Someone (we’ll labell A) wrote the following review of Androphilia by Jack Malebranche on Goodreads.com:
Malebranche’s manifesto is basically to encourage your average mainstream gay to grow a pair of balls and act like a man. Instead of being called gay, Malebranche prefers the title “Androphilia.”
I read this book for two reasons: The author is a priest in the Church of Satan and he rejects mainstream gay power organizations (which I am against). As a straight male, I found Malebranche’s arguments and ideas to be good for the betterment of social relations between straight/gay men. Malebranche believes that “gay power” organizations and lobbies have given the “typical gay man” a bad name which I believe as well. Gay organizations have made gay men no longer men but like another gender. Androphilia shows how although gay organizations often declare people “close minded,” they like to fit all Gays into one very negative effeminate stereotype.
Malebranche makes no lie that his “manifesto” is more like a rant. It’s a fairly short read and worth reading for those that are really getting fed up with the mainstream manufactured “gay agenda.”
Someone else (B) wrote:
Fuck all that, I think happy flambouyant drama queen fags are funny and entertaining as hell. I’m leary of the ones trying to hide and/or repress it. They are the ones you better keep an eye , they are the ones that turn out to be pervert preachers chasing young boys or Jeffrey Dahmer or some shit.
And the reviewer (A) responds:
haha good point(s). I am a huge fan of the early John Waters films so I can agree with your sentiments.
So then I step in with:
Jack doesn’t advocate repressing your sexuality, just not putting on a big f’kn to-do over what is nothing special. More importantly to his message is that being “gay” has little to do with sexual preference. Being “gay” is a political and social lifestyle that can be adopted by anyone, regardless of sexuality, and therefore is independent of it.
Your objection Cwn_annwn reads like the following: “I find the monkeys in hats pretending to play instruments entertaining, so don’t do anything to suggest they are anything but clowns for my amusement.”
And out of Candorville, the first commentator (B) says:
Well if your saying what I think your saying about monkeys in hats then yeah I suppose you are right. I mean are there really people out there that are into Liberace for his music? I find his whole persona funny and entertaining, but I just can’t groove on his music. If I had ever sat down and talked to Liberace would I have ever been able to take him serious as a person instead of as a nutty entertaining fruit? Probably not. If that makes me a homophobe then so be it.
WHA!? Wow… huh… okay. Guess I don’t have any follow up to that.
KIS
Related posts: