LGBT and NPD

Nowadays it seems as if everybody is mad about something.

Anger can be a good thing, but it can also be counter-productive. Anger can also be a product of self-absorption.

Angry self-absorption can afflict anyone in any community, but let's talk about the GLBT community while we're at it.

In recent weeks I've had a few angry asexuals, bitter bisexuals and others sending me hate emails, saying they're "watching out for me" and making veiled, vague threats of one kind or another because here and there I write or say things that they don't agree with. Let me make it clear that I do not believe that these people speak for nor represent the intelligent and rational members of their respective communities.

Rather these are people who are so insecure, whose sense of self is so tenuous, that they feel a need to bully -- or at least try to bully -- everyone into agreeing with their every pin-headed opinion, whether it makes sense or not.

I try to keep abreast of new developments in, new thoughts on, and new studies of, sexuality. I have a problem with studies that I feel are unscientific, too small or vague, or which are not objective. I don't trust people who have an agenda, whatever it may be. And I have never trusted bullies.

Today studies and surveys on sexuality are often done by those who have a vested interest in the studies saying what they want them to say. By their very nature they are suspect. Studies are rarely done by the impartial.

But getting back to the angry folk. Some of these people may at least feel they have legitimate complaints but why do I think that so much of it really has to do with me-ism? Meaning, it's all about me, me, me. Much of the anger is not due to any real or even perceived discrimination, but to an almost overwhelming self-centeredness that prevents these people from seeing an inch beyond their own noses. They are incapable of understanding -- or even listening to -- another person's viewpoint. You either agree with them totally or you get a hate email. Pathetic.

LGBT people are just as subject to NPD -- Narcissistic Personality Disorder -- as non-LGBT people. These howling, mad-as-a-hornet-types desperately want attention, which makes you wonder why they also prefer to be anonymous -- but there's nothing rational about them. They desperately want you to think of them as victims, they accuse you of victimizing them just because you disagree on certain aspects of certain issues. They want you to feel their pain, even if they could care less about yours. I suppose in their real lives off the Internet nobody pays these people attention -- assuming they even have a life off the Internet.

Most of these people aren't comfortable in their own skin. And certainly not with their sexuality, whatever it may be. They need to take it out on somebody. Let's get this Out and Proud Gay Guy who's stupid enough to use his real name and photo (they never use theirs; too ashamed, I suppose).

I don't know what these people have been doing but I've spent decades fighting for gay rights in one way or another. I hardly need these immature, emotionally stunted pissants threatening me or giving me a lecture cobbled together from trendy reports by people just as dumb and inconsequential as they are.

Often these people are very young, but not always. NPD can affect all sorts of people. I recently got a rather nasty email from a guy who objected to my criticisms of a certain historic bar. He made insulting and wrong speculations about me. After a couple of rounds of emails I realized that this guy didn't really give a shit about the bar. You see, it was his hang-out, "his" bar, and if I "attacked" the bar that meant I was attacking him. A regular person, of course, wouldn't feel this way. They'd think: okay, I like the bar; you don't -- big deal. But a self-absorbed person is a different story. It's all about them.

I'm sure there are various members of the LGBT community who have legitimate gripes and grievances, and can talk about them -- rationally, honestly -- without getting hysterical or stupid.

But the ones with NPD?

I'm not interested in a damn thing they have to say. Because it's never really about a cause, about biphobia or whatever, or this or that or what-have-you.

It's always about them.

And they're a bore.

TWO'S BRAVE BATTLE

TWO [Truth Wins Out] executive Director Wayne Besen has issued the following press release:

"I am proud to announce that Truth Wins Out has finally moved into its new Manhattan office! For the past three years, I had run the organization out of a small studio apartment in Brooklyn. While I loved the short commute and liberal dress code, space was extremely tight. As the organization grew, so did the stacks of media packets, brochures and educational materials. Even my cat, Critter, began to complain about the lack of space. Clearly, the time had come for Truth Wins Out to find an office. This is especially true, when you consider that our main "ex-gay" opposition, Exodus International, has a one million dollar budget, thirteen staff members and a large office complex to plan its destructive "pray away the gay" operations. Exodus also has a quarter-million dollar youth program to shame vulnerable teens into renouncing their sexual orientation. To effectively compete with Exodus and stop them from shattering more families and ruining more lives - it was time to spread our wings. The new office space also makes it possible to have volunteers and interns. There is finally a place where they can work and use their talents to help further Truth Wins Out's crucial mission. I hope you will consider a tax-deductible contribution to help us cover our new office space."

