More New Year's Male Beauty

Jon Huntsman - The Manchurian Candidate?

Just shy of two years ago I wrote here and here about former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and his likely calculated decision to change his stance on opposition to gay rights and to oppose some of the most vocal social conservatives in that state. At the time there was speculation that Huntsman realized that to be attractive to independents and moderates on the national scene, a shift from far right extremism was mandatory. Then, subsequently, when Huntsman - who is extremely wealthy - took the position as Obama's ambassador to China, there was speculation that Huntsman was honing his foreign affairs credentials in contemplation of a presidential run for president in 2012. Now, speculation has reappeared and Newsweek has the sub-headline of "When Barack Obama posted Jon Huntsman to Beijing, it looked like a crafty way to sideline a 2012 rival. Don’t bet on it." Given the current field of would be GOP candidates, a bid by Huntsman might make sense - he has conservative credentials but is not batshit crazy like many of his would be opponents. Like Mitt Romney, Huntsman should he run will have the challenge of overcoming his Mormon faith with the lunatic Christianist of the GOP base. Here are highlights from Newsweek:
*
The Huntsmans’ new home in the posh D.C. neighborhood of Kalorama is the prototype of pricey Washington real estate: a tall, boxy structure defined by red brick and right angles. Last spring, Bravo used the space to film its reality show Top Chef: Washington, D.C., but on a Sunday morning in mid-December, the spacious rooms on the first floor were largely unfurnished. “We’ve been living out of boxes for the last two years,” says Jon Huntsman Jr., who resigned the Utah governorship in 2009 to become U.S. ambassador to China. “We’re just now unpacking things we didn’t even remember we had. It’s like Christmas.”

The federal-style house attracted a small wave of Utah media attention last fall when Washingtonian magazine first noted the Huntsmans’ $3.6 million purchase on its real-estate page. It was just the sort of trivial Beltway gossip that lends itself to breathless interpretation by local political reporters, and both Salt Lake City dailies dutifully ran articles speculating that the hometown hero might soon return to the States gunning for higher office. It wasn’t a ridiculous notion. The moderate Republican had once been considered a rising star in the GOP and a likely 2012 contender, with David Plouffe, Barack Obama’s campaign mastermind, even identifying Huntsman as the only Republican who made him “a wee bit queasy” about the next race. But speculation ended abruptly in 2009 when Obama tapped Huntsman for the ambassadorship. National pundits called the appointment a shrewd move by the White House to sideline a potential rival, and then promptly forgot about him—which is probably why last fall’s Beehive State buzz was drowned out on the national stage by the noise of the midterms.
*
Now, it appears, the ambassador is ready to make some noise of his own. Sitting in the echo-y living room of his new Washington home, Huntsman, a tall, lean man with silver hair and impeccable posture, pauses only briefly when faced with the question of presidential aspirations. “You know, I’m really focused on what we’re doing in our current position,” he says. “But we won’t do this forever, and I think we may have one final run left in our bones.” Asked whether he is prepared to rule out a run in 2012 (since it would require him to campaign against his current boss), he declines to comment.
*
The winking response—about as close to a hat-in-ring announcement as you’ll get from a sitting member of the incumbent’s administration—could just be a hollow cry for attention. But sources close to Huntsman (who requested anonymity to speak freely without his permission) say that during his December trip to the U.S., he met with several former political advisers in Washington and Salt Lake City to discuss a potential campaign. “I’m not saying he’s running,” says one supporter who has worked with him in the past. “But we’re a fire squad; if he says the word, we can get things going fast.” What’s more, Huntsman tells NEWSWEEK that when he accepted the ambassadorial appointment, he promised his family they would “come up for air” sometime in 2010 to decide how much longer they would stay in Beijing. “I’m not announcing anything at all,” he says. But he sure seems to be hinting.
*
Of the half-dozen Republican strategists and pundits contacted by NEWSWEEK in recent weeks, not one listed him as a viable candidate in the upcoming race. The rationale is twofold: as a member of President Obama’s administration, Huntsman runs the risk of appearing ungrateful, or even disloyal, if he decides to run; and as a Mormon with ties to Utah, he would face tough competition from likely GOP candidate Mitt Romney as he milks their overlapping networks for donors and campaign talent. But neither obstacle is insurmountable. A Republican-primary candidate could do worse than publicly slighting the Obama White House. And Huntsman wouldn’t have much trouble financing the first leg of a presidential campaign on his own: his father, whose company invented the “clamshell” container for McDonald’s to package its Big Macs, is a billionaire. Setting those potential pitfalls aside, then, the big red elephant in the room remains: would the Republican base actually vote for someone like Huntsman?
*
But a closer look at his record reveals a nuanced approach to Republican politics. Shortly after Obama was swept into office in a tidal wave of Democratic victories, the popular governor began articulating a new national vision for the GOP, one designed to appeal to all time zones. Warning that the party was losing young voters, he argued that Republicans would need to tack to the middle on three hot-button issues if they were to maintain national relevance: immigration, gay rights, and the environment.
*
Today that strategy might seem out of step with recent GOP victories, but Weaver and many of his fellow moderates believe Huntsman is uniquely qualified to unify competing factions on the right and usher in a new era for the Republican Party. The portrait his most ardent fans paint is one of a natural-born consensus builder, capable of guiding bullheaded stakeholders through sensitive negotiations—and coming out on top. “He’s an inclusive person, which, without getting into personalities within our party, unfortunately is a rare commodity,” says Weaver, who has advised Huntsman on his political career in the past. “I’m a firm believer that our next great Republican president will be a conservative problem-solver. And to be a problem-solver you have to be inclusive about getting things done.”
*
Huntsman is eager not to appear too idealistic. “You remember that diplomats are pretty much trained as warriors,” he says. “I mean, you take a situation up to the brink of having to call in the military. It isn’t just making nice with people; it’s getting stuff done.” With little experience in the national political arena, it’s impossible to know what, exactly, Huntsman is capable of getting done. But voters may get a chance to find out sooner than anybody—especially the White House—expected.

