Leading Evangelical Paid for Gay Sex
Yet another conservative, anti-gay, religious hypocrite bites the … dust:
Ted Haggard, one of the most prominent evangelical pastors in the nation, resigned today as president of the National Association of Evangelicals amid allegations that he carried on a three-year sexual relationship with a male prostitute.
Haggard, founder of the 14,000-member New Life Church, has denied the accusations but said in a statement released by the church today that he could "not continue to minister under the cloud created by accusations made on Denver talk radio this morning."
He has placed himself on administrative leave pending investigation, spiritual counsel and a decision by the church's board of overseers, the church's legal counsel said. Haggard founded the church in 1985.
[excerpt from Eric Gorski, Felisa Cardona and Manny Gonzales, "Haggard steps down amid gay affair inquiry", Denver Post, 2 November 2006.]
In: All, Current Events, Raised Eyebrows Dept.
Moyers on Wealth, Power, & Democracy
These are paragraphs I selected from Bill Moyers' "America 101", a speech he gave in San Diego on 27 October 2006 to the Council of Great City Schools.
[…]
Despite continued growth in the economy, real median household income declined between 2000 and 2004. Between 1980 and 2004, real wages in manufacturing fell 1 percent while the real income of the richest 1 percent rose – by 135 percent. In 1976 the top 1 percent of Americans owned 22 percent of our total wealth. Today, the top 1 percent controls 38 percent of our total wealth. In 1960, the gap in terms of wealth between the top 20 percent and the bottom 20 percent was 30 fold. Now it is more than 75 fold.Such concentrations of wealth would be far less of an issue if the rest of society were benefiting proportionately. But that’s not the case. According to Census Bureau data, Americans have become progressively less likely to advance up the socio-economic ladder. One study cited by Stephen Heinz concludes, “The rich are likely to remain rich and the poor are likely to remain poor.”
Aristotle thought injustice resulted from pleonexia, literally, “having more.” A class of people having more than their share of the common wealth was the characteristic feature of an unjust society. Plato thought that the common good required a ratio of only 5 to 1 between the richest and poorest members of a society. Even J.P. Morgan thought bosses should only get twenty times more than their workers, at most. How quaint: In 2005 the average CEO earned 262 times what the average worker got.
[…]
This wasn’t meant to be. America was not meant to be a country where the winner takes all. Our system of checks and balances – read the Federalist papers — was going to keep an equilibrium in how power works, and for whom. Because equitable access to public resources is the lifeblood of democracy, Americans made primary schooling free to all. Because everyone deserves a second chance, debtors – especially the relatively poor – were protected by state law against rich creditors. Charters to establish corporations were not restricted to elites. Government encouraged Americans to own their own piece of land, and even supported squatters’ rights. Equal access to opportunity began to materialize for millions of us.
[…]
It’s all right there in bold letters in the early manifestos of the Reagan Revolution – essential reading like William Simon’s A Time for Truth . He argued that “funds generated by business” would have to “rush by multimillions” into conservative causes to uproot the institutions and the “heretical” morality of the New Deal. An “alliance” between right-wing leaders and “men of action in the capitalist world” must mount a “veritable crusade” against everything brought forth by the Progressive era. Reading right out of the new reactionary playbook, the business press somberly concluded that “some people will obviously have to do with less…It will be a bitter pill for many Americans to swallow the idea of doing with less so that big business can have more,” BusinessWeek sermonized.
[…]
In 2001, 397,000 people who applied for the Earned Income Tax Credit were audited, one out of every 47 returns. That’s a rate eight times higher than the rate for people earning $100,000 or more. Only one out of every 366 returns of wealthy households was audited. Over the previous 11 years, in fact, audit rates for the poor increased by a third, while the wealthiest enjoyed a 90 percent decline in IRS scrutiny. Of all the 744,000 tax returns audited by the IRS in 2002, more than half, David Cay Johnston finds, were filed by the working poor. More than half of IRS audits targeted people who account for less than 20 percent of taxpayers, the poorest 20 percent.
[…]
William Henry Harrison, our ill-fated ninth president and unlikely Whig populist, once said that it’s “true Democratic feeling that all the measures of the Government are directed to the purpose of making the rich richer and the poor poorer.” I’d say it’s more than a feeling. It’s the God’s honest truth, and we need to see it for what it is – the betrayal of the American Revolution.
[…]
We know now that “a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” can, indeed, perish. And perish not under fallen battlements and bombs raining down and the sneak attack of some fanatical distant foe, but by the deliberate plunder of an organized minority – for our governing elites do not represent the majority of Americans – that methodically imposes its will on the laws and institutions of a people until the whole foundation has become their very throne.
[…]
Yet history tells us that concentrated wealth and political power can be challenged. The Jeffersonian “second revolution” of the 1790s; the populist revolt of the 1890s that led to the Progressive era of reform; the powerful electoral ratification of the New Deal; the equally powerful rejection of race and gender discrimination in the 1960s — all manifested the ordinary beliefs and values, collectively revived, to confront the domination by wealthy elites that had debased the American Promise inherent in our revolutionary beginnings.
Bond on Civil Rights
Marriage is a civil right. If you don't want gay people to marry in your church, good for you. But you can't say they can't marry in your city.
