More Identify as LGBT, Especially Among Millennials

click image to enlarge chart

While evangelical Christians and Mormons remain the most consumed by anti-LGBT animus - in my view, because the mere existence of gays threatens their Bronze Ade based world view - and Christofascists continue to peddle the fraudulent myth that gays can "change"  for both monetary and political purposes, a new Gallup survey indicates that the percentage of American adults self-identifying as LGBT is increasing, particularly among Millennials who at 8.2% are nearly twice as likely to identify as LGBT than older generations.  Personally, I still believe the true number is even higher in all age brackets given the number of LGBT individuals who continue to "live in the closet." While Gallup doesn't analyze the marked increase in Millennials identifying as LGBT, I suspect two factors are in play: (i) Millennials have grown up with exposure to increased LGBT rights, and (ii) close to 40% of Millennials have walked away from religion, the sole underlying cause from anti-LGBT animus and discrimination.  Here are some of the Gallup findings:

The percentage of American adults identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) increased to 4.5% in 2017, up from 4.1% in 2016 and 3.5% in 2012 when Gallup began tracking the measure. The latest estimate is based on over 340,000 interviews conducted as part of Gallup's daily tracking in 2017.

Extrapolation to the latest census estimate of adults 18 and older in the U.S. suggests that more than 11 million adults identify as LGBT in the country today.

The expansion in the number of Americans who identify as LGBT is driven primarily by the cohort of millennials, defined as those born between 1980 and 1999. The percentage of millennials who identify as LGBT expanded from 7.3% to 8.1% from 2016 to 2017, and is up from 5.8% in 2012. By contrast, the LGBT percentage in Generation X (those born from 1965 to 1979) was up only .2% from 2016 to 2017. There was no change last year in LGBT percentage among baby boomers (born 1946 through 1964) and traditionalists (born prior to 1946).

Women continue to be more likely to identify as LGBT than men, and this gender gap expanded last year.

Overall, 5.1% of women in 2017 identified as LGBT, compared with 3.9% of men. The change among men over time has been minimal, with the LGBT percentage edging up from 3.4% in 2012 to 3.7% both last year and this year. On the other hand, the percentage of women identifying as LGBT has risen from 3.5% in 2012 to 5.1% today, with the largest jump occurring between 2016 and 2017.

The LGBT percentage has risen among all race and ethnic groups since 2012, although not on an equal basis. Hispanics and Asians have seen the greatest increase, thus contributing the most on a relative basis to the uptick in LGBT identification nationwide. Whites and blacks have seen the least change. . . . . At 6.1%, Hispanics continue to be the single race or ethnic group most likely to identify as LGBT, while the 4.0 % of whites who identify as LGBT remains the lowest. LGBT identification among blacks and Asians, 4.9% and 5.0%, respectively, is essentially midway between the estimates for Hispanics and whites.

This 2017 update on LGBT identification underscores two significant conclusions. First, the percentage of adults in the U.S. who identify as LGBT has been increasing and is now at its highest point across the six years of Gallup's tracking of this measure. Second, the increase has been driven almost totally by millennials, whose self-reports of being LGBT have risen from 5.2% six years ago to 8.1% today.

As the older generations die off, the overall percentage of the population identifying as LGBT will continue to increase. Compounding this trend will be the fact that Millennials are the most LGBT accepting of the generations.  Christofascists will be fighting an increasingly fighting a losing rear guard action and, with luck, may in time find themselves faced with a harsh backlash by those in society not motivated by hate, bigotry, and the embrace of ignorance. who have had enough of false Christian nastiness. 

Salt Lake City Elects Lesbian Mayor and Gay City Councilman

(Tribune file photo) Salt Lake City mayoral candidate Jackie Biskupski.

While the election results in Houston and Kentucky are very disappointing - the finger pointing on the Houston loss has already begun - two total surprises have come out of Salt Lake City, home base of the anti-gay Mormon Church: if the unofficial results hold up, the city will have a lesbian mayor and a gay city council member.  Making it all the sweeter, the new city council man is Derek Kitchen who, with his now-husband Moudi Sbeity, was one half of one of three couples that won their challenge to Utah's gay marriage ban before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.  Here's what Kitchen posted on Facebook:

Thank you! Thank you to my family for standing next to me through this campaign, for my volunteers for putting in countless hours knocking on doors, making calls, and talking to their friends. Thank you to all my supporters, your enthusiasm, donations, and moral cheers really kept me going. This has been such a positive experience for me as a first time candidate for public office. I’m happy to say that we ran a clean campaign focused on the issues and the residents of this great city.

I feel honored that the residents of District 4 have put their faith in me to represent them and make important decisions on their behalf. I’m energized and excited to get to work on the Salt Lake City council as your next representative!

As for the mayoral race, here are highlights from  the Salt Lake Tribune (let's hope the uncounted ballots confirm Biskupski's win):

There remain several thousand uncounted provisional and mail-in ballots in Salt Lake City's mayor's race, leaving the door open for Mayor Ralph Becker to pull off a come-from-behind win — although such a scenario appears unlikely.

