365Gay has the story of two American go-go boys who have gone missing in Montreal.
This is how I see it shaking out. The ex-military man is afraid of both getting called up again and of getting a dishonourable discharge due to Don't Ask Don't Tell, so his party boy friend/sex partner decides to take him on a thousand mile odyssey throughout Canada: where they speak broken French, have a threeway with Ashley MacIsaac, take photos of themselves in headscarves--teeth a-gleaming, culminating in a high speed chase over the Confederation Bridge.
It's Thelma & Louise as written by Bret Easton Ellis.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Vintage Eye Candy
I am a bad gay blogger by rarely posting eye candy. As a mea culpa, here is a classic photo of John Wesley Shipp:
Attenzione!
Missives to Hikaruland may be interrupted this week as I'm working on a "project." It's not necessarily top-secret, but all I can really say is that I never imagined that my life's trajectory would lead me to hyping opportunities for capitalists--even if it is in the "Third World" and in a country that I'm surprised isn't up there with the Ireland, South Korea, Singapore, and the other "tiger" nations.
Oh well, I just keep repeating to myself "it's for the people," and I really do want this country to become an economic powerhouse.
(By the way, there were no hidden clues inside the preceding photographs. I'm just staying mum.)
In other navel-gazing news: Ben Patrick Johnson and Ron Corning must have loads of fans or people curious about them, because I'm getting loads of referrals with their names. Alas, the Cameron Cartio referrals are still coming in, lo these many months post-Melodifestivalen.
Oh well, I just keep repeating to myself "it's for the people," and I really do want this country to become an economic powerhouse.
(By the way, there were no hidden clues inside the preceding photographs. I'm just staying mum.)
In other navel-gazing news: Ben Patrick Johnson and Ron Corning must have loads of fans or people curious about them, because I'm getting loads of referrals with their names. Alas, the Cameron Cartio referrals are still coming in, lo these many months post-Melodifestivalen.
Sunday, August 28, 2005
The Roxy Post-Mortem: Dancing to Oblivion
Yes, that's right, I went to The Roxy.
It all started out very innoculous, I was chatting with Garrett last night, when I saw a high school classmate's name listed as one of the performers to appear at The Roxy. I haven't seen her in almost a decade, so I roped Garrett into going.
It was like a surreal comedy brought to life.
Here we are two people who don't dance sitting in the middle of a dance club. It's too dark for Garrett to read my lips or my haphazard ASL, so we communicated via pad and text messages. A particular highlight was when I thought I saw B.D. Wong dancing shirtless, but upon closer examination, 'twas not him.
However, this is all beside the point.
Being at The Roxy that night was a bit of a sociological epiphany for me. You see, I can't quite wrap my mind around the logic of going there. You pay $20+ to enter (general admission was $40 this particular night), you have bottles of water starting out $3 (perhaps even higher), and it gets so crowded that you can barely move around. Why would someone subject themselves to this on a weekly basis?
The rationale that I've come to believe: These people are living purely for now.
Savings be damned, some people just want to forget that the world exists. Life is brutal today, we are bombarded with news of how dire the economy is, how the war in Iraq is a quagmire that no one seems to know the way out of, how the GLBT community is still treated like second class citizens in the US, and just basically how imperfect we all are when measured up against some impossible media ideal--especially if you look at gay media.
When I was making my way back to my apartment afterwards, I was thinking that I was going to focus on the absurdly thin twinks flailing their bodies across the dancefloor, the steroid abusers shuffling from left to right, and the Freudian hysteric Will & Grace-esque couples. Yet, as I type this out now, I realise that perhaps this is their one time a week where they feel at ease with themselves.
I often say that there is a lack of personal responsibility in today's society, but there is also a lack of self-love. It seems like the hardest thing for many of us to do is to wake up in the morning and say "I'm right as I am." This is not to say that we are no longer works-in-progress, but occasionally we need to realise that while we are works-in-progress, we are still marvelous things behold.
As marvelous things, we sometimes curse the sun that our lives have not become the stuff that William J. Mann novels are made out of. It always seems that someone else has got that special ingredient that makes their lives appear seemingly sparkling in comparison to our own seemingly humdrum existence.
So we dance, we spend beyond our means, we do drugs, we drink, we become nihilists. Yet we forget that in someone else's eyes, we seem to have it all.
The answer, as I see it, is not to be happy beyond your wildest wishes, but instead, to be serene. If you can, take a moment today--and every day, indeed--to just remind yourself of what you do have and what you are, instead of what you lack both externally and internally.
Then you'll know, that if you have made it this far in life, there is no need to dance off into oblivion.
