Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  Deafening Silence

Barack Obama Had 5772 Words for the Middle East. None of Them About Gays

We’ve already placed out bet on whether Barack Obama will address gay rights during his July visit to Ghana, his first return to the continent since moving in to the White House. (Our guess: Hellz no.) But early this morning the president was a little farther north, in Cairo, Egypt, where he addressed the Muslim community in what some are calling a welcome olive branch to the Islamic community. (Others criticize him for, uh, forgetting about 9/11.) And while we won’t pretend gay Americans are single-issue citizens, we wouldn’t be doing our job if we didn’t point out that, once again, Obama had nothing to say about GLBTs.

As the tweets and Facebook blasts went out, and Obama mentioned the word “rights” more than a dozen times — the right for American Muslim girls to wear a hijab, the right for Palestinians and Israelis to live without fear and enjoy their own states, “the rights of minorities” — there were noticeable absences in Obama’s speech.

obamacairo2

Perhaps because they’re assumed to be non-issues in the Middle East, but neither abortion nor rights for gays and transgender citizens were mentioned. This should be no surprise; while Sec. of State Hillary Clinton continues to call for an end to gay persecution, the White House is all but silent on the institutionalized assault on gays in Iraq, and elsewhere.

Obama urged the Muslim community to embrace democracy (and not only when it was convenient), to give permit Palestine to form its own true nation, and to treat women as equals.

But in a region of 400 million people, where gay rights aren’t even an after-thought, Obama did nothing to provide a voice to the millions of GLBTs persecuted and living in hiding and shame. Yes, Obama tailored his message for the community he was speaking to. But he missed an enormous opportunity to include queer people in his call for global human rights.

And he did it on purpose.

(The full transcript of Obama’s speech is available here.)

By:           editor editor
On:           Jun 4, 2009
Tagged: ,

  • 107 Comments
    • AlanInSLC
      AlanInSLC

      The issues in the middle east are NOT directly a gay issue. Of course they do affect our community, but the issues in the middle east affect ALL communities. Not just ours. It was also his first visit. Give him time. Its not even 1/2 way through the first year of his term. Let him work on things that affect us all. He is still working for us.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 12:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      As much as I get on Obama’s case, it would’ve been incredibly imprudent of him to mention LGBT rights in this speech. The divide between the Muslim world and western world is large enough, and unfortunately something like that would only look like the west trying to impose its values. That’s just how many in the Islamic world look at it. I do think not enough’s being done on the ground in places like Iraq to help LGBTs, but as far as this speech goes, I can’t go with you on that.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 12:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlanInSLC
      AlanInSLC

      Also, maybe when Queerty has something nice to say about Obama and his administration, maybe then we’ll have something said about our community. Maybe the negative energy Queerty is constantly sending out to the universe is what is keeping the negative response or lack there of coming from his administration.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JasonMoreland
      JasonMoreland

      Man didn’t even get the women’s right issue correct and you expect him to mention tha gayz!?!? Queerty has jumped the shark. What a failure. Obama is the man now with his his new Saudi friends. What a looser.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 12:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      This is a silly response to Obama’s speech. Obama had a particular agenda in the speech – to hold out an olive branch to the Moslem world, not to speak about gay rights. In a recent interview with NBC, Obama said that he supports gay rights e.g. treating gay couples as partners with all the same legal rights as straights. As regards to gay marriage, he said it is not the job of the federal government to define what is and what is not “marriage”, so he is leaving it up to each state to decide which is exactly what is happening. Gay marriage continues to be adopted in state after state. I should add that as a gay man living in Canada, we have had gay marriage now for about 4 years, but I don’t identify with this issue. I think it was a huge mistake for gays and lesbians to push “gay marriage” as such and make the argument that “civil unions” are less equal than straight marriages. This is just a belief in some gay people’s heads. As long as the state recognizes gay lovers as a couple, it doesn’t matter what you call it. Seizing the term “marriage” which has always meant the union of a man and a woman and trying to use it to legitimize gay unions was a dumb move which needlessly antagonizes the straight world. I think that gay couples were fine when they lived together because they loved each other and, to me, these longings to legitimize the relationship by having the state recognize it as a “marriage” is beyond comprehension. In fact, I think that gays have won all the rights they need in the US and Canada to lead happy lives, and it’s time to stop kvetching about every little perceived slight from the majority straight world, but I guess that would put gay activists out of business and then what would they do with their lives if they didn’t have something to complain about?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert

      Maybe Obama realized that telling another country how to run its people is the biggest mistake the US has ever (continuously) engaged in? I’d love equal rights for all people across the world… but I think we should focus on our own troubles first.

      And hell… one of the biggest problems Muslim nations have with the US is just that- we put our nose where it doesn’t belong. Queerty seems to think every time Obama fails to mention a GLBT issue that its some sort of slap in the face… maybe you’re just reading too much into things, or think that the gay agenda is the only agenda worth talking about?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wondermann
      wondermann

      This article is DUMB! Who’s the brain trust of this group? Bullwinkle?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • osocubano
      osocubano

      Because that’s not why he went to Egypt.
      There is a conflict over there that has nothing to do with gays, if you can imagine such a thing.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zack
      Zack

      Queerty, you piss me off tremendously. Even though you know he won’t, it is as if you want Obama to spend 100% of his time on gay issues. And when he doesn’t, you write this horrible entries. I am so over this debate. I’m a politically involved gay man who lives in DC and even I am not pressuring the President as much as this god damned blog is. I’m done with this shit, Towleroad and Joe.My.God are much better, easier to read, and aren’t ignorantly reactionary.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian
      Brian

      This is the dumbest article I’ve read. Queerty just sucks.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @AlanInSLC: You said. “The issues in the middle east are NOT directly a gay issue. Of course they do affect our community, but the issues in the middle east affect ALL communities.”
      ____________________________________________________________

      But he spoke about Women’s rights. That would seem to indicate that he was willing to at least talk about SOME oppressed groups over there.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JasonMoreland
      JasonMoreland

      And his speech on those women’s rights was nambly pambly and without substance…

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael W.
      Michael W.

      He intended to close the divide between America and the Muslim world, not widen it.

      While we’re over here complaining about DOMA, they see western acceptance of homosexuality as a major weakness, another reason to look down on us. To sit at the table and open the dialogue with a discussion about homosexuality is preposterous. We’re still trying to get these animals to stop blowing each other up.

      When you’re teaching a caveman to fish, you don’t show him how to pick out a good wine at the same time. He’s overwhelmed enough as it is.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 1:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Louis Solnicki: @Louis Solnicki:

      “needlessly antagonizes the straight world.”

      A straight world that demotes LGBT people to second-class citizenship, demeans, denies equal rights, demonizes, marginalizes , imprisons, gay-bashes, murders and hangs them in public squares simply on suspicion of being gay and you are worried about “antagonizing” the straight world? WTF?

      “it’s time to stop kvetching about every little perceived slight from the majority straight world,”

      You either a straight person who does not believe in equality for all tax-paying American Citizens, or a self-loathing gay person who seems himself as a lowly, vassal who must crawl about on his hands and knees, begging for forgiveness from your straight Master for being queer.

      You are a disgrace to the LGBT community.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Synnerman
      Synnerman

      It would have been stupid to bring it up.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Michael W.:

      “When you’re teaching a caveman to fish, you don’t show him how to pick out a good wine at the same time.”

      A fish dinner without a fine, aged Pinot Noir or a dry Sauvignon Blanc?

      Sacre Bleu!

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      The Middle East doesn’t even have the most draconian laws on abortion. That special designation is reserved for Nicaragua and Chile, IIRC.

      Moreover, I’m sure that leaders and plenty of citizens and subjects in the Middle East are aware of President Obama’s call for the decriminalization of homosexuality at the UN.

      Of course, I predicted this angle on his speech at this site.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casper O
      Casper O

      It would have been a diplomatic disaster to bring it up. President Obama did a fantastic job!

      You guys should stop picking on him. Sure we would all love to see the White House make an effort for the LGBT community, but give the guy a year or two.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      Why is it that to some people “it would be counterproductive to bring that up” is not a good enough reason?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wowjustwow
      wowjustwow

      @Casper O: Don’t bother. Some people just want Obama to kiss their rings 24/7 so that they can feel validated.

