Tuesday, March 21
by Sue on Tue 21 Mar 2006 07:49 PM EST
This is worth a quick peak. A recent study from Journal of Research Into Personality tracked children for 20 years and discovered
The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity.
The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective.
Why? The author posits an interesting rational
He reasons that insecure kids look for the reassurance provided by tradition and authority, and find it in conservative politics. The more confident kids are eager to explore alternatives to the way things are, and find liberal politics more congenial.
Monday, March 20
by Sue on Mon 20 Mar 2006 09:04 AM EST
Now this makes for an interesting Monday morning read. A letter to the Tribune Review from a pagan that stems from another letter commenting on an Anglican Nigerian Bishop.
Anne E. Lynch of Swissvale writes in response to John Patterson's letter. You'll recall from last week that Mr. Patterson is an admirer of homophobic Nigerian Archbishop Akinola, noting his "spiritual testosterone" as well as his disdain for American sexual freedom.
Ms. Lynch takes issue with Mr. Patterson's reference to "the rubber-band flexibility of neo-pagan permissiveness." A practicing pagan, she notes that "all Pagans follow a code of moral, ethical, social and religious behavior."
Ms. Lynch then goes on to invite readers to visit Greater Pittsburgh Pagan Pride with a clear request that visitors avoid offering to save their souls.
She writes, "We don't proselytize or seek converts. Your spirituality is your business -- let us practice ours in peace.
Ah, Anne, if only all people of faith could live by that code.
This has been an intriguing thread and a fascinating example of the real dialogue around LGBT faith and spirituality issues and, perhaps, a microcosm of the larget societal debate. Archbishop Chane's original epistle frames the conflict between a pastoral concern for members of the gay community and a failure to speak out when a church leader endorses a law that openly criminalizes homosexuality and strips homosexuals of their most basic civil liberties.
This treasure trove has inspired many letters to the editor in both the Tri and the Post-Gazette with the vast majority expressing sympathy and compassion for the gay community. How telling that the few letters defending Akinola's position are vitriolic rants from individuals who openly hate homosexuals. Excepting the tempered response opinion piece in the Post-Gazette.
That's the ultimate chasm. These people -- the ones who speak up -- deeply hate homosexuals. They are not content to love us in spite of our "sins." They want to obliterate us from their churches, schools and government. They have a clear, concise message that appeals to the vast masses who are acutely uncomfortable with homosexuality and find us a convenient target for all their post-modern angst. (Obviously, they would not describe it that way).
The gay community, both in and out of the church, must find a way to reach out to the middle. We are never going to convince the right wingnuts to let go of their hatred. But I remain convinced that most people don't hate us; they simply don't understand us. Confronted with something new, they look for guidance and many turn to a warped moral schematic which puts queers in the category of immoral being.
We chip away at this stigma, this sense of "other" with every positive interaction the middle folks have with an identified homosexual. Some of my gay comrades prefer to keep a low-profile. In the name of self-preservation, that's fine and sadly necessary. But for those who ride under the radar simply because its easier or because its comfortable, you are doing a disservice to our community.
People need to know queers on a personal level to overcome the homophobia they learn at school, church and home. It is not the only battle, but its one that every queer can take on.
Sunday, March 19
by Sue on Sun 19 Mar 2006 09:39 AM EST
I was unable to attend this year b/c of another unbreakable commitment. I was there last year. God willing, I won't have to be there next year.
For more photos from the rally, click here
by Sue on Sun 19 Mar 2006 09:27 AM EST
I made it almost all the way through this week's dose of insipid advice before I found that one little nuggest (it is always in there) that suggests Catherine Specter landed her job because she's related to someone with more influence than common sense.
This week, BARE-FACED asks for date advice for women who choose not to wear cosmetics. Here's what our favorite sorority sister has to say:
DEAR BARE: If makeup isn't your thing, then it's not a must for you. The goal is to look fresh and ready, so pretty up in other ways. Fun-up your hair, wear dangly earrings, think very good thoughts to erase work from your brain, and put a gleam in your eye. Nothing's sexier than "that look. Trade work shoes for heels but not office heels! Wear the fun pair you bought and never wore. If your toes hurt, deal with it, they won't hurt more than a missed opportunity. You can prettify and flirtify anything, including your attitude. I still stand by sheer lip gloss or shiny lip balm.
Puttng aside the health issues for a moment, Catherine Specter once again wants to drag women back to an era of pleasing men at all costs. She obsessively lectures women about bring pretty and flirtatious, sending a clear message that physical beauty (and appearance) is the benchmark for self-worth.
And what the hell does it mean to prettify your attitude? That's easily the most stupid comment I've read in the Post-Gazette for over a year and, arguably, the most anti-woman. (And I read Jack Kelly).
