There be no shelter here

Photo of Ferguson on fire, from PBS.




We played "Killing in the name" at the end of our radio show last night, which was right before 9pm, the time of Prosecutor Robert McCulloch's press conference in Ferguson, Missouri. In this incendiary (but rather bizarre) press conference, he announced the grand jury had not returned an indictment, and there would be no trial for the murder of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson on August 9th.

All three of us are seasoned activists, and we knew what was coming. Even though 99% of grand juries return indictments... we knew THIS CASE would be an exception.

And so, driving home, I thought of the song we had played ... and then I thought of Rage Against the Machine's "No Shelter"--which I heard in my head, over and over... there be no shelter here/the front lines are everywhere. I wondered, is that really true?

Apparently so.

By the time I got home, America was burning.

I was going to write a post-election synopsis, but I think this post is going to stand in for it. My feelings about Ferguson and the 2014 election are forever entwined. One has in fact brought about the other. You are seeing the results of the election in action: the arrogance of power.

Rarely has an election had such a catastrophic effect on my morale. I have been plagued with self-doubt and disgust at the Left (or what passes for the Left in the USA), particularly the young folks who didn't vote and thus turned over the election to the Republicans. The election of Ronald Reagan left me deeply depressed, and this has been almost as bad. I just have to keep remembering: most people didn't vote, midterms belong to the base, it wasn't an actual mandate, blah blah blah. But right after the election, I was most upset at all the pseudo-radical tumblrites, the kids who talk a good game and do nothing, those people who claim there is no difference between the parties, when the lack of Medicaid expansion here in most southern states means that thousands will die with no health care.

They don't seem to care about that, or at least, not enough to vote.

Now see, when you put it that way, they howl in disagreement and indignation. But that is exactly what they did. They chose to sit out the election, and as David Brooks smugly reminded us on PBS, not voting is a vote, and the Democrats "failed to mobilize the base." Both true.

But see, the youth are all fired up over Ferguson. They tweeted furiously, almost more than I did. What's up with that? Drama attracts attention, but boring elections don't? (Do they understand the election was also a matter of life and death?) I was amazed at all the young people I saw in the Ferguson footage, all races, raising fists in the air and blocking the interstate. I once helped block an interstate highway (at the 1980 Republican convention in Detroit that nominated Ronald Reagan) and it is a powerful feeling. (We delayed Reagan's acceptance speech by almost an hour.) GODDAMMIT, PAY ATTENTION is what these actions scream out loud. It is as if they have decided elections are old school, and yet, the only way to get more minority cops and minority representation, IS ELECTIONS. However, considering all the votes habitually dropped down the toilet, along with gerrymandering and right-wing hijinks, we ALSO see that elections are stolen regularly, and that has created an epidemic of electoral cynicism.

I feel like the country is going down the road described so frighteningly in the (very entertaining, highly recommended) novel California, by Edan Lepucki. She describes a time when "the internet goes dark"--scary but totally believable, since it is obviously a threat to hegemony. People pay to live in "communities" that are safe and protected. If you can't afford to live in one of these, too bad. In Margaret Atwood's trilogy, Oryx and Crake, Year of the Flood and MaddAddam, there are likewise "compounds" populated by the employees of the international corporations, and if you can't make it into one of these, you are consigned to the "pleeblands"--which are pillaged, torched and trashed with regularity.

Watching the news reports last night, I momentarily felt like I was in a compound, while Ferguson is a pleebland.

~*~

At left, Curtis McLaughlin on our radio show right before the election. He was the Libertarian Party candidate for congress in South Carolina's 4th district, against Trey Gowdy.

There was NO Democratic challenger.

Gowdy won 85% of the vote. Welcome to the South.

~*~





There is also some good news, as the first gay marriages in South Carolina have now become legal. I went to the demonstration last week at Greenville County Square, to cheer on those couples going in to get their licenses and thereby make history.

A little light in the darkness. A little bit. Some light, but no shelter.


There be no shelter here.


No Shelter - Rage Against the Machine



Comments welcome, but pro-Wilson/pro-cop comments will be dealt with harshly, and possibly deleted. Be advised.

Altruism and Angels

Above, from left to right: Rabbi Mark Wilson, Rabbi Joshua Lesser, Rev. Jerry Hill, Rev. Donna Stroud, and Jayce Tromsness (director of the upcoming ANGELS IN AMERICA at the Warehouse Theatre). As always, you can click the photos to enlarge.

It was really great to listen to ALL of their varied experiences!

~*~

A week ago today, on Martin Luther King day (January 20th), some of us from Occupy the Microphone radio show attended a Warehouse Theatre event, one of a series of community discussions/dialogues titled Altruism and Angels: A Community in Conversation. The one we attended was titled Religion: Blessing, Curse, Irrelevant? A Discussion of the Impact on the Spirit, Advocacy and Vision of the LGBT Community. (This special series of discussions is part of the larger "Year of Altruism" that will be a religious focus here in Greenville during 2014.)

It was one of those evenings that caught me off-guard... one of those things where I thought I knew everything already, but the discussion took me in surprising and unanticipated new directions. The discussion wasn't a modest one, with God-loves-everybody platitudes, but instead went right for the jugular. It wasn't just about the fundamentalists, everybody's favorite whipping-boy, but about the ongoing moral struggle now faced by the "mainstream" denominations, when they grapple with issues like gay marriage and adoption.

For that reason, I didn't know how to write about the event, since I had mixed feelings about it.

To wit: Is religion one of the main causes of pain and anguish in the lives of LGBT people? Listening to some of the stories, it sure sounded like that to me.

Is this fact due to some intrinsically-negative factor about religion/spirituality in and of itself, or a separate thing, religious dogma specifically?

Can we separate the spirituality/comfort of religion, from the dogma that provides its ultimate psychological wallop, as ultimate truth and metaphysical certainty?

Isn't the fact of unchanging dogma one of the things that comforts us when we need it? If not (and I've never found dogma by itself particularly comforting, but I realize others do), then what is it that we grasp for in times of spiritual need?

At left: Some of the discussion participants. It was a lively conversation.


These are the things we talked about. Very intense. I did not necessarily come to the conclusion that religion should be let off the hook, although I did come to the conclusion that it is probably not an unqualified good, which is something I have always believed on some level. Religion done properly, I would say, is a good thing. Done improperly, it's a bad thing.

I am now wondering if that truism (which I never fully realized I subscribed to in the first place!) is simply mythological. One of those just-so stories we tell ourselves so we can get along with all of our religious neighbors.

