The article goes on and on and on and on like that -- for two pages in the NY Regional Section, which is a lot of ink for such a marginal enterprise.

But which now has the blessing of the NY Times.

Notice how the Times equates "unabashedly gay" with "gender-bending camp," "flamboyant," "men in high heels and pantyhose," "transsexual," etc.

There's a lot of emphasis on the transgendered, needless to say.

And then there's this paragraph:

"Strange Fruits," which first went on the air in 1997, has become one of the few public displays of homosexuality in a blue-collar borough that is a bastion of Latin machismo. None of the borough's movie theaters bothered showing "Brokeback Mountain." There has not been a gay pride parade here in years. Yet, each Saturday on Channel 68 on BronxNet, the public-access station, "Strange Fruits" pops up on television screens, courtesy of Eric Stephen Booth.

Notice how the Times has simply edited MEN who are "blue-collar" / "Latin machismo" -- out of "homosexuality."

In other words, for the Times, homosexuality = effeminacy and gender-bending camp.

BUT NOT BLUE-COLLAR, MASCULINE, MEN.

Is that accurate?

NO.

Are there blue-collar, masculine Latin (and other) men living in the Bronx and elsewhere who have sex with other men?

YES.

I've lived in working class Latin neighborhoods in NYC.

First of all, the men are NOT macho.

They are MASCULINE.

And the macho reference is actually, for anyone who has a brain, an anti-Hispanic slur.

It's also an ANTI-MALE slur.

And, ultimately, an anti-gay slur.

It's what Robert said about straight-acting gay men.

We're not acting, we're MEN, and we have a right to our masculinity.

But hey, the writer is an Hispanic "man," so I guess it's okay.

Nevertheless, in my experience of them, NYC Hispanic men are dignified people with a lot of integrity and a lot of HEART.

They're not macho -- they're MEN.

And not a small number of them are "MSM" -- men who have sex with men.

But to the Times, working-class masculine men CANNOT BE HOMOSEXUAL.

They're not part of that great big happy LGBT community.

Instead, the director of the show says, "It's about crazy drag-queen, transgender, gay people ... living in the Bronx."

What about just plain men who like to have sex with men?

Or men who love men?

Where are they in this "gay" soap opera which includes

Billie M. Nelson, a transsexual Bronx resident and mental health counselor who plays Miss Bebe Montana, a seductive villainess with a Southern drawl on the prowl for a man and money... [and] the streetwise "baby detective" named Jeffrey (as in Dahmer, the serial killer and cannibal) Cunanan (as in Andrew, who murdered Gianni Versace).

So there you have it guys:

In the Bronx, it's transsexual seductresses and murderous queers.

But NO ORDINARY GUYS WHO ARE INTO OTHER GUYS.

No MEN who love MEN.

Instead it's all gender-bending high heels and panythose.

THAT'S WHY MSM LIFE IS SO FUCKED UP.

That's why a straight-identified guy like JM, who just posted in honor and integrity, and a gay-identified guy like JK, who posted in looking for insight, are so confused.

The straight-identified guy says -- there's NOTHING I can relate to. I'm into my working class budz who are honorable and true-blue. I'm not into effeminate.

The gay-identified guy says -- I'm gay. I've been a "weak fag" and a "hole" for years. How can I be into Frot and stop doing anal when you guys aren't effeminate -- and even praise masculinity?

To both JM and JK, homosexuality is effeminacy and weakness.

And no one tells them different.

Instead, they see articles like this one.

The NY Times is the leading, and largest, moderate, "left-of-center" newspaper in the country.

It has a huge following.

What it says matters.

And, the NY Times says, gay is about "gender-bending camp."

Okay, that's the media.

How bout our best and brightest in Cambridge Mass?

Transgender leader honored at Harvard

PlanetOut

Tue May 9, 2006

SUMMARY: Mara Keisling extols civil rights gains made by transgender people, including protections passed just last week in Hawaii and Vermont.

A Harvard University group has named transgender advocate Mara Keisling as the Outstanding Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Person of the Year, and she has been invited to address the university on LGBT issues.

Keisling, who is executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, was to give the annual Papadopoulos Lecture on Tuesday.

"It is an honor to be recognized with this award from one of the pre-eminent institutions of higher learning," said Keisling. "It speaks to just how far the movement for transgender civil rights has come in the past decade. I'm proud to be asked to speak to the Harvard community about the victories transgender advocates have made -- and continue to make -- against tremendous odds."

In the past week, both Vermont and Hawaii passed laws protecting the civil rights of transgender people.

