Read DREADNOUGHTERS' Comments Below and/or Add Your Own V.R.S.N.S.M.V. + S.M.Q.L.I.V.B
Great piece John
Many thanks for posting it for those of us outide of Australia. I hope this is a piece that may touch many Australian Catholic parents. So many seem to think that they have to choose between being a good parent and being a good Catholic in this situation.
Bec
A good Catholic is, frequently I suppose, a good parent. I can't imagine any of us are called to deny facts or reject those we're supposed to love.
Not that I know much about being a good Catholic, but I do know that parents are important for young men. Especially while moral habits are forming. Some guys I've met think they're alone, that they're cut off from family and religion and so, if they're going to hell anyway, why do things by halves?
I must say, as someone who has generally always enjoyed your writing, I found that particular piece fairly off-putting. I don't want my parents to confront me with their suspicions about my sexuality. I can think of few things worse in the whole coming-out process than that. The individual concerned should tell their parents at such time as they believe appropriate, not be preemptively accosted over their alleged sexuality.
It's far too personal to have anyone, even a parent, do such a thing.
BTW, I have always wanted to ask, are you actually out in your parish?
I don't wear a pink hat Danny and there are few occassions to trumpet my inclinations, but anyone with a computer and eyes can see I'm DREADNOUGHT and DREADNOUGHT is me.
I've been recognised at Mass before. I don't hide anything. There's nothing to hide.
Same with the parents. If you cannot discuss something like this with them, dread the moment, etc. then something has broken down.
The piece was written to try and fix that kind of problem.
Light and honesty destroy secrets and lies.
But secrets and lies are not the same things. Secrets are often secrets of temporary necessity, at least, whereas a lie is deliberate deceit. I too would agree talking with parents about the matter is important. But I still have real difficulty in seeing how a young person, if they are not themselves ready to discuss it with their parents, would be comfortable in having the subject brought up.
That's very brave of you at the parish level. It's all well and good to polemicise on the internet, but having it acknowledged on a very small community/parish level seems even more courageous.
I don't know about it being acknowledged as such. What is there to acknowledge?
I've never met a Catholic who gave me any trouble merely because I'm same sex attracted.
Similarly, the priests I know, meet, etc. have all been magnificent, whether they're considered traditional or liberal.
As for the other business, I'm not encouraging an interrogation, rather merely letting parents know that sometimes their boys don't know how to put things into words.
In that case, it's better to be out with it, love the boy, etc. than have him resent his parents later. Certainly it's better to be sensitive to his interests/gifts, rather than force him into a football helmet or endlessly refer to his wedding, etc.
Further, it is much remarked that ‘out’ same sex attracted men often become ‘tired of the gay scene’ and return to a more stable life. A secret shame, a private sin, is more appealing than the flabby mediocrity that actually characterises the ‘gay community’.
Who says it's a secret shame or a private "sin" to not be a scenester?
Choosing not to be a scenester has more to do with your cultural and social interests, than shame, well maybe not for people like you.
Within my larger social circle there are a few scene-hating gays like me among the straights, none of us are hidden or ashamed about our lives. We just don't like the music, people or activities which characterise the scene. If we were so ashamed, would 2 of my male friends be living together openly as a couple? Everyone knows they're a couple and they usually have a bit of a dance together at the pub, and 2 guys dancing together at a pub are hardly hiding their "secret shame".
I pity you for being torn about who you really are. It must really suck to wake up every morning and be confronted with the fact your morning glory only responds to thoughts about stuff you're not allowed to do or enjoy.
[queeny comment deleted because it bagged a DREADMATE]
Edited By Siteowner
"Who says it's a secret shame or a private "sin" to not be a scenester?"
Not me. I said closeted guys often think the scene is hotter than it is. This means they hold onto fantasies longer than bored, over-it queens like you/me Mikey. Read the post again.
Oh and not that it's any of your business, but I do dream of girls too.
Yawn. Your default response of "read my self-important twaddle". Then again, everything you've ever written (or said) is a default response of twaddle.
I've read all your patronising little articles for that paper and you said people make a choice between being in the scene and not and that shame drives people to be non-scene.
