We've got another mystery on our hands, readers. Homo-journo Andrew Sullivan has launched a search party for the possibly sham gay porn, Him. Allegedly filmed in the 1970s, Him concerns a one Jesus Christ and his titillating take on "Love Thy Neighbor". From Film Threat:
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.
Speaking of eagle-eyes, herb-loving homo-journo Andrew Sullivan spotted a scandalous little blurb in Haaretz's review of Uri Dan's new Ariel Sharon biography:
Speaking of George Bush, with whom Sharon developed a very close relationship, Uri Dan recalls that Sharon's delicacy made him reluctant to repeat what the president had told him when they discussed Osama bin Laden. Finally he relented. And here is what the leader of the Western world, valiant warrior in the battle of cultures, promised to do to bin Laden if he caught him: "I will screw him in the ass!"
Now we know why Bush and his cronies are so intent on finding bin Laden. It's not about 9/11, Kenya or their petty quest for world domination! It's, quite simply, history's deadliest case of unrequited love. bin Laden may be a homicidal maniac, but he's far better looking (and more wealthy) than Bush. No way he'd go for that Texan pansy. Also, President Bush, sorry to burst you bubble, but we actually think it's bin Laden who would screw you in the ass.
Here's some exciting news via our favorite euphemism for pot, Andrew Sullivan: the amount of first time meth users dropped considerably between 2004 and 2005. The US Department of Health and Human Services reports:
The number of persons who used methamphetamine for the first time in the prior 12 months did not differ significantly between 2002 (299,000 persons) and 2004 (318,000 persons) but did decrease significantly between 2004 and 2005. In 2004, an estimated 318,000 persons aged 12 or older first tried methamphetamine in the year prior to the survey compared with 192,000 persons in 2005.
The report also notes that people living in non-urban areas are more likely to try the highly addictive drug and that it has more fans out on the West coast than anywhere else in the country. Why? We don't know.
While certainly these statistics are encourage for those of us who don't want to see our fellow countrymen become toothless, greasy messes, it doesn't reflect last year's data. So, for all we know, there could have been a huge spike. Guess we'll have to wait to find out…
So, you may have heard that YouTube's removed Donnie Davies' controversial video about god hating fags and the such. Well, in response to their censorship, Davies has issued this video.
In the video, Davies admonishies YouTube for hindering his freedom of speech and, also, in a somewhat fitting honor, thanks Andrew Sullivan - a good Christian. He says:
I also gotta give a special thanks to Andrew Sullivan: the world famous blogger from Time Magzine, obviously a great Christian man helping us forward our message….Thank you so much, Andrew Sullivan, for getting behind me.
Andrew Sullivan got behind us once and we were about to thank him, too, but he put his fingers to our tenders lips and said, "Shhh, Andrew Sullivan needs no thanks." It sort of gave us the creeps, so we left.
Anyway, Davies goes on to say, "If it weren't for the homosexual community, I wouldn't be where I am today and I definitely wouldn't be talking to you about this message." Well, that's true, because a. gays helped spread your video and b. without gays, you'd have no mission, so then you'd have no reason to make the video.
In addition to addressing the scandal, he get's a little emotional when talking about his weight - he can't help it, kids. It's a thyroid disorder, okay? So stop "lampooning" him about it - it's an "ugly" way to live.
It seems a day doesn't pass without another article on the seemingly imminent breakdown of the worldwide Anglican Church, a distintegration exasperated by the American Episcopal Church's own infighting. Well, you know what, man-loving Archbishop Gene Robinson's had enough.
Speaking in Hartford on Monday, Robinson said the media (that's us) should stop blowing things out of proportion. He also took some time to admonish the bickering Bible thumpers, saying:
In a world facing 40 million people dying of AIDS and an increasing gap between rich and poor, this seems like a waste of our time and energy, debating the rightness and wrongness of gay and lesbian people and their relationships… I think it breaks God's heart that we would be focusing on such an internal issue, instead of focusing upon the world which, as I understand it, Jesus called us to…
Robinson left for the Sundance directly after the speech, saying, "Hey, the world includes celebrity-saturated film festivals, bitches!"
