Here’s the stories we missed this week while I was working three jobs simultaneously, packing for camp, and slowly but surely watching my ability to function decline.
Read This Zine
If you can’t make it to camp, you’ll miss the staff reading. Nobody knows what to read, though, so don’t be upset.
Good Gay News Done Dirt Cheap
+ In Cambodia, lesbians are getting away with marriage.
A Cambodian LGBT rights activist said that some local authorities in the southeast Asian nation already recognize gay couples as married.
‘Some local authorities give marriage certificates to lesbian couples,’ said Srorn Srun facilitator for Rainbow Community Kampuchea (RoCK) in a interview with Gay Star News.
Cambodian law defines marriage as between a man and a woman only but in some provinces in the country local government officials have decided to recognize gay couples.
+ In New Zealand, a new lesbian MP (the first of her kind!) is taking over… and she’s hilarious on the Internet.
Claudette Hauti has just confirmed she will take up the position in Parliament left vacant by Aaron Gilmore.
She’s been itching to get into Parliament, tweeting during the final reading of the marriage equality Bill: “Oh F–K! I ccouldv’e been there in that house debating this bill #63listrankingsucks#marriageequality”
Hauiti is in a civil union with Nadine Hauiti-Mau and they have three children.
Albania is amending its criminal code after two laws protecting the LGBT community against hate crimes were passed this past weekend.
On May 4, the country’s parliament approved a law that puts hate crimes against sexual orientation and gender identity on par with offenses against gender, race, ethnicity, religious belief, and disability, the Gay Star News reports.
Albania also passed a law making the “dissemination of homophobic information” punishable with up to two years in prison.
“Providing to the public or distribution of deliberate materials containing racist, homophobic or xenophobic content, through the communication and information technology, is punishable by a fine or imprisonment up to two years,” the law specifies.
Television Sucks Right Now
TV’s getting less gay. Soon, the queermo characters you know and love from The New Normal, Go On, Smash, The Office, 1600 Penn, Happy Endings, Don’t Trust the B___ in Apartment 23, 90210, Emily Owens, M.D., The L.A. Complex, Partners, and Southland will cease to exist. Awesome!
If you’re still trying to enjoy the silver screen despite your sheer invisibility on it, don’t forget to block spoilers on Twitter, which you can do now, all thanks to a 17-year-old girl:
Imagine you forget to watch a new episode of Game of Thrones the night it airs. Even if coworkers stay mum about important plot points, Twitter is abuzz with spoilers. Fortunately, there’s Twivo, a new program that allows Twitter users to censor their feeds from mentioning a certain TV show (and its characters) for a set time period. Jennie Lamere, a 17-year-old girl, invented the software last month—and won the grand prize at a national coding competition where Lamere was the only female who presented a project, and the only developer to work alone. Internet: Meet the reason we need more women in tech.
F*cked Up Shit
In Tennessee, a 50-year Boy Scouts of America veteran took one look at the organization’s struggle to accept queermos and then was like “okay, fuck it, I can’t do this anymore.” Not in those words, though: he wrote a letter of resignation in which he declared that “teaching or practicing intolerance IS NOT in the Scout Oath or Law,” and that “the policy advocated by the Middle Tennessee Council which would require Scouts who discover they are gay to either resign or violate the 1st Scout Law (Trustworthy) is WRONG.” You go, random dude! You’re so much cooler than that other old dude Pat Robertson who is an absolute disgrace to ewoks everywhere.
Pat Robertson went on television this week and lamented the terrible, terrible persecution of anti-gay pastors and gay conversion therapists—comparing gay people to rapists, murderers, and thieves (all of whom, according to Robertson, can “change”).
In Russia, activists are trying to make the connection between political intolerance for LGBT folk and the brutal hate crime which occurred in the region last week. (In Ethiopia, a lesbian couple recently suffered a similarly brutal attack.) In Lebanon, thought to be the most liberal region of the Middle East, you can get arrested and sexuality tested for being LGBT.