As I said, intense discussion. So intense, I could not fully deal with it until today, so thanks for hanging around while I try to figure things out.

~*~

I recently went on a bit of a screed over at Tumblr, ranting about the kids who won't do activism. (And like most kids, they shrug, roll their eyes, and go on about their bizness.) But seriously, I do realize this phenomenon is one big reason why people avoid activism... or start like gangbusters and then fade out over time:

People have cherished ideas they bring with them into their activism and then, BLAMMO, something happens (like this discussion) and we end up questioning what we think we know, what we tell ourselves we already believe. And stuff like this can sneak up on you and leave you too winded to deal with what is right in front of you. I probably should warn the kids about life-altering moments like this, if indeed they do ever decide to engage in some real activism.

Then again, nah. Let em all find out for themselves. ;)

Daisy's Duck Dynasty rant (from Thursday's show)

Gregg and Scotty, my amazing producers, made it into a YouTube clip! :) (The whole show is at the radio blog.)

Throwing Stones

What a mess. What a total, complete, unadulterated, absolute MESS. It's hard to come up with anything more descriptive to say about the debacle that is the Republican temper-tantrum, i.e. the current government shutdown, which officially began at midnight. (I keep thinking of the Grateful Dead song that is the title of this post.) Of course, we talked about it at length on Occupy the Microphone today.

The puzzling thing, to me, is that Republicans don't seem to mind being perceived as the party that prefers the American people stay unhealthy and uninsured. "Anything to keep people from having health care!" is how most of the GOP congressional representatives sounded, proudly venting on various news shows late last night. It's worth it to STOP OBAMACARE! Do they know how they sound? Or is their own re-election the primary factor in their decision? Robert at Blue Heron Blast sums up a lot of my thinking:

The problem is that the House Republicans have all gerrymandered themselves into safe seats in safe districts. Any flak they will receive will be from their right in the primaries. Although I am sure that many are concerned with the health of the nation, at least I hope so, the overriding motive has to be getting re-elected. So there is really no hope for common ground.

The optics of this debacle are pretty clear. A CNN/ORC poll found that Republicans in Congress would shoulder more of the blame for a shutdown. Forty-six percent of Americans said that Republicans on Capitol Hill would be mostly responsible for a shutdown, versus 36 percent who would blame Obama and 13 percent who would blame both.

So 25% of Americans polled will blame you more than the other guy and you don't care, because it will play so well for the folks in your district and frankly, what else matters? Bravo!

I went to the outfitting store to get some straps to hitch my borrowed monopod to my camera pack this morning. The vacation to the National Parks between Wyoming and Montana that are scheduled to be closed at midnight tonight barring an unforeseen stroke of sanity barreling down on the beltway, which you should certainly not hold your breath for.

I will make do, lots of nice state parks I am looking at in the area, there are worse prison sentences than spending a week on a bar stool in Jackson Hole. But it sucks. And it even sucks worse for the man helping me in the store, who is in the naval reserve and ferries Navy Seals around on missions. He is now on no pay as are many of the private contractors who aid our defense effort. Awful thing we are doing to them, not to mention furloughing 800,000 civil servants and leaving millions without pay. Oh, I forgot, we hate the government and the people who work for them.

Yes. The party that loves war, does not want to pay their soldiers. Irony!

And such a depressing, demoralizing spectacle.

~*~

While waiting for Republicans to come to their wacked-out senses (might be awhile), we can work on getting us some gay marriage rights, and thus, continue to drive (some of them!) crazy.* From the Advocate, here is a great piece by Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, whom I was fortunate to meet during our local Campaign for Southern Equality demonstration in January.

Op-ed: How Resistance Will Change the South:

Growing numbers of people across the South are finding the courage to stand up to such laws by taking public action. Since the We Do Campaign launched two years ago, I have stood with more than 80 LGBT couples as they have requested — and been denied — marriage licenses in their hometowns across the South, from small rural towns in Mississippi to cities like Charlotte, N.C. To watch LGBT people stand at the marriage license counter, many with their children at their side, is to witness courage firsthand. In the face of a legal system that denies our humanity and tells us we have no right to even approach this counter, these families are expressing powerful truths: We are human, we are equal, this is our home, and we have a fundamental right to marry.

As we continue to grow the We Do Campaign, we are now actively seeking a public official in the South who will stand up with us and issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple as an act of conscience. Marriage license offices in New Mexico and Pennsylvania have recently started doing this, and in years past it has happened in California and New York as well. In Pennsylvania, Montgomery County Register of Wills Bruce Hanes has said of his choice, “I firmly believe that I’m on the right side of history.”

Can this happen in the South? We have contacted marriage license offices in more than 600 counties to pose this question. There may be a Bruce Hanes somewhere in our region. Or it may well be that the power of these discriminatory laws is so great that even those public officials who support marriage equality — and they exist — feel that the risk of acting on this belief is too great.

It's an interesting strategy, and I will be watching carefully to see how it goes.


*I acknowledge there are SOME Republicans who are in favor of legalizing gay marriage, foremost among them Cindy and Meghan McCain.

DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS

As we say here in Carolina, HAIL YEAH!!!


From NBC NEWS:

Supreme Court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act, paves way for gay marriage to resume in California
By Pete Williams and Erin McClam, NBC News

In a landmark ruling for gay rights, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law blocking federal recognition of same-sex marriages.

The decision was 5-4, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. It said that the law amounted to the “deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.” In a separate case, the court ruled that it could not take up a challenge to Proposition 8, the California law that banned gay marriage in that state. That decision means that gay marriage will once again be legal in California.

That decision was also 5-4, written by Chief Justice John Roberts.

The ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act means that the federal government must recognize the gay marriages deemed legal by the states — 12 plus the District of Columbia, before the California case was decided. The law helps determine who is covered by more than 1,100 federal laws, programs and benefits, including Social Security survivor benefits, immigration rights and family leave.

“DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others,” the ruling said. It added that the law was invalid because there was no legitimate purpose for disparaging those whom states “sought to protect in personhood and dignity.”

President Barack Obama, in a post on Twitter, said that the ruling was a “historic step forward for #MarriageEquality.”

Kennedy was joined in the majority by the four members of the court’s liberal wing, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Dissenting were Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Scalia, in his dissent, wrote: “We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation. The Court’s errors on both points spring forth from the same diseased root: an exalted conception of the role of this institution in America.”

