Wednesday, March 30, 2005

New Referendum Petition NOT the Solution

How sad to see our would-be allies acting so myopically. The Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI) is about to announce its new referendum petition drive to end homosexual "marriage". A worthy goal, but a fatally flawed strategy. (See the Boston Globe report, "Gay marriage foes eye new petition," 3/30/05.)

Why must one group perversely go off on a fool's errand, split our movement, deplete our financial resources, time, and energy??? How can the MFI be so short-sighted and forgetful of our recent history?

Governor Romney, not exactly known for getting things done, is in a "dialogue" with the MFI on their hare-brained scheme. But House minority leader Rep. Bradley H. Jones, Jr. (R-North Reading), clearly more in touch with political reality, warns of the difficulties with MFI's strategy. Jones said, "It's worth it from their perspective, I suppose, but the hurdles are more daunting than they think they are."

Remember that in 2002, Senate President Birmingham violated our Constitutional requirement to bring a marriage referendum up for a vote. So even though MFI's new referendum petition would only need 50 votes in the Legislature (two years in a row) before going to the voters, it appears unlikely this will ever be allowed. It's not only the Supreme Judicial Court that's out of control in this state -- our Legislature has also been ignoring the Constitution!

Even if the referendum passed the hurdle of being approved by two consecutive Constitutional Conventions, there is fine print (according to a reliable source) which would probably not allow it to go to the voters until 2010 or 2011! Do you want to wait that long to end homosexual "marriage"?

Further, with tyrant judges still in place, you can be sure they'd throw the measure out as "unconstitutional" even if approved by the voters! THE PROBLEM IS THE JUDGES. REMOVE THE SJC4 ! Support Article 8 Alliance!

BUT THE MFI STUBBORNLY PERSISTS, engaged in infantile wishful thinking! ... A group no longer worthy of your support.

Monday, March 28, 2005

Polyamory at the U of Chicago Law School

When we wrote about polyamorists, queer activists, and slimy hotels a few days ago, we hadn't yet seen Stanley Kurtz's piece in National Review Online, "Rick Santorum Was Right" (3/23/05). Well, things are even worse than we thought. It seems that prestigious law schools are now treating group marriage as "the next big cause in family law." Elizabeth Emens, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, "taking her cue from the movement for gay marriage", argues that polyamory is "not just ... a practice, but ... a disposition."

Kurtz explains that according to this highly credentialed legal scholar, "whether for biological or cultural reasons, some folks simply canot live happily unless they are allowed multiple, simultaneous sexual partners." (Didn't this used to be called adultery?) "And for these people, our current system of marriage and family laws is every bit as unjust as it is for homosexuals."

Kurtz continues:
"Emens tackles a whole series of further objections to polyamory. So, for example, what about the need for cultural consensus in our marriage practices? If people who believe in monogamous marriage can't take it for granted that their potential partners believe in marital monogamy, aren't we setting ourselves up for social chaos? No problem, says Emens. In a polyamory-friendly world, monogamists will be able to form associations, just as polyamorists do now. People can join monogamy or polyamory clubs, just like we now choose churches. That way, we'll be assured of finding companions who share our own rules of marriage."

Sunday, March 27, 2005

Has the Catholic Church Forgotten Who Rep. Sciortino Is?

Why would The Pilot, the weekly newspaper of the Archdiocese of Boston, print a large photo of a studious looking Rep. Carl Sciortino (D-Somerville) at a State House symposium on stem cells? (3/25/05, p. 6; not on their website.) If you didn't know any better, you'd think he's a man worthy of their respect. Do they remember who he is? Do they really think he'll take any position in violation of the Culture of Death he embraces?

The Pilot ran a story on Sciortino's defilement of the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in June 2003 when, during Communion, he and his homosexual partner held hands, turned their back to the altar, and walked out of the church in protest of its opposition to homosexual "marriage". (But they didn't mention it THIS time!)

Article 8 Alliance exposed Sciortino's radical homosexual activist past. Click here to see it. Surely the Church knows his history. Very strange that he should be featured in the flattering photo accompanying their stem-cell story!

