Father Tony

Better Know A Contributor: Nathan Strang

Filed By Father Tony | February 01, 2009 7:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Gay Geeks, Site News
Tags: gay bloggers, Nathan Strang

I met Nathan in DC. As some of you know, I am drawn to hot young guys. It shouldn't surprise you, then, that I found myself seated at a table with Nate. Ordinarily, I would prefer not to hear the voices of hot young men and would prefer not to witness their failed attempts to birth a viable thought through the channel of a complete sentence. Nate, however, was delightful in conversation. In fact, we were chastised for talking throughout Barney Frank' speech at the Mayflower Hotel. Nate is a fascinator and Bilerico is lucky to have him as a contributor. I know you will pardon me the shallow questions.

1. How did you get involved with the Bilerico Project?

The love started when I attended the LGBT Blogger and Citizen Journalist Initiative in DC last December. I met Bil, Jereme, Father Tony and some other Bilerico bloggers, I think Bil Fell in love with the my hat which is why I he asked me to contribute. Either that or my half nude display at Towne Dance Boutique in DC


2. You look good. All over. Can you feel it when men look at you with lust in their eyes? How does it make you feel?

I spent a year Gogo dancing in a gay club in Buffalo called Marcellas, from the first akward moments in a red tiger striped thong, I learned quick to channel the lust. When people lust after you, its empowering, but you can start to feel like a piece of meat. But for a cocky bastard like me, that's ok.


3. Nice eyebrows. Are they naturally that perfectly shaped?

Not at all. My roommate gives me a shave and a trim once or twice a month. He plucks my eyebrows too, or else I look like groucho marx. Some daddy bear once told me my unibrow was cute and I should keep it, but I think he just wanted to take me to his cave.

4. You've done some very adventurous things in your young life. Would you like to talk about any of them for our readers?

I've been around the block a few times, and I can say that I know exactly what I want in life, sexually and relationshipwise. Some people say that if you do everything early in your life, then your are boring when you get older. I think that if you make your mistakes and try new things early on, you'll save regret later on.

5. In DC, you asked me if I had seen your cock. You can explain to our readers what you meant, or not.

Haha, I have a big black cock. No really! See? I have this obsession for a small clothing label called Whiteboy, and I had their logo tattooed on my arm. It's a perfect match, I'm a little bit white trash and a whole lot of cocky.

6. Where did you grow up? What kind of town? What kind of family? What kind of child were you?

I grew up in a rural town outside of an Air Force Base in Goldsboro, North Carolina. Cotton fields everywhere, I drove a steel blue El Camino to school. I was an airforce brat, nerdy, underweight, super awkward. I was raised Southern Baptist, and I was on track via my moms wishes to become a youth minister. The minor detail that I was gay threw a wrench in to all the plans my mom had set for me and it was a wild childhood from then on. I went to "gay camp", I prayed and went for therapy. Until about 17, I struggled with who I was, conflicted with being "Christian" and being who I was.

7. How/when did you come out? Are you out to everyone? What do you like best about being an out gay man?

I came out officially to everyone in 2005. There wasn't any big unveiling, I sorta just fell out of the closet. I had spent my entire childhood hiding who I was, masturbating at night to images of men, then praying for forgiveness directly afterward, its so uplifting to be who I am and to be proud of it. I understand the pressure of being gay and living in the south, which is why I don't live there anymore.

8. Your gay role models or heroes?

Well, my dad isn't gay, but he's my hero for being the most supportive person in my life. He once drove two hours to pick me up in 2006 after I had this super violent break up fight with my lover and shattered three of his ribs. I was stranded in Buffalo and he got right in his car, drove, and picked me up. I'm a big daddy's boy, in more ways that one. As for gay role models, I don't think I have any. I tend to rely more on my straight allies. Those are my best friends. They fight for me and for gay rights, its unselfish and I'm grateful for them.

9. Tell us all about your cute boyfriend.

I have a confession: I've met every single boyfriend online. I met John over a year ago on a bear community site called bearciti. We are both big geeks and sit in offices all day so we would chat and talk a lot. He lives outside of DC and I live in Buffalo, but I finally got the balls to go see him last February and its been hot sweaty man love ever since. Long term relationships are hard but we have a lot of ways to communicate. He's so handsome, I called him my big titted blonde cause I think redheads are the sexiest beasts in the bear world.

