Something incredibly unusual happened in the UK on Monday night. The seldom watched BBC 3 channel broke the mold and drew a transfixed audience. And the reason for it was a truly remarkable one too!

No, it wasn’t some new lame reality show. There were no celebrities on a panel humiliating passing victims. It wasn’t some new game show with ridiculously fake people trying to “outsmart” each other for a prize.

It was actually a documentary.

Before you start snoring at the mere reading of the word documentary, this was an important moment for the UK. In recent years there has bee a fair bit of discussion about football (soccer) here, and how corrupt it might be, how racist it might be, how violent it often is, and so on. But something that rarely sees a word of discussion is how homophobic our national sport is.

There is no doubt that racism is not acceptable in football. Great steps have been made in recent years to stamp it out, with racist chants resulting in fines for the clubs responsible, players banned and publicly humiliated when found guilty of racist slurs on the pitch, and new rules being drawn up to weed out those kinds of poisonous attitudes from the fans and players.

But something that has not been confronted is homophobia.

In the last year we’ve seen Sepp Blatter – the head of FIFA – laughing openly about the issue of gay rights and the safety of gay football fans when visiting violently homophobic nations. It wasn’t just him either, the entire room joined in laughing, a room full of sports media from around the world. It seemed that they were incredulous that there could be any gay football fans. And even if there were, their Human rights and safety were not the concern of FIFA.

So, what happened on BBC 3 on Monday? They screened Britain’s Gay Footballers, a documentary created and presented by the (beautiful) Amal Fashanu – daughter of John Fashanu – asking why there were no openly gay footballers in the national game.

For those who might not be aware, Amal Fashanu is the niece of the tragic Justin Fashanu, the only openly gay footballer to ever come out in the UK, and who subsequently took his own life in 1998 after the decline of his career and repeated revelations and accusations about his private life.

His brother, John Fashanu – also a footballer but far less skilled – had abandoned him. His entire family had seemingly disowned the young man, and so when he found himself in a position that he couldn’t tolerate any longer, he found that the only way out was to end his life.

It was a remarkable documentary, and it increased the viewing figures for the seldom-watched channel by 50%. Twitter was abuzz with discussion about the show, with the vast majority of all comments seeming to be supportive and positive toward the issue, and highly critical of the sporting bodies responsible for maintaining the status quo, and critical of John Fashanu himself.

Although the marked absence of openly gay football players is in itself quite worrying, there were two things specifically about the documentary which unsettled me.

Firstly, young Amal Fashanu faced a wall of almost complete silence from clubs, managers and players across the UK. It seemed that no professional player was willing to come forward and discuss homophobia or gay players. Even when in a room full of professional footballers she was met with silence, childish giggles or complete arrogance. It really seemed as though a message had gone out from some sort of mafia Don that no one should speak to her. Or else they may find a horses head in their locker!

The second thing that struck me was the interview with her father, John Fashanu, about his dead gay brother. You know what he said? He called his brother selfish, for “embarrassing” and “shaming” his family. Even after his brothers suicide (with a note stating how totally alone he felt) John Fashanu has no shame in sticking to his tried and trusted line of labeling his brother an embarrassment.

After a gut-wrenching and tear inducing film, there were a couple of shining moments that offered some hope. Joey Barton – professional UK footballer – was confident enough to come forward for an interview and was a shining example of common sense and tolerance. He even went as far as suggesting that there would be an openly gay professional football player in the UK within the next ten years.

Gareth Thomas, openly gay Welsh Rugby player, also spoke on camera – with a number of his straight teammates alongside him. Making the contrast between the two sports quite remarkable. As Gareth says, the Rugby union released a statement after Gareth came out expressing complete support for him. His teammates made statements to the same effect at every opportunity too. People who know him and work with him were lining up to say how much they love the guy and that they support him in his brave decision.

Hold that up against giggling immaturity and ignorance of Sepp Blatter, a silent majority of homophobes in the management of the sport, the ignorance and astounding bigotry of the many players in football who couldn’t find the balls to speak on camera, and the fact that the only openly gay footballer in the British history is dead while his brother still thinks he was an embarrassment… it all becomes quite clear doesn’t it?

I wish I believed that we’d see another openly gay footballer in the UK in the next ten years. But I very much doubt it.

ABC recently debuted a show called “Work It” about two straight guys that are trying to land a job in a recession. They have been on unemployment for a year now and are desperate for a job. They figure out that they could dress up in drag and get a job known normally just for females in the pharmaceutical sales industry. Having worked in sales and applied for several drug companies I do know that you need to be a gorgeous women for this task or a sales person that is highly charismatic.