Fairfax County, Virginia's First Gay Bar

In many ways, Northern Virginia is the most liberal area of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Admittedly, "liberal" is a relative term - especially when parts of that "liberal" region elect Neanderthals and cretins like Del. Bob Marshall to the General Assembly and Eugene Delgaudio to the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, respectively. Now, as the Washington Post reports, Fairfax County boasts its own gay bar - previously, a trip into the District of Columbia afforded the only gay bar venues to residents in the Virginia suburbs. No doubt, Marshall and Delguadio publicly are not happy campers in terms of having a gay venue close to home, yet I suspect both have secret gay sex fantasies given the way they fit the tormented closet case profile. Here are some highlights from the Post's article:
*
Austin Jennings is the manager of So Addictive Lounge, a Herndon bar and grill, where he's learned that it's a lot of work, this business of going fully gay. There are gay and lesbian bartenders to hire, and more drag queens to book, and fruit-flavored Michelob Ultras to add to the beer list, and an entire menu to be made over, with salads replacing all that deep-fried food, Jennings said, "because gay people are conscious of what they eat." And he has repainted, too. "Gay people have an eye for detail and decorating. It's a stereotype, but it's true."
*
So Addictive, which started out as a coffeehouse (thus the name), launched a weekly gay night last summer - a Wednesday gathering that initially consisted of four people, including Jennings and his boyfriend, drinking beer, watching "Modern Family" at the bar and wondering where everybody else was.
*
Now, the Wednesday night drag shows - featuring a wild mix of makeup, wigs, spangles and Lady Gaga impersonations - fill the place. Their success has persuaded Jennings and So Addictive's owner to swap out the bar's weekly hip-hop and Latin nights and turn their place into the only almost full-time gay bar in Fairfax County, home to more than 1 million people. The new format took effect on New Year's Eve; the only straight holdover on the schedule, for now, is heavy-metal Monday.
*
The arrival of a gay bar in the heart of a quintessentially suburban community nearly 25 miles outside of Washington is a milestone for the gay community. It's also a broader test to see whether a business that caters to gay men and lesbians can succeed and gain mainstream acceptance in a town that was once featured in a book on the 100 "Best Places to Raise Your Family" in the United States.
*
Sarah Gustafson, president of the gay rights organization Equality Fairfax, recently e-mailed the 900 people on her list to announce the "fantastic news" that "yes, Virginia, there is a gay bar in Fairfax County." "There's a tremendous amount of gay, lesbian and transsexual people who live in the county, so it's really great that a bar's coming to us," Gustafson said. "People might not realize there's a significant gay and lesbian population in the suburbs; everybody assumes we live downtown. But we are everywhere. We are your neighbors, and having a neighborhood bar finally puts a permanent face on that."
*
Along with Freddie's Beach Bar in Crystal City, So Addictive will be one of just two full-time gay bars in the northern half of a state that activists say is not exactly the most hospitable place for gays.
*
Jimmy Cirrito, the owner of Jimmy's Old Town Tavern, said he welcomed the gayification of So Addictive, which is across the street from his bar. "If somebody's against having a gay bar, then they're against America," he said. "It's freedom. We're all God's people. We do what we want."
*
I like the unique business opportunity," Yen said. If there are 7,000 gays in Herndon and Reston, and 25,000 in Fairfax County (both numbers were guesses because there's no reliable data, according to Gustafson), not to mention underserved gay people in Loudoun and Prince William counties, that seems to offer "great possibilities," Yen said.
*
I hope So Addictive is a big success and, who knows, maybe the boyfriend and I will visit it someday soon.

The Problem Isn't Gays, It's Bigots

A letter to the editor in the Henderson, Kentucky Gleaner hits on a topic that needs to be more widely addressed in the wake of DADT repeal - namely the the problem with gays in the military has nothing to do with LGBT service members themselves but rather the bigotry of typically Christian extremists who want special rights for themselves and preference given to their beliefs at the expense of all others. Per these Christofascists, everyone else is supposed to yield to their religious based bigotry. The argument is, pardon my "French," bullshit and is akin to saying that the military should return to a segregated basis because white bigots dislike blacks (and typically other minorities as well). If the U.S. Constitution is to mean anything, then bigotry should not be given special rights and special privileges. Here are some highlights from this very apt letter to the editor:
*
I don't often reminisce about my military days, but recent opinions concerning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" have had me traveling down some dusty paths of memory. Mostly, I've been pondering the "tell" part, and whether it is inappropriate to advertise your sexuality in the service. During my term, we were young, healthy and single. We advertised our sexuality at every opportunity. I served with Christians of all stripes. Know what I noticed? Christians talk about sex.
*
I'll never know how many homosexuals I served with. Two for sure. The first one left the service after graduating top of his class from tech school, discharged for voluntarily disclosing his sexuality. The other came out to me after I'd known him for a bit. By the time he told me he was gay, I already knew. We ALL knew. How? Well, while the rest of us were talking about sex, he never talked about it. Ever. See, if public discussion of sexuality is a problem, it is OUR problem. We heterosexuals just can't shut up about it.
*
The military is not a Christian organization. It is, however, an ongoing social experiment. We experimented when we decided that anyone of any religion could join, when we integrated the service (years before Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights acts of the '60s), and when we expanded the role of women in the service. Things didn't always go smooth with those experiments, but we did it and the service is better for it.
*
The problem with gays in the military isn't gays. It's bigots. The answer isn't to get rid of gays; it's getting rid of the bigots. That's how we handled it during all those other transitions -- service members either learned to get past their prejudices or were discharged.
*
We shouldn't ask whether gays should be in the military -- they serve and always have. We should ask why homosexuals should be silent when heterosexuals aren't. We should ask, is a bigot who says he won't serve with gays any better than one who says he won't serve with Jews?

New Year's Male Beauty

Conservatives' Brains Have Larger "Fear Center"

The Christianists and and religious extremist wingnuts are quick to deny that sexual orientation is something inborn and insist on claiming that gays have "chosen" a "lifestyle." Now science may be about to have a last laugh on the crazies and we'll see if they are quick to admit that perhaps their conservative lunacy is something that they can't help. And that, therefore, they are not merely simply paranoid, nasty bigots. Yep, a new study suggests that conservatives suffer from an inborn fear factor, if you will, that causes them to be fearful of far more than normal people. If the premise is true, then Maggie Gallagher, Tony Perkins, Robert Knight and similar hate merchants must have received a double or triple dose of the brain structure phenomenon. As Salon is reporting, University College London researchers say brains of the right-leaning have big amygdala, small anterior cingulate - the centers of the brain that control fear and courage and optimism, respectively. Here are some highlights:
*
A study to be published next year at University College London suggests that conservative brains are structured differently than the brains of other people. The investigation, led by Geraint Rees, focused on 92 individuals in the U.K. -- 90 students and two members of Parliament.
*
Specifically, the research shows that people with conservative tendencies have a larger amygdala and a smaller anterior cingulate than other people. The amygdala -- typically thought of as the "primitive brain" -- is responsible for reflexive impulses, like fear. The anterior cingulate is thought to be responsible for courage and optimism. This one-two punch could be responsible for many of the anecdotal claims that conservatives "think differently" from others.
*
Since only adults were included in the investigation, researchers were unable to determine if cerebral physiology drives politics or if political beliefs change the brain. A previous University of California study suggests the former is possible, isolating a so-called "liberal gene" -- the neurotransmitter DRD4 -- responsible for an increased receptiveness to novel ideas.
*
[S]some conservative tweeters have even tried to claim that the enlarged amygdala just means that conservatives "have bigger brains." Of course, the first claim begs the question, and the second ignores the shrunken anterior cingulate. While the extent of the differences is still unclear, the biology of politics has begun to confirm that those differences are real.

