And now a little bit about gay and black me
In commemoration of my blog reaching over 30,000 hits, I want to do something a little different. In my 20 months of blogging, I have noticed something interesting; our opposition refuses to acknowledge lgbts of color. It's like they are scared of us.
Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber and the rest talk about the African-American civil rights movement in halting, condescending tones that are designed to exploit the notion that the African-American identity and the lgbt orientation are two entities that can never intersect.
Now I could combat this by preaching about how we are all brothers and no group has the patent on the struggle for equality.
But I won't. I think that it would be best served to give the opposition something that they don't want; the voice and experiences of a gay man of color. By all means, tell me what you think of it:
Let me give you a few facts about myself by way of introduction.
I am a 37-year-old black male and a native of South Carolina. I remember things like the PTL Club, the birth of rap music and Cher when she was hitched to Sonny.
And there is one more fact that you should know.
I am gay.
Sometimes I take an uncalled for pleasure with informing other African-Americans about my sexual orientation.
It’s not like I shout about it from rooftops. I only reveal that part about myself when the situation calls for clearing up incorrect preconceived notions.
Like when I’m asked why I’m not married yet or what young female I’m seeing.
There is nothing quite like seeing the realization slowly creeping across the face of whomever I am talking to when they realize that they are in the presence of a genuine, dyed in the wool black homosexual.
Unfortunately it never leads to them asking for my autograph.
To the African-American community, I’m persona non grata.
It’s always interesting to run into one of my fellow gay black brothers in a public setting, especially the ones who don’t want anyone to know their sexual orientation. We tend to share the same animals trapped in a lab cage look.
It’s not that being gay is a bad thing and we are trapped in our orientation. We are just trapped in our communities.
Don’t get me wrong. I ‘m proud to be an African-American.
But there is a great deal of hypocrisy in the black community regarding homosexuality.
When I attended Winthrop University, homosexuality was one of those subjects you just didn’t bring up amongst black students. It was “a sin.”
Meanwhile, the largest black organization on campus would have yearly town hall meetings geared to deciphering the logistics of relationships between black males and females. These highly attended events would be filled with claims of cheating and long-winded speeches.
I remember one specifically due to its rather impressive title: A man is a dog and a dog is a man but what about the woman he is dogging with?
The implication was clear: unmarried black male and female students were having sex across the campus. But only the gay and lesbian students should be ashamed of it.
This reluctance to talk about homosexuality in the African-American community and the consequences of it do make things interesting.
Generally, when black women discover that I am gay, they work hard to become my friend. I like to think that they feel some kindred with me. The cynic in me though tells me that they are trying to work themselves in my good graces so that in the future I can give them some clues to tell whether or not their boyfriends or husbands are on the “down low.”
And speaking of the “down low,” (or the practice of a heterosexual man having a secret gay relationship on the side) I am so sick and tired of hearing about it.
I wouldn’t mind talking about it. But like so many conversations in the African-American community, us gays can’t get a word in edgewise with all of the books written on it by heterosexuals and words spoken in churches about it by heterosexuals, and all the forums held by heterosexuals.
The “down low” is not a new thing nor is it indigenous to race. The practice of a man with a wife or girlfriend having a boyfriend on the side is as old as the hills. It’s just that the African-American community seems to be the only group that has given it a pet name.
I once ran into two acquaintances talking about this “down low” situation. Both were in agreement that black men who were having gay relationships on the side should come out. But then I pointed out that they and the African-American community in general should do more to encourage them to come out. And they pointed out that they weren’t about to do that. That did not surprise me.
This entire “down low” situation reveals a certain meanness about the African-American community. So many became alarmed when it was presented that the “down low” could be the reason for the high HIV rate amongst African-American women.
The question that no one wants to ask is that if HIV wasn’t affecting black women the way it is, would anyone care about the rate of HIV amongst black gay men?
I am so tired of the distorted message I hear about the “down low.” In the first place, we never talk about the real issue, which is that the African-American community, through its mistreatment of the black gay man, actually encourages this sort of behavior.
History gives us such legendary black gays and lesbians as Bayard Rustin, Lorraine Hansberry, Barbara Jordan, and James Baldwin.
Black society today gives us Fantasia and Venus who fix up our hair, cousin Pookie, Jamal who is in the church choir and tries to be in the closet but just who is he kidding anyway, and that sister down the street with a can of beer always in her hand; the one who wears her pants lower than the brothers on the corner.
How in the hell did it come to this?
I’m no different from any other African-American. I get annoyed at the little subtle digs of racism in American society. I know that when people talk about the “All-American boy” or the “girl next door,” they don’t mean me or those who look like me.
So why is it that in the African-American community where me and my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are supposed to get support, we either are without a voice or have our voices so muted that no one hears us.
You never see us featured in Ebony, Jet, or Essence. We hardly ever any play on BET except for an offhand mention when people are talking about HIV prevention.
And it always astounds me when a heterosexual African-American says, “hey I don’t have a problem with gay people. I have no problem with anyone’s sexual preference,” then proceeds to overtalk us, generalize about us, and systematically exclude us from all-important conversations of the black community.
I have heard the usual about “you can’t compare being gay to being black.” I’ve heard the usual about gays never riding the back of the bus or gays not going through the same levels of discrimination black folks have.
And it’s all irrelevant details as far as I'm concerned.
All I know is that I have been accosted for being gay and I have been accosted for being black.
And after being accosted for being gay, I never walked away from the situation saying something like, “Whew, I’m glad so-and-so didn’t try to beat me up because of my color. The punches would have hurt more.”
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Did Cybercast News make the case against Crystal Dixon
So the right-wing are slowly catching on to the Crystal Dixon story. And with their usual candor, they are spinning it to make Dixon look like a victim:
"She has been fired," said Brian Rooney, spokesman for the Thomas More Law Center, an Ann Arbor, Mich.-based legal-defense group which is representing Dixon.
