Peter LaBarbera makes our case for us (again)
Sometimes I can't help wondering whether or not Peter LaBarbera is a mole working for HRC.
Either that or he can't grasp the idea that his words help our cause more than his.
For example, his post advertising an appearance on the Liberty Counsel's radio program:
I will be the guest on Liberty Counsel’s outstanding new radio program, “Liberty Live” – airing today at 4:00-5:00 PM Eastern Time (3:00-4:00 Central). The host (in Liberty Counsel Founder Mat Staver’s absence) will be my good friend, Matt Barber, LC’s Director of Cultural Affairs and an AFTAH Board Member. (Matt is the guy who was fired by Allstate a few years back after writing a private web article against “gay marriage”– on his own time; this was God’s way of launching him into full-time pro-family work!)
For the record, Peter is being highly deceptive. Barber may have written his article on "his own time," but he included his place of employment in his bio, thereby involving AllState in his screed.
So the idea that Barber was blameless in that matter is up for conjecture. However, Peter's careful omission of that fact isn't.
Judging from Peter's advertisement, he is going to whine about President Obama's potential plans for aiding the lgbt community, including (Peter's words):
Transsexuality-Promoting ENDA (think men in dresses entering corporate female restrooms);
The pro-homosexual immigration bill euphemistically called the “United American Families Act of 2009” – which would allow Americans caught up in immoral homosexual relationships to sponsor their foreign-living homosexual lovers for immigration into the United States. We might rename this last bill the “Foreign Homosexual Lovers Importation Act of 2009.”
The linking of ENDA (which would give lgbts protection against discrimination in housing, employment, etc.) to men "dressed as women" invading bathrooms is no different than racists claiming that integration will lead to black men having sex with white women.
And spare me the nonsense about how homosexuality is different from race. That's not the issue here. The issue is that Peter's claim is a cynical tactic and while it may be successful, it's highly un-Christian. And it's untruthful too. I know this for a fact.
My city, Columbia, passed a transgender inclusive nondiscrimination policy and there has not been a problem of "men invading women's restrooms." For the record, there has never been a problem with "men invading women's restrooms" due to transgender inclusive nondiscrimination laws.
If there is, then I challenge Peter to show me.
Then there is the “United American Families Act of 2009." Peter's rather immature phrasing of this bill is yet another attempt by him and folks on his side to reduce the validity of lgbt relationships to that of sex acts.
According to HRC:
The legislation amends the definitions sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act to include definitions for “permanent partner” and “permanent partnership.” The Act defines “permanent partner” as an individual who is at least 18 years of age who is in a committed relationship with another individual at least 18 years of age who is not a first, second or third-degree blood relative, with the intent that this be a lifelong commitment. The individual must be financially interdependent with his or her partner, cannot be married or in another permanent partnership and must be unable to enter into a marriage recognized under the INA with the partner.
UAFA will provide lesbian and gay individuals the same opportunity as different-sex, married couples to sponsor their partner. Like different-sex couples, there are requirements such as providing proof of the relationship — including affidavits from friends and family or evidence of financial support. As with current immigration laws for married couples, UAFA would impose harsh penalties for fraud, including up to five years in prison and as much as $250,000 in fines.
The irony of the entire thing is that on occasion, Peter has whined that the gay community attacks him personally rather than give reasonable arguments to his opposition of gay rights.
He should talk, huh.
Personally I'm all for him talking. The more LaBarbera (and for that matter - Sally Kern, Chris Buttars, Matt Barber) talk, the more they reveal just what their true motives are.
Sooner or later, America is going to get tired of these phony Christian activists, their conspiracy theories, and especially their need to stoop to the lowest hyperbole.
UPDATE - Jeremy from GoodAsYou has just published the transcript and the audio from the show. He is a better man than I. And has a stronger stomach too.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Thursday mid-day news briefs
And One News Now still has not reported on President Obama being against the Fairness Doctrine.
GOP Governors Consider Turning Down Stimulus Money - Not necessarily an lgbt issue per se but isn't it interesting how two of these governors (Jindal and Sanford) have potential future presidential aspirations. And neither are lgbt's best friends.
UPDATE - Sanford will take the money - I guess every now and then, the big bad wolf has to let everyone know that he exists by blowing the smoke.
The Blend picks up a Lezzy - Much congrats to Pam's House Blend and a big thanks for all of the support you have given me and my blog.
Bigotry on parade - Geez, not another anti-gay adoption bill disguised as something "good for the children."
And One News Now still has not reported on President Obama being against the Fairness Doctrine.
GOP Governors Consider Turning Down Stimulus Money - Not necessarily an lgbt issue per se but isn't it interesting how two of these governors (Jindal and Sanford) have potential future presidential aspirations. And neither are lgbt's best friends.
UPDATE - Sanford will take the money - I guess every now and then, the big bad wolf has to let everyone know that he exists by blowing the smoke.
The Blend picks up a Lezzy - Much congrats to Pam's House Blend and a big thanks for all of the support you have given me and my blog.
Bigotry on parade - Geez, not another anti-gay adoption bill disguised as something "good for the children."
Will the religious right defend Chris Buttars?
Quick note - For days One News Now has been speculating about the return of the Fairness Doctrine - about how it will harm Christian broadcasters and lead to censorship.Yesterday, President Obama said he was against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.
And there isn't even one article about it at One News Now.
How typical.
But the events over the past few days remind me about how delicious irony can be on occasion.
Last year around this time, Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern gave a speech where she said gays were worse than terrorists.
When the lgbt community complained, the religious right made her into the modern Joan of Arc.
It culminated into a huge rally for Kern at the Oklahoma State House that was attended by over 1,500 people.
A year later comes Utah State Senator Chris Buttars. In an interview with a documentary filmmaker, he said the following:
– To me, homosexuality will always be a sexual perversion. And you say that around here now and everybody goes nuts! But I don’t care.
– They say, I’m born that way. There’s some truth to that, in that some people are born with an attraction to alcohol.
– They’re mean! They want to talk about being nice — they’re the meanest buggers I ever seen. It’s just like the Moslems. Moslems are good people and their religion is anti-war. But it’s been taken over by the radical side. And the gays are totally taken over by the radical side.
– I believe that you will destroy the foundation of American society, because I believe the cornerstone of it is a man and a woman, the family. … And I believe that they’re, internally, they’re probably the greatest threat to America going down I know of. Yep, the radical gay movement.
Buttars has never been a friend to the lgbt community. In the interview, he also claimed that he "killed" gay/straight alliances in high schools, calling them places where gays "recruit."
But now he seems to be using the Donnie McClurkin defense (i.e. saying you were misquoted even when you are on video saying the remarks), so it's obvious that he realizes just how much trouble he is in.
Last year, the attention over Kern's remarks, especially the way she hid her lies (i.e. citing Paul Cameron studies) behind her religious beliefs and how some in the lgbt community dwelled on nonsense (i.e. whether or not her son was gay) bummed me out.
I refuse to be bummed out this year. I'm waiting for the religious right to defend Buttars.
But I suspect that they won't though for two reasons.
His comments were just ignant (i.e. something so dumb it doesn't deserve more than two syllables in the description of its ineptitude). I don't think anyone Christian (even if the person didn't "approve" of homosexuality) would want to associate themselves with Buttars's comments.
Most importantly, Buttars's comments ruins the religious right's schtick. Their entire image depends on being portrayed as innocent Christians being attacked by "rabid homosexual activists" simply because they are trying to uphold traditional values and morality.
Kern reminded people of a nice grandmother who occasionally gives out quarters and penny candy to children because of the nature of goodness in her heart.
Buttars reminds people of a crotchety old man who wildly waves his cane as he spews venom and tries to keep from soiling himself.
Everyone wants to defend the sweet old grandmother. But no one cares about the pissy old fart.
It just goes to show that sooner or later, kismet has a way of coming around.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Chimps and the Fairness Doctrine make for a strange Wednesday
Sometimes I hate work.
I love my job but I'm at it 7.5 hours a day for five days. By the time I get home, all of the good stuff seems to have already been posted about.
It's difficult not to become obsolete. But I will try.
Anger rises over NY Post cartoon that many think depicts President Obama as monkey shot dead by police - I wonder how much attention Fox News will devote to this madness. I defy anyone to even attempt to tell me that the cartoonist Sean Delonas didn't have racist intentions when he created this monstrosity.
And here is another piece of news that ought to aggravate those who think that racism and homophobia have no connection - Delonas has been known in the past for creating comic strips comparing gay marriage to bestiality.
Just something nice to remember the next time someone (such as Harry Jackson or Ken Hutcherson) plays that "you can't compare my skin to their sin" card.
And speaking of President Obama, what's the deal with the Fairness Doctrine? I've noticed that those two words seem to make not only the religious right but conservatives in general to wet their pants. It's not a new thing. I remember when they were calling it the "Hush Rush" Act.
One News Now seems to have devoted so much time to talking about it thatI'm getting jealous. And here I thought lgbts were the biggest threats (oh well - at least we still are to Utah State Congressman Chris Buttars):
ACLJ ready to do battle against 'Fairness Doctrine'
Author predicts backlash would accompany Fairness Doctrine (the author, by the way, is Bernard Goldberg who seems to have made a career whining about the so-called liberal media)
Christian radio - target of 'Fairness Doctrine'?
'Fairness Doctrine' comeback likely
Well today, President Obama spoke about the Fairness Doctrine:
President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.
The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.
"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.
You think that's going to be the end of it? Come on now. If you have read this blog or my book, then you know that a hallmark of religious right propaganda techniques is to repeat a statement, even after it's been proven to be false.
We will be hearing about the Fairness Doctrine again from the religious right.
Sometimes I hate work.
I love my job but I'm at it 7.5 hours a day for five days. By the time I get home, all of the good stuff seems to have already been posted about.
It's difficult not to become obsolete. But I will try.
Anger rises over NY Post cartoon that many think depicts President Obama as monkey shot dead by police - I wonder how much attention Fox News will devote to this madness. I defy anyone to even attempt to tell me that the cartoonist Sean Delonas didn't have racist intentions when he created this monstrosity.
And here is another piece of news that ought to aggravate those who think that racism and homophobia have no connection - Delonas has been known in the past for creating comic strips comparing gay marriage to bestiality.
Just something nice to remember the next time someone (such as Harry Jackson or Ken Hutcherson) plays that "you can't compare my skin to their sin" card.
And speaking of President Obama, what's the deal with the Fairness Doctrine? I've noticed that those two words seem to make not only the religious right but conservatives in general to wet their pants. It's not a new thing. I remember when they were calling it the "Hush Rush" Act.
One News Now seems to have devoted so much time to talking about it thatI'm getting jealous. And here I thought lgbts were the biggest threats (oh well - at least we still are to Utah State Congressman Chris Buttars):
ACLJ ready to do battle against 'Fairness Doctrine'
Author predicts backlash would accompany Fairness Doctrine (the author, by the way, is Bernard Goldberg who seems to have made a career whining about the so-called liberal media)
Christian radio - target of 'Fairness Doctrine'?
'Fairness Doctrine' comeback likely
Well today, President Obama spoke about the Fairness Doctrine:
President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.
The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.
"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.
You think that's going to be the end of it? Come on now. If you have read this blog or my book, then you know that a hallmark of religious right propaganda techniques is to repeat a statement, even after it's been proven to be false.
We will be hearing about the Fairness Doctrine again from the religious right.
Speaking of Utah - lgbts can get no love from the legislators there
And just a reminder that the flyer from America Forever is not an anomaly, this just came in:
Four down, one to go.
The Utah Legislature snuffed out two more gay-rights bills Tuesday.
After lengthy public hearings, House committees rejected two measures: HB288, which would have allowed same-sex couples and other unmarried pairs to adopt and foster children; and HB267, which would have protected gay and transgender Utahns from housing and employment discrimination.
The snuffing out of these bills would be bad enough. But the comments from legislators and others are beyond the pale:
In rejecting the latest measures, opponents painted being gay as a "choice" rather than an innate characteristic -- contrary to a broad consensus among psychological and medical experts.
"Adoption is not a right, it's a privilege. Those who choose alternative lifestyles suffer the consequences because they can't naturally produce between them," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, who joined a 5-1 vote to defeat HB288. "Heterosexual couples who cohabit also face consequences because they choose not to marry."
And on the anti-discrimination bill, Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka made a similar case against adding sexual orientation to existing fair housing and employment laws.
"What we're talking about is choice -- someone's sexual choice," she told a House panel. "Why would we put into law someone's sexual choice? … This is not the right thing to do."
Here we go about comparing sexual orienation to sexual activity. It seems to be a stand by - it's simplistic and to the point. And it's also inaccurate. But when you can't make your points with truth, I guess sexual innuendoes are all you have left.
It's ironic to me how the religious right and those who support them accuse lgbts of being the aggressors when they are the ones passing the anti-gay marriage laws. And they are the ones in backroomss figuring out ways to work around the courts when they strike down ordinances that bar gay adoption.
Maybe I'm confused about definitions here, but just who are the aggressors and who are the ones having to deal with the onslaught?
And just who are the people with integrity?
And just a reminder that the flyer from America Forever is not an anomaly, this just came in:
Four down, one to go.
The Utah Legislature snuffed out two more gay-rights bills Tuesday.
After lengthy public hearings, House committees rejected two measures: HB288, which would have allowed same-sex couples and other unmarried pairs to adopt and foster children; and HB267, which would have protected gay and transgender Utahns from housing and employment discrimination.
The snuffing out of these bills would be bad enough. But the comments from legislators and others are beyond the pale:
In rejecting the latest measures, opponents painted being gay as a "choice" rather than an innate characteristic -- contrary to a broad consensus among psychological and medical experts.
"Adoption is not a right, it's a privilege. Those who choose alternative lifestyles suffer the consequences because they can't naturally produce between them," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, who joined a 5-1 vote to defeat HB288. "Heterosexual couples who cohabit also face consequences because they choose not to marry."
And on the anti-discrimination bill, Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka made a similar case against adding sexual orientation to existing fair housing and employment laws.
"What we're talking about is choice -- someone's sexual choice," she told a House panel. "Why would we put into law someone's sexual choice? … This is not the right thing to do."
Here we go about comparing sexual orienation to sexual activity. It seems to be a stand by - it's simplistic and to the point. And it's also inaccurate. But when you can't make your points with truth, I guess sexual innuendoes are all you have left.
It's ironic to me how the religious right and those who support them accuse lgbts of being the aggressors when they are the ones passing the anti-gay marriage laws. And they are the ones in backroomss figuring out ways to work around the courts when they strike down ordinances that bar gay adoption.
Maybe I'm confused about definitions here, but just who are the aggressors and who are the ones having to deal with the onslaught?
And just who are the people with integrity?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Show me the difference between the rhetoric - I dare youIs it just me or is the opposition getting more and more hysterical.
This flyer to the left is from a group in Utah, America Forever.
It's a vile piece of mess that exploits every anti-gay stereotype there seems to be (including the Michael Swift life). And also, don't think I didn't notice that the couple pictured is interracial. I guess a little racism on the side never hurts.
Just ugly. And the section in the flyer comparing lgbt openess in the workplace to sexual conduct is especially offensive to me.