Tuesday's unofficial and incomplete results gave Jackie Biskupski a 52.1 percent to 47.8 percent lead over Becker. They are separated by 1,450 votes out of 33,717 counted — 46.8 percent of registered voters in Salt Lake City.

According to Utah law, the new total will be sealed until the Nov. 17 canvass.

Tuesday night Biskupski said that Becker's 4.3-point deficit was statistically "insurmountable." When she announced at her campaign celebration that Becker would not concede, her crowd of supporters groaned and booed. 

Until Nov. 17, the discussion of Biskupski's possible election as the first openly gay big-city mayor in the deeply conservative, Mormon state are on hold. 

"In a couple weeks," she said, "I'm confident we will have a chance to talk about how historic this is."

Biskupski said she recognized from the beginning that she would lose votes for a number of reasons, not limited to her gender. "There are people who would not vote for me because I'm openly gay," she said. "There are people who would not vote for me because I'm a single mom."

Nonetheless, it's possible to get elected in a conservative state based on your merits, Biskupski told reporters Tuesday night.

"Not my gender, not my sexual orientation," she said. "It matters that we embrace people for their ability to lead and affect change."

Her likely victory says something about Utah, Biskupski said.  "We have a reputation here, right? But ... this community continues to move forward in strides that are mind-blowing," she said. "I'm so proud of our community."

In some ways I am not surprised by Utah.  Jon Huntsman  is one of the few sane Republicans left and he was a popular governor in Utah.  The fact that he is sane is why he failed to gain traction in 2012. That said, what could be more delicious than a lesbian mayor in the Mormon Church's home town. :)

Gay Country Singer Reveals Ex-Gay Therapy Past

Steve Grand, who is seeking to become the first major country music star who is openly gay, has a video/song (see below) that has gone somewhat viral and in the process won him an interview on Good Morning America.  Grand has been criticized by some for his depiction of gays, but he is nonetheless breaking down barriers.  In addition, he has talked about his experience of being pushed into bogus "ex-gay" therapy.  He talks about this in an article in The Advocate.  Here are highlights:

Steve Grand became an overnight sensation when his gay-themed music video, “All American Boy,” went viral shortly after being posted on YouTube last week.

The video has racked up more than 650,000 views in just six days—an accomplishment on par with some of the most successful artists currently working in the music industry.

However, the independent singer/songwriter wasn’t always as comfortable with his sexuality as he appears in his hit video, and has revealed to ABC that he once endured so-called gay-to-straight reparative therapy after he told his family he was gay.

"I felt like I really was a shame to my parents," Grand said. "I felt like there was no way I could ever make them proud and I felt like I was a constant disappointment."

Since coming to terms with his sexuality, Grand says he was driven to tell the story of his popular power-ballad, risking everything he had to make “All American Boy” a reality.

Kudos to Grand for talking about his experience and coming to terms with being gay.  I look forward to the day when, hopefully, being gay is simply a non-issue.

 

International News | Entertainment | Politics

Openly Gay Scout Leaders Less A Threat than Closeted Scout Leaders and Catholic Priests

As long time readers of this blog know, time and time again the sexual predators who prey on children and youths are not well adjusted openly gay individuals.  No, it's the closeted Catholic priests who have been warped psychologically by the Church hierarchy's obsession with all things sexual, especially gay sex, and closeted Republicans, and conservative religious denomination pastors (e.g., Southern Baptists) who are the true threats to children and youth.  Normal, well adjusted gays simply do not need to prey on children to fulfill their sexual fantasies and to find sexual partners.   Yet, but barring openly gay scoutmasters, the Boy Scouts of America have unwittingly agreed to continue to provide unfettered opportunity to closet cases who pose the most significant risk of sexual molestation to children and youths.  Andrew Sullivan looks at this reality:

YouGov finds that a majority of the public agrees with the Boy Scouts’ new policy of accepting gay troops but banning gay troop leaders.  

I suspect the issue has been clouded by the impact of the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic church and understandably greater nervousness about allowing boys to be supervised by grown men away from their parents. But although that’s understandable, it’s irrational. Openly gay scoutmasters are far less likely to abuse boys than closet case “bachelors” – because they are more emotionally and sexually adjusted. And closet-case “bachelors” will remain in the Scouts, while the less damaged ones are purged.

This is not to say that all closet-case bachelors are would-be molesters (many have, for decades, channeled their repressed sexuality into completely ethical and moral leadership for boys, including the Boy Scouts founder, Robert Baden Powell, who is now widely regarded as bisexual, if not gay).

The Christofascists and anti-gay hate groups may like to depict gays as sexual predators, but legitimate research shows that it is not the gays who do the bulk of the sexual molesting.  It's the ostensible straight males - many of who are married to women - who are the real threat to children and youths.   The Boy Scouts of America may have pandered to public opinion, but their action did nothing to make young scouts safer from molestation.