Cheers went up outside the Supreme Court, where supporters of gay marriage waved signs, rainbow banners and flags with equality symbols.
The ruling comes as states are authorizing gay marriage with increasing speed and with public opinion having turned narrowly in favor of gay marriage. Under the law, gay couples who are legally married in their states were not considered married in the eyes of the federal government, and were ineligible for the federal benefits that come with marriage.

The case before the Supreme Court, U.S. v. Windsor, concerned Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer, a lesbian couple who lived together in New York for 44 years and married in Canada in 2007. When Spyer died in 2009, Windsor was hit with $363,000 in federal estate taxes. Had the couple been considered by the federal government to be married, Windsor would not have incurred those taxes. Kennedy, in the ruling, said that New York’s decision to authorize gay marriage was a proper exercise of its authority, and reflected “the community’s considered perspective on the historical roots of the institution of marriage and its evolving understanding of the meaning of equality.”

President Bill Clinton signed the act into law in September 1996. A court ruling in Hawaii had raised the prospect that that state might become the first to authorize gay marriage.

At the time, some members of Congress believed that the Defense of Marriage Act might be a compromise that would take the air out of a movement to amend the Constitution to block gay marriage.

LOLGOP just Tweeted: "Life would be so much better if Antonin Scalia just had a blog."

Ain't it the truth. Today, however, he just has to stand aside and DEAL WITH IT. Let the preachers all go cover themselves in ashes and sackcloth and REPENT--because their grandchildren will be as ashamed of them as southern white kids are now ashamed of their racist segregationist grandparents.

We will be covering this on our radio show today, so stay tuned.

Glenn Greenwald verbalizes my worries about gay rights

Yesterday it was announced by the LGBT Pride Celebration Committee, that Wikileaks whistleblower/political prisoner Bradley Manning was selected as one of the Grand Marshals of the yearly San Francisco gay pride parade, considered a high honor in the gay community.

Almost immediately, Lisa L Williams, president of the Board of SF Pride, wrote a statement retracting his nomination:

Bradley Manning is facing the military justice system of this country. We all await the decision of that system. However, until that time, even the hint of support for actions which placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform — and countless others, military and civilian alike — will not be tolerated by the leadership of San Francisco Pride. It is, and would be, an insult to every one, gay and straight, who has ever served in the military of this country.

Yes, you read that right. Blowing the whistle on war crimes is an insult to the military.

Glenn Greenwald (who is also gay, for the record) wasted no time in blasting Williams, calling her statement a "substance-free falsehood originally spread by top US military officials, which has since been decisively and extensively debunked, even by some government officials." Greenwald correctly reminds us:

Indeed, it's the US government itself, not Manning, that is guilty of "actions which placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform."

And then Greenwald underscores the incipient fascism (my label, not his) of Williams warning the organization's members that EVEN THE HINT of support for Manning, WILL NOT BE TOLERATED. WILL. NOT. BE. TOLERATED.

Wow.

This certainly is a long, long way from the San Francisco Gay Pride parade I once attended, decades ago, which tolerated (celebrated!) every bizarre, crazy activity and wayward political belief in the world. This had the wonderful result of making everyone feel welcome and giving off a warm, beneficent glow. This event was where I saw the revolutionary Tom Robinson Band, in 1981. (Robinson was an influential, radical gay punk rocker from the UK, who founded Rock Against Racism, a cause I was once allied with myself.) I suddenly realized that me and Tom Robinson probably do not belong in today's gay rights movement, which is now officially aligning itself with the government and trashing a courageous gay man who dares to speak out (and has had his civil rights violated as a result). Tom Robinson and Bradley Manning and Glenn Greenwald (and me) are OUT... apologists for right-wing warmongering like Lisa Williams are IN... it is the wholesale Lady Gagaization of gay rights; the defanging and neutralizing of a once-radical movement that asked the tough questions. Its all razzle-dazzle and the Bravo Network and Will and Grace reruns... nothing that asks participants to seriously question the status quo. (As it was for me, when I was young.)

Depressing.

Further, it isn't just the Lady Gagaization of gay rights, but the corporate sponsorship of gay rights... Glenn Greenwald ticks off the list of glitzy parade sponsors (HERE is the official list) which include AT&T, Verizon, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Clear Channel, Kaiser Permanente... basically the same list of corporate shysters presented by the Occupy Wall Street movement. Greenwald carefully catalogs their sins against the people, and then sputters:

So apparently, the very high-minded ethical standards of Lisa L Williams and the SF Pride Board apply only to young and powerless Army Privates who engage in an act of conscience against the US war machine, but instantly disappear for large corporations and banks that hand over cash. What we really see here is how the largest and most corrupt corporations own not just the government but also the culture. Even at the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade, once an iconic symbol of cultural dissent and disregard for stifling pieties, nothing can happen that might offend AT&T and the Bank of America. The minute something even a bit deviant takes place (as defined by standards imposed by America's political and corporate class), even the SF Gay Pride Parade must scamper, capitulate, apologize, and take an oath of fealty to their orthodoxies (we adore the military, the state, and your laws). And, as usual, the largest corporate factions are completely exempt from the strictures and standards applied to the marginalized and powerless. Thus, while Bradley Manning is persona non grata at SF Pride, illegal eavesdropping telecoms, scheming banks, and hedge-fund purveyors of the nation's worst right-wing agitprop are more than welcome.

And then, Greenwald starts making some interesting connections. Lisa Williams once worked for the political campaign of ... guess who?! President Hopey-Changey himself!* Greenwald reminds us:

It was President Obama, of course, who so notoriously decreed Bradley Manning guilty in public before his trial by military officers serving under Obama even began, and whose administration was found by the UN's top torture investigator to have abused him and is now so harshly prosecuting him. It's anything but surprising that a person who was a loyal Obama campaign aide finds Bradley Manning anathema while adoring big corporations and banks (which funded the Obama campaign and who, in the case of telecoms, Obama voted to immunize).

And finally, Greenwald voices the worries and concerns I have had for years... which it seems are finally coming to pass:

When I wrote several weeks ago about the remarkable shift in public opinion on gay equality, I noted that this development is less significant than it seems because the cause of gay equality poses no real threat to elite factions or to how political and economic power in the US are distributed. If anything, it bolsters those power structures because it completely and harmlessly assimilates a previously excluded group into existing institutions and thus incentivizes them to accommodate those institutions and adopt their mindset. This event illustrates exactly what I meant.

Yeah. And I remember ancient arguments I engaged in, with wacky old reds like the RCP, who warned me that gay rights was cosmetic and would NOT upend the status quo the way I was convinced it would. Were they right, after all?

