What does Pride mean?

It’s pride weekend this weekend or next weekend for the majority of American cities that have parades and/or festivals to celebrate being gay, or bisexual, or transgendered, or an ally of any of the above. Prides are fun, even for children (save the not common exhibitionist whose appearance might spark a long conversation with your younger children).

Joe My God is one of my favorite blogs, and he is currently running a reprint of one of his annual posts concerning Pride. He has some penetrating (no pun intended) insights into the phenomenon. Here is but one of them:

“Oh, you could test run a ‘defective’-free parade. You could form urban anti-drag squads and go around to all the gayborhoods on the morning of the parade and give all the drag queens 50% off coupons for Loehmann’s, offer good during the parade only. And they’d GO, of course, cuz hey, those girls love a bargain. But the resultant bland, humorless, ‘normal’ gay parade wouldn’t change the course of the gay movement one bit. The part of straight America that is repulsed by drag queens is quite possibly even more terrified by the so-called “normal” gays, because ‘those clever calculating creatures look JUST LIKE US, and can infiltrate and get access to our precious children. And that’s been their disgusting plan all along, of course.’ “

There’s lots more good stuff in the post. Read it, and go have yourselves a ball at Pride. (snicker)

Words are insufficient

Here is a couple of the videos from PETA’s new advertising campaign. Some gibberish about the “BWVAKTBOOM” phenomenon…

I cannot fathom the depth of depravity required to think that these videos portray anything positive, or something that any sane human would find desirable. Sexual violence isn’t funny, or entertaining, or enviable.

Not one tiny bit.

UPDATE: the gay video for this campaign, while it implies violence (“got the plastic tarp and duct tape…just in case”), it shows no violence unlike the ones featuring women.


Funny imitates life

My stepsons, known collectively as The Four Horsemen, often generate the funniest material.

The family was talking about the recent Komen Foundation fracas; I mentioned Rachel Maddow’s claim that the entire Herman Cain presidential nominee campaign was nothing more than performance art. Cain’s recent appearance with Stephen Colbert seems to bear that out.

I don’t exactly remember whose idea this was, but a quick mental juxtaposition on someone’s part came up with this:

“Personal mammogram, ma’am?”

“Ya know, boah, somtahms reality jist grabs yuh ‘n shakes th’ livin’ daylights outtaya.”

Take a moment. Sit back and relax. Close your eyes. Take a deep breath and let it out slowly. Consciously relax and take a long moment to recenter yourself.

Done? Good.

Now look at this article:

Click to enbiggen

Do you feel your blood pressure rising? Can you feel that catch in your breath as you see the headline and its accompanying photo of women in a long line in a beautiful, sun-lit mall, going to get their abortions?

Before you snuff your own life with a cerebral aneurysm, look just above that picture at this:

It’s satire, folks. It’s a joke.

Planned Parenthood does not run a big-box mall storefront for women who are getting abortions. Never have. Never will. Really.

What Planned Parenthood does offer are breast cancer screenings (the Komen Foundation’s pathetic attempts at stopping them notwithstanding), reduced-price and free contraceptives distribution (mostly condoms and birth control pills), sex education and anti-STD education programs, and well-women gynecology examinations. Less than 3% of PP’s budget is used for abortion referrals.

Remember, though, that anti-choice zealots often have no sense of humor or reality:

Could someone tell Congresscritter Fleming that Reality is on line 2 and Humor is on line 3 for him? They’re both pissed off.

A savage look at Newtonian hypocrisy

I really shouldn’t quote Savage Love letters in their entireties, but this one‘s just too delicious to pass up.

Congrats, Dan. It looks like you’ve got your first high-profile “monogamish” public figure: Newt Gingrich. You must be so proud.

