I’m No Victim

I’m puzzled at the lack of reading comprehension by internet pundits.  There are a few stories popping up – in The Advocate and one or two on HuffPo on a recent Google alert — claiming I’m playing “the victim card” over here on my blog. However, anyone who actually read my post would know that I simply made two claims:

1.  Those who claim to be loving and tolerant certainly are hateful and bullying.

2.  But despite their efforts at name-calling and even their threats, I won’t be deterred from speaking out.

Here’s what I said:

“Here’s a news flash, guys.  Your hate and bullying don’t work.  People see through it, and they don’t like to be pushed around.  You think it’s completely obvious that you’re right, but this younger generation is more pro-life than their parents, and voters just keep defending traditional marriage.  Why?  Why would we if you’ve been telling us what to think for all these years?

Because we think for ourselves.  And we’ll keep thinking for ourselves no matter what you call us.  So keep sending the hate, but realize that hate doesn’t win arguments.”

So, this is what professional pundits are calling “playing the victim?”

To paraphrase The Princess Bride: that word does not mean what you think it means.

You might also enjoy:

Connect with me further by:

  • huntingmoose

    First your mother at Fox, now you.

    you both just make my day. The headache I got from accidental watching Obama 5 seconds is gone.

  • Charlie

    Bristol, why do you even have a blog or say anything publicly at all if you can’t handle the criticism thrown your way? You say something, there will always be people who disagree with it. That’s the way the world works! You’re not above criticism dear.

    You’re generalizing and assuming that two men or two women can’t provide a happy household for youngsters, yet you blithely ignore the fact that children who were raised by straight parents don’t always grow up to be well rounded, good natured, productive citizens of society. I could list tons of murderers, rapists, thieves, drug addicts, alcoholics, terrorists, abusers, etc. who all were raised by one man and one woman and still didn’t turn out to be perfect little angels obviously. Yet there are plenty of kids who have been raised by same sex couples that turn out just fine, likable, good natured solid productive citizens of society. What about them? Can we just agree that what the genders of a parent or what gender said parents are attracted to has next to NOTHING to do with raising a child? There are more important fundamental qualities we should look for in good parents, you’re merely looking at the outside and not the inside.

  • Joe Butterworth

    Bristol, I’m not throwing out insults…just facts. I have read every word in this little “debate” or whatever you refer to it as. I have even read the comments. One thing I noticed is that you are just as hypocritical as those you condemn. And you are also just as biased as those you point the finger at. You even play the same game as the media that you enjoy critisizing by only drawing attention to those that oppose you and putting a little “spin” on the actual facts. You directly insulted the POTUS and his daughters and then say it’s okay for you to do that because you were just joking, for one example, but when others insult you it suddenly becomes bullying. What if they all said they were joking? Would it be okay then, by your standards? You call same sex marriage a sin and then forget to acknowledge that sex out of wedlock is also a sin. Doesn’t your Bible say that I should throw rocks at you or something? You say that all those against you are vicious bullies for what they say, and then omit the fact that your followers were being just as vicious and hurling death threats around. Or is it okay to threaten and insult liberals and gays in your opinion? The whole “They treat me like I’m not human…” bit was an obvious cry for sympathy over the can of worms you opened…and then you say “I’m not being a victim”. And lastly…yes, JWoww insulted you, and then you just insulted her right back which makes you no better. The difference is that JWoww came right at you with no fear, as did several others; meanwhile, you use passive-aggressive statements and double-talk so that you can later hide behind a false claim of innocence. Do you know who uses passive-aggressive manipulation the most to get attention for themselves? That’s right…people who like to play the victim. If you’re going to be brave enough to throw stones at life…don’t be so scared when life throws them back. (Yes, I purposely used your book title against you)

    • Eileen

      Very well said!

  • GrizzlyMom

    Just 14 more minutes to go. Time goes by so slowly.

  • Lavender Pitt

    If having a father around to inform the kids’ viewpoint is so important, consider the last time your baby saw HIS father. If it was more than a week ago, you’re a fraud and a hypocrite- AGAIN.

