republican uses the phrase "Homosexual Agenda," or "protecting marriage."
Gays just want to get married and if marriage needs to be protected it's from people like Newt.
Amen
What Villa said . . . 100%. There's nothing inherently wrong with an effeminate manner of speech. The author of the article apparently thinks there is. What's curious to me though is that so much of what the anti-gay contingent dislikes about gays is the "in your face" behavior they stereotype for them - e.g., effeminate speech and enthusiasm for dancing, to name but two. So if you're part of a group that wants all aspects of homosexuality invisible or non-existent, then you'd think you'd take care of your own overtly queer tendencies. It's like calling Jews heathens while wearing a yarmulke. It just doesn't compute.
I'm glad someone said something advertent ANND divergent about this. Well Said. Me, myself, being generously liberal, was kind of scratching my head on this one. Attributing him with these wild accusations because his profile makes it convenient? Come on Dems. Tactics have gotten a little capricious and sloppy and I'll give them the benefit of the doubt granted the current political climate but still...
I don't know Barnes' story as well, but Kagan is gay. That is a huge difference right there. She never said that she was straight, she gave those who-the-fuck-are-you-even-kidding "My sexuality shouldn't be relevant" answers. (I'm not saying that's not true--it is--but no straight person would ever say that.) She lived with her fucking partner in her job! She is the Anderson Cooper of the Supreme Court. Beyond that, the difference is essentially what Villa said.
While I think that distinction is important, I do agree that the whole "he talks funny -- what a fag!" thing is very regressive, no matter who does it or why.
I know the Barnes' story VERY well...I worked on that campaign and the opposing incumbent, Sam Graves, has always had his campaign ran by notorious fat ass Jeff Roe.
Barnes' is straight, but often came to the support of the LGBT community as mayor of Kansas City. Graves/Roe released an incredibly homophobic commercial to paint Barnes as a radical liberal.
...it worked. It's one of the reasons I'm leaving the midwest.
TL/DR. I don't need permission or justification to mock Marcus Bachmann. I can do it because he's there (and it's fun).
And it does so much to advance the debate. Be sure to decry the atmosphere of the debate when you're done mocking him.
Who gives a shit about the debate? I just like doing it because it's fun.
First, taking John Stewart to task on this is bullshit. JS did a whole segment as to how we must resist poking fun of Marcus Bachmann for his effiminate tendencies, even going so far as to bringing in Jerry Seinfeld as a comedy "coach" of sorts. Did this bit backdoor (sorry) in some digs at Bachmann? Sure, but in so doing, JS rightfully, tactfully, and humorously acknowledges the 800 lb pink gorilla in the room.
Moreover, I don't think any of the liberal critics are making fun of him for being gay. They're making light of the fact that, at worst, he's a dick-bag hypocrite who's referred to gays as "barbarians"; and at best he's just a dick-bag who refers to gays as "barbarians."
Agreed.
And agreed.
Not agreed. Stewart's segment basically acknowledges the point this piece makes while also still making fun of Marcus Bachmann for seeming gay, does it not? Joking about his sexuality to undercut him when we have no actual reason to believe he's gay is churlish and unnecessary. His views are disgusting enough; we don't need to play adolescent games to reject them.
Oh sure we can, these batshit crazy Bachmann's deserve to be mocked at eevry moment of every day of their phony, miserable, delusional, pathetic, racist, homophobic, fear-mongering, hateful lives...they represent the WORST of the ego in all it's destructive/ dangerous manifestations
Jeffrey, you said we have "no actual reason to believe he's gay." Au contraire. I am a psychotherapist in practice over 30 years. I have never, even once, heard of a "reparative therapist" who wasn't gay. I Marcus was not gay he'd be the first one I've ever heard of who wasn't. And by the way, we legitemate, licensed therapists do not consider "reparative therapy" to be real therapy.
Therapists think everyone is gay.
gee, a bit late to the game, are we? slate already tried to make this very same point a week ago -- that what dan savage was engaging in was bullying, and equating it with HS kids getting bullied.
however, there's quite a bit of difference between an effeminate kid in high school being taunted for possibly being gay, and a closeted homophobe who drives gay people into suicide (sorry, i meant to say healing them via religious therapy) by perpetutating the idea that there is something inherently wrong with them. oh, and he is a public figure.
