Very few things make me feel this way. Oh, I have a temper, and I can be a bit of a dick, but it’s rare for me to feel like this.

Earlier tonight, hours after New York City Mayor and multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg ordered Zuccotti Park raided, journalists arrested, and the Constitution pissed all over, a security guard for Brookfield Properties, which owns the park, …wow this is the longest run on sentence ever. This is what happens when I’m mad.

Anyway, the security guard called comedian (?) Joey Boots a “faggot.” On camera. While trying to look tough before running away when Joey didn’t just stand there and take it.

Here are a couple shots of the bigot rent-a-cop who couldn’t control his bigotry with a camera in his face. (Uppity faggot doesn’t know his place, so he’s going to tell him.) He wouldn’t give his name, you know, because bigot tough guys hate it when people know their names.

Anybody know who he is? Send me an email or comment on the post. I want his name plastered all over the internet so future prospective employers know who they’re getting.

P.S. Who wears sunglasses like that? Bigots, apparently.

(h/t Scott Wooledge, via towleroad)

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

To be fair, I’d probably shout an insult too if someone called me a “crypto-Nazi.” Even if I were one.

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

I mean, the— the right to marry who you please isn’t in the Constitution. But I think all of us assume that if a state— decided to pass a law saying, “Brian, you can’t marry the woman you love,” that you’d think that was unconstitutional. Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy— that may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.

I’m not the only one who sees the direct contradiction between this and “God is in the mix,” am I?

Incidentally, I’ve long thought we should be using the “right to privacy” argument instead of the “love is love” one when talking about the right of civil marriage. It doesn’t hit people’s emotions as well, though, so we’ll just struggle along with “love is love.”

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

Miss Representation will premiere tonight at 9PM Eastern/8PM Central exclusively on OWN, Oprah Winfrey’s (relatively) new network, so set your DVRs!

(If you don’t have time for the full eight-minute trailer, here’s a shorter version.)

From the official Miss Representation website:

In a society where media is the most persuasive force shaping cultural norms, the collective message that our young women and men overwhelmingly receive is that a woman’s value and power lie in her youth, beauty, and sexuality, and not in her capacity as a leader. While women have made great strides in leadership over the past few decades, the United States is still 90th in the world for women in national legislatures, women hold only three percent of clout positions in mainstream media, and 65 percent of women and girls have disordered eating behaviors.

Stories from teenage girls and provocative interviews with politicians, journalists, entertainers, activists and academics, like Condoleezza Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Katie Couric, Rachel Maddow, Margaret Cho, Rosario Dawson and Gloria Steinem build momentum as Miss Representation accumulates startling facts and statistics that will leave the audience shaken and armed with a new perspective.

Honestly, it’s killing me that since I don’t have access to OWN, I won’t be able to see Miss Representation until the DVD eventually comes out. I’m counting on all of you to fill me in, so get to watching!

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

Family Research Council and American Family Association have both been considered hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center for some time now, and with good reason; both groups push their shared agenda with dangerous propaganda and outright lies about LGBT people.

To repeat: Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all accepted the invitation of these hate groups (as they have for years), hoping to get their endorsements and the votes of like-minded individuals.

Do you really need more information before you cast your vote in the 2012 presidential election? What stance on which issue could possibly make it okay to vote for a candidate who has actively courted bigotry?

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

I couldn’t be happier to know that the next generation will only know by my generation’s horror stories what it was like to hide in order to serve, and I can’t help but imagine their reactions.

They will stare in disbelief as they hear Air Force Sgt. Jené Newsome‘s story of police acting as Peeping Toms in order to out her and have no recourse but to accept a discharge.

A closeted servicemember, photograph by Jeff Sheng

Their jaws will hit the floor when they hear how Navy Lt. Tracy Thorne-Begland was paraded before a jeering crowd in May 1993 and all but called a faggot by US Senators. He would be discharged twice for being gay, once before DADT and once after the law went into effect.

They will shake their heads as Army Sergeant Bleu Copas tells how his superiors broke DADT law multiple times, both in asking him directly if he was gay and in breaking into his personal email account to gather evidence, but in the end, his being quietly gay was more destructive than breaking the law, and he was fired.

A closeted servicemember, photograph by Jeff Sheng

They will be stunned into silence as Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach tells how he was outed by falsely accused of rape and had to decide whether to defend himself against those false claims or continue his military career. Ultimately he chose to defend himself, and after his exoneration had to fight in court not to be fired, finally winning his case only because a court ordered it due to the law being repealed.