    Please stop riding what’s left of your mother’s coat-tails and get a real job. No-one wants you on TV except the people who like watching train-wrecks.

    Have a nice day.

  • Erica Cook

    Being pushed around? You mean like when that paster said he’d like to take all people against same sex marriage and put them in an electrified fence and watch them die?… Oh wait, no. it was us. You mean when people came after you to rape you until you agreed with same sex marriage. Oh, again no, that was us too to try and make lesbians strait. Maybe it was when schools said it was okay to attack you kids for being against marriage. Shoot, again that was to us for being gay. When were you pushed around?

    • Amalia

      Yes, pushed around like Madeleine McAulay, a sixteen year old girl from North Carolina who got death threats over a video she put up detailing her support for traditional marriage (aka proper marriage). Or pushed around like Stacy Transacos a few months ago when she blogged about how she was sick of gay couples making out in public parks – she got death threats for that too. Or pushed around like Carrie Prejan, who offered her opinion on marriage when asked about it, and was harassed and threatened with rape and death.

      The biggest and nastiest bullies are on your side of the aisle. Those are just three examples out of thousands.

      • MattZuke

        “The biggest and nastiest bullies are on your side of the aisle. Those are just three examples out of thousands.”

        As opposed to the Christians who actually exterminate the homosexuals.

        In 2008 1617 hate crimes were reported
        58.6% were against male homosexuals
        25.7% were against homosexuals in general
        12% were anti-lesbian
        2% were anti-heterosexual
        1.7% were anti bisexual

        Here is a list of homosexuals who were murdered, or were otherwise bullied into killing themselves.

        In short, extremist Christians actually murder homosexuals, or bully and harass them until the kill themselves. But somehow YOUR being bullied. Now I don’t condone the bozo who asserts that Bristol should “kill herself”, but you’re trying to put this into the same class of bullying as the risk of a extremist Christian bashing in the skull of a fag for Jesus. Murder and harassment that leads to suicide is okay in your book, but telling a bozo to kill themselves is worse?

      • Name withheld

        I believe my rapist was heterosexual, Amalia. I would much rather have been “threatened” with rape by a “gay bully,” trust me.

      • MattZuke

        “traditional marriage (aka proper marriage)”

        First of all, there is no law prohibiting single moms from caring for a child. Second of all, traditional marriage was akin to slavery. Men could have as many wives as they could feed, and this is supported in the bible. Women were exchanged for livestock, money, or other goods. This IS traditional marriage.

        There was NO church involved in traditional marriage. It was often an arrangement between the parents, and the “wedding” was the first night of coupling. The father of the bride had to keep tokens of virginity, as in the blood stained sheets, in the event the husband changed his mind and claimed she wasn’t a virgin. Non-virgins, or no bloody sheets, were subject to stoning. Coupling = married. This would apply if you were raped.

        The whole concept of courtship, allowing people to decide who they marry is NON-TRADITIONAL.

        It kind of helps to actually READ the bible.

        • Georgia

          Perhaps it is you who ought to read the Bible, Matt. Christians believe that God is the Church. Traditional marriage has been proscribed by God. Here is what the Bible says about men and women and marrying but I will start by letting you know what Christ actually says about judging, not the tripe spewed by homosexuals. I expect you or someone else to say that Christ does not want us to judge.

          For your edification:

          Matthew 7
          1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
          2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
          3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
          4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
          5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

          The passage is not teaching “NOT to judge” just “HOW to judge”.

          Matthew 19
          4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
          5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
          6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

          Matthew 7:1-5 includes Jesus’ warning about trying to take a speck out of a neighbor’s eye while ignoring the log in your own eye. In verse five, Jesus makes clear the audience he is addressing: “You hypocrite!” When Jesus says “Do not judge,” he is warning people against heaping criticism and condemnation on others without being willing to examine one’s own behavior. Clearly the context is one in which some religious leaders were harshly condemning other people while attempting to justify their own sinfulness.

