Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2009 January
2008 December
2008 November
2008 October
2008 September
2008 August
2008 February
2008 January
2007 December
2007 April
2006 September
2006 August
2006 June
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 February
2006 January
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 September
2005 August
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 February
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| L Word Shocker Isn't Really a Shocker |
| 02.28.05 (1:01 pm) [edit] |
 Episode 2, Season 2:
I almost fell out of my chair laughing when viewers learned in episode 2 of The L Word's second season that Marina's father was really her hubby of 12 years. Dear lord. WHAT exactly is The L Word up to? That was just almost too predictable. Ya never know about these "lesbians" who are married to men.
Tina got a lawyer, thanks to Alice making the suggestion. It became apparent that Alice is a bit jaded because she was dumped by Bette after a very brief fling. Ouch! And of course, Alice is being pretty judgemental of Bette's behavior while she simultaneously chases another woman's fiancee. Alice seems to be pretty jealous of Bette and appears to relish in Bette's misery.
But Shane is on to Alice, and mentions that she knows something is going on between Alice and Dana. Alice, of course, freaks and asks Shane if anyone else knows. That's right, bitch! Now you can't point your finger at Bette 'cuz someone knows your dirty little secret. Wouldn't that be just the way these girls would behave?
Sandra Bernhard was a true treat on this episode! I loved the way she made Jenny slink away like the loser she is. Bravo!
View the L Word's cast of characters.
| Link to this post | | Filed: The L Word
|
|
|
| |
| Props to Fellow Potty Mouth Chris Rock |
| 02.27.05 (9:01 pm) [edit] |
Reports are stating comedian Chris Rock literally rocked this year's Oscars. I'm sure it was a huge surprise to many who expected him to fall on his face because they can't stand his profanity-laced stand-up comedy. Rock even received a standing ovation from the star-studded audience, before he ever got started.
Congrats to a fellow potty mouth who says it the way he wants -- when he wants -- and offers no apologies.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| You Read a Map Like a Girl |
| 02.27.05 (8:36 pm) [edit] |
An article in Indo-Asian news reports:
London, Feb 28 (IANS) Gay men use the same strategies for navigating as women, using landmarks to find their way around, a new study suggests.
But they also use strategies typically used by straight men, such as using compass directions and distances, reported New Scientist magazine quoting a University of East London study on 80 heterosexual and homosexual men and women.
In contrast, gay women read maps just like straight women.
Ok, I noticed bisexuals and transgendered people weren't mentioned. So, who wants to label this article with some kind of word that ends in "phobia" first. Ha!
Seriously though, I thought this was an interesting article, although a bit odd. Now someone is studying how gays and lesbians read maps?
I need to decide the best person to take with me on a camping trip -- a gay man, a straight man, or a lesbian? That sounds like the beginning of a really bad joke.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Vanessa Williams Talks About Her Gay Fans |
| 02.27.05 (3:58 pm) [edit] |
 A recent press release offers a brief interview with pop diva and Broadway star, Vanessa Williams:
Q: What do you think it is about your music that appeals to gay people?
A: I think that my gift as a performer and what probably works for me as a singer when I record is that I can use my acting ability to be a storyteller. I think that “Save the Best for Last” did well not only because it was a well-written song and was very sentimental, but people could hear me smile while I was singing, they could connect with the wistfulness and the longing, which as a singer all comes from being able to do my acting homework. It’s more than vocal acrobatics or how long I can hold the note. I try to make it as intimate as possible. When you tell a story, and you make people feel, that’s what works for me.
Q: How do you feel about gay marriage?
A: I have no problem with it. I completely support it. I have many gay friends that are married. Close male friends of mine have been living together as a couple for over 20 years, and they have adopted a beautiful baby girl who is now 3-years-old. They are fantastic parents. Other gay couples I know are also looking to adopt and are trying to find the right combination. And then I have single gay friends who are adoptive parents.
Of course, the interviewer goes on to ask Ms. Williams how she would respond if one of her children came out as gay, and if she would ever play the role of a lesbian. Her answers aren't a surprise at all.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| Family Evolutions on L Word Starting in February |
| 02.27.05 (2:07 pm) [edit] |
 I'd almost forgotten I was on the mailing list for Family Evolutions, an e-commerce website that offers clothing and accessories for alternative families. In the email I received today, FE announced The L Word would soon feature products from the FE line.
Former lesbian couple Bette (played by Jennifer Beals) and Tina (played by Laurel Holloman) are having a baby -- only Bette doesn't know that yet. Items from FE's baby line will appear on The L Word starting with the February 27th episode. Hopefully, this will be the same episode where Bette learns she's going to be a Mommy.
I like the FE products, for the most part, but I am a bit disturbed by the "My Daddy's name is Donor" bib. I think that's a bit over the top since it involves a child. Now, I know at least one of my readers wouldn't consider my opinion very progressive (and I really don't give a damn). But, that bib is nothing more than a political statement using a child as the medium. To me, that's not cool people. That's like hanging a sign around a child's neck that says, "My Mommy doesn't know who my Daddy is" and sending that child off to school. It also reminds me of the 5 year old who sits on her Dad's shoulder, proudly waving the American flag to show her patriotism and she probably can't even spell America or patriotism.
On a good note: congratulations to FE on a job well done for alternative families everywhere.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Women's Issues
|
|
|
| |
| How the Christian Right Responded to Jeff Gannon |
| 02.26.05 (8:40 pm) [edit] |
They haven't responded.
I find it quite curious indeed; however, Bill Berkowitz says it so much better than I could:
They were livid over SpongeBob Square Pants' participation in a video advocating tolerance, and fuming about Buster the Bunny's visit to a lesbian household. So where's the outrage from the Christian right over the Jeff Gannon Affair? Despite a chunk of time having passed since the Gannon Affair was first uncovered, Christian right organizations are still cloaked in silence. As of February 24, there wasn't any news about the Gannon Affair available on the Web sites of Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, or the Traditional Values Coalition. As best as I could determine, no special alerts about the Gannon Affair have been issued; and no campaigns have been launched to get to the bottom of the matter.
Berkowitz contacted Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family, The Family Research Council, The Traditional Values Coalition, The Free Congress Foundation, the editors of Town Hall, and American Family Association. None of those organizations have made one statement whatsoever about the supposed conservative anti-gay homosexual pimp who owned gay websites and was infamous for tossing out open-ended questions to GW during press conferences. Not one!
Check out Berkowitz's article. It's a good read.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Religion
|
|
|
| |
| Sharon Stone to Play Dyke in Basic Instinct 2 |
| 02.26.05 (4:43 pm) [edit] |
 Sharon Stone must realize the power of playin' a dyke on TV, particularly since it's so faddish these days. The latest reports say Basic Instinct 2 will contain lesbian love. Ooooh. I can hardly wait to run out and see it. I'll be the first in line on opening night. Pfft.
Apparently Stone's character admitted she had 2 lesbian relationships in the first movie. I don't remember that, obviously, because I didn't give a crap. I'm not even sure why they were called "lesbian relationships" because Stone's character isn't a lesbian. But who am I to decide what to call things? Nobody asked me.
She's become a lesbian icon of sorts since she starred opposite Ellen DeGeneres in "If These Walls Could Talk." So, ladies, pay your $12 and go watch Stone play dyke. Send me a synopsis (very brief, please) after you've seen it, will ya?
I noticed in her interview she hinted that she might be interested in a "lesbian relationship" in real life: "When Bush asks if Stone, 46, would welcome life imitating art, Stone replies, "Why not? Middle age is an open-minded period." Can we say, "playing to your audience"? Stone isn't any more interested in a relationship with a woman than Angelina Jolie or Ani DiFranco.
Additional Story:
STONE LOVES PICKING LESBIAN LOVER
| Link to this post | | Filed: Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| Lesbian in Tux Banned from Yearbook |
| 02.26.05 (4:19 pm) [edit] |
And they call us loonies?
A FL lesbian teenager who is openly gay and dressed in a tux was banned from her high school yearbook.
The county school board and its superintendent backed the decision, which was debated at a School Board meeting attended by about 200 people.
What a waste of taxpayer money. The school board claims it's not an issue of sexual orientation, but rather an issue of dress code. The lesbian teen was not supposed to be dressed in men's attire. There is no written dress code for school pictures, so I'm not sure how this teenager violated a dress code that doesn't exist.
And this folks, is what the right thinks they can do since their boy is back in the White House. Who was that teenager hurting by wearing that tuxedo? Not a single soul.
More on the issue:
Lesbian's picture in tux banned from Florida high school yearbook
Lesbian can't wear tuxedo in yearbook
US: Lesbian's Picture in Tux Banned From Clay County School Yearbook (in an Indian newspaper -- geez!)
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Pro-Choice Even if She's Aborting a Gay Baby? |
| 02.26.05 (3:58 pm) [edit] |
It's kinda scarey to see this topic, particularly since SistersTalk reader Alena (I think) mentioned awhile back that she wondered if women would abort babies if genetic testing pre-birth indicated the child was gay. It was my opinion that pro-lifers would have no part of that, although many pro-lifers are also anti-gay folks. A child is a precious life, yes, even if it's a gay child. I imagine that would be the pro-lifer's stance. If it's not, it would be the biggest show of hypocrisy this world has ever seen.
