George Takei responds to "traditional" marriage fans

Star Trek star and noted homosexual George Takei responds to bigots who believe in restricting the right to love to straight people only: an image gallery on Imgur. Oh, snap, oh glorious snap.



  1. “…noted homosexual…”

    I don’t know why, but that just sounds funny to me. I know nothing untoward was intended by it… but it just sounds funny.

    1. Kind of like calling the President, “noted black.” It’s just the wrong noun. But a good kind of wrong.

      1. The President is not currently making a career out of being black.  Mr. Takei is working the gay as hard as he can.

        1.  If I, for some reason, were given the power to arrange orbital strikes, say, a plate-class GSV at my disposal, and could therefore make everyone do as they’re fucking told, I think I might first make George Takei POTUS, just for the lulz.

          1. You can never have too much punctuation.
            — Mrs. Smith, 6th grade grammar teacher

        2. “Mr. Takei is working the gay as hard as he can.”

          I bet he is. I saw the photoset on a friend’s FB the other day – just hilarious and awesome.

        3. I’m curious what you think of that? Should we condemn him for “selling his gayness”? How much of this is him working within the system in which we are all subject? What does this new creative entrepreneurship say about our political economy?

          I was just having a discussion with my better half about fandom and how it’s been commodified since the 90s. I think it’s generally indicative of the post-Cold War economy, which is neo-liberal in nature and pushes as many people as possible into the role of entrepeneur – we are all here to make money, in this configuration. Artists/actors/musicans most especially. They are the new avant-garde of selling themselves as products.  The creative classes are the new middle class, and the new elite has embraced this notion of creativity as the new world order….

          I’m not trying to be a jackass, btw, but am genuinely curious about this because given the nature of the economy today, selling creativity is where we are going.  You’re  smart cookie, so I want to hear your take on this stuff…

          1. He’s a celebrity activist, and “selling” himself (and therefore his “gayness)” is certainly part of that activism.  But it’s also just part of being a celebrity. So I’m not sure you can necessarily separate the two, even if you wanted to.

            He has a voice, a loud voice, and people pay attention — and he’s using it.  For a really great cause.  AND he actually connects with his fans — he’s not just some vague celebrity.  He really puts himself out there, which is really risky.  And it has to be very tiresome, too, to always be ON like that.

            He’s more selling his activism than he is his gayness, in my opinion.

            My dad isn’t a bigot but he’s pretty “old school” sometimes and he follows and SHARES Take’s facebook posts.  That tripped me out!  That’s just freakin’ awesome, man.  People who may not have otherwise been exposed to Takei’s brand of humor and activism are now being exposed.

          2. Good for him. Everyone who does (good) comedy, sells some part of themselves. People pay to observe someone who presents as more interesting and entertaining than themselves.

        4. To be fair, if you or I were George Takei, we too would be working the gay just as hard.

          Just as hard.

    2. The awkward silliness of the “just so” phrasing is intentional.

      But seriously, that princess quote, ungh. Just another lame “I CAN’T BE HAPPY IF GAYS ARE HAPPY” attempt at a meme. It’s not even clever!

  2. Also, the hoodie one was brilliant. Leviticus 19 19: Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

      1. “It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.” ~ Sun Tzu [The Art of War]

      2. The Levitican law that Leviticus 19:19 refers to still has adherents today; they are observant Jews, and they take pains to ensure they do not wear clothing made of mixed fibres.

        They take so many pains that they employ professionals to check their clothing, whose profession is termed, in Hebrew, shatner.

        So there is something of a reason he may have known that particular one.

          1.  The 1977 telephone directory for Kansas City, MO.

            Nobody is really sure how that works.

          2. I used to interview elder Ashkenazi concentration camp survivors. I misattributed the term, too, as shatner is old colloquial Yiddish (a language mix of German and Hebrew). I can’t find web citations for it but it came up in an interview.
            Yiddish is pretty fascinating, in that the strongest swearing (“dirty” language) is along the lines of “you have poop on your head” and “may your daughter-in-law dump your son”.