It all started out very innoculous, I was chatting with Garrett last night, when I saw a high school classmate's name listed as one of the performers to appear at The Roxy. I haven't seen her in almost a decade, so I roped Garrett into going.
It was like a surreal comedy brought to life.
Here we are two people who don't dance sitting in the middle of a dance club. It's too dark for Garrett to read my lips or my haphazard ASL, so we communicated via pad and text messages. A particular highlight was when I thought I saw B.D. Wong dancing shirtless, but upon closer examination, 'twas not him.
However, this is all beside the point.
Being at The Roxy that night was a bit of a sociological epiphany for me. You see, I can't quite wrap my mind around the logic of going there. You pay $20+ to enter (general admission was $40 this particular night), you have bottles of water starting out $3 (perhaps even higher), and it gets so crowded that you can barely move around. Why would someone subject themselves to this on a weekly basis?
The rationale that I've come to believe: These people are living purely for now.
Savings be damned, some people just want to forget that the world exists. Life is brutal today, we are bombarded with news of how dire the economy is, how the war in Iraq is a quagmire that no one seems to know the way out of, how the GLBT community is still treated like second class citizens in the US, and just basically how imperfect we all are when measured up against some impossible media ideal--especially if you look at gay media.
When I was making my way back to my apartment afterwards, I was thinking that I was going to focus on the absurdly thin twinks flailing their bodies across the dancefloor, the steroid abusers shuffling from left to right, and the Freudian hysteric Will & Grace-esque couples. Yet, as I type this out now, I realise that perhaps this is their one time a week where they feel at ease with themselves.
I often say that there is a lack of personal responsibility in today's society, but there is also a lack of self-love. It seems like the hardest thing for many of us to do is to wake up in the morning and say "I'm right as I am." This is not to say that we are no longer works-in-progress, but occasionally we need to realise that while we are works-in-progress, we are still marvelous things behold.
As marvelous things, we sometimes curse the sun that our lives have not become the stuff that William J. Mann novels are made out of. It always seems that someone else has got that special ingredient that makes their lives appear seemingly sparkling in comparison to our own seemingly humdrum existence.
So we dance, we spend beyond our means, we do drugs, we drink, we become nihilists. Yet we forget that in someone else's eyes, we seem to have it all.
The answer, as I see it, is not to be happy beyond your wildest wishes, but instead, to be serene. If you can, take a moment today--and every day, indeed--to just remind yourself of what you do have and what you are, instead of what you lack both externally and internally.
Then you'll know, that if you have made it this far in life, there is no need to dance off into oblivion.
Schadenfreude: Milwaukee Edition
The City of Milwaukee now admits that it messed up in closing the production of Naked Boys Singing. The Milwaukee Gay Arts Center (yes, I'm surprised there is one, as is Garrett) is seeking $634,420 in damages nonetheless.
Don't mess with us Dairy Queens, we bite hard and rough.
Don't mess with us Dairy Queens, we bite hard and rough.
Saturday, August 27, 2005
The Commemorative 250th Post
After one month of the recovery from hell, two months of sadistic (but fulfilling) workouts, seven weeks of stacking, and several post-mortems...Here is how I look today:
Alas, the self-timer on my camera is so fast that I always forget to shuffle my boxers down so that they aren't showing. I had the same problem last month, but at least I'm a little less puffy now.
Alas, the self-timer on my camera is so fast that I always forget to shuffle my boxers down so that they aren't showing. I had the same problem last month, but at least I'm a little less puffy now.
Friday, August 26, 2005
What's the Spanish for Schadenfreude?
I was not trying to make this a triple post day--especially since I'm nearing 250 posts very soon--but sometimes a story comes along that needs a lot of publicity.
I can't write it better than the headline: Chavez offers cheap gas to Poor in the U.S.
Pardon me while I laugh pointedly in the direction of Virginia Beach.
I can't write it better than the headline: Chavez offers cheap gas to Poor in the U.S.
Pardon me while I laugh pointedly in the direction of Virginia Beach.
Another Confused Philospher
(With apologies to The Royal Canadian Air Farce)
- Why does it feel like The Young & The Beautiful is followed by The Bold & The Restless this summer?
- When did being Christian include calling for physical harm to others?
- Why does the openly gay candidate running for Manhattan Borough President not have the endorsement of the Gay & Lesbian Independent Democrats?
- Why hasn't George W. Bush been impeached yet?
- Who does Sean Hayes think he's fooling by going publicly back into the closet?
- Why isn't Myra Breckinridge seen as a camp classic film?
- Why am I not working for the CBC?
- How did Jerry Bruckheimer wind up taking over most of CBS's primetime lineup?