For the record, I am open about my orientation at work. On my office wall, I hang an award I received in 2007 from the local lgbt community center as the Harriet Hancock Volunteer of the Year.
I received this award for many efforts, including taking part in a Richland County Sheriff Department committee that looked at how law enforcement can better serve lgbt communities. I also took part in panel discussions on college campuses about lgbt issues.
None of this has anything to do with sodomy, except for in the mind of a homophobe.
But you know what - let's make things more interesting. Take a look at words of this email I received from the Family Research Council:
Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back
February 17, 2009 Share with Friends
Dear Alvin,
President Barack Obama has unveiled his massive plan to silence the moral voices of America and reshape our country. He calls it "The Agenda."
Please stand with me now and send an immediate donation to help Family Research Council fight back.
Obama says we are divisive--because we object to immoral and dangerous behavior.
He implies that we are not patriotic--because we won't compromise our values to suit the radical advocates of the homosexual agenda.
We must be silenced, the Left says, and "The Agenda" lays out their plans to do that.
Hate crimes laws that could lead to penalties for Christians who publicly criticize homosexual behavior
Employment laws forcing businesses, even churches, to hire homosexuals (and indoctrinate employees)
Abolish the federal Defense of Marriage Act and other laws against counterfeit marriage
Yet most Americans disagree with the President's extremist views. Most want to:
Preserve the biblical definition of marriage
Be free to voice their concerns and Christian values
Protect schoolchildren from indoctrination that promotes dangerous sexual behavior
If we work together--we can stop "The Agenda."
Dozens of new congressional Democrats in Congress now represent moderate and conservative districts. They--and most Republicans--are open to our concerns.
Your prayerful support enables FRC policy experts to educate citizens and these members of Congress who can stop this disastrous plan.
So please send your most generous gift immediately. The radical homosexual activists have a champion in the White House, and they are demanding action.
Thank you for standing for faith, family and freedom. It is an honor to serve alongside you in this critical hour for our nation.
It's the same set of lies put out by America Forever, only done in a "nicer" way. If FRC is being attacked by President Obama, then their claims about the desires of "radical gay activists" give him and others who criticize them more than enough reason.
No matter how you dress it up, you never can totally disguise the smell of trash.
The religious right claims that they are only trying to perserve their beliefs and heritage but if these things they believe in entails stigmatizing lgbt relationships and reducing the dignity of our lives to ignorant stereotypes then I really wonder if their beliefs and heritage are worth perserving.
Because whatever these beliefs are, it's not the Christianity I grew up to respect.
Lies, inneundoes, and fear tactics have nothing to do with Christianity or any religious beliefs.
Tuesday's news briefs
Pat Robertson denounces Rush Limbaugh’s comments: He’s ‘not exactly thinking rationally.’ - A sign of the Apocalypse - I agree with Pat Robertson on something.
Fundie org issues dismal report card for the work of the professional 'Christian' set - And here I thought the religious right should be getting a failing grade on integrity and honesty.
As per usual, FOF is condemning gay 'Children' - On daytime soap operas where there have been rapes, murders, thieving, lying, cheating and all sorts of bad behavior (you know you enjoy watching it), nothing is worse than a gay wedding. I'm glad Focus on the Family makes things so clear.
Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever - President Obama's potential judicial picks are facing opposition before he even picks them.
A Party Fractured, GOP Conservatives Regroup - A political version of Friday the 13th. Fast as you think they are dead, they spring up again.
Pat Robertson denounces Rush Limbaugh’s comments: He’s ‘not exactly thinking rationally.’ - A sign of the Apocalypse - I agree with Pat Robertson on something.
Fundie org issues dismal report card for the work of the professional 'Christian' set - And here I thought the religious right should be getting a failing grade on integrity and honesty.
As per usual, FOF is condemning gay 'Children' - On daytime soap operas where there have been rapes, murders, thieving, lying, cheating and all sorts of bad behavior (you know you enjoy watching it), nothing is worse than a gay wedding. I'm glad Focus on the Family makes things so clear.
Culture Wars Today, Culture Wars Tomorrow, Culture Wars Forever - President Obama's potential judicial picks are facing opposition before he even picks them.
A Party Fractured, GOP Conservatives Regroup - A political version of Friday the 13th. Fast as you think they are dead, they spring up again.
A short but interesting story on being black and gay in America
I suspect that the issue of being black and gay in America will be receiving more attention as the months go by.
We have seen certain incidents (i.e. the arrest of T.D. Jakes's son, the Morehouse column, the Proposition 8 vote that led to the absolutely ridiculous question "Is Gay the New Black") that points to the fact that this could be THE issue to discuss.
But let me tell you a short story from my perspective.
A couple of years ago (I think 2004), I read an issue of Ebony magazine featuring an article that asked the question "Is Gay Rights Civil Rights."
This article polled responses from six prominent African-Americans from poet Nikki Giovanni to civil rights legends Revs. Fred Shuttlesworth and Walter Fauntroy.
It was an interesting piece and all involved gave thorough and very intelligent answers on whether or not they considered gay rights the same as "civil rights" (meaning a comparison between gay rights and the Civil Rights Movement).
To me though, it wasn't what was said, but what wasn't present.
Not one of those six people were self-identified lgbts of color. This was something that I found difficult to fathom - the fact that Ebony magazine could not or chose not to find any lgbts of color to participate in this article.
It's not as if they weren't out there. I'm sure that Keith Boykin, Mandy Carter, Nadine Smith, Alex Robinson, or any prominent lgbts of color would have participated if asked to.
But Ebony magazine chose not to go that route. In a conversation where the voices of lgbts of color was vital and necessary, the magazine chose to send the connotation that somehow gay rights have nothing to do with the black community.
And that lgbts of color do not exist.
This short incident may not mean much to you but as an lgbt of color, it says volumes to me.
In all of these discussions about gay rights and black civil rights, that incident of forced invisibility always stays with me.
Even though sometimes I wish it didn't.
I suspect that the issue of being black and gay in America will be receiving more attention as the months go by.
We have seen certain incidents (i.e. the arrest of T.D. Jakes's son, the Morehouse column, the Proposition 8 vote that led to the absolutely ridiculous question "Is Gay the New Black") that points to the fact that this could be THE issue to discuss.
But let me tell you a short story from my perspective.
A couple of years ago (I think 2004), I read an issue of Ebony magazine featuring an article that asked the question "Is Gay Rights Civil Rights."
This article polled responses from six prominent African-Americans from poet Nikki Giovanni to civil rights legends Revs. Fred Shuttlesworth and Walter Fauntroy.
It was an interesting piece and all involved gave thorough and very intelligent answers on whether or not they considered gay rights the same as "civil rights" (meaning a comparison between gay rights and the Civil Rights Movement).
To me though, it wasn't what was said, but what wasn't present.
Not one of those six people were self-identified lgbts of color. This was something that I found difficult to fathom - the fact that Ebony magazine could not or chose not to find any lgbts of color to participate in this article.
It's not as if they weren't out there. I'm sure that Keith Boykin, Mandy Carter, Nadine Smith, Alex Robinson, or any prominent lgbts of color would have participated if asked to.
But Ebony magazine chose not to go that route. In a conversation where the voices of lgbts of color was vital and necessary, the magazine chose to send the connotation that somehow gay rights have nothing to do with the black community.
And that lgbts of color do not exist.
This short incident may not mean much to you but as an lgbt of color, it says volumes to me.
In all of these discussions about gay rights and black civil rights, that incident of forced invisibility always stays with me.
Even though sometimes I wish it didn't.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Ignorant Morehouse College column makes me wonder
I love my African-American heterosexual brothers and sisters but let's face some facts: the black community in general is highly ignorant when it comes to acknowledging and supporting gays and lesbians of color.
How else can one explain the words in this recent hot mess of a column by Morehouse University writer Gerren Gaynor:
It's not so much that "straight" men of Morehouse are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle, but more so because it is constantly and quite robustly thrown in their face. Does being a gay man include adopting the traits of a woman? Because if that's the case, there's a more fitting school, and it's called Spelman College.
I'm all for being who you are. If you like women, go on and date women. If you like men, be my guest and date men. But if you are born a man, you should be just that--a man. If I have to look twice to tell if I'm looking at a man or woman on an all-male campus, then something is tragically wrong.
At this rate, Morehouse College may find itself in a difficult situation. What happens if and when one of our gay Morehouse brothers decides to go the next step and undergo a sex-change operation, and is then physically considered to be a woman? Does Morehouse have the right to ask that student to leave?
It's ironic that Mr. Gaynor claims to have support for gay men and then proceeds to throw out some of the most offensive stereotypes that could have only come from being locked up in a room for 24 hrs and forced to watch repeated clips from shows like In Living Color and movies like Soul Plane.
For the record, homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things entirely. Just because someone is openly gay doesn't necessarily mean will seek to have sexual reassignment surgery.
Mr. Gaynor's fickless bullshit is rooted in an unfortunate facet of the African-American community - this push to hypermasculinity.
You can see it in so many images on African-American oriented shows - it's not enough for a black man to be masculine. He must be hypermasculine. Everything about him must exude masculinity, even his gas.
But I really don't blame Mr. Gaynor for his ignorance regarding the gay community because it is prevalent in the black community.
Lgbts of color are nonexistent in the black community as far as our leaders, magazines, radio shows, and networks are concerned.
We are not people in the actual sense. We don't have lives or families. We are soulless props designed as warning stops to "real brothers and sisters." Or cariactures designed for laughter and amusement - clowns whose only functions are to induce laughter or pity.
We are constantly bombarded with either invisibility or negative stereotypes of weak feminine men or hypermasculine sexually aggressive men.
Yet this is the same community that cries about its high HIV rate in our community.
This is the same community who chuckles and says things like "we knew it all the time" when people like Pastor T.D. Jakes's son is arrested.
And we are the same community that gives birth to supposedly intelligent black men like Mr. Gaynor who will write ridiculous nonsensical filled columns.
So . . .
To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.
To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them
To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.
To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.
To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.
To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."
I lay Mr. Gaynor's ignorance as well as the ignorance of the entire black community at your feet.
What are you going to do about it?
I love my African-American heterosexual brothers and sisters but let's face some facts: the black community in general is highly ignorant when it comes to acknowledging and supporting gays and lesbians of color.
How else can one explain the words in this recent hot mess of a column by Morehouse University writer Gerren Gaynor:
It's not so much that "straight" men of Morehouse are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle, but more so because it is constantly and quite robustly thrown in their face. Does being a gay man include adopting the traits of a woman? Because if that's the case, there's a more fitting school, and it's called Spelman College.
I'm all for being who you are. If you like women, go on and date women. If you like men, be my guest and date men. But if you are born a man, you should be just that--a man. If I have to look twice to tell if I'm looking at a man or woman on an all-male campus, then something is tragically wrong.
At this rate, Morehouse College may find itself in a difficult situation. What happens if and when one of our gay Morehouse brothers decides to go the next step and undergo a sex-change operation, and is then physically considered to be a woman? Does Morehouse have the right to ask that student to leave?
It's ironic that Mr. Gaynor claims to have support for gay men and then proceeds to throw out some of the most offensive stereotypes that could have only come from being locked up in a room for 24 hrs and forced to watch repeated clips from shows like In Living Color and movies like Soul Plane.
For the record, homosexuality and transgenderism are two different things entirely. Just because someone is openly gay doesn't necessarily mean will seek to have sexual reassignment surgery.
Mr. Gaynor's fickless bullshit is rooted in an unfortunate facet of the African-American community - this push to hypermasculinity.
You can see it in so many images on African-American oriented shows - it's not enough for a black man to be masculine. He must be hypermasculine. Everything about him must exude masculinity, even his gas.
But I really don't blame Mr. Gaynor for his ignorance regarding the gay community because it is prevalent in the black community.
Lgbts of color are nonexistent in the black community as far as our leaders, magazines, radio shows, and networks are concerned.
We are not people in the actual sense. We don't have lives or families. We are soulless props designed as warning stops to "real brothers and sisters." Or cariactures designed for laughter and amusement - clowns whose only functions are to induce laughter or pity.
We are constantly bombarded with either invisibility or negative stereotypes of weak feminine men or hypermasculine sexually aggressive men.
Yet this is the same community that cries about its high HIV rate in our community.
This is the same community who chuckles and says things like "we knew it all the time" when people like Pastor T.D. Jakes's son is arrested.
And we are the same community that gives birth to supposedly intelligent black men like Mr. Gaynor who will write ridiculous nonsensical filled columns.
So . . .
To Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, Alveda King, and the rest of the black ministers and spokespeople who spout silly homilies like “don’t equate my skin with your sin” and help propagate the lie that the lgbt orientation and the African-American identity are mutually exclusive.
To all of the black ministers nationwide who knowingly have lgbt of color congregants but will not pursue private one-on-one nonjudgmental conversations with them
To Ebony, Essence, Jet, Emerge and other African-American oriented magazines who write very few articles regarding lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American social organizations who will not even mention lgbts of color.
To all of the African-American oriented television shows (such as House of Payne) who feature no lgbt of color characters.
To all of the African-American motion pictures who feature lgbt of color characters strictly as vehicles for the worst form of comedy.
To all of the civic minded African-American spokespeople and leaders who will not even address the fact that lgbts of color exist.
To all of those in the African-American community who reduce lgbt of color relationships to sexual innuendoes by their patronizing comments like "not caring about who someone sleeps with."
I lay Mr. Gaynor's ignorance as well as the ignorance of the entire black community at your feet.
What are you going to do about it?
Student sues college, religious right feeding frenzy begins
We will hear about this story repeatedly over the next few days:
A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.
Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.
When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says.
Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to higher-ups.
In addition to financial damages, the suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks to strike down a sexual harassment code barring students from uttering "offensive" statements.
Jean-Paul Jassy, a 1st Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles, said a number of cases have explored the tension between offensive speech and the expression of religious views. Often, he said, the decision depends on the specifics of the situation.
"Free speech really thrives when people are going back and forth, disagreeing sometimes and sometimes finding things each other says offensive, but there are limits, particularly in a school setting," Jassy said after reviewing the lawsuit.
Lopez, a Los Angeles resident working toward an associate of arts degree, is described in the suit as a Christian who considers it a religious duty to share his beliefs, particularly with other students. He declined to comment. Matteson could not be reached.
Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family.
If the story turns out to be true, the professor should be reprimanded. That is if the story turns out to be true.
Unfortunately there seems to be a bigger issue here. The Allied Defense Fund and its allies are now engaging in a p.r. battle regarding this situation.
It's been done so many times before:
- An alleged incident of discrimination against a Christian takes place.
- The Allied Defense Fund sues "on behalf" of the innocent Christian and sends out a press release.
- The press release is "conveniently" picked up by right wing sources like World Net Daily, Free Republic, right wing blogs, etc.
- One News Now publishes a one-sided article making sure to add "details."
- The incident is featured on talk shows and radio shows featuring the "innocent Christian" giving only his or her side of the story.
- The incident will be used to incorrectly claim that pro-gay laws (such as hate crimes legislation) are going to lead to the imprisonment and persecution of Christians.