Openly Gay Former College Kicker Tries for the NFL

Former Middle Tennessee State placekicker, Alan Gendreauis is openly gay and, as Out Sports reports, he intends to seek a place in the NFL.  Trailblazer or glutton for punishment, whatever the case may be, kudos to Gendreauis for his courage.  It goes without saying it will be interesting to watch his effort.  With recent reports that NFL recruiters tried to question some applicants about their sexual orientation it is certainly possible that Gendreauis could face discrimination regardless of his abilities as a kicker.  Here are highlights from the article:

Now with renewed purpose, Gendreau had made a potentially game-changing decision: It’s time for him to shoot for the stars again.

Gendreau had a record-breaking career at Middle Tennessee State.  With a PAT in his final game as a Blue Raider, he became the all-time leading scorer in Sun Belt Conference history with 295 points. His longest field goal in college, at 55 yards, was the second-longest ever in the conference. That was 12 yards short of the 67-yard field goals he connected on during team practices; it was even shorter than field goals he kicked in high school.

I first met Gendreau four years ago when Outsports ran an anonymous story by sociologist Eric Anderson about the gay kicker. Gendreau was a freshman at MTSU at the time, out to his teammates and embraced by them. He didn’t reveal his name publicly at the time because he feared how it would affect both his family and his shot at the NFL. 

Now openly gay and 23, with a deep-seated confidence in his sexual orientation, Gendreau wants another shot at the pros. This time, he wants to do it open and honest about who he is. This time, he wants to give it everything he has.  The Orlando, Fla., native knew he was gay at a very young age. He came out to friends and family at 16, started dating boys in high school and had on-again, off-again relationships with men through college.  "When you know, you know," he said with a smile.

Gendreau has also long been a devout Christian, raised in a deeply religious household. It’s a tough mix, being gay and Christian. When he came out to his parents in high school, they put him in church-based counseling. That lasted four sessions.

While some may worry that his sexual orientation would be questioned during his senior season slump, Davis said the team never considered it.

"I don't think his off-the-field lifestyle was questioned about that," Davis said. "It was more a question, ‘What's up with Gendreau? Why isn't he making kicks? Where is he mentally with his game?’ But I never heard anything about him being gay, it was just questions about why he was missing kicks.

"Football was the business, he was an employee and he did his job well," Davis added. "For people who had a relationship with him outside of football, he's a friendly, funny guy. He was just a normal guy. He was a football player."

There has never been a publicly out gay player in the NFL or Division I college football. Only six NFL players — from Dave Kopay in 1975 to Kwame Harris earlier this year — have come out publicly after retiring.  Many experts have long believed the first gay NFL player wouldn’t be a current athlete who comes out. Instead, he would be openly gay in high school and college and eventually make his way into the pros already out of the closet.  If he can make it to the NFL, Gendreau will fit that mold.

"His sexual orientation is not going to matter one bit," said super agent Leigh Steinberg, who has represented the likes of Hall of Famers Warren Moon, Troy Aikman and Thurman Thomas, among others. "The only thing that matters is if he can put that ball between those goal posts. If he can do that, and if he can do it consistently, he’ll have a shot at the NFL."

Gendreau’s best shot this season will be to secure an invitation to a team’s organized team activities (OTAs) over the next two months. That invitation could come from a team who attends a workout or sees a video highlighting his skills.

The next opportunity is a training camp in late July or August. Each team has two to three kickers at camp who are either competing for a job or, in the case of a team like the Patriots whose kicking position is locked up by Stephen Gostkowski, are competing for reps to showcase their talent to other teams.

In many ways, a place-kicker could be the perfect next step for gay visibility in the NFL. It’s the position on a team furthest removed from other players, not part of the offense or defense, but rather the "special" teams unit. A place-kicker only steps on the field for a handful of plays. Some former football players, like former 12-year offensive lineman and current ESPN personality Mark Schlereth, have long taken potshots at kickers, saying they’re not even football players.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.  I wish Gendreauis lots of luck.

Can You Be Openly Gay and Survive in the South?

A column in the New York Times looks at the issue of being gay and living in the American South.  The short answer to the question asked in the caption of this post is, yes, one can be openly gay and survive in the South.  At least as long as you are willing to be a third or fourth class citizens and devoid of any non-discrimination protections whatsoever.  Oh, and did I mention that recognition of your commitment to your life partner will be banned by state constitution?   Provided one is willing to overlook these serious issues, then one can be happy and survive in many parts of the South - at least in the larger cities.  Areas of say Southwest Virginia on the other hand might make taking razor blades to your wrists look attractive.  Here are highlights from the Times piece:

Many people assume that because the South is the nation’s most evangelical and politically conservative region, it is probably also a hotbed for hate crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. But while such crimes do occur, they are less common than in large urban centers, where the absence of a tight community and the abundance of strangers make it easier to target people for their differences. 

I should know: as a lesbian who has lived in the South my entire life, and in a small town in the Deep South for part of it, I’ve met many people — men, women and transgendered — whose sexual identity has not prevented them from living a life of acceptance, admiration and even respect by their families and communities. 

My friend Helen and her partner, Kathleen, for example, have made an enormous impact on the small town of Louisville, Ga., in rural Jefferson County.  .  .  .  .  .  It’s an unspoken truth that Helen and Kathleen are in a committed relationship, and yet they’re invited to social gatherings as a couple, and only a few months ago Helen gave the graduation address at the local high school. People know who they are and very likely understand the nature of their relationship, and it’s clear they value the investment that Helen and Kathleen have made in their community. 

