Leave It To Fox News To Complain About Diversity On U.S. Olympic Team

Fox News Vice President John Moody is very upset that
some of the United States athletes now competing in the
2018 Winter Olympics are not white and straight.
Apparently, in his mind, Olympics are for whites only.

Apparently, the white supremacists at Fox News are deeply upset by our U.S. Winter Olympics team.

A greater proportion of our team has more people of color, more people from the LGBTQ community and more people from different backgrounds than in past years.

It sounds to me like whoever deals with getting athletes on the U.S team might have looked to a broader population than usual to get the cream of the crop into the Olympics.

Or much more likely, the best athletes out there come from more diverse backgrounds than they used to. America is more diverse than it used to be, so this makes total sense.

But Fox News would beg to differ.

The U.S. Olympic team's motto is Faster, Higher, Stronger.  Period. Our best athletes are now competing in PyeongChang. Not our gayist, not our most African-American. Not our most Asian. Just our best.

Apparently, Fox News and its hard core racists, homeophobic fans really don't want the best of the best. As long as the atheletes are white and are not queer.

Fox News executive Vice President John Moody whined that that the U.S. Olympic Committee seems to want to change the above mentioned motto to "Darker, Gayer, Different."

Moody was terribly upset that the U.S. Olympic Committee has the gall to have qualified team members that might be African-American, Hispanic, Asian, gay, or simply not 100 percent straight and white.

"If your goal is to win medals, that won't work," Moody whined. "No sport that we are aware of awards points - or medals - for skin color or sexual orientation," he added.

"Were our Olympians selected because they're the best at what they do, or because they're the best publicity for our current obsession with having one each from Column A, B and C."?

African-American speed skater Shani Davis is not qualified
to be in the Olympics because he is black and only white athletes
are good enough, says Fox News Vice President John Moody.
By the way, Davis already has four Olympic medals
under his belt. 

And there you have it.  White supremacy at work. What Moody basically said is that anyone who is not white and straight has lesser abilities and skills white people.

 It's unfathonable to Moody that an African American, Asian, gay, whatever, could possibly have the ability to win a gold medal at the Olympics.

That's totally in league with Trump fans and avid followers of Fox News. A bit ignorant, to say the least.

A day or so after Moody's column appeared, Fox News removed it from its web site, saying Moody is just a longtime mucky muck there who doesn't have editorial control. Because of his longevity there, they didn't really vet or edit it carefully.

"John Moody's column does not reflect the views or values of Fox News and has been removed," according to a statement Fox released to the media Friday. 

Riiiiight.

Unsurprisingly, there was quite a bit of pushback against Moody's column before it was yanked. "These athletes are at the Olympics because they already won by qualifying to represent the United States on the world's stage; and they did so despite facing discrimination from places like Fox News throughout their careers," said Sarah Kate Ellis, president and CEO of GLAAD, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

".....to suggest that race, sexuality, or gender orientation are the reasons these incredible athletes made the cut is insulting, repugnant and dismissive of a lifetime of hard work," said Catherine Sakimur of the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

The column is off the web site, but it did its job. It was a nice serving of red meat for the white supremacists, alt-right, aging racists and raving lunatics that make up the core of Trump's base.I don't think we'll ever change the minds of this very base Trump base. But the louder the rest of us are when we resist these idiots, the better.  

Wacko Kenyan "Moral Leader" Appalled By Gay Lion Sex

Paul Goldstein's photo of two male lions in a romantic
embrace has freaked out Kenya's film censor.

So a guy named Paul Goldstein took a picture of two male lions in Kenya seemingly having sex, and a Kenyan "moral leader" said human gay people must have taught the lions to do that.

Yes, I know the crazy train runs all over the world, doesn't it?

According to the New York Daily News, Ezekiel Mutua the head of Kenya's Film Classification Board has this theory:

"These animals need counseling, because probably they have been influenced by gays who have gone to the national parks and behaved badly."

Mutua  said the lions must have seen two gay guys going at it, and decided to copy the feat.

I guess that puts new meaning into the term "lion tamer."

Mutua, who clearly does not know much about wildlife (there often are same gender encounters among animals) marveled:

"I mean where on earth have you heard something like this happening. The demonic spirits inflicting in humans seem to have now caught up with animals."

