Master Bedroom, Extra Closet: The Truth About Gay Marriage
"In the fight for marriage rights, gay activists have (smartly) put forward couples who embody a familiar form of unity... But not all gay unions are built on the straight model, particularly when it comes to the issue of monogamy... The gay rights movement has made a calculated decision to highlight the similarities, not the differences, between straight and gay love on the road to marriage equality."
posted by andoatnp
on Jun 20, 2013 -
Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Matter If You Are Fluent In Arabic, Despite Our Serious Need For That....
This story hits very close to home. This is a friend from college (Emory) who was just thrown out of the army when they discovered he had a boyfriend. Particularly ridiculous is the fact that he had just achieved fluency in Arabic and would have been (among other gay soldiers) extremely useful to the cause at present. Apparently, heterosexual couples discovered coupled in their rooms at the same inspection were given 10 days restriction and extra duty.
posted by adrober
on Nov 13, 2002 -
Going to Hell?
According to the Vatican, sexually active homosexuals and divorced Catholics who remarry cannot be forgiven until they give up their sin. However, it came as good news for pedophile priests that priests implicated in the sex abuse scandal can be forgiven. Has the Church lost it's relevancy, or will it just take another 350 years for it to catch up with reality as was the case with Copernicus
posted by Mack Twain
on May 4, 2002 -
Was tonight's "Will and Grace"
a coming out episode for Rosie O'Donnel? Sure, it was her character that came out---(though, so was Ellen's)---but she seemed a little choked up when she said the line: "Jack, I'm gay." PlanetOut.com
discusses the matter and reports that Rosie will be coming out for real in her soon to be published Biography: "Find Me." Either way, though, whether it was just her character or Rosie speaking through the character, it was a prettty memorable TV moment.
posted by adrober
on Jan 31, 2002 -
Latest David Horowitz trolling op-ed piece,
this time on gays in the military. With his usual obliviousness to irony, he presumes in this piece that anyone who disagrees with him must be the knee-jerk PC police. Question: does posting a link to a troll constitute trolling in and of itself? Discuss.
posted by hincandenza
on Jun 25, 2001 -
Is this Andrew Sullivan's ass?
This morning, Jim Romenesko
made a questionable publishing decision. He ran a link to an article in last Friday's edition of the newspaper LGNY
, in which Michelangelo Signorile
makes a very serious allegation: That Andrew Sullivan
has been advertising for "bareback" sex online
(anal sex w/o condoms). Such actions on Sullivan's part would be seen by many as exceedingly hypocritical given his voluminous writings of a moral conservative bent and his "arrogance toward the ghettoized gay scene" (as Signorile puts it), if not downright dangerous given his HIV+ status.
If true, this brings up plenty of ideological and moral issues, which I'm sure will be discussed in this thread. But that's not why I'm bringing it up here. I'm posting because of the vaguely Kayceeish nature of the whole thing. If you look at Signorile's article, you'll see that all the evidence is circumstantial. Several people who Signorile really really trust say they answered the ads and Sullivan was the guy that showed up when they met. The photos in the ads look like what most people expect Sullivan's body to look like (minus his head, of course). Also, Sullivan hasn't responded to anyone's questions about this, and after all, if the accusations were false wouldn't Sullivan be loudly denying them (wink wink)?
Complicating the whole mess is Signorile's own journalistic history - he made his name during the late '80s-early '90s running gossipy columns outing famous people against their will - and that Romenesko decided to publicize this article in the first place, thus ensuring that every single person in the national media is fully aware of the allegations, true or not. Is this actual proof that Sullivan is guilty of barebacking, or is he being Borked (Kayceed?)? Should it have been publicized like this in the first place, since a mention in Romenesko is the best way to start up a classic pack journalism action short of running a front-page story in The New York Times? Will other media outlets jump on this now and sully Sullivan's reputation, whether the allegations are true or not?
posted by aaron
on May 29, 2001 -
politically incorrect may air a gay marriage.
if they can find two guys who will exchange vows, P.I. will air it on febuary 18th. hmm. "The on-screen wedding will kick off an episode devoted entirely to gay marriage, a particularly timely topic given Vermont's recent block of an anti-marriage bill, California's upcoming Proposition 22"
posted by palegirl
on Feb 11, 2000 -