GLAAD wasted a full page ad on going up against this show. It got canceled today but after watching it online it looked like it certainly would not harm a transgender person. I think there are things that GLAAD should be going after such as Santorum or Romney instead of a sitcom that the gays would enjoy.

One face-book comment on the issue said “It makes your organization look about as uptight as Elton John losing out to Madonna last night. Was your organization offended when George Washington wore a wig? I mean what kind of uptight organization are you?” We also saw some comments against GLAAD for taking this action against ABC and ‘Work It’ saying “Who will they go after next.. Tootsie?”. Seriously, they might go after Britney for lip synching at her shows or yes even Tootsie. Watch out GLAAD is like the new team of elites that will stop at anything and judge.

‘Betty White’s Off Their Rockers’ would be offensive to a senior citizens rights groups if GLAAD was in charge of it. It really was more offensive to elderly and used more stereotypes than ‘Work It’.

Work It proved to show it is not easy to dress up in drag. It showed the main characters going to get help putting on make-up after he tried once and looked like a clown. It then showed toilet paper coming out of his dress while dancing.

It is a shame that this show got canceled before it really had a chance to take off thanks to GLAAD and the HRC throwing a fit and placing ads against the show. It may have also been due to low ratings for the the new ABC Sitcom but it would have aired more than twice.

This brings me to think that the HRC and GLAAD have really disappointed in the last year. HRC going after Chick-fil-a and GLAAD spending all this money against a show that really was not all that offensive. There are bigger fishes to fry or goals these organizations that run off of our donations should be going after such as the presidential candidates or HIV stigma. They might could have worked with the ABC show to make sure it was more understanding of transgendered people.
Read more »

I saw something truly fascinating yesterday, and although it is an emotive discussion, it actually raised questions for me that it seems a lot of others hadn’t really considered. I’ll warn you now, this post might not be easy to read!

So a few weeks ago I brought up the Occupy movement and how it seems that a new wave of civil protest is braking out. This of course started on September 17th (my birthday, coincidentally!) and since then we’ve seen some remarkable events.

Primarily, we’ve seen enormous protests in solidarity all over the world. There have been messages of support back and forth between England, Australia, USA, Spain, Egypt, France, Ireland, Japan and hundreds of capital cities in countries all over the planet. Occupations have arisen in all corners, with hundreds of thousands of people calling for everything from gay rights to the end of banker bonuses. Students are demanding a fair education, mothers are demanding  adequate health care, unions are calling for fair workers rights…

But along with the amazing outpouring of a demand for justice, there have also been some impressive shows of force by those in positions of power. Notably, in the USA, the right to freedom of assembly has been under attack, with some cities allocating time slots for citizens to express themselves, some forcibly evicting protesters and – in the case of Oakland California – brutally crushing the right to protest with the use of weaponry.

That brings me to the crux of this post.

We saw a couple of Marines join the Wall Street protests after the girls were attacked by the NYPD, and they vowed to defend their fellow Americans against the violence. This was, without a doubt, a very noble and moral thing to do.

But, on Tuesday 25th October, we saw things go wonky in Oakland. The Oakland PD (in conjunction with other law enforcement departments from neighboring areas) arrived to enforce an eviction demand enacted by Mayor Jean Quan. Ironically, she came to fame for being an active member of the rights movements previously and was seen as an advocate of Liberal policies. Unfortunately, it seems that the old line of power being a corrupting force has been proven in her case.

When protesters arrived in the evening to reclaim their rightful place in the heart of the city, they were met with brute force. Officers fired tear gas, rubber bullets and “flash bang” grenades at protesters (Oakland Police have denied this, despite these weapons being filmed in use). There are reports that an LRAD weapon (sound cannon) was on scene and ready to be deployed. This is a military grade weapon, illegal for use against American citizens.

In the proceeding violence a young man fell to the ground. His name is Scott Olsen. Other occupiers quickly arrived to assist him – then a grenade was thrown by an officer directly into the crowd, exploding inches from Scott’s head. Police ignored calls for medical assistance from the crowd, and his fellow protesters carried him to safety. Scott was found to have a skull fracture and ended up in a medically induced coma.

While he is now stable and awake, his memory is reportedly impeded and his speech is slurred. There are fears that he may have suffered permanent brain damage.