"In four short years, we have increased sixfold the percentage of people in the United States who live in jurisdictions where legislatures have enacted protections for people based on gender identity and expression," said Keisling, according to an excerpt of her Tuesday speech provided to PlanetOut. "From 5 percent to 31 percent since the beginning of 2002 -- that is remarkable."

Keisling, a transgender woman and parent who did graduate work at Harvard, is the founding director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. She hails from Pennsylvania and has 25 years of professional experience in social marketing and opinion research.

Keisling's award was given by the Harvard Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender and Supporters Alliance. Past honorees include Col. Margarethe Cammermeyer and California state Sen. Sheila Kuehl.

Notice that Keisling, who's "a transgender woman" -- what does that mean? I guess male to female, which means he elected to be at least chemically CASTRATED -- "has 25 years of professional experience in social marketing and opinion research."

A good field to be in if you want to sell the public a pile of horse manure called transgenderism.

Truth is that Mara Keisling, assuming "she" has gone all the way, is what used to be called a eunuch.

And the nation's leading university's LGBT Alliance is honoring him for DENYING HIS MASCULINITY.

For practicing psychic and probably physical SELF-CASTRATION.

I say probably because many of these people are very coy about what they've actually had done surgically.

Nonetheless, even if it's "only" chemical, it is CASTRATION.

Here's Robert Loring, writing yesterday:

Males are encouraged to be ashamed of their masculinity as if there is something innately wrong about natural male masculinity. They are brainwashed into thinking that their innate aggressions are somehow wrong and sinful. That they must shun their natural aggressiveness and sense of competition. Males today are encouraged to "explore" their "softer" sides and to set aside their male interests in such things as cars, sports, fighting, etc. in favor of such things as home economics, baking cookies, etc. And, males are encouraged to reject their natural male bodies as they are encouraged to be weak and effeminate in their appearance while shaving off all body hair that makes a person distinctly MALE. In short, males today are being encouraged and brainwashed into rejecting their own selves and it is that self rejection which opens up a disastrous can of worms!

"Weak and effeminate in their natural appearance"

After awhile, it makes sense to these guys to STOP BEING MEN altogether.

So they find a surgeon to lop off their cocks and balls and get breast implants.

And hip implants and ass implants and cheek implants etc.

And how does Harvard react?

It names the guy "Outstanding Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Person of the Year."

Wow!

But wait, there's more:

Frat brothers fined in anti-gay hazing

PlanetOut Network

Tue May 9, 2006

SUMMARY: Four University of Vermont frat members are slapped with $1,000 fines after an incident that parodied the movie "Brokeback Mountain."

Four fraternity members at the University of Vermont have been ordered to pay $1,000 fines under Vermont's anti-hazing law after being charged in an incident that parodied the movie "Brokeback Mountain."

Campus police issued civil citations Friday based on 20 witnesses' accounts of pledges being forced to wear cowboy clothes and suffer homophobic insults at a March 2 party at the Phi Gamma Delta house, the Burlington Free Press reported -- accounts the frat's alumni advisers have denied.

"What they did, which I felt was homophobic in nature, was inappropriate," campus Police Chief Gary Margolis told the Free Press. "There was underage drinking, furnishing alcohol to minors and there was hazing, based on what we learned."

Police singled out fraternity officers Scott Curley II, 18, and Eric Freedman, Bill Holohan IV and Geoffrey Robinson, all 20, saying they should be held accountable.

Despite Vermont's anti-hazing law, the Chittenden County State's Attorney's Office decided not to file criminal charges.

"I feel that the case would be better dealt with in context of a university judicial review," said Deputy State Attorney Ed Sutton. "It was clear there were actions that could be offensive to some people, but there was no intention by anyone to be hurtful."

Jean-Marie Nazetta, a spokeswoman for Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, disagreed with Sutton's assessment.

"I think it was pretty clear that this was something 'hurtful,' " Nazetta said. "If you substituted a movie about women, it would have been hurtful. They were using something that was a landmark film for us to mock people."

Vermont lawmakers passed the anti-hazing law in 1999 after members of the university's hockey team were accused of forcing freshman players to drink warm beer until they vomited and to parade holding each other's genitals in an "elephant walk."

Heavens to Betsy!

Not "holding each other's genitals in an "elephant walk." ?!?!?!

I can see why "Vermont lawmakers" are concerned.

Clearly this is dangerous and anti-social behavior which must be stopped.

What actually happened here?

Basically, some college kids made fun of Brokeback Mountain.

And were promptly accused of being homophobic.

Does that sound familiar?

Well, we've been critical of Brokeback -- and we've been accused of being "homophobic."

Are we homophobic?

NO.

We're all in favor of men having sex with men.

Were these college kids homophobic?

Well, says Jean-Marie Nazetta, a spokeswoman for Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, "They were using something that was a landmark film for us to mock people."