Online, straight men are posing as lesbians on dating websites because men are the worst. In Illinois, Republican Party Chairman Patrick Brady resigned after “sustained opposition” from his peers due to his support of gay marriage. In the NFL, Chris Kluwe’s goodness wasn’t enough to keep him on the field – or, worse, could have been the reason he was let go from the Vikings:
Kluwe never asked if it was his activism that cost him his job. The Vikings never offered the thought even as the answer loomed obvious to everyone else. Two football players have spoken loud for gay rights issues in the last several months, specifically gay marriage: Kluwe and Brendon Ayanbadejo. Both have been cut. And while you could argue Ayanbadejo was a financial casualty for a team desperate to get under the salary cap, Kluwe was a modest budget strain to the Vikings; he was scheduled to make $1.45 million in 2013. What happened to him makes little sense. Except it makes lots of sense.
They Need Help
QWOCMAP has your back, and they need your dollas:
QWOCMAP is a non-profit media arts and activist organization that creates, exhibits and distributes films that authentically reflect the lives of queer women of color, gender nonconforming and transgender people of color, and addresses the vital social justice issues that concern multiple communities.
QWOCMAP Filmmaker, Meja Tyehimba says “if it wasn’t for QWOCMAP I would never have gotten the opportunity, support and training needed to venture into the male-dominated world of filmmaking. To learn the filmmaking process with a group of like-minded women was an experience that has fueled me through the completion of three films. It is still part of the inspiration that feeds my desire to create films that speaks to the lives, struggles and successes of queer women of color.”
http://vimeo.com/28525602
+ Be part of “The Golden Age of Hustlers”:
“Bill de Blasio’s ‘Formerly Lesbian’ Wife Patiently Explains Human Sexuality”
I am more than just a label. Why are people so driven to labeling where we fall on the sexual spectrum? Labels put people in boxes, and those boxes are shaped like coffins. Finding the right person can be so hard that often, when a person finally finds someone she or he is comfortable with, she or he just makes it work. As my friend Vanessa says, “It’s not whom you love; it’s that you love.”
Hall of Fame
+ Two Words: Wonder Woman. The movie, that is.
+ Sandra Bernhard speaks poetry in her e-mails and shoots the shit with The Rumpus.
good question
it comes to me in my dreams
where i am back manicuring at 351 n canon at Cia hair salon
with the macrame hanging baskets and a dark woodsy vibe
when i wake up i think that i might have actually never left
and am so relieved to know i have.
i don’t miss it, and although i get my nails done
i don’t like going it doesn’t feel like a luxury to me at all.
but i am a very good tipper.”
Am I the only one who takes issue with the dating-site admins calling filtering for male profiles “penis duty”? That just seems really cissexist to me.
Holy shit, I just realized how confrontational that came out. The question form is only to see if anyone agrees, so I can tell if I’m just wrong or not (I’m in a crazy-feeling place IRL).
Don’t worry, that pissed me off too. And a lot of the comments were transphobic and anti-MoC bullshit.
cissexist, the new racist, everybody!
in all seriousness, i think that’s appropriate for what they’re talking about. they’re filtering male profiles, in which males USUALLY have wieners. yes, for the most part it’s true. there doesn’t need to be a paragraph long disclaimer for every term that’s thrown around.
For starters, there is no “new racist.” Racism is still alive and well, and oppression-olympics bullshit is not going to get anyone anywhere. For another fucking thing, this community aims to be welcoming to ALL women. That includes trans* women. If you’re so up in arms that I would decline to erase their womanhood, I’m sure you can find plenty of support for those personal issues elsewhere. Buh-bye now.
why would i be up in arms? just pointing out the obvious. also, sense of humor – you’re too young not to have one. buh-bye ;)
Where exactly was the joke in what you said? All I heard you say is that you’re tired of people acknowledging that not all women have vaginas. And what do you consider was obvious? That all women are cis? Sorry, but things that aren’t true can’t be obvious.
