boy culture

Epilogue To A Diss

Via Towleroad, this is a must-see TV: the infamous "Shrek" lady (Monica Conyers, who I never realized was the wife of John Conyers) gets pwned by a very on-point kid:

The woman can not even admit it was wrong when asked point-blank!

I know tempers can flare up, but you know what? This woman is nuts. I also have zero tolerance for people who talk incessantly about "respect" and display none of it. You do not gain respect by plowing over and bullying others. Someone should turn the hose on her next time because her behavior was no better than that of a dog.

In other news, Detroit continues to be a shithole. I hope Barack will remember Michigan, because I bet Michigan will vote for him and my home state—if not each and every one of its inhabitants—is about due for some respect.

Swing Out Sister

As I've been saying, and posting on various blogs, the idea that just because Obama isn't winning every "big state" vs. Clinton means he could not beat McCain is bogus. He's doing as well or better than her in match-ups vs. McCain in all those states. Once Marvin K. Mooney goes home, Obama will send McCain to the trivial-history books.

Hillary's Campaign Is A Bust

Okay, I would take my vote back if I could. I said it. I feel better. Now, let's move on...

Speaking of which, Hillary is now trashing MoveOn.org, complaining (gee, that's a lot like the "whining" she and Bill are accusing Obama of doing) that her impending defeat is due to "Democratic activists" flooding caucuses. When Democrats are fired up and voting, that is a good thing. Just because it's been a bad thing for her inevitability as our candidate, she needs to realize that the party comes first.

The ultimate irony is MoveOn.org came into being in 1998 to support Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky affair, urging the Republicans to "move on" from that issue. Now, just like several members of the Clintons' past team, MoveOn has moved on from the Clintons—and, embarrassingly, she hasn't accepted that.

Hillary will likely win Pennsylvania and Indiana, but her delegate lead will never happen. Now that Dean is finally telling superdelegates "This is it!" this might be, indeed, it.

Or will she throw a fit and continue fighting even if all the superdelegates declare their allegiances and she still comes up short?

Brown-Bagged

Papa Don't Be Cruel.

Weird Madonna news of the week comes from In Touch (April 21, 2008), in which Bobby Brown's autobio Bobby Brown: The Truth, The Whole Truth And Nothing But... is previewed. Yes, Bobby Brown claims he "had a fling with Madonna. 'I met Madonna early in my career,' he says, 'so getting to know her better at the height of my career was like a reunion.'"

It's my prerogative to hurl at this point. Not that he explicitly says he had sex with her anyway.

In the same issue, Guy Ritchie is slagged off for being less muscular than his wife. He looks pretty fuckin' fit to me—as long as I'm more aroused by him than her, he's doing well and she's not too muscled yet:

Phwoar!

Finally, I hope you don't miss New York (April 14, 2008)—it's got a terrific feature called "This Is New York, 1968—2008" that covers everything from Rhoda to Warhol to, yes, Madonna. She's listed as one of the highlights of 1983's music scene (along with the Wild Style Soundtrack and Rammelzee vs. K-Rob) and praised for being "cool enough to inspire a Sonic Youth cover."

Made it there.

The image below, from New York's story, is a great concert shot I've seen before. I've always liked how Madonna is shamelessly connecting with the (gay?) men and the girls—who "wannabe" like her—are sidelined.

That's what all the boys say.

The issue has political highlights, too, including "Falling Out Of Love With Bill" by Kurt Andersen, which wisely points out that Democrats' frustrations with the real Bill Clinton mirror the feelings Republicans have been having toward their former hero, George W. Bush. This might be the only way in which I will accept a comparison between the two.

I May Be Gay, But I Ain't Ignorant!

I tend to get more e-mails than comments, which is cool. Here's one I just got. I wouldn't post the name of the person, who—considering his take on gays—might be living in an area where he feels it's impossible to be openly gay. Or he might just be suffering from a bad case of Straight Stockholm Syndrome:

"Subject: Please, at least act like you have an open mind

"Please, Please, Stop the making sure everyone knows you have no point of view except a liberal one. One of the biggest problems gay people have today, is they are just like minorities with a total allegiance to one party. It's killing us, and making neither side want nothing to do with us. Liberal hate is the next headline, and your senseless, one sided, ignorant view while showing pictures of naked men is the exact reason why gay people are suffering. If you were a straight person in control of this country would you be impressed? No wonder we never get anywhere. Quit trying to piss off 50% of the population and form some actual credible, and concrete reasoning for your ignorant and polarizing views on something most people already know you know nothing about. Seriously man, what are you really doing to help? Think for yourself man. The dividing party is obviously the Democrats anyway, and if you haven't figured that out watch CNN these days with Obama and Clinton. Please, let us think for ourselves and make up our own minds. We will gain more respect as a whole if you just let us be individuals instead of insisting on sticking to the gay liberal talking points that get us despised and railroaded constantly. We're not on top so quit trying to shove everything in peoples faces. It doesn't work except to help them win and make their points! Thanks"

I love the polite "thanks" at the end. Here is my reply, after the jump...

