Extracted from THE ADVOCATE
If you want to dig deeper into issues surrounding your legal rights, the followiing organizaitons provide a wealth of online information.
IMMIGRATION (Immigration Equality)
www.immigrationequality.org
GLAAD (Gender and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders)
www.glad.org
GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)
www.glaad.org
HRC (Human Rights Campaign)
www.hrc.org
NGLTF National Gay and Lesbian Task Force)
www.ngltf.org
NLGLA (National Lesbian and Gay Law Association)
www.nlgla.org
IGLHRC (International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission)
www.iglhrc.org
ILGA (International Lesbian and Gay Association)
www.ilga.org
Share Me
Let's eat!
This month we cook a lot of dishes from Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore and Kuala Lumpur are a melting pot bubbling over with tourists, inhabitants and expatriates from all parts of the world, and these people naturally have diverse eating habits. Through the ages, the Chinese, Malay, Indians and the foreigners (westerners) have cast their influence on Singapore's food recipes and there is no doubt that Singapore is a food lovers' paradise. We are bringing the fantastic Singapore/Malay dishes to you and our friends who will be couchsurfing with us...Cheers! Tiger & Marlon
Monday, April 30, 2007
The Advocate Special Report
Marriage and Civil Unions
Marriage is where the difference between the federal constitution and state constitution becomes important. For now, most gay rights litigators are not making arguments under the federal Constitution. Instead, they're arguing that state constitutions guarantee gays right to marry.
This savvy tactic keeps marriage cases away from an unsymphathetic Supreme Court, which can't review cases decided solely on state law grounds.
So far only Massachusetts permits gay couples to marry. Thanks to a landmark 2003 decision by that state's supreme judicial court. And even that decision is vulnerable, as conservatives are fighting for a state constitutional amendment taht would supersede the ruling.
Marriage is where the difference between the federal constitution and state constitution becomes important. For now, most gay rights litigators are not making arguments under the federal Constitution. Instead, they're arguing that state constitutions guarantee gays right to marry.
This savvy tactic keeps marriage cases away from an unsymphathetic Supreme Court, which can't review cases decided solely on state law grounds.
So far only Massachusetts permits gay couples to marry. Thanks to a landmark 2003 decision by that state's supreme judicial court. And even that decision is vulnerable, as conservatives are fighting for a state constitutional amendment taht would supersede the ruling.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
You think all hate crimes are equal? Wake up!
"All Hate Crimes Are Not Equal" said NY Blade recently. You think so too?
According to a report by NY Blade last week, like most national tragedies, the shooting massacre at Virginia Tech has found its way into the public debate on a number of hot-button social issues. Within hours, both sides of the battle over gun control had cited the events in Blacksburg to support their positions.
Do our laws regularly punish crimes differently based upon the intent of the perpetrator and the societal impact of the offense?
Consider for a moment if Cho Hseung-Hui, the VA Tech shooter, had been a Muslim, and his videotape message has said his attack was part of an anti-American jihad. The crime would no doubt taken on even greater significance, probably resulting in all sorts of anti-terror measures...but the truth is: Cho killed 33 people with a gun he bought - easily bought.
According to a report by NY Blade last week, like most national tragedies, the shooting massacre at Virginia Tech has found its way into the public debate on a number of hot-button social issues. Within hours, both sides of the battle over gun control had cited the events in Blacksburg to support their positions.
Do our laws regularly punish crimes differently based upon the intent of the perpetrator and the societal impact of the offense?
Consider for a moment if Cho Hseung-Hui, the VA Tech shooter, had been a Muslim, and his videotape message has said his attack was part of an anti-American jihad. The crime would no doubt taken on even greater significance, probably resulting in all sorts of anti-terror measures...but the truth is: Cho killed 33 people with a gun he bought - easily bought.
So what if Anderson Cooper...is gay?
So what if Anderson Cooper is gay? Is he that important to you? I mean he is not going to help us pay our bills, is he when he is out?.
The way I look at it, it is no point in outing him. We must respect those who want to be in the closet. Why is it so hard for us to do that?
As written on his blog: "Be honest about what you see, get out of the way and let the story reveal by itself" - Anderson Cooper Blog 360. Exactly! Get out of the way, and let him come out by himself...sooner or later, one day.
You desperate queer writers must know one thing: Cooper's closet case it is not a matter of life and death. Let him hide in the glass closet. We can see him where he feels safer and saner.
But I think this is not about Anderson Cooper being gay or behaving gayly in Fire Island, as seen by some of us, walking and holding hands in the sand with his guy. This is, sadly, about us gay writers/bloggers who want to out him -- it is a battle among us gay writers/bloggers to out him first! It is boundary-pushing suggestions of outrageous acts in the gay world.
As for you Anderson, you have risen from humble begining in news and through pure grit and resourcefulness, got yourself through college and major newsrooms. You may not suffer under the weight of massive student loans (because you are from a super rich family and your famous ma is goodlookin') like most of them do, or, dazzle by life in the big city like I am, but you entered the rarefied field of journalism in Manhattan and you did well and are still doing extremely well. We gays are so proud of you. We know you are gay because we've seen you, even caught you aware and unaware.
But we don't need you to come out, to be perfectly honest. And you don't need our help either. Your homo life is non of our business, is it? No. That is the cold hard truth. We don't really care about you. We love you as the Anderson Cooper the newsman because you are damn good and no more.
In a world that often takes "gay outing" for granted, yours is a million dollar story we queer writers/bloggers are dying for. Don't give them the pleasure to out you. If you want to get out of your glass closet, issue a statement to all the world so that no one will get the title "the one who outed Cooper".
Michael Lucas (The Lucas File) and Michael Musto (Out Magazine) and the others are all active writers but until they are really genuinely interested in helping you out without wanting the title 'the first to out Anderson Cooper", don't come out to them.
And don't sleep with them!
While it is true that we queers need a good role model like you, we don't need you to complete us.
I remember you said: "Be yourself and be real" This is the time for you to be real, be honest and be true to yourself. When you are ready, come out to Oprah. Be classy.
I have a question to all the writers/bloggers who are out there to out others. Why must you out Anderson Cooper?
Respect other gay people the way you want others to respect you. I know some gay people who fuck girls and will rather die than to admit it...fucking come out!
The way I look at it, it is no point in outing him. We must respect those who want to be in the closet. Why is it so hard for us to do that?
As written on his blog: "Be honest about what you see, get out of the way and let the story reveal by itself" - Anderson Cooper Blog 360. Exactly! Get out of the way, and let him come out by himself...sooner or later, one day.
You desperate queer writers must know one thing: Cooper's closet case it is not a matter of life and death. Let him hide in the glass closet. We can see him where he feels safer and saner.
But I think this is not about Anderson Cooper being gay or behaving gayly in Fire Island, as seen by some of us, walking and holding hands in the sand with his guy. This is, sadly, about us gay writers/bloggers who want to out him -- it is a battle among us gay writers/bloggers to out him first! It is boundary-pushing suggestions of outrageous acts in the gay world.
As for you Anderson, you have risen from humble begining in news and through pure grit and resourcefulness, got yourself through college and major newsrooms. You may not suffer under the weight of massive student loans (because you are from a super rich family and your famous ma is goodlookin') like most of them do, or, dazzle by life in the big city like I am, but you entered the rarefied field of journalism in Manhattan and you did well and are still doing extremely well. We gays are so proud of you. We know you are gay because we've seen you, even caught you aware and unaware.
But we don't need you to come out, to be perfectly honest. And you don't need our help either. Your homo life is non of our business, is it? No. That is the cold hard truth. We don't really care about you. We love you as the Anderson Cooper the newsman because you are damn good and no more.
In a world that often takes "gay outing" for granted, yours is a million dollar story we queer writers/bloggers are dying for. Don't give them the pleasure to out you. If you want to get out of your glass closet, issue a statement to all the world so that no one will get the title "the one who outed Cooper".
Michael Lucas (The Lucas File) and Michael Musto (Out Magazine) and the others are all active writers but until they are really genuinely interested in helping you out without wanting the title 'the first to out Anderson Cooper", don't come out to them.
And don't sleep with them!
While it is true that we queers need a good role model like you, we don't need you to complete us.
I remember you said: "Be yourself and be real" This is the time for you to be real, be honest and be true to yourself. When you are ready, come out to Oprah. Be classy.
I have a question to all the writers/bloggers who are out there to out others. Why must you out Anderson Cooper?
Respect other gay people the way you want others to respect you. I know some gay people who fuck girls and will rather die than to admit it...fucking come out!
Thursday, April 26, 2007
This is for us Coulter-phobic homos
Just tell me how could I not want (or try) to dislike Ann Coulter. There are just so many reasons to hate her (and to want to boycott her) or simply to gang up on her and break her spirits. Until she can no longer say or do the things she's been doing - ridiculing and humiliating others. This is a woman who loves to be hated. She feeds off anger like Cancer feeds off sugar.
According to a report recently at the American Conservative Union Political Action Conference, she said, “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.”
She was probably pointing to actor Isaiah Washington, who referred to Grey’s Anatomy co-star (and gay man) T.R. Knight as a faggot. But Washington, at least, apologized to the community and met with gay leaders. He checked into rehab because—well, because that’s what stars seem to do when they commit big social gaffes.
Sure, you’re a right-wing pitbull who has made her name by attacking anything and everyone to the left of fascist. And yes, you once said Al Gore was a fag, though because you did it in an almost gentle half-insider kind of way, it came across as a fag hag’s idea of a joke instead of a venomous attack like this one. And indeed, your crowd of young admirers cheered you on as you said it, laughing, as if they had never heard anything as funny as a serious candidate for president, a former United States Senator, being deeply insulted by a cheap throwaway line.