The scene was never an option for me or others and never will be. Before I told everyone I was gay (at 17 - quite old), the scene seemed very unattractive and I thought it was a good reason for me NOT to come out. It was usually straight friends who begged me to go to gay bars so I could pick-up like they can at the pub.
I always thought pride and vanity were sins? How come you have several posey photos of yourself in just about every post?
[comments deleted because they were either blasphemous, insulting and/or puerile] - DN
And as for the queen comment, I wasn't the one who went on a fruity channel like SBS wearing Industrie and talking with a wet cum-rag voice. That was you.
[this last comment allowed, it demonstrates the calibre of my interlocutor...]
Edited By Siteowner
wow!
mikey, how hateful are you?
Personal insults do nothing for your argument. Actually trying to find and argument in amongst all that hate is almost impossible.
Bec
"...you said people make a choice between being in the scene and not and that shame drives people to be non-scene."
Wrong. I tell you to read my posts in the hope that words on a page might induce comprehension.
Put simply, the gay scene = pathetic. Total closet = boys think the scene is better than pathetic. Thus, parents should encourage their sons to be open about their struggles so that pathetic things don't rule boys' lives.
It wasn't bloody Industrie. It was a Topless California tee shirt from Bloomingdales. If appearing on SBS is indeed pathetic, perhaps the only thing more pathetic is watching me appear on SBS.
I have no idea what a wet, cum-rag voice would sound like, so I can't comment. I'd ask you to express your ideas (if you have any) without resorting to personal attacks or obscenities.
lol @ changing Mikey's homepage link. For a moment there I thought that the Vatican was rebelling against you, Dread!
SBS is not a fruity channel. A bit dork, perhaps. Dry and boring, often. But definitely not fruity.
And those photos of Mr. Nought are not 'posey'. From my experience he assumes those facial expressions naturally and throughout the day. So cute! The public couldn't handle DREADNOUGHT being posey (is that even a word?!)
With respect, Mikey, I think you did misread the post. John is the last person in the world to support the gay scene. Nor is he torn about who he really is. He's depressingly stable. And he would NEVER, EVER wear Industrie...NEVER
Meanwhile, JH, sounds like you've found your most avid reader/viewer...
Ha! With avid readers like that, who needs enemies?
I change the links if someone is being silly/obscene. Often such behaviour is an attempt to 'startle' DREADNOUGHTERS into visiting their sites.
I'd much rather people read me because of the quality of my writing/ideas. Paris Hilton-style attention seeking is tres passe, even for Paris.
Oh, and 
You may have written on this before, but how can you say the the Church thinks there is nothing wrong with same-sex attraction when it clearly teaches that same sex attraction is disordered? I agree that the Church says these attractions in andof themselves are not sinful, but that is not the same thing as saying there is "nothing wrong with you" if you have these attractions.
What is wrong with me?
The point I'm making is about not being 'made for evil'. Catholicism doesn't teach that anyone is constitutionally formed for sin, such an idea offends Free Will.
Whatever is wrong with a man in that situation is the same thing that is 'wrong' with any boy who looks at a woman he's not married to and wants to have sex with her.
It's not some special, secret shame. It's the same old lust that all men have to fight.
It wasn't bloody Industrie. It was a Topless California tee shirt from Bloomingdales. If appearing on SBS is indeed pathetic, perhaps the only thing more pathetic is watching me appear on SBS.
You have clothes from overseas? You're such a hip, fashionable metrosexual, can I be your friend? I only watched you because you grandstanded about how you were going to be on TV, sticking it to the world. All my mates thought you were a douched cockbag.
I just can't understand why you're so narcissistic. You're ugly, conceited, arrogant, bloated, humourless and friendless, just like Kyle Sandilands. I can always be certain you have time to reply to my messages straightaway, as you seem to sit in front of the computer - A LOT. What does that say about you?
Narcissism is identified as a mental disorder in the DSM IV. I suggest you do something about it as it has obviously affected your social life in the real world (i.e: you're on the computer so much showing everyone how "hot" you are that you don't have one).
I like Catholics. The beauracracy may be way off the money, but at a grass-roots level, you wouldn't find a more "christian" group of people at any other church, definitely no prosperity preaching there.