FUCK him. hard.
For those of us trying to keep track, please let me know at what age bullying becomes acceptable.
Thanks.
Person A believes Person B is fundamentally flawed and that specific flaw leads to damnation. Person A runs a service that attempts to fix that flaw, even though success rate for fixing that flaw is very, very low and has been demonstrated to lead to mental problems that result from being told you're fundamentally wrong at a basic level and need to be fixed.
Person C, who believes that Person B is not flawed, just different, comes along and says to Person A, "Actually, you seem to have more in common with Person B than you realize."
I don't believe Person C is bullying at all.
Agree with potshot.
Bullying really only works when it's the majority picking on a minority. Bachmann is the bully because he picks on gay people and does it from a supposed societal majority (which is, thankfully, changing). In calling him gay, we are calling him the thing that he seems to abhor the most. I remember being bullied as a kid, and I can tell you, this is just trying to stop people from hitting you and picking on you.
KP, I LOVED it!!!!
@Boson Higgins... Of course you loved it; you're from the future. So my question is: is the racism, homophobia and disparity between the rich everyone else better in the gay ol future?
Well, in order for it to be wrong to wonder whether Marcus Bachmann is gay, you'd have to believe there was something wrong with being gay.
If you don't believe being gay is wrong, it isn't wrong to wonder whether somebody is gay any more than wondering if they like pizza. This is especially true if the person whom you wonder about whether they enjoy pizza runs an anti-pizza clinic.
Jackpot. KP has it exactly right.
Exactly!
Perhaps this is a case of not necessarily homophobia, per se, but just a simplistic and narrow definition of gender.
What?! A dude likes to dance and he has a lisp? He must be gay!!!
And since a lot of homophobia is about policing masculinity (You like to dance? Dude you're a fag!) it is connected to homophobia, just in a round-about way.
Yes, part homophobia is the policing of masculinity. I have no problem using a homophobe's own prejudices against him.
He is using $150,000 of tax payer money to help "ex-gays" hate themselves. I'm sorry but it is NOT just between him and Michele - when he started tapping into public funds for this hatred, it became a national conversation.
KP- I think the pizza question is a funny way of demonstrating this view point which I wholeheartedly agree with. Wondering if someone is or is not gay/straight/bi/queer isn't a bad thing. In fact, I think we should wonder more often and not make being straight the norm and something assumed. However, with these comments calling Marcus gay, I feel that this is a different ball game. I don't think pushing a label onto someone is really "wondering about his or her sexuality." Go ahead and ask the question, but we can't go around assuming and labeling. And if he is (and he even may not be), we should wait until he actually comes out before we label him. I would feel sad for him if indeed he were because then yes, I suppose he would be considered a hypocrite, but he would also see himself in a negative light. If he needs to come to that realization, he'll do it. If not, it's not our business.
Lilithe- your statement on the other hand, I agree with. Thank you. However, I don't think his sexuality is our conversation, but more that no matter what his sexual orientation is, he shouldn't be using the public's money in order to fulfill his freedom of speech request, especially when it isn't even backed with legitimate data.
All gays have lisps and are effeminate. That's why he's gay. Gay people can't possibly talk normal and act macho. Thus, he's a hypocrite because he's closeted gay and not liberal. We all have to fit in our neat tidy boxes or else.
Freddy Mercury being the obvious and only exception, of course :)
I don't care if Marcus Bachmann is in the closet or not. What I care about is this couple's crackpot ideas, hateful bigotry and conviction that, as Christians, they are superior to other free Americans and have God's blessing to legislate their morality into our private lives. All my taxpayer money they're pocketing for their unlicensed mental health clinic and for each foster child smells like kind of a scam, too.
I couldn't agree more. We definitely need to discourage people from taking in foster children. I mean, who do they think these people are?
Can we stop all the "@soandso" BS? Get your own moniker!
Three or four subsidized foster children is noble. 23 sounds like a farm.
On one hand, I applaud anyone taking in foster children. Another part of me thinks religious fundamentalists should not be allowed to adopt, because if they get gay kids, they're doing untold damage.
You said it bro! Fucking eh! Right on KP! What you said! Hallelujah! Oh, wait...