In the mid-1990s, while in graduate school, I lived in the small city of Hattiesburg, Miss. There I met gays and lesbians who came to Hattiesburg from nearby rural communities like Petal, Wiggins, Runnelstown and even more far-flung places to enjoy the one gay bar that was within reasonable driving distance, or simply hang out with friends. Though they came for the comforts of a larger L.G.B.T. community, their sexual orientation was often known to their communities back home. 

And there is a limit to the acceptance. In the rural South, people love their sons and daughters and they may even break bread with the florist and his partner, but they still believe homosexuality is a sin. They draw the line at a gay pride march down Main Street, and they won’t stand for gay marriage. 

Still, as Alana’s Uncle Lee has shown America, there are gays living in the rural South who don’t all set out for the big city. They lead rich lives and have families, and sometimes even communities, that love them and accept them for who they are.

Despite the positive picture the article seeks to depict, all things considered, if I could leave the South and no offense meant to our friends, I would - in a heart beat.

Romney Faces Backlash Over Gay Advisor's Tweets and Sexual Orientation

I commented after Mitt Romney hired openly gay Richard A. Grenell to be his campaign's national security adviser and wondered how soon the far right would go into apoplexy over Romney's decision.  AFA's premier gay hater, Bryan Fischer did not disappoint and has been virtually foaming at the mouth.  But it turns out that not only are the knuckle draggers unhappy with Romney's selection, as it has become obvious that Grenell is not necessarily any real friend to LGBT equality (as seems to be the norm for gay Republicans) and has had a bad habit of tweeting nasty comments about women and others.  The end result is that Romney s catching flack from all sides.  The Washington Post looks at the lingering controversy.  Here are highlights:

In one of the first moves depicting a shift to a general election footing, Mitt Romney’s campaign announced last week the hiring of Richard A. Grenell as a national security and foreign policy adviser. This week, the campaign and Grenell were dealing with backlash from the left and right.

Grenell, who spent seven years at the United Nations heading the communications department for the U.S. mission, has had to scrub snarky tweets aimed at women — particularly Democrats and liberals — and the media, while the Romney campaign has had to fend off criticism from social conservatives who object to Grenell’s appointment because he is gay.

 In one entry removed from his Twitter account, Grenell wrote of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton: “Hillary is starting to look liek Madeline Albright.”  Of MSNBC’s liberal-leaning Rachel Maddow, he wrote that she should “take a breath and put on a necklace.”

The snark was not limited to the political opposition. Grenell, a former spokesman for Newt Gingrich, said of Gingrich’s third wife, Callista, that he wondered whether her “hair snaps on” and that she “stands there like she is wife #1” at political events.

Tony Perkins, president of the [hate group] Family Research Council, took issue with Grenell over his criticism of the Bush administration’s failure to sign a December 2008 U.N. resolution that called for decriminalizing homosexuality across the globe.

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association shared his disappointment with the Grenell pick on Twitter: “Romney picks out & loud gay as a spokesman. If personnel is policy, his message to the pro-family community: drop dead.”

Grenell had an uneasy relationship with some reporters, who found him difficult to deal with, his supporters said, but it is that very aggressiveness with the press and knowledge of policy that makes him qualified to be Romney’s top flack on foreign policy. “If he saw a reporter inaccurately characterize U.S. positions, he would take them to task, but in terms of half answers, half truths, that wasn’t the case,” said Mark Groombridge, who was a top aide for John R. Bolton, then the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

 

Groombridge said Grenell’s sexual orientation is a “nonissue.”  In a statement from the Romney campaign, Bolton called his former aide “a thoroughly professional press spokesperson.”

His sexual orientation may be a non-issue for rational people, but the Christiansts ranks and much of the GOP base are not made up of rational people.

Romney Hires Openly Gay Man as National Security Spokesperson

One has to wonder what was going through the mind of Mitt Romney as he hired openly gay Richard Grenell, a former spokesperson for the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations appointed by by President Bush, to be his national Security and foreign policy spokesperson. The Christofascist element in the GOP base will not be amused and I suspect some spittle will be flying amongst the Kool-Aid drinker set - think James Dobson, Tony Perkins, Maggie Gallagher and the usual hate group leaders - once they realize Grenell is gay and - oh the horror! - has a partner with whom he has been living for a number of years. Karen Ocamb at LGBT Pov looks at the development and ponders what it means. Here are highlights:

Rachel Maddow called it! Wednesday night she wondered why Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney delivered what was billed as a major talk in North Carolina – and never mentioned the antigay Amendment One on that state’s May 8 ballot. Mark this day, April 18, as the day Romney pivots to appeal to mainstream voters for the general election.

Well, given the Pew Research Center Poll two days ago indicating that gay marriage is the issue of least importance to voters, it may not be surprising then that Thursday afternoon the Romney campaign announced that Romney has hired openly gay Richard Grenell, a former spokesperson for the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations appointed by by President Bush, as his national Security and foreign policy spokesperson.

