Which Witch Is Which?


Rant about Andrew Sullivan's personal and political hypocrisy

Which Witch Is Which?

This was written in reaction to LGNY's recent cover story and Andrew Sullivan's subsequent outraged reaction, about his alleged barebacking yens, professed on the Internet site, BarebackCity.com.

Andrew Sullivan: Sleeps with Witches, Then Burns Them
"And what sort of lives do these people, who pose as being moral, lead themselves? My dear fellow, you forget that we are in the native land of the hypocrite." --Oscar Wilde

In early 1999, an Advocate interview featuring Andrew Sullivan had the writer labeling gay men who have sex without love as "emotionally immature." Sullivan probably has more name recognition nationwide among nongay readers than any other. His words felt like more than just opinionation; it rang deep with resonance from place of craven need for acceptance from the institutions. To convince them he is normal. And what better way to be virtually normal than to tarnish others, and while indulging in the very activities he helps demonize?

Like the Puritans, Sullivan came to us from England, Oscar Wilde's "native land of the hypocrite." America was, theoretically, created to hold as many opinions as it has people, even Sullivan's. But he has been here long enough to observe us keenly, accurately pinpointing our "porno-puritanical" nature. So why this mock shock this week on his Website, bristling as the victim of "sexual McCarthyism." Like his forefathers, Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, J. Edgar Hoover, Roy Cohn, and Father Ritter, his bleated entreaties about sex with love sounded like the bark of a dog with a big, smelly bone to hide.

Last week, that bone was dug up by an all-American dog, Michelangelo Signorile.

Somehow forgetting Gary Hart's arrogance, Sullivan's detectable contempt for the "rabble," the venal gay male community, helped him in his bid for acceptance by nongay America. Even after a few paragraphs of his Advocate interview, it was not hard to imagine Sullivan on the Mayflower, picking out likely witches for the post-landing bonfire.

Consequently, it is equally unsurprising that Sullivan would have some less-than-spiritual perambulations on the lubricious side of the Internet. Let's face it, BarebackCity.com bears inherent differences from, oh, the Village Voice personals, or asking your friends to set you up with Mr. Right. Barebacking encompasses a wide range of activities, many of which Sullivan's alleged preferences seem to match, but there is no way Sullivan can ever skillfully spin an open advertisement for "gang bangs" in "Internet privacy" while publicly demonizing the unfaithful. Perhaps Sullivan intended to love everyone at the potential orgy. Be it simultaneous or in quick succession, I am sure his search for meaningfulness would continue.

Mr. Sullivan you are entitled to do whatever you like with however many whomevers you like, but please don't dress like the Pope while you act like Messalina. And seeking it on the Internet is like hiding Donna Rice on your lap while yachting in front of papparazzi. The free and easy hypocrisy Sullivan wears bothers me far more than the issues of outing and barebacking and "privacy." His indignation at the "witch hunt" is put in perspective when you realize how many logs this man has put on the fire from a high pulpit few gay men enjoy in the nongay media.

As for "Sexual McCarthyism?" Well, I guess there's a Republican out there Mr. Sullivan doesn't like.

Posted: Thu - May 31, 2001 at 01:24 AM        


©