Presidential Hopeful Herman Cain: It’s Your Fault if You’re Poor

Posted on October 5, 2011 by Jacob Flores

Herman Cain, 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate and former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, revealed exactly how in touch he is with the pulse of America. When interviewed by the Wall Street Journal, about the grass roots movement “Occupy Wall Street,” Cain announced, “Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself! . . . It is not someone’s fault if they succeeded, it is someone’s fault if they failed.”

Think Progress reported the following on Cain’s comment: “But Cain’s claim about the unemployed is especially heartless and uninformed. There are simply not enough jobs to go around, with 4.32 unemployed people for every job opening in the country. So even someone looking hard for a job will have a difficult time finding one. Moreover, Cain fails to understand the astronomical income inequality in the U.S. and the negative effect it has on economic growth.”

To further illustrate his ignorance, Cain also claimed, “I don’t have facts to back this up, but I happen to believe that these demonstrations are planned and orchestrated to distract from the failed policies of the Obama administration.”

Well, without facts, who can really argue with him? I’ll give it a try though.

The citizens behind the “Occupy Wall Street” movement aren’t pleased with Republicans or Democrats! (as mentioned in the Huffington Post). They are angry with politicians in general. They aren’t trying to help Obama or hurt him. They are trying to bring attention to the plight of the everyday citizen, who flounders in an economy that favors the top 1% of American income earners.

They are upset that the individuals who caused the banking crisis remain unaffected and free, while the average American still suffers from the fallout of the banking scandals in 2008. But as Cain said, “We aren’t in 2008; we’re in 2011.”

Who can argue with that logic? What happened in 2008 couldn’t possibly be affecting the nation still in 2011! I mean slavery in this country ended in 1863, and our country has long since moved passed that, right?

Cain obviously has no concept of the struggles of the typical American. To blatantly tell an interviewer that the unemployed should blame themselves is ridiculous, especially in this job climate. Jobs are simply not there, so how can the unemployed be blamed?

With Cain now tied for first place with Massachussetts Governor Mitt Romney in the Republican presidential nod (both candidates are at 17% among Republican primary voters, as reported by CBS), I am concerned that someone as out of touch with the average American might one day represent their interests in The White House.

House Speaker Boehner Triples Budget in Defense of DOMA

Posted on October 4, 2011 by Jacob Flores

In what can only be called a frivolous waste of tax payers’ money, House Speaker John Boehner has approved to triple the amount paid to their legal team to battle DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) in legal proceedings. This move is supported by other House Republican leaders.

What I find interesting, and a little maddening, is that Republicans constantly blast Democrats for their “frivolous” spending on the poor, Medicare, food stamps, and Social Security, to name a few, (all programs to help Americans, by the way), while Republican leaders apparently have no problem spending 1.5 millions dollars to defend a law that restricts civil rights.

Apparently, defending marriage and restricting it to only one man and one woman means more than providing food and health care for the down trodden. Is that really what this country, whose deficit is approximately 14 trillion dollars, needs to be spending money on? Is ensuring that two men or two women, who love each other, are not allowed to marry that important?

For Republican leaders, the answer would apparently be a resounding yes!

When asked about the tripled budget to defend DOMA, Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, said, “At a time when Americans are hurting and job creation should be the top priority, it just shows how out of touch House Republicans have become that they would spend up to $1.5 million dollars to defend discrimination in our country.”

And that is exactly what Republican leaders are doing.

As I’ve said before, marriage is not only a religious sacrament, it is also a civil right. Not every straight couple is married in a church. And homosexuals aren’t asking to be married in a church. We are simply asking for the same rights heterosexual couples enjoy (and take for granted), which they receive from the government–the right of inheritance, the right of hospital visits, the right to make medical decisions, and the right to file joint income tax returns. The list goes on and on.

But spending 1.5 million dollars to prevent that from happening means more to Republican leaders than any social program that helps others. This is government-sponsored discrimination at its best!

With the way things are going in politics these days, the America of 2050 I envisioned in my novel Moral Authority really isn’t that far-fetched, is it?

Student Assaulted by TN HS Principal Over a GSA Shirt

Posted on October 4, 2011 by Jacob Flores

It hasn’t been a good couple of days for gays or Tennessee. You may remember yesterday I posted about two gay men assaulted for attempting to attend services at a church in Tennessee. Click here to read that post.