Robinson's in Sundance to help promote For The Bible Tells Me So: the Grand Jury nominated documentary in which he and four other gay Christians appear And, by the looks of this picture, he'll be scoring some wicked Andrew Sullivan and cruising the slopes. Sweet.
• Keith Boykin pays tribute to Luther Vandross for Out Magazine. [Out]
• Gay People's Chronicle has discovered that Carol Channing doesn't like the homos. She does, however, like their money. [Gay People's Chronicle]
• SOVO chops it up with some gay veterans. [The Southern Voice]
• Metro Weekly delves into the mind of Andrew Sullivan. [Metro Weekly]
• Jono and HX Magazine get in the holiday mood. [HX Magazine]
• AfterElton likes playing with Gay Gamer Flynn Demarco's joystick. [AfterElton]
What? You thought there wouldn't be some sort of Andrew Sullivan/Election Day interview? Sheesh, you're more far gone than we thought.
If you kids head pop on over to our friends at Radar (click here, silly), you too can enjoy John Cook's interview between the famed homo-journo-politico. It's definitely a good read, with Cook really sticking it to Sullivan (pictured, in a Boi From Troi artist's rendition).
Here's a taste from their discussion of the war in Iraq:
JC: We do know that perhaps hundreds of thousands of people that are dead now would still be alive.
AS: We don't know that, actually. We know what has happened because of the result of our actions. We don't know what the result of inaction would have been. Many people who opposed the Iraq war opposed the Afghanistan war. Not many of them are prepared now to admit it, but many of them did. All one can do is account for the decision one has made. But I don't think the hard left, which was against anything Bush did, and actually believed that America deserved what Al Qaeda gave us, has been proven right. Do you?
JC: No.
AS: You don't think Michael Moore, who said the Afghan war was about an oil pipeline deal, has been proven right. But I don't see you demanding that he take account of his own errors.
JC: I'm not interviewing him right now.
Girl! Slap on a wig, some over-sized glasses and stick a cig in his hand, and John Cook may be the next Oriana Fallaci!
Of course, the boys talk about than just the war. Sullivan calls himself a rebel for being a Thatcherite, glosses over Mark Foley like a pro and defends his love of Reagan. Wheee!
Okay, so homophobic Pastor Ted Haggard (pictured) hasn't technically admitted to having slept with wiley hooker, Mike Jones, but the fact that he's stepped down as President of the National Association of Evangelicals and run off for "spiritual guidance" doesn't look good.
For those of you not up to date, this story first broke Tuesday when Jones - who had actually spoken with reporters two months ago - said he had a three-year affair with the politically connected preacher man. Haggard, of course, insisted no such thing ever happened: he's a good Christian, after all, and spouts homo-hatred left and right in his pursuit of heaven on Earth, a heaven in which gays will never get the chance to marry. Maintaining his heterosexuality, Haggard questions whether or not Jones' allegations are mere political chicanery:
I don't know if this is election year politics or if this has to do with the marriage amendment or what it is, but I'm not even the guy who will investigate it or question it. I don't know what the dynamics are, but this independent group will come in and do that.
That "independent group", of course, would consist of members from Haggard's 14,000-strong New Life Church in Colorado Springs.
As the day went on and prominent Evangelicals, such as Focus on the Family's James Dobson, came out in support of Haggard, Jones dropped another bomb shell: he has evidential voice mails and a letter from Haggard. What's more, Jones claims to have seen Haggard use meth.
Cue the getaway car.
Of course, Haggard insists he stepped down for the good of his church-run investigation:
I am voluntarily stepping aside from leadership so that the overseer process can be allowed to proceed with integrity," he said. "I hope to be able to discuss this matter in more detail at a later date. In the interim, I will seek both spiritual advice and guidance.
"Spiritual advice and guidance" means either "harsh defagification" or "pull a Mark Foley and hide until after the election".
Ahh, yes, the election. As we mentioned, Haggard's exceedingly well-connected and has been described as one of the most powerful religious leaders in America. How could he not? As of yesterday he commanded 30 million Evangelicals, an organization known for its virulent homophobia and anti-gay marriage politics. It's also the religious group President Bush calls his own.