They will learn in any respectable military history or LGBT history course about Air Force Major Margaret Witt, who fought her discharge so vigorously and so successfully that a court actually ruled that her discharge was unconstitutional, leading to a legal standard that was actually named after her.

A closeted servicemember, photograph by Jeff Sheng

Those in the next generation will be even more stunned to find that these firings were treated as reasonable and even honorable by more than half the country for over a decade, and by well-respected Republicans for even longer.

Even as we are overjoyed by the end of DADT, we must keep our eye on several loose ends left by the repeal.

1. Repeal notwithstanding, it is still legal today to discriminate against a servicemember because s/he is lesbian, gay, or bisexual. We’re allowed to serve, but we are absolutely without protection against discrimination in promotion or assignment. First thing Tuesday morning, President Obama should sign an executive order, which should end such discrimination.
2. All discharges under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell should be reviewed and upgraded to remove DADT-identifiers. Currently, anyone discharged under DADT faces forced outing any time they apply for a job. Discharges under DADT labeled general, dishonorable, or other than honorable should be reviewed and changed to a more appropriate classification.
3. Discharged servicemembers like Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi and Army Cpl. Anthony Woods should have debts related to DADT discharge forgiven and previous payments reimbursed. Choi, for example, is getting letters from debt collectors for $2,500 related to his discharge, and Woods has had to pay the Army $35,000 in tuition because they decided they didn’t want to honor their commitment to him. This is unjust and must be reversed.

These actions should happen swiftly and decisively. Doing so would go a long way toward shoring up support within the LGBT community for President Obama’s reelection campaign.

The era of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is ending. Here’s to the new era of fairness and equality that we all continue to work toward.

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

I could talk about how the Republican majority in the House snuck the amendment onto the floor, disguising it as a bill on an unrelated and uncontroversial issue until the last minute on Monday afternoon, when the bill changed chambers, committees, bill numbers, content, and ballot date in less than 75 minutes. (Fortunately someone leaked the actual text late Friday.)

I could talk about how the Republican House Majority Leader Paul Stam refused to allow public comment before the vote, openly breaking North Carolina’s open meeting laws, saying that people would get to comment at the polls next May, so, you know, fuck ‘em.

I could talk about how Senator James Forrester, the major Republican sponsor in the Senate, went to a church last Thursday night and perpetuated the lie that gays live 20 years less than straight people, after which he said, “We need to … get them to change their lifestyle back to the normal lifestyle which we can accept,” as if he’s Big Daddy on the plantation.

Oh, and thanks to ThinkProgress, it’s on tape.

I could talk about how UNC Law Professor Maxine Eichner told the North Carolina Legislature that the vague language of the amendment endangers laws against domestic violence involving unmarried straight couples. Apparently that human collateral damage is okay with the Republican majorities, because both bodies voted the amendment through anyway, with eight Democrats joining the Republicans.

I could talk about how Community College instructor Johnny Hunter stood up in a press conference last Wednesday and banged two locks together to show how weird gays having sex is. That’s on tape too. (Don’t worry, it’s cued up.)

(And I’m sorry, that’s nowhere near as poetic as Dr. Camilla Bowner’s electric socket analogy.)

I could talk about how Republican House Majority Leader Paul Stam had such contempt for the process and for the American taxpayers whose rights he was taking away that he literally snacked on popcorn during Monday’s brief debate.

I could talk about all those things, but (378 words later) I won’t.

Instead, I’ll share some unfortunately relevant words from Rachel Maddow. It’s a quote that I’ve had in rotation over there on the right since she said it last year. (Image shamelessly stolen from Brian Gets Clarity.)

Feel free to pass it on.

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

Anyway, the story’s been making the rounds, and this bit of audio from an interview Turek did with AFA’s Tim Wildmon and Tony Perkins (leader of the Family Research Council, another SPLC-certified hate group).

It's not that complicated, Frank.

Anytime you have to call something “pride,” there’s a problem with it, particularly when it comes to behavior because you don’t hear people walking around saying “heterosexual pride” … Although I think there was some parade down in Brazil or something recently…

Pride? Pride? Pride is, as we all know, really the root of all sin; we want to do it our way rather than God’s way.

Laying aside for a moment the tried-and-true false “homosexuality is just behavior” rhetoric, I want to bring Turek’s fixation with the word “Pride” to your attention. That’s a common problem people (usually anti-gay people) have with the LGBT-rights movement.

