All posts by GayFriendschat.com

Andy Bell Remembers When He Was “A Greedy Pig For Drugs”

Andy Bell Remembers When He Was “A Greedy Pig For Drugs”

Andy_Bell_(Erasure)_2Sometimes I think I was a greedy pig for all the drugs I took. I don’t regret it, though, because I was just being me. I was a mess and I did try therapy, but I can’t imagine I’m ever going to live my life in a way where if I’m out and I’m having a good time, I’m going to say no.”

The much loved and now sober Erasure vocalist Andy Bell in a very revealing interview with The Guardian

Jeremy Kinser

feedproxy.google.com/~r/queerty2/~3/66w7UNBT1jY/andy-bell-remembers-when-he-was-a-greedy-pig-for-drugs-20150314

Gay Iconography: Does 'Sex and the City' Stand the Test of Time?

Gay Iconography: Does 'Sex and the City' Stand the Test of Time?

Sex-and-the-City-2-Photo

Earlier this week, I joined a group of gay journalists in a roundtable interview of Madonna. While awaiting our time with the Queen of Pop, we chatted over wine and snacks about a variety of topics, including our thoughts on the album, HBO’s Looking and RuPaul’s Drag Race. The conversation picked up though when a certain television show came up.

Perhaps we need a corollary to Godwin’s Law (which posits that any online debate that goes on long enough will eventually invoke Hitler or Nazis). Maybe any conversation between pop-culturally savvy gay men will invariably reference Sex and the City at some point. Once the topic was broached among our group, references flew across the table, including episode numbers, titles, guest stars and storylines.

It’s the kind of show that feels embedded in the DNA of a large swath of the gay community. In its seemingly perpetual airings in syndication, the show certainly shows its age, but the impact of its six seasons (and maybe one of the movies) is still worth discussing today. Driven largely by gay creative forces Darren Starr and Michael Patrick King, the show not only brought openly gay characters to a mainstream series, but it embodied a sort of fabulous, urban lifestyle that spoke to the independent, creative spirit that permeates a wide, cross section of the gay community. Even its central protagonists — with their frank sexuality, over-the-top styles and witty retorts — feel like they’re ripped straight from Drag Race.

Still, the show’s portrayal of actual gay characters was far from revolutionary. The mostly sexless sidekicks, Stanford Blatch (Willie Garson) and Anthony Marentino (Mario Cantone), are quintessentially shallow representations. The show also clumsily tackled topics of bisexuality and trans characters. (And that’s nothing to say about the lack of racial diversity, rampant consumerism and class privilege that made the show feel continuously more out-of-touch the longer it went on.)

Flaws and all, the series still holds a special place in many hearts, so let’s revisit some classic clips, AFTER THE JUMP

 

In addition to being one of the most ‘90s things to ever happen on television (Carrie Bradshaw kissing Alanis Morissette) the fourth episode of season three featured a befuddled Carrie exploring the fluid sexuality of the young bisexual man she was dating. While she spends most of the episode fairly rattled by the the whole concept, she eventually becomes slightly more comfortable with it. She deserts him at a party and never sees him again, sure, but at least she’s accepted that the problem is hers, not his. (Watch a longer clip here.)

 

It’s been suggested that Starr and King used the four female leads to project the gay experience onto more palatable, heterosexual female characters. (The drag queen comparisons go beyond just the outfits.) If that is the case, it adds another layer to the scene above, wherein Samantha (Kim Cattrall) gets an HIV test. It brings to life the sort of anxiety that once felt exclusive to the gay community.

 

By 2015 standards, the clip above is difficult to get through. After RuPaul faced criticism for his use of words like “tranny” and puns of “she-male,” it’s unsettling to see the four white, straight, cisgender, upperclass women of Sex and the City toss around those terms while discussing three trans women of color. (As an aside, yes, this was a TV comedy, not a sociology thesis paper. But at the same time, such a beloved pop culture institution still airing in heavy reruns deserves some scrutiny.)

 

When folks ask in retrospect why we ever rooted for Carrie even though she was such a selfish, self-absorbed character, it’s easy to point to the clip above from “The Real Me” as evidence as to why many viewers wanted to think of themselves as the Carrie of their circles. In one of the series’ most memorable moments, Carrie agrees to appear as a fashion model, confronting her own insecurities about her appearance. She hits the runway, only to see her fears realized: she trips, falls and could be totally made a fool. Instead, she picks herself up, carries on with a smile and even gets a high-five from Heidi Klum. We may not all traipse down a runway in our underwear, but who can’t relate to that?