- Were Christian LeBlanc and Gale Harold separated at birth?
- Why is Rex Wockner so bitter?
- Who thought that musicalising the Alfred Kinsey story was a good idea?
- Why does MTV still broadcast The Video Music Awards if there's practically no music on the network at all?
- Why did they change the voice of Four Murasame for the new Zeta Gundam movies?
- Why did they get rid of Crystal Pepsi?
Thursday, August 25, 2005
These are the people in my neighbourhood
Stumbled across this interesting tidbit from Curbed:
The Post offers a handy guide to telling apart the different apartment towers in Chelsea. On the terrace at Chelsea Towers (100 West 26th St @ 6th Ave): "'Single, rich young women' lounging in bikinis and Dolce and Gabbana sunglasses." At the Capitol at Chelsea (55 West 26th St @ Broadway/6th Ave): 'Very gay and very snobby,' notes one resident. 'If we see a straight person in the elevator, it's like, 'What are you doing here?'"
The Post offers a handy guide to telling apart the different apartment towers in Chelsea. On the terrace at Chelsea Towers (100 West 26th St @ 6th Ave): "'Single, rich young women' lounging in bikinis and Dolce and Gabbana sunglasses." At the Capitol at Chelsea (55 West 26th St @ Broadway/6th Ave): 'Very gay and very snobby,' notes one resident. 'If we see a straight person in the elevator, it's like, 'What are you doing here?'"
Minneapolis: The Next Gay Mecca
That's what GLBT Minneapolis would like you think. This may very well be the Milwaukeean in me speaking, but Minneapolis as a gay mecca? I think Biloxi is more likely.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
The View-Splash-Rawhide Post Mortem: Lots O' Observations
I certainly was not expecting to keep the post-mortems up given that I'm now working out 6 days a week--and getting up early for each one, but bizarrely I find myself doing my normal Tuesday night pattern.
- Gwen Stefani is at least a decade older than I am. She has no business referring to herself as a "girl" (I gave up "boy" when I turned 21) nor can she gallivant about like a high school cheerleader. That being said, her music is very good.
- If the Benetton becomes a Wachovia, then what does that say about Chelsea?
- The go-go boys @ Rawhide are still skanky. I think the "New York's best" tagline should be removed.
- If you're drinking solo, the last thing you want to be privy to is a fag and his hag dancing to "Dancing Queen"--especially if they appear to be younger than yourself.
- RuPaul's video for "Workout" is disturbingly cheap. The whole premise seems to be "let's put RuPaul in front of a cement wall, change her hair a couple of times, but avoid changing her outfit."
- Why does "Since U Been Gone" get the young queens excited? I know Kelly Clarkson is the first "American Idol," but still...
- I am not considering my twenties complete until I have sex with Rod Barry.
- While I like the bartenders over @ Splash personality-wise, there's a lot of distended (read: likely steroid use) stomach over there.
- At some point in life, everyone--especially gay men--should try to re-enact house music videos on 25th street between 6th & 7th Avenues. My specific recommendation: "Alomszep" by Karanyi out of this year's Hungarian National Final.
- True masculinity comes from being who you genuinely are as opposed to subscribing to what you think masculinity is.
- I hate to say this, but The View does actually edge out Splash in terms of music video selection.
Possible Answers
Here's a possibility for the closeted couple from yesterday's Daily News blind item:
The talk show host: Tavis Smiley
The playwright: Tyler Perry
Well...erm...that's an interesting couple. For those who aren't familiar with the names; Tavis Smiley hosts a well-known if not popular (especially amongst blacks) talk show that's along the lines of Charlie Rose. Tyler Perry is the (HACK) writer behind many "chitlin circuit" plays, most notably Diary of A Mad Black Woman, which was a sleeper hit as a film earlier this year. He lives in Atlanta, I believe (Pookie can you confirm?) in a mansion that I think he had painted pink.
Now, I know fully well that cross-dressing goes on all across the sexual spectrum, but the fact that Perry's plays often feature himself playing loud-mouthed sassy grandmother Madea makes you wonder. (Personally, I don't necessarily buy Smiley, but who knows?)
Standard set up of a Perry play: Decent person or persons go astray, Madea sasses them into church, they find salvation in god after a lot of screaming about how they're mad at themselves.
He's the new Tennessee Williams, he is.
The talk show host: Tavis Smiley
The playwright: Tyler Perry
Well...erm...that's an interesting couple. For those who aren't familiar with the names; Tavis Smiley hosts a well-known if not popular (especially amongst blacks) talk show that's along the lines of Charlie Rose. Tyler Perry is the (HACK) writer behind many "chitlin circuit" plays, most notably Diary of A Mad Black Woman, which was a sleeper hit as a film earlier this year. He lives in Atlanta, I believe (Pookie can you confirm?) in a mansion that I think he had painted pink.