- We find out that the incident was blown out of proportion, but after all of that build up and hype about "Christians being persecuted," no one really gives a shit.
This incident has already hit One News Now complete with the usual whiny comments about "intolerant purveyors of tolerance," "Christians are being persecuted all over" and other things we can come to expect from One News Now supporters and readers.
I don't remember comments being posted to a One News Now story so quickly. It's obvious that the phony news service will be pushing this situation hard.
And the right wing blogs have gone haywire over it. I cringe to see how many entries on Free Republic have been dedicated to the incident.
My guess is that Mr. Lopez will be featured in a new AFA video on "silencing Christians."
But as I reiterated before, I want to hear the entire story. If Mr. Lopez's version of the story is true, then I hope a suitable solution is reached.
However, given the track record of his allies, I have more than enough reason to doubt Mr. Lopez's version of the story.
For now that is.
We will hear about this story repeatedly over the next few days:
A classroom dispute at Los Angeles City College in the emotional aftermath of Proposition 8 has given rise to a lawsuit testing the balance between 1st Amendment rights and school codes on offensive speech.
Student Jonathan Lopez says his professor called him a "fascist bastard" and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.
When Lopez tried to find out his mark for the speech, the professor, John Matteson, allegedly told him to "ask God what your grade is," the suit says.
Lopez also said the teacher threatened to have him expelled when he complained to higher-ups.
In addition to financial damages, the suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks to strike down a sexual harassment code barring students from uttering "offensive" statements.
Jean-Paul Jassy, a 1st Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles, said a number of cases have explored the tension between offensive speech and the expression of religious views. Often, he said, the decision depends on the specifics of the situation.
"Free speech really thrives when people are going back and forth, disagreeing sometimes and sometimes finding things each other says offensive, but there are limits, particularly in a school setting," Jassy said after reviewing the lawsuit.
Lopez, a Los Angeles resident working toward an associate of arts degree, is described in the suit as a Christian who considers it a religious duty to share his beliefs, particularly with other students. He declined to comment. Matteson could not be reached.
Lopez is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization based in Scottsdale, Ariz., and co-founded by evangelical leader James Dobson of Focus on the Family.
If the story turns out to be true, the professor should be reprimanded. That is if the story turns out to be true.
Unfortunately there seems to be a bigger issue here. The Allied Defense Fund and its allies are now engaging in a p.r. battle regarding this situation.
It's been done so many times before:
- An alleged incident of discrimination against a Christian takes place.
- The Allied Defense Fund sues "on behalf" of the innocent Christian and sends out a press release.
- The press release is "conveniently" picked up by right wing sources like World Net Daily, Free Republic, right wing blogs, etc.
- One News Now publishes a one-sided article making sure to add "details."
- The incident is featured on talk shows and radio shows featuring the "innocent Christian" giving only his or her side of the story.
- The incident will be used to incorrectly claim that pro-gay laws (such as hate crimes legislation) are going to lead to the imprisonment and persecution of Christians.
- We find out that the incident was blown out of proportion, but after all of that build up and hype about "Christians being persecuted," no one really gives a shit.
This incident has already hit One News Now complete with the usual whiny comments about "intolerant purveyors of tolerance," "Christians are being persecuted all over" and other things we can come to expect from One News Now supporters and readers.
I don't remember comments being posted to a One News Now story so quickly. It's obvious that the phony news service will be pushing this situation hard.
And the right wing blogs have gone haywire over it. I cringe to see how many entries on Free Republic have been dedicated to the incident.
My guess is that Mr. Lopez will be featured in a new AFA video on "silencing Christians."
But as I reiterated before, I want to hear the entire story. If Mr. Lopez's version of the story is true, then I hope a suitable solution is reached.
However, given the track record of his allies, I have more than enough reason to doubt Mr. Lopez's version of the story.
For now that is.
Fears of a phony 'homosexual agenda' even encompasses school janitors
At times, I can't help but to laugh at religious right groups because of how they interpret situations with the most extreme forms of hyperbole.
Take for example, a recent incident in Massachusetts.
At the beginning of the year, parents of children attending the Clara Barton Elementary School received a reasonable letter informing them that an employee, a janitor, had transitioned from male to female:
Dear Clara Barton Families,
Welcome back to a new school year! I hope that you all had a safe, rest filled and refreshing summer. A lot of work has taken place over the summer to get the school ready for this year.
Although we do not usually make formal announcements about our employee's [sic] personal lives, a matter has come up that has the potential to impact the school environment. We believe that it is important to inform everyone openly. Our night custodian has informed us of his decision to change his gender and, as we begin the school year, he will begin living and working as a woman. He has been a valued employee of the Oxford Public schools for many years, and we expect his exemplary performance to continue as he changes gender roles.
The custodial uniform is the same for men and women. However, our students may notice and ask about the differences in our custodian from last year to this. If they ask at school, they will be given a simple and straightforward answer. The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman.
This can be a difficult topic about which to talk and likely a conversation that no one expected to have. Included with this letter are some resources that provide information about transgender issues that will be helpful should you choose to learn more.
Whether or not one agrees with or supports the decision of our custodian, it is important to note that the Oxford Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability. We expect our custodian to be treated with the same respect as every other employee. We teach respect by demonstrating respectful behavior.
If you have any questions or concerns that are not addressed by this letter or by the resources provided, please do not hesitate to contact either one of us.
Sincerely,
Ernest Boss
Superintendent, Oxford Public Schools
Norman Yvon
Principal, Clara Barton School
The school deserves kudos for the professional way it handled the matter.
But the local religious right group, Mass Resistance (an official hate group according to the Southern Law Poverty Center), said the following (You will forgive me for adding my little editorial critiques in the middle of Mass Resistance's ramblings):
The radical transgender agenda is proceeding quickly into the schools, now reaching the youngest of children. (Editor's note - That's right. Our 'agenda' is to take over the school janitor's union. And next year, it will be the cafeteria workers.) What was completely unthinkable just a few years ago is now being forced as mainstream by public officials. And as usual, no one cares how this affects the fragile psychology of children. Pushing the political ideology as fast as possible takes precedence over everything. . .
. . . Written simply in an eerie informational style, the parents were told that one of the male custodians will now be coming to school dressed as a woman, and is now considered a "woman", and that parents should inform their children of this because the school intended to tell them if they asked about it. "The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman," the letter said to parents. It's extremely Orwellian. (Editor's note - Yes, I am sure that George Orwell had the proliferation of transgendered janitors in mind when he wrote 1984).
. . . This is where the homosexual movement is taking your children. It's like a science fiction movie . . . (Editor's note - I resent that. This is like a James Bond movie).
Mass Resistance's love of hyperbole seems to be matched by that of One News Now's coverage of the situation:
Transgender janitor shocks elem. school parents
I would be beating an old horse if I told you all that the headline is blatantly misleading. The One News Now article offers no proof that parents are shocked. It doesn't quote parents of the students attending Clara Barton Elementary School.
The only person quoted is Brian Camenker, who just happens to be the head of Mass Resistance. Camenker claims that parents are "afraid" to speak out because their children may face reprisals - shades of the David Parker lie indeed.
How convenient.
At times, I can't help but to laugh at religious right groups because of how they interpret situations with the most extreme forms of hyperbole.
Take for example, a recent incident in Massachusetts.
At the beginning of the year, parents of children attending the Clara Barton Elementary School received a reasonable letter informing them that an employee, a janitor, had transitioned from male to female:
Dear Clara Barton Families,
Welcome back to a new school year! I hope that you all had a safe, rest filled and refreshing summer. A lot of work has taken place over the summer to get the school ready for this year.
Although we do not usually make formal announcements about our employee's [sic] personal lives, a matter has come up that has the potential to impact the school environment. We believe that it is important to inform everyone openly. Our night custodian has informed us of his decision to change his gender and, as we begin the school year, he will begin living and working as a woman. He has been a valued employee of the Oxford Public schools for many years, and we expect his exemplary performance to continue as he changes gender roles.
The custodial uniform is the same for men and women. However, our students may notice and ask about the differences in our custodian from last year to this. If they ask at school, they will be given a simple and straightforward answer. The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman.
This can be a difficult topic about which to talk and likely a conversation that no one expected to have. Included with this letter are some resources that provide information about transgender issues that will be helpful should you choose to learn more.
Whether or not one agrees with or supports the decision of our custodian, it is important to note that the Oxford Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability. We expect our custodian to be treated with the same respect as every other employee. We teach respect by demonstrating respectful behavior.
If you have any questions or concerns that are not addressed by this letter or by the resources provided, please do not hesitate to contact either one of us.
Sincerely,
Ernest Boss
Superintendent, Oxford Public Schools
Norman Yvon
Principal, Clara Barton School
The school deserves kudos for the professional way it handled the matter.
But the local religious right group, Mass Resistance (an official hate group according to the Southern Law Poverty Center), said the following (You will forgive me for adding my little editorial critiques in the middle of Mass Resistance's ramblings):
The radical transgender agenda is proceeding quickly into the schools, now reaching the youngest of children. (Editor's note - That's right. Our 'agenda' is to take over the school janitor's union. And next year, it will be the cafeteria workers.) What was completely unthinkable just a few years ago is now being forced as mainstream by public officials. And as usual, no one cares how this affects the fragile psychology of children. Pushing the political ideology as fast as possible takes precedence over everything. . .
. . . Written simply in an eerie informational style, the parents were told that one of the male custodians will now be coming to school dressed as a woman, and is now considered a "woman", and that parents should inform their children of this because the school intended to tell them if they asked about it. "The best thing to tell them is that our custodian used to be a man. She has changed her gender role and is now a woman," the letter said to parents. It's extremely Orwellian. (Editor's note - Yes, I am sure that George Orwell had the proliferation of transgendered janitors in mind when he wrote 1984).
. . . This is where the homosexual movement is taking your children. It's like a science fiction movie . . . (Editor's note - I resent that. This is like a James Bond movie).
Mass Resistance's love of hyperbole seems to be matched by that of One News Now's coverage of the situation:
Transgender janitor shocks elem. school parents
I would be beating an old horse if I told you all that the headline is blatantly misleading. The One News Now article offers no proof that parents are shocked. It doesn't quote parents of the students attending Clara Barton Elementary School.
The only person quoted is Brian Camenker, who just happens to be the head of Mass Resistance. Camenker claims that parents are "afraid" to speak out because their children may face reprisals - shades of the David Parker lie indeed.
How convenient.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Tony Perkins figures out our plan
Okay who dropped the ball on this one?
Someone has linked a portion of our plans for world conquest to Family Research Council head Tony Perkins. Naturally I'm angry, seeing that it was one of the greatest, far reaching plans of it's time.
And the best part was that no one would have connected it to the lgbt community because it had to do with a heterosexual woman:
When Nadya Suleman became a mom for the 14th time, she raised more than a few eyebrows. The drama grew by national proportions when details trickled out that Suleman was not only unmarried, but chose to have multiple embryos implanted in her womb through in-vitro fertilization. Last week, taxpayers learned that they would be partially liable for the family's care through hundreds of dollars in food stamps and disability payments. The news fueled even more conviction that the fertility doctor should have refused the procedure.
But is he really to blame--or are our courts? In California, the state Supreme Court made it virtually impossible for a physician to exercise his own judgment after two lesbians sued in 2001 for the right to be artificially inseminated over the doctors' personal or social objections.
Last year, in Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group, the justices ruled that anti-discrimination laws trumped physicians' rights. In so doing, the court tied the hands of the medical field, leaving little recourse against irresponsible and unhealthy decisions like Suleman's.
Okay, leaked the memo to Perkins. I mean how else could he have found out that Nadya Suleman's decision to have octupulets by assisted reproductive technology was actually a goal of the lgbt community.
What else does Perkins know?
He doesn't know about the hypnotic suggestions our operatives gave Suleman and the doctors involved in the case to go through with the procedure, does he?
Or that we were the ones who talked her into having six more before those eight.
Or we were the ones who was behind her mother's gag order.
Or that it is our operatives in the press who continues to fuel this controversy to take attention away from the secret passage of hate crimes legislation, ENDA, gay adoption, and the building of jails to house all of the conservative Christians we imprison when we take over.
Who leaked Perkins the memo outlining all of these things?
I mean he is not the type who would spin inaccurate conspiracy theories. Why that would make him a cynically, dishonest man desperate for any advantage in a cultural war that he is steadily losing.
And that would make FRC seem a bit ridiculous in that the group tries to link everything negative to an alleged radical gay agenda. That's almost like knowingly putting out inaccurate "studies" about the lgbt community.
No matter. Just keep a handle on the Michael Phelps memo.
Okay who dropped the ball on this one?
Someone has linked a portion of our plans for world conquest to Family Research Council head Tony Perkins. Naturally I'm angry, seeing that it was one of the greatest, far reaching plans of it's time.
And the best part was that no one would have connected it to the lgbt community because it had to do with a heterosexual woman:
When Nadya Suleman became a mom for the 14th time, she raised more than a few eyebrows. The drama grew by national proportions when details trickled out that Suleman was not only unmarried, but chose to have multiple embryos implanted in her womb through in-vitro fertilization. Last week, taxpayers learned that they would be partially liable for the family's care through hundreds of dollars in food stamps and disability payments. The news fueled even more conviction that the fertility doctor should have refused the procedure.
But is he really to blame--or are our courts? In California, the state Supreme Court made it virtually impossible for a physician to exercise his own judgment after two lesbians sued in 2001 for the right to be artificially inseminated over the doctors' personal or social objections.
Last year, in Benitez v. North Coast Women's Care Medical Group, the justices ruled that anti-discrimination laws trumped physicians' rights. In so doing, the court tied the hands of the medical field, leaving little recourse against irresponsible and unhealthy decisions like Suleman's.
Okay, leaked the memo to Perkins. I mean how else could he have found out that Nadya Suleman's decision to have octupulets by assisted reproductive technology was actually a goal of the lgbt community.
What else does Perkins know?
He doesn't know about the hypnotic suggestions our operatives gave Suleman and the doctors involved in the case to go through with the procedure, does he?
Or that we were the ones who talked her into having six more before those eight.
Or we were the ones who was behind her mother's gag order.
Or that it is our operatives in the press who continues to fuel this controversy to take attention away from the secret passage of hate crimes legislation, ENDA, gay adoption, and the building of jails to house all of the conservative Christians we imprison when we take over.
Who leaked Perkins the memo outlining all of these things?
I mean he is not the type who would spin inaccurate conspiracy theories. Why that would make him a cynically, dishonest man desperate for any advantage in a cultural war that he is steadily losing.
And that would make FRC seem a bit ridiculous in that the group tries to link everything negative to an alleged radical gay agenda. That's almost like knowingly putting out inaccurate "studies" about the lgbt community.
No matter. Just keep a handle on the Michael Phelps memo.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Friday's news posts
Fiery plane crash in upstate NY kills 49 people - No words. Only prayers
Details in gay student's slaying are revealed in prosecution brief - On the first year anniversary of the murder of Lawrence King, details are emerging. And it's about time too. For a while, this was beginning to look like another case of the "gay panic defense." The prosecution's case includes this tidbit:
"Witnesses said King was usually not the aggressor. But after months of teasing by McInerney and other male students who called him "faggot," he had began to retort, according to prosecutors."
