Antidote: A Coming Out Story

I don't usually remark on this kind of story, but this one is exceptional:

I also decided that it was then time to officially come out to everyone at school. I remember the first teacher I told was my biology teacher, Mrs. Broomas. We had a sex-ed quiz and one of the questions asked, "How could you prevent getting a girl pregnant while having intercourse?" My reply was, "I'm GAY so I don't have to worry about that.”

As she got to my paper she broke out laughing and just smiled at me. She then asked if she could read it to the class, and with confidence I told her she could. When she did, all the kids laughed and gave me a hug afterward and told me no matter what that they would always be my friends and still support me.

It's worth reading the whole thing.

(Via RawStory.)

Point, Counterpoint

Remember Khizr Khan, the father of a fallen Muslim soldier who lit into Trump at the Democratic convention? Well, Trump responded, in typical Trump fashion:

Of course Donald Trump was going to go after Khizr Khan, the bereaved father who spoke at the Democratic National Convention on Thursday night. He had to, because Khan stands for everything anti-Trump. Patriotism, sacrifice, and integrity. Oh, and Khan is Muslim.

Trump did not disappoint, telling ABC News Saturday that he had "made a lot of sacrifices" by employing "thousands and thousands of people," and having "tremendous success."

Somehow, having tremendous success defrauding thousands of people doesn't strike me as much of a sacrifice. But he didn't stop there:

“If you look at his wife, she was standing there. She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say. You tell me,” he rambled.

What a stupid thing to say. In their interview with Lawrence O'Donnell Friday, Mrs Khan explained that she can't even bear to go into the room where his picture is because the loss is still so utterly fresh for her. She didn't trust herself to maintain her composure so she let her husband speak. He, in turn, said that without her at his side he wouldn't have made it through the speech.

The Khans had more to say:

Khizr Khan continued: "Running for president is not an entitlement to disrespect Gold Star families and [a] Gold Star mother not realizing her pain. Shame on him! Shame on his family! He is not worthy of our comments. He has no decency. He is void of decency, he has a dark heart."

Ghazala Khan said: "Sacrifice -- I don't think he knows the meaning of sacrifice, the meaning of the word. Because when I was standing there, all America felt my pain. Without saying a single word. Everybody felt that pain."

Let's face it -- Trump is a clod. A loud, obnoxious clod.

Josh Marshall has an observation that I think is, unfortunately, very much on the mark:

I confess I struggle with the emerging back and forth between Trump and the Khans. It's good for the country because it shows what Khizr Khan aptly labels Trump's "dark heart." But I have no doubt that notwithstanding the well-wishes of so may the Khans will now be vilified, scrutinized and smeared by Trump's supporters.

We've already had one example of that, from a woman who has no right to comment.

I wish the Khans strength -- which they already seem to have in good measure, along with grace and courage. Pity the Republicans can't seem to entertain those qualities.

Footnote: Compare and contrast: Hillary Clinton's statement on the Khans:

Clinton issued a statement on Saturday that said, “I was very moved to see Ghazala Khan stand bravely and with dignity in support of her son on Thursday night. And I was very moved to hear her speak last night, bravely and with dignity, about her son’s life and the ultimate sacrifice he made for his country.”

She continued, “This is a time for all Americans to stand with the Khans, and with all the families whose children have died in service to our country. And this is a time to honor the sacrifice of Captain Khan and all the fallen. Captain Khan and his family represent the best of America, and we salute them.”

Together -- We Are Stronger

Something positive for today:

From the official description:

A few months ago we asked our users to take part in the exciting #GaySelfie global video. We were amazed to receive more than 100,000 Selfies entries shared on Moovz feed.

This proves how united we are :)

Here's more background from Joe.My.God.

Jason Collins Comes Out

If you don't know who Jason Collins is, or why it's important, welcome to the club. I didn't know who he was until yesterday. However, Collins' coming out is significant: he's the first player in a national sports league to come out and express his intention of continuing to play.