So, obviously someone else is thinking the same thing I'm thinking: that women and couples would be so bothered to learn that their little Johnny may be a flaming homosexual that women may want to abort the child. State Rep. Brian Duprey has filed a bill that would forbid women from ending a pregnancy based on the projected sexual orientation of a fetus. Let's see how long it takes to see that bill passed, shall we?
For all the pro-choice advocates out there (I am one of them), do you still think a woman has the right to choose to abort a child -- even if the only reason she's doing it is because the child is gay? Will we still support a woman's right to choose if we learn she wants to abort just because the child is gay?
We support a woman's right to choose for so many reasons: economics, her health, or just to be supportive of her right to choose, even if we don't agree with abortion itself (that would be me). So, to say, "wait, I don't support your right to choose if the only reason you're doing it is because you learned the child is gay" is a bit hypocritical. At least it is to me.
I can see so many LGBT groups, particularly those that are women-focused and pro-choice, being really torn with this issue. And really, I can see many of them being extremely hypocritical about it also. I see these same pro-choice groups being up in arms that a woman would want to abort a gay child. But why? Are you supporting her right to choose or not? Does that support come with conditions? I see groups like the HRC (lord bless their little hearts) issuing a bold statement (in the form of yet another press release) vehemently opposing a woman's right to abort a gay child. Nevermind the millions of babies (sexual orientation unknown) that have already been aborted. Where was the opposition then?
It would be amazing to see a religious group standing on the side of the road with anti-abortion signs that say, "Life is Precious, Even Gay Life." Will we see that?
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues, Women's Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Deceptive Conception Not Immaculate Conception |
| 02.25.05 (10:08 pm) [edit] |
All I could do was laugh when I read this article because it was just so unbelievable. I felt like I was reading a really bad soap opera story line.
A brief synopsis:
The story involves two doctors in Chicago. A male doctor alleges a female doctor stole his sperm and impregnated herself. The female says the child was conceived in the usual fashion. The male says he and the woman engaged only in oral sex; therefore, the only way the child could be his is if the woman used his sperm to get herself pregnant without his knowledge. There's an issue of child support in the story somewhere and there's a husband in the story too. Hers, not his. Ha!
Deceptive conception alleged by dad's suit
I'm tying to figure out why this woman would deceive this man into getting her pregnant -- unless she's got a few screws loose. I know for a fact there are many, many men in Chicago -- many of whom are straight and would get her pregnant (knowingly or unknowingly) the old fashioned way. Her husband could have gotten her pregnant just as easily also.
Thanks to SistersTalk reader Leanne for the tip.
| Link to this post | | Filed: General
|
|
|
| |
| Discussing Terri Schiavo From the Left |
| 02.24.05 (1:49 pm) [edit] |
I received an email from a woman who asked that I mention Terri Schiavo on SistersTalk. She said, "If there's anyone who talks about what they want to when they want to, it's you."
I have talked about Terri on SistersTalk before, but it was from a different perspective. I was not taking a side on the issue. I was, instead, speaking to the "sanctity of marriage" issue. Terri Schiavo and her husband Michael meet the right's definition of marriage: one woman, one man. Their marriage is sacred, according to the right. It should be honored. After all, that's what all the fuss is about, right? Protecting the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. Michael should be allowed to provide for his one wife the way he sees fit and we, as a nation, should be honoring that one man one woman marriage and allowing him to do just that.
But, is the marriage really sacred? Michael is living with another woman and he has children with another woman. That's no sacred marriage just because one man is married to one woman. Michael has moved on with his life, yet he still has guardianship over Terri. Michael has moved on with his life, yet he still has the right to decide if Terri lives or dies. That is the problem with how we define marriage in this country. If anything, Michael's wife is really the woman he lives with and sleeps next to every night. His wife is really the woman he's been raising children with for years. His wife is not Terri Schiavo. Michael Schiavo has no right to decide if Terri lives or dies.
I would not want to live the way Terri lives. For me, it would be the worst way to live. It's unfortunate Terri did not leave written instructions. It's even worse that she's being bounced back and forth between the state, her parents, and her spouse like a tennis ball. I would hope that everyone would give the woman some peace.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Religion
|
|
|
| |
| MA to Hear Suit Challenging Out-of-State Marriage Ban |
| 02.24.05 (12:38 pm) [edit] |
The state of Massachusetts has agreed to hear a suit that challenges the 1913 law that bars couples from marrying in MA if it would be illegal in their home state. I'm wondering if that law was originally designed to keep interracial couples from marrying in MA then returning to states like Alabama where interracial marriage was illegal for quite some time.
Same-sex couples are challenging the 1913 law for obvious reasons. MA is the first state, and the only state at this time, to allow same-sex couples to legally marry.
[b]More on the issue:[/b]
Mass. Top Court to Hear Gay Marriage Case
SJC will hear challenge to 1913 marriage law
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| $200 Million to Replace Gays in the Military |
| 02.24.05 (12:20 pm) [edit] |
I apologize for neglecting SistersTalk. Lots of school work to catch up on.
Perhaps now that the government can make the correlation between stupid homophobic laws and the federal budget, we may see some changes around these here parts.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) has cost taxpayers $200 million since its inception. I bet there are some religious right folks goin' "and it was damn worth it, too!" It seems pretty obvious to those of us who have ever worked with employees (particulary recruiting, staffing, and developing long-term strategic staffing plans) that it costs an organization a lot of money to hire new people. Seems the military is just figuring that out. It only took them 12 years.
[b]More on the subject: [/b]
Study tallies cost of gay policy in U.S. military
Rules on Gays Exact a Cost in Recruiting, a Study Finds
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| L Word Offers Snapshot of Jaded Lesbian Mommy |
| 02.22.05 (7:56 am) [edit] |
 L Word's episode 2 offered a view of how one lesbian mommy behaves when she learns her partner has had an affair.
Tina, pictured in the photo, is the as of now former partner to Jennifer Beals' character Bette. Bette had an affair with "the carpenter," as Bette's clique keeps calling her. To punish Bette for her infidelity, Tina won't tell Bette she's pregnant with the child they worked so hard to conceive. Originially, Tina kept her pregnancy a secret to protect Bette because of her previous miscarriage. It's obvious now she's doing it just to punish Bette.
We've seen this kind of bad form in lesbian mommy behavior in the news a lot lately:
Gay Adoption Inching Toward Supreme Court
It's nice to see the show's producers aren't making lesbian mommies out to be nurturing creatures who are without flaws. As a matter of fact, Tina's character reminds me of daytime soaps and how jaded pregnant women responded when they learned their men cheated on them. Remember your favorite character having her baby and the father not learning the child was his until the kid was in preschool -- or even college?
| Link to this post | | Filed: The L Word
|
|
|
| |
| Religious Right Targets Shrek |
| 02.21.05 (7:09 pm) [edit] |
I get so many neo-cons passing through this blog telling me they're sick of listening to me talk about gay marriage and other gay issues that I'm starting to think there's a parrot perched in my hard drive. But I keep talking about it because I keep reading reports like these:
Now, I'm wondering what rock these fools have been living under. Did they not watch cartoons as a child? If they did, they should be able to recall Bugs Bunny dressing in drag and luring Elmer Fudd into her seductive web of perversion just moments after Elmer tried to kill her. The two of them had an almost sadistic sexual tension between them. Hell, I remember the two of them making it to the alter more than once while Bugs was in drag. Can we say gay marriage on a children's cartoon? Even back then!
The difference? Gays and lesbians have more political strength today. We communicate with each other more. We react to news faster. We have the power of the internet to help us pass information quickly and easily. It scares the hell out of them. If Bugs Bunny were running around in drag today, fooling Elmer into marrying him, the religious wrong would have a fit -- when they didn't give a fuck before because they assumed they would always have the upper hand.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| The Simpsons Take on Gay Marriage |
| 02.21.05 (11:31 am) [edit] |
 Homer Simpson jumps into the gay marriage debate. Marge's sister came out as gay and Homer Simpson became an ordained minister so he could marry same-sex couples. Not too big of a surprise on the Simpsons.
Roberta Knight of Concerned Women for America said television was becoming obsessed with homosexuality. I would agree. Thanks to GW and his push to criminalize same-sex marriage. When GW took to national television and made a call to Americans to protect the sanctity of heterosexual marriages, he began the process of dividing Americans. He began the process of dividing Americans in order to protect an entity even heterosexuals show little respect for: note the 50% divorce rate and the millions of bastard children in America.
So yes, television is obsessed with homosexuality, but mostly the television Ms. Knight doesn't like is obsessed with exposing the right's blatant hypocrisy. Perhaps that is what bothers Ms. Knight.