Dan Savage

For anyone who spent last week under a rock: Newt Gingrich, brave defender of traditional marriage, was still married to his second wife—and still fucking the consecrated host out of his “devout Catholic” mistress—when he asked his second wife to agree to an open marriage. Newt had been fucking Callista, his devoutly Catholic mistress, for six years when he made the big ask. Newt’s second wife wouldn’t agree to an open marriage, according to Newt’s second wife, which is how she became Newt’s second ex-wife and Newt’s mistress—the devoutly Catholic Callista—became Newt’s third wife.

That’s not monogamish, SCUM. That’s CPOSish. And lumping honest nonmonogamists—people who don’t lie or cheat—in with the likes of the Gingriches and Schwarzeneggers of the world, which whiny and insecure monogamists (who are not to be confused with reasonable and secure monogamists) are always doing, is simply unfair. Newt, like Arnold before him, didn’t succeed at nonmonogamy, he failed at monogamy.

Newton Gingrich

Zooming out for a moment: The Gingrich campaign has presented the holesome story of Newt and Callista’s courtship as a redemption narrative: Newt is a better man today thanks to Callista, he’s better suited to be president thanks to Callista, and he’s better prepared to defend traditional marriage thanks to Callista. She’s been described as a “devout Catholic” in every profile written about her—so devout that her love brought Newt to the one, holy, Catholic, apostolic, and ever-more-rabidly anti-gay church. So it seems to me that it’s fair to ask if Callista knew in advance that Newt was proposing an open marriage to his then-wife and approved of the arrangement. (It might be more accurate to say that Newt informed his second wife that she was already in an open marriage and asked if she wanted to remain in it.) Did Callista know about Newt’s open marriage proposal? Did Newt bounce the idea off his devoutly Catholic mistress first? Maybe right after he finished bouncing himself off his devoutly Catholic mistress?

Would the devout Catholic still be Newt’s mistress today if the second Mrs. Gingrich had agreed to remain in the marriage that Newt had already opened?

Callista Gingrich

This news alters the redemption narrative that the Gingrich camp set before the voters. So questioning Callista about the open marriage proposal—what did the mistress know and when did she know it?—seems like an entirely legit line of inquiry to me.

Callista Gingrich, like her vile husband, doesn’t believe that gays and lesbians should be equal under the law because, as a good Catholic, she believes that homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals should remain celibate. Well, the Catholic Church considers adultery, divorce, and birth control sinful, too. Someone in the liberal media really ought to ask Callista to explain why her faith should place limits on my sexual expression but not her own. (emphasis mine)

And let’s not forget that Newton did the same damned thing to wife #1, except that he kinda left out the “can I cheat on you with your blessing?” part.

“Oh, this one’s *easy*!”

God can look like George Lazenby if He wants to.

The intercom on His desk buzzed. He put down the latest copy of Playboy and thumbed the switch. “Yeah?”

“Peter would like a word with You, Sir.”

“Send him on in.”

St. Peter stuck his head in the door. “Got a second, Big G?”

“Sure.” God’s eyes wandered over his desk, and his eyes locked onto Miss January’s splendors, which were open for all to see.

“Sir, I’ve got a problem at the Gate.”

“Yeah?” God’s eyes didn’t move.

“Yes, Sir. I’ve got Joe Paterno wanting in.”

God was obviously more concerned about where he wanted to put his Godhood than he was with Peter’s issue. “Yeah?”

“There’s a problem, Sir. The man knowingly let his subordinate…Sir, are you listening to me?”

“Yeah. I’m omniscent, remember?”

Peter waited. He knew better than to intrude when He was in one of His Moods.

Finally God noticed the silence and looked up. “Sooooo, what about it?”

“Well, Sir, I’m not quite sure what to do. Paterno was a game-winner that made a lot of money for his school, and he showed a lot of young men what it was like to be winners. He was dutiful to the rules that were set before him by his superiors at Penn State, but he let those awful things go on for years without taking any action.”

Peter waited. God finally said, “Pete, what does that plaque over My Door say today?”