Let’s just get a little perspective on this… you’re getting cross because a jokey term (used by two site admins to refer to a group of douchebags who create fake female profiles on les/bi dating and social media sites) isn’t inclusive enough of trans* people? I think this could qualify as an overreaction.
No, but I’m getting really annoyed with the facile equation of “penis” with “male.” And no, it doesn’t make any difference what the admins of the site intended, the result is still a reinforcement of that equation. That’s an outdated definition of manhood and womanhood, and the basis of transphobic denials of the manhood of trans* men and the womanhood of trans* women. It’s a big fucking deal, so stop minimizing it just because it doesn’t affect you.
I frigging love Cambodia. Seriously, my wife and I have been there 4 or 5 times and I recommend anybody visit, still being mindful of the country’s tragedies and poverty. Last time we were there we spent most evenings with a 10-year-old street vendor who instantly understood my androgynous-presenting wife is trans*, and insisted upon doing her hair and painting her nails. Mine too. Green and orange – it was ugly as sin and so wonderful.
Ugh, I feel so frustrated and angry at the prevalent biphobia which makes women feel like ‘former lesbian’ is a more valid identity than ‘bisexual’ – because, I mean, I respect everyone’s right to label themselves what they want, but this really isn’t the first time I’ve seen a woman who’s dated both men and women say that her sexuality is fluid or spontaneous or something else along those lines but ABSOLUTELY DEFINITELY NOT IN THE LEAST BIT bisexual. It happens all the time and you can’t tell me the rejection of label has nothing to do with biphobia and how hated and reviled bi women are.
Sometimes the rejection of a label actually doesn’t include biphobia, but something else entirely. Imagine that. How can you say you respect everyone’s right to label themselves, but then go on to say that you can’t be told it’s not biphobia? You’re contradicting yourself. Sexual fluidity is not synonymous with bisexuality, but it seems to be mistaken as such quite often. I’m rather disappointed and annoyed by that, within the LGBTetc community because there seems to be a lack of understanding there. Just because someone identifies as sexually fluid doesn’t mean that they are biphobic. It may actually allude to something more, such as the person not wanting to identify with the gender binary, or some other explanation thereof. People seem quick to yell “whateverphobic” when they don’t know the full truth of the matter, especially when they are looking from the outside in.
Bisexuality = “identify with the gender binary”
Please stop!
Because statements like that erase (1) non-binary people as subjects of desire of bisexuals as well as (2) bisexuals who identify outside of the gender binary themselves as actual people.
Thank you.
If my comment came off like that, that was definitely not my intent. If anything I was trying to express the differing perspectives of identity, hence “some other explanation thereof.” I was merely using it as one example of the many different perspectives out there.
I understood your intent very well. I just asked to drop the quoted explanation of yours because of named reasons.
Also it does make as much sense to reject the bisexual label because of an artificial gender binary concept as it makes sense to reject said label because of red balloons. I mean, those are two separate things and bisexuals neither invented the gender binary nor do they have magical powers to reinforce it.
Seriously my sexual identity has no effect on other people’s gender. Not even on my own.
I wish, I had some magical powers tho…
So identify however feels right for you, that is all fine and good, just don’t make up weird stuff about a label that is not your own. That is all.
I mean yeah. All that being bisexual really entails in itself is that you love/are attracted to two genders, those two not necessarily being binary male and binary female, right? Any bi-identified person, please feel free to yell at me if I’m off base.
@Bertha Mason lives (sorry, couldn’t reply directly because the thread was too deep):
Er, not quite. At least, not any more than “homosexual” or “heterosexual” inherently refer to one gender.
The definition that most socially-conscious bisexual people I know use (myself included) is on parallel with those terms- that is, if “homosexual” refers to being attracted to people of the same gender identity as you, and “heterosexual” refers to being attracted to people of a different gender identity from you, then “bisexual” refers to being attracted to people of both the same gender identity as you or a different gender identity from you. (and yes, I understand not everyone likes those terms either, but it’s easier to explain by analogy.)