I know there are people who are leery of contributing to some gay rights groups because they're afraid their money will simply go to pay the six figure salaries of some of the officers. [Years ago I was shocked to see the salaries of some of the people working for Gay Men's Health Crisis! I don't know if this has changed.] But TWO is still a small outfit with dedicated activist Besen and others doing what most other gay groups don't seem to be doing: monitoring groups like Exodus, reporting on their activities on a regular basis, and organizing counter-protests and other campaigns to counteract the ex-gay industries distortions, lies, and blatant hatred. This is extremely important work.

So think about making a contribution if you can.

Check out Two's web site here.

Rum Dump at the Stonewall Inn

I've reported in the past how utterly disappointed I was in the "new" Stonewall Inn -- to put it mildly -- the historic bar where began the modern-day Gay Rights movement. (There was a movement even before the Stonewall rebellion, let's make that clear.) This mostly straight-owned bar with its deluge of drunken straight tourists from The Duplex, closeted bartenders, weird hostesses, and an almost total absence of gay pride finally made a little burp in that direction, although it was activist Wayne Besen who deserves the credit for it. He got the bar's owners to stage a "Rum Dump" at the bar to protest and publicize the fact that Jamaica (from whence comes Myer's Rum and Red Stripe Beer) has become "the most homophobic place on Earth." But there are other world-wide trouble spots, as Besen reports on his blog, which is essential -- and scary -- reading.

I've no doubt the owners of the Stonewall see this as a chance for publicity and probably don't care all that much about the situation in Jamaica (and can probably afford to lose the one or two bottles they had of Myers Rum) but at least it's a step in the right direction. But this Stonewall Inn is not and never has been (nor, I believe, will it ever be) the "historic" Stonewall Inn" regardless of its name and its location. LGBT groups will hold occasional events there because of this "history," but it's clear to me, at least, that the owners are less interested in history than they are in the kachung of the cash register, and I'm sure they would say "we're businessmen, who can blame us?" But they did play up the history of the bar in interviews for the gay press, in which they were often mistaken for a gay couple.

Wonder how big a crowd they got for the Rum Dump?

But if Besen can keep at the owners and get them to support more activist-oriented events and protests, maybe the bar can at some point turn into what it should be, or at least some approximation thereof.

But forgive me if I don't hold my breath.

In the meantime, if you see any of the offending Jamaican brands in your local gay bar, ask the manager not to order any more. A complete and total boycott of Jamaica and its products is what is called for, as Besen has noted.

George Weber, R.I.P.

The news tonight is full of the murder of the "masseuse" who was killed by the clean cut guy who found her on Craig's list. About a month ago there was another murder that probably didn't get quite as much attention in the general media. Former ABC radio man George Weber hooked up for "rough sex" with a guy he met on Craig's List. This other guy, John Katehis, who says he is heterosexual (naturally) is 16 but looks older. Apparently you have to be 18 to use the sex ads on Craig's List, so there's a possibility Weber thought he was dealing with an adult.

There have been interesting reactions to this terrible event in the blogosphere. Weber was apparently a closeted conservative who didn't support gay marriage. He was into S & M and gave drugs and alcohol to a guy who looks like the poster boy for "bad news." But who among us hasn't occasionally exercised bad judgment when it comes to sex? And certainly Weber didn't deserve his fate just because he liked it rough and dangerous. [Was this an extension of his internalized homophobia?]

While one should not chortle over the horrible murder even of a closet case or hypocrite like Weber, I can't blame those who have suggested that this gruesome scene may never have enfolded had Weber been an Out and Proud self-accepting man with a loving partner and a healthier attitude toward himself. At the same time, we have to remember that any gay man -- even those of us who are Out and Proud -- can accidentally hook up (on line or in bars) with someone who turns out to be violent and dangerous. People always cluck their tongues when the sexually active get their "comeuppance" as if the murdered ones are sacrificial offerings for their bitterness over being left out of the party -- and that really stinks.

Weber was working in what some might considered a "macho" profession (newsman) and that may have been in part why he stayed in the closet, but I'm willing to bet it was more than that. It's more problematic to explain why he was a Republican,and why he was against gay marriage. It's likely that he had zero gay identity but rather was one of these allegedly "heterosexual" men who liked sex with other men. (I don't buy this heterosexual business for one minute, of course. I've no doubt some of Weber's straight friends, fearful of "guilt" by association, will paint him as a hetero.) Did he tell fag jokes one minute and make dates with men on Craig's List the next? Weber was probably homosexual but he was not a Gay Man.