 

Sex and the City could almost be forgiven for its neutered portrayal of gay BFFs Stanford and Anthony, but its most egregious offense occurred in the second movie. (OK, one of many offenses.) The two characters, having shown mostly animosity toward one another throughout the six-season run, are hastily married off in a ceremony that’s like what “Gay: The Ride” would be like if it ever came to Disneyland. (Not that I didn’t enjoy seeing Liza Minnelli make an appearance, it just felt a little on the nose, don’t you think?) What’s more baffling is that in “The Real Me” Anthony criticizes Charlotte for setting him up with Stanford just because they both happen to be gay guys she knows.

As Carrie might ponder, awash in the glow of her laptop screen: Does the series’ humor, heart and bold sexuality keep it timeless as a Chanel suit, or does its uneven treatment of LGBT characters make it feel as hopelessly dated as Cosmos and cupcakes? 

Share your thoughts in the comments.


Bobby Hankinson

www.towleroad.com/2015/03/gay-iconography-does-sex-and-the-city-stand-the-test-of-time.html

Are The US Territories Still Too Conservative For Same-Sex Marriage?

Are The US Territories Still Too Conservative For Same-Sex Marriage?
While more than 70 percent of U.S. states now allow same-sex marriage, the waves of change have yet to reach America’s far-flung and socially conservative territories in the Caribbean and Pacific.

Of the five territories, only Puerto Rico has faced a lawsuit seeking the right for gay and lesbian couples to wed, and a federal judge there – bucking the trend in federal courts on the mainland – rejected the suit. That case is under appeal before the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston.

In the other four territories – the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Marianas – no gay or lesbian couples have stepped forward to make a legal case for marriage rights, according to advocacy groups monitoring the situation.

The five territories would be covered by a possible U.S. Supreme Court ruling establishing a constitutional right for same-sex couples to wed, notes Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, an attorney with the national gay-rights group Lambda Legal. Several same-sex marriage cases from the mainland are before the high court this spring, and a ruling is expected by the end of June.

Gonzalez-Pagan said he hoped same-sex couples in the territories would step forward to seek marriage rights.

“No matter how big or small the population might be in any one of these territories, or the fact there’s vehement opposition in them, it doesn’t mean any citizens should be left behind,” he said. “All of them have a fundamental right to marry. They’re all entitled to equal protection.”

The only pending territorial lawsuit involving gay marriage was filed in Puerto Rico last year by five couples – two who are seeking to marry in Puerto Rico and three who live on the island and want recognition of marriages that occurred elsewhere.

In October, U.S. District Court Judge Juan Perez-Gimenez upheld Puerto Rico’s ban on same-sex marriage, saying voters and legislators, not judges, should decide the issue.

On the mainland, four U.S. circuit courts of appeal have ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, while one – the 6th Circuit – upheld the laws in four states that prohibit it.

Lambda Legal is now appealing Perez-Gimenez’ ruling before the 1st Circuit; no date for oral arguments has been set.

Among the plaintiffs are Johanne Velez Garcia and Faviola Melendez Rodríguez, who have been a couple for six years and married in New York in 2012. They have been trying to adopt a child for several years, and believe their efforts have been thwarted because Puerto Rico does not recognize their marriage.

Velez, a 50-year-old attorney and consultant, said she’s optimistic that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of same-sex marriage and thus nullify Puerto Rico’s ban. Meanwhile, she has been heartened by the support of family and friends as the lawsuit proceeds.

“When the news came out that we were filing this case, Faviola and I were a little apprehensive,” Velez said.

“But what we received were positive comments, expressions of love and support even from acquaintances who, due to religious reasons, might not be too happy about what we were doing,” she added. “Even those people understand we are fighting for our rights.”

However, the leader of the conservative group Puerto Rico for Families, pastor and physician Cesar Vazquez, says he and his allies will be dismayed if the Supreme Court decides to legalize same-sex marriage.

“It doesn’t mean we have to approve of it, and it doesn’t mean we can’t keep educating people,” said Vazquez, who expressed concern that schools might be required to teach children that same-sex marriage is “a valid alternative.”

In the other Caribbean territory – the U.S. Virgin Islands – there is strong opposition to same-sex marriage from leaders of various Christian denominations. A member of the territory’s Senate riled some of those leaders last year by drafting a bill that would have legalized gay marriage, but the bill has not advanced.