(To make this post simpler, I’ll also lay aside the troublesome parallels between the concepts of Heterosexual Pride in response to Gay Pride and White Power in response to Black Power. Oh wait, I guess I won’t.)

Fortunately for us, British comedian Dick Coughlan recently addressed the issue of pride, covering it quite well. He even talked about the Straight Pride Parade in São Paulo, Brazil that Turek mentioned.

Coughlan begins the video (NSFW, by the way) with some comments on completely heterosexual Republican Indiana State Rep. Phil Hinkle’s Craig’s List problem, which I still haven’t gotten around to bringing up here, before segueing into the portion quoted below.

Gay people tend to be a group, who, within a great deal of, unfortunately, so-called “civilized society” are made to feel ashamed and embarrassed for what they are. They are told that they are wrong, they are immoral, what they are and what they do is disgusting, and they should be ashamed.

And so in response to that, they decide to say, “Fuck you, we’re not ashamed, so we’re going to have a Pride March.” It’s not really a pride march, because you are born this way, there is no pride in being born a certain way, but what they’re actually saying is “We are not ashamed.”

That’s what it’s about, yeah? “We are not ashamed.” You can’t really call it a We Are Not Ashamed March; It doesn’t have the same ring to it.

That about says it. Any questions, Frank?

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

Photo by Todd Franson

Fortunately, the civil rights leader is equally determined to respond with honor. Following George’s campaign of intimidation on Choi and the twelve other White House protestors earlier this year, a campaign that even left the judge citing Martin Luther Mother Fucking King Junior, Choi alone refused a plea agreement that forced the other twelve to plead guilty to a “failure to move” charge.

To call the federal charges levied against Dan Choi disproportionate would be the height of understatement. Instead of dismissing charges or utilizing the common “post and forfeit” procedure as happens in the vast majority of this type of cases, Assistant US Attorney Angela George told the judge that the protestors were too quiet and polite to charge them with disorderly conduct.

Here’s a quick example of how quiet and polite Choi and his fellow protestors were:

Fortunately, the emerging civil rights figure’s resolve seems undeterred as his trial is set to begin this morning. Clearly, he has learned the truth behind the quote from African American Civil Rights hero Bayard Rustin (who was also gay) that says, “When an individual is protesting society’s refusal to acknowledge his dignity as a human being, his very act of protest confers dignity on him.”

If you’re so inclined, please keep Dan Choi in your thoughts and prayers today. I only wish I’d been cuffed to the White House fence last November so I could stand with him today. It ain’t easy standing alone in a courtroom, no matter how many people stand behind you outside.

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink

In February 2007, Tim Hardaway made headlines when he told an interviewer, “I hate gay people.” He went on to say that if a player on his team had come out of the closet, he would have asked that the player be traded.

Four short years later, there’s a different Tim Hardaway in the news. Last week, he joined a press conference in El Paso, Texas, where local religious right leaders are leading a recall election of the mayor and two city representatives. The move comes after the city leaders voted to reinstate benefits for the spouses of LGBT city workers.

Only this time, Tim Hardaway is standing up against discrimination.

In asking citizens to oppose the recall, Hardaway said he was asking them not to do what he did.

Faced with a backlash from friends, family and the NBA, Hardaway quickly apologized for what he said.

“I opened my eyes and went to counseling,” he said Thursday.

Tom Brown, leader of the recall drive, was not available for comment on Thursday.

But supporters say they are motivated by frustration that Cook, Byrd and Ortega disregarded the outcome of the November initiative. They also say they harbor no hatred toward gays — but that they think it’s wrong to use tax dollars to support what they believe is an immoral lifestyle.

Hardaway wasn’t having it on Thursday as he stood, clad all in white, in Lower Tom Lea Park.

“I would say grow up and catch up with the times,” he said. “It’s all around the world.”

Hardaway said that what made his earlier statements especially shameful is that, as a black man, he should understand discrimination. And so should El Paso, as it has in the past, he said.

He recalled how in 1966 at the height of the civil rights movement, his former coach, Don Haskins, led a team with five black starters past an all-white University of Kentucky team to win a national championship.

“A lot of people said, ‘What is Don Haskins doing?’ ” Hardaway said. “But El Paso understood.”

Good on you, Tim. You’ve made an amazing transformation in a short time. I hope the people of El Paso and beyond learn from your inspirational example.

(cc) Matt Algren for Asterisk, 2011. | Permalink