Who's On Your Team?

Sometimes we get sucker punched. Sometimes we get our asses kicked. Sometimes we need a little help from a teammate. So who is on your team? As I read the daily headlines, I can't help but wonder how many people don't have anyone on their teams. I immediately think about Anna Nicole Smith and the autopsy results that were released this week. The coroner indicated that she had taken a bunch of over-the-counter cold medication in addition to a boatload of other stuff including antibiotics for an infection in her leg. It is this part that gets me. Her friends put her in an ice bath to bring down her temperature of 105, but they didn't get her to a hospital. They said she refused.

This is where your teammates come in. When you are too stupid, stubborn, or drunk to help yourself, your teammates take over. When you have a temp of 105 and some weird infection in your leg, your teammates call 911 even though you tell them not to. Anna's wasn't some suicide that took place in a remote mountain cabin, this was a slow overdose at the Hardrock Hotel with lots of friends around. Anna may have had friends around, but she sure as hell didn't have any teammates.

If you have been following Alberto Gonzalez, the soon to be ousted Attorney General of the United States, you will see a similar scenario unfolding. Alberto has clearly abused some of his power, but none of his teammates are coming in to tell him how to diffuse the situation. He thought the President was on his team, but he is quickly figuring out that the President has the luxury of switching teams at will. Alberto has got the ball and is ready for the pass, but has realized all of his teammates are gone. He'll be holding the ball until the day his office is packed up and shipped out.

On a daily basis we don't usually stop to assess who is on our team. Probably because on a daily basis we don't need to. It is when we hit a rough spot - a break up, a financial hiccup, an indictment - that we start looking around to see who is still on the court with us. The ones that will be there are the ones that have shown up because of years of relationship cultivation and some inexplicable universal design. We expect those we have known forever to be there, but sometimes people are strategically placed in our lives for a critical moment. In that brief minute, they become that team member that saves your assets, your job, or maybe your life.

Take a look around. Who's on Your Team?

Offensive Displays of Public Affection Should be Banned

Today a veritable boatload of lesbians will descend upon and IHOP in Grandview, Missouri to protest the ousting of 4 lesbians, two of which upset the restaurant by kissing in public. The cavalcade of lesbians will be bringing brooms to "clean up the corporate brush-off" received by the four booted lesbians.

Now the facts of the story are fuzzy as to whether it was the management of the IHOP or customers that had problem with the public display of affection, but I will say it doesn't matter. I completely agree that offensive displays of public affection should be banned for the good of society. I have compiled a list of offensive displays of public affection that should be banned forever: 1) Courtney Love and Bruce Willis. 2) Any image with Whitney and Bobby. (I still get chills). 3) Tom Green and any animal. 4) Michael Jackson and any, um, anyone. 5) Donald Trump and his hair. 6) Jeff Goldblum and Nicole Richie. 7) Hugh Hefner and any playmate.

I think the Queer community might be in a position to make a deal here. If we promised not to engage in public displays of affection that could be found offensive, we can leverage the prohibition of the aforementioned offensive acts! We could also agree that the mere definition of offensive can be determined by a small number of individuals, say the number that could fit into an IHOP in a small Missouri town. What's good for Grandview, Mo, is most certainly good for the rest of us.

But why stop at banning offensive displays of affection. How about if we ban stupid people? I would have to suggest that we start at that little IHOP in Grandview. After all, I find stupid people offensive, so that should be barred from sharing the same space with me. Of course, this would certainly mean a rapid decline in the patrons and management at the Grandview IHOP, but I maintain that as a beef jerky chewing, tractor riding, red blood American, I don't have to subject myself to anything that offends me. Much less a person with a sexual orientation that I am not used to.

Of course, there are heroes in this story. The heroes are the four lesbians who didn't give a damn in the first place. These heroes didn't give a damn about spreading the word about what happened to them. The individuals staging a protest tonight are also heroes because they aren't passively letting injustices transpire. If the customers and staff found the lesbian kiss offensive, I am certain droves of lesbians and lesbian supporters convening at the IHOP will be found to be offensive with a side of offensive.

Give Garrison a Break

On March 14, Garrison Keillor offended a lot of people. Garrision is, of course, the satirist of Prairie Home Companion fame. Garrison said on Salon.com that "The country has come to accept stereotypical gay men—sardonic fellows with fussy hair who live in overdecorated apartments with a striped sofa and a small weird dog and who worship campy performers. If they want to be accepted as couples and daddies, however, the flamboyance may have to be brought under control." The proverbial firestorm has since ensued.

