Alex Blaze

Weekend queer reader

Filed By Alex Blaze | July 14, 2007 12:21 PM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, The Movement
Tags: Weekend Queer Reader

  • Enrique Fernandez describes some of the many slang words for gay in Spanish:

    In gorgeous imagery, Lorca defended Whitman's love for men while mercilessly attacking homosexuals who display behavior associated with being "queer''-- a word that later generations would use as a badge of pride and empowerment.

    Whether Lorca was expressing self-hatred in his anti-queer rant has been a subject of debate, but as with so many things, the issue boils down to a question of language -- much of it from the realm of food and drink.

  • Julia takes on the proposed showing of the transphobic Gendercator to build dialogue:

    If there is one thing that I’ve learned as a trans activist, it’s that I should immediately be suspicious of oppositional binaries. And to be honest, I see one forming around this Gendercator film, one where a trans activist can only ever be depicted as either a narrow-minded advocate of “censorship,” or as a progressive, open-minded person who understands that showing and discussing the film is the best course of action. Now, I think that having a dialogue between trans & cis (ie., non-trans) folks in our community over this and other issues would be very timely and potentially bridge building, but the idea of centering such a dialogue around the Gendercator film is highly problematic for reasons that are typically overlooked.

  • Mary Zeiss Stange argues that Martin Luther would have been down with the gay if he were alive today:

    Luther would certainly still find himself at odds with the Catholic Church's rigidity on sexual matters and its intolerance of principled dissent. For example, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which takes a dim view of what it calls the "homosexual inclination," in March publicly censured theologian Daniel Maguire of Marquette University for venturing the suggestion that Catholic sexual theology might make room for same-sex marriage.

  • Jasmyne Cannick questions race representation at the HRC/Logo debate:

    All I want to know is, besides Senator Obama, will there be any other Blacks apart of this event? For that matter, other minorities period.

    I think it’s great to have a presidential forum on SGL issues, but if it’s to be taken seriously, it will have to include Blacks, Latinos, and Asians, as this is where is the war really is. And not just our faces in the audience for diversity purposes. The questions posed need to also address our issues as they are slightly different than that your average affluent white gay man or woman who is mainly concerned with marriage and marriage only.

  • Barbara Ehrenreich attacks Bush's defense of the private health care system:

    Now you don't have to have seen Sicko to know that if there is one area of human endeavor where private enterprise doesn't work, it's healthcare. Consider the private, profit-making insurance industry, which Bush is so determined to defend. What "innovations" has it produced? The deductible, the co-pay and the pre-existing condition are the only ones that leap to mind. In general, the great accomplishment of the private health insurance industry has been to overturn the very meaning of "insurance," which is risk-sharing: We all put in some money, though only some of us will need to draw on the common pool by using expensive healthcare. And the insurance companies have overturned it by refusing to insure the people who need care the most--those who are already, or are likely to become, sick.


Recent Entries Filed under The Movement:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


A. J. Lopp | July 15, 2007 3:03 AM

I do not know if many people would care about what Martin Luther would have thought about today's "queer theology" and similar issues. In any event, I found Professor Stange's arguments to be highly unconvincing. Second guessing what Luther would have thought had he lived in today's world is about as meaningful as speculating whether Sir Isaac Newton would prefer Microsoft Windows or the Apple Mac. (Of course, it would be indeed poetic for him to prefer the Apple.)

However, as an eighth generation German-American who was brought up in the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, I can attest that major portions of the Lutheran Church are so tradition-obsessed that logic and science hardly merits a footnote in most of their viewpoints.

I have come to consider them largely irrelevant to today's world (except for their political influence), and I probably cannot judge accurately how much this opinion is formed out of my own resentment over childhood religious lies, dogma and abuse. Allow me to start this meeting by saying in good 12-step tradition, "Good evening, group, my name is Allen and I am a Recovering Lutheran."

Totally agree, Allen. I linked to that article because I thought TBP readers would find it interesting, not as an endorsement of the argument, which at this point in history is just idle musing. It's kind of like all that queer liberation theology about how Jesus would have been down with the queers or was queer himself, which I suppose is important to queer people who follow that religion but unimportant to those who use religion for hate.