Saturday, March 26, 2005

Adoptions by Homosexual Couples Were Key

The radical homosexual activists figured out long ago that they had to play on emotions to win their battle for full acceptance in mainstream American society. One clever way to do this would be to portray themselves in"normal" families, INCLUDING CHILDREN. Children have been used as political pawns in the gay power struggle. See the 1972 Gay Rights Platform which includes the demand for rights to adoption and foster care.)

Since neither gay men nor exclusively lesbian women could reproduce, how would they acquire children? Some brought children from former heterosexual marriages or relationships; some lesbians went the route of natural (grin and bear it for the cause!), or artificial, insemination. (And maybe the "bisexuals" fit in here somewhere?) Many have ADOPTED.

Adoptions are regulated by the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS), which was totally co-opted by the homosexual activists over the last two decades. (Bear in mind that Governor Romney controls the DSS as part of the Executive Branch.) Many, many homosexuals work in the DSS at all levels, as confirmed by our source, a long-time former social worker in adoption and foster care at DSS.

It has been Massachusetts law for some time that the DSS cannot deny homosexuals ("married" or "unmarried" couples, or singles) the privilege of adopting. This falls under the "Multi-Ethnic Placement Act". How incredible that homosexual behaviors are categorized by Massachusetts law as an "ethnic" factor!!! ["No one can be denied the opportunity to become an adoptive or foster parent on the basis of race, creed, color, religion, age, ancestry, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, language, disability, veteran status, or national origin..."]

Our source has shared some interesting DSS training materials on GLBT issues. DSS personnel must learn definitions which fully incorporate the radical homosexual perspective, taught in a mandatory session by a Harvard Ph.D. expert in "identity issues". The motto of the session: "To tolerate is an assault; you HAVE TO ACCEPT!"

Examples of definitions taught:

Heterosexism: Systems and ways of thinking that reinforce a belief in the inherent superiority of heterosexuality and heterosexual relationships, thereby negating the lives and relationships of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people.

Heterosexual Privilege: The basic civil rights and social privileges that a heterosexual person automatically receives that are systematically denied to gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons simply because of their sexual orientation. The assumption that all people are heterosexual.

Gender Identity: An individual's basic self-conviction of being male or female. This conviction is not contingent upon the individual's biological gender.

Gender Expression: External representation of one's gender identity, usually expressed through "masculine" or "feminine" behavior, clothing, hair cut, voice or body characteristics.

Down Low (or DL): A term coined by some bisexual men of color that describes a cultural phenomenon of men who have sex with other men without informing their female partners.

Bisexual: A person who experiences the human need for warmth, affection, and love from persons of either gender. Sometimes this includes sexual contact..."

Homosexual: ... Homosexuality per se is no longer considered an illness by the American Psychiatric Association, nor by the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, or most other reputable professional organizations.

The social workers are given a flyer on Waltham House, the Home for Little Wanderers' therapeutic center for "self-identified GLBT youth who cannot live at home with their family." DSS workers are directed to resources including BAGLY (Boston Alliance for GLBT Youth), Gay & Lesbian National Hotline, Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD, the lawyers for gay "marriage"), Lambda Legal, and the infamous GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network, behind all the propaganda in our schools) -- all guaranteed to draw these troubled youth further into this dangerous "lifestyle".

All paid for by your tax dollars.

Thursday, March 24, 2005

Polyamorists Team with Queer Activists and Boston Hotels

Our society is getting weirder and weirder. Are you ready to hear about the polyamorist radicals linking up with queer activists? And holding their conference at a supposedly respectable local hotel (where we go for wedding receptions)?

You can read all about it in "Poly Politics: Lessons from Queer Liberation", a paper presented at a very queer conference held at the Natick Crowne Plaza last October. One of the sponsoring groups was the New England Leather Alliance (not into shoe manufacturing).

That reminds me of the article in the Boston Globe last year about the people riding up and down the elevators with chains, leashes, and whips, wearing just a little leather -- in front of families with small children -- at the Boston Park Plaza Hotel. These freaks were attending the annual national Leather Leadership Conference. And don't forget the Sheraton Boston hosts the Fetish Fair Fleamarket.

See our Hall of Shame entry (Feb. 12), listing corporate sponsors of the radical homosexual movement in Massachusetts. We've added these hotels to that list, because after reading the above article, it becomes clear that the boundaries between these groups of "sexual adventurers" are not at all well defined... There's lots of crossover.

