Bloggasm

Within any kind of moralist debate, the need to categorize and define becomes almost necessary in order to form an argument. What results is a devolution into a game of semantics, where one party simply tries to debase the generalized terms of the other, and in the end they are no longer arguing about the issue at hand, but at ways to merely define the issue. Arguments that deal with gay or lesbian issues often fall into this trap, because the pro-gay side will no-doubt produce analogies or scenarios in which straight people engage in the same action. For instance, if a homophobe were to make the claim that gay sex is unnatural since sex is aimed at procreation, then the other side would say that anything other than vaginal sex should be deemed inappropriate between straight couples, since procreation is impossible without it. This would discount any kind of foreplay, and though I’m sure that some straight people out there wouldn’t mind this, I think most would. At the heart of this semantics debate is the one between essentialists and constructionists. The essentialists, by their very nature, attempt to locate the essence of every entity, and would try to hone in on specific traits that make and categorize that entity into a group. This does not mean that this person couldn’t have traits uncharacteristic to the group, only that these characteristics are irrelevant to it, just things that define an individual person. What is stressed is the fact that these traits or characteristics are often considered permanent, consistently found to be true in every scenario. So in terms of gay and lesbian lifestyle, there is a key essence to what it means to be a homosexual. Social constructionism, on the other hand, doesn’t necessarily completely contradict the essentialist philosophy, but rather tries to explain it. The theory was first created by Thomas Luckmann and Peter L. Berger in their book The Social Construction of Reality, and tries to argue that people work and function in what is often termed a perceived reality. Rather than things being permanent, like essentialists claim they are, these perceived realities are an ongoing process that is based on people’s interpretations of the world around them. It rejects the notion of everyday common sense, claiming that common sense is just another interpretation of reality. What makes the essentialist vs constructionist debate even more interesting is when it isn’t just applied to morals, but the law as well. Perhaps one of the most well-documented 21st-century supreme court cases of this is Lawrence vs. Texas. In it, two gay males were caught in the act of gay sex when police officers entered their home (for entirely different reasons) and arrested them for anti-sodomy laws that were still in use in the state of Texas. The case eventually made it to the supreme court, and the end result was a 6-3 ruling in favor of Lawrence, thereby stomping down the anti-sodomy laws across the land, making this a landmark case for the Gay Right Movement. I’ll outline the essentialist and constructionist debates in both the dissenting and majority opinions for this particular case.
(more…)

In this week’s segment of Bigots R’ Us, we have a person who has been discriminated against through Myspace. Notice how the term “gay” has been once again linked to “deviant sexual practice,” since we all know gay lifestyle is centered around sex:

The headlines have come fast and furious in recent months about kids being busted for everything from threatening teachers to plotting to burn down churches on their MySpace and Facebook pages. But at a small Christian liberal arts university in

Williamsburg, Kentucky, last week, 20-year-old Jason Johnson was expelled not for a threat, but for admitting he is gay.

University of the Cumberlands spokesperson Larry Cockrum said he wasn’t allowed to discuss matters pertaining to students or faculty, but the Lexington Herald-Leader newspaper confirmed that the expulsion happened recently.

Cockrum said the 117-year-old school has a policy that allows administrators to expel a student who “promotes sexual behavior not consistent with Christian principles.”

For those who don’t know, Myspace is open to anyone who wants to see it. For awhile, Facebook only allowed students in, but now it allows professors to create accounts, and there’s been some instances where cops have managed to log on and find out about college parties. Is it just me, or is there something off about your professor combing through your Facebook photo albums to see what you do on your weekends?

No, the penguins aren’t even gay in the book. They just worked together to help raise an adopted egg.

A book about two male penguins that raised a baby penguin has been moved from the children’s section to the non-fiction section of two public library branches after parents complained about homosexual undertones.

The illustrated children’s book, “And Tango Makes Three,” is based on a true story of two male penguins in New York City’s Central Park Zoo.

The penguins, named Roy and Silo, adopted an abandoned egg in the late 1990s.

I don’t know why libraries become such a central issue of debate when it comes to conservatives. Do they just find them to be an easy target because libraries tend to back down really easily?

Simon Owens: Which conservative bloggers do you think create the most spin? And if you had to pick a conservative blogger to label a worthy adversary, which blogger would that be?