A lot of good points, JBR. I admit I was really uncomfortable when Savage kept on going back to Bachmann on the podcast, making fun of his speaking mannerisms. The whole "what a fag!" atmosphere is not any better because Savage is gay. If anyone wants to go after the Bachmanns, there are plenty more relevant and documented reasons to do so. (Marcus not being "macho" enough is really not one of them.)
Great piece, James Brady Ryan, as always. I am going to agree 70% with you. I think that the mocking has gone off the deep end a little. What started out as indignantly pointing out a *potential* hypocrisy seems to have morphed into something a little more sinister. If Marcus Bachmann was a member of the KKK and we found out he was a quarter or half black, we would be less tolerant of people making up skits exaggerating his sterotypical "black" behavior. In fact, we'd be pretty repulsed by it and wouldn't tolerate it.
The fact that ANYONE gets so worked up about another person's sexuality always baffles me, but this reaction seems to be crossing the lines at points.
When tastefully done, satire can be effective at pointing things out that we have a public interest in seeing.
That sounds kind of funny actually. Just sayin'.
"The fact that ANYONE gets so worked up about another person's sexuality always baffles me, but this reaction seems to be crossing the lines at points. "
...Its even weirder that the Bachmanns have a clinic to turn gay people straight then, huh?
....exactly. This doesn't seem to be the right approach to change their perception on homosexuality, now does it?
Now, I haven't made my mind up one way or the other here, but just throwing this out there: Isn't it okay for grown ups to make fun of other grown ups? Rough humor directed at children is obviously not cool, but isn't being made fun of kind of par?
And if it is, then it has to be okay to make fun of sensitive things, because "Haha! Sarah Palin's hair is really shiny!!" isn't a funny joke.
i believe once you are a fucking grown-up, you can deal with bullying without having to run to your mommie. i further believe that if you are fucking hypocrite, it's ok to bully you.
you may disagree, but i don't give a rat's ass, frankly.
Whatta you got against rat's asses? Delicious, toasted in a bun with sauerkraut and pepper.
If someone said, "He's got a lot of money and a pointy nose - I think he's secretly Jewish." I bet lots of people would have a problem with that - but that's essentially what's happening here.
Let's just focus on the fact that he runs a barbaric anti-gay "therapy" program and forget about the fact that he is gay.
Quite honestly, if a guy who looked like Jerry Stiller was a prominent anti-Semite, I can guarantee some jokes would be made at his expense. And I would laugh.
Yeah, cause it would be funny! And it wouldn't be bullying, cause bullying is when someone with more power teases or abuses someone with less. But Savage and Bachman have the same amount of power: none. So we get to tease each other, and laugh about it, and it's okay... I think.
Remember: Marcus Bachmann isn't the only one on the receiving end of this "bullying". The same gay kids grappling with their own developing identities (whom liberal figures like Savage have been trying to reach out to) are hearing these messages too. They sit quietly in front of the TV and hear mildly effeminate behavior being ridiculed. Stewarts' bit betrayed his guilty conscience. Its a cheap shot, but I'm not worried about Bachmann handling it, I'm worried about those who are stung in the crossfire.
Yes, that's a real concern. But the answer can't be to stop making jokes that could offend someone or hurt their feelings! Can it? Wouldn't it be better to draw the distinction between public figures taking the piss out of one another and real damaging type bullying?
Or maybe make the distinction between bullying and calling bullies on their bullshit?
If a chubby bully makes fun of a fat kid for being fat, I don't think the fat kid is going to get his feelings hurt if a third party says, "Uh, you might want to loose some weight yourself, bullyman."
Marcus Bachmann isn't gay, he just wants to teach the barbarians. Lay off; at least he does it in a respectable clinic instead of some airport restroom like other less-reputable republicans. He can't understand why all these homosexuals keep sucking his cock. From his website:
"I've got nothing against homosexuals. Let them be free to do their gay thing in peace, I say. But when they start sucking my cock, then I've got a real problem. I swear, if these homosexuals don't take a hint and quit sucking my cock all the time, I'm going to have to resort to drastic measures–like maybe pinning them down to the cement floor of the loading dock with my powerful forearms and working my cock all the way up their butt so they understand loud and clear just how much I disapprove of their unwelcome advances. I mean, you can't get much more direct than that."