Now, I know fully well that cross-dressing goes on all across the sexual spectrum, but the fact that Perry's plays often feature himself playing loud-mouthed sassy grandmother Madea makes you wonder. (Personally, I don't necessarily buy Smiley, but who knows?)
Standard set up of a Perry play: Decent person or persons go astray, Madea sasses them into church, they find salvation in god after a lot of screaming about how they're mad at themselves.
He's the new Tennessee Williams, he is.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Fast Food Theatre
This is turning out to be quite the cerebral multiple-post day for me.
My comrade playwright and classmate, Adam Szymkowicz posted on his blog a letter from playwright Larry Kunofsky about the current state of playwriting.
I have to say that while Larry makes me feel good about my choice to pursue my MFA, I have to disagree with what he says about playwriting today.
While the current crop of plays coming out may be written by serious-minded playwrights, the plays themselves seem to suggest that at the forefront of their mind is "fast food theatre," which is easy to digest, and completely unforgettable afterwards.
Theatre is definitely doing well, but it seems that the people behind it are taking their cues from Hollywood and packing 'em in with celebrities and/or simplistic themes that don't challenge you. Most things of merit tend to be revivals or re-envisionings of classic work. The new crop of work is based on pop culture. Having pop culture as a subject matter is not of itself a bad thing, but it must be used as a vehicle to explain something deeper, not to just merely say "hey, I like this, don't you?" It's theatre as a celebration of conformity.
Take for example The One-Man Star Wars Trilogy. It is exactly what it says it is, one man performs the Star Wars Trilogy. It is lauded by many ostensibly for the performance of Charles Ross (who wrote and performs it--not always a good idea), but what I feel they are really applauding is seeing one media in another. It's nothing more than that. Think of the successful film-to-television series transfers, for every M*A*S*H and The Odd Couple, there is a My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Party Girl, and a 9 to 5. It's just the novelty.
Theatre today is obsessed with the familar, and in this day and age of 15 minute fame, pop icons are born practically at the speed of sound. The man who did the superficial, but stylish Paris Hilton one-man show, is now directing Fatal Attraction: A Greek Tragedy (Not!), which features Corey Feldman in its cast in order to maximise the 1980's references. It's not camp, it's just tacky and self-referential. I'm pretty certain Charles Busch would agree with me on this.
Then there's Orgasms: The Play, which brings out the ancient battle of the sexes cliche and adds nothing to it. That's just evident by the title. Let's just talk about sex, but make it superficial and funny, because no one wants to actually sit through a production that talks about genuine feelings and genuine sexuality.
Joy (as in The Joy of Gay Sex) purports to do that, but ultimately fails because again, the interest is solely in sex, laughs, and colourful characters. You forget about it afterwards, because it's just another gay romantic comedy, a creature that is needed more in film and less onstage.
Now in theatre as opposed to film, the writer has a lot of control, so we can't say that these were great works that became homogenised by the evil producers. The fact of the matter is that these plays were the works that the writers have chosen to meet the world. They are their beasts that shout "I," and their "I" is life unexamined.
I am not saying that there isn't a place for camp and froth in theatre. Quite the opposite, we need to laugh at the outlandish foibles of others much as we need to be able to laugh at ourselves. What I am saying, however, is that something is terribly wrong with the state of playwriting today if the majority of work being done and seen by the public is froth that assumes that people don't want to think. We don't have to be restrained from slitting our wrists at the end, but we do want to feel like we had a genuine live experience.
Otherwise, we'd just sit at home, watch E!, and giggle at Benny Hill reruns.
My comrade playwright and classmate, Adam Szymkowicz posted on his blog a letter from playwright Larry Kunofsky about the current state of playwriting.
I have to say that while Larry makes me feel good about my choice to pursue my MFA, I have to disagree with what he says about playwriting today.
While the current crop of plays coming out may be written by serious-minded playwrights, the plays themselves seem to suggest that at the forefront of their mind is "fast food theatre," which is easy to digest, and completely unforgettable afterwards.
Theatre is definitely doing well, but it seems that the people behind it are taking their cues from Hollywood and packing 'em in with celebrities and/or simplistic themes that don't challenge you. Most things of merit tend to be revivals or re-envisionings of classic work. The new crop of work is based on pop culture. Having pop culture as a subject matter is not of itself a bad thing, but it must be used as a vehicle to explain something deeper, not to just merely say "hey, I like this, don't you?" It's theatre as a celebration of conformity.