The following day it became apparent that Scott Olsen is a veteran. He served two tours in Iraq for his country. Yes, the 24 year old served for his country twice in a war zone, came home safely, and was almost killed by the Police of California.

When this came to light, US marine Jay C Gentile posted the following pic -

Almost immediately hundreds of other veterans and serving military joined in with their condemnation, demanding several things including comment from President Obama, the resignations of Mayor Quan and her senior police officers, and calling for larger protests against those restricting the freedom of assembly in every city in America.

But – and this is the hard part – what if Scott hadn’t been a veteran?

I’m all for the sudden outpouring of support and solidarity with the brotherhood, but would we be seeing the same thing if the person who is now in a hospital bed recovering from a critical injury were gay, or black, or a student, or unemployed… Would the military actually care if it was “just another regular American”?

I know, it’s a hard thought to have. These people are noble for standing up now, but where were they all when they were watching those girls being maced by the NYPD? Why did that event only illicit a response from a handful of military men when this has gained hundreds of serving and veteran marines? Where were all these heroes during other violent crackdowns on protest in America? Scott is not the first, and he certainly won’t be the last.

Ultimately, it’s a great thing that they have stepped up and vowed to defend their fellow citizens against the brutality of numerous out of control Police establishments and local authorities in America. We all know that things are getting dangerous, and as the violence is stepped up by those in blue, the people will need the boys in camo to defend them. In the last couple of weeks we’ve seen groups being announced including OccupyTeachers, OccupyPolice and OccupyTheBoardRoom – but most importantly, OccupyMarines.

Hundreds of serving and veteran Marines are now signing up to Occupy alongside their fellow Americans. It’s just a shame that it took the attempted murder of a fellow Marine to get them moving to defend their people on home soil.

Susan Sarandon At Occupy Wall Street

If you blinked, you might have missed it on your nightly news, but that’s probably because all major news broadcasters are suspiciously quiet about it.

There’s something going on in Wall Street, and this time it isn’t another too-big-to-fail being given your tax money, or the markets on a slump because of the likelihood of Greece collapsing.

Firstly, I’ll give you a little background info…

On the 17th September, Anonymous (the infamous Internet group responsible for publicly trolling Scientology, taking down several sites in defense of Wikileaks and defacing all of the Syrian government websites – among other things) planned to invade wall street and start their own popular uprising against corporate greed and influence on government. They were ambitions, stating 20k people might be there. Of course, these things don’t quite start like that. So instead there was a gathering of maybe 50 people. This soon turned into a couple of thousand when they marched on Wall Street itself from their base at Liberty Plaza.

I picked up the story on sept 24th when a friend – knowing how I love a good cause to get behind – sent me a link to a video of a group of female protesters being sprayed with MACE at point-blank range by LAPD Officer Tony Bologne (yes, that is his real name!)

Suddenly, word was spreading. Their peaceful protest and uneventful marches were suddenly out there saturating the Internet. The Information Superhighway was seething with anger at the blatant abuse of freedom and rights, resulting in many thousands more joining the cause.

The numbers of those camped out in Liberty Plaza has grown, with supplies and donations from people all around the world who want to see the corporate interests pushed out of government. Similar protests are now being organized for cities all across America, and the world.

Why is this important to us, the gay community?

Apart from us being a part of the wider community that all of this affects, the Occupy Wall Street protesters have gone to great lengths to be inclusive of the LGBT community, often bringing it up in discussion in their videos and live broadcasts, inviting people to come and take part, no matter what your race, religion, sexual orientation or political leaning. On Tuesday the 27th, Michael Moore appeared to show his support and speak to the protesters. I know, sometimes he can be a right pain in the butt, right? But he again brought up the fact that America was changing, and that now over 50% of Americans believe that gay marriage should be legal and recognized. This brought cheers from the crowd around him.

Ultimately, this is everyones fight. This isn’t about whether you support Obama or not. This isn’t about whether you believe in capitalism or not. It’s about whether you are happy to sit back and watch as the corporations control your government. It’s about stopping the 1% who control 90% of the wealth. It’s about making it clear to your government that your rights matter, and that corporations do not have the right to be your rulers by paying off your elected.

Some of us remember the struggle of the LGBT community, and without those brave people we would not have the freedom we now have. Plenty of us are educated enough to know of the struggles other communities have faced to rectify society.

All of those events involved just a section of society, this fight involves all of us.

Dancing With the Stars is making its awaited return, following in the footsteps of some other shows in a similar vein and becoming a little more risky too.