Christian TV special being stifled - There they go. You can set your watch to the lies the AFA tells.
Fiery plane crash in upstate NY kills 49 people - No words. Only prayers
Details in gay student's slaying are revealed in prosecution brief - On the first year anniversary of the murder of Lawrence King, details are emerging. And it's about time too. For a while, this was beginning to look like another case of the "gay panic defense." The prosecution's case includes this tidbit:
"Witnesses said King was usually not the aggressor. But after months of teasing by McInerney and other male students who called him "faggot," he had began to retort, according to prosecutors."
Christian TV special being stifled - There they go. You can set your watch to the lies the AFA tells.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Gays and the black church - show some honesty or at least some dignity
In light of what has happened regarding the son of Pastor T.D. Jakes, I think it may be time for the lid to be taken off of something.
Not that I am outing anyone but there is a paradox that must be addressed.
We have seen how the religious right plays the black and lgbt communities against one another. And sometimes their ally has been the black church.
Well to me, that is the height of irony because of one thing.
So many "mainstream" (i.e. white) lgbts say that they cannot find any gays and lesbians of color who will be open.
The reason is that many of them are in the church. Many of them are prominent in the black gospel music scene (Yes that includes BET and the Stellar Awards).
As an lgbt of color, I am privy to many things and I can honestly tell you that the main ones hooping and hollering in church and on the gospel records tend to do so for more than reasons of salvation.
A lot of it is guilt. But I really don't blame them as much as I blame the black community at large for its intentional inability to address the needs of lgbts of color.
So let me throw out a few suggestions:
Stop giving speeches about the evils of homosexuality when you know that you are on the dl or know of someone on the dl.
Stop making comments about not comparing blacks to gays when you are engaging in the same behavior that white racists did to African-Americans - i.e. the stigmatization of an entire group of people based on stereotypes and Biblical interpretations of God's words.
Stop puffing out your chests because you support endeavors to end AIDS/HIV when it isyour lack of support of lgbts of color that is the very thing which can lead to new cases of the disease.
What happened to T.D. Jakes's son may be the subject of juicy gossip amongst "upstanding church folks," but we all know that it is part of a larger problem - the intentional dehumanization of the lgbts of color in the black community.
When is the black community going to get off of its collective asses and work on solving it?
In light of what has happened regarding the son of Pastor T.D. Jakes, I think it may be time for the lid to be taken off of something.
Not that I am outing anyone but there is a paradox that must be addressed.
We have seen how the religious right plays the black and lgbt communities against one another. And sometimes their ally has been the black church.
Well to me, that is the height of irony because of one thing.
So many "mainstream" (i.e. white) lgbts say that they cannot find any gays and lesbians of color who will be open.
The reason is that many of them are in the church. Many of them are prominent in the black gospel music scene (Yes that includes BET and the Stellar Awards).
As an lgbt of color, I am privy to many things and I can honestly tell you that the main ones hooping and hollering in church and on the gospel records tend to do so for more than reasons of salvation.
A lot of it is guilt. But I really don't blame them as much as I blame the black community at large for its intentional inability to address the needs of lgbts of color.
So let me throw out a few suggestions:
Stop giving speeches about the evils of homosexuality when you know that you are on the dl or know of someone on the dl.
Stop making comments about not comparing blacks to gays when you are engaging in the same behavior that white racists did to African-Americans - i.e. the stigmatization of an entire group of people based on stereotypes and Biblical interpretations of God's words.
Stop puffing out your chests because you support endeavors to end AIDS/HIV when it isyour lack of support of lgbts of color that is the very thing which can lead to new cases of the disease.
What happened to T.D. Jakes's son may be the subject of juicy gossip amongst "upstanding church folks," but we all know that it is part of a larger problem - the intentional dehumanization of the lgbts of color in the black community.
When is the black community going to get off of its collective asses and work on solving it?
T.D. Jakes' Son Charged With Indecent Exposure
I post this not as a way to make fun or gloat. If the story turns out to be true, I hope that the African-American community (who will no doubt be talking about this in huge masses) will take it as a hint to address the fact that lgbts of color are marginalized in the black community. Let's face it - folks say the black church opposes homosexuality but if it wasn't for black gays, the black church probably wouldn't exist in the form that it does now.
Jermaine Jakes, son of Dallas pastor T.D. Jakes, was arrested on a charge of indecent exposure in January, 2009.
According to a Dallas Police Department arrest warrant affidavit obtained by CBS 11 News, Jakes exposed himself to two undercover vice detectives at Keist Park on January 3.
The affidavit says Jakes walked up to one of the detectives at the park with his pants unzipped. Jakes then began to masturbate while making eye contact with the detective, according to the affidavit.
The detectives arrested Jakes on a charge of indecent exposure.
Late Wednesday evening, CBS 11 News received a statement from Faith Johnson, an attorney for Jermaine Jakes. The statement read:
"We are aware of potential allegations involving Jermaine Jakes and are undertaking our own investigation of these allegations at this time. Given an apparent government investigation, we have no further comment at this time."
More here.
I post this not as a way to make fun or gloat. If the story turns out to be true, I hope that the African-American community (who will no doubt be talking about this in huge masses) will take it as a hint to address the fact that lgbts of color are marginalized in the black community. Let's face it - folks say the black church opposes homosexuality but if it wasn't for black gays, the black church probably wouldn't exist in the form that it does now.
Jermaine Jakes, son of Dallas pastor T.D. Jakes, was arrested on a charge of indecent exposure in January, 2009.
According to a Dallas Police Department arrest warrant affidavit obtained by CBS 11 News, Jakes exposed himself to two undercover vice detectives at Keist Park on January 3.
The affidavit says Jakes walked up to one of the detectives at the park with his pants unzipped. Jakes then began to masturbate while making eye contact with the detective, according to the affidavit.
The detectives arrested Jakes on a charge of indecent exposure.
Late Wednesday evening, CBS 11 News received a statement from Faith Johnson, an attorney for Jermaine Jakes. The statement read:
"We are aware of potential allegations involving Jermaine Jakes and are undertaking our own investigation of these allegations at this time. Given an apparent government investigation, we have no further comment at this time."
More here.
The American Family Association's fascination with fradulent documentaries
I haven't seen in yet but I'm sure the American Family Association is cooking up a response to a Michigan TV station putting the kibosh on the showing of Speechless: Silencing Christians, a one-hour piece of propaganda pushing the usual inaccurate talking points of an anti-Christian conspiracy on the part of lgbts.
I find the entire thing interesting because Speechless was made over a year ago and had been shown on "Christian" stations. In addition, it is offered on youtube and also on the AFA's webpage .
I guess it speaks to the audacity of the organization. And it fills me with dread.
How many other stations have been asked to run this mess? And how many of them will comply?
And then I am bothered by something else. On the AFA's webpage is the video It's Not Gay.
This video supposedly tells the story of "ex-gays" or people who feel that they have been delivered from the alleged "homosexual lifestyle" through the power of God. Featured in the video (and he is on the front cover) is a man named Michael Johnston.
Johnston was a prominent ex-gay spokesperson who claimed that he was delivered by God after catching HIV. However, in 2003 it was discovered that he was having clandestine sexual encounters with men in hotel rooms.
Since that time he has been been sequestered out of the limelight.
This isn't the first time Johnston has come up. Wayne Besen exposed the story. Box Turtle Bulletin exposed the story. Countless bloggers have continued to talk about the Michael Johnston story from time to time.
But the AFA continues to sell the tape even after its errors have been pointed out.
So this organization, which seems to have no problem selling a fradulent dvd, is complaining that the are being silenced because they are Christians.
Well if this is the way the AFA spreads the Gospel of Jesus, they have bigger problems than so-called "radical homosexuals." And maybe any resistance they are running up against is God's way of telling them to stop their nonsense.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Silencing Christians? Hardly
Apparently there was a controversy over that American Family Association video, Speechless: Silencing Christians, I talked about earlier this week.
It was set to air on Monday in Grand Rapids, MI right before President Obama's press conference. However the television station wanted to reset the airing to another time. Since they received no word from the producers, the station decided to rescind the offer.
The silence you are aware of now stems from the AFA in closed door meetings with other religious right groups as they plot to turn this into another phony case of "Christians being discriminated against."
First of all, the station did not refuse to air tthe program, although I think it would have more than enough reason to. It merely wanted to set the program for another time.
And for the record, Speechless: Silencing Christians, is a one-sided piece of garbage that pushes the usual religious right propaganda against the lgbt community with the usual cast of characters - Matt Barber, Robert Knight, Concerned Women for America, Janet Parshall, etc.
It's possible airing received a strong response. The Human Rights Campaign said the following:
Make no mistake: this is the opening salvo in a coming battle over pro-equality legislation.
Just as we are on the cusp of historic change – a federal hate crimes law, protections for LGBT workers against job discrimination – extremist groups like the AFA are launching a well-funded national campaign of hatred and fear to halt our progress.
This program recycles familiar lies: that hate crime laws will "do away with our freedom of speech," or that pastors will be "criminalized for sharing the love of Jesus Christ." (In fact, the proposed federal hate crimes law explicitly states that it only applies to violent acts – not speech.)
The "anchor" of this faux-news program, which may have already aired in smaller markets, is controversial talk show host Janet Parshall, who in 2006 suggested Matthew Shepard's lifestyle was responsible for his murder and called gay adoption "state-sanctioned child abuse."
We cannot let this bigotry go unanswered. We can't let it scare voters, force LGBT people back into a place of shame and hiding, or create an atmosphere of intolerance or hate.
Before the AFA starts their nonsense, let me say that this is not a case of silencing Christians. And what Speechless was going to do is par for the course for the religious right - present a bunch of unchallenged lies, anecdotes and misconceptions about the lgbt community. They never really want to debate us on their lies. They seem to want to present them in an arena where the rules have been predestined to be in their favor.
I just can't believe that they had the temerity to attempt to it on a regular network.
No doubt the Obama regime has gotten them desperate and scared.
Folks, this is a headless monster in the making. Let's kill it before the religious right can gain traction from it.
The problem with Speechless is that it exploits the feeling of entitlement that some Christians have in this country. They have had their minds filled by James Dobson and company with the idea that America is their country and the rest of us are here by their will and pleasure.
That idea of entitlement makes them susceptible to any anecdote or lie that comes down the pike about them being silenced. We have seen this so many times with the religious right taking incidents and manipulating them to claim that lgbts are out to get Christians. A perfect example is the Ocean Grove Pavilion. The religious right claimed that the church who owned this pavilion was "forced" to allow gays to have marriage ceremonies there. However the true story was that the church was getting tax breaks for the pavilion and a requirement of those tax breaks was that the facility should be open to all.
The program that was to air is filled with half truths like this. If I were a Christian, I would be less worried about being "silenced by lgbts" and more worried about the untruths put out by those who claim to also be Christians.
Apparently there was a controversy over that American Family Association video, Speechless: Silencing Christians, I talked about earlier this week.
It was set to air on Monday in Grand Rapids, MI right before President Obama's press conference. However the television station wanted to reset the airing to another time. Since they received no word from the producers, the station decided to rescind the offer.
The silence you are aware of now stems from the AFA in closed door meetings with other religious right groups as they plot to turn this into another phony case of "Christians being discriminated against."
First of all, the station did not refuse to air tthe program, although I think it would have more than enough reason to. It merely wanted to set the program for another time.
And for the record, Speechless: Silencing Christians, is a one-sided piece of garbage that pushes the usual religious right propaganda against the lgbt community with the usual cast of characters - Matt Barber, Robert Knight, Concerned Women for America, Janet Parshall, etc.
It's possible airing received a strong response. The Human Rights Campaign said the following:
Make no mistake: this is the opening salvo in a coming battle over pro-equality legislation.
Just as we are on the cusp of historic change – a federal hate crimes law, protections for LGBT workers against job discrimination – extremist groups like the AFA are launching a well-funded national campaign of hatred and fear to halt our progress.
This program recycles familiar lies: that hate crime laws will "do away with our freedom of speech," or that pastors will be "criminalized for sharing the love of Jesus Christ." (In fact, the proposed federal hate crimes law explicitly states that it only applies to violent acts – not speech.)
The "anchor" of this faux-news program, which may have already aired in smaller markets, is controversial talk show host Janet Parshall, who in 2006 suggested Matthew Shepard's lifestyle was responsible for his murder and called gay adoption "state-sanctioned child abuse."
We cannot let this bigotry go unanswered. We can't let it scare voters, force LGBT people back into a place of shame and hiding, or create an atmosphere of intolerance or hate.
Before the AFA starts their nonsense, let me say that this is not a case of silencing Christians. And what Speechless was going to do is par for the course for the religious right - present a bunch of unchallenged lies, anecdotes and misconceptions about the lgbt community. They never really want to debate us on their lies. They seem to want to present them in an arena where the rules have been predestined to be in their favor.
I just can't believe that they had the temerity to attempt to it on a regular network.
No doubt the Obama regime has gotten them desperate and scared.
Folks, this is a headless monster in the making. Let's kill it before the religious right can gain traction from it.
The problem with Speechless is that it exploits the feeling of entitlement that some Christians have in this country. They have had their minds filled by James Dobson and company with the idea that America is their country and the rest of us are here by their will and pleasure.
That idea of entitlement makes them susceptible to any anecdote or lie that comes down the pike about them being silenced. We have seen this so many times with the religious right taking incidents and manipulating them to claim that lgbts are out to get Christians. A perfect example is the Ocean Grove Pavilion. The religious right claimed that the church who owned this pavilion was "forced" to allow gays to have marriage ceremonies there. However the true story was that the church was getting tax breaks for the pavilion and a requirement of those tax breaks was that the facility should be open to all.
The program that was to air is filled with half truths like this. If I were a Christian, I would be less worried about being "silenced by lgbts" and more worried about the untruths put out by those who claim to also be Christians.
Parole DENIED for murderer of gay man
Not necessarily a victory but still not a bad thing
I have just received word via email that Stephen Moller, the man who murdered Sean Kennedy in 2007, has been denied early parole.
Here are the facts:
Sean William Kennedy, 20, was attacked in the early morning of May 17, 2007 outside the former Brew's Bar in Greenville, South Carolina. His assailant, Stephen Andrew Moller, pulled up in a car, threw one punch after reportedly yelling anti-gay slurs, and fled. Kennedy died about 17 hours later from the brain injury he sustained, and friends and family believe he was targeted at least in part due to his sexual orientation.
Since South Carolina has no hate crime statute, no enhancement was available for Moller's June 2008 sentence of five years in prison on a reduced charge of involuntary manslaughter. The judge reduced the sentence to three years with credit for seven months' time served and ordered Moller to seek help to manage anger and substance abuse.
There was a huge possibility that Moller could have gotten out on parole this month. Elke Kennedy, the mother of Stephen, and the SC Progressive Network organized a letter drive geared to persuading the parole board not to let Moller out early.
Yesterday (and I did mention this as the event I had attended), there was a candlelight vigil held at the State House:
Friends and family of Kennedy met at the State House at 5:30pm to protest an early release for Stephen Moller and to hold a candlelight memorial for Kennedy.
