Comments

  1. jason says

    This is homophobic of The New Yorker. It is, generally speaking, a homophobic liberal magazine run by anti-male women. This is why a lot of gay people are going to vote against Obama.

    Keep in mind this very interesting fact about The New Yorker. In the last year or so, it elected to have 2 covers regarding gay marriage, and neither of them showed two men. It was the liberally correct two women, not two men.

    As far as I’m concerned, The New Yorker is a selectively homophobic liberal magazine that should be boycotted by gay men.

  2. j m says

    Jason, do you have any other evidence of the New Yorker being anti-gay in the case of gay men? As for me, I found the cover funny, except for the tar and feather “prank” that was to be played on the dog. It’s hard to gauge how many gay people (especially when the exact numbers of gay people are not clear given to different views on what constitutes being gay) are not going to vote for Obama. My personal belief is that except for the GOProud crowd and the LCRs and other self-loathers with trust funds to protect, the vast majority of gay men will vote for Obama. I think he’s easily the lesser of two evils.

  3. jason says

    The New Yorker appears to be homophobic and has a homophobic double standard. The double standard regarding its two gay wedding covers is evidence of this. It failed to show two men on its cover on both occasions.

    There’s a general anti-male attitude that runs through any publication that is politically correct in a pro-female direction. As men, we gays suffer because of this.

  4. Dback says

    That cover combined with the fall-out-of-the-chair funny column by Karen Garcia (thanks Redball!) is a liberal satirist’s nocturnal emission. I’m going to have some great dreams tonight imagining Romney and Ryan re-enacting some Daddy/Son scenes from hotoldermale.com. (Oh, you can just imagine Ryan whimpering “Yes, Daddy” as Mitt murmurs to him lovingly, holding on tight to both of Ryan’s wide-spread ankles…)

  5. jason says

    The feminazis and their girly straight male friends love to poke homophobic fun at bonding between men. It irks them because it proves the superiority of men. The fact they use homophobia as a means of poking fun is proof that feminazis and girly straight guys are prepared to use male homosexuality as a means of degrading someone.

    This is one of the reasons why I don’t like feminists. I’ve turned off feminists in general. At heart, they are homophobic towards men. The New Yorker is run by these sorts of females.

  6. jason says

    Well, there’s no denying that The New Yorker refused to show male couples on its two gay wedding covers during the past couple of years. It went for the lesbians both times.

  7. Nick says

    Jason, are you really sooooo stupid that you’re upset with the New Yorker for making fun of two rabidly anti-gay men, implying that they’re hypocrites, instead of actually being upset with the anti-gay men? Are you sooo stupid that you fall for that conservative BS that *liberals* are the problem? Are you that stupid, Jason?

  8. i could go on, but I won't says

    I just googled “the new yorker masthead” and found that of the top four positions, two were male, two female. In general half the positions were male. So much for Jason’s theory.

    Interesting side note, The New Yorker has never published a masthead except for one list they put together resembling a masthead. And the positions change over time because they have a large staff and publish almost weekly.

  9. jason says

    I Could Go On,

    What theory? I pointed to the fact that The New Yorker refused to show gay male couples on its cover for its two most recent issues on gay marriage. It went for the lesbians both times.

    It’s a homophobic magazine as far as male-male sexuality is concerned.

  10. says

    Never mind the @&*&ing New Yorker.

    Paul Ryan needs to be outed NOW.
    He is clearly a member of Opus Dei who has sworn to push Catholic Doctrinal positions in his political life. His position on abortion and the non exception for rape victims is straight out his local bishop’s mouth.
    Ryan does not serve the people , he serves the promotion of the Catholic position on moral issues………
    Even if some bishops disagree with his views on Health care, it is the abortion issue that is absolutely paramount with him.
    In second place is the gay issue; he is rabidly anti-gay, again taking his position as a mouth piece and a secret promoter for Opus Dei.

    Ryan must be outed.

  11. Terry says

    Ya’ll….I think Jason is a paid commenter whose job is to provoke conversation…and increase page views maybe? Why else would someone write such stupid things are obviously inflammatory and moronic?

  12. Robert K. says

    Jason, I’m not sure how you got the idea that The New Yorker is homophobic. In February of this year the magazine published a 15-page article, written by a man, on the tragic suicide of Tyler Clementi, and it did not cast disparaging remarks on Tyler at all.

  13. i could go on, but I won't says

    @Jason: This theory: “It is, generally speaking, a homophobic liberal magazine run by anti-male women.”

    You did write that didn’t you?

    You don’t place a high value on factual information do you? No wonder you’re so taken in by Republican bs.

  14. Tanoka says

    Jason, the feminazis’ called. They’re coming for YOU!

    You’d better ruuuuuuuuunnnnnnn……

    In other news, 9 out of 10 doctors recommend medical treatment for paranoid schizophrenia. The 10th is called Jason and he’s seen the truth about those man-hating doctor’s and their anti-gay feminine agenda.

  15. Bill says

    Jason, you are WRONG: the New Yorker ran a gay male marriage cover cartoon (2 grooms) several years ago. Look it up, instead of repeatedly posting the same complaint, that they “refused” to run a cover with 2 men marrying. Yes, the last 2 cover cartoons on this theme were of women couples. Before that, it was a male couple. Get over it! You are as boring as you are uninformed. If you read the magazine you would know that the New Yorker is very supportive of gay rights and has demonstrated that in its articles again and again over many years.

  16. jsb says

    @Jason
    Are you and Rick living together? Maybe a split personality? There must be some reason for your nonsense, and you getting all upset when anything isn’t the way YOU think it should be, makes you just as bad as all the bible thumping bigots who act the same way.

    Maybe you just need some new meds…

  17. UFFDA says

    This cover was slowly and then completely hilarious.

    Plus, jason, a few years ago the NYer showed a great image of two men kissing right on the cover. It’s one of their great covers.

  18. LincolnLounger says

    How is it funny that the New Yorker portrays Romney/Ryan as gay? It’s intended as an insult, and the Hallelujah Chorus of Republican haters still lap it up. Revolting.

  19. mike26 says

    file under ‘showing his age’—wasn’t there a similar depiction in 1992 of Al Gore and Bill Clinton in something (Village Voice?) wearing the then courant hiking boots, thick socks, cutoff shorts, sleeveless plaid shirts? They were much cuter in 1992, btw, than Ryan and Romney are in 2012…

  20. Diogenes Arktos says

    I don’t know if it’s the cover Uffda is refering to, but some years ago they ran a cover with two military men (navy?) kissing in an updated version of the famous straight couple kissing at the end of WWII.

  21. andrew says

    @Jason: You will be part of a very tiny minority of gay people who vote for Romney. Most of us know that with all his faults Obama is head and shoulders above Romney. With Obama we won’t get wing nut conservatives running all the Depts and Agencies of the Federal Govt. And we won’t get right wing Justices appointed to the U. S. Supreme court etc. etc.

Leave A Reply