Matt Walsh writes;
We all know the score.
This is how the game is played.
They lie, and cooperate with lies, and become willing participants in things that are very likely to be lies, and they do it all for the greater good. We're talking about the Conservative Media Brainwashing Industry again, right? ;)
Did you hear about the infamous gay bashing birthday party RSVP from earlier this week? Yup. The story set social media on fire. Two gay dads threw a tie dye party for their 7-year-old daughter, Sophia, and invited all of the neighborhood children over to celebrate. But some anti-gay mother (probably a Christian, as countless people on Facebook and Twitter observed ...actually, from what I've heard, she probably doesn't exist) declined the invitation, and she did so in the rudest way possible. Rather than simply offering a polite ‘sorry, we can’t make it,’ she jotted down a vicious anti-gay rant, and sent it to Sophia’s dads.
The note said: “Tommy will NOT attend. I do not believe in what you do and will not subject my innocent son to your “lifestyle.” I’m sorry Sophia has to grow up this way.”
When I first saw this story, my initial thought was: who in God’s name throws tie dye parties anymore? Actually.... yes, that was one of my first reactions too.
Then my second thought was: how long before we find out that this entire story is a hoax? I told my wife it would be two weeks. I was wrong. It took one week. A couple of days ago, the inevitable inevitably happened. We discovered that the Tale of the Anti Gay RSVP was, in fact, a complete fabrication, cooked up by a morning radio show.
Don’t worry, they say they only wanted to “start a conversation.” Come on, you know that was not their intent. They wanted to entertain and get an audience, just like you.
Mission accomplished. Conversation started.
Well, it wasn’t so much a ‘conversation’ as it was an excuse for a bunch of nincompoops to spew tired old anti-Christian and anti-conservative clichés – but I guess that’s what passes for dialogue these days. No, it was a morning radio show. I'll repeat: a morning radio show. It is the same great American institution that brought us phone scams.
You know, I’m beginning to suspect that the folks who spread these fraudulent parables of “anti-gay bias” might be doing it on purpose. Yes. FOR RATINGS.
I’m starting to suspect that these people aren’t as gullible as they pretend to be.
I might be onto something. Funny, because I often wonder if you are as totally un-self-aware as you pretend to be.
Look at Jezebel’s post on the bigoted birthday snub: Gay Dads Receive Mean, Homophobic RSVP to Their Kid’s Birthday Party. The writer rants about this “mean” woman, and reports the perceived ”facts” of the case. Then, in the second to last paragraph, she says this: “Of course, this note could be a fake just to get us all frothing and get this radio station’s name in the news. It kind of seems fake.”
She thinks it “seems fake” YET SHE SPREAD THE STORY ANYWAY. GASP! Because online media are also pressured to maintain audiences!
Hey, Lindy West, if you think the story is fake, howza ’bout tossing an “allegedly” into that title? Or maybe you should, I dunno, just not intentionally reiterate an anecdote you suspect to be false.
It’s called “integrity.” Look into it sometime. Oh my god. There's so much I could say here.
But the false narrative is the primary weapon in the arsenal of the progressive. And it's never, ever been used by a conservative. (There's that Matt Walsh integrity.) Maybe it’s their only weapon. People who disagree with you on this and other matters have rational reasons for their points of view. You just choose to ignore all of it. In no area is this more pronounced or prevalent than in the realm of “gay rights.” The gay rights movement is built on mischaracterizations, fabrications, and outright lies. Actually the "____ (some group I disagree with)___ is built on lies" is your own favorite false narrative. They don’t always come up with the lie — this one originated as nothing more than a radio station’s cheap publicity stunt — but they will use it for their benefit. How, exactly, have they used it for their benefit? The one gay person I saw post a link to that "story" immediately provided a link to its debunking. There was no attempt to use a hoax for their benefit.
As the Jezebel writer said, in a stunning admission: “But, fake or not, “Beth”‘s homophobic mindset is real and common and gross. So froth away.” Oh right, you're still harping on the Jezebel writer. The one who we already established is just trying to make a living, much like you.
Translation: “I know this didn’t happen, but I’m sure things like it HAVE happened, so go ahead and get all riled up about a fairy tale. I’m not interested in reality, only emotion. Use this to feed your anger at the people who disagree with our position on this topic.” Oh man, Matt Walsh, it is so easy to point out your hypocrisy. I could start with your paranoid rant about progressives taking crucifixes and 10 commandments out of schools... and then go through almost every blog post you have ever written. (Which is basically what I've been doing.)
