News for the Week Ended June 1, 2011
BY ANN ROSTOW
Vive La Difference
I warn you that this is not an exciting week in the world of GLBT news. Indeed I have spent two hours surfing and checking blogs and Google-newsing for “gay” and “DOMA” and what have you. All to no avail.
We have a gay prom king somewhere and, elsewhere, a trans prom queen (Yay). The President issued a gay pride proclamation (Thanks). A court in Texas says a transwoman cannot receive her late firefighter husband’s $600,000 death payment. That money will go to the man’s ex-wife or his kids thanks to my home state’s policy of simply ignoring gender reassignments (Bastards!).
Oh, and speaking of gender, how about the Canadian parents who have decided to keep the sex of their third child, Storm, a secret? When I first heard about the story, I thought they were going to try to raise Storm as an androgynous entity, liberated from stereotypes, which I thought was quite insane. We all condemn stereotyping, transphobia, and rigid roles. But is there something wrong with the simple fact of having a sex? I don’t think so!
For our community in particular, we have fought for decades for our right to our own gender identity and for our right to commit to same-gender relationships. Our sex, male or female (trans or at birth) is not just important to us; it’s intrinsic to our existence as a political class. Equally important is our gender style, if you want to call it that, our freedom to be masculine women or feminine men or whatever combination suits us. Thus to me, there seems to be no reason to keep the sex of your child a secret, but every reason to encourage your child to gravitate towards his or her spot on the axis of masculinity and femininity, regardless of his or her sex.
From what I read, however, I think that the parents are just going to let Storm grow out of infancy without any particular pressure. They seem fairly sane, so I assume that if little Storm turns out to be a typical boy or girl, then that will be that. I read that their other son is a bit of a non-conformist, who loves bright colors and used to like dresses, so I guess their experience with his unconventional style inspired them to give Storm a head start on gender bending if he or she was so inclined.
You know what really bugs me? The name “Storm.” It sounds like a porn name. I hope he or she is given the chance to pick another moniker around the age of 12.
--
Lions and Tigers and Bears
As I was saying, there’s a news dearth this week. Civil unions started in Illinois and we’re still six votes short of marriage equality in the New York senate. I’m sort of boycotting legislative news out of the Empire State based on the premise that if I don’t write about it, marriage equality will pass out of Albany. But if I belabor the story as I have in the past, the bill will be killed by last-minute stratagems.
Some bad things happened at Moscow Pride. Oh, and I think the Memphis Grizzlies are going to keep the injured Rudy Gay on their roster. Get better soon, Rudy. Our community is rooting for you!
Well that’s that. So what shall we talk about if we don’t care about the gays? Here’s a very annoying development. I have half an eye on the women’s French Open quarterfinals on ESPN2. The commentators just announced the final score of Sharapova’s match against Petrovic. Then they carried on a ten-minute discussion about Sharapova’s game and how well she was playing. And now they’re showing the aforementioned match from start to finish even though we know exactly how it turns out. Lunkheads.
My afternoon is going from bad to worse now that the dog disconnected my damaged laptop, which only works when it’s plugged in. I lost two good paragraphs on a planned $172 million park in Kentucky which will feature a “life sized” Noah’s Ark complete with live animals. The owners will receive some $40 million in state tax incentives, which seems a little constitutionally suspect to me. And they claim that the park display will be able to “prove” that Noah had room for all the animals.
(Will there be pugs, I wonder? When I was a child, I used to say “aminals” instead of “animals” and it took me a long time to break the habit. To this day, I feel as if “aminals” should be a word.)
At any rate, how is it possible that in our own limited lifetimes we have taken so many steps back into the dark ages of religious superstition, creationism, and insisting on the literal truth of the Bible? For God’s sake, I went to the National Cathedral School for Girls as a child, had to go to chapel every day and cathedral every week and was forced to take Bible class. But even then, and there, I was taught that the stories in the Bible were allegorical. No one considered for a minute that Jonah was eaten by a whale or that all the beasts of the world politely lined up two-by-two and marched quietly into a giant ark.
