The Catholic Thing
All Gay all the “Times” – and “Post” Print E-mail
By Austin Ruse   
Monday, 09 September 2013

There are maybe 2 percent of Americans who experience some degree of same-sex attraction. Recent polls show that most Americans think the number is far higher, along the lines of 25 percent. This mistake is understandable given the amount of coverage gays get in our major media.

I read the New York Times and the Washington Post each day. Both are arguably among the best newspapers in the United States. Some days it seems they are the hometown paper of someplace called Gayland. This was particularly true in the run-up to the Proposition 8/DOMA decisions when each paper was wall-to-wall gay news, and in all sections, too.

This has abated, but only slightly. On Friday I took a look at the gay news in both papers.

Page three of Friday’s Post opens with a picture of a woman in San Antonio wiping her tears of joy with the rainbow flag. The City Council passed an ordinance banning discrimination based on “sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The Style Section ran a front-page story about pronouns preferred by the transgendered. Nicholas Gumas heads the largest “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning” organization on campus and he’s holding an orientation for incoming freshman. He’s asking them for their PGP, “preferred gender pronoun.”

Gumas said freshman “who come from progressive or urban areas may have been asked [for their PGPs] before, but others may not have.” Candace Gingrich, Newt’s sister, who works at the Human Rights Campaign said, “You have to respect how someone wants to be referred to.” She considered it practicing “basic human dignity.”

The story mentions Jesse Izen, a former student at the University of Maryland who wants to be called “they.” “They” says “they” wants to be able “to get groceries and not have an uncomfortable encounter with someone where I have to assert something that interrupts the flow of conversation.” I am not sure how pronouns really come up when you’re buying organic Rambutan at Whole Foods, but “they” clearly lives in a world foreign to me.

Rounding out the Post’s gay news is a sports story, about the Olympics, and what is an Olympics story these days without a gay angle. The International Olympic Committee is meeting to choose a new president and to consider new host cities but reporters wanted to know what the Olympic committee is going to do about the new law in Russia banning homosexual propaganda to school children. The IOC upholds Star Trek’s Prime Directive – and says it can’t interfere.

The New York Times would be the school paper of gay-town. These guys are constant in their coverage of gay news. A gay guy gets a hangnail in Magee, Mississippi and the Times is there with a 1,000-word head-scratcher.

The Times starts with a page-ten story on a proposed new law in Russia that would allow authorities to take children away from parents where one or both are homosexual. This may or may not be true; it matters little to the Times. When it comes to gay news, the more lurid the better.

Then there is a long take out on the new San Antonio ordinance banning gay discrimination. The reporter tells us that opponents worry about “suppressing the views of those who oppose homosexuality or same-sex marriage for religious reasons,” and the Times reporter – with a completely straight face – writes that supporters of the measure deny it.

The most interesting story in the Times was about the opening of NewFest, the 25th annual lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender film festival. Headlined “Putting the Sex in Homosexuality.” If this piece had been written by – well – me, it would be a hate piece because it dredges up old omnivorous sexual stereotypes that do not fit in with today’s whitewashed gay narrative.

Critic Stephen Holden points out that “the face of gay liberation in 2013 is a sanitized image of polite, smiling gay and lesbian couples parading hand in hand and exchanging chaste kisses at city halls. . .but if there is a theme [to the new film festival] it is that gay liberation is fundamentally about sex.” Cohen says, “Some gay activists lament the fading away of the eroticized outlaw mystique of homosexuality.”  These activists would find great validation in the films at this festival.

“Concussion” tells the story of a lesbian who, after a car crash, becomes a high priced hooker to other lesbians. The Times laments that most of the sex takes place “beneath the sheets.” One of the most anticipated films, “Blue is the Warmest Color,” takes place above the sheets and is supposed to be hot hot hot.

And then there is “Interior. Leather Bar,” which imagines the forty minutes that were cut from the 1980 Al Pacino movie “Cruising.” Pacino is a New York City detective sent into the gay-sex underground on the hunt for a murderer. He cruises gay bars and also public trysting places including a forest in Central Park called the Ramble – these  days taken back by moms with strollers but then quite interesting.

One of my all time favorite movie lines is from “Cruising” when Pacino squares off with a leather-boy hook up in the Ramble and says, “Hips or lips, Dorothy.” That still makes me chuckle.  Mainstream actor James Franco thought the leather part of this movie needed retelling, and the Times loved it.

What strikes me reading the Times and the Post every day and paying attention to politics and culture is that these gay guys have the whip hand. How is it that 2 percent can make the remaining 98 percent bend to their will?