          Furthermore, many people are unaware of balancing texts about judging in the rest of the New Testament. These include Jesus’ command “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment” (John 7:24, NRSV), and Paul’s rhetorical question “Is it not those who are inside [the church] that you are to judge?” (1 Cor. 5:12). Clearly not all judging is forbidden. I’m sure you hate that fact, Matt. If that were the case, the church could have no boundaries; the body of Christ would not be a body but a gaseous vapor!

          Paul urged the Corinthian church to exclude the man who was living with his father’s wife; he ordered them not to associate with people who claim to be Christians but live blatantly sinful lives without repentance (1 Cor. 5). Did Paul simply forget Jesus’ command not to judge? Was he unaware of it? That’s doubtful. Rather, we should suppose that Jesus meant only to condemn hypocritical judging. When the church must discipline a member, it should always do so in full recognition of everyone’s lack of perfection and need of the Savior.

          You can find an Old and New Testament in any bookstore, at Amazon, etc. Have a good day, Matt.

          • MattZuke

            “Perhaps it is you who ought to read the Bible, Matt. Christians believe that God is the Church.”

            Yes, so you concede my point. Marriage is NOT a state matter.
            Deut 22:13-21 virginity is required, or the women gets stoned.

            But let’s review

            Gen 4:1 – Let there be incest
            Gen 20:12 More incest, Abraham and his sister, well half sister as Abraham’s father had many “wives”.
            Gen 16:3 And took the maid Hagar “and became my wife”

            So what does this mean, it means polygamy was accepted and the ACT of copulation equates to marriage.

            Deut 22:28-29 Again, the act of rape is marriage, but compensation to the father is required, 50 shekels of silver.

            Judges 21:7-23 Kill the people, but save the virgins, all 400 of them.

            1 Chron 3:1-9 David has 8 wives, plus concubines
            2 Sam 16:21 David’s concubines were raped by David’s son

            1 Kings 11:1 David’s son Solomon “Loved many strange women”, 700 wives, 300 concubines

            1 Chron 2:34 In this case marriage is between a man and a slave dad hired to rape her.

            So to review, the act of coupling IS marriage in the context of the bible. This includes rape, the rape fee includes the person you raped. Polygamy is endorsed, as is incest, which is slightly better than incest with monogamy.

            And yeah, YOU should read your bible :P

          • MattZuke

            “You can find an Old and New Testament in any bookstore, at Amazon, etc. Have a good day, Matt”

            Nice condensation there. Bigots like you have NEVER heard of an annotated concordance bible.

            You do understand that the the folks depicted in the bible didn’t speak English. This is why we have tools like Strong’s numbers to easily facilitate looking up the meaning of words and their meaning in the language from where they’re translated. Even then you have to take into account that much of the NT was translated into Koine, with limited transliteration, from what ever variation of Aramaic Jesus would have spoken. “Eli eli lema sabachthani” (Matthew 27:46 & Mark 15:34) suggests Jesus’s language Aramaic, as would “Talitha koum” (Mark 5:41), though it’s not cited in Luke 8:54 or Matt 9:24. Remember, if we accept the bible as truth, Jesus spoke mainly to peasants.

            So nice condensation, but you see I actually had “some” bible education, the real kind. It’s limited but trumps uneducated bigots like yourself who NEVER used any form of study bible.

            Regardless, I demonstrated my point. Marriage was the act of coupling, which required a woman to be a virgin. Polygamy was normal, thus “traditional” marriage means selling your daughter to a man who might already have a wife. If she’s not a virgin, she’d dead.

