Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Gay Marriage won't turn you into a lustful cockmonster, scolds NFL punter Chris Kluwe

This guy is great:

by Anonymousreply 4801/19/2013

This man is a god. Love his letter and his forthrightness.

by Anonymousreply 109/08/2012

While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point. He comes across as an name calling brat who may as well have called him a doo-doo head.

by Anonymousreply 209/08/2012

i just find it hilarious how proprietarily and bureaucratically the letter began, it's something i (unfortunately) see all the time.

by Anonymousreply 309/08/2012

If you ever figure out what, exactly, does turn a person into a cockmonster, could you let me know?

by Anonymousreply 409/08/2012

...

by Anonymousreply 509/08/2012

I am in Minnesota, so he is the hometown punter. He is always a pretty entertaining interview on the sports radio shows. He is also in a band, which I think does pretty well. He definitely marches to his own drummer, and is a decent punter as well (although with the Vikings this year, I don't think that is going to matter...)

by Anonymousreply 609/08/2012

Punter? More like pumper.

by Anonymousreply 809/08/2012

And yet, r7, Burns was responding to the pro-gay advocacy of not Kluwe but this man:

by Anonymousreply 1009/08/2012

[quote] While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point

He's also posted a cleaner version. ("They won’t magically turn you into a lustful FROLICKING OSTRICH.")

by Anonymousreply 1109/08/2012

[quote]While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point. He comes across as an name calling brat who may as well have called him a doo-doo head.

To the contrary, it's very effective because it goes to the very heart of that icky sex stuff that creeps out the breeders.

by Anonymousreply 1209/08/2012

And that's supposed to equal it out r10?

D-bag!

by Anonymousreply 1309/08/2012

Why is it so easy for some people to forget the civil rights movement?

by Anonymousreply 1409/08/2012

Brendon Ayanbadejo has not forgotten the civil rights movement, r14.

"I see the big picture,” Ayanbadejo said. “There was a time when women didn't have rights, black people didn't have rights, and right now, gay rights is a big issue and it has been for a long time. And so we're slowly chopping down the barriers to equality. We have some minority rights we have to get straight and some gay rights, then we'll be on our way.”

Of course, now you will probably rush to call me a "d-bag" for raining on your little "all blacks are homophobes" parade.

by Anonymousreply 1509/08/2012

" I wipe back to front! "

by Anonymousreply 1609/08/2012

What a potty mouth.

He does seem like a fun guy to hang with.

by Anonymousreply 1709/08/2012

"all the racy language kind of ruins the point."

The entire English-typing webisphere wouldn't be talking about it if he hadn't used racy language.

by Anonymousreply 1809/08/2012

[quote] While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point. He comes across as an name calling brat who may as well have called him a doo-doo head.

Shut the fuck up, you overly-sensitive little Mary.

I'm re-posting the link at R11. To quote a passage from it, written especially for uptight people like you:

[quote] That those who would refute the point could seize upon my colorful insults to dismiss the main thrust as little more than childish antics and egotistical displays of temper.

[quote] Bollocks.

[quote] The swearing is there for a reason. What Emmett C. Burns Jr. wrote, what I responded to, was far more disgusting and foul minded than any simple scatological reference or genital mashup. His words degrade the very essence of the English language with their barely hidden venom and intolerant hate; drag it screaming into the muck of iniquity by wrapping a mantle of seeming reasonableness around corruption and control; masquerade as discourse while screaming their very lie to any Heaven you care to name – I could go on.

by Anonymousreply 1909/08/2012

[quote]While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point. He comes across as an name calling brat who may as well have called him a doo-doo head

Oh shut the fuck up. Nice gets sand kicked in your face.

by Anonymousreply 2009/08/2012

What might otherwise be vulgar works in his letter because it's playful and mocking. Saying gay marriage won't turn a straight guy into a "cockmonster" treats the politico's views with the derision they so richly deserve.

Bravo to Chris. I'm a new fan.

by Anonymousreply 2109/08/2012

Smart, funny, brave, and hot. What's not to love about Chris Kluwe? I especially appreciate the snarkiness of his sanitized version.

It would have been really easy for him to just keep playing football, raking in the bucks and keeping his mouth shut. But he didn't. If only more straight men understood that homophobia is about the least sexy thing there is. This guy?... SEXY.

by Anonymousreply 2209/08/2012

Don't forget to support Brendon Ayanbadejo, too.

by Anonymousreply 2309/08/2012

His follow up letter about the swearing is fucking GOLD.

by Anonymousreply 2409/08/2012

I stick to my original point while weeping for the death of civil discourse. And for all of you who say that you have to fight gutter with gutter, you can cram it up your fetid cunts.

by Anonymousreply 2509/08/2012

Oh, R2, R25 prisspot. How dare anyone offend your delicate sensibilities.