And yet, here we are.
--
Show Us The Money
While we’re in Kentucky, I was pleased to read in the New York Times the other day that the two counties that have been unsuccessfully defending their right to display the Ten Commandments in public for many years now owe $456,881 to the ACLU, mostly for legal fees. The loser of a constitutional court battle has to pay the winner’s costs and fees, a policy that allows us all to defend our constitutional rights without fear of bankruptcy. At any rate, the two counties, McCreary and Pulaski, claim they have no idea where they’ll find the dough re mi.
The county’s expenses are not covered by their insurance policies, and after all, these two local governments pursued their Decalogue cases for no apparent civic advantage through thick and thin, not even stopping after a High Court defeat. Now, guess what? The check is sitting in the middle of the table, McCreary is staring at the ceiling and Pulaski says he forgot his wallet.
Here’s a question for my fellow Star Trek Next Generation fans. Why did Beverly leave the Enterprise and get replaced by Dr. Pulaski? And then, what happened to Pulaski and why did Beverly come back? I’m sure I could look this up myself.
I also wonder why we never hear anything more about the people who stay on the Enterprise at the end of their episodes. Like the warp scientist Marista Yale or the little alien boy who kidnapped Riker.
--
The Place For Politics
Moving right along, did you hear that Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut” and was suspended without pay from his MSNBC cable show for a week? I’m not crazy about Ed, but I thought his on air apology was solid. I mean, he really apologized. None of this mealy mouthed “I’m sorry if I offended anyone.”
I’m an MSNBC addict, although as I’ve said before, Chris Matthews can be hard to take. The man is simplistic yet presents himself as some kind of political expert just because he worked for Tip O’Neill back in the day. Plus, he spits and sputters and won’t let anyone finish a thought.
Additionally, Matthews is running a “Lean Forward” commercial for his show where he stares into the camera and wonders pompously if and when one of the GOP candidates will just accept that Obama is “as Amurcan as I am.”
Chris? No one, not even the GOP candidates, is saying or implying that Obama is not an American. As for his birth certificate, which had nothing to do with citizenship per se, that subject has been closed for weeks and weeks. Is this really the only issue you can think of to draw an audience?
Speaking of presidential politics, I told you that Newt’s Tiffany bill would stick to him like glue on stamps, didn’t I? I’m currently torn between wanting to spend the next 18 months speculating on the 2012 election, and being disgusted with all this vastly premature punditry. Can we not accept that for now, none of us have the slightest idea who will wind up contesting Obama for the presidency?
No? OK! We know it’s not going to be Newt. But between now and Labor Day, anyone can stitch themselves into this crazy quilt. They don’t have to win Iowa. They just need to be in the top three with momentum. And while Newt got in trouble for calling Ryan’s budget “rightwing extremism,” that doesn’t mean that a GOP candidate must endorse the plan. On the contrary, the person who wins the nomination will be a candidate who praises Ryan, while claiming to have a different budget plan that will not destroy Medicare as we know it. (Ergo, it will not be Jon Huntsman, who jumped into bed with Ryan like a star-struck teenager.)
I’m guessing that no one who wants to run in 2016 will get into this arena. But there are a few opportunists who may see their chance in this current chaos. I bet that someone we can’t even imagine is out there right now with a phone in his ear, calling buddies and CEOs to sound them out.
As for the Tea Party, most of them are not fixed ideologues; they are Obama haters and will support the most electable man or woman in the field, specifically a deficit hawk who will not be brought down in the general election based on his or her views on Medicare.
--
Bin Laden’s Secret Gay Love!
Let’s go see if anything remotely interesting has developed in GLBT news over the last three hours. I’ll be right back.
Nothing new, but when I scrolled back in my email records, I discovered a salacious clip from blogactivist Michael Petrelis, who shared with us his copy of The Globe, and its revelations about Osama Bin Laden’s gay sex life!
