Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010

The Most Hilarious Piece You'll Ever Read About Gays in the Military

D.C. comedy site "The Daily Caller" has a hilarious piece today, extremely Swiftian and sophisticated in its humor and irony! It is by a former Tennessee District Attorney, named Joe Rehyansky. It goes like this: "I have never encountered my eminently sensible proposal, one that protects the patriotic urges of some homosexuals as well as the national interest on the basis of 'force readiness' arguments which should govern the thinking of those charged with implementing the defense of our country: Lesbians should be allowed to serve, gay men (hereafter 'gays') should not." Fascinating idea right? He argues this case extremely hilariously well! Here's my favorite ironic transition: "Most men who are sexually attracted to other men can and do indulge their promiscuous urges with little or no restraint; i.e., it’s 'party time' all the time. My wife and I watched a sad documentary about AIDS a few years ago." [Pauses. Re-reads. Pauses again. Goes out for a cigarette. Comes back. Re-reads.] But wait, it gets even better. UPDATE: It actually "does get better" because that piece was just actually removed from the Daily Caller website. UPDATE AGAIN: Oh and now it's back!

I mean: "It’s no secret that men are generally much more susceptible to sexual arousal through visual stimuli than are most women. Many gays will deny that this is the case with them, but why then is the Internet saturated with gay porn?"

Yes, why. Why is that. That speaks to me.

Our author is humble too. "I don’t claim to be a Constitutional law scholar on a par with President Obama," he writes.

Anyway, if you're not already rolling in the aisles/cubicles, the piece has a punchline that you literally won't believe!

(And now you'll never see it because it has apparently been disappeared.)

49 Comments / Post A Comment

Evan Hurst (#3,398)

OMG the punchline. "A fair shot." I'm through with the internet now.

deepomega (#1,720)

The internet is saturated with gay porn as a result of a military experiment gone wrong. The DOD was attempting to develop a gay virus, which would infect anyone exposed to it and turn them gay. Due to a miscommunication, they accidentally turned the internet gay instead. They pumped in as much McAfee as they could, but it was still too late for about 1 in 3 websites, which remain tremendously gay to this very day.

iplaudius (#1,066)

I imagined Ken Burns reading your comment, and then I nodded my head in agreement.

HiredGoons (#603)

the literal 'Philadelphia Experiment' no doubt (please somebody get this).

Also: Swiftian is my favorite term.

Matt (#26)

I don't get that joke. Explain it to me like I'm a four year old.

HiredGoons (#603)

PHILLY = BROTHERLY LOVE = HOMO + http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Experiment

I'd smack you, Matt, if I wasn't so fond of you.

Matt (#26)

I'm just really fond of quoting Denzel is all.

flossy (#1,402)

Ha! "Project Rainbow," indeed. Leave it to those Navy boys…

Matt Langer (#2,467)

Huh, they pulled the article. The editors were displeased with the gratuitous use of "penumbrally" and "pulchritudinous".

LondonLee (#922)

I had to look up "penumbrally" and I'm still none the wiser as to what on earth he meant.

Jared (#1,227)

"Penumbra" is etymologically related to "umbrage" (from the Latin "umbra," shadow) which may be significant here. Or maybe taking offense at an imagined slight is not the same as taking offense at an imagined turn-on?

gregorg (#30)

I think he means army beefcake parades are fine, as long as they do it in the dark.

BadUncle (#153)

Let a smile be your penumbra.

drone (#1,446)

The reference is to Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 supreme court case that overturned Connecticut's ban on contraceptives. The court ruled that while the constitution contains no mention of privacy, the rights specified in the constitution nevertheless imply a right to privacy. They used the metaphor of lights and shadows to convey this concept; the right to privacy, they said, is found in the penumbra cast by the Bill of Rights. (Working through the metaphor, I suspect that what is meant is that the specified constitutional rights lie in the umbra – the darkest part of a shadow – while the implied rights lie in the penumbra).

boyofdestiny (#1,243)

People toss around terms like "literally" and "unbelievable" with such abandon these days that it's actually refreshing to come across written words that I LITERALLY DON'T BELIEVE!

mjfrombuffalo (#2,561)

404 error here.

zidaane (#373)

It wouldn't be a problem if they got rid of the sexy uniforms and hot hot guns.

riggssm (#760)

And those grooming procedures!! High and tight, indeed.

zidaane (#373)

"lithe naked bodies"

Whoop, here it is.

Could this guy and Walt Fruttinger to review Top Gun please.

KarenUhOh (#19)

The problem of conveying sphincter tone on the Internet. Solved.

MikeBarthel (#1,884)

But what about when those lesbians get on the rag, and then you just CAN'T get them to shut up about quinoa and Le Tigre.

flossy (#1,402)

"The unrefuted 1978 study by Bell and Weinberg indicated that 43% of gays had sex with 500 or more partners, and 28% had 1,000 or more partners."

Somebody please refute this before I start feeling woefully inadequate. How am I already hundreds of sex partners behind the curve?! Maybe I should join the Army.

HelloTitty (#830)

Oops, I meant to reply to you here but posted downstream instead. See my post below for some "data".