Or the demonic spirits have infected people so badly that they freak out over everything that suggests anything gay.

Mutua, who I mentioned  heads the Film Classification Board, is also freaking out about gay themes in movies, no matter how benign.

His agency banned Disney's "Andi Mack" because the show added a gay character. "Any attempt to introduce gay programming in Kenya will be met with the full force of the law," Mutua said.

I guess Mutua never go to Kenya being a gay guy myself. Even if I promise not to teach lions how to have gay sex. Lions just aren't my type anyway.

Conservative Pundit Erickson Says Noncomforming Gay People Should Get Beaten Up.

Snowflake Erick Erickson wants everybody to look and act like
him because those who don't are so icky that it weirds him out

Erick Erickson, to use the term so often bandied about by conservatives, is a total snowflake.

It turns out that he finds people who are obviously different, especially gay people who don't dress and act like he wants them to, are totally icky and he Just. Can't. Stand. It.

Why can't people look and act like he wants them to? Why does he have to suffer through the torture of seeing guys who aren't as macho as he is? Why can't everybody just make him happy like he deserves? Or something.

This all started when, last week, Republican Senator Mike Enzi spoke to a group of middle and high school students in Wyoming and one of the students asked what he was doing to impro e the life of the LGBT community in Wyoming.

Part of Enzi's response was this:

"In Wyoming, you can be just about anything you want to be, as long as you don't push it in somebody's face."

Then he went on: "I know a guy who wears a tutu and goes to bars on Friday night and is always surprised that he gets in fights. Well, he kind of asks for it. That's the way he winds up with that kind of problem."

No, the problem is solved when, if you see a guy in a bar wearing a tutu and you don't like that fact, you ignore said guy in the tutu.

To Enzi's credit, he apologized for the inartful comments and called the guy who wears the tutu, who reports they had a productive conversation.

Well, pundit Erickson was NOT happy with Enzi's apology.

He responded by writing a column titled, "You Will Get Punched and Others Have Rights Too."

Erickson's column collapses in its very first paragraph, which is:

"You know, I'm really damn tired of all the people running around making other people extremely uncomfortable then screaming about their rights and priveges when called out. If you want to go around making people uncomfortable, you've got the problem, not the the rest of us."

Um, actually, you've got the problem Erick! If you fall apart because some guy is wearing a tutu in the same room as you, that makes you a total snowflake.

And you're the worst narcissist ever. It's not everybody else's job to make you comfortable and happy. You're not the center of the friggin' universe.

Again, the solution is so, so easy: Ignore the people you don't like.  You don't get to punch people who you believe are aesthetically displeasing.

Erickson goes on:

"I know liberals in the coastal bubbles of homogenized whiteness and skinny jeans think everyone has to be think like them - not does, but has to - but the reality is we don't. We are a culurally heterogeneous nation with diverse cultural norms."

Um, since when does anybody think you have to like their point of view and their skinny jeans. Nobody is making you do anything, Erick. You get to think what you want. And if skinny jeans give you the vapors, they you're really a wimp.

Erickson demands in his column that everybody he thinks are icky should "get over themselves." No, Erick, you need to get over yourself.

You don't get to dictate how others look and act. Just like me or anybody else has no right to demand that you act or look a certain way.

Sure, we can criticize you, and you can criticize anyone you want.

But don't go around justifying beating up people you think are weird.

Frankly, Erick, I think you're weird, but I don't want to beat you up and I don't want anybody else to, either.

Just chill.

Straight Dutch Men Have Perfect Response To A Homophobic Attack; Gay Putin Banned

Many straight men in the
Netherlands are holding hands
lately to protest a recent
homophobic attack on a gay couple

A week ago, a married gay couple were brutally attacked in Arnhem, a city in the eastern part of the Netherlands.

Apparently, the five horrible homophobic teenagers that attacked the couple couldn't stand the fact that the two men had been holding hands as they walked down a sidewalk, something that many, many married couples do routinely.

The teens are in a heap of trouble, of course, and most people in the Netherlands were horrified by the attack.

According to the Guardian, a journalist named Barbara Barend had a great idea to show solidarity to the couple who had been attacked. She tweeted a all for "all men (straight and gay) please to just walk hand in hand."