— Julian Bond, NAACP Chair
[Said in reference to a state constitutional amendment referendum that would ban marriage equality for gays in Virginia. Quoted in "NAACP Leader Denounces Anti-Gay Amendment", 365gay.com, 1 November 2006.]
In: All, Common-Place Book, Current Events
Bush's "Katrina Foreign Policy"
This [Bush] administration has given us a Katrina foreign policy—mistake upon mistake upon mistake. Unwilling to give our troops the armor that they need. Unwilling to have enough troops in place. Unwilling to give them the Humvees that they deserve to protect them. Unwilling to have a coalition that is adequate to be able to defend our interests. Our own intelligence agency has told us they’re creating more terrorists, not less. They’re making us less safe, not more. I think Americans are sick and tired of this game. These Republicans are afraid to stand up and debate a real veteran on this topic, and they’re afraid to debate, you know, they want to debate straw men, because they’re afraid to debate real men.
–John Kerry, 31 October 2006[excerpt from Kerry's statement via "Kerry Strikes Back", Shakespeare's Sister, 31 October 2006.]
In: All, Common-Place Book, Current Events
Culture of Thugs?
What an interesting question to ask your favorite conservative candidate, which we receive via Pam Spaulding:*
Homobigot Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) was approached by Ben Gelt of ProgressActionNow yesterday and was asked to respond to a question from an undecided voter in her district:
If you had the choice between saving a soldier's life and preventing a gay marriage, which would you choose, Congresswoman?
Guess what? She runs away, and her handlers/goons push at the camera, and rough up Gelt on a public street. What a class act she is.
Pop over to the Blend (link below) for the video record.
———-
*Pam Spaulding, "Marilyn Musgrave, gay-bashing coward", Pam's House Blend, 31 October 2006.
NYDPs
The end of marriage as we know it?
The data tells [sic] it straight — three quarters of domestic partnerships in New York City are heterosexual couples.
"So far this year, 27% of overall domestic partnership registrations are same- sex couples. We are on par percentage-wise with last year," said Michael McSweeney, first deputy at the Office of the City Clerk.
For the first 10 months of this year, there were 2,863 domestic partnership registrations, of which only 767 were homosexual couples. In 2005, there were 815 same-sex domestic partnerships out of 3,066.
[excerpt from Chuck Bennett, "Domestic partnerships mostly straight couples", Newsday, 30 October 2006.]
In: All, Current Events, Plus Ca Change...
'Wings' & 'Wonderland' Press
Last night was our last performance of "Scenes in Wonderland" and "Wings", the two, one-act shows that our theatre group did this fall, both of which I directed. The production came out quite well and all the performances were very good despite little variations that come with live theatre. I would have liked bigger audiences, of course (we averaged about 50 each night), but it seems we were a critical success and provided a memorable evening for those who attended.
We had good press in our local paper, the Bowie Blade-News, thanks to David Emanuel, who has been a great supporter of our efforts. He wrote two pieces in the Blade, one a preview of the shows, the other his personal reflections after seeing the shows. For my own self-aggrandizement and for the record, I'm reproducing both articles here (without the accompanying photographs). I don't like to reproduce copyrighted material, but the URLs for direct links don't work well, and I don't know that they will be available indefinitely.
The first piece was published on 19 October 2006; the second is from 27 October 2006.
'Wings' and 'Wonderland' take flight at St. Matthew's : Unique, contemporary shows a first for the Bowie area
By DAVID EMANUEL Staff WriterSt. Matthew's Musical Theatre Troupe is tackling two truly unique musicals as the group celebrates its 10th anniversary and 21st production – "Scenes in Wonderland," a recent original hour-long comic opera and the very rarely performed "Wings," a 75-minute, emotionally stirring drama about an elderly woman who suffers a stroke.
The shows feature musical direction by Isaac Borocz and Jeffrey Shaumeyer.
"These are two completely different shows and one of them is what I consider a world premiere," said Mary Jennings, who has parts in both shows. "I don't think the Bowie area has seen anything like this before."
"Scenes in Wonderland" is a recent work by New York composer Seymour Barab, setting words taken verbatim from the "Alice" books by Lewis Carroll.
"The result is a light-hearted opera with narrator," said Shaumeyer. "We imagine a drawing-room entertainment in an Edwardian country house performed by a gathering of friends and family."
"And this is one of the most challenging things I've ever done," said Becky Unkenholz, who plays Alice. "I think I'm a little more nervous with this show as compared to all the others. It's so different."
In nine scenes, performers literally put on different hats to sing and act the absurd nonsense poems originally recited by such familiar characters as the White Rabbit, Mock Turtle, Humpty Dumpty and even Alice herself.
"Wings," however, takes viewers into an entirely different world. (In fact, some are suggesting that the show has themes too emotional for very young children to handle.)
The show spotlights the troupe's founding director, Jacqueline Gerard, in what Shaumeyer calls a tour-de-force performance. (Gerard is on stage for practically the entire show.)
Gerard plays Emily Stilson, a woman who, in her youth, was a daredevil wing-walker and aviator.
