As my readers know, I object to any sort of name calling or hatred on any site. I feel that such name calling appeals to our base emotions and has no other purpose in the broad scheme of things than just to make the individual spewing the comments feel good in some superior way. Because of this feeling, I was also surprised at GLAAD's designation of the above blog for the award (considering GLAAD's mission statement), for I am a regular reader of said blog, and am aware of some of the more hateful comments that come from it. That being said, I really didn't feel that at the time it was that big of an issue, and hence didnt give it another thought.
But, now that this issue is being addressed, I feel it necessary to throw my thoughts into the ring. As stated above, I feel that any sort of comments attacking individuals (which I see alot from the gay community) gets us nowhere. In fact, it shows that we are not capable of rational discussion on issues, for instead of actually dealing with the arguments and slander that are thrown against our community, we respond by directing just as vile and hateful comments to those doing us harm. This appeal to ad hominem logical fallacies does not help us in the long run at all, and in fact hurts our overall credibility to engage in rational debate.
I would have liked to have seen the discussion about civility towards our opponents, as a result of this article, play out without such name calling or ad hominem attacks. But instead, I'm seeing just the opposite. Joe.My.God. for example, in responding to the Daily Caller article states,
GOProud has planted an anti-JMG story on the wingnut site Daily Caller, whose dumb bunny writer manages to spell my name two different ways in consecutive sentences. I'll totally cop to calling GOProud "kapos and Quislings," cuz ya know, they totally are. But Daily Caller also quotes Chris Barron as saying that I regularly post misogynistic comments. (No citation of that bullshit is offered in the article, of course.) This, from the guy who regularly tweets fat jokes about Meghan McCain and who only yesterday said that Rachel Maddow "looks like a dude."Really? Does this at all address the issue in the article - namely civility and respect to those with opposing views? Nope. Instead we get a deflection of the issue; for instead of dealing with the actual criticism of the blog and GLADD's award, Joe Jervis instead attacks Chris Barron of GOProud for comments that he has also made. I'm sorry, for though Mr. Barrons comments were not justified, it is equally not a justifiable argument to say "look, he does it, so I can do it too". A legitimate concern and question deserve an equally legitimate response, not a deflected attack.
Maybe I hope for civility too much, but thats the idealist in me.