Rooney told Cybercast News Service that the university had offered Dixon "another position, in a different part of the university, not in human resources" because she had argued in her editorial that sexual orientation is not an immutable characteristic like race or sex and should not be afforded the same protection under civil rights laws.
The University said the following:
According to a statement from UT spokesman Lawrence J. Burns, the university determined that there was “just cause” to fire Dixon.
“The public position Ms. Dixon took in the Toledo Free Press is in direct contradiction to University policies and procedures, as well as the institutional core values as defined in our strategic plan, and called into question her continued ability to lead a critical function within the administration as personnel actions or decisions taken in her capacity as associate vice president for human resources could be challenged or placed at risk,” Burn said in the statement.
The article also said Dixon was not initially fired. She was offered a demotion and a pay cut, both of which she refused.
So it can be interpreted that the University found that Ms. Dixon's personal beliefs could interfere with her job duties.
Interesting.
However, there is another side to the story.
The question may come down to that of policy, not the context of Dixon’s statements.
I have read the claim on several sites that Dixon indicated that she was speaking for herself and did not involve the University.
This is may not be true. Nowhere in her column did Dixon indicate that she was solely giving her opinion. She even indentifies herself as an employee of the university.
Even though they probably didn’t mean to, her lawyers indicate this very point:
Attorneys with the Thomas More Law Center, meanwhile, point out that Dixon, an African-American woman and evangelical Christian, was not speaking on behalf of the university, but -- as Dixon herself phrased it in the column -- "as a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo's Graduate School, an employee and a business owner."
By that statement, it can be construed that she was in fact speaking on behalf of the University.
It all comes down to how this will interpreted.
And what about when she said the following:
The reference to the alleged benefits disparity at the University of Toledo was rather misleading. When the University of Toledo and former Medical University of Ohio merged, both entities had multiple contracts for different benefit plans at substantially different employee cost sharing levels. To suggest that homosexual employees on one campus are being denied benefits avoids the fact that ALL employees across the two campuses regardless of their sexual orientation, have different benefit plans. The university is working diligently to address this issue in a reasonable and cost-efficient manner, for all employees, not just one segment.
Was this private information? If so, who gave her clearance to make it public?
We all have been ruminating on the context of Dixon’s words. Some of us have canonized her as a martyr of political correctness and others have vilified her as intolerant.
I myself have been very disturbed by yet another example of an African-American self-righteous wannabe attacking the lgbt community.
But ultimately, the entire thing could come down to that of policy.
Does an employee have a right to involve their employer (even indirectly) in personal opinions?
Does free speech and religion cover this sort of thing?
Does the University's policy address this issue?
Can an employee not agree with the University's core mission but still fulfill the job duties that would accomplish this core mission?
All very interesting questions. I'm very curious to see how this will play out.
UPDATE - Matt Barber weighs in
Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America weighs in the situation with his usual brand of hysteria:
Don’t let this egregious and discriminatory action by the University of Toledo be ignored. Please contact University of Toledo President Lloyd Jacobs and respectfully request that he immediately reinstate Crystal Dixon and issue a public apology to her, the African-American community and to Christians worldwide.
Apologize to Christians worldwide? Apparently Barber takes too much on himself. I am sure that many Christians worldwide do not agree with Dixon's statements.
And speaking of apologies, if Barber wants to play that game, then he should apologize to us lgbts of color for every lie he has told on the lgbt community.
Or do LGBTs of color exist in his world?
So the right-wing are slowly catching on to the Crystal Dixon story. And with their usual candor, they are spinning it to make Dixon look like a victim:
"She has been fired," said Brian Rooney, spokesman for the Thomas More Law Center, an Ann Arbor, Mich.-based legal-defense group which is representing Dixon.
Rooney told Cybercast News Service that the university had offered Dixon "another position, in a different part of the university, not in human resources" because she had argued in her editorial that sexual orientation is not an immutable characteristic like race or sex and should not be afforded the same protection under civil rights laws.
The University said the following:
According to a statement from UT spokesman Lawrence J. Burns, the university determined that there was “just cause” to fire Dixon.
“The public position Ms. Dixon took in the Toledo Free Press is in direct contradiction to University policies and procedures, as well as the institutional core values as defined in our strategic plan, and called into question her continued ability to lead a critical function within the administration as personnel actions or decisions taken in her capacity as associate vice president for human resources could be challenged or placed at risk,” Burn said in the statement.
The article also said Dixon was not initially fired. She was offered a demotion and a pay cut, both of which she refused.
So it can be interpreted that the University found that Ms. Dixon's personal beliefs could interfere with her job duties.
Interesting.
However, there is another side to the story.
The question may come down to that of policy, not the context of Dixon’s statements.
I have read the claim on several sites that Dixon indicated that she was speaking for herself and did not involve the University.
This is may not be true. Nowhere in her column did Dixon indicate that she was solely giving her opinion. She even indentifies herself as an employee of the university.
Even though they probably didn’t mean to, her lawyers indicate this very point:
Attorneys with the Thomas More Law Center, meanwhile, point out that Dixon, an African-American woman and evangelical Christian, was not speaking on behalf of the university, but -- as Dixon herself phrased it in the column -- "as a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo's Graduate School, an employee and a business owner."
By that statement, it can be construed that she was in fact speaking on behalf of the University.
It all comes down to how this will interpreted.
And what about when she said the following:
The reference to the alleged benefits disparity at the University of Toledo was rather misleading. When the University of Toledo and former Medical University of Ohio merged, both entities had multiple contracts for different benefit plans at substantially different employee cost sharing levels. To suggest that homosexual employees on one campus are being denied benefits avoids the fact that ALL employees across the two campuses regardless of their sexual orientation, have different benefit plans. The university is working diligently to address this issue in a reasonable and cost-efficient manner, for all employees, not just one segment.