Now an elderly woman, she suffers a stroke and draws on her inner courage to overcome the resulting speech aphasia and reassemble the fragments of her life as she starts her "next great adventure," in the words of Shaumeyer.
Much of this show, especially the ending, is left up to interpretation by the audience.
Even the title is open for discussion – does it simply refer to her illustrious life as a wing-walker, is her life finally taking flight, or is she now an angel who has gotten her wings?
First produced at the Goodman Theatre in Chicago in 1992, "Wings, The Musical" was hailed as "evocative and deeply meaningful" by the New York Times.
The show features music by Jeffrey Lunden, with book and lyrics by Arthur Perlman, all based on the play "Wings" by Arthur Kopit.
"It's a show with some really interesting, atmospheric, evocative melodies and story, and amazing sound effects that I think will surprise people," said Shaumeyer.
The show itself is about courage, yet the show has moments where you're never quite sure if events are happening, have happened, or are all in the main character's head.
"I don't think audiences have seen or heard anything like this before," said Shaumeyer. "Several people have screened the show, some of the people have had family members who have suffered strokes, and they have all said it is very difficult, yet compelling, to watch a show like this. It has mature themes and is emotionally intense, but is very real to what they know loved ones have experienced."
" 'Wings' is a very challenging show – both of the shows are," said Jennings. "These are not your average musicals. These are very, very different shows, something audiences may not be used to. But anyone who really loves and respects theatre, and appreciates the dramatic aspect of it all, will really be in for something special. We understand this is truly a vehicle for Jackie, and that she finally gets to show off her dramatic ability and with all she's been through, it's truly miraculous."
For Gerard, being able to sing again really is something special.
"I am really psyched to be doing this and psyched to be able to sing again," she said. "My doctor and my therapist told me two years ago, because I have a paralyzed vocal chord, that I would never sing again. Well, I wasn't going to hear anything of the sort. And I've gotten better, and here I am singing again, and I am really very interested in how the audience reacts to a show like this."
"Audience members are going to get a variety smorgasbord of theater with these two shows," said Shaumeyer. "And they will see pretty much the same faces, with totally different characters, in both shows. This will be an evening to remember."
St. Matthew's Musical Theatre Troupe is a nonprofit organization dedicated to amateur musical theatre production and performance for the benefit of its community.
Published 10/19/06, Copyright © 2006 The Bowie Blade
'Wonderland' and 'Wings' will wow you : There's still one more weekend left
By DAVID EMANUEL Staff WriterThere are two remaining performances at St. Matthew's United Methodist Church of two shows that for one ticket price of $7 will be worth it in so many ways.
The church's theatre troupe is presenting two what I shall call "experimental" one-hour musicals – New York composer Seymour Barab's "Scenes in Wonderland," an operetta of sorts, followed by the incredibly dramatic "Wings," by Jeffrey Lunden, about a woman who has suffered a stroke.
"Wonderland" pulls verbatim nine different short stories from "Alice in Wonderland" and sets them to new heights. The show features a lilting how-does-she-hit-those-high notes Becky Unkenholz as Alice, and other familiar characters such as Chuck Hastings as the White Rabbit and his real-life-wife Karen as the mouse and knave.
Special mention must also go to Christin Vare, for her hilarious (and my favorite) number, titled, appropriately enough, "Duchess." The scene involves the duchess, a baby and a cook. That's all I'll say. (And Mary Jennings, well let's just say she "nose" how to play a certain part.)
As for "Wings," well, it's very hard to describe, and it's certainly nothing to sneeze at.
The challenge for me throughout this mature, adult-themed show was: How can I tell people to spend money on a show that will likely depress them? Or, might cause a walk-out, as did three people on the night I attended? Was it too heavy for them? Too "out there"? I guess we'll never know, but the one thing I do know is that this truly was a tour-de-force for the show's lead, Jackie Gerard, who is on stage pretty much the entire time.
You simply cannot take your eyes off her presence (just watch how she completely "becomes" Emily) or your ears off her voice (or the incredible sound effects that are a vital part of this show).
What makes the show even more powerful is the personal triumph behind the actress in the lead role: With a paralyzed vocal chord, doctors said years ago Gerard would never sing again.
Well, perhaps they should cough up seven bucks and see this unbelievable, some would even say miraculous, former patient.
It's a show that will challenge you not just with its theme (am I really sitting here watching a musical about a woman who had a stroke?), but also with its atonal, discordant, yet somehow evocative and stirring music.
There are really no songs you will leave the theatre humming, (with the exception of the absolutely touching song near the finale, "Snow," between Emily and her nurse/caregiver/friend Amy played with such tenderness by Jane Thessin) yet there are moments – sudden, simple, heart-breaking moments – as when at one point Emily says "there's something wet in both my eyes" – that you will not forget.
And there is something very real about the show. (Some audience members said this is exactly what it is like, as they recalled after the show some family members who suffered from a stroke.)
Emily Stilson may forget who she was, but I shall always remember Emily Stilson and Jackie Gerard's stunning performance.
St. Matthew's Musical Theatre Troupe is a nonprofit organization dedicated to amateur musical theatre production and performance for the benefit of its community.