Sequoyah High School, where children aren't safe

Today, I came across another assault in Tennessee (courtesy of Towleroad). In Madisonville, TN, high school principal Maurice Moser assaulted 17 year old Chris Sigler over his decision to wear a homemade shirt in support of Sequoyah High School starting a Gay-Straight Alliance. The shirt contained the school’s abbreviation–SQHS–on the front. The back of the shirt read “Gay Straight Alliance: We’ve Got Your Back.”

The day before the assault, Moser warned Sigler not to wear the shirt again; however, brave Sigler, refusing to allow anyone to squelch his First Amendment Right, wore the shirt the following day. Moser allegedly interrupted Sigler’s class and ordered everyone out of the room. Sigler’s sister, however, refused to leave. The ACLU of Tennessee, who has taken Sigler’s case, says that “Moser then grabbed Sigler’s arm, shoved him, and chest-bumped him repeatedly while asking ‘Who’s the big man now?’ Sigler’s mother reported that when she arrived at the school, she saw her son seated in a desk with Moser leaning over him and shouting in Sigler’s face.”

Based on the ACLU letter sent to the school district, “Mr. Moser stopped his attack after a school resource officer and Chris’ mother intervened, and that Mr. Moser eventually agreed not to suspend Chris only on the condition that he leave the school grounds with his mother and not return for the rest of the school day.”

Maurice Moser, Principal, not a pal to SQHS students

When asked about the attack and why he wore the shirt, Sigler said, “All I want is to have a GSA at my school to help stop the bullying against gays and lesbians and their friends who support them. The shirt was a way to use my voice and show my support for the club. The way I was treated shows even more why we need a GSA here.”

Sigler couldn’t be more right. The courageous young man did nothing wrong. He is a level-headed young man, who is straight but who is also tired of seeing his friends, who happen to be homosexual, bullied at school. He was simply expressing his opinion and showing his support for something he believed in. He certainly didn’t deserve to be attacked by his principal, a man whose job it is to not only oversee the education of the children at his school, but who is also supposed to protect the children entrusted in his care from any threat on the school grounds.

As an educator, I find Moser’s actions reprehensible, and it makes me wonder about the safety of all children at schools across the country. Do we as parents now have to worry about educators and students bullying our children for being different? Are the people who we trust to protect our children not going to be there for them when they are needed the most, simply because our child might look different of believe differently from school officials?

If anyone thinks this might not happen to you or your child, it just might. You see, I have personal experience with this.

While I won’t name the school, my daughter attended a private elementary school in the town where we live. When she started Kindergarten, my ex-wife and I informed her teachers of our unique situation (at least unique for our part of the world), that I was gay and that we are both active parents in her life. My ex-wife and I agonized over this issue, but we felt it was the right thing to do in case our child started to talk about it among her classmates. We wanted the teachers to be there for her and for the other students, who may have asked them questions.

Unfortunately, in our efforts to protect her, we opened her up to the criticisms and attacks of those teachers and all her future teachers at that school. She was allowed to flail academically and received no extra help though other students in her class received special attention. For three years, we thought our child suffered from a learning disability until we learned that she was being singled out (or denied assistance) because of who her father was.

Naturally, we withdrew her from that school and she now thrives in an new school environment where my private life in no way affects her life at school. The entire school knows I’m gay. In fact, my husband serves on the Board for this school, and no one cares about our private life. Their only focus is educating every single child.

Isn’t that how all schools are supposed to operate? Unfortunately for Sigler and for my daughter, it’s not always the case.

In Tennessee: Two Gay Men Assaulted For Trying to Attend Church Services

Posted on October 3, 2011 by Jacob Flores

If you’re like me, you were raised to believe that God is good, and that His church, His places of worship, (no matter what religious denomination it might be) are where all are welcome—the believers and the sinners, the members of society and those castaway from it, the rich and the poor, and the healthy and the sick.

Churches are safe havens. It’s where we as members of a flock can find solace and unconditional love in times of great distress. After all, God loves every single one of us, and those of us who are Christians believe He sent His only son to us as a gift—to show us what true love really means. That love, that acceptance begins at God’s house—his church.

Apparently, that might no longer be true.

Pittman, Jr and Lee after assault

Last Wednesday, in an appalling scene at Grace Fellowship Church in Fruitland, Tennessee, two gay men were attacked for simply trying to enter a church to worship.