Michael, we all thank you for letting us end this column with a bang rather than a whisper. And how on earth did I miss the May 30 tabloid, with its cover headline: “Government Insider Reveals: Bin Laden’s Secret Gay Life!”
According to the snippets on Michael’s blog, Petrelis Files, Bin Laden fell in love with that courier guy back when they were hiding out from American forces in caves. The two lovers stayed together for the next ten years (unnamed CIA sources suspected) and of course we know that the courier died defending the scruffy terrorist against Navy Seals.
It’s unclear how Bin Laden also managed to have five wives and at least twenty children, but other Globe sources speculated that the mass murderer might have been attempting to cover up his shameful secret.
Look, many of us tried to appear straight back before summoning the courage to come out of the closet. But five wives and twenty kids? That’s quite the cover. Still, we might expect an elaborate charade from such a devious villain, n’est-ce pas?
Bin Laden’s (alleged) sexual orientation was (reportedly) known by government insiders as far back as the 1980s, when Bin Laden and his cronies were fighting the USSR in Afghanistan (with our help). An “aide” in the Reagan Administration recalled having dinner with the young freedom fighter in Houston back in 1987.
Clean cut, in khakis and a polo sweater, Bin Laden was negotiating for some Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. At the table, the mystery aide said Bin Laden’s leg touched his own a few times, leading him to suspect that the man was making a pass. His suspicions were confirmed when Bin Laden licked his lips and fluttered his eyelashes. (!)
The aide did not succumb to Bin Laden’s charms. But he did give Bin Laden cab fare to hit a bar that Bin Laden called “Ripcord.” Indeed, Michael confirms that The Ripcord Club has been a favorite Houston leather bar for the last 25 years.
Hey. I’m convinced! Although I prefer the heroes be gay and the evildoers be straight. I really wish that one or more of those Navy Seals were gay and would come out of the closet. That might shut up a few House conservatives, don’t you think?
BY ANN ROSTOW
Vive La Difference
I warn you that this is not an exciting week in the world of GLBT news. Indeed I have spent two hours surfing and checking blogs and Google-newsing for “gay” and “DOMA” and what have you. All to no avail.
We have a gay prom king somewhere and, elsewhere, a trans prom queen (Yay). The President issued a gay pride proclamation (Thanks). A court in Texas says a transwoman cannot receive her late firefighter husband’s $600,000 death payment. That money will go to the man’s ex-wife or his kids thanks to my home state’s policy of simply ignoring gender reassignments (Bastards!).
Oh, and speaking of gender, how about the Canadian parents who have decided to keep the sex of their third child, Storm, a secret? When I first heard about the story, I thought they were going to try to raise Storm as an androgynous entity, liberated from stereotypes, which I thought was quite insane. We all condemn stereotyping, transphobia, and rigid roles. But is there something wrong with the simple fact of having a sex? I don’t think so!
For our community in particular, we have fought for decades for our right to our own gender identity and for our right to commit to same-gender relationships. Our sex, male or female (trans or at birth) is not just important to us; it’s intrinsic to our existence as a political class. Equally important is our gender style, if you want to call it that, our freedom to be masculine women or feminine men or whatever combination suits us. Thus to me, there seems to be no reason to keep the sex of your child a secret, but every reason to encourage your child to gravitate towards his or her spot on the axis of masculinity and femininity, regardless of his or her sex.
From what I read, however, I think that the parents are just going to let Storm grow out of infancy without any particular pressure. They seem fairly sane, so I assume that if little Storm turns out to be a typical boy or girl, then that will be that. I read that their other son is a bit of a non-conformist, who loves bright colors and used to like dresses, so I guess their experience with his unconventional style inspired them to give Storm a head start on gender bending if he or she was so inclined.
You know what really bugs me? The name “Storm.” It sounds like a porn name. I hope he or she is given the chance to pick another moniker around the age of 12.