Take for example The One-Man Star Wars Trilogy. It is exactly what it says it is, one man performs the Star Wars Trilogy. It is lauded by many ostensibly for the performance of Charles Ross (who wrote and performs it--not always a good idea), but what I feel they are really applauding is seeing one media in another. It's nothing more than that. Think of the successful film-to-television series transfers, for every M*A*S*H and The Odd Couple, there is a My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Party Girl, and a 9 to 5. It's just the novelty.
Theatre today is obsessed with the familar, and in this day and age of 15 minute fame, pop icons are born practically at the speed of sound. The man who did the superficial, but stylish Paris Hilton one-man show, is now directing Fatal Attraction: A Greek Tragedy (Not!), which features Corey Feldman in its cast in order to maximise the 1980's references. It's not camp, it's just tacky and self-referential. I'm pretty certain Charles Busch would agree with me on this.
Then there's Orgasms: The Play, which brings out the ancient battle of the sexes cliche and adds nothing to it. That's just evident by the title. Let's just talk about sex, but make it superficial and funny, because no one wants to actually sit through a production that talks about genuine feelings and genuine sexuality.
Joy (as in The Joy of Gay Sex) purports to do that, but ultimately fails because again, the interest is solely in sex, laughs, and colourful characters. You forget about it afterwards, because it's just another gay romantic comedy, a creature that is needed more in film and less onstage.
Now in theatre as opposed to film, the writer has a lot of control, so we can't say that these were great works that became homogenised by the evil producers. The fact of the matter is that these plays were the works that the writers have chosen to meet the world. They are their beasts that shout "I," and their "I" is life unexamined.
I am not saying that there isn't a place for camp and froth in theatre. Quite the opposite, we need to laugh at the outlandish foibles of others much as we need to be able to laugh at ourselves. What I am saying, however, is that something is terribly wrong with the state of playwriting today if the majority of work being done and seen by the public is froth that assumes that people don't want to think. We don't have to be restrained from slitting our wrists at the end, but we do want to feel like we had a genuine live experience.
Otherwise, we'd just sit at home, watch E!, and giggle at Benny Hill reruns.
Why I am a Socialist
I've transitioned to working out early mornings this week, so I now have a huge chunk of my days open while waiting for: a) an interim job, b) a production, c) a random adventure. I'm not a huge fan of idle time, so I've started educating myself further with Socialism.
I initially switched from mainstream Democrat to Socialist in college, partly for shock value, but also because I do believe strongly in egalitarianism and cooperative ownership. I also don't have a fear of government when smart, intelligent people who aren't concerned with career advancement are in charge. I think government ownership is a wonderful thing in certain critical industries such as utilities. Problems arise, however, when those in charge of government owned companies forget that they are representatives of the public at large.
Yet despite these beliefs, I often wonder if I'm as "rose" (Socialists are different than Communists, so I don't say "red," which oddly enough suggests Republicans these days) as I believe. So I took a look at the manifesto/platform for New York City's Socialist Party local.
On housing:
"Physically beautiful, ecologically sound affordable housing is absolutely vital to the future of the city – only by constructing such housing can we reduce rents and break the overwhelming political power of the real estate industry."
How true. I love my apartment, but the rent I pay is exorbitant for what it is. Very few New Yorkers outside of rent-controlled apartments would disagree. "Well, you're in New York, no one is forcing you to be there," critics would say. This argument does not hold water with me. I am not much of a conspiracy theorist, but there does seem to be a cabal between the media, the real estate developers, and the government to hype "hot neighbourhoods." I imagine the process works like this: City has land that it wants developed. Developer buys site in a neighbourhood in order to build a towering apartment building. Wanting to insure that the units will be filled with residents paying the maximum, developer goes to the media to generate "buzz." If the hype is successful, the building fills up with people wanting to sample "the glamorous life." The process is repeated over and over, sometimes even in the same neighbourhood, all for the love of greed. The residents and employees are basically cash machines. It does need to stop. I do believe that we have to have a capitalist economy, but it must be kept strongly in check.
On Public Transit:
"Private cars make no sense in a dense city center. The pollution, noise, and danger they bring is only exacerbated by the tremendous cost to the city for the roads, services and infrastructure they require. Cities like Amsterdam have shown that it is possible to remove cars from the city center while allowing delivery trucks and emergency vehicles to operate with far greater efficiency."