One thing is certain: Weber has been demonized as a "pedophile" but even if he knew Katehis was 16, it would hardly make him a child molester. Pedophiles generally target much younger children. Besides, Katehis looks about as "child-like" as a panther. Apparently his lawyer is planning on painting Weber as a predator and his client as his victim. As others have pointed out, Katehis' youth may work in his favor at trial. Katehis claims that he stabbed Weber --- fifty times, mostly in the back!-- in "self-defense" when Weber took out a knife to cut the duct tape binding his legs. (Need I say anymore?)

Whatever one's feelings about this, the whole business is just sad on so many levels. Here we have another "self-hating homo" who probably avoided gay bars and gay men like the plague, but was driven by that very self-hatred into a violent encounter with someone most of us would cross the street to avoid. And Katehis is probably another conflicted type, just as self-hating, stabbing to death the man with whom he'd just had a sexual encounter (if you can even call it that).

The ultimate irony is the very gay activists that guys like Weber generally have disdain for will be on his side when the defense argues that he was just a predator who got what he deserved.

The saddest thing is that Weber was deprived of the day when he might have finally come out proudly as a gay man. He might someday have actually done some good for the gay community. Who knows?

Instead he became the subject of a lurid news story.

A fate I wouldn't wish on anyone.

As the Gay World Turns

Never did I dream that one day I would be recommending a soap opera, but I have to say that the gay developments on a CBS soap called As The World Turns have become increasingly interesting and decidedly pro-gay.

Luke (Van Hansis) and Noah (Jake Silbermann) are the young college-age gay couple on the program. Luke came out of the closet first, while Noah -- whom Luke suspected was gay -- was dating a young lady. Noah resisted at first, but eventually came out of the closet, which prompted his homophobic father to take a shot at Luke. Luckily, Luke survived the attack and Noah's father eventually died.

After awhile the producers introduced a young lady who needed to get married or else she would be sent back to her homeland and in all likelihood killed. So she and Noah got married and moved in together, but the producers assured gay viewers that the storyline was not going to go the way they feared. Noah and the young lady did not hop into the sack, and in fact so far the show has resisted making Noah bisexual. [TV shows often make gay characters bisexual not to explore or highlight the bisexual lifestyle, but because they know the mostly heterosexual viewers will feel more comfortable with a character who, despite their same-sex attraction, can enter into an audience-pleasing relationship with a member of the opposite sex at any time. And anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.] Noah, like Luke, appears to have been conceived as a gay character, and hopefully that is the way it will remain.

Luke and Noah nearly broke up for one reason or another before they even had a chance to make love. Complaints that they rarely kissed were responded to with a scene of them happily smooching. A few weeks later they finally went to bed together. Now, we didn't actually see them in bed together the way we see straight couples -- which is, admittedly, annoying, and not because I have a prurient interest in seeing anything -- but at least they have given the guys an active sex life.

I also like the way that Luke is the more political and militant of the two, an activist, while Noah, who took much longer to accept himself, is more of a laid-back, make no waves kind of guy. It makes for interesting conflicts. But the two have also argued, like most couples, about things unrelated to their sexual orientation. However, they were recently denied housing because they were gay, which prompted Luke to hold a rally. I was ready to go until I remembered these are just ficitional characters, although they're playing out situations that occur in real life.

An interesting development occurred when Luke's grandmother's new, much younger and rather handsome husband made a pass at Luke! At first he denied being gay, then said he didn't label himself (where have I heard that before?) then came out only a few days after Lucinda, the grandmother, threw him out of the house for lying to and using her. Frankly, I think the show should have let this situation go on a little longer. The guy, who was closeted for years, seemed to find self-acceptance almost overnight. The producers seemed too anxious to wrap up the storyline. (Maybe the whole bit about married homosexuals just made them too nervous.)

A wild moment occurred when Luke came on to this guy on the very same night that he and Noah were supposed to make love for the first time. Noah went off with his ex-girlfriend -- now just a good friend -- but Luke, misunderstanding, got paranoid and drunk [Luke is not perfect and neither is Noah, another thing I like about them] and made a flagrant pass at his grandmother's husband. Noah, of course, came across the two of them making out and was furious. Most guys would have found it kind of funny -- your boyfriend kissing your grandmother's gay husband -- but Noah has always been a bit humorless as compared to Luke. They made up eventually, of course.