I think that JBR is right that one shouldn't mock Bachmann simply for "acting gay"; it plays into the stereotype, and the stereotype is harmful. However, I disagree that his sexuality is a private matter. His virulent homophobia -- and let's call it what it is: Describing a group of people as "barbarians" who need "disciplining" reflects a fear and hatred, or at least contempt of that group -- makes his sexuality a legitimate topic for discussion. It is also anecdotally true that some of the most anti-gay people are themselves closeted gays (who, indeed, may not even realize it consciously). Bachmann behaves in the same way these closeted anti-gay people behave, and it is that combined with elements of the "acting gay" stereotype that feed this perception. Now, how we separate out the legitimate interest and observation of his behaviors from hurtful, stereotype-perpetuating behaviors is difficult. But I appreciate JBR focusing on that issue, which has helped me think about it more deeply.
On a less intense note, anyone remember Dana Carvey's "Lyle, the Effeminate Heterosexual" character?
https://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/07/18/queen-for-a-day
Wait you mean liberals are not liberal? I'm shocked.
I'm not shocked.
There's a big difference here between "gay" and homosexual.
only if you're a dumfuck
Oh, shit. I'm a dumfuck!
Haha! Proved it. You're a dumfuck. You can't even spel it right! Dumfuck.
Wait...what did I misspell? I just spelled "dumfuck" exactly the way you did your original comment. And I'm assuming you purposely wrote "spel" instead of "spell?" (I betcha she won't answer this!)
marcus bachmann seriously reminds me of buddy garrity from friday night lights in this picture. by far my favorite part of this whole article.
I don't want to disrespect anything anyone above me has said nor do I want to repeat anyone's opinions, but I have not read any comments to this article based on my strong stand to never read comments on the internet due to the fact that when I did, they just let my faith in humanity dissolve. But ...
Today my good friend referenced Marcus and said 'he does everything that a gay man should do'. She was talking about his dancing, lisp and other things mentioned in this article. I'm sorry, but last I checked, the only thing a gay man was suppose to do was be sexually attracted to other men. To me, Marcus's biggest fault is that he for some reason thought his now wife was marriage material and was someone to stand by through thick or thin. We can't add up stereotypes to equal someones life and maybe closeted secrets. I wish it was simple enough to have an equation that made us who we are. But we don't. Yet.
Perhaps it's because he looks like Chaz Bono.
"And if Marcus Bachmann is gay? Well, that's pretty much between him and his wife — not us. And anyway, there are plenty (too many) legitimately abhorrent political things that he and his wife have gotten up to. Let’s focus on those."
Agreed.
Hey, we're just calling out an old Queen when we see one.
I'm sure I'll take you with pleasure! Twopence a week and jam every other day.
So earnest, people! That shit's just funny---quit taking it so seriously and realize the whole point is to point out Bachmann is a douche. gay douche or straight douche, doesn't really matter.
Just noting that gay-friendly people wouldn't laugh at Bachmann for being gay, but for being the gay husband of a republican. Homophobics take the inference as an insult, which is funny, as is apparent hypocrisy.
So, the real take-away here is that a tone troll elevated to feature writer from commenter is still a tone troll, and can still be ignored and ridiculed as required. Honestly, dear, it's nice that you were able to participate, but you're wrong. And seriously, you rated a D- at best at trying to derail.
Being Gay myself, when I first heard the remark "All gays aren't sissies but all sissies are gay ." I was, well, not offended, but "taken aback." But then, at least in my experience, I found it to be generally true. So Marcus is a sissy and, probably, gay. No big deal. Unfortunately for him, his remarks and "therapy" practice place a big target on his bearish belly. And I say, fire away! No one is saying it is open season on gays or sissies, but only on Marcus (Nice Latin name, reminds me of the Monty Python movie, life of Brian. I wonder if he is "Biggus Marcus?")
Yeah, because "sissy" generally means to avoid confrontation and physical violence, which are admirable female traits probably because testosterone is one of the primary drivers behind the behaviour. If this is all true, in some ways, I wish we were all "sissies". While I tend to be an aggressive, large male, I'm not always happy about the behaviour.