An intense, narcissistic little fugmo who sits on the computer all day, grandstanding about how "hot" he is like you does nothing for the severely tarnished image of your church or you're quest to "flourish" or whatever, unless being a vain yuppie wanker is flourishing.
I'm not the only person who says this. I usually have other (straight) people goading me to give you shit.
I'm sure you'll have plenty of time to edit my post, you always do.
You have your work cut out for you above.
Hey John,
I found your blog today and have been reading it a bit all day. I love your insights. As a future pastor, I have often wondered the best methods for shepherding homosexuals closer to Christ and the Church. This blog has given me a lot of direction, and I really appreciate it. God Bless.
Mikey, I might be ugly. I might be stupid. I'm certainly far too arrogant. Indeed, I might be many of the things you say and I'm certainly a bad ambassador for Catholicism.
However, as long as good souls stop by and find something worthwhile, I'll keep on blogging.
If hundred of thousands of them stop by - as they have - I'll consider it a duty. Certainly I went on SBS out of a sense of duty. I hate hearing my voice, probably for the same reasons you do!
There's nothing else of any consequence in the rest of your rant. Have a good day anyway. If you're after serious debate, come up with ideas of your own. Or challenge specific ones I've supported. Robust debate is welcome on DREADNOUGHT. However, I'm not at all interested in having some sort of bitch fight, that's tiresome.
Thanks Bryan Good luck with your formation mate.
OK- thanks. I understand what you are saying .
You alone in all the world Thomas!
Sweet. You're self-flagellating.
way to go John! You know, alot of parents would not know how to react, let alone know what their reactions will do to their child.
The more information on how to deal with it the better. And most importantly they must feel worthy of Gods love, as im sure many don't feel that way.
Im glad you posted it for the US folks, im out of Australia and got to see it too!
Peace!
I am impressed that you did not delete Mikeys perhaps honest but a tad rude comments . Makes me wonder however, why in the world you have issues with Spirit of Vatican II- who is so obviously more measured, impressive as a scholar /writer/catholic and certainly worth listening too.
If nothing else your site/comment box would attract even more visitors if the debate became more lively and diversed.
I am certainly amazed how much you seem to be willing to tempt yourself - I personally seriously doubt that you have any chance in the world to "win" your game.
I also honestly ask myself:
Why do you not even consider becoming a catholic priest? That way you could certainly further legitimize your attempted lifelong quest for chastidy.
Do not get me wrong - if you succeed good for you - I hope you realize however that most folks will not - and in my opinion in case they find love and commitment should not.
As a heterosexual citizen I prefer my fellow brothers and sisters to live honest good lifes.
May god bless you and help you find a good partner that accompanies you on your chosen journey.
But I trust that you can tollerate the many amoung your peers that walk a slightly different path from yourself.
I believe strongly that you and them will benefit from a society that sees value in love and commitment and that does not snoop around peoples bedrooms.
grega, I think it is because Spirit of Vatican II challenged John from within, whereas Mikey observed from without.
Spirit of Vatican II insulted my friends, and blaphemed. Repeatedly. He's also a priest. He did not challenge, he caused scandal. I will not host/participate in apostasy.
Mikey is welcome here, if she can keep her mouth out of the slops bucket.
I'm glad you liked it Carmel. I'm glad to at least attempt to help
grega, if I had what it takes to be a priest, I'd be locked up in a seminary already. Another path lies before me. God knows what it is but I will give it my best.
Smell my finger Vincent!
In re: snooping around people's bedrooms, people don't know what's good for them. If someone good stood at my bedroom door, I'd be a holier man!
Just a drop-in note to say I gave up blog-surfing for Lent. It's been working out pretty well, and has certainly turned me into a more productive person (at least temporarily). I don't know how you Noughters will be able to manage without me, but I hope you can pull through somehow.
It's tough Xpat, but we'll manage. Especially if it's part of your Lenten fast...
Dread, I like you but I have to say your blog was more interesting when Spirit was allowed to contribute. Truthfully it has lost a little as a forum for cogently passionately argued differing points of view on matters Catholic. It is very easy to ignore arguments we don't agree with on the net and speak to those who merely pant and salivate in agreement like Pavlov’s dog. Very boring and one learns nothing.