Just this week Luke's biological father Damian -- who sent him to a horrible camp when he found out he was gay -- is back in town, saying he's changed, and begging forgiveness. Frankly, I think it would be great if this sexy Italian told his son "I couldn't accept that you were gay because I couldn't accept myself" so he could come out of the closet, too, and maybe look up Lucinda's gay ex-husband-- they'd make a hot pair!

Ah, but has the homophobic Damian really turned over a new leaf -- or is there something else on his mind? Stay tuned.

Seriously, think what you will about soap operas, this is certainly a major development in the treatment of gay characters, who have been disproportionately non-existent on most soaps. If the storyline of Luke and Noah will make some housewives, house husbands, college kids and others rethink their position on Gay Rights, so much the better. It's also refreshing to see an uncompromising gay activist on daytime television (or anywhere for that matter). This would have been unheard of back in my Gay Activists Alliance media committee days, when all you generally saw were self-hating homos and suicidal lesbians.

As The World Turns has proven that there can be compelling drama in the story of a man's coming out, accepting himself, and fighting against prejudice in the most uncompromising of ways.

As for the rest of the show, I admit I fast forward through the other storylines because I just don't have time to watch a whole hour every day (Luke and Noah are not on every day or every week).

Finally, a clap of my hands to those young actors Van Hansis and Jake Silbermann who, in my opinion, do a splendid job of playing Luke and Noah. I have no idea of their private sexual orientation, and while it might be nice if gay actors were enacting these roles, I have to say that whether they're gay or straight they have my admiration for a job very well done.

As the World Turns is on Monday - Friday from 2 PM to 3 PM on CBS.

Attack of the Self-Hating Homos

Okay, you've heard of Attack of the 50 Foot Woman and Attack of the Giant Leeches, but have you ever been subjected to an attack by a self-hating homo? As much as I'd like to think that SHH's are a dying breed, they still exist. Most of them are in the religious ex-gay camps or on the down low, but a few identify as gay and can be found in gay bars and parties. They can strike when you least expect it.

It usually goes like this. SHH is offended by your gay identity because he or she has none of his/her own. Instead they're dealing with a lot of internalized homophobia. They are almost never out of the closet, even to family and [non-gay] friends, even though just about everyone knows that they're gay anyway.

What brings on an attack can be anything, but especially a discussion on gay rights and gay marriage. Self-hating homos will employ the same arguments that straight bigots use when discussing gay marriage and gay rights ["special privileges" to them]. Regardless of how old they are, they're stuck back in the 1970's.

Because they are on the periphery of the gay scene, they have little knowledge of it beyond their own sexual urges. They know little of homophobia or of the struggle for acceptance, and couldn't care less -- to their minds, it doesn't concern them. They tend to eschew relationships and their sex is of the anonymous (as opposed to casual) variety. They have sex not in actual beds and bedrooms but in parked cars and bushes. Even if they are not in heterosexual relationships (wife and kids), they very much resemble those kind of closet cases. Since they think of gay men in the most stereotypical of terms, and feel they are not in any way like them (except, ahem, for the attraction-to-men bit), they want to disassociate themselves as much as possible from gay guys. They deign to have friendships with openly gay men. [As if we need them.]

They speak of gays as if they are somehow apart from them (which in many ways is true; these people are homosexual but hardly Out and Proud). Like straight bigots they will point out all the outrageous [to them] participants in Gay Pride parades -- "those drag and leather queens, why would I want to march with them?" -- blindly ignoring the fact that most participants in Gay Marches are just average folk who happen to be gay. [Let me make it clear that I am not putting down the more flamboyant marchers.]

They speak of total disdain for gay culture, gay life. Because they are essentially unhappy, they blame it all on their being homosexual. They brag about how they hardly ever go to gay bars, how they have few if any gay friends. In their own minds this somehow makes them better than the rest of us. Their superiority complex only masks an inferiority complex -- but it doesn't fool anyone.

An aside: Most of us certainly have and should have heterosexual friends. But whenever I meet a homosexual person who says, in that certain "superior" tone, that most of their friends are straight, I always get an impression that they feel this makes them somehow better in their own eyes because after all, they think heterosexuals are better than gays [or at least that it's better to be straight than gay].

Sometimes you can help a self-hating homo to find acceptance. More often they set up a stony wall of attitude that it's impossible to breach. They need therapy and counseling but will rarely seek it. They prefer to wallow in their misery.

Some of these people stay shivering in their closets. Others do real damage to themselves and others. They never understand that by acting as if there's something wrong with being gay, they insult every gay person they choose to associate with.