*

So the next time a fundy is going off, just tell him/her that they suffer from a congenital defect.

More Friday Male Beauty

New Task Forces to Focus on LGBT Youth

As anyone not living under a stone must know, suicide is a major problem for LGBT teens and youth who all too often are targeted for bullying by peers and who often witness the endless denigration of LGBT individuals by Christianist hate merchants and professional Christians. The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention announced yesterday that it is creating a new task force to handle suicide prevention efforts among LGBT youths. Additional task forces are also being created to work with American Indians/Alaska Natives and military service members and veterans since these two groups also experience increased levels of suicide. As I have advocated before, besides helping gay teens and youths, more must be done to stigmatize and marginalize the disseminators of religious based hatred that lends respectability to gay bashing and anti-gay bullying. These false Christians need to be held accountable for the blood on their hands. Here are highlights from the The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention's press release:
*
The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention today added three new task forces to address suicide prevention efforts within high-risk populations: American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/AN); youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT); and military service members and veterans.
*
Studies from organizations such as the Suicide Prevention Resource Center report that lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth are from 1.5 to seven times more likely to report having attempted suicide than their non-LGBT peers, while transgender youth are believed to have higher rates of suicidal behavior as well. Co-leading the LGBT Youth Task Force are Kevin Jennings, Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, U.S. Department of Education, and Charles Robbins, Executive Director of The Trevor Project, the leading national organization focused on crisis and suicide prevention efforts among LGBT youth.
*
"This task force will bring together the best minds in the country to combat suicide and make sure that every LGBT youth has the opportunity to grow up in a supportive, accepting community and to enter adulthood safely," Robbins said.
*
The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, a public-private partnership, provides an operating structure to catalyze planning, execution and accountability for advancing the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention (NSSP). From this alliance will grow advancements for practitioners, policymakers, service providers, communities, families, agencies, and other partners that play a vital role in reducing suicides in America.
*
No one should ever feel that suicide is their best option. I've been there myself twice and there truly needs to be more accountability and repercussions placed on judges, politicians, religious leaders and others that use anti-gay bigotry to aggrandize their own egos or for political and/or financial gain.

After DADT's Demise, Will There Be Equal Rights for Gay Servicemembers?

With the demise of legalized discrimination against LGBT in the form of DADT, the Christianists next biggest fear is that - oh the horror - gay service members might come to have their relationships with their life partners recognized somehow, be it in the form of spousal benefits or other form. First and foremost in the Christianists agenda is to do everything possible to keep LGBT citizens - and service members - treated as second class citizens. Nothing helps them bootstrap their religious bigotry toward quasi-respectability more than to be able to point to laws and government policies that stigmatize and discriminate against LGBT citizens. With DADT now thankfully headed to the trash heap of history, the U. S. military has the opportunity to distinguish itself by how it treats gay service members henceforth. Will DOMA be used as an excuse for continued unequal treatment, or will better angels prevail? An op-ed in the Washington Post by a 20 year service member argues that the military should lead the nation by example. Here are some highlights:
*
Despite all of the controversy, repealing "don't ask, don't tell" was the easy part. Politics aside, it takes no courage to simply right a wrong. The president and members of Congress have been congratulating themselves for doing the right thing. But minds should be turning to the difficult questions that remain. These are the same questions that vex our society when it comes to equal rights for homosexuals. They cross over into the "gray areas" where some start to feel uncomfortable and where the legal options are ambiguous.
*
It is, for example, one thing to hand a gay junior sailor a paintbrush and point him toward a rusty bulkhead. But can that gay sailor, if he has a partner, collect the same housing allowance his married counterparts do? Can a lesbian sailor request to be stationed where her partner is? Will the military recognize a marriage between two service members that is legal in one state but not in another?
*
I hope that my brothers and sisters in the armed forces can help the Defense Department set standards for the rights of gay men and lesbians that far outpace the conflicted sentiment and resulting legal tangle in our society. This is an opportunity to show all Americans that homosexuals deserve equal treatment under the law. This applies not just in some cases or with limitations but to the full rights all Americans should share when it comes to legal matters such as marriage, salary and tax benefits.
*
[T]he repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" means that there may be quiet instances of a lesbian sailor telling a shipmate that she is gay, or a gay sailor saying that his plans for the weekend include going on a trip with his partner. Such statements are likely to be met with shrugs, and everyone will go back to getting the mission done. But just because these moments no longer risk automatic discharge does not mean that gay and lesbian service members have equality.
*
The Pentagon must be clear about treating all members of the U.S. military equally, which means that it must recognize gay marriage as legal and a right of every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine. These rights almost must extend to their spouses, just as they do to the spouses of straight servicemen and women, to include health care, retirement benefits, GI Bill eligibility and commissary privileges.
*
I fully agree with the column's author, Chris Patti. However, we can unfortunately be assured that the Christianists and self-enriching professional Christians will do everything possible to derail such equality. Once again, hate and bigotry will likely be the face of Christianity experienced by LGBT citizens.