Bit by bit you can see the institutions crumble before them, even the religious ones.  In the end, you just know, the only institution that will remain unbent is the Catholic Church. What a remarkable time to be a faithful Catholic.

Austin Ruse is the President of the New York and Washington, D.C.-based Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a research institute that focuses exclusively on international social policy. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Ruse’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of C-FAM.
The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (26)Add Comment
written by Patsy, September 09, 2013
Wow, only 2%? I guess I thought it was higher than that, maybe at least 10%. But then maybe where I live (Arlington, VA) has a higher than normal concentration of gays?

As for their crazy amount of influence, I think it's a matter of the children of this world being more shrewd than the children of light. They're really clever about trying to get what they want.
written by Walter, September 09, 2013
This website has the same fascination with and gives the same dispropotionate coverage to gay topics. The word "gay" or "homosexual" appears much more often on this site than the word "Jesus."
written by Jack,CT, September 09, 2013
Mr Ruse,
I guess all people of the 'Majority"
have claimed this sort of ; Master Race or
"Correct" truth!
I happen to disagree that all gay,leasbian,tran
and whatever else is 2%,not sure about those stats
despite t fact it would be millions,I would argue
perhaps this more in line with perhaps a single one"
I respect your obvious predjudice.
I just simply see it for what it is : Predjudice!

I guess I would have to admit to much of the same
"Predjudice" at a time in my life of less culture
and was not around any "gays'.
you will find that all people are very simple
and we all have the need for LOVE,if people find
it in the same what,as Pope Francis
said"Who am I to Judge" and yes Mr Ruse,Who the Hell
are you!
And if they want to be called by a word that they feel
best describes them so be it..
I simply disagree and feel we have so many problems
in the world and we focus on "Pronouns HERE?
written by Jack,CT, September 09, 2013
@Walter :you seem to on to something!
written by William Manley, September 09, 2013
Mr. Ruse, ironically, you seem to be a citizen of Gayland as that seems to be your favorite subject to bash over and over and over again. Please heed the Pope's words: "Who am I to judge?" and move on to other subjects. Thank you.
written by Pay, September 09, 2013
The article is good. It points out what needs pointing out. Two broad groups will not like it though.

The first group is the "gay" group. Those who must self identify by their desires. Not that long ago sane people would be put off by such nonsense. Any rational person would see such self identification as immoral and contrary to decency.

The second group are those who really do not see this evil ideology as that big of a deal. They always wag their finger at these types of essays as they are above that. They only view "serious" issues like poverty as important.

The gay propagandists have succeeded is controlling the language, the culture, and even the moral logic the masses use today.
written by Rich in MN, September 09, 2013
Many years ago, there was a "Saturday Night Live" skit in which a reporter was interviewing people leaving a performance by some hypnotist (named "Convoluto, the Great," or something like that). The reporter asks the first person leaving the theater, "How did you like the show?" He replies, "I loved it. It's better than 'CATS.' I'm going to see it again and again." The reporter asks a second person and she replies, "I loved it. It's better than 'CATS.' I'm going to see it again and again." The reporter asks a couple and they reply (in unison), "I loved it. It's better than 'CATS.' I'm going to see it again and again."

In our day of mass media, a person (or group) does not need to be a skilled hypnotist to influence a large number of others. They can be a rap singer (Macklemore) or a pop singer (? Lady Gaga), or a producer of "Glee" or "Modern Family" or whatever. Just gain control over the message -- that is the key. If there is an opposing message, either ignore it, drown it out, or caricature it. If you control the message, you shape the thinking of those who receive the message.

Mr. Ruse, I think you are 'Spot' on with your assessment of how the tail wags the dog these days. And this is a vital message considering how much depends on it. For people to complain that "The Catholic Thing" is obsessed with the homosexual agenda makes about as much sense to me is saying that the Titanic is such a gigantic, pretty ship -- why are you so obsessed with the tiny little tear in the hull???

I hope and pray that you are correct that the Catholic Church can withstand this onslaught. Let us all pray that "Thy Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven." I believe we can all pray that prayer even though we may strongly disagree about what our Father's Will actually is. Let us pray.
written by Athanasius, September 09, 2013
At least two commenters here have misunderstood the Pope's comment. He was referring to priests who, although they had a same sex attraction, acknowledged that this was disordered and were thus living chaste lives while practicing their ministry.