So, lots of men in the Netherlands are doing just that.  For instance, Button-down Alexander Pechtold, of the Democrats D66 party, showed up at a government meeting the other holding hands with his finance spokesman Wouter Koolmees the other day.

Very straight and macho looking Dutch military personnel posted photos of themselves on social media holding hands with other men. Male workers at Dutch embassies around the world also posted photos of themselves holding hands in solidarity.

Holding hands is just symbolic, of course, and, won't in itself get rid of homophobic violence. But it does put the world on notice, that we're not going to tolerate it. Anything helps.

Meanwhile, in much more homophobic Russia, authorities have banned the meme of Vladimir Putin as a "gay clown" whatever that is.

Vladimir Putin hates this meme of him, so don't share
it with anybody! Wouldn't want to offend him! 

It probably refers to a popular meme that shows Putin with lots of makeup, long eyelashes and bright red lipstick.

The Russian government has tried to depict Putin as super macho, like that famous image of Putin, shirtless, riding a horse, which to me is the gayest depiction of Putin I've ever seen.

Of course, the rest of the world is laughing at Putin being so insecure there can't be gayish images of him.

True, the Russian government is hostile and violent toward gay people, but one tool to fight that is mockery.

Sorry, with all of Putin's evilness, a good response is to laugh at that jerk.

And we might as well let Stephen Colbert pile on:

Perfect Karma Might Strike Anti-Gay Harlem Church

Advocates are hoping for karma. This Harlem
homophobic church is up for foreclosure auction
and an organization that helps homless gay teens wants to buy it. 

There's this weird minister at this weird little church in Harlem called Atlah World Missionary Church, who is vehemently anti-gay.

And weird. Did I say weird?

The marquee in the front of the church has had messages like "Jesus Would Stone Homos," and "Obama has released the homo demons on the black man."

The church's pastor, Rev James David Manning, famously said in 2014 that Starbucks flavored its coffees with semen from "sodomites."

Yeah, did I say he was weird?

Anyway,  it appears that Manning, or whoever is running the Atlah World Missonary Church, isn't so good with finances.

The city of New York says Atlah owes debts and tax liens totalling a little over a million dollars. The church is about to be sold in a foreclosure auction, says the Huffington Post.

This is prime real estate, so I'm sure a lot of developers want to gobble this place up.

However, I'm really rooting for one of the potential bidders for this property - the Ali Forney Center.

Why? Because the Ali Forney Center would be awesome karma for this place. It's an advocacy group for homeless gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender teens.

Talk about turning a derelict property to good use!

The Ali Forney Center is conducting an online fundraiser tohelp raise $200,000 so it can buy the property and turn it into housing for its young clients, says the Huffington Post. 

The $200,000 would be used to leverage other funds and help from foundations to secure the property.

If the Ali Forney Center is ultimately unsuccessful in buying the building, it will use the donations to expand its services for homeless youth elsewhere.

Carl Siciliano, the Center's founder and executive director, said converting the "church" to a building that houses homeless gay teens would "truly be a triumph of love over hatred."

The fundraising for the Ali Forney Center at what is hoped will soon be the former Atlah church is going quite well.

As of Sunday, $75,000 had been raised, reports the JoeMyGod blog. Hopes are that today, as people head to work and tell each other about the fundraiser, the donations will skyrocket even more.

(UPDATE: As of 2 p.m. EDT, the fundraising has gotten up past $100,000)

If you want to make a donation hit this link. 

If you do donate, you will help make things just that much more right in the world.

Awesome Little Girl Reacts Perfectly To Annoying Street Preacher

Zea, left, is non-plussed by weied street preachers
promoting homophobia in Columbus, Ohio.
Photo by Mara Gruber.  

In Columbus, Ohio, a self-absorbed, incredibly annoying street "preacher" confronted a little girl named Zea who was holding a rainbow flag.

Zea was among a throng of people celebrating Friday's Supreme Court decision that legalized same sex marriage across the nation.

The street preacher wasn't very enthusiastic about the Supreme Court decision. Oh well.

In a video showing the confrontation,  Zea at first looks a little stunned and afraid of the idiot yelling in her face. Really. Wouldn't you? I would.

