Josh Asks:

What is "gay enough"?

Comments

[sonicfrog]

Being a guy and giving a good BJ. OK. I AM a perv!

[MP]

insipid reader comment conventiently enables blogger to pontificate on his own "gayness" or lack thereof. [YAWN]

[Aatom]

Who is MP, and why does he feel the need to be rude to Josh?

[MP]

Yawning is rude? I covered my mouth.

[Josh]

Oh Aatom, you should know by now that "thoughts with which I disagree" is equivalent to "insipid self-indulgent meta-commentary." At least, according to MP. Ironically, he proves my point, after a fashion.

[MP]

Josh, I read your blog b/c we share and interest in international affairs, foreign languages, and have both lived in Central Asia. There's good stuff on your page. My yawn was directed at TM for linking to piece that doesn't go anywhere outside of the common, well-worn parameters of sexual identity discourse. There's much better content of yours to choose from.

[Jack Malebranche]

My yawn was directed at TM for linking to piece that doesn't go anywhere outside of the common, well-worn parameters of sexual identity discourse.

Is it really that 'well-worn?'

I wonder if the path hasn't been tread by too few people, who all shared essentially the same viewpoint and political motivations...

I guess time will tell.

[Josh]

MP, I find it interesting, then, that the very few times I post on such "well worn parameters of sexual discourse" are the posts that gather by far the highest numbers of commenters. Unsurprisingly, my analyses of the former Soviet Union, north east asia, and the middle east don't get much discussion.

But, the high volume of emails I get complaining that I'm not "gay enough" in the things I cover is quite disheartening. When that's all you hear, it gets really frustrating. I have interests outside of being gay. I was unaware that was so well-worn, as whenever Robbie or Matt here make similar comments (though on a slightly less personal level), they are the recipients of rather shocking hostility. To me, that doesn't seem well-worn, just unorthodox.

[Dan]

Thanks, MP, for letting us know what topics are permissible in the blogosphere. We try our best to satisfy you, but of course there will be errors. Thank you for the correction.

[MP]

Dan: If you're putting content out there with a forum for comments, expect to get feedback from readers on what they think is insightful, resonant, etc. and what isn't. I haven't made any comment here on what's permissible to post and what's not.

[Aatom]

No, but you have been rather actively discussing a topic that is supposedly common and well-worn. That makes you a part of the problem, does it not? ;)

[MP]

Aatom:

but we're not discussing the topic of sexuality here - just whether or not that topic is tired (for some people). if I had wanted to participate in that other dialogue, i would have posted something on Josh's page. so no, while I'm sure i'm part of a lot of problems, i'm not part of THAT one. ;)

and besides, my previous post doesn't count b/c it was only a reponse to Dan's spiritedly-sarcastic, but woefully-obtuse comment. Dan, shine on, you crazy diamond! :)