Well, it seems that if you are a Christian, and you criticize homosexuality, it can land you in jail for a month.
Personally, I don’t care what you stuff up your wazoo or your goonya. It’s not my call.
But ferchrissakes, if that’s your thing, I don’t see how your sexual habits should be off-limits targets of my wit.
[Send the kids to bed here, folks. Including yourself if you are easily offended.]
I mean, honestly, you stick a live gerbil up your ass, and that’s supposed to be sacrosanct? Jeeebus. We issue government grants to artists who put a statue of Jesus freaking Christ in a bucket of piss and shit, yet your predilection for suffocating small rodents in the same place Michael Moore usually rests his head, is supposed to pass without comment?
And chicks who hate guys go out and buy rubber dicks, all manner of strap, girder, buckle, velcro and elastic contraptions so that they can bang away like a man and a woman, and I’m not allowed to notice that extremely (and apparently unnoticed) ironic fact?
Or the whole “fisting” thing that they are apparently teaching to kids in Massachusetts sex ed classes. Come on – everybody talks about Dick Cheney having his arm up George Bush’s ass to make him talk, yet I can’t criticize my next door neighbors, Neal and Bob, for literally having their arms up each other’s asses? Please.
And how ’bout the whole gay bathhouse & permiscuity thing? Honestly, the one thing I remember about AIDS in the 80’s, was that it’s a “straight disease” as much as it belonged to any particular group of people belonging to any given self-identified sexual preference group.* I suppose it’s a crime in Sweden to point out that while the ranks of male fashion designers [this would explain Grunge, by the way], playwrights, ballet dancers and and figure skaters have been wiped out by the disease, that strangely enough the UAW, lumber camps, the Steamfitters Union, and the Forest Service don’t seem to have been hurt at all?
And finally, one has to wonder, does this ban on criticizing gay sex extend to substantive criticism that could in some way discourage people from partaking? For example, “after I spent that gay singles weekend at the nudist colony in Thailand, my ass was a mess, and I’m really wondering if the whole thing is safe. By the way, I’ve had a wicked cold that I can’t seem to kick…” So is that banned, too?
Ahh, I don’t know what I’m going on about here. I guess I should just resign myself to the fact I will eventually just flat out be outlawed in most places. I’m not a gay basher, but I have some “impermissible” opinions – even the neutral, humorous ones can apparently land me in the hoosegow in Sweden. (And soon too in Canada.)
On the positive side of the coin, when criticism of outlaw sex is outlawed, only outlaws will criticise protected outlaw sex. If you remove the boundaries, the old exciting stuff, that was exciting because it was bad, won’t be exciting any more.
For example – this was borne out in De Sade’s writings. At one point, he paid a girl to trample on a crucifix while he jerked off (-). When she stopped and suggested they have sex, he was incredibly bummed out, and the little Marquis (the Viscount?) started to shrivel (~) really badly (\)… so he made her trample the crucifix, she started crying about the blasphemy, and then he got really excited. Oh yeah, baby. Tell it to the Duke! (/)
On the other hand, those whose sexual practices, and their advocacy of them, get outlawed, will find their brand of sex (and talking about the same) quite exciting, since what was workaday is now prohibited. We’ve simply inverted taboos here – something our gay friends will figure out pretty soon here, as they have boring sex with their Massachusetts-married partner, hammering away while they think about the mortgage payment, the two adopted kids, and the neighborhood association dues that are past due. Meanwhile… well, I’m getting sweaty just thinking about all that prohibited missionary sex I’m going to have with my opposite-sex partner (aka “wife” in outlaw sex fiend talk).
Or in simpler terms, anybody up for a good ol’ Roman Catholic screw? I sure am.
(Within the bounds of marriage, of course. Sure, that used to be boring. But now that advocating straight sex and old-fashioned morals is being outlawed, why hell, even the much-maligned missionary position between the same husband and wife ought to be damn near mind-blowing – better than taking amyl nitrate, better than having various members of genus rodentia, or for that matter the local squash club’s collective arms up your butt, better than cruising highway rest stops for anonymous buggery. Indeed, pretty soon, the only people having really good sex will be straight, monogamous married couples.
Yep, us carnal outlaws have a bright future, I tell you.
I’ll let the rest of you think about that as you’re getting it on with your same sex softball team in the boring old Sumatran Kumquat position whilst huffing “poppers”.)
*By the way, Ron Reagan is villified by the gay community for having condemned everybody with AIDS to death by not funding enough research, and not closing the bathhouses. You will remember – and if you don’t, Randy Shilts’ “And the Band Played On” will remind you – that this measure was considered, and condemned by shrill gay activists as a hateful measure to clamp down on people’s sex lives. So the NHS naturally didn’t want to step in, nor did local pols in New York, San Francisco, or D.C., at least not until it was pretty clear that the places were, in effect, slow motion charnel houses. Sorry Bruce and Serge, this one is self-inflicted…