Anyway, another adult enters the picture and gives Zea a high five, just to reassure her that everybody's got her back and it's OK.

Soon, Zea is high fiving  EVERYONE and pointedly annoying the idiot yelling nearby. She doesn't give a whit about what the moron is saying

Well, played, Zea!

Watch the brief video (H/T Gawker)

Some Idiot In California Wants Ballot Measure To Execute All Gay People

California Attorney General Kamala Harris
totally doesn't want a petition for a terrible
anti-gay ballot intiative but it looks
like she will be compelled by existing
laws to do just that.  

UPDATE: As of Wednesday, a day after I wrote this, it turns out California Attorney General Kamala Harris IS going to try preventing this idiotic "kill the gays" proposal  from going forward.

The Guardian newspaper reports late this afternoon that she is going to ask a judge to step in and prevent the petitions for this weird, odious proposal from being circulated.

Said Harris:

"It is my sworn duty to uphold the California and United States constitutions and to protect the rights of all Californians. 

This proposal not only threatens public safety, it is patently unconstitutional, utterly reprehensible, and has no place in civil society."

PREVIOUS DISCUSSION:

Demonstrating yet again how just one idiot can provoke incredible embarassment, not to mention expense, a doofus in California wants the state residents to pass a law imposing the death penalty on all gay people living in the state.

Quote, unquote "Christian" activist Matt McLaughlin is behind this harebrained scheme.

This moron's proposed legislation demands "any person who touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification be put to death by bullets to the head or any other convenient measure."

Well, this guy's touched all right.

McLaughlin has done the easy part in getting this proposal on the ballot. McLaughlin has paid his $200 filing fee.

That means California Attorney General Kamala Harris must put the "Sodomite Suppression Act" proposal on the state's web site, and allow petitions to circulate.

The petitions are the hard part for McLaughlin. He needs at least 365,000 Californians to sign a petition that would force state election officials to put the question to all of the state's voters.

If he finds 365,000 legitimate voters to sign his petition, we're all in trouble.

Of course, Harris isn't exactly happy about putting this out for petition.  But her hands might be tied on this one. According to SF Gate:

"Does she have the power to refuese if the measure is patently unconstitutional? Harris isn't saying; her office did not return repeated phone calls. But some veteran practitioners of election law said they don't think so.

'The statute is clear: That the office has to prepare a summary provided the proponents have paid $200 and followed the right procedures,' said attorney Robert Stern, author of the state's 1974 Political Reform Act. He said he's never heard of a case in which the attorney general refused to issue a tital and summary."

Which of course leaves us with McLaughlin, who's proposed law declares it is "better that offenders should die rathern all of us should be killed by God's just wrath."

I suppose somebody is going to feel God's just wrath. If I were McLaughlin, I'd hide deep in the basement when there's lightning, just in case.

McLaughlin is sure as hell hiding from the public's wrath. He's pretty shadowy, no media has been able to contact him for comment, and he's tough to track down.

Of course, hiding like this will make it hard for McLaughlin and any of his minions to get the 365,000 signatures he needs for the ballot item. After all, you have to go out and public and get people to sign the stupid thing.

I'm guessing, just guessing, that a lot of people would be offended if asked to sign the petition, and that could lead to difficulties as well.

McLaughlin's um, proposal has begotten some other farcical ballot ideas going, at least from one activist.

Late last week, the publication Slate reported this tidbit:

"Frustrated by the attorney general's inability to combat McLaughlin's proposal, Charlotte Laws has decided to fight back with some free speech of her own. On Monday morning, Lewis plans to file the Intolerant Jackass Act, accompanied by the requisite $200, with the California attorney general.

Laws' proposal cleverly mirrors and skewers the Sodomite Suppression Act, explaining that the 'abominable crime known as prejudice against sexual orientation' is 'a destructive view that society commands to suppress.'

Laws' um, law, would force anyone bringing forth a ballot measure suggesting that gay people be killed be forced to attend sensitivity traning for at least three hours per month for 12 consecutive months, and the offender or "Intolerant Jackass" must donate $5,000 to a pro-gay or pro-lesbian organization."

OK, Laws' idea is probably unconstitutional, too, but as you can tell, she's just trolling McLaughlin.

