For years the far Right has been insisting that gay people comprise a mere one percent of the population—which somehow bolsters their belief that we don’t deserve equal rights. And for years we’ve worried that this claim would stick, and that would not be good. Worry no more: a recent Gallup survey showed that Americans on average believe that fully 25 percent of all people are gay; and a clear majority, 52 percent, believe that at least one in five is gay or lesbian. These figures are astonishing in light of recent studies that seem to be converging on a figure closer to four percent. How to account for this huge overestimate? Could it be that gays are perceived as such a Godzilla-like menace that their numbers are gigantized? But no, other polling has recorded a steady rise in acceptance of same-sex marriage and GLBT rights in general. Gallup attributes the overestimate to the high visibility of gay issues in the news of late. So activists have been right all along: it’s all about visibility. The more visible we are, the more of us there are. At some point, it seems there are just too many of us to hate.

Sometimes these items almost write themselves, and there’s just nothing much to add. Take the recent rant by Rev. Pat Robertson of The 700 Club (yes, it still exists), when he blamed the January blizzard in New York on gay people. This would be garden variety Robertson, only this time the blizzard was seen not as a punishment for sins gone by but for planning to sin upon arrival by plane or car. God sent the snowfall, he averred, “to punish Americans who were planning to drive to do something gay.” New York airports were shut down “so that people who were hoping to fly to do something of a gay nature would have to take a train or a bus, so it might be days before the gay thing they were going to do could occur.” In short, Pat Robertson has officially reached the drooling stage of senility, admittedly a shallow slide from a lifetime of mediocrity. Nurse to Pat: think now, it’s winter, and it’s bound to snow somewhere, and the snow will probably ruin some people’s plans. Chances are, the vast majority will be straight people planning to visit Grandma for the holidays or go to Disney World for some good clean fun. But you’re saying that God would smite their trips just to stop “something gay” from being planned (gay sex? a trip to the Pottery Barn?) on this particular weekend? And, Pat, think of all the gay things that may have happened because people didn’t finish their trips but instead remained in New York!

•  A huge study of sexual behavior conducted by Indiana University’s Center for Sexual Health Promotion, compiled from almost 6,000 subjects and published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, has found that eight percent of men and seven percent of women identify as gay or bisexual. This proportion is far larger than claimed by religious conservatives and begins to approach the ten percent that’s often attributed to Alfred Kinsey’s research of some sixty years ago.

•  The “world’s longest kiss” as officially recorded in Guinness World Records is now held by two men, Matty Daley and Bobby Canciello, who locked lips for an astonishing 33 hours, in public, without eating, sleeping, or (apparently) going to the bathroom. The two men, students at the College of New Jersey, were consciously seeking “to queer Guinness,” and now they have.

Tea and Calumny The so-called “Tea Party” (or has it gone beyond the “so-called” stage?) has accomplished a number of things, such as exposing the fault lines within the Republican Party, not to be mistaken for your father’s club for button-down suburbanites. No, this new breed of shut-ins and early retirees is mad as hell, and they aren’t afraid to talk a little trash when describing their enemies. Take the following exchange between the recently deposed head of Montana’s Big Sky Tea Party Association, Tim Ravndal, and two political pals:

Tim Ravndal: Marriage is between a man and a woman period! By giving rights to those otherwise would be a violation of the constitution and my own rights

Keith Baker: How dare you exercise your First Amendment Rights?

Dennis Scranton: I think fruits are decorative. Hang up where they can be seen and appreciated. Call Wyoming for display instructions.

Ravndal: Oops I forgot this aint America no more! Where can I get that Wyoming printed instruction manual?

Scranton: Should be able to get info Gazette archives. Maybe even an illustration. Go back a bit over ten years.

The Wyoming “display” was recognized as a reference to Mat-thew Shepard and thus amounted to a jocular suggestion that “fruits” be tortured and killed. In fairness, Ravndal was forced to resign over the comments, but they echo the kind of slogans that routinely show up at Tea Party rallies. Party leaders can’t be responsible for the excesses of rank-and-file members, but now that the rank-and-file are running the asylum, they’re saying things openly that used to be said only in code.

A recent survey showed a surprising uptick in the percentage of American men who now find homosexuality to be “morally acceptable”—a rise from around 40% for men of all ages in 2006 to around 55% today (and well over 60% for men under fifty). The story received an op-ed comment in the Times from Charles Blow, who offered three hypotheses for the shift: increased contact between gay and straight people; a more egalitarian ethic among men in general; and reaction to the many, many scandals involving homophobic politicians and religious leaders who’ve been busted as gay in recent years. Of the three, only the third seems capable of explaining so drastic a shift in such a short period of time. Plus, it makes the most sense psychologically. All those rabid homophobes turning out to be gay has put the fear of Liberace into insecure straight guys who thought they could shore up their hetero bona fides by advertising their homophobia. Wrong! Turns out, far from protecting your little secret, that over-compensation stuff just gives you away; so straight guys are cool with the gay thing all of a sudden. Having hit them like a bolt out of the blue, this revelation is the kind of thing that could bring around those 15% of American men in just four years. So what if the underlying motive is self-serving rather than enlightened? It seems these guys are already getting used to the idea of seeing themselves as tolerant straight dudes with nothing to prove.