      Oooooh look at me, I’m so self-loathing.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @hyhybt: Because they’re not at all familiar with the Middle East and don’t care to familiarize themselves with it, or US policy in the region?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Louis Solnicki:

      “In fact, I think that gays have won all the rights they need in the US and Canada to lead happy lives, and it’s time to stop kvetching about every little perceived slight from the majority straight world, but I guess that would put gay activists out of business and then what would they do with their lives if they didn’t have something to complain about?”

      You’re NO gay male, you fraud. You’re just another shill for the right wing anti same sex marriage haters. Which rights have we all won in the U.S? There are currently 1324 of them that we don’t enjoy as gay people, where is it written that we have all of them? If we do, then we should ban ban straights from marrying and we’ll all be equal. Get it? I guess not.

      So what exactly defines marriage for you, the man/woman mantra aside? The word marriage never existed in the old testament and its only now being loosely adopted in some versions of the new testament. There is no record of any marriage ceremony ever being performed in the bible either and if there was, where did the first one take place and who conducted it? The “wedding” in Cana in the new testament makes no mention of the actual ceremony, just the fact that there was a “wedding”. There is no mention of the form it took or the words used, proof positive its all man-made.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • xiquet
      xiquet

      Queerty is just getting obnoxious…

      What ridiculous thing is Queerty going to feign outrage over next?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @schlukitz:

      You hit the nail on the head, he’s another shill for the far right, there’s a group of them who post on here…ergo…yeson8won and Stephen R et al. For all we know they could all be the same person, who cares. The fact of the matter is they’re straight, they give themselves away by the things they say, liars they are but not that good at it let alone convincing. Its better to ignore them from now on, they’ll grow tired when they get no further reaction. Poor sick little psychos have to come here to get an audience.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • InExile
      InExile

      Obama has no interest in discussing gay rights right here in the USA, why would he talk gay issues in the Middle East? I understand the question but get real!

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce
      Landon Bryce

      @Robert, NYC:
      “In fact, I think that gays have won all the rights they need in the US and Canada to lead happy lives, and it’s time to stop kvetching about every little perceived slight from the majority straight world.”

      I think this could very well have come from one of the dozens of self-hating gay people who support everything Obama does because, like Louis, they agree with the president that we are not worthy of equality.

      This is stupidly phrased article, but it is much wiser than those who claim that the situation in the middle east, where gay people are tortured are murdered for their sexual orientation, has nothing to do with gay issues. That so many American gays identfy with their glamorous president to the exclusion of persecutred sexual minorities is really sad.

      But it is still a dumb article.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marzipone
      Marzipone

      @Michael W.: For the record, what you are actually saying is “It’s okay for Obama to ignore gay rights on an international level.”

      No, it is not.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 3:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • NICHOLAS
      NICHOLAS

      This article is ridiculous. Queerty’s continuous bashing of the Obama administration is getting to be VERY annoying.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Robert, NYC:

      Yeah, Robert, it’s really sad that we have to put up with this kind of abuse out there in the real world, but when we come to a gay site, only to have to endure more of it, that’s really over the top.

      And I do not understand why Queerty is allowing it to continue, unabated?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wondermann
      wondermann

      @Landon Bryce: How is Louis a self hating Gay? I follow the President and I love being gay. We are not suffering like slaves, so let’s not pretend we are

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Quinn
      Quinn

      When you’re teaching a caveman to fish, you don’t show him how to pick out a good wine at the same time.

      Oh my – holy racism, Batman!

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce
      Landon Bryce

      @wondermann:

      I do not recall ever saying that we were suffering like slaves, so why are you putting words in my mouth. If you read Louis’ message, he states that he actually opposes the idea that gay relationships should be considered equal to those of heterosexuals. I think it is fair to call that self-hating.

      I think his statement that he have enough rights to be happy and should stop kvetching is self-hating.

      If you don’t, then I don’t think very many people in the world would agree with your standards.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rick
      rick

      what was he supposed to say? good lord you people writing these stories are morons. we had 8 years of republicans messing things up and you want obama to bring up the gays. there are bigger fish to fry than the muslims on gay rights right now. use your brains and some fracking common sense.

      i am getting pretty sick and tired of all the obama bashing here. everything is not all about the gays. you can’t have everything done overnight like you seem to expect.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rick
      rick

      did rupert murdoch buy queerty?

      Jun 4, 2009 at 4:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael W.
      Michael W. [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Marzipone: That’s not what I’m saying. He didn’t give a general speech on international relations, he gave a targeted address to a specific audience: the Muslim world. They barely want to hear from him as it is with Old Glory pinned to his lapel, he doesn’t need to further alienate whatever amount of ears he has by lecturing them on gay rights.

      You want to go down the list of other minority groups being persecuted in the Islamic world? How about dark-skinned Arabs and Africans who get treated as second class citizens in many Muslim countries? I don’t see you or Queerty too concerned with them. Shall he have extended the speech by two hours so he could name-drop every single thing that Muslims do in which we don’t approve?

      He had a limited amount of time to hit the broadest, most effective notes.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 5:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      Obama didn’t mention us because his government denies there’s a problem. They pretend that their puppet government in
      Iraq is not involved in the murders. “In a response to US Rep. Jared Polis, following a meeting with Iraqi government officials, (US) chargé d’affaires Patricia Butenis said “We have no evidence that [the Iraq government's] security forces are in any way involved with these militias.”

      Opposition to Obama’s racist war, to the occupation and US attempts to control Iraqi oil and Afghan gas production continues unabated. That’s why the Brits got out while the getting was good.

      The level of violence has ups and downs but it won’t stop as long as US soldiers and US oil companies are present at any level. There are more and more signs that Iraqi’s in very large numbers are concluding that Obama’s racist war for oil and the Democrats occupation of Iraq are for keeps. Iraqi’s, after a million deaths from the Clinton/Bush/Obama war and occupation, are not nearly as naive as many Americans about the war for oil. They never did catch Obamabot fever and the appeal of flag-waving American paytriotism is lost on them.

      The Iraqi jihadist groups who hunt down and murder GLBT folks in Iraq: the Shiite militia, Sunni ‘police’ and the Iraqi puppet regime itself are all armed and trained by the US military occupation command. That same US command refuses to raise a finger to grant asylum be

      The best way to help our brothers and sisters in Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is to build a mass antiwar movement on the basis of demanding

      1) the total, permanent and immediate withdrawal of all US military, spy, and mercenary forces to their US home bases

      2) an end to US sponsorship of the zionist policies of apartheid and ethnic cleansing against Palestinians.

      3) the immediate implementation of an open door asylum policy for LGBT folks threatened by hostile régimes including emergency protection, transport and the guarantee of asylum.

      The withdrawal of US forces will enable the Iraqi people to end the puppet regime with a bang, so to speak, and to treat Grand Ayatollah Al Sistani and the other jihadists in the same way the Italians treated Mussolini after the defeat of German troops in Italy.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 5:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @rick: whines “did rupert murdoch buy queerty?” No Rick but he did buy Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and John McCain, all sleazy hustlers on the make.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ugotmeinsd_619
      ugotmeinsd_619

      @Michael W.: I agree with you Michael, there’s a time & place for everything, and bringing up the gay issue at a Muslim conference is not the time.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 5:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Bill Perdue: You make it sound as though the US initiated the anti-gay pogroms, and anti-gay witch hunts will disappear along with the US presence. We know that’s not true.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 5:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Alec: ,get a clue. There were no anti-GLBT pogroms under Hussein. They began as a result of the degradation of Iraqi society under the impact of genocide by the US. The US invasion and occupation led to over a million deaths. Three racist, pro-oil company presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama are directly and solely responsible.

      The Iraqi government is a fiction created by the US to steal oil. The Iraqi government is itself responsible for many of the murders disguised. Iraqi LGBT says

      Iraqi gays condemn Obama/Clinton inaction on pogrom. Embassy statement ‘offensive and insulting’.

      For immediate release 03.06.09.

      A group representing Iraqi lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people (LGBT) has spoken of their deep anger and offence at a statement by the Baghdad US Embassy concerning the violence and murder campaign against gays.

      In a response to US Rep. Jared Polis, following a meeting with Iraqi government officials, chargé d’affaires Patricia Butenis said “We have no evidence that [the Iraq government's] security forces are in any way involved with these militias.”