Bradley Manning - Tortured Until Proven Guilty

While having finally delivered on DADT repeal, Barack Obama still has many campaign promises that have yet to be delivered upon. One is the end of Gitmo and the use of torture techniques on selected prisoners. A case in point is reportedly gay 22-year-old U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning, accused leaker of classified documents to Wikileaks -documents which among other things revealed U.S. military members recklessly killing (murdering is a more accurate term) civilians. Manning has not been convicted of anything to date, yet he is being held under severe solitary confinement. Not only is such treatment of an unconvicted individual improper (it's reminiscent of something out of the Soviet gulags), but it also makes one wonder what the Hell the government/military is so worried Manning might say or do if he had the opportunity for interaction with others. To me, it's yet another example of "if you don't have something to hide, then why are acting like you do?" Or could it be that the goal is to break Manning down to a point where a conviction might be easily secured? Whatever the motivation, it speaks volumes about our government/military, and none of it good. The Huffington Post has a piece that looks at this shameful situation and what it says about the moral depravity of those directing Manning's treatment. Here are highlights:
*
The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons. ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky.
*
Charles Dickens had a keen interest in prison conditions, having witnessed his father's detention in a Victorian debtor's prison. When he heard about the latest American innovation in housing convicts, he came to see for himself. At Philadelphia's Eastern State Penitentiary, the wretches he found in solitary confinement were barely human specters who picked their flesh raw and stared blankly at walls. His on-the-spot conclusion: Solitary confinement is torture.
*
A man who had seen his share of inhumanities, Dickens pronounced solitary confinement to be "rigid, strict, and hopeless...cruel and wrong." That was 1842. Since then, piles of scientific studies, along with the vivid accounts of victims, have confirmed what was obvious to Dickens. Solitary confinement is worse than smashed bones and torn flesh. When human beings are deprived of social contact for even a few weeks, concentration breaks down, memory fades and disorientation sets in.
*
It [solitary confinement] is banned by the Geneva Convention, condemned by the United Nations, and either prohibited or restricted in most civilized countries. . . . it is being used as a method of terror and coercion by the United States government upon a citizen who has not even been convicted of a crime. As Glenn Greenwald and several other courageous journalists and bloggers have documented, Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has been detained in solitary confinement for the last seven months, despite not having been convicted of any crime, having been a model detainee, and having evidenced no signs of violence or even disciplinary misdemeanors. Manning has been kept alone in a cell for 23 hours a day, barred from exercising in that cell, deprived of sleep, and denied even a pillow or sheets for his bed.
*
The message of the U.S. government to its citizens in this activity is clear: blow the whistle and your brain will be mutilated before you even have a trial. But it may be that much to the shame of the U.S. government, our slumbering humanity is awakening. The solitary confinement -- the torture, for we must call it that -- of Bradley Manning is ironically shining a light on this brutality and tipping us off to the danger of authoritarianism. A United Nations probe is now investigating the Bradley case, and the drumbeat of outrage in the blogosphere grows louder every day.
*
[L]et us send our own message back to our government: We are Americans. We will not accept the intimidation and coercion of our fellow citizens, even from the Pentagon. Most assuredly, we will not accept torture in our name. Not of the accused. Not of the mentally ill. Not even of convicted criminals. When our civilized society is attacked, no matter what the justification, we will rise up to defend it.

Friday Male Beauty

Baptist Clergy Sex Abuse - An Under Reported Story

This blog is unrelenting in taking the Roman Catholic Church to task for the world wide sex abuse scandal which deservedly has received much media coverage - none of which to date has lead to a serious house cleaning of the Church's morally bankrupt leadership, including Benedict XVI who clearly has dirty hands himself. But, sexual predatory clergy are not unique to the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention ("SBC") churches - the second largest denomination after Catholicism in the USA - are similarly plagued with predators, but lacking the Catholic Church's centralized hierarchy, the SBC sadly manages to escape the media thrashing that is so justly deserved. In my view, it's no coincidence that the Catholic Church and the SBC share problems of sexually abusive clergy - both institutions have an obsession with things sexual - especially gay sex - and preach that sex is vile, dirty and to be restrained except within limited parameters, and even then, one had best not enjoy the sex. Both churches specialize in hypocrisy to this viewer. The blog Stop Baptist Predators has a year end summary on the state of the SBC and its refusal to take meaningful measures to rein in and expel the sexual predators within the ranks of its clergy. Here are some highlights:
*
“It would be a mistake to give in to the convenient temptation that this is ‘a Catholic problem’.” “Sex-abuse cases also rock Baptist churches. Individually they are just as bad, and collectively we are doing a lot less than the Catholics about resolution.
*
"Southern Baptists as a national entity have nothing in place to prevent abusers from carrying their satchels of pain to another church or to yank credentials from an abusive clergyman.
*
"A motion to institute a national registry of abusers was rejected by the Southern Baptist Executive Committee in 2008 on the basis of church autonomy. The Executive Committee recommended instead that churches run background checks through an already available U.S. Department of Justice system. That system contains names only of those convicted of a crime and not those times when a church forces a minister to leave and keep the reasons unstated to avoid lawsuits or embarrassment.”
*
“Protecting the Baptist denomination and churches from public humiliation and discrediting has been a higher priority for many Baptist leaders than protecting children from the predatory ministers – ministers who move from church to church, state to state, without punishment, only to harm again. . . . The shield of local church autonomy is a false one that should not be used to protect predatory preachers. . . Baptist leaders know too well about the official church connectivity and ‘unofficial web of clergy connectivity’.
*
As with the Catholic Church, the SBC - and its leaders such as Albert Mohler - needs to spend less time gay bashing and intruding on the religious freedom of other citizens and more time in cleaning up its own tawdry house.

What's With "Sideshow Bob" Marshall and Gay People?

Perhaps no other member of the Virginia General Assembly is as obsessed with all things gay - or homosexual, since that's his preferred term - than Del. Bob Marshall who continually strives to make Virginians seem like utter Neanderthals to rational individuals in other parts of the nation and world. Indeed, Marshall has done everything short of calling for gays to be rounded up, placed in concentration camps and exterminated. Blue Virginia ran a poll on what people thought motivated Marshall's bizarre obsession which mirrors that of professional anti-gay nutcases like Porno Pete LaBarbera and Robert Knight. Not surprisingly, the category receiving the most votes was: "repressed homosexuality/'closet case' syndrome. Based on other shrill closeted Republicans I've known - e.g., former Congressman Ed Schrock - Marshall's wife had better be screening the Mega Phone ads and similar gay hook up sites. As for the bogus excuse of "deep moral/religious beliefs about homosexuality," Lowell has a great take down of Marshall's disingenuousness:
*
Perhaps the option which puts "Sideshow Bob" in the best light is that he has "deep moral/religious beliefs about homosexuality." The only problem with that one is, why would "deep moral/religious beliefs" about anything justify bigotry and hateful rhetoric? Also, I'd love to have Bob Marshall point to the passage in the New Testament where Jesus condemns homosexuality, homosexuals, transgender people, whatever. Oh wait, there isn't anywhere in the Gospels where Jesus condemns homosexuality or GLBT people? But then, where would Marshall's "deep moral/religious beliefs about homosexuality" come from, exactly? Perhaps the Old Testament Book of Leviticus, which also states that "every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death;" that "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death;" that "he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death;" that "the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death." Obviously, these are not laws we follow - or that most of us wish to follow - in modern civilization. Bob Marshall, on the other hand? Who knows..

*

Marshall - like LaBarbera and Knight - needs to get some serious mental health care intervention, come out of the closet, and stop making life difficult for the rest of us.

