Comedy time - Five Red Flags Signs to 'Down Low Men'

It's the weekend, so I'm going to have a little fun.

The following video is a comical example of the dangers of not discussing lgbts issues in the African-American community.

A while back, a black gay man, J.L. King, wrote a book talking about "down low" black men, or black men who are secretly gay while maintaining a heterosexual facade.

The book was featured on Oprah and all hell broke loose, as it does in all situations of ridiculous moral panics.

African-Americans (particularly black women) practically flipped out over the real notion that there is such thing as closeted gay men. Fueling the madness was the now debunked belief that these men were causing the HIV rate to go up in the black community, chiefly amongst black women.

Seminars, books, and talk shows spread across the country supposedly giving tips about how to "detect down low men." Strangely enough, the idea of having a real conversation about homophobia in the black community never crossed the mind of these "concerned individuals."

The following video is an example of this insanity. According to this lady on the video, the red flags of "down low men" are men who:

don't check their nails palm down,

chew gum loudly,

chooses to blow something out of a man's eye,

pronounce their "esses better than a rattlesnake,"

and fart silently. Apparently a heterosexual man's fart is supposed to make noise.

No disrespect to the lady in this video, but I think she is serious:

Know Your LGBT History - Gimme A Break

Gimme a Break was a long-running 80s situation comedy featuring Tony and Emmy-award winner Nell Carter as a woman who is taking care of a California chief of police (Dolph Sweet) and his three daughters as a promise to a dying friend.

It got some criticism early in its run because of the implication that Carter was playing the stereotypical sassy black maid in the spirit of Beulah. However, Carter's timing and comic talents gave this television show its life.

The episodes varied from outrageous comedy to serious issues, such as the one featured in this week's post, The Chief's Gay Evening.

During a stakeout, featuring unfortunately a man in drag (couldn't they have gotten a woman police officer), the chief discovers that one of his officers is gay (not the guy in drag, by the way). What follows is a conversation about stereotypes and the damage they do.

I found the episode to be dated in terms of comedy, but still useful in showing young lgbts what the community had to deal with in the 80s. However, there was one thing I really liked about this episode. The gay man (Eugene Roche) stood up for himself without "begging for tolerance." There was no shame nor weakness in his portrayal.

Ironically, Carter appears only at the beginning and ending of this episode, which is a shame. When the actress died in 2003 of diabetes, it was discovered that she was in a long-term relationship with another woman, Ann Kaser. They were raising her two adopted sons together:







Past Know Your LGBT History Posts:

NOM threatening New York lawmakers and other Friday midday news briefs

Faith Groups Campaign to Block Gay Marriage - I believe the phrase "it's on now" is very apt here. A portion of the article which stands out is the following:

As in past years, the local religious opposition to same-sex marriage will have the support of a Washington-based national political lobby, the National Organization for Marriage, which formed in 2007 to fight same-sex legislation around the country. That organization was behind the April 12 blitz of automated phone calls singling out voters in about a dozen Senate and Assembly districts where legislators have said they are undecided. Brian Brown, the group’s president, said the calls urged voters to tell lawmakers they opposed same-sex marriage.

“We spent over half a million dollars in New York” in 2009, he said, “and we’re ready to spend that and more this time. We are willing to spend a million against any Republican senator who votes for gay marriage.”

Bear in mind that Brown and NOM are the same folks who have called the lgbt community "bullies" for causing the law firm King & Spalding to change its mind and elect not to defend DOMA in the courts. But it's okay cause NOM is "bullying for Jesus."

New York's organized opposition: Defending sanctity of preconceived monologues - Meanwhile, the New York Family Research Foundation is erasing dissenting comments from its facebook page to make it seem that all of those responding are on board with its anti-marriage equality stance.

Uganda’s “Kill The Gays” Bill May Be Fast Tracked For A Vote - Meanwhile, things just nastier in Uganda.

Clovis school district approves application for gay-straight alliance club - Victory!

Governor signs bill to end discrimination - Another bit of good news from Hawaii

A Houston tragedy the religious right won't tell you about

Mom: 'I Lost My Son Because I'm a Lesbian': MyFoxHOUSTON.com

This is a sad story coming out of Houston, TX.

