Posted by
Andrews on Monday, May 11, 2009 4:30:38 PM
In the past I have asked why the left, the political home of "tolerance" would revel so much in calling Republicans "gay". After all, if homosexuality is a morally neutral position, then it would be akin to trying to insult someone by saying "you have brown eyes" or "you're a Presbyterian!" I have argued that just as the left tends to be condescending toward minorities, they also have an equally condescending attitude toward homosexuals. (And I find this true in the way some on the left treat homosexuals almost as pets. The "I met the most darling gay man!" type of attitude...)
On the other hand,
Best of the Web today, suggests it is a safe way for the left to violate social norms, the same way Clarence Thomas and Michael Steele give them a safe venue for violating norms of racial etiquette:
What makes Sykes's joke funny to a liberal, then, is the sense of
danger that accompanies her risky themes, combined with the secure
knowledge that since the joke is at the expense of a liberal hate
figure, the usual rules not apply. It's the same reason people on the
left evince particular glee when they attack Clarence Thomas or Michael
Steele in expressly racist terms, or when they use antigay innuendo
against their political opponents (regardless of the latter's sexual
orientation).
However, in one way this begs the question. After all, why would these tolerant people feel the need to violate such norms? Are they just so immature that they can't resist being "transgressive"? Or do they secretly harbor racist and "homophobic" beliefs? So, yes, it gives them a way to express these views, but the question remains why they want to express these views at all.