Was this private information? If so, who gave her clearance to make it public?
We all have been ruminating on the context of Dixon’s words. Some of us have canonized her as a martyr of political correctness and others have vilified her as intolerant.
I myself have been very disturbed by yet another example of an African-American self-righteous wannabe attacking the lgbt community.
But ultimately, the entire thing could come down to that of policy.
Does an employee have a right to involve their employer (even indirectly) in personal opinions?
Does free speech and religion cover this sort of thing?
Does the University's policy address this issue?
Can an employee not agree with the University's core mission but still fulfill the job duties that would accomplish this core mission?
All very interesting questions. I'm very curious to see how this will play out.
UPDATE - Matt Barber weighs in
Matt Barber from Concerned Women for America weighs in the situation with his usual brand of hysteria:
Don’t let this egregious and discriminatory action by the University of Toledo be ignored. Please contact University of Toledo President Lloyd Jacobs and respectfully request that he immediately reinstate Crystal Dixon and issue a public apology to her, the African-American community and to Christians worldwide.
Apologize to Christians worldwide? Apparently Barber takes too much on himself. I am sure that many Christians worldwide do not agree with Dixon's statements.
And speaking of apologies, if Barber wants to play that game, then he should apologize to us lgbts of color for every lie he has told on the lgbt community.
Or do LGBTs of color exist in his world?
Monday, May 12, 2008
I'm buying this book!!!!
I'm not one for gossipy tell-all books, but in the following case, I am going to make an exception:
Terrance Dean, a former executive at music channel MTV, has penned a memoir of his life and times in the hip hop industry as a gay man. It is an explosive exposé of a thriving gay subculture in an aggressively male business, where anti-gay lyrics and public homophobia are common.
I don't know how I feel about Dean naming names, but I support the book for several reasons.
Hip-hop is a microcosm of African-American hypocrisy regarding the lgbt community.
With all due respect to my brothers and sisters, we are talking about a genre of music that encourages baby mama dramas, makes stars out of women for doing nothing but jiggling their butts in a video, and propagates ignorance of speech and attitudes amongst black men.
We are talking about a genre of music that creates and supports images of masculinity so extreme that you couldn't measure up to them if your blood was replaced with testosterone.
Some vestiges of hip-hop add to the problem of homophobia in the African-American community, pure and simple.
Oh yeah, that is right. Kanye West spoke out against homophobia in hip-hop. He even got on the cover of several magazines because of it.
Natually that led me to find the tallest mountain in the United States so that I could stand on the very top, twirl my finger in the air and go "whoop te do."
This book will give hip-hop and my African-American community a rude shot in the arm. And trust me when I say that both need it.
I may buy five copies, all hardback editions.
See, I bet you all thought I was going to write about Crystal Dixon again.
I'm not one for gossipy tell-all books, but in the following case, I am going to make an exception:
Terrance Dean, a former executive at music channel MTV, has penned a memoir of his life and times in the hip hop industry as a gay man. It is an explosive exposé of a thriving gay subculture in an aggressively male business, where anti-gay lyrics and public homophobia are common.
I don't know how I feel about Dean naming names, but I support the book for several reasons.
Hip-hop is a microcosm of African-American hypocrisy regarding the lgbt community.
With all due respect to my brothers and sisters, we are talking about a genre of music that encourages baby mama dramas, makes stars out of women for doing nothing but jiggling their butts in a video, and propagates ignorance of speech and attitudes amongst black men.
We are talking about a genre of music that creates and supports images of masculinity so extreme that you couldn't measure up to them if your blood was replaced with testosterone.
Some vestiges of hip-hop add to the problem of homophobia in the African-American community, pure and simple.
Oh yeah, that is right. Kanye West spoke out against homophobia in hip-hop. He even got on the cover of several magazines because of it.
Natually that led me to find the tallest mountain in the United States so that I could stand on the very top, twirl my finger in the air and go "whoop te do."
This book will give hip-hop and my African-American community a rude shot in the arm. And trust me when I say that both need it.
I may buy five copies, all hardback editions.
See, I bet you all thought I was going to write about Crystal Dixon again.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Crystal Dixon fired
Reports are slowly coming out that the University of Toledo fired Crystal Dixon.
Dixon had written a column this week calling homosexuality a choice and saying that she takes umbrage with the comparison of being black and being gay. She also said she did not consider gay rights as civil rights.
It was not a simple case of free speech. Dixon was an associate vice president of Human Resources at the university.
She was responsible for insuring equity and diversity at the university. Because of such, there was some concern with whether or not she could do her job adequately.
Also, as a staff member at the University, she was not entitled to the same academic freedoms that professors are.
Let me say a couple of things that will probably be lost in the flurry to exploit this situation.
As a gay black man, I was offended by yet again a heterosexual African-American speaking against their lgbt brothers and sisters. I was also offended by her very bad use of statistics and her relying on bad sources such as PFOX.
I also feel that the University had an obligation to investigate whether or not Dixon could do her job fairly in light of her comments.
And as of right now, I agree with the decision to let her go.
But I hate it when this sort of thing happens.
I wish there was some sort of compromise.
But to those who will spin this case as one of "an attack on free speech," how would you feel if her comments had been against Christians, or Muslims, or any other groups; people whose interests she was hired to look after while they are students at the university.
Ms. Dixon has a right to free speech, but that doesn't trump her responsibility to the students, whether or not they are gay. Their well-being takes precedent over everything.
She is not the victim here.
Happy Confederate Memorial Day!!!!
I kid you not.
Today is Confederate Memorial Day in South Carolina.
Confederate Memorial Day was the result of a legislative compromise in which the state agreed to recognize today as a state holiday if Martin Luther King Jr. Day was also recognized as a state holiday.
Such is life way down south in Dixie.
Now as a black man, I'm a little conflicted.
