How I Will Spend My Summer Vacation

Trying to stay cool!

I'll be back in early August -- if not before -- with brand new posts on:

Supposedly "straight" bears.

An odd episode of Law and Order: Criminal Intent where a man marries a women because he had the hots for her brother [!?]

The way that the odd, pre-Stonewall "deification" of "straight" men doesn't ever seem to end and what it says about some gay men's feelings of self-worth.

Some bizarre and interesting gay goings-on in assorted films and TV shows, such as a gay football team on Bones.

When it isn't advisable to sue a blogger who says you're gay.

Some unvarnished truths about bisexuality, "straight" guys [ or "straightguise"] who have sex with men, and internalized homophobia.

And more!

HAPPY GAY PRIDE

HAPPY GAY PRIDE, EVERYONE!

HAVE A GREAT DAY!

AND IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY. COME OUT TO SOMEONE YOU CARE ABOUT!

BILL SCHOELL

Flamed

I have written before about the events for Fireflag, the gay firefighters group, at Ty's bar on this blog.

A couple of weeks ago they had another event. There is, as I have said, a buffet, and for five dollars you can enter a raffle in which the prizes include a substantial amount of cash [at least $100 and generally more].

There are guys who come in, stuff their faces with food, and never buy any tickets. The issue that some customers wouldn't be around for the drawing was addressed: consider the five bucks a donation they were told [I mean you're getting good food]. Or give your tickets away. If you know somebody in the bar, given them your tickets and ask them to let you know if you win.

Well, at this particular event one of the Fireflag members sat by the buffet selling tickets. A few people slipped by while he was getting ready, but he told everyone else that they had to buy tickets before they ate. I thought this was an excellent idea and told him so. "It's an uphill battle," he told me. And this for the gay firefighters who risk their lives ... ?

Suddenly two guys I had never seen before rushed up to the buffet, grabbing plates. He told them the buffet was only for ticket holders. The first guy started screeching at him that he "gave every month" or something along those lines, even though I had never before seen him at a Fireflag event or even at Ty's. He became hysterical, and even called the fireman a faggot. Then the other guy who was with him snapped at the same fellow I hope your house -- or the bar, I foget which -- burns down.

Lovely! Talk about bitchy queens who need some valium -- or therapy.

Some people go berserk when they see free food [or an open bar]! The night before the Fireflag evening I had been at a wonderful event given for the 30th anniversary of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. [No, I was not one of the old wrecks they were preserving!] After awards were given out to notable village establishments and individuals, there was a reception up the block at the Forbes Gallery. Inside the lobby there was a table of food. I went in the other room to get some wine and when I returned the table was absolutely surrounded by people -- mostly seniors -- three deep who were gobbling everything they could get their hands on and wouldn't make room for anyone else to get a nibble. I said to a young lady watching this spectacle; "You'd think they hadn't had a decent meal for weeks!"

Luckily, as this was the 30th anniversary, the Society went all out, and there were not only two open bars with every kind of top shelf liquor imaginable, but waiters came around with trays of delicious appetizers, so nobody went hungry. It was a Class A event.

Now most of the people gobbling up everything on that table were straight, but I bet they wouldn't have paid a measley five dollars for all the free food and booze,either. It's not that the people at the Society gathering -- or the men at Ty's -- can't afford it, but there's just something that makes people go crazy when it's free. I know of at least one man who goes to every free buffet at every gay bar he can find, even though he has plenty of money and goes out to dinner two or three times a week. No, he doesn't give five dollars to Fireflag. Fuck him! [I mean even Larry, the wonderful guy who makes the food every month, buys tickets!]

I guess it's human nature, and not especially a gay thing. But I do wish that some of the hungry tightwads at the Fireflag events were more supportive of the organization and their gay brothers.

As for those two screeching queens who made such a fuss. Happy Gay Pride, brothers -- and go to hell!

Troubling Questions About Aaron Vargas

20/20 recently did a story about Aaron Vargas [pictured], who shot to death a man named Darrell McNeill who had allegedly sexually abused Vargas since he was eleven.