What others are saying:
`Simpsons' wades into gay unions
Gay "Simpsons" sis comes out of animated closet
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT
|
|
|
| |
| Death Threats from the Anti-Gay Crowd |
| 02.19.05 (5:45 pm) [edit] |
I just don't know what to say about some of those anti-gay people:
As of this weekend, Famous Players, Canada's largest movie chain, will no longer run any "issue-driven advertising" in its 79 theatres after pre-film ads it's been carrying in support of same-sex marriage prompted a boycott of its theatres by opposing groups. "We were starting to get e-mails that were threatening to our staff," Nuria Bronfman, the Toronto-based vice-president of corporate affairs for Famous Players, said yesterday. The man who placed the ad, another Famous Players executive, said yesterday he'd received death threats. Also, "the phone calls were starting to get abusive," explained Ms. Bronfman, "so we thought it's not fair for our staff to have to go through that sort of thing." Famous Players drops same-sex advertisements
Now, umm. . . who said the conservatives were good people who didn't do naughty things or say naughty things? WHO was that? Seems a death threat is a really naughty thing.
In Canada, we have the homophobes threatening to cause death. In the US, we have the Bush Administration threatening to cut off funds to a suicide prevention program for the LGBT community because the program uses the words "gay", "lesbian", bisexual" and "transgender." But the liberals are the loonies around here? Marriage is THAT important of an issue the anti-gay marriage folks are willing to threaten people with death? You have GOT to be kidding me. Some of these people need some serious psychological help.
Thanks to SistersTalk reader Leanne for the tip.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Could They Be Bigger Jackasses? |
| 02.18.05 (11:33 am) [edit] |
In keeping with my usual style of potty-mouth language ('cuz I could give a rat's ass about the conservatives who keep returning time and time again to read it just so they can bitch about it), could the Bush administration be bigger jackasses?
(Washington) The Bush administration has backed down on a call for an LGBT suicide conference to remove the words "gay," "lesbian," "bisexual" and "transgender" from its material. Charles Curie, Administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, now says that it is permissible for groups that receive money from the agency to use the terms "Gay", "Lesbian", "Bisexual" and "Transgender" in the titles of SAMHSA-sponsored public events. On Wednesday 365Gay.com reported that SAMHSA, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, had issued a veiled threat to organizers of the conference to be held in Portland, Oregon on February 28, that the use of LGBT terms could result in its funding being pulled. HHS Backs Down On Gay Funding Threats
Now, this kind of behavior by our grown-up elected officials offends me. But wait, the left should be less offensive with our foul-mouth rants on our blogs, yes? The left should think about who we are offending when we use swear words to complain about this kind of fucked up behavior, yes? We should speak softly and carry a huge ass fuckin' stick, while the right does whatever the hell they want.
Fat chance. At least not from this corner of the left.
Here we have GW and the rest of the right (which is really dead wrong) threatening to remove funding from an organization that works to prevent suicide. Why? Because the words "Gay", "Lesbian", "Bisexual" and "Transgender" are used in the title. Not because the organization was swindling the money. Not because the organization was buying drugs with the money. I wonder how GW's 1 million gay Republican supporters feel about that. Maybe we should ask them.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Melissa Etheridge Represents Lesbians With Breast Cancer |
| 02.18.05 (9:01 am) [edit] |
 An article about Melissa Etheridge's recent appearance at the Grammys reads in part:
In the flash of a paparazzo's camera, Melissa and her partner, Tammy Lynn Michaels, accomplished what lesbian health activists have been trying to do for decades: get the mainstream media to say the words "lesbian" and "cancer" in the same sentence, and get lesbians to focus on an issue of tremendous importance to their health and well being.
Since the Grammy Awards, my e-mail box has been filled with messages from women for whom, as one wrote, "Melissa just opened a huge closet door" in their lives. The comments ranged from deeply poignant ("I just wish Linda could have been here to see it with me. She loved Melissa so much") to fiercely empowered ("I'm not wearing my wig to work today -- bald is beautiful!") Even more wonderful was the number of calls and e-mail messages asking for information about cancer, or asking for referrals to lesbian-friendly doctors or asking how they could help lesbians with cancer. All because Melissa Etheridge had the courage to say, "Yes, I am." Yes, she is a lesbian. And, yes, she is a lesbian with cancer.
I can say I'm a Melissa Etheridge fan, but a new one. I'd say the SKIN album won me over. All her music before that just struck me as obsessive-love-get-thee-s ome-therapy music. I've enjoyed learning more about Melissa in the past few years and I can say I was touched by the news that she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Melissa is but one woman with breast cancer of millions, so let's not forget that. I'm sure she wouldn't want us to forget that.
What I'm disturbed about is the representation we're placing in Melissa's hands -- particularly with such a serious issue. The author of this piece stated that Melissa accomplished something that lesbian health activists haven't been able to accomplish for decades. My best friend is 47 years old. She's had the same family doctor since she was 18. He is not aware that she is a lesbian. Why is that?
The author of this piece also noted she received many emails and phone calls from women looking for lesbian-friendly doctors. Why are lesbians just feeling comfortable enough to seek out lesbian-friendly doctors? What did these lesbian health activists do all these decades? Attempt to win over mainstream media? Or attempt to get lesbians to seek out lesbian-friendly doctors? Well, it wasn't the latter, because the author specifically stated these activists have been attempting to win over mainstream media. My best friend has never even heard of any lesbian health organizations. The same is true of most of the lesbians she associates with. Somewhere along the way, the media got more attention from these lesbian health activists than the lesbians did.
In addition, lesbian activist movements tend to be very much academia-centered. Many lesbians who are not a part of the academic scene miss so much important information.
So, that is why Melissa Etheridge has been able to accomplish so much with the "flash of a paparazzo's camera." Her image spoke something loud and clear to lesbians who have needed something so badly for decades. Her image said, "you need to do something 'cuz these activists ain't doin' it for ya." It's been decades.
So, in hindsight, I don't see this as Melissa Etheridge representing lesbians with breast cancer. I see her as showing those women how to represent themselves.
Image: Getty (captured from PlanetOut.com)
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues, Women's Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Judge Rules Religious Group Can't Post Anti-Gay Flyers At Work |
| 02.17.05 (9:33 am) [edit] |
A brief item in the American Thinker discusses a judge who ruled a group that posted an item promoting "the natural family" to the City of Oakland's bulletin board could not do so; however gay and lesbian groups could continue to post items to the same bulletin board. The American Thinker feels this embodies a form of viewpoint discimination.
In the article the American Thinker points to, it mentions that two city employees planned to form a religious club that promoted the formation of natural families. This club bothered a city employee and thus the flyer was removed. The reason is the flyer created a hostile workplace:
The flyer, posted on a workplace bulletin board in January 2003, urged readers to "preserve our workplace with integrity'' and called the group a forum for "people of faith'' to express their views "with respect for the natural family, marriage and family values.''
I noticed The American Thinker did not mention that the flyer violated anti-discrimination laws that protect gays and lesbians in the workplace. The flyer spoke directly to city employees and meant to involve the workplace in a religious battle between homosexuals and the church. That is unacceptable in a working environment. Creating workplace drama is ridiculous and only something a small person would do.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Religion, LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| GW Names His Daddy's Former Partner-in-Crime as Intelligence Director |
| 02.17.05 (8:47 am) [edit] |
 This is one TV mini-series I can't wait to see. Amazing the things our government has been doing, and apparently repeating, for quite some time now.
The latest reports announce that GW has named his Daddy's former partner in crime, John Negroponte, the first National Intelligence Director.
Well, if GW wants someone he and his family can trust, Negroponte is the man for the job. The rest of us are up shit creek.
I am still trying to figure out how 51% of the country got to be so damn stupid. Oh yeah, it was that gay issue and those family values. Nevermind the fact that those bankrolled by the GW administration consist of gay pimps who own porn websites, Black conservative commentators who lie to the country, and political figures who cover up illegal weapons deals. Average citizens have to have values, but politicians don't. I see . . .
I saw an ad for a conservative gay website that said something like "ravishing the left and enjoying every minue of it." Honey, I wouldn't brag about that if I was you. You're pimpin' your shit like a $2 ho'. On your knees, bitch!
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| PBS Executive to Resign |
| 02.17.05 (3:39 am) [edit] |
 Pat Mitchell, the PBS President who gave the OK for the "Postcards from Buster" episode that featured a lesbian couple on the way to Vermont, has announced she will resign when her contract ends in 2006. And ya know what? I don't blame her. She can do so much better someplace else.
At a time when PBS is facing significant fundraising challenges, as it was before Mitchell took over, it was a good idea to reach out to new demographics. It sure doesn't seem like the government will be dumping loads of cash in PBS's bank account since we're spending $81.9B on Iraq.
Lesbian mothers and gay fathers (whose kids watch educational television) exist. It's a shame there are so many people in the United States who want to pretend that isn't true.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics, LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Anti-Gay Adoption Ban Killed in Virgina |
| 02.17.05 (3:17 am) [edit] |
A heated debate transpired between Democrats and Republicans in Virginia regarding the suitability of gays and lesbians for adoption purposes. It was nice to see the issue wasn't a party issue, but instead an issue that got to the heart of each individual's feelings about homosexuals.