Now if we can only pass a law to make McLaughlin just shut up already and stop wasting everybody's time, and taxpayers' money.

English Language School Teacher Fired Over Blog About Homophones Because His Boss Thinks Homophones Are Totally Gay

This guy's language school blog
post about homophones got him fired. 

The English language can be tricky for those trying to learn it.  

There was a guy named Tim Torkildson at the Nomen Global Language Center who wrote a helpful blog post about homophones, which are words that sound the same but have completely different meanings.

Think "peal" and "peel" or "flour" and "flower."

Here's the "problem": The word "homophone" has "homo" in it. Torkildson's boss, Clarke Woodger, fired him, because the subject of homophones is just so gay.

Paul Rolly, writing in the Salt Lake Tribune, reported that Woodger complained that because of the blog, "now our school is going to be associated with homosexuality."

Actually, it wouldn't have, had Woodger not been so homophobic that any word with the word "homo" in it is totally gay.  

Um, can you have words that have a same-sex attraction toward each other?  

As Rolly reports:  "(Torkildson) knew the 'homo' part of the word could be politically charged, but he thought the explanation of that quirky part of the English language would be educational."

Boy, was it ever! I had no idea I should avoid words with the word "homo" in it, like "homosapien" or "homogenize" because they're so gay.

Torkildson said he wanted to teach the concept of homophones because such words are confusing to someone whose native language doesn't have that feature, Rolly reports.

However, Woodger said that most of his language school's students are at a basic level of English proficiency and are not ready to learn complex concepts like homophones.

This whole thing could get worse, though, if you consider another word for homophone is homonym.

Yep, as I said, the English language is just so queer.

New Anti-Gay Laws Promoting "Religious Freedom" Reflect Chutzah, Will Backfire

Arizona looked, at least until today, like it was onthe cusp of enacting a law that basically says if a gay person comes into your shop and your "heartfelt religious convictions" make you not want to serve them, go ahead and throw them out.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is
deciding whether to veto a really
over the top anti-gay bill.  

At first glance, this might seem too bad. Why should business owner have to deal with somebody they don't like?

Well, because you're discriminating against a whole class of citizens, that's why. It's really like the Jim Crow laws back in the 1950s.

Black people don't have a choice other than to be black, so you can't discriminate against that entire class. Gay people, despite the protestations of religious  conservatives and the discredited "ex-gay" types, really can't change their sexual orientation.

And it's a little much to ask gay people to either pretend they are straight or to spend their lives being celibate, just to make adherents of certain religions feel better.  

Arizona's proposal, and similar ones in other conservative states, have come up because same gender, gay marriage is sweeping the nation.  It's legal in 12 states (including Vermont, Yay!, where I live and have been gay married to the wonderful Jeff since August 26, 2012. )

The people who don't like gay marriage are afraid that say, a religious wedding cake baker might be forced to bake a cake for a gay couple who are getting married.

And under anti-discrimination laws in some states, that's entirely possible. Here in Vermont, a bed and breakfast owner got in trouble for declining to host a wedding between two same gender partners, based on the inn owners' religious beliefs.

Contrary to some conservatives' assertions, people aren't going to get thrown in jail for refusing to serve gays, but they might lose civil lawsuits, as the owners of the Vermont bed and breakfast did to the tune of $10,000.

The deal is, if you run a business open to the public, some of your clientele are going to be people you'd rather not associate with.

Unless those people cause a direct disruption to your business, say by shoplifting, disturbing other customers or causing damage your really have to do business with them.

If you don't want your business to serve gays, blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and I don't know, purple people from Pluto, then don't have a business that serves the public.

It really does take a lot of gall to say people are being "discriminated" against because they have to live in the same world as people their religion says they should hate.  I don't like, say, Internet trolls, but no matter how much I whine, they're going to exist. Deal with it.

All this is why the Arizona bill, if the state's governor, Jan Brewer, signs it into law, will probably get struck down by the courts.

The people behind the bill surely know that, but are just trying to score political points with their conservative base voters.

Of course the court of public opinion could easily shoot down the law before any federal appeals court event gets to glance at the thing.

It seems most people nowadays either tolerate gays or are fine with them. Most businesses want to have as many happy customers as possible. After all, the point of having a business is to make money and you need customers to do that, right?