Vargas did not go to the police [although other alleged victims did] but went out to McNeill's trailer and shot him dead. No matter how heinous McNeill's acts, he would not have gotten the death penalty for them, but that's what he got from Vargas. [Vargas claimed that he was afraid McNeill would molest his young daughter.]

However, let me say upfront that I have little sympathy for pedophiles. I am tired of the confusion they cause in that some people mistake men who molest little boys for gay men, who are only attracted to adult males.

But here's where this case gets interesting. Vargas and McNeill apparently continued the sexual relationship long after Vargas became an adult.

A psychologist -- Dr. Michael Welner, I believe -- interviewed on the show seemed to have very little knowledge of this sort of thing, but suggested that Vargas was somehow under McNeill's sadistic control or something along those lines which is why he continued to have sex with him. Maybe.

I don't know. Maybe this is true. On the other hand I think people tend to have sex with other people they're presumably not attracted to for some kind of gain -- monetary or something.

In other words, I think 20/20 only touched the surface on this story. There's a whole lot more going on here that the program didn't reveal. The motive seems to be cut and dry: Vargas killed the man who molested him for years. Yet why now? What was the true reason behind his sudden actions?

Reporter Chris Cuomo asked Vargas about the adult sex he had with McNeill and what that might indicate about someone, and Vargas responded that you might think that someone who did that was "'a fag." [So right away we know what Vargas thinks of gay people. And sadly, maybe of himself? Self-hatred 101 anyone?] Cuomo immediately said/corrected him: "they might think you were gay." Italics mine.

One might also wonder why it was necessary to murder McNeill to supposedly keep him away from Vargas' daughter [assuming he had any interest in molesting her in the first place]? It seems Vargas could just tell the guy to stay the hell away from his home and his daughter -- I mean he had the gumption to shoot him [in front of his wife] -- and tell the child's mother to lock the door if she saw him coming.

Again let me make it clear it's not that I have sympathy for McNeill, but more that the 20/20 program raised so many red flags and other issues. Many of the citizens of Fort Bragg rallied around Vargas but I got the sensation that it wasn't so much they were glad he'd killed a molester, but that they might as well have been cheering that he'd killed a "fag," that to these conservative people there was little difference between the two. The shame for Vargas and for other boys abused isn't so much that they were victims but that they "indulged" in homoerotic activities.

That's another problem I have with predators like McNeill. They are not "gay men" but they like sex with males. But they are not part of the Out and Proud Healthy, Accepting Gay Community, but rather are closeted hypocrites who victimize children who can't defend themselves. McNeill portrayed himself as a married heterosexual pillar of the community, while he had sex with men and boys. Was it more about power than anything else? Untouched by gay liberation these sad, pathetic creatures fuck up their own lives as well as others. One man reported that his younger brother committed suicide due to McNeill's actions, or at least that was what he felt had happened.

I've no doubt that some of the boys McNeill allegedly molested were born gay. But their first homoerotic experience was not a healthy, positive, mutual one, but one of rape and molestation. One man interviewed on the program who claimed to be McNeill's victim was such a positive portrait of self-loathing that it was hard to look at him. [I wanted to say to this guy, okay, being molested by a man doesn't make you, or mean that, you're gay, but if you are gay, it's okay! Not okay to be molested, of course, but okay to be gay.] It may be possible that some heterosexual victims of male-male child abuse can become confused about their orientation -- maybe -- but I've no doubt that some gay victims may find it impossible to ever feel good about being gay.

I can't quite bring myself to cheer for Aaron Vargas, however, not only because he circumvented the justice system and prevented some of his fellow victims from getting the closure they may have gotten by seeing McNeill on trial and facing his accusers, but because I have this nagging doubt that it wasn't [or at least wasn't just] his alleged molestation that drove Vargas to murder McNeill. There's something else going on here.

We may get the answers someday, but we probably won't get them from 20/20 -- or Aaron Vargas.

Of Newsweek and Gay Actors

THAT'S WHY THEY CALL IT ACTING

A recent article in Newsweek has some [professional] gay activists and gay actors upset, and I can't blame them.