When are regular Americans going to call these hotels to account for hosting such twisted groups? They've always been around, but now they're unashamedly "out" -- with the help of these hotels.

Sunday, March 20, 2005

Playing on Emotions: One Key to Their Victory

Bay Windows muses over why Massachusetts is so different from the other more primitive states (which still choose to stand up and fight the radical homosexuals' attack on traditional values). The GLBT newspaper claims it's because Massachusetts has been "having the conversation" over homosexual "rights" much longer--for over 30 years--instead of just the last few years.

Putting a human face on their cause had a lot to do with their success. Playing on the emotions of the legislators. Badgering ("lobbying") them relentlessly. Showing smiling family portraits with their children.

"We made progress over 17 years of lobbying to pass the gay rights bill by talking about our lives with state legislators. We told stories about our relationships. We showed off pictures of our children. In the process we became fully human to a generation of local lawmakers. There's a lesson in all this for the rest of the country: Coming out helps. Steady, persistent lobbying of lawmakers helps. Principled, unyielding demands for equality helps."

There's a lesson in this for us, too. We must understand that many legislators will respond to EMOTION, but not rational or moral arguments.

Let's go into the State House and lobby ceaselessly. Remind these legislators of all the young men still needlessly contracting AIDS and homosex diseases. Of the STD plague that has spread largely due to "bisexual" males sharing these diseases with females. And of families sadly torn apart by children announcing they're "gay" (after being recruited in the gay clubs in our public high schools).

Remind the legislators that we too have families, and we have every right to protect OUR CHILDREN from a dangerous "lifestyle" we also object to on moral grounds.

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Lexington Schools: "What happens here stays here"

Here we go again in Lexington. The schools there are out of control. A 15-year-old Lexington High School student confirms what we all knew, that parents will never know what is said in our kids' "health" classes. He wrote in the local chat room:

"The Health Ed. program does have a 'What is said in this classroom stays in this classroom' policy."

Think about it.

Wanted: TOPS & BOTTOMS for HIV Vaccine Testing

Seems like we're spending a lot of time lately monitoring Bay Windows [one of Boston's GLBT newspapers; also check out the Boston Globe]. But that has something to do with the fact that it's being distributed in vending boxes in front of post offices, on street corners, and in supermarkets (Shaw' s, Stop & Shop) across the state. It's IN OUR FACES -- and our kids' faces -- wherever we turn!

The content of Bay Windows is hardly what we'd consider mainstream. But remember, homosexual "marriage" is "legal" in Massachusetts, so ANYTHING they do and print is OK! Some current items:

Latest online survey:
Do you think contact tracing would help prevent the spread of HIV? 34% YES
31% No
35% How would that work? I don't know the last names of everyone I've had sex with.

Recent headline stories:
"The true lives of hookers, hustlers and whores." Stuck in these times of heightened censorship and renewed Right Wing zealotry, sex workers don't get much respect...

"So online sex sites aren't to blame, after all." ...30% of the online sexual hook-ups resulted in UAI [unprotected anal intercourse], while 25% of those who met sexual partners offline reported UAI.

Recent Advertisement:
Wanted -- Tops & Bottoms
Fenway Community Health is seeking HIV-negative men who have sex with men to participate in the STEP trial to determine the safety and effectiveness of an investigational HIV vaccine in preventing HIV infections.
The fact is, 63% of all HIV/AIDS cases in the U.S. are in gay and bisexual men and HIV infection rates are rising among men who have sex with men.
We are seeking volunteers: HIV-negative men, ages 18-45, who have been a top or bottom in the past 6 months. Volunteers receive compensation for their time and travel expenses, as well as confidential HIV counseling and testing.
--Fenway Community Health, Boston

Gay Newspeak Strikes Again!

Truly unbelievable ... but then they took control of the language some years back in the culture war. [See the piece by Scott Lively below.] Bay Windows, the Boston GLBT newspaper, reports:

Pro-Marriage candidates win!

What does this mean in gay newspeak? That the candidates supporting homosexual "marriage" won. Only 10% of the voters turned out for the election in former House Speaker Finneran's district. -- Advantage goes to the well-funded, well-organized homosexual activists. They have plenty of spare time, few family responsibilities, lots of money. [Wait--I thought they suffered from discrimination??] They're very adept at seeking out such opportunities: special elections, primaries, no one paying attention.