That business angle is why a similar bill in Kansas recently got shot down. In Arizona, the state's Chamber of Commerce and Industry, not exactly extreme leftists, urged Brewer to veto the bill. As did the state's two Republican U.S. Senators.

And three of the state legislators who originally voted for the bill now say thir vote was a mistake and want the governor to veto it.
 
Here's what the Arizona Chamber of Commerce has to say:

"After analyzing the bill, we are very concerned about the effects it would have on Arizona's economy. As leaders in the business community, we cannot support measures that could expose our businesses to litgation, nor do want to send a message that our state is anything but an open and attractive place for visitors and the top talent that will be the cornerstone of our continued economic growth"  

I also think the law, if it's enacted, would backfire on the religious fundamentalists who backed it. What if a business owner said it was against his heartfelt religious belief to serve someone who would discriminate against gay people?

Already, a Tuscon pizzeria put up a tongue in cheek sign saying it reserved the right to not serve lawmakers who supported the bills. 

So,  as is usually the case, when legislators pass laws based on their well, basic bases, and adhere to narrow, ideological world views, the laws don't end up working in their favor.

Which tells me even if Brewer doesn't veto this stupid proposal, it won't last long, even the most conservative corners of Arizona.

The fun part? All those national extreme right wing fundamentalists that goaded the legislature to take this up willl end up looking even more stupid once the bill, or the law dies.

Bummer, dude

Canadian Group Has Awesome Olympics Ad Protesting Russians' Hate of Gays

Much has been made of the horrible, hideous attacks on gay people in Russia from the top levels of government on down to many people on the street. 

A still from "Luge" a Canadian group's ad
protesting anti-gay idiocy in Russia.  

The government goes after them, vigilante groups brutally attack gay people there. Disgusting beyond belief.

A silver lining to all this is that the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia are shining a spotlight on these abuses. I don't know if it will force any changes, but there is pressure on the government and the people of Russia to back off.

Sometimes, the best forms of protest involve humor, and a group called the Canadian Institute of Diversity and Inclusion put together an AWESOME 30-second, Olympic themed ad calling the homophobic Russians out.

Here's the video, Enjoy:

Sue The Gays To Make Them Straight?

I was definitely perplexed to say the least when I ran across a little item last week when I was researching extremist right wing crazies.

This guy is trying to figure out how to
sue the gays. 

Yes, I'm a masochist, deal with it.

This guy named Rick Scarborough of some outfit called Tea Party Unity said he had a great idea.  He doesn't like gay people, so he and other activists say they should file a class action suit to stop the gays.

His buddy Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Trust About Homosexuality (well, maybe not truth, necessarily) wholeheartedly agreed.  So that's two people who think this is a great idea.

The lawsuit would sort of be like those class action lawsuits against tobacco companies a few years ago that accused the tobacco companies of basically selling death.

I'll leave aside for a moment that political end of his idea and go straight (ha!) to the practical side.

Scarborough didn't offer a plan as to exactly whom to target in the lawsuit. The tobacco companies were easy. Find which big companies sold tobacco  products and have at it.

But last I checked, there was no company selling "gay"

Who would you sue? Every gay person out there? That could get complicated. How would you find them all? Assuming you could win the lawsuit, how would you collect settlement money?

Various Web sites that featured this bit of news had helpful comments from readers offering Scarborough potential targets.

At Towlerroad, someone suggested suing all straight people, because they're the ones who make babies, some of whom turn out gay.

Others suggested anti-gay groups sue themselves, since many of them have workers or volunteers who are self-loathing closeted gay people.

How would the results of the lawsuit work? The tobacco lawsuits led to controls on the sale of cigarettes. What would the demands on gays be in this lawsuit?  Would gay people have to stop having sex? Or register with Peter LaBarbera before they engaged in sexual contact?

You'd like that, wouldn't you, Peter?

Rest assured, quite a few people who associate with the Tea Party think Scarborough's idea is nuts.

David Webb of Tea Party 365 had this to say:

"Rick Scarborough is not a Tea Partier....He is not a Tea Party spokesperson, no matter what he, or the media, wants people to believe."

Well, that's a relief. I was afraid someone would shut down the government again until they found a way to sue all the world's gay people and make them straight.