There are no hate crime laws in this state, and Kennedy's family is working to change that.
It was just the kind of night Sean's mom says her son would have lived for.
"He always said, 'when I get older, I'm gonna change this, make sure people are treated equally,'" says Elke Kennedy.
But the fact is, Sean Kennedy's death brought many people together.
"This is my mission. Sean's death, in order for it not to be in vain, my job is to do whatever I can to change things so it doesn't happen again," says Kennedy.
Sean's death in Greenville was never deemed a hate crime, because hate crimes aren't recognized in this state.
But if you ask the folks at the rally, they happen.
"In high school, I was accosted constantly, dragged into a bathroom, had my face beat up and lost three teeth from it," said one person.
"We're not here to get revenge," said Kennedy. "This is about social justice, every citizen in South Carolina deserves protection."
Kennedy wants her son's killer to stay in prison. She took her concern to the parole board, asking for him to stay longer than eight months.
Whether it was a hate crime or not, she says its a light sentence for a heavy loss.
"As a matter of fact he is here, he is with us tonight. Maybe that's why we have such a beautiful evening," she said.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center there are 45 listed hate groups in the state, one of the highest numbers in the US.
In addition, over 400 letters were written to the parole board asking that Moller not be paroled.
This isn't a victory per se. Sean won't be coming back and nothing can take away Elke's pain. She lost her child due to a senseless act.
But since the time of Sean's death, Elke has been speaking out around the state in efforts to bring attention to the need for hate crimes legislation as well as the need to stop the violence that plague lgbt youth.
She should be commended for all that she has done. And although this isn't a victory per se, I hope that she takes solace in the fact that so many are listening to her message.
Not necessarily a victory but still not a bad thing
I have just received word via email that Stephen Moller, the man who murdered Sean Kennedy in 2007, has been denied early parole.
Here are the facts:
Sean William Kennedy, 20, was attacked in the early morning of May 17, 2007 outside the former Brew's Bar in Greenville, South Carolina. His assailant, Stephen Andrew Moller, pulled up in a car, threw one punch after reportedly yelling anti-gay slurs, and fled. Kennedy died about 17 hours later from the brain injury he sustained, and friends and family believe he was targeted at least in part due to his sexual orientation.
Since South Carolina has no hate crime statute, no enhancement was available for Moller's June 2008 sentence of five years in prison on a reduced charge of involuntary manslaughter. The judge reduced the sentence to three years with credit for seven months' time served and ordered Moller to seek help to manage anger and substance abuse.
There was a huge possibility that Moller could have gotten out on parole this month. Elke Kennedy, the mother of Stephen, and the SC Progressive Network organized a letter drive geared to persuading the parole board not to let Moller out early.
Yesterday (and I did mention this as the event I had attended), there was a candlelight vigil held at the State House:
Friends and family of Kennedy met at the State House at 5:30pm to protest an early release for Stephen Moller and to hold a candlelight memorial for Kennedy.
There are no hate crime laws in this state, and Kennedy's family is working to change that.
It was just the kind of night Sean's mom says her son would have lived for.
"He always said, 'when I get older, I'm gonna change this, make sure people are treated equally,'" says Elke Kennedy.
But the fact is, Sean Kennedy's death brought many people together.
"This is my mission. Sean's death, in order for it not to be in vain, my job is to do whatever I can to change things so it doesn't happen again," says Kennedy.
Sean's death in Greenville was never deemed a hate crime, because hate crimes aren't recognized in this state.
But if you ask the folks at the rally, they happen.
"In high school, I was accosted constantly, dragged into a bathroom, had my face beat up and lost three teeth from it," said one person.
"We're not here to get revenge," said Kennedy. "This is about social justice, every citizen in South Carolina deserves protection."
Kennedy wants her son's killer to stay in prison. She took her concern to the parole board, asking for him to stay longer than eight months.
Whether it was a hate crime or not, she says its a light sentence for a heavy loss.
"As a matter of fact he is here, he is with us tonight. Maybe that's why we have such a beautiful evening," she said.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center there are 45 listed hate groups in the state, one of the highest numbers in the US.
In addition, over 400 letters were written to the parole board asking that Moller not be paroled.
This isn't a victory per se. Sean won't be coming back and nothing can take away Elke's pain. She lost her child due to a senseless act.
But since the time of Sean's death, Elke has been speaking out around the state in efforts to bring attention to the need for hate crimes legislation as well as the need to stop the violence that plague lgbt youth.
She should be commended for all that she has done. And although this isn't a victory per se, I hope that she takes solace in the fact that so many are listening to her message.
And continuing the "they hate us and are out to get us" lie - Mike Huckabee
Huckabee: Stimulus is 'anti-religious' - All I can say is thank goodness this man never got anywhere near the White House.
To me, Huckabee is one of the worst propaganda spreaders out there, particularly how he addresses the lgbt community.
"They want tolerance, but they won't show tolerance" meme seems to be his main point in talking about our community. That tactic works when he is on shows like The View and can take an anecdotal incident out of context with no one to challenge him on it. (i.e. Phyllis Burgess)
Or if he ever got around to inviting an lgbt spokesperson on his talk show, I suspect he would pull the "I'm just trying to be compassionate" nonsense.
For those who are not familiar with that tactic - it would comprise of interrupting the guest when he or she is trying to make their point, speaking in a pseudo calm and reassuring manner with a tone that infers that you are addressing an irrational person, and steering the conversation from the needs of the lgbt community to "why does the lgbt community think that everyone hates them."
The tactic is designed to unnerve the guest with a phony sort of kindness and put him or her on the defensive.
That tone is more insulting than that of Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber. At least with those two, you know where you stand.
Huckabee: Stimulus is 'anti-religious' - All I can say is thank goodness this man never got anywhere near the White House.
To me, Huckabee is one of the worst propaganda spreaders out there, particularly how he addresses the lgbt community.
"They want tolerance, but they won't show tolerance" meme seems to be his main point in talking about our community. That tactic works when he is on shows like The View and can take an anecdotal incident out of context with no one to challenge him on it. (i.e. Phyllis Burgess)
Or if he ever got around to inviting an lgbt spokesperson on his talk show, I suspect he would pull the "I'm just trying to be compassionate" nonsense.
For those who are not familiar with that tactic - it would comprise of interrupting the guest when he or she is trying to make their point, speaking in a pseudo calm and reassuring manner with a tone that infers that you are addressing an irrational person, and steering the conversation from the needs of the lgbt community to "why does the lgbt community think that everyone hates them."
The tactic is designed to unnerve the guest with a phony sort of kindness and put him or her on the defensive.
That tone is more insulting than that of Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber. At least with those two, you know where you stand.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Tuesday's news briefs
I apologize for not having a complete post today. I was at an event that I will most likely be talking about tomorrow.
Stay tuned.
Fox passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all - In the great scheme of things, people have come to expect this from Fox News. But it's awesome as hell just the same.
As predicted, the professional anti-gay forces plan to descend on NC - The LGBT community in North Carolina deserve much praise for holding out so long against the anti-gay marriage forces.
Tax dollars for homosexual adoption - gov't 'at its worst' - My news brief logs are never complete without a shout out from phony news service One News Now. This article is interesting in that it doesn't contain the usual lying talking points about the so-called "dangers of the homosexual lifestyle." And what's more interesting is the fact that the article has received a 2.5 (out of five) rating from readers. Naturally One News Now won't show the comments. Shame too cause I think our side is winning.
Now for something highly unusual . . .
Taxi: Elaine's Strange Triangle 3/3 - A hobby of mine is to examine episodes of old television shows that feature lgbt characters. This episode of Taxi won an Emmy. In it, the main female character, Elaine, falls for a young man. However, the young man likes another character, Tony.
The main character of the show, Alex, tries to get to the bottom of it. This is the scene that won the episode the Emmy. And it begs the question - did gay men really dance that bad back then?
I apologize for not having a complete post today. I was at an event that I will most likely be talking about tomorrow.
Stay tuned.
Fox passes off GOP press release as its own research -- typo and all - In the great scheme of things, people have come to expect this from Fox News. But it's awesome as hell just the same.
As predicted, the professional anti-gay forces plan to descend on NC - The LGBT community in North Carolina deserve much praise for holding out so long against the anti-gay marriage forces.
Tax dollars for homosexual adoption - gov't 'at its worst' - My news brief logs are never complete without a shout out from phony news service One News Now. This article is interesting in that it doesn't contain the usual lying talking points about the so-called "dangers of the homosexual lifestyle." And what's more interesting is the fact that the article has received a 2.5 (out of five) rating from readers. Naturally One News Now won't show the comments. Shame too cause I think our side is winning.
Now for something highly unusual . . .
Taxi: Elaine's Strange Triangle 3/3 - A hobby of mine is to examine episodes of old television shows that feature lgbt characters. This episode of Taxi won an Emmy. In it, the main female character, Elaine, falls for a young man. However, the young man likes another character, Tony.
The main character of the show, Alex, tries to get to the bottom of it. This is the scene that won the episode the Emmy. And it begs the question - did gay men really dance that bad back then?
More on phony expert John R. Diggs
In my last post yesterday, I talked about how the American Family Association is utilizing the services of phony expert John R. Diggs in a new video with the familiar whine of "Christian persecution."
In the video, Diggs pushes the old factoid about "homosexuality being a dangerous lifestyle."
I think the AFA relied on Diggs because a while back, he published a study called The Health Risks of Gay Sex.
If that study sounds familiar it's probably because it is almost identical to the Family Research Council's The Negative Effects of Homosexuality, even to the point of using some of the same sources and citations.
You will remember, however, that the Negative Effects of Homosexuality was removed from FRC's webpage because it contained "outdated sources."
Naturally, Diggs's study has some of the same errors and a few of its own. Here are just a couple:
Twice, John R. Diggs includes the study done by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg in their book, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, as indicative of the entire gay population. In one passage, he even refers to it as “a far ranging study of homosexual men . . .” But Bell and Weinberg never said that their findings were indicative of all gay men. They actually said “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlikely that any investigator willever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”
Diggs cites a Canadian study twice in order to claim that gays have a shorter lifespan than heterosexuals. But his citation of the study is a mischaracterization. In 2001, the six original researchers (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. O’Shaughnessy, Julion Montaner, and Martin T. Schechter) who conducted that study have gone on record saying that religious conservatives (like Diggs) was distorting their work.
In another section entitled Physical Health, Diggs claims that gays are victims of “gay bowel syndrome.” Gay Bowel Syndrome is an obsolete medical term and even the CDC does not use it. In fact, if one was to look at the endnotes of Diggs’ study, he would find that two of the sources he quoted concerning “gay bowel syndrome” were from articles in published in 1976 and 1983, which is consistent with the years that the term existed. One last source was a letter to the editor printed in 1994 but Diggs does not make it clear as to the circumstances surrounding it.
Diggs uses convenience sample studies, like those conducted in STD clinics, claiming that they are indicative of the gay population at large.
Diggs claims that there are five distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual populations including levels of promiscuity, physical health, mental health, lifespan, and monogamy. However, he spends very little time comparing the two dynamics (heterosexual and homosexual populations.) He uses all of his time castigating gay populations.
Diggs uses an out of date book, The Gay Report (published in 1979) to claim that gays are engaging in deviant sexual practices. Only once does he attempt to tie the alleged deviant practices of gays in 1979 to present day; and to do so, he cites two events that took place regarding bondage workshops. However, there is a strong indication that heterosexuals took part in these events as well as gays. Diggs ignores this dynamic.
In my last post yesterday, I talked about how the American Family Association is utilizing the services of phony expert John R. Diggs in a new video with the familiar whine of "Christian persecution."
In the video, Diggs pushes the old factoid about "homosexuality being a dangerous lifestyle."
I think the AFA relied on Diggs because a while back, he published a study called The Health Risks of Gay Sex.
If that study sounds familiar it's probably because it is almost identical to the Family Research Council's The Negative Effects of Homosexuality, even to the point of using some of the same sources and citations.
You will remember, however, that the Negative Effects of Homosexuality was removed from FRC's webpage because it contained "outdated sources."
Naturally, Diggs's study has some of the same errors and a few of its own. Here are just a couple:
Twice, John R. Diggs includes the study done by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg in their book, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, as indicative of the entire gay population. In one passage, he even refers to it as “a far ranging study of homosexual men . . .” But Bell and Weinberg never said that their findings were indicative of all gay men. They actually said “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlikely that any investigator willever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”
Diggs cites a Canadian study twice in order to claim that gays have a shorter lifespan than heterosexuals. But his citation of the study is a mischaracterization. In 2001, the six original researchers (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. O’Shaughnessy, Julion Montaner, and Martin T. Schechter) who conducted that study have gone on record saying that religious conservatives (like Diggs) was distorting their work.
In another section entitled Physical Health, Diggs claims that gays are victims of “gay bowel syndrome.” Gay Bowel Syndrome is an obsolete medical term and even the CDC does not use it. In fact, if one was to look at the endnotes of Diggs’ study, he would find that two of the sources he quoted concerning “gay bowel syndrome” were from articles in published in 1976 and 1983, which is consistent with the years that the term existed. One last source was a letter to the editor printed in 1994 but Diggs does not make it clear as to the circumstances surrounding it.
Diggs uses convenience sample studies, like those conducted in STD clinics, claiming that they are indicative of the gay population at large.
Diggs claims that there are five distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual populations including levels of promiscuity, physical health, mental health, lifespan, and monogamy. However, he spends very little time comparing the two dynamics (heterosexual and homosexual populations.) He uses all of his time castigating gay populations.
Diggs uses an out of date book, The Gay Report (published in 1979) to claim that gays are engaging in deviant sexual practices. Only once does he attempt to tie the alleged deviant practices of gays in 1979 to present day; and to do so, he cites two events that took place regarding bondage workshops. However, there is a strong indication that heterosexuals took part in these events as well as gays. Diggs ignores this dynamic.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Time for AFA to pull out the 'persecuted Christians' card
Pam's House Blend alerted me to this mess:
This is all the American Family Association has left, folks, but it's slickly produced bile. When homo-hating, illegal pistol-packing state legislator Sally Kern cited the book After the Ball as the proof of the Homosexual Agenda last week at a fundnut fest in OKC, it should have been no surprise that the AFA has been propagandizing this nonsense with its web site and hour-long video, Silencing Christians.com.
The premise is that Christians are under assault by homosexualists, enabled by state and local governments and schools, to force them to accept LGBTs as -- gasp -- human beings deserving of civil rights! They are careful to mention "former homosexuals" and those struggling with "unwanted same-sex attraction" in order to soothe and absolve the target audience of "Christians" that their motivations are rooted in compassion, not bigotry.
You can watch the video on Pams House Blend. It made me positively ill.
It's a bunch of one-sided anecdotal nonsense with the same claptrap i.e. yet more isolated incidents anecdotes taken out of context, and out-and-out lies which push the same message - homosexuals are nasty oversexed radicals who want to force their beliefs on everyone and silence Christians.
For the record, Matt Barber is in it, so is Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle. But the person who really caught me by surprise was phony expert John R. Diggs.