The Washington Post reports:

Grenell brings foreign policy chops and more than a decade of political experience to the aggressive but relatively young Romney staff. His is one in a series of hires as the presumptive Republican nominee rapidly expands his small staff as it moves into the general election against President Obama.

Grenell has also blogged on the Huffington Post, where he wrote this piece entitled: Gay Leaders Need a Tea Party Style Shakeup — 111th Congress a Total Failure. An excerpt:

Gay Americans from outside Washington should demand that they stop sacrificing progress to further their personal political careers. It’s time we found some young gay leaders who will work for equality and not be concerned about pleasing the Democratic Party.

Gay politics are not black and white. It isn’t true that all Democrats are good on gay issues and all Republicans bad. The outcome of the Prop 8 vote in California, where the traditionally Democratic state also overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama for president, proves that Democrats have a lot of work to do in their own party. Republicans have failed us, too. I am not suggesting we dismiss the GOP sins of advocating for small government policies while practicing intrusive, big government tactics. But Republicans who advocate laissez-faire principles can be great allies, just as liberal Southern Democrats can be strong opponents working against us.

OK – now that Grenell is probably the highest ranking openly gay member of Romney’s campaign, might we see the GOP candidate pivot in a more pro-equality direction?

Personally, I will not be holding my breath waiting for any shift in the GOP approach to LGBT Americans. It would mean that the leadership would have to collectively stand up to the Christianists - something they have shown themselves afraid to do time and time again even though long term it would be the best possible move for the GOP's future. Meanwhile, it will be interesting to watch for the Christianists' reaction to Grenell's appointment

Chris Chritie Nominates New Jersey's First Openly Gay Supreme Court Justice

OMG!! I cannot wait to hear the venting and gnashing of teeth from the Christianists over GOP Governor Chris Christie's appointment of the first openly gay justice to the New Jersey Supreme Court. The flying spittle will make foul weather gear a necessity! And to make matters worse - oh, the absolute horror - Christie's appointee, Bruce A. Harris, is African American. In addition, Christie filled another vacancy on the Court with an appointee of Asian descent. The folks at Family Research Council and the American Family Association - especially Bryan Fischer - must be convulsing on the floor. Needless to say, I love it! Here's a video clip from the Star-Ledger:

The Star-Ledger has these additional highlights:

Gov. Chris Christie today nominated an openly gay African-American Republican mayor and a Korean-American assistant attorney general to the state’s highest court.

Two nominees are Phil Kwon, 44, who worked under Christie when he was U.S. attorney for New Jersey, and Bruce Harris, 61, who was elected mayor of Chatham Borough in November. Kwon, of Bergen County, would be the first Asian-American to sit on the state Supreme Court, and Harris would be the first openly gay justice.

"I am honored to nominate these two gentlemen," Christie said at a Statehouse news conference. "I trust the Senate will take into account their extraordinary backgrounds and experience and will give them swift hearings.”

The nominees would replace former Justice John Wallace Jr., whom Christie declined to reappoint in 2010, and Justice Virginia Long, who faces mandatory retirement on March 1.

Christie has emphasized that he wants to remake the Supreme Court, which he blames for tying his hands on such issues as financing poor school districts and affordable housing.

Harris graduated magna cum laude from Amherst College, and with honors from Boston University Graduate School of Management. He earned a law degree from Yale. In addition to serving as mayor of Chatham, he most recently worked at the law firm of Greenberg Traurig and previously at Riker, Danzi, Scherer, Hyland and Perretti.

Steve Goldstein, the chief executive of Garden State Equality, a gay rights organization, said he was stunned when Christie called to tell him about the imminent nomination of Harris, 60, a graduate of Yale Law School. "As I told the governor right then and there, you could have picked me up off the floor," Goldstein said .

State Sen. Nicholas Scutari (D-Union), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, . . . said he was pleased by the diversity of the governor’s appointments, but had yet to examine their professional careers to determine their qualifications for the bench.

Scutari may be pleased with the nominees' diversity, but it's a safe bet that the Christianist/Tea Party crowd will be anything but pleased. Kudos to Governor Christie.

Too Gay For The USA?