Tireless Advocate

The Advocate (April 8, 2008) has a cover story on the murder of transgendered student Lawrence King that provocatively asks if encouraging King to express himself was partly responsible for his tragic end. I'm not a fan of the "we're all to blame" mentality, but I do think that our society is set up to discourage and revile difference, particularly sexual and gender deviations. Look at some of the reactions to "the pregnant man" Thomas Beatie, who writes an account of his decision to carry a baby despite having transitioned from female to male. Would it be surprising to read that someone had put a gun to his head?

It's ironic that the same issue features a rah-rah column on John McCain by New Republic editor James Kirchick, who attempts to argue that McCain would be "A President to Be Proud Of" based on the fact that he hasn't heinously overplayed the anti-gay card as his direct predecessor George W. Bush has. Oh, brother. The same assholes who used to argue how amazing and misunderstood and unifying Bush was going to be are now acting like they're as shocked as we are at how bad he turned out to be, and are trying to convince us McCain would be much better. Sorry, but your judgment was way, way off before; let's ignore you this cycle. As for McCain vs. Obama, I will take promising rhetoric over a "not as bad as Bush" record.

Oh, the ironic part is that McCain will likely get mucho support from the anti-gay brigade, and sought out the support of anti-gay zealot Pastor John Hagee. Sample Hageeism:

"The newspaper carried the story in our local area that was not carried nationally that there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. So I believe that the judgment of God is a very real thing. I know that there are people who demur from that, but I believe that the Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment." [NPR Fresh Air, 9/18/06]

Yet Kirchee lamely attempts to re-chastise Obama for his (admittedly annoying and stubborn) use of ex-gay proponent Donnie McClurkin on a brief promotional tour. Such a stretch. Next thing he'll say is that McCain never said we should be in Iraq for 100 years.

Less controversially, yet still on a related note, there's a charming profile of The Office-boy John Krasinski. Regarding how he was raised to view gays, Krasinski says:

"I have two of the coolest parents around. I was always a little confused when I heard anybody have issues with anything like homosexuality."

I don't have the April 22 issue yet, but the online-exclusive feature "Madge-ical Moments" is built of four Advocate contributors' personal feelings about Madonna. And, surprisingly, all four are unabashedly positive. It's so nice to read a Madonna story without the perfunctory, defensive anti- angle. I'm sure a lot of people just don't like her stuff, but when it comes to gay rights, face facts—Madonna's done more for gay people than the vast majority of actually gay people have. The piece reflects on how Madonna helped the gay writers in the area of self-acceptance as well as providing pure entertainment.

Finally, the April 22 issue features another gay person on the cover (after April 8's Lawrence King)—Broadway babe Cheyenne Jackson. Every little bit helps toward molding our culture—even for people who are already gay themselves—to be more accepting so that other Lawrence Kings might be spared.

Tired Of All The Scaredy-'Crats

For frightened Dems, read this piece regarding the political landscape. Yes, McCain is formidable, yes, our country is dumb enough to point at Obama and chant "witch! witch! witch!" over his pastor for a time, but things are looking good—still!

Just What We Need...Another Hillary/Rudy Contest

Hillary's New York state of mind.

Hillary's consolation prize?

Things To Do In Denver When You're Dem

Mount "No Rush"more.

If you care at all—at all—about how the Democratic nomination is shaking out, whether you're for Obama, for Hillary or for whichever officially nabs it, do yourself a favor and read this article in The New Republic. It offers a historical comparison to Ted Kennedy vs. Jimmy Carter and also theorizes the very few scenarios remaining.

In a nutshell, May is seen as the earliest ending, with June more likely and Denver altogether possible. Drudge is hyping it as a doomsday piece, but remember this—Kennedy vs. Carter was a mess, but the eventual nominee, Carter, still won the general.

Despite their politics, Obama is Carter in this comparison because both won more early contests, and Kennedy is Clinton. It remains to be seen if Clinton wins the hearts and minds of the convention even if Obama wins their votes, as the article suggests Kennedy and Carter, respectively, did. Even more interesting, the doofus who Carter (barely) beat was Ford...who kind of reminds me of McCain in many ways. If history repeats, the implication would be that Obama would get the nod but the party would be fractured and McCain would benefit. In '80, though, Reagan won as the alternative to what we already had, and in this case—minus a sitting president in the mix—Obama would in theory be the Reagan figure. We'll see. (And sorry for my gaffe—you'd think having been 11 at the time I'd remember this better...)

Unmasked

Like a sparrow.

Madonna celebrates Purim dressed as Edith Piaf. That's because Purim is just like Jewish Halloween! (At least, that's what Joe Lieberman told me. Does anyone else think Joe Lieberman is going to be a VP candidate again? (If so, I hope Gore speaks out against him.) Does anyone else think Madonna looks every bit as hideous as Piaf in this outfit?