      Iraqi LGBT has been reporting for four years on police involvement with the terror campaign. They also criticize the US military command for coldly refusing to assist victims of jihadist and state sponsored murder.

      The statement won’t convince any apologists for US genocide like Alec who deny US culpability in the deaths of GLBT folks in Iraq but it does show that our brothers and sisters in Iraq know who the killers are and who unleashed them.

      Here’s a link to the full press release and an invaluable list of resource materials on the US/Jihadist pogroms.

      http://madikazemi.blogspot.com/2009/05/report-iraqi-anti-lgbt-pogrom.html

      Jun 4, 2009 at 6:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Alec:,get a clue. Obots might deny it but the murder campaign began after the invasion and it’ll end after the occupation. There were no anti-GLBT pogroms under Hussein. They began as a result of the degradation of Iraqi society under the impact of genocide by the US. The US invasion and occupation led to over a million deaths. Three racist, pro-oil company presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama are directly and solely responsible.

      The Iraqi government is a fiction created by the US to steal oil. The Iraqi government is itself responsible for many of the murders disguised. Iraqi LGBT says
      “Iraqi gays condemn Obama/Clinton inaction on pogrom. Embassy statement ‘offensive and insulting’.

      A group representing Iraqi lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people (LGBT) has spoken of their deep anger and offence at a statement by the Baghdad US Embassy concerning the violence and murder campaign against gays.

      In a response to US Rep. Jared Polis, following a meeting with Iraqi government officials, chargé d’affaires Patricia Butenis said “We have no evidence that [the Iraq government's] security forces are in any way involved with these militias.”

      Iraqi LGBT has been reporting for four years on police involvement with the terror campaign. They also criticize the US military command for coldly refusing to assist victims of jihadist and state sponsored murder.

      The statement won’t convince any apologists for US genocide who deny US culpability in the deaths of GLBT folks in Iraq but it does show that our brothers and sisters in Iraq know who the killers are and who unleashed them.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 6:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      Queerty, please continue to criticize Obama. but only when it makes sense; here it does not.

      @Quinn: i don’t think that was racism, that was an accurate description of the state of affairs in several mid-east nations, where they basically *do* hit women over the head and drag them home.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 6:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Bill Perdue: Oh I believe the US invasion made things worse for the LGBT community in Iraq. But before the invasion Hussein reinstated the death penalty for homosexuality, and it was only the secular and relatively indifferent nature of the regime that made it tolerable for gay men there. Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia were always intolerable. Moreover, their homophobia is homegrown; you aren’t going to blame that one on Western colonialism.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 8:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      This was a HISTORIC, BRAVE speech…Our President spoke TRUTH to a very troubled area of the world, one that has heard only lies, agendas and bullshit from us for decades …this a watershed moment in our relations with the Muslim world, and anyone who fails to see or acknowledge this OBVIOUS truth has their head lodged firmly up their queer(ty) ass.

      This speech was not an advance for gay rights, nor was it meant to be…but it was an amazing effort to begin clearing up and cleaning up DECADES of U.S. bullshit and mutual distrust between us and the Middle East.

      God, this site SUUUUCCKKS so hard…

      Jun 4, 2009 at 11:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AL
      AL

      @Bill Perdue: U.S. presence in the Middle East causes anti-gay violence? You are kidding, right? Here we go, another left-winger blames America for every single problem in the world. Islamofascists have always been homophobic regardless of Western influence of any kind. Your idea of ending support for ‘zionist’ Isral is moronic, as well. No country in Middle East is as tolerant and friendly towards gays as Israel. Palestinians are nothing but Islamofascist barbarians who deserve no right to establish an independent state. Kill ‘em all!

      Jun 4, 2009 at 11:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • craig
      craig

      I haven’t responded to many other issues exposed by Qweerty, but I feel compelled to address this issue. Yes, I am dissapointed with the progress of Obama’s presidency on domestic gay issues (DADT, Gay Marriage (even though it is a state issue), etc.), but remember: they are domestic issues. I agree with Robert and Dennis who, so eloquently, expressed what Obama was trying to achieve in the Middle East. Obama is a beacon of hope (sorry, if I have used a cliche used by others) in the Middle East for Americans after years of abuse, intolerance and an attempt at American hegemony perpetuated by Bush and Cheney. Give Obama a break, he has many bridges to build (another cliche – sorry!) after the debacle of the Bush adminstration.

      The process of reconciliation must begin at the most basic level and, I am sorry to say, that doesn’t include us yet. Each journey begins with the first step (yet another cliche!) and we should be thankful that Obama has had the cojones to take that first step and appear in public in an environment that is not exactly disposed to Americans or American values. Let us hope that this is the “olive branch” (expressed by another contributor) for which we seak.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 11:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Alec:, how can you be so willfully ignorant? You must take classes. Do you have an advanced degree in being a shill for colonialism and the christers? Did you get your degree at Obama U?

      Islam, like their cousins the christers have sometimes tolerated and sometimes persecuted sexual minorities. Your statement implying that homobigotry is endemic in muslim culture is simply a lie you made up to promote islamophobia which in turn is used to justify the Clinton-Bush-Obama genocide.

      Wherever and whenever the English and other Euros established colonies they brought their rancid homobigotry with them. It was English colonists who infected Egypt, the Sudan, Yemen, many of the Gulf states and Iran, plus big chunks of Asia, Australasia, Africa, and the Caribbean with their virulent homobigotry. The Euros introduced laws formalizing and codifying bigotry.

      Do us all a favor Alec and check the facts before you begin babbling.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 11:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Dennis: The US can begin to have good relations with the islamic regions of South Asia after it does three things.

      First and most critical is the immediate, total and permanent withdrawal of all US troops, mercenaries and kidnap/torture/murder teams to US home bases.

      Secondly the US will have to cut all the purse strings used to finance zionist apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

      Third the US should offer unlimited asylum to GLBT folks endangered by its illegal and genocidal invasions and occupations in the region.

      Jun 4, 2009 at 11:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dennis
      Dennis

      @Bill Perdue:
      First, Obama IS working to clean up the unbelievable clusterfuck of international lies and torture handed to him by the Bush administration. This bullshit foreign policy he inherited is decades, DECADES in the making…expecting to clean up decades of shit in a matter of months is delusional.

      Second, Obama is taking a harder line with Israel than any other president in decades. Yeah, right, he’s gonna go “rogue hardline” on Israel and piss off every American Jew, again, a fantasy… his tougher talk is movement in the right direction.

      Third, gay people are persecuted and/or tortured the world over…as are women, other minorities, orphaned children, religious minorities, and millions of people of all kinds…a sad truth…can we take them all? Millions of refugees every year? Are gay people the ONLY people deserving protection from violence? We gays get asylum, and EVERYONE else gets a ‘sorry, we’re full up, so you’ll have to fuck off, we’re only taking the gays right now’ ??….Yeah, unlimited asylum will be waaay popular in D. C.

      Obama’s speech was groudbreaking, a new beginning, and a HUGE step in the right for U.S. / Middle East relations.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 12:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paul canning
      paul canning

      Iraqi LGBT statement in full

      Iraqi gays condemn Obama/Clinton inaction on pogrom
      Embassy statement ‘offensive and insulting’

      http://madikazemi.blogspot.com/2009/06/iraqi-gays-condemn-obamaclinton.html

      Jun 5, 2009 at 12:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Bill Perdue:

      ‘scuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor.

      Bill, did you actually mean what you said here?:

      “Islam, like their cousins the christers have sometimes tolerated and sometimes persecuted sexual minorities. Your statement implying that homobigotry is endemic in muslim culture is simply a lie you made up to promote islamophobia”

      I’m not saying I disagree. I just can’t believe you are saying it given your past statements on religion.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 1:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @strumpetwindsock: strumpie, your reaction on this as well as most things is based on willful misunderstanding of the kind so popular among those terrified of change. (And please don’t say “You don’t know me” – I’m all too familiar with the dismal accommodating of people like you towards ignorance and superstition.)

      When I say that religion is the enemy I don’t mean they aren’t nuanced as enemies. Cultures dominated by religion, superstition and ignorance don’t always follow strict religious precepts to the letter. Even the looniest of them balks at following the lemmings off the cliff. As the events at Jamestown in Guyana show, most are unwilling martyrs.

