This makes me wonder why we ever expect more from these closet cases. We have been hearing time and time again about about some guy who's getting some on the side and actively working against his own interests. Why do we expect anything good, or even half-way decent, to come from people who are powerful and comfortable from within the closet? I don't think anyone who embodies these three traits can be trusted to do anything that isn't selfish, let alone help people who are just like them.
It just seems par for the course that I'm hearing about Griffin (who I must admit, I really only knew from being mentioned on an episode of Sienfield) sexual hypocrisy. Im glad you posted this because if they haven't lionized him yet, they will soon.
I suppose power, comfort, and the closet are a dangerous mix.
I agree with your analysis completely. The closet is a dangerous place and the closeted are dangerous people.
a closeted gay republican???
I had no idea. This sounds all to familiar, much like the never ending Republican gay sex scandals we've been hearing about for the past 3 years.
Is Lachlan Murdock his generation's Merv?
A bloated pig like that should burn in hell, if not for eternity, at least until Dick Cheney arrives.
How the fuck do you know what Merv did or didnt say to the Reagans during their private encounters in the White House or Bel Air or wherever? Oh, it is "highly unlikely" that he ever said anything. How can ANYONE compare him with a war criminal like Dick Cheney? Oh, of course, Merv was "bloated," not buff, and we all know what a moral failing that is. It's sad that there is just as much sanctimonious crap on a website like this as there is anywhere else.
Why do we assume powerful/rich means good/praiseworthy? It nauseates me to read the adoring, sentimental coverage of a man who did nothing for mankind. Like all moguls, he was only interested in acquiring money and power for himself. Yet he gets headline coverage as a "great" man. Its a twisted society that idolizes pitiful, cruel, egocentric men because they are rich. As Merv symbolizes, a life whose primary goal is the accumulation of money is shallow, painful, and often dangerous to society. He died rich, yes, but without ever truly loving another or perhaps finding his soul. RIP, Merv - hope you can find happiness in the next life.
The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times obits have also mentioned the palimony suit and Denny Terrio.
This is all about power. And that translates for the likes of Merv into "I've got mine -- fuck you!" He was a "walker" at heart -- like Jerome Zipkin, who prior to Merv was Nancy's favorite gay man. Did Jerry say Word One to Nancy in the midst of th AIDS crisis with people dying left and right? Of course not. That would be "impolite" and "in poor taste."
Jerry and Merv were KAPOS.
And so are those well-heeled "out" gays and lesbians today who think that voting for Hillary means jack shit.
Signorile, you are nothing but a bitter queen. So what if Merv wanted to stay in the closet. That's his choice.
I'd say a lot of these workplace stories are just rumors by bitter ex's. Quit dancing on his grave!
How can I compare him to a war criminal? That's easy. MILLIONS have died of AIDS because a few very powerful people decided to do nothing. Or worse, decided to tell people a disease was God's retribution for being gay. The legacy lives on. Thank goodness, the swine do not.
I hope he died alone. With his millions. And his regret.
gay or straight, keeping a personal life separate from business...mixed emotions. but everything in America seems to be out of ordinary. power, wealth and greed are a dangerous combination.
so who are his heirs?
"I'd like to buy a vowel"
M_RV GRIFFIN W_S G_Y
You have absolutely no idea what Merv Griffin said or did not say to Nancy Reagan. I'm also curious about the comments here that Mr. Griffin was only concerned with amassing wealth and never did anything for anyone else. Maybe that is true and maybe it is not. Who knows?! If someone has evidence that he did not engage in any philanthropic activities, please note it here to clear the record. Or is the real issue that his philanthropy is not your philanthropy and is therefore useless? Mr. Signorile and those of you who take it upon yourselves to decide who others should live their PRIVATE lives are really just a bunch of bitter tired old queens. You are the stereotypes that give gays a bad name.
Mike, you are so accurate in your assessment of Merv. There are so many like him. Straight society rewards them for being silent and reinforcing the lie that gays are too sick to exist. Many gay Republcans play a crucial role in perpetuating a dark shadow that shrouds their lives in secrecy and spicy anonymous sex. They fulfill the role of creating their own demons. When Andrew Sullivan was at his most preachy, lecturing the gay community on monogamy and the sanctity of religious virtue, he was secretly advertising for anonymous bareback gangbangs (while HIV+).
There is still a strong vestige of this neurotic world that wants to seal off gay identity as a vice to be sampled in secret with hidden desires and elicit rendezvous (ie Matt Drudge). Some day the history books will truly be opened and expose the vile behavior of these scum and the groundwork they laid to perpetuate lies, bigotry, and death itself.
Merv was 82 years old, for goodness sake. It was not for a gay person of that generation. I don't believe it is fair to judge him by today's standards. You would have to walk in his shoes to understand how men of that generation behaved and thought. Yes, ideally he would have been out and proud. It's easy for us to tell other people what they SHOULD have done. From all accounts Merv was a nice person. Flawed, like all of us are.
My sentence above should read "It was not EASY for a gay person of (Merv's) generation.
"It was not EASY for a gay person of (Merv's) generation."
Sure. Look at Christopher Isherwood, Tennessee Williams, Gore Vidal, Frank O'Hara, and Pier Paolo Pasolini.
When I think of all the talk and game shows they might have created I burst out crying.
The world, and the experience of many queer people, is full of grays. I, like many of the commentators here, deplore the ideology of silence and find it particularly pernicious when it is upheld by those in positions of power and those who have access to wealth and media exposure. However, I find it equally problematic that many of these comments appear to uphold a different ideology -- that gays with power, wealth, and/or media (or anybody, for that matter) have a moral obligation to come out or will risk vilification and ostracization -- exactly what many fear if/when they do come out. Is this fair? Would you call it moral? Ideology is ideology -- and more often than not, it is dangerous. As an out gay man, I hope I never judge my neighbor (closeted or out) in such an unthoughtful, unexamined way.
And, as a postscript, I would like to add that I feel that my moral responsibility as a gay man is to live as an out gay man, not to police the status of other people's closets. I am confident enough in the fact that there are queers who are out and proud like me to know better than to fall into one or another ideology.
I'm neither proud nor ashamed of my sexual identity. It's as relevant as the color of my skin. I'm a human being, and as such there IS a moral imperative to help other human beings in need. It helps the species survive. It is genetic. Not helping at the risk of embarrassment is more than reprehensible, it's criminal.
Good job, Mike. In addition to all you've written, I remember how Griffin used to have the it-boy of the moment on his show and salivate all over him--from Tom Cruise to the underwear model Jeff Aquilon. Why have a talk show if you can't meet beautiful young men? Sometimes the cute guests didn't quite get why they were on the show, but it was obvious to those with gaydar.
"However, I find it equally problematic that many of these comments appear to uphold a different ideology -- that gays with power, wealth, and/or media (or anybody, for that matter) have a moral obligation to come out or will risk vilification and ostracization -- exactly what many fear if/when they do come out. Is this fair?
Yes.
" Would you call it moral?"
Yes.
"As an out gay man, I hope I never judge my neighbor (closeted or out) in such an unthoughtful, unexamined way."
No guts, no glory.
NEXT!!!!
"MILLIONS HAVE DIED OF AIDS BECAUSE A FEW POWERFUL PEOPLE DID NOTHING." And Merv Griffin was one of those people who could have stopped the epidemic?
That is just the biggest stupidest bullshit I have ever heard. If you lost friends or loved ones because of AIDS, you have my sympathy. So did I. But I don't think silly scapegoating is going to help.
SILENCE = DEATH, Tom.
Deal with it.
Artaud said, "you canot be apolitical, being apolitical is a political choice." Yes, we can posthumously lambast Griffin for not being a politically correct person in concert with his wealth and power, and then we forget that not all straight people have been our opponents, and our own gay friends have sometimes been the most conflicting. Griffin was a media mogul. Why question his intentions or lack of them-would you suddenly feel ashamed if you learned that either Warren Buffet or Rupert Murdoch were gay and died, and then you had to balance that with the rest of their profiles? The other responder who said he was not responsible for policing other people's closets has it right--and just because someone becomes famous or rich does not mean they have lost their right to privacy.