I think I read about all of the comments on here so far, some quite thoughtful too. Good arguments. Personally, I am willing to just wait for the truth some day soon to come out about Marcus Bachman. Though as a gay man who has zero obvious outward signs of being gay, or in other words has no stereotypical characteristics of a gay man, I still think that Marcus is gay. I believe this because I believe that within most stereotypes there lies at least a spark of truth. And in the case of gay men, it has been shown many times to me that a lot of gay men have similar characteristics. But I rarely, if ever, have seen any straight men show these characteristics attributed to gay men. I do believe that it is possible though. It may occur when a straight male is brought up without a father figure who has typically male charateristics. But even most of these guys don't grow up acting like their mothers. I've known lots of guys who have been brought up by women only, and they show no stereotypical gay characteristics. I did sort of get to know one guy who I will say was what is commonly known as a real "flamer". He was married and was in counseling for being the child of an alcoholic. Anyway, I was shocked that he was married. I was also shocked that any woman would have married him without wondering if she had married a gay guy. But this actually is a very common occurance. Some women out there actually think that they can cure/change homosexuals. I know this from first hand experience when I got married to a woman who still insisted that God had sent me to her even though I made it clear to her from the very beginning that I am gay. By saying this, I must admit my fault in allowing this marriage fiasco to run its course.
I suppose I'm getting off course here. But I do believe that anyone who suggests that homosexuality is evil and should be exorcised out of a person opens themselves up to common observations. I use the words, "evil" and "exorcised" because this is really what Marcus is saying when he calls it a sin. He's not calling it a sickness, but much more like choosing to live in a sinful existence.
Anyway I do believe that once any gay person either personally or by proxy gets into the spotlight, the truth will come out about them. Marcus will have people digging into his life. Some of his foster children will speak up about how life was with the Bachmans. And I suspect that several will get the courage to tell the truth about odd activities in the household. OR... they won't because nothing unusual happened. But gay men who lead lives of lies, tend to live out their true desires in some way or another, some through cheating on their wives. (I didn't.), or maybe through secretive porn usage, or being a youth minister, or becoming a priest.
There are just so many ways that gay men and women growing up have to pretty much on their own make decisions to cope with figuring out who they are, whether they are evil or not, and how to deal with it. And as we know from other figures who have been in the spotlight, some of them decide that the best way to cope is to fight their feelings by "helping" others to not have these same feelings. And that is really sick. I understand and don't judge Marcus too harshly for it. But I actually hope that if he is gay, as I believe he is, he will decide soon that it would be better for all if he at least admitted that he is gay, regardless of whether he decides to continue in his efforts to change others or not. Usually though, when people "come out", they find a freedom from years of guilt, and this changes a lot of other ideas/beliefs they have held for so long.
Well said.
the part about youth minister of priest gave me shutters...
or*
I like shutters! I think the wood kind is the best. They look so nice painted in contrasting colors on those buildings in France and Spain! What is a youth minister of priest? Did he give you nice shutters? Did he make you do somethings nasty like give your heart to Jesus to get them?
Shutters are both a force of Good and Evil in this life. Shutters are like, in that respect, a double edged sword. Except that I would never, ever pull a shutter out of my scabbard in a fight unless I had spent a lot of time and effort honing and hardening one of the edges to the point where it could effortlessly carve through steel, as I sing "Praise Jesus!" and cut a swath through the hordes of liberals trying to foist day care and homosexuals upon my pious children. I can't imagine how they do things over in Europe, with all those gaily painted weapons hanging everywhere in plain sight beside windows.
Okay. So I think one of the main reasons why Marcus Bachmann seems so gay -- beyond the whole "lisping dancing pansy" thing, which is, yes, pretty insulting -- is that when he talks about his conversion, he always implies, at least, that HE is actively choosing not to give in to temptation, not to lead a gay lifestyle. When you hear ex-gays talk, the language they use about themselves is almost exactly like the language he uses about himself. And if you don't believe in "ex-gays," you would probably think that someone who is an "ex-gay" is really just a gay. I don't think a straight person would ever really believe that you have to constantly choose to be straight.
"I don't think a straight person would ever really believe that you have to constantly choose to be straight." So very true. How come nobody ever says these things out loud to a group of people... oh.
