In re: "Those 'Happy Homos'"

Some of you may have read this interesting New York Times profile of David B. Lat, who serves as Article III Groupie's mouthpiece to the world. Lat has some corrections, clarifications, and comments on Jonathan Miller's article, which should hopefully appear in these pages in the near future.

For the time being, however, A3G would like to defend David Lat against a specific accusation that has been leveled against him by some who have read the article. If you've met David Lat in person, you know that although he's a genial and pleasant fellow, he's a bit of a wimp. This is why he needs a strong woman -- to wit, Article 3 Groupie -- to rush to his aid.

Miller writes:

[Lat] skipped the sixth grade, and attended Regis High School, the prestigious all-boys Catholic high school in Manhattan, where he gained a reputation as a skilled debater (he sang the Banana Boat song when he delivered a speech about Haitian refugees). From there he went on to Harvard, where he socialized little while earning a degree in English and adopted a conservative worldview, writing lacerating opinion columns for The Harvard Crimson.

He declared, among other things, that campus liberals had no "no broad, overarching philosophy." He lamented the revocation of Ireland's ban on divorce, and repeatedly castigated the school's Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Student Association.

In one column, entitled "Those 'Happy Homos,'" he wrote: "National Coming Out Day is just another event in the recent rash of identity-based pride rallies. These alleged celebrations of diversity have devolved into mutual masturbation festivals. They reassure people who are still deeply troubled by their lifestyle choices and are desperately seeking a stamp of approval. We have a duty to deny them this approval."

Those statements brought a harsh rebuke from members of the organization in a subsequent letter to the editor that called the column "spiteful and logically vapid."

Based on the foregoing, some of you have accused David Lat of being "homophobic." Much could be said on this subject; but for present purposes, suffice it to say that nothing could be farther from the truth.

Just as Samuel Alito should not be judged based on statements in a job application from 20 years ago, Lat should not be judged based on his (literally) sophomoric ramblings in a college newspaper, from over a decade ago. These "youthful indiscretions" -- of a hotheaded, rabble rousing campus conservative -- should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of who Lat is today. Nor do they represent the views he currently holds on such issues as homosexuality, gay marriage, etc.

Also, for the record, the reference in the column's title to "Happy Homo[s]" -- which could be viewed as derisive or derogatory -- should not be ascribed to Lat. If you read the column in its entirety, you'll see that the title was merely quoting from posters that were put up around the Harvard campus by the BGLSA.

More on this subject may follow in a subsequent post. But for the time being, A3G wanted to get these thoughts into circulation, to stop the flood of hate mail that poor Mr. Lat has been receiving from people who believe, incorrectly, that he harbors some animosity towards gay Americans (or, for that matter, gay persons of any nationality).

Comments

[Ellen Katz]

David:
Your defense of your College Article is not as good as Sam Alito's defense of his job application. Sam Alito claimed, much to everyone's shock, that he had no recollection of his insertion of the Princeton group nor could he even recollect ever being a member. You, however, are asserting that you should not be held accountable for what you remember writing in a college newspaper. If you ever hope to get confirmed as an Article III judge, you may need to tweak your story!

[Dave Hardy]

Is it true that he was a member of Concerned Alumni of Regis, the group that fought to exclude divorced Irishmen from the student body?

[doyt]

This is incredibly weak, for all the reasons listed above. Also, your protestations that your opinions at the time were "sophomoric" and don't reflect your current views are nonresponsive to the accusation that you're a homophobe. Maybe your views have changed. And maybe you still harbor a homophobic worldview. Or maybe you don't. Absent a fuller elaboration of your current views, there is no reason to believe that you are not still highly homophobic, and I'm sure you'd agree that your writings from 10 years ago erect a presumption against you.

[Samuel Alito]

I, for one, concur with the original article. When I was growing up, they used to hold despicable parades on "Columbus Day" for Italians and "St. Patrick's Day" for the Irish, all allegedly to celebrate their "identity." I naturally believed that the entire shebang was disgusting.

[J]

Speaking only for myself, I don't care what sexual orientation Mr. Lat is. That's his business.

What I do care about are the very offensive comments which were made in some of those Harvard Crimson articles, and I'm glad that this site had the courtesy to at least clarify the statements. Maybe it's just a CYA maneuver, but whatever the reason, it's nice to know that such statements about gays were not simply ignored. I'm a cynical enough person that I thought people would just pretend those portions of the NYT article were written in invisible ink.

As for A3G:

Every persona has a lifespan, every website has a lifespan. The whole site is generally a lampoon, and I always took A3G as a part of that lampoon. Never as a real person. The quality of the site is the same (whether people like the site or dislike the site). The appeal of Underneath Their Robes was more the peek at various judges and their clerks, and that appeal can probably continue whether or not A3G ceases to exist or whether the site moves into other hands.

[Flex]

I, too, hope this blog returns to its former foci, but, contrary to the other commentators below, it seems to me that some reference to Mr. Lat is required at the present time because of the media coverage of the blog. (And don't worry, Mr. Lat: some of us do accept the statements about your unfortunate "youthful indiscretion" at face value. Te absolvo. We believe you to be wiser now.)

[ChicagoLaw]

I agree... this blog has become less than a shadow of its former self. It's now a black hole that is sucking away the fun and informative reputation of the site. David, give it up: become A3G again, or take it down. Coming here every day since it's re-release has been an exercise in frustration. Fix it, or kill it.

[friend of friends]

David,

Why do you remain closeted about your own homosexuality? You could be an inspiration to gay (and straight) bloggers everywhere by showing that you have nothing to hide and that (as you show via A3G) you can bend gender to suit your own purposes and you need answer to no one. It would also help explain that your college articles were a criticism of identity politics and not anti-homosexual in any way.

[Forrest]

Will this formally wonderful blog ever return to the way it used be? Are there no comments on the confirmation hearings? If AG3 no longer has time to devote to this blog then it should be taken offline, again.

[thelawgal]

ABC,

Why are you reading the blog, then?

[Hispanic Clerk]

I agree with the former portion of ABC's comment, but not the latter. A3G lately speaks too much of Mr. Lat to maintain the alter ego. I think A3G can reclaim this blog, but to do so, she should start immediately and refer no more to Mr. Lat. Otherwise, I think the readers would be happy to see the blog become Mr. Lat's outlet.

Either way, I'm terribly concerned that Mr. Lat's work at Wonkette may eclipse UTR. I don't care for Wonkette and wouldn't read it even if A3G were writing there. A3G fulfilled a niche with this blog. It would be a shame for it to go by the wayside. Judging from the recent posting history, I'm afraid that is going to happen.

A question for A3G: what happened to all of the email she received (with juicy judicial tidbits) just before she went offline?

[ABC]

This identity-switching is a total non-starter. The continued masquerade that somehow A3G is a person co-existing with Lat is utterly unworkable. That you now need to use A3G to defend yourself only further destroys any allure this blog had.