10. If I was in bed with you and your boyfriend (and my husband, of course)....finish the sentence.

Wow, this is a hard question, Tony. I've never met your husband, but I bet you and I would end up going on and on about some past wild sexual experience or theory and our respective husbands would shake their heads at us. Then Jimbo would tell us to take it outside (inside joke!). Oh, and I'm on top.


Recent Entries Filed under Gay Geeks:

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.


I haven't told this to Nathan directly so might as well do it here: Such a darn cutie patootie and geeky smart too! Plus! Lives! In! Buffalo! Love love love his techie geeky sexy blog. And, no, it wasn't me shushing you too at the Victory Fund dinner (though I know who it was)... Great to see Father Tony do the interview...

steve tabarez | February 2, 2009 9:30 AM

Ok. Am trying to figure out the point of this article? Guess I missed the part where he gets asked why his looks and sexual infamy, and obvious lustfulness and "modeling", make him relevant to our cause. Would have been nice to have read why it's good to kno THIS contributor. Must have got lost in all the gushing, and innuendo like tone. Celebrity? Sexuality over issues? Inferences that those in the KNOW kno why he's a catch? Is this TV GUIDE?

Steve,
"Relevant to our cause"?? Walk over to a mirror and try to say that out loud without laughing.

It's good to know Nate because he's a contributor and a good one. Not everyone has to be a super-duper activist who's worried about every cause under the sun that's important to you.

We all have different personalities, different experiences, different styles and, well, different priorities. Nate is a fun guy who blogs about tech, likes to show off, and is completely different from all of the rest of us. That's cool.

Enjoy the diversity instead of sitting back and criticizing every last little thing, Steve. I've not seen one comment from you yet that wasn't simply some sort of complaint. We're not all about causes and academics. We have a broad range of contributors and beauty, technology and fun are an important part of the movement too.

Besides, it's just insulting to stop by a post and bitch that the questions/answers weren't good enough. Who are you to judge Nate when you've been on other threads complaining that some groups are automatically excluded by judgmental people?

steve tabarez | February 2, 2009 10:49 AM

Excuse me, but somehow I di not think that over-objectifying, and over-sexualizing necessarily helps our coause, no. We are rampant with superficial, and carnal self-indulgent, pursuits, that have hurt alot of our community in very personal ways. Many of those have died, as you are aware. Waht is not looked at by those in our community, is whay the hyper-sexuality, the over-emphasis of our sexuality, and why for many in our community, we seemingly can't get past the repressed, now stagnant, hormoanl rages of our adolescent days. I say, because all these stem from the our societal constraints of the straight society. They repress us, they stifle us, and doom us to superficial, yet totally self-destructive pursuits. And we embrace them with that old, 60's view of total accept me, the unhinged carnal beast, IHAVE A RIGHT TO SELF-EXPRESSION. But which self is that? The one victimized by a straight society that forces us to be "over" the almost everything we do. We have the right to express our sexuality in the that way. We also have the right NOT TO! We have the capacity to get beyond the repressiion of our adolescent sexual development years. Ther are some things you just can't go back and recapture, or replace. To do so leaves us where we are now. A group more interested in excessive self-indulgence, surfacy, inane pursuit of acceptance based on who we kno, what we wear, and what is the latest CD, MOVIE, FASHION. We practice self will, and self actualization, thru means that only prove to keep us trapped in the lost days of our most developmental stages. Through sex, through vanity, through gluttony, or greed, we can not progress and be the true persons we are meant to be. BALANCE. SELF-RESTRAINT. PURSUITS GREATER THAN SELF. Above all, your post never addressed why someon so beautiful is more important to our cause than someone who isn't. Sad, given the coverage here, of the Creating Change Conference. Your comment serves to show me that you just don't get it. Who is setting onesself apart now? Who is excluding whom based on beauty? Is that not bias?

OK. I get it now. You're joking. Tongue in cheek.

You are joking, right?

steve tabarez | February 2, 2009 11:00 AM

You answered my questions. For you, style and beauty over substance and significance. Your lust is showing...

Steve, while I appreciate that you don't deny my style and beauty, its somewhat disappointing that you believe I have no other substance. Why am I "important to this cause?" What cause is this exactly? TBP? Equal Rights? I was asked to contribute for my skill in not being frumpy and hyper analyzing the minutiae of the LGBT universe.