          3. Come on now. Takei played Sulu in Star Trek. Who played Captain Kirk? Shatner. This isn’t rocket science.

          4. Yes, I got as far as that. It was rather the name of the orthodox jews whose occupation was the inspection of heterogeneous textiles, and the connection thereof to the name of the actor, that surprised me.

          5. Actually, this is often cited by those trying to show how the bible is full of things that Christians ignore while claiming to adhere to biblical law…  I’ve heard it often before and I don’t read the bible very much, or like ever.

          6.  I’m trying to understand. You’re angry that Takei knows some of the more famously stupid parts of The Bible?

      3. not to discredit George Takai or anything, but quoting Leviticus is one of the primary atheist/secular kata. it’s just so useful in slapping idiots down.

        my favorite is genesis 9:13 where the LORD (apparently) changes the refractive index of water to something more fabulous.

      4. If you know just a bit of the quote, or even just the gist of it, you can put what you know into Google and usually get chapter and verse. 
        “eaten by bears bible”
        “smash babies rocks”
        “piss wall bible”
        …and you too can look like a bible scholar!

        1. So I don’t have to read it, right? There are machines to do that for me now, like Douglas Adams said? Well, okay.

  3. My favorite was “You also mean at the protest, I presume.”

    But as much as his clever retorts amuse, overall I’m just left depressed about all the other people with signs. 

  4. I’m most amused by the one with the little “yolo” written in the corner. Sounds like in the true spirit of yolo one should try out both “Adam and Eve” and “Adam and Steve”, just to see how it feels.

    1.  ugh, that girl.  “yolo” written small and off to the side.  awkward as fuck yet you can tell she thinks she’s really of-the-moment.  that picture particularly grinds my gears more than it ought to.

      1. Maybe because they are both completely vapid cliches? Maybe because “YOLO” itself is completely annoying (and actually false if you are a Christian who believes in Judgement Day and eternal life in heaven or hell after earthly death). Honestly, Mr. “Because —- It. Right to do it” seems to have put more thought into what he was trying to say.

  5. Are reactionaries starting to run out of people capable of rudimentary feats of spelling and punctuation? For humanitarian reasons I am inclined to hope that they aren’t a representative sample…

    1. Apparently the homophobe gene is linked to the bad spelling and grammar gene.  It’s possible that they’ll all just wander into wood chippers eventually because they can’t understand the warning signs.

      1. No good.  The signs are pictograms.  Let’s all hope they’re terrible at charades too.

      2. Maybe the best antidote for them is run into some nice gay people who can reveal to them that they are, just like them, human beings… But generally, they are too busy screaming biblical verses at “the gays” to really get to  know any.

    2. Reality has a liberal bias. Ergo, because reality is complex, education has a liberal bias. (I suppose intelligence should be thrown in there somewhere too.)

    3.  Seriously. I struggled to understand the phrasing of more than half of those. Coherence is apparently just not a priority, either on paper or in ideology.

      1. There were a couple where I still don’t understand what they were trying to say.  That’s excluding the things like the one pictured above, which is intelligible but just doesn’t make any fucking sense at all.

          1. I guess the problem is that they’re fragmentary references to incredibly stupid supposed “arguments” made by the anti-marriage forces that didn’t make a lick of sense to begin with, even in context.

          1. Yeah, I think there’s parroting of bits of popular “arguments” that didn’t make any sense in the first place going on.  They think that since those statements have been repeated, they must mean something.

  6. Wow, the “traditional marriage” advocates range from the completely incoherent to the idiotic.  Initially I was thinking whoever took the photos of them wasn’t too sympathetic to their cause, given what a stunning collection of stupidity it is.  But I remembered the sorts of arguments that side thinks are brilliant, so now I’m not so sure.

  7. The most recent podcast episode of Philosophy Bites covers the topic of gay marriage and the guest philosopher makes a very reasoned and compelling argument about why it should be legal.

    1.  Seems like a lot of work. I’d have thought, ‘Well, of course it fucking should’ would pretty much cover it.

  8. God’s ORIGINAL plan was just Adam, and Himself.

    Adam wasn’t allowed to wear clothing, and would stay at home taking care of the garden, the pets, and waiting for his Master and Adam would Obey his Master’s every Word. That was the orginal plan. HIM, Adam and pets and garden. (plus no clothing as a bonus).