"Spirit of Vatican II insulted my friends, and blasphemed. Repeatedly. He's also a priest. He did not challenge, he caused scandal. I will not host/participate in apostasy"
I have personally seen both of you converse in a less that satisfactory manner. Of the serious charges you make (and then convict and execute) they really amount to an outburst of anger because Spirit did engage and challenge you albeit sometimes on a personal level. I hope that evidence to support these allegations is not drawn from Dr Blosser and man who in my experience lacks judgement. Although I do admire how the Prods get him to take the workload of two professors (the work ethic of 400yrs of my forebears at work hehehehehe)
I certainly don't agree with everything both you and Spirit say but I did like to see your arguments and his tested.
Be a little less precious and a little more expensive and generous Dread – it suits you better - and that goes for giving the smelly finger to Vincent. "Not nice" as they say in Melbourne.
p.s. You still haven’t told us about your admission yet. We expect photos.
Atiyah the smelly finger is not offensive, I was being silly. Vincent knows it.
The decision on Spirit is final. I warned him multiple times. I sincerely cannot be bothered responding to his lengthy, incoherent, arrogant, insulting, blasphemous comments. I'm not paid to do this.
If you like his nonsense so much, write a blog and invite him to contribute.
I don't care if this makes me boring. But I don't think the diversity of the comments has suffered. Rather than Spirit vs John ad nauseum, there are many and varied voices. Not all of these are supportive.
See above.
I'd prefer not to discuss my professional life in this forum. It has nothing to do with the Church's position on same sex attraction. I think I give out enough. I am actually a rather private person!
Yeah John, I know about the smelly finger. I like you queeny as the remark about Mikey. When queer quys are insulted they shift into 'she'-mode.
You are a smart guy and a good writer, and it must be said you allow many voices on your blog, and more importantly, you respond to all their sillly rantings, I miss Atiyah lately. but it seems he is still around judging his latest comment.
I think, to be fair, I should delete your positive comments Vincent
Yeah, Atiyah is still around, wonderfully!
I had to smile when you wrote that you are a rather private person. Todays visual offering seem to show for example a heap of dirty rather private laundry.
This whole blog certainly could be read as your very non private coming to grips with yourself type offering.
Sorry to say, but IMHO you are less than convincing when citing reasons why you can not possibly be bothered to allow Spirit Vatican II to contibute here. Perhaps you indeed fear that what the Spirit offers is very much in store for yourself down the line. You have to admit that the focus on love and commitment must have some appeal to some of your kind.
I doubt you will walk to the end of your time on this fine planet happily as a singularity. Personally I respect those that make a loving commitment to another person more than those that claim one thing just to fall short over and over again.
It's not my laundry. Who said I'd never had a boyfriend? Hasty assumptions murder reason.
Grega, he's obsessed with sex. His relativism/moral equivocation has nothing to do with true love and real commitment. It's pasty, flabby and dated. My generation look beyond 60's slogans toward firm ideas and truth.
I didn't ban him after one comment, or even twenty. I banned him after hundreds of comments and almost six months of constant interaction.
Not, however, because I was tempted. No, rather because his ideas are boring and this style is tiresome. He also insulted my friends, claimed on other blogs that I was an S&M slave and a porn addict. What nonsense, and from an apparent priest!
As I've said before, if you like his brand of filth, set up your own blog and invite him to play. I have absolutely no time for that rubbish (in an intellectual and interpersonal sense) here.
John, 'your generation' and mine too owes a lot to sixties liberals. The generations before that brought us two world wars and the great depression, not exactly a great record either. Sixties liberals' thinking seems dated precisely because it was so succesfull, and it has helped pave the way for you and me to be open and honest about who we are. It may be completely natural for you, but it wasn't in those days when they were young. Many conservatives have in fact adopted liberal cultural attitudes, just they don't realize it.
Yes, we owe drugs, divorce, adoption scandals, AIDS, the Iraq war, etc. to the sixties liberals.
Weimar Germany, at least before 1934-ish, was a freer, more creative place for SSA young men than Chelsea NYC is today. Indeed, Restoration England, if we're to believe the scholars, was better than 2006!