Thus, if you (hypothetical you) have a gender identity, and you are attracted to other people with gender identity, it would be appropriate to use. You can also choose not to apply it to yourself for any number of reasons, including that it’s frequently misinterpreted, which is entirely your prerogative. But not your prerogative to go around accusing others of automatically reinforcing the gender binary by using it, as you (not-hypothetical you) quite accurately noted.
What is my intent if you understand it very well? If you actually understood my intent, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I never said that bisexuality = identity with the gender binary. You took that one phrase and assumed that my whole intent was based upon that specific phrase, then got defensive and completely ignored the latter statement.
I know that bisexuality isn’t about reinforcing the artificial gender binary, but guess what? Some (not all) people who happen to identify as bisexual also identify with the gender binary via their own socialization of the genders, however artificial that may be to you. Is it an inherent problem? Yes and no, depending on who you ask and how one identifies. Socialization and the concept of identity can be a very complex issue for a person, depending on their own experiences, demographics, culture and so forth. I believe this article merely elaborated on some of those complexities, hence the varying perspectives in the comment section. What I was getting at, is that people can still have a very (what may seem contradictive, denial, content, apathetic attitude, etc) identity, but at the end of the day, it’s their identity and we don’t know what they may or may not be struggling with, if they are struggling at all. Hence also why I said, “looking from the outside in,” or “quick to yell whateverphobic.”
People are quick to villify a person and the label or identity they choose because it doesn’t align with their own perspective, or they don’t understand where that person is actually coming from and frankly, I’m so tired of that. You’re doing the same thing. You’re trying to say that you respect that choice, but then contradict yourself with the following, “…just don’t make up weird stuff about a label that is not your own.” How do you know what someone’s label is? Why are you assuming what other people’s identities are and that they are the same as yours? You don’t know them and you don’t have the authority to dictate or project your definition on them, whether or not you agree with their definition because you don’t know how that label is being used or why it’s being used. Labels can be a way to uplift or empower someone and it can also be a way of bringing them down, so how dare you say that someone can’t use a label that sounds “weird” to you (because you may not understand) then assume that it’s not their label because it doesn’t fit your neat little box. As for myself, I truly believe in the freedom of choice when it comes to self-identity, no matter how weird or strange their identity may “seem” to me because at the end of the day, I’m not them and that’s all I have to say on the matter.
@ Bertha Mason:
Sure, you can insist on etymology of bi=2. But only if you also insist that everybody who identifies as “lesbian” must be born on Lesbos, Greece ;)
Actually the origins for the term “bisexual” lie in botany: Plants who are bearing both the androecium and gynoecium of a flower – the male and female reproductive organs.
In 1840s scientist started to apply this term to human beings because they concluded those who are attracted to people of multiple genders must have androgynous brains (as it was believed that attraction to men = female brain vs. attraction to women = male brain).
But things progressed since than and as bisexual people are pretty diverse the safest definition of bisexuality today would be: Attraction to more than one gender.
But The Bisexual Manifesto explains it best:
“Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or duogamous in nature: that we have “two” sides or that we must be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don’t assume that there are only two genders.
Do not mistake our fluidity for confusion, irresponsibility, or an inability to commit. Do not equate promiscuity, infidelity, or unsafe sexual behavior with bisexuality. Those are human traits that cross all sexual orientations. Nothing should be assumed about anyone’s sexuality, including your own.”
Source: http://bialogue-group.tumblr.com/post/17532147836/atm1990-bisexualmanifesto
@ antiant:
Please be patient with me as I am not a native speaker and therefore have troubles to express myself in English the way I want.
Okay… Let’s review the whole situation:
(1) Andreea expressed her frustration about (internalized) biphobia and how this might be the cause for people rejecting the bisexual label
(2) You had some explanations for why people might reject the label other than biphobia
(3) I pointed out that one the reasons you named was invalid
…and then things got twisted somehow
(4) You said sorry. (But I’m not sure for what.)