I'm a 34-year-old NBA center. I'm black. And I'm gay.

I didn't set out to be the first openly gay athlete playing in a major American team sport. But since I am, I'm happy to start the conversation. I wish I wasn't the kid in the classroom raising his hand and saying, "I'm different." If I had my way, someone else would have already done this. Nobody has, which is why I'm raising my hand.

With a few notable exceptions, the response has been overwhelmingly positive. Joe.My.God. has a good summary of those responding in support, including the President and First Lady, a whole bunch of athletes, Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton (who went to school with Collins), and just about everyone else you can think of. The Red Sox offered him the opportunity to throw the first pitch:

There are, of course, the usual jerks who think this is terrible. Bryan Fischer came out with the hysterical (in both senses of the word, but I doubt he was thinking "funny") observation that now the straight players in the locker room will be "uncomfortable" because they're worried about Collins "eyeballing" them.

Um -- he's been sharing showers with them for twelve years. And isn't it interesting that Fischer feels that he's qualified to speak, not only for NBA players, but their wives? (Hey, Fischer -- remember all the horrible consequences of the repeal of DADT? Oh, wait. . . .)

The one that struck me was this:

What bothers me is not Wallace's tweets -- he doesn't get it, and he admits it -- but the reaction. The headline from the Pink News story catches the tone of what I've seen:

US: NFL player tweets homophobic message hours after first NBA player comes out as gay

The comments at that story are illustrative of what I've seen in other coverage: the assumption that since Wallace didn't immediately accept Collins' announcement without question, he must be a homophobe.

There's a category of people, I've discovered, who spend a lot of time looking for things to be offended about. It's highly prevalent on the PC, identity politics left, and the right has borrowed the idea -- the OneMillionMoms [sic] for example. John Aravosis has a good post on that subject:

It’s part of a growing problem I’ve noticed for years, but have recently felt coming to a head. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to comment about far too many things in the public sphere without offending someone and creating instant outrage, often unmerited. As a result, you end up not wanting to write about the possibly-offending topics, which works to the detriment of the topics involved, unless the writer is a flaming bigot.

In the past few months I’ve been accused of supporting rape, terrorism, and hating trans people, bisexuals, women, immigrants, and Bradley Manning, which apparently encompasses a larger category of mom-and-apple-pie things that I’m sure I must hate or at least have no respect for (apparently I hate Manning because I asked a simple innocuous question in order to better understand what most angered his advocates). The need to be outraged about everything, and usually for insufficient reason, I’m calling Outrage, Inc. It’s the Change-dot-org-ification of advocacy, where with only 30 seconds of effort, you too can be mad as hell about anything, everything, and nothing.

I've had the same experience, having once been accused of racism on a blog which shall remain nameless (but one in which they have turned victimhood into a fine and rare form of bullying) for asking questions. (In point of fact, until that incident, I wasn't much aware of race except as a descriptive category -- the idea of using race as a basis for judgment never occurred to me. That's the way I was raised: I don't see people as categories.)

I'll finish with the comment I left at Aravosis' post:

I've run into too much of that kind of nonsense, and it's not even that I tend to be somewhat plain-spoken: it's been because I dared to question assumptions, which apparently is the one sin that the ideologues on both the right and left consider unforgivable.

Since I don't believe in sin to begin with, I'm now at the point where my response to that sort of crap is simply: "Grow up, get over yourself, and leave the outrage to the OneMillionMoms [sic] and Tony Perkins."

Oh, and congratulations to Jason Collins.

Some Happy Things

to set you up for the weekend:

First, I'm sure you've heard about Ryan Andreson, the Scout who met all the requirements for an Eagle Scout badge, which was denied because he's gay. He was invited go appear on Ellen deGeneres' show:

His mom's a total winner.

(Via Towleroad) Click through and sign the petition.