I've talked about him several times on this blog. He wrote The Health Risks of Gay Sex, a piece of anti-gay propaganda so worthless that no one but members of the religious right cites it. Tomorrow morning, I will repost the errors I found in Digg's piece .
This constant complaint about being persecuted will only backfire on the AFA. You saw it last week when it and other religious right groups tried to claim that a simple wording of something in President Obama's stimulus package would lead to the persecution of Christians. Despite their planning and despite enlisting the help of Sen. Jim DeMint to push the lie, they were shot down in Congressional debates.
How long will it be before the AFA's (and religious right's for that matter) consistent lie about being persecuted evoke images not of Roman arenas and lions but cynical politicians. Or wild haired men on street corners with huge display cards.
Soon, I hope.
And by the way, if you want a real view of persecution, check out this via One News Now:
TN: Adoption by married couples best for children
Shades of Arkansas no doubt. But the state Congressman pushing for this travesty may have put his foot in his mouth with his explanation of the proposed law:
"We were having a lot of [unmarried] individuals apply to adopt children from state custody....And while single people can make very good parents, what we were finding is that some of those individuals were in same-sex relationships," he points out. "And we just thought it was not advantageous to have children who are the responsibility of the state being placed in such homes."
So the law is about denying lgbts the right to adopt children and not just keeping unmarried couples from adoption.
Of course the law will probably have no incentives for married couples to adopt children, therefore the Congressman's premise is faulty.
But neither lies nor faulty premises have ever stopped the religious right. After all, what's truth when you are trying to remake America in "God's" image?
Pam's House Blend alerted me to this mess:
This is all the American Family Association has left, folks, but it's slickly produced bile. When homo-hating, illegal pistol-packing state legislator Sally Kern cited the book After the Ball as the proof of the Homosexual Agenda last week at a fundnut fest in OKC, it should have been no surprise that the AFA has been propagandizing this nonsense with its web site and hour-long video, Silencing Christians.com.
The premise is that Christians are under assault by homosexualists, enabled by state and local governments and schools, to force them to accept LGBTs as -- gasp -- human beings deserving of civil rights! They are careful to mention "former homosexuals" and those struggling with "unwanted same-sex attraction" in order to soothe and absolve the target audience of "Christians" that their motivations are rooted in compassion, not bigotry.
You can watch the video on Pams House Blend. It made me positively ill.
It's a bunch of one-sided anecdotal nonsense with the same claptrap i.e. yet more isolated incidents anecdotes taken out of context, and out-and-out lies which push the same message - homosexuals are nasty oversexed radicals who want to force their beliefs on everyone and silence Christians.
For the record, Matt Barber is in it, so is Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle. But the person who really caught me by surprise was phony expert John R. Diggs.
I've talked about him several times on this blog. He wrote The Health Risks of Gay Sex, a piece of anti-gay propaganda so worthless that no one but members of the religious right cites it. Tomorrow morning, I will repost the errors I found in Digg's piece .
This constant complaint about being persecuted will only backfire on the AFA. You saw it last week when it and other religious right groups tried to claim that a simple wording of something in President Obama's stimulus package would lead to the persecution of Christians. Despite their planning and despite enlisting the help of Sen. Jim DeMint to push the lie, they were shot down in Congressional debates.
How long will it be before the AFA's (and religious right's for that matter) consistent lie about being persecuted evoke images not of Roman arenas and lions but cynical politicians. Or wild haired men on street corners with huge display cards.
Soon, I hope.
And by the way, if you want a real view of persecution, check out this via One News Now:
TN: Adoption by married couples best for children
Shades of Arkansas no doubt. But the state Congressman pushing for this travesty may have put his foot in his mouth with his explanation of the proposed law:
"We were having a lot of [unmarried] individuals apply to adopt children from state custody....And while single people can make very good parents, what we were finding is that some of those individuals were in same-sex relationships," he points out. "And we just thought it was not advantageous to have children who are the responsibility of the state being placed in such homes."
So the law is about denying lgbts the right to adopt children and not just keeping unmarried couples from adoption.
Of course the law will probably have no incentives for married couples to adopt children, therefore the Congressman's premise is faulty.
But neither lies nor faulty premises have ever stopped the religious right. After all, what's truth when you are trying to remake America in "God's" image?
What if you held a protest and no one gave a damn?
With Peter LaBarbera, the laughs keep coming.
As I understand it, he continued his protest against Winter Wickedness with a small number of protestors this weekend.
If you blink, you will miss it because no one covered it - that is except for a newspaper in Columbus who had a very interesting point of view of the entire thing:
Our neighborhood in old Worthington is a close-knit, tolerant and faithful community. So it was shocking this morning on the drive home from grade-school wrestling practice, to see a small group of protesters lined up outside of the Holiday Inn on Wilson Bridge Road waving “God Hates Fags” signs.
Try explaining to your first grader “what’s a 'fag'?” then explaining that, number one: we don't say 'fag' and God is love, and number two: if God has a problem with somebody, he’s got the resources to work it out on his own—you don’t have to worry about judging anyone, son.
And all this before my third cup of coffee. Yeah, it would piss you off, too.
So I returned to the protesters, notebook in hand, to find out why these three had such a giant bug up their collective ass. After introducing myself, I asked what they were protesting and why they were doing so from Holiday Inn’s side lawn.
“Is it a homo paper?” asked a scruffy 50+ man who spoke broken English with an Appalachain twang. In one hand he waved a large sign with the anagram “Gross Anus Yearning Sodomists” (whatever in the world that means) and in the other, he had two naked Ken dolls taped together in the position commonly referred to as “doggy style”.
All I can say is Lawd Hammercy!!
With Peter LaBarbera, the laughs keep coming.
As I understand it, he continued his protest against Winter Wickedness with a small number of protestors this weekend.
If you blink, you will miss it because no one covered it - that is except for a newspaper in Columbus who had a very interesting point of view of the entire thing:
Our neighborhood in old Worthington is a close-knit, tolerant and faithful community. So it was shocking this morning on the drive home from grade-school wrestling practice, to see a small group of protesters lined up outside of the Holiday Inn on Wilson Bridge Road waving “God Hates Fags” signs.
Try explaining to your first grader “what’s a 'fag'?” then explaining that, number one: we don't say 'fag' and God is love, and number two: if God has a problem with somebody, he’s got the resources to work it out on his own—you don’t have to worry about judging anyone, son.
And all this before my third cup of coffee. Yeah, it would piss you off, too.
So I returned to the protesters, notebook in hand, to find out why these three had such a giant bug up their collective ass. After introducing myself, I asked what they were protesting and why they were doing so from Holiday Inn’s side lawn.
“Is it a homo paper?” asked a scruffy 50+ man who spoke broken English with an Appalachain twang. In one hand he waved a large sign with the anagram “Gross Anus Yearning Sodomists” (whatever in the world that means) and in the other, he had two naked Ken dolls taped together in the position commonly referred to as “doggy style”.
All I can say is Lawd Hammercy!!
I’m not down with the maps
I’m going to come out and say it - this recent idea regarding the use of maps to show who donated to anti-gay marriage amendments is a BAD idea for us to pursue.
I didn’t feel comfortable when it began in California and I don’t like that it's being used in regards to the Florida vote.
Proposition 8 was a travesty. What happened in Florida was a travesty. Any time lgbts are denied fairness through lies, fear tactics, and propaganda is a travesty.
But some of us, in our anger, will not grasp the fact that we are teetering over a precipice. While I may not agree with where individual people donate their money, it just doesn’t sit right with me to call them out in the manner that these maps do.
While we may not intend it to be such, the map effort could border on intimidation. It could also end up biting the lgbt community in the ass.
What if we won a vote against a referendum and religious right organizations use the map idea against us? We would have no grounds to complain because we started this notion of tracking donations via zip codes. The opposition would be simply following our lead.
And in a practical sense, this method of tracking individuals donors is counterproductive i.e. yet another way for the right to control the argument.
Never mind the lies that were told to pass Proposition 8, never mind the families who are being told that they are inferior, and never mind the possible future problems for lgbt couples because the talk shows (such as those of O’Reilly and Hannity) will be spotlighting religious right spokespersons and the “All-American families” as they spin stories of intimidation by the “radical homosexual lobby” via these maps.
All of our arguments about the unfairness of anti-gay marriage initiatives will mean nothing in the wake of that onslaught.
We fall in this trap so many times:
Religious right organizations organize their followers and push for a law or referendum
The lgbt community, unorganized and unprepared, lose the vote.
We get angry and some of us act irrationally. We may say stupid things and some of us may lash out in inappropriate manners (i.e. sending allegedly threatening messages via blogs or seemingly accosting people who voted for the law/referendum).
The religious right (having monitored the blogs and our reactions to the vote) uses our anger against us in talking points, press releases, and on talk shows.
Subsequently, we end up on the defensive.
I’m tired of feeling like a dog chasing his own tail so I want to present a few notions.
Maybe it’s time we did some soul searching. Lgbts should have our full rights, undiluted by someone else’s religious beliefs or stereotypes. But are our actions (like this map thing) the product of our own laziness - like that of a high school student who suddenly remembers the exam he is supposed to take an hour before classes start?
Are we trying to gain something by quick cramming rather than steady and meticulous action? Why do we sit on our asses or play Dynasty games with our circle of friends until things are done to us and then act precipitously with the incorrect belief that our anger alone will get us what we need?
A protest here. A march there and presto. We have our rights.
It simply doesn’t work like that.
And why are we so quick to write off religious right organizations and their supporters as “homophobic simpletons?” Some of those “homophobic simpletons” control the media (i.e. Mike Huckabee) and are elected officials (i.e. Sally Kern). Like it or not, they have power.
And specifically, they organize, study, and plan. Maybe we shouldn’t be so quick to point out their ignorance but rather study their dedication to their cause. Perhaps it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to copy that dedication.
Sometimes I hesitate to ask these questions because a few of my lgbt brothers and sisters get so caught up in their “anger” that they lash out and attack their own.
But that’s okay. You don’t agree with what I’m saying? That’s fine. Tell me so. But remember that while we may disagree we should not be disagreeable.
Get angry by all means but realize that anger is only a first step to getting things done. Transitory visibility is fleeting and acts of temporary empowerment are just that - temporary. But it can also have negative long term consequences.
I’m going to come out and say it - this recent idea regarding the use of maps to show who donated to anti-gay marriage amendments is a BAD idea for us to pursue.
I didn’t feel comfortable when it began in California and I don’t like that it's being used in regards to the Florida vote.
Proposition 8 was a travesty. What happened in Florida was a travesty. Any time lgbts are denied fairness through lies, fear tactics, and propaganda is a travesty.
But some of us, in our anger, will not grasp the fact that we are teetering over a precipice. While I may not agree with where individual people donate their money, it just doesn’t sit right with me to call them out in the manner that these maps do.
While we may not intend it to be such, the map effort could border on intimidation. It could also end up biting the lgbt community in the ass.
What if we won a vote against a referendum and religious right organizations use the map idea against us? We would have no grounds to complain because we started this notion of tracking donations via zip codes. The opposition would be simply following our lead.
And in a practical sense, this method of tracking individuals donors is counterproductive i.e. yet another way for the right to control the argument.
Never mind the lies that were told to pass Proposition 8, never mind the families who are being told that they are inferior, and never mind the possible future problems for lgbt couples because the talk shows (such as those of O’Reilly and Hannity) will be spotlighting religious right spokespersons and the “All-American families” as they spin stories of intimidation by the “radical homosexual lobby” via these maps.
All of our arguments about the unfairness of anti-gay marriage initiatives will mean nothing in the wake of that onslaught.
We fall in this trap so many times:
Religious right organizations organize their followers and push for a law or referendum
The lgbt community, unorganized and unprepared, lose the vote.
We get angry and some of us act irrationally. We may say stupid things and some of us may lash out in inappropriate manners (i.e. sending allegedly threatening messages via blogs or seemingly accosting people who voted for the law/referendum).
The religious right (having monitored the blogs and our reactions to the vote) uses our anger against us in talking points, press releases, and on talk shows.
Subsequently, we end up on the defensive.
I’m tired of feeling like a dog chasing his own tail so I want to present a few notions.
Maybe it’s time we did some soul searching. Lgbts should have our full rights, undiluted by someone else’s religious beliefs or stereotypes. But are our actions (like this map thing) the product of our own laziness - like that of a high school student who suddenly remembers the exam he is supposed to take an hour before classes start?
Are we trying to gain something by quick cramming rather than steady and meticulous action? Why do we sit on our asses or play Dynasty games with our circle of friends until things are done to us and then act precipitously with the incorrect belief that our anger alone will get us what we need?
A protest here. A march there and presto. We have our rights.
It simply doesn’t work like that.
And why are we so quick to write off religious right organizations and their supporters as “homophobic simpletons?” Some of those “homophobic simpletons” control the media (i.e. Mike Huckabee) and are elected officials (i.e. Sally Kern). Like it or not, they have power.
And specifically, they organize, study, and plan. Maybe we shouldn’t be so quick to point out their ignorance but rather study their dedication to their cause. Perhaps it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to copy that dedication.
Sometimes I hesitate to ask these questions because a few of my lgbt brothers and sisters get so caught up in their “anger” that they lash out and attack their own.
But that’s okay. You don’t agree with what I’m saying? That’s fine. Tell me so. But remember that while we may disagree we should not be disagreeable.
Get angry by all means but realize that anger is only a first step to getting things done. Transitory visibility is fleeting and acts of temporary empowerment are just that - temporary. But it can also have negative long term consequences.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
The Religious Right's Big Lie Stategy
People for the American Way has just come out with a more detailed account of the religious right's attempt to scare the Senate into stripping away a portion of the stimulus bill that they inaccurately claimed discriminates against religion.
It's an excellent read. An excerpt is as follows:
On Thursday, February 5, the U.S. Senate took up an amendment introduced by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) to strip church-state protections from the stimulus bill. The amendment failed 43 to 54 after DeMint repeated the inflammatory claims he had been making all week and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) swiftly and effectively refuted them.
The creation of a phony crisis that DeMint’s amendment was supposed to solve is a case study of Religious Right leaders’ strategic use of false alarms about threats to religious liberty – and of the willingness of right-wing media and elected officials to play along. . . . in the wake of the amendment’s defeat, for Religious Right leaders to use the vote as “evidence” that Democrats are hostile to people of faith and to try to undermine support from religious Americans for the new administration.
Wildly alarmist rhetoric from DeMint and right-wing leaders accusing the Obama administration and congressional Democrats of hostility to faith and public prayer was especially ridiculous coming in the week that President Obama spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast and announced the creation of a multifaith advisory panel for his office of faith based and community initiatives. But stoking fears about anti-Christian “persecution” and claiming that liberal politicians are out to destroy religious liberty is a fundraising and organizing tactic that the Religious Right cannot seem to give up.
Here’s how it played out, as documented in near-real time by People For the American Way’s RightWingWatch.org.
And here I thought it was the GAYS who are persecuting Christians.
Sooner or later, that argument of religious persecution is going to get old.
People for the American Way has just come out with a more detailed account of the religious right's attempt to scare the Senate into stripping away a portion of the stimulus bill that they inaccurately claimed discriminates against religion.