SHH's are all over the Internet. They have strong opinions, but their opinions are always ill-conceived and uneducated because, as they admit, they are on the periphery of gay life. Still they persist in mouthing off on message boards and blogs.

Always anonymously.

Cutting Through the Bullshit

I'm still getting some responses to my post on asexuality, but I'm not going to revisit that issue, except to include one final comment that I received a few days ago, which actually raises a whole other issue; It goes like this:

Look... Buddy...I actually agree with a few of your points here. I agree that this is not a natural orientation. I agree that the LGBT community taking it on is a very stupid idea. I agree that all those who are asexual and experience problems because of it [are] in need of help. I especially agree with your last paragraph that states that if they don't want help, let them go for it. I myself have an asexual friend who is perfectly content with it. There's nothing wrong with that. I may not think it's natural but they're far more content with life than I myself am, so, let them.But your wording - your referring to it as a disability - your tone... It's just far too offensive. Many of your points are valid but you are not going to convince anyone with an approach like that. If anything you're just going to make them more resolute in their ways. I can understand how you would be upset and offended about this, but to have any hope of a credible point, you just need to calm down. (Shinkada) 3/4/09

Shinkada makes some good points. Actually I am a pretty calm person for the most part. But I've never suffered fools gladly, and my sense of humor, irreverence, and my refusal to always adhere to political correctness, may make me seem overly blunt, even nasty, to some people.

I myself have told others that if you tell somebody something in a nasty tone, the other person will miss your message and only focus on the nastiness. That being said, I don't think my post was especially nasty -- when I come across something that I just feel is kind of dopey, my let's-cut-through-the-bullshit attitude comes flaring forth and there's little I can do to stop it. My irreverent tone, my belief that there's humor in almost all things, pisses off those who take themselves, perhaps, way too seriously.

Anyway, on to other issues ....

The hate ... The hate...

Why on earth is it that if you happen to disagree with someone or with some group, you're immediately told that you're full of hate. I can certainly disagree -- vehemently disagree with someone -- without "hating" them (although it doesn't seem to work in reverse). On my recent post on asexuality -- in which I simply expressed an opinion; I did not rage that asexuality is evil or that asexuals should be rounded up and shot -- I got the impression that most of the people who disagreed with me hated me a lot more than I supposedly hated them. [For the record I don't hate people who identify as asexual. And I don't hate those who identify as bisexual, although I've been called biphobic more than once, mostly because I don't always believe that everyone who says they're bisexual is genuinely bisexual anymore than I think everyone who claims to be straight is actually straight. Sue me.]

It seems the only way you can convince some people that you don't hate them is to agree with everything they say. Jeez-- what would be the point then of writing anything or even expressing an opinion? I have never lied about how I feel just to get people to like me. Sure I can be wrong at times, and when and if I come to that conclusion -- about anything -- I'll say so.

As a gay man I'm almost constantly told that because I'm discriminated against I mustn't dare say anything about any group that might be considered a teensy bit negative. I've been told that I must be transphobic (even though I've mentioned more than once that I support transgender rights) because I don't write more often about transgender issues. Actually I have written a few posts on transsexuality, sometimes with irreverence, never with hatred.

But the fact remains that I can not be a spokesperson for the transgender community. I am a gay man, and am knowledgeable of what it means and what it's like to be a gay man. I am not transsexual and can't write from personal experience about what it means and what it's like to be transgender. There are plenty of transgender blogs for that. And asexuals can have their say by starting their own blogs. I do have to say -- here comes the "hatred" again -- that while I find aspects of transsexuality to be rather fascinating, I do not have a similar fascination with asexuality [or bisexuality, for that matter]. There will be immature people who will instantly decide that I therefore must hate asexuals. So far no lesbian has ever accused me of being anti-lesbian, misogynous, or homophobic because I may write more about gay men -- understandably -- than about lesbians.

Some of this attitude comes from youthful mis-directed fervor, some from immaturity, some from mental instability. We don't like to talk about it much, but just like the straight community, the GLBT community and other "out there" groups have some members who are not playing with a full deck or to put it more kindly have mental or emotional "issues." This is not due to their various sexual orientations (although it could be exacerbated by self-hatred or society's disdain) but comes from a variety of causes as it does with straights.

The trouble is that a gay man and activist is not allowed to come right out and say "I think this is silly, I think it's stupid, I think you have emotional or mental issues," even if this is the case. Right away you're slapped back with "but gay people were once thought [still are in some quarters] to be mentally unstable -- how can you discriminate against anyone else?"