As the story developed, CNN's Wolf Blitzer called on everyone's favorite homo-journo-politico, Andrew Sullivan to weigh in on the matter. (Not incidentally, Sulivan's blog comes to us via Time Magazine, which is owned by CNN's parent company, Time Warner.)
Undoubtedly a bright man, Sullivan brought up the fact that Evangelicals - who once toed the Republican party line as if their lives depended on it - have been turning away from politics. MSNBC concurs:
The number of conservative Christians with a favorable view of the party has plummeted from 74 percent to 54 percent between 2004 and this year, according to the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Evangelicals comprise more than one-third of GOP voters.
Rather than aligning whole-heartedly with the GOP, Sullivan says, many Evangelicals will "pray on it" to determine a new political route. No doubt the fact that their leader sucks cock will confuse their decision-making prayers.
While many think the Evangelicals will vote for the GOP, even if only for lack of options, we can't help but think that thousands may turn away entirely. As if the string of corruption scandals weren't enough, they've had to deal with the entire Mark Foley mess, and now their leader - the man to whom they turned for religious, political and social guidance - may be a big, fat liar.
This is more than a test of faith. This is a test of personal will - is someone willing to follow a debunked myth or does a new path come calling? Obviously there's no cut and dry answer to this matter, but it sure as hell's going to cause some major trouble.
In our opinion, Jones's probably telling the truth. Of course, the timing's mighty fishy and we suspect someone paid him to keep the story under wraps until closer to the election. Who that person may be, however, remains a mystery.
Previously: I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Hooker"
Speaking of Jim McGreevey, those of you in New York and with a penchant for masochism may want to head on over to the 92nd Street Y this evening to here the former NJ governor shoot the shit with conservative homo-politico, Andrew Sullivan.
God, can you imagine? We'd rather eat out of a used barf bag than participate in what will undoubtedly become an orgy of self-promotion as they chat about their respective books.
Complete details, after the jump.
(Oh, and if you're wondering why this post has been tagged as "culture", we were asking ourselves the same question…)
(Correction: The event is Sunday night, not tonight. Our bad.)
CONTINUED »
We may have glossed over New York Magazine's review of Andrew Sullivan's new book, but this interview from Salon is something we can really can't ignore.
Sitting down with Alex Koppelman, Sullivan continues to sell himself, his views, and - of course - his new book, The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It, How to Get It Back.
While he touches on the War in Iraq and attempts once again to justify his stance, what really intrigues us are his comments on the Foley scandal. When asked how the scandal will change the Republican party, Sullivan waxes philosophical on the ways in which the closet can no longer function within the party and laments the loss of the Log Cabin Republicans' once-spirited alliance with the party, saying:
It's a horrible end, really, to this attempt to make it work — and maybe the future will lead to better things — but right now I don't know how you can be an openly gay person and work for this administration and look at yourself in the mirror every morning.
Huh. That's exactly what we wonder about you, Mr. Sullivan, especially when you say things like:
All I can do — part of what this book is about — it was really prompted partly by my own frustration at the Republican Party, but it was also directed at a criticism of my own certainty before the war. It really shook me, that I had bought hook, line and sinker this entire certain ideology. I realized if I had stuck to my principles I would have been more skeptical, and I regret that. I think, and the only way I can explain that, and it's not excusing it, is the shock of 9/11 and the fear of the unknown. If you look back, it's easy to say that we shouldn't have been afraid of a possible attack with WMDs, but that distorted my judgment. This book is an attempt to atone for that and to ask the deeper questions about why I made the wrong judgment.
Sure, Sullivan admits his mistake, but we can't imagine he doesn't love the drama. Fuck, he's certainly done a great job turning it into a book: a book that will, no doubt, make him buckets of money.
That will ease his sorrows, we're sure.
While we're on the subject of gay books - or, at least, books by gay people - let's take a second to ponder the publication of homo-servative Andrew Sullivan's new book: The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It, How To Get It Back.