Same sex attraction is a disorder. The attraction in and of itself is a physical that is ultimately the result of original, just as blindness is a disorder of the eyes. Christians who suffer from this disorder should strive to live chaste lives. Happiness cannot come from indulging a disorder. Happiness comes from pursuing God's truth. There may be some short term pain due to our fallen state, but enduring this pain is what we mean by "dying to oneself to live in Christ."
written by Grump, September 09, 2013
Enjoyed the column, Austin, although I would replace "gay" with "queer," which more accurately and traditionally describes the "intrinsically disordered."

Sadly co-opted in modern usage, the word "gay" throughout all but recent history meant "happily excited, merry , keenly alive and exuberant; having or inducing high spirits
written by Deacon Ed Peitler, September 09, 2013
So why continue to invest in these corporations? It is tantamount to buying stock, not only in dying enterprises, but in ones which are purveyors of distortion and outright lies. I suspect that your need to be informed will not suffer at all once these hallowed institutions go belly up.

I swore off the NY Times many years ago. I also refuse to subscribe to cable since I won't support Hollywood either. Yet, I rarely think myself to be culturally or informationally deprived.
written by Ben h, September 09, 2013
The question I have is why are the papers so gay? Its not like the newsroom of major papers has been increasing over the past few years. Is it that the staffing is now heavily oriented in that direction or do non-gays who work there find this stuff so extraordinarily interesting? We should know where our propaganda is coming from.
written by Chris in Maryland, September 09, 2013
As Leon Panetta and Robert Bennett et al stated in "A Report on the Crisis of the Catholic Church in the United States" by The National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People (Feb 27, 2004), Section IV, Findings, subpart A.3:

"However, we must call attention to the homosexual behavior that characterized the vast majority of the cases of abuse observed in recent decades. That eighty-one of the reported victims of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy were boys shows that the crisis was characterized by homosexual behavior....The board believes that the failure to take disciplinary action against such conduct contributed to an atmosphere in which sexual abuse of adolescent boys by priests was more likely."

What have NYT and WAPO said about that?
written by Manfred, September 09, 2013
How this phenomenon impacts on our lives: A few years ago, my wife and I and two of our grammar school(at the time) children, stopped in New Hope, PA to see the shad fishing festival in the Delaware. At lunch in a river bank restaurant, two men took the last table next to us, sitting side by side. After a glass of wine, one morphed into a female persona and became sulky. When their entree was served, the "female" refused to eat. Whereupon the other began to feed "her", forkful by forkful, speaking to the other as though he was a four year old girl. When I protested to the manager, she told me there was nothing she could do about it. We settled by paying half price for the food we had consumed and we left.
written by maineman, September 09, 2013
I think that devout Catholics - all lovers of Civilization, for that matter - come by a stunned concern with this phenomenon honestly and understandably.

The fact that the proponents of paganism are wielding an axe fashioned from sexual gratification, thinly disguised as a "civil right", to chop to bits the basic building blocks of a culture that was thousands of years in the making, is indeed a very big deal.

It really appears that we have crossed over the Rubicon and are returning, at lightning speed, to pre-Christendom; with one big exception, however. As David Bentley Hart is fond of pointing out, it was a comparatively easy job for the earliest Christians to convert people who already looked to gods for guidance, whereas now we are confronted by a tyrannical cultural impulse that worships the will.

Maybe God will find a way to turn this around, but the sense is that it is time to choose whether one is a sheep or a goat. (And if you ask me, sheep don't read the NYT or WaPo.)
written by cminca, September 09, 2013
Funny--I'd say exactly the same thing about Christianity and Christians.

I don't understand why we fixate on the religion of our political candidates. Why old men in robes occupied the news cycle over and over while they picked the head guy in robes. Why 60 Minutes or the NYT's subjects us to Dolan and his opinions.

Who cares what Dolan's opinion is on the price of coffee-let alone necessary Health Care legislation.

I'd say your position is clear. And there is a name for it.
written by Pay, September 09, 2013

We do not fixate but care about religion because to points to character. Character matters. That is why the "gay" lobby is seen as so evil. We care about civilization, families, and salvation. What do those in the "Gay" Lobby care about aside from themselves and their desires?
written by Tom, NC, September 09, 2013
On the question of preferred gender pronoun: to quote an old family friend, "Just call me 'Sir'."
written by Ty, September 09, 2013
Mr. Ruse,
Thank you for the information revealed in this article. I hadn't read the NY Times or the Washington Post. On reflection, we might as well have these newspapers keep us informed on this influential aspect of the culture. Otherwise, how would we know what level of absurdity or decadence the nation has achieved?
Also, it's quite amusing to see how often Pope Francis is being quoted out of context ("Who am I to judge?") by commenters on various blogs.
written by Chris in Maryland, September 10, 2013
As to "who am I to judge"...etc...etc: the "go-along-or-we'll-get-you" media strive mightily to maintain the confusion about the roles of the jury and the judge...