Meanwhile, the Times has a story about this today about how powerful the letter was and how welcome Brendon and Chris's support is.

by Anonymousreply 2609/09/2012

[quote]Why is it so easy for some people to forget the civil rights movement?

Because the black cause is not the gay cause, and the two can never be equated.

by Anonymousreply 2709/09/2012

[quote]Why is it so easy for some people to forget the civil rights movement?

Because the black cause is not the gay cause, and the two can never be equated.

by Anonymousreply 2809/09/2012

[quote]That's BARELY a sports position much less a football sport position.

Much less a football sports position? It's ONLY a football sports position, you moron. Did you think maybe figure skating or beach volleyball had punters?

by Anonymousreply 3009/09/2012

BTW, Ayanbadejo and Kluwe have made the NY Times for their support of marriage equality.

by Anonymousreply 3109/09/2012

Besides being a mensch, he looks nice with less clothes

by Anonymousreply 3209/09/2012

As a gay man who was a lustful cockmonster before my own gay marriage, I assure you he's absolutely right about this.

by Anonymousreply 3309/09/2012

No kidding, R32. He's a handsome man - the ladies are lucky.

by Anonymousreply 3409/09/2012

Who cares if he has a potty mouth? At least he loves his gays.

by Anonymousreply 3509/09/2012

Interesting profile of Chris -- he screwed off in school, never studied for tests, and got a perfect score on his verbal SATs. He turned down Harvard so he could play football at UCLA, and graduated with degrees in history and poli sci. He's also a speed reader.

Like a lot of straight guys who become outspoken gay advocates, he seems both smart and a person who has always followed his own muse.

by Anonymousreply 3609/09/2012

Interesting profile and person, R36. I'm skeptical that speed reading is even worthwhile - who can capture the nuance of a tome when you skim like that? - but I'm a naturally fast reader too, so I can understand the tendency.

by Anonymousreply 3709/09/2012

im not a little disappointed that we're forgetting the guy who came out originally, who, while he isn't white or "brilliant", wrote w/o prompting to give his support...

by Anonymousreply 3809/09/2012

While I applaud Chris for taking a stand on an issue in which I share his views, I question the overall effect his letter may have. I in no way agree with the views espoused by Rep. Burns. However, regarding Kluwe's response: No one will ever change Burns' mind, as his views are most likely cemented and inflexible. (I could be wrong, but I'm probably not.) The guy is old and so ingrained in his ways that he was willing to abuse his status as an elected official to issue such a brazen statement to begin with. Publicly shaming him, while satisfying, may not achieve what should be the ultimate goal: voting the curmudgeon out of office. (Note that that is not an insult; I think the guy actually qualifies as a textbook example of a curmudgeon. He might even take pride in the fact.) The real target for Kluwe's reply ought not to be aimed at Burns but at the constituents who may have been thinking, "Well, perhaps Rep. Burns has a point, but I don't like the way in which he went about trying to enforce it." These are the folks who could be swayed one way or another, and could effect the change that could actually help benefit the men and women actively campaigning for Marriage Equality. To launch an expletive-filled diatribe, however humorous, eloquent or well-intended, may only serve to drive these same voters closer to Burns. That, to be sure, is the worst form of elective democracy: to vote for someone not because they reflect your views and values, but out of a sense of loyalty because an individual from outside their district has attacked "one of their own." My concern is that Kluwe might have done more harm than good by inadvertently driving voters who were on the fence right back towards Burns' side of the ballot box. It is Chris' urge to "fight fire with fire" that must be tempered, refined, and deployed in such a way that it destroys the meritless views espoused by Burns and those sympathetic to him, without the collateral damage of turning away those in Burns' district who might otherwise be swayed to vote against him.

The great thing about the 1950's/60's civil rights movement was that it was above all, a moral movement using moral arguments and moral language, such as forgiveness, love, and turning the other cheek. It was a spiritual movement with unwavering spiritual tenets and dogma no matter what the opponents did. Vulgar, lewd, and profane tirades repel people instead of persuading them. The Antigay side wants to protray gay rights as the cause of the immoral, ungodly, immature, and profane, and stories like this don't help dispel that perception. We need to be on our best behavior and stop using inappropriate and vulgar language in our communications about gay equality.

by Anonymousreply 3909/09/2012

You could temper your remarks with a few paragraph returns, dear.

by Anonymousreply 4009/10/2012

Burns is a Democrat, so voting him out of office wouldn't necessarily do anything to advance the cause of marriage equality (if he were beaten by an equally antigay Repub). In any case, he's not up for reelection until 2014, by which time this story will be old news.

by Anonymousreply 4109/10/2012

[quote]While I applaud the message, all the racy language kind of ruins the point. He comes across as an name calling brat who may as well have called him a doo-doo head.