It's an excellent read. An excerpt is as follows:
On Thursday, February 5, the U.S. Senate took up an amendment introduced by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) to strip church-state protections from the stimulus bill. The amendment failed 43 to 54 after DeMint repeated the inflammatory claims he had been making all week and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) swiftly and effectively refuted them.
The creation of a phony crisis that DeMint’s amendment was supposed to solve is a case study of Religious Right leaders’ strategic use of false alarms about threats to religious liberty – and of the willingness of right-wing media and elected officials to play along. . . . in the wake of the amendment’s defeat, for Religious Right leaders to use the vote as “evidence” that Democrats are hostile to people of faith and to try to undermine support from religious Americans for the new administration.
Wildly alarmist rhetoric from DeMint and right-wing leaders accusing the Obama administration and congressional Democrats of hostility to faith and public prayer was especially ridiculous coming in the week that President Obama spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast and announced the creation of a multifaith advisory panel for his office of faith based and community initiatives. But stoking fears about anti-Christian “persecution” and claiming that liberal politicians are out to destroy religious liberty is a fundraising and organizing tactic that the Religious Right cannot seem to give up.
Here’s how it played out, as documented in near-real time by People For the American Way’s RightWingWatch.org.
And here I thought it was the GAYS who are persecuting Christians.
Sooner or later, that argument of religious persecution is going to get old.
Friday, February 06, 2009
Nice try Peter LaBarbera, but no dice
Sometimes it's nice to see folks like Peter LaBarbera twist in the ropes of their own nonsense.
Earlier this week, Peter took it upon himself to expose an alleged upcoming sadomaschistic hotel orgy.
Just one problem - this alleged event seems to have been heterosexual, which would not big deal in the matter except for the fact that LaBarbera has, in the past, made a name for himself by going to gay subcultural events such as Folsom Street Fair, taking pictures and posting them on his webpage, and going on talks shows decrying about how "gay culture" is indicative of these events.
In this case, Peter seems to have out trumped himself. Lgbts have nothing to do with this upcoming event.
So what does he do now?
A. Let the situation die out, allowing it to add another dubious chapter to his reputation as Porno Petey.
B. Admit that he has been unfairly generalizing about all lgbts based on the alleged behavior of some gay men at a subcultural event?
C. Try to link this heterosexual orgy to lgbt culture irregardless of the fact that the orgys's very existence negates all of the bullshit he has been spouting about gays in the past.
If Peter had done anything but "C," I would have admired his new found maturity.
But, as I have come to expect from him, Peter picked the choice that not only deepens the wound but makes me wonder just how low can his reputation sink.
LaBarbera is actually trying to link this heterosexual event to lgbt culture by claiming that we "led the way" to sexual misconduct:
While homosexuals certainly cannot be blamed for the entire, sordid Sexual Revolution, the “gay pride” (GLBT) movement has paved the way for a perversion explosion among “heterosexuals.” For if it’s perfectly acceptable for men to sodomize other men in the name of “love” — and lesbianism and bisexuality and now transsexuality to be treated as OK (while it’s NOT OK to judge them as wrong) — then what on earth is stopping other perverts like Tristan Taormino (above left) from pursuing the same popularity and acceptance? And ditto for “poly rights” in the law.
So a bunch of heterosexuals decide a big sadomaschistic orgy in a hotel and it's not their fault. It's the GAYS who put the idea in their heads. It's the GAYS who started the entire thing.
I don't know what's funnier. The idea that LaBarbera actually believes this stuff or his insistence to sneak something about gay sex into the piece.
Sometimes I think he dwells on sodomy more than gay men.
If LaBarbera keeps this up, I'm going to have stop posting about him.
Exposing the lies of the religious right is one thing but dwelling on a man who seems to be melting down in the contradictions of his own nonsense is something else entirely.
And I'm not that sadistic to give an audience to it.
Sometimes it's nice to see folks like Peter LaBarbera twist in the ropes of their own nonsense.
Earlier this week, Peter took it upon himself to expose an alleged upcoming sadomaschistic hotel orgy.
Just one problem - this alleged event seems to have been heterosexual, which would not big deal in the matter except for the fact that LaBarbera has, in the past, made a name for himself by going to gay subcultural events such as Folsom Street Fair, taking pictures and posting them on his webpage, and going on talks shows decrying about how "gay culture" is indicative of these events.
In this case, Peter seems to have out trumped himself. Lgbts have nothing to do with this upcoming event.
So what does he do now?
A. Let the situation die out, allowing it to add another dubious chapter to his reputation as Porno Petey.
B. Admit that he has been unfairly generalizing about all lgbts based on the alleged behavior of some gay men at a subcultural event?
C. Try to link this heterosexual orgy to lgbt culture irregardless of the fact that the orgys's very existence negates all of the bullshit he has been spouting about gays in the past.
If Peter had done anything but "C," I would have admired his new found maturity.
But, as I have come to expect from him, Peter picked the choice that not only deepens the wound but makes me wonder just how low can his reputation sink.
LaBarbera is actually trying to link this heterosexual event to lgbt culture by claiming that we "led the way" to sexual misconduct:
While homosexuals certainly cannot be blamed for the entire, sordid Sexual Revolution, the “gay pride” (GLBT) movement has paved the way for a perversion explosion among “heterosexuals.” For if it’s perfectly acceptable for men to sodomize other men in the name of “love” — and lesbianism and bisexuality and now transsexuality to be treated as OK (while it’s NOT OK to judge them as wrong) — then what on earth is stopping other perverts like Tristan Taormino (above left) from pursuing the same popularity and acceptance? And ditto for “poly rights” in the law.
So a bunch of heterosexuals decide a big sadomaschistic orgy in a hotel and it's not their fault. It's the GAYS who put the idea in their heads. It's the GAYS who started the entire thing.
I don't know what's funnier. The idea that LaBarbera actually believes this stuff or his insistence to sneak something about gay sex into the piece.
Sometimes I think he dwells on sodomy more than gay men.
If LaBarbera keeps this up, I'm going to have stop posting about him.
Exposing the lies of the religious right is one thing but dwelling on a man who seems to be melting down in the contradictions of his own nonsense is something else entirely.
And I'm not that sadistic to give an audience to it.
A lesson in evasion brought to you by One News Now.
But first, some news briefs to tide you over on this Friday.
Gay lawmaker says she was left off family committee in Missouri
Obama's faith-based council includes openly gay appointee
Fundie message to young people of color: thou shalt not master your domain
And now, my friends, I present to you the difference between good report and partisan spearing:
From One News Now - Hilda Solis - another 'taxing' embarrassment for Obama?
From Reuters UK - Obama labor secretary-nominee faces tax questions
Now the issue in question has to do with tax liens put on the business of Solis's husband.
This is how Reuters UK addressed the issue:
The White House indicated Solis was in a different category, with spokesman Robert Gibbs saying she was not involved in her husband's business and should not be punished for the tax lapse.
"We reviewed her tax returns and her tax returns are in order," Gibbs said. "She's not a partner in that business, so we're not going to penalize her for her husband's business mistakes."
Asked if Solis' husband paid the taxes at the prompting of the White House, Gibbs said: "I think he paid the liens back because he owed the taxes. ... The White House believes that if you owe taxes, you should pay them. But at the same time, this obviously is a business that she's not a partner in and we're not going to hold her responsible for."
This is what One News Now says about the issue:
Hans von Spakovsky, a visiting legal scholar at The Heritage Foundation, says it is hard to believe Solis was not aware of the tax liens while she was profiting from her husband's business.
"I think there is a problem when we have a recurring pattern here. You know, she says that she doesn't know about these tax problems. She also failed to reveal on those same disclosure forms that she was the treasurer of this outside organization, which I think is kind of a little bit difficult for her to not remember or really claim she made a mistake," he contends. "If it wasn't a recurring pattern, there might be more credibility to that claim -- but I think this is an accumulating problem that she has."
There is no word on whether or not One News Now even tried to seek a response from the Obama Administration.
Also, I find it highly ironic who the phony news site chooses as a legimate person to cite in this article. Spavoksky isn't exactly an objective individual.
But apparently he is adequate enough for One News Now.
The state of Christianity in this country is SAD.
But first, some news briefs to tide you over on this Friday.
Gay lawmaker says she was left off family committee in Missouri
Obama's faith-based council includes openly gay appointee
Fundie message to young people of color: thou shalt not master your domain
And now, my friends, I present to you the difference between good report and partisan spearing:
From One News Now - Hilda Solis - another 'taxing' embarrassment for Obama?
From Reuters UK - Obama labor secretary-nominee faces tax questions
Now the issue in question has to do with tax liens put on the business of Solis's husband.
This is how Reuters UK addressed the issue:
The White House indicated Solis was in a different category, with spokesman Robert Gibbs saying she was not involved in her husband's business and should not be punished for the tax lapse.
"We reviewed her tax returns and her tax returns are in order," Gibbs said. "She's not a partner in that business, so we're not going to penalize her for her husband's business mistakes."
Asked if Solis' husband paid the taxes at the prompting of the White House, Gibbs said: "I think he paid the liens back because he owed the taxes. ... The White House believes that if you owe taxes, you should pay them. But at the same time, this obviously is a business that she's not a partner in and we're not going to hold her responsible for."
This is what One News Now says about the issue:
Hans von Spakovsky, a visiting legal scholar at The Heritage Foundation, says it is hard to believe Solis was not aware of the tax liens while she was profiting from her husband's business.
"I think there is a problem when we have a recurring pattern here. You know, she says that she doesn't know about these tax problems. She also failed to reveal on those same disclosure forms that she was the treasurer of this outside organization, which I think is kind of a little bit difficult for her to not remember or really claim she made a mistake," he contends. "If it wasn't a recurring pattern, there might be more credibility to that claim -- but I think this is an accumulating problem that she has."
There is no word on whether or not One News Now even tried to seek a response from the Obama Administration.
Also, I find it highly ironic who the phony news site chooses as a legimate person to cite in this article. Spavoksky isn't exactly an objective individual.
But apparently he is adequate enough for One News Now.
The state of Christianity in this country is SAD.
What the hell is wrong with ABC News
First, a continuation of the post from yesterday.
It appears that despite the wranglings, press releases, hyperbolic nonsense, and the intervention of Senator Jim DeMint, the religious right lobby against part of the stimulus package that they say discriminates against Christians has failed:
Right Wing Zombie Lies Fail in Senate February 5, 2009 - God Bless America.
This next issue isn't exactly lgbt related per se, but it gives a good reason why it's difficult for us to win the p.r. argument:
ABC: Obama Is Hypocritical For Limiting Wall Street Pay While Having A ‘Lavish Lifestyle’:
Yesterday, President Obama instituted a pay cap on bailed out businesses after it was revealed that Wall Street doled out an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses last year. “If the taxpayers are helping you, then you’ve got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog,” he explained.
In what appears to be an attempt to call Obama a hypocrite, ABC’s Scott Mayerowitz “reports” today that the President also has a “lavish lifestyle.” Under the title: “Obama’s Perks: Private Jet, Chef Tax-Free,” ABC notes that Obama earns $400,000 dollars a year and even has a private jet
Unbelievable. And here I thought Obama was the President of the United States and leader of the free world who will constantly be on call for at least four (I'm hoping eight) years.
Must have been my mistake.
The big question is will the religious right and other conservatives actually run with this article? Or will they show restraint for a change.
First, a continuation of the post from yesterday.
It appears that despite the wranglings, press releases, hyperbolic nonsense, and the intervention of Senator Jim DeMint, the religious right lobby against part of the stimulus package that they say discriminates against Christians has failed:
Right Wing Zombie Lies Fail in Senate February 5, 2009 - God Bless America.
This next issue isn't exactly lgbt related per se, but it gives a good reason why it's difficult for us to win the p.r. argument:
ABC: Obama Is Hypocritical For Limiting Wall Street Pay While Having A ‘Lavish Lifestyle’:
Yesterday, President Obama instituted a pay cap on bailed out businesses after it was revealed that Wall Street doled out an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses last year. “If the taxpayers are helping you, then you’ve got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog,” he explained.
In what appears to be an attempt to call Obama a hypocrite, ABC’s Scott Mayerowitz “reports” today that the President also has a “lavish lifestyle.” Under the title: “Obama’s Perks: Private Jet, Chef Tax-Free,” ABC notes that Obama earns $400,000 dollars a year and even has a private jet
Unbelievable. And here I thought Obama was the President of the United States and leader of the free world who will constantly be on call for at least four (I'm hoping eight) years.
Must have been my mistake.
The big question is will the religious right and other conservatives actually run with this article? Or will they show restraint for a change.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
The religious right and the precision of their lies
Earlier this week, while I speculated on the power of the religious right echo chamber, People for the American Way did me one better.
The organization is following an actual case demonstrating just how the religious right is able to successfully push distortions and lies.
The following increments is taken from PFAW's Religious Right Watch:
ACLJ Demands Non-Existent Threat Be Stripped from Stimulus Bill - Feb. 3, 2009 - The right wing American Center for Law and Justice inaccurately claims that President Obama's stimulus package contains a threat to religious activities on colleges and universities.
DeMint Lends Voice to Bogus Controversy Over Stimulus Bill - Feb. 4, 2009 - My Senator from South Carolina, Jim (gays shouldn't be allowed to teach) DeMint gets involved.
Bogus Stimulus Outcry Grows as Liberty Counsel and TVC Hop on the Bandwagon - Feb. 4, 2009 - the Liberty Counsel and the Traditional Values Coalition get involved. Also, the lie gets a shout-out from Fox News due to this unbelievably biased framing of the issue - "Democrats in Congress have declared war on prayer, say conservative groups who object to a provision in the stimulus bill that was passed by the House of Representatives last week. "
ACLJ's Zombie Lie Becomes Official Right Wing Talking Point - Feb. 5, 2009 - Now the Family Research Council gets involved.
The Zombie Lie Lumbers On - Feb. 5, 2009 - And now the Christian Anti-Defamation League get involved. You remember that group, don't you? They were the ones who accused President Obama of bashing Christians simply because he has a different view of the religion.
Sen. DeMint Spews Zombie Lies on Senate Floor, Compares Opponents to George Wallace - Feb. 5, 2009 - And now, Senator DeMint has been handed the ball and he is running with it. By the way, the defintion of irony alert - South Carolina Senator DeMint evoking the image of a racist George Wallace while the Confederate Flag hangs at the SC State House along with a statue dedicated to a virulent racist (Ben "Pitchfork" Tillman) who bragged on the Senate floor about murdering African-Americans.
And that, my friends, is how it is done.
While I certainly can't give the religious right points for integrity, they get a '10' in precision.
Earlier this week, while I speculated on the power of the religious right echo chamber, People for the American Way did me one better.
The organization is following an actual case demonstrating just how the religious right is able to successfully push distortions and lies.
The following increments is taken from PFAW's Religious Right Watch:
ACLJ Demands Non-Existent Threat Be Stripped from Stimulus Bill - Feb. 3, 2009 - The right wing American Center for Law and Justice inaccurately claims that President Obama's stimulus package contains a threat to religious activities on colleges and universities.
DeMint Lends Voice to Bogus Controversy Over Stimulus Bill - Feb. 4, 2009 - My Senator from South Carolina, Jim (gays shouldn't be allowed to teach) DeMint gets involved.