Terry Krepel: I’m not a regular reader of the major conservative blogs — I get my fill of conservatism from the news sites I monitor (NewsMax, WorldNetDaily, MRC/CNSNews/NewsBusters). To me, the conservative blogosphere is such an echo chamber, with everyone posting minor variations of the same thing. Sites such as Power Line and Michelle Malkin are definitely the opinion leaders there — if something gets traction there, it moves up in the conservative news food chain. But they’re not breaking a lot of actual news there; it’s more minor scandals and controversies. To my knowledge, no advancing of stories like Jack Abramoff or Duke Cunningham occurred in the conservative blogosphere. That could all flip with a change in party power in 2008; if a Democrat wins the presidency and/or gains control of Congress, look for a Josh Marshall-type conservative news blog to surface; if it can stay away from mindless liberal-bashing, it could be successful.

SO: The rights of homosexuals keeps on making it to the forefront of political debate. Do you think the conservatives keep on pushing this issue because they know they have the majority behind them on this particular subject, thereby distracting America away from other issues they aren’t as strong on?

TK: I think it’s a red-meat issue for them, something they can wave as a
way to rally the troops when things are going badly (and even when they’re not) since a significant amount of their base believes in it. Then it gets taken to an extreme and they have to back off for a while. I think we’re starting to see that with “Brokeback Mountain” — the movie appears to be of sufficient overall quality to withstand the attacks over its subject matter, so now conservatives are looking for another target. Right now, it’s a movie called “End of the Spear,” a film about Christian missionaries which conservative Christians who’ve seen it are apparently enraptured with — until they find out that one of the missionaries was played by a gay man and a political activist to boot. I think that the continual demonization wears thin after a while, and that each time they lose a few people who eventually figure that real-life gay people usually don’t conform to the caricatures.

SO: In the 2004 election, we saw a significant shift of the African American vote to the Republican side. Do you think that if Hillary gets nominated that she will be able to shift those votes back to her side?

TK: I suspect that most of the votes she pulls back over will be because they have fond memories of her husband’s presidency. But we’re also way early in the process, and Hillary is not inevitable — she’s still a demon in conservatives’ eyes, even more so than Bill was, so they will continue to their attacks on her. But people may weary of those kinds of attacks as well, and Hillary will get in on a sympathy vote. Conservatives have been vicious enough for that to be a possibility; Ed Klein’s book turned out to be overly prurient and backfired.

SO: What are the five blogs everyone should be reading (besides your own)?

TK: Suburban Guerrilla (well-done liberal rants by an ex-journalist)

World O’Crap (hilarious deconstructions of the right wing)

Talking Points Memo (there really is no equivalent to this on the conservative side of the blogosphere)

Orcinus (focuses on racial and immigration issues; does a fine job of demolishing Michelle Malkin)

Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion (he keeps up with religious extremism of all kinds)

You can find ConWebWatch over here.

Simon Owens: Do you think the realm of drag has become an art?

Lady Bunny: Well, I think it’s been an art for centuries. From Japan’s kabuki theater to boys playing all the female roles of Shakespeare’s plays to Michael Jackson, the larger than life quality of drag has made it an entertainment staple for centuries. It goes in and out of vogue, but at one point around the turn of the century, a queen named Julian Eltinge hit it so big on Broadway that he had musicals written for him and even face cream marketed to women who wanted his complexion–which was actually make-up!

Many people think of drag as lip-synch only and that is what is the standard fare in gay clubs around the world. But there are also queens doing stand-up (Dame Edna, Jackie Beat), recording original music (RuPaul, Hedwig, Kevin Aviance, Celeda), djing (Me!), directing porn (Chi Chi LaRue), and even singing opera (Shequida, La Gran Scena). Many queens act as well, but often bigger drag roles are given to either straight actors or gay ones who don’t really do drag full-time. Do I sound bitter?

SO: Do you find there to be a ridiculous humor to drag, or is it to be taken completely seriously?

LB: Interview cancelled! I’m highly offended by that question! No, nothing should be taken completely seriously ever! Especially not drag! There are plenty of queens who do take themselves too seriously, but since my character is basically a clown, I don’t. There is something innately ridiculous about drag. When a queen is rigged up in all her flashy finery it can be quite regal–hence the term “queen”. I think it’s hilarious to temper this grandness with lunacy or else the drag risks being a snooze. Unless, of course, the queen is breathtakingly beautiful and styled so incredibly that she can get away with taking herself seriously. But that route has never been an option for me!