But—Ann Coulter. Really. Is this what you want the future of politics to look like? The future of democracy? The future of America? Do you really want serious debate about a very serious issue—the issue of who will be elected to lead our country—do you really want this debate to be hijacked by a round of playground bully-type name calling?
It seems to me, Ann Coulter, that someone with your brains and quick wit could certainly do better than saying, “Nyah, nyah, your guy’s a faggot!” to a national audience.
But maybe Ann Coulter can’t do better, not any more. Maybe she’s bought her own hype. Maybe she thinks she is the woman she plays on TV. Maybe she thinks its enough, now, to be outrageous instead of outrageously smart, or outrageously pointed.
Ann Coulter, after all, is theater. She’s not even a real person. She’s like those World Wrestling Federation guys in tight shiny, skin-revealing outfits who pretend to be fierce and powerful but really have to plan out all their moves beforehand so they won’t get hurt.
Maybe she felt that her influence is fading, that the Republican party is slowly but surely pulling away from the social conservatives who are weighing them down until they are almost drowned.
Her influence is fading. There is no question now. Her influence faded right before our eyes as, one by one, Republicans lined up to denounce her. The Republican presidential candidates denounced her. The Christian Defense Coalition denounced her. Even the Right half of the blogosphere, led by RedState, called for an old fashioned shunning, to let Ann Coulter know she was no longer one of their own.
In fact, the Red State recall of Ann Coulter has been amazing. They have made it clear that this sort of name-calling has no place in our national debate.
Good for them.
And good for us.
Because we gained something from Ann Coulter’s gaffe. We saw Republicans and conservatives of all stripes come forward to say that calling someone a faggot is wrong. We saw them realize that in fact they can’t say anything they want about marginalized people. That there is a line and they don’t want to cross it. We witnessed our Red State brethren take a step back from the precipice of Coulter-Hannity-Limbaugh insanity, and instead say, “Wait a minute. This is not what we want. This is not who we are.”
Oh, how funny!
All Coulter did was initiate the regular "firestorm of outrage" that keeps her in the media spotlight for another six months and sells another couple of million books.
And the Democrats and Republicans who are condeming her "hateful, insensitive language" will go right back to passing anti-gay laws and muttering about "faggots" in private -- while reaping the phoney "tolerance" that comes from a breathless, outraged condemnation of Coulter's stupidity in public.
It's hilariously scripted and substance-free, and represents neither a "return to tolerance" for Republicans nor a breakthrough for gay people.
Maybe the language of conservatives has become more genteel of late. I don't know. I do know that not too long ago tossing around terms like "fag", "pervert", "girlie boys", etc. was a standard conservative way of advertising one's worthiness of the Group - kind of like ants touching one another's antennae. At any rate , avoiding juvenile and inflammatory language says nothing about one's intentions. I suspect that conservatives are just as determined as ever to re-marginalize gay people; it remains the fervid dream of their yahoo base, after all, but will soon learn to be more circumspect in their language in this post- Senator Macaca age.
After reading through all the Republican blog posts and comments and the CPAC crowds' reaction, it's very apparent that these conservatives were just fine with using 'faggot' but only went into damage control mode when presented with the prospect of losing independent/moderate support.
It's obvious that the Republican base is virulently homophobic and only makes symbolic attempts to appear otherwise when faced with the prospect of losing power. Principles be damned, it's all about holding onto power. Seems rather familiar doesn't it?
Coulter's demogogery is nothing new. She's been spewing it for seventeen years, and conservatives lap it up like the "red meat" bait it's meant to serve. It's made her millions of dollar and conservative fans.
The "difference" this time is that the audience's reaction (first gasps, then wild applause) demonstrated to the nation just how viscerally toxic her demagagery appeals to CPAC and the Religious Right, the very people destroying our nation as we speak. Watching her wildly-accepted adulation by these folk awakened the rest of the nation to the fears we all should fear when demagogues have gone over the edge. Coulter is always over the edge, but now we know conservatives esteem this nonsense, relish it, and revel in it.
Seeing the blonde, anorexic on amphetamines spew her demagogery sells big-time, and maybe that isn't good for democracy, freedom, equality, justice, peace, and all those values our Founders thought so wildly delerious. Coulter's delerium was the proper tonic delivered in the appropriate moment, and the audience's reaction sealed the fate. The nation has awakened again from its slumbers and did not like what it saw. Finally!
Has anyone here or in the mainstream media noted that no spokesmen at Concerned Women for America or the Family Resarch Council issued a press release distancing themselves from, let alone condemning, Ann Coulter for her remarks?
One would think the predominantly liberal news reporters would play "gotcha" and inform their viewers that the leading spokemen for these organizations really do not believe in the "love the sinner, hate the sin" crap that they spew.
Then again, almost no one called FRC President Tony Perkins to task after he used the Mark Foley sexual predator scandal to slander the entire gay community. Where was Chris Matthews when MSNBC commentator Pat Buchanan called Mark Foley a real "flamer" and why didn't any notable journalists question the predominantly evangelical theoconservative spokesmen when they dismiss the claims that we are born gay (one sexual orientation)but then accuse us of being pedophiles (which they invoke as a sexual orienation that inadvertently might be protected by any proposed sexual orienation inclusive nondiscrimination laws)?
The others, most especially Ann Coulter , the CPAC attendees who applauded, and the cluless journalists we rely upon for fair and accurate balance, should wallow in shame.
One would think the predominantly liberal news reporters would play "gotcha" and inform their viewers that the leading spokemen for these organizations really do not believe in the "love the sinner, hate the sin" crap that they spew.
Except that many liberals are homophobic too. Just go to any Democratic Party event and start talking, unapologetically, about your right to marry -- and watch the "tolerant" folks' backs get up as they accuse you of being a "single issue extremist" who "is talking about something that doesn't matter."
Of course, their obsessions with forcing socialized medicine on everyone -- including those who don't want it -- isn't defined in nearly the same terms.
How about the issues on Same-sex Marriages, Medical Marijuana & Needle Exchange, Low-Cost AIDS Drugs, Equal Rights, Ending anti-gay bias in the Military, Abortion rights, Civil Liberties, Universal Health Care, Election Reform and Instant Runoff Voting, Nonviolent Solutions to Conflic?
Not that either the Greens or the Libertarians have any chance of getting elected with the current election laws. If we want these minor parties to have a voice, we need to lobby the mainstream media to include them in political debates, especially the presidential debates. Because if Americans don't see it on TV, it's not for real. If we want the minor parties to have a chance, we should lobby to institute instant runoff ballots. Check out this site for an explanation:
I'm glad Coulter said what she did, I wish more of the 30% would speak in plain language. Because when they speak in euphemisms and code words they mislead some people into seeing them as legitimate. I'd rather hear bigotry expressed aloud instead of cloaked behind "defense of marriage" rhetoric, I'd rather hear open racism than allusions to "porous borders." I'd rather these people stated their repellant views in plain language to enable their easy identification as idiots so the rest of us can shun them and get on with rational discussion.
I don't think those who lined up to distance themselves from the drunken sorority slut were repudiating her bigotry, only her stating it so plainly. The last thing they want to do is alienate those nasty bigots who comprise their base. You think?
According to a report recently at the American Conservative Union Political Action Conference, she said, “I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word ‘faggot,’ so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Edwards.”
She was probably pointing to actor Isaiah Washington, who referred to Grey’s Anatomy co-star (and gay man) T.R. Knight as a faggot. But Washington, at least, apologized to the community and met with gay leaders. He checked into rehab because—well, because that’s what stars seem to do when they commit big social gaffes.
Sure, you’re a right-wing pitbull who has made her name by attacking anything and everyone to the left of fascist. And yes, you once said Al Gore was a fag, though because you did it in an almost gentle half-insider kind of way, it came across as a fag hag’s idea of a joke instead of a venomous attack like this one. And indeed, your crowd of young admirers cheered you on as you said it, laughing, as if they had never heard anything as funny as a serious candidate for president, a former United States Senator, being deeply insulted by a cheap throwaway line.
But—Ann Coulter. Really. Is this what you want the future of politics to look like? The future of democracy? The future of America? Do you really want serious debate about a very serious issue—the issue of who will be elected to lead our country—do you really want this debate to be hijacked by a round of playground bully-type name calling?
It seems to me, Ann Coulter, that someone with your brains and quick wit could certainly do better than saying, “Nyah, nyah, your guy’s a faggot!” to a national audience.
But maybe Ann Coulter can’t do better, not any more. Maybe she’s bought her own hype. Maybe she thinks she is the woman she plays on TV. Maybe she thinks its enough, now, to be outrageous instead of outrageously smart, or outrageously pointed.
Ann Coulter, after all, is theater. She’s not even a real person. She’s like those World Wrestling Federation guys in tight shiny, skin-revealing outfits who pretend to be fierce and powerful but really have to plan out all their moves beforehand so they won’t get hurt.
Maybe she felt that her influence is fading, that the Republican party is slowly but surely pulling away from the social conservatives who are weighing them down until they are almost drowned.
Her influence is fading. There is no question now. Her influence faded right before our eyes as, one by one, Republicans lined up to denounce her. The Republican presidential candidates denounced her. The Christian Defense Coalition denounced her. Even the Right half of the blogosphere, led by RedState, called for an old fashioned shunning, to let Ann Coulter know she was no longer one of their own.