      • BobbyJoe

        You are a disgusting human being AMELIA. PERIOD

    • Louis Schnitzer

      Apparently, you have not read all of the ignorant and hate-filled things that have been said against Bristol by those trying to “shut her down”. I certainly have, and its disgusting. Last time I checked, we had a First Amendment in America. You may strongly disagree with her views, but attempting to demonize her or launching personal attacks against her is just ignorant. Good arguments will always stand up by themselves in what one philosopher described as the “competition in the market-place of ideas”. Lets keep it about Ideas, not about insults. Just because we believe in traditional morality does not make us “haters” any more than the Pope or Billy Graham, or Jesus himself (who had plenty to say about sexual morality) should be described as a “hater”. Disagree with opinions, but don’t launch personal attacks, especially if you call yourself a “humanist” or a believer in “free speech”.

  • Georgia

    MattZuke — I’ve shared al that I have to say to you. You babble and provide no proof. You are boring me.

    • MattZuke

      “You babble and provide no proof”

      Actually there is tons of evidence that support the idea of being born that way. You are just a bigot who supports infanticide over gays adopting kids.

      You’re just projecting on the “proof” front. All you have is the assertion homosexuals are sub-human scum, and the assertion genes play no role. If that assertion was true, then twin studies would not show 70% connection that twin is gay, the other twin is gay. We wouldn’t have genetic evidence in fruit flies that they can be manipulated to being gay.

      You see, to validate your bigotry YOU need evidence, and that evidence doesn’t exist. What people do in the bedroom plays no factor in adopting kids, well, unless they are kid fuckers. Hetrosexuals are allowed to adopt kids even if one dresses up like a baby and poops in a diaper, and the other person eats it. But homosexuals are not granted the same right, even though you have NO evidence homosexuals engage in this behavior.

      The person with the positive assertion has the burden of proof, and YOU need STRONG evidence that homosexuals should be rounded up and put in concentration camps with electric fences.

      • Amalia

        Your faux outrage is tiresome.
        There’s plenty of proof to assert the idea that the best home for children is one in which there is a male father and female mother present. The studies you refer to are all flawed and biased.
        But go ahead with your fake indignation and name calling. It shows you for what you really are – an intolerant, hypocritical bully.

        • MattZuke

          “There’s plenty of proof to assert the idea that the best home for children is one in which there is a male father and female mother present. The studies you refer to are all flawed and biased.”

          The proposition being proposed is unwanted children, and children slated for infanticide, not children already in stable heterosexual homes. No one is proposing taking children in stable families and transplanting them to homosexual homes. That’s patently silly.

          The objective reality is 80,000 children go unadopted each year, so even if you have evidence homosexual parents are inferior to heterosexual parents, and you don’t, homosexual parents only need to be better than having NO parents, or single parents.

          Asserting THOSE studies are FLAWED isn’t really evidence of anything. It’ just means you’re a bigot who accepts preconception over observation. I started thinking “I don’t know if gays make acceptable parents” then looked for the evidence. The evidence would suggest they are equal to hetrosexual parents.

          “It shows you for what you really are – an intolerant, hypocritical bully.”

          Sure, rounding up homosexuals and putting them in concentration camps with electric fences is tolerant. Exterminating homosexuals in the name of Jesus is tolerance, accepting minorities is intolerant. Denying kids a gay home IN FAVOR OF INFANTICIDE is tolerance, letting gays adopt kids who otherwise would be killed is bullying?

          What the flying hell are you smoking?

        • Mrs. Sixx

          Hogwash! And you know it. The majority of studies today state that children do just as well in same sex parent home as they do in an opposite sex parent home. In fact there have been recent studies which seem to indicate that children of two mother homes do the best of all. This makes absolute sense if you think about it; mothers are, after all the natural nurturers. If there are two in the house, the children are going to have two nurturing parents (not always the case if the father is not a nurturer).

          I don’t even know why I am bothering with you. You obviously will not listen to science or facts or reason. You choose to leave your blinders on so that you can keep your myopic world view. I actually feel sorry for you.

        • Georgia

          Amalia, Well said.

          • MattZuke

            “Amalia, Well said.”

            Not really, it’s just validation by an appeal to persecution. Homosexuals are harassed and killed. You yourself promote the philosophy that homosexuals are mentally ill and are more likely to be pedophiles, yet somehow YOU’RE being BULLIED.