The caption of this post is the headline of an article that looks at the slow launch and to date depressing revenues of the movie I Love You Phillip Morris, starring Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor. True to form - and probably supporting the article's premise - the movie is not showing anywhere locally. If it shows anywhere, it will likely be at The Naro Theater in Norfolk's Ghent neighborhood which is the region's closest thing to a gayborhood. Where the movie is doing well is in European markets where males in particular don't seem so afflicted with insecurity about their own sexuality. The article goes on to posit that the characters in Phillip Morris aren't agonizing about their sexuality and don't end up dead or outcasts also cuts against the norm of how Hollywood films treat gay protaganists in what few large release gay themed films we have seen in the past. It's unfortunate, but I believe the article is a damning testament to how f*cked American society remains when it comes to LGBT acceptance. Here are highlights from AskMen:
*
I Love You Phillip Morris, the new film starring Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor, has so far grossed over $18 million -- almost entirely in foreign markets. In fact, as of last week, its domestic ticket sales wouldn't pay the salary of a school superintendent. That's because, although the film has been finished for almost two years, it was just released in the United States last Friday and has so far been shown on a total of six screens.
*
Though the industry reaction wasn't overtly bigoted -- Hollywood is a town of making-nice and air-kissing after all -- there was a telling deafness to the project. "It was almost a lack of reaction. More a retreat," says Lazar.
Distributors may well have been thrown by a film as genre-bending and tonally-varied as Phillip Morris, which is at once a slapstick comedy, a con-man thriller, a prison-break drama and a love story, but the gay content seems to have been a major factor in their skittishness.
*
There have been big American movies starring gay characters in recent years, notably Brokeback Mountain and Milk, and one would think these Oscar-winning hits would have whetted the industry's appetite for gay subject matter, or at least settled its uneasy stomach. But in truth, when Hollywood embraces films with gay themes, it does so in fairly specific and predictable ways, and the offbeat, morally neutral Phillip Morris simply didn't fit the mold.
*
So what, in particular, does Hollywood not like about Philip Morris?... In each case, being gay creates personal or social problems for the characters and is the main font of dramatic tension in the film. It's hardly a coincidence that the protagonists of major gay-themed films generally wind up dead, slain either by disease or by bigoted assassins representing the status quo. . . . As such, their deaths make a broader social point and an easily digestible moral lesson for the viewing public. They're martyrs to time and place, figures both tragic and heroic.
*
Carrey's flamboyant fraudster is none of the above. Where Hollywood's gay favorites are noble or conflicted, Russell is selfish and exuberant. He's neither a political crusader nor a tortured soul, and I Love You Phillip Morris offers none of the easy balms of martyrdom or an Underdog-vs.-the-Machine narrative.
*
Andrew Lazar thinks it's precisely this lack of agonizing and self-flagellation that's made the film popular with GLAAD and other gay and lesbian groups. "Once he gets to his authentic self there's never any looking back," says Lazar. "It's: 'This is it. I'm gay and this is who I'm going to be.'" It sounds so simple, yet marketing departments were afraid of the movie, says Lazar, which he describes as "an unapologetic gay love story" with an audacious sense of humor.
*
More audacious than the humor is the fact that the film treats homosexuality as neither an obstacle nor a plight, resulting for once in a film with gay characters that's not about the personal or social travails of being gay. Like anyone, Steven and Phillip have their problems, but being gay isn't one of them.

What is Behind Jim Webb's PR Campaign?

It turns out that I was not the only person to receive what at first blush appeared to be pro-active outreach from Senator Jim Webb's office on DADT. It seems I was but one of several. Other recipients included field consultants and organizers on DADT in Virginia and a staff member of a progressive military families advocacy group. One can only conclude that Webb is attempting to engage in some sort of PR offensive in the hope of distracting the LGBT community from the fact that Webb is needlessly supporting delay. I summarized my view to one other blogger this way:
*
I suspect that one worry that Webb and other Democrats have is the 2010 mid--terms. Glenn Nye in the 2nd District (my district) is facing a tough challenge (probably from Ken Cuccinelli want to be Scott Rigell although the primary is not until June 8th) as is the incumbent in the 5th. If progressives and LGBT voters stay home, these seats are definitely likely to be lost. Passage of ENDA and repeal of DADT before November could make for a strong turn out. Further delay and folks - like my partner and myself - may stay home come election day. We have already stopped giving money. I believe Webb is reacting to this reality.
*
I certainly have no intention of allowing Webb to get away with this apparently calculated deception. I hope others will recognize that we are being played yet again. From the comments left on my post at The Bilerico Project, it looks like many are seeing through the ruse. One comment clearly notes that the writer believes that Webb is involved in a ploy to get us to support the Democrats in the mid-term elections. His response to Webb is basically as follows:
*
I tell them [Congressional Democrats] "It is better to have an enemy you know you have to fight against than a supposed friend who you don't know is either going to run away or might stab you in the back". It they don't fulfill their campaign promises from 2006 and 2008,then they aren't the right people for the job. Do not let losers hold you responsible for their own failure. I only give and vote for candidates who have done specific things to move our country forward.
*
The truth is that the whole "study" argument serves only to provide cover for those who want delay - which sadly, I believe includes our anything but "fierce advocate" Barack Obama. As idicated in prior posts, more than enough studies have already been done and they all support ending DADT. Moreover, a significant majority of Americans now support repeal - including some 56% of Republicans. Therefore, why the cowardly, chicken shit approach by Congressional Democrats like Jim Webb? Here are some more highlights from the Columbia study that looked at the experience of U.S. allies that have ended the ban on openly gay service members:
*
As part of the coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. soldiers have fought for years alongside troops from twenty-two of the approximately twenty-four countries that allow gay servicemembers to serve openly.201 This service includes both training and combat. General Gregory S. Newbold, a vice-president at the Potomac Institute, reports that U.S. and British forces “have trained together a great deal, so that relationship is a very easy one to carry into combat."
*
Importantly, no one has reported that the presence of openly gay and lesbian members of other countries’ militaries has had a negative effect on the ability of U.S. troops to serve effectively.203 For example, referring to gay soldiers under his command, Glenn Truitt, a former submarine officer and graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, said "[t]he homosexual men I knew in the military were much more professional about their sexuality than the heterosexuals, if only because they had to be" to gain full acceptance.204 The ability of U.S. soldiers to serve alongside openly gay and lesbian servicemembers from other countries in the Iraq war “demonstrates that the morale and cohesion of our forces is simply not affected by
the presence of openly gay soldiers.”