From Greenwald's piece last month, mentioned above, titled The gay marriage snowball and political change:

If anything, one could say that the shift on this issue has been more institution-affirming than institution-subverting: the campaign to overturn "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" continually glorified and even fetishized military service, while gay marriage revitalizes a traditional institution - marriage - that heterosexuals have been in the process of killing with whimsical weddings, impetuous divorces, and serial new spouses (as Rush Limbaugh might put it: I'd like you to meet my fourth wife). And these changes are taking a once marginalized and culturally independent community and fully integrating it into mainstream society, thus making that community invested in conventional societal institutions.

Notably, Malcolm X also worried about the "buying off" of the black community, in just this same fashion. Some of us have probably forgotten that this was one of the tenets of Black Nationalism, that integration was also a form of neutralization ... and in the process of integration and assimilation, much intrinsic radicalism and core identity can be compromised.

Is the gay community being bought off and neutralized?

Unfortunately, I think so. Faster than you can say LADY GAGA. Or Bradley Manning.

~*~

*This perfect term for President Obama comes from Mister LarryE, aka Lotus, who has a cool blog you should all check out.

Greenville Candlelight Vigil for Marriage Equality

... tonight at the Unitarian Universalist church.

Candlelight vigils and supportive demonstrations are taking place throughout the nation tonight, and all week long. Legal arguments before the Supreme Court will begin tomorrow, for and against the constitutionality of gay marriage. From NBC:

The U.S. Supreme Court this week takes its first serious look ever at the issue of same-sex marriage, considering two cases that raise a fundamental issue: does the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection allow legal distinctions between same-sex couples and those of the opposite sex?

The greatest potential for a ruling with nationwide implications comes in a case from California, to be argued Tuesday, brought by proponents of Proposition 8. The following day, the court will hear a separate case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages in states where they are legal.

Approved by 52 percent of California voters in 2008, Prop 8 amended the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages. It was placed on the ballot after 18,000 couples had been legally wed there.

A federal judge in San Francisco declared the ban unconstitutional, and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling. Once a state grants a fundamental right like marriage, the appeals court said, it cannot later take it away, even by voter initiative.

Photos of our vigil below, and you can click to enlarge all photos.

I hope you will also take part in one locally. Like the signs say, "Equality means everyone."

Thursday links

Got copious links for your perusal.

~*~

Did Nikki Haley Kill Climate Study?:

The article in The State [Columbia, SC newspaper] also reported that [John] Frampton [head of South Carolina's Department of Natural Resources] retired in 2012 after conflicts with Caroline Rhodes, then the Chairperson of the Board that oversaw the Department of Resources. Rhodes had been appointed to her position by Republican Governor Nikki Haley. The DNR climate change study pre-dated the Haley administration. Although current DNR officials are claiming that the refusal to release the study is not politically motivated, it's hard to accept their denials at face value. The report was on track to be released until Haley, a Tea Party favorite, was elected as South Carolina's governor and appointed her own people to the DNR Board after assuming office in 2011.

The only logical conclusion is that her administration quashed the climate change report prepared by the state's own scientists based on political considerations.

~*~

Kirk Smalley Found A Mission After the Suicide of His Son:

Smalley’s life has become a mission to stop bullying, and youth suicide. Kirk now spends his days telling his son’s story at schools around the world. He has told Ty’s story at more than 500 hundred schools and has talked to hundreds of thousands of students, teachers, and school administrators since Ty’s suicide nearly three years ago. He said,

We do it because we don’t want another family to live our nightmare. Laura doesn’t ever want another mama to find her baby the way she found ours. We don’t want another kid to ever feel the way Ty felt, that that was the only option. We’re not doing it for Ty. We’re doing it for all the other kids out there. The main part of our message is not to stand silent and watch it happen and that’s addressing the bystanders. If we can empower those kids to be willing to stand up and say ‘you know what – this isn’t right. It’s not funny,’ then we’ll greatly outnumber the bullies. One kid, one voice can make a difference.

~*~

One of my favorite bloggers has called it a day: Renegade Evolution, whom I have written about on this blog before.

Good luck to you, my friend. May the wind always be at your back.

~*~

TOO ADORABLE FOR WORDS! SQUEEEE! AIYEEEE! The San Diego Zoo's panda cub, Xiao Liwu, playing with his little ball during his medical exam.

If you die from cuteness, not my fault, you were warned.

~*~

Obama to urge court to overturn same-sex marriage ban in California:

Government sources say the Justice Department will by day's end articulate a legal position in the so-called Proposition 8 case, a ban by California voters over same-sex marriage that is now being challenged in the Supreme Court. At the very least, the administration will express general support for gay and lesbian couples in that state alone to wed.

That case and another appeal over the federal Defense of Marriage Act will produce blockbuster rulings from the justices in coming months.

Gay rights groups have privately urged Obama and his top aides to go beyond his previous personal rhetoric in support of the right and come down "on the side of history" in this legal fight. Those sources tell CNN that Obama has made the final decision over whether to file a brief and what to say.

As of earlier this week, there was still internal debate among White House and Justice Department staff about whether the president should take the big step and say there is a constitutional right of gay and lesbian couples to wed. The administration was also considering a compromise position -- affirming previous support for same-sex marriage, at least in California, while conceding other states may have the option to ban it.

~*~

Wikileaks whistle-blower Bradley Manning pleads guilty to 10 of the 22 charges against him:

After two months in military jail in Kuwait, Manning was moved to the US Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia, on July 29, 2010. He was held there in maximum security confinement for nearly a year, where he sat alone in a cell for 23 hours per day and was denied a pillow and sheets. An online petition at Avaaz.org received more than 500,000 signatures calling for President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to "end the torture, isolation, and public humiliation of Bradley Manning." And in February of this year a UN report from Juan Mendez, the special rapporteur on torture, concluded after receiving information from the US government about Manning's treatment that "imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity…"

~*~

I heard Toubab Krewe last night, on the namesake of this blog, the indispensable UNCLE DAVE'S DEAD AIR. Loved em! Sharing their musical genius here... apparently, they play frequently at the Orange Peel in Asheville (their hometown), and I am fervently hoping to get up there to see them in the future.

This is an acoustic set recorded live at The Festy Experience, October 2011. Their electric sets are just as impressive.

Acoustic Sessions at The Festy : Toubab Krewe



If you know the names of any of these exotic instruments, please let me know!