But as a state employee, to hell with it.
A day off is a day off.
Apparently our opposition has their ecumenical knickers in a twist over the online search site Wikipedia. The following is according to that bastion of Christian fairness, One News Now:
Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, is facing harsh criticism over the posting of sexually explicit photos and images, including that of homosexuals.
Officials with Wikipedia say they permit the smut because they have a policy against censoring anything -- but that is not true, according to Bob Peters of Morality in Media. He says Wikipedia does not post child porn on the site, and they also censor personal attacks or anything potentially libelous.
And even our lovely friend Matt Barber weighs in on the pseudo-controversy:
“Perhaps Wikipedia should change its name to Pornopedia. Providing clinical images that may assist people in research is one thing, but many of the images and videos featured by Wikipedia are gratuitous and obscene. They’re entirely unnecessary and amount to hardcore pornography, plain and simple.
Of course neither Barber nor One News Now go into detail concerning such images. In Barber's case it just adds to the notion that he thinks hyperbole substitutes as truth. The title of his piece is Wikipedia peddles porn to kids.
I thought if you make charges of that nature, you must show proof. I guess it doesn't count if you are a "fine, upstanding conservative Christian."
In One News Now's case, the lack of proof regarding the charges against Wikipedia is a fact duly noted by some of the commentators on the site. The entire issue seems to be bringing all the interesting comments out:
"As I read these comments I hear anger, bitterness, condemnation and all manner of emotions EXCEPT love. WWJD? He loves every one of us and hope this love would win us over to his way (True Christianity.)"
"Well I haven't seen the wind but I can tell you its there. Just because you personally haven't seen it doesn't mean its not there. Go looking, bet you 'll find it....Also stopping children from looking at pornography is not a bad thing really its not.... Nothing wrong with keeping a youngsters mind out of the gutter..Nothing wrong with a conservative outlook on life either, if you don't like it don't become a conservative...;)"
"I don't think anyone trying to "highjack" this site can make Christians look bad. You so-called Christians are doing such an excellent job by yourselves." (that one is by me. I feel so famous!)
"It’s pretty obvious that unbelievers are commenting here. I pity them because they are blind to their own ignorance, and will ultimately stand in judgment, with no hope of mercy. They think they can say whatever they want without consequence… Big mistake! "Do not keep talking so proudly or let your mouth speak such arrogance, for the LORD is a God who knows, and by him deeds are weighed." 1 Samuel 2:3"
"I've used Wikipedia many, many times and have never encountered pornography. There are photos of human anatomy, but it would be quite sad if some people considered that to be pornographic."
"Whether it is legal or not, each and every man and woman has the right and knowledge to know if they want to venture down those paths or not. Just because I am selling something legal, like horse crap, that doesn't mean that you have to stop and buy it. If each person would just ask that little phrase......WWJD. That stands for What Would Jesus Do. The Mormon religion has one that is older then that. CTR. Which stands for Choose the Right."
"Obvioiusly the good people at AFA and OneNewsNow are NOT going to give detail so everyone else can pollute their minds and spread this around. It simply requires common sense to know this if one is geared to decency at all! It's also common sense to know your source. If you read this site then you know whether it's reliable or not."
"So I typed in the word "porn" on wikipedia's website and at the bottom of the page that came up was a "Silent 'stag' film" In which the woman becomes topless. So, yes it is there. But again I think any normal filter would catch this and this story is fruitless."
"Yes, the fools wage their war against their creator and His instructions for living the best life. The only intelligent comment posted, was the one that warns that the "comments are partially hijacked." Impostors, pretenders, liars, defenders of what God says He hates. Sad to see how self-deceived and defiled people can become, to call right wrong, and wrong right."
"Well, i just went their and it has a link to a smut video clip. That is enough. Porn is Porn and it will not detract, it will attract. People who have seen porn tend to want more and the potent material will just add to the addiction!"
""ATTENTION IF YOU ARE READING THESE COMMENTS! Please know that these comments have partially been hijacked by people wanting to make Christians look bad and defend their point of view. Its common for activist to jump on a good Christian site like Onenewsnow and make it look as if there are all kids of people that disagree with the Bible and present ultra liberal views. I have managed message boards and blogs for a long time and this is common.""
"I've never seen porn on Wikipedia. Regardless, porn is not illegal so the Justice Department is not going to do anything about it. Besides, anyone who was looking for porn on the internet would have millions of sites on which to find it easily before searching through Wikipedia. This article is nonsense."
"I have never seen "porn" on Wiki only anatomy pictures. They certainly do have links to pornographic material in the pornography articles. Wiki is for everybody, if you do not like it then get a filter because they only way you are going to see naked pictures on wiki is in an article that will have some sort of words that will block the article."
"I've heard these allegations before, but have never seen any evidence."
"Where is the proof? I use Wikipedia for a lot of research, I have thus far never found anything offensive on the website. What gives? Did they refuse to say anything nice about the AFA on their site?"
"Is it actual porn, or is it human anatomy? Or have some people completely confused the two?"
"Here's something that could stop children from accessing the site: Parenting. Start being responsible for raising your children so the rest of us don't have to."
"You can write another article and tell us what articles contain porn? I'm very interested in finding out what porn is on Wikipedia."
Reports are slowly coming out that the University of Toledo fired Crystal Dixon.
Dixon had written a column this week calling homosexuality a choice and saying that she takes umbrage with the comparison of being black and being gay. She also said she did not consider gay rights as civil rights.
It was not a simple case of free speech. Dixon was an associate vice president of Human Resources at the university.
She was responsible for insuring equity and diversity at the university. Because of such, there was some concern with whether or not she could do her job adequately.
Also, as a staff member at the University, she was not entitled to the same academic freedoms that professors are.
Let me say a couple of things that will probably be lost in the flurry to exploit this situation.