Sure, they're have been some gains, but they would have happened anyway or they're not directly related to the Age of Aquarius.
We've lost something in the haze of Woodstock.
Ah sure, divorce was invented by John Kerry on campus in the sixties.
The Iraq War was lauded by conservative youth, wasn't it? Their MTV-minds saw their Burger King-existence threatened on 9/11 so they support any attack their Saudi Theocrat Friend in the White House tells them to.
And Weimar Germany was killed because conservatives supported Hitler's request for 'special temporary powers'. Don't EVER forget that.
Ha ha!
Weimar Germany was killed because Germans elected a monster.
I supported the war. However, the aftermath has been mismanaged by baby boomers with a Vietnam complex.
Anyway, I don't want to discuss this. Homo Catholicism is my shtick
The point is, however, that Stonewall mightn't have been as good for us as many people imagine. Hold your breath for my paedophilia post!
I really feel 'Woodstock', 'Stonewall' and the likes were far less influential than is often presumed, and they certainly did not spread any coherent philosophy that was adopted by later generations. More accurately they were extreme edges of cultural changes and their impact has been quite minimal because they were sort of isolated events.
Over the past fifteen years, I can't recall having met any SSA man my age who was trying to 'sexually liberate' himself. Just we wanted to be out, dance, flirt and have a boyfriend, and like any other person work, study, love our families and be good. Simple really, but quite impossible before the sixties. We all were embarrassed by Gay Pride marches and we all said we were 'non-scene'.
There was some missionary work to do, but it was not anything like Stonewalling the neighborhood. There were more essential tasks like making Madonna popular among straight 'alternative music'-lovers.
Get my point? The sixties, hippies, it's like it's all from a different planet to anyone from after the sixties. It means nothing to me. Sixty-year old men who still don't know how to dress.
Not sure what your new post will say, but I'll not accept if you even remotely suggest gays encourage paedophilia.
John:
you got to be kidding
"Yes, we owe drugs, divorce, adoption scandals, AIDS, the Iraq war, etc. to the sixties liberals. "
What are adoption scandals ?
By the way , Vincent is correct when he points to the less than flattering influcene that conservatives back than had in ending the Weimar Democracy and in getting Herrn Hitler 's 30% party to dictatorial powers. Hitler gained dictatorial powers with the help of conservatives like Hugenberg ( a Rupert Murdoch type Media tycoon back then). The conservative and military 'elite' back than certainly never took a person like Hitler all that serious -until it was to late. The fact that Hitler never made it past rank of a lowly Gefreiter in the army in WWI certainly did not help amoung those folks.
Make no mistake the bulk of your conservative buddies in society and church would like nothing more than to shuff you right back into a closet.
You talk about having a boyfriend - you toy around with desires of sexual nature - interesting -most of the conservatives in the catholic church have zero tollerance for your kind and certainly would not allow you anything other than a friend.
I bet in the long run you will catch much harsher flak in years to come from the folks you try to buddy up too, than from well meaning liberals like Spirit of Vatican II. I bet you will end up admiting to being the social liberal and political conservative that you are one of these days. Nothing wrong with being that type of person of course.
Certainly it seems very opportunistic to me the way you take advantage of the accomplishments of your more liberal peers when it fits your personal desires (boyfriend etc.) while trashing them otherwise. IMHO you desperatly need all the Spirit of Vatican II's in the church you can get to live your life as a conservative gay catholic.
In another post you talk about not being out even within your parish for example - is that correct?
Since I attend a catholic parish with high percentage of Gays and Lesbians I do not understand what holds you back to be yourself. We(my wife and kids) even witness a good number of catholic SSA families - stop by one of these days when being in the US you might find it a more honest way to worship after all.
Dread, I might be a day late and a dollar short with this, but “the flabby mediocrity that actually characterises the ‘gay community’”
I think I understand that you’re stating how ghey gay culture is, but mightn’t anemic be a better word than flabby? Metaphors of flab may confuse any of the literalist ranks body fascists that inhabit said community...with the concomitant, ironic, and appallingly high levels of ageism, sexism, and racism also found therein.
Commenting by HaloScan