Published 10/26/06, Copyright © 2006 The Bowie Blade
Exponential Dracula
Herewith, from the popular press, an excellent example of geometric (exponential) growth and its implications:
WASHINGTON (AP) — It may be the season for vampires, ghosts and zombies. Just remember, they're not real, warns physicist Costas Efthimiou.
[…]
Efthimiou takes out the calculator to prove that if a vampire sucked one person's blood each month [only 1 meal a month!] — turning each victim into an equally hungry vampire [exponential growth!] — after a couple of years there would be no people left, just vampires. He started his calculations with just one vampire and 537 million humans on January 1, 1600 and shows that the human population would be down to zero by July 1602.
[Associated Press, "Count Dracula not in the numbers, physicist says",* cnn.com, 27 October 2006.]
———-
* Evidently the headline writer was tired; a more obvious choice: "Count Numbers, not Dracula".
In: All, Curious Stuff, It's Only Rocket Science
New Jersey & Marriage Equality
The opinion on the "gay-marriage" case in New Jersey was handed down today by that state's supreme court. The opinion, which I haven't read yet entirely, is interesting. Here's the pivotal bit:
Only rights that are deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people are deemed to be fundamental. Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this State, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution. With this State’s legislative and judicial commitment to eradicating sexual orientation discrimination as our backdrop, we now hold that denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples that are statutorily given to their heterosexual counterparts violates the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1. To comply with this constitutional mandate, the Legislature must either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure, which will provide for, on equal terms, the rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples. We will not presume that a separate statutory scheme, which uses a title other than marriage, contravenes equal protection principles, so long as the rights and benefits of civil marriage are made equally available to same-sex couples. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to same- sex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.
Of course, this won't really satisfy anyone, which is what makes it interesting. However, although I believe that using the term "marriage" is really very important, I also feel that gaining equal benefits regardless of the nomenclature is operationally fundamental, so I think this is a positive step, particularly realizing that this position at this time is itself pretty bold, even if it falls short of the final goal. The goal can be reached if we keep moving in the right direction.
Of course, much of the contention has been over the use of the word "marriage", which is itself curious. But now the New Jersey court has called the bluff of reactionaries who give ample lip-service to "not hating homosexuals" and claim that they would be fine, just fine, giving all the legal benefits of marriage to same-sex couples just as long as it's not called "marriage".
I'm not convinced that this latter group will see much victory in today's decision. Look for renewed excitement over "activist judges", tired rhetoric that will be seen more clearly as such by an electorate that is learning how to interpret the right's hysterical hyperbole.
In: All, Current Events, Faaabulosity
Natural Nature
I would be remiss if I made no mention of the recently opened exhibit at the Natural History Museum, University of Oslo [Norway] , "dedicated to gay animals", called "Against Nature?" The Norwegians can be such a sensible lot sometimes.
According to BBC news:
The Oslo Natural History Museum opened the show last week and says it has been well attended, not least by families.
Organisers reported early criticism of the project, and being told by one opponent they would "burn in hell".
Excerpts from the online information about the exhibit (follow the links from the page above to read all informative essay):
On Thursday October 12 2006 The Natural History Museum, University of Oslo, opened the first-ever museum exhibition dedicated to gay animals.
Today we know that homosexuality is a common and widespread phenomenon in the animal world. Not only short-lived sexual relationships, but even long-lasting partnerships; partnerships that may last a lifetime.
The exhibit puts on display a small selection among the more than 1500 species where homosexuality have been observed. This fascinating story of the animals' secret life is told by means of models, photos, texts and specimens. The visitor will be confronted with all sorts of creatures from tiny insects to enormous spermwhales.
[…]
Sadly, most museums have no traditions for airing difficult, concealed, and possibly controversial questions. Homosexuality is certainly such a question. We feel confident that a greater understanding of how extensive and common this behaviour is among animals, will help to de-mystify homosexuality among people. – At least, we hope to reject the all too well known argument that homosexual behaviour is a crime against nature.
[…]
Why haven’t we been told?
Homosexuality in animals has been known since Antiquity, but has only recently made it into mainstream science. The cause may be a lack of interest, distaste, ridicule or scientists fearing to lose their grants. The few scientists publishing on the topic, often made sure their own sexual preferences were known, directly or indirectly.Some scientists have interpreted same-sex pairing as anything but sex. In a study of giraffes in Africa a researcher registered all cases where a male sniffed a female as “sexual interest” – while anal intercourse with ejaculation between males was registered as a form of ritualised fighting (“sparring”), despite the fact that 94% of all registered sexual activity in one area took place between males. Only recently has scientists started investigating homosexuality in animals in earnest.
[…]
In: All, Faaabulosity, The Art of Conversation
Can't Win, Can't Lose
Fascinating. Don Rumsfeld says
"You've got a situation [in Iraq] where it's not possible to lose militarily," Rumsfeld said. "It's also going to require more than military power to prevail."
These things strike me as interesting about this assessment:
- NB: He's not saying it is impossible not to win, only that we cannot lose;
- He's discovered, therefore, the previously excluded middle, which is quite a step for this heretofor "you're either for us or agin us" administration;
- Is this, therefore, a new high-water mark for the administration's skill at prevaricating?
- The administration, so far, has been unable to say what winning this war would mean; however, they now seem clear on what not losing it would mean.