This incident happens only a couple of months after a lesbian waitress in New Jersey took to the internet to complain about an anti-gay note left on a receipt. The note said: “I’m sorry but I cannot tip because I do not agree with your lifestyle.” In the surprise twist ending that was neither surprising nor twisty, it eventually came out that the whole thing was a hoax. The waitress made it up.
Of course she made it up.
“I can’t tip because I don’t agree with your lifestyle”? Really? Why would the customer even know her “lifestyle” in the first place? As a lesbian, at what point in taking someone’s food order and refilling their Cokes do you find an opportunity to inform them of your sexual affinity for other women? (Well, you can tell if someone has a non-conforming gender expression, which this woman did. But also, it should bear mentioning that even this woman's friends described her as a compulsive liar; I can show you many a compulsive liar among the straights of this world as well.)
But the people who reposted this garbage on their Facebook and Twitter feeds didn’t bother asking that question. And the media outlets that reported it didn’t bother fact checking any aspect of the story until it began to unravel on its own. THE MEDIA DOES THAT ALL THE TIME. They don't fact check until it's too late! It has nothing to with gay rights or liberalism. It has to do with the general state of the media!
That’s because the truth is irrelevant here.
It’s all about the narrative. That’s it. For ALL media, liberal, conservative, and everything in between.
In fact, instances of fake gay bashing and fabricated homophobic ”hate crimes” are so common that I’d need to drag this on for 20 pages just to come close to listing all of the more recent cases. Here’s a good one. A lesbian couple spray painted the phrase “kill the gay” on their own garage. Because “kill the gay” is something that traditional marriage advocates frequently say.
And another.
And another.
And another.
And another.
And another.
And another.
And another.
And another.
I don't have time at the moment to even look at these links. But sure, I would be willing to accept that gay people lie. That's because people lie. The human race, in general, does not seem to be so good with honesty. I could create a much longer list of links to stories about straight people making things up. (I'll just give you one to whet your appetite.)
I’m sure, as we speak, there’s yet another wannabe victim on some liberal arts campus somewhere busily planning a biased assault on themselves. And I’m just as sure that gay rights advocates will seize on their unlikely fable and use it to turn their opposition into straw men who refuse to tip lesbians. And also, as we speak, some young conservative is busily planning a fake assault on themselves, to attribute to a liberal adversary (FLASHBACK!!)
But there’s more than one way to construct a narrative. Bald faced lying is simply one strategy. One that you seem to be quite familiar and comfortable with.
Mythologizing can be even more effective.
Right in front of our eyes, out in the open, they make men into myths. *coughcough*RonaldReagan*coughcough*
They made a marginal, obscure, unremarkable, aging NBA benchwarmer into a “historic” sports legend. Jason Collins was morphed into Jackie Robinson — which is about as absurd as attempting to turn Billy Ripken into Babe Ruth.
As you recall, Jason Collins — in a ploy to buy himself a few more years of being drastically overpaid by the NBA — came out of the closet last year. The media erupted in applause, and everyone from Hollywood celebrities to the President of the United States of America chimed in to mark the occasion.
The stage was set for the progressive narrative. You got me with the sports. I know absolutely nothing about sports and I don't have time to look into any of this. Though I suspect pure athletic ability does not in this case (nor in many other cases) explain the interest.
They had their hero, now they needed to make him into a victim. Right on cue, as the new season rolled around and, shockingly, no team jumped at the opportunity to hire a bench riding media-spectacle, the gentle insinuations of “bias” began to surface. The New York Times published an article, Jason Collins, Openly Gay and Still Unsigned, Waits and Wonders. The writer pontificates: “The question Collins has to ponder is why he has not been signed as a free agent.”
Uh, could it be that he’s 35 and averages under 4 points a game? Could it be that teams would rather pay a younger guy less money for more production than an older guy more money for less production? Maybe. Or maybe, as the article suggests, something “sinister” is afoot. Collins, for his part, thinks that’s “possible,” but he wouldn’t want to speculate (awfully charitable of you, Jason).
And now the NFL has become another staging ground for the gay victimhood mythology. It was inevitable. As soon as Michael Sam announced his sexual habits publicly, we knew what would come next. He’ll be a victim, even if he’s not. NFL teams are in a lose-lose predicament. They can draft him higher than he deserves to be drafted, and find themselves under the close scrutiny of the media and gay rights organizations who are waiting eagerly for any example of gay discrimination in the locker room or on the field. Or NFL clubs can refuse to distract their entire team for the sake of winning points with progressives by drafting an undersized, middle round defensive prospect, and be accused of “homophobia” and “bigotry” because of it.