--
Lions and Tigers and Bears
As I was saying, there’s a news dearth this week. Civil unions started in Illinois and we’re still six votes short of marriage equality in the New York senate. I’m sort of boycotting legislative news out of the Empire State based on the premise that if I don’t write about it, marriage equality will pass out of Albany. But if I belabor the story as I have in the past, the bill will be killed by last-minute stratagems.
Some bad things happened at Moscow Pride. Oh, and I think the Memphis Grizzlies are going to keep the injured Rudy Gay on their roster. Get better soon, Rudy. Our community is rooting for you!
Well that’s that. So what shall we talk about if we don’t care about the gays? Here’s a very annoying development. I have half an eye on the women’s French Open quarterfinals on ESPN2. The commentators just announced the final score of Sharapova’s match against Petrovic. Then they carried on a ten-minute discussion about Sharapova’s game and how well she was playing. And now they’re showing the aforementioned match from start to finish even though we know exactly how it turns out. Lunkheads.
My afternoon is going from bad to worse now that the dog disconnected my damaged laptop, which only works when it’s plugged in. I lost two good paragraphs on a planned $172 million park in Kentucky which will feature a “life sized” Noah’s Ark complete with live animals. The owners will receive some $40 million in state tax incentives, which seems a little constitutionally suspect to me. And they claim that the park display will be able to “prove” that Noah had room for all the animals.
(Will there be pugs, I wonder? When I was a child, I used to say “aminals” instead of “animals” and it took me a long time to break the habit. To this day, I feel as if “aminals” should be a word.)
At any rate, how is it possible that in our own limited lifetimes we have taken so many steps back into the dark ages of religious superstition, creationism, and insisting on the literal truth of the Bible? For God’s sake, I went to the National Cathedral School for Girls as a child, had to go to chapel every day and cathedral every week and was forced to take Bible class. But even then, and there, I was taught that the stories in the Bible were allegorical. No one considered for a minute that Jonah was eaten by a whale or that all the beasts of the world politely lined up two-by-two and marched quietly into a giant ark.
And yet, here we are.
--
Show Us The Money
While we’re in Kentucky, I was pleased to read in the New York Times the other day that the two counties that have been unsuccessfully defending their right to display the Ten Commandments in public for many years now owe $456,881 to the ACLU, mostly for legal fees. The loser of a constitutional court battle has to pay the winner’s costs and fees, a policy that allows us all to defend our constitutional rights without fear of bankruptcy. At any rate, the two counties, McCreary and Pulaski, claim they have no idea where they’ll find the dough re mi.
The county’s expenses are not covered by their insurance policies, and after all, these two local governments pursued their Decalogue cases for no apparent civic advantage through thick and thin, not even stopping after a High Court defeat. Now, guess what? The check is sitting in the middle of the table, McCreary is staring at the ceiling and Pulaski says he forgot his wallet.
Here’s a question for my fellow Star Trek Next Generation fans. Why did Beverly leave the Enterprise and get replaced by Dr. Pulaski? And then, what happened to Pulaski and why did Beverly come back? I’m sure I could look this up myself.
I also wonder why we never hear anything more about the people who stay on the Enterprise at the end of their episodes. Like the warp scientist Marista Yale or the little alien boy who kidnapped Riker.
--
The Place For Politics
Moving right along, did you hear that Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut” and was suspended without pay from his MSNBC cable show for a week? I’m not crazy about Ed, but I thought his on air apology was solid. I mean, he really apologized. None of this mealy mouthed “I’m sorry if I offended anyone.”
I’m an MSNBC addict, although as I’ve said before, Chris Matthews can be hard to take. The man is simplistic yet presents himself as some kind of political expert just because he worked for Tip O’Neill back in the day. Plus, he spits and sputters and won’t let anyone finish a thought.
Additionally, Matthews is running a “Lean Forward” commercial for his show where he stares into the camera and wonders pompously if and when one of the GOP candidates will just accept that Obama is “as Amurcan as I am.”