Peter turned and read it. God was fond of changing what was on the plaque, and Peter hadn’t glanced at it when he came in.

“Sir, it says ‘There is no higher Law than doing Good.’ “

“There’s your answer, son. Paterno knew what was going on, and that asshole’s moral compass worked about as well as Frothy’s. Following the letter of the law without doing what is Good gets him a big ‘Fuck Off!’ in my book. It should in yours as well. Call Lucie and tell him to reserve a big pot of boiling pitch and an ass funnel. Joe’s in for a bad time.”

“Yes, Sir.” Peter watched as God picked up his Playboy. Lindsey Lohan was on the cover, and Peter had no doubt at all as to where to send HER when the time came.

“It’s like we’re all amnesiacs.”

Chunks of the ABC interview with Newton Gingrich’s second wife Marianne are starting to ooze out into the public eye, including:

Marianne Gingrich, a self-described conservative Republican, said she is coming forward now so voters can know what she knows about Gingrich. In her most provocative comments, the ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Newt sought an “open marriage” arrangement so he could have a mistress and a wife. She said when Gingrich admitted to a six-year affair with a Congressional aide, he asked her if she would share him with the other woman, Callista, who is now married to Gingrich…. “He wanted an open marriage and I refused.”

She [Marianne] said Newt moved for the divorce just months after she had been diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, with her then-husband present. “He also was advised by the doctor when I was sitting there that I was not to be under stress. He knew.”

Gingrich divorced his first wife, Jackie, as she was being treated for cancer. His relationship with Marianne began while he was still married to Jackie but in divorce proceedings, Marianne said.”

(Gingrich divorced his first wife while she was battling cancer.)

Dan Savage added a potent comment about Newton’s actions:

Technically you’re not asking your wife for an open marriage if you’ve already been fucking another woman for six years. You’re presenting your wife with an ultimatum. That doesn’t make you a proponent of open marriage, Newt, it makes you a CPOS.

Uh, folks?

If any of you were paying attention to the second Mrs. Gingrich in 2010 when she was interviewed by Esquire, you’d know all this already:

Early in May, she went out to Ohio for her mother’s birthday. A day and a half went by and Newt didn’t return her calls, which was strange. They always talked every day, often ten times a day, so she was frantic by the time he called to say he needed to talk to her.

“About what?”

He wanted to talk in person, he said.

“I said, ‘No, we need to talk now.’ ” He went quiet. “There’s somebody else, isn’t there?”

She kind of guessed it, of course. Women usually do. But did she know the woman was in her apartment, eating off her plates, sleeping in her bed?

She called a minister they both trusted. He came over to the house the next day and worked with them the whole weekend, but Gingrich just kept saying she was a Jaguar and all he wanted was a Chevrolet. ” ‘I can’t handle a Jaguar right now.’ He said that many times. ‘All I want is a Chevrolet.’ “

He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused.

He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

How could anyone support a man who espouses one set of values and then shits on them in his private life? How could anyone support a man who is so erratic and secretive, and (ultimately) personally and politically unstable?


“Let’s party like it’s 1399!”

Frothy Mix Santorum wants to become president and outlaw all non-procreational sex.

“The state has a right to do that [rescind access to contraception], I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statutes they have…”

President Frothy would allow no access to contraception at all. No condoms, pills, diaphragms, caps, foams, jellies, IUDs, Plan Bs, and certainly no abortions.

No way for women to prevent paying the price of pregnancy for the “sin” of sex. (Someone call H. L. Mencken.)

No help for mothers whose health or lives are threatened by unwanted pregnancies.

No sex at all unless procreation is a potential outcome.

No freedom of choice for heterosexual expression at all. (And no homosexuality at all, per Frothy’s perorations. He is so far back in the closet he can’t even see the damned door.)

In other words, the uterus would be owned by the state.

Anyone care to guess how much of Frothy Mix’s campaign chest comes from Catholic sources?