Citizens have a duty to perform as jurors to decide the verdict as to whether or not a law has been broken. They have the authority and duty to decide that. They do not have the authority to levy the sentence. Levying the punishment is left to the judge.

So every citizen has "THE DUTY" to decide whether or not someone has done right or wrong. No citizen has the right to punish.

To decide what is right and wrong is the duty of men and women. To punish (at least for sins not deemed "illegal") is for God.
written by Jack,CT, September 10, 2013
"To decide what is right and wrong is the duty"
of all men and woman.",SCARY:do u apreciate
the fct that all "Man and Woman"....decide,
but we all have different opinions.

I respect the concept but believe we have ONE
LORD for a reason,
And....all men and woman have the
opposite Commandment: Forgiveness.

Drawing the line....................................
written by Chris in Maryland, September 10, 2013
I think that you are making the same mistake can there be forgiveness, if there is no verdict first?

Man cannot be merciful, when he refuses to make verdicts about right and wrong.

The duty to make verdicts comes before the grace of mercy. Indeed, per his holy Word, God's justice is but for a day, yet His mercy endures forever...but his justice does precede his mercy.

Let us remember, when Jesus refused to condemn sinners, he said "go and sin no more." He had made a verdict. It is ours to imitate him.
written by Chris in Maryland, September 10, 2013
And yes, Jack, I agree, we have ONE LORD, and we exist to know him, love him, and serve him...or as Jesus put obey all of his commandments. So since he has commanded that all men must live in chastity, then those of us who exercise different opinions, against the will of The Lord, are breaking his law. Out of love and obedience to The One Lord and concern for our fellow man, we are allowed to say, and The Lord expects us to say, that people are breaking his law when they break his law - which is a logical extension of your premise about ONE LORD.

The Lord gets to decide the sentence, in his justice and mercy. As Catholic children of God, we both know and hold that the witness for him, the way, and the truth, and the life, is our duty to proclaim, as Jesus commanded us at the end of the Gospel of Matthew.
written by Romy1, September 10, 2013
Until, someone
Jack, CT's
Does Jack
have an opinion
on what his job
should be? @@@@@
Perhaps the boss
Perhaps the
person who stole
his car,
has another
written by Hay-looo!, September 10, 2013
I read the NY Times almost every day, and they are what they are. Now the Wall St. Journal seems to believe that their readers are now desiring gay updates, so they pander to that. Vogue magazine had a lesbian fashion spread a few months ago but, lo!, Miley Cyrus was withdrawn by the Editor, Anna Wintour, as the subject of an upcoming cover. I want to know: WHY?!! Such latent prudery is laughable! And sooo unbecoming someone like Wintour. Her "outré" factor has dropped as far as I am concerned.
written by Tony, September 12, 2013
I'd like a heterosexual father of a son who happens to be shy and not athletic to tell me, face to face, that the all-gay all-day barrage does not concern him -- that it will be just A-OK by him if some idiot of a teacher tells his son that he is probably on the gay-side of the sexual spectrum.

Foolish Epicureans! Don't you see that there is no such thing as a private sin? All sin corrupts, and since we are made by God to be social creatures, all sin does harm to our neighbors too. Try raising a boy these days with a healthy attitude towards his own sex -- try. You won't get much help. The schools will be downright destructive. The Boy Scouts caved in, and now I'm seeing signs posted around town for the "Scouts" -- with the boy omitted. Hell, that's par for the course; we've been omitting the "boy" from our consideration for a long time now. You try, too, just try, all by your lonesome, to raise a girl who will be faithful to the Church's teachings AND who will then find a decent young man to marry. Try finding good air in a sewer.

The sexual revolution profits bad men and bad women: bad men, who can get sex on the cheap, and bad women, who like to control things and who are quite comfortable with the collapse of manhood around them. It has immiserated good men and good women, by robbing the former of any healthy models of manhood, and by robbing the latter of good men to marry, and of the respect they deserve when they become mothers of children.
written by Jack,CT, September 16, 2013
I feel as a father of two boys
our culture is changing but
boys look to there father.
So perhaps some need to calm

I read some of commentary and
it looks as if people have
divorced themselves
from there children then
blame society.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


Other Articles By This Author