New Conservative Blog in Massachusetts

Can you believe it? We're not alone!!! Check out another CONSERVATIVE blog here in Massachusetts: (The only thing we take issue with is their claim to be the "premier" conservative blog in the state...) An excerpt:

The institution founded by the Puritan, John Harvard, is rife with impurities. Summers, who I have no great love for, is under attack for stating that there may be inherent differences between the sexes. It amazes me that the multi-culturalists at Harvard who insist that people are born gay can't accept that fact that the sexes may be born with inherent differences as well. And then, heaven forbid, an actress (we know how conservative THEY are), used heteronormative language (i.e. she only mentioned women as marrying men) in describing how women can have it all. The cultural terrorists went after her immediately to obtain an apology. Harvard is lost.

[Note from MassResistance: No, Harvard isn't entirely lost. MassResistance will be at the Harvard Faculty Club for brunch on March 20. See if you can find us there! We're working on assorted alum to come out of the closet and remind everyone of the meaning of VERITAS.]

Monday, March 14, 2005

"Married" Gays Whining over Their Taxes

Now they're whining that their "tax tangles" are too burdensome. It's just not fair that the federal government and IRS don't recognize their "marriage"! Something must be done to correct this violation of their civil rights! Not content to settle for their unfair advantage over singles, cohabiting non-married family members, etc., the unnaturally joined make the front page on the Boston Globe, crying over their federal taxes.

Not much sympathy on our part for the apparently well-to-do lesbian couple shown poring over their "blueprints for renovations to their house in Jamaica Plain." Tax professionals and accountants must be pleased. One said "she may charge up to twice her standard fee of $250 to $350, due to the extra work" filing for "married" gays. Apparently, high-income homosexual couples will have no problem paying. But they do enjoy complaining.

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Gay Orgies Untouchable by Law Enforcement

The radical gays are upset that Boston Police Commissioner O'Toole appointed a detective they don't like to the "hate-crimes" unit. (Boston Globe story, 3/12/05.) They don't like Sgt. Detective Joseph MacDonald because years ago he arrested one of their orgy planners.

Back in 1992, 161 nude gay men cavorted at what they called a "safe sex" party in Boston's South End. An admission fee was charged, alcohol was flowing, and "safe sex literature" was distributed. The D.A. later dropped the charges against the orgy planner ("selling alcohol without a license, maintaining a house of ill fame, and distributing obscenity").

But Gary Daffin, head of the Massachusetts Gay & Lesbian Political Caucus (very influential on Beacon Hill), is OUTRAGED!! that MacDonald would be appointed to this position. Daffin said the 1992 incident is "notorious" in the gay community. "It is surprising that they would appoint someone with this history.... his record seemed particularly egregious and he seemed particularly uncomfortable with gay people," Daffin said.

Seventeen Magazine Pushing the Gay Agenda

It's not only the public schools pushing acceptance of homosexuality on your kids. It's popular magazines like Seventeen. In the April 2005 issue, there is a prominent piece, "am i gay?" . (Note the cutesy, all-lower-case title.) The title is superimposed on two lovely feminine faces, staring at you with a confused, open-mouthed, intent expression.

Well, let's see who the sources are for this article: The past president of the Gay & Lesbian Medical Association in San Francisco. A psychologist who wrote Mom, Dad, I'm Gay. The director of policy for PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians & Gays).

If the young reader is confused or "questioning", she is directed to,, or 888-THE-GLNH ("for confidential counseling about your sexuality"). GLSEN (Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network) is the radical homosexual activist group recruiting our children in schools across America.

"Do you think you might be bisexual or lesbian?" Step 1: Answer four questions, and "if you [answer] yes to any of these, you probably are attracted to other girls to some degree." Example: "Do you ever think about what it would feel like to kiss or make out with another girl?" (Emphasis in original.) If you answered yes, you need to go to Step 2: Are you "ready to come out?" Contact the helping organizations above.

Click here to contact the editors of Seventeen.

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Sad Story in Lexington

A seminal strategy of the radical homosexual movement was their enlistment of children as pawns in their war against normality. Take this sad example from Lexington.

Just a few weeks ago, an unsuspecting father was shocked when his elementary-school child came home from school with a "diversity bag", including the book Who's In a Family?. (Well, you can imagine who's in that family...) When the father complained to the principal of the school (who said the school can do anything it wants), and a school committee candidate addressed the issue, it became a topic on the local politics chat board. A very telling post came from a lesbian mother (printed below).