      All of them love to ‘sin’ and act human once in a while. Sometimes their double standards give us a little wriggle room, like we have now in North America and Europe to a certain extent. But it’s not enough for real equality and not enough to take serious steps to suppress religious instilled violence. The numbers of people in our communities murdered jumped in 2007 and 2008 and likely will again this year.

      So it remains true that our ultimate liberation from the torments of the homophobes will come after we establish a fundamentally different kind of society that treats religion as a mental illness which is often accompanied by criminality.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Dennis: Don’t be such an clueless wonder Dennis. What you describe as “the unbelievable clusterfuck of international lies and torture handed to him by the Bush administration” is still in place. The only difference is that Gitmo may be closed. All the other elements of the Clinton-Bush oil piracy – kidnapping and torture, attacks on the US Constitution, a genocidal war – remain unchanged.

      Obama’s ‘harder’ line on settlements and other zionist colonialist adventures is nothing new. It’s been the US line since the Eisenhower years but it’s always accompanied by a wind, a nod, and few billion more in military equipment.

      Obama didn’t promise to end the US genocidal war for oil. He refused to end the ‘special relationship’ of the US with the zionists which consists of giving them the bullets they need to enforce apartheid and ethnic cleansing. He refuses to accept responsibility for the pogroms in Iraq. He refuses to end the war there and is expanding the war of terror against civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

      And yes, I’m for opening the US to asylum to other groups but particularly to those injured directly or indirectly by US aggression, which especially includes GLBT people from Palestine to Pakistan. And I don’t give a rat’s ass if that’s popular in DC. I don’t think, as you seem to, that we have to accommodate to the racists and homobigots who infest the White House, Congress, the RNC and the DNC. And did I mention the Pentagon in that list. And your own State Department?

      Jun 5, 2009 at 2:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @AL: The barbarians are those who commit genocide in Iraq and practice ethnic cleansing and apartheid against Palestinians. And the barbarians are neo-Nazis who advocate mass murder based on ethnicity, like AL.

      For those uninfected by racism here are some facts that throw a little light on the topic.

      The zionist state is not a haven for GLBT Palestinians, who face victimization and the occasional ‘honor killing’ from rightist islamist clerics or their families.

      If they do manage to get to Tel Aviv it’s without papers or money and most are simply arrested and deported. Many are forced into ultra low paying jobs or become prostitutes or worse. The worse in this case is that the zionist secret police force them to become collaborators by blackmailing them.

      The Jewish Daily Forward reports that “Because they are so vulnerable to blackmail, it is assumed by the families and neighbors of gay Palestinian men — sometimes correctly — that they have been blackmailed into becoming informers, either for Israeli intelligence or for opposition Palestinian factions.

      Charity Crouse, a Jewish lesbian anti-occupation activist connects the dots. She says “… the Shabak, or Israeli secret police, will immediately attempt to blackmail any gay Palestinian they encounter into being a collaborator. …the men are sometimes picked up by the Israeli police ostensibly for being in the country illegally, and eventually end up in the custody of Shabak. Shabak threatens to tell their families or the P.A. that they are gay and working as prostitutes in Israel.”

      Second, the zionist colonial administration operates a cruel apartheid system to exploit Palestinians. Desmond Tutu, who can be considered an expert on such matters says he was “very deeply distressed” by a visit to the Holy Land, adding that “it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa”.

      Third, in addition to its colonialist apartheid practices the zionist regime denies basic items like adequate food, medical and educational services. It subjects Palestinians to constant military attacks aimed a causing civilian causalities. The attack in January this year took the lives of 1600 civilians, including over 300 children. Every time shells landed on a school some IDF or zionist source would issue an “oops” statement.

      The net effect of these denials of food and medicine and intermittent killing sprees by the IDF is clearly a case of ethnic cleansing.

      The solution is the creation of a democratic, secular Palestinian state in all territory historically (aka, before 1947) defined as Palestine and the withdrawal of all US forces from the region. The zionists will have to accept the same sort of arrangement that ended apartheid in SA complicated by the issue or returning Palestinian refugees.

      (I’ll provide links for all of the above as requested. Unfortunately when I put all of them in my comments Queerty’s defense program went apeshit and disallowed the comment. Paul Cannon already put in the one quoting Iraqi LGBT on the murders in comment No. 50.)

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @Landon Bryce:

      Landon, thanks, I totally concur.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Bill Perdue: Oh this is rich.

      Islam, like their cousins the christers have sometimes tolerated and sometimes persecuted sexual minorities. Your statement implying that homobigotry is endemic in muslim culture is simply a lie you made up to promote islamophobia which in turn is used to justify the Clinton-Bush-Obama genocide.

      No more “endemic” in Islam than in Christianity or Judaism. All three are bad for sexual minorities. Whatever periods of relative tolerance one might point to, in any society dominated by these religions, the homohate remains strong.

      Wherever and whenever the English and other Euros established colonies they brought their rancid homobigotry with them. It was English colonists who infected Egypt, the Sudan, Yemen, many of the Gulf states and Iran, plus big chunks of Asia, Australasia, Africa, and the Caribbean with their virulent homobigotry. The Euros introduced laws formalizing and codifying bigotry.

      Yes, that’s a good argument for much of Africa, Asia and the Americas. It isn’t much of an argument when addressing the imposition of religious law, which itself was and is often a situs of resistance to colonialism. The English didn’t always need to invent anti-gay attitudes, and the existence of a statute influenced by English law is not an argument that sexual minorities were free from persecution before the arrival of the evil Christian Whites.

      I find Southeast Asia telling. Thailand was never colonized by the West or subject to communist control, and is easily the most gay friendly country in the region. This can be contrasted with Communist colonialism in Vietnam, where homosexuality is classified as a “social evil” by the Party.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Alec: Such mindless McCarthyite drivel. Homobigotry in Vietnam is the result of a century or so of French colonial rule and the American invasion and occupaiton. Homophobia, especially the kind associated with self loathing is another matter altogether. It’s best for people like you not to confuse the two concepts, Cohn.

      How DO you get that stupid?

      I thought Agnus Dei was a goner, but listening to you maybe they’re making a comeback.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paul canning
      paul canning

      Ways to help Iraqi gays (has this been featured on this site? Not sure)

      Support Iraqi LGBT through fund raising and donations

      This support is desperately needed and will be put to good use both inside Iraq itself and to support the exiled movement. The group needs £10,000 a month in order to keep its safe houses and other support for beleaguered LGBT inside Iraq going.

      You can find out how to do this on the Iraqi LGBT website http://iraqilgbtuk.blogspot.com

      Alternatively, in the USA, tax-deductible donations can be made at http://rainbowfund.org

      Contact your local representative to urge them to ask for your government’s pressure on the Iraqi government to take action

      In the USA -
      You can get contact information for Representatives and Senators on this website http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
      The only statement so far from the State Department is carried in this post http://madikazemi.blogspot.com/2009/04/does-hillary-know-this-man.html

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @paul canning: they have been ‘featured’ several times but bear repeating. Thanks.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paul canning
      paul canning

      Financial support really is desperately needed. They are having to turn people away, sometimes onto the street with literally nothing but clothes on their back and no support anywhere, no one else to turn to, to who knows what fate as they have so few resources.

      Please, please help them and encourage everyone else you know to.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GBM
      GBM

      He isn’t President of that country and should’nt have to say SHIT about Gays in that country. I’m more concerned about him saying here where he is President!

      Jun 5, 2009 at 10:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Bill Perdue: Homophobia/homobigotry/whatever you choose to call it is really more of a state problem in Vietnam, from what I can gather. The population appears to be more tolerant than the goverment.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 10:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @GBM: He is however warlord of an imperial military forces using state sponsored terror to murder Iraqis and Afghans in numbers approaching genocide.

      The American military pretense is directly and solely responsible for the pogroms against GLBT people. So it would be nice if he and Hillary opened the doors of US consulates and embassies and granted unlimited asylum to GLBT folks in danger of being tortured and murdered because he wants to steal oil.