- To those of us who do not accept the law of the excluded middle in general, the last point is basically devoid of useful content.
- Can we expect anyone to ask just how long the American people would like to continue "not losing" the war on terror?
- Is "not losing" then similar to not winning? Logic doesn't say.
- If "losing" is not an option, and "winning" not likely, is "not losing" a satisfying alternative?
- Whatever are we to do with all those frustrated conservatives for whom a stunning victory (i.e., not "not losing") in Iraq was to be the comeuppance for all those peacenik liberals who made us lose (i.e., not "not losing") in Vietnam?
Fairy-Tale Astronomy
In a way it's hardly worth the bother to describe the background to this tidbit, which is a headline to a "Search and Discovery" item in this month's Physics Today.* The story concerns type Ia supernovae, which are white dwarf stars that make their startling brightness by accreting enough mass to ignite the fusion of carbon in their core, vaporizing the star. But, along the way, accreting mass may simply ignite in a smaller fusion explosion on the surface of the star and blow away from it — this is a plain nova, and they're much more frequent occurences.
It might seem like a challenge for the white dwarf to find mass to swallow up, but it's not so hard because many of them are in binary-star arrangements, and they can take mass from their companion star. One such nova outburst was seen recently. Here's a bit of the background from the story:
Stargazers have noticed novae since antiquity. But only 10 novae, RS Ophiuchi among them [the interesting star system that's the subject of the article], have ever been caught in outburst more than once. RS Ophiuchi flared up in 1985, 1967, 1958, 1933, and 1898 and possibly in 1944 and 1902. Hiroaki Narumi and Kiyotaka Kanai of Japan spotted the new outburst on 12 February and promptly alerted their fellow astronomers.
From the previous outbursts, astronomers identified RS Ophiuchi as a symbiotic binary: a white dwarf and red giant orbiting their mutual center of mass. […] The pairing is unusual. So far, only about 200 symbiotics have been cataloged in our galaxy.
What Narumi and Kanai witnessed was the thermonuclear explosion on the white dwarf surface. As the burning layer lifts off, it expands adiabatically and cools. By March, the ejecta's optical flux had plunged to one thousandth of its 4.5-magnitude peak.
Anyway, the whole point of my mentioning it was to assert that — occasionally — even physicists display their sense of humor, although it might not always be recognizable to others. It was the title of the article that caused me to chortle:
White dwarf is caught hurling its outer layers at its red giant companion
Make of it what you will.
———-
*Unfortunately it's subscriber only, but for reference, here's the link.
In: All, It's Only Rocket Science, Laughing Matters
Beard of the Week XIX: NCOD
Today,# here in the US, it's National Coming Out Day, a day chosen to commemorate the first "March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights" on the same date in 1987. I didn't make it to that one, but I was there with Isaac for the next March in 1983, along with about a million of our friends. That was certainly an exhilarating day; maybe I'll tell some of those stories on another occasion.
Anyway, this week's beard belongs to Hadrian, emperor of the Roman Empire from AD 117 to 138. There are many reasons why we're fond of Hadrian around our house, including the fun we had visiting Hadrian's villa outside Rome (see our photo album of Hadrian's Villa) in 2001, and his attractive beard, as seen in the photo of this bust of Hadrian (that we took in the Vatican museums in 2001).*
For today, however, the interesting fact about Hadrian is that he was gay, at least insofar as the category would apply. The link above relates the story of Hadrian's love for Antinuous (variously spelled "Antinous"). Tragically, Antinuous died by drowning in the Nile on a trip there with Hadrian in 130. Hadrian was devastated. As the fascinating list of "Milestones: A Timeline of Gay and Lesbian Artists and History" of the Leslie/Lohman Gay Art Foundation puts it (the entry at 117 – 138 C.E.):
Hadrian & Antinuous, Emperor Hadrian in his agony of grief over the death of his young lover, the beautiful, Bythnian youth Antinuous, raised the boy to godhood.
Throughout the Roman Empire hundreds of busts and full statues of Hadrian and Antinuous appeared. Although all the artists were not necessarily gay — (but many surely were) — all these busts and full statues were created to glorify and memorialize one of the great gay loves of history.
Such a romantic!
I don't often notice National Coming Out Day with the attention that I once did since I've pretty much settled these issues for myself finally some 15 years ago (still rather late, since I was 35 when I came out). However, this does not mean that I discount the importance of coming out and living out. For some time I have felt that the best support I can give to those still in their closets is to go about my life as though being gay is entirely routine and acceptable — because it is!
Just this week we heard about a new poll done by Harris Interactive reporting that now 7 out of 10 heterosexuals (i.e., 70%) know someone gay. Isn't that amazing! It was not so long ago, easily within my memory, that the vast majority of straight people would claim that they didn't actually know anyone who was gay, and now 70% claim they do know a gay person. For years it has been received wisdom among gay people that the single best strategy for gaining equal rights was to come out and put a face on the "gay agenda". It seems that people have been listening.
Is it working? I think it is. Oddly, the anxiety and hysteria of reactionary forces is part of what convinces me that things are changing. I find particularly curious the gay angles to all the carrying on about the situation with Mark Foley. Leave aside for a moment all the issues about just what he was up to and how creepy it was (yes, I think it was very creepy), and the curiosity of the apparent cover-up by Republican leadership, and listen to what people have to say whenever they come near the "gay issue".