SO: Have you ever appeared in drag in a very conservative area? What was the general response?

LB: Well, I dj’ed at the CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch’s Ohio mansion this summer. There was a little stiffness at first, but once the liquor started flowing their reservations/curiosity about me passed. Besides, they coulldn’t request a song from anyone else, so they had to get over the fact that a freak was the dj at their staff party!

I also protested a KFC in Lexington, Kentucky in a very short skirt. A few people yelled things, but I think they were more motivated by thoughts like “You’re a whore/freak who my kids shouldn’t be seeing in the light of day” as opposed to any pro-KFC sentiments. I do put myself in a lot of mainstream situations where you don’t normally expect to see a queen. I just attended Howard Stern’s Sirius radio launch at the Hard Rock Cafe in NYC and his fans were a little homophobic but after enough booze they were begging for “photos with the clown.” I also dj’ed last Xmas at Saks Fifth Avenue in NYC. That was nuts. There were tourists from all over in the middle of frenzied holiday shopping and many of them gagged at the sight of me. So I have to give Saks credit for taking a chance like that. Certain types are predisposed to hating you–like young, straight guys or anyone with a Middle-Eatern head wrap, but you just have to be fearless. I met every stare with “I’m-sending-out-holiday-party-vibes-whether-you-like-it-or-not!” attitude and won the vast majority over. I think when people see a drag queen with a big wig and an over-the-top look, they associate it with partying and tend to scream “Work!” or “You go, girl!”. It’s the serious “I’m-passing-as-a-woman” looks that tend to be less popular, when the queens aren’t passing and there’s no hint of fun or glamor. Then straights tend to want to yell stuff like “Hello, sir!” to let the queens know that they aren’t fooling anybody. But with a more outrageous look, your glad rags don’t indicate that you are trying to blend in or “pass”.

SO: What are the five blogs everyone should be reading (besides your own)?

LB: 1.Huffingtonpost.com–not exactly a blog, but it contains blogs and the kind of news stories which our mainstream TV news refuses to cover. So if you don’t have time to scour the NY Times and Washington Post daily, it’s a quick fix.

2.lucasblog.com (by porn star and sick, very opinionated queen Michael Lucas)

3.VaginalDavis.com This whore is hilarious.

4.WorldofWonder.net Ex-Details columnist Stephen Saban edits this juicy gossip blog.

5.yeastradio.podshow.com This bloated, Jewish lesbian with a yeast infection mixes insightful with ridiculous and is a top-notch pod-caster, with amazing video posts as well.

You can find Lady Bunny over here.

You can find Queerty over here.

Simon Owens: As we progress into the 21st Century, many gays are starting to steer away from the label of being “gay” because they don’t like being categorized by their sexual preference. Do you ever feel limited by being labeled as a gay blogger?

Bradford Shellhammer: God no. Why would you not want to be labeled gay? Gay is a good thing. Hell, our whole site is based on how freaking amazing it is to be gay.

SO: What successes have you and other gay bloggers had in pushing for political change in terms of gay acceptance? Has there been any instances when you’ve been able to pull together a large protest or raise a significant amount of funds to help your cause?

BS: I don’t know how much success gay bloggers have had pushing political change. I can say that there are many I have inspired to dress better, so in a way, that helps the world. And no I have never held a protest or organized one. Living in San Francisco sours your attitude toward peaceful demonstrations. There was a rally or march every other day and it just got old fast. I’d rather stay home, drink champagne, and write a check to the organizations out there fighting for our rights.

SO: How close do you think we are to having the gay lifestyle accepted by mainstream society? We already have a show with gays on major network television (Will and Grace). Is this a reflection of the times changing?

BS: Will &Grace? Elton John? Queer Eye? I think it’s pretty accepted now. The times have changed. A lot. And it’s a generational thing. Give it a few more cycles. The biggots are dying and time is on our side.

SO: What are the five blogs everyone should be reading besides your own?

BS: They should read Jossip, because David writes me a check every two weeks and because he is funny as fuck. Gawker, because that is really how blogging should be done. Towleroad, because he’s the Newsweek to our People. Art is For Losers, because it is one big inside joke. Fleshbot, because there is always something to masturbate to.