Category: Old Dish

WHO AM I? WHY AM I HERE?

First, I’d like to thank Andrew for letting me take his blog out for a spin while he knocks back beers on the beach. “Savage Love” readers have been asking me to start a blog of my own for, oh, six or seven years now and I’ve resisted. I’m a Luddite, I confess, one of the ways in which my deeply conservative soul expresses itself. It was only a few years ago that I started accepting email at “Savage Love,” to give you on example of my fear of new technology, and much to my boyfriend’s dismay I’ve insisted on keeping a broken toaster for years (you have to hold that little-black-thing-you-push-down-to-start-the-toasting-process-is there a name for that thing?-which I’m happy to do while I read the paper As far as I’m concerned, better the impaired toaster you know, you know?)
Performance anxiety? I’ve got a touch. Maybe that’s why I’m rambling on about toasters, not a usual topic.
I usually work in a Q&A format-hell, after almost 15 years of writing an advice column I dream in a Q&A format. So if you’ve got a question for me, feel free to send it in via Andrew’s site, and, if I’m so moved, I’ll answer it. But it’ll have to be clean; I promised Andrew no smut, no lower-case santorum, no discussions of the latest sex toys or scandals. I reserve the right, however, to renege on that agreement if a sex scandal as irresistible as the case of the man who-how to put this delicately?-went home to Jesus after being the passive partner in a romantic interlude with a horse should break.
Since horse lovers are right out, as the Brits say, what should you expect from me this week? Well, a few more pop culture references than Andrew might make, a smattering of double- and single- entendres, a little more sneering contempt for politicians and little less devastating political analysis. If you hate Wonkette-and I don’t understand how could anyone hate Wonkette-you’ll probably hate me too.
Okay! On to matters with deadly serious political ramifications!

-posted by Dan

TRADITION, TRADITION!

Rosie O’Donnell is joining the cast of the Broadway production of “Fiddler on the Roof.” She’ll be playing Golde, the love interest of Harvey Fierstein’s Tevye. This is not, as some would have it, “stunt casting.” Still, wonders the NYT this morning, it’s remarkable that “two openly gay and outspoken actors will play husband and wife in a musical all about the breaking of traditions.” Yeah, yeah-gay audiences have endured the casting of straight actors in gay roles for, like, ever. From Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas in “Philadelphia” to the entirely unbelievable Eric McCormack in the entirely unbearable “Will and Grace” to Charlton Heston in “Ben-Hur” (AKA “Get Her”), we’ve always been willing to suspend our disbelief and buy off on straight actors playing gay. Indeed, playing gay, like playing the endearingly retarded, has always been a way for a straight actor to demonstrate his or her chops. Why not the reverse for Rosie?
And, hey, Rosie once made the whole country believe she was in love with Tom Cruise. Surely she can convince Broadway audiences that she’s in love with Harvey.

-posted by Dan

THE PARENT CLAPTRAP

Matt Drudge is still hyping the “NYT probes Judge Robert’s Adoptions” story. Apparently-and I’ve only seen this on Drudge, so it could be entirely bogus-a reporter for the NYT asked if Roberts’ adoption records would be made available to the press for inspection. I’m glad the right wing thinks that politicizing legal adoptions is outside the pale. Drudge quotes from a statement released by the National Council for Adoption that slams the NYT for questioning “the very private circumstances, motivations, and processes by which” people adopt children. I couldn’t agree more-no one should question the private circumstances, motivations, and processes by which qualified, screened parent-wannabes become parents through adoption. As an adoptive parent myself, I look forward to the right adopting this sensible position and ceasing to harass gay and lesbian adoptive parents.

-posted by Dan

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION:
I’m not sure what this group’s position is on gay adoptions. I’ve been digging around on their website and haven’t found anything-which seems odd, since gay adoption is such a hot topic. If anyone can dig up the NCfA’s take on gay and lesbian parents, I’d like to see it. If they group is committed to “serving the interests of children through adoption,” they ought to be pro-gay adoptions.