More Thursday Male Beauty

More Double Standards [Hypocrisy] from Mindless Catholics

I get lambasted from time to time because of my unwavering demands that the Roman Catholic Church do a thorough house cleaning of the Church's hierarchy to rid the institution of those who participated in the enabling and covering up for sexual predator priests. This demand goes all the way to the current occupant of the throne of St. Peter who clearly seems to have less than clean hands in the matter. Meanwhile, apparently brain dead Catholics ranging from the servile boot lickers in the leadership of the Knights of Columbus to Catholic columnists and commentators continue to attack those who demand accountability from the Church hierarchy and the Pope rather than likewise demand that the moral rot at the Vatican and bishoprics be rooted out. Obviously, these "defenders" of the Church want Roman Catholicism to become the religion of solely ignorant third world populations. Yet another example of this ass backward reasoning comes from Catholic Insight which attacks the CBC for not publishing batshitery by Vatican sycophants who refuse to accept modern medical and mental health knowledge on sexual orientation and seek to yet again regurgitate the 13th century Vatican "natural law" idiocy. Here's a sampling of the simpering idiocy that is raised to serious discourse at Catholic Insight:
*
Most Canadian academics and journalists are so in thrall to a perverse system of value relativism that they can no longer tolerate even the expression of public support for the traditional principles of Judeo-Christian morality. And nowhere is this malign censorship more evident than in the mass media.
*
Take the CBC, for example. In an article published on its website It Gets Better: Trevor Ritchie on coming out (November 1), the author, a third-year student and gay activist at the University of British Columbia, advises "queer teens" that they have little to fear from publicly affirming their homosexuality. Ritchie assures: "Positive portrayals in popular culture, as well as individuals in the community providing positive role models, have made the rest of society understand that we are not that different, save for who [sic] we are attracted to...."
*
That's typical of the CBC. Day in and day out, our national broadcaster serves up an unrelenting drumbeat of propaganda for homosexual acts, promiscuity, abortion and a range of other perversions. Of late, the corporation has even started slanting its news broadcasts in favour of legalized prostitution.
*
Kevin G. McDonald, a CBC reader, listener and viewer in Halifax, has taken up this invitation. In response to Ritchie's article, he emailed a comment to the CBC, suggesting that: "Catholic youth struggling with same-sex attraction may want to consider the advice of the Catechism of the Catholic Church."
*
Yet the corporation has refused to publish his comment. . . . Coming from a public broadcaster that gets more than $1 billion a year in taxpayers' subsidies, such censorship is completely unacceptable. What will the Harper government do about this scandal? Evidently, nothing. In reaction to a query from McDonald, Heritage Minister James Moore, the cabinet member responsible for the CBC, conveyed no response except that he does not get involved in "day-to-day operations at the CBC."
*
Like it or not, the defenders of the morally bankrupt Catholic Church and its Medieval vintage of sexuality are increasingly on a par with witch doctors, voodoo practitioners and others who reject modern knowledge and modernity in general. Moreover, until such time as they demand that the hierarchy be purged of all who participated in the enabling and of and cover ups for predator priests - and that includes Benedict XVI - they lack any moral authority to lecture anyone.

Enough Agonizing, Mr. President

There has been much coverage of Barack Obama's confession that he's "evolving" on the issue of same sex marriage - which in my view is yet another example of Obama trying to have his cake and eat it too by seeking to placate the LGBT portion of the Democratic Party base yet at the same time stroke the fundies like his BFF Rick Warren. As discussed in a recent post, if one is really true to the Bible, then polygamy, not marriage between one man and one woman, is the true form of "Biblical marriage." Thus, Obama needs to get over the attempts at fence sitting and admit that CIVIL marriage and religious marriage are two utterly separate things and get on board the civil marriage for same sex couples bandwagon. The torturous prevarication is truly growing tiresome. The editorial board of the Los Angeles Times agrees and has taken Mr. Obama to task. Here are some highlights:

*

We can't peer into President Obama's soul, but his statement last week that he is "struggling" with whether to endorse same-sex marriage is open to an unedifying interpretation. Given the president's support of gay rights in other contexts, his opposition to marriage equality raises the question of whether the struggle Obama referred to is between politics and principle. If so, we hope principle will prevail.

*

"As I've said, my feelings about this are constantly evolving. I struggle with this. I have friends, I have people who work for me, who are in powerful, strong, long-lasting gay or lesbian unions. And they are extraordinary people, and this is something that means a lot to them and they care deeply about.

*

The president could spare himself that struggle if he would analyze the issue logically. If he did, he would recognize that it's irrational, once same-sex couples are given the practical advantages of marriage, to deny them married status. Civil unions, while a vast improvement over the absence of any recognition of same-sex relationships, are almost by definition second-class arrangements.

*

The temptation is to think that Obama knows this, and that his reluctance to endorse marriage equality is more political than personal. When he ran for the presidency in 2008, it was the conventional wisdom that supporting gay marriage would be politically fatal. With shifts in public attitudes, that probably will not be the case in 2012. According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 42% of adults now favor same-sex marriage, compared to 37% in 2009. The trend seems clear.

*

What should determine his position is logic and the fact that same-sex couples across America, not just those in his circle, yearn for recognition of their relationships. Enough agonizing, Mr. President. Support marriage equality.

Thursday Male Beauty

Revered Belgian Priest Confesses to Child Molestation

It seems that new stories of sexual improprieties and molestations of children and youths just never cease to surface. The latest revelation involves a priest who some sought to nominate for the Nobel Peace Prize and is typical of the arrogance of the Church's priesthood which seems to think that if they "confess their sins" they have a clean slate and there will be no accountability. Indeed, the Church refuses to undertake any thorough house cleaning of its clerical ranks. It reminds me of the mindset of evangelical Christians who once "saved" feel they can engage in any kind of fraud, embezzlement and other acts of moral turpitude with impunity. The Huffington Post has a column on 85-year-old Fr. Francois Houtart (pictured at right) whose nomination effort has collapsed in light of the bombshell. Here are some highlights:
*
Belgian priest has confessed to a child sex-abuse accusation that came to light during a campaign to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work fighting globalization's impact on developing countries.
*
The confession was published in a Belgian newspaper Wednesday and confirmed by the organization the priest founded, deepening a sex-abuse scandal that has rocked the Catholic Church in the country.
*
In October, after supporters of 85-year-old Francois Houtart began working to nominate him for the Nobel, a woman contacted the nonprofit organization he founded and said the priest had abused her brother 40 years ago, according to its director, Bernard Duterme.
*
In her e-mail to Cetri and the committee to nominate Houtart for the Nobel Prize, the victim's sister also pointed to her testimony in the church's report, Duterme said. There, she details the abuse of her brother, which she describes as "rape," by an unnamed priest. She says the priest, who was a friend of her father, entered her brother's room twice "to rape him." "Before the third time, my brother went to tell his parents, who kept him in their room," she is quoted as saying in the report.
*
As I have maintained many times, the ONLY thing that will force reform on the Catholic Church is the mass exodus of sheeple and their money. Nothing else will make the cover ups and culture of lies and secrecy within the hierarchy end.