Conservatives do have hearts. We feel for the letter-writer's family. We are struck by the woman's obvious normal desire to be a mother -- but also her self-delusion, her efforts to "normalize" the unnaturalness of her situation. And we are struck hard by the boy's situation. How sad to inflict this twisted reality on a child.

Needless to say, the boy and his classmates are forced by the unnaturalness of his family composition to dwell upon sexuality more than when regarding a normal family. Yes, it is sex education to consider a "marriage" that is obviously so different. How sad: for the mother, for her boy, for our society. Her letter:

Subject: Sex Education in the Lexington School Curriculum
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005

Dear Lexingtonians,

[A]s a lesbian mother here in town, I feel the need to address two basic assumptions that Mr. P seemed to be (and Mr J as well?) making: first, that talking about gay families is the same thing as talking about sex, and second, that it is okay to exclude our families from our school books and resources because some people don't like us being here.

First, the assumption that including books that have families like mine, headed by two mothers, in our elementary schools is somehow "sex education". Is it sex education to read a book about a man and a woman getting married? About a family where you have the birth of a younger sibling? If you think that a book that includes families with a man and a woman as parents ARE about sexuality issues or sex education, then our curriculum for kindergarten and first grade is, surprise, all about sex!! Of course, this may seem a bit silly. Why would it be different if it is a gay or lesbian headed family.

Please do take a look at the few books that include our families -- such as "Who's In a Family" that [Mr. P] mentioned. If you actually read them it is immediately obvious that these are not books about sex, or about 'sexuality issues' --- they are books as T wrote about families, all our families. On the second point: is it right to exclude our families from the resources and books in the classrooms? Or to give parents "advance notice" so they can pull their child out?

Let's be clear: everyone has a right to their own beliefs. Where we share a public space, however, as we do in our public schools, our behavior (teaching and other) must be inclusive and non-marginalizing. To quote the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: “neither the mantra of tradition, nor individual conviction, can justify the perpetuation of a hierarchy in which couples of the same sex and their families are deemed less worthy of social and legal recognition than couples of the opposite sex and their families" (from Justices Meaney's [sic; should be Greaney] concurrence in the Goodridge equal marriage case).

If our families are left out of the books that are read, if we are invisible in the curriculum because some people feel we shouldn't be here, then our schools indeed hurt our children and families by treating us as "less worthy", by, in the justices' terminology, 'perpetuating a hierarchy in which couples of the same sex are deemed less worthy... than couples of the opposite sex and their families.'

I will share a story: our older son came home very excitedly when he was in first grade. He was talking about a book at school that had mentioned someone who was "gay", and he was very happy. I didn't say much except the "oh that's nice" type of thing. Then he came home again with another such book. When it happened a third time, I finally felt I had to explain to him that "gay" in these books probably didn't mean people like those parents in his family, but "happy". He was deflated.

What was so clear, what stuck with me so strongly, was how hungry he was for stories at school that included our family. Finally, you may believe divorce is morally wrong, but would you say to the schools, I don't want you including books with any of those divorced families in them because it's mature subject matter and doesn't send the right message? I trust that most of you would answer no, for the same reasons that you should answer no as well to excluding the families of gay and lesbian people from books.

We are here, our children are here taking flute lessons and playing soccer, trying to be good people and good citizens and good neighbors, just like each of you. And we need to be included in the sense of who our large and diverse community is, reflected in our public institutions like the schools.

Thank you! -M.

Sunday, March 06, 2005

Romney's Getting It from Both Sides

Gov. Mitt Romney can't win. First, we remind everyone of his support of the homosexual agenda in our schools, and his failure to halt same-sex "marriage". Now Boston's GLBT newspaper, Bay Windows, is dredging up other fun stuff on the Gov. See "Mitt Romney's Secret Gay History!" (3/3/05) :

"During his 2002 gubernatorial run his campaign distributed bright pink flyers during Pride that declared 'Mitt and Kerry wish you a great Pride weekend! All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.' Romney also argued that he would not only support gay friendly policies but would fight on behalf of the gay community to secure benefits such as domestic partner benefits and hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples."