If you have listened extensively to Garrison on NPR's Prairie Home Companion, you can't help but find him endearing. He has a colloquial way of putting things that generally makes you laugh your ass off. He makes fun of the Lutheran's and family members and anything else that comes to mind. The satire is done in a very gentle fashion however, with glancing blows for effect, never with direct hits. The problem with the gay remark is that it didn't make us laugh, it wasn't colloquial, and it was a direct hit. It is the flamboyance of our Queer brothers that is such a big problem for so many heteros and even some of butcher Queer brethren. It is the flamboyance that people point to as a deficiency and a reason not being good enough; not a good enough son, not a good enough co-worker, not a good enough parent.

Garrison's awkward apology didn't make things any better. He said he works around gay people. He said he comes from a small world. I really hate when people use the "I knew a gay guy once" credibility builder. I don't care about your one real or imaginary gay friend. So, Garrison, because you know gays doesn't mean you can make bad fun of them. Good fun is fine, but you have to pretend punch, not really punch. You remember that from the Kindergarten playground, right? As far as Garrison's "small world" goes, he travels around the nation with his show each week. His world is seemingly larger than most. (You can read his response here: http://prairiehome.publicradio.org/).

So why give Garrison a break? Because he is an entertainer. He is a comedian of sorts. And he is usually very, very good at what he does. I don't know how many years I have listed to him and have, until now, never been even remotely offended. There will be those out there who will not give Garrison a second chance and I would suggest that while his statement was a mistake, it was innocent and not mean-spirited. I am most certain he will never come close to the edge of this abyss again.

Besides, if Garrison is going to apologize for anything, I would rather he begin with apologizing for last year's Prairie Home Companion movie.

Swagger, Don't Sway

You've got to love the Philippines. According to advocate.com, Philippine police have issued a warning to officers not to sway their hips or display other suggestive behavior while on duty or they could risk losing their jobs. What a great country where you have to issue an warning like this! I wish that they would have to issue a warning like that in the U.S. "All you hot cops stop swaying your hips and grabbing your crotches or you'll be fired." Ah, what a perfect world it would be.

How prevalent could this problem have been that an official warning had to be issued and international attention drawn to epidemic? That's a lot of hip swaying! Philippine National Police Spokesman Chief Superintendent Samuel Padilao said that the department doesn't discriminate based on one's sexual orientation, but it does scrutinize conduct of those in uniform. I have to say, having spent some time with someone from the Philippines, his perception of living there was that homophobia was rampant. While there is a growing acceptance of gays, it is by no means an out and about kind of society. This leads me to wonder whether the prohibition against hip swaying is actually the result of systematic homophobia within the police force. This could be some awkward way of dealing with gays on the force. Maybe its a kind of Don't Ask, Don't Sway policy.

Your Never to Young to be an Idiot

A couple of Chicago High School students are trying to get their day in Federal Court claiming that their free speech rights were trampled when they weren't permitted to wear shirts proclaiming, "My Day of Silence, Straight Alliance. Be Happy, Not Gay." I've made up a new shirt for these kids. It reads, "Ignore me. I'm an idiot."

Schwarzenegger Gets His Groove

Since Arnold came into office, it has been a roller coaster of hope. When he was first elected, hopes were high. When he tried to push a series of referendum measures onto California voters, hopes were spiraling downward. By the time he vetoed the Gay Marriage Bill, AB 849 in September of 2005, hope for him as a governor and a person were at all time lows.

But the ride isn't over. After winning a relatively easy re-election, Arnold has begun to come into his own by creating his own political identity. Arnold was successful at creating his own persona in bodybuilding and as a never before seen Hollywood character and now he is attempting to do the same in politics. The nice thing is that Arnold is doing this unabashedly. Just today I read an article about Arnold responding to comments made by Rush Limbaugh denigrating Arnold's shift away from typical Republican stances towards more centrist paradigms.

Whether this is a smart political move on Arnold's part or a desire to reach out to more of his constituents and potential constituents doesn't really matter. Frankly, whether Arnold passes the next Gay Marriage Bill because he cares about me or because he wants my vote doesn't matter to me one bit. Politics is business, folks, and this is politics. If Arnold promised to unite Queers in Holy Matrimony, I will most certainly cast my vote for him regardless of what his true underlying feelings may or may not be about the gay marriage.

Of course, given Arnold's ability to have every stupid thing he has ever said recorded in one way or another, I suspect that sooner or later we will learn his real views on gay marriage.

We'll have to stay tuned and see what Arnold does over the next few months. I suspect as he finds his place in politics by trying on different hats, he will end up being the epitome of a centrist politician. This is a natural spot for him. Surprisingly, I have seen few parallels drawn between The Terminator and Jesse "The Body" Ventura, the former pro wrestler elected Governor of Minnesota in 1998. Jesse ran and won on the Independent Party ticket and went on to enjoy the highest approval rating of any Governor in Minnesota state history. (Some polls ranked him in the 73rd percentile). People in Minnesota, like people in California, wanted a change from politics as usual and both Arnold and Jesse delivered just that.