      And look at it this way, GBM, if he’s out of the country he won’t have as much time to wreck the economy by passing out welfare for the looter rich and demanding austerity and cutbacks from working people and unions. So it’s a good thing when he wanders because as long as he’s President he’s going to fuck over working people, GLBT folk, women and etc.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 10:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @Alec: You could be right. I’ve never seen any polling (and neither have you) but it sounds reasonable. Nevertheless what bigotry there is constitutes a hold over of French and American colonialism.

      Vietnam, if you’re right, sounds a lot like the US where more and more people support full marriage equality but homobigots like Obama, Clinton and McCain and their parties oppose it and craven apologists for bigotry like you agree find that agreeable.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 10:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Bill Perdue:

      How can you say that I misunderstand when I haven’t even stated my opinion (except to say that I agree with you in part)?

      I am fully aware that there are myriad causes for discrimination and homophobia in cultures, from colonizing influence, to religion to simple ingrained xenophobia. As a matter of fact, much of the worst in sharia is actually secular law made by the Caliphates, and has no basis in the Koran.

      I just find it annoying that you accuse someone else of religious discrimination because you are one of its most vitriolic critics, and the one usually calling for non-compromise when it comes to religious tolerance.

      For you to turn around and give religion a pass, and accuse others of discrimination simply because you have a bigger target-of-the-day seems a bit hypocritical to me.

      And if, as you say, your five-year-plan includes declaring religion a sickness once you have eliminated the capitalist oppressors, then I guess you are just pretending to be tolerant, and you agree with Alec after all.

      But just to be clear…. you believe that homophobia is NOT endemic in islamic/judeo/christian culture?

      Jun 5, 2009 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @strumpetwindsock: strumpie, in terms even a pedant can understand, Islamophobia is the belief expressed by piglets like AL, tankie and other racist vermin that all muslims are homobigots. It’s used by apologists for genocide like Alec, Hillary Clinton and others to deny the primary role of political leaders in promoting the murder of GLBT folks in Iraq using the instrumentality of jihadists.

      None of that is very complex nevertheless I’m not surprised that you don’t seem able to grasp it.

      Homobigotry is endemic among superstitious and ignorant people, aka religious people but not in everyone else in the cultures they infest. Ignorance and superstition, aka, religion is not what defines modern cultures. That seems simple enough but I you seem unable to grasp it. Perhaps that because it’s not all black and white, but shaded. Pedants like you rarely understand these simple facts.

      The belief that religion dominates cultures is a myth perpetrated by the cults, and one you’ve fallen for hook line and sinker. Cultures are much more complex than their most backward layers, ie, religious layers. The pro-democratic, scientific, humanist and secular impulses generated by the Age of Revolutions now permeate many modern societies.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 11:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Bill Perdue:

      You do seem to be contradicting yourself Bill, because in #46 you are definitely referring to religious MUSLIM culture. If you had made reference to a cultural group like arabs, persians, jews, or turks I would not have questioned your assertion.

      As to your other points, they don’t seem to be all that rock-solid either:

      All discrimination in a culture is imposed by its leaders, and the people bear no responsibility for it.

      Discrimination is a product of ignorance and superstition (and by contrast an educated, advanced, non-religious culture will presumably have NO prejudice)

      Modern cultures are not defined by ignorance and superstition. It just seems that way from all the bigots who seem to be running the show. The enlightened people must be off having coffee or something.

      If Bill gets caught up in a contradiction the fault is not with his reasoning, but others’ pedantry in pointing it out.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 12:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paul canning
      paul canning

      Bill, whilst I appreciate most of your points it is not true that the statement says ‘They also criticize the US military command for coldly refusing to assist victims of jihadist and state sponsored murder’

      I cannot speak for the group but it is my understanding that individual soldiers and officers have tried to assist individuals as have individual embassy officials. The problem is the official stance of the State Department and their shielding of the Iraqi government. Any fire should be directed at Hillary Clinton, and ultimately Barack Obama.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 2:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      Could it possibly be because this speech was designed to ease tensions between the middle east and the United States and gay issues in the middle east are a powder keg? No, that couldn’t be it. Obama should mention gay rights in every speech and if he doesn’t we should impeach him for not keeping his campaign promises. Lets just be glad he is quiet about the topic after the last dude mentioned gay and lesbian rights every time he needed to scare the religious right into getting out in mass to support him. I’d rather there be silence for awhile than the threat of a gay marriage ban amendment every time the president is losing ground.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 2:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @galefan2004:
      I’m sure he was also aware of the Lebanese elections.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 2:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Strumpetwindsock: I’m sure he was aware of all the atrocities that have been committed from the but gluing to the denial of gays in Iran by its own prime minister. However, that still doesn’t change the fact that this speech was given to ease tensions between countries that didn’t think 9/11 went far enough and the United States. Turning it into a gay rights speech wasn’t going to help anything. He was careful not to tread to heavy on sacred ground when he spoke about women’s rights as well.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @galefan2004:
      That’s what I meant.

      Although he was direct about some things, it would have have been counterproductive to call for a new beginning, then immediately start hectoring people.

      That sort of an approach might not go over so well in a country which is in the middle of an election right now.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @paul canning: That may be true of individual soldiers. I’m sure many of them do what they can to help all kinds of Iraqis caught up in the killing fields created by Clinton’s genocide, Bush’s invasion and occupation and Obama’s occupation. The same thing occurred in Vietnam

      I thought it was clear that I was speaking of the ‘US military command’, which reports to Obama, and the diplomatic corps, aka, the empires proconsuls and legates, who report to Hillary Clinton. They are, as I noted, coldly hostile to the plight of GLBT Iraqis and all Iraqis, which explains the 1.2 million civilian deaths they caused.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 8:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @galefan2004: @strumpetwindsock: @galefan2004: Clinton, Bush and now Obama are in essence hand puppets acting in the interests of the rich who looted our economy nearly to death and who killed better than a million Iraqis through an embargo of foods and medicine, the invasion, by inciting communal warfare and occupation.

      Do you imagine that Obama cares one way or the other who gets killed as long as Haliburton, Chevron-Texaco, BP-Conoco and the others get hegemony over the regions oil and gas?

      That’s not unique in US history. Here’s the statement of a former Commandant of the USMC and winner of two Medals of Honor, Major General Butler, who said of his ‘service’

      “”I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

      And he was only a major general. Imagine how much more criminality adheres to Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, the Bushes, Clinton and now Obama.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Bill Perdue:

      I agree with what you say about the role of imperialism (though it is definitely a two-edged sword).

      But I think you already know where we disagree – on the fact that our people quite complicit in the crimes of our government, whether it is by being blissfully ignorant, or taking an active role.

      Likewise, in most cases the colonizers did not create oppression in other parts of the world out of thin air, nor would it disappear if we packed up our tents and left.

      As for the role of our political leaders, while some try to effect positive change, and some are active proponents of oppression, I think it is more accurate to see them as simply not in control of the real engines of power. Not to say they are impotent – but they are severely limited in what they can do.

      Jun 5, 2009 at 9:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      Anyone notice the results in the Lebanese election yesterday?

      And there is also this little event taking place next weekend:

      http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ifKX05Pf2PZcemfZfvAx_N-I4Okg

      Jun 8, 2009 at 9:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @schlukitz: You are entitled to your opinions and beliefs, of course, but I am not a self-hating gay person nor am I a disgrace. I’ve actually been out since 1972 and marched in Gay Pride Day in NYC in 1975. Regarding the following in your post:

      “A straight world that demotes LGBT people to second-class citizenship, demeans, denies equal rights, demonizes, marginalizes , imprisons, gay-bashes, murders and hangs them in public squares simply on suspicion of being gay and you are worried about “antagonizing” the straight world? WTF?”

      I guess I wasn’t clear. I was referring to antagonizing the straight world in Canada, not in the Moslem world where I amn aware that LGBT people are oppressed in teh way that you describe. I did indicate that I live in Canada where LGBT people are fully protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and have the same rights as straights including the right to get married. So from my perspective, in Canada, we have the whole rights package already. I consider myself post-gay lib and I’m having a happy life. Also, I don’t have heterophobia like a lot of LGBT people. I like straights. Some of them are my best friends and I like their kids. I am not gay 24 hours a day. There’s much more to me than my sexual orientation. I don;t think this makes me a traitor. I think it makes me a grown up.