Well ... if I think someone is a little nutty (as opposed to eccentric), I think they're nutty, and it doesn't matter if they're also gay or at least GLBT. They are perfectly free to think I'm nutty, too.

For instance, on one progressive message board a person suggested that F for Furry be added to GLBT. "Furries" are people who dress up as cartoon animals, hold conventions, and the like. This person thought of furries as a persecuted minority group and felt that since many furries were gay, they should be added to GLBT. [Let me make it clear that unlike the groups on my "sexual minorities you never heard of" post, furries actually exist! Yes!]

Frankly, even on this progressive board, he didn't get much sympathy.

I left a comment that went something like this. "Perhaps we should add an H for Honeymooners to GLBT. I am a gay man who loves The Honeymooners with Jackie Gleason. There are many gay Honeymooners fans so surely this would be the right thing to do."

Naturally, the furry and a couple of GLBT furry supporters slammed me as a bigot and said I was full of -- you guessed it -- hatred.

I didn't hate that guy. I just thought he was being foolish. But saying someone is being foolish is enough to get you branded a hateful bigot these days. Especially in the modern GLBT community where sensitivity and touchiness is at an all-time high. I understand the reasons for it -- attacks from the Religious Right, the ongoing gay marriage debate, and so on, everyone needing their own space and spotlight, wanting complete understanding (and total agreement -- or else) -- but when it leads to gay men being called Fascists and Nazis simply because they have a differing opinion it's a little ridiculous. [Most of the people who fling out the terms Fascist and Nazi at people who disagree with them have no idea what those terms really mean. Talk about hatred!]

Years ago there was this guy who invited me and a friend to a party without first telling me that most of the guests were into not men but boys. Young boys. As soon as I realized it I turned to my friend and said "put down your drink. Head for the door. Do not say good-bye to anyone. Just leave." When I saw the guy who extended the invitation days later I freely admit I shunned him. "Oh ... the hate, the hate," he muttered as he walked away. Did I hate him? Let's just say I was furious that he had simply assumed because I was a gay activist that I was "okay" with pedophilia, which I'm certainly not, and found his guests to be repellant. People like this have been no help to Gay Rights and have only helped perpetuate ugly stereotypes.

Compared to those people, I haven't much of a beef with asexuals.

Years ago all of [most of?] the sexual minorities were lumped together under the GLBT banner for political purposes. While in some ways this makes perfect sense, it has also created its own set of problems. Gays and bi's and transsexuals do not always look at the world in the same way or from the same vantage point. Bad enough that within the gay community itself there are nasty disagreements based on varying levels of "outness" and identifications (butch vs femme etc.). And of course there are generational disagreements.

Many of the ones who feel "hated" are people in their teens and twenties with various identities who want very much to be taken seriously and are furious when they're not. Believe me, I, too, was young once, so I get that. What I get and they generally don't get is that people in their teens and twenties are still finding themselves for the most part. [Older people can still be finding themselves, of course, but it's more often a phenomenon of youth.] They may be bisexual at 25 and gay at 30. They may see themselves as being gay at 14 and realize that they're really transsexual four years later. Some of the attitudes that they most cherish while in college may seem as ridiculous to them as they do to me when they've been out in the real world for several years. But you just can't tell them this; they have to learn it for themselves. And along with generational conflicts comes age discrimination, which can admittedly work in both directions but which is more likely to target the older person, despite the fact that he or she is clearly more experienced, at least at some things.

If you're gay you sometimes feel as if you're almost forced to stand up for the entire experience of the sexual spectrum, whether you're qualified to or not. You don't dare criticize. At all times you must be politically correct and totally progressive. If you don't you're branded a bigot. And you're always slapped with that "But you're gay so you of all people should understand ..." and so on. I'm really beginning to resent it. This doesn't just come from outside the gay community but from within it. I have actually heard gay men who complain that their favorite gay bar and safe haven is becoming a little too straight for their comfort level being called "heterophobic" from other (and very, very silly) gay men. The former gay men don't hate heterosexuals nor do they wish to discriminate against them, they just get a little nervous when a bar becomes so straight-friendly that straights who are not so gay-friendly come into the place in droves and take over the joint.

But some GLBTers see objecting to this as bigotry. If I think they're ninnies, I'm going to say so. [Ironically I have straight friends who completely understand where the gay guys are coming from and don't in any way, shape or form see this as anti-straight discrimination.]

And why is it politically correct to talk about biphobia and transphobia among gay men and lesbians but politically incorrect to talk about homophobia among some bi's and transsexuals?