As a pro wrestler and an actor, mass audience appeal is critical for box office draw and continued success. Jesse took this to the Governor's office. Arnold has initially tried sticking with the party line and has apparently learned that alienated half or more of your audience is bad for business. Arnold just may have followed Jesse's lead in figuring out that doing the most for the most people yields the largest political returns.

So stay tuned and keep your fingers crossed that Arnold can pull off in Sacramento what he pulled off in his other entertainment endeavors. Lets hope that this term as Governor, like his movies, leaves you feeling like although you've seen better, it was far from the worst.

To Have and To Hold

Sometimes we just need to borrow someone for a while. Sure, maybe its not my husband, but as long as he is someones husband, that is a big turn-on for me and that is all that really matters. Now doubt be offended, after all I am Queer and we just have a different spin on sexuality and the sexual experience than you do. So let your man go for a little sweetie, at least long enough for me to have a good time and send him home wanting to come back for more.

Okay, so that's not me, but as I was searching through the m4m section of Craigslist yesterday, I was marveling at the number of guys seeking guys who are straight or married. I get the straight part. Its a conquest. We're gay guys, so we like guys and straight guys act like, well, guys. Not that I don't love a delicious little twink for dessert, but liking guys is kind of the whole premise of being a gay guy. But the married thing, I just don't get.

Is it the thrill of possibly being caught that makes being with a married dude so appealing? I'd rather keep my risky sex in public where the only consequence is endless media exposure and related public ridicule. Messing around with another woman's man just ends of with some poor rabbit boiling in a pot on my stove and battery acid on my car. Is the married part a requirement to prove that he is really straight? Well that could be since only straight married guys look through Craiglist's m4m searching for hookups with other guys.

I guess the other thing that I don't get about hooking up with straight guys is the creepy factor. That little feeling I get thinking about getting together with a married guy knowing that there is someone at home waiting for him. This feeling gets even more pronounced when I think about kids being in the picture. Now, I fully understand the process of coming out if you've made the mistake of getting married while denying your true orientation, and let me be the first to fully embrace the naked body of a man who has decided to rectify that situation permanently. I say bring him on, kids and all, and we'll be the Queer Brady Bunch. But thinking about someone waiting for this guy to come home while we're identifying anatomical marvels is just, well, creepy.

I still haven't really answered the question why our gay brethren are chasing after the married kind. I think it must be the same reason that straight guys lust after beautiful airbrushed women that don't really exist. For years successful marketing firms thrust idealized images of women at the public, making straight guys drool and women lose their minds trying to imitate the images. These same firms have been equally as successful at shoving impossible gorgeous men down our throats. (No pun intended). Now the Queer community has completely bought into it. We want the impossible. Don't just give us straight guys, give us straight married guys! Maybe by asking for the impossible, we can settle on the next best thing, while maintaining the dignity of having tried for the best.

Straight women have wised-up and rebelled against that ad agencies and publications that have turned women into something they never were and never could be. Queers should stand up and take notice that we're never going to get the A&F boy because he doesn't exist. He's not in WeHo, Chelsea, or Miami. He's not straight and he sure as hell ain't married because he is the perfectly created corporate commodity whose sole purpose is separate you from your MasterCard. If he wasn't so hot, he would be a real bastard, wouldn't he?

I think that I'll keep cruising Craigslist, and the better of my regional parks, to find that real connection. The pictures of the many gay prospects may not always be real pretty, but at least their real and at least their gay.

We Suck, But They Suck More

The area of international law is simply fascinating. It is this humongous conglomeration of treatises and conventions meant to govern the behavior of one nation towards another. The most interesting part is that none of it means a damn thing. Okay, okay. Don't get too excited. We pretend like it means something. The U.S. invokes the appropriate international legislation when it is appropriate and disregards other legislation when convenient. But so does everyone else, so its okay.

If you are clamoring for examples of this, we only have to look as far at the war in Iraq. According to the many tenets of international law, the invasion was clearly a illegal in terms of violating the rights of a sovereign nation. There has been some argument to this and unfortunately the ones who use this argument the most are dressed in camoflauge shirts that read "Impeach Bush Now!" Frankly, I still don't get that one. While it is often hard to separate legal and political issues, my statement that the Iraq War is an illegal one is rooted in international legal definition rather than in U.S. definition of the war. When other countries invade each other, it is much easier to see the non-legality of the action, its not so easy when there is perceived self-interest such as the need to protect ourselves from alleged weapons of mass destruction.

Now that the invasion of Iraq has been completely botched, there have been grumblings of invading Iran on a number of grounds, not the least of which is the admitted development of a nuclear weapons program. After the first inklings of this developing situation, I bristled with irritation and foreboding. Then I paused to remember Iran's policy on homosexuality. Iran's policy says, in short, that if two dudes are found naked under one cover without good reason, they can choose death by hanging, stoning, being halved by a sword, or being dropped from the highest perch. It is both unclear what constitutes a "good reason" or where exactly "the highest perch" is located.