In fact, the Red State recall of Ann Coulter has been amazing. They have made it clear that this sort of name-calling has no place in our national debate.
Good for them.
And good for us.
Because we gained something from Ann Coulter’s gaffe. We saw Republicans and conservatives of all stripes come forward to say that calling someone a faggot is wrong. We saw them realize that in fact they can’t say anything they want about marginalized people. That there is a line and they don’t want to cross it. We witnessed our Red State brethren take a step back from the precipice of Coulter-Hannity-Limbaugh insanity, and instead say, “Wait a minute. This is not what we want. This is not who we are.”
Oh, how funny!
All Coulter did was initiate the regular "firestorm of outrage" that keeps her in the media spotlight for another six months and sells another couple of million books.
And the Democrats and Republicans who are condeming her "hateful, insensitive language" will go right back to passing anti-gay laws and muttering about "faggots" in private -- while reaping the phoney "tolerance" that comes from a breathless, outraged condemnation of Coulter's stupidity in public.
It's hilariously scripted and substance-free, and represents neither a "return to tolerance" for Republicans nor a breakthrough for gay people.
Maybe the language of conservatives has become more genteel of late. I don't know. I do know that not too long ago tossing around terms like "fag", "pervert", "girlie boys", etc. was a standard conservative way of advertising one's worthiness of the Group - kind of like ants touching one another's antennae. At any rate , avoiding juvenile and inflammatory language says nothing about one's intentions. I suspect that conservatives are just as determined as ever to re-marginalize gay people; it remains the fervid dream of their yahoo base, after all, but will soon learn to be more circumspect in their language in this post- Senator Macaca age.
After reading through all the Republican blog posts and comments and the CPAC crowds' reaction, it's very apparent that these conservatives were just fine with using 'faggot' but only went into damage control mode when presented with the prospect of losing independent/moderate support.
It's obvious that the Republican base is virulently homophobic and only makes symbolic attempts to appear otherwise when faced with the prospect of losing power. Principles be damned, it's all about holding onto power. Seems rather familiar doesn't it?
Coulter's demogogery is nothing new. She's been spewing it for seventeen years, and conservatives lap it up like the "red meat" bait it's meant to serve. It's made her millions of dollar and conservative fans.
The "difference" this time is that the audience's reaction (first gasps, then wild applause) demonstrated to the nation just how viscerally toxic her demagagery appeals to CPAC and the Religious Right, the very people destroying our nation as we speak. Watching her wildly-accepted adulation by these folk awakened the rest of the nation to the fears we all should fear when demagogues have gone over the edge. Coulter is always over the edge, but now we know conservatives esteem this nonsense, relish it, and revel in it.
Seeing the blonde, anorexic on amphetamines spew her demagogery sells big-time, and maybe that isn't good for democracy, freedom, equality, justice, peace, and all those values our Founders thought so wildly delerious. Coulter's delerium was the proper tonic delivered in the appropriate moment, and the audience's reaction sealed the fate. The nation has awakened again from its slumbers and did not like what it saw. Finally!
Has anyone here or in the mainstream media noted that no spokesmen at Concerned Women for America or the Family Resarch Council issued a press release distancing themselves from, let alone condemning, Ann Coulter for her remarks?
One would think the predominantly liberal news reporters would play "gotcha" and inform their viewers that the leading spokemen for these organizations really do not believe in the "love the sinner, hate the sin" crap that they spew.
Then again, almost no one called FRC President Tony Perkins to task after he used the Mark Foley sexual predator scandal to slander the entire gay community. Where was Chris Matthews when MSNBC commentator Pat Buchanan called Mark Foley a real "flamer" and why didn't any notable journalists question the predominantly evangelical theoconservative spokesmen when they dismiss the claims that we are born gay (one sexual orientation)but then accuse us of being pedophiles (which they invoke as a sexual orienation that inadvertently might be protected by any proposed sexual orienation inclusive nondiscrimination laws)?
The others, most especially Ann Coulter , the CPAC attendees who applauded, and the cluless journalists we rely upon for fair and accurate balance, should wallow in shame.
One would think the predominantly liberal news reporters would play "gotcha" and inform their viewers that the leading spokemen for these organizations really do not believe in the "love the sinner, hate the sin" crap that they spew.
Except that many liberals are homophobic too. Just go to any Democratic Party event and start talking, unapologetically, about your right to marry -- and watch the "tolerant" folks' backs get up as they accuse you of being a "single issue extremist" who "is talking about something that doesn't matter."
Of course, their obsessions with forcing socialized medicine on everyone -- including those who don't want it -- isn't defined in nearly the same terms.
How about the issues on Same-sex Marriages, Medical Marijuana & Needle Exchange, Low-Cost AIDS Drugs, Equal Rights, Ending anti-gay bias in the Military, Abortion rights, Civil Liberties, Universal Health Care, Election Reform and Instant Runoff Voting, Nonviolent Solutions to Conflic?
Not that either the Greens or the Libertarians have any chance of getting elected with the current election laws. If we want these minor parties to have a voice, we need to lobby the mainstream media to include them in political debates, especially the presidential debates. Because if Americans don't see it on TV, it's not for real. If we want the minor parties to have a chance, we should lobby to institute instant runoff ballots. Check out this site for an explanation:
I'm glad Coulter said what she did, I wish more of the 30% would speak in plain language. Because when they speak in euphemisms and code words they mislead some people into seeing them as legitimate. I'd rather hear bigotry expressed aloud instead of cloaked behind "defense of marriage" rhetoric, I'd rather hear open racism than allusions to "porous borders." I'd rather these people stated their repellant views in plain language to enable their easy identification as idiots so the rest of us can shun them and get on with rational discussion.
I don't think those who lined up to distance themselves from the drunken sorority slut were repudiating her bigotry, only her stating it so plainly. The last thing they want to do is alienate those nasty bigots who comprise their base. You think?
That is so Gere-ay!
What is fucking wrong with Richard Gere kissing Shilpa Shetty?
Kissing who? Shilpa Shetty. Who the hell is she again? She's an actress from India. And she is gorgeous.
So Gere kissed her. So what? Here's the thing -- India may arrest Gere for kissing the actress! Is that not the sickest thing you've ever heard? A kiss is just a kiss. And Gere is a respectful man. I watched the controversial kiss on TV and I didn't think it was deliberately done to humiliate Indian culture. Indians should also respect Gere for being polite and respectful. It was a gesture of respect for Shilpa Shetty.
And now they are accused of corrupting the society. It cannot get anymore sicker than that, I can tell you. The world respects India's beautiful culture. India has to grow up.
I am appalled and disturbed by that. It is humiliating to me that such a nice gesture is being slammed and condemned. To me the kiss was clean, but the Indian mind was not.
Kissing who? Shilpa Shetty. Who the hell is she again? She's an actress from India. And she is gorgeous.
So Gere kissed her. So what? Here's the thing -- India may arrest Gere for kissing the actress! Is that not the sickest thing you've ever heard? A kiss is just a kiss. And Gere is a respectful man. I watched the controversial kiss on TV and I didn't think it was deliberately done to humiliate Indian culture. Indians should also respect Gere for being polite and respectful. It was a gesture of respect for Shilpa Shetty.
And now they are accused of corrupting the society. It cannot get anymore sicker than that, I can tell you. The world respects India's beautiful culture. India has to grow up.
I am appalled and disturbed by that. It is humiliating to me that such a nice gesture is being slammed and condemned. To me the kiss was clean, but the Indian mind was not.
How is gay going to end?
When Ellen Degeneres came out on the cover of Time many years ago, she did it using three simple, carefree words - "Yep, I'm Gay." Gay as an identity is now looking like it is going to end soon. That's cos many men who aren't gay are more and more behaving, acting, and living life as gay men do and living among gay men in most affluent gayborhoods like Castro, Palm Spring, Hells Kitchen - they also have a new name -- metrosexual. Gay people are really thinking of their sexuality in a much diffuse way these days and that is frightening. We gay people make being gay looking so easy and simple that straight men and women aren't finding looking gay so disturbing anymore (which is, of course, a momentous development). People are having freedom to self-determine their sexual identity and preference. It is roomy. Everyone has a place. "Being straight and looking gay is so much more fun", says a sweet straight friend of mine. How did that happen?
Being gay is part of my identity but it doesn't define me. Does it define you? It's sort of a bonus, to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't trade it for anything. I was 16 when I came out to myself and 21 when mom and dad gave me a t-shirt that says "Only my mom thinks I am straight" She's the best fag hag. My mom says to me recently -- "I think gay people have problems with people who aren't gay enough like those bisexual and straight people living within and loving the gay community."
I wonder if Apple and Dell are gay computers. Is there such a thing as a gay computer/consumer technology? Hmm, let's prepare for a challenge as they are always changing, always evolving. It is their ability to move with and often before the market that keeps them out in front, understanding and meeting the challenges. I am not sure about Apple tho but Dell clearly tells you to consider the possibilities!
Being gay is part of my identity but it doesn't define me. Does it define you? It's sort of a bonus, to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't trade it for anything. I was 16 when I came out to myself and 21 when mom and dad gave me a t-shirt that says "Only my mom thinks I am straight" She's the best fag hag. My mom says to me recently -- "I think gay people have problems with people who aren't gay enough like those bisexual and straight people living within and loving the gay community."
I wonder if Apple and Dell are gay computers. Is there such a thing as a gay computer/consumer technology? Hmm, let's prepare for a challenge as they are always changing, always evolving. It is their ability to move with and often before the market that keeps them out in front, understanding and meeting the challenges. I am not sure about Apple tho but Dell clearly tells you to consider the possibilities!