Again, I totally agree. I live on the corner of 6th Avenue (aka Avenue of the Americas). Personally, I don't mind the ambient noise of cars going by, but the amount of traffic is insane for a locale in the middle of Manhattan. There are many many private cars being driven here, that really have no place being in New York with the multitude of public transit options at their disposal. This is not Los Angeles. People who work in New York City have a choice of subways, buses, trains, and ferries to get them where they want to go in relative speed--not to mention taxis as well. It does indeed make no sense to have private cars. Every evening, it seems that I am witness to a fire truck creeping slowly up 6th Avenue, horns a-wailing, trying to make it through a sea of cars, the majority of which are not taxis/limousines, nor delivery trucks.
That being said, I think the NYC Socialists are a little bit crazy with this portion:
"Our subways would cost only 60 cents a ride if the state subsidized them at the same rate it subsidizes the commuter railroads that serve the suburbs, but we call for a completely free system, funded by fair subsidies and a return to the commuter tax for non-residents."
Oh, we should tax the commuters without a doubt, but a free system? That is ludicrous. I don't think that a commuter tax would subsidise the transit system. A commuter tax would reduce the amount of commuters coming by car, who would subsequently switch to public transportation. Capacity on public transport would have to be expanded to accommodate them, and that costs money. The fares need to stay in order to allow the system to both expand, improve, and maintain itself. I believe in subsides, but I also believe that subsidies should not be wasted.
On independence:
"New Yorkers send three times as many dollars in taxes to the state and federal governments as we receive in services--the Transit Authority, school budget, housing laws, and social welfare systems are all controlled by bureaucrats in Albany. The Socialist Party advocates complete legislative autonomy for New York City, in effect creating a free city within US territory."
I find this very interesting. On a purely symbolic level, "New York City" being separate from "New York State" is bizarre and anachronistic. The county seat of my home county, Ozaukee County, is Port Washington, which is a holdover from the time when it was part of neighbouring Washington County. (Not that it has made any difference, according to Mike Nichols of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.)
Putting aside any renaming debates, I have a problem with the notion of separation. Call me Pollyanna, but if the money sent from New York City helps others in New York State plus the city itself, then I am perfectly fine with it being so. If I move to Buffalo, I'd like to have the same access and government benefits that I would in New York City. Sheer population ensures that New York City will often contribute more, and the way to fix the disparity is by working in tandem with New York State, not by suddenly creating a new level of bureaucracy.
Nonetheless, it's this statement on the main website of The Socialist Party USA that affirms my socialism:
"THE SOCIALIST PARTY USA stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation, whether based on social class, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other characteristics... As we build the socialist movement, we organize around a platform committed to our common and interdependent struggles and aspirations."
And that's what is so often forgotten in the world today, that we are all in this together.
I initially switched from mainstream Democrat to Socialist in college, partly for shock value, but also because I do believe strongly in egalitarianism and cooperative ownership. I also don't have a fear of government when smart, intelligent people who aren't concerned with career advancement are in charge. I think government ownership is a wonderful thing in certain critical industries such as utilities. Problems arise, however, when those in charge of government owned companies forget that they are representatives of the public at large.
Yet despite these beliefs, I often wonder if I'm as "rose" (Socialists are different than Communists, so I don't say "red," which oddly enough suggests Republicans these days) as I believe. So I took a look at the manifesto/platform for New York City's Socialist Party local.
On housing:
"Physically beautiful, ecologically sound affordable housing is absolutely vital to the future of the city – only by constructing such housing can we reduce rents and break the overwhelming political power of the real estate industry."
How true. I love my apartment, but the rent I pay is exorbitant for what it is. Very few New Yorkers outside of rent-controlled apartments would disagree. "Well, you're in New York, no one is forcing you to be there," critics would say. This argument does not hold water with me. I am not much of a conspiracy theorist, but there does seem to be a cabal between the media, the real estate developers, and the government to hype "hot neighbourhoods." I imagine the process works like this: City has land that it wants developed. Developer buys site in a neighbourhood in order to build a towering apartment building. Wanting to insure that the units will be filled with residents paying the maximum, developer goes to the media to generate "buzz." If the hype is successful, the building fills up with people wanting to sample "the glamorous life." The process is repeated over and over, sometimes even in the same neighbourhood, all for the love of greed. The residents and employees are basically cash machines. It does need to stop. I do believe that we have to have a capitalist economy, but it must be kept strongly in check.
On Public Transit:
"Private cars make no sense in a dense city center. The pollution, noise, and danger they bring is only exacerbated by the tremendous cost to the city for the roads, services and infrastructure they require. Cities like Amsterdam have shown that it is possible to remove cars from the city center while allowing delivery trucks and emergency vehicles to operate with far greater efficiency."