Check out the members of Congress who joined the NOH8 campaign in honor of National Coming Out Day. My own rep is there:

Nordstrom has come out in support of Washington's Referendum 74.

And this is just for fun: two of my favorite TV people, together:

And this is the joke of the day, courtesy of "Mr. Watchdog," Rep. Darryl Issa: possible hearings of the House Oversight Committee on the "fudged" job numbers.

I may add to this as I run across more goodies, but that should get you started.

Profiles in Courage

From Joe Klein:

The Senate Democrats' apparent decision not to fund the $80 million closing of Guantanamo links them, inextricably, to the cheap politics being played by Senate Republicans, especially the most neolithic member of that august body, Senator Jim Inhofe, who has submitted a bill that would prohibit any of the Guantanamo detainees from coming to the United States to stand trial or serve their sentences.

Guantanamo is a symbol of American brutality that needs to be expunged to the extent possible by closure, as soon as practicable. We have a system of military prisons that would be perfectly adequate to handle the detainees who are not returned to the home countries. Apparently, President Obama is going to give a speech on this topic on Thursday--but the Senators just couldn't wait 48 hours while the Republicans and cable newsistas were scaring their constituents. Yet another profile in courage.

OK, Klein's overstating the case just a bit, but it's these damned Blue Dogs who are going to sink the country even further into the muck. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?

Here's a more balanced report from Andrew Taylor at HuffPo:

And in a further break with Obama, the Senate's top Democrat said he opposes transferring any Guantanamo prisoners to the United States for their trials or to serve their sentences. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has said 50 to 100 Guantanamo detainees may be transferred to U.S. facilities.

"I can't make it any more clear," Reid said. "We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States."

When did James Inhofe start writing Reid's scripts? And Why is Reid still majority leader?

Dday has more background at Hullaballoo. Let's face it, Reid is a freakin' idiot:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) declared in a press conference today, “We will never allow terrorists to be released into the United States.” In several tense back and forths with reporters, Reid said he opposes imprisoning detainees on U.S. soil, saying flatly, “We don’t want them around the United States”:

REID: I’m saying that the United States Senate, Democrats and Republicans, do not want terrorists to be released in the United States. That’s very clear.

QUESTION: No one’s talking about releasing them. We’re talking about putting them in prison somewhere in the United States.

REID: Can’t put them in prison unless you release them.

QUESTION: Sir, are you going to clarify that a little bit? …

REID: I can’t make it any more clear than the statement I have given to you. We will never allow terrorists to be released in the United States.

Later, Reid repeated that he would not support Guantanamo detainees being transferred to U.S prisons:

QUESTION: But Senator, Senator, it’s not that you’re not being clear when you say you don’t want them released. But could you say — would you be all right with them being transferred to an American prison?

REID: Not in the United States.

Dick Durbin, my own senator, seems to have come down firmly on both sides of the issue, if this report is correct.

"The administration has not come up with a plan at this point," said Durbin, who is the whip, or No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. He added that Democrats are likely to address the issue on later legislation. "I think Guantanamo should be closed and we have to wait for the president's direction on what happens to the detainees."

Durbin said that he could support transferring detainees to U.S. prisons. "Our prisons are filled with dangerous people, including terrorists. And not a single one has escaped," he said.

So what's your position, Senator? I'm really not sure what these comments actually boil down to, which is probably why Durbin's a senator and Im just a schmoo. (The irony here is that, after eight years of rubber-stamping whatever Bush wanted, all of a sudden the Democrats are showing some "independence." Jeebus. I mean, if Mitch McConnell thinks you're "heading in the right direction", you kow you've fucked up.)

Update: Some amelioration for Durbin. He seems genuinely interested in seeing something concrete from Obama, and is not just jumping on the bandwagon.

Just Stand Up And Say It

A wonderful post at Box Turtle Bulletin, about how one lesbian stymied a panel of anti-gay "experts" in the nicest possible way. Read it.