(5) I said, that I don’t disagree on the freedom of labeling oneself as whatever feels right. As long as the reasons to reject something are not completely made up.
So…
“How do you know what someone’s label is? Why are you assuming what other people’s identities are and that they are the same as yours?”
As I asked YOU specifically to “not make things up” that are not true about a “label that is not your own” I actually looked up your profile and saw that you – in fact – don’t identify as bisexual. This is how I know what your labels are and that they are not the same as my.
While you were talking about bisexuality – a label that is therefore not yours to define – you brought up the concept of gender binary a one of the possible reasons to reject it. Which would imply that bisexuality is somehow based on / related to it. This is at least the way I understood your argument in context of (2) in rely to (1).
And this is the one and only thing that you’ve got wrong and the one and only thing that I asked you to please not say as it defines bisexuality in wrong or the most narrow way possible. A way that erases bisexual people who identify outside of the gender binary and/or are attracted to non-binary people.
That is really it. I don’t vilify you and don’t accuse you of being biphobic. I actually agree on everything else that you say (especially on the middle section of your last response), I just ask you don’t narrow down MY sexual identity as it erases ME from my own label.
Thank you :)
@red she said
“I actually looked up your profile and saw that you – in fact – don’t identify as bisexual. This is how I know what your labels are and that they are not the same as my.”
Did it ever cross your mind that maybe I have before though? Or that I might in the future? Here’s the thing about humanity, people can change, labels can change, so how someone identifies today may be different 10 or so years down the road. Does that always happen? No, some people keep their labels. Some labels and identifiers are stagnate for a person, while in some instances it’s more kinetic. The article also highlights that aspect. Case in point, have you ever written something down in a journal and then, 5 years from now, realized, “What the hell was I thinking?” or “I really don’t identify with this anymore?”
Some bisexuals actually identify with the gender binary as strange or as weird as that may sound to you due to the factors I mentioned above and you don’t speak for those bisexuals. So no, that’s not making stuff up, it’s more like being aware of the different cultural variables that come into play with someone’s own socialization and individualization when it comes to identity and labels. See hibiscus’ response because it’s on par with what I’m trying to express.
“While you were talking about bisexuality – a label that is therefore not yours to define – you brought up the concept of gender binary a one of the possible reasons to reject it. Which would imply that bisexuality is somehow based on / related to it. This is at least the way I understood your argument in context of (2) in rely to (1).”
I’m not defining bisexuality, I never tried to define it. I tried to describe different aspects of bisexuality and the factors that come into play when someone chooses or doesn’t choose that label as a self-identifier.
It’s kind of like saying, “You don’t have a right to talk about parenting because you have adopted and you really don’t know what parenting is because you don’t have a blood connection.” It sounds absurd and dismissive because you can’t comprehend other perspectives and alternatives of how one identifies, how they use to identify or that their identification is not the same as yours. Just because another bisexual doesn’t identify with your biseuxal definition (outside the gender binary), doesn’t make them any less of a bisexual (one who identifies with the gender binary). You’re actually dismissing them and their experiences, when you’re telling others not to do the same to you, hence contradiction.
Yes, as “one of” the possible reasons to reject it, I also said “or some other explanation thereof.” I said sorry because my implication and intent was not to mean that I think bisexuality is synonymous with the gender binary, but that it’s one reason why someone may reject it due to their socialization, etc. The former wasn’t meant to imply the latter, BUT from an individual perspective or someone choosing their own labels, the former may actually imply the latter for them.
“And this is the one and only thing that you’ve got wrong and the one and only thing that I asked you to please not say as it defines bisexuality in wrong or the most narrow way possible. A way that erases bisexual people who identify outside of the gender binary and/or are attracted to non-binary people.”