-posted by Dan

THE LONDON UNDERGROUND

From Saturday’s NYT: “Mr. Blair’s announcement [of plans to toss foreign-born Muslim radicals out of Britain] was immediately condemned by Muslim groups here, who warned that the moves would be seen as discriminatory, driving Muslim radicals underground…”
Excuse me? Were the four Muslim radicals who bombed the Tube and a bus in London on July 7, and the four who attempted to pull a repeat on July 21, operating “above ground”? Did they hang a shingle in front of a storefront that said “Ye Olde Muslim Radical Shoppe”? Were they selling nail bombs from lemonade stands on street corners?
Why do mainstream Muslim groups insist on making themselves ridiculous? The kind of “radicals” (too nice a word-I prefer “murderers”) who blow up buses and trains and discos in places like London, Madrid, and Bali are already operating “underground.” They don’t carry business cards or maintain office hours, for Christ’s sake. The further “underground” they’re driven the better-the deeper underground you go, the harder it is to plan and stage terror attacks. If I was a sensible British Muslim, or non-Muslim for that matter, I would be furious with Muslim “leaders” who suggested that Blair’s move to “close down mosques and bar or deport clerics deemed to be fostering hatred and violence” was an attack on their civil liberties. As on 9/11, Muslims died on 7/7. Blair’s move will protect everyone in Britain-Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

-posted by Dan

UNCHURCHED

The Catholic Diocese of Oakland is paying out $56.3 million dollars to settle 56 cases of sexual abuse of children. The long, sordid tale of Catholic kids abused by Catholic priests has been picked over here and elsewhere, and I don’t want to dwell on it. (Like Andrew, I was raised Catholic. Unlike Andrew, I’m not practicing-and, no, I wasn’t molested when I was an altar boy. The priests I encountered as a child were, so far as I know, all good guys. Or maybe the fact that my dad was a cop and carried a gun acted as a deterrent?) Like other Catholic dioceses (dioci?), the Catholic Diocese in Oakland plans to sell church-owned land to cover the debt. Settlements in the Church sex-abuse scandal are going to reach into the hundreds of millions, if not the billions, of dollars. Like most adults my age, I’m obsessed with real estate. So with shitloads of real estate being sold off by the Church I can’t help but wonder what kind of an impact all of this property returning to private, secular ownership is going to have on property tax receipts in places like, say, Boston and Oakland and Chicago…

-posted by Dan

SAYING GOODBYE

To my beloved niece and nephew. I’ve been recovering all week, but the DP did most of the heavy lifting. Here they are again, just because I’m a proud uncle:

SAVAGE BLOG: Fasten your laptops. Next week, Dan Savage will be guest-blogging in this space. He’s the editor of the Stranger in Seattle, writes a weekly sex advice column that is easily the best on the planet, and has also produced some seriously good books. My favorites: “The Kid,” a memoir of being a gay dad, and “Skipping Towards Gomorrah,” a cheerful account of trying to commit the seven deadly sins across America. His new book, “The Commitment,” is due out in September. Check out his first blogging experience here, live, on Monday.

CHANNELING FALWELL: “One of the things that strikes me more, not less, forcibly as time has passed is the contempt that Muslim extremists feel for us. They despise us for our decadence, and I feel more and more forced to accept the painful truth that they have a point.” – Minette Marin, blaming Britain’s liberalism for Islamo-fascist murder.

ROBERTS AND ROMER: I don’t think there’s much here. Roberts helped out on a fascinating Supreme Court case for his firm. It doesn’t tell us how he’d rule on, say, Lawrence vs Texas. My guess is that as an educated man of his generation, he’s well aware of gay people, doesn’t approve of discrimination, but has a very limited idea of what the constitution can do to protect minorities. I learned more from the reaction of people like James Dobson. For Dobson, any hint of sympathy for homosexuals is anathema. Roberts is a better man than that. And from everything I’ve read, is a superb choice for SCOTUS.