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
A Global Gay Report Card
A Global Gay Report Card
by Richard J. Rosendall
First published in Bay Windows, March 22, 2007
Article I of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights begins, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The United States was not just a party to its adoption in 1948; the key force behind its creation was Eleanor Roosevelt. While sexual orientation is not a protected category, the U.S. State Department since 1991 has included gay rights abuses and advances in its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, tracking the status of internationally recognized human rights.
The reports for 2006, released on March 6, 2007, reflect a dramatic improvement in LGBT- and HIV-related information gathering. In the reports for 2005, I found relevant items under 105 countries. For 2006, the number has risen to 142 countries. You can view my extracts online at http://www.glaa.org/archive/2007/CountryReports2006.shtml .
Here are some highlights, organized in three broad groupings.
Negative:
• In many countries, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) reported HIV/AIDS in prisons.
• In Cambodia, “Trafficking victims, especially those trafficked for sexual exploitation, faced the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS.”
• In Cameroon, “false allegations of homosexuality were used to harass enemies or to extort money.”
• In Central African Republic, “An estimated 110,000 children have lost one or both parents to HIV/AIDS, and children accused of sorcery ... were often expelled from their households.”
• In China, HIV/AIDS activist Hu Jia “was detained and held incommunicado for 41 days.” His attorney was similarly detained.
• In Egypt, “The government ... has occasionally used emergency courts to prosecute homosexuals ....”
• In El Salvador, “There were no developments regarding the Governance Ministry’s 2005 denial of legal status to En Nombre de la Rosa, a homosexual and transvestite advocacy NGO,” and no developments in investigations into the 2004 killings of two transvestites.
"It was hard not to be overwhelmed by all the brutality and inhumanity; but gradually I became inspired by the realization that LGBT people are organizing everywhere from Mali to Fiji."• In Guinea, “An international NGO reported the prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS among incarcerated minor boys to be as high as 50 percent, suggesting sexual abuse.”
• In Iraq, “There were several reported examples of juveniles sentenced to up to 10 years in jail for having engaged in same-sex sexual relations.”
• In Jamaica, the gay rights group J-FLAG reported “police harassment, arbitrary detention, mob attacks, stabbings, harassment of homosexual patients by hospital and prison staff, and targeted shootings of homosexuals.”
• In Kuwait, “police raided a party where homosexuals were allegedly celebrating a wedding,” and a law was approved “to impose a fine of $3,450 and/or one year’s imprisonment for those imitating the opposite sex.”
• In Rwanda, “Due to the genocide and deaths from HIV/AIDS, there were numerous households headed by children, some of whom resorted to prostitution to survive.”
• In Tanzania, a Muslim NGO “blocked a local restaurant’s planned celebration of Freddie Mercury’s birthday because the Zanzibar-born rock star was gay.”
• In Zimbabwe, members of Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe were once again expelled from a book fair and their literature seized by unidentified men while police watched.
• Permits for gay events were denied by officials in Ghana, Latvia, Moldova, and Russia. Police in Estonia failed to protect gay rights marchers.
Positive:
• In Brazil, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, “The Secretariat of State Security in Rio de Janeiro State in partnership with NGOs operated a hot line and offered professional counseling services to victims of antihomosexual crimes.”
• In Bulgaria, the gay rights group Gemini won three gay-related discrimination cases.
• In the Czech Republic, “parliament passed registered domestic partnership legislation.”
• In Israel, “the High Court issued a ruling requiring the government to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in foreign jurisdictions.”
• In Mexico, Mexico City passed a civil unions bill.
• In Mozambique, “a major newspaper published, for the first time, an article arguing in favor of homosexual rights.”
• In Singapore, “the government approved a gay and lesbian festival that included movie showings, book signings, and theater performances.”
• South Africa legalized same-sex marriage.
Mixed:
• In Burma, despite widespread human rights abuses including anti-gay discrimination, “homosexuals had a certain degree of protection through societal traditions. Transgender performers commonly provided entertainment at traditional observances.”
• In Germany, “authorities in Baden‑Wuerttemberg required residents seeking naturalization to complete a questionnaire concerning their political and moral beliefs and their adherence to the constitution. ... Critics viewed the questionnaire, which included questions on attitudes toward women’s and gay rights ... as discriminating against Muslim immigrants.”
• In Romania, a gay pride parade “was marred by violent physical and verbal attacks by onlookers” who “hurled bottles, food, and buckets of water” and were egged on by Orthodox priests and seminarians. On the other hand, “police were reportedly alerted in advance to the planned attacks and dispatched a highly organized force to protect the marchers.”
• In Saudi Arabia, while sodomy is punishable by death or flogging, there was regular discussion in the media of homosexuality (previously taboo), and a case was dismissed against a journalist charged with promoting homosexuality for suggesting that homosexuality has a genetic cause.
• In Sweden, “The government allocated extra funding to combat honor-related violence [by Muslim immigrants] against young women and men (including homosexuals).”
As I searched through the immense document for the LGBT- and HIV-related portions, it was hard not to be overwhelmed by all the brutality and inhumanity; but gradually I became inspired by the realization that LGBT people are organizing everywhere from Mali to Fiji. Great things grow from small seeds.
by Richard J. Rosendall
First published in Bay Windows, March 22, 2007
Article I of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights begins, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” The United States was not just a party to its adoption in 1948; the key force behind its creation was Eleanor Roosevelt. While sexual orientation is not a protected category, the U.S. State Department since 1991 has included gay rights abuses and advances in its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, tracking the status of internationally recognized human rights.
The reports for 2006, released on March 6, 2007, reflect a dramatic improvement in LGBT- and HIV-related information gathering. In the reports for 2005, I found relevant items under 105 countries. For 2006, the number has risen to 142 countries. You can view my extracts online at http://www.glaa.org/archive/2007/CountryReports2006.shtml .
Here are some highlights, organized in three broad groupings.
Negative:
• In many countries, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) reported HIV/AIDS in prisons.
• In Cambodia, “Trafficking victims, especially those trafficked for sexual exploitation, faced the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS.”
• In Cameroon, “false allegations of homosexuality were used to harass enemies or to extort money.”
• In Central African Republic, “An estimated 110,000 children have lost one or both parents to HIV/AIDS, and children accused of sorcery ... were often expelled from their households.”
• In China, HIV/AIDS activist Hu Jia “was detained and held incommunicado for 41 days.” His attorney was similarly detained.
• In Egypt, “The government ... has occasionally used emergency courts to prosecute homosexuals ....”
• In El Salvador, “There were no developments regarding the Governance Ministry’s 2005 denial of legal status to En Nombre de la Rosa, a homosexual and transvestite advocacy NGO,” and no developments in investigations into the 2004 killings of two transvestites.
"It was hard not to be overwhelmed by all the brutality and inhumanity; but gradually I became inspired by the realization that LGBT people are organizing everywhere from Mali to Fiji."• In Guinea, “An international NGO reported the prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS among incarcerated minor boys to be as high as 50 percent, suggesting sexual abuse.”
• In Iraq, “There were several reported examples of juveniles sentenced to up to 10 years in jail for having engaged in same-sex sexual relations.”
• In Jamaica, the gay rights group J-FLAG reported “police harassment, arbitrary detention, mob attacks, stabbings, harassment of homosexual patients by hospital and prison staff, and targeted shootings of homosexuals.”
• In Kuwait, “police raided a party where homosexuals were allegedly celebrating a wedding,” and a law was approved “to impose a fine of $3,450 and/or one year’s imprisonment for those imitating the opposite sex.”
• In Rwanda, “Due to the genocide and deaths from HIV/AIDS, there were numerous households headed by children, some of whom resorted to prostitution to survive.”
• In Tanzania, a Muslim NGO “blocked a local restaurant’s planned celebration of Freddie Mercury’s birthday because the Zanzibar-born rock star was gay.”
• In Zimbabwe, members of Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe were once again expelled from a book fair and their literature seized by unidentified men while police watched.
• Permits for gay events were denied by officials in Ghana, Latvia, Moldova, and Russia. Police in Estonia failed to protect gay rights marchers.
Positive:
• In Brazil, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, “The Secretariat of State Security in Rio de Janeiro State in partnership with NGOs operated a hot line and offered professional counseling services to victims of antihomosexual crimes.”
• In Bulgaria, the gay rights group Gemini won three gay-related discrimination cases.
• In the Czech Republic, “parliament passed registered domestic partnership legislation.”
• In Israel, “the High Court issued a ruling requiring the government to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in foreign jurisdictions.”
• In Mexico, Mexico City passed a civil unions bill.
• In Mozambique, “a major newspaper published, for the first time, an article arguing in favor of homosexual rights.”
• In Singapore, “the government approved a gay and lesbian festival that included movie showings, book signings, and theater performances.”
• South Africa legalized same-sex marriage.
Mixed:
• In Burma, despite widespread human rights abuses including anti-gay discrimination, “homosexuals had a certain degree of protection through societal traditions. Transgender performers commonly provided entertainment at traditional observances.”
• In Germany, “authorities in Baden‑Wuerttemberg required residents seeking naturalization to complete a questionnaire concerning their political and moral beliefs and their adherence to the constitution. ... Critics viewed the questionnaire, which included questions on attitudes toward women’s and gay rights ... as discriminating against Muslim immigrants.”
• In Romania, a gay pride parade “was marred by violent physical and verbal attacks by onlookers” who “hurled bottles, food, and buckets of water” and were egged on by Orthodox priests and seminarians. On the other hand, “police were reportedly alerted in advance to the planned attacks and dispatched a highly organized force to protect the marchers.”
