As gay discourse in the West is dominated by conservative ideas non-aligned opinions gain a smaller margin. LGBT social movement, parliaments and governments are creating the legal underpinning for the contemporary gay man: marriage and parenting laws. Mainstream media, in turn, create the official image: rich, married, with children and assimilated. Completely assimilated (see the example of the French far right of Marine Le Pen that is also supported by gay sectors). Who would dream this could happen?
That’s why the words of fashion designers Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana are being misinterpreted and censured. They both said in an interview for the Italian magazine Panorama that they believe in the “traditional family” and that children of gay parents are “synthetic“.
Elton John felt outraged. Madonna gave some advice. British activist Peter Tatchell wrote in The Guardian: “Their words have given a propaganda gift to the opponents of LGBT equality.” Ricky Martin also disapproved.
Under such public pressure, Dolce and Gabbana were forced to give an interview to CNN and tried to explain their opinions.
This is the formula The New York Times used to summarize the case:
“Well before same-sex marriage became widely recognized around the world (though not in Italy), the two were openly living together as lovers. […] So it was something of a surprise this week when word broke that the two men, who are no longer romantically involved but still run their business together, had given an interview in the Italian magazine Panorama in which they said they opposed gay people having families of their own.”
We are dealing with a hoax. Whoever really defends human rights shall recognize freedom of thought and freedom of expression to others. Dolce and Gabbana are being victims of gay monolithic agenda, a form of intolerance as many others.
The typical truncated arguments that mainstream media likes to adopt are: speaking against LGBT parenting or marriage is like speaking against human rights and is contrary to the very condition of being gay. This is a conservative and oppressive narrative. This is the neo-Puritanism, as Alex Andreu noted in a recent article. (That same neo-Puritanism was used to criticise the interview actor Russell Tovey gave to The Guardian.)
Through Internet and social media this siege of freedom of expression expands itself. Gay integrism is a form of discrimination and an attack over freedom.