It should be said here that I don’t watch these shows. There’s something about them that unsettles me. It seems as if media is forever being watered-down, designed for the brain-dead. And I have to say that I view all of these shows in a similar way. I know, I know, I’m being too judgmental, but I can’t help it. I feel as though I should say that some of my closest friends watch these shows! :)

But I was interested to see the news that Chaz Bono is to appear in the new season of Dancing With the Stars, and – I believe – not for the reasons that you might expect either!

While commentators in the equality movement are praising it as a great move by the producers, and while I’m sure many in the transgender community are celebrating some recognition in mainstream media, is anyone stopping to think about why this is being done and what the ultimate results could be?

Chaz himself has stated that he believes it’s a good opportunity to show the world that transgender people are normal, everyday, fun and interesting people. And while I agree that these messages need to be made clear throughout media, I have to question if this is the right format for it or if the hearts and minds of all those involved are in the right place.

In 2004 the UK saw transgender reality TV star Nadia Almada successfully win the Big Brother show, going on to appear in the US version a year later. While she was an incredible hit in the UK, with viewers loving her witty and honest attitude to life, the press were initially far from favorable. In fact, many only came around to acknowledging her a valid competitor when they realized they were loosing track of public sentiment.

Some of the trash they printed about her was pretty horrific, with those opposed to anything LGBT-related in vociferous uproar at every opportunity. And I hate to have to point this out, but America is certainly behind the UK when it comes to the acceptance of gender diversity.

As if the addition of Chaz into the show was not enough, they’re also inviting fashion guru Carson Kressley to take part too. Can the religious right survive such a thing without their heads simultaneously exploding all over the country?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting for one minute that this should be reconsidered or abandoned, I’m just suggesting that perhaps people still have a rose-tinted view of the media that we feed off of. This is not a move by a studio to be “inclusive” and support the sexuality and gender equality movement. This is a studio knowing that they have to create more drama to compete with other shows who do it better. And if we admit for just a second that this could indeed be the case, what lengths would they go to during the show to create more drama and secure those ratings?

It’s all about mixing high-drama in there, and people are used as props to do it. They know very well that masses of wordage will be espoused through every media outlet discussing the “abhorrent” and “influential” effect such a show might be having on the youth of today, and they’ll use that to boost their ratings.

But, there is the other side of the coin too. Perhaps this could be used as intended and real progress actually be made? Maybe Chaz knows very well what the motives are and intends to carry himself with such charm and poise as to completely disarm the cretins I believe have some interesting twists planned?

I guess we won’t know until we see the story unfolding…

It should seem obvious, the European Court Of Human Rights (ECHR) is founded on the principal of supporting equality and freedom for all, regardless of race, religion, sexuality…

Of course, those who are staunchly “Godly” see it in a completely different light, with many maintaining their intolerance and bigotry in the face of what their religion supposedly teaches.

While on the one hand there are token expressions of peace, love and tolerance (which is what religion is SUPPOSED to be about) many neglect this aspect entirely. They don’t seem to recognize their own hypocrisy; they claim to wish to maintain the status quo, the “true” word of their God, while selecting the right quotes and passages from a wide array and neglecting the very fundamental message.
They also call this the word of God while neglecting the fact those words have been altered, translated, rewritten and distorted numerous times to suit those in positions of authority, or those who wish to gain authority over followers.

None of this is new, of course. But the fight being taken to the ECHR, with renewed support from the Alliance Defense Fund, could see a long fight ahead.

It begins with four cases taken to the ECHR by British individuals who claim that they have been discriminated against through their requirement to serve gay people.
These people presumably believe that gay people are not equal to them. They believe that they are somehow superior. And they wish to challenge a law affecting millions of people because they feel “uncomfortable”.

Lets be clear here, the employment rights of one should not take priority over the fundamental Human Rights of another. Basically, I believe that the rights of religious people to refuse to work with gay people on religious grounds does not take priority over the rights of those gay people to be treated equally.

So why is the Alliance Defense Fund – A right-wing American consortium – becoming involved in the battle? The last time I checked, America was not a European nation. So, it might be fair to ask why a right-wing religious group from Arizona is meddling in the rights of others thousands of miles away. It would be like the English Defense League (widely viewed as a racist, homophobic and highly bigoted far-right group in the UK) deciding to become involved in the US legal system in an attempt to revoke the right to vote from non-white racial groups. Would that be accepted?

