We know D.C. Get our free newsletter to stay in the know.

THANKS TO WASHINGTON City Paper and reporter Michael Gips for writing a reasonably balanced piece on Lambda Report (“Lambda Razing,” The District Line, 8/13). Compared to the usual shrill treatment of our newsletter by gay writer Dan Savage (in CP-type papers in Seattle and Chicago), Gips’ piece was a model in fairness.

That said, the fact that Lambda Report covers the homosexual movement critically, and that its publishers are religious, makes it an easy mark for reporters looking to write another chilling “exposé” on the “Christian right.” Though CP avoided such heavy-handedness, it still felt obliged to make the obligatory references to “evangelicals,” “fundamentalists,” etc. I wonder: Will we ever see a news article that makes similar offhand references to the “religious left,” or—even more heretical—the “secular left”? One waits and waits. I also wonder if Gips actually viewed the Report‘s “gay agenda” videos, which he dismissed as “sensationalist.”

I found it ironic that Gips’ piece on LR ran in the same issue as my tormentor Savage’s article celebrating the new Ken doll (“Ken Comes Out?”). To Savage, the arrival of a “queer Ken” with such homosexual touches as a lavender leather vest, earring, and cock ring is a good thing—the triumph of “queer” influence on the culture. I’m afraid there’s some truth to Savage’s hopeful boast that it’s become “hip to be queer.” (In the media, perhaps, though I have yet to meet the parent, however progressive, who actually hopes his or her child will be a homosexual.)

The fact that Dan Savage as a homosexual cannot have “safe” sex (only “safer”) unless he abstains from the defining sex acts his precious cock ring was designed to enhance tells us all we need to know about the desirability of “queer imagery” influencing the culture. In fact, a good deal more than we want to know. It reflects on the callousness of gay activists like Savage and their guilt-ridden liberal allies that even amid the wreckage of AIDS, homo- and bisexuality have somehow emerged as a “hip” and “cool” option for youth. Yet the same folk who encourage this trend decry voices like LR that report on the many people who have left the gay lifestyle to embrace a healthier sexuality.

Then there is David Healy’s letter claiming that his biblical namesake was “clearly” a homosexual (The Mail, 8/20). If so, this facet of King David’s personality had eluded two millennia of Bible scholars until discovered by today’s homosexual exegetes. More to the point, Mr. Healy seems to have confused affectional love with erotic love. The latest rage among gay activists is to claim that many of our historical heroes were homosexuals—Socrates, the apostle Paul, even Jesus Christ himself. I find this imputation interesting in that professionals who adhere to the developmental explanation of homosexuality’s cause argue that somewhere along the way, gays who were rejected or confused in their youth “sexualized” their emotional needs for love and acceptance.

Obviously, a man can love another man, and a woman another woman, free of sexual desire—as in the deep, loving friendships most all enjoy. Though perhaps not “hip,” this sort of love strengthens a person rather than destroying him.

Editor, Lambda Report

Washington, D.C.