Christopher Hitchens: Yes, still a complete ass April 7, 2008
Posted by Evil Bender in bigotry, wingnuts.trackback
Via Pam, I learn that Christopher Hitchens apparently thinks calling a gay man a lesbian is an insult:
SULLIVAN: Again, you keep playing with that quote. We’re happy to have it on the record. And now you’ve made me forget my second point, which is –
HITCHENS: Oh, well, don’t be such a lesbian. Get on with it.
No doubt Hitchens will respond that only he is clever enough to know why that’s funny. I swear, every time that man opens his mouth, I detest him more.
As a fag, I think this is hysterical! It’s funny in that it’s not expected and it’s a bit of a non-sequitur. If Christopher Hitchens, or anyone else for that matter, called me a lesbian after I spend a few minutes whining, I would not only have it coming but I would most definitely laugh my ass off.
HItchens is like the Bill Donahue for Atheists, right?
Let’s see: loud, beligerent, ignorant, and a huge embarrassment to those who agree with some of his positions.
Yeah, I’d say it’s a good fit. :)
At least Hitchens mainly limits his bullying to in-person crap, though, rather than trying to silence those he doesn’t like in the service of the Republican Party the way Donahue does.
For Christ’s sake, get over it. Hitchens and Sullivan are friendly outside the confines of whatever show they happen to be on. This is just one friend teasing another. I know Hitchens ties up his critics in knots, and they’re desperate to land one solid punch, but all of this petty bullshit makes you all look silly. Rarely does anyone take issue with Hitchens on specific points. The attacks are personal, vague and inconsequential. Mr. Hitchens and Mr. Sullivan (both of whom I at times disagree with) are welcome on my TV any time.
I can’t understand how it’s fine for you to “detest” Hitchens, but wrong for anyone to so much as disagree with the gay lifestyle. I’m more than sympathetic to gays, just not hypocrites.
Dear “Confused”:
You honestly can’t understand the difference between disliking a person due to their political views and open hostility towards groups of people based on what gender they’re attracted to? Or are you merely conflating the two in an attempt to make me, rather than homophobes, sound like the intolerant one?
Also, as an agressive defender of free speech and free thought, I should point out that people absolutely have the right to think homosexuality is wrong, just as I have the right to call BS on their arguments. What they don’t have the right to do is enshrine their bigotry in law.
Zolon1: Whatever “friendly” banter they engage in off-camera, Hitchen’s words were inappropriate. Aside from stereotyping*, the comment was a distraction from the real issues that were being discussed, and a personal shot–even if in jest–during a substantive discussion.
And obviously you don’t keep up on this blog, or you’d know that my reasons for disliking Hitchens are anything but “personal, vague and inconsequential.” I think he’s a bigoted man who makes lazy, unthoughtful arguments. He’s an embarrassment because of what he says.
*I suppose–I’m not sure what that insult was supposed to mean, exactly.
Yo, Bender, I see Martin Cothran has gone off the deep end again. I’m about to give up on him just as you did, but I must confess I find it fun to watch his arguments come to a sputtering halt after the first coherent refutation.
Zolon1: HItch and Sullivan may be good friends off-camera, but why does that justify pretending to be enemies on-camera? I didn’t see the show, so maybe the name-calling was a good deal friendlier than EB makes out; but I do have a bit of a problem with people pretending to blast each other on-camera while being totally chummy otherwise. It can become a form of lying, IMO, creating a bitter divide that need not necessarily exist. According to Dante, there’s a place in Hell for “sowers of discord.”