Campaign for Southern Equality

The "WE DO" demonstration was today in both Greenville and Asheville... and we had a pretty good-sized group for the upstate. Over a hundred folks; I am SO proud of us!

And only one lone heckler, who instructed us to read Romans Chapter 1. (I guess the rain was a mixed blessing.) There were five Greenville Occupiers in attendance.







We started at the Warehouse Theater and marched over to Greenville County Square. Six couples attempted to get marriage licenses as we quietly witnessed outside; some prayed. When the couples emerged, we applauded and cheered.

At least one couple was already married in their home state, but are not regarded as legally married here in South Carolina, where they currently reside.

It was invigorating! Hope you like my photos (at left and below) of the demonstration; the last two were taken inside the Warehouse Theater. (As always, you can click to enlarge.)

Gay, lesbian couples denied marriage licenses in Greenville
Written by Ron Barnett
Greenville News staff writer

More than 100 supporters turned out on a drizzly morning to support half a dozen gay and lesbian couples who attempted — and were denied — to apply for marriage licenses at Greenville County Square.

The event was aimed at drawing attention to South Carolina’s marriage laws, which allow only heterosexual couples to marry.

“In May of 2011 we were able to go to Washington, D.C., and get married,” Ra’Shawn Barlow-Flournoy told marriage license clerk Elizabeth Robinson. “And we just wish that we could be able to come back home to South Carolina and be able to have the same rights as everyone else.”

The event was organized by the Campaign for Southern Equality and was the fourth of nine stops at courthouses in six states. The group was headed to Asheville after leaving Greenville.

The Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, executive director of the organization, urged the group which gathered at the Warehouse Theatre on Augusta Street afterward to continue to work to change people’s minds in a nation that allows gay marriage in some states and not in others.

“It’s immoral and it’s illogical and it’s unsustainable, and it’s got to change,” she told the cheering group.

Ongoing YouTube account of the Southern Campaign here.

Please check them out on Twitter and elsewhere on the net, and lend your support. The South needs you!

~*~

The Empire Strikes Back

Graphic courtesy of the Feminist Majority Foundation blog.

Millions of poor chickens have to die en masse, all to prove that Christians hate gay marriage. I am one of the minority of folks who worries about the innocent chickens in this whole fiasco. (waves to fellow vegetarians)



As you are undoubtedly aware, the Chick Fil-A hoopla continues, as everyone in the world continues to brawl on Facebook, Twitter, Blogdonia and beyond. (The pro-gay kiss-in protest was held today, in various areas of the country.) The gay marriage debate has now reached every corner of the USA. People are being defriended right and left.

Meanwhile, the beleaguered, hard-working Christians who head up the nation's soup kitchens and homeless shelters, wonder why they can't get even one-eightieth of these Christians to assist them, when they put out their constant pleas for help.

Maybe its the food? The soup kitchen fare is no match for fried-fowl sandwiches, apparently.

Or maybe it's easier to grandstand, pose in a fast-food line for TV cameras, then eat and run. POOF, you are a devout Christian! No caring for the poor, no mopping floors, no boring bake-sales, no ladling out soup for dirty junkies who have been sleeping out in the used-car lot. No work necessary. No need to leave your comfy suburb and associate with filthy lowlifes, publicans and sinners. In fact, you do not even need to leave your air-conditioned vehicle if you decide to go to the drive-thru. Its much easier, quicker, AND you get to be on TV! All your friends will see you! You can take a photo of yourself and put it on Facebook so your parents, preacher and other buddies can see what a good Christian you are! Mike Huckabee will sing your praises on Fox News!

Serving the poor and such, as Jesus actually advised his followers to do? The Franciscans have been doing this since forever, and as we know, nobody puts them on Facebook or TV. They are boring, poorly-attired and do not understand good PR, as Dan Cathy obviously does.

Too bad we can't get these Christians to care about the poor and homeless as much as they care about hating gays. Society might actually change for the GOOD, and we certainly can't have THAT!

More on this topic tomorrow, on my radio show. I taped it today, ranted and raved, and even shouted once. (What, me worry?) It's entertaining and lots more fun than Mike Huckabee.

Tune in tomorrow!

And speaking of Mike Huckabee, what happened to his concerns about weight, wholesome foods and health? He goes from talk of healthy eating, to exhorting us all to eat fried garbage? Huh?

He used to talk about the importance of Americans eating good food, but I guess he can't now that he has his Fox News marching orders. I mean, he's under contract, you know.

Locally, here in Bob Jones University land, we actually had a PROTESTOR! More on the show tomorrow. In the meantime, eat HERE instead of nasty Chick Fil-A. (check out the show for the reasons why)

~*~

A few other links:

[] South Carolina Boy wrote about his tarot reading... I love it when people write cool stuff about me. :)

My best wishes are with him at this time, as always.

[] Private prisons spend $45 million on lobbying, rake in $5.1 billion for immigrant detention alone.

[] And finally, Harry Reid decides to go after Romney in a big way:

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid is unabashed as he makes a serious, unsubstantiated claim about Mitt Romney: that the Republican candidate for president did not pay any taxes for 10 years. That, the Nevada senator says, is why Mr. Romney will not release tax returns beyond those he has already made public, his 2010 return and an estimate for 2011.

Senator Reid, in fact, is so certain he’s doing the right thing that he repeated his charge on the floor of the Senate Thursday night, and put it out in a statement.

(giggle)

Let the games begin!

~*~

And did you all see THE DARK KNIGHT RISES yet? Did you notice the trashing of Occupy Wall Street?

I did find it very interesting that Bruce Wayne has now lost his money... do filmmakers think a rich hero is no longer sympathetic? As one of my friends also said, the tumultuous economy means we find this new plot-development totally believable, if alarming: Good Lord, even BRUCE WAYNE IS POOR NOW? Is nothing sacred?

The director, Christopher Nolan (whom I have admired ever since his wonderful movie-masterpiece MEMENTO) said in his Rolling Stone interview:

We put a lot of interesting questions in the air, but that's simply a backdrop for the story. What we're really trying to do is show the cracks of society, show the conflicts that somebody would try to wedge open. We're going to get wildly different interpretations of what the film is supporting and not supporting, but it's not doing any of those things. It's just telling a story. If you're saying, “Have you made a film that's supposed to be criticizing the Occupy Wall Street movement?” – well, obviously, that's not true.

For the record, I don't think its "obviously" not true at all... someone is trying to have his cake and eat it too.