Jeremy Pittman, Jr. and his boyfriend, Dustin Lee, were barred entry from the church by church leaders. Pittman and Lee were then verbally and physically assaulted by the pastor and deacons. To make matters worse, two of the offenders were Pittman’s father, Jeremy Pittman, Sr. (pastor of Grace Fellowship Church) and Pittman’s uncle, who was one of the deacons. The attack took place in front of the church, where several church goers witnessed the attack and did nothing to help Pittman, Jr. or Lee.

According to WBBJ, the local CBS affiliate, Pittman, Jr. told reporters: “My uncle and two other deacons came over to the car per my dad’s request. My uncle smash me in the door as the other deacon knocked my boyfriend back so he couldn’t help me, punching him in his face and his chest. The other deacon came and hit me through my car window in my back,” said Pittman. He also stated the deacon yelled derogatory homosexual slurs, even after officers arrived, and the officers never attempted to stop the deacons’ verbal assaults.

Even though, the responding deputy reportedly did not allow Pittman, Jr. or Lee to press charges or file a complaint at the time of the assault, all parties are scheduled to appear in court tomorrow.

This story boggles my mind!

How could church leaders—a pastor and three deacons—think in any way that God would have wanted them to not only prevent individuals from worshipping but to assault them? And to do so in His name? How could these men think God would have wanted them to physically assault a member of their own family?

What infuriates me the most is that these are the same Christian extremists who claim homosexuality destroys the family and causes irreparable damage to God’s children!

Are they really talking about homosexuals or themselves?

The pastor and the deacons at Grace Fellowship Church, and others like them in the nation and the world, are the ones behind these types of attacks, not the homosexuals!

I have yet to hear one story of a group of homosexuals converging on an unsuspecting Christian and beating him or preventing him from entering a Neiman Marcus. I have yet to hear a story of a straight teen committing suicide because a horde of homosexuals taunted him by calling him a breeder. I have yet to hear of a congregation at a Metropolitan Community Church (a church run by and for spiritual homosexuals) banning straight people from attending services or beating them on church grounds.

Homosexuals aren’t the ones creating the violence. We aren’t even responding to violence with violence. In fact, we keep turning the other cheek, we try to show love even when met with violence, and we follow the laws of the land to incite change. We don’t attack others, and we don’t turn our backs on family, even if they turn their backs on us.

This only makes me wonder: just who is following God’s laws again?

Story originally found via Towleroad

Top 5 Most Challenged LGBT Themed Books

Posted on October 2, 2011 by Jacob Flores

Banned Book Week (September 24-October 1 2011) has just concluded, and as an English professor, the concept of banning books baffles my mind. Literature is meant to be an exploration, a journey into worlds, experiences, and ideas we might never experience in our lives. Reading is meant to broaden our horizons, to teach us lessons about love and to inspire growth as a person and as a species.

How can growth be accomplished when groups or organizations exist that constantly attempt to weed out the ideas they don’t want shared with the world?

No one person or group should be allowed that much power, for reading is knowledge and knowledge is power. By attempting to ban books, those groups are endeavoring to keep individuals ignorant, to keep growth stunted to another’s concept of morality. Those people are like a gardner attempting to prune a bonsai tree, to keep it small and weak by clipping this idea or whittling that thought from the collective garden of society.

Libraries are for everyone and should represent the multitudes. When a book is banned, a subset of our societal make up is also lopped off.

Banning books, for any reason, just should not be allowed. If those who ban books had their way, many classics we enjoy, such as The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald (challenged because of language and sexual references), The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger (challenged for being “anti-white” and containing vulgarity and sex), or The Color Purple by Alice Walker (challenged for depictions of race relations, African history, vulgarity, and explicit sexual encounters) would never have found a place among the shelves or in our hearts.

If you look closely as to why books are challenged/banned, it’s because they deal with real life situations–sex, vulgarity, race relations, and minority topics–that make the supposed moral “majority” uncomfortable, that threaten their strangle hold onto power. Consider this: why do you think slave owners didn’t want their slaves to read or be educated? It wasn’t because it was too expensive or not worthwhile. It’s because education is power. It’s because once a group learns of the persecutions being heaped upon them, then they demand and clamor for change. So those who attempt to ban books today, under the guise of protecting their children, are really using the ploy to foster ignorance and keep the down trodden down.