Goodness me!

They were mocking people.

Once again, clearly dangerous and anti-social behavior.

Problem: Free Speech.

Freedom of Speech is supposed to guarantee our right to speak out and criticize, which includes mocking people and, yes, even "landmark films."

And most likely, what these college boys were mocking in Brokeback was the anal.

Which should be mocked.

It's a travesty.

Dirty, demeaning, dangerous, and dishonorable.

But for mocking it, they were punished.

In Vermont.

Where have we heard Vermont before?

Oh yes, it was in that "transgender leader honored" article, in which the honoree praised "civil rights gains made by transgender people, including protections passed just last week in Hawaii and Vermont."

In Vermont it would appear, masculinity is out, anal and she-males are in.

Do we in the Alliance ever "mock" people?

Well, I've been known to refer to certain "men" into anal as buttboys and shitfairies, and to their culture as the BFD -- the Buttfuck Dictatorship.

Of course, I don't really mean that as mockery.

I mean it as apt description.

For example, they are boys, or at least say they are, and they are into butt, so clearly they're buttboys.

And since their "sex" lives revolve around shitholes -- their's and others' -- and since they're such staunch defenders of effeminacy -- their's and others' -- "shitfairy" certainly sounds apt to me.

And there is without question a Buttfuck Dictatorship -- just ask Scott Curley II, Eric Freedman, Bill Holohan IV and Geoffrey Robinson -- they were fined for mocking the BFD.

I don't think you can be fined for mocking something that doesn't exist.

Guess it's a good thing I'm not attempting to matriculate at the U of V.

Because I would NOT BE ALLOWED TO SAY THESE THINGS.

What we can see in all three articles is the MAINSTREAM CULTURE, in the form of the NY Times, Harvard, and the University of Vermont, defending and de facto promoting effeminacy, gender theory, transsexualism, and analism -- while pursuing an anti-masculine agenda.

The nation's leading paper of record praises drag queens and attacks "blue-collar ... Latin machismo."

A Harvard student association has named a "transgender leader" and castrato "Outstanding Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Person of the Year"!!!

While in Vermont, frat boys who dared parody Brokeback are hit with a $4000 fine.

Brought on by their earlier quintessentially male behavior of holding each other's genitals.

Male behavior is attacked.

Effeminacy, effeminization, transgenderism, and analism are all supported.

Robert:

A person (male or female) bent on self rejection is a person bent on self hatred. A person bent on self hatred is a person bent on self destruction. When we think of such things as suicide or castration we often think in physical terms but one can commit suicide and become castrated not only physically but psychologically and spiritually as well. Sadly, there appears to be growing numbers of males who have already committed psychospiritual suicide and/or castration today as they have bought into being feminized and, thus, have become easily controllable. As has been written elsewhere on this site "Gods denied become demons. Creatures of the shadow. And what comes from the shadow is death and destruction." This is not simply true of "gods" but it is also true of MEN.

For a long time now society has been bent on the idea that a male becomes deviant because of his own maleness and aggressiveness. He becomes confused and angry and eventually begins to strike out at society. This is all boiled down to the individual so that society as a whole might wash it's hands clean of any guilt. But, society is not washed clean of guilt. In fact, society as a whole is very guilty! Society has shunned its responsibilities to males and it has failed miserably in teaching boys how to become masculine men of honor. Society is bent on feminizing males in a futile attempt to make males easily controllable. Male deviance is just not an individual problem but it's also a SOCIAL PROBLEM that society MUST begin to address WITHOUT feminizing the male and turn males onto the road of self rejection.

Society has chosen the route of feminizing males in an effort to make males controllable. Mistakenly, society has concluded that by feminizing males young males will still become men. We fail to realize that feminizing a male insures only that males will NOT become men but will become something inbetween and creatures never meant to be. The feminization of males has only served to make male deviance WORSE not better in my estimation.

"Society has chosen the route of feminizing males in an effort to make males controllable."

Robert's speaking the truth.

In Vermont, when young males, in a boyish effort to resist that feminization, get drunk, hold each other's dicks, and parody a "gay-themed," that is analist, movie, they're fined.

Now, I know that teen drinking is a problem and certainly a legitimate public policy concern.

But FREE SPEECH IS NOT A PROBLEM.

Nor is mutual masturbation.

Unless you live in Vermont.

In which case:

CENSORSHIP IS THE PROBLEM.

I'll have more to say about this later.

But clearly, as I've said before, society is NOT trending your way.

Robert -- and Greg and Oscar and I and a lot of other guys -- have called upon you to find your balls and fight back.

You better do it soon.

You may not elect to get your balls lopped off.