This isn’t about right and wrong, this is about tolerating other people’s perspectives and realizing that things aren’t so black and white, when it comes to identity for some people. Like I said, if you understood my intent, you’d realize that “erasing bisexual people who identify outside of the gender binary and/or are attracted to non-binary people,” doesn’t apply. Just because you don’t like that definition and it’s narrow to you, doesn’t mean it’s narrow to another person.
Regarding your points:
(1) Andreea expressed her frustration about (internalized) biphobia and how this might be the cause for people rejecting the bisexual label
*Yes, keyword “might.” As in it might be the cause, but it’s not always the cause. I took it upon myself to elaborate on other causes, hence my responses.
(2) You had some explanations for why people might reject the label other than biphobia
*Yes, see above.
(3) I pointed out that one the reasons you named was invalid
*No, the reasons I named were invalid to YOU and some bisexuals, but that doesn’t mean it’s invalid for EVERY bisexual. Difference.
(4) You said sorry. (But I’m not sure for what.)
*I explained why, above.
(5) I said, that I don’t disagree on the freedom of labeling oneself as whatever feels right. As long as the reasons to reject something are not completely made up.
*They’re not made up, again see above for further explanation.
“That is really it. I don’t vilify you and don’t accuse you of being biphobic. I actually agree on everything else that you say (especially on the middle section of your last response), I just ask you don’t narrow down MY sexual identity as it erases ME from my own label.”
I never said you vilified me, I said that people are often vilified because the labels and or identity they choose is not understood, I was speaking more general here. They aren’t understood because some people look at labels in a very black and white context. The LGBTetc community sometimes does this and it’s something I strongly dislike within the community, but that’s another discussion entirely. Some people get so wrapped up in the labels and identities of others, that they don’t even see the person anymore, they just see a label, which defines and limits the nature of their being. Also, I’m not narrowing down your sexual identity nor am I erasing you from your own label, I get that you don’t identify within the gender binary, I got that from the get go. What I don’t understand, is that you tried to erase the experiences of other bisexuals who actually do in fact, identify with the gender binary.
Cheers :)
Yes, I am aware that there are bisexuals out there who do identify with the gender binary – as there are lesbians, gay men and straight folks who do the same. So only pointing in the direction of bisexuals is kinda weird in the first place. But whatever.
And yes, I neither speak for them nor do I erase them nor do I say that they are less of bisexuals.
Look, the problem is, that if you only take those bisexuals into account who do fancy the gender binary, you bring the definition of bisexuality to the most narrow version that is imaginable. That would exclude many bisexuals like myself.
But if you do it the other way around and keep the definition inclusive in a way of: Bisexuality = “attraction to people of more than one gender” or = “attraction to people of same gender + people of different gender(s)”, it can mean anything from [two] to any combination of [cis/trans + binary/non-binary + intersex] on an individual level and therefore include EVERY bisexual person.
I did the later and therefore rejected your exclusive argument of the gender binary as a defining point of bisexuality in general. Because it’s not . It is something that is neither exclusive to bisexuals alone nor is it something that ALL bisexuals adopt.
If you are interested, there are some more definitions of bisexuality by most well-known bi organizations: http://bialogue-group.tumblr.com/post/27662473981/girl-panic-what-is-bisexuality You will see, they are all pretty inclusive and many of them explicitly reject the idea of a gender binary.
I don’t know if I came over as super angry/aggressive or
anything like that. I promise I am not. I actually like the conversation :)
Although I must confess that I am quite protective of my label (just in case you didn’t notice yet… *lol*) and a little bit sensitive right now because there is a kickstarter campaign that collects money for a documentary on bisexuality but the makers are quite shitty about inclusion of non-binary folks, POC and trans* bisexuals. Ironically the documentary is called “Outsiders of the outsiders” – while only including cis, white, male “experts” and cis, binary participants :(
And there is a comic on bisexuality that is about to be published in a book that also solely focuses on bi=gender binary. Likewise the artist doesn’t listen to the complains from actual bisexuals :(
It’s tiresome and frustrating that people are so eager to put limitations on labels, that they insist there must be clear differences and therefore neat little boxes to squeeze in the complexity of life. There are probably far more overlaps between non-monosexual labels and folks who use them as well as monosexuals and non-monosexuals then people want to believe.