Bogus Stimulus Outcry Grows as Liberty Counsel and TVC Hop on the Bandwagon - Feb. 4, 2009 - the Liberty Counsel and the Traditional Values Coalition get involved. Also, the lie gets a shout-out from Fox News due to this unbelievably biased framing of the issue - "Democrats in Congress have declared war on prayer, say conservative groups who object to a provision in the stimulus bill that was passed by the House of Representatives last week. "
ACLJ's Zombie Lie Becomes Official Right Wing Talking Point - Feb. 5, 2009 - Now the Family Research Council gets involved.
The Zombie Lie Lumbers On - Feb. 5, 2009 - And now the Christian Anti-Defamation League get involved. You remember that group, don't you? They were the ones who accused President Obama of bashing Christians simply because he has a different view of the religion.
Sen. DeMint Spews Zombie Lies on Senate Floor, Compares Opponents to George Wallace - Feb. 5, 2009 - And now, Senator DeMint has been handed the ball and he is running with it. By the way, the defintion of irony alert - South Carolina Senator DeMint evoking the image of a racist George Wallace while the Confederate Flag hangs at the SC State House along with a statue dedicated to a virulent racist (Ben "Pitchfork" Tillman) who bragged on the Senate floor about murdering African-Americans.
And that, my friends, is how it is done.
While I certainly can't give the religious right points for integrity, they get a '10' in precision.
See how they lie
Jeremy from Good As You pointed this out and I just want to piggyback on it.
Yesterday, I wrote how Peter LaBarbera is going on another crusade against an alleged bondage/sadomaschistic event at a hotel.
Usually LaBarbera goes after gay subcultural events and tries to use them to generalize about all lgbts.
However, this event in question has to do with heterosexuals, not lgbts. Even LaBarbera's screechings about the event emphasizes this point.
But today comes the news that this doesn't stop World Net Daily from proclaiming the following:
Another homo-sex-fest set for hotel'
Winter Wickedness' to include 'sadomasochistic perversion'
What can you say about a "Christian" news source that will tell such a blatant lie?
Jeremy from Good As You pointed this out and I just want to piggyback on it.
Yesterday, I wrote how Peter LaBarbera is going on another crusade against an alleged bondage/sadomaschistic event at a hotel.
Usually LaBarbera goes after gay subcultural events and tries to use them to generalize about all lgbts.
However, this event in question has to do with heterosexuals, not lgbts. Even LaBarbera's screechings about the event emphasizes this point.
But today comes the news that this doesn't stop World Net Daily from proclaiming the following:
Another homo-sex-fest set for hotel'
Winter Wickedness' to include 'sadomasochistic perversion'
What can you say about a "Christian" news source that will tell such a blatant lie?
Say it with me now - GO AWAY SALLY KERN!
I never did like the controversy regarding Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern.
I didn't like the way she consistently relied on bad information from Paul Cameron and the religious right to make her case that lgbts are as bad as terrorists.
I didn't like the way she hid behind her so-called Christian religion when questioned about her comments.
And most of all, I didn't like how the lgbt community pretty much let her get away with it.
We wasted time speculating on whether or not her son was gay or talking about what Ellen DeGeneres said about the situation. The fact that Sally Kern was a good example of how the religious right flim flams guillible people of faith into believing the worst about lgbts was a point that got lost in all of the controversy.
I was glad when the controversy died down. One wonders if Kern was because she keeps making an ass of herself:
Speaking at the Clouds Over America conference, run and organized by the John Birch Society in Oklahoma City, Kern told a welcoming crowd that she found the elusive gay agenda between the pages of Marshall Kirk's and Hunter Madsen's 1990 book After The Ball: How America Will Conquer Its fear & Hatred Of Gays In The 90s. Its authors mostly argue in 432 pages that gays and lesbians will most likely be accepted once they are liked by the general public.
Oklahoma Gazette, the Oklahoma City alternative weekly, reports Kern spoke to a packed crowd.
“You know,” Kern said, “I've done a lot of reading on this. I wish I could describe to you their behavior. I will not because I would be redder than this suit. It's their behavior that we oppose.”
Here we go again. Gays are following a six point plan to take over America. It's a standard urban legend in religious right dogma.
From time to time, the religious right will claim that the lgbt community is using the book After the Ball as a sort of blueprint to allegedly force acceptance. Then they will point to certain incidents that somehow "connect all of the dots."
To a lot of us, these incidents (i.e. more visibility and a little more acceptance for lgbts and our families) mean nothing more than positive evolutionary steps of the human existence. To the religious right, these steps are the result of planning by a group of evil geniuses intent on conquest.
Apparently they got us mixed up with their efforts to ban same-sex marriage nationwide.
For the record, the vast majority of lgbts have never heard of After the Ball - not that it matters to Kern and folks who agree with her.
The real question is will our community finally bring more attention to the fact that the religious right is intentionally putting out bad propaganda about lgbts?
Somehow I doubt that this will happen.
To some of us, it's much more fun to focus on issues such as Kern's age or weight.
I never did like the controversy regarding Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern.
I didn't like the way she consistently relied on bad information from Paul Cameron and the religious right to make her case that lgbts are as bad as terrorists.
I didn't like the way she hid behind her so-called Christian religion when questioned about her comments.
And most of all, I didn't like how the lgbt community pretty much let her get away with it.
We wasted time speculating on whether or not her son was gay or talking about what Ellen DeGeneres said about the situation. The fact that Sally Kern was a good example of how the religious right flim flams guillible people of faith into believing the worst about lgbts was a point that got lost in all of the controversy.
I was glad when the controversy died down. One wonders if Kern was because she keeps making an ass of herself:
Speaking at the Clouds Over America conference, run and organized by the John Birch Society in Oklahoma City, Kern told a welcoming crowd that she found the elusive gay agenda between the pages of Marshall Kirk's and Hunter Madsen's 1990 book After The Ball: How America Will Conquer Its fear & Hatred Of Gays In The 90s. Its authors mostly argue in 432 pages that gays and lesbians will most likely be accepted once they are liked by the general public.
Oklahoma Gazette, the Oklahoma City alternative weekly, reports Kern spoke to a packed crowd.
“You know,” Kern said, “I've done a lot of reading on this. I wish I could describe to you their behavior. I will not because I would be redder than this suit. It's their behavior that we oppose.”
Here we go again. Gays are following a six point plan to take over America. It's a standard urban legend in religious right dogma.
From time to time, the religious right will claim that the lgbt community is using the book After the Ball as a sort of blueprint to allegedly force acceptance. Then they will point to certain incidents that somehow "connect all of the dots."
To a lot of us, these incidents (i.e. more visibility and a little more acceptance for lgbts and our families) mean nothing more than positive evolutionary steps of the human existence. To the religious right, these steps are the result of planning by a group of evil geniuses intent on conquest.
Apparently they got us mixed up with their efforts to ban same-sex marriage nationwide.
For the record, the vast majority of lgbts have never heard of After the Ball - not that it matters to Kern and folks who agree with her.
The real question is will our community finally bring more attention to the fact that the religious right is intentionally putting out bad propaganda about lgbts?
Somehow I doubt that this will happen.
To some of us, it's much more fun to focus on issues such as Kern's age or weight.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
The religious right's Biblically nice rhetoric
First, one little matter.
I noticed Michelle Malkin saying that due to the Tom Daschle situation, President Obama's transition has been a disaster.
Oh stop it already. Like I'm actually shocked that Malkin is criticizing Obama. She would call his State of the Union address a disaster if he coughed briefly while giving it.
If she wants induce shock, she would give President Obama credit for something.
I don't think it's a big deal. Clinton had Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood, Bush had Linda Chavez, and now Obama has Tom Daschle.
It happens and it's called getting a feel for the office.
Now onto other matters - I ran across a hilarious bit in One News Now by former Concerned Women for America spokesperson and now director of Cultural Affairs at Liberty Counsel and 2008 Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters Misinformer of the Year Matt Barber.
And what is he talking about? Why lgbt folks yet again in a piece entitled Homosexuality & the laws of moral physics.
So now being a phony expert gives one expertise in "moral physics." I guess it's not enough for the religious right to fake credentials in legitimate sciences; they are now creating imaginary ones.
Anyway, it's a rather long and ponderous piece of mumbo jumbo in which Barber cites Biblical texts talking about homosexuality (and naturally excluding the parts that say homosexuals should be executed, which is highly ironic seeing that he complains about people cherry picking the Bible).
But I noticed what isn't there. Where is the "homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle" lie that I have come to expect from folks like him? Where are the discredited studies or the studies taken out of context?
I know. Wishful thinking.
Paul Cameron and gerbils still have a place in religious right lies about lgbts.
But I think there will be some subtleties played from now on.
This emphasis on the "religious wrongness of homosexuality" will probably be a recurrent theme. And the minute that President Obama tries to push something pro-lgbt forward, count on the religious right to use this theme to get them over in the African-American community.
It's not as farfetched as one thinks. The minute hate crimes legislation or ENDA comes up, expect the religious right to put on their consoling faces and try to be the heterosexual black community's best friend (despite months of inferring that black folks are racists for supporting Obama). Expect them to exploit the idea that black folks are highly religious and therefore disapproves of homosexuality in a high number.
As a black gay man, I can tell you that the notion is bullshit. It's the inability to talk about lgbt issues in the black community that has led the notion to flourish. But that's irrelevant right now.
What will most likely happen next will be the following - the black community will be too proud to admit that it is being used and the lgbt community will be too angry to realize that the religious right is counting on it to behave irrationally. Neither side will unite against the common enemies of ignorance and fear.
This will thereby lead to the end result - black folks will be angry, gay folks will be angry, Obama will be humbled, the religious right will have more press, and lgbts of color like myself will end up feeling like Gloria Vanderbilt after that custody trial.
Geez, I almost miss the Paul Cameronesque rhetoric already.
First, one little matter.
I noticed Michelle Malkin saying that due to the Tom Daschle situation, President Obama's transition has been a disaster.
Oh stop it already. Like I'm actually shocked that Malkin is criticizing Obama. She would call his State of the Union address a disaster if he coughed briefly while giving it.
If she wants induce shock, she would give President Obama credit for something.
I don't think it's a big deal. Clinton had Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood, Bush had Linda Chavez, and now Obama has Tom Daschle.
It happens and it's called getting a feel for the office.
Now onto other matters - I ran across a hilarious bit in One News Now by former Concerned Women for America spokesperson and now director of Cultural Affairs at Liberty Counsel and 2008 Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters Misinformer of the Year Matt Barber.
And what is he talking about? Why lgbt folks yet again in a piece entitled Homosexuality & the laws of moral physics.
So now being a phony expert gives one expertise in "moral physics." I guess it's not enough for the religious right to fake credentials in legitimate sciences; they are now creating imaginary ones.
Anyway, it's a rather long and ponderous piece of mumbo jumbo in which Barber cites Biblical texts talking about homosexuality (and naturally excluding the parts that say homosexuals should be executed, which is highly ironic seeing that he complains about people cherry picking the Bible).
But I noticed what isn't there. Where is the "homosexuality is a dangerous lifestyle" lie that I have come to expect from folks like him? Where are the discredited studies or the studies taken out of context?
I know. Wishful thinking.
Paul Cameron and gerbils still have a place in religious right lies about lgbts.
But I think there will be some subtleties played from now on.
This emphasis on the "religious wrongness of homosexuality" will probably be a recurrent theme. And the minute that President Obama tries to push something pro-lgbt forward, count on the religious right to use this theme to get them over in the African-American community.
It's not as farfetched as one thinks. The minute hate crimes legislation or ENDA comes up, expect the religious right to put on their consoling faces and try to be the heterosexual black community's best friend (despite months of inferring that black folks are racists for supporting Obama). Expect them to exploit the idea that black folks are highly religious and therefore disapproves of homosexuality in a high number.
As a black gay man, I can tell you that the notion is bullshit. It's the inability to talk about lgbt issues in the black community that has led the notion to flourish. But that's irrelevant right now.
What will most likely happen next will be the following - the black community will be too proud to admit that it is being used and the lgbt community will be too angry to realize that the religious right is counting on it to behave irrationally. Neither side will unite against the common enemies of ignorance and fear.
This will thereby lead to the end result - black folks will be angry, gay folks will be angry, Obama will be humbled, the religious right will have more press, and lgbts of color like myself will end up feeling like Gloria Vanderbilt after that custody trial.
Geez, I almost miss the Paul Cameronesque rhetoric already.
Maybe we are getting to Porno Petey
Peter LaBarbera is on another one of his crusades about bondage events:
BREAKING STORY — Columbus, Ohio Holiday Inn Hotel Hosts ‘Winter Wickedness’ Perversion-Fest
But this one is different.
LaBarbera is generally known for attending gay subcultural events (such as Folsom Street Fair), taking pictures of the most outrageous things he sees there, and then describing the events as indicative of the entire lgbt community.
So imagine my shock when I see that the event he has attacked this time (wait for it) has absolutely nothing to do with lgbts.
I kid you not. This alleged Winter Wickedness Perversion Fest seems to be strictly heterosexual.
Will wonders ever cease? And it brings up two points.
In the past, when Peter went on his jags about "homosexual perversion," he was accused of unfairly targeting the entire lgbt community. He would never talk about heterosexual subcultural events.
You think maybe he has taken the criticism to heart?
And one other thing. When talking about Folsom Street Fair and the like, he would use the events to generalize about the alleged perversions of homosexuality - thereby inferring that what he took pictures of was indicative of all lgbts, including those who have never attended Folsom Street Fair or any gay subcultural event.
His commentary today was free of such generalizations about the alleged "radical heterosexuals" or how heterosexuals are behind the "perversion of America."
It's an important point to remember when Peter does in fact try to use another gay subcultural event to stigmatize the entire lgbt community.
Peter LaBarbera is on another one of his crusades about bondage events:
BREAKING STORY — Columbus, Ohio Holiday Inn Hotel Hosts ‘Winter Wickedness’ Perversion-Fest
But this one is different.
LaBarbera is generally known for attending gay subcultural events (such as Folsom Street Fair), taking pictures of the most outrageous things he sees there, and then describing the events as indicative of the entire lgbt community.
So imagine my shock when I see that the event he has attacked this time (wait for it) has absolutely nothing to do with lgbts.
I kid you not. This alleged Winter Wickedness Perversion Fest seems to be strictly heterosexual.
Will wonders ever cease? And it brings up two points.
In the past, when Peter went on his jags about "homosexual perversion," he was accused of unfairly targeting the entire lgbt community. He would never talk about heterosexual subcultural events.
You think maybe he has taken the criticism to heart?
And one other thing. When talking about Folsom Street Fair and the like, he would use the events to generalize about the alleged perversions of homosexuality - thereby inferring that what he took pictures of was indicative of all lgbts, including those who have never attended Folsom Street Fair or any gay subcultural event.
His commentary today was free of such generalizations about the alleged "radical heterosexuals" or how heterosexuals are behind the "perversion of America."
It's an important point to remember when Peter does in fact try to use another gay subcultural event to stigmatize the entire lgbt community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)