I'm more concerned that your school paper would print such drivel. They printed a column like that back when I was at Arizona State a number of years back, and I remember the controversy it caused on campus - mostly free speech vs. pro-gay. It was an interesting dichotomy, as if those two things are opposed to each other or they can be absolutes abstractions, ever. I'd think that they have some editorial standards there, and if they don't, they should adopt some. It's not like this kid wouldn't be able to speak without being on the newspaper staff, and his whole column, it sounds like, was written to encourage people to silence queers. See? we win the free speech argument that way.

Ugh. That paper is just irresponsible. And now they want a "debate" with him? Yeah, he seems like he's all about argumentation and reason. I guess it's cute in that college idealistic way, that he'll hear "arguments" (Gays are good people, trannies don't choose to be that way!) and then he'll somehow be persuaded. I'm not saying he's beyond help, just saying that you work on people with symbolism, etc, and not some sort of debate.

And then think about what an arrogant power trip that'll probably put him on - here's a debate all about trying to convince me to accept others as fully human with the same right to exist as I do. Uh, yeah. I'm tired of having to convince others that we're equal, in a vast and expansive definition of the word, and I'm so glad that people who came before me did that because I'd probably just have slapped people and gotten thrown in prison.

But seriously, what's this debate going to be about? Any debate worth anything has a central, defined question so that people know what they're talking about. Since this dude talks about just about everything LGBTQ in his column, would it be "Should queers be systematically killed?" Or maybe "If someone bothers me with their very existence, "do I have a right to call on 300 million people to help end their existence?" Or, at his suggestion, "Why is practicing homosexuality intrinsically disordered and why does it prevent one from loving fully?"

Instead of having debates in response to a column like this and acknowledging it as anything more than homophobic pablum, why not have a debate without him (but he'll be invited, of course) about what the university community can do to fight this sort of speech? I'm not thinking speech codes, but something more creative. Obviously, there's a need.

Maybe several years ago I would have been all gung ho about a debate on this subject, but it's getting tiring having to respond to junk like this. This guy is wrong, in every way possible, we should all know it by now, and it's degrading to have to debate for our right to exist. It's also creating a hostile environment for other students who might just be coming out at college and all. (Not you, of course, Bruce, since you seem to enjoy this whole thing a little too much.)

Either way, good post.

Great post, Bruce. As an aside, when I found that article and sent it to you I showed it to Jerame. I pointed out the picture and said, "Bruce should just fuck him. He looks like Bruce's type." So do you know how hard I'm laughing while reading "the author of this silly and dangerous column is somewhat attractive and, at least to my eyes, a little gay looking"? GMTA

Alex is right: debating this guy is futile for queers and validating for him. Have a public gender-blind queer fuck fest and validate that instead!

I am not being sarcastic.

You can take the bo*y* out of the public gender-blind queer fuck fest, but you can't take the public gender-blind queer fuck fest out of the boy.

Bruce, all I want to know is when and where so I can come and watch you in action!

"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
Martin Luther King Jr. (1929 - 1968)

I think that you're right, Bruce. We will win--there's no other way for this whole convoluted exercise to end. The sad part is that there is a struggle in the first place. Being back in good ole Pike County, I feel like I'm closer to the front lines than I've been in years!

Maybe a debate may open him up to the scope of what he's trying to rally against. Maybe a thorough, public tongue-lashing (get your dirty little mind out of the gutter) will educate him. It isn't likely, but there's always hope.

But, if this kid really feels the way that he comes off in his paper, no debate or simple conversation is going to change his mind. I fear the possibility that nothing he sees will have any impact upon him. He has probably never had more than remote exposure to the lifestyle he has chosen to attack and he likely bases his opinions on second hand news and outmoded religious doctrine. Those all-too-common sources of ignorance are the most difficult to combat. Sometimes educating just one person is enough, though.

Have you thought about trying to publish a reaction in the same paper?