Right-wing newspapers and talk show hosts insist on using the word “homosexual” rather than “gay”—and with good reason, if their goal is to subtly denigrate GLBT people. A new survey showed that the “homo” word carries a much more negative connotation than does the word “gay,” particularly with Democrats. The New York Times/CBS News poll found that support for allowing gays to serve openly in the military dropped from sixty to 44 percent when the word was switched from “gay” to “homosexual.” Like the word “Negro” in the 1960’s and 70’s, the word “homosexual” may be technically acceptable, but it still packs the wallop of the bad old days.  (May/June 2010, BTW)

“And Here’s To You…” Meet Iris Robinson, a Member of Parliament in Northern Ireland who’s involved in a nasty financial scandal. But first, to appreciate the relevance of this faraway kickback case, consider the following brief exchange between Robinson and a radio interviewer:

“Stephen Nolan: Do you think that homosexuality is something that is shamefully wicked and vile?”

“Iris Robinson: Yes, of course it is, it’s an abomination.”

This came after she’d agreed that homosexuality makes her nauseous and should be loathed. These and other recent statements were seen as so incendiary—perhaps a hate crime under
British law—that the Police Service of Northern Ireland opened an investigation into Ms. Robinson’s affairs, which is when they came upon the financial impropriety. Oh, the case involves a real estate deal and the solicitation of £50,000 from developers and failure to report this business interest as an MP. But the fun part is that the funds were being solicited on behalf of a
nineteen-year-old Irishman named Kirk McCambley with whom Ms. Robinson was
having an affair! As luck would have it, the devoutly Christian, gay-baiting Mrs.
Robinson (as she’s now universally called) is a married woman whose husband is
the recently installed first minister of Northern Ireland. (He could be in
trouble for not reporting what he knew about the financial affair.) The
sordidness of the sexual fling can be gauged by a few facts: Mrs. Robinson has
known Mr. McCambley since the latter was nine, a neighborhood kid whose mother
had died: “I worked at the butcher’s. … She looked out for me and made sure I
was OK.” When Peter Robinson found out about the affair, his wife tried to
commit suicide. And when it was over, Mrs. R. demanded a £5,000 kickback from
Kirk McCambley for helping to arrange the transaction (he’s now the proud owner
of the Lock Keepers Inn). People have been clamoring for Mrs. Robinson to
resign, and so she will, according to a statement: “due to mental ill health.”

Okay, famous people shouldn’t be held responsible for the misdeeds of their adult progeny. But what if the parent in question has built his entire career out of thumping this connection between fathers and sons, promoting an agenda of prudery and homophobia—calling it “family values”—on the theory that “the children” must be protected by an intact family unit from exposure to sexual items? Thus do we cite the case of pastor T. D. Jakes and his son Jermaine, who was recently arrested for, well, exposure of a sexual item. The police report described the circumstances of the arrest with Henry Miller precision (as reported by CBS11tv.com): “Detective X and Detective X entered the wooded area. Suspect Jakes walked directly over to where Detective X was, and stood next to Detective X with his penis exposed through his unzipped pants. Suspect Jakes then began to masturbate his erect penis with his left hand for several seconds while making eye contact with Detective X. … Suspect Jakes masturbated his erect penis in order to gratify himself and Detective X. Suspect Jakes made no attempt to conceal his erect penis from Detective X, or any other person who might be offended by his actions,” whereupon the two detectives identified themselves and made the arrest. Given the one-to-one correspondence, in Rev. Jakes’ world, between early socialization in the home and the development of homosexuality or other perversions, we are forced to wonder what specific events or family dynamics led to such a shocking display on the part of the son.

A brief but intense kafuffle erupted last week over a campaign contribution received by Senator McCain from one of his supporters, culminating in the refund of the $2,300 donation to the contributor. What could cause the campaign to part with precious monies at this crucial time in the fund-raising season?

It seems the donor, Jonathan Crutchley, was the co-creator of Manhunt.net, the ultra-popular on-line site for gay men interested in meeting other men for casual relationships and more. Once word of Mr. Crutchley’s gift got out, the gay Blogosphere lit up in angry red at the idea that America’s most popular gay website—which it is by far—was owned by Republicans. That allegation was countered by Manhunt’s other founder, Larry Basile, a lifelong Democrat who disavowed any connection to or affection for the Republican Party. He also announced Crutchley’s resignation as chairman of the company.

The fact that Crutchley felt that he had to take this step underscores a) the extent to which partisan politics has infused all areas of life, such that Manhunt actually did lose customers in the wake of this revelation; and b) just how radioactive the Republican Party has become for gay voters—and vice versa. That the McCain campaign took the unusual step of returning the donation speaks volumes about the Party’s attitude toward GLBT voters. To reject a gift given in good faith is an extreme act of social censure. The implication is that the gift is tainted by its source, which is unworthy even to pay tribute to the recipient.

On the other hand, returning the gift probably did Manhunt a big favor, allowing the company to forget it ever happened and return to doing what it does best.

A largescale study conducted in two parts of the world has revealed that roughly one in four heterosexual men have anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. The condition is traditionally associated with women, who undergo the familiar “pap smear” to detect its presence, while the incidence in men was assumed to be much lower. Until recently, there was no effective test for HPV in men, but now there is and, guess what? According to a report in the June 15th issue of The Journal of Infectious Diseases, samples of men in the Netherlands and Brazil found rates of anal HPV infection (in both the anal canal and the perianal region) to rival women’s vaginal rates. Since men are, in today’s curious lingo, the “vector” of this infection for women, this finding does raise an intriguing question, which research leader Alan Nyitray posed with classic scientific undertatement: “There are a number of questions this study raises. For instance, how was HPV transmitted to the perianal region and anal canal of these men.” How indeed? Are we to conclude that vast numbers of Dutch and Brazilian men are going down on other men on a regular basis? Perhaps not, but it’s a puzzlement, that’s for sure. The hunt for a vector is on.

Source: Reuters Health Information 2008

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_67111.html