      “it’s time to stop kvetching about every little perceived slight from the majority straight world,”

      Jun 20, 2009 at 10:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @Robert, NYC: What are you so angry about? It can’t really be that I’m a gay man who doesn’t support “gay marriage” as such, can it? See, I don’t feel “oppressed”. I don’t feel that anyone or any thing is preventing me from being who I am. And I don’t need to stand with other “oppressed” LGBT people to feel good about myself. Frankly, the LGBT world is a very small room. There’s a big world out there made up of 90% of men and women who are not LGBT, and some of them are just as interesting as LGBT people. Does that mean I’m a traitor? What is this? Public school? I think it’s time that you folks grow up, get over yourselves and your sexuality and get on with having a happy life. It’s 40 years since Stonewall!!! When are you going to liberate yourself, not as a gay person per se, but as a person period? Anyway, just because I say things that you don’t want to hear and just because I think differently than you and don’t buy into the whole LGBT schtick, doesn’t make me a monster. The gay world is made up of many different people doing many different things, or haven’t you heard?

      Jun 20, 2009 at 11:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @wondermann: Thank you!! After a certain point, the oppressor is not out there; the oppressor is in your head. If you get upset by every Right wing jerk who doesn’t believe in gay marriage, then you are giving your power away. I was fortunate to have spent time in NYC before the Stonewall riots and to hang out with gay men. They were wonderful!! They were gentlemen. They were cultured. They had developed a way of life that was very interesting. There were many different kinds of relationships. You could love someone and live together. You could love someone and not live together. You could love someone and have sex with other poeple etc. Gay men worked out their love situations on an individual basis. There were no socially-sanctioned rules about how 2 men could love one another, and they didn’t need the power of the state meddling into their affairs. They didn’t need gay marriage to legitimize their relationships. I much prefer, “This is my lover,” to “This is my husband.” I don’t want a husband. I want a lover, OK? It’s OK with me if you want a husband. I don’t claim to understand it, but if that’s what you want, fine. But I’m not a traitor or a monster because I don’t believe in gay marriage.

      Jun 20, 2009 at 11:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @Landon Bryce: To me, the whole concept that gay relationships have to be equal to gay relationships is bullshit. Why call gay relationships a “marriage”? Let the straights have this word. Let”s all live in peace and harmony together. Let clever gay people come up with their own word for gay loving relationships. I don’t particularly care for “civil union” which is cold and unimaginative. How about Ishkabibble? Whatever. To call gay relationships something different from marriage is not self-hating. I don’t get where self-hating comes into it. I don’t define myself by what straight people do or by what other gay people do. I define myself by what I decide to do. Anyway, if you chose to consider gay marriage as an equal rights issue, be my guest. Come to Canada and get married.

      Jun 20, 2009 at 11:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Louis Solnicki:

      Oh man. Where to begin?

      I was referring to antagonizing the straight world in Canada, not in the Moslem world

      Doh! I do not live in Canada or the Moslem World. I live in the United States.

      I did indicate that I live in Canada where LGBT people are fully protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and have the same rights as straights including the right to get married

      Well, goody goody for you. Here again, I live in the States, not Canada. We don’t have your laws here.

      in Canada, we have the whole rights package already.

      We’re still fighting to get our down here.

      I consider myself post-gay lib and I’m having a happy life.

      I’m so happy your’re happy! Sounds a bit like “We got ours. Fuck you!”

      Also, I don’t have heterophobia like a lot of LGBT people.

      Yes, we American bigoted, hateful and discriminating homosexuals really need to get over that, don’t we? Until we we do, we deserve everything we get from the heteros and the church crowd.

      I like straights. Some of them are my best friends

      I like blacks. Some of them are my best friends. So?

      and I like their kids

      I ain’t going near that comment with a ten-foot pole!

      I am not gay 24 hours a day

      I see. How many hours a day do you spend being gay and how many hours a day do you pretend to be straight?

      There’s much more to me than my sexual orientation. I don;t think this makes me a traitor

      A high-protein, low-fat diet could alleviate that problem, I’m sure.

      I don;t think this makes me a traitor

      Of course not. Julius and Ethyl Rosenbertg felt the same way.

      I think it makes me a grown up

      Why of course it does. Everyone should give themselves a good, hearty slap on the back.

      Is there anything else that you forgot to share with us as Canadian Citizen of the Year?

      Perhaps you could post a picture of the Silver Cup they awared you with for us to gave upon?

      Suck up to straights much?

      Jun 21, 2009 at 1:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      Typo: Fave should be gaze.

      Delete the “I don’t think this makes me a traitor” after the “There’s more to me…..” highlight. I dealt with that in the next highlight.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 1:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @schlukitz:

      I believe he’s either a so called “ex-gay” or a “wannabe” straight agitator, just another shill I guess. If he lived in the U.S. he’d be voting republican and against marriage equality and probably voted against it in Canada. I’m not going to dignify his responses any more, he’s trying to pit one against the other and I’m not playing his mind games. He gives himself away when in another post he cites “marriage has always been between a man and a woman” mantra. He also thinks we already have our rights in the U.S. whatever the fuck that means. To me, he’s a delusional loser, big time. If there were no civil unions and no marriage equality in Canada, he’d be just as “happy”? He’s an idiot.

      He’s also wrong and so is Obama when they say that the federal government should not be involved with marriage but should be left to the states. The fact of the matter is, the federal government is most certainly involved when it confers over 900 federal rights that only marriage can bring, while the states offer the remainder. If its not, then federal marriage rights should be extended to single people (gay and straight) living together or in some form of legally recognized union and that would end the right wing’s argument against same-sex marriage or the need for it to obtain those rights reserved currently for one class of people. The federal government should recognize all forms of unions, not just married couples. You can’t have a society where there is more democracy for married couples only and not others even if a majority holds sway, either we are ALL equal or we’re not and if we’re not, we’re not a democracy.

      Thus far, seven countries (and growing) have already figured that one out, but we haven’t.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 10:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Robert, NYC:

      Your observations are right on the money concerning this Canadian of the Year. He is so far out in left field as to be totally laughable.

      Unfortunately, it isn’t laughable because there seem to be so many posters just like him on these threads anymore and it is driving away GLBT people who do have something meaningful to say and discuss with others on these threads.

      And, it is exactly because of people with attitudes like Mr. Canada, that this country still dos not have the rights that seven other countries have already figured out ahead of us.

      That’s what makes me want to sit down and cry when I read posts like his.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      He’s posted on other topics, not just on Queerty either. Their m.o. is to wear us down, dehumanize us, the “one man, one woman” mantra regarding marriage is the code for dehumanization and the first clue as to who these people are and what they’re about. They think they’ll drive Queerty and other gay blogsites off the net altogether,but….they NEVER succeed. Sooner or later, people stop enabling them, and we should start thinking about that, we allow them to get their jollies momentarily but we have to put a stop to their constant craving for an audience. They know they’re losers, losing the cultural war and in an act of desperation….come to sites like this to to vent their frustration out on us. They’re to be pitied, many are deeply closeted people, some are very sick and some use religion as a front, all of them of course are in denial, deeply troubled and in need of help. Some are even paid to do it, ex-gay ministries are notorious for that. So with that, I say, lets all try if we can to ignore them, its the best remedy.

      Actually, this is one of the few sites that doesn’t block agitators and I sometimes wonder why? Food for thought?

      Jun 21, 2009 at 2:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @schlukitz:

      Plus, Louis seems to ignore that having the right to marry, let your partner immigrate, and to and serve in the army doesn’t give us complete equality.

      There is still enough homophobia in Canada. We still face physical threat, discrimination and humiliation, and there is still lots of work to be done. If we stopped being vigilant it wouldn’t be too long before things started sliding backwards.

      And for him to suggest that you have “enough” rights recognized in the U.S. is ridiculous. He is quite mistaken.

      I think I understand part of what he is implying regarding isolationism – that if we see ourselves as separate and opposed to the straight community we will wind up ghettoizing ourselves and hindering our fight for equality (at least I think that is what he was implying).

      And the accusation that because of his opinions he must be an ex-gay or wannabe straight is part of that isolationism, I think. I know plenty of queers who are racist, right-wing, homophobic, and have lots of other terrible values. Why should we assume that if someone disagrees with us s/he must be straight?