Back in 1994, when he ran for Senate against Ted Kennedy, Romney promised, "as we seek to establish full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent" [i.e., Kennedy].

Regarding the Boy Scouts, Romney said in the 1994 debate, "I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation." This reminded us that as head of the Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002, Romney barred the Boy Scouts from their traditional participation in the festivities. David Bresnahan reported in MassNews (6/18/02):

"[Romney] made it clear that the Boy Scouts would not be a part of the Olympics as they had traditionally been throughout modern Olympic history. There would be no Scouts in uniform for the public or press to see. Romney wanted no complaints from the homosexual community or the world press. In every past Olympics, regardless of host country, the local Scouts have participated in some way -- in uniform. In fact, some of the past Olympics even used Scouts in uniform to present the awards to the Olympians.

"Romney was very careful to eliminate the Boy Scouts from view. He appeased them by permitting Scouts to perform litter cleanup of Olympic sites before the Games began, and to help with putting up and taking down of security fences. All out of view of the public and the media. He also very cleverly made sure the homosexual activist community were invited to participate in the Olympics in a meaningful way that they would brag about.

"The homosexual website from the United Kingdom did that very thing on January 30, just before the games began. An article read by homosexuals all over the world proclaimed: 'Winter Olympics First To Welcome Gays'. 'The Winter Games in Salt Lake City, Utah, next month will be the first to open its arms to the gay community. Organisers [sic] of the 2002 Winter Olympics have actively gone out to get the gay community involved.' "

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Gender, Restroom, & Pronoun Confusion

Now, in Methuen, Massachusetts, we read about parents who are so "sensitized" to transgender acceptance that their little 9-year old girl is getting HER wish to "be" a boy. And the school authorities are going along with it. The Boston Globe reports (3/5/05):

"Dozens of parents flooded the Methuen school system with phone calls yesterday after a local newspaper reported that a fourth-grade girl had returned from the February school break requesting to be treated as a boy.... The child's parents told the Eagle Tribune on the condition of anonymity that their child, who was born with the body of a girl, has never identified as a girl. After consulting with medical professionals, they have decided to let him [sic] grow up as a boy and wanted teachers and other students to treat him as a boy.

"Dr. Norman Spack, clinical director of the endocrine division at Children's Hospital in Boston, said gender identity is formed at birth and is not a product of the environment. Much more research still needs to be done around how male and female brains differ and how transgenderism occurs, he said. Of the more than 100 transgendered people he has treated, many secretly cross-dressed as children and suppressed their gender identity because their parents were punitive.

'' 'In many cases they went on to live a life that was a sham, getting married and having children,' said Spack, one of the few pediatric endocrinologists in the country who specializes in gender identity and intersex issues. 'They go through a difficult time of depression coming to grips with the fact that their body doesn't match their brain.' "

Pseudoscience, anyone?!! Here again, as with AIDS, we seem to be witnessing the politicization of science.

There's no end to the strange demands of the "transgendered". In the last several years, restrooms have become a focus. The New York Times ran a story on March 4, "A Quest for a Restroom That's Neither Men's Room Nor Women's Room." Excerpts:

"[This is] a new political frontier: the campaign to establish gender-neutral bathrooms in public places. The idea is to make sure that transgender people (an umbrella term that can include transsexuals, cross-dressers and those with a fluid, androgynous identity who do not consider themselves completely male or female) can use bathrooms without fear of harassment.

"One reason the issue has significance on these campuses is that in contrast to previous generations, in which many sought to transform their birth sex through hormones or surgery, today's young transgender people are content with a more fluid identity.

" 'I use the male bathroom, because I live my life as a male,' said Rolan Gregg, a 29-year-old student at the California College of Arts and Crafts in San Francisco, who was born female and, though he [sic] is taking hormones, does not 'pass yet,' as he [sic] put it. 'The problem with not passing is that my risk of violence is really high. So going to the bathroom becomes really scary.' "

Clearly, the media are happy to play along with the pronoun confusion.

Thursday, March 03, 2005

Reader Beware: This is a Heteronormative Blog !!

The latest newspeak to come from the radical gay movement: "heteronormative" ! Their concepts are so absurd ... new words must be invented. Now we dare not speak about our own NORMAL heterosexual lives: marriage to a member of the opposite sex, naturally procreated children, etc. It might offend.