            I don’t support death threats, or even people who suggest you take your own life, which isn’t a death threat by the way. However, you’re trying to equate being told to kill yourself with minority persecution, perpetrated by extremist Christians. Somehow smashing the skulls of fags is okay in your book, but being mean to a fellow Christian is an unforgivable crime.

          • BobbyJoe

            BOTH of You, GEORGIA and AMALIA are disgusting, bigoted human beings. IRAN would love to have you.

  • Georgia

    Sky — Yes, I would call a male who is SEXUALLY attracted to an 8-year-old female child a heterosexual pedophile and I would call a male who is attracted to an 8-year-old male child a homosexual pedophile. It does not matter if heterosexual and homosexual men (or women) have sex with adults. If they are sexually attracted to children they are pedophiles.

    Did you ever hear of NAMBLA? Here are some comments from leaders, in the homosexual community:

    “The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality. For
    the gay community to imply that boy-love is not homosexual love is
    – “No Place for Homo-Homophobia,” letter to the editor, *San Francisco
    Sentinel*, 26 March 1992.

    “We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of
    your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools,
    in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums…”
    – Michael Swift, *Gay Community News*, 15 February 1987.

    “The age of consent is just one of the many ways in which adults impose
    their system of control on children.”
    – NAMBLA quoted in Shirley J. O’Brien’s article “The Child Molester,”
    *National Federation for Decency Journal*, May/June 1987, pp. 9-11.

    “How many gay men, I wonder, would have missed out on a valuable,
    liberating experience — one that initiated them into their sexuality –
    if it weren’t for so-called molestation?”
    – Carl Maves, “Getting Over It,” *The Advocate*, 5 May 1992, p. 85.

    “Boy-lovers and the lesbians who have young lovers … are not child
    molesters. The child abusers are priests, teachers, therapists, cops and
    parents who force their staid morality onto the young people in their
    – Pat Califia’s essay, “Man/Boy Love and the Lesbian/Gay Movement,” *The
    Age of Taboo: Gay Male Sexuality, Power and Consent, (Boston and London:
    Alyson Publications/Gay Men’s Press, 1981), p. 144…

    FULL ARTICLE: http://www.qrd.org/qrd/religion/anti/CFV/cfv.report.pt1-03.94

    It is you who appears to be intellectually dishonest or you are woefully misinformed, Sky. You need to do more than read your homosexual talking points. The sources are all there for your edification!

    Even the United Nations had a lot to say on the subject. As follows:



    In Other Action, Council Adopts
    2003 Work Programme, Grants Consultative Status to 56 NGOs
    [According to the NGO Committee report, the International Lesbian and Gay Association is an international organization previously on the roster. In 1994, one year after it had been granted consultative status, the Council suspended it, “based on concerns raised about its member organizations or subsidiaries that promoted or condoned paedophilia”. Subsequently, the NGO requested reinstatement of its status, but a number of delegations to the NGO Committee raised questions in that regard. The Committee made a recommendation to deny the consultative status to the International Lesbian and Gay Association.]

    *** International Lesbian and Gay Association is the largest homosexual organization in the world.
    Have a lovely holiday, Sky.

    • MattZuke

      “Sky — Yes, I would call a male who is SEXUALLY attracted to an 8-year-old female child a heterosexual pedophile and I would call a male who is attracted to an 8-year-old male child a homosexual pedophile”

      You can call them that as much as you like.

      Here’s the thing about people who fuck 8 year olds, 8 year olds don’t have any secondary sexual attributes. There is not a ton of difference between a 8 year old girl and 8 year old boy. This is why pedophiles are in their own class.

      “For the present discussion, the important point is that many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman” –http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

      “Using the fixated-regressed distinction, Groth and Birnbaum (1978) studied 175 adult males who were convicted in Massachusetts of sexual assault against a child. None of the men had an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation. 83 (47%) were classified as “fixated;” 70 others (40%) were classified as regressed adult heterosexuals; the remaining 22 (13%) were classified as regressed adult bisexuals. Of the last group, Groth and Birnbaum observed that “in their adult relationships they engaged in sex on occasion with men as well as with women. However, in no case did this attraction to men exceed their preference for women….There were no men who were primarily sexually attracted to other adult males…” (p.180).”