—
As far as your parenting analogy goes, I think it is less saying “you don’t know anything about parenting” but more “don’t tell me how to raise my child” or “you don’t know anything that is specific to raising an adopted child”? Because as a queer person (=parent) you obviously do know stuff about labels (=some general parenting), but I still want to define a label that is specific to me myself (=parenting to a specific kind of child).
But is this even important at this point? Probably not.
Have I forgot to address something important? I dunno, it’s past midnight and I am tired :) But I had fun talking to you, Antiant. So let me know if I missed something.
On a related note (because this just appeared on my tumblr dash): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aj-walkley/bisexual-gender-binary_b_2425081.html
:)
I didn’t mean that women who reject the bi label are biphobic, but that biphobia makes them reject it because bi women face a lot of violence, are stereotyped as “promiscuous” and “unfaithful” etc. I know it’s hard to identify as bi and I don’t judge any individual women, but to me it’s pretty clear that there are a lot of societal pressures at work making people not see bisexuality as a valid identity.
Right, but the same thing can be said for a number of other identity’s and labels as well, such as sexual fluidity, being label free, etc. Anyways, communication can be hard on the internet. I think we’re coming from the same page, just wording it slightly different. I understand the point you were getting at and I was merely trying to elaborate on some of those points. S’all good.
I’m just going to keep this short because it seems we’re going around in circles and you’re still missing my point. My argument was not an exclusive one and I wasn’t trying to define bisexuality, if anything my argument was the opposite of that, but for whatever reason that seemed to get lost in the shuffle. I’m also aware of what bisexuality entails, so you don’t have to try and attempt to “educate” me, via links. I actually find that behavior annoying because if you understood where I was coming from, you wouldn’t be doing that. In any event, I am tired of repeating myself and on that note, life is calling me, so take care.
I just wanted to point out that if you follow football, and Vikings in particular, you would know that Kluwe was NOT a good punter… he ranked 31 out of 39 in the NFL and he was set to be making 1.45 million is 2013 when he hasn’t even done a good job! The Vikings were smart by cutting him; they can now draft a cheaper, and probably better player.
I liked Kluwe for his politics and because he is a great ally to the LGBT community, but he wasn’t doing well at his job, so I support him being cut.
Just to clarify, Claudette Hauti isn’t the first openly lesbian MP in New Zealand, just the first openly lesbian MP in the National Party (centre-right party currently in power).
She seems awesome, and about a million times better than the complete idiot she’s replacing.
^yes, please fix this.
Lebanon is the most liberal region of the Middle East? Tel Aviv will be so disappointed.
was literally about to comment this. last time i checked having hezbollah as the de facto government makes it decidedly not the most liberal region of the middle east
Too bad I haven’t heard of most of the shows on the list. I would of have least checked them out because we could really use more queers on tv and not just any queers: MOC lesbians, non white gay males, trans* people and bisexuals deserve to join the fun too!
I always like how you start these posts with a brief synopsis of your week. :) Also, just fyi, the film industry/movies are referred to as “the silver screen. ” TV is “the small screen.” I watch way too much television…
yo that is straight up so embarrassing but thanks because honestly i get my sayings and phrases and colloquialisms mixed up a lot and people don’t correct me and it’s just embarrassing. i learned a thing today kind of like it’s and its! which i relearn almost every day as well.
xoxoxo
A point about the Ohio teacher. She worked at a private school. Private schools do not, to my knowledge, have any sort of teachers unions, thus no union support. Although I don’t work at a private school myself (public school teacher here!) and I didn’t read the article that Carmen posted so I could be totally wrong.
G,
Everything that I have read indicates that you are right in that, in most cases, private schools do not have any kind of teachers unions.
You can watch it for free right now at PBS until June 14!
the wonder woman doc I mean