As a gay black man, I was offended by yet again a heterosexual African-American speaking against their lgbt brothers and sisters. I was also offended by her very bad use of statistics and her relying on bad sources such as PFOX.
I also feel that the University had an obligation to investigate whether or not Dixon could do her job fairly in light of her comments.
And as of right now, I agree with the decision to let her go.
But I hate it when this sort of thing happens.
I wish there was some sort of compromise.
But to those who will spin this case as one of "an attack on free speech," how would you feel if her comments had been against Christians, or Muslims, or any other groups; people whose interests she was hired to look after while they are students at the university.
Ms. Dixon has a right to free speech, but that doesn't trump her responsibility to the students, whether or not they are gay. Their well-being takes precedent over everything.
She is not the victim here.
Happy Confederate Memorial Day!!!!
I kid you not.
Today is Confederate Memorial Day in South Carolina.
Confederate Memorial Day was the result of a legislative compromise in which the state agreed to recognize today as a state holiday if Martin Luther King Jr. Day was also recognized as a state holiday.
Such is life way down south in Dixie.
Now as a black man, I'm a little conflicted.
But as a state employee, to hell with it.
A day off is a day off.
Apparently our opposition has their ecumenical knickers in a twist over the online search site Wikipedia. The following is according to that bastion of Christian fairness, One News Now:
Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, is facing harsh criticism over the posting of sexually explicit photos and images, including that of homosexuals.
Officials with Wikipedia say they permit the smut because they have a policy against censoring anything -- but that is not true, according to Bob Peters of Morality in Media. He says Wikipedia does not post child porn on the site, and they also censor personal attacks or anything potentially libelous.
And even our lovely friend Matt Barber weighs in on the pseudo-controversy:
“Perhaps Wikipedia should change its name to Pornopedia. Providing clinical images that may assist people in research is one thing, but many of the images and videos featured by Wikipedia are gratuitous and obscene. They’re entirely unnecessary and amount to hardcore pornography, plain and simple.
Of course neither Barber nor One News Now go into detail concerning such images. In Barber's case it just adds to the notion that he thinks hyperbole substitutes as truth. The title of his piece is Wikipedia peddles porn to kids.
I thought if you make charges of that nature, you must show proof. I guess it doesn't count if you are a "fine, upstanding conservative Christian."
In One News Now's case, the lack of proof regarding the charges against Wikipedia is a fact duly noted by some of the commentators on the site. The entire issue seems to be bringing all the interesting comments out:
"As I read these comments I hear anger, bitterness, condemnation and all manner of emotions EXCEPT love. WWJD? He loves every one of us and hope this love would win us over to his way (True Christianity.)"
"Well I haven't seen the wind but I can tell you its there. Just because you personally haven't seen it doesn't mean its not there. Go looking, bet you 'll find it....Also stopping children from looking at pornography is not a bad thing really its not.... Nothing wrong with keeping a youngsters mind out of the gutter..Nothing wrong with a conservative outlook on life either, if you don't like it don't become a conservative...;)"
"I don't think anyone trying to "highjack" this site can make Christians look bad. You so-called Christians are doing such an excellent job by yourselves." (that one is by me. I feel so famous!)
"It’s pretty obvious that unbelievers are commenting here. I pity them because they are blind to their own ignorance, and will ultimately stand in judgment, with no hope of mercy. They think they can say whatever they want without consequence… Big mistake! "Do not keep talking so proudly or let your mouth speak such arrogance, for the LORD is a God who knows, and by him deeds are weighed." 1 Samuel 2:3"
"I've used Wikipedia many, many times and have never encountered pornography. There are photos of human anatomy, but it would be quite sad if some people considered that to be pornographic."
"Whether it is legal or not, each and every man and woman has the right and knowledge to know if they want to venture down those paths or not. Just because I am selling something legal, like horse crap, that doesn't mean that you have to stop and buy it. If each person would just ask that little phrase......WWJD. That stands for What Would Jesus Do. The Mormon religion has one that is older then that. CTR. Which stands for Choose the Right."
"Obvioiusly the good people at AFA and OneNewsNow are NOT going to give detail so everyone else can pollute their minds and spread this around. It simply requires common sense to know this if one is geared to decency at all! It's also common sense to know your source. If you read this site then you know whether it's reliable or not."
"So I typed in the word "porn" on wikipedia's website and at the bottom of the page that came up was a "Silent 'stag' film" In which the woman becomes topless. So, yes it is there. But again I think any normal filter would catch this and this story is fruitless."
"Yes, the fools wage their war against their creator and His instructions for living the best life. The only intelligent comment posted, was the one that warns that the "comments are partially hijacked." Impostors, pretenders, liars, defenders of what God says He hates. Sad to see how self-deceived and defiled people can become, to call right wrong, and wrong right."
"Well, i just went their and it has a link to a smut video clip. That is enough. Porn is Porn and it will not detract, it will attract. People who have seen porn tend to want more and the potent material will just add to the addiction!"
""ATTENTION IF YOU ARE READING THESE COMMENTS! Please know that these comments have partially been hijacked by people wanting to make Christians look bad and defend their point of view. Its common for activist to jump on a good Christian site like Onenewsnow and make it look as if there are all kids of people that disagree with the Bible and present ultra liberal views. I have managed message boards and blogs for a long time and this is common.""
"I've never seen porn on Wikipedia. Regardless, porn is not illegal so the Justice Department is not going to do anything about it. Besides, anyone who was looking for porn on the internet would have millions of sites on which to find it easily before searching through Wikipedia. This article is nonsense."
"I have never seen "porn" on Wiki only anatomy pictures. They certainly do have links to pornographic material in the pornography articles. Wiki is for everybody, if you do not like it then get a filter because they only way you are going to see naked pictures on wiki is in an article that will have some sort of words that will block the article."
"I've heard these allegations before, but have never seen any evidence."