• In Saudi Arabia, while sodomy is punishable by death or flogging, there was regular discussion in the media of homosexuality (previously taboo), and a case was dismissed against a journalist charged with promoting homosexuality for suggesting that homosexuality has a genetic cause.
• In Sweden, “The government allocated extra funding to combat honor-related violence [by Muslim immigrants] against young women and men (including homosexuals).”
As I searched through the immense document for the LGBT- and HIV-related portions, it was hard not to be overwhelmed by all the brutality and inhumanity; but gradually I became inspired by the realization that LGBT people are organizing everywhere from Mali to Fiji. Great things grow from small seeds.
Spanking! Really?
Spanking fetishes make men happier
AAP | Tuesday, 17 April 2007
Bondage and discipline may actually make men happier, according to the first national survey of Australians' fetish habits.
The new sex study has revealed that two per cent of Australian men and 1.4 per cent of women admit to enjoying dominance, submission and sadomasochism-type sex in the past year.
But researchers involved in the phone survey of 20,000 people say they expect many more Australians to be engaging in the practice but unwilling to label it BDSM (bondage, discipline, domination and submission).
"There will definitely be more men and women who have sexual tastes in this direction but won't call it this," said Dr Juliet Richters, of the University of New South Wales.
"They might not like sex magazines but they just happen to like being tied up and spanked as part of foreplay.
"Ask them if they're into BDSM they'll say 'Yuck, no'."
The survey results, to be presented at the World Association of Sexual Health congress in Sydney this week, give the first snapshot of Australians involved in bondage behaviour.
These fetishes were most common among gay, lesbian and bisexual people and heterosexuals who are "bi-interested", said Richters, the lead researcher.
In women, BDSM was most popular among under 20-year-olds and those who had a partner they didn't live with. There were no age or relationship trends in men, she said.
People who engaged in the habit were more likely to be sexually adventurous in other ways, like trying anal sex and phone sex, looking at internet pornography or using sex toys.
"These are people for whom sex is a hobby," Richters said.
They were no more likely to have suffered sexual difficulties, sexual abuse or coercion or anxiety than other Australians.
In fact, says Richters, men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men.
"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," she said.
"It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that.
"There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are."
At the other end of the spectrum – least happy – were men who reported being attracted to men but had never acted on their desire and didn't regard themselves as gay.
Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children and were therefore "dysfunctional".
"We really found that BDSM is simply a sexual interest or subculture attractive to a minority, not a pathological symptom of past abuse or difficulty with 'normal' sex," Dr Richters said.
"They've just got a broader and more unusual sexual repertoire than most."
AAP | Tuesday, 17 April 2007
Bondage and discipline may actually make men happier, according to the first national survey of Australians' fetish habits.
The new sex study has revealed that two per cent of Australian men and 1.4 per cent of women admit to enjoying dominance, submission and sadomasochism-type sex in the past year.
But researchers involved in the phone survey of 20,000 people say they expect many more Australians to be engaging in the practice but unwilling to label it BDSM (bondage, discipline, domination and submission).
"There will definitely be more men and women who have sexual tastes in this direction but won't call it this," said Dr Juliet Richters, of the University of New South Wales.
"They might not like sex magazines but they just happen to like being tied up and spanked as part of foreplay.
"Ask them if they're into BDSM they'll say 'Yuck, no'."
The survey results, to be presented at the World Association of Sexual Health congress in Sydney this week, give the first snapshot of Australians involved in bondage behaviour.
These fetishes were most common among gay, lesbian and bisexual people and heterosexuals who are "bi-interested", said Richters, the lead researcher.
In women, BDSM was most popular among under 20-year-olds and those who had a partner they didn't live with. There were no age or relationship trends in men, she said.
People who engaged in the habit were more likely to be sexually adventurous in other ways, like trying anal sex and phone sex, looking at internet pornography or using sex toys.
"These are people for whom sex is a hobby," Richters said.
They were no more likely to have suffered sexual difficulties, sexual abuse or coercion or anxiety than other Australians.
In fact, says Richters, men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men.
"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," she said.
"It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that.
"There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are."
At the other end of the spectrum – least happy – were men who reported being attracted to men but had never acted on their desire and didn't regard themselves as gay.
Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children and were therefore "dysfunctional".
"We really found that BDSM is simply a sexual interest or subculture attractive to a minority, not a pathological symptom of past abuse or difficulty with 'normal' sex," Dr Richters said.
"They've just got a broader and more unusual sexual repertoire than most."
Saturday, April 21, 2007
From horror to healing
Not that I care if Cho Hseung-Hui was gay or wasn't crazy, he killed 33 people. Was it meant to be? Should we now think of that one moment in time, when they were killed, or celebrate the lives they've beautifully and happily lived?
To the fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters of the victims who advocate for their children today, we salute them.
To the fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters of the victims who advocate for their children today, we salute them.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Where do broken hearts go?
Can they find their way home? Back to the loving arms of society?
Today our hearts go to the loved ones of those murdered at Virginia Tech. Their lives and promises cut short - by an act of thoughtlessness. But wait? The killer did think about it first! We saw the video he sent to NBC, he said "I could have fled..." It kills me inside. Guns are no roses. Why is it still so easy to buy them in America?
The faces of the victims continue to haunt us.
We know that some of them were accomplished sportsmen/women, one was an aspiring dancer, and...
Our hearts go to the victims' mommies and daddies, brothers and sisters, gramps, nanas, cousins, uncles and aunts...and their friends who love them so much. Their loss is not ordinary and neccessary. Another lesson to be learned? Do we ahve to still learn the hard way? Why can't we learn the easier way? There's no escaping the bullet when it is shot at you, is there?
My heart sank when I learned that the killer was an Asian man, a young, educated, Americanized Korean man to be exact. I am afraid even as Malaysian-American. Being Asian-American, I am afraid to be blamed for what he did. Or, to be judged for what he did. He was clearly a very broken man. The rest of us, not. We are God-fearing and peace-loving people.
And, there is no need to blame the Korean movie, Oldboy either -- that they said must have inspired Cho Hseung-Hui to kill. He was clearly very determined to kill and be killed. But yet smart enough to shoot himself and escaped the long arms of the law. He is gone. But we don't care about him and the family he left behind, do we? Where are they now? I cannot imagine their pains and their anger. It is easy to say we are sorry to the families of those who died after they were shot by a mentally disturbed man with a gun. Not that is it much easier to accept if Cho had only used a knife or a parang! But it kills us knowing ... that it was so unfair and unnecessary.
Today our hearts go to the loved ones of those murdered at Virginia Tech. Their lives and promises cut short - by an act of thoughtlessness. But wait? The killer did think about it first! We saw the video he sent to NBC, he said "I could have fled..." It kills me inside. Guns are no roses. Why is it still so easy to buy them in America?
The faces of the victims continue to haunt us.
We know that some of them were accomplished sportsmen/women, one was an aspiring dancer, and...
Our hearts go to the victims' mommies and daddies, brothers and sisters, gramps, nanas, cousins, uncles and aunts...and their friends who love them so much. Their loss is not ordinary and neccessary. Another lesson to be learned? Do we ahve to still learn the hard way? Why can't we learn the easier way? There's no escaping the bullet when it is shot at you, is there?
My heart sank when I learned that the killer was an Asian man, a young, educated, Americanized Korean man to be exact. I am afraid even as Malaysian-American. Being Asian-American, I am afraid to be blamed for what he did. Or, to be judged for what he did. He was clearly a very broken man. The rest of us, not. We are God-fearing and peace-loving people.
And, there is no need to blame the Korean movie, Oldboy either -- that they said must have inspired Cho Hseung-Hui to kill. He was clearly very determined to kill and be killed. But yet smart enough to shoot himself and escaped the long arms of the law. He is gone. But we don't care about him and the family he left behind, do we? Where are they now? I cannot imagine their pains and their anger. It is easy to say we are sorry to the families of those who died after they were shot by a mentally disturbed man with a gun. Not that is it much easier to accept if Cho had only used a knife or a parang! But it kills us knowing ... that it was so unfair and unnecessary.
Monday, April 16, 2007
We can sue Adoption.com
Yes the judge in San Francisco says gays can now sue Adoption.com. More than three years after an internet adoption site refused to allow a gay couple to post their profile, a federal judge this week allowed the pair's discrimination lawsuit to go to trial.
According to AP, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton rejected arguments that Adoption.com had free speech rights to exclude same-sex couples from this paid listings, which are designed to match birth mothers with qualified parents.
In allowing the lawsuit to go to trial in June, Hamilton also dismissed the company's claim that California anti-bias policies did not apply because Adoption.com is based in Tempe, Ariz, where state laws don't bar disctrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status.
The ruling definitely set a precedent for Californians who feel that they have been discriminated against for other reasons, such as race, or religion, in their dealings with companies that operate over the internet.
According to AP, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton rejected arguments that Adoption.com had free speech rights to exclude same-sex couples from this paid listings, which are designed to match birth mothers with qualified parents.
In allowing the lawsuit to go to trial in June, Hamilton also dismissed the company's claim that California anti-bias policies did not apply because Adoption.com is based in Tempe, Ariz, where state laws don't bar disctrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status.
The ruling definitely set a precedent for Californians who feel that they have been discriminated against for other reasons, such as race, or religion, in their dealings with companies that operate over the internet.
Friday, April 13, 2007
DownUnder says no to HIV+ immigrants
Just when you thought he is one of the smartest leaders of the modern commonwealth countries...John Howard of Australia said Friday people with the AIDS virus should not be allowed to migrate to Australia, and his government was investigating whether it could tighten existing restrictions.