Sullivan and his cronies don't talk to us, so we never would have known about it had we not again taken a chance on his blog, The Daily Dish, where Sullivan's published a lovely little post quoting the acknowledgement page from his new release:
This book was informed throughout by the readers of my blog, who have written countless emails challenging arguments made here and making others.
Of course, he's just warming them up for the interactive pitch:
For me, it's been an fascinating experience to see how two media can interact - how ideas and arguments that started on a blog can evolve into something more concrete in a book. So, to take the next obvious step, I'm hoping to continue the debate about the boook … on the blog. I'm resurrecting the Book Club format I experimented with a few years ago - but with my own book this time.
Here's the idea: you buy the book online or from a store, you get three weeks or so to read it along with everyone else, and then I post the sharpest email criticisms of the book and respond to them. It's like an online reading club which ends in a grilling of the author. I've hired an extra pair of eyes to read every single email and make sure I don't miss the best counter-arguments. So the book will continue, I hope, in some way on the blog. As will the arguments.
We have to admit, this is one of the better cross-promotional tricks we've seen since John Cameron Mitchell's work with Time Out New York.
Sullivan's certainly got the salesman bit down: kiss ass with some meaningless drivel, back up sincerity of comments with a bit of personal reflection, then tricks the softened up readers into buying the book with a challenge to submit their thoughts. Marketing genius!
Here's a trick: someone get us a copy of this book (we're certainly not buying it), and we'll play Sullivan's little game ourselves…
We came across this article over at ABCnew.com - you know, the folks who pulled the article by J. Jennings Moss on Foley - and we find it more than appropriate for a few reasons. First, it's a fairly interesting piece on where gay conservatives fit in the grand governmental scheme of things. Second, it helps us answer a question we've been asked more than a few times over the past few days: why we're covering this story so aggressively.
A British reader writes:
Why is the Foley scandal getting so much coverage on queerty.com. Is it a gay issue? Admittedly coverage of some of the more homophobic and ignorant media outlets is appropriate, but most of your coverage is sensationalised and seems to me to reek of the same associations made between paedophilia and homosexuality that these other reports rely on.
Of course, those of you who know us must realize that such we've never intended such a reading. And, yes, we've considered the fact that covering the scandal would somehow implicate homosexuality in Foley's kiddie-loving ways, but we feel the story needs to be addressed, not because we want to link homosexuality with pedophilia, but because it points to glaring flaws and debates in the American political system.
The Republican party has long upheld homophobic beliefs and, in fact, touted them as one of their greatest strengths. Now, as the Foley stink grows even more pungent, Republicans are questioning whether or not they should include gays at all. ABC reports:
Conservative activists are beginning to discuss the Mark Foley scandal as indicative of a GOP that has become too tolerant of gays in their midst. Regardless of the party's efforts against gay marriage, the argument goes, the fact that Republican officials accept gay congressmen, such as Foley, and staffers will mean the party will have problems.
While we can't wait to hear what the Log Cabin Republicans have to say about all of this, President of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins has this morsel of homo-hatery to share:
As a society we've made diversity and tolerance the guidepost of public life…Maybe we shouldn't be surprised that we have Congressmen chasing after sixteen year old boys.
We all know - well, we hope you all know - that Foley's interest in young men nothing to do with him being gay, but stems from larger psychological issues. Conservative homo-journo, Andrew Sullivan, boils the issue down to the continued immutability of the closet, particularly in Washington:
The closet is so psychologically destructive it often produces pathological behavior. When you compartmentalize your life, you sometimes act out in one compartment in ways that you would never condone in another one. Think Clinton-Lewinsky, in a heterosexual context. But closeted gay men are particularly vulnerable to this kind of thing. Your psyche is so split by decades of lies and deceptions and euphemisms that integrity and mental health suffer. No one should excuse Foley's creepy interactions; they are inexcusable, as is the alleged cover-up …But there's a reason gay men in homophobic institutions behave in self-destructive ways.
While we agree the closet's one of the most dangerous societal constructions, we're hestitant to chalk Foley's behaviour up as simply the "self-destructive" result of closeted life. We do feel, however, that this whole mess raises pertinent questions about the role of gays not only in American politics, but American society in general.