Just keep your mouth shut and let them run everything! Only they may speak and share their stories. Who would be interested in anything else these days???

First we see the report in the Boston Herald (3/3/05) on actress Jada Pinkett Smith's remarks at a Harvard event, which were highly offensive to Harvard's Bisexual/Gay/blahblahblah group:

"While neither group specified what Pinkett Smith said that was so offensive, a previous edition of the Crimson included a quote from the actress from the event at Sanders Theater.
'Women, you can have it all - a loving man, devoted husband, loving children, a fabulous career,' she said. 'They say you gotta choose. Nah, nah, nah. We are a new generation of women. We got to set a new standard of rules around here. You can do whatever it is you want. All you have to do is want it.' "

Also discussed by James Taranto in his Best of the Web Today (Wall Street Journal, 3/3/05):

"Calling the comments heteronormative, according to [BGLTSA Co-Chair] Woods means they implied that standard sexual relationships are only between males and females."

And in the Harvard Crimson (3/2/05):

"After some students were offended by Jada Pinkett Smith’s comments at Saturday’s Cultural Rhythms show, the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance (BGLTSA) and the Harvard Foundation for Intercultural and Race Relations have begun working together to increase sensitivity toward issues of sexuality at Harvard.
"Students said that some of Pinkett Smith’s remarks concerning appropriate gender roles were specific to heterosexual relationships.
"In a press release circulated yesterday by the BGLTSA—and developed in coordination with the Foundation—the BGLTSA called for an apology from the Foundation and encouraged future discussion of the issue."

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

Sex-Change Operations: Against Nature

How sad--and sickening. In the March 1 "Dear Prudence" column, "Beyond Confused" asks how to address someone after a sex change operation. A friend had just had "surgery to become a woman", would be bandaged, and "the physical changes would be quite apparent".

Let's stop right there. If he was born a man, he is still a man. The surgery did nothing more than horribly maim, disfigure, and violate him. Such surgery is part of the culture of death. But the mainstream media is promoting total acceptance of this hideous practice.

But once the door has been opened to acceptance of homosexuality, how can we say no to bisexuality, transgenderism, and transsexuality? And this is what acceptance leads to: the mutilation of human bodies, against nature and creation.

Do we really want to teach our children that they might consider having their breasts or penises cut off, if they happen to be confused (or, as the homosexual movement says, "questioning")?

Gay Manifesto: NOT a Satire

Some follow-up on "An Essay on the Homosexual Revolution" or, the "Gay Manifesto". (See "Be Afraid. ... Be VERY Afraid", 2/19/05 below) . Apparently, the original essay included the following introductory line, which did not appear in the reprint in the Congressional Record:

"This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."

Would the inclusion of this introductory line in any way change the meaning, intent, or impact of the essay? As a friend wrote to MassResistance:

I'd seen the Gay Manifesto before, but seeing it again inspired me to see what the other side says in response. They admit it was written by a gay activist in 1987 and read into the Congressional Record in 1989. They dismiss it as a satire, but they quote the author's censored introduction: "the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor." So what's the major complaint? Isn't that the point; the oppressed dreamed of being the oppressor, and 20 years later aren't they well on their way? The analysis below is from

The Gay Agenda--How The Conservative Religious Right Created a Lie
(See Also:
The American Family Association and the 'Gay Nostradamus')
The "Gay Agenda" is but one of the many lies promulgated by radical religious political activists.
The Radical Religious Right has repeatedly referenced an article written by Michael Swift in 1987 at the request of the Gay Community News as satirical "proof" of the so-called "Gay Agenda". The article is titled "The Gay Manifesto".
One of the most notable examples of the religious right referencing this article is the video "Gay Rights, Special Rights", put out by Lou Sheldon's Traditional Values Coalition. The video cites it with ominous music and pictures of children.
But when the religious right cites this text, they always omit the vital first line, which sets the context for the piece. In other words, every other version of this found on the net and in the literature of religious right political activists is part of the radical right's great lie about gay people.
"This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor."
In fact, a "shocked, so very very shocked" congressperson read the article in the Congressional Record in 1989. Funny thing, though, the opening disclaimer was deliberately omitted.

So ... That line doesn't come across as a "disclaimer" to us. What we're dealing with is their angry dream come true.