The article claims that straight actors can play gay but gay actors have a problem playing it straight.

According to the author, a Ramin Setoodeh, this is even a problem when the actor is non-stereotypical. He thinks that because the audience knows the actor is gay, they won't or can't accept him in straight, especially romantic, roles.

The latter point may have some validity to it, but it seems to me that if an actor is really good in his or her role, the audience will forget that they're acting and accept them in the part.

Another point the Newsweek author misses, incredibly, is that actors act. It may be impossible for some stereotypical gay guys to act butch on stage or on camera, but I have seen cases where even a "queen" can act very masculine when called for. I have met actors off-stage who were very butch in a play but rather femme in real life as well as vice versa. I remember even Harvey Fierstein played a straight gangster in a movie and was marvelous and completely convincing. That's why it's called acting.

Rock Hudson certainly had no trouble loving up the ladies in his movies and while he may not have been a great actor, he came off as convincingly "hetero." In fact, it annoys the hell out of me whenever someone -- gay or straight -- suggests that there's no chemistry between a leading man and a lady [or the other way around] because one of them is gay. Often you have two straight actors playing lovers and there's still no chemistry. Some people think the two actors have to be screwing off-screen before they can be believable as a couple. The truth is that a lot has to depend on such factors as basic acting ability, how realistic a couple they make in the first place [65-year-old guy and babe of 20?), and an intangible rapport between the two actors that may or may not show up on camera.

I don't know anything about Ramin Setoodeh. Don't know if he's straight or gay, or if he's gay whether he's Out and Proud or some self-hating homo, all I know is that with his ill-advised Newsweek column he's taken a giant step backward.

With its shrinking readership, let's hope Newsweek doesn't influence producers who were thinking of hiring a gay actor for an important straight role -- including a romantic lead -- and now may think twice about it.

A Sad Good-bye to Harry

I met Harry Weider (pictured), who died last month, at a party and was immediately taken with him. Harry was a Gay, Jewish, Disabled Dwarf, and he fought for rights for all of those groups. Life gave him a lot of issues to deal with, and he dealt with them with intelligence, humor, and tenacity. He was a very sweet and likable man. He was active in ACT UP, which fought for the rights of AIDS patients, served on community boards, and was always an advocate for the disabled and gay people.

In his late fifties, Harry had just started getting into opera. Knowing I was into opera and had written one tome on the subject, he emailed me a few times on the subject in general and on specific operas that he was planning to see. His always lively e-letters were always intelligent and opinionated in the right way. We also discussed the best places to go have a drink, as not every bar was comfortable for a man who had trouble walking and sitting. [Apparently he had a hearing impairment as well, which I was completely unaware of. I assume he was able to read lips.]

He frequently asked me to meet him for a drink, but unfortunately, the timing was always off. I hope he didn't think I was blowing him off, because I thought he was a genuinely fascinating person and wanted to know him better. Reading various tributes to him I realize that there was a lot I didn't know about him, a lot I didn't get the chance to appreciate.

I got a message from Harry via Facebook a few months ago, importuning me to sign up so that I could look at his "stories and photos." Well, I signed up, went to his profile, and discovered that there was nothing there but his name and photograph. The next time I saw Harry I said, "I only signed up for that thing because you wanted me to see your stories and pictures and there was nothing there." Harry laughed and said, "That's because I haven't put anything on there yet!"

Some of the tributes I read about him by fellow board members and politicians with whom he crossed swords focus -- in my opinion, too much perhaps -- on his feistiness, albeit affectionately, but he was also a good-natured man with a great sense of humor and warm personality.

Harry was leaving one of the frequent meetings he attended when he was struck and killed by a cab. He died on a Thursday. His funeral was on the very next day, which unfortunately meant that he was buried before many of his friends and acquaintances even knew of his death. I know there are a great many people who would have loved to have been able to pay their last respects to him, although a great many people did attend.

He is survived by his mother, a Holocaust survivor. My heart goes out to her.