Pro and Con Gay Rights Bills Pre-filed with Virginia General Assembly

While the news media has given much coverage to the latest lunacy and example of unrelenting anti-gay hatred that is the norm for Del. Bob Marshall - Ken Kookinelli's evil twin in the House of Delegates - additional bills have been pre-filed that would block the effort pushed by Marshall to ban gays from serving in the Virginia National Guard and in some cases extend employment non-discrimination protections to LGBT citizens in both the public and private work sectors. True to form, the Christo-fascists at The Family Foundation - and organization that one can only hope will soon gain hate group registry status with the Southern Poverty Law Center - is shrieking and carrying on at anything that might curb the religious based bigotry which is the organizations stock in trade. Statehouse News Online has details of the bills pre-filed to date and here are some highlights:
*
The repeal of the federal "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" law has put a new twist in an old debate for Virginia lawmakers. For several years bills have been offered in the General Assembly that would include sexual orientation as a protected class and prohibit discrimination against gay, lesbian and transgender public employees. Several bills have been proposed ahead of the upcoming General Assembly session that could enhance gay rights or erode them.
*
The latest bill, announced Wednesday, would ensure that Virginia’s eligibility requirements for the National Guard would mirror national standards set by Congress and the U.S. Department of Defense and reflect the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Del. Joe Morrissey, D-Henrico, said he will file that bill to counteract an effort by Del. Bob Marshall, R- Manassas, to ban gays from serving in the Virginia National Guard.
*
This year Del. Adam Ebbin, D- Alexandria, plans to file the bill again. And Del. Jim Scott, D-Fairfax County, has already filed a bill that would extend protection for gay workers to all employers, both public and private. Scott said he introduced a similar bill eight or nine sessions ago, and it quickly died for lack of support. But two things have changed since then, Scott said.
*
Gov. Bob McDonnell issued an executive directive stating that discrimination based on factors like a person’ s sexual orientation or parental status violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. An earlier executive order prohibiting discrimination was missing the words “sexual orientation,” which the two previous governors had included in their orders. The other change that spurred Scott was the repeal of the federal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law, he said.
*
The Virginia-based Family Foundation said the proposed legislation is unwarranted and could hamper private businesses and religious institutions. Church-based schools and social services could be forced to serve or hire gay people or shut down, said spokesman Chris Freund.
*
Freund said he doesn’t see the bills making progress. He said the Family Foundation is reviewing Marshall’s proposal to see if it meets legal muster. The group said that "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" was a good policy and should not have been repealed.
*
As is always the case here in Virginia, it will be interesting to see if the haters at The Family Foundation once again co-opt black pastors into their discriminatory dirty work - even though The Family Foundation supporters are in many cases the same folks who opposed desegregation and interracial marriage. A flawed knowledge of history time and time again sees the black religious community doing the bidding of their former oppressors. It drives me crazy that these pastors unthinkingly continue to do the work of those who continue to despise them almost as much as gays.

More Wednesday Male Beauty

"Christian" Hate Groups and Allies to Boycott CPAC

Purportedly because "a homosexual activist group, GOProud," has been invited to CPAC, the haters and loonies at several of the SPLC registered anti-gay hate groups and their almost equally vile anti-gay "family values" organizations are pulling out of Conservative Political Action Conference ("CPAC") to be held this coming February in Washington, D.C. While these organizations think they are punishing CPAC and in directly the GOP elected officials who typically appear to prostitute themselves to the Christianists, the argument can be made that the exodus of these groups might actually add to the legitimacy of the CPAC gathering. The reality is that the rise of the Christianists in the GOP and its allied organizations has been one direct cause for the flight of many educated and rational citizens to either the Democrats or those embracing the "independent" label. Hate and religious extremism may be a plus for the Kool-Aid drinkers, but it doesn't sell with many more voters. Here are highlights from Think Progress' take on the Uber-Christian boycott:
*
The religious right has grown apoplectic over what it sees as the harbingers of its demise: gay conservatives. The emergence of the GOProud, a right-wing group of conservatives that support gay rights, is spurring a civil war between conservative bigwigs.
*
Ever vigilant against “twisted and dangerous” threat of gay conservatives, right-wing groups are now repudiating any person, place, or thing that may associate with these wolves-in-sheep’s-clothing, most notably the American Conservative Union’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Despite receiving flak last year for their association with GOProud, CPAC organizers recently confirmed that GOProud will be a “participating organization,” at next year’s conference, “the second highest level of participation.
*
The possible presence of gay people sparked the far-right American Principles Project to instigate a growing boycott of CPAC in November. Yesterday, WND [Wing Nut Daily] announced that the Family Research Council and the Concerned Women for America are now the most high-profile conservative groups to join the boycott.
*
The far-right [hate group] Americans for Truth about Homosexuality president Peter LaBarbera, who is also boycotting CPAC, finds it “gratifying to to see FRC and CWA respond appropriately to CPAC’s moral sellout of allowing GOProud as a sponsor.” “By bringing in GOProud, CPAC was effectively saying moral opposition to homosexuality is no longer welcome in the conservative movement.”
*
Frankly, CPAC ought to be thankful that a number of registered hate groups with documented histories of outright lying and/or distorting information will not be participants. But the Kool-Aid drinker set is none too happy and the spittle is flying. Here is a sampling of Wing Nut Daily's coverage of the boycott:
*
Two of the nation's premier moral issues organizations, the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America, are refusing to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference in February because a homosexual activist group, GOProud, has been invited.
*
FRC and CWA join the American Principles Project, American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage in withdrawing from CPAC. In November, APP organized a boycott of CPAC over the participation of GOProud.
*
Liberty Counsel responded by sending a protest letter to the ACU. "We said GOProud is not a conservative organization," said Staver. "They are undermining the military" by promoting open homosexuality, and "undermining marriage" by opposing the Defense of Marriage Act, which preserves the traditional definition of marriage by limiting it to one man and one woman. "Anything that undermines marriage also undermines our freedom and economy," said Staver. "It is contrary to our fundamental values to have as a cosponsor an organization that promotes same-sex marriage."
*
Both FRC and Liberty Counsel said they would direct their efforts to rival conferences that respect moral conservatism.