MOMENTUM BUILDS: The latest poll on marriage rights for gays is encouraging news for my side of the debate. For the first time, a national majority (53 percent) support civil unions “permitting gays and lesbians to enter into legal arrangements that would give them many of the same rights as married couples.” Marriage still only gets 36 percent support nationally, but I bet in many blue states, the number is higher (and it’s back to the levels before the election year Republican campaign to demonize it). Interestingly, the highest levels of support come among Independents, not Democrats or Republicans. Given how new this topic is – it’s only been fully in the national discourse for a decade or so – these are striking figures. Support for a constitutional amendment banning all protections for gay couples has sunk from 35 percent to 29 percent in the last year. This last week in Ptown was also family week. Every year, the week has grown. This year it was almost oppressive – kids everywhere, strollers on every sidewalk, bedtime stories at the library, beaches jammed with buckets and shovels. Whatever happens, this social shift is simply reality, part of a bewilderingly rapid change in what can almost no longer be called a single gay culture. I expected some sort of assimilation process. But the speed of it is staggering. The poll also has fascinating data on other social issues. For all their hysteria, the theocons are losing almost every debate.

WORSE THAN THE FATE OF OSCAR THE GROUCH

Ken Tomlinson, the head of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, has taken much heat. There’s an argument to be had about his tenure there. And his efforts to inject politics into the institution might even make the case for privatizing public television. But Tomlinson has two jobs. In addition to CPB, he has run the Broadcasting Board of Governors-the board that oversees Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Sawa, etc. Sadly, he has treated the BBG with the same well-documented tactics that he deployed at CPB. This is not good. The BBG stations should be critical instruments in the war on terror. For many years, they were run in bipartisan fashion. Under Tomlinson that spirit of cooperation has collapsed. I have just
written a piece about this for TNR.

posted by Frank.

WHY NOT, THE RONALD REAGAN MEMORIAL SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT?

First, they came for my airport, and I said nothing. Now, they’re trying to rename my main thoroughfare, 16th Street. The bastards want to make it Ronald Reagan Boulevard. I have much grudging respect for the Gipper. But the District of Columbia was one the few places to thoroughly reject Reagan’s reelection. They won’t let that drop. It’s seems they’ll keep forcing the Great Leader’s name on us until we recant our decision in the 1984 election.

By the way, a big shout out to Tom Davis, for having the sense to stick up for DC on this one.

posted by Frank.

YOU CAN STOP PATTING YOURSELF ON THE BACK

Yes, blogs can create nice communities. (Thanks, by the way, for your hospitality this week.) Yes, blogs can help provide an important check on powerful (and sometimes irresponsible) media. Yes, blogs can help you sell your book on soccer when links to amazon are embedded in superflous sentences. But let’s not get too excited about the blogosphere’s political and social importance just yet. As this study shows, the audience for blogs is comparatively small for now. Therefore, I’m not so ready to say that this medium will revivify American democracy. True, it allows many people to rant, blowing off steam that might otherwise turn into dangerous passions. But, if we’re speaking calmly, it seems the blogs greatest contribution is to slightly expand the elite political discussion. For a long time, the circulation of opinion journals like TNR and NR had stagnated. But the biggest political blogs have expanded the readership of opinion to an audience that goes beyond those magazines. What does this mean? For starters, people want political opinion, but aren’t willing to pay for it. (Andrew’s gnarled fingers bleed in the production of opinion and you won’t pay, ungrateful swine!) Or possibly people have shortened attention spans. They’ll sit for the length of this post (are you still with me?), but they’re too busy and too ADD to sit for a 7,000 word essay in the Atlantic. If blogs lead people further into a world of political ideas, well, color me a booster. If the evidence shows that they come at the expense of other forms of reading, then let’s get hysterical.

By the way, I’m disappointed by the New York Times editorial on blogging. It really says nothing. The Times should be vociferously attacking the blogosphere. Blogging deserves a loyal opposition.

posted by Frank.