Mary Cheney media letter. (public domain)

[troublemaker]

Subject: You seem oblivious to your subtle bigotry. (It’s a generational thing)

We can all learn something from Tom Selleck. He was falsely outed by a tabloid many years ago and he held a press conference to say he was not, in fact, gay. He said his purpose in debunking the tabloid claim was to assure the many people he had known throughout his life that he had not been living a lie with them. But when asked if he planned to sue the tabloid for defamation he said (paraphrasing), “No. Why would I? There’s nothing defamatory about being called gay.”

Throughout the civil rights struggles liberal whites essentially agreed to overlook black people’s blackness and treat them as provisionally white. That was far better than the segregationist alternative but it was bigotry suppressed, not bigotry vanquished.

Young people today are more colorblind than their parents, sometimes in ways that defy comfortable political labels. Kids today are more likely to date outside their race and less likely to support affirmative action. Their parents are like Moses outside the Promised Land, having brought the children so far, but being unable to take the next step with them.

Today we have seen a similar dynamic in your willingness to abet, however subtly and inadvertently, the view that it’s categorically dirty or under-handed to mention that an out homosexual is gay. Why? Homosexuality is not alcoholism or shoplifting or infidelity. Gay acceptance is not a state of societal “don’t ask, don’t tell” where we straight folks agree to help gay people keep their shameful secret.

While processing this controversy today, did you or any journalists you know take note of the fact that almost every single person outraged (or feigning outrage) over Kerry’s mention of Mary Cheney happened to be an older heterosexual?

The question in the third Presidential debate was, “is gay a choice?” President Bush left the question completely unanswered, suggesting that he may or may not agree with fellow Republican conservative Alan Keyes that his own running mate’s daughter is a willful, selfish pervert acting in conscious defiance of God’s will.

Senator Kerry, however, decisively opposed the Keyes view. He mentioned Mary Cheney in his answer.

He probably had ulterior political motives, as politicians always do.

For instance, since we are examining ploitical motives, let’s examine Vice President Cheney’s post-address family reunion on the convention stage in New York that somehow omitted Mary Cheney even though she was sitting right there in Madison Square Garden at the time. Does anyone seriously believe Mary Cheney had a sprained ankle or something and simply couldn’t make it to the stage? It was a political decision. Most likely Mary Cheney’s own political decision, made because she feared that appearing on the stage would cost her father votes. And why would it cost him votes? Because she is well aware that her father Vice President Richard Cheney is disproportionately supported by bigots.


Respectfully,
________________________

This letter is up for grabs. Feel free to use over your name in any media person or forum, edited in any way you wish.

[Quixote1818]

1. Awesome letter!

[troublemaker]

2. Thank you. I am really exercised about this thing!