Now it does take four witnesses to prove homosexuality under Islamic law, which Iran has adopted. Charges are often fabricated against gays because it is, after all, difficult to get four witnesses together to find two guys under one cover. The first two witnesses usually spoil the hunt.

In spite of the sheer idocracy of the law and the requirement for invoking it, Iran continues putting gays to death for the crime of homosexuality. A year and a half ago there was a highly publicized case of two teenagers who were lovers in life and, by way of hanging, in death. And that was after 14 months of imprisonment and 228 lashes each.

So where is the U.S.'s outrage? Where is our proclamation that we will come to the aid of the people of Iran and stop that same atrocities we held up for international scrutiny in Iraq? Do we only make a case when we are about to invade? Why were other nations such as England, France, Ireland, Italy, and Sweden more up in arms than the U.S. about the deaths of gay teenagers? Maybe it is because the U.S. is still in the process of coming out.

In the United States, we can't talk about Matthew Shepard without proclaiming that we don't care that he was gay. We can't talk about HIV without saying its not just a gay disease. We can't talk to someone who's gay without telling the story about our one gay friend. The U.S. hasn't grown up enough to accept the presence of the gay among us to go out on a limb and advocate for queers in another country. We just aren't there yet. Sure, we can invade another country in search of weapons that may, well, not exist, but we don't want to create an international scene about a couple of little queers.

When the U.S. decides that international law is not a tool of convenience, but an unbreakable convenant between sovereign entities, it can only come to the conclusion that those covenants must be enforced. Human rights treaties, nuclear proliferations treaties, and trade regulations must one day carry equal weight when the United States decides which laws it is going to enforce. The deaths of a couple of queers must someday spark the same furor as the threat of developing a weapons program. Until then, when it comes to the equal application of international law, the U.S. will continue to suck. That is okay thought, because right now, everyone else sucks more.

Setting the Pace

Today the chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff said that he won't apologize for calling homosexuality immoral and incompatible with military service. Afraid to stop there for fear that the religious right wouldn't know what he meant, Pace went on to compare homosexuality to adultery. According to Pace, homosexuality and adultery are the type of immoral behavior that the military prosecutes.

It is unclear whether Pace would like to prosecute homosexuality or homosexual acts. Under the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, being homosexual isn't a crime, so long as you don't do anything homosexual. Pace's representatives have said that Pace was merely expressing his personal opinion when he gave a formal interview to a newspaper where his comments were made. I guess no one told Pace that he no longer has the luxury of personal comments now that wears the chairman's hat, particularly when his personal opinion bears directly on currently military policy.

When I think of gays in the military, I always have to ask the "So what?" question. So what if the entire LGBT population is banned from military service? So what if you can be homosexual, but not a practicing homosexual. Well, at the end of the day it matters a lot. By excluding the LGBT population, the military is sending the clear message that homosexuals are not fit to defend this nation. The military is sending the message that gays and lesbians do not meet the standards required of this nation's fighting men and women. The military is making a qualitative judgment about the entire LGBT population in which a verdict of inadequate is rendered.

I spent 8 years in the Army before being kicked out for being gay. I started out as an enlisted Russian Linguist, then went to Officer's Candidate School and became a Field Artillery Officer. During my years in the service, I knew countless soldiers who were gay, bisexual, lesbian, and confused. Not surprising when you consider the number of hormone driven 18-25 year olds serving in the military! I also knew many soldiers who were drug users, adulterers, and fond of being absent without leave (A.W.O.L.). Ironically, I never knew one of these soldiers to get kicked out of the Army. The drug users were usually given a slap on the wrist with a little extra duty, the adulterers were largely ignored, and those that went A.W.O.L. usually lost some pay and rank. The queers on the other hand were actively pursued and hung out to dry.

Pace's "personal opinion" is merely an affirmation of what really happens in the military. My gay and lesbian brethren were best served by staying as far in the closet as possible for fear of the Pace's of the Army coming after them with reckless abandon. Of course it is pretty easy pickins' for the Pace's of the military. The LGBT crew isn't hard to find. They congregate together in the same places and when a high-ranking officer sits down a low-ranking enlisted person for little one-on-one Q&A session, you can bet Private Nancy is going to sing his heart out.

Tonight we have General Pace to thank for keeping America safe from the homosexuals who are trying to penetrate the ranks of our military. We have this crusader of Freedom to thank for keeping the military on the straight and narrow. We have a man whose self-described moral convictions lead him to denigrate soldiers who are currently under his command and to alienate potentially great soldiers from ever serving in the military. My disdain for General Pace is only outweighed by my hope that he has more military sense than common sense and he managed to bring all soldiers serving in war zones home safely. Even the homosexual ones.