      So sorry bigot :P

    • MattZuke

      “Here are some comments from leaders, in the homosexual community:”

      What is it with you Nazi Christians making bold assertions that “these are comments from LEADERS” when no one has ever heard of these people before, or citations taken out of context.

      “We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums…”
      – Michael Swift, *Gay Community News*, 15 February 1987.

      You kind of missed a line.

      “This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.” –http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/swift1.asp

      How does it feel to be intellectually dishonest. Take a quote out of context and it makes it look like Mr. Swift is advocating pedophilia. “Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.” I guess this is normal for Nazi Christians validating their pro-death cult.

      The rest of your hate speech is citing NAMBLA, simply asserting they are part of the homosexual community. This is obviously a lie. But like with you Nazi Christians the right to free speech is used to hang yourselves. Unfortunately this form of hate speech results in the death of homosexuals, and somehow YOUR being bullied.

      • Georgia

        MattZuke writes: “The rest of your hate speech is citing NAMBLA, simply asserting they are part of the homosexual community. This is obviously a lie…”

        One of many Homosexual Pedophile Organizations:
        “The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws criminalizing male adult sexual involvement with minors and for the release of all men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that did not involve coercion…”

        Males who exclusively molest male children are homosexual pedophiles. Continue to lie to yourself, Matt. You confuse hate speech with facts and truth, as many homosexuals do.

        • MattZuke

          “You confuse hate speech with facts”

          No I don’t. You’re just a Nazi Christian who trying to promote hate on homosexuals, and ignore facts. Not only did you quote mine satire, but you’re being intellectually dishonest. Asserting NAMBLA are members of the homosexual community requires some strong evidence. The evidence suggests groups like Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation deplores NAMBLA’s goals, as well as National Gay and Lesbian Task Force which doesn’t support the abuse of minors.

          “Males who exclusively molest male children are homosexual pedophiles. ”

          No bigot. To be a homosexual or heterosexual you must a preference to engage is sexual relations with sexually mature members of your own gender, or the opposite gender. You concede that you require EVIDENCE that a pedophile picks boys over girls, and NOT choose the opposite gender in adults. The evidence is actually the reverse, Groth and Birnbaum (1978), none of the pedophiles were homosexuals. If you were intellectually honest, the norm would be bi-sexual. But as cited, there is not a ton of difference between a 8yo girl or boy.

          So by your own logic, heterosexual couples should be bared from adopting as hetrosexuals are more likely to be child molesters than homosexuals.

          And yes, this is hate speech. You’re actively promoting hate toward a minority group.

  • Dennis McHale

    Come on Bristol, you must have learned from your Mom’s experience that “they just make things up”. Bristol you can’t try to understand Haters with the rational that they are dealing with reality, and are being reasonable. There “NUTS!!!” Ignore them and understand they are not looking for conversation or debate. They want you do like they said in the Movie ‘Independence Day’: “To Die.”
    Your supporters know better. We enjoy your posts. Keep writing them, they will attract other sane people eventually.

  • Kristen

    Bristol did cry victim of bulleying and she used what a selected few said out of her blog. She did not respond to people who had valid points. How can she say that people who come from a two parent heterosexual home, when she came from a two parent home and still made poor choices? How did she come up with the facts that kids do better in a two parent heterosexual home when there are studies that say the complete opposite? Bristol also brought up the traditional marriage that has been around thousands of years, but she has not did her research. Women was considered property, marriage was not about love, it was a business merger. It was all about bloodline. People were marrying their family members. That is the “traditional” marriage. If she believed in tradition, she would have gooten married to Levi before the world knew she was married. She wants to hide behind tradition as a cover up because she does not want to admit she is homophobic.