Again, I totally agree. I live on the corner of 6th Avenue (aka Avenue of the Americas). Personally, I don't mind the ambient noise of cars going by, but the amount of traffic is insane for a locale in the middle of Manhattan. There are many many private cars being driven here, that really have no place being in New York with the multitude of public transit options at their disposal. This is not Los Angeles. People who work in New York City have a choice of subways, buses, trains, and ferries to get them where they want to go in relative speed--not to mention taxis as well. It does indeed make no sense to have private cars. Every evening, it seems that I am witness to a fire truck creeping slowly up 6th Avenue, horns a-wailing, trying to make it through a sea of cars, the majority of which are not taxis/limousines, nor delivery trucks.
That being said, I think the NYC Socialists are a little bit crazy with this portion:
"Our subways would cost only 60 cents a ride if the state subsidized them at the same rate it subsidizes the commuter railroads that serve the suburbs, but we call for a completely free system, funded by fair subsidies and a return to the commuter tax for non-residents."
Oh, we should tax the commuters without a doubt, but a free system? That is ludicrous. I don't think that a commuter tax would subsidise the transit system. A commuter tax would reduce the amount of commuters coming by car, who would subsequently switch to public transportation. Capacity on public transport would have to be expanded to accommodate them, and that costs money. The fares need to stay in order to allow the system to both expand, improve, and maintain itself. I believe in subsides, but I also believe that subsidies should not be wasted.
On independence:
"New Yorkers send three times as many dollars in taxes to the state and federal governments as we receive in services--the Transit Authority, school budget, housing laws, and social welfare systems are all controlled by bureaucrats in Albany. The Socialist Party advocates complete legislative autonomy for New York City, in effect creating a free city within US territory."
I find this very interesting. On a purely symbolic level, "New York City" being separate from "New York State" is bizarre and anachronistic. The county seat of my home county, Ozaukee County, is Port Washington, which is a holdover from the time when it was part of neighbouring Washington County. (Not that it has made any difference, according to Mike Nichols of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.)
Putting aside any renaming debates, I have a problem with the notion of separation. Call me Pollyanna, but if the money sent from New York City helps others in New York State plus the city itself, then I am perfectly fine with it being so. If I move to Buffalo, I'd like to have the same access and government benefits that I would in New York City. Sheer population ensures that New York City will often contribute more, and the way to fix the disparity is by working in tandem with New York State, not by suddenly creating a new level of bureaucracy.
Nonetheless, it's this statement on the main website of The Socialist Party USA that affirms my socialism:
"THE SOCIALIST PARTY USA stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation, whether based on social class, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other characteristics... As we build the socialist movement, we organize around a platform committed to our common and interdependent struggles and aspirations."
And that's what is so often forgotten in the world today, that we are all in this together.
Monday, August 22, 2005
I Want Answers!
Very interesting blind item in today's Daily News:
"Which prize-winning male talk-show host has been secretly dating a renowned playwright who still hasn't managed to leave the closet? The scribe keeps telling interviewers that he is excited to find a wife and start a family, even though he has been seeing men on the sly ..."
I'm baffled on this one. McNally, Rudnick, and Greenberg are all out. Shanley, I severely doubt. I know it definitely can't be my former professor at Columbia, because he's out as well.
As for talk-show host: Montel is married; Olbermann, I doubt; Charles Perez is possible, even though he's just doing news now; Geraldo Rivera is married.
Any guesses?
"Which prize-winning male talk-show host has been secretly dating a renowned playwright who still hasn't managed to leave the closet? The scribe keeps telling interviewers that he is excited to find a wife and start a family, even though he has been seeing men on the sly ..."
I'm baffled on this one. McNally, Rudnick, and Greenberg are all out. Shanley, I severely doubt. I know it definitely can't be my former professor at Columbia, because he's out as well.
As for talk-show host: Montel is married; Olbermann, I doubt; Charles Perez is possible, even though he's just doing news now; Geraldo Rivera is married.
Any guesses?
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Alas, Milwaukee takes two steps back (again)
Milwaukee's attempts to become Chicago's answer to Fort Lauderdale--which is to say the swinging, hip, gay-friendly mid-level city--are further squashed by the shuttering of a local production of Naked Boys Singing.
The excuse? No theatrical license.
Yah, right.
Norquist, despite his flaws, at least realised that you have to be good to the gays in order to see a city prosper. That being said, I think this has more to do with the Milwaukee Police Department's entrenched bigotry rather than the city administration.
The excuse? No theatrical license.
Yah, right.
Norquist, despite his flaws, at least realised that you have to be good to the gays in order to see a city prosper. That being said, I think this has more to do with the Milwaukee Police Department's entrenched bigotry rather than the city administration.