"Where is the proof? I use Wikipedia for a lot of research, I have thus far never found anything offensive on the website. What gives? Did they refuse to say anything nice about the AFA on their site?"
"Is it actual porn, or is it human anatomy? Or have some people completely confused the two?"
"Here's something that could stop children from accessing the site: Parenting. Start being responsible for raising your children so the rest of us don't have to."
"You can write another article and tell us what articles contain porn? I'm very interested in finding out what porn is on Wikipedia."
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Homophobia creates strange bedfellows
As the Crystal Dixon controversy slowly makes it way through the right-wing of the blogsphere, the scuttlebutt seems to be that the anti-gay industry is trying to make this into a case of yet another "innocent Christian" who has been targeted by the invisible gay empire.
As chronicled here and here, the case is not so simple.
But it amazes me what I read.
One News Now has covered the situation with its usual attention to bias. Interestingly enough, Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America claims that the university violated its own policy in suspending Dixon. Of course he does not go into detail. Typical Barber; hyperbole instead of truth.
But if you want to talk about irony, consider that our friend Peter LaBarbera has weighed in on the Crystal Dixon situation.
Apparently in an email version of the story (that's not posted on his site), LaBarbera incorrectly said that Dixon was fired. He has corrected the error.
And he also published a letter from a Professor Robert Gagnon defending Dixon's comments. The very long letter reads in part:
Ms. Dixon is absolutely right that sexual orientation is not akin to race or sex. Unlike a homosexual orientation, race and sex are 100% congenitally predetermined, cannot be fundamentally changed in their essence by cultural influences, and are not a primary or direct desire for behavior that is incompatible with embodied structures.
Amazing how Peter tries to distract the argument. How scientifically Gagnon can prove that homosexuality and race is not alike is not the point.
The point is that Ms. Dixon was hired to look over equity and diversity at Toledo State University. Now there are legitimate questions as to how she can do her job in light of the fact that she has demonstrated a potential bias against a group of students.
But believe it or not, that's not the crux of this irony.
Peter has also been pushing the case of one Brett Vanasdlen. This “strapping, clean-cut, All-American looking young man” (Peter's words, not mine) has been accused of a hate crime in an altercation with another young man.
Guess whose side Peter is taking, even to the point of making it seem that Vanasdlen and his family are somehow under siege.
Peter originally got the information about Vanasdlen from Ted Pike, someone he calls a "pro-family" advocate.
But there is another side to Pike. According to Box Turtle Bulletin:
David Duke, onetime Louisiana legislator and Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, has a website where like-minded individuals proclaim their beliefs. They rant about the corrupting influence of Jews, how civil rights laws lead to black men raping white women, how European countries need to keep their ethnic identity free from the dilution of immigration, and radical hispanics want to return the Southwest to Mexico. Rev. Ted Pike is a regular writer who specializes in anti-Semitic screeds (he loves Jews in the same way that LaBarbera love gays).
Box Turtle Bulletin also said that Pike posted the article about Vanasdlen on this website. This is true because the article is right here under the teaser of another article that reads Zionist Sponsored “Hate” Legislation Railroading Christian Teenagers in Illinois
Other very interesting articles by and quoting Ted Pike, that "pro-family" advocate, are here. The title of one - Jewish Media Corrupts Teen Girls - gives you all you need to know about just what type of "family" Pike is interested in protecting.
Now in LaBarbera's defense, he did not get Pike's article from Duke' site. But it still speaks to Peter's character (or lack thereof) that he calls Pike a "pro-family" advocate.
In the past, LaBarbera has been very vocal against lgbts allegedly "highjacking the civil rights movement."
How ironic that he canonizes someone whose mindset made it necessary to have a civil rights movement.
Ironic but not unexpected.
In the future, African-Americans who ally themselves with the anti-gay industry would do themselves a service to pay attention to the "friends" of their "friends."
It may give them the right answer as to exactly who is trying to "highjack the civil rights movement."
Big thanks to Box Turtle Bulletin for help with this post.
As the Crystal Dixon controversy slowly makes it way through the right-wing of the blogsphere, the scuttlebutt seems to be that the anti-gay industry is trying to make this into a case of yet another "innocent Christian" who has been targeted by the invisible gay empire.
As chronicled here and here, the case is not so simple.
But it amazes me what I read.
One News Now has covered the situation with its usual attention to bias. Interestingly enough, Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America claims that the university violated its own policy in suspending Dixon. Of course he does not go into detail. Typical Barber; hyperbole instead of truth.
But if you want to talk about irony, consider that our friend Peter LaBarbera has weighed in on the Crystal Dixon situation.
Apparently in an email version of the story (that's not posted on his site), LaBarbera incorrectly said that Dixon was fired. He has corrected the error.
And he also published a letter from a Professor Robert Gagnon defending Dixon's comments. The very long letter reads in part:
Ms. Dixon is absolutely right that sexual orientation is not akin to race or sex. Unlike a homosexual orientation, race and sex are 100% congenitally predetermined, cannot be fundamentally changed in their essence by cultural influences, and are not a primary or direct desire for behavior that is incompatible with embodied structures.
Amazing how Peter tries to distract the argument. How scientifically Gagnon can prove that homosexuality and race is not alike is not the point.
The point is that Ms. Dixon was hired to look over equity and diversity at Toledo State University. Now there are legitimate questions as to how she can do her job in light of the fact that she has demonstrated a potential bias against a group of students.
But believe it or not, that's not the crux of this irony.
Peter has also been pushing the case of one Brett Vanasdlen. This “strapping, clean-cut, All-American looking young man” (Peter's words, not mine) has been accused of a hate crime in an altercation with another young man.
Guess whose side Peter is taking, even to the point of making it seem that Vanasdlen and his family are somehow under siege.
Peter originally got the information about Vanasdlen from Ted Pike, someone he calls a "pro-family" advocate.