The political anxiety regarding homos in America's nothing new, as ABC reports:
The debate over the role of gays in civic life has been a part of the American story at least as far back as March 11, 1778, when General George Washington approved the court martial of Lt. Gotthold Frederick Enslin for homosexuality.
Even since then, Americans have been obsessed with politico-homos.
So, to answer our reader's question: we're covering the Foley scandal as both as way to shine some light on the hypocrisy of American politics, to highlight the traumas caused by the closet, and to examine the failures of our government to acknowledge both homosexuality in its midst, as well as to monitor its own actions. Plus, it's a great way to poke fun at Republicans. What could be better?
It's rare that we find ourselves over at Andrew Sullivan's (seen here in a picture from many-a-year ago Daily Dish, but something took hold of us just now and we found ourselves ambling on over. We're sure glad we did, because we came across a quaint letter sent to Sullivan by a particularly charming reader. Never has an opening sentence grabbed us by the balls in quite the same way:
Gay men belong in the closet. It is better for gay men, and it is better for the rest of us… The sexual behavior of gay men is a threat to the public health, as the AIDS epidemic made clear.
Oh boy, one of those types. If there's one thing we absolutely love, it's when people put AIDS on gay shoulders a la the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center. Oh, don't worry, it gets better:
This will change in the future. No society can continue to survive with gay men living without constraint. And, no society can long endure under the authority of the fag hags. The world of the fags and the fag hags is disgusting. There is something called reality.
I don't think we should throw men in jail for f***ing [sic] each other in the ass. But, we certainly shouldn't encourage it either. We should push you and your like back into the closet where you belong. Hope it happens soon.
We do too. We can't wait to drudge through the absolute angst of living a lie, pulling our hair in frustration as we try to fit into a society that loathes us. What a time! We recall the denial with tears of joy, knowing that we managed to subdue our true identities with the grace, poise, and determination of a closeted politician.
Oh, and as for reality: yes, there is something called reality. This is it - gays exist and barring some horrible queer master plan, we're going to continue to exist. If you don't like it, tough shit.
Bruce Vilanch recently took time from his busy schedule to chat with Bradford Shellhammer about the blogs he reads, the Bush administration, and this year’s Oscars. He also dishes on a few of our favorite divas.
Ok. Hi Bruce. We at Queerty love you. And we are sad we missed your show Almost Famous 2005 in San Francisco. What did we miss?
Full-frontal nudity. The first three rows had to move back.
You have so many projects lined up. Tell us about Queer Duck?
I play myself. It's a stretch. But it's never gotten in Jerry Seinfeld's way. This is a feature-length version of the cartoons that used to follow Queer as Folk on Showtime. They once had me pop in as a guest joke, and we all thought that this time I should do the voice instead of Mercedes McCambridge.
And Celebrity Fit Club! This is one of our guilty pleasures. We only wish you were on the same season at Jackee. How did this come about?
I think I can lay the blame at the feet of ant. Which is better than laying ants at the feet of, oh never mind. He recommended me and when they called they said we're hoping you can add some humor to the proceedings. Losing weight is such martyrdom that people give themselves over to their own drama. Maybe it's because they're deprived of the one thing that they could count on — food. It's a pity party three times a day. So I'm trying to do it and have a few chuckles along the way.
After the jump Bruce talks about Bette, Whoopi, and Miss. Ross.
CONTINUED »
• Andrew Sullivan's blog has gone MSM. It will now be a part of Time.com. We're much too jealous to accuse him of selling out.
• Germany has won the 2010 Gay Games which will definately piss off their neighbor's new president.
• Just as we suspected. New York Magazine loves bears.
• This Thursday's Oprah is titled "When I Knew I Was Gay." Guest Carson Kressley will reveal that he knew in first grade. Most likely when his show and tell project turned out to be a make-over of his frumpy teacher.
• That much anticipated queer-restricting document from the Vatican is being released at the end of the month. What a thoughtful early Christmas gift from the Church to gay Catholic priests everywhere.