It doesn’t matter what happens next. Michael Sam will be a victim. Michael Sam will be what the narrative needs him to be. He is now another character in a fictitious drama, written and produced by agenda-driven liars and schemers.
Ok, I don't know anything about sports, but I do know this: I have personally witnessed bullying and bigotry against gay people. I have heard the inappropriate comments in the workplace. I have seen the anguish of gay people in my life as they struggled to come out, or come to terms with family members who disowned them. It is real stuff. It is not a fantasy.
It used to take centuries to make a man into a legend. Now it happens overnight.
Of course, no blog post about fake gay rights narratives would be complete without mentioning the Mother of All Narratives. The narrative which quickly became gospel; which became engrained in the public conscience; which led to volumes and volumes of legislation; which, quite literally, changed the course of modern history.
Matthew Shepard.
Matthew Shepard, the young gay man, brutally slaughtered 15 years ago. Murdered and tortured for being gay.
At least, that’s the narrative.
The reality, though still violent and tragic, is likely quite different from the fable we’ve been sold. It was ten years ago that ABC ran a story debunking many of the lies surrounding the Shepard case. Their investigation found that the young man was killed by two druggies who weren’t in the throes of homophobic hysteria, but rather meth-induced rage. He was killed because of drugs, not sexuality. The reason he was troubled and got in to drugs, according to his mother as quoted by this article? He had been beaten and raped.
A sad story, for sure, but not one that’s useful to the narrative.
So the reporters behind the ABC piece were attacked and vilified for their bigoted act of honest journalism, and the whole ordeal was pushed under the proverbial rug.
Until a few months ago, when an openly gay journalist named Stephen Jimenez published a book I love how, in the midst of a post decrying the media's lack of honesty and fact-checking, you link to the NY Post. Classy. detailing the findings of his decade-long investigation into the Shepard murder. He claims that Shepard’s killer was also Shepard’s former gay lover, and that both men were drug addicts. The killing occurred after a drug-related dispute.
Still sad. Still terrible. But not helpful to the narrative.
Unlike the fictitious saga that swept through the nation before the police had even arrested the suspects, the revelations by Jimenez and ABC come after a thoughtful analysis of the facts. Jimenez’s book cites over 100 named sources, and references information that was actually included in the initial police reports — like the fact that Shepard’s killer was a known bisexual.
The Shepard story, as it’s been told, is a lie.
But it’s a convenient lie. A useful lie. A Lie for the Greater Good.
So it’s a lie they’ll keep telling. Like all of the other lies they tell.
It’s not that they hate the truth — it’s just that they can’t find a place for it in the story.
First of all, Mr. Hypocrisy, you do not have any proof that the original version of the story was a lie. Often, the lack of information available in the wake of such an event causes inaccurate narratives to circulate. Columbine is a notorious example. Once again, that is just how these things often work. A lot of what we think about the world and history is distorted, inaccurate, and mythologized. This goes for you too, conservatives.
For that matter, that is particularly often the case when it comes to people that we revere as heroes. Many of their lives have sordid details that we would rather not think about. But really, it doesn't matter. There definitely is a time and place for historical accuracy (many times and many places), but sometimes, symbolism is more important. Sometimes, the reality of a situation (e.g. the reality, yes, the reality of bullying faced by LGBT youth) demands a symbol that helps a community express deep truths and create a rallying point for important, necessary action.
But quite frankly, I have not heard much at all about Matthew Shepard in recent years. I almost forgot he existed until you mentioned him. Gay people are quite capable of driving their movement without Matthew Shepard, and they are more honest than you give them credit for.
That brings me back to you, Matt. I was going to comment on your previous post (about your millions of blog hits). I was going to say that I have a blog or two, and neither are motivated by getting hits or making money. I have 2 jobs, in fact, that sustain me. My motivation is cutting through all the bullshit. I am trying to expose the reality of the discussions going on in our country. I want a more honest conversation. Thus, I am motivated to point out the places where people like you, Matt Walsh, are distorting and lying - yes, lying! - in ways that hinder productive conversation. In fact, I think it is because your primary motive is views and money that you write in a way that is ultimately counterproductive to honest conversation. Whenever the goal is to maintain an audience (in order to make money), whenever entertainment and appeals to emotion trump facts and reality, then everything that you criticize above, all of which you are guilty of doing yourself, is bound to occur.
So take a good look in the mirror, Matt Walsh.
No comments:
Post a Comment