So, here’s my take on it all, and it might not be what you expect…

Let them have their way. GIve those four people what they want in respect of refusing to serve gay people. Don’t provide them with any financial gain, but allow them to work without having to meet the legal requirements of their employers. Let them change their working hours so they can avoid a legal requirement, but do not allow their employers to breach equality laws.

Why do I say this? Because those who refuse to bend to social changes become quickly irrelevant. The more they cry and stamp their feet, and the more they demand that the world remain in the dark ages to suit their views, the quicker they will become defunct.
Numbers attending religious services are collapsing, with churches closing every week. Those willing to embrace the modern world will succeed, and those who maintain their bigotry and hateful ways will become extinct.

They are out of touch with the rest of society. They’re like the despot refusing to accept that his power is gone even as the rebels beat at his door. They are the stubborn people who would rather drive into a lake than admit they read the map wrong.

There are thousands of others out there who have managed to reconcile their religious conviction with serving the gay community, and they will grow and grow with support throughout society. Those who want to spend their days screaming about what they think is right and wrong about other people loving each other will become increasingly less relevant to society.

Ultimately, we have already won. All we have to do is sit back and watch them embarrassing themselves and wasting their lives feeling hatred for others. We should pity them, not hate them in return.

I am of course talking about the wave of violence which recently shook Britain – and Philadelphia. Why is that relevant to us? There are plenty out there casting blame and offering excuses, stating disaffection and brutality, racism and injustice. Where were we when we were facing similar? Our very lifestyles were illegal at one time, and yet I don’t recall gangs of queers attacking shops and stealing HD TV’s! Did we miss our chance to do what we liked while blaming everyone else but ourselves? No, it’s not simply about a group of society being routinely under attack from outside forces or being denied a fair existence. That’s far too simple an excuse.

It all began on Thursday 4th August in an anti-gun operation in London, when 29 year old Mark Duggan was shot and killed by Police. It was understood at that time that an exchange of fire had occurred and that the Police had to act. Cases like this are automatically referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Unfortunately, neither the Metropolitan Police nor the IPCC bothered to discuss anything the with the family of the deceased. They were left to deal with their grief without knowing what had happened, and without any assurance that it would be thoroughly investigated. At the very least, as a mark or respect and reassurance, they should have been consulted about the death of Mark Duggan.

On Saturday, anger had increased at the lack of information or even basic respect for the family, a vigil was held in Tottenham outside the local Police station. This then became violent.

Cars were set alight, Police came under attack and the London Fire Service had been called to attend numerous fires in the area as Police struggled to maintain control.

That’s how it started. Like numerous other public disturbances all around the world, an injustice is perceived, and those in positions of authority are deemed to be the enemy.

However, there are a few things that quickly became clear; Mr Mark Duggan had possession of a firearm. Whether he fired it or not is irrelevant prior to the investigation. Police are required to take adequate action to defend themselves and protect others against an armed individual. While the circumstances of the incident do have to be clarified, he was carrying a loaded weapon in a country where such weapons are illegal and deadly force can be used to stop them. In addition, the Duggan family understood that what was happening was not in response to the death of Mark. They were immediately condemning the massive destruction around them and making it clear that it was not related to his death.

We also have to look at what happened next, after the initial protest turned violent in Tottenham. While the buildings burned and over 20 local people were forced to flee from their homes as they watched their possessions go up in flames, the looting started. Kids and young adults attacked their own local businesses. It was no longer about an injustice, it was now about selfish greed and a complete lack of respect for any other Human.

Personally, I think the Police made a fatal error on this night (and subsequent nights). They stood back and watched the community be torn apart by gangs of roaming young thugs who value Nike footwear more than Human life. It was clear from everyone in the country that they should have been acting to prevent it from spreading. But, fearful of making things worse and turning it back into a race issue, they stood back and allowed it to happen.

This spread the message across the country that the Police were unable or unwilling to act, and it showed gangs of kids that they have strength in numbers. We have seen governments fall through the sheer swell of Human will, and we know that when the people of a nation come together they can outnumber and outmanoeuvre any authority.

In this case, however, it wasn’t about an unjust government, or even an unfair social system. It was about sheer greed and consumerism, arrogance and selfish attitude, violence and the glorification of criminality.

What many do not know about the Riots in the UK is that it didn’t just happen in London, Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool and Manchester. It happened everywhere. Numerous smaller towns and cities saw flash looting as kids in all areas decided that they could get away with it too. It might have been on a smaller scale, but it was happening all over the country.