DoctorDisaster (#1,970)

That statistic is so wildly ridiculous that I think he made it up completely. I can't find the full text of the study he cites online, but it seems to be a pretty straightforward statistical analysis of the gay population. Most of the citations of it seem to refer to suicide rates. If you guys are really interested, the university library is like two blocks away and I can take a look.

(EDIT: LotaLota beat me to it, never mind!)

LotaLota (#1,703)

The Bell and Weinberg study involved people they interviewed in San Francisco in 1969-70, nearly half of whom they found hanging out at bars, bathhouses and sex clubs. You can't get a more unrepresentative sample than that. In fact the authors themselves noted,

"The non-representative nature of other investigators’ sample as well as our own precludes any generalization about the incidence of a particular phenomenon even to persons living in the locale where the interviews were conducted, much less to homosexuals in general. … We cannot stress too much that ours is not a representative sample."

When the authors learned that the homophobes were misusing their study to pursue their anti-gay agenda, they denounced it, once again emphasizing the non-representative nature of their sample group. In fact, the Family Research Council eventually dropped reference to this study because it is so easily refuted.

Aatom (#74)

Wait, now we PREFER women in the military? I can't keep up.

garge (#736)

I think we prefer lesbians in the military because they make good administrators? I could be mistaken in my takeaway, though, because my brain kept restarting due to the offensive absurdity of the text.

Van Buren Boy (#1,233)

He's absoultely right, I can't even count the number of times my gay roomate in college tried to stick it in my butt while I was changing my clothes. Either that, or he'll get busted with a gay prostitute. It's probably the latter.

David (#192)

Membership in the military is known to be composed of a heterosexual majority. And it's not like any of them are attracted to one another or anything like that, right?

They had to fuck the village in order to save it.

hman (#53)

Tags: Don't ask, Don't Ask Don't Tell, don't tell

lawyergay (#220)

I will never truly understand pro-lifers, or as I like to call them, forced-birthers.
Where are Obama's re-education camps for right-wingers when you need them? Or wait…when was the last time anyone you know LEFT Tennessee?

Leon (#6,596)

Am I the only straight guy ever who sometimes showers w a lady and rather than just jabbing her w/ my thingie every time i see a square inch of tit sometimes has more of a "sorry, we are running very late for our seperate works and yes i guess you're pretty when naked but jesus christ i have a meeting in 40 minutes and if i don't get coffee i will die and omg what is this do i have bedbugs do you have bedbugs oh no wait its a mosquito bite fucking move i dropped my razer you're in the way please no i can't meet you for dinner, clients, remember yes yes i will grab it at lunch and mail it no its your mothers birthday fuck i wanted to see this show but fine fine okay" kind of morning?

flossy (#1,402)

You gotta learn to multi-task.

HelloTitty (#830)

Well, good data are hard to come by (see what I did there?), but this link indicates that straight men and gay men have about the same number of sex partners in their lifetime. This link and this link both indicate that the average (median) is 8. That's right. EIGHT.

boyofdestiny (#1,243)

I have to confess that I'm bringing down this average.

riggssm (#760)

@boyofdestiny Sadly, me too. /long sigh

Harry Cheadle (#6,316)

More data on sex partners, from OK Cupid: http://bit.ly/90gRpj

DoctorDisaster (#1,970)

Harry, that whole post was an amazing read, if not entirely scientific. Thanks for the link.

"Religion is the opiate of the masses, so long as the masses are straight. However, amass a bunch of lesbians and you're going to need actual drugs."

DoctorDisaster (#1,970)

After falling prey to about a dozen terrible articles on the Daily Caller, I promised myself I wouldn't provide it any more traffic. Alas, this was too good a pitch to pass up.

I think my favorite bit was in the second paragraph, where he says 'reading about issues is boring, so I stopped bothering to be informed, like, years and years ago!'

Peteykins (#1,916)

Penumbrally! Use it in a sentence today!

Rollo (#3,202)

If at all possible, see this play "Another American" about gays in the military. It is amazing and devastating. (Also very funny, at first.) Looks like it will be in Kansas City soon.

Tweety (#8,715)

Oh, for fuck sake, again with the showers! If some guy looking at your wiener keeps you awake at night, you are a big ol' closet case. Get over it.

MythReindeer (#5,553)

Wait, so, if I get this article's context, as a hetero if some guy looks at me naked and gets turned on, I'm supposed to be offended? "That dude over there likes my cock. O GOD IT'S SO HORRIBLE." Bullshit. I don't care if I'm straight–if I give some guy a boner I will feel like a million bucks. That is the visible, throbbing specter of flattery pointing at me. My sense of vanity isn't picky.

SeanP (#4,058)

Yeah, that's the thing about gay-phobia that I've never figured out. My reaction to the "but.. but… gay guys might look at you in the shower!" thing was always "um… so?".

bigcheese0001 (#8,722)

Fired seven months ago for sexual harassment. Shame. http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_172480.asp
You can just scrape the surface of his time warp here, Fox, Oliver North,overt racism. Wow!: http://www.humanevents.com/search.php?author_name=Joseph+A.++Rehyansky
Bottom line, the expiration date for his behavior and ideas is long past.

Post a Comment