*

The time for studies is over. Senator Webb needs to vote to repeal DADT THIS YEAR. If not, he and other Congressional Democrats need to be ready to pay the price of gays shutting off the LGBT ATM and staying home in November. If that leads to electoral losses, Webb and those like him will have only THEMSELVES to blame.

Gay-Straight Brother Team Wins Amazing Race

On a less serious note, the gay-straight brother team of Dan and Jordan Pious won season 16 of the reality show Amazing Race. I will admit that I only watched bits and pieces of the show when I first heard about Dan and Jordan competing. The last time I watched was a few years back when two cute male models, Tyler Denk and James Branaman won Amazing Race 10. What is most moving to me is the relationship that this year's winners have with one another and how Dan supported Jordan when he came out as gay. I also hope that as more and more gay characters and contestants are on television and in other media forms, the sooner homophobia becomes a thing of the past. Congratulations to Dan and Jordan! Here are some highlights from The Advocate on the victorious brother team:

*
Brotherly love may be priceless, but it was worth at least $1 million to gay and straight siblings Jordan and Dan Pious, the winners of season 16 of The Amazing Race. Rhode Island natives Jordan, 23, and Dan, 25, proved themselves formidable contenders in the round-the-world reality TV competition, and they made some controversial moves in the final leg, cutting into an airline ticket line in Shanghai, China, and then managing to get bumped up to first class so they beat their remaining two rival teams off the plane in San Francisco. (Both moves are allowed by the race’s rules.)
*
The day after their victory episode was broadcast, this gay-straight alliance spoke with The Advocate about their winning strategies, their relationship with each other and with the race’s 10 other teams. . . and what it means to give the race its first openly gay winner since Reichen Lehmkuhl and Chip Arndt, then a couple, in 2003.
*
Growing up, I think my brother saw me becoming a gay boy, a gay man, and at the early stages tried to get me involved with sports, like “I don’t know if want you to be gay,” etc. I was like 7 or 8. When I came out, the first person I came out to in my family was my brother. I was 14-1/2 years old and I told him that I was gay, and his reaction was, “I will never love you any differently, you are my little brother, and you mean the world to me, and do you, do Jordan, and don’t change who you are,” and he has been the most supportive person in my life, and that was no exception.
*
You are the first openly gay winner since Chip and Reichen. Do you feel like you’ve helped score some points for gay visibility? Jordan: I’ve received some fan messages and stuff like that from homosexual men and women who say I’m a positive role model for the gay community hearing that means the world to me. I have never felt that I don’t have opportunities because I’m gay, and I want everyone else to think and believe that as well. It’s just a part of who I am, it doesn’t define who I am, and you can do anything you put your mind to, so I hope people definitely take that away from this experience.

We Could Support Gay SCOTUS, But Not One With "Pro-Gay Ideology"

The caption of this post describes recent remarks attributed to Focus on the Family and Family Research Council in connection with the opening on the U. S. Supreme Court arising from David Souter's announced retirement. Do I believe it? No - I don't believe anything that either of these organizations say unless it is a statement that they detest gays and will do all in their power to depict us as sub-human. Why then these remarks? Perhaps its merely a smoke screen given the disastrous anti-gay marriage campaign of the National Organization for Marriage which was become a comical farce and hence the efforts of FOTF and FRC to appear less whacked out than they truly are once one looks at their websites and historic agendas. Moreover, I suspect that a "pro-gay ideology" would encompass anything other than one hiding in the closest and/or someone riddled with internalized homophobia. It will be interesting to see how quickly FOTF and FRC show their true colors. Here are highlights:

*

Yesterday I reported that the religious right group Focus on the Family said that they wouldn’t oppose an openly-gay nominee to the Supreme Court on the basis of their sexual orientation. Now a second top religious right organization, Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council, is declaring something similar — it’s a shift in emphasis from its harder-line stance against gay judges two years ago, and another sign of the changing times. To be sure, the group is hedging a bit. Its position : Being gay would not in and of itself rule out getting the group’s support, though having a “pro-gay ideology” would.

*

“But if a person does publicly identify as gay or lesbian, or particularly if a person has been involved with homosexual rights activism at any level, then there would have to be serious questions asked about whether he or she would impose a pro-gay ideology on the court.” Sprigg added that homosexuality in and of itself would not be a “determinant” against the acceptability of the nominee.

*
That’s not as hard-line as two years ago, when the Family Research Council argued: “We don’t accept that homosexuality is any kind of cultural identity that should be sought in a judge.” To be sure, it’s unlikely that either of these groups would support any Obama nominee, simply because of philosophical differences. But the unwillingness of these groups to rule out opposition to an openly-gay nominee is a big sign of how much things have shifted towards tolerance of gays and lesbians.