      On that one point I agree with him. But pretty much everything else he said is seriously misguided and quite harmful to the struggle for our rights.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 3:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Predictable. Oh, and fuck canada. I hate it. It’s full of canadians and, worse than that, french canadians.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      From someone who’s said before that he pretty much hates everything and everybody, this is no big surprise.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 3:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • galefan2004
      galefan2004

      @Robert, NYC: Perhaps QT thinks that we can govern and handle ourselves on this site so a moderator is not really needed. Personally, I don’t think you really get anywhere without encouraging free speech in debates and you can’t truly do that with a moderator deleting every comment deemed unwelcome.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 3:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @TANK:

      LOL. What?

      I don’t know why you are down on french canadians.
      Quebec is where most of the anti-church sentiment is.
      Research man, research.

      Plus, they’d kick your fucking ass for calling them french Canadian. It’s Quebecois (or Quebeckers for you non-french speakers).

      @galefan2004:
      I agree it is important to allow free speech, even of opinions we disagree with (though usually they are not listened to – just drowned out by a volley of curses and denunciations).

      A moderator is still important for when debete turns to personal attack. There is none of that that I have seen. They seem more concerned that no one speaks the name of their former editor.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 4:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      No moderation, I mean.

      Jun 21, 2009 at 5:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      From KC Labor, a web port of entry for working people”

      “Iraqi Unions Under Fresh Attack.

      Bosses in Iraq are still trying to utilize the only Saddam Hussein era law that was permitted by U.S. occupation forces to remain intact- the outlawing of unions in the public sector (which includes most industry, utilities, and transportation.) Members of the General Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq at the Basra water purification plant have been ordered to disband their union and their leaders are threatened with imprisonment.

      U.S. Labor Against the War is helping to circulate a solidarity appeal from these workers. To find out what you can do to help click here: http://uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=19479

      KC Labor itself can be reached here http://www.kclabor.org/

      Jun 22, 2009 at 2:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      TABARNAC! That would be the ultimate humiliation. It’d be like being slapped about by a fake canadian wannabe. Did I say “like”? My bad.

      Jun 22, 2009 at 2:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @schlukitz: I am sorry if what I said ruffled your feathers. Please be advised that: I’m not an “ex-gay”, I’m not a wannabe straight agitator, I’m not a shill, I don’t like Republicans, I would never vote against gay marriage, I don’t play mind games, I’m not a delusional loser, I’m not an idiot, I don’t think I’m laughable or far out in left field, I’m not a loser, I’m not fighting a culture war, I’m not desperate etc.

      This is quite the list of put-downs, discounts and name-calling from gay men who probably suffered from put downs, discounts and name-calling when you were growing up!!! I think differently than you guys do and I shared with you what I have have come to think and believe. I didn’t call you names for what you believe, did I?

      My tone was somewhat snarky because, as I said, for me, the gay marriage issue is not an equality issue, and even after you have explained why it is for you, I still don’t see it that way….

      I’m sorry that American LGBT still don’t have the basic human rights that we have in Canada and that there seems to be far more homophobia in the US than there is in Canada….

      The latest statistics regarding gay marriage in Canada were published today in Toronto’a edition of Metro newspaper. In 2008, 616 women married each other, down 28% from 2004, the first full year in which same-sex marriage was legal. For men, the number for 2008 was 868, down the same 28% since 2004. According to the 2006 census, there were 7,465 married same-sex couples in Canada. Most likely, there are fewer than 10,000 of them compared with more than 6 million of opposite-sex marriages. Canada changed a lot of lsws and upset a lot of people in the process – all for what’s turned out to be something like .06% of the population.

      So, was it worth it? Some gay people say, yes. It created a different Canada. I leave it to you guys to decide. For the way I live my life, this law hasn’t changed a thing. Since I came out in 1972, I never gave the idea of gay marriage a second thought and was very surprised that it has become the gay issue de jour.

      Finally, I believe that for gay people to invest so much energy to fight for the right for “equal marriage” will, in the end, prove to be a hollow victory and a tremendous disappointment. Gay people do not need “gay marriage” to confer legitimacy on gay loving relationships, and I suspect, once “gay marriage” laws have been passed throughout the US, after the initial excitement, just as has happened in Canada, the numbers of gay men and women getting married will decline.

      If you do not feel good about yourself as a gay person, then “gay marriage” will not suddenly make your life better. In addition, don’t give your power away to straights who will have the power to decide in a referendum on the legitimacy of gay marriage. Gay people leave themselves very vulnerable to all kinds of emotional issues when they do this. The response of the gay community in California to the passing of Proposition 8 revealed much agony, heartache and pain. Many consider such a referendum on gay marriage to be a referendum on unconditional acceptance of themselves as gay people which I don’t think it is.

      Some battles are worth fighting for and some are not and it takes wisdom to know the difference. I don’t think that fighting for “equal marriage” is a wise decision

      Jun 23, 2009 at 6:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Louis Solnicki:

      EH, shaddup, canadian.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 6:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Louis Solnicki:
      If you don’t value it then that is your concern.

      The fact is there are many of us who do value being treated as equal under the law, How many people it affects is not important; whether it is the right and legal thing to do is what counts.

      More importantly, why should people in the states or another country settle for a “separate but equal” status that simply allows bigots to feel justified in their discrimination?

      While I think legal provisions (such as those in New Hampshire) are okay so long as it allows us full marriage, I think it is shameful to bend the law and recognition of our rights to the will of religious fundamentalists and homophobes. That is why I think the Canadian legal solution was the simple and right way.

      I understand that you may not see it as something of value, and that it is a poor choice of battles.

      I disagree, and I think public support down in the states will ultimately change in our favour…. but not if we keep quiet and stop pushing.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 6:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Louis Solnicki:
      And besides, it wasn’t a matter of Canada changing laws and upsetting people.

      People here challenged the law in court and struck it down because it was unconstitutional. The feds could have tried to fight it with some sort of “separate but equal” compromise, but they wisely decided not to do so.

      As reasonable people they saw they had no choice (unlike Stephen Harper’s current actions regarding Omar Kadhr), and changed the definition of marriage to comply with the law.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @strumpetwindsock:

      “I think I understand part of what he is implying regarding isolationism – that if we see ourselves as separate and opposed to the straight community we will wind up ghettoizing ourselves and hindering our fight for equality (at least I think that is what he was implying).

      And the accusation that because of his opinions he must be an ex-gay or wannabe straight is part of that isolationism, I think. I know plenty of queers who are racist, right-wing, homophobic, and have lots of other terrible values. Why should we assume that if someone disagrees with us s/he must be straight?”

      Exactly!!! Different strokes for different folks.

      I’m not only a gay man, but I am also Jewish, so I know intimately the danger in seeing oneself as separate and different from the world community and living in a ghetto. I don’t like the Jewish ghetto mentality and I don’t much like the gay ghetto mentality either.

      As you may know, the Jewish Right in the US, Canada and Israel are of one mind about the state of Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews over 2000 years ago, that they are God’s “chosen people” and that the Palestinians have little claim on this land. And if you don’t agree with them, they will call you an anti-Semite, and if you happen to be Jewish and don’t agree with them, then you are self-hating Jew.

      And you guys have used the exact same argument with me. All gay people must be in favour of equal marriage. If you are straight and don’t agree, then you are a homophobe, and if you are gay and don’t agree, then you are a self-hating gay person.

      Growing up, I suffered as a gay man at the hands of my Jewish brethren. They called me “fagele”, a Yiddish word which means literally “bird”, but means “fairy” as in “Fairy, go fly away!”. So in order to survive and maintain my sanity, I moved away from the Jewish ghetto when I graduated from high school and moved into he wider world community, and I never expected that when I came out as a gay man, I would be entering another ghetto, and just as I refused to fall in line with the Jewish ghetto, I have refused to fall in line with the gay ghetto.

      In addition, I did not embrace social activism, but rather turned inward to liberate myself emotionally and spiritually through a life long journey of therapy, meditation and Buddhism.

      As I see it, the danger of following a path of social activism is that you lose your unique identity by introjecting the beliefs of woman’s liberation, gay liberation etc. The tendency is to use the world as a screen to project inner issues that developed in our families of origin.