Chris? No one, not even the GOP candidates, is saying or implying that Obama is not an American. As for his birth certificate, which had nothing to do with citizenship per se, that subject has been closed for weeks and weeks. Is this really the only issue you can think of to draw an audience?
Speaking of presidential politics, I told you that Newt’s Tiffany bill would stick to him like glue on stamps, didn’t I? I’m currently torn between wanting to spend the next 18 months speculating on the 2012 election, and being disgusted with all this vastly premature punditry. Can we not accept that for now, none of us have the slightest idea who will wind up contesting Obama for the presidency?
No? OK! We know it’s not going to be Newt. But between now and Labor Day, anyone can stitch themselves into this crazy quilt. They don’t have to win Iowa. They just need to be in the top three with momentum. And while Newt got in trouble for calling Ryan’s budget “rightwing extremism,” that doesn’t mean that a GOP candidate must endorse the plan. On the contrary, the person who wins the nomination will be a candidate who praises Ryan, while claiming to have a different budget plan that will not destroy Medicare as we know it. (Ergo, it will not be Jon Huntsman, who jumped into bed with Ryan like a star-struck teenager.)
I’m guessing that no one who wants to run in 2016 will get into this arena. But there are a few opportunists who may see their chance in this current chaos. I bet that someone we can’t even imagine is out there right now with a phone in his ear, calling buddies and CEOs to sound them out.
As for the Tea Party, most of them are not fixed ideologues; they are Obama haters and will support the most electable man or woman in the field, specifically a deficit hawk who will not be brought down in the general election based on his or her views on Medicare.
--
Bin Laden’s Secret Gay Love!
Let’s go see if anything remotely interesting has developed in GLBT news over the last three hours. I’ll be right back.
Nothing new, but when I scrolled back in my email records, I discovered a salacious clip from blogactivist Michael Petrelis, who shared with us his copy of The Globe, and its revelations about Osama Bin Laden’s gay sex life!
Michael, we all thank you for letting us end this column with a bang rather than a whisper. And how on earth did I miss the May 30 tabloid, with its cover headline: “Government Insider Reveals: Bin Laden’s Secret Gay Life!”
According to the snippets on Michael’s blog, Petrelis Files, Bin Laden fell in love with that courier guy back when they were hiding out from American forces in caves. The two lovers stayed together for the next ten years (unnamed CIA sources suspected) and of course we know that the courier died defending the scruffy terrorist against Navy Seals.
It’s unclear how Bin Laden also managed to have five wives and at least twenty children, but other Globe sources speculated that the mass murderer might have been attempting to cover up his shameful secret.
Look, many of us tried to appear straight back before summoning the courage to come out of the closet. But five wives and twenty kids? That’s quite the cover. Still, we might expect an elaborate charade from such a devious villain, n’est-ce pas?
Bin Laden’s (alleged) sexual orientation was (reportedly) known by government insiders as far back as the 1980s, when Bin Laden and his cronies were fighting the USSR in Afghanistan (with our help). An “aide” in the Reagan Administration recalled having dinner with the young freedom fighter in Houston back in 1987.
Clean cut, in khakis and a polo sweater, Bin Laden was negotiating for some Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. At the table, the mystery aide said Bin Laden’s leg touched his own a few times, leading him to suspect that the man was making a pass. His suspicions were confirmed when Bin Laden licked his lips and fluttered his eyelashes. (!)
The aide did not succumb to Bin Laden’s charms. But he did give Bin Laden cab fare to hit a bar that Bin Laden called “Ripcord.” Indeed, Michael confirms that The Ripcord Club has been a favorite Houston leather bar for the last 25 years.
Hey. I’m convinced! Although I prefer the heroes be gay and the evildoers be straight. I really wish that one or more of those Navy Seals were gay and would come out of the closet. That might shut up a few House conservatives, don’t you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment