StandwithSergey: Trending now!

Via email From: AllOut.org

Last week, you stood with Sergey, the straight attorney charged for violating St. Petersburg, Russia’s ridiculous new “homosexual propaganda” law. Good news: Russian officials have just delayed his trial to next Monday – buying us precious time to turn up the heat.

Russian politicians want nothing more than for Sergey’s story to disappear from the global media. But by asking influential public figures and entertainers to #StandwithSergey, we can ensure his courageous stand is broadcast worldwide and push officials to back down.

Will you take one minute to ask MadonnaUN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Lady GagaRicky Martin or US Seretary of State Hillary Clinton to #StandwithSergey?

        

As a straight married man, our friend Sergey Kondrashov is a a powerful spokesperson shining a light on the absurdity of this new anti-gay law in Russia. But at his trial next week he may be fined – or even thrown back in jail – simply for holding a banner calling for equal rights for a family friend who happens to be a lesbian.

Will you take one minute to ask these world leaders and celebrities to #StandwithSergey?
Thanks again for going All Out.

Best,
Alberto, Andre, Erika, Flavia, Guillaume, Jasmin, Jeremy, Joseph, Michael, Tile and Wesley
www.allout.org/standwithsergey

A Response to Criminalize the Closet

Marten Weber, writing for the HuffPost Gay Voices,  proposes in his ‘satirical’ article (because, come on, he can’t be serious!), “Criminalize the Closet!” that we, “make it illegal to lie about your sexuality, and let’s punish the offenders.”

Weber attempts to justify this argument by comparing someone living in the closet to someone who while driving intoxicated, hurts or kills another person.

Sorry, but this is simply not a good argument, idea or even a worthy comparison.

There are two major problems with Weber’s idea.

First: He has neglected to discuss how he would prove that someone was gay and/or in the closet. How would he propose doing this? Perhaps a police sting with plain clothed officers hanging out in public restrooms frequented by the homosexual minority. Or maybe anti-closet law enforcement officers could run escort ads in the local tabloids offering services for the gentleman in need of discretion. Then what? Does the officer put the client or tea room daddy under surveillance, and upon catching the helpless closet case loading his wife, Golden Retriever and 2.5 kids into the mini-van, a small army of the Anti-Closet Brigade reigns down upon him with rainbow coloured handcuffs and drives him off in a pink Cadillac to an all-male Turkish prison?

(And how do you entrap a closeted lesbian? Someone throw me a bone here! Really, I’m gay and I simply have no idea!)

Secondly, and perhaps I’m being biased, and maybe even anti-American but criminalization is such an American state of mind. If the Americans aren’t making something illegal, then their suing someone for something that they did or that they might be about to do. But I digress. Criminalization establishes a president that something is bad, negative, harmful and wrong. Coming out of the closet is a process. Coming out is a priori not wrong. Now, in an ideal world, if we fostered the coming out process, if we lived in a world where parents, media, family and friends taught their children about the freedom of choice to love and to be attracted to the opposite or the same gender, without prejudice, that would be the solution to breaking down the closet once and for all.

Perhaps a third point should be addressed. Weber states that,

“Closeted people set a bad example for our youth. Because you remain in the closet, gay lifestyles are less acceptable than they could be. People suffer as a consequence, emotionally, in their human dignity, and often financially.”

The logic of this argument places the onus and blame on everyone in the closet in a position of adulthood, power and influence. As I explained in the last paragraph, the onus is on all of society to embrace sexual equality. However slow a process we are seeing more lawmakers and governments working to secure the rights, privileges and safety of all people, regardless of their sexual orientation. For example, we recently watched as U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke about Equality Everywhere for all sexual orientations.

Criminalization of anyone living in the closet is not the answer to queer rights. Complete and unequivocal legal, social and moral support of gay, lesbian and transgender rights (I know I’ve missed some labels) is what is needed and required. We need equality for people of all sexual orientations. No more compromises!

 

On Being a Slut: A Response to QueerBeat

Dear Queerbeat,

In response to your article, “1 Girl 5 Gays: What Makes A Guy A Slut?” (as featured on HomoRazzi.com) I completely agree with your initial statement that “each person has his or her own interpretation of the word ‘slut’ and as societal norms and definitions change, so, too, will opinions.” I would expand upon the idea that the meaning of the word ‘slut’ changes as societal norms change and where you live, i.e. what country and culture (especially in a religious culture).

I also concur that someone who has a lot of sex with multiple partners, or frequent sex with one person is not, de facto, a slut. The issue is that some people have higher sex drives than others.

So what makes a guy a slut? You wrote, “you become a ‘slut’ when you lose control of your own actions – when you begin to abuse your body.” I don’t agree with this definition. In the next paragraph you go on to say, “I have to disagree with JP’s correlation and say that the moment you begin to lose self-respect for your body (as a direct result of your sexual actions) is the moment you become a ‘slut’.” What is the difference between losing self-respect for your body, and losing control of your actions in the realm of having sex?

Losing self-respect could mean that you don’t care about having bareback sex and the possible health implications. It could mean having sex with someone you don’t find attractive because you need sex so bad, you don’t care. It could mean getting fucked by a stranger in a dark room at a bar or bathhouse, again with no consideration of looks, health status, etc. And it could mean you allow yourself to be abused or hurt physically to find sex.

A loss of control could happen when you are drunk or high and are unable to make a choice you would have made sober. Any of the above situations for loss of self-respect could also apply here. I would argue that abusing the body doesn’t make one a slut. Abusing the body (and the mind for that matter) fall under the realm of psychology, personal and mental health.

We are still left with a contradiction the begs the original question, ‘What makes a guy a slut?’

I don’t know if we could ever come to a universal consensus for a single definition of the word, ‘slut’. It is a loaded word that is currently affected by social mores and individual prudishness, upbringing, class, religion and one’s level of healthy sexual self-esteem.

Perhaps it’s safe to say that when someone calls another guy a slut they’re either jealous of the amount of sex that guy is having, or due to their sexual and/or religious morals, they believe he’s having more sex than he should, hence he’s a slut. And there is never a quantification for a ‘should-statement’. We are still faced with the question of how much sex is too much? Having a very open mind on this subject, I would state that too many people have far too many hang-ups about sex and the freedom and pleasure that great sex can bring two (or more) people.

If we look at the etymology of the word, according to Dictionary.com, we discover:

c.1400, “a dirty, slovenly, or untidy woman,” probably cognate with dialectal Ger. Schlutt “slovenly woman,” dialectal Swed. slata “idle woman, slut,” and Du. slodder “slut,” but the ultimate origin is doubtful. Chaucer uses sluttish (late 14c.) in reference to the appearance of an untidy man…. Meaning “woman of loose character, bold hussy” is attested from mid-15c.

So the history of the word tells us it’s rooted in the concept of being ‘dirty and untidy.’ It then later refers to loose morals and in most cases with reference to a woman. The word ‘slut’ is therefore rooted in heterosexist and patriarchal dogma, which are still dominant influence in our society and culture. As an aside, I wonder if straight guys call each other sluts? My experience and intuition tells me that gay men will use ‘slut’ as a label, but straight men will probably glorify another straight man’s ‘promiscuity’.

To assume that I can wrap up the word ‘slut’ with a single, contemporary and North American definition would create controversy. But here’s my attempt:

Slut is a label in the gay world that is usually applied by someone else who is judging another person’s sexual choices, behaviour, quantity and frequency of sexual activity. Most times it’s a negative label, but sometimes used jokingly. It can be used as a condemnation, e.g. ‘I would never have sex with him, he’s such a slut!’ As a compliment/joke/admiration, ‘Oh my god, you slept with him? Wow, you are such a slut!’ The understanding of the word is not universal.

Just as some gays reclaim the words gay, fag and queer, sexually active and sexually content individuals could easily do the same thing, reclaiming ‘slut’ to diminish its power and lack of clear definition. As a self-proclaimed slut friend of mine once said, “Do you know how much work it takes to be a slut? People call me a slut because they’re too lazy to meet the guy they want!”

© 2012 Darren Stehle. All Rights Reserved.

Dis-Connect

It’s not that we didn’t connect
 Your lips caressing mine
     Wet, warm, engorged

Our talk came before, during and after
The sounds you make
     When I lick you nipples

Those were the only times
Your smell, hidden, hairless
     I taste your flesh to remember you

Bed made I would text you
Feeling you hardness pressed against mine
     Wrapping my arms around you

Answers came sporadic and non-committal
 Your touch upon my skin
     Like a long lost lover; a physical lover

And when you came again we’d play the same game
 You wanted me to come first
     And for you I did.

 

© 2009 Darren Stehle. All Rights Reserved.

 

Molehills are not that Special

The darkness in his eyes spoke the truth. He didn’t love him, let alone himself, enough. Enough was not enough and without enough there wasn’t enough. And so nothing led to a lot of nothing. Or something lead to something else that was something but in the end was only nothing.

He made such glorious mountains, so many magnificent landscapes, out of his-eyes-filled with love’s proverbial molehills. He thought: What the fuck is a molehill? Nothing when compared to the mountains I built. Nothing when compared to the landscapes I drew, right out in front of my eyes.

A painting for his own purview. A private showing. A twenty-five cent peepshow. A dark, dirty shade jerks up revealing his private show. Darkness his cabin mate.

But let’s stick to the point of this poem, this fountain of ink transgressing and caressing horizontally-lined pages, recounting, without being so specific as to say His Name. Or his name.

Six months after him and four months with him. They make for good poetry. Or something.

© 2012 Darren Stehle. All Rights Reserved.