Virginia History Texts Filled with Errors

Having served on the Standards of Learning committee that helped map out some of the requirements for Virginia history and social studies classes back in the mid-1990's, I am shocked but at the same time not surprised by recent articles such as the one in today's Washington Post that many of the history textbooks in use in Virginia are filled with errors. Personally, the problem stems from three main sources - (1) publishers such as the apparently incompetent Five Ponds Press which fail to have legitimate historians on staff or as review experts, (2) state review panels principally comprised of teachers who lack adequate subject matter expertise to even recognize error, and (3) college and universities education programs that put more emphasis on "education courses" at the expense of any subject matter knowledge. In Virginia, someone like myself with a high GPA history degree from the state's flagship university and a law degree from the same university cannot teach history in any Virginia public school because I did not take a batch of Micky Mouse education courses. With all of the talk of reforming public education in this country, one crucial requirement should be making sure that teachers have actual subject expertise. Here are highlights from the Post story:
*
In the version of history being taught in some Virginia classrooms, New Orleans began the 1800s as a bustling U.S. harbor (instead of as a Spanish colonial one). The Confederacy included 12 states (instead of 11). And the United States entered World War I in 1916 (instead of in 1917).
*
These are among the dozens of errors historians have found since Virginia officials ordered a review of textbooks by Five Ponds Press, the publisher responsible for a controversial claim that African American soldiers fought for the South in large numbers during the Civil War.
*
"I absolutely could not believe the number of mistakes - wrong dates and wrong facts everywhere. How in the world did these books get approved?" said Ronald Heinemann, a former history professor at Hampden-Sydney College. He reviewed "Our Virginia: Past and Present." In his recommendation to the state, Heinemann wrote, "This book should be withdrawn from the classroom immediately, or at least by the end of the year."
*
State officials plan to meet Jan. 10 to review the historians' concerns. "The findings of these historians have certainly underscored and added urgency to the need to address the weaknesses in our system so we don't have glaring historical errors in our books," said Charles Pyle, a spokesman for Virginia's Department of Education.
*
The department approves textbooks after panels of reviewers, often elementary school teachers, verify that the books cover each of the Standards of Learning themes. Experts in particular subject matters also sometimes review books. . . . Teachers are not reading textbooks front to back, and they're not in a position to identify the kinds of errors that historians could identify," Pyle said.
*
The fifth reviewer, DePaul University sociology professor Christopher Einolf . .. said many of the other books neglect key elements, such as the role of African Americans in 19th-century Virginia. "Making a mistake is one thing. Ignoring the role that African Americans played in the state is almost as bad," Einolf said.
*
Historian Mary Miley Theobald, a former Virginia Commonwealth University professor, reviewed "Our America" and concluded that it was "just too shocking for words." "Any literate person could have opened that book and immediately found a mistake," she said.
*
Theobald's list of errors spanned 10 pages, including inaccurate claims that men in Colonial Virginia commonly wore full suits of armor and that no Americans survived the Battle of the Alamo. Most historians say that some survived.

Wing Nut Daily Is Selling Discredited "The Pink Swastika" Book

It's not as if I didn't already hold World Net Daily - a/k/a Wing Nut Daily on this blog - in low esteem, but Joseph Farah, and his rag of a publication have stooped to new lows in marketing the thoroughly discredited "The Pink Swastika" authored by certifiable fruitcake Scott Lively who heads up Abiding Truth Ministries - a Southern Poverty Law Center ("SPLC") registered hate group. With this type of advocacy of the work of a known hate group, one can only wonder if the fundies at Wing Nut Daily are trying to make the hate group list themselves. As Alvin McKwen at Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters reports (and I have noted on the blog in the past), The Pink Swastika has been shown to be little more than the delusional rant of a very disturbed homophobe. Alvin notes in part as follows:
*
At its online superstore (yes World Net Daily has a "superstore"), interested individuals can buy a discounted copy of The Pink Swastika. According to the description on the page: The Pink Swastika is a thoroughly researched, eminently readable, demolition of the "gay" myth, symbolized by the pink triangle, that the Nazis were anti-homosexual. In other words, The Pink Swastika supposedly gives proof that the gay community was behind the Nazi Party in Germany during World War II.
*
[I]n the case of The Pink Swastika, Lively clearly outdoes himself. It was written in 1995 (although World Net Daily seems to be selling an "updated version") and since that time, it has been routinely criticized. According to SPLC: The Pink Swastika has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and other scholars. Christine Mueller, professor of history at Reed College, did a line-by-line refutation of an earlier (1994) Abrams article on the topic and of the broader claim that the Nazi Party was “entirely controlled” by gay men. Historian Jon David Wynecken at Grove City College also refuted the book, pointing out that Lively and Abrams did no primary research of their own, instead using out-of-context citations of some legitimate sources while ignoring information from those same sources that ran counter to their thesis.
*

As for Lively and his lunatic organization, SPLC has a lengthy run down on the totally mis-named Abiding Truth Ministries. Here's a sampling of SPLC's litany of Lively's hatefulness:
*
Abiding Truth Ministries serves mainly as a launching pad for an international anti-gay campaign. Its founder, Scott Lively, is also responsible for a book, widely cited by gay-bashers, accusing homosexuals of running the Nazi Party.
*
Lively first emerged as an anti-gay activist when he became communications director for the Oregon Citizens Alliance, which was backing that state’s notorious Measure 9 vote in 1992. The measure, which failed, would have added language to the state constitution listing homosexuality, along with pedophilia and masochism, as “abnormal behavior.” Lively later served as California director of the American Family Association, another particularly hard-line anti-gay group.
*
Lively has taken his message abroad to Eastern Europe (see Watchmen on the Walls, below), Africa and Russia. In a 2007 open letter to the Russian people, he asserted that “homosexuality is a personality disorder that involves various, often dangerous sexual addictions and aggressive, anti-social impulses.” In 2009, he went to Uganda to speak at a major conference on the evils of homosexuality, saying, among other things: “The gay movement is an evil institution. The goal of the gay movement is to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.” He also met with Ugandan lawmakers. A month after Lively left the country, a bill was introduced that called for the death penalty for certain homosexual acts and prison for those who fail to disclose gays’ identities.