The comments triggered anger among AIDS workers, who accused Howard of xenophobia and of blaming sufferers for their illness.
Gays around the world love Australia and the Australians -- some of whom are world class individuals and high achievers. For a gay-friendly country, it is sad to know her leader is not thinking straight.
According to a report by The Advocate, he said "My initial reaction is no." to a question. However, he said there may be "humanitarian considerations" in certain cases.
Do you homos think Australia should allow their PM do that or think that?
Howard was asked about the issue during a visit to Melbourne, the capital of Victoria state, where the state health minister said this week that 70 of the 334 new HIV infection cases reported in Victoria in 2006 were among immigrants who had arrived in the country with the virus.
Australia has long had restrictions on people who try to immigrate who have health problems that could threaten to spread disease or impose an additional burden on the public health system, according to The Advocate.
Many countries, including the United States, impose restrictions on immigration and visa approvals for people with HIV, though there are often exceptions in special cases.
AIDS was first diagnosed in Australia in the early 1980s, and the disease has mostly been concentrated in large cities such as Sydney and in high-risk groups such as gay men and needle-sharing drug addicts.
The National Center for HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research said in an October 2006 report that since it was first detected, 25,703 infections had been reported in Australia, of which 9,827 people developed full-blown AIDS and 6,621 had died.
The comments triggered anger among AIDS workers, who accused Howard of xenophobia and of blaming sufferers for their illness.
Gays around the world love Australia and the Australians -- some of whom are world class individuals and high achievers. For a gay-friendly country, it is sad to know her leader is not thinking straight.
According to a report by The Advocate, he said "My initial reaction is no." to a question. However, he said there may be "humanitarian considerations" in certain cases.
Do you homos think Australia should allow their PM do that or think that?
Howard was asked about the issue during a visit to Melbourne, the capital of Victoria state, where the state health minister said this week that 70 of the 334 new HIV infection cases reported in Victoria in 2006 were among immigrants who had arrived in the country with the virus.
Australia has long had restrictions on people who try to immigrate who have health problems that could threaten to spread disease or impose an additional burden on the public health system, according to The Advocate.
Many countries, including the United States, impose restrictions on immigration and visa approvals for people with HIV, though there are often exceptions in special cases.
AIDS was first diagnosed in Australia in the early 1980s, and the disease has mostly been concentrated in large cities such as Sydney and in high-risk groups such as gay men and needle-sharing drug addicts.
The National Center for HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research said in an October 2006 report that since it was first detected, 25,703 infections had been reported in Australia, of which 9,827 people developed full-blown AIDS and 6,621 had died.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Just quit smoking
Yes that's what a friend told me to do last year. I picked Dec 31st to smoke my last stick of American Spirits - on a rooftop of a friend's apartment in a Manhanttan highrise! I am tired of stubbing out everywhere lookng like a school drop out who ditch math class for a smoke. I've also stopped drinking. Now I drink occasionally but that doesn't mean I am not going to have my Stoli/Cranberry tonight. A strange defense machanism you think? I have to shield myself from your criticism...anyway if you have been thiking about quitting, just do it. All this sounds a little too much like a Lifetime Original movie to you? Uh huh. Nope this is real. Sometimes you have to quit.
And Imus is disgracefully booted out of radio
CBS plucks off the mike on Imus. And that's good news!
Not that I care whether he is gay or not, Imus is an asshole in the truest of form.
For years, according to reports on Radar Online, politicians, pundits, and power players have clamored to appear on Don Imus's radio program—which, until today, was also telecast on MSNBC—to hawk their latest books and TV shows to his audience of 3.5 million. Then came "Nappy-headed Ho"-gate.
In my opinion, no one from ABC should show up on Imus again. He is not that good anyway! He may have a good rating but none of what he says other than humiliating others, other than his loved ones, are important to our economy, our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places. With a look like a devil and little like Leona Hemsley, Imus is a very unattractive looking guy as he is mean and vicious. Thank God he is not gay.
On Wednesday, Radar Online polled several dozen members of the I-Man's former stable to find out if they would continue to appear on his beleaguered show.
Not that I care whether he is gay or not, Imus is an asshole in the truest of form.
For years, according to reports on Radar Online, politicians, pundits, and power players have clamored to appear on Don Imus's radio program—which, until today, was also telecast on MSNBC—to hawk their latest books and TV shows to his audience of 3.5 million. Then came "Nappy-headed Ho"-gate.
In my opinion, no one from ABC should show up on Imus again. He is not that good anyway! He may have a good rating but none of what he says other than humiliating others, other than his loved ones, are important to our economy, our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places. With a look like a devil and little like Leona Hemsley, Imus is a very unattractive looking guy as he is mean and vicious. Thank God he is not gay.
On Wednesday, Radar Online polled several dozen members of the I-Man's former stable to find out if they would continue to appear on his beleaguered show.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Adoptive gay parents can post internet profiles...
A federal court judge in San Francisco ruled Tuesday that a gay couple can proceed with a lawsuit against an internet adoption service that allegedly refused to allow the couple to use its service.
According to a news report by 365Gay.com, Federal district court judge Phyllis J. Hamilton ruled that Michael and Rich Butler, of San Jose, can move to trial in their discrimination suit against the internet business known as Adoption.com and Adoption Profiles LLC. The business is owned by Arizona residents Nathan and Dale Gwilliam, who are also named in the suit.
The defendants charge a fee for permitting prospective adoptive parents to post internet profiles, which are then viewed by birth mothers seeking to place their children for adoption.
The Butlers alleged that the defendants violated California law by refusing to permit same-sex couples to use the profiling service.
The Butlers, who are represented by Orrick and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, allege in the suit that the defendants’ policy of refusing services to same-sex couples unlawfully discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, marital status, and sex.
“We are very pleased with the ruling,” said Michael Butler.
“When the Gwilliams refused to post our profile because we are a same-sex couple, we were very upset. But this case is not just about our family. It is about protecting everyone from discriminatory business practices.”
In her ruling, Judge Hamilton rejected the defendants’ argument that they are not bound by California law because they are an internet business based in Arizona and do not have any physical offices or staff located in California.
“When an out-of-state business solicits California and does business with customers living in California, California has an interest in ensuring that the out-of-state business does not discriminate against the California customers,” Judge Hamilton's ruling said.
“By every objective measure, the Adoption.com website does more business with Californians than with any other state in the Country,” said Neel Chatterjee, a partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutfcliffe who represents the Butlers in the case.
“This ruling recognizes California’s strong interest in protecting its residents against arbitrary discrimination by businesses who decide to transact business in this state.”
Judge Hamilton also rejected the Gwilliams’ claim that requiring them to comply with California’s anti-discrimination laws would violate their constitutional right to freedom of speech.
“Plaintiffs are not seeking to place any restrictions on what defendants are permitted to say or to compel them to say anything," the ruling said. "It is the discriminatory conduct that is at issue here – defendants’ refusal to do business with the plaintiffs, based on their sexual orientation and/or marital status.”
“This ruling is a tremendous victory for California consumers,” said Shannon Minter, NCLR’s legal director, who also represents the Butlers.
“The First Amendment protects speech, not discriminatory conduct. If business owners could get away with refusing to serve certain groups just by claiming a right to express discriminatory beliefs, there would be no civil rights protections.”
We are looking forward to the trial,” said Rich Butler. “It has taken more than five years to reach this point, and we are ready to present our case in trial. We hope to put this discriminatory policy to an end.”
According to a news report by 365Gay.com, Federal district court judge Phyllis J. Hamilton ruled that Michael and Rich Butler, of San Jose, can move to trial in their discrimination suit against the internet business known as Adoption.com and Adoption Profiles LLC. The business is owned by Arizona residents Nathan and Dale Gwilliam, who are also named in the suit.
The defendants charge a fee for permitting prospective adoptive parents to post internet profiles, which are then viewed by birth mothers seeking to place their children for adoption.
The Butlers alleged that the defendants violated California law by refusing to permit same-sex couples to use the profiling service.
The Butlers, who are represented by Orrick and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, allege in the suit that the defendants’ policy of refusing services to same-sex couples unlawfully discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, marital status, and sex.
“We are very pleased with the ruling,” said Michael Butler.
“When the Gwilliams refused to post our profile because we are a same-sex couple, we were very upset. But this case is not just about our family. It is about protecting everyone from discriminatory business practices.”
In her ruling, Judge Hamilton rejected the defendants’ argument that they are not bound by California law because they are an internet business based in Arizona and do not have any physical offices or staff located in California.
“When an out-of-state business solicits California and does business with customers living in California, California has an interest in ensuring that the out-of-state business does not discriminate against the California customers,” Judge Hamilton's ruling said.
“By every objective measure, the Adoption.com website does more business with Californians than with any other state in the Country,” said Neel Chatterjee, a partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutfcliffe who represents the Butlers in the case.
“This ruling recognizes California’s strong interest in protecting its residents against arbitrary discrimination by businesses who decide to transact business in this state.”
Judge Hamilton also rejected the Gwilliams’ claim that requiring them to comply with California’s anti-discrimination laws would violate their constitutional right to freedom of speech.
“Plaintiffs are not seeking to place any restrictions on what defendants are permitted to say or to compel them to say anything," the ruling said. "It is the discriminatory conduct that is at issue here – defendants’ refusal to do business with the plaintiffs, based on their sexual orientation and/or marital status.”
“This ruling is a tremendous victory for California consumers,” said Shannon Minter, NCLR’s legal director, who also represents the Butlers.