Black listed a string of reasons why he thinks gays and lesbians are unfit to adopt children, including a supposed high rate of suicide, drug use, child abuse and depression.
"It is my belief that homosexuality presents a degree of risk. We want an adoptive child in the place where they have the best chance to flourish," Black said.
Sen. Janet Howell, D-Fairfax, pounced.
Are you saying depressed people shouldn't be allowed to adopt? she asked.
"Yes," Black responded.
Do you know how many straight people are clinically depressed?
"I would imagine lots," he responded.
Sen. Thomas K. Norment Jr., R-James City, said he has handled thousands of adoption cases as a lawyer and has never seen a child placed with an adult who wasn't recommended as able to provide a secure, loving environment, regardless of sexual orientation. As a result, he said, the bill wasn't needed.
The anti-gay adoption bill was killed and the Conservative religious right was angry. They were most angry the Senators did not record their votes individually.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Jennifer Beals Returns with The L Word |
| 02.17.05 (2:43 am) [edit] |
 Why does it seem she gets more beautiful as she ages?
MSNBC reports Jennifer Beals will return with The L Word this season, but her relationship with her onscreen long-term partner Tina will have a few problems. No big surprise there. It's a dramatic TV series about lesbians.
Beals had a few things to say about gay marriage:
“I’m always shocked that gay marriage is such a big deal,” says Beals over coffee in a Lower East Side patisserie she loves visiting when she’s in town. “You have to realize how precious human life is, when there are tsunamis and mudslides, when there are armies and terrorists — at any moment, you could be gone, and potentially in the most brutal fashion.
“And then you have to realize that love is truly one of the most extraordinary things you can experience in your life. To begrudge someone else their love of another person because of gender seems to me absolutely absurd.
“It’s based in fear, fear of the other, fear of what is not like you,” she says.
Anyway, I'm still looking forward to watching The L Word this season although I hate my local cable company.
More L Word News: Sarah Shahi, a former Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader, Now L Word Cast Member
| Link to this post | | Filed: Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| George Michael Discusses 1998 Arrest -- Again |
| 02.17.05 (2:18 am) [edit] |
 Yahoo! News reports that George Michael's new 100-minute docummentary discusses that infamous arrest in 1998 that forced him out the proverbial closet.
I'm not sure what the big deal is about this particular discussion of George Michael's public bathroom activities. Michael has already discussed this issue with Oprah Winfrey on public television.
Ya know, George Michael really is one handsome man. Geezus.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues, Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| Chris Rock Suggests Gays Watch the Oscars |
| 02.16.05 (8:28 pm) [edit] |
 As I read this article, I wondered, "who the fuck wrote this article?" It wasn't until I got to the bottom and saw "those liberals" that I started questioning the source. In addition, this writer's work is published on Alan Keyes' website quite often. So, umm. . . yeah.
Isaiah Z. Sterrett, a Conservative commentator, suggests Chris Rock is a homophobe because he says things like "fuck those faggots" when he mocks GW. As if Isaiah gives a rat's ass about what Chris Rock says about faggots. I guess that makes me a homophobe too because I call GW's gay Republican supporters "GW whores." Being a Republican isn't necssarily a bad thing (I hear ya'll snickerin'. It's not.). But supporting that Republican after he did everything in his power to fuck the homos in the ass to win an election . . . oh wait. Nevermind. I see, said the blind man.
Gay.com had nothing else to write about, so they jumped on a comment Chris Rock made to Entertainment Weekly. He said, "Come on, it's a fashion show," he told the magazine. "What straight black man sits there and watches the Oscars? Show me one." The readers there jumped on that bit and are now saying Chris Rock said only gay men watch the Oscars. That's not what he said. He said straight Black men don't watch the Oscars. And, he has a point.
Why did the Oscars hire Chris Rock? To increase its viewership among Black men and Black viewers in general because statistics show the buying power among Black Americans has increased tremendously in the past 5 years. I'm guessing we'll see several commercials with darker faces during this year's Oscar run. Note the P. Diddy Superbowl commercial this year. With the big fuss everyone is making about Chris Rock's comments, I wonder what the Black viewership will be. Obviously, gays won't turn away just because Chris Rock is hosting it. Gays don't stop supporting GW, I hardly see them shunning the Oscars. And yes, I did suggest state that homosexuals watch the Oscars. Guess that makes me a homophobe too.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Reader Appalled that Lesbian is Feature Article |
| 02.15.05 (1:55 pm) [edit] |
While doing my usual afternoon newsfeed reading, I happened upon a letter to the editor from a reader named Ethel Hamm. Ethel was angry the editors had used a story about a local lesbian woman who had lost her partner as its feature story. Ethel wrote, in part:
Dear Editor:
I was appalled when I picked up the Sunday morning Advocate on Feb. 6 and read the front-page headlines. The Advocate had chosen a story about lesbians as its feature story. With so many things going on in the world today that affect so many more people than a story on lesbians, how can the Advocate justify this coverage? Why is anyone surprised that our moral values have taken such a downward spiral? It seems that we are willing to accept the "anything goes" idea today.
So, I took a look through the website's archives to learn of the "more important things in the world" that Ethel spoke of. Obviously there were many things published in this publication that did not bother Ethel, that Ethel felt was much more important than the lesbians. I am guessing this is the case because Ethel did not write and complain about those items.
Here's a random sample of news headlines I found:
Danville mulls need for new police station
People: Brandi Carpenter, 23-year-old at nerve center of Boyle bus system
DHS forensics team wins regional title
Net Xpress: 'Funny money' from meal kits can teach kids about finances
Bill would stop winery from selling beer
Illness closes Lincoln schools
Danville couple spend retirement building Habitat homes
Wickliffe resigns as chairman of Mercer park board
Perryville named Preserve America community
Junction City considers taking Railroad Days back
Corner Inn gets dancing permit
Lincoln will limit multiple driveways on major roads
Drug dog visits Garrard school board meeting
Pet of the Week
All those stories look so much more important than the lesbians. Yep.
This isn't about what story is more important. The newspaper was attempting to provide a diverse mixture of news and information because the editors realize the local community consists of diverse people. Ethel there could care less about that. Why should Ethel care about diversity when we have GW and his GOP soldiers attempting to make everybody a little Republican mini-me?
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Anti-Gay Campaigns Launched in 19 More States |
| 02.15.05 (12:49 pm) [edit] |
Ok, so ya know what that means, right? It means I won't be shuttin' the hell up anytime soon.
A recent report states petition drives in 19 states have been launched to ban gay marriages -- FL is one of them. After 11 states successfully passed gay bans in the 2004 election, conservatives and religious fanatics in 19 other states decided they would attempt to do the same thing in their states.
So, it seems the people who keep pushing the issue here is not the homosexuals, but instead those who don't want to see homosexuals have the right to marry.
Personally, I think gay couples should be taking this issue to the Supreme Court. It's the same court that slapped Texas and its ancient sodomy laws right in the face. Obviously the House of Representatives isn't certain the government can win the issue at the Supreme Court level or they wouldn't be attempting to keep gay couples from challenging the issue with their fucked up unconstitutional Marriage Protection Act -- an act that states (simply put) a citizen cannot challenge state gay marriage bans at the Supreme Court level. That's like passing a law that says no one can ever challenge Roe vs. Wade. I wonder how the Christians would feel if an Abortion Protection Act was passed and they didn't have the right to challenge abortions.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| What's John Kerry Up To? |
| 02.15.05 (12:31 pm) [edit] |
Kerry Backs Bush's $81.9 Bln War Spending Plan:
"I think we're in a very different situation," Kerry told reporters. "I'm going to vote for this ... I think this money is important to our being successful and to the completion of the process."
Uh. . . yeah. Another $81.9 billion. Ain't this just grand? GW is the man with the plan.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Fuck the Whiney Ass Conservatives |
| 02.15.05 (7:39 am) [edit] |
They're the first ones to tell us to stop whining and get over it when we doth protest too much. But, let us chat more than they want us to about one of their own people's indiscretions and they bitch about us only doing it because it's a conservative who was caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar. Well, yes! Of course that's why we're doing it, ya jackasses. It's the same reason you people hammer away at the liberals -- because they're liberals. It's the same reason you people hammer away at progressives -- because we're progressives. So, fuck the whiney ass conservatives. Let's chat more about Jeff Gannon.
Seems Jeff Gannon, the conservative anti-gay White House staff writer, doesn't just own gay websites, he poses on those websites also. Americablog has some amazing photos to view.
Now, when the liberal and progressive bloggers couldn't stop chatting it up about Armstrong Williams, we heard the same whiney ass crap from the conservatives: "they're just doing this because it's a conservative." Oh yeah, and the conservatives bash Hillary Clinton because she's a . . . woman? A white woman? No! They do it because she's an extremely liberal Democrat.