In particular, this is a very peculiar time for gay Republicans who — if you ask my opinion — have always been in a peculiar situation anyway. I'm interested in how multi-faceted are the barrages being hurled at them. On the gay activist side is the issue of outing — I have to admit I feel no sympathy at all for closeted gay Republicans who work for reactionaries who would continue to oppress gay people. On the reactionary side, all the fundamentalist forces who want to purge their party of the gay menace, convinced that it's an internal conspiracy to take over their party. In the middle: the poor gay Republicans who like to believe that there are bigger issues than their personal "lifestyle" — I don't agree on that either, but it's a bigger topic for another time.
In the end, the message should become clear that it's not a winning proposition to be a gay Republican, but the issue also serves as a catalyst to make clear to many Americans all the bogus, nonsensical non-issues about gay people, the chimeras that the Republican party has been using as wedge issues since the turn of the century. What I like about it, too, is that the reactionary forces can't really win: they can't seem to help themselves when it comes to attacking the gay conspiracy within their ranks and revealing their rank homophobia, but if they could contain themselves it would just make them look welcoming, which would make them even crazier. On the whole it seems like I can just stand by and shake my head in disbelief along with those 70% of Americans who now know someone gay, and now know not to believe most of what they're hearing about the dreaded homosexual agenda.
Happy Coming Out Day!
———-
#At least it was when I started writing.
*It seems apparent that someone actually made some representation of Hadrian during his lifetime, i.e., from life, that was the basis for the various representations of Hadrian that one can find in Rome, because they all look like a real person and that person is instantly recognizable in the representations.
In: All, Beard of the Week, Current Events, Faaabulosity
We Resume our Regular Programming
I'm back. Bearcastle.com and this blog have finished moving to the new server, and everything seems to be put back in order after the move. Even this brief hiatus seems to have left me at least elbow-deep in things to catch up on, although experience shows that I never will quite catch up. Ah well.
One thing that has been occupying my attention for the last couple of months, which I may have mentioned before, is the tax-exempt application (IRS form 1023) for Ars Hermeneutica and its ongoing examination process. I wrote all the stuff (some 40 or 50 pages) for the application and mailed it to the IRS in mid-September 2005. Not quite a year later we finally got word than an examiner had been assigned and that our application was being processed.
Since shortly after the beginning of August of this year, I'v been responding in writing to written questions from our examiner concerning our application. There are lots of unclear issues about tax-exempt activity and scientific-research organizations in the mind of the IRS,* and our examiner seems bent on looking at each one he can uncover.
At any rate, I just last night finished the third round of answering questions — only one question in this instance, actually. I'm hoping there's significance in the fact that the number of questions has been going down: the first set had 10 questions, followed by 3 questions in September, and then this singlet this month. Does this mean that the questions are vanishing and that the determination letter is close behind? We'll see.
The questions and the answers, all committed to writing, are public documents and freely available. Thus, if you are really interested in seeing the correspondance, you can find it all on the Ars Hermeneutica Corporate Documents page in the "Tax-Exempt Status" section.
Aside from all the 1023 work, and trying to carry on with other Ars work at the same time, I've also been pretty busy with directing the two shows we're doing for our fall musical production: "Wings" and "Scenes from Wonderland". (I wrote some about this back in August.) They are coming along quite well, but there's been a continuous stream of stuff to prepare, organize, and manage to get the shows ready to perform in addition to just the rehearsals that occupy two evenings a week and Saturday mornings. Next week begins "hell week" when we rehearse every night prior to our first performance on Friday, 20 October. All the performers are now over their initial shock at the unfamiliar idioms in the music and they're starting to relax and enjoy their performances. It looks like we'll have good shows.
In the middle of September a good friend died in an accident at home; he was only 34 and such things come as an immense surprise and shock, not just to his friends but much more so to his older partner. I still feel profound sadness from the whole incident.
And, of course, life keeps happening, there's always stuff to do just to keep up. This weekend we saw an opportunity to steal a few hours and we started painting our guest room. It's half done now, with all the stuff usually lining the walls piled on the bed in the middle of the room, and it's going to stay that way at least through this weekend before we can finish it up. It's a lovely, warm, medium orangy-gold color that makes the room feel very cozy. My arm aches from holding up the paint brush to do all the edges around the ceiling and baseboard.
That's it. No pleasing summary or moral to the tale, just stuff happening, and likely to continue happening for awhile. Right now I'm trying to breathe deeply a few times before plunging into this final rehearsal push before the show opens, and then some of the weight will lift.
—–
*There's a nice white paper on tax-exempt status and scientific-research organizations, published by the IRS, that surveys lots of the issues and the case law and reveals most of the issues about which the IRS has never been clear. I found it disconcerting last year when I first read this paper that virtually all the research organizations that I thought of as models for Ars Hermeneutica as a research organization have been sued at one time or another by the IRS over whether certain activities really were tax-exempt; I decided to be optimistic, however, on noticing that all of these cases were decided in favor of the research organizations.