“The First Amendment protects speech, not discriminatory conduct. If business owners could get away with refusing to serve certain groups just by claiming a right to express discriminatory beliefs, there would be no civil rights protections.”
We are looking forward to the trial,” said Rich Butler. “It has taken more than five years to reach this point, and we are ready to present our case in trial. We hope to put this discriminatory policy to an end.”
So happy for Danielynn...
And the dady is Larry Birkhead! Yes, he is the father! He seems nice, too, and unpretentious. He is the father of the cute little Danielynn. Whether or not you think he is genuine or just there for the money. Anna Nicole Smith is smiling in heaven. I so happy that she has a daddy after Anna passed away. She could not be any cuter, too. I always thought Anna was one of the few perfectly-looking women God has ever created. So pale and blonde, with this incredible soft serve ice cream vulnerability, like ripe summer peaches hot from the sun, or rice pudding made from grains boiled for over a day on the stove; Anna Nicole Smith was the goddess of all things that are sweet and enveloping.
I know she is happy where she is. It is easy to picture her there, riding the clouds, her young son at her side, a million miles above the paparazzi and the tabloids, the gossip columns and the lawsuits and Bobby Trendy and Trimspa and the rest. I hope she feels thin, and nothing is bugging her, and that she doesn't have any more doubts or worries. Only puppies and kisses and love. Because she deserves that.
I know she is happy where she is. It is easy to picture her there, riding the clouds, her young son at her side, a million miles above the paparazzi and the tabloids, the gossip columns and the lawsuits and Bobby Trendy and Trimspa and the rest. I hope she feels thin, and nothing is bugging her, and that she doesn't have any more doubts or worries. Only puppies and kisses and love. Because she deserves that.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
What? And the hits just keep on coming...
What is wrong with the army? Haven't you heard it?
An Army recruiter sent antigay and racist rants to a Jersey City, N.J., job seeker via e-mail recently - bashing gay again. Never mind he has been suspended from recruiting and is under investigation by the military, but what the ffff is going on?
According to The Advocate,On February 27, Sgt. Marcia Ramode contacted freelance copywriter Corey Andrew Powell, who had posted his résumé on CareerBuilder.com, inviting him to apply to the armed forces. Powell responded that he was openly gay and asked if that would disqualify him. The two exchanged e-mails for the next three days in which Ramode became increasingly insulting and racist.
According to the Chicago Tribune, she wrote, "You head off to gay land of people who have no morals, and get rid of yourself. Personally I think being gay is disgusting and immoral. You are definitely unqualified, now take you gay self someplace else we do not tolerate gay people like you in any part of the military."
Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the U.S. Army Recruitment Command at Fort Knox, Ky., confirmed to the Tribune that Ramode has been suspended from recruiting duties until the investigation is complete. Citing the investigation, he did not comment on the sergeant's actions but indicated that there is a procedure in place for handling openly gay applicants and all recruiters are expected to behave professionally.
"If an applicant makes a statement that he or she is homosexual, the recruiter must inform the applicant in a professional manner that they are not eligible for enlistment," Smith said in a statement. (The Advocate)
An Army recruiter sent antigay and racist rants to a Jersey City, N.J., job seeker via e-mail recently - bashing gay again. Never mind he has been suspended from recruiting and is under investigation by the military, but what the ffff is going on?
According to The Advocate,On February 27, Sgt. Marcia Ramode contacted freelance copywriter Corey Andrew Powell, who had posted his résumé on CareerBuilder.com, inviting him to apply to the armed forces. Powell responded that he was openly gay and asked if that would disqualify him. The two exchanged e-mails for the next three days in which Ramode became increasingly insulting and racist.
According to the Chicago Tribune, she wrote, "You head off to gay land of people who have no morals, and get rid of yourself. Personally I think being gay is disgusting and immoral. You are definitely unqualified, now take you gay self someplace else we do not tolerate gay people like you in any part of the military."
Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the U.S. Army Recruitment Command at Fort Knox, Ky., confirmed to the Tribune that Ramode has been suspended from recruiting duties until the investigation is complete. Citing the investigation, he did not comment on the sergeant's actions but indicated that there is a procedure in place for handling openly gay applicants and all recruiters are expected to behave professionally.
"If an applicant makes a statement that he or she is homosexual, the recruiter must inform the applicant in a professional manner that they are not eligible for enlistment," Smith said in a statement. (The Advocate)
Saturday, April 7, 2007
Way to go Petrelis!
I absolutely think Michael Petrelis is right about IGLHRC recently - that the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission should have issued a statement at least on the portions of the U.S. State Department's annual report on human rights that deal with LGBT issues and HIV/AIDS-related incidents.
IGLHRC and its executive director, Paula Ettelbrick, would have gained more respect from the gay community worldwide by issuing a press release on the State Department's findings.
This only make Ettelbrick looks outdated and irrelevant to some of us. It is no wonder why IGLHRC and Ettelbrick have been getting rotten eggs from gay people of late. We need leaders who want to fight for our rights, not ones with so many excuses. Just publish the goddamn thing!
IGLHRC and its executive director, Paula Ettelbrick, would have gained more respect from the gay community worldwide by issuing a press release on the State Department's findings.
This only make Ettelbrick looks outdated and irrelevant to some of us. It is no wonder why IGLHRC and Ettelbrick have been getting rotten eggs from gay people of late. We need leaders who want to fight for our rights, not ones with so many excuses. Just publish the goddamn thing!
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Out Magazine rocks!
‘Out’ Ranks the Top 50 Gays; Anderson Coopers #2
When New York did a "Gay Life Now" issue in 2001, only seven of the forty prominent New York gays asked to pose for the cover were willing. Those big shots may have been gay, and they may have been out, but it just wouldn't do for them to be gay and out on the cover of a magazine.
"There was a time when the closet was a necessary safe haven," our pal Maer Roshan, who edited the issue, wrote in an angry 2,000-word essay. "But now, it exists as an anachronistic monument to shame. It's time for our public figures to stop hiding in there — and for journalists to stop helping them." Six years and a month later, maybe at least that second part has come true.
Here's a first glimpse at the cover of Out magazine's "50 Most Powerful Gay Men and Women in America" issue. (Click here for a larger image.) Those are models holding Jodie Foster and Anderson Cooper masks on the cover. Neither, of course, would appear themselves.
1. David Geffen
2. Anderson Cooper
3. Ellen DeGeneres
4. Tim Gill
5. Barney Frank
6. Rosie O’Donnell
7. The New York Times Gay Mafia: Richard Berke, Ben Brantley, Frank Bruni, Stuart Elliott, Adam Nagourney, Stefano Tonchi, and Eric Wilson
8. Marc Jacobs
9. Andrew Tobias
10. Brian Graden
11. Jann Wenner
12. Andrew Sullivan
13. Suze Orman
14. Joe Solmonese
15. Fred Hochberg
16. Christine Quinn
17. Perez Hilton
18. Scott Rudin
19. John Aravosis
20. Sheila Kuehl
21. James B. Stewart
22. Nick Denton
23. Tom Ford
24. Nate Berkus
25. Adam Moss
26. Jim Nelson
27. Lorri L. Jean
28. Adam Rose
29. Annie Leibovitz
30. Simon Halls and Stephen Huvane
31. Bryan Lourd
32. Bryan Singer
33. Jonathan Burnham
34. Brian Swardstrom
35. Robert Greenblatt
36. Chi Chi LaRue
37. Dan Mathews
38. Neil Meron and Craig Zadan
39. Ingrid Sischy
40. Marc Cherry
41. Carolyn Strauss
42. Irshad Manji
43. Jodie Foster
44. Christine Vachon
45. André Leon Talley
46. Hilary Rosen
47. Matthew Marks
48. Benny Medina
49. Mitchell Gold
50. David Kuhn
When New York did a "Gay Life Now" issue in 2001, only seven of the forty prominent New York gays asked to pose for the cover were willing. Those big shots may have been gay, and they may have been out, but it just wouldn't do for them to be gay and out on the cover of a magazine.
"There was a time when the closet was a necessary safe haven," our pal Maer Roshan, who edited the issue, wrote in an angry 2,000-word essay. "But now, it exists as an anachronistic monument to shame. It's time for our public figures to stop hiding in there — and for journalists to stop helping them." Six years and a month later, maybe at least that second part has come true.
Here's a first glimpse at the cover of Out magazine's "50 Most Powerful Gay Men and Women in America" issue. (Click here for a larger image.) Those are models holding Jodie Foster and Anderson Cooper masks on the cover. Neither, of course, would appear themselves.
1. David Geffen
2. Anderson Cooper
3. Ellen DeGeneres
4. Tim Gill
5. Barney Frank
6. Rosie O’Donnell
7. The New York Times Gay Mafia: Richard Berke, Ben Brantley, Frank Bruni, Stuart Elliott, Adam Nagourney, Stefano Tonchi, and Eric Wilson
8. Marc Jacobs
9. Andrew Tobias
10. Brian Graden
11. Jann Wenner
12. Andrew Sullivan
13. Suze Orman
14. Joe Solmonese
15. Fred Hochberg
16. Christine Quinn
17. Perez Hilton
18. Scott Rudin
19. John Aravosis
20. Sheila Kuehl
21. James B. Stewart
22. Nick Denton
23. Tom Ford
24. Nate Berkus
25. Adam Moss
26. Jim Nelson
27. Lorri L. Jean
28. Adam Rose
29. Annie Leibovitz
30. Simon Halls and Stephen Huvane
31. Bryan Lourd
32. Bryan Singer
33. Jonathan Burnham
34. Brian Swardstrom
35. Robert Greenblatt
36. Chi Chi LaRue
37. Dan Mathews
38. Neil Meron and Craig Zadan
39. Ingrid Sischy
40. Marc Cherry
41. Carolyn Strauss
42. Irshad Manji
43. Jodie Foster
44. Christine Vachon
45. André Leon Talley
46. Hilary Rosen
47. Matthew Marks
48. Benny Medina
49. Mitchell Gold
50. David Kuhn
Hmmm...Anderson is?