It's sad when it is so easy for one to sit in judgment and flippantly decree whether another is a friend or foe simply because they were in the public eye and didn
’t behave in the way one desires. Merv Griffin was no more and no less than human; flawed like all of us. To surmise that he said nothing to the Reagans because the President remained silent about AIDS for many years is simply speculation. Do you know for a fact that he did nothing to fight AIDS? He may not have been an active champion for the cause, but perhaps he chose to keep his philanthropic actions private. Because he was gay doesn't mean he owed the "gay community" anything. To say he actively harmed others by not doing anything publicly to fight AIDS is assuming that he had to live to your moral standards.
This attitude is no different than fundamentalists decreeing that you, me and many others are less than equal and should be condemned for being who we are.
Your commentary is scapegoating at its finest.
It's sad when it is so easy for one to sit in judgment and flippantly decree whether another is a friend or foe simply because they were in the public eye and didn
’t behave in the way one desires. Merv Griffin was no more and no less than human; flawed like all of us. To surmise that he said nothing to the Reagans because the President remained silent about AIDS for many years is simply speculation. Do you know for a fact that he did nothing to fight AIDS? He may not have been an active champion for the cause, but perhaps he chose to keep his philanthropic actions private. Because he was gay doesn't mean he owed the "gay community" anything. To say he actively harmed others by not doing anything publicly to fight AIDS is assuming that he had to live to your moral standards.
This attitude is no different than fundamentalists decreeing that you, me and many others are less than equal and should be condemned for being who we are.
Your commentary is scapegoating at its finest.
It's sad when it is so easy for one to sit in judgment and flippantly decree whether another is a friend or foe simply because they were in the public eye and didn
’t behave in the way one desires. Merv Griffin was no more and no less than human; flawed like all of us. To surmise that he said nothing to the Reagans because the President remained silent about AIDS for many years is simply speculation. Do you know for a fact that he did nothing to fight AIDS? He may not have been an active champion for the cause, but perhaps he chose to keep his philanthropic actions private. Because he was gay doesn't mean he owed the "gay community" anything. To say he actively harmed others by not doing anything publicly to fight AIDS is assuming that he had to live to your moral standards.
This attitude is no different than fundamentalists decreeing that you, me and many others are less than equal and should be condemned for being who we are.
Your commentary is scapegoating at its finest.
It
I knew Merv was gay before I knew I was gay.
Keep it up, Mike. Always provocative, always informed!
"right to privacy" = "Stay in the Closet and Shut Up!"
Hi Jim!
Just re-reading the chapter about "The Mogul" in Queer in America, Mike.
The truth about Merv Griffin needs to be discussed in detail.
The fanatical self-righteous borderline fascist zeal of the David Ehrenstein's of this world concern me far more than closet cases like Merv. I want nothing to do with people like that.
And when you pass a burning house, with a mother screaming on the street that her babies are in there, you should do nothing.
And when an automobile accident occurs and people are injured in front of you, you should do nothing.
May your family reap the rewards of your civic, amoral apathy
What on Earth are some of these people talking about? They've got a screw loose.
I guess nobody here who's judging Merv has heard of Childhelp's Merv Griffin Village, a haven for abused children who get intensive, round-the-clock treatment for trauma associated with abuse, neglect, sexual molestation and abandonment. I wonder what David Ehrenstein has founded.
Millions didn't die of AIDS because Merv Griffin decided to do nothing and stay in the closet, Millions ARE dying because they don't wear condoms.
Maybe some gay people don't want to become a part of our community because of attitudes like that.
If he came out, it wouldn't have mattered much. He was an old fossil and young gay people wouldn't identify with him anyway. He would still be criticized for being a rich white man, albeit it a show biz has been. As it was, he died as a Mr. Showbiz. Big deal. Marty Richards the broadway producer is out, and no one cares, gay or straight.
I care.
But of course I'm no one because I haven't founded a charity like Lady Bountiful Merv.
That's the Gold Standard for self-loathing closet cases -- found a charity and get a free pass.
Same with Jodie Foster and her blood money for gay causes.
I'm not sure what Gov. Richardson would make of my conflict, but I often struggle with whether or not we are born with a giving, compassionate, responsible gene or whether we choose to be so. I have always had a fantasy of winning the lottery and setting up a foundation to address the many crushing issues facing LGBT people (of course after I buy my villa in Tuscany). I can't imagine what it would be like to have abundant resources and not give part to help people I identify with. That's me. Of course that's the reason Griffin didn't come out and do so, as identification with such causes, and people, would have been an indictnment of whom he was, in his closeted fearful mind. Of course my "giving-responsible" gene motivates and forces me to overcome my fears and do what is right. It seems ole Merv gave people the gift of laughter but not the gift of self-realization, a gift he never gave himself ... enough of sounding like Melisa Etheridge at a presidential forum. This is clearly a situation where one person's closet contained a black hole that engulfed hope for not just himself but for so many others. Mike is just saying what has to be said and what has to be heard so others may learn from it.
We should all be so fortunate as to have our lives examined by David Ehrenstein and pronounced worthy or not.
It's a thankless job but somebody's got to do it, stosine.
You may now kiss the ring.
Mike...once again you cut to the chase and manage to say what's on my mind. Regardless of what some posters here think it DOES matter when someone like Merv Griffin stays in the closet. Staying in the closet may well be a personal choice, but that doesn't negate the harm it causes.
Keep up the good work.
I agree and disagree with parts of most every post. It's certainly not a black & white issue like some prefer it be.
While it would've been great if Griffin had spoken out publicly during the Reagan years, we all knew by '82 that HIV/AIDS was running rampant, so where does one's own personal responsibility come into the picture? I agree with Jack -- The rant that "It was Reagan's fault that my friends died of AIDS" is so tired.
Nevertheless, Griffin was outspoken and articulate on many controversial topics back in his talk show days, so it is disappointing that he didn't even talk about it publicly -- even if it was on Letterman or Leno's shows during the past few years...
But at the same time, the generational thing should not be dismissed. He lived 48 years of his life possibly believing that his homosexuality (or bisexuality?) was a mental illness, or if not, at least during a time when one's career was doomed (with very very few exceptions -- a writer or playright or artist could occaisonally get away with it) -- but many of them were very tortured souls.
Because of his testimony in the lawsuit against Confidential magazine, Liberace could subsequently never admit to being gay, for doing so would amount to perjury. He'd be thrown in jail.
And I don't think he would've done to well in prison...
What I think is almost worse, is the pandering reporting that went on last week by the likes of Entertainment Tonight and other similar shows. You KNOW that in the coming weeks, they'll hypocritcally have on as many of his former boy-toys as they can pay for, to tell their "shocking" stories.
Things are changing thanks to generations that have followed...Geffen is a great example. Keep in mind that it took him many years before he finally came out...
The sad thing is that if Griffin had lived another 82 years he probably would not have come to a point of self acceptance. He was given 82 years to work things out, for crying out loud! Most if us don't get that chance. I'm tired if the excuse that he was of a generation of greater oppression and misinformation. I was born in '56 and even when I was in high school, pre - '73 and the declassification of homosexuailty as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association, I had no positive info or role models. Richard Chamberlain was of Merv's generation for one, and he came to a place of self accepotance at some point and went public to help others in their quest. So let's just drop that excuse once and for all.
What is up with callers defending gay Merv on the show this afternoon? Mike, maybe you have a lot of closeted listeners, and this is really striking a nerve. Who knows.
I think that Merv could have done more to help the community. He didn't have to come blasting out of the closet, but he could have done some things to help the AIDS epidemic.
The closet may be over in practice by psychologically it's still there. Far too many of us see ourselves as damaged goods. Gays Without Pride.
"Because of his testimony in the lawsuit against Confidential magazine, Liberace could subsequently never admit to being gay, for doing so would amount to perjury. He'd be thrown in jail."
Not at all. You're obviously not familiar with the specifics of each case. The one in great Britain concerned a slur that implied that he was gay, and was therefore seen as "damaging to his reputaiton."
In regard to the one the U.S. Liberace was able to establish that he wasn't present where the plaintiff claimed. IOW open and shut in legal terms.
So he skated.
Richard Chamberlain and Tab Hunter finally coming out was nice.
And Farley Granger's memoir is quite good too. Apparently Leonard Bernstein was fabulous is bed. Great to know.
Michaelangelo,
I was listening to your broadcast on Sirius and I just have to wonder, yes he may have never said anything publically about AIDS, but are we sure that he didn't give donations annonymously to a charity.
Just because he was closeted, doesn't necessarily mean he didn't give. Millions of dollars I am sure were raised without knowing the donor or donors.
Just a thought,
James
I thought it strange that I had to search to find obit. news that had any mention of Merv being gay. Even my bf didn't know that Merv was widely known to be gay. I guess because Merv was so liked that everyone is willing to give him a free pass? But what exactly did he have to lose by coming out after selling his game shows for $250 million? David Geffen may not be as well liked but at least he's honest. Now we'll have to wait to what Republican causes Merv's estate will fund. What a shame.
Wow, I suppose we gave up believing that having copious amounts of unprotected drug fueled sex is the blame of the participants.
That Merv Griffin lived to 82, bypassing by responsible behavior a death of AIDS in the 1980's, means he is to blame.
Silence does not equal death, unprotected, dangerous sex does.
That Merv Griffin actively destroyed out gay men's careers makes him simply bitchy, not Hitler.
He was successful, rich, powerful, and lived a very long life.
Stop being so jealous and bitchy Micky Sig.
"That Merv Griffin actively destroyed out gay men's careers makes him simply bitchy, not Hitler."
So destroying people's career's is nothing to complain about.
Remind me when I have power to destroy yours, bitch!
Rosie O'Donnell just put up a gushing tribute up to him on her site. She and Michelangelo have been on good terms, but I hope she gets wind of him telling the truth about Merv, and it pisses her off enough she starts calling Signorile a nazi again. I'm sick of her let's all be friends attitude about Republicans and homophobes like Elizabitch, and Repug closet-cases like Mervy Pervy. That's right Rosie, Michelangelo's dissing your bud, doesn't it piss you off?
For those who can't read - I believe Mr. S said in his piece it is highly unlikely Merv made the connection to the Reagans....
However, considering how many other things got so much of their attention, and the fact good ol Ronnie didn't even say AIDS for 4 years - do we really need transcripts of every conversation he ever had? It is abundantly clear AIDS wasn't a priority.
Yes, unprotected sex between many men is a big cause of AIDS in the U.S. However, apply the same morality to everything else - unwed motherhood and welfare, corporate polluting, and stealing of pension funds etc. This is no better or worse a portrait of any other bad human behavior.
For those who want to let Merv off the hook due to his age or era, first of all someone with his amount of money should be able to come out easily. However, I am with you on his private life kept private IF he wasn't filing lawsuits to keep a lie going, if he wasn't sexually harassing men and firing out gay men,having pool parties with tons of young men then ok. But if all this is true, then criticism is justified no matter what his age or era.
Wow David, take a Zanax. I don't think anyone has the right to push a single person, no matter who they are, poor and infamous or famous, wealthy, or powerful out front to be the poster child or spokesperson for any cause. You can ask them to represent a cause, but they don't owe it to anyone.
I never liked Merv, not sure why, he just seemed creepy. But to say he is to blame for anything concerning HIV/AIDS or that he didn't support the LGBT community enough IS being bitchy. He didn't owe me anything, or you.
It's each persons choice to be in or out of the closet, that should be respected as long as they are not trying to do damage to a community. Being silent is not the same as doing harm.
I know several "famous" people. They shine brightly in public, but in private, they are just human.
I'm not in the closet, or living the open secret. I am what I am. Some people can tell I'm TG, some can't. I don't worry about it or talk about it. I live my life.
Stop trying to impose your problems with life on other peoples actions.
"choice" is the favorite word of KAPOS.
Stop trying to impose your problems with life on other peoples actions, "Ron."
Merv Griffin was emblematic of many other rich, powerful Gay folks in America in that he was happy to partake in all the freedoms that had been bought with the livelihoods and lives of Activists, but uninterested in contributing anything to the ongoing effort to push progress.
It's very simple, gang. Essentially, Merv was a Taker. He took. What was important to Merv was Money and Power, which makes him no different than many, if not most Americans of his Class. Money and Power were his oxygen, without it, people like Merv die or go quickly mad.
Signiorelli can be militant and shrill and contrary to what people like him say, I don't believe ALL famous gays have to come out. I don't follow the Perez Hilton line of thought. It could derail a career in its begining. Not to mention, there are many famous gays who I wouldn't be wild about them becoming the face of our brand.
However. Merv is a different case. He was not successfull for being Merv. He was successfull for what he created, he wasn't a true celebrity in the sense that he was "selling" himself to the public as a product like most stars.
Merv was in a unique position to do as he pleased. Was America going to stop watching "Wheel and Jeopardy" because the creator admits he's a MO? Hardly, and the bucks would have continued to roll in like always. Weirdly, people don't realy care who created something they enjoy. Do you hear people talking about the songwriters who wrote their favorite song? No. They give credit for the song to the artist who performs it. If people cared who was actually responsible for the entertainment they enjoyed, they'd sit in the theater and watch the credits. He wasn't the kind of person who's celebrity/success was dependant upon people liking/aproving of HIM as a person.
I've never cared for the man because he's always come off as an arrogant, ass hole, never mind the shameless pandering to the conservatives. He's the man who hired and loved Pat Sajak, one of Hollywoods out conservatives. Remeber, Pat is the guy who criticized Rosie for coming out!... Like it was ANY of his business! I guess Merv rightly associated the Republicans with the money and power he so greatly admired, and therefore, felt he wouldn't have realy "made it" until he was accepted by them. If that meant denying who he was, then so be it. It's just a shame that at no point in his life did he seem to use his celebrity/fame/money to make a difference. It seems he only used his fame and money to further glorify himself. Now he's being lionized in the media. Why? Maybe his estate will redeem him and leave few million to HRC or Lambda, but I wouldn't count on it.
I've kept pace,and been out and proud; but 70 years ago you WOULD be killed if you were out in many places. Many old timers never got over it. They regret it every day, but after all this time they can not bring themselves to a new lifestyle, no mater how much they desire it.
" Signiorelli can be militant and shrill and contrary to what people like him say, I don't believe ALL famous gays have to come out.",/i>
"Shrill" is the word they all use when you've won the argument.
Why don't you believe "ALL famous gays have to come out," dear?
And what is your problem with choice David?
Whatever KAPOS means.
Typical article and many following comments from those that wish to impose their own views, ethics, and choices upon others -- ironically hypocritical when they are so outspoken and scream abuse when the same is done towards them. Haven't you learned anything from the past and much of the present?!
I look at the debates going on here, with grown men who are ostensibly journalists or high-level people in the LGBT community calling each other bitchy, bitter queens, and it makes me incredibly sad that half a century after a closeted Merv Griffin hit the scene, people still CANNOT have a constructive debate on sexuality, on public disclosure.
I don't care whether Merv Griffin was the fucking shoeshine boy at a hotel, or whether he owned a chain of them. Whether one lives their lives in truth and honor? Is the real yardstick that ANYONE's achievements should be measured by.
"And what is your problem with choice David?"
Is gayness a choice? (Cue Bill Richardson)
"Whatever KAPOS means"
"Google" is you friend, dear. It compensates for your severe shortcomigns in late 20th Century history.
"Whether one lives their lives in truth and honor? Is the real yardstick that ANYONE's achievements should be measured by."
And Merv failed.
Well Dear, Kapos isn't a term I've ever used, heard or needed, so I won't bother to google it, dear.
I don't remember anyone bringing up choice in that way in this thread.
But I guess I'm not someone you would like anyway. I built my own company, lived how I wanted with out asking permission, and I'm "that dirty word" that you look down on. I guess next you will be running me down for not hoisting your flag of cause.
Sober up or whatever you need to do. But quit being such a crybaby.
Off your soapbox Signoramous. Why is it that so many gays think it's an absolute necessity to let the whole world know they are gay - and their sworn duty to out every else as well? Do you guys think the gay action might pick up somewhat if there's more happy chaps out in the open? It's akin to gay gang rapists infecting straight guys with AIDS in a retarded attempt to increase the AIDS population for unprotected sex. If Merv Griffin was gay and chose to play it his way, then what right does it give you or anyone else to bad mouth him. He was rich - SO WHAT? He was gay - SO WHAT? It is not your business to say one way or another what he should've done with his wealth and status. Which Cosmic Law states all gays must reveal themselves and spend their fortunes baby-sitting other gays who refuse to practice safer sex. It sounds like petty jealousy more than anything else. You have no right to judge anyone by your own values because you didn't live Griffin's life and have no idea why he made the choices he did.
Get off his back!
J Antipodes just come out. it is nice out here
I wonder how all these negative posters would feel if they were the target of Merv's advances. As a gay man I find it gross. As a straight man I would puke at the thought of having that old fat troll comming to me.
In Merv's defense, he didn't appear to be part of the christian right. He was more part of the old fiscally conservitave republicans, like Phillis Diller, Joan Rivers, Lucille Ball, and the other smoking, drinking, fucking high living republicans. How I miss them. The onlhy fically conservitives left are the Democrats.
This is what practically every thread on Perez Hilton looks like. I'm just sick of all the foaming-at-the-mouth hysteria about outing public figures. People in public life have a lot more money than the average individual and their lives will not be ruined by this disclosure. This is 2007 not 1957, it's not that terrifying to be out. I've done it, and without millions to protect me as Merv had. Instead of challenging the homophobic power structure, he was their lapdog instead. What else could you call that but pathetic self-hatred.
Kapo was a term used for certain prisoners who worked inside the Nazi concentration camps during World War II in various lower administrative positions. Kapos received more privileges than normal prisoners, towards whom they were often brutal. They were often convicts who were offered this work in exchange for a reduced sentence or parole."
Yep, Merv was a Kapo. Received favors from the Repug nazis, and then donated heavily to them while they treated his kind brutally. His biggest donation to the Repug party was in '04, all that anti-gay rhetoric sure didn't scare off old Merv. I think he deserves to burn in hell just for voting for Bush twice.
"Why is it that so many gays think it's an absolute necessity to let the whole world know they are gay - and their sworn duty to out every else as well? "
Because the whole world proclaims itself to be straight. Which it isn't.
"It is not your business to say one way or another what he should've done with his wealth and status."
But you've made it YOUR business to kiss his dead ass.
So AIDS is all Merv's fault? Who knew.
Sure as hell wasn't the barebacking queens who slept with more guys than I have underwear. Nah. Can't be a victim unless you blame others.
What a turd.
David Ehrenstein -
I have much admiration for you (I read your comments at a certain writer's blog regularly, and always enjoy your POV). But I'm curious - in your op-ed piece in last week's LATimes, you seemed to give AC a free pass.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opin...&
track=ntothtml
In fact, you praise him for keeping his personal life private, in this day of Paris and Nicole.
Why does AC, who already has more money than god, get a pass while you're trashing ole dead Merv, who lived most of his life in a time same sex relationships were criminalized?
I mean no disrespect, and I don't know much about Merv (way before my time), but after reading your blog comments, and your op-ed piece on Obama earlier this year, I guess I'm surprised at the double standard.
Catman, you have to read that article as a joke. He's making fun of the idea that Cooper is a serious journalist. At least I hope he is, anyway it's definitely tongue-in-cheek.
The sodomy laws weren't struck down until 2003, you seriously think that's what was keeping anyone in the closet? They were never enforced. How ridiculous to imply Merv stayed in the closet until 2003 because he feared arrest!
And no one's saying he should've come out in the 40s-70s. He could've come out by the 80s though. Merv was not way before your time, he died a few days ago. That's your time, he could've come out in your time, even in the "terrifying" 80s and 90s before the Supreme Court struck down the sodomy laws.
Excellent point Catman. Ehrenstein didn't mention the fact the Cooper refuses to PUBLICLY acknowledge his orientation, yet blasts Griffin for exactly the same thing.
Catman, there was no need to be so apologetic --Ehrenstein is a blatant hypocrite when it serves his purposes, however foolish they may be.
And now we're taking shots at Jodie Foster as well? Someone actually took a shot at the president to get her attention. If anyone in this country has a right to privacy , it's her for godsakes. No one has to "represent" or speak for a community. Not Merv, not Jodie. We each speak for ourselves.
Most people are missing the point - it is NOT about Merv's silence or so-called "privacy" as many put it. No, it is about his ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN A LIE!
It is exactly what those gay Republicans did who staffed Bush's White House. Way before Bush was elected people were warning them. But no, they said Bush was "compassionate" and Bush was "sympathetic". The Austin 12 met personally with Bush and spoke of his tender heart and depth of understanding. And Log Cabin kept insisting all the while that they were "working from the inside".
Well where the fuck did it get you? And more importantly where the hell did it get everyone else who wasn't being bought off? Whether or not Merv was a Republican has nothing to do with it. He played the part of a ultra-rich mogul who symbolized for all to see that being gay had just a little touch of deception, a little touch of sneakiness, a little touch of denial, a little touch of suspicion, a little touch of duplicity, a little touch of hiding. And when you add up all that shit you get someone who has no true core values, no true identity, and no true character. You have a shell built upon a facade, a mask, a mirage.
So if Silence = Death
then
DEATH = THE LIE = MERV
BTW, why is it that every time there is a debate about toxic closet cases, the ones angrily defending the closet are almost 100% gay Republicans. Hello?
I've seen Ehrenstein lambast Cooper for not being out, even after Cooper wrote that book which detailed much of his personal life. Why wouldn't he hate Cooper for being closeted? Believe me he does. Criticizing Cooper for being closeted just didn't happen to be the focus of that particular article. And when he complimented Cooper for keeping his private life private, he was refering to Cooper's SHOW specifically. He was saying he doesn't drag his personal life into his show. And you can't read "personal life" to simply mean his sexual orientation, there's a lot more to his personal life than that. He wasn't complimenting Cooper for being closeted (Ehrenstein, are you out of your mind?) he was complimenting him for having the decorum not to turn his news show into a tawdry reality-show. Being openly-gay wouldn't do that, dragging excessive personal baggage (of all kinds) onto his show would do that.
And Ehrenstein did make it clear, he was only talking about Cooper's SHOW: "But on his own show, Cooper's private life is nowhere to be found. In the age of Paris, Lindsay and Britney, this is rather becoming." And again, you can't read "private life" to be a code-word for sexual-orientation. Coop could publicly announce he's gay, and then continue on with his show as it is now, with no personal content. The fact that he's gay would only come up occasionally when it related to the subject being discussed.
I amm for outing politicians like Senator Lindsay Graham, but outing shallow vaudeville, song and dance clowns doesn't make much sense because they have no power to make laws.
To be objective, we have to examine entertainers who came out and how their career's suffered. Ellen and Rosie are lesbians and acceptable, but gay men have a tougher time. Richard Simmonds has never officialy come out. The Baptist preachers would tell those overweight mammas in the south to boycott him.
There is validity in the comments about the generational divide and the caution it represents. Once terrorized, many never forget. Some of these same people, however, channel their energies and work hard to attain a level of power, money and whatever and quietly contribute to causes that help others. Who's to say that Merv did not do the same? I recall a number of gay acts he had on his show (gay disco diva Sylvester and Lily Tomlin come to mind). Yes, its 2007 but hate and discrimination still abound and sometimes they dress up in clever deceptive attire.
"He's making fun of the idea that Cooper is a serious journalist. At least I hope he is, anyway it's definitely tongue-in-cheek."
Definitely.
It seems that Merv Griffin's problem, like that of a huge number of Americans, was that he was both stupid and queer. We automatically assume that because a person is rich, really rich, and became that way by manipulating circumstances and his own background (and Merv started off very well off: read the Times obit), we assume that the shit is smart. So, we have a huge number of dumb rich closeted shits who still hide under the rubric of "taste." To be queer is not "tasteful," it is distasteful to power: you cannot be powerful and gay at the same time. Ergo, stay in the ever-tasteful closet. Also, we (the openly queer minority, and we are a small minority, we are the needle-tip of the iceberg) have got to get out of the old queer mindset of undermining power, instead of creating it. So, rather than excoriate a dumb but rich shit like Merv, why not make it easier for a lot of rich queens to come out? To begin with, there needs to be models of hugely powerful gay men and women
—we're getting them, thankfully; and then closeted people need to see that they can assume power and be open. Also, what passes as "gay culture" is a pathetic, dumb-ass joke, perpetrated by the commercial media. Gay culture used to be alligned with power—ask Phillip Johnson, if you can get to him. Now it's alligned wit idiocy.
As for the Republican closet cases: they are going to be with us for a long time, simply because as "tasteful" as it is to stay in the closet, they also see that coming out puts them into an emotionally vulnerable place, and these little turds are way too weak to be there.
"Coop could publicly announce he's gay, and then continue on with his show as it is now, with no personal content."
Well prior to his CNN gig he WAS out.
He even did a piece on a young gay athelete and won a a GLAAD award for it -- which he accepted in person.
Now he "prefers not to discuss his private life."
Surely the Mervitas would say that's "his choice."
But as we all know Anderson Cooper has become the punchline to a joke. On a recent episode of "30 Rock" a very agressively gay producer from the West Coast, out to get Alec Baldwin's job, comes to town and demands Kenneth the Page -- a dingbat of uncertain sexuality (the uncertainty stemming from whether or not he'd know how to have any kind of sex.) So on Baldwin's orders he goes out on a date with the producer. The next day Baldwin asks "So what happened?" and Kenneth says "Oh nothing much. Mostly we talked about Anderson Cooper."
"Ellen and Rosie are lesbians and acceptable, but gay men have a tougher time."
Ellen is America's Sweetheart. Rosie -- not so much.
As for gay men Neil Patrick Harris is doing splendidly (he's up for an Emmy), and so is T.R. Knight.
Matt gets it.
Hi Perry! (It's been EONS.)
Great piece! I've sent it out to my extensive email list here in the great state of Kentucky.
I do resent the fact that I've sacrificed my personal safety and a couple jobs being openly gay while closeted, wealthy Republicans reap the benefits my open life generate. To that extent, shame on Merv.
SING OUT LOUISE!!!!
A little late in the posting, but I must reply to "Why must every Gay announce to the world..." I will tell you why: I am a state employee and our governor issued several policy statements that Gays are equal to straights. All I did was mention to a co-worker that I had a boyfriend and people complained. Nothing happened but EVERY DAY, ALL DAY LONG women in here talk about their kids, their husbands, answer the telephone MRS. so & so..... I don't care, of course, but wake up and think! That, in much more words than the great David Ehrenstein's previous post is but a few of the ways THE STRAIGHT WORLD ANNOUNCES WHO THEY ARE every day. Thank you.
As a committed gay couple of over 36 years, we have always been a very "out" gay couple to our friends, family, neighbors and business associates. And we must add that in those more than 36 years that we have gained the respect of so many straight people for being a "committed couple". We travel all over the country and stay in gay owned but str8 friendly B and B's and it is so nice to be treated so nice. Sure, there are some stupid, idiotic and crazy str8 people out there but on the whole they, like us, are only looking for happiness and contentment in their lives. We simply cannot understand how some gay people think that it is a good thing to stay in the closet. Trust us, your family, friends, neighbors and business associates always know and they don't care! What a shame that Merv Griffin's life was not as fulfilling as it could have been.
Gays are not the only group with experience with the closet. There was a time when many Jews (at least those who weren't "obvious") would change their name and hide their religion in order to avoid discrimination.
Now we have reached a point where the media feels that it has both a right and a responsibility to "out" public figures like Madeleine Albright who try to hide their Jewish heritage. I think we need to get to the same point with gay people. Being gay is a basic trait, just like gender or race. One of the side effects of the marriage equality movement is that it is helping to remove sexual orientation from the realm of "privacy". Already, having domestic partnership benefits has led to many people being out at work who may have otherwise chosen to keep their sexual orientation "private". It has become standard, especially here in California, to see "partnered" added to the choice of married or single on forms and questionnaires. I look forward to the day when the closet is sent to the "dustbin of history", as Mike Gravel would say.
As an adolescent I adored Merv and his afternoon show, as an adult I realized he could have been a hero. It makes me sad. I feel sad for anyone in the closet anywhere.
To Dick Zinya, while you're thinking up witty (not really) pseudonyms, why don't you grow up and take responsibility for your own actions, instead of believing that every public figure has to walk around carrying the soapbox for YOUR 'causes'?Whether or not anyone gets help for anything, is directly related to how one conducts his/her own life.And we all have the choice whether or not we wish to do anything or nothing to help yours.Suddenly, everyone needs to be diapered and pacified. (and not in a good way!)
This is also true in San Diego, where the major metro daily, the Union-Tribune, is owned by a closeted gay man. I worked there for a few years and is that place ever hostile! How many times did I hear that adding domestic partner benfits would be "embarassing to Mr. Copley"?
The simple fact that people are calling it Merv's "private life" reveals alot about this insane propaganda.
Being attracted to males or females has NEVER EVER been a "private issue" for straights. Have you ever spoken to everyday average straight people? They reveal their sexual orientation all day long (especially the young ones 14-2
.
The only reason sexual orientation became a so-called "private life" issue for gays is because homosexual Republicans don't want the truth interferring with their charade. Just look at the absurd degree of denial that Republican Bob Allen is using. He is actually claiming that if you are afraid of a menacing Black man, you stalk him and follow him into a toilet stall to beg him for oral sex. Then you invite him to your truck and suggest going to a more remote area. WTF? That is how you run away from a thug? Leave to gay Republicans to screw up the world for everyone else.
Why expect so much of others, and nothing of yourself? Merv was a great entertainer. Period. He was also human, not more, not less. And he knew it. Not like some of these cretins in People, or Star, or whatever rag, who are experts on everything.They must be so tired. Actually, they ARE quite tired. Here's to Merv for being who he was, whether he was in or out - that was HIS pain, not yours! right on, fruitfly!
Unless I'm mistaken, Madeline Albright didn't hide her Jewish heritage, she was raised Catholic and her parents didn't tell her. I recall the newspaper articles at the time about how and when she found out about her Jewish heritage. Of course, after reading Al Franken's book "lies and the lying liars who tell them" is full of documented cases of columnists writing about events they never attended so who knows what one can believe in the newspapers..... but still based on what we know, I don't think MA hid her Jewish identity.
Leave it to a whining liberal to turn each and every blog into a platform for jabs and complaints. The segues are not even subtle. The foaming at the mouth, flailing and spitting, and rolling around, are so easy to imagine as I read some of the posts. Wasn't I reading about Merv Griffin and his death? Oh, no, what - it's about how he killed thousands w/ his silence? Oh, not anymore - now it's about evil Republicans? -geez,a sock has a longer attention span.
Not everyone accepts Madeline Albright's explanation but let's give her the benefit of the doubt. The point is the media felt it had the right to disclose this information even if she was trying to hide it. They didn't think it was a matter of privacy. There was a time the media might have had second thoughts before disclosing that because it might be damaging to a political career. Now, that has changed and I think that is a good thing. I think the media needs to treat sexual orientation the same way.
Few people in a lifetime will be given the opportunity to trully make a differance, of those given the opportunity few will recognize it for what it is. The others for the most part will fail to act. Both Merv and Ronald face eternity with ....
We can only hope there will someday be a time when ones sexuality will not make a difference, but I am sure that is merely a pollyanna view. As long as we have individuals with the need to belong in a society that does not care about the individual, but more about the lifestyle they represent we will have people like Mr. Griffin resigning themselves to the right-wing superiority complex. Mr. Griffin did some amazing things even if it was in the closet. It was and still a different generation, and I can hope that will change as a new generation steps up to be recognized.
The reason it's OK to talk about Merv's sexuality comes down to his hypocrisy. I am reminded of the press coverage surrounding the posthumous revelation that Strom Thurmond fathered a mixed race child. I don't remember anyone saying that we shouldn't be talking about that. Why is it wrong to talk about Merv Griffin or anyone else who engages in hurtful behavior to gays and is themselves gay? Is it because those who object think being gay is shameful?
"Is it because those who object think being gay is shameful?"
Yep.
I worked for Merv Griffin in the late 1970's. There were lots of closeted gay people working there. I was openly gay. I was soon fired. The woman who fired me said (I'll never forget these words): "We don't want your type here!" That hurt. It still does.
It is always sad when a person of great wealth does not live up to our expectations. I am not saying that we deserve to have great expectations, however. But we do. A real disaster and disappoint was the later life of Liberace. As I get older, I realize that I should not assume that the norm is heterosexual. Why can't we presume that everyone is gay unless proven otherwise?
Mr. Signorile speaks his mind and makes us think and react - that is a good thing! So often we don't speak up, but guess I am doing that here.
LarryLufkin@comcast.net
"I worked for Merv Griffin in the late 1970's. There were lots of closeted gay people working there. I was openly gay. I was soon fired. The woman who fired me said (I'll never forget these words): "We don't want your type here!" That hurt. It still does.
Mike | 08.14.07 - 5:21 pm | #"
Mike-
Let me know her name so I can find her and slap her face.
Andrew
The amount of heat this issue of outing generates is amazing, for 2007 - in this celebrity culture, after a mid-term election partially swayed Democratic by the outing of an openly closeted Republican (Foley) and the outing of a deeply closeted but politically influential conservative minister (Haggard).
I have no issue with "unimportant" (by media definition or by political definition) people staying in the closet. It's usually better to be out, assuming it isn't dangerous to be so, but it isn't anyone's job to pry ordinary folks out of the closet. People who cause harm to the community, and public figures / celebrities - they should expect to be outed at some point. I don't know if it is fair to expect all LGB media celebrities to be activists, but they should be capable of saying - "yep, I'm gay, and (single/dating/long-term couplehood), next question?"
I'm still trying to figure out what the big "LIE" was Merv was helping cover up. I think I know, but I don't want to jump to any conclusions.
I agree for the most part. I do have one question. What role does a homophobic society play in how Merv Griffin lived his life?
Just because many people come out of the closet does not mean every single person has the ability to do that.
"I have no issue with "unimportant" (by media definition or by political definition) people staying in the closet. It's usually better to be out, assuming it isn't dangerous to be so, but it isn't anyone's job to pry ordinary folks out of the closet."
NancyP
Is that not a double standard? If a person marries a closet case, makes a family with that person and then gets "the news" years later, then that can seriously disrupt the life of that person.
Harm is harm be it a personal setback that befalls one person or something that damages all of us. Sensible people don't want to be on the giving or receiving end of either.
I agree with Larry Lufkin's comments about it being a disappointment that people value wealth over honesty.
@ NancyP - How can you even say Republican Mark Foley was "outed"?? Are you crazy ??? Were it any other gay man caught sending provocative IM's to an underage boy, they would be locked in jail awaiting trial. Mark Foley just went to an alcohol treatment center. Bit your tounge :-(
NancyP, I'm not bashing you, but you are just one more who chooses to delete the T from LGBT.
So before anymore of you talk about how bad Merv was, I ask, how many times have you dropped the T from LGBT?
Criminy, if you can't come out when you've got a billion dollars, when CAN you? And don't tell me any of the privacy crap I've seen around here and other places. Going around with beards like Eva Gabor completely negates that. Furthermore, a straight man in a heterosexual relationship has no compelling need to be "private." The correct word is not privacy, but secrecy. Don't even bother telling me that anybody gets off on a secret life, 24/7.
Well, actually, some people do get off on living a totally private life. I know it's hard to understand, but it's for real.
Did I say get off on a private life?
No, I don't think a secret life, and the ever-present fear of getting caught- is a barrel of laughs.
Whats up with this...Once again it is not taking personal responsibility. People gay or straight who practice safe sex don't usually get aids...Merv didn't cause aids it wasn't his job to cure it.If he had came out more than likely he wouldn't have died as rich. Maybe all of us who just set back and accept our brothers having unprotected casual sex are more to blame.
WOW, I'm amazed at some of what I've been reading about Merv Griffin and how everyone thinks that they know how someone should live their lives.
This mean spirited rhetoric is the VERY reason I stayed in the closet for so long myself. I didn't want to become what some of you have become, bitter and mean, full of more hate and hypocrisy than the people you unashamedly bash.
I see so many gay men dictating what, and how, others should conduct their lives. It blows my mind how narrow minded some of you gay people are. Every thing's OK if life happens the way YOU think it should but you have ZERO tolerance for those that do it differently.
Y'all amaze me to no end!
A cowboy in Texas
"Merv didn't cause AIDS it wasn't his job to cure it."
Typical Republican! If it doesn't directly impact you in some way, then it doesn't matter. Life is just one long repetition of "Not my problem/Not my fault" until something directly affects you, then it's all whine and tears.
Why, if you could help cure AIDS or alleviate some other problem (and Merv could have helped) would you not WANT to? What difference is a few million going to make when you have BILLIONS left? Why would you turn down the opportunity to make a positive difference in the world?
And why are so many Republicans so passionately eager to defend to the death the "right" of people (particularly the rich and powerful) to be selfish, loser assholes?
I guess they feel implicated by association. In most cases, they should.
Paul? Feel free to go back in.
Paul!!!!! Are you reading these posts? Do you know the english language? Differences of opinion based on logical conclusions from observed behavior/statements are NOT rhetoric!
Speaking of people who could have made a difference but didn't lift a finger... Ron Reagan (formerly known as Junior). "Dad, I have something to tell you..." would have saved thousands of lives, but according to some people- not his job, who cares, look out for number one, the usual Republican mantra- me, me, me. Yeah, really Christian.
Doing "harm to his own people"?
Pleeeeze, Merv's people were show business people. . . .
Merv was the product of his era. He was a great business person and made lots of money for lots of people, alot of them queer.
Please prove that no money ever filtered out from Merv's huge circle to gay politics and gay agendas from his decades of hundreds of associates.
For that matter, prove Merv wasn't bisexual.
I have to wonder if Merv could have survived to become what he was in Hollywood if he had came out as whatever it was he was. Not everyone is Ellen Degeneres.
Michael.
No one here is saying that Merv should have started his career (back in the 40s) as an out homosexual. What we are saying is that it's a shame he couldn't find the cojones to come out within the past two decades - which would have made no difference to his business and a huge difference in the struggle for Human Rights.
And, I think it is high time folks like you retired Reagan's "trickle down" theory. First of all, whenever anything trickles down, it not only loses volume, it picks up every speck of dirt and dilution in its path. Secondly, it has been completely and thoroughly debunked as an Economic Model, so the notion that Merv is off the hook because he signed a lot of paychecks and maybe some of that money went to gay causes is ridiculous at best. You demean yourself with such a foolish argument.
"Merv was the product of his era. He was a great business person and made lots of money for lots of people, a lot of them queer."
Who? Do you have any names? And were they out? Or just more sad closet cases, like the boss?
"Please prove that no money ever filtered out from Merv's huge circle to gay politics and gay agendas from his decades of hundreds of associates."
Please prove that it did.
"For that matter, prove Merv wasn't bisexual"
For that matter, prove that he was.
This is always my favorite part of the conservative post, the "Prove that Saddam Hussein didn't have Weapons of Mass Destruction," part. The burden of proof isn't on us, Michael; all we're saying is "What a shame Merv didn't take this particular opportunity to do some huge good, and instead decided to be an integrity-free loser when it came to this part of himself."
And you folks are saying "Merv was rich! And that's enough for me! And, you're jealous and mean for beating up on him! Who are you to question Merv?"
And that's what it really comes down to, isn't it? How dare we, who are not rich, and are not powerful, how dare we call Merv out? How dare we call anyone out? Has it ever occurred to you that a lot of us have paid a price for being out, and that no, we're not as far along in our careers because we decided to be honest rather than duplicitous? Yeah, some of us actually bought into the notion that Honesty is the Best Policy.
Well, I still think it is, and I make no apologies, nor do I want any pity for the choices I've made, but I'll be damned if I'm going to sit here and pretend that some old, dead duffer wasn't a blazing, nasty old hypocrite because people like you just want to be left alone to fetishize his wealth and power.
And btw, Ellen's journey out of the closet was a protracted, ridiculous burlesque - and one year later, she was quoted while sitting in the Hancock Park home she shared with Anne Heche bitching about how little professional opportunity either of them had after coming out.
She seems to have done alright for herself in the long run, huh?
Sorry to disagree with you, Jeroslaw, but your comment:
"Are you reading these posts? Do you know the english language? Differences of opinion based on logical conclusions from observed behavior/statements are NOT rhetoric!"
First, of course I read this posts. Do you think I responded for no reason? For my health? Because I felt the need to write?
Second, look up the word rhetoric, and you'll find the following:
rhet·o·ric (rtr-k)
n.
1.
a. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
b. A treatise or book discussing this art.
2. Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.
3.
a. A style of speaking or WRITING, especially the language of a particular subject: fiery political rhetoric.
b. Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric.
4. Verbal communication; discourse.
So yeah, I know the English language. And what is going on in these posts IS rhetoric by definition.
And third, you said "Differences of opinion based on logical conclusions from observed behavior/statements are NOT rhetoric!", once again, blows my mind.
Observed behavior/statements would make sense if you actually KNEW Merv. But a one hundred dollar bill on the table says you DIDN'T know him and so you really don't have a clue on what his behavior OR statements might have been. You MAY have perceived some behavior, or lack of a behavior you thought he SHOULD have done, yet you really don't know what he did, or didn't do/say, do you? So there was nothing logical in how you arrived at your conclusion.
You're trying to create something that you really don't know anything about. Now if you can SHOW me a behavior, or quote me a statement, that Merv did/made that proves your point, then I'm all eyes and ears.
Otherwise, this feller in Texas stands by his statements.
Y'all have a good day
A cowboy in Texas
Paul
Paul, you should know by now most left leaning people believe in socialism. What you make isn't really yours, but belongs to the whole. They believe that they, and not you, should be able to decide where, to whom, and how much of your money goes for their favorite cause.
I saw this Merv Griffin quote on imdb.com. Just thought this was interesting...
"I've been in the public eye for more than fifty years as Merv Griffin, not as somebody else's creation. I've never pretended to be someone I wasn't. If there was anything really important that people didn't know about me by now, then I would have to be world's greatest actor. Forget Brando, forget Hoffman, forget DeNiro...I would have to be the best."
What the???
someday, gay sccmay, all people will be able to live who they are, sexual taste just like taste buds for food, different strokes, can;t we all get along and let gay pepple just be gay......? we are the world, one world, gay schmay. but yes, Merv shoulda been more honest. in the future....
" Paul, you should know by now most left leaning people believe in socialism. What you make isn't really yours, but belongs to the whole."
IOW, your sorry pathetic ass is mine, Ron.
I think that Merv would be absolutely delighted that so many people, especially so many younger men, are discussing him. He wouldn't be happy that the topic of the discussion was something that he stayed ashamed of, and managed to lock out of his life. However, power is power, and that is the name of the game for poeple like Merv, or our beloved pres, George W., whom it has been rumored had a younger life rife with homosexual "contacts," somethng that the RNC is hiding for dear life. I'm not sure if ol' Merv was a life-long Republican, but their closets overfloweth, and not just with rich queens like Merv Griffin.
Ron, your comment:
"What you make isn't really yours, but belongs to the whole. They believe that they, and not you, should be able to decide where, to whom, and how much of your money goes for their favorite cause."
is SOOOOOO correct.
I'm a gay man, and a conservative gay man at that. I even vote Republican much of the time. (and before some of you start bashing me, I don't always agree on everything the GOP says or does)
Does that make me a bad gay man. To many the answer is a resounding YES! But I believe that I can believe what ever way I want. I don't need someone telling me that just because I live a certain way (gay) that I should believe in a set of ideals or principles that is commonly adhered to by that particular "community".
My gosh, the last time I looked, y'all, we lived in the United States of America, the home of the proud and the free (free to believe the way we want)
I work hard for what I have. I've NEVER asked for a hand out. I've NEVER considered any sort of public assistance and wouldn't expect it if I ever needed it.
But like you said. Many folks that lean left seem to think what's mine is theirs and I shouldn't have a problem sharing it with anyone that might need it.
As far as Merv Griffin's millions or billion, it was his. He earned it, he worked for it, some of it might have even fell in his lap. SO WHAT! If you don't like the free enterprise system that made this country great, go find yourself a really nice socialist government to take care of you.
It was NEVER Mervs responsibility to take care of a "community" just because some thought he might be part of it. And even IF he was gay, then what rule is there that it was his responsibility to take care of the folks stricken with HIV or AIDS just because he had more expendable income than most?
My gosh, people, wake up and smell the coffee. Like someone said earlier, take responsibility for your own life and health and stop relying on someone, or the government to take care of you. Are you that lazy or uneducated, or better yet, in my ever so humble opinion, brain washed by the liberal left side. Food for thought.
Off my soap box for now! Time to get out and put up some hay. I've got a mortgage to pay.
Y'all have a good day
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Sex wasn't all that important to Merv. You can see that from how he behaved. Power and wealth was what was important. He cozied up to Republicans because that was a way to power.
What gave him the greatest anguish was not the problems of other people, gay or straight, but his own problems with food and weight. Going a full day without eating any sweets was a major accomplishment. He'd celebrate that success by eating a donut at breakfast the following day and would be back at square one -- for the umpteenth time.
Merv didn't even talk seriously about his problems with food until the past five years. He was just uncomfortable talking about anything he saw as his failings, so DENIAL was the way to go.
There's a possibility he may have said and done something behind the scenes for gays, but I doubt it. Whenever you saw or heard of him, he always went out of his way not to say anything negative about anybody and not to say or do anything controversial. Donald Trump screwed Merv royally, but publicly -- and even in the information available from the lawsuits -- Merv went out of his way to speak (relatively) positively about Trump -- a man who's easy to hate who took Merv for over $100 million by (unprosecuted) fraud.
Hell, if you're unwilling to dis the man who took you for over $100 million and if you're not comfortable about talking about being fat -- when you've been fat your whole life -- you're not going to be comfortable talking about your sexuality at all, gay or straight. Merv knew he wanted to be liked and loved and was not willing to say and do anything that would arouse the contempt of others.
Coming out is a courageous act. Merv was not a man of valor. He did not have the strength of character to be a hero for gay people by coming out; he was a coward.
I'd appreciate any followup comments. i was trying to write as well as I could.
"Griffin's closet had him engaging in workplace sexual harassment, something that, as I showed in my 1993 book Queer in America, is common among closeted powerful men, who often are simply seeking outlets for sex."
At first, I quite liked this bit, as it seemed to convey M.S.'s compassion for both sides of the power equation. But then I remembered what it was like to be seventeen and fighting off older men -- how I couldn't even spend the night at my best friend's house without his creepy gray-haired roommate trying to slither onto the couch to enter me as I slept. I remember getting evicted from my apartment at eighteen by a middle-aged landlord who had finally understood I wasn't about to be sleep with him. I can't tell you how often I've been chased around and strong-armed by people I didn't even know or like. Remembering that, I've concluded M.S.'s description of sexual harassment is far too charitable. We all fall prey to sexual frustration, but only sociopaths bully and grope others routinely as a result.
The need for a "sexual outlet" is not peculiar to closeted powerful men. Rather, the same selfish drive that made certain men powerful is the one that allows them to overlook the feelings of the relatively powerless. I have no doubt Griffin is responsible for making a number of younger employees and acquaintances detest and blame themselves for what he did. The same narcissistic opportunism that made Griffin support Reagan and Bush despite their eerily pragmatic homophobia also made him feel he had the right to damage people whenever he decided to scratch his lewd itch.
The Washington Post's Tom Shales has weighed in on this, click here or go to top of the blog to my latest post.
Finally, a post worth reading. I love you, Paul.
A Yank from NY
anytime Mysty. Just tryin to be a voice for the common person tryin' to find his way in life without someone forcing me to fit a mold.
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Christ, Shale actually infers at the end of his article that homosexuality could be responsible for the virulence of people's responses. Why do I suddenly feel like the cross-dressing killer in a Hitchcock flick?
I also like his complaint that anonymous posters are frothing invective on a web board "without documentation," as if we were submitting formal theses for a college course on ethics. It's the same neither/nor reasoning that allows Fox News to conclude that Moore's films "aren't documentaries" even though Birth of a Nation and Triumph of the Will qualify: using stilted and incorrect criteria to disqualify people whose arguments the speaker doesn't happen to like.
You mention GLBT, or gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered.
Okay, Merv wasn't lesbian and he wasn't transgendered. How do you know he wasn't bisexual?
And what the hell could any politician, Reagan included, do about AIDS when an almost obsessive-compulsive habit of bed-hopping was, and is, practiced by so many gay men, even today, many years after so much information has been released about the threat of AIDS?
"I work hard for what I have. I've NEVER asked for a hand out. I've NEVER considered any sort of public assistance and wouldn't expect it if I ever needed it."
Pity Party of One!
Wow. Do you think he had an affair with Arthur Treacher, his 1960's TV co-host? LOL.
David, what is that supposed to mean "Pity party of one"? I don't see any sort of party at all. Just stated a fact that I work hard for what I have and don't expect a handout. And oh, by the way, it's my tax dollars, and yours too, that pays those handouts.
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Cowboy, the idea that the wealthy in society voluntarily help out the poor is NOT a leftist/liberal idea. This is exactly what the Republicans trot out as why we don’t need to tax the rich to help the poor. I’m glad you’re self-sufficient, but what about the all the homeless kids out there (many of which are gay and have been kicked out of their homes)? Just think about how many lives could have been helped with Merv’s money. And yes, gay people have a moral obligation to help out other gay people who need help, who else will? Tons of money can’t fix discrimination, but to personally know that ‘discrimination’ and not help those that are a victim of it, is just wrong.
And please, let’s not debate whether Merv was gay. Just how many super wealthy straight white men would prefer to spend time with Nancy Reagon, instead of the latest super model?
Ummm, he's friends with Nancy Reagan. Why does that make him responsible for being an AIDS advocate for her husband? Not every friendship mixes politics.
Marty
I've never said that "the idea that the wealthy in society voluntarily help out the poor is NOT a leftist/liberal idea".
What I DO think is that a lot of leftist/liberals THINK that just because someone is a rich Republican they aren't benevolent, or generous with their income. I've never understood where that idea comes from. How many of you actually have access to the check books of the rich and famous? How do you know who gives what, and further more, since when is it your business?
I know many rich conservatives that give money to all kinds of charitable organizations all the time. And not just for a tax break, many do it for the simple reason that they are greatful for what they have and want to give back in return. I know that's not how some liberals want to see it, but it's the truth weither you like it or not.
And I bet you won't find to many rich people, straight, gay, conservative OR not, that doesn't give back. Oh, I think many liberals would WANT you to believe the Republicans just want to sit there and get rich and don't lift a finger to help anyone out. Sorry, have to disagree with you.
My family has a large ranch, about 4,000 acres. We have hired over 50 people that have needed jobs badly in a very depressed economy near where I live. We could get by with half that, trust me. We pay WELL over the normal salary and provide health and dental insurance as well as other benefits. I know my neighbor down the road, is a hard core Democrat, that hires fewer employee's, barely pays minimum wage and provides NO benefits. So, tell me, who is the more generous to the "down trodden"? Not tryin to toot my horn, not at all, I'm just tryin' to get y'all to see that you'd better not point a finger if you're not willing to look in your own back yard.
And since you brought up the young gay kids that have been kicked out because they were gay issue, I have a thought or two about that as well.
First, I'm not saying there aren't those kids out there (I want to hit their folks up side the head with a 2x4 sometimes) but I know there are fewer and fewer of them today than ever before as acceptance is more and more common (ok, I didn't say EVERYONE accepts their gay kids, just saying it's not as prevalent as it once was)
And second, how many of them live at your house? How many of them are supported by the average Joe, or Susan like yourself? Why is it that these kids have to be supported on the backs of the rich, be they Republican or Democrat (oh yeah, guess what, I know some rich Democrats, too, go figure). When are you going to open your door, as I have, to a poor kid that has no where to go? Huh? Where is the generosity of the gay community?
It stagers the mind to know that the gay community has to hold so many "fund raisers" that raises very little cash when I know for a fact any number of them could write a check that day, for the entire amount collected in a fund raiser. So put your m
.............money where your mouth is and be a responsible group of people instead of trying to blame someone else for what ails the society
Y'all have a great afternoon
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
"Just stated a fact that I work hard for what I have and don't expect a handout. And oh, by the way, it's my tax dollars, and yours too, that pays those handouts."
Oh, get the F over it! Unless you travel exclusively on private roads, generate your own electricity, have always used nothing but your own well-water, educated yourself, and can guarantee me that your cattle (if you have any) have never grazed on Federal Land, and you recieve no: Farm Subsidies, price supports or anything of the kind and do not participate in any programs administered by the USDA or the state of Texas, never went to a state university, and inherited exactly nothing, go eat a damn cowpie, Tex!
The fact is, Tex, that the West would not be where it is today without the Federal Government's Electrification Program, and the WPA's dam and aqueduct projects. You people are always screaming about government handouts and you're the biggest damn welfare queens there are.
And by the way, straight up public assistance programs eat up exactly 0.1 percent of the Federal budget. Virtually nothing.
People like you think nothing of paying top dollar for luxury items and the like, but when it comes to paying the tab for the privilege of living in the country that allowed you to become materially successful, you all turn into a bunch of whiney, spoiled, selfish brats.
I'll tell you one thing, if people like you keep running this country our immigration problem will be solved - the U.S. will be indistinguishable from Mexico. And they'll need that border fence to keep Americans from sneaking out.
And Tex? According to what I'm reading, the top tier of American society is doing a very, very poor job of spreading the wealth at the moment. The amount of giving is NOT keeping up with the amount of wealth that is being hoarded among the few.
Another thought, Yes, kids are sill getting kicked out of their homes by their families. Fortunately, as you point out, less and less so. That's because of the work and risks taken by people (everyday people as well as famous ones) in coming out.
See, the whole point of coming out is to gain visibility, so the next time some fake Christian preacher demonizes us, some of the folks in the congregation can say to themselves, "Well, he's saying this, but my brother is gay and he's fine person and that lady at the dry cleaners is a lesbian and she's as nice as she can be, so the preacher can't be right." That's the reason.
And Merv did nothing to help that.
I really don't care about people's sexual orientation. You are what you are. I have had several "gay" friends and several "straight" friends. Sexual preferences have never been an issue with me. I love my friends for what they are, good, kind people that are always there for me no matter what. Wake up - what's really important - loyalty and sincerity or what someone does between the sheets which is really no one else's business? It is not our place to place judgement. It's God's place to do that. Get Real -
Heterosexual Woman
mcQuaid just made my point about the assumptions of the gay community about someone they don't even know. He