Friday, August 19, 2005
Martha Stewart: My New Neighbour
I have not had many celebrity encounters since moving to New York 4 years ago--save for Ethan Hawke, but everybody sees him, so he doesn't count.
Now I find out (via Gawker) that Martha Stewart's new show will be shooting from the studios a block away from my apartment. Said block is also home to FIT. I think this will create the most fabulous concentration of gayness in New York City outside of Pride. I'm no Martha fan, but I thoroughly welcome this development.
Now I find out (via Gawker) that Martha Stewart's new show will be shooting from the studios a block away from my apartment. Said block is also home to FIT. I think this will create the most fabulous concentration of gayness in New York City outside of Pride. I'm no Martha fan, but I thoroughly welcome this development.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
No, I'm not GLAAD
...I'm just curious. GLAAD has picked a new head, Neil Giuliano to replace Joan Garry.
Giuliano is the former Republican mayor of Tempe, Arizona, where he served 4 terms. (Although Tempe elections are non-partisan, Giuliano's political stance was apparently quite well-known, especially during the presidental election last year where he did support Bush.)
I have to say that I don't completely trust this development. GLAAD has been making missteps for quite some time.
For starters, I think the ABC boycott GLAAD made was asinine, because it made no sense to do make it network-wide instead of limited to just 20/20, where the problem was and remained. I have trouble buying that a news organisation that has a slew of out reporters (Jeffrey Kofman, Miquel Marquez, Steve Osunsami, and John Yang to name a few) and anchors (Ron Corning) would have a noxious environment for gays. A show might have a homophobic environment, but not an entire organisation with that many out professionals.
Secondly, I remember GLAAD meekly defending Boat Trip by saying that it was true that gay cruises are full of big muscular men dancing around in their skivvies. THAT WAS NOT THE POINT. The point was that the film suggested that straight = good and gay = weird. You can poke fun without crossing the line, you know. Any educated writer knows that the best comedy comes out of character-specific traits, not by generalisations about an entire community.
I don't know what happened to this once vibrant organisation. Have their teeth disappeared after years of celebrity boot-licking? The GLAAD Media Awards used to really celebrate positive portrayals, now, it seems that it's just a chance for people to rub shoulders with celebrities.
Where is the advocacy?
All that being said, I do believe that GLAAD can return back to the organisation it once was. Perhaps Giuliano is a RINO (Republican In Name Only) like Bloomberg, and he'll actually change things for the better. His pedigree doesn't seem to suggest so, but then again, Souter got to the Supreme Court under a Republican, so who knows?
I know that I will be watching closely to what actions he does take.
Giuliano is the former Republican mayor of Tempe, Arizona, where he served 4 terms. (Although Tempe elections are non-partisan, Giuliano's political stance was apparently quite well-known, especially during the presidental election last year where he did support Bush.)
I have to say that I don't completely trust this development. GLAAD has been making missteps for quite some time.
For starters, I think the ABC boycott GLAAD made was asinine, because it made no sense to do make it network-wide instead of limited to just 20/20, where the problem was and remained. I have trouble buying that a news organisation that has a slew of out reporters (Jeffrey Kofman, Miquel Marquez, Steve Osunsami, and John Yang to name a few) and anchors (Ron Corning) would have a noxious environment for gays. A show might have a homophobic environment, but not an entire organisation with that many out professionals.
Secondly, I remember GLAAD meekly defending Boat Trip by saying that it was true that gay cruises are full of big muscular men dancing around in their skivvies. THAT WAS NOT THE POINT. The point was that the film suggested that straight = good and gay = weird. You can poke fun without crossing the line, you know. Any educated writer knows that the best comedy comes out of character-specific traits, not by generalisations about an entire community.
I don't know what happened to this once vibrant organisation. Have their teeth disappeared after years of celebrity boot-licking? The GLAAD Media Awards used to really celebrate positive portrayals, now, it seems that it's just a chance for people to rub shoulders with celebrities.
Where is the advocacy?
All that being said, I do believe that GLAAD can return back to the organisation it once was. Perhaps Giuliano is a RINO (Republican In Name Only) like Bloomberg, and he'll actually change things for the better. His pedigree doesn't seem to suggest so, but then again, Souter got to the Supreme Court under a Republican, so who knows?
I know that I will be watching closely to what actions he does take.
Rent Me!
A Swedish library is offering people for rent in an effort to combat stereotypes.
I think this is a brilliant idea. I would have no problem offering myself up to be rented from the Mequon Library.
I think this is a brilliant idea. I would have no problem offering myself up to be rented from the Mequon Library.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)