Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Feb 12, 2010

Friday, February 12, 2010

Know Your LGBT History - 3 Strikes

It's snowing in South Carolina and it's like when the USC football team makes it to a bowl game - it happens so rarely that when it does, folks down here tend to freak out.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

And I will apologize again for today's segment of Know Your LGBT History. I know that I should be positive seeing that it's Black History Month and I was last week with Paris Is Burning.

But it's equally important to show the flipside in terms of the media images that lgbts of color have to deal with.

3 Strikes is a bad movie. And not in a Plan 9 From Outer Space good way. It's an insult all around to everyone involved. It tells the story of a young man who has just been released from prison for the second time. This means, according to the 3 strikes law, if he is arrested for another crime, he will be going to jail for a looong time. And as luck would have it, the young man who picks him up from prison gets caught in the middle of a police shootout.

Which means . . . never mind. This movie doesn't deserve an explanation. It insults everyone involved, especially the lgbt community in this scene which is supposed to be funny but reveals the mindset of the movie's writer about gay men. Apparently he felt that we are so sex crazed, we will rape someone in the hospital wearing a bloody diaper.

And it gets better. For a long time, Black Entertainment Television would show this movie. And that was funny because it was filled with so much profanity that the network would have to blot out the dialogue from a lot of scenes. If you hadn't watched this movie on video or at the movies, you wouldn't know what was going on.

The hateful hospital scene is seen here via a bad copy (sorry but I just don't have the stomach to put a good copy of this scene on my blog):

Black History Month Jewels and other Friday midday news briefs

The NBJC celebrates Black History Month -- and names present-day jewels of the week - And I am proud to say that my very good online buddy Pam Spaulding has been chosen as a "jewel of the week." Congratulations, Pam. The honor is WELL DESERVED!

R.I. officials elect 1st openly gay speaker - Kick ass! Another honor for Black History Month because he is an lgbt of color.

Why I Loathe The Term ‘Same-Sex Attraction’ (SSA) - You and me both, Wayne!

Right-Wing Accuracy In Media: Abandoning freedom of speech and the press are a “natural reaction” to pro-gay “propagandizing” - Hateful group continues to support Ugandan anti-gay bill. Paging the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Gillibrand Lays Out Strategy For DADT Repeal – Moratorium Or Repeal, Tucked Into Defense Bill - However we can get it done, get it done!

Gays serving openly in the military = reinstating the draft

According to the American Family Association's One News Now, if gays are allowed in the military, the draft will have to be reinstated because it will be difficult to get new recruits:

A national defense analyst and Pentagon advisor says if those pushing for repeal of the 1993 law banning homosexuals from military service are successful, it will be difficult to maintain an all-volunteer force.

. . . Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis (USA-Ret.) was part of the military working group that helped craft the 1993 law known as Section 654, Title 10, which strictly prohibits homosexuals from serving in the military. He believes lifting the ban would alienate those people most likely to volunteer for the military.

"If you begin to erode the base -- primarily conservative, many are religious, and of course they're very patriotic... -- if you begin to erode that, guess what? You have no alternative if you want to fill the ranks than to draft," Maginnis decides.

He is convinced that President Obama could care less about how unpopular such a move would be. "The politicians don't want to vote for that, so that's really...the crux of what these people are about to do," the defense analyst explains. "Obama could care less about the military. He's paying back a political payola to the homosexual community."

And to prove this assertion, Maginnis offers . . . nothing. No studies, no proof, not even a magic show. Just his opinion. And his opinion pretty much makes up the article.