Are homophobes actually self-hating gays? That's long been the suspicion among anyone with, what do you call 'em, eyes and ears. A new study, detailed in the New York Times recently, and summarized here in Slate by my homeboy Dan Engber, seems to suggest that there may be a scientific basis for the belief that the only thing gayer than being gay (and Christmas) is really, really letting everyone else know that you're totally not gay. Did we really need a scientific study to prove that?
Player Bro:
Both here and hence pursue me lasting strife,
If once I be a homophobe, ever I be a homo!
Player Bro's Bro:
'Tis deeply sworn and you KILLED IT. Sweet, leave me here a while,
My buzz grow dull, and fain I would beguile
The tedious day with pussy and bitches. [fist bump]
Player Bro:
Sleep rock thy brain,
And never come sweet, sweet gay sex between us twain!
Scientists:
Brosephs, how like you this play?
NYT Reader:
The bro doth protest too much, methinks.
Engber seems to doubt that the findings of the study actually prove what they set out to do in a convincing fashion. At least I think that's what he's saying -- the whole thing got a little, uh, "science" for me there toward the end.
Without more compelling laboratory data or more explicitly sexual test stimuli, it's hard to argue that the Rochester study demonstrates anything about secret homosexual urges. There's a much simpler interpretation at hand: College freshmen who claim to be nervous around gay people are probably a little nervous around gay people. And college freshmen who call themselves gay are probably somewhat gay.
All of which is great and fascinating and whatever, but what I came here to do today was point out to you the funniest, and surprisingly the most accurate, turn of phrase I've seen in a long time, where Engber refers to the concept behind the study as the "he-who-smelt-it-dealt-it theory of sexuality." LOL.
For at least 15 years, scientists have been trying to use objective laboratory measures to prove the he-who-smelt-it-dealt-it theory of human sexuality. Has a research team based at the University of Rochester finally done it? The new study works like an elaborate game of "homo say what?": Evidence of private, homosexual urges is elicited by subtle verbal cues.
That sentence just gave me a boner. I measured it with my pants. Someone give me a grant to study comedy.
brought to you by
8 comments:
this post was gay
homophones are gay
Opens up a whole new slew of "He who smelt it dealt it" expressions.
Like: "He who hates it, dates it."
One of the funniest t-shirts I ever read said, " I'm not gay, but my boyfriend is."
I should have bought one of those then sported it at the next death-metal show.
Cite Barbara Kruger's piece in the new contemporary wing at the MFA, "You construct elaborate rituals to touch the skin of other men." Football, wrestling, rugby, baseball has enough butt slapping to be included. Basically all dudes who play sports or like to watch those sports are closet gays. Barbara Kruger's words, not mine.
Haha, Dirty Dave. Hey, btw, Dirty Dave, you're not one of the three Dirty Daves I already know I don't think, so who are you?
Sean, I like that shirt. Send me one, thanks in advance.
Greg, that sounds a little, eh, you know what I mean, to me. There's nothing gay about wanting to physically dominate another man. Unless it's MMA.
MMA, I'd like to remind everyone, is gayer than a pink boner. That's ironic racism (via Girls/Leslie Arfin/hipsers).
Surely it should be "the bro doth brotest too much, methinks"? Also what's gay about getting into a cage with another muscular, greased-up guy and groping each other? PTSOTL's anti-combat sports bias has to stop.
Post a Comment