Those Cracking Noises
Krugman suspects that the juggernaut may be more not than previously suspected.
At its core, the political axis that currently controls Congress and the White House is an alliance between the preachers and the plutocrats between the religious right, which hates gays, abortion and the theory of evolution, and the economic right, which hates Social Security, Medicare and taxes on rich people. Surrounding this core is a large periphery of politicians and lobbyists who joined the movement not out of conviction, but to share in the spoils.
[…]
So the right-wing coalition is showing signs of coming apart. It seems that were not in Kansas anymore. In fact, Kansas itself doesnt seem to be in Kansas anymore. Kathleen Sebelius, the states Democratic governor, has achieved a sky-high favorability rating by focusing on good governance rather than culture wars, and her party believes it will win big this year.And nine former Kansas Republicans, including Mark Parkinson, the former state G.O.P. chairman, are now running for state office as Democrats. Why did Mr. Parkinson change parties? Because he got tired of the theological debate over whether Charles Darwin was right.
[excerpts from Paul Krugman, "Things Fall Apart", 2 October 2006.]
In: All, Common-Place Book, Current Events
To Count Every Vote is American
This week the venerable New York Times was the latest of many organisations and institutions to declare that America's democratic system is simply starting to fail. Not in terms of its democratic ideals, or some takeover by a Neocon cabal, but by a simple collapse in its ability to count everyone's votes accurately and fairly. The Times is editorialising on a shocking government report into electoral rules in Ohio's biggest county, Cuyahoga, which contains the city of Cleveland. It details a litany of errors and a large discrepancy between the paper record of a ballot and the result recorded by the new Diebold electronic voting machines the county has just installed. It also worried that 31 per cent of black people were asked for identification as they voted compared to 18 per cent of other voters. '[The] report should be a wake-up call to states and counties nationwide,' the paper thundered.
But Ohio is far from isolated. The problem is simply that America has no national standard for tallying the votes in its elections. Apart from a few federal mandates to safeguard broad constitutional rights, it is left up to local officials to sort out the details on the ground. This means in one state a machine might be used. In others a simple paper ballot and a pen. Or it varies from county to county. In one small town a touch screen machine might be on hand, a few miles away other voters might use a punch ballot and in the next county after that you might use a pen. Or pull a lever. Or countless other complex ways to do what should be so, so simple. It also means in one place there is a solid (paper) record of a vote that can be recounted, while in others, it is all down to famously fallible machines and their electronic memories.
In some places you can't vote if you have a prison record. In others, you can. In some states you need identification to vote. In others you don't. In some a drivers' licence will be enough, in others it won't. All this is fundamentally a violation of the basic genius of democracy: it should be simple and uniform. In America that is simply not true.
[excerpt from Paul Harris, "The myth of fair elections in America", Guardian Unlimited, 7 September 2006.]
My Passion for Cookbooks
There are many things I like, but rather few for which it might be said I have a passion bordering on obsession. One of those is cookbooks, about which I've been meaning to write for some time, although I don't think I've accomplished it yet. If I have already, you'll forgive the meanderings and forgetfulness of an old fart.
There is one thing we need to establish right here at the start: my passion for cookbooks does not derive from a passion for cooking. Although I do enjoy cooking, and I'm pretty good at it when I'm in the mood (having learned in my early days most of what I know from Mastering the Art of French Cooking), it is no more than perhaps a catalyst for my interest in cookbooks.
I like to read cookbooks; I like to collect cookbooks. We have some 500 in the house at the moment. Most of these I bought either remaindered or used — my local library's bookstore nearly always has something obscure on offer. My criteria for selection are dimly realized in my own mind, but include many aesthetic considerations as well as content, but I usually insist that any cookbook I'm considering have at least two recipes that strike me as ones that I would be tempted to make, should I buy the book. I may never get around to it, but it happens sometimes. So, there's a vestigial thought that cookbooks should be practical.
But really, there are many things about cookbooks that delight me:
- Variety. Even thought they deal with the single topic of food, cookbooks are remarkably varied — at least to the eye of the connoisseur. You can find beginner's books, advanced books, and everything in between; general cookbooks that try to explain everything, comprehensive cookbooks that try to cover everything on some particular topic, and books on very narrow topics; pretty books, text-only books, and some remarkably ugly books. I suppose to some they may all look the same, but not to me.
- Design. I am interested in book design as a thing in itself, and cookbooks are one of the few publishing categories where excursions in novel book design are commonplace. To be honest, some designs that make it out of the printer's really suck and it's not surprising that they've appeared in the remainder bins that I'm looking through, but many offer fresh and stimulating ideas in design.
- Style. As a literary form, you might think that the recipe — like, say, the sonnet — wouldn't exhibit much variation, but that's far from the truth. I'm fascinated to read how various authors solve the problem of describing the preparation and presentation of a dish of food. Some are laborious, some are telegraphic. Some belabor the obvious, some are cryptic. Some have an amazing amount of attitude, which I usually lampoon along the lines of "take one free-range chicken who died happily in it's sleep…". (It would be over hasty to blame California authors for this because New England cookbook writers can be just as opinionated.)
