That Iranian president guy, wozzisname, Ahmadinejad. Yeah, him wot spoke at Columbia University today. Anyway, put aside the nuclear question. Ignore his crackpot views on the Holocaust. And on women. What really got me was this:
"In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it."
Er, maybe that's because the regime has either killed them all or beaten it out of them?
Woman + woman, woman + man, man + man. It's all the same. Or should be.
Hey, look! A video! Pay attention, kiddies.
Senseless Things - Homophobic Asshole
Oh, alright. And just to drive home the point, here's a dab of queercore for you:
Pansy Division - Cowboys Are Frequently Secretly Fond Of Each Other (buy here)
Monday, September 24, 2007
Talking Out His Backside
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Stumble It!
5 comments:
Truly righteous post, mon FiL. Yeah, my man Mahmoud and his truly puzzling statements - but heaven knows he's in good company, even in this bastion of tolerance what we call New York City. Why, just the other day a rastafarian in a passing minivan yelled out 'Batty Boy!' at me several times. I would have told him that I was born in the land of Haile Selassie and that he should fuck right off but his minivan was too fast.
P.S. Hurrah Senseless Things! Can we expect some Wonder Stuff & Mega City 4 next?
I wish I could just say he's merely insane, but that would insult insane people. He's a power-junkie and a psychopath.
the best thing would be for him to find out that a close family member is gay. alas, he'd probably just deny it.
you really do have to wonder how he gets away with it, though. it's kind of like anne coulter: the more attention people pay to her--even if it's negative--the more she eats it up and it fuels her. trouble is he's like 400 thousand times more powerful. ahhhh!
I hope I don't come off as a stick in the mud, but I found the opening premise of this post a bit puzzling:
"...put aside the nuclear question. Ignore his crackpot views on the Holocaust. And on women. What really got me was this:..."
OK, so the WORST thing this guy has done has been to oppress homosexuals?
Ya know, I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, his attitudes and actions towards homosexuals are truly appalling but they're just one part of the bigger picture of his general evilness.
In the same trip, he also denied flogging and executing journalists. He said women were not oppressed in his country. He basically said Amnesty International was lying about all human rights abuses in Iran and that "freedom was flowing" in his country.
Then of course there's his long-standing desire to wipe Israel off the map and to acquire nuclear weapons. The latter is a really really REALLY scary thought given his other statements.
Yet its his comments about homosexuals that are getting the majority of the media coverage.
It all just seems, I don't know, unbalanced. It's as though certain sectors in the West cannot see oppression unless it fits into a particular, very narrow paradigm.
Does that make any sense? I hope I haven't offended anyone. My apologies if so. I'm discussing, not arguing, if you get what I mean.
Dearest Beesh: Addis Ababa rules... Actually, I'm uncomfortable with a fair few of the views expressed by certain strains of rastafarianism, especially concerning women and homosexuality. But folding that back, I suppose I feel the same way about a lot of religions. Yah boo sucks to intolerance, hooray for compassion!
Dearest Marcy: I'd speculate further, but I don't fancy a visit from the Revolutionary Guard.
Ahmadinejad does indeed occupy a powerful position. But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Iranian politics are extremely complex, and that he represents but one faction. There are many who do not support him or agree with his views, even within the political structure.
Solution - Coulter and Ahmadinejad in a steel cage match. $100 on Coulter to win after three minutes.
Dearest Mentok: Oh dear, the opening premise was an intentional understatement meant to be taken with a pinch of dry sarcasm. Of course the Iranian regime's overall human rights record and geopolitical intentions are supremely important. But it was his comments on homosexuality that really tugged my ear and made me both guffaw and seethe. I suppose maybe that's because his views are not a million miles away from similar ones I've heard expressed closer to home.
I'm not sure I agree that his homosexuality comments are getting the majority of comments. Most of what I've been seeing/hearing is focusing on the nuclear issue and the general human rights picture. And I think there is widespread recognition of Iran's record of oppression.
And fret not, I get what you mean. To anyone who might take offense: Mentok is good folk.
Post a Comment