I'm here to contribute to the more social and cultural aspects of the world. I'm a tech blogger, and fuck yea, I'm eye candy I suppose but does that make me less significant? Am I doomed to be null and void for whatever activism I support because I employ my wonderfully trimmed eyebrows in the fight?

I wasn't aware that "Better know a contributor" segments were about pulling out my activism belt and showing my rally notches.

What I think you fail to realize, Steve, is that TBP is intended to represent as much of the LGBTQ community as possible. Do we support "the cause" here - yes. Is that ALL that we're about? Hell no.

Nathan represents the youthful, tech-savvy, club-crowd part of our community. Does that "help our cause"? I say yes. Why? Because we should embrace the diversity of our community and not worry so much about how the rest of the world sees it.

Nate is a good guy. I talk with him regularly. He's more than a piece of meat. He's smart, he's funny, and he has insights into life as a young gay man that few of our other contributors have. Don't get so hung up on his past and Tony's objectification.

Nate is important to the cause because it is the sexual freedom and carefree nature of his life we are all fighting to protect. He lives his life unabashedly and I think that takes guts and a certain amount of self-awareness.

I think this judgmental attitude toward him harms "the cause" much more than he does by living his life.

steve tabarez | February 2, 2009 12:41 PM

FIRST, if your comments to me about what u are going to contribute here is now clear. That, was glaringly absent in that piece. I simply asked why. Wasn't much in it except that becuz of your looks, we should be so honored to have u. If u think aboutit , I am actually saying the same thing u are. I think we both agree that there may be more than the pretty little wrapper. There should be. That said, I also think that we tend to place on the wrapper. What is sad to me is that u allowed urself to be framed iin this post as not much more than wrapping and then get angry at me when I say that is all I saw.

steve tabarez | February 2, 2009 2:02 PM

First, I in no way said he was not important, or should be excluded from any thing or anywhere. Nor did I say he doesn't contribute to our community. Nor did I say that I would not like him if I ever met him. That was never the issue. I include all in my circle. Including those who disagree with. More so. Because sometimes it is easier to malign the dissenter. And cast them aside. If in fact you knew me, you would know that I have fought most fiercely for those that disagreed with me and those around me. We a, should.

You know, we lost a generation of gay men to HIV and what's sad about this article to me, is that it misses an opportunity to really have an inter-generational conversation or relationship that goes beyond viewing someone young as purely a sex object.

I'm sure that was not its intent- but it just hit me, only me, as sad.

We all have so much to learn from each other, but all I see here is an older man objectifying a younger one. Completely consensual, but what about creating a dialogue.

We all have so much to learn from each other.

Dear Capitalistpiggy,
Your comment is a fair one. An interview is about choices.It ought to be obvious that I chose humor over a serious dissection of the issues you mention. It would not be fair to assume that Nate and I have not or would not discuss serious issues. We have, and to his credit, Nate does mention safe sex. I thought the disclaimer about "shallow questions" clarified my direction and posture for this particular interview. It's not like I haven't generated volumes of more serious material. I'll stand by my approach in this instance, but I appreciate your intelligent comment.

I'm sure Nathan is very smart and nice, etc., but I have to say I'm with the crowd that found this post super-creepy. Encouraging Nathan's narcissism because it turns you on does him a disservice. I think a real friend might tell him, gently of course, that he's a little too into himself.

Dear Golikewater,

Your comment serves to remind me that some folks don't know a performance and a performer when they see one. Some folks don't feel humor even when it is as broadly telegraphed as mine.

If you and those of what you call your "crowd" (and I don't think there is such a crowd) think that I will start serving porridge to the toothless, think again. Your criticism reminds me of the pain felt by those who fall in love on the internet and are shocked to learn that their love objects were fraudulent. A reality check might be required here, if you really assume to now know enough about the subject of the interview to diagnose his state of mind and recommend that friends adjust him. Please. I think you know better.

Father Tony, if you have such thin skin, you probably shouldn't be blogging. Berating people who criticize you is no more attractive than fawning over go-go boys. Satire is difficult to pull off. No need to get all bent out of shape when it falls flat.

P.S. I have all my teeth.

Dear Golikewater,
Thick-skinned as an old rhino and having blogged daily for more than four years, I'll get into this type of spat only to the point of worthwhile clarification. My toes are on that line.