Yes, gay men are discriminated against. That doesn't mean we have to buy or agree with everything or risk being branded a bigot.

Our community is diverse. Let's celebrate that diversity [of opinion] and not expect everyone to toe the line and have the exact same opinion and attitude of everyone else.

Just my opinion.

Sex Groups You May Never Have Heard Of

Okay, people. I know you've all heard of homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, and asexuals, but it's recently come to my attention that there are many, many other sex-oriented groups and minorities out there that you may have been unaware of. For example:

Vegan sensualists: These are people who are only sexually attracted to vegetables. It gives a whole new meaning to the term "carrot top!"

Ambidextrous ambisexuals: These people insist, rather haughtily, that they are very different from "ordinary" bisexuals. "We are ambidextrous as well as bisexual," says Jeremy N. a representative of the group. "Not only can we shake hands with either our right or left hand, but we can screw both a man and a woman at exactly the same time."

Intersectionists: I've mentioned these before. I'll let Joey Taylor, the President of Intersectionists International, explain it. "Do you have a friend you've known for years but whose home you've never been to, in fact you only have a vague idea of where he lives and the two of you always meet at some intersection? Our orientation is to intersections, which is our fetish. We are turned on by avenues meeting streets, and prefer to have sex only at intersections. Hence no one ever sees our apartments." O-kay.

anal retentive narcissists: These are people who are only turned on by their own assholes.

excessive avoirdupois-ists: These people used to be called "chubby chasers" before the term became politically incorrect.

extra hemorrhoidal action activists: People who find it sexy that they -- or their sex partner -- has hemorrhoids. This group is organizing and planning many militant actions to advance their cause and stamp out hemorrhoidal-obia.

anti-transvestism interiorists: These people insist that they are only "interior" transvestites in that they refuse to dress up in male or female drag. There is a raging debate as to whether they are true transvestites or not. Madame LaBanca, drag queen par excellance, insists that "Honey, these mothers are closet transvestites too hung up to come out in all their finery. I am the real deal, they are just TV wannabees." [I'm staying out of this one!]

ambidextrous fruitandveggie ambisexual sensualists: The 7 members of this group insist that they are not only different from bisexuals, but from ambidextrous ambisexuals and vegan sensualists. "Please!" says group leader Maggie LaFarge. "Those people are so vanilla, so limited. We don't just have sex with vegetables, but fruits as well, and we can have sex with two people at the same time while juggling bananas and cucumbers."

adolphitis-ists: These are people who are only attracted to men or women who look like Adolph Hitler, including the mustache.

joanrivers-ites: These are people who can only have sex with anyone who has obviously had a great deal of plastic surgery. They are the exact opposite of robertredford-ites who are only attracted to people who have obviously not had plastic surgery.

jerkoffmoviemusicalists: These are people who can only get off while watching old movie musicals. Since they're generally unable to find people to watch along with them, they wind up jerking off.

masculinefemaledressers: These men are a variety of drag queen but instead of trying to look as feminine as possible, they put on women's clothing but eschew make up, wear beards, and are very macho. Sometimes they are called "bra bears" but this is considered mfd-phobic.

antidisestablishment sex heads: These are people who run around giving sudden blow jobs to surprised -- indeed shocked -- people in the most unlikely places, such as the supermarket, church, and The Center for Asexual Studies.. They see themselves as a kind of guerrilla movement. "Our job is to blow your mind while we're blowing your joint!" says Poindexter Twittle, the movement's founder. Mr. Twittle has asked me to say that the group is in desperate need of legal defense funds due to the number of arrests. At last count, virtually the entire membership was in jail.

atomicmutantxites: People who are only sexually aroused by members of Marvel Comics mutant super-hero team, The X-Men. Since the X-Men are merely fictional comic book characters, the members of this minority do not get laid very often, and Hugh Jackman has had to take out restraining orders on several of them.

flatulovables: are people who are turned on by flatulence. They publish a newsletter which is printed on toilet paper and entitled "Gastric Mistress."

Bettina Linney is a woman who insists that she alone is a persecuted minority group. "How can you be a minority group when you're only one person?" Miss Linney is asked on a regular basis. She replies that, "Look, like, it's this way, I don't really see how that's relevant. I mean, how dare you judge me and tell me who or what I am? You're a bigot, bigot, bigot!"

If you know of any more, let me know!

Asexuals United! -- Give Me a Break!

or NO SEX PLEASE -- WE'RE GLBTA!