Now we have the inevitable mess afterwards, where pundits and talking heads all vie for their camera time and people who elected themselves as “spokespeople” for communities try to excuse the actions of their young thugs. We’re hearing people talk about lack of opportunity, disaffection, government cuts and racism, all offering some kind of explanation other than “they’re just criminal thugs”.

I’m very liberal, I believe that people should be able to do as they wish as long as they don’t harm others. But I do not subscribe to the idea that we need to look further than their immediate families and friends to understand why this happened. Their exposure to Police and government is not as consistent as their exposure to their family, friends and environment. If we want to place blame anywhere, it should be placed at the feet of the single mother who gets wasted every weekend and leaves her kids with others, or the parents who don’t bother to ask where their 16 year old is a midnight, the absent father and the mother who can’t be bothered to sit with their kids to help them with their homework, or the family who places value on material gain while not offering their kids any tools to improve their lives and actually achieve something.

We only need to look at the words and responses of the parents of these kids as they rush from the courts after standing before a judge. They yell abuse at the press, they feel like the victims, they demand respect while refusing to offer it back. These are the people who are raising these kids, and once you see how their parents act, it’s no surprise that these kids have become the animals they now are.

However, although I do not often subscribe the theory of media influence (I didn’t when it was Manson blamed for Columbine, for example), I do accept that much of the culture we are looking at reinforces the “I DEMAND!” attitude. It’s like a perfect storm, we have a youth across the country who have very low moral values through pathetic parental example, while they have music surrounding them telling them that if they can’t afford something they should take it through any means. They’re told that they deserve things, and that they don’t have to work like the rest of us to get them. They’re bombarded with advertising and media placing value on status and property. They’re encouraged to believe that they live in a survivalist society where anything is justified as long as they get what they want – not what they need.

So, what do we do now? As the businesses rebuild and the lives lost remembered and mourned, as people gather together to help those who have lost their homes, we need to do several things to fix this society, and none of them involve providing excuses to mindless thugs who DO know better and chose to follow their culturally induced greed instead…

We need the Police to act with reasonable force in the right circumstances. It’s not hard. We saw them charge at protesters in London at the student protests, and that was without mass destruction, looting and fire-bombing. During the first night they should have used force to stop it, and if it continued the following night baton rounds and tear gas should have been used. Because they didn’t act, it emboldened kids up and down the country to do the same.

We can all recognize the difference between a political protest and a violent riot. Why was it that students and those protesting events such as the G20 are treated to such overwhelming Police control, and yet violent looters destroying businesses and homes with no political opinion at all are allowed to continue? There is something deeply suspicious about this. Are we to believe that the Police were too scared to act? All of a sudden? I don’t think so. This needs to be clarified for the future, with specific events and actions leading to an immediate escalation of Police response. For example, if more than ten people are involved and a business is looted, the officers are then given authority to use baton rounds.

We need to name and shame those families who have done such a thoroughly disgusting job of raising their kids. I was born in North London, we were a poor family with two working parents, and we would never have even remotely considered behaving like this. We weren’t raised to value material gain above moral decency. But even if that were not the case, we would have been too ashamed to disappoint our parents! We’ve lost the social responsibility that is encouraged by shame. If people were antisocial back when I was a child, people knew about it. Parents didn’t want to be the outcasts in their society because of the actions of their kids, and that helped to keep them in line. Parents are no longer scared of being seen as failures, because their identities are often protected from the press. They should not be protected, they should be publicly humiliated.

We need to send those responsible for violence and destruction to prison, for reasonable sentences. We need those who are too young or those found to have taken part in a minor way to face community service, visible to all those they hurt and visible to all those kids out there who think they have a right to act in this way and without consequences.

And, perhaps as a concession to all those extreme liberal “hug a hoodie” people out there who would like to blame society, the Police, the government (basically anyone but the individual committing the crime), we should explore methods to get these kids into programs that further their education. Quite simply, we should perhaps look at doing the job their parents should have done and try to save the next group of kids from being raised in the same way. Those kids should be forced to work for their benefits. Whether it’s cleaning up graffiti or replacing the windows they’ve smashed, rebuilding the Reeves furniture store or working on the Police patrol vehicles, they need to be put to work and they need to start realizing that claiming benefits is not an acceptable career.

For now, the chaos in the UK is over. But unless we learn the lessons from this and take action to show that it will not be tolerated, it will happen again. We need to show these criminals that society is not going to be their victim, and that doesn’t mean giving them more money or more state resources – it means forcing individuals and families to be decent members of society, with consequences if they refuse.