      Yes, there are people who oppress LGBT out in the world, but we also have voices that oppress us internally, and, I believe, unless you confront your inner oppressor fully, no amount of gay rights and freedoms passed by state legislators including “equal marriage” is going to make a whit of difference as you experience your life in the here and now as a gay person.

      Obviously, this site is dedicated to gay social activism, so I am not sharing my views to a receptive audience. Consequently, I think it’s best if I make this my final post on this site because what I say appears to antagonize those who post here regularly.
      -Louis Solnicki

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      So once we lose our oppression, we lose our unique identity? More brilliant canadian reasoning.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @TANK: I’m afraid that I’m not going to please you and shaddup, but I have decided to post elsewhere as what I say appears to antagonize people like you on this site. However, if you and your fellow travelers prefer to communicate only with others who believe as you do and to gang up on, put down and bully away those who disagree with you, then you are living in an echo chamber of like views. Birds of a feather flock together on internet sites, and this site is no different. You will not grow as a person if you get so impatient and resentful of those who are not your cup of tea.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Louis Solnicki:

      I thought I told you to shut your face, canuck… But seriously, you wrote you were going to stop posting…you don’t take your own advice? You sound old, too. Keep your lunch money, martyr.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @TANK: No, once you let go of your feelings of oppression, then you gain your true identity. What I say has nothing to do with being “brilliant” or “Canadian”. Anyway, TANK, you resent what I say, so you and I can’t have a real dialogue. If you post a response, I will let you have the last word, so you have won. I hope this makes you happy.

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @TANK: “If you and your fellow travelers prefer to communicate only with others who believe as you do and to gang up on, put down and bully away those who disagree with you, then you are living in an echo chamber of like views.” In short, you’re a little prick!!!

      Jun 23, 2009 at 7:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Louis Solnicki:

      For some odd reason, I do not really get that you are sorry that you “ruffled my feathers” as you so indelicately put it. Perhaps it is because you envision me in your minds eye as a “fagele” as in “bird” or “fairy”?

      Thank you (I think) for the list of pejoratives you put together for me that you state you have been the victim of since arriving on this site.

      May I remind you that you are a guest here, just like the rest of us and when you barge in like a bull in a china shop and start laying your negativism and “I’ve got mine, Jack, so you just go fuck off” attitude, just how did you think you would be received? Did you expect accolades and bouquets of flowers to be thrown at your feet in return for your selfish denial of civil-rights to others simply because you feel you don’t need them or want them? How fucking cavalier of you!

      Had you taken the time and the trouble to do some research on the topic of LGBT civil-rights, which is not just limited to same-sex marriage as you seem to think, you would realize that many people, unlike you, are having to suffer because of a second-class citizenship status that denies them the most basis of human rights. How thoroughly selfish of you to just flick them off like a fly on your coat because they “bother” you.
      Man, talk about chutzpah?

      In addition to the myriad reasons Strumpetwinsock patiently explained to you, and believe me, Strumpet is one of the most patient people I have ever come across when it comes to trying to get people to see all aspects of an argument, there is also the matter of some 40,000 LGBT, bi-national couples who cannot bring their spouses into this country because our Immigration Dept. and our government will not allow them to marry and thus be able to sponsor their partners for American Citizenship just like str8s do.

      If you do not feel good about yourself as a gay person, then “gay marriage” will not suddenly make your life better

      Oh really now. The self appointed Sigmund Freud deigns to preach to the rest of us ignorant slobs who just want to be looked at and treated like human beings for a change and give us a free Psychiatry 101 lesson. Try telling that to the 40,000 same-sex bi-national couples. You’d be lucky to escape with your glasses, bad hairpiece and clothing intact.

      Your tone was somewhat snarky???

      Totally infuriating would be more like it.

      And don’t think for one moment that airing your childhood Yiddishkeit on this thread has gained you one ounce of sympathy or understanding of your crappy present attitudes. Your explanations fall far short of sounding anything like a a real apology.

      Gai feifen ahfen yam! – (Go peddle your fish elsewhere!)

      Jun 23, 2009 at 9:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      @TANK:

      Solnicki thinks that gay people don’t need marriage to get our full rights. It begs the question, if we don’t, then why do straight people need to marry to get them? They could easily opt for domestic partnerships if they wanted them and do what many gay couples do, assuming they can afford it, by paying lawyers a few thousand dollars to draw up other documents to give them more rights that straight married couples don’t have to do. Or the federal government could abolish marriage and opt for civil unions for all to make it equal. I often wonder why so many straights don’t opt for domestic partnerships since they can’t get access to civil unions. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

      Jun 24, 2009 at 8:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @schlukitz: Re:
      “…when you barge in like a bull in a china shop and start laying your negativism and “I’ve got mine, Jack, so you just go fuck off” attitude, just how did you think you would be received?”

      I think that’s mostly a fair response. I did make a point of stating my disagreement with fighting for “equal marriage” and why I didn’t take the gay activist route on a site where both these issues are strongly advocated. I confess that I did want to push some buttons to see what would happen, and, surprise, there’s a lot of angry people on this site including yourself!!

      Re: “I’ve got mine, Jack”. Well, I think I do and I did a lot of inner work to get there, so I’m not going to apologize for bragging about it. Why should I? But I don’t think I told people who post on this site to fuck off. Actually, it is TANK who told me to fuck off!!

      Re:’Perhaps it is because you envision me in your minds eye as a “fagele” as in “bird” or “fairy”?’ This never crossed my mind, so I take this to be your own interpretation. Why would I think of you as a “fagele”? Please enlighten me.

      Re: “…in return for your selfish denial of civil-rights to others simply because you feel you don’t need them or want them”

      First, I don’t realy have the power to deny others their civil rights; I’m not a law or a person in any kind of authority. As for being “selfish”, everyone has the psychologial right to be selfish: i.e. to make decisions about what is and what is not good for them. Of course, I need and want civil rights just like you do, but, for me, freedom is an inner decision and is not really subject to outer laws regarding civil rights. On a day-to-day, moment-by-moments basis, who or what is really stopping you from making decisions to create a happy life for yourself?

      In addition – and this is going to make you very angry – can you have a happy life as a gay person while gay people in other countries are suffering from oppression? And, if not, why not? Why do you think it’s your job to fight for the civil rights of gay people all over the planet?

      If you think about it, you have no control over other people, mass events, anything going on outside you. The only thing you have control over is yourself and how you react. Of course, one would never become a gay activist if one believed this. But after all that’s said and done, you are left with the existential reality of your own life on a moment-by-moment basis. I think it’s a big enough job deciding how you are going to create a happy life for yourself, without trying to rescue all the other gay people on the planet. But then, I’m “selfish”, so of course I would think this way.

      Re: “The self appointed Sigmund Freud deigns to preach to the rest of us ignorant slobs who just want to be looked at and treated like human beings for a change and give us a free Psychiatry 101 lesson.” I’m not Sigmund Freud. I don’t think of you as ignorant slobs and I’m not giving you a free lesson in Psychiatry 101.

      I just think that you guys are not in awareness and in the here and now. You are in your heads all the time ruminating about gay rights. Anyway, it’s your choice to live your life as you see fit. But if you read over my responses, you will see that I am not persecuting you for having a different viewpoint than I do. I explain how I came to believe as I do.

      On the other hand, you and your fellow travelers persecute me, call me names, use sarcasm and put downs and swear at me, all very aggressive and angry tactics, to discredit what I say, and you don’t just do this with me. You do this with each other as well.

      I have read a number of threads on this site, and this is how you guys disagree with each other. Obviously, you like relating in this way. Are you aware that you do this? If so, what makes you think that relating in this way gives credibility to the content of what you are saying? If you are advocating for gay rights in the real world, no one in any position of authority is going to give you the time of day if you relate to them in this way. They will shut the door in your face.

      Finally, I did not tell you my story about being called a “fagele” to get your sympathy. I told you this to indicate that indeed, I am not straight, and, like you, I was oppressed growing up as a gay man and why I dislike the gay ghetto mentality.

      Happy Pride Day

      Jun 24, 2009 at 10:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Louis Solnicki
      Louis Solnicki

      @schlukitz: I’m pleased to have had my say. I’m going to end this slugfest, call it a draw and shake your hand. Best of luck in your fight for gay rights and equal marriage in the US! -Louis Solnicki

      Jun 24, 2009 at 11:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.