*
Goups that see homosexuality as a fundamentally illegitimate and morally questionable lifestyle are no longer willing to say openly that its a disqualifier from serving on the highest court.

Gay Gold Medal

Hurrah!! Matthew Mitcham, Australian Olympic diver and the only out gay man at the Beijing Games won a gold medal for Australia in the men’s 10 metre platform diving in Beijing. The 20-year-old offered an incredible 112.10 final dive to beat the Chinese Luxin Zhou who had lead the competition until that point.

Dating Someone In the Closet

UPDATED: Some readers state that they know semi-closeted gays who are perfectly happy that way. I agree that there are those who may find happiness living that way. I just cannot do it myself nor do I think I could survive in a relationship where I had to appear to not exist, etc., and could not be acknowledged by my partner. Each of us must follow the path that works for us.

*

*

I have been chastised at times by some readers for my stand that I do not want to get involved romantically with any guys who is not totally out. It's not that I am unsympathetic to where these individuals might be in their process of self-acceptance or that I do not want to help them. The fact is that I am contacted by guys in the closet all the time seeking advise or my reflections on my experiences. Moreover, even after coming out socially and to family, out of fear I remained closeted at my former law firm for well over a year to the constant irritation of my former boyfriend. Truth be told, I hated it and it messed both me and my relationship up living that way. I believe that only when one has come out totally is it possible to achieve a full acceptance of yourself and finally live your life as who you are. No apologies or permission required. Thus I found it interesting that Matt at Debriefing the Boys said something very similar on his blog on this topic while recounting meeting someone he had been involved with previously who is still not out:
*

I learned a valuable lesson, though. As strongly as I sympathize with guys who are struggling to figure out whether they're gay, and as much as I want to help guys through that process (and you know I do, because I've talked to hundreds of you over the years), and as much as I want a boyfriend, I know now that I can't date a guy who doesn't know who he is and isn't ready to be proud of himself. As wonderful as a guy may be in every other way, I can't be somebody's dirty little secret.

*

That sentiment explains it all in my view. For those still in the closet, I believe that for me, being out in all facets of my life has been/is incredibly empowering and liberating. I truly do not believe that I could ever return to the closet. It would be totally suffocating at best.

My Quest

During my telephone conversation with Justin (for new readers, he's a West Coast blogger friend) yesterday, he asked me what I wanted most in life. He suggested that based on our conversations over the last four months that what I really wanted was a guy for a committed, loving, monogamous relationship. While he teased me in part about my list of what I do not want in a guy - facial hair, being overweight, and closeted, all of which are pretty non-negotiable - he said I need to enunciate what I want and to talk more about my positive attributes. On the latter topic, I do think I am a nice person - despite what my ex-wife or former in laws might say - and that I am kind, honest, loyal, compassionate (perhaps to a fault at times), romantic, passionate and sincere. I like to make others - my partner in particular - happy and doing so makes me happy. Also, while hardly a Bel Ami model, I think I am decent looking, have a pretty nice body (especially for a guy my age). So why aren't guys flocking to my door?? To be candid, I don't know why. As I said in my post about Lately Gay, it does feel at times that I missed the window of opportunity by coming out so late in life. Not that I regret coming out since it has led to a self-acceptance that I believe I would never otherwise have found.

*

Seriously, however, Justin is correct about what I want most in life at this point: "Mr. Right" with whom I can have a mutually fulfilling monogamous relationship. My vision when I first decided to come out was to find a guy with whom I could have a relationship akin to my married life with my former wife, except that it would be complete because it would be based on my true sexual orientation as opposed to a construct based on the expectations of family, church and society. Having said that, I do want to state for the record, that I did love my ex-wife when I married her and through the years we were together. sadly, I do not think she will every fully understand that. It was simply a case of trying to force the square peg into a round hole. It just will not work long term.

*

So what do I want in a guy? First and foremost, I want someone who is intelligent, a good person and totally comfortable with himself and his sexuality. Being able to talk and have conversation on a myriad of topics is important in my view. So too, I do not want to be haunted by someone else's demons since I have worked so very hard to put my own behind me. Likewise, I do not want to have to be someone else's "dirty secret" because they are not out to family or at work. While I might make an exception for someone in the military if there was a clear end date after which he'd be totally out, I feel that being openly gay has been so liberating and essential to true self-acceptance, I'd be afraid about what being with someone closeted long term would do to both him and me. As for what do I mean by a good person, I think that includes being faithful, compassionate, honest, sincere, loving, romantic, and many similar attributes. Monogamy is also a must since if I am going to totally and completely give myself to someone, I expect a similar love/commitment in return. Being able to be passionate is also a requirement.

*

A final and important requirement is that there be physical attraction between us. From my experience, if the attraction/chemistry isn't there, sooner or later the relationship will fall apart, much as happened with my straight marriage. Eventually, the effort to make it work just becomes too heavy. Where does all of this leave me? I guess hoping that at some point this wonderful person will find me and/or that we find each other. Since I am shy (even if opinionated on some topics) when it comes to personal romance, I suspect he will have to make the first move. :)