You may or may not have noticed how some GLBT bloggers are adding "asexuals" to the list of oppressed minorities (Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender). If you have any sense at all, you're probably going "what the fuck?" [Or perhaps "what the no-fuck" might be more appropriate.] Salon and The New York Times both did articles on the (small) number of people who are identifying as asexual and who claim that, like gay or straight, it is an orientation.

No, I'm not making this up!

It's almost becoming -- hell it has become--comical the way that groups are stealing the language of gay liberation -- "asexual and proud" like hell! -- and appropriating it for their own pathetic purposes. Of course, some dim bulbs in the GLBT movement are perfectly happy to let them do it. As I've said before, some well-meaning but intellectually challenged individuals are loathe to discriminate against anyone who might be "oppressed," so they''ll add just about any group imaginable to GLBT (thank goodness that does not extend to pedophiles or bestialists, but in the future, who knows?)

Asexuality has different meanings but for our purposes it refers to people who have no sexual attraction for anyone, male or female. Naturally they have no sex lives, or if they do, don't get any pleasure out of them. As far as I'm concerned, this isn't an orientation -- it's a disability and it does no one -- least of all the asexuals who are missing out on one of life's greatest pleasures -- any good to pretend otherwise.

Frankly, as a gay man I find it deeply offensive to have these "asexuals" comparing themselves to gay people. Sex is the big bugaboo in our society, not a lack of it. I don't know of anyone being beaten to death because they were asexual, or being fired from their job because of it, or any really negative societal response except maybe laughter, pity, or disbelief. The fact that homosexuality was once seen as a mental or medical disorder doesn't change my mind one bit. Homosexuality is not a disability; asexuality is.

David Jay (pictured) founded a group for asexuals called Aven when he was all of 19. Many people don't know if they're gay, straight, bi or what-have-you at 19, but Jay has identified as an asexual for the past four years. Even people at 23 or (much) older often haven't determined exactly where they are on the sexual scale, so it seems a mite premature of Jay to classify himself as anything. But the asexual movement -- pause for a big guffaw right here -- is just the kind of stupid thing that an immature mind would conceive of and post on the Internet.

There are different reports as to the number of members in AVEN, everything from 100 (which seems reasonable) to 4000 (which is pathetic). I've no doubt that a lot of sad, sexless people who for one (bad) reason or another have zero sex drive have happily signed up with the group to validate their dysfunctional lives. Some of them may be people who couldn't get laid if they showed up in hooker heaven with a pile of thousand dollar bills in their fists. Many therapists [unless they're politically over-correct assholes] agree that these are people who need therapy and counseling, not to be told that their asexuality is just another "orientation."

Comments that Jay makes to reporters make it clear that he has a very negative attitude toward sex, which is either the cause or result of his "asexuality." He literally doesn't seem to understand what it is that he's missing.

It's appalling that some GLBT people would take the asexual movement seriously. Again, I can only assume its very young or at least very immature people who have no real sense of the long-time gay movement, the struggles before and after Stonewall (and still on-going) and really don't understand why comparing asexuals to homosexuals is blatantly ludicrous, inaccurate, and even, as I said, offensive.

And there's something else that's troubling about this. In a New York Times piece written by Mary Duenwald, she writes about a 32-year-old man who got married hoping that it would "fix" his asexuality. Unfortunately, it only resulted in divorce. Duenwald then writes: "now he is living with a younger man in a relationship that he described as loving and romantic but free of sex."

Frankly, this guy sounds more like someone who's gay and in denial, someone who desires men sexually but is too hung up for whatever reason to act upon it, then a genuine (if there is such a thing) "asexual." [Asexual may merely be the opposite of bisexual and just as trendy, if not yet as political.]

And how many more of the men and women attracted to AVEN are in this category, how many more will fall victim to Jay's childishness and irresponsibility. Even if one believes that some people are "oriented" to be asexual (that's like not liking food, as one therapist puts it), it doesn't mean that many people who classify themselves as such don't need counseling and sex therapy and help of some kind to discover why there is this abnormal gap in their psycho-sexual make up. GLBT activists should not and hopefully most will not enable these people in their delusion.

Sure, there may be people who are not sexually active and may be happy in spite of it. You can be deaf and blind and still be happy -- but you're still disabled. Just like deaf people who refuse to get cochlear impants, "asexuals" have the right to refuse treatment or advice. But they are not an oppressed minority group, and I believe -- despite all the pc fools out there -- if they continue to insist that they are it will only backfire on them.

Now I'm going to have some safe sex. The rest of you -- jerk off!