Actually it makes his point. However, you come across as a pretentious prude.

by Anonymousreply 4209/10/2012

Here's his latest blog post:

So it has come to my attention that Mr. Burns (no word on Smithers’ position yet) is attempting to salvage some sort of political credibility by backtracking away from his previous statements concerning Brendon Ayanbadejo.

I can only imagine the vociferous plague of letters, emails, and phone calls he’s no doubt received in the last 48 hours contributed mightily to this change of mind, but it’s still not enough.

That’s right, it’s not enough.

“But Chris” I hear you cry, “why is it not enough? Surely seeing the man profess the error of his ways gives us the victory, no?”

No. It is a false, hollow victory if we allow Delegate Burns to make this the end of the matter. You see, what Delegate Burns failed to give us, failed to craft after two days of ample time to reflect upon and rebut my initial jab, is the ‘WHY’ of his actions, the ‘WHY’ of his oppression, the ‘WHY’ of his small minded mean spiritedness. He’s given us a begrudging admission of freedom of speech, but he has yet to wax eloquent on his motivations; motivations that will tell us the true character of one Emmett C. Burns Jr. Is he motivated by the ignorance of selfishness, a lack of empathy? Is he motivated by hatred and fear towards those that are different? Or is he motivated by the desire to control the lives of others, to tell them what to do as if they were his personal toys to be strewn about the room as he pleases?

In my previous post, I talked about treating the disease, and not the symptoms. If we allow ourselves to proclaim victory now, we’ve merely driven the disease into a slight remission; we have not cured it because we still haven’t heard from Delegate Burns the ‘WHY’.

WHY did you initially write that letter Delegate Burns? WHY did you feel that it’s your job to stifle someone else’s freedom? WHY have you not explained your actions? WHY should we consider you competent to wield the reins of power if you believe in using it to stamp out opposition?

The problem does not lie solely with Delegate Burns, however. When did we stop asking ‘WHY’ to our politicians, content to accept a bland and perfunctory “No comment” as a reasonable answer? When did we agree that rhetoric and one-liners would replace reasoned debate and factual presentations? These are the people that represent you, me, our neighbors, our very country; the power they assert flows from power we delegate (and isn’t that a delicious use of the word). Why should we not ask them these questions? Why should we not interrogate what our leaders believe, truly believe in their heart of hearts, instead of accepting placating platitudes? Why do we, as citizens, not demand that our representatives tell us what they truly feel when their actions illustrate so clearly the disconnect between their words and their thoughts? And don’t count on the media to ask for you, you need to do this yourself. The media can be ignored and funneled away; the clamoring of constituents, not so much.

I implore any and all of you that may happen to read this – ask WHY. Don’t accept a meandering load of nothing, masquerading as a sentence, for an explanation. Look past words to the actions, and dare to question if they don’t align.

by Anonymousreply 4309/11/2012

r30

Or a gambling position

Or a Canadian Football position

Or a skiier

Or a...

Lots of areas have PUNTERS

Even computer nerds have positions called PUNTERS

LOSER

by Anonymousreply 4409/11/2012

This needs to be repeated from Kluwe's post at r43:

When did we stop asking ‘WHY’ to our politicians, content to accept a bland and perfunctory “No comment” as a reasonable answer? When did we agree that rhetoric and one-liners would replace reasoned debate and factual presentations? These are the people that represent you, me, our neighbors, our very country; the power they assert flows from power we delegate (and isn’t that a delicious use of the word). Why should we not ask them these questions? Why should we not interrogate what our leaders believe, truly believe in their heart of hearts, instead of accepting placating platitudes? Why do we, as citizens, not demand that our representatives tell us what they truly feel when their actions illustrate so clearly the disconnect between their words and their thoughts? And don’t count on the media to ask for you, you need to do this yourself. The media can be ignored and funneled away; the clamoring of constituents, not so much.

I implore any and all of you that may happen to read this – ask WHY. Don’t accept a meandering load of nothing, masquerading as a sentence, for an explanation. Look past words to the actions, and dare to question if they don’t align.

by Anonymousreply 4509/11/2012

r43 makes me shiver, but in a good way. Great comment by Kluwe.

by Anonymousreply 4609/11/2012

He sounds fucking smart! Better than most of youse!!

by Anonymousreply 4709/11/2012

his book deal better include lots of shirtless photos.

by Anonymousreply 4801/19/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.