MAGLOMANIA! from Radaronline
Not-out Cooper on Out's Gay Power List
OUTED CooperMost of the celebrities and tycoons on Out magazine's first Gay Power List (May issue, on newsstands Apr. 17) will probably be grateful for the honor, but maybe not the two on the cover. That's because Anderson Cooper and Jodie Foster have never publicly identified themselves as gay, though neither has ever challenged plentiful speculation to that effect.
"It's a bit of chutzpah on our part," acknowledges Out editor in chief Aaron Hicklin. But he says it wasn't merely an attempt to stir up controversy. "The A-list and even B-list gays are mostly in the closet still, and those are the kinds of people we need to have on our cover. This is a way of addressing that."
While the ethics of outing are up for debate, Cooper and Foster, who appear on the cover in the form of models holding up masks of their faces, were fair game, says Hicklin, because they inhabit what he calls the "glass closet." "The Anderson Coopers and Jodie Fosters of the world don't go to any great lengths, if any at all, to pretend they have partners of the opposite sex. There are a lot of closeted gay men and women who aren't going to make that list because the risk of litigation [against Out] is too great."
A CNN spokeswoman said Cooper was out of the office and not immediately reachable; the network itself had no comment. A message left for Foster's spokeswoman wasn't immediately returned.
Not-out Cooper on Out's Gay Power List
OUTED CooperMost of the celebrities and tycoons on Out magazine's first Gay Power List (May issue, on newsstands Apr. 17) will probably be grateful for the honor, but maybe not the two on the cover. That's because Anderson Cooper and Jodie Foster have never publicly identified themselves as gay, though neither has ever challenged plentiful speculation to that effect.
"It's a bit of chutzpah on our part," acknowledges Out editor in chief Aaron Hicklin. But he says it wasn't merely an attempt to stir up controversy. "The A-list and even B-list gays are mostly in the closet still, and those are the kinds of people we need to have on our cover. This is a way of addressing that."
While the ethics of outing are up for debate, Cooper and Foster, who appear on the cover in the form of models holding up masks of their faces, were fair game, says Hicklin, because they inhabit what he calls the "glass closet." "The Anderson Coopers and Jodie Fosters of the world don't go to any great lengths, if any at all, to pretend they have partners of the opposite sex. There are a lot of closeted gay men and women who aren't going to make that list because the risk of litigation [against Out] is too great."
A CNN spokeswoman said Cooper was out of the office and not immediately reachable; the network itself had no comment. A message left for Foster's spokeswoman wasn't immediately returned.
Sportscaster Packer Slurs Gays
HOMPHOBIC SLUR Skip through Gonzales to hear Packer's comment
Lead CBS college basketball announcer and noted curmudgeon Billy Packer doesn't exactly endear himself to viewers with his holier-than-thou announcing style. He certainly didn't do himself any favors after dropping an anti-gay slur on Friday's edition of The Charlie Rose Show. The slip-up came at the end of Rose's video interview with Packer, who was in Atlanta for the men's Final Four. "You always fag out on that one for me, you know," Packer told Rose after the host joked that he'd jump on a plane to be a runner for Packer.
Packer's remark comes at a rather testy time for homophobia in sports, following former NBA point guard Tim Hardaway's now-infamous "I Hate Gay People" tirade, as well as New York Daily News gossip columnist Ben Widdicombe's curious blind item from April 2, in which he claims an active NFL player is considering coming out (a first for an active player).
This isn't the first time Packer's mouth has gotten him into trouble.
During a 1996 broadcast, he took heat for calling then Georgetown point guard Allen Iverson a "tough monkey." Four years later, he issued an apology to students at Duke after allegedly telling two female ushers who had asked to see his press credentials, "Since when do we let women control who gets into a men's basketball games? Why don't you go find a women's game to let people into?"
Calls to CBS seeking comment on Packer's remarks were not immediately returned.
Lead CBS college basketball announcer and noted curmudgeon Billy Packer doesn't exactly endear himself to viewers with his holier-than-thou announcing style. He certainly didn't do himself any favors after dropping an anti-gay slur on Friday's edition of The Charlie Rose Show. The slip-up came at the end of Rose's video interview with Packer, who was in Atlanta for the men's Final Four. "You always fag out on that one for me, you know," Packer told Rose after the host joked that he'd jump on a plane to be a runner for Packer.
Packer's remark comes at a rather testy time for homophobia in sports, following former NBA point guard Tim Hardaway's now-infamous "I Hate Gay People" tirade, as well as New York Daily News gossip columnist Ben Widdicombe's curious blind item from April 2, in which he claims an active NFL player is considering coming out (a first for an active player).
This isn't the first time Packer's mouth has gotten him into trouble.
During a 1996 broadcast, he took heat for calling then Georgetown point guard Allen Iverson a "tough monkey." Four years later, he issued an apology to students at Duke after allegedly telling two female ushers who had asked to see his press credentials, "Since when do we let women control who gets into a men's basketball games? Why don't you go find a women's game to let people into?"
Calls to CBS seeking comment on Packer's remarks were not immediately returned.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Just who is immoral?
All the LGBT media and all-news, LGBT-friendly TV and radio channels reported it -- General Peter Pace, who ignited a political firestorm recently by offering his personal point of view that we, homosexuals, are immoral are defending the controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. He defended the policy. And at the same calling gay people (including our soldiers) immoral.
The national debate that followed provided an interesting window into the ever-evolving psyche of the American political establishment as it comes to terms with how to address issues relating to LGBT Americans.
And that is not it. The 2008 Presidential candidates, Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton, have not yet said something we want to hear in their responses -- only to show that the intense debate over gay rights still finds our most seasoned political leaders - both Dems and Reps - stumbling and mumbling their way through an issue that remains front and center in today's political arena...
The national debate that followed provided an interesting window into the ever-evolving psyche of the American political establishment as it comes to terms with how to address issues relating to LGBT Americans.
And that is not it. The 2008 Presidential candidates, Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton, have not yet said something we want to hear in their responses -- only to show that the intense debate over gay rights still finds our most seasoned political leaders - both Dems and Reps - stumbling and mumbling their way through an issue that remains front and center in today's political arena...
Domestic Partner Equality in NYC
Yes! It's official.
On Wednesday, March 28,2007, our mayor, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, signed the domestic partnership bill into law.
"This legislation will ensure that in New York City, whatever married couples are entitled to domestic partners will be entitled to as well," said openly gay city council speaker, Christine Quinn.
"We cannot anticipate what benefits might be available down the road.
But the fact is that this legislation will ensure that the LGBT Community will not have to fight for equal rights and access everytime a new city benefit or service is available.
On Wednesday, March 28,2007, our mayor, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, signed the domestic partnership bill into law.
"This legislation will ensure that in New York City, whatever married couples are entitled to domestic partners will be entitled to as well," said openly gay city council speaker, Christine Quinn.
"We cannot anticipate what benefits might be available down the road.
But the fact is that this legislation will ensure that the LGBT Community will not have to fight for equal rights and access everytime a new city benefit or service is available.
From NY Blade
Queer Cop Sues NYPD After Flirting With Undercover Officer
Jai Aiken, a cop with the NYPD, plans to sue the NYPD for $15 million after other members of the police force tried to set him up in a sting, the New York Post reported. In an earlier incident, Aiken was accused of paying for hustlers and stolen guns. But after a police investigation into those allegations found no evidence that Aiken was guilty, the department tried to set him up, this time with an undercover cop who attempted to sell him a stolen iPod and TV. In an attempt to seduce the undercover cop, he allegedly took the bait and was charged with buying the merchandise. Int he trial, tapes of their conversations were played, which humiliated Aiken, according to The Post. A Brooklyn patrolman with an unblemished record, Aiken is suing for civil rights violations, wrongful arrest and imprisonment and malicious presecution. Good for him.
Jai Aiken, a cop with the NYPD, plans to sue the NYPD for $15 million after other members of the police force tried to set him up in a sting, the New York Post reported. In an earlier incident, Aiken was accused of paying for hustlers and stolen guns. But after a police investigation into those allegations found no evidence that Aiken was guilty, the department tried to set him up, this time with an undercover cop who attempted to sell him a stolen iPod and TV. In an attempt to seduce the undercover cop, he allegedly took the bait and was charged with buying the merchandise. Int he trial, tapes of their conversations were played, which humiliated Aiken, according to The Post. A Brooklyn patrolman with an unblemished record, Aiken is suing for civil rights violations, wrongful arrest and imprisonment and malicious presecution. Good for him.
Str8 Boys in Gay Porn...
RandyBlue.com has emerged, again, as one of the most popular adult sites on the Net and thanks to its abundance of hot videos and its stable of beautiful guys. In RandyBlue.com, the lines of gay and straight are blurred beyond recognition. Visitors can now enjoy the beauty of man on man sex. But, who are these straight guys that enter in the world of gay porn? JustUsBoys has the story. It recently was able to chat with two of Randy Blue's most popular guys to find out the psychology of the straight man in gay adult entertainment...check them out on RandyBlue.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)