Oh, the random Right Wingnuts are at it again, this time in Hazard, Kentucky. Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water… (that will make sense in a couple of minutes, I swear!)

The drama unfolded in the city of Hazard when two developmentally challenged young men began larking about at the side of the pool. Apparently, they did something so disgusting! Yes, one sat on the others knee! Oh the abhorrence, Gods eyes must have bled!

They attended the pool with a group called Mending Hearts Inc, a charitable organization connecting individuals and providing services to the Intellectually and developmentally challenged. Organizations like Mending Hearts Inc provide invaluable services, offering respite and support to parents, carers and families, and disabled individuals with a vitally important path into the community.

So what happened when this apparent abhorrent behavior was spotted? In rushed a gaggle of staff who seemingly happen to be religious (these people must be trained by Ninjas, always creeping about just waiting for their homophobic moment, and then, Shark Attack! – UK readers might understand that joke more than others).

These staff obviously had nothing better to do than to upset a group of people already struggling with equality and life in general, telling them all that they had to leave. Apparently, God doesn’t like gay people swimming in his pool in Hazard Kentucky.

I kid you not, the staff member quoted the Bible and suggested that he had the right to remove them based on that. Forget law, forget the inalienable rights to Freedom and Liberty, the Bible apparently ignores all of that (as is too often the case in the translation of some) and advises that the local pool in Hazard Kentucky is not to be used by disabled gay people. I must have missed that section because I don’t recall any mention of swimming pools and recreation centers the last time I read through it.

And this is the part that really upsets me; the two young men left in tears, humiliated and simply not understanding what they had done wrong. As if the world doesn’t already seem like a baffling and unfriendly place to them, they’re humiliated and embarrassed by complete strangers and made to feel even more like outcasts on a day when fun and inclusion should have been key.

Mending Hearts Inc did what any sensible person or group facing disgusting homophobia and discrimination should, they filed a formal complaint with their local gay rights group, in this case the Kentucky Equality Federation, and in partnership they requested an apology and that the employee who removed them be transferred to another department of the STATE RUN recreation center. They also planned a protest outside of the facility to highlight the issue.

As you’d expect, this minor skirmish has brought the truly religiously insane out of the woodwork, with Jordan Palmer (President of the Kentucky Equality Federation) receiving death threats if their planned protest outside of the facility were to go ahead.

In steps the Mayor of Hazard, Kentucky, Nan Gorman, 83. And how does she pour oil on turbulent water? By being the equivalent of that racist guy who says “some of my friends are black”, stating that the Pool once hired a gay lifeguard.

Insert.Face.Palm.Here

Oh they did? Well that’s fine then, all is forgiven. There cannot possibly be anything wrong if the Center was once so open and equal as to hire one gay Lifeguard! Move along, nothing to see here after all.

When asked, Charlotte Sizemore, executive director of the recreation center, declined to comment on the incident directly because she hadn’t witnessed it. But forgive my naiveté, as head of the facility you don’t need to witness every footfall and intolerant uttering to have an opinion and issue a sensible statement. But it appears that she let slip that although she holds such a position, others have authority, stating “They don’t want us to talk about it”. Hmm, intriguing. Gagged huh? By whom?

Charlotte Sizemore added:

“We are getting all kinds of phone calls,” she said. “We’re sorry it happened. We’re just fair to everybody. … We never have any trouble here, period.”

One of those phone calls was allegedly from a blogger (NewProgressiveMuckraker) who had the balls to call Ms. Sizemore for a direct comment. Nice to offer a chance for both sides of the story, far more professional than me. But it seems the executive director had been having a very tough day, and with the words “You don’t fucking know, Fuck you!” she hung up.

Yep, them Hazard Pavilion folks are real professionals, such a classy way to hold such a coveted position in the community.

Well, clearly her more sensible statements are not correct. I may be being unfair, but saying you’re sorry it happened is not the same as saying sorry to the two guys who were humiliated and left feeling less Human than when they arrived. Stating “we’re just fair to everybody” is clearly not true, otherwise the employee would have been moved already and a public statement would have been issued clarifying the cock-up. And finally, they obviously do have “trouble” there, this story is testament to that.

I don’t know if the protest went ahead, unfortunately. I can’t find mention of it since the initial incident. I sincerely hope they get the apology they so desperately deserve, and the fact that it has been so long in coming is evidence of the lunacy and true opinions of all involved. Forget the initial incident for just a moment, because the silence since then is deafening.