Meanwhile, the new game Call of Duty is also taking direct aim at Occupy. And the two have something in common, it turns out. From SALON:

Reporting on the upcoming new edition of the game “Call of Duty” and the imminent release of the film “The Dark Knight Rises,” Gameranx.com reports:

The game’s main villain is Raul Menendez, described as the “idolized Messiah of the 99%” – a Julian Assange-like character who’s old, experienced, and hell bent on starting a global insurrection against the status quo…

The character, as with the rest of the story, is the creation of David S. Goyer. Goyer is the co-writer of “The Dark Knight Rises,” which also shares a similar story featuring Bane as Batman’s primary antagonist, who starts a class war aimed against the rich and privileged of Gotham City with the backing of the common man.

In 1988, a Konami executive said pop culture industries were looking to “take anything remotely in the news and make it a game.” Obviously, this move to put the headline-grabbing “99 percent” concept into video games and movies shows what that enduring strategy looks like in practice — and it doesn’t look very good.

It has also been pointed out to me that the new villain in the next James Bond movie, Skyfall, (named "Silva" and played by Javier Bardem) has whitish-blond, Julian Assange-ish hair. No kidding?

As Ryan Gilbey of the UK Guardian wrote:

One unwritten rule of the series is that 007's opponents tend to personify the perceived threats or preoccupations of the era which spawns them. We can discern from the plot titbits present in the Skyfall trailer that the security of British spies is compromised when a disc containing information about their identities is lost. So we have a potentially hazardous leak of top-secret data, presided over perhaps by this bright-haired man named Silva. As if Julian Assange hasn't got enough to worry about, he won't even be able to pop to the local multiplex in October without seeing a menacing supervillain modelled on him.

The Empire Strikes Back.

The War over Sally Ride

I was considering writing an obituary for astronaut Sally Ride, when the war over the facts of her personal life broke out.

Was she gay? Apparently so. Interestingly, one of my old friends told me his gaydar went off when he saw her interviewed on TV back in the 80s, when she first went up in space (and was still married to astronaut Steve Hawley). I have heard this "gaydar" comment several times since. I had no idea if this was true or not, so I went to Wikipedia, like I always do.

And wouldn't you know? That's where the war is.

Wikipedia does not see fit to mention that Ride had a 27-year relationship with a woman, Tam O'Shaughnessy, whom she called her partner. Glenn Greenwald tweeted his disapproval of Wikipedia's omission, and got goofy (and thoroughly bigoted) replies, such as "not sure why it matters?"

Not sure why it matters? Does the marriage of a heterosexual person matter, if one is seeking factual biographical information? I think we all agree that it does. In fact, even heterosexual AFFAIRS (not sanctified by legal marriage) are covered in Wikipedia biographies. But since being gay is considered BAD, it is widely regarded as an INSULT if you include this fact about her. Even if its accurate.

So, we have the (possibly) first gay astronaut, and most people do not know this about her. The official accounts are leaving out her grieving widow, Tam. Imagine if this was a heterosexual astronaut 'hero'--and they refused to acknowledge their widow?

Impossible to contemplate. It would simply never happen.

The GAWKER's article about this homophobic fiasco includes a series of comments left on the Wikipedia 'history' page, which would be hilarious if they didn't seek to erase 27 years of two women's lives. For example:

There's another logical gap: according to this bio, Tam O'Shaughnessy was Sally Ride's partner of 27 years, i.e. since 1985. But the article says that "in 1983 [Ride] became the first American woman, the first lesbian [...] to enter space", and it doesn't logically follow that she was a lesbian in 1983.

Do you believe this stuff? ANYTHING to avoid the facts, that the first US woman in space was a lesbian.

Last Autumn, I wrote about this phenomenon (the emphatic denial of gay sexuality in obituaries) after the death of film producer Ismail Merchant. The same hysterical, ridiculous denials surfaced at that time.

Why can't the homophobes at least ACCEPT PEOPLE IN DEATH? It's like they can't let their hatred go, even for a second. They refuse to grant any gay person respect. And if they should by chance actually admire the individual in question (as so many admired both Merchant and Ride), then they MUST deny that they were gay. Because they simply CANNOT ADMIRE a self-professed gay person.

There really is no other explanation for this behavior.

And with that, I will end with my concluding comment in my post about Ismail Merchant:

Again, we see how gay people are disappeared by the culture at large, as heterosexuality, even openly illicit heterosexuality, is heralded.

Unfortunately, it's still an accurate observation.

~*~

EDIT--Wikipedia has added the following paragraph to Ride's obit, due to popular demand: After death, her obituary revealed that Ride's partner was Tam E. O'Shaughnessy, a female professor emerita of school psychology at San Diego State University and a childhood friend who met Ride when both were aspiring tennis players. O'Shaughnessy became a science teacher and writer and, later, the chief operating officer and executive vice president of Ride's company, Sally Ride Science. She co-authored several books with Ride. The 27-year relationship was revealed by the company and confirmed by Ride's sister who also stated that Ride chose to keep her personal life private including her sickness and treatments.

More than I expected.

Occupy Human Rights - candlelight vigil

Last evening, Occupy Greenville celebrated GLBT pride month with a candlelight vigil commemorating all who have been victims of violence, intolerance and bullying. (In first photo, third from left, is Deb Morrow, 4th District candidate for US congress.) We had about 25-30 participants, including high school students from Eastside High school.

In the last photo, the group is being addressed by organizer Abigail LeCompte.

Not surprisingly, we attracted some spirited hecklers, including one rather obsessed individual who went away to fetch religious tracts and then brought them back, presenting them with a dramatic flourish--all while yelling that he would pray for all of us. (Um, okay.) At one point, the exchange became rather heated, as another person who happened to be passing by told him (not us!) to shut up and stood there and made fun of him at some length. Hey, Greenville is changing!

But of course, not fast enough for me.

Thanks to everyone who showed up. I love you all!

You can click to enlarge. More photos HERE!

Amendment One round-up

I knew the horribly homophobic and bigoted Amendment One (in North Carolina) would pass, because nothing gets the fundies stirred up like getting a chance to shit all over the gays. In fact, that and slut-shaming seem to be their favorite activities, that I can see. (Feeding the poor and all that other boring stuff Jesus instructed them to do? Not so much.)

The right-wing can fire up their base during primaries with direct-hatred opportunities like this, and win elections. This doesn't work as well in general elections.

Interestingly, the last time North Carolina amended their constitution on marriage (in 1875), it was to outlaw interracial marriages. The fundies have never apologized for that one, either. (I am sure a majority of fundamentalists still quietly agree with that position, but they have learned it isn't polite to say it out loud.)

