LaBarbera's up late at night thinking about The Homosexual BlogosphereTM
Here it is, the latest bleating in the inbox from Peter LaBarbera, though I was merely copied on it. It looks like he’s miffed at PlanetOut‘s blog for picking up on Wayne Besen‘s new moniker for the Illinois Family Institute activist, “Porno Pete” and his library of “research porn.”
I’ll just post this for your amusement, as it were. Read and weep (my emphasis)…
From: “Peter L.” PeterLaBarbera@comcast
Date: Mon, July 17, 2006 2:50 am
Cc: WBesen, Pam Spaulding
Subject: FOR RAY DELGADO…Ray, before you reported that I “earned” Wayne’s nasty nickname…
… (“Porno Pete”), why didn’t you contact me first? Or do you always run with the most vicious smears just because a prominent gay activist uses them? Usually I get fair treatment in the gay press; not this time.
Yes, I once researched gay events, and still do occasionally, by attending them to get firsthand info. I sometimes went undercover so as not to get kicked out by “tolerant” gay activists (what are they trying to hide?), but other times I went openly, such as at the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Ass’n, where I once spoke at a panel debate opposite gay journalists dealing with whether the media has a pro-gay bias.
No, I do not “collect” porn–never have–and I am not interested in or enjoy gay pornography. Frankly, it’s pretty sick stuff, in my view. And no, I am not a homosexual nor did I ever struggle with those desires. (Isn’t it funny how gay activists accuse their opponents of being homosexual as if that’s the biggest slur they can come up with?)
Wayne Besen relied on the false testimony of a former “ex-gay,” Wade Richards, who worked a while for Americans for Truth before we (foolishly) urged him to speak at a press conference. Besen attended the event and apparently helped to recruit young Wade back into the gay life. [Gee, Wayne has some serious powers of persuasion, doesn’t he? LOL!] Wade knew full well that my interests were as a critical researcher, but he wanted to strike back at me, so he accused me of collecting gay “porn.”
Yes, I have purchased numerous gay magazine subscriptions and books over the years as part of my efforts to research the movement–just like some gay researchers peruse the writings of the Family Research Council or Dr. James Dobson. (Should we accuse “Ex-Gay Watch” of secretly supporting Christian conservatives because they spend a lot of time and energy researching them?)
But, no, I don’t “collect” gay porn. [OK, “purchase”…”subscribe to”…”archive”…which fits the bill?] Wade lied to smear me, and Wayne never bothered to check his new recruit’s “facts” because that would have gotten in the way of him slamming a right-winger, I suppose.
The fact is, porn is a prominent part of the gay male world, and some magazines I collected had pornographic content (surprise!). (Most were simply gay publications like the Washington Blade.) On my side of the issue, we think porn use/addiction is a big problem; hopefully some gays will agree with us, but regardless, the endless effort to portray ME as a gay perv because I try to expose the wrongs of your movement makes about as much sense as saying GLAAD supports the Federal Marriage Amendment because they write about it a lot.
I’ll cc this to Wayne Besen for publication (full letter only, Wayne), but I’m quite sure it won’t deter him from spreading lies about me in his crusade to nail the “religious right.”
Please. This is so sad. What is LaBarbera doing up in the middle of the night worrying about what Wayne Besen posts on his blog?
I’ve already addressed this “all (male) homos/all the time” – fixated fundie in an open letter to him some time ago to which he never responded. A snippet:
Peter: Dare I say that you, too, would be highly offended at some of the activities that are “tolerated” there-such as a booth for the “Waterboys”-men who urinate on and in one another for sexual pleasure?
PHB: Quite frankly, I don’t think much about this stuff unless I read it on bible-beating moralist news sites, why do you? While I personally don’t find the idea of this particular practice appealing, I don’t have to partake in it, nor do you or your fellow good Christians. This is about adult, consensual behavior (despite your attempt to pre-empt the use of this as a counter-argument). Why is this not a persuasive argument? Are you saying you would like to criminalize golden showers? How, exactly, would that be enforced? Hetero or homo participants or both?
If the issue is about the decline of public morality or that our society has an unusual and unhealthy preoccupation with sex, that’s a different matter worthy of debate, but I don’t see what this has to do with sexual orientation or private consensual acts.
When you make multiple trips to “uncover” deviant acts by “going undercover” to gay pride events (or International Mr. Leather), this kind of effort doesn’t tell your audience anything about the entire gay community, any more than heading to hetero swingers clubs, a frat house or the local meet-market bar tells me about straight sexual culture. Sexual subcultures exist along the entire orientation spectrum. Why are you so fixated on the sex? Is it because it is non-procreative? Explain this need to place yourself in these situations.
Seeing as I’ve not heard from him since December, I guess he doesn’t have anything to say. There’s no need to make anything up about LaBarbera’s activities anyway; since it’s all out there to see on his own web site — and the record speaks for itself.