I didn't read all of the comments because I'm SO sleepy, but "IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK, AND QUACKS LIKE A DUCK, IT'S A DUCK." I have seen numerous gay men post videos stating that Marcus Bachmann is totally gay. And I don't care if people are gay or not gay - who cares? But I do care when someone (Michele and Marcus) are anti-gay and will vote to deny marriage to gays, and then the husband is a closet gay. We have all seen this over and over. I'm just waiting for someone to start talking. But the bottom line is, people like preach and teach intolerance. I have never read in the bible that we are supposed to condemn someone because they're gay. Anyway, I believe Marcus Bachmann is gay and that it will come out some day.
Of all the things you could say, the bit about the bible never supporting the condemnation of homosexuals is a bit misguided. It's uh, it's in there several times. In fact, huge tracts of the Old Testament are pretty renowned for pretty much explicitly telling you just how lethally to engage in condemnation of XY and Z. That was really the main reason I found Christianity a turn off as a kid, not because I disagreed with the premise that Sinners Must Perish, but the hypocrisy of the two or three cherry-picked quotes about God loving us all and whatnot that were bandied about in church. There's something about realizing you've got a better grasp of biblical lore than the sunday school teachers
Otherwise, yeah, I agree with you. Note that Bachmann is getting so much derision whereas the Log Cabin republicans might get called misguided, but rarely receive snickers about their sexuality; they don't really go around talking about how terrible gays are. It's the irony that's the joke. It's like finding out that the SS' top administrator and killer and 2nd in command was 1/4th Jewish (look up Reinhard Heydrich).
Zat isch a rumour! If zou persist in zis, I vill be forst to killink you! Sank you.
It's the hypocrisy. Its our time and our word to use. Just like blacks use the n word.
Lots of people used to make those same uninformed assumptions about that preacher in Colorado Springs, Ted Haggart. Oh wait he is gay... never mind.
After seeing the picture of Michele Bachmann and her husband Marcus together I think somebody should feed Michele a doughnut and take a doughnut away from Marcus if he's holding one.
No chance. Marcus Bachmann is as queer as they come and I find it hilarious. In fact, here goes... Marcus Bachmann is so flaming that..... Ahh, you go ahead.
It's homophobic to point out the obvious. Bachmann is gayer than a handbag full of rainbows.
I love that phrase "policing masculinity" that's going to become my catchphrase in these discussions over on SodaHead.
LOL... y'all so crazy!
No one really cares if Marcus Bachmann is gay, but we should care if he's a hypocrite. Being a hypocrite is fair game for being mocked. We should also care that he is practicing "reparative therapy" despite denying it repeatedly. This makes him a liar. Who's the bully? The one calling gays barbarians, or those of us that choose to call him out?
If that's actually him in the video and audio clips I've seen and heard there's no doubt in my mind that he's gay. The lisp, the gestures, the way he dances - all the way gay!! I don't have a problem with that but, as some people have said previously, I do have a problem with the hypocrisy.
I'm a bit shocked that someone else hasn't pointed this out already yet (assuming I didn't just miss it):
What's going on with the comments about Marcus Bachmann isn't "homophobic"; there is no "phobia" about it. Nobody making the cracks about his possible sexual identity is afraid that he's gay. Sure, there may be some stereotyping going on (which I don't necessarily agree with), but it's a far cry from being "homophobic". It destroys any credibility the rest of the article may have when it's apparent the author doesn't even know what the word actually means.
You'd think such an article would get THAT right at least. Then again....
There are so many causes to focus on in this country and Marcus picks changing gay people??? WTF. Has any gay person come forward to say this actually worked?? Marcus....did it work for you?
Marcus swears it worked for Marcus.
First, let me say that I am in no way supporting Marcus Bachman's 'work' here.
But, people (including the author) keep saying that if Bachman was born gay then he is a hypocrite for 'helping' people turn away from a gay lifestyle.
Ummm, no, he is being 100% consistent with his teachings/work.
Even if you dislike his work and think it is horribly wrong, he would just like his people he is counseling.
A former alcoholic that counsels alcoholics is not a hypocrite, he is a person that knows one way of living and espouses a different way. Now, none of this makes Bachman's work noble like helping alcoholics, but it is not hypocritical under any definition I can think off.