And now, featuring some very good writing on the whole Amendment One debacle, starting off with DEAD AIR's big winner for the best case to be made for (now-defeated) Amendment One:

One Trial Lawyer’s Final Argument to the Amendment One Jury (NC Amendment One Truth)

BREAKING: Marriage-banning Amendment One Passes in North Carolina (Queerty)

North Carolina (Box Turtle Bulletin)

The Anti-Gay Religious Freedom Contradiction (Waking Up Now)

Maggie [Gallagher]: Why Focus on Same-Sex Marriage Rather than Divorce? (Waking Up Now)

In North Carolina after Amendment One, ‘Let the wild rumpus start' (Washington Post blogs)

Amendment One Passes: North Carolina State University Launches Petition Calling For Appeal (Huffington Post)

North Carolina and Amendment One (Whatever)

John Scalzi of Whatever (last link) is especially eloquent and worth quoting:

Five years from now the majority of Americans will support same-sex marriage; ten years from now the large majority will. But ten years from now it will still be against the Constitution of North Carolina for same sex couples to get married (and Ohio’s, too). I’d like to be wrong, but I doubt I will be. It’s harder to repeal a constitutional amendment than a law. The bigots know this. This is why the bigots do what they do.

It sucks for gays and lesbians that in places like North Carolina, and Ohio, and even California, all that can done at the moment is to assure those of them who would like to marry those they love is to tell them that it will get better. I shouldn’t have to get better. It should be better. But you work with what you have in the real world, and in the real world, what gays and lesbians in places like North Carolina and Ohio and even California have is the future. Let’s get working toward it.

We will be discussing evil Amendment One (and the fascist fundie response to it) at length on my radio show on WFIS, Saturday morning at 9am. (see link to podcasts on right)

Stay tuned, sports fans.


~*~

Photo at top is from Strollerderby.

Goodbye lovely Meredith!

Today I helped still another cool person move away from the upstate. :(

I have written before of how we lose all the cool people to places like Oregon, California, even Asheville. I am hopeful that someday, progressive, forward-thinking folks might make this area a real destination, rather than a pit stop.

I helped my Occupier-friend move back to California, and in turn, she blessed me with a bunch of amazingly wonderful old stuff she could not find room to pack: a Tibetan prayer wheel, several tarot decks (including the fabulous Haindl Tarot, Day of the Dead and Goddess Tarot), various sacred and voodoo oils, candles, linens, a sweater and jacket, a clay sculpture of Ariadne, a small brass Buddha, assorted office supplies and unused photo albums, an antique teddy bear and so much more.

It's been like Christmas for hippies.

I still wish she would stay. Greenville needs more enlightened souls who will hang around awhile. I have decided that building our Occupy Greenville chapter is one way to ensure this. We had a picnic on Saturday, and I was reminded of what wonderful folks we are lucky to have, and how tight-knit our group has become as a result.

Unfortunately, evil, bigoted, homophobic laws like the one currently being voted on in North Carolina today (denying equal marriage rights to gay couples) are one reason the cool people leave, as I have complained in this space so many times. The oppressive and backward presence of Bob Jones University, is still another. We have to keep fighting the repression, fighting the people who would take us backwards and spread damaging ignorance.

In the meantime, we do have a solid collective, and that is something to celebrate.

And to my dearest Meredith: Vaya Con Dios. We shall meet again.

Happy Coming Out Day!

Hey friends and neighbors! So much is going on, I hardly know where to begin. I am virtually breathless with excitement. I am also still unemployed, and we are nearing the finish line with those nice unemployment checks. I NEED A JOB, so send me an email if you are rich and need someone to: buff your floors, make your coffee, design a blog for you (I've done it three times now!), pick apples and green beans, walk your dogs, transcribe indecipherable medical blather, sell your health supplements, answer phones from irate people, talk on the radio about politics, and/or drive your bus fulla ill-mannered day-care brats. These are a few of the things I have done, but if I think a bit, can probably come up with a few more. Jack of all trades, etc.

I miss video stores... I rather enjoyed working at those. I worked for a local chain, so I got sent all over the upstate. Some of the video stores were in middle-class neighborhoods, but some were NOT; it was unpredictable and fun. It was a lot like the movie Clerks. This was the 90s, so when one of my movie-geek co-workers gave me copies of (much sought-after) PEEPING TOM and SHOCK CORRIDOR, I was thrilled beyond telling. No DVDs-with-extras in those days! I felt like I'd joined the ranks of the esoteric movie-fans, owning real-live collectables.

~*~

Happy Coming Out Day everyone!

Speaking of movies, I assume that anyone who has read my star-struck babbling about Elizabeth Taylor, Christina Hendricks and others, knows this about me already. But just in case I have to spell it out and COME OUT to my readers as bisexual: Yes, I am. Although frankly, I find that admission a bit foolish.

I am a boring old married woman, in a faithful and monogamous marriage, preparing to celebrate my 24th legal wedding anniversary to a man. Thus, it seems largely irrelevant to me. But of course, it is not... it is the whole reason I am so gung-ho on gay rights. If I had by chance fallen in love with the wrong person of the wrong gender, this anniversary would not be celebrated by some of the same people who now congratulate us. I can't quite forget that. I have privileges, I can pass, and it is my responsibility to use these privileges to help bring equality to others.

I would like everyone to have the right to be married for 24 years.

~*~

Some other interesting stuff for your perusal:

Jenni (whose blog I have just linked here at DEAD AIR) is an ex-fundamentalist Christian who wrote a heartfelt and honest coming-out letter to friends and family, many of whom are still fundamentalist. This made for a fascinating post on John Shore's blog: A Christian’s Coming Out Letter–And Some Responses To It. Recommended reading!

~*~

I have been participating on the blog No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz? (NSWATM) Aside: As I have asked before, who decided on this odd spelling of "teh" and why are we being forced to use it?

The discussions at NSWATM are highly critical of Second Wave feminism, but they are interesting. I have to restrain myself from giggling when certain participants start whining about how White Middle Class Educated Hetero Cis Men have been made to Feel Bad (aw), and I have discovered the wisest decision is simply to not comment when my giggling starts... giggling is by far, the best barometer I have that commenting is NOT SAFE... that was the mistake I made over at the Manblog That Will Not Be Named (MTWNBN).