So, I'll have a drink to Harry's memory tonight. And hope that wherever he is, he's givin' 'em hell and having fun.

You can read more about Harry here.

Gay and Running for Office?-- Bring Out the Girlfriend!

Well, I at least find this amusing.

In Philadelphia two people are running for the House in a heavily gay district that is known as the "gayborhood."

One of them is a lady named Babette Josephs. The other is a man named Gregg [more on that spelling later] Kravitz, who is pictured.

Ms. Josephs claims that Kravitz told her he was gay.

Gay. Not bisexual. Not straight. But gay.

[Okay, let's get to the spelling of that name. I know I am always railing against stereotyping and the like, but whenever I see a guy who spells his name with two consonants at the end -- you know, Ronn instead of Ron, Donn instead of Donn, or Gregg instead of Greg -- I always think: gay. No offense, but I find it kind of, well "queeny."]

Anyway Since Gregg with two "g"s told Ms. Josephs that he was gay, the lady was a bit surprised when he showed up with a young lady in tow, and introduced her as his girlfriend -- not gal pal or female friend, but someone he is dating.

Now -- just when he's running for office -- Gregg with two "g"s has suddenly become "bisexual."

See, Gregg wants to have his cake and eat it too. He can reach out and touch more heterosexual voters by producing the girlfriend -- see , guys, sure I'm queer and all that, but -- wink, wink -- I'm really a reg'lar fella, I got a girlfriend, see --ain't she a babe -- I'm not a total --- sshhh -- fag, I dig chicks just like you do.

But Gregg can also appeal to LGBT voters by claiming to be bisexual, and if you doubt or question or dare to say that a bi guy with a girlfriend is not exactly on the same planet as a homosexual man who can't even get married, you'll just be called "biphobic."

So Gregg-- whatever he may be [but keep those two gs in mind] -- is a fairly clever fellow.

But I feel not clever enough to fool Babs. I mean, Babette.

Ms. Josephs seems to feel that Gregg is actually a straight guy, cynically saying he's gay, then bi [so he can be seen in public with his girlfriend] to get LGBT votes.

But let's remember, he spells his name with two gs.

Archie Goes Gay

Last year the big news in Archie comic books was that ol' freckle face -- who must be over seventy at this point, having first appeared in Pep comics in the 1930's -- was getting engaged to either Betty or Veronica [what -- no Jughead?]

The big news this year is that the Archie comics line is introducing a gay character!

"Kevin Keller" will first appear in an issue of Veronica that goes on sale in September. Veronica becomes smitten with him, but he has no romantic interest in her, poor thing.

Kevin has been described as a "strapping blond" who beats Jughead in a pie-eating contest. I'm sure he can beat Jughead in a lot of things.

As far as I know the rumors that Jughead will be "outed" as an asexual are entirely false.

Seriously, this is an excellent development. If Kevin appeals to the readers, I can imagine that other gay characters will be introduced as well. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. How "open" will Kevin be? I'm glad they resisted making him a dork or -- sorry -- a "big queen."

Okay. I'm willing to watch the occasional soap opera episode with gay characters in the privacy of my own home. But now to monitor this I'm going to have to actually buy issues of Archie and Veronica?

What I won't do for the cause!

Perfect Husbands?

What's it with all these guys named Peterson murdering their wives?

First there's Drew Peterson, the former police sergeant, who's been charged with murdering both his third and fourth wives. I can't get why four women would marry this guy. If he walked into the Eagle I wouldn't give him a first look, let alone a second one.

Then there's Scott Peterson, whose wife Laci went missing. He was later convicted of murdering her [first degree] and their prenatal son [second degree].

And then we've got Michael Peterson, the subject of at least one book [A Perfect Husband by Aphrodite Jones], a foreign documentary, a made-for-television movie starring Treat Williams as Peterson, and many, many hours on Dateline, 20/20 and other news programs.

The most sensational aspect of the case was when the male prostitute Brent Wolgamott was called in to testify that he and Peterson had made arrangements -- never fulfilled -- to hook up for paid sex.