But if you don't start using them, guys, they'll shrivel up and disappear.

© All material Copyright 2006 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.

Jim

5-12-2006

Re: NY Times creams its jeans for drag; Harvard honors

These three news items really set me off.

OK, on "Strange Fruits", we've got a "transsexual Southern belle" who steals babies and POISONS PEOPLE? This is supposed to be funny? Wait a minute, how gauche of me. Funny? No, it's ironic, post-modern, smirkily simperingly HUMOROUS. A knowing "Hmm-hmm" noise in response, nothing so vulgar - or honest - as an outright laugh. (Not that there's anything to actually laugh at, I'm sure.) And I suppose that because it's "unabashedly gay", it's OK to bring up echoes of the old canards tying M2M with deviancy and pathology - at least that's how I rate kidnapping and poisoning. And since everything is so ironic, of course it would be campy and cross-dressing. NOTHING is serious, right? As far as editing out the blue-collar, outer-borough guys, yeah, its because they're masculine and because Booth, the BFD, the Times and all the other over-educated, effete pseudo-intellectual phonies want to get as far away from them as possible. That's how they convince themselves they are better than the "masses". I've known people like this in school and throughout my working life and they just have to find a way to prove themselves somehow better than the common man, which means a truly masculine man (and this is regardless of whether they identify as gay or straight). It doesn't surprise me there was the "machismo" ethnic slur in there, either. The contempt and half-heartedly veiled insults for groups outside their pale is another distinguishing characteristic of the species.

On the Harvard story, I'm speechless. If you put that scene into a novel ten years ago, it would have been edited out as too unrealistic. I know that there are people out there who, through a genetic fluke (or even a doctor's screw-up), aren't clearly one sex or the other. And people in such situations should be able to ameliorate, if not completely fix, the problem if there are the medical procedures and technology to do it. But this other stuff is a theater of the absurd and sometimes, it's treated like some kind of achievement - which corresponds with the attitude that men are inferior and flawed and being female - or asexual - is the superior "choice".

And on the U of Vermont story, George Orwell said it best: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." The BFD and its ilk can say anything they want (after all, they are just attacking the oppressive patriarchy or its representatives) but God help you if if you mock them or their shibboleths. And the worst of it is, those kids - and possibly all the frats or the male student body - will have to undergo some sort of "sensitivity training", which is, in its essence a form of public humiliation and denigration to show the "misbehaving" individuals - and anyone like them - that they must conform to the common group-think - as dictated by the pressure groups in power at the moment. And they aren't happy until you believe their tripe and "admit" you are trash. It may not be physical, but it is a violation as personal and humiliating as actual anal rape.

To me, that's the place to start fighting back.

Bill Weintraub

Re: NY Times creams its jeans for drag; Harvard honors

5-12-2006

Thank you Jim.

Great stuff.

As far as editing out the blue-collar, outer-borough guys, yeah, its because they're masculine and because Booth, the BFD, the Times and all the other over-educated, effete pseudo-intellectual phonies want to get as far away from them as possible. That's how they convince themselves they are better than the "masses". I've known people like this in school and throughout my working life and they just have to find a way to prove themselves somehow better than the common man, which means a truly masculine man...

Right.

There's a social class issue here.

Masculinity, such as it is, has come to be associated with working-class men, and both are denigrated.

In our new gilded age, the officially-sanctioned American heroes are the smooth-shaven captains of industry.

Where's Billy Jack?

I don't see him.

And the worst of it is, those kids - and possibly all the frats or the male student body - will have to undergo some sort of "sensitivity training", which is, in its essence a form of public humiliation and denigration to show the "misbehaving" individuals - and anyone like them - that they must conform to the common group-think - as dictated by the pressure groups in power at the moment.

Yes!

I often say that the gay establishment is Stalinist.

The "sensitivity training" is suggestive of Maoist China and the cultural revolution.

Particularly in the public humiliation aspect.

See, I'm not afraid of anti-gay speech.

It doesn't frighten me.

I've dealt with it all my life.

What does frighten me is CENSORSHIP.

That's genuinely scary.

Now, to be fair, the greater threat of censorship these days is coming from the religious right -- because they de facto have the power.

And they fully intend to censor everyone if they can.

But, fueling the support for that censorship is censorship coming from the cultural left.

As in this instance: where college kids aren't allowed to parody a topical movie because so doing "offends gay people."

Whoa.

I'm gay, and their mockery does not offend me.

So who's deciding what's offensive?

Answer: what is essentially a self-appointed elite.

That's a huge problem.

That's why we need to be in this debate.

But we aren't.

Why not?

No donations.

No donations -- No debate.

© All material Copyright 2006 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.