The very gifted anti-feminist troll, Typhon Blue (mentioned rather unkindly here and here) has established a beachhead at NSWATM, so grab your popcorn. The show is just starting! TB is doing "her" usual reactionary schtick, forcefully attacking feminists and then standing back as the chivalrous anti-feminist men (who comically claim chivalry oppresses men, of course!) gallantly come to her aid. The question is whether this new exercise in melodrama will successfully get anyone banned, as she got ME banned at MTWNBN. So far, the management of NSWATM isn't swooning over her mommy-defends-the-beleaguered-boys routine, but she is just so deft at the concern trolling. The anti-feminist fellas just loooove her.

Remember the first time you explained to some guy that porn was staged and not real? I daresay, the guys at both NSWATM and MTWNBN will have that same crestfallen look when they discover that Typhon Blue is some 50-year-old farmer from Iowa, or whatever it is. (giggles)

As for me, I have made a point of not replying to her, so I hope that keeps her off me. I don't think I have much to worry about, since she has bigger fish to fry. There are lots of other feminists there for her to place in her cross-hairs and harass, all while playing innocent and complaining that she is triggered.

Honest confession: Damn, I wish I knew how to do that stuff. Those halos NEVER stayed on my head, even when I was a kid! ;)

Everyone's gone to the movies

The futuristic movie SURROGATES (2009) unexpectedly blew my mind... a culture in which affluent humans prefer to stay ensconced in their homes, behind closed doors, directing their (good-looking, able-bodied, young) android-selves (through which they see, smell, hear, taste reality as experienced by the android) was not as far removed from everyday experience as I thought it would be. I mean, I am typing on this contraption that people now use like a 'surrogate'--right? Various events are already not regarded as "real" to people unless they've seen them on TV, and it is through a similar smallish screen that people in SURROGATES engage their world. The people who don't, are either too weird or too poor, and are therefore dubbed "meatbags" for not getting with the surrogates-program.

Scificool.com gave the movie a mostly-negative review:

It is the future, and lifelike robotic surrogates have become commonplace. In fact, they’re so commonplace that only a small portion of the population don’t use them, and these “dregs” of society have cut themselves off from the rest of the world to live in inner city reservations. They are led by The Prophet (Ving Rhames), a mysterious, homeless-looking fella who preaches revolution against the machines. The story proper begins when two surrogates are destroyed, resulting in the death of their human hosts – impossibility, we’re told by the creators of the machines.

This is, in fact, the first-ever recorded murder of a human while “jacked in”. In a world where crime is no longer a viable human endeavor, and murder is practically non-existent thanks to the presence of surrogates, the FBI, led by Greer (Willis) and Peters (Radha Mitchell) are understandably shocked. But as Greer and Peters chases the killer, they begin to realize that a larger conspiracy is at work.

But it wasn't the plot that bothered me, it was the underlying IDEAS the plot was based on. The kids at Scificool are already shrugging, but *I* was disoriented by the basic premise.

It was disturbing. I assume that's why it went straight to DVD ... nobody will pay money to go to a theater (their surrogate might) to ponder at length how seriously messed-up we are.

Because, you know, if there were surrogates, it would be just like the movie... that is the truly disturbing, disorienting thing. The perfection of the androids (like the perfection of movie stars) is intimidating, and the meatbags are at a clear disadvantage. A world of beautiful, fit androids means that more people would opt to live this way... in so many ways, we are herd animals. What if the herd stayed home en masse and sent androids out to work? Lots of people have said (when I have described the movie to them) they'd love the option of sending the android to work for them. But would that persona take over your life, becoming the only acceptable facade you can present to the world?

Mr Daisy has met the authors of the graphic novel, Robert Venditti and Brett Weldele, who say they weren't inspired by Philip K Dick or JG Ballard, but were most assuredly inspired by William Gibson. Bruce Willis doesn't mind going back and forth in his role; in the first half he looks like a movie star, blond hair, about 32 years old... then he abandons the surrogate for his true meatbag self, and he is bald, obviously aging, and banged up in a fight with scars on his face for the rest of the movie. The juxtaposition between him and the beautiful androids is striking. (I found Radha Mitchell largely unrecognizable, so she made an excellent android.)

The ideas in this movie gave me nightmares and continue to do so.

~*~

During the last couple of Thursdays, I huddled up with my bowl of popcorn to watch a night of fabulous Merchant/Ivory films on Turner Classic Movies... but wait. What?

Ask yourself, if a married couple made a slew of amazing, fantastic, Oscar-winning movies, do you think they might mention that? They mention Tracy and Hepburn, who were not even legally married. They mention Bogart and Bacall. They mention Judy Garland and Vincent Minelli. And these are only off the top of my head.

Ismail Merchant and James Ivory were partners. You know, PARTNERS? THOSE KIND of partners?

I recently got the smackdown on another blog for fulminating about this after the recent death of Ismail Merchant; I was self-righteously informed in short order that Merchant, in particular, was a "private man" and IF he was gay, it's nobody's business.

Really? And who decided that? Why is it nobody's business? Bullshit, of course it is. When Spencer Tracy protested that he and Katharine Hepburn's affair was nobody's business, did anybody listen? (Tracy was already married and as a Catholic, would not get a divorce; their decades-long affair was always technically an "adulterous" affair.) Why are we suddenly being polite and respectful when some celebrity tells us something is not our business? Since when?

I think some people don't WANT to know.

The fact that these great movies were made by loving partners, is a major reason why they are so wonderful. It is clear that the director and producer had a unified vision, and worked in harmony to bring it to the audience. Just as people enjoyed the witty repartee of Tracy/Hepburn or the sexual electricity of Taylor/Burton or Newman/Woodward... these couples crackled onscreen and made audiences curious about their private lives. Movie magazines delivered all the goods. They were not allowed to declare their private lives off limits, try as they might.

It was the stunning beauty of these films, that we now call "Merchant-Ivory" (a trusted brand name, a sign of high quality) that first made me curious also. How could these men, from such different backgrounds, make such identifiable, signature films, with such a definable point of view? When I discovered they were life-partners, I was not surprised. In fact, it explains so much about their work.

But alas, nobody will mention their domestic partnership when introducing their work on classic movie networks. They are officially "artistic collaborators" only.

Again, we see how gay people are disappeared by the culture at large, as heterosexuality, even openly illicit heterosexuality, is heralded.

~*~

NOTE: Today's blog post title is of course from STEELY DAN. I'd add the song itself, but I could only find a demo version, an outtake version and a 90s live version... arrrgh, if I can't have the exact version I first heard on KATY LIED, I won't print any of them. (musical snobbery)

But the one I linked is the closest.