First let's deal with the hustler, also known as "Brad." Whatever he is, Wolgamott is not too bright. He was quoted as saying that the majority of his clients were "predominantly straight with minor homosexual tendencies." Apparently he's never heard of married homosexuals. It makes no sense that a man with supposedly minor homosexual tendencies would explore gay porn web sites with abandon and want to hire a male hooker for sex.

As Jones writes in her book "from the explicit nature of Michael's e-mails, it was obvious that he was not only an adulterer, but that he was perhaps more homosexual than straight." She adds: "the thought of [his murdered wife] Kathleen's marriage being a sham, especially when she was paying for everything ... was all the more hurtful to her sisters and [her daughter] Caitlin."

Michael Peterson claimed that he was "bisexual" and that Kathleen already knew that. He enlisted his brother to say that he knew about Michael's bisexuality since they were teens.

Well, whether Peterson was "bisexual" or just a married, ashamed homosexual -- and I think the latter is more accurate -- I don't think his wife knew the score.

Of course, most married homosexuals don't want to murder their wives, just cheat on them.

Although I must say that more and more we're learning about the gay secret lives of certain men accused of murdering their wives or at least making them disappear forever. [Recently there was the case of murder victim Karen Tipton, whose husband David had gay porn on his computer.] Sure, some of this may be an attempt to demonize a suspect, give him another motive for doing away with the little woman, but given what we know of the whole "down low" business of homosexuality, much of it is probably accurate. While the whole business of murdering your wife in the 21st century because she finds out you're gay [with the resultant exposure, divorce, and financial loss] sounds like a bad Law and Order episode, apparently it sometimes happens.

In any case, it's safe to say that these men -- these murderers of women -- are not Out and Proud members of our community, but dysfunctional and often sociopathic losers whose poor wives pay the price for their inability to accept themselves.

In any case Michael Peterson is spending the rest of his life in prison.

Just as many of these guys spend their whole, pathetic lives in the closet.

Let's Not "Thank" Rick Warren

I had very mixed emotions a while back when I read that some gay/LGBT organizations were offering praise to homophobic pastor Rick Warren.

Some months ago, in an interview on ABC, Warren [pictured] -- claiming he had gay friends [no self-respecting gay person would want Warren for a friend] -- basically confirmed that he thought homosexuality was immoral and that "decent" homosexuals should abstain from any gay relations or relationships. He said that even though he was attracted to other women at times, he "abstained" from affairs out of decency. Similarly -- to his way of thinking -- a "decent" gay person should abstain his or her entire life from having homosexual relationships! "It's all about character," he said.

In other words, it was better to be a closet case, an "ex-gay," or be in a sham relationship with a member of the opposite sex than to be Out and Proud and in a happy relationship with a member of your own sex! Those of us who are not ashamed or guilt-wracked over being gay are of low character.

Okay, I get why some LGBT activists recently applauded Warren when he spoke out against a anti-homosexual Ugandan hate bill, saying it was "extreme, unjust and unchristian toward homosexuals." I get that some gay activists feel that the more "Christians" who speak out against hate bills, the better it will be for the gay community in the long run.

But at the same time -- just look at who they're praising!!!

True, Rick Warren may not want gay people to be put to death, but he wants us to lead lives of self-denial and self-hatred -- which is more or less the same.

So he spoke out against the Ugandan hate bill on youtube. Good for him -- and big deal! It's essentially attitudes like Warren's that lead directly to the extreme measures taken against gays in other nations, and the prejudice and hatred that still exists in the good ol' USA.

So, we can say that Warren may be doing the right thing here, but praising him, acting like he's an ally?

That is just ridiculous!

This illustrates my problem with the comparative weak-tea approach of gay activism today. Can you imagine New York's militant Gay Activists Alliance praising Rick Warren? We may have said he was doing the right thing for a change, but we would never have let it pass that he himself was a homophobe of the first rank, negatively influencing millions of Americans about gay men and lesbians. It's his attitude that keeps many gay people in the closet, creates self-hatred in innumerable gay men and lesbians, and leads to suicides among gay teens, especially in the bible belt.

Praise?

Indeed!