|
Is Homo-Journo As Bad As Homophobe?
In a swooning post, Sullivan featured the presidential candidate's so-called commitment to fighting homophobia in black churches - and beyond! From Sunday's Meet The Press: I've talked to African-American ministers. There's a problem of homophobia in the African-American community. I will go into churches, I will go into meetings with ministers and say, "I disagree with you on these issues. This is not how I interpret my faith." As Sullivan celebrates Obama's queer commitment, the Riskers remind him of the gay gospel gaffe, a political SNAFU Sullivan seems poised to forget. |
|
• Jossip hit up The Atlantic's 150th anniversary bash/voyeuristic adventure. Watch for special appearances from Moby, Andrew Sullivan, Patti Smith and some other familiar faces. • Who's your favorite fictional gay? • RIP AIDS activist and Bill Clinton ally Dr. R. Scott Hitt. |
|
• Dog The Bounty Hunter erroneously imagined himself to be "down" enough to use the word "nigger". He was wrong. • Radar tests naughty t-shirt limits, proves New Yorkers have thick skin. • Andrew Sullivan takes on the Clintons: Democrats, it seems to me, also have a right to know whether the Clinton team expects another out-break of the kind of scandals that rocked and roiled the country the last time this couple occupied the White House together. Are we headed back to marital psychodrama as public spectacle? Well, it's more interesting than the frigid Bush family. • Joey "Fat One" Fatone warned Lance Bass of mother's wrath. |
|
|
|
Trans Rights Not Equal To Gay Rights
The transgendered movement is so important that it's worth subjecting gay people to many more years of employment insecurity. Not so urgent, after all, is it? Gay people in red states without employment protection have to wait while pomo lefty activists in cushy gay lobby jobs preen about p.c. purity. Why are we not surprised? Sullivan's not exactly the post child for equality, compassion or humanity. |
|
• Just for fun, you know? • Kenneth Hill offers a closer look at John F. Kennedy and his best (and gay) pal, Lem Billings. • Iranian queer couple speak out. • Jonathan Rhys Meyers in Russian GQ. |
|
|
|
…Capehart was selected as a questioner of the Democratic candidates by the Human Rights Campaign. He did a good job, I thought. He also fit the bill: a Democrat, and a pliant member of the gay establishment. But it seems to me that he represents something that plagues gay elites. To put it bluntly, they have limited conviction about their own equality, especially if it means challenging those who give them access to power. After battling our many internal voices, we've got to agree with Sullivan - not necessarily about Capehart in particular, but definitely many mainstream gays' inability to stand up for what's actually right, rather than what's right for now. And, more importantly, dig into their candidates. |
|
Obama Ready To Take Charge
|
|
There is nothing gay in this movie. I'm not playing a gay man. Scientology is not homophobic in any way, in fact it's one of the more tolerant faiths. Anyone's accepted. As long as they assimilate to pre-determined Scientological "lifestyles" and sacrifice their rational thought, brain and soul. • Gay for pay porn star Marc Dalton continues to make his parents proud: a domestic dispute violated his probation and landed him back in jail. And he'll probably be there for the foreseeable future. • Did Kate Moss leave Pete Doherty because he cheated? If his junk problem didn't come between them, we're sure they can reconcile a moment of sluttiness.. |
|
While old Sully makes a living slinging words, Krone's busy slinging paint. And, as you can see, he's been known to train his eye on his main squeeze. Above you see Sullivan looking muscular and majestic. Below, you see what Big Head DC supposes to be Sullivan's bottom. For more of Krone's work click here. No, it's not all of Andrew Sullivan. Yes, it is good. |
|
In an email sent to Sullivan and forwarded to us, an HRCer gets a little snippy, insisting Sullivan's getting bogged down by semantics. There is, it seems, a huge difference between "member" and "supporter". Yeah, one's attached to your body and the other keeps it up. The HRCer explains: As HRC does not want to exclude anyone from our membership based on his or her ability to pay, we consider any one a "member" who has contributed $5.00, and we do accept contributions in that amount on our website. We also consider any one who has taken an action as a "supporter." Combined, those members and supporters comprise our "membership." He then goes off into a pretty indepth and, thus, decidedly boring, explanation of their practices - for example, the difference between a 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) non-profit (they're both) and why watchdogs often confuse the two. We've included the entire email after the jump. Allow us, however, to feature the some what cultish closing: Over the next few months, HRC is going to be engaged in legislative battles the likes of which we have not seen in over a decade. We will always be open to legitimate criticism, and be willing to address and correct any fair and honest problems that our critics and our friends may point out. But this year, our major focus is on securing equal rights for the GLBT community. We still would welcome your joining us in that battle. But first, we eat your brain! Related: Andrew Sullivan Launches Fresh Attack Against HRC |
|
Human Rights Campaign, America's self-proclaimed largest LGBT non-profit, hasn't yet replied to Andrew Sullivan's queries into their queer membership practices, but some of his readers sent him a little HRC-related note: |
|
The mimimum membership fee on your website is $35. How many members paid $35 or more in annual dues in the last twelve months? You claim 650,000. What's the real number? Please provide documentation to prove it. Some of Sully's faithful readers did a bit of research and found that HRC reported donations of $7.3 million. Divide that number by $35 and you get, at the most, 210,000 people donated to the cause. So, what of the other 440,000 members? Sullivan seems to think HRC's lying. They've promised to get back to him today. Can't wait to read their creative response… (Also, Chris Crain's all up in the mud-slinging mix. Read his take here.) |
|
Well, the wait is over, patient readers, because old Sullivan's finally put down that bong and released his statement on Coulter's statement that her statement was just a joke. |
|
The film would have probably been forgotten had it not been detailed in the 1980 book 'The Golden Turkey Awards' by the Medved Brothers. Despite an Internet debate that insists the film never existed, poster art from the movie's original New York run has turned up to verify it did exist. The film itself, however, is believed to be lost (how the Medveds learned of the film is not clear, though the idea of Michael Medved watching gay porno for "research" is mind-boggling). Apparently other sleuths have been seeking this blasphemous classic for years to no avail. Thus, Sullivan implores M. Medved: "Was this your hoax? Can you tell us now? Did you watch this movie? Or did you make it up?" Pressing questions for the weekend - the time when Sullivan likes to take matters into his own hands, if you know what we mean. |