I shall check the usual conservative spots in a few days to see how they handle this issue, particularly the self-righteous Barber -- especially since her disdain for homosexuals is so apparent. Her Sophomore year English rhetoric on the Armstong Williams issue was touching to say the least, but if you took that course, you could see clean through it. It shall be quite entertaining to see the anti-homosexual conservatives defending the supposed anti-gay conservative pimp who plastered nude pictures of himself on his gay websites. Quite entertaining indeed.
I don't think the GOP soldiers have a script to answer to this one, except "you liberals are so fuckin' brainwashed" or "you liberals are so stupid." or "Genia, you don't care at all about this issue, you just want to point out that conservatives are hypocritical." Pick one. All of them are overused.
[b]Update: February 15, 2005 2:22pm[/b]
The Conservative Voice offers no apologies for Gannon. In fact, he exposes Gannon's problems with the IRS.
Ya know, I wonder how the rest of the gay Republicans are dealing with this news. Are the male ones lookin' up Gannon's number? He is kinda cute.
[b]Update February 15, 2005 2:35 pm[/b]
Jeff is cute alright. He'll need those great looks where he might be headed. Who leaked Valerie Plame's name to Jeff Gannon?
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| 4 More Years Video by Dean Friedman |
| 02.14.05 (5:20 pm) [edit] |
The things people send me. In my email this evening is a video from Dean Friedman. Click the image to view the video:
 .
It may take a minute for the song to completely download, so be patient. Grab some snacks from the kitchen while you wait.
Oh, I forgot to mention. Take a look at the Prevention First Act ad to your left. If you agree with the initiative, please help NARAL by simply signing the petition.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Parental Obligations: Is College Tuition One of Them? |
| 02.14.05 (8:52 am) [edit] |
We've been talking about Maya Keyes in another thread. Her father disowned her and refuses to pay her college tuition. As a college educated woman who has found ways to pay my own college tuition and fees, both undergraduate and graduate degrees (see those ads to your left? they pay for books.), I don't necessarily feel it's a parent's obligation to pay for a child's college education.
While I don't agree with Alan Keyes refusing to talk to his daughter because she's a lesbian, I'm not singing any sad songs because he won't pay her college tuition. A solution to Maya's college woes? She can take some time off and work for awhile -- saving money for school, then going back. She may even have to go into debt to fund her college education. What? Is that shock I hear? Many parents go into debt financing their kids' education. Why can't the child wait a few years, enter college as a non-traditional age student, and finance some of his or her tuition? Who benefits from the college degree anyway? Certainly not the parents, unless bragging rights are a benefit.
I can agree with a parent helping a child fund her or his college education. That's what I plan to do with my two children because I really want to start the tradition of college in my family. I am a first generation college student. If I pay for my children to attend college, I will expect them to pay me back.
| Link to this post | | Filed: General
|
|
|
| |
| Spokane School District Cancels Gay Dance |
| 02.13.05 (9:35 pm) [edit] |
Last year, Ferris High School in Spokane, Washington had a gay and lesbian students dance in which the age restriction was 14 - 22. This year, the school was to have the same dance, but 24 hours before the dance the event was canceled.
District Superintendent Brian Benzel said the dance was canceled after the district learned guests who were 22 would be allowed to the event. He said the district only learned of this on Thursday. The event was scheduled for Friday.
Benzel claims the dance was canceled because security was not arranged for people who were 22 years old. Gay and lesbian students believe the dance was canceled because the district caved to pressures from conservatives in the area.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Melissa Etheridge Bald at the Grammys |
| 02.13.05 (8:48 pm) [edit] |
She didn't want to hide her battle with breast cancer, so rocker Melissa Etheridge appeared bald at the Grammys
She said, "I feel good, I finished chemo last month, I'm out, my hair's growing back. I'm feeling fine."
Update: February 14, 2005 10:55pm Photo Added
Melissa E and Joss Stone performing at the Grammys
| Link to this post | | Filed: Women's Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Alan Keyes Disowns Lesbian Daughter |
| 02.13.05 (7:43 pm) [edit] |
 This has been the subject of discussion on blogs since at least the end of January. The first I heard of it was on TCF's blog when a visitor mentioned in one of Bert's comment threads that Maya had been kicked out of her father's home and was looking for a place to live in Chicago. I see the story has made its way to mainstream media.
Washington Post writer Marc Fisher has picked up the story. It appears much of his story was lifted directly from Maya's blog.
In either case, Alan Keyes, a prominent, Black, conservative politician has booted Maya out of the house (as Maya has stated) because she's a lesbian. It's quite interesting this get-the-hell-out was timed for after the election.
I can honestly say my family could care less who or what I am. But then again, my family doesn't care what the world thinks of them. My family isn't all about putting on a show for the world and pretending to be better than everybody else while we hide our dirty little secrets from the world. My former in-laws were very much about pretending they were better than everybody else while they hid the fact that my mother in-law's father had sex with his own daughter. As long as they hid that fact, they could point the finger at me and judge my faults all day long. Those people still hide the fact that they have more gay people in their family than I have in mine. Yep, I know all about conservative families like those.
Thanks to Tari Akpodiete for the Washington Post article link and the Metafilter discussion link on the issue.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Fox News Bought Al-Jazeera Network |
| 02.13.05 (3:56 pm) [edit] |
Some of you may already know this if you read some of the "in" political blogs. Well, the "in" liberal blogs, 'cuz I'm sure the GOP bloggers didn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
Allegedly because of pressure from the Bush Administration, the Al-Jazeera network has been sold. Conservative Fox News was more than happy to purchase Al-Jazeera, claiming it will provide more fair-and-balanced reporting.
Immediately after 9/11, Condi Rice defended the United States on Al-Jazeera television. Even back then, the Bush Administration was exercising some control over the Al-Jazeera network. Please read the article for more details.
Thanks to SistersTalk reader Alena for the tip.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Shiite Muslims Are Victorious in Iraq |
| 02.13.05 (8:27 am) [edit] |
The results of Iraq's election are in. Iraq's majority Shiite Muslims won nearly half the votes in the election on January 30. Shiite Muslims have been Iraq's most oppressed group. Now, they have significant power in Iraq.
The Shiite-dominated ticket received more than 4 million votes, or about 48 percent of the total cast, Iraqi election officials said. A Kurdish alliance was second with 2.175 million votes, or 26 percent, and Allawi's [(the US hand-picked interim Prime Minister)] list was third with about 1.168 million, or 13.8 percent.
Does anyone, besides myself, think it's more than a coincidence that the candidate with the most ties to the United States came in third place? What a way to thank us, eh?
The parties have 3 days to make any complaints before the election results are considered official.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Mock Gay Weddings at High School Welcomed by Protestors |
| 02.12.05 (12:40 pm) [edit] |
 Eighteen high school students staged mock gay weddings on campus and were greeted by 50 protestors. The weddings were a part of National Freedom to Marry Day.
One woman -- Amy Drake, age 32 -- was angry because the students held the mock ceremonies on campus, although other students have held mock heterosexual weddings on campus. Wonder if Drake protested those. Drake said the mock gay weddings were creating emotions the students did not need to deal with. Mind you, Drake was one of the angry protestors. Personally, I think Drake and the other protestors were creating anger and fear the students did not need to deal with.
The school's superintendent, Greg Lundeen, said it was a student activity and the school district was staying out of it.
Although the students were shocked, and one student said he was afraid and threatened with violence, the mock weddings continued.
Congratulations to the young people who are full of courage.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Howard Dean Wins Bid for Chairman of DNC |
| 02.12.05 (12:11 pm) [edit] |
 Howard Dean has won his bid for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Dean promises to focus on state operations and energize the Democratic party's grass roots -- something that made Dean so popular during his presidential campaign.
Now that the Democratic party has progressive leadership, perhaps those of us who have hoped to see major changes within the party will see those changes begin to take shape. Will we see them in time for Election 2006?
Keep an eye on Bert over at TCF. If I recall correctly, Bert is a Dean supporter. I'm sure he will have a much better analysis of Dean's win very soon.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Marines Answer Don't Ask Don't Tell Questions to Recruit on Campus |
| 02.12.05 (10:34 am) [edit] |
Rev. Dr. Spyder X sent me an email that says:
I love your site! That probably says a lot coming from a straight male. Here is an article in my local paper about recruiters and Middlebury College that I thought you might like. [Marine recruiter explains 'don't ask, don't tell' to college]. If I was there I would have stood up and said that I was gay and so was everybody else at this school! Oops, sorry! I guess you can't recruit any of us now!!
Thank you, Spyder, for pointing me to that article.
It's an interesting compromise Middlebury College has reached with local military recruiters. Is it fair? Absolutely not. But, the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy isn't fair either. If local military recruiters wish to use Middlebury's facilities for recruitment purposes, they must attend a question and answer session about the DADT policy. It's unfair to hold one military person accountable for a policy that person had no say in drafting or implementing.
My exhusband was a Navy recruiter. If he were still a recruiter and his senior officer wanted to make sure he met his recruitment quota for the month, his senior officer would ensure that someone attended Middlebury's DADT question and answer session -- whether it's fair or not. The military oftentimes cares little about fairness as it relates to how the military treats others. So, let the shoe sit firmly on the other foot for a change. An intense question and answer session about the DADT policy is hardly boot camp. I'm sure military recruiters can handle it.