- Anthropology. Every cookbook tells stories about the people who would prepare the food it describes, and about the people who would eat the result. Plus, I'm fascinated to read older recipes and see both how tastes in food have changed, not to mention how the perceived need to explain various kitchen techniques have changed.
- Lasting Appeal. Cookbooks are neither reference books or merely nonfiction books to me. Unlike novels — which I enjoy thoroughly but almost never expect to read twice — I enjoy cookbooks for a lifetime. They simply don't get used up, but I can read bits of them over and over and find something new or something worth remembering from each one. Most of our friends are aware that I like getting books as gifts and my favorite is a cookbook, because it seems to me like a gift that never wears out or gets used up, but one that lasts forever.
I doubt that these reasons explain my passion for cookbooks; however, they do serve as good excuses.
Beard of the Week XVIII: Bulgarian Wedding Bells
|
|
This week's beard belongs to Azis, described by the Sofia News Agency as "Bulgaria's famed Roma transvestite". It seems that Azis, following what was to be his farewell appearance in Sofia, was set to fly to Germany to get married. The original caption to the lower photo read:
Bulgaria's famed Roma transvestite Azis (R) exchanged rings, vows and gentle kisses with his long-time lover Niki Kitaetsa (The Chinese), at a special ceremony in Sofia on Wednesday. Photo by bulphoto
Aren't weddings romantic, particularly when it's two men getting married!
Two interesting issue swirl around Azis and his beard for me this week. One is the fact that he performs in various outrageous yet fabulous drag outfits (more fabulous photos of Azis here), and yet he is most definitely not a female impersonator. As evidence one notes his prominant beard, which he integrates into his ensembles. It seems more a glam outgrowth than classic cross-dressing or traditional drag performance — a post-modern gender-bending that asserts his masculinity at the same time as his outfits assert something other. It's the spice of contrast.
This relates for me to the earlier discussion I had about how drag queens make some men, notably some gay men, uncomfortable for any number of reasons, most traceable to their internal view of themselves as separate, as not one of them, which I believe is a corrosive attitude. Here is Azis with his in-your-face challenge that says accept that we are all part of the human panorama and enjoy it! It can be a challenge to get past all that attitude and see what's being offered with fresh and unprejudiced eyes, but it's worth the taking the challenge.
And then there's the question of marriage between two men or two women; to me, of course, the idea seems entirely natural. To most children too, of course, most of whom shock their parents sooner or later by wanting to marry their best friend, invariably of the same gender.
Ten or fifteen years ago there was a lot of discussion in the gay community, and a lot of hand wringing, about marriage, domestic partnership, commitment ceremonies, and all those things. My radical suggestion at the time grew out of this observation: it seemed that many people opposed to "gay marriage" were not so opposed to the idea of gay couples enjoying the benefits of marriage, but they got extremely bent out of shape by the idea of using the word "marriage" to describe whatever arrangement came along.
In the face of that, and noting that "marriage" is just a word and that it's use was not legally regulated in casual social situations, my radical suggestion was that partnered men should use the vocabulary to describe their partnership: "husband", "marriage", "wedding", etc. It would be a subversive political move that would effect change as no legislature can. My exceptions to using the "marriage vocabulary" included avoiding it in situations where it would just confuse the listener, since it turns out that there are still many people who are not aware that gay people are not allowed legally to marry.
I still think it's a good strategy: free and easy, irritating to our opponents and oppresors but legal.
Before I end, I wanted to share this other paragraph from the Sofia News Agency story (only one of several that seemed distinctly odd, gratuitous even):
Azis, 28, has already delivered a load of highly controversial videos and stage performances and his whims can hardly shock anyone in Bulgaria.
I'm so happy that it takes more than Azis to shock Bulgarians!
Best wishes to Azis and Mr. Kitaetsa.
[I first saw the story at: "Bulgarian Drag Star to Marry his Partner", towleroad, 14 September 2006.]
In: All, Beard of the Week, Faaabulosity
One-Third of Americans
Sometime recently I remember hearing the results of a poll that said that about a third of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Another poll — or perhaps it was the same one — revealed that about a third of Americans believe that George W Bush and the US government itself was behind the 9/11 attacks.
One of these is considered to be a group of true patriots, salt of the earth, the backbone of the party in power and the courage of America.
One of these is considered to be a fringe group of radical idiots who'll believe any damn thing they're told without the least use of their critical faculties.
How are we, the remaining third of Americans, supposed to tell the difference?
In: All, Plus Ca Change..., Splenetics
Our Story So Far…
I can't help but feel sorry for my old Republican friends in Congress who are fighting for their political lives. After all, it must be tough explaining to voters at their local Baptist church's Keep Congress Conservative Day that it was their party that took a $155 billion surplus and turned it into a record-setting $400 billion deficit.
How exactly does one convince the teeming masses that Republicans deserve to stay in power despite botching a war, doubling the national debt, keeping company with Jack Abramoff, fumbling the response to Hurricane Katrina, expanding the government at record rates, raising cronyism to an art form, playing poker with Duke Cunningham, isolating America and repeatedly electing Tom DeLay as their House majority leader?
[Joe Scarborough, "Save Yourself, Blame Bush", Washington Post, 17 September2006.]
In: All, Common-Place Book, Current Events