Moral of the story is, reconsider who are the ones truly “developmentally challenged”.

Second moral of the story is, don’t go to Hazard Pavilion if you’re gay, disabled, or moral, nice, decent… just don’t go.

There are two stories this week that have captured my imagination, and the imaginations of millions around the world too.

First up, we have the rather interesting suggestion that today (Saturday 21st May 2011) is Judgment Day. 6pm Pacific time, to be exact.

Now, you can forget thoughts of Cybernet and don’t be worrying about Sarah and John Connor, it’s not a Man-Made apocalypse where the machines turn against us. In any case, if it were I would be doomed and you along with me because we’re all connected to our potential enemy as you read this.

This is all the making of one man, a man who believes that he has “deciphered” the date of “The Rapture” – in the Biblical sense.

89 year old Harold Camping (you don’t need to look him up, just imagine an old guy with an imaginary friend and a book of stories that he likes to smack people around the head with – metaphorically of course) is the guy proclaiming that he has managed to calculate that the Rapture will begin today. And he’s managed to convince his small band of followers that this is the case too.

For those who were too busy jerking off to the male underwear pages in the catalog to follow the family to church back in the day, the Rapture is the Biblical version of the traditional apocalypse story, the day when almighty God whisks 144,000 of the good people away to heaven and leaves the rest of us to suffer as the world ends in a blaze of glory. Presumably, all us gay folk are imagined to immediately break out into orgies, isn’t that what they think we all do? So call around your gay mafia gang, haul that leather fetish wear out from the back of the wardrobe, get the lube ready and grease yourself up.

There are a few problems with Mr. Camping’s prediction though, the main problem is that the Rapture is like a ninja operation, no one is supposed to know when it’s gonna happen. Just like the Ninja, it’ll sneak up on all of us when we least expect it, and we’ll be watching all the good Christian folk vanishing before our eyes (if that’s how it happens). The next problem is that he’s done this before and predicted that it would happen in 1994. And when it didn’t he asserted that he’d got his calculations wrong.

And in other news…

It seems that perhaps the Pope is heeding Mr. Camping’s words and seeking a get-out, just in case he isn’t among the 144,000 righteous people to be saved. You know, our past can come back to haunt us, and if there are only so many places on that big bus into the sky the Pope needs to make some other arrangements just in case his own Hitler youth history makes him less worthy.

Now, you might think me suspicious and a bit “tin-foil hat”, but when I think of the Pope and his wealth, I imagine that perhaps he might have a secret lair and one of those rockets able to jet him into space within an hour. Perhaps there’s a defunct church somewhere in Rome where the steeple opens up at the click of a button and we’ll see that rocket departing as the Rapture begins? Dan Brown eat your heart out!

The Pope certainly seems to be making his plans by calling up to the International Space Station and making friends with the only Humans who would survive it.

The conversation was broadcast, but I would imagine there was a section they didn’t show, the few minutes where he suggested that he might pay them a visit, at about 7pm today as a matter of fact.

I have a question… on October 22, 1844, William Miller and Samuel S. Snow predicted that this would happen, and their followers believed so desperately that they gave up all of their worldly possessions in preparation for it. So has Mr. Camping perhaps suggested that his small band of followers do the same? And did he open a bank account for them to wire all their soon-to-be-worthless cash to? If not, he’s missed an opportunity. Long live capitalism! lol

BTW, I was joking about the gay orgies. We don’t need a threat of the Rapture to have a good time.

I’ll see you at 7pm when we can all point and laugh, while wearing fetish gear and slipping off our computer chairs.

I was reading a very interesting post over on another blog recently about the seeming hypocrisy when it comes to us gay folk offending Christianity at every opportunity, while proclaiming unfairness and bigotry when we have the same in return. The article was quite effective, pointing out what – at first glance – seems to be a valid argument.

It is true that we do seem to do this on regular occasions – at queer events and in the gay media – with people dressing up and being lewd, cracking jokes and pointing fingers. And yet when we receive that same treatment from some maniacal preacher in more drag than Chi Chi LaRue we scream about it, plan boycotts, write letters and hold it up as an example of homophobia and bigotry.

So why can’t the Christian faith hold up our own dirty laundry and wave it around for all to see while we mock and cast judgment on an entire religious faith? After all, they have all the evidence they need in recent YouTube videos featuring “Hunky Jesus” at an Easter event in San Fransisco.