According to Sharon Laverne Fuller, she lost custody of her son, William Fuller, a decade ago to his father, Rev. Tracy Burleson, because she is a lesbian.

This loss led to a chain of events which now sees her son and his father on trial in a murder-for-hire plot in which the ex-husband allegedly hired the son to murder his present wife, Patricia Burleson.

Burleson was found shot dead in her driveway a year ago.

And the kicker?

Also on trial is Tyonne Palmer, a woman who allegedly both men (the father and the son) had a sexual relationship with.

The point here is not to bash two-parent heterosexual households, even though if this had happened in same-sex household, the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, and various religious right groups would trot it out as a way to criticize same-sex families.

Ms. Fuller say it best herself in this interview. You see, at the time of the custody hearing, even her family supported her son's father:

They said that God told them to do that. And my question now is: did God change his mind?”

The point here is a basic question - in the history of the world, what has caused more death, destruction, and basic havoc? Lgbts or people thinking that they know what God wants?

By the way, Fuller has moved back to Houston to aid in her son's defense.

You know how "selfish" lgbt parents are.

Editor's note - The original post inaccurately stated that Ms. Fuller was once married to Burleson. 

Anti-gay groups to get an huge infusion of money, taking homophobia to state levels

If you want any indication of how successful the lgbt community has been in this so-called culture war, the following item in Minnesota Independent gives you a huge clue:

Anti-gay rights groups around the country will see a cash infusion over the next two years through a plan called “Ignite an Enduring Cultural Transformation.” And the groups are remaining mum about who is responsible.

The campaign, which largely targets states where Republicans won control of legislatures or governorships, has garnered the support of Republican political superstars such as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.), Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Jon Kyl (Ariz.), and Rep. Trent Franks (Ariz.). The groups intend to pass anti-gay marriage amendments, curtail abortion rights and, in at least one case, ban “transgender bathrooms.”

Family policy councils — a creation of Focus on the Family in the 1980s — have launched the Ignite plan in 15 states. Each family policy council has a three-prong plan to achieve their legislative goals over the next two years: lobbying for legislation, mobilizing pastors and social conservatives and supporting candidates that have backed their initiatives. Each group has used a stock brochure containing nearly identical wording to explain their plan and to solicit funds. In many cases, an Ignite plan was launched with an anonymous matching-grant donor.

Requests for information from many of the policy councils were denied, and Focus on the Family told the Minnesota Independent that they have no involvement, declining to offer information on any organization that might back the plan.

The article goes on to list groups and dollar amounts. It ain't pretty:

In several states — such as Indiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and West Virginia — Ignite plans seems to be targeted at getting anti-gay marriage amendments passed.

 . . . The Family Policy Council of West Virginia (FPCWV) plans to spend $168,000 through 2012 (it’s average yearly budget is $132,000) during its two-year Ignite campaign to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions, and also to defeat laws that would prevent discrimination against gays and lesbians.

 . . . The Pennsylvania Family Institute plans to spend $1.5 million through 2012 on anti-abortion rights measures as well as a constitutional amendment barring gay marriage in the state. The average yearly revenue for the group over the last three years was $1.4 million.

The group also received a matching donation of $7,500 at the end of 2010.

 . . . In Minnesota, the Ignite plan calls for adding an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution banning gay marriage; the Minnesota Family Council is planning to spend $4.71 million in the next two years. The group averaged $832,000 in revenue over the last three years between the Council and it’s affiliate, the Minnesota Family Institute. If the Ignite campaign goes according to plan, the group will spend more than twice its historical average in working to abolish gay marriage in the state.

Seems to me that these groups are following the game plan of the National Organization for Marriage, i.e. get a mysterious, highly moneyed backer to fund their plans - funds which will pay for obscene amounts of flyers to spread, commercials to be filmed, and publicists to develop talking points as well as book spots on local television shows.

Get on the ball folks, cause it's coming. Whining about "Gay, Inc." ain't gonna cut it. It's safe to say that we are kicking serious ass on the national level with DADT overturned and DOMA and Proposition 8 slowly but surely on the way out.