Is this a compromise that could work for other universities? This compromise between the recruiter and the college doesn't change the fact that the United States military (the same military we have sent to fight for someone else's freedom in Iraq) does not allow homosexuals to serve openly among its ranks.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues, General
|
|
|
| |
| Andrea Ratkovic’s Surprising Comeback |
| 02.12.05 (8:23 am) [edit] |
 At the recent Frost Yer Fanny Duathlon in Shreveport, La., American Andrea Ratkovic savored a unique experience for many women athletes—she was the first athlete across the finish line in a race that started men and women together.
Ratkovic, a pro cyclist and former US Duathlon Pro Champion, had headed to the race almost on a whim in search of a hard day's training as she prepares for Ironman New Zealand next month.
"I think I was ninth off the [first] run and then within about five or six miles of the bike I was in the lead totally—and then I just never relinquished that, "she said.”I tried to put as much difference between myself and the other person on the bike."
With Achilles tendon issues making her cautious on the run, Ratkovic said she was expecting to be overtaken but about halfway through she realized the overall was within her grasp.
She hammered home alone but later learned that, due to a ‘positioning’ penalty called on the bike, she would be relegated simply to the overall female winner, with the fantastic Karen Smyers second. Along the way, though, she'd given spectators a bit of a thrill. [read more]
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues, General
|
|
|
| |
| GLAAD Thanks ABC for Gay Bashing |
| 02.11.05 (6:34 pm) [edit] |
Since HRC is off the scene for now, GLAAD is stepping in and soaking up the spotlight.
GLAAD sent its thanks to ABC for it recent episode of [i]Wife Swap. [/i] Digital Spy reports GLAAD thanked ABC for its "realistic depiction of homophobic attacks that can so often be a fact of life for gay people." Did they forget to thank them for the blatant Christians vs. Lesbians boxing match? I mean honestly, do they really think that episode of [i]Wife Swap [/i]was all about helping the gay and lesbian community?
Are we, as a community, that desperate for media attention, that we would thank television executives who would run their own mothers over with a truck for ratings? That's a serious question.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Pentagon Brags About the Work SLDN Accomplished |
| 02.11.05 (6:16 pm) [edit] |
The Pentagon announces that the number of discharges under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy" decreased last year, just days after the Bush Administration asks for a dismissal of a lawsuit that challenges the 10 year policy. Coincidence? I think not!
According the Service Members Legal Defense Network (SLDN) -- a network of attorneys that work to protect gay and lesbian service members -- 2004 was a record year for assistance requests. SLDN reports the organization received "a record 1025 requests for assistance in 2004, up from 991 similar requests in 2003."
So, if discharges are down, as the Pentagon has stated, that's because SLDN busted their asses to make that happen. It certainly wasn't anything the Pentagon did.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Vagina Monologues to Be Banned in Uganda |
| 02.11.05 (5:54 pm) [edit] |
The government of Uganda says the Vagina Monologues is "indecent and tasteless" and is rumored to have plans to ban the film:
"The title of the film in question is undoubtedly indecent and tasteless. The author of the film is a known lesbian who lives with another woman. She worships the female sexual organ, seeing it as her god," Buturo said during the Government's weekly press briefing yesterday.
Those who support the film feel the title is necessary for shock value in order to make people understand the injustices women suffer worldwide. Burturo says the government is not in the business of stooping to accepting money from organizations that promote values that are a threat to society's values. Obviously, Buturo doesn't live in the United States. We do that all the time.
| Link to this post | | Filed: Women's Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Lesbian Mom Loses Custody in Mississippi |
| 02.10.05 (2:52 pm) [edit] |
A lesbian mother of two in Mississippi lost custody of her two children to the father because the court did not want the children exposed to her lesbian lifestyle. An "expert" witness claimed the mother's lifestyle would be detrimental to the children's well-being.
According to the opinion for the court by Judge T. Kenneth Griffis, Edwin Coit and April Davidson were married in 1991 and divorced at the end of 1997. At the time of their divorce, they had agreed to joint legal custody, with the girls living with Davidson and Coit having liberal visitation privileges. Davidson’s lesbian identity was known to Coit and to the court at that time, but apparently it did not become an issue for Coit until the girls got a bit older and began to comment about their mother’s girlfriends.
In August 2001, Coit filed a motion with the local court to modify the custody order on two grounds: that the children were being “exposed” to Davidson’s “lesbian lifestyle,” and that Davidson’s girlfriends and mother were actually raising the children without much participation from Davidson, who worked all day and allegedly spent very little time with the girls when she was not working.
This is bullshit, and definitely very sexist. If a man works all day and leaves the children with a girlfriend or his mother to take care of, the court would have no problem with that. But, because this is a woman who works all day and leaves the children with her lesbian lover, the court takes an issue with that. Would it matter if the mother had her boyfriend watching the children while she worked all day? Would the father care in that case? Most likely not. Neither would the court. I'm guessing the children will now reside with the father -- who will spend his day at work also.
In addition, the report indicates the mother exposed the children to her lesbian partner(s) and her sexual relationship with them. It did not offer any specific details about the nature of the "sexual relationship." Did the mother kiss her partner in front of the children? If so, so what? Heterosexuals kiss in front of children all the time. The report did indicate that the children were aware the mother shared a bed with her lesbian partner. That is not cause to remove a child from her mother's home.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Anti-Gay White House Writer Owns Gay Websites |
| 02.10.05 (1:53 pm) [edit] |
Found at Jossip.
Anti-gay conservative writer, James Dale Guckert (writing under the pen name Jeff Gannon) a White House press writer, has been linked to several gay websites. He resigned his writing post at the White House after this came to light. The websites he's linked to? Hotmilitarystud.com, Militaryescorts.com and Militaryescortsm4m.com.
Lord, I tell ya. The hypocrisy ya find with these people.
And that brings me to this:
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| Iraqis Get a Recount, But We Don't? |
| 02.09.05 (10:37 am) [edit] |
The candidate that GW's administration wanted to control Iraq came in third place in Iraq's election, so . . . the Iraqis get a recount of the votes.
The ticket of interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite, is in third place among the 111 candidate lists. A Shiite-dominated ticket endorsed by Iraq's most influential Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, led with about half the votes, followed by the coalition of Kurdish parties.
If that reflects the final lineup it appears unlikely that Allawi, who favors strong ties to the United States and a tough stand against the insurgents, could emerge as a compromise choice for prime minister when the new assembly convenes by early March.
But hey, according to GW and his pro-war GOP soldiers, the whole point was to liberate Iraq and spread democracy. If democracy in Iraq means electing someone the US didn't want in office, so be it. I find it quite humorous and a bit sad at the same time. All those soldiers over in Iraq fighting to get Prime Minister Ayad Allawi positioned as leader of Iraq.
So, what will the US do if their pick for an Iraqi leader isn't chosen to lead Iraq? Stay in Iraq and force the people to have another election, one we can call successful only if Prime Minister Ayad Allawi is elected?
| Link to this post | | Filed: Politics
|
|
|
| |
| ABC Desperately Uses Lesbian Fad for Ratings |
| 02.08.05 (9:10 pm) [edit] |
Lesbianism definitely gets the ratings up, eh?
A recent article discusses an episode of Wife Swap in which a conservative, Christian, anti-gay mother switches places with a lesbian who is in a committed relationship. Tempers flare, of course, and words get a little nasty between the participants. The show is on ABC.
Does anyone recall the story about the lesbian couple that was supposed to debate the ex-gay man on ABC's Good Morning America during the whole PBS "Postcards from Buster" fiasco? The lesbian couple, upon finding out that they were to debate an ex-gay man, decided they didn't want to go through with it. A conservative Christian group claimed the lesbian couple discriminated against the ex-gay man by asking ABC to cancel the debate. It was my belief that ABC only planned the debate for ratings.
Now, backing up to the conservative, Christian, anti-gay housewife who switches places with the lesbian who is in a committed relationship. Does anyone else think these two situations sound vaguely familiar? It's so obvious ABC is desperately using gay and lesbian issues to increase the station's ratings.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Desperate Housewife to Come Out as Real Lesbian |
| 02.08.05 (9:47 am) [edit] |
 Now, who's surprised by this news? I'm not. Sky.com reports that Marcia Cross, of Desperate Housewives, and former nutcase Kimberly of Melrose Place, will announce she's a lesbian -- complete with a story in the Advocate to confirm her lesbian "leanings."
Back when Cross played Kimberly on Melrose Place, she was the only reason I really watched the show. Besides the fact that her outrageous schemes made me feel like the sanest person alive, I watched because I thought she was the hottest thing on the show. I had some idea then that she was gay (something in the jawline and her mannerisms). Hell, at one point I thought she might be transgendered. I kid you not!