The facts. According to the American Podiatric Medical Association, American women spend $2 billion a year on surgery related to footwear. Research indicates high heels are associated with foot pain, foot deformities, a change in back posture, knew osteoarthritis and balance impairment. (Medical College of Georgia).
Something I didn't know - women's shoes are designed for men's feet. According to Dr. Mary Franklin, associate professor of physical therapy at MGC "men?s feet are shaped differently than men?s; women?s feet tend to be more narrow at the back than the toe. Women generally use the back of the shoe to determine their fit?whether or not the foot slides in the shoe. Shoes based on men?s foot shape will fit in the back but be too narrow in the front, unnaturally constricting the toes."
Correspondent's Call: let's try and find Cat Specter a man so she can turn all her attention toward pleasing him and leave the women of Pittsburgh alone.
Saturday, March 18
by Sue on Sat 18 Mar 2006 11:01 PM EST
How did I miss this?
Published on March 9, this letter to the editor from Lionel Deimel of Mt. Lebanon rightly condemns the intolerant words and actions of Nigerian Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola. Deimel opines:
Those applauding his principled stand in opposition to the consecration of gay bishops should recognize that Akinola's principles apparently also include intolerance, ignorance and hatred.
Archbishop Akinola's rhetoric may have more dire effects in Nigeria than mere repression, however. He recently warned rioting Muslims in Nigeria that "(our Muslim brothers) do not have the monopoly of violence in this nation" and that Christian Association of Nigeria, of which Akinola is president, "may no longer be able to contain our restive youths should this ugly trend continue."Whether this was meant as a statement of fact or an outright threat, it should alarm Muslims and Christians, dismaying all who seek justice and peace.
And Ron Pedersen Jr. of North Versailles takes a similar stance, drawing on the esteemed Bishop Desmond Tutu in response to the hateful letter written by a Mr. John Patterson of Monroeville. Pederson writes:
Mr. Patterson, you have not earned or achieved heterosexuality. It is yours because of genetics. You face no persecution because of it.
Patterson admires Akinola's ample supply of "spiritual testosterone" and comments that "It's a fine thing to see biblically minded African Archbishop Akinola spit upon Hollywood's code of sexual freedom, which lots of American Episcopal clergy relish with all of their lustful hearts."
In the face of such ridiculous ignorance, kudos to Mr.Deimel and Mr. Pederson for standing up to homophobic ignorant fools.
You can count on your lesbian correspondents to let you know when mind shattering events, such as Trib readers defending homosexuals, take place in Pittsburgh.
by Ledcat on Sat 18 Mar 2006 10:23 PM EST
According to an article in the Wednesday (March 15) Post-Gazette, several state legislators have decided to attempt to ban a notorius gay basher--Fred Phelps--from protesting at the funerals of fallen soldiers. Putting aside for a minute the First Amendment issues this ban would involve, I find this incredibly hypocritical. As perhaps some of you may know, Fred Phelps and his merry band of bigots has been protesting at funerals for aids victims, homosexuals, and several years ago, even paid a visit to Pittsburgh to protest at the funeral of--Fred Rogers-- of all people. And, apparently that did not offend the sensibilities of Senators John Pippy, Bob Regola and Jennifer Mann, the sponsors of this proposed legislation. I have a suggestion. Instead of banning Fred Phelps' free speech rights, however despicable his speech may be, how about if these senators do something constructive and GASP Christian. How about Senators Pippy, Regola and Mann make a statement that everyone--regardless of who they are--deserves to be remembered and mourned in a respectful and reverant manner.
by Sue on Sat 18 Mar 2006 10:50 AM EST
The thing that really gets me is when homo-bigots are not content to just hate us for ourselves, but have to take the extra step of connecting us with something vile ... like pedophilia, bestiality or white supremacy. From the New York City St. Patric's Day Parade comes this gem.
In an interview with the Irish Times published on Friday Hibernian chair John Dunleavy said, "If an Israeli group wants to march in New York, do you allow Neo-Nazis into their parade? If African Americans are marching in Harlem, do they have to let the Ku Klux Klan into their parade?"
Dunleavy went on to tell the paper that "People have rights. If we let the ILGO in, is it the Irish Prostitute Association next?"
For the past 16 years, the NYC parade organizers have kept the queer contingent from marching as an identified group as permitted by a court ruling on religious freedom. Apparently, they are not content to simply disallow homos but have to take it one step further.
And guess who marches in spite of these hate laced comments? Senator Hillary Clinton. Are you stunned that she'd sell us out for a good PR moment?
Friday, March 17
by Sue on Fri 17 Mar 2006 09:45 PM EST
by Sue on Fri 17 Mar 2006 03:19 PM EST
1. He never got married.
2. He lived at home until he was 33.
3. He was followed around by men who left their wives to be with him.
4. He was "sensitive" toward women and other vulnerable people.
5. He was docile and loving toward others.
6. He was persecuted by the church AND the government.
Thanks to Correspondent Bob for this little joke.