In the western Pacific territory of Guam, where more than 80 percent of the residents are Roman Catholic, the church helped defeat a bill to recognize same-sex unions in 2009. It was introduced by the vice speaker of the territorial legislature, Sen. Benjamin Cruz, who is openly gay.

Cruz said he tried to find gay couples willing to campaign publicly for same-sex marriage, but only one couple stepped forward, and he’s now ceased his advocacy efforts.

“Why should I be the only one that gets the nasty stares in church?” he asked.

Several gay couples have gone off-island to marry, but their unions are not recognized when they return to Guam even though they enjoy federal benefits, such as filing joint tax returns.

Joseph Querimit, 32, and Simon-Joseph Querimit, 31, flew to Hawaii to marry in April 2014; they are now raising an 8-year-old child.

Joseph said he would have preferred to marry on Guam, “but I didn’t want to face all the ridicule.”

“Born and raised on Guam, being Catholics, the upbringing, it’s just not something you would go out there and flaunt,” he said.

A lesbian couple – Dausha Magalhaes, 30, and her wife, Richelle, 32 – have lived on Guam since April 2013, shortly after they were married in Massachusetts, and find the island more welcoming than parts of Texas where they once resided.

“We don’t have to be scared if we want to hold hands,” Dausha said. “We do not get stared at or gawked at, and I have not once felt like a social pariah like I do back home.”

The other two Pacific territories – American Samoa and the Northern Marianas – do not recognize same-sex marriages even though they have no formal ban. American Samoa’s Office of Vital Statistics said it has not received any request from same-sex couples seeking a marriage license, and local lawyers have not taken up the cause.

Galeai Tu’ufuli, one of American Samoa’s paramount traditional chiefs and a member of territorial Senate, said he is neither for nor against gay marriage, but cited prevailing religious views that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.

“Why test the waters now by introducing legislation to deal with this issue?” said Tu’ufuli. “Time will tell when and if this issue surfaces in the future.”

Christian churches with conservative social views predominate in American Samoa, and the government’s motto is, “Samoa, Let God Be First.” Yet the territory also has a tradition of embracing its community of fa’afafine – males who are raised as females and adapt feminine traits.

Many of the fa’afafine are college-educated and hold professional jobs. Some older members of the community have cautioned against joining in same-sex marriage advocacy for fear of roiling the status quo, while some younger members have chosen differently.

“I joined the minority in pushing for same-sex marriage and for equal rights for happiness,” said 29-year-old Princess Auva’a, a well-known fa’afafine.

Together, the five U.S. territories have almost 4 million residents – more than 3.5 million of them in Puerto Rico. As of the 2010 U.S. census, Guam had 159,358 residents, the U.S. Virgin Islands 106,405, Guam 159,358; American Samoa 55,519 and the Northern Marianas 53,883

Associated Press writers Danica Coto in Puerto Rico, Grace Garces Bordallo in Guam and Fili Sagapolutele in American Samoa contributed to this report.

Follow David Crary on Twitter at twitter.com/CraryAP

© 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/14/marriage-equality-us-territories_n_6870354.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices

Dolce & Gabbana Again Speak Out Against Same-Sex Parenting: 'The Only Family is the Traditional One'

Dolce & Gabbana Again Speak Out Against Same-Sex Parenting: 'The Only Family is the Traditional One'

Stefano-gabbana-domenico-dolce-portraitDomenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, the two men and former couple behind the Italian luxury fashion house Dolce & Gabbana, are once again letting the world know their thoughts on why same-sex couples shouldn’t raise children.

“The family is not a fad,” Gabbana declared to Panorama magazine according to a Google translation of Spanish outlet ABC. “No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed.”

Procreation “must be an act of love,” added Dolce. Children born through artificial insemination or egg donors are “children of chemistry, synthetic children. Uteruses for rent, semen chosen from a catalog.”

Back in a 2006 interview with an Italian newspaper, Dolce expressed similar views saying:

I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents. A child needs a mother and a father. I could not imagine my childhood without my mother. I also believe that it is cruel to take a baby away from its mother.”

LGBT news outlet LGBT news Italia has responded by calling for a boycott of the D&G brand in the vein of last year’s boycott of pasta maker Barilla, who made international headlines when its chairman told an Italian radio show that the company would never make an ad with gay people and if they didn’t like it they could find another brand of pasta.

[h/t NCRM]


Kyler Geoffroy

www.towleroad.com/2015/03/-dolce-gabbana-againspeak-out-against-same-sex-parenting-the-only-family-is-the-traditional-one.html