It's a mass exit-us-out-the-closet in Hollywood lately. It would be nice to see gay men feeling just as comfortable about coming out in Hollywood. So, will it be The L Word and Desperate Housewives for all the pop culture addicted lesbians?
| Link to this post | | Filed: Pop Culture
|
|
|
| |
| Bush Asks for Dismissal of Don't Ask Don't Tell Lawsuit |
| 02.07.05 (6:30 pm) [edit] |
Let's look at an issue many of GW's Republican homosexual fans claim is so near and dear to them -- one of the reasons they stand by their man, through thick and thin. Let's look at that issue critically, using our thinking caps, shall we?
The issue: The nation's security.
GW's 1 million Republican homosexual fans are supporting their man because they feel he puts national security first on his list. These side-swiped homosexuals are singing GW's praises about the great work he does to protect this land of the free and equal.
Today I read that GW has asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit that challenges the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy."
The Bush administration on Monday asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Pentagon's 11-year-old "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
The government said last year's landmark Supreme Court ruling that overturned state laws making gay sex a crime does not undercut the military's policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve as long as they abstain from homosexual activity and don't reveal their sexual orientation.
This means the Bush Administration is against homosexuals serving in the military. If a homosexual discloses her or his sexual orientation, that homosexual is no longer fit to serve and protect the country. If a homosexual wants to serve the nation, he or she has to serve as a celibate person or a closeted person. At a time when the nation's military could use all the help it gets -- in order to continue to protect the country -- the Bush Administration is saying, "we don't want your kind of help. Or perhaps this has more to do with GW paying out those debts to those fundamental religious right groups, and less to do with him caring one way or the other if gays serve in the military.
I'm sure I'm not saying anything that they didn't know already, because it really doesn't have a damn thing to do with anything other than certain people live very well when Republicans are in office. 1 million of those people are openly gay card-carrying Republicans.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| The Cure for Homosexuality Involves a Shotgun |
| 02.07.05 (5:50 pm) [edit] |
Breaking down the formula: (Homosexuality - Gay Pride + Morality) = Heterosexual. The cure's developer says:
As we can see the process for curing homosexuality is not a complicated one but nevertheless takes a certain strength of character and the legal right to brandish a gun. Let us do the sum together below, you may want to note this down if you have a poofter son or pot holing daughter, or you have suspicions about a relative (flamboyant clothing etc).
I had to read that article twice before I felt comfortable saying it was satire at its best. If it's not satire, this [i]cure [/i]is no more ridiculous than the ex-gay movement or any of the other [i]cures [/i]people keep coming up with. I visited Sir Maxwell's website. After looking around a bit, I'd say Maxwell reminds me of someone who enjoys annoying the hell out of people.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| The L Word Ain't About Social Responsibility |
| 02.07.05 (3:48 pm) [edit] |
 Ilene Chaiken, producer of The L Word, stated in Sunday's New York Times:
Ms. Chaiken decided that if she was going to create a show about lesbians and their erotic lives, she was going to leave the lights on. "Some of these scenes may be perceived as calculated," she said. "They weren't. I do want to move people on some deep level. But I won't take on the mantle of social responsibility." That's not, she says, compatible with entertainment.
I'm reminded of a couple of conversations we've had about lesbian representation on television: here and here. Based on Chaiken's comments, entertainment and social responsibility cannot work together. Personally, I think it's a cop-out for Chaiken's blatant application of Hollywood beauty standards to mainstream lesbian identification. Even if it is a cop-out, I agree to some extent with Chaiken.
As I have stated before, Ellen DeGeneres is no more responsible for respresenting the lesbian community than Melissa Etheridge or any other famous lesbian. Representation should be a collective effort. So far, I see the lesbian "community" reaching out to popular, attractive, white lesbians to represent all of us -- particularly through television and music. That really gets under my skin.
So, based on our last conversation about The L Word, I've resolved to watch the show this year -- for nothing more than to analyze, poke, and prod the show to pieces. Chaiken has all but admitted the show is about nothing more than sex and drama. That should keep me entertained for a few minutes a week.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Female GIs Flash Mud Covered Hot Bods |
| 02.07.05 (3:12 pm) [edit] |
Honestly, I don't know what the big fuss is about. What's a little mud wrestling, bare breasts, and exposed thongs among US military personnel in Iraq? If military personnel are going to be running around flashing each other, I can see why those in the homophobic ranks don't want the queers among them.
If gives new meaning to "slingin' mud," doesn't it?
| Link to this post | | Filed: General
|
|
|
| |
| Comparing Fat Bias to Gay Bias |
| 02.05.05 (9:55 am) [edit] |
Well, it's nice to see the Fortune 500-like leadership here at tblog has finally fixed the posting editor after a week of trials and tribulations.
While I was off doing other things, I found interesting commentary that compared the prejudices obese people deal with to the prejudices homosexuals, women and Blacks deal with. As a Black lesbian who often struggles with my weight, I was honestly bothered by what I read:
While the majority of people will speak out against discrimination based on race, gender or sexual preference, these same people have no problem saying “I don’t want a fat person working for me.”
Shortly after I did the story I was taking a walk with a friend who had spent 20 years in the recruiting field. I asked her about recommending the overweight for job positions. This isn’t exactly the conversation, but it's close.
“ Well, I would never recommend an obese person for a job that required client contact,” confessed Claudia, a former recruiter.
“Why not?”
“ Because its bad for business. A fat person hurts the company’s image. It says the company is sloppy and not disciplined.”
“So you don’t buy into the theory genetics plays a big role in weight?”
“No. I believe its all about self-discipline."
"Isn’t that discrimination?"" I implored.
"I think it's different," defended Claudia, "Fat people make others feel uncomfortable and that’s not good business.”
"Well," I said, "I think you could substitute any minority in that same sentence and at one time businesses felt uncomfortable with women, blacks, Hispanics, and gays.”
Claudia concluded, “The difference is you don’t have to be fat. It’s a choice.”
I wasn’t surprised at Claudia’s response. She is obsessed about her weight, my weight and her daughter’s weight. Heaven forbid we go from thick-wasted to super-waisted.
The fact is people who are overweight have a difficult time proving discrimination and an even more difficult time fighting it. There are very few situations that would allow someone to file a discrimination claim based on weight.
Meanwhile, businesses are doing their part to tell people of size that corporate life may not be for them.
I was bothered by the comments from both people engaged in the conversation. The assertion that fat people make people uncomfortable is ridiculous. What she meant to say is fat women bother people -- both men and women; but fat men don't seem to have nearly that affect on people. A fat man in a suit in a board room will still receive a certain level of respect, while a fat woman in the same board room will be the butt of jokes.
I was really irritated by the writer's use of the words "sexual preference" -- as if all gay people woke up one morning and chose homosexuality like we color coded our underwear and socks: "ok, I think I'll wear thongs, black socks, and try on homosexuality for awhile." If she's trying to make the argument that obese people cannot control what they eat and cannot control their weight (because it's linked to genetics), and she's comparing it to race, gender, and sexual "preference," the use of the word "preference" throws her whole argument off.
It's my belief that some fat people have little to zero control over their obesity, while others have much control over it. I think it's a stretch to compare the prejudices obese people deal with to the prejudices that women, Blacks, Hispanics, gays, and other minority groups are dealing with everyday -- particularly if we're looking at the way those prejudices have shaped the laws of this country.
| Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Counter-Argument to 31 Reasons Not to Change Definition of Marriage |
| 02.04.05 (12:55 pm) [edit] |
I found this list of reasons why Canada should vote no to changing the definition of marriage. I read through the list and was about to write an entry to respond, but thought I would call on my extremely intelligent readers to help me create an even longer counter-list of why the definition of marriage can and should be changed. The list must be a counter to this list. So, review the arguments Dr. Charles McVety has made and have at it. I will add my own counter-arguments later. You don't have to respond to all 31 reasons, but I would like to counter as many of his arguments as possible. The list is relevant to almost any country; however some of the arguments he makes are directly related to the results of the Canadian elections. I thought those were rather lame arguments for a Dr. to use against changing the definition of marriage, but he used them nonetheless.
Please be sure to point out where his argument starts to stray, fall apart, or becomes mixed with situations that have nothing to do with marriage.
31 Reasons to Vote "No" to Changing the Definition of Marriage
by Dr. Charles McVety, President, Canada Christian College and Canada Family Action Coalition
February 4, 2005
1. The government has no authority to change the definition of a religious term such as marriage. They have no right to change the definition of "baptism", "communion", "bar mitzvah", "marriage" or any other religious term.
2. Same sex marriage is not a "human right". The United Nations’ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms make no mention, directly or indirectly of such a right.
3. When women gained equal rights in Canada, they were not renamed "men". Laws were passed to give them rights. Same sex couples do not have to be called "married" to receive rights.
4. If marriage is redefined, it is redefined for everyone. Are your married? If so, to a man or a woman? To properly identify oneself every married couple in Canada will then have to define their marriage as a "same sex marriage" or an "opposite sex marriage".
5. To change the definition of marriage is a violation of Article 16 of the United Nations’ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights". This article demands government protection of "family" and "marriage".
6. To change the definition of marriage is a violation of Canada’s "Charter of Rights". The first line of the Charter reads "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:" It is a violation of "The principle of the supremacy of God" to re-define a sacred institution.