But there is another side to Pike. According to Box Turtle Bulletin:
David Duke, onetime Louisiana legislator and Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, has a website where like-minded individuals proclaim their beliefs. They rant about the corrupting influence of Jews, how civil rights laws lead to black men raping white women, how European countries need to keep their ethnic identity free from the dilution of immigration, and radical hispanics want to return the Southwest to Mexico. Rev. Ted Pike is a regular writer who specializes in anti-Semitic screeds (he loves Jews in the same way that LaBarbera love gays).
Box Turtle Bulletin also said that Pike posted the article about Vanasdlen on this website. This is true because the article is right here under the teaser of another article that reads Zionist Sponsored “Hate” Legislation Railroading Christian Teenagers in Illinois
Other very interesting articles by and quoting Ted Pike, that "pro-family" advocate, are here. The title of one - Jewish Media Corrupts Teen Girls - gives you all you need to know about just what type of "family" Pike is interested in protecting.
Now in LaBarbera's defense, he did not get Pike's article from Duke' site. But it still speaks to Peter's character (or lack thereof) that he calls Pike a "pro-family" advocate.
In the past, LaBarbera has been very vocal against lgbts allegedly "highjacking the civil rights movement."
How ironic that he canonizes someone whose mindset made it necessary to have a civil rights movement.
Ironic but not unexpected.
In the future, African-Americans who ally themselves with the anti-gay industry would do themselves a service to pay attention to the "friends" of their "friends."
It may give them the right answer as to exactly who is trying to "highjack the civil rights movement."
Big thanks to Box Turtle Bulletin for help with this post.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
One News Now tries to sneak a lie past us all
Almost two weeks after the 2008 Day of Silence, One News Now is trying to push the lie that Ken Hutcherson's protest of the event at his child's high school was a success
The recent "Day of Silence" event promoting homosexuality was a bust at one Washington State high school thanks to the efforts of pro-family students, parents, and community leaders.
The Day of Silence is promoted by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) as an event to draw attention to alleged persecution suffered by students who claim to be homosexual or confused about their gender. But Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, Washington, claims the event was actually designed by homosexual activists to promote their lifestyle to students. So Hutcherson worked with other parents in the area of his daughter's Mount Si High School to protest the event.
Hutcherson and his wife purchased a half-page ad in the local newspaper urging concerned parents and Christians to join them in protest of the event. "Then the word went out," he explains. "It went out to my prayer warriors. And they prayed about it ... and last Friday [April 25], we had probably about 250 to 300 parents there," he contends.
Let's take the truth from the top yet again, boys. According to the Seattle Times:
About 100 people joined the Rev. Ken Hutcherson outside Mt. Si High School this morning to protest the Day of Silence being observed inside the school. The group prayed and sang as a noisy group of counter protesters tried to drown them out by beating on drums and chanting, "Go Home."
That's right. Just 100. Of course One News Now did not bother to cite another source other than Hutcherson.
Hell, even the title of the article is wrong:
'Day of Silence' walkout a success
No one walked out of the school in protest of the Day of Silence.
Hutcherson also contends that he was responsible for the absences during the day. This is not true. While one-third of students were absent that day, there has been no indication that the absences were in support of Hutcherson's protest.
The article is a whitewashed lie. And I think One News Now is aware of this fact. Why, after all, did this daily publication wait till almost two weeks to publish it?
Who was it that said - “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. "
Excellent news for lgbts of color
I got another hero for Black History Month:
Webb becomes Virginia’s first openly gay African-American elected official
Last night, while most political onlookers were watching the race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Indiana and North Carolina, a Virginia resident quietly made history as he became the state’s first openly gay African-American elected to public office.
In his first bid for elected office, Lawrence Webb won a seat on the Falls Church City Council by a margin of 39 votes. He joins two other candidates on the City Council: Nader Baroukh and Robin S. Gardner.
“I am grateful that the citizens of Falls Church have entrusted me with the responsibility to help guide the direction of our city’s future, and I thank them. I look forward to working with Council to make Falls Church an even better city than it is now,” Webb said.
“I also hope my election opens the door for others to get involved in public service. It doesn’t matter if you’re gay or black or both. What matters is your dedication to building a better community, and your willingness to work hard at it. . . "
more here
It's nice to know that in a world where people are trying to exploit our differences, others are stepping up to point out our similarities.
Almost two weeks after the 2008 Day of Silence, One News Now is trying to push the lie that Ken Hutcherson's protest of the event at his child's high school was a success
The recent "Day of Silence" event promoting homosexuality was a bust at one Washington State high school thanks to the efforts of pro-family students, parents, and community leaders.
The Day of Silence is promoted by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) as an event to draw attention to alleged persecution suffered by students who claim to be homosexual or confused about their gender. But Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond, Washington, claims the event was actually designed by homosexual activists to promote their lifestyle to students. So Hutcherson worked with other parents in the area of his daughter's Mount Si High School to protest the event.
Hutcherson and his wife purchased a half-page ad in the local newspaper urging concerned parents and Christians to join them in protest of the event. "Then the word went out," he explains. "It went out to my prayer warriors. And they prayed about it ... and last Friday [April 25], we had probably about 250 to 300 parents there," he contends.
Let's take the truth from the top yet again, boys. According to the Seattle Times:
About 100 people joined the Rev. Ken Hutcherson outside Mt. Si High School this morning to protest the Day of Silence being observed inside the school. The group prayed and sang as a noisy group of counter protesters tried to drown them out by beating on drums and chanting, "Go Home."
That's right. Just 100. Of course One News Now did not bother to cite another source other than Hutcherson.
Hell, even the title of the article is wrong:
'Day of Silence' walkout a success
No one walked out of the school in protest of the Day of Silence.
Hutcherson also contends that he was responsible for the absences during the day. This is not true. While one-third of students were absent that day, there has been no indication that the absences were in support of Hutcherson's protest.