I'm tired of conservatives crying foul whenever a liberal does something that is possibly a little out of bounds. The truth of the matter is that conservatives use deception (or more to the point outright lies), misdirection, fear, racism, sexism/misogyny, hatred, derision, etc, etc, etc as their everyday strategy, so much so that this is actually platform strategy. A conservative calling someone out for questionable use of gay innuendo is like a KKK grand wizard calling someone out for not hiring a black man via an affirmative action policy. Its so ludicrous and hypocritical that its pathetic. I am not gay but I have many gay friends who I've talked to about this and absolutely none of them is offended by what Dan Savage or Jon Stewart have said about Marcus Bachman. So who are you defending again? Or are you just doing what every Republican does when they see an opportunity to exploit false outrage and make an issue of it so they can attack liberals and use those attacks as more fodder to push a medieval agenda? That's what I thought.
I differ on one major point in this article. It is not just between him and his wife. When she uses anti-gay platforms while running for office, what happens in her household now becomes our business as well. She's not allowed to hate on me publicly and allow what she campaigns against to go on in the privacy of her own home.
If a flaming queen works against gay rights, they're fair game.
Why is it homophobic to call a gay man gay?
Marcus is about as straight as ricki martin, and trying to "cure" gayness through prayer is the same as an amputee trying to grow back a limb through prayer.. it won't happen.. you cannot correct nature..
The man is gay, he's an opportunist and a hypocrite.. And that's the truth..
Good point. I hadn't tuohght about it quite that way. :)
I'm a centrist who couldn't care less about Bachmann's homosexuality. But, have a huge problem with a pretend "psychologist" who received all of his higher education from schools more concerned about fitting a psuedo-academic discipline with a religious viewpoint. Then he uses his questionable credentials to "pray-the-gay" away. And please don't tell me that isn't so. That is exactly what that clinic is about and to deny it is to lie about it. That brings me to the next problem. Bachmann presents herself as a "fine Christian woman," implying that somehow she wouldn't lie, cheat, or subscribe to the idea of the "ends justifies the means." In other words, Bachmann has already shown a willingness to lie to protect their lie. And, considering Bachmann's obvious ignorance about science and history, well... what can I say. My real problem is the hypocrisy, - not that good old-fashioned kind that politicians have always played. Oh no, this is that hypocrisy where the religious nut wife is married to a man that she knows to be gay; he even opens a clinic to "pray the gay away" as an obvious and pathetic effort to fight his own inner conflict between his religious ideal and his very human sexuality. Then his wife reinforces this with declarations of how she would use Executive power to "enforce" a right-wing religious social policy. Oh, and before you reply, take a day off from work to visit a religious school such as Bob Jones University. Engage the students randomly. Then go to a "liberal" university and do the say. I'll kiss you ass if don't encounter more gay men at the religious schools.
I'm a gay man, and I think Marcus Bachmann is gayer than a handbag full of rainbows... Am I a homophobe?
i don't condone it, but didn't all the marcus bashing start after his gays are barbaric and need to be disciplined rant?
I agree with the writer. I'm a gay guy and I'm basically apolitical. But when comedians like Bill Maher make jokes about Marcus Bachmann for simply seeming "gay" it is completely insulting to all gays and it exposes the fact that they don't respect gays. And when the audience laughs and claps at those jokes, well, now it's a whole roomful of people who don't respect gays. If your argument is that Marcus Bachmann is worthy of ridicule not because he's gay but because he's a hypocrite, then you are being far too presumptuous about his sex life and you are nonetheless still denigrating gays. That being said, I'm not demanding political correctness. If you think gays are silly, wimpy, disgusting, sinful, or all of the above? That's fine by me. But at least be honest with your beliefs and stop blowing sunshine up our collective gay asses with your leftist "love the minorities" nonsense.
Dude, this guy is so freaking gay. The only thing more rediculous than your pathetic attempt to defend this total knob gobbler is the fact that you refer to him as a possible first husband. That will
never happen! It's more likely that we'll find a sex tape staring this douche and Rick Santorum. That bitch is crazy...anybody who thinks she has a chance is as delusional about American voters as Michele Bachmann is about her sham of a marriage.
Outing closet case hate-spewing homophobes isn't homophobic, it's calling out hypocrites on their bullshit. Anyone has the right to stay in the closet if they really want to, but the minute you come out as a bigoted (self loathing?) shit smear, all bets are off.
I will gladly stop calling him gay once he stops calling gays "evil," or "sick," or in any way less than other people! Not too much to ask, is it?
Now you say something