7. Re-definition of marriage violates the first "fundamental freedom" listed by the "Charter of Rights" that states "Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: a) freedom of conscience and religion". By dictating religion the state infringes upon the freedom of religion.
8. Re-definition sets up a "two tiered" Charter of Rights where homosexuals and lesbians have powers over the religious.
9. The Prime Minister has betrayed his colleagues attempting to force cabinet members to go against their religious convictions and vote to redefine marriage. If he will not protect religious freedom for his friends he will certainly not protect ordinary Canadians.
10. Two-tiered rights regimes suppress the underclass. Religious institutions are being forced to host same sex nuptials such as the Knights of Columbus hall in Port Coquitlam, British Columbia. Religious schools such as the Catholic School in Whitby, Ontario are being forced to accept same sex relationships. Religious individuals such as Scott Brockie are forced to print material against his conscience. You and your Church, Synagogue or place of worship may be next.
11. Two-tiered rights are currently violating freedom for those who conduct marriage ceremonies. Religious commissioners of marriages in British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have already been threatened with loss of livelihood if they do not succumb to the dictates of the state and agree to marry same sex couples.
12. Religious freedom for Clergy will not be upheld. On December 9, 2004 the Supreme Court clearly articulated that the federal government has no ability to protect Clergy from marrying same sex couples. The Court says this is a Provincial responsibility however no province in Canada has legislation in place to protect Clergy. In fact at least three provinces have already attacked Clergy freedoms.
13. Religious freedom in education is being debased. Religious students are forced to study same sex values, relationships, activities and homosexual and lesbian way of life. There is no protection or conscientious objection caveat to alleviate students from being exposed to objectionable material.
14. Same sex education is commonly used as a proselytizing tool. Much of the material leads the student to question their sexuality by their dreams and level of stimulation when exposed to explicit material.
15. Re-definition of marriage undermines the foundation of society. Our civilization is based on the traditional definition of marriage. Social engineers are now attempting to demolish society as we know it and build their own "Brave New World".
16. Family is our foundation. The United Nations’ "Universal Declaration of Human Rights",Article 16.(3) states "The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State."
17. Marriage is the foundation of family. The place for pro-creation and development of children. Same sex couples cannot pro-create.
18. Marriage is the foundation of government where members are governed.
19. Marriage is the first level of implementation of the law where members are encouraged to keep the law.
20. Marriage is the first level of education where members are taught civilized behaviour, morals and ethics.
21. Marriage is the first level of healthcare where the sick are cared for.
22. Marriage is the first level caring for the poor.
23. Radical social-engineering cannot be enacted without full debate, discussion, involvement and participation of vast majority of the citizens in a free country. Dictatorships have attempted to radically change society in other ways and the result is catastrophic. Not even the most corrupt Communist or fascist dictatorships have attempted to redefine marriage.
24. Re-engineering society is not a priority of the people however it has become the number one priority for the Prime Minister. Instead of focusing on Canada’s vital issues such as healthcare, education, security and taxes, Mr. Martin is fixated on same sex marriage.
25. If same sex marriage was a "human right" then most same sex couples would exercise this so-called right. In fact same sex marriage has been legal in parts of Canada for almost two years and only a couple thousand have become married. Over 99 percent have not entered into so-called "same sex marriage". Now the social engineers want to re-define marriage for the .006 percent of the population of Canada.
26. The majority of Canadians do not want marriage to be redefined. Virtually every poll has indicated this fact with as much as 69% of the nation in objection.
27. Statistics Canada released its findings that only one percent of Canadians are homosexual or lesbian. Another .7 percent of Canadians are bi-sexual. Even this community does not wholly support redefining marriage.
28. There is an electoral consequence to violating the will of the constituents. Numerous Members of Parliament lost their seat subsequent to voting against marriage.
29. Betraying the trust of the people creates an electoral consequence. Many Members of Parliament voted for marriage before voting against it. Mr. Martin and 215 other Members of Parliament voted for marriage in 1999. Over 130 Members voted for marriage in 2002. Now some are changing their vote. Their word yesterday appears to have no bearing on their actions of today. Who knows what they will do tomorrow? Such subterfuge will not tolerated by the electorate.
30. Radically changing the Liberal Party will bring demise. Throughout its history the Liberal Party was moderate and centrist. Now the Prime Minister is bringing in an extremist agenda of redefining marriage, talk of polygamy, decriminalizing marijuana and discussions on euthanasia. In addition they grant 582 work visas to Romanian strippers and pay $250 million dollars to Liberal friends. These are not Liberal Values they are Extremist Values.
31. For the sake of our children and their children, the cornerstone of civilization must be protected.
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Gays and Lesbians Win Marriage Victory in New York |
| 02.04.05 (12:30 pm) [edit] |
The Village Voice reports that gays and lesbians in New York are one step closer to full marriage rights. A New York trial judge decided the state must grant gay and lesbian couples the right to marriage. The decision is a result of a case filed by Lambda Legal on behalf of five couples. The judge says the state's constitution guarantees gay and lesbians the same basic freedoms afforded to heterosexual couples.
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Say No to Publicly Funded Gay Bashing |
| 02.04.05 (12:18 pm) [edit] |
I'm sorry folks, this isn't what public funding is for:
(Fairfax, Virginia) Principals in all of Fairfax county's high schools have received a letter telling them to host speakers "ex-gay perspective".
The letter was written by Stephen M. Hunt, a School Board member. Copies were sent to all 24 high schools in the suburban Washington district.
The letter calls homosexuality a "very destructive lifestyle" and said students need to [be] offered a choice. Public funding can not be used to promote homosexuality -- according to Margaret Spellings, the new education secretary; therefore, it stands to reason that public funding can not be used to gay bash in high schools either. If public funding will be used to gay bash, it would be fair and reasonable that all gay American citizens request that all tax dollars we contributed to the system be refunded to us immediately.
An update on Mr. Hunt's conservative endeavors: School Board Censures Official Over 'Ex-Gays' Letter
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| The Agenda to Keep Children Narrow-Minded and Hateful |
| 02.02.05 (9:54 pm) [edit] |
What the hell?
Parents at a Catholic school in Orange County, Calif., are challenging a gay couple that has put their adopted twin sons into a Catholic kindergarten. The parents are concerned that the children may be part of a broader strategy to create greater tolerance for homosexuality within the church. On NPR
Now that is about the dumbest thing those people have pulled out their ass in . . . days. But hey, I've heard even gay people claim those fathers had some kind of sinister agenda.
So, it appears the real cause for concern here is that the parents who are protesting don't want their children attending school with two little boys who appear happy and healthy like all the other kids in school. It would ruin the theory they peddle that gay parents somehow ruin the lives of young children. As long as the protesting parents can keep their kids ignorant and unaware that happy, healthy children are raised by gay parents, they can raise their kids to believe that homosexuality is an abomination. Sounds more like the folks with real agenda are the bigoted Catholics. Their agenda is to keep their children narrow-minded and hateful.
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Back Up the Uhaul, Baby! |
| 02.02.05 (7:58 pm) [edit] |
 In response to the announcement that Ellen and Portia are already wearing matching wedding rings, one of my favorite regulars asked:
". . . what the hell is it with lesbians and their need to get so damn committed so damn fast? Good grief, you think you'd want to get to know a person first."
Open thread about Uhauls and fast committments. Have fun, but be gentle.
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| Charges Filed Against Gay Weddings Mayor |
| 02.02.05 (4:36 pm) [edit] |
 Twenty four misdemeanor charges against New Paltz Village, NY Mayor Jason West were reinstated today by a judge who said officials cannot pick and choose which laws they wish to obey. I wish someone would tell GW that.
West performed a series of homosexual weddings last February, but the charges were originally dismissed by a judge who said the law banning gay marriages was unconstitutional. West argues he was honoring the couples' constitutional right to marry when he performed the ceremonies. The charges were re-instated because West has an obligation to honor the oath of his office and follow the law.
In other news:
A gay marriage ban passes in Alabama, but fails in Idaho.
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues
|
|
|
| |
| A Quick Afternoon News Roundup |
| 02.02.05 (12:56 pm) [edit] |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Controversial Postcards from Buster Will Air Afterall |
| 02.01.05 (2:25 am) [edit] |
 And the show will go on. PBS plans to broadcast the Buster episode that features two lesbian couples -- despite US Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings condemnation. The show will air at 5:30 p.m. on February 02, 2005. And thanks to all the hoopla Spellings made about the show, I'm sure the show's ratings will go through the roof. People will tune in just to see what all the fuss was about. Bert over at TCF made note that Spellings did not demand that PBS pull the episode; the decision was made before Spellings made her comments. I wish I could remember where I read this (I didn't think I'd be commenting on Buster again), but I heard Spellings actually had the nerve to demand that PBS return the money used to fund the show. What rat bastards. Oooh, the best part about this: it will drive Dr. James Dobson crazy!
Link to this post | | Filed: LGBT Issues |
|
|
| |
|
|