The article is a whitewashed lie. And I think One News Now is aware of this fact. Why, after all, did this daily publication wait till almost two weeks to publish it?
Who was it that said - “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. "
Excellent news for lgbts of color
I got another hero for Black History Month:
Webb becomes Virginia’s first openly gay African-American elected official
Last night, while most political onlookers were watching the race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Indiana and North Carolina, a Virginia resident quietly made history as he became the state’s first openly gay African-American elected to public office.
In his first bid for elected office, Lawrence Webb won a seat on the Falls Church City Council by a margin of 39 votes. He joins two other candidates on the City Council: Nader Baroukh and Robin S. Gardner.
“I am grateful that the citizens of Falls Church have entrusted me with the responsibility to help guide the direction of our city’s future, and I thank them. I look forward to working with Council to make Falls Church an even better city than it is now,” Webb said.
“I also hope my election opens the door for others to get involved in public service. It doesn’t matter if you’re gay or black or both. What matters is your dedication to building a better community, and your willingness to work hard at it. . . "
more here
It's nice to know that in a world where people are trying to exploit our differences, others are stepping up to point out our similarities.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
More thoughts on the Crystal Dixon situation
In my eagerness and anger over the racial connotation regarding Crystal Dixon's comments (see yesterday's post), I omitted a crucial part of the story.
This was brought home to me when I see the headlines in various anti-gay industry publications concerning the situation:
Black University Employee Suspended for Objecting to Comparison between Black and Homosexual Discrimination
University suspends staffer over view of homosexuality
African-American condemned for stating in local paper being 'gay' not the same as being handicapped or black
How very predatory. Emphasizing the fact that Ms. Dixon is black in a pathetic attempt to set the gay and African-American communities against one another.
My guess is that they are going to try to make Ms. Dixon look like a victim; the latest cause celebre in the so-called "war on Christianity."
But let's not forget the more practical elements of this story.
Ms. Dixon wrote the column on her own time, but she placed her own employment in jeopardy because her opinions had to do with a crucial part of her job.
Let me put it another way: what if I were employed with an agency that sends out Medicaid applications. On my own time, I write a piece that gives the impression that I have a bias against a group of people who receive Medicaid applications (let's say the Latino community).
If someone pointed what I wrote to my supervisor, doesn't he have an obligation to investigate whether or not my bias infringes on my work?
It's the same thing in this situation regarding Ms. Dixon.
As a human resource officer at the University of Toledo, she is responsible for ensuring equity and diversity on the campus.
College campuses thrive on diversity, which means attracting potential students from different backgrounds, including gay students.
What Ms. Dixon wrote (especially the way she misrepresented statistics to prove her position and relying on the unsubstantiated claims of PFOX), shows a potential bias against lgbt students.
In light of this, can she be trusted to do her job adequately?
I don't know the answer to this question, but the University of Toledo has a responsibility to investigate whether she can or can't.
Please bear in mind that I said investigate, not fire. Ms. Dixon has not been fired.
Nor is she a victim here. People talk about free speech but many always forget that free speech comes with responsibilities. Sometimes you just can't say what you want. Or if you open your mouth, you should be prepared to face the consequences (especially if you are pontificating on something that has to do with your job).
In many cases it's unfortunate and unfair, but it's still a fact.
In short, Ms. Dixon has a right to free speech, but she really should have used a bit of common sense.
This situation is not about her. This situation is about the students. Their needs should not take a backseat to anyone's personal opinion.
No matter what happens in the end, the students are the only ones who matter.
In my eagerness and anger over the racial connotation regarding Crystal Dixon's comments (see yesterday's post), I omitted a crucial part of the story.
This was brought home to me when I see the headlines in various anti-gay industry publications concerning the situation:
Black University Employee Suspended for Objecting to Comparison between Black and Homosexual Discrimination
University suspends staffer over view of homosexuality
African-American condemned for stating in local paper being 'gay' not the same as being handicapped or black
How very predatory. Emphasizing the fact that Ms. Dixon is black in a pathetic attempt to set the gay and African-American communities against one another.
My guess is that they are going to try to make Ms. Dixon look like a victim; the latest cause celebre in the so-called "war on Christianity."
But let's not forget the more practical elements of this story.
Ms. Dixon wrote the column on her own time, but she placed her own employment in jeopardy because her opinions had to do with a crucial part of her job.
Let me put it another way: what if I were employed with an agency that sends out Medicaid applications. On my own time, I write a piece that gives the impression that I have a bias against a group of people who receive Medicaid applications (let's say the Latino community).
If someone pointed what I wrote to my supervisor, doesn't he have an obligation to investigate whether or not my bias infringes on my work?
It's the same thing in this situation regarding Ms. Dixon.
As a human resource officer at the University of Toledo, she is responsible for ensuring equity and diversity on the campus.
College campuses thrive on diversity, which means attracting potential students from different backgrounds, including gay students.
What Ms. Dixon wrote (especially the way she misrepresented statistics to prove her position and relying on the unsubstantiated claims of PFOX), shows a potential bias against lgbt students.
In light of this, can she be trusted to do her job adequately?
I don't know the answer to this question, but the University of Toledo has a responsibility to investigate whether she can or can't.
Please bear in mind that I said investigate, not fire. Ms. Dixon has not been fired.
Nor is she a victim here. People talk about free speech but many always forget that free speech comes with responsibilities. Sometimes you just can't say what you want. Or if you open your mouth, you should be prepared to face the consequences (especially if you are pontificating on something that has to do with your job).
In many cases it's unfortunate and unfair, but it's still a fact.
In short, Ms. Dixon has a right to free speech, but she really should have used a bit of common sense.
This situation is not about her. This situation is about the students. Their needs should not take a backseat to anyone's personal opinion.
No matter what happens in the end, the students are the only ones who matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)