Wednesday Male Beauty

The Public Isn’t Homophobic, Hollywood Is

The other day I noted actor Richard Chamberlain's advice to gay actors to stay in the closet in order to protect their careers. Chamberlain's advice may sound practical, but it highlights what many - including myself - see as a double standard. Movers and shakers in Hollywood have been great advocates for repeal of DADT, the overturning of Proposition 8 and gay equality in general, yet the Hollywood establishment allows a different standard for itself compared to what so many of its stars demand of the military and the public at larger. What makes the situation all the more disturbing is that some of those in Hollywood who are holding the closet door shut are gays themselves. Are they worried solely about box office revenues or is something else going on such as latent self-doubt and internalized homophobia? Granted, there are few out major male stars, but coming out seems to have done nothing to harm the career of Neil Patrick Harris for example - who routinely plays a straight character. So what gives? Greg Gutfeld at Big Holloywood takes on the issue as does my friend Lyndon Evans at Focus on the Rainbow and as a community we need to ask Hollywood why it should not meet the same standards we have demanded of the U. S. military. First, this from Gutfeld:
*
Chamberlain’s advice comes at a perfect time for people like me who need to write stuff: just days after the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. How hilarious is it that, as the military now dumps that strategy, a Hollywood icon is imploring actors to embrace it!
*
Anyway, I wonder why we don’t demand from Hollywood, what Hollywood demands from the military. I have absolutely no data to back this up, but I bet the percentage of gays employed in film exceeds those in foxholes. Which is why homophobia seems worse in Tinseltown. The fact is, the troops can handle gays; Hollywood can’t.
*
Evans, a former broadcast newscaster in a prior career before he discovered the world of blogging, gives the issue a far more detailed analysis and even points fingers at some of gay Hollywood and asks some pointed questions. Here are some highlights:
*
While theater goers embrace actors and actresses who are openly gay and lesbian particularly on The Great White Way not so can be said of movie and television audiences, or so many in Hollywood would say. For the second time in as many years advice was given to actors and actresses, wannabees or actual, to stay in the closet as it can only hurt your career.
*
This of course is the shameful irony of Hollywood which for decades has been a champion through its films for the mistreated, discriminated against and persecuted. The idea that those in power who have the luxury to be out prefer the actors and actresses who without which there would be no movie, are told to lie, not be true to themselves and stay closeted until such time that every nickel and dime has been squeezed out of their performing years.
*
For all of the more read bloggers who are and write about LGBT injustice, I think I am one of the very few who has, and will continue to write about discrimination in Hollywood against gays, lesbians and bisexuals, not from the heterosexual powers that be, which of course is to be expected, but the ones who would have their own brethren stay in the closet forever.
*
If the audience knows the guy is gay, apparently it will kill the fantasy and no one will want to buy tickets. We hear it time and time again from the Hollywood power players and creative folks – both gay and straight – and we heard it again over the weekend at the Outfest Film Festival during a panel called Coming Out in Hollywood.
*
But it’s hard to change things when an openly gay writer-director such as Don Roos (The Opposite of Sex, Bounce, Happy Endings) has issues with gays playing straight and vice-versa.
*
At Outfest on Sunday afternoon, three-time Emmy winning and openly gay director Todd Holland told a small audience that he advises young, gay male actors to “stay in the closet.” The remark came during a panel at the Directors Guild of America titled, “Taking It to the Streets: LGBT Directors Get Political.” Outfest, which pushes the slogan “protecting our past, showcasing our present, nurturing our future,” is one of the premiere gay and lesbian film festivals in the United States.
*
Holland, who was talking as one of the featured panelists, and who once worked as a director on the critically acclaimed HBO sit-com The Larry Sanders Show, explained that it’s a necessary career choice if a gay actor wants to succeed in Hollywood. Fellow panelist and filmmaker Kirby Dick, director of Outrage, a 2009 documentary about gay politicians who stay in the closet to further their political careers, told Holland: “I know where you’re coming from, but it’s a regressive argument."
*
Those LGBT bloggers who are so quick to throw Obama under the bus and the activists who protest about DADT, if they would rally behind the discrimination against gays, lesbians and bisexuals in Hollywood, then maybe, just maybe change would come.

*
Evans' last comment is not directed at me in particular, but he does have a point and many of us in the blogosphere need to start asking hard questions of Hollywood.

More Tuesday Male Beauty

Are Gay becoming Bourgeois or Have We Been So All Along?

Andrew Sullivan and other LGBT commentators have written columns and posts about the decline/death of "gay culture" in the past and now Jonah Goldberg (at left), someone who is hardly a typical ally of the LGBT rights movement, has a column in the Los Angeles Times which looks at the purported mainstreaming of LGBT citizens and how this "progress" in the arena of equality may speed the demise of a distinct gay culture - if there is such a thing in the lives of most of us. Goldberg states that the "sweeping embrace of bourgeois lifestyles by the gay community has been stunning" and offers the gay family on Modern Family as a case in point. The reality, of course, is that many in the LGBT community have been in long term marriage like relationships for decades. The boyfriend and I have a number of friends who have been in committed marriage like relationships for over 20 years - many of whom live very middle class, suburban lives. In my view, what Goldberg is focusing on is something that has , in fact, existed for many years - the straight community simply never knew it existed. Here are some column highlights:
*
With 'don't ask, don't tell' repealed and gays seeking marriage equality, the homosexual bourgeoisie is emerging — a concept subversive to both liberals and conservatives.
*
Two decades ago, the gay left wanted to smash the bourgeois prisons of monogamy, capitalistic enterprise and patriotic values and bask in the warm sun of bohemian "free love." And avant-garde values. In this, they were simply picking up the torch from the straight left of the 1960s and 1970s, who had sought to throw off the sexual hang-ups of their parents' generation along with their gray flannel suits.
*
The gay experiment with open bohemianism was arguably shorter. Of course, AIDS played an obvious and tragic role in focusing attention on the downside of promiscuity. But even so, the sweeping embrace of bourgeois lifestyles by the gay community has been stunning.
*
Nowhere is this more evident — and perhaps exaggerated — than in popular culture. Watch ABC's "Modern Family." The sitcom is supposed to be "subversive" in part because it features a gay couple with an adopted daughter from Asia. And you can see why both liberal proponents and conservative opponents of gay marriage see it that way. But imagine you hate the institution of marriage and then watch "Modern Family's" hardworking bourgeois gay couple through those eyes. What's being subverted? Traditional marriage, or some bohemian identity politics fantasy of homosexuality? By the way, according to a recent study, "Modern Family" is the No. 1 sitcom among Republicans. . .
*
Personally, I have always felt that gay marriage was an inevitability, for good or ill (most likely both). I do not think that the arguments against gay marriage are all grounded in bigotry, and I find some of the arguments persuasive. But I also find it cruel and absurd to tell gays that living the free-love lifestyle is abominable while at the same time telling them that their committed relationships are illegitimate too.
*
Many of my conservative friends often act as if there's some grand alternative to both the bohemian or the bourgeois lifestyles. But there isn't. And given that open homosexuality is simply a fact of life, the rise of the HoBos — the homosexual bourgeoisie — strikes me as good news.

*
I suspect Goldberg would view the boyfriend and I as HoBos based on our home and "lifestyle" - or maybe not since I write this blog and contribute to Bilerico and do my best to show the disingenuousness of Goldberg's conservative buddies.