There is definitely a lot more stuff to do on that level, but let's not forget the local levels. It's obvious that the other side hasn't.

Hat tip to my Facebook buddy Philip Lowe Jr. for this tip.

Ex-gay group disses 'It Gets Better' and other Thursday midday news briefs

Exodus International Attacks Google And Toy Story Over Anti-Suicide Ad - What a load of tripe from Exodus International, especially that part about "thousands of ex-gays." If this is truly the case, then I challenge them to have a march. Show your numbers instead of attacks on those of us comfortable with our orientation.

Photo: Meet the purchased families that'll drive down the L.I.E - Great! Another phony "we have to save marriage" tour.

Guest column by Irene Monroe: Marriage equality film comes to Harlem - Excellent news because despite what has been implied by "some people," marriage equality is not solely a "white" issue.

Fit to Rule on Same-Sex Marriage - Even the New York Times tells Proposition 8 proponents not to blame the judge simply because their case was piss poor.

VIDEO: First gay justice on Supreme Judicial Court confirmed in close vote - Barbara Lenk is confirmed in Massachusetts.

ACLU threatens to sue Clovis schools - Good. There is NOTHING wrong with gay/straight alliance clubs in high schools.

Proposition 8 defenders shouldn't blame the judge because their case was poor

By now, you all have heard the latest from the Proposition 8 proponents. They have filed a suit asking the courts to vacate the decision against Proposition 8 because the judge, Vaughn Walker, is gay.

These folks assert that since Walker was gay, he had a interest in the case and should have recused himself.

Let me just say that if that is the case, then I think the case in which the Supreme Court ruled that gays shouldn't be allowed in the Boy Scouts should be overturned because all of the justices ruling were heterosexual. But that is ridiculous.

And that is the point.

While legal experts agree that this gambit is desperate and will not prevail, it has succeeded in obscuring the fact that Proposition 8 proponents lost because their case was poor.

I mean really, really poor.

In the 13 day trial, lawyers fighting Proposition 8 brought out the experts, academics, and same-sex couples who were affected by the law.

In contrast, proponents only brought two witnesses.

Where was Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization for Marriage or all of those pastors who rallied their congregations against marriage equality, such as Miles McPherson of the Rock Church of San Diego?

All of these "brave defenders of marriage" conveniently didn't not to testify.

It is not known why Gallagher didn't testify but others, like McPherson, claimed that they were fearful of violent reaction by those who supported marriage equality.

Some, like myself, felt that McPherson was worried less about violence and more worried about being questioned on bogus positions he took, such as using discredited research to make a link between pedophilia and homosexuality.

In the words of legal analyst Andrew Cohen, the trial was an "uneven matchup" which led to the foregone conclusion that Walker would rule against Proposition 8:

Judge Walker will so rule, in large part, because he has been left with virtually no other choice as result of the odd tactics and weak case presented to him by opponents of same-sex marriage.

Take, for example, the bizarre courtroom display Wednesday by Charles Cooper, the lead attorney for defenders of Prop 8. His side presented only two witnesses during the long course of the trial, neither of whom was particularly compelling. In fact, one of the defense witnesses, David Blankenhorn, was so hapless during his testimony a while back that Judge Walker on Wednesday questioned his credentials as an expert on marriage. When you have bad facts, you argue the law. When you've presented little evidence, or the evidence you've presented is not so hot, you say that evidence doesn't matter. That's partly why Cooper told Judge Walker during closing arguments, "Your honor, you don't have to have evidence for this."

But you do need evidence. And commercials telling lies about how children will suddenly become gay if  marriage equality becomes law or leaflets featuring phony horror stories about states which did pass gay marriage laws or pastors thundering about morality from the pulpit just ain't going to cut it.

It's easy to persuade voters that way, but in a court, you need logic, you need evidence, and you need witnesses.

Those who defended Proposition 8 had neither of the first two and very little of the last.

And that's why they lost.

Their pathetic maneuver of "gaming the referee" after the fact is just a matter of sour grapes by people who unfortunately have enough money to turn those sour grapes into wine.

But I don't think any court is going to swallow it.