    Eve was an after thought and things rapidly spiraled out of control after “SHE” showed up. And Adam was tempted..and disobeyed his same Sex Master.
    Thus the fall of the mankind was made.

    1. Genesis…the reboot!

      I can’t wait to see how Lilith and Samael work into the original plan, or are we only going to original cannon material?

      1.  Oh lets stay with the Cannon of “Christian”.

        Gods original plan was Adam and God, Adam took care of pets, garden and was naked.

        Eve in the Christian cannon was a afterthought from “God”. Not in the original plan created much later, after “GOD” thought he needed someone to boss about too.

          1. Cannon is a misspelling of canon, anyway, which is a misspelling of cannone, anyway.

  9. Look at those pictures. They are taken at a Ralph Reed event. That would be a stupid magnet. It’s just not fair.

  10.  News flash to the woman: you are not and never will be a princess. You don’t have a king and queen for parents and let me remind you, this is the USA. Our gov’t was founded by people intent on overthrowing royal families and their aristocracy.  Also, do not confuse Disney’s  images of women  and life in general with reality. In short, grow up.

  11. I find myself experiencing a fair amount of cognitive dissonance looking at these pictures.  They (mostly) look like nice kids, but they’re holding signs espousing such hateful bullshit.  Hopefully at least some of them will realize that at some point.

    1. This happens to me too, not just here. I think part of the problem of these nice looking kids, is that they are nice looking kids, many (but not all) white and probably all middle class and comfortable. I doubt that any of them had to struggle for anything in their lives. Hence, I think it’s probably hard for them to identify with people who do have some sort of struggle. Or they could all just be assholes.

      That being said, I have a few conservative friends who are incredibly nice, open and caring people, who have pretty horrible political views. They’d never imagine being rude or not kind and inviting to everyone they meet, gay people included, but they consistently reject the notion that you can legalize gay marriage (or that you should have a social safety net, or whatever).

      1.  They probably live in areas (rural/suburban) where they’ve had little exposure to different kinds of people and viewpoints and have absorbed their wretched parent’s views for the time being. One of Takei’s best responses pointed that out. Some will move on as they get away from their folks, some may not.

        Some of the worst people are measured, polite, and long on social graces.

  12. “Please tell me where this island of men is. Thanks.” has me rolling on the floor.
    I love George Takei. I just love him…

  13. I do feel sorry for the kids. They seem to be of college age, but apparently they have undergone a brainectomy, as they seem to be totally lacking critical thinking.

    Do they seriously think that the arguments they have been spoon fed (apparently, as I’ve seen exactly the same ones elsewhere) make any sense? That they are actual arguments? Have they even once stopped and thought about the words they are parroting? Do they really want to tie marriage 1:1 to the ability to procreate, as that is an incredibly scary path to walk down?

  14. Leviticus 19:19 Oh my! Classic!

    If anything it shows the absurdity of some peoples supposed beliefs. At least read the instruction manual properly. It might save you some embarrassment.

  15. …and on the Seventh Day, the Lord regarded His creation and proclaimed

    OH MY!

    Or maybe it was

    OY VEY!

  16. These douchefaces have at least as good grammar and spelling as climate change deniers.

    Get a brain, morans!

  17.  Isn’t it appropriate in that it’s the part of the bible that mentions man lying with man?

    1. Except there’s an obsession with that one quote, while ignoring the rest of it. Hence, Takei’s comeback quote. 

      It takes a special type of hypocritical dumbass to claim to hold one verse in a set of laws above all the other laws while pretending that any of them matter when they themselves don’t follow all those laws. . Either go by ALL the laws, or none of them. I don’t think they were meant to be utilized buffet-style. 

      1. there’s a sophistic (not to be mistaken for sophisticated) argument that some of the laws were pure laws about how to live (kill gays), and some of them were just social laws about setting yourself apart from the pagans, because pagans wore blended fabrics. and of course, god in his infinite wisdom didn’t say which are which.

        they certainly do have an answer for everything, don’t they…

Comments are closed.