Having problems with message search?
I have to take quite a bit of issue with Fay Jacobs' assessment of how "wholesome" homoaffectionals are supposedly being perceived (http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/921/921_jacobs.asp). Since Showtime is the limited pay channel audience that CBS's "axed-due-to-reich-wing pressure" is the only place you can find a regular lesbian mommy couple - Lindsay and Melanie from QaF and any potential lesbian mommy couple(s) that may or may not be there now and/or showing up in the near future (Can you tell I don't bother to watch it?), there is little access for teenagers, twenty-somethings or even aspiring mothers that happen to be lesbians to see role models for themselves on TV.
Let me let you know what there is access to, however. More of a "grainy shot of a half-nekked gal with a Harley between her legs" than anyone with a brain asked for. More of the kind of "humoring" from the networks Fay Jacobs craves ever so much... More of the concept that (There we go; weren't we past this by now at least where "liberal Hollywood" was concerned?) being gay is still a "lifestyle". That's right; the use of the word "lifestyle" is prevalent, even on MTV, which is often considered so PC that the Leviticus crowd considers it "shoving homosexuality down people's throats", so I hope that helps humor Fay Jacobs, not to mention the horrendously horrific portrayals of gay people on Queer As Folk & the latest rendition of smear the queer, FX's firefighter show "Rescue Me" which actually had a gay character raise not one objection to being asked "Does your father accept your choice
and your lifestyle"? Choice? Choice? Choice? I guess "Rescue Me" is retroactively trying to instill the propaganda that being homoaffectional is now a "choice" and even that show's incidental gay characters now agree??!??
Aside from that, there's plenty of other evidence that things aren't so "Two Women With 2.5 Children and White Picket Fence" as Jacobs would like to claim. Perhaps if there were, hundreds and on some days, thousands, of protesters wouldn't have been so adamantly opposed to the Goodridges getting legal recognition as a lesbian household that cared for their children just as much as their heteroaffectional counterparts next door, railing against them getting legal recognition as married parents in the eyes of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Let's start with Jim McGreevey. Many, upon hearing the resignation speech of the now first openly gay governor of any US state, often remark that "Solely being gay is no reason why he should have to resign." But it's not the conditions under which he was faced after making the "dreaded" announcement that are of import, but the conditions under which he felt that he had to keep it a big secret in the first place. Perhaps if there was any truth to what Jacobs claims, McGreevey wouldn't have fought his coming out tooth and nail, and begged his wife to stay with him until after he was ready to make his big announcement. The media tried to cover this with the proper balance of the various issues and mostly took upon the various aspects of McGreevey's situation one at a time -- and many chose only to seize on one particular aspect depending on an individual station/paper's partisan leanings.
Back to entertainment media, however. Arguably the most liberal show on network television - Judging Amy - no "wholesome" gay characters. There are no same-sex couples that the Grays know and welcome as dinner guests to their warm, wholesome home, touting their babies. There was only one same-sex couple that had a baby, and in that case Judge Amy Gray encountered that lesbian couple in her official capacity - on the bench - trying to determine whether or not the lesbian couple were fit enough parents to deserve their baby's birth certificate be amended to reflect them both as the baby's parents. And although Judge Gray wound up ruling in favor of the lesbian couple in the end, that's hardly a testament to the atmosphere Jacobs describes.
And Fay Jacobs seems to be making her statements in a vacuum... putting aside the examples I've brought up, she also to be ignoring the fact that Middle and Southern America clearly don't agree regardless of what images are presented on TV... we are clearly not "wholesome" enough for Missouri and Louisiana, who both voted overwhelmingly to ban the prospect of marriage equality there. Louisiana's initial vote may be thrown out, but only because the amendment would have banned not only marriage equality, but even civil unions and domestic partnerships. Where were the couples w/babies shown on the nightly news in both states shortly before the vote, in an attempt to sway voters against voting for the discriminatory amendment? I'd pose this question to Jacobs, but somehow I doubt she's bother to try to justify her incredibly inaccurate take on things. Meanwhile, Ohio,
whose citizens have polled that a majority would vote to ban it, something that may not bode well for John Kerry should the marriage equality ban make it to the November 2nd ballot.
Fay Jacobs needs to take her head out of her ass and pay attention to what's going on, the trends on the ground as well as on TV... neither one bodes well for the prospect of homoaffectionals ever being considered "wholesome" enough to be allowed to marry or raise kids, let alone "too" wholesome. But that figures, what with the Advocate's choices of writers, who often tend to live in their own words - what with Andrew Sullivan, so insulated in his rich world where the Republican Party has no choice but to tolerate him, so that it takes him 4 years to realize what a danger to humanity Resident Bush is, and not just to the prospects of marriage equality... and Fay Jacobs, who lives in a gay resort town like Rehoboth Beach, where she can take it for granted that many gay families can be perceived as wholesome. Did she ever bother to drag her ass to the Boston State House, where tired protesters, standing inside and outside the building for hours, were
desperate to convince legislators that would rather have been anywhere but there, that they were worthy of marrying and raising families, over the rabid objections of the religious wrong? No, I suppose it wouldn't have fit in her memoirs of a delusional existence where it is believed that all of gay America has it as easy as she does. Did she ever bother to acknowledge the existence of the Matthew Shepard Foundation, which is trying desperately to bring awareness to the plight of runaway lesbian & gay youth, thrown out of their homes, who have to turn to prostitution in the hopes of not having to sleep under a bridge, or in some condemned building, for the night? No... I suppose having her actually write about these kinds of things would be too much of an intrusion on her cushy, "lesbian-friendly" existence. But if she stepped outside of her sheltered location, stopped obsessing over the exceptions like Rosie O'Donnell being repeatedly
interviewed about life with her wife Kelli and 300 adopted kids on "liberal" ABC, turned off the reruns of the Hillary & Julie Goodridge news footage, she might see things as they are, and could perhaps write articles that reflect life the way it is for the overwhelmingly vast majority of lesbians in America.
Read about the Bush family's long history in bed with neo-nazi groups and maybe you'll have a true understanding of why everyone seems to be afraid of this administration, including members of his own party, and why, we, the people must make them go!! This was worth the FBI drawing attention to itself and raiding the servers of IndyMedia, so you know how badly the Bush administration doesn't want you to read it:
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
Offline 
Send Email