This is why I believe many LGBT-themed books are challenged today. It’s not merely because of the “sex” or “vulgarity.” It’s because LGBT-themed books challenge the status quo. They show gay and/or lesbian characters as real people dealing with difficult situations of coming out, questioning their identity, or overcoming obstacles that are universal in nature. These conflicts make homosexuals more human and more like everyone else and not the other many people would like to see us as.

To prove my point, let’s take a look at some of the most challenged LGBT themed books.

And Tango Makes Three

#1 And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson, Peter Parnell, and Henry Cole and published by Simon and Schuster.

This children’s book is challenged because it is pro-homosexuality, anti-family, and unsuited to age group. Here is what the story is actually about. It’s about two real life penguins from Central Park Zoo in NYC, who nested together and tried to hatch a rock. Zookeepers decided to give the partnered male penguins an egg from a male/female pairing of penguins who had one too many. Had the zoo not done so, one of the eggs would have been sacrificed and would have died. Instead, by giving the extra egg to the two male penguins, the chick hatched and was nurtured and raised by their loving fathers.

This book is hardly anti-family since it is all about family. In fact, the book’s message seems more pro-life to me, and I thought that was one societal issue most conservative Christians supported. Are they saying it’s better for chicks (or children) to die or be cast off than to be raised by homosexual parents? Now, that story seems more anti-family and unsuited for a child’s age group to me!

Daddy's Roommate

Heather Has Two Mommies

#2 Daddy’s Roommate by Michael Willhoite and #3 Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman. Both books published by Alyson Books

These children’s books are challenged because they involve characters engaged in same-sex relationships. These two books depict how two different children are raised by same-gender parents. The lives these families lead are ordinary. They do household chores, they argue, and they spend time as a family–all very typical and mundane aspects of every single family. The only difference is the same-gendered parents. The moral of these stories is to show everyone that a family is a family, no matter what the family dynamics. The only universal tie is the love that brings the family together.

I can’t help but feel as if that is precisely the reason these two books are challenged. Remember my comment earlier about the slave owners keeping their slaves ignorant. Well, the same idea applies here. The conservative Christians don’t want people to realize that homosexuals are not only capable parents but that there is no distinction whatsever between homosexual and heterosexual parents beyond the gender of the adults.

King & King

#4 King and King by Linda De Haan and Stern Nijland and published by Tricyle Press (previously published in the Netherlands)

This young children’s book was also challenged because of its homosexual content. What’s intriguing about this book’s challenge, however, is that the couple who sought to ban it did it to keep children from having to worry about “homosexuality, race, or religion.” Their attempted ban though increased the circulation of the book in their library and in their township. All of this over a twist on the classic fairy tale. The Queen wants her son to marry, so she can retire. The Prince doesn’t like the princesses brought to him until he meets one of the princesses’ brothers. The two fall in love and marry, and the Queen gets to retire while the two Kings take care of the country and the retired Queen.

The homosexual content that is apparently objectionable–since there are no graphic sex scenes or vulgarity–is the love shown between two boys. The boys do nothing wrong in the story. They obey their families, and they get married. They even take care of the grouchy mom, who gets to sit poolside and sun. No one is abandoned, and the responsibilities of the kingdom are met. Unless taking care of family, falling in love, and fulfilling responsibilities are objectionable, I just don’t see how this story differs all that much from “Cinderella” or “Sleeping Beauty.”

Baby Be Bop

#5 Baby Be Bop by Francesca Lia Block and published by HarperCollins

This young adult book is challenged for explicit language and promoting the homosexual agenda. It’s about a young boy’s struggle with his sexual identity, a common theme of today. The protagonist falls in love (which is unrequited), is beaten to near death by bullies, but learns that true love comes to us all.

Obviously, this is a book children, who suffer from extensive bullying in the school system, shouldn’t read! Why should children who might be different not learn that it gets better, that love is waiting in the wings, and that family will (and should) always be there when we need them?

When a rational person, who doesn’t carry the repressive yoke of hate or fear around their necks, looks at these books, he/she can see these books are about love, family, and acceptance–all integral values to a society. These ideas shouldn’t be banned anymore than the Bible or the Koran. All books teach valuable lessons, and it is an individual’s right to choose for him/herself what book to read.

No one should do that for us!

The Truth About Twinks

Posted on October 1, 2011 by Jacob Flores

This posting is part II in my series explaining the various subgroups in the gay male culture. Today’s topic is the Twink. (To read Part I: A Reference Guide to Gay Bear Culture, click here).

For those of you who have ever wondered just what a twink was when your gay friends talked about one, this post will hopefully clear up your confusion and give you a basic understanding of those gay boys who fall under the twink classification.

A Group of Twinkies

Definition of a Twink: Men (or boys) in the gay community who are rarely above 30 years old. Many are slender if not extremely thin and often lack body hair and rarely, if ever, have facial hair (as opposed to the bears, who are considered their polar opposites). Traditionally, these gay men most closely represent the stereotype of gay men as being “queenie” or “effeminate.” They are often portrayed as wild partiers, who are either still in the closet, newly gay, or still struggling through coming out issues.

Characteristics of a Twink: Twinks suffer from a bad reputation. Beyond having to deal with the “queenie” or “effeminate” stereotype, as a group they are often known for being drama queens, rude, snotty, and dumb. In fact, the term twink originates from a popular junk food–The Twinkie. The comparison connotes that twinks are only for short-term consumption and not a long-term relationship. (This is an unfair description, seeing as how most of the men in this classification are young and should be having fun and enjoying life.) Additionally, the comparison also points to the often sun-kissed skin most twinks have through either excessive sun worship or frequent visits to tanning salons. Like Bears, Twinks tend to travel in groups, and while not as physically dangerous as a pack of Bears, they are known for razor sharp tongues capable of verbally ripping anyone to shreds. Unless you can verbally spar, don’t enter into a word war with a twink.

What Do Twinkies Do in the Box? Like Bears, Twinks are more than just what a few individuals enjoy. However, there are some standard past times of this younger set of gay men. On average, clubbing ranks among the highest. Walk into any trendy gay hot spot, and you will find groups of twinks twirling on the dance floor or luxuriating in the VIP section. The drinks of choice are typically fruity and vibrant in color, such as a Cosmo, or low in calories like a vodka and Red Bull. Most twinks are obsessed with fashion, music, popular trends, hooking up, and coming out. And, due to their age, most are enrolled in college.

Twink Wrapping: Twinks enjoy shopping for the latest youthful trends. They frequent stores such as Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister, or American Eagle. While they enjoy the finer fashion designers–Armani, Prada, and Hugo Boss–their lack of sustainable income (unless they come from money or are attached to a wealthy daddy-husband), means they typically cannot afford to splurge their college funds on fashion. Whether the outfit is high fashion or not, you will be hard-pressed to find a twink not dressed to impress, whether it’s Friday night at a club or Sunday morning brunch. The world is their runway. And like most models, it isn’t uncommon for a Twink to forego food in favor of looking his best. Many will often engage in crash dieting to achieve the desired lean and waifish look.

Types of Twinks: Within this category, you will also find a few subcategories that also fall under the larger Twink classification.

All-American Twink represents the epitome of popularity and physical perfection. He is extremely athletic and his hair is always perfectly manicured.
Zac Efron--All American Twink
Beach Twink refers to the type of younger gay male who spends his days at, you guessed it, the beach. His hair is typically almost platinum blonde from sun exposure.
Gaysian is a twink of Asian descent.
Gym Twink are those boys who live at the gym. Unlike the traditional twink, their bodies are not lean or waifish. Gym Twinks strive for muscle definition and will not break if handled roughly.
Taylor Lautner--a Gym Twink example

Twunk is a pejorative remark describing an older man trying to be a twink. This type of gay man is typically between the ages of 28-40, who still shops at Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister, or American Eagle. Also, in efforts to reclaim lost youth, a twunk frequents tanning salons, wears clothing at least two sizes too small, and sometimes indulges in Botox or plastic surgery. Men who fit this definition will often lie about their age and will create drama if they hit on you and you reject them.

Twink Admirers: Individuals who seek the company of twinks have their own classifications as well.

Daddies represent the older men who pursue younger men for sexual and/or long-term relationships. These men typically support twinks by paying their bills and their rent all in the hopes of stealing some of the youthful energy the twink possesses in abundance.
Fag Hags are girls who typically are only friends with gay boys. They accompany them to clubs and help their gays sweep up their broken hearts. It is a relationship that is sacrosanct, often more meaningful than most sexual relationships the gay boy or hag are currently involved in.

Twinks and those that gravitate toward them are an eclectic group of individuals. If you’re looking for someone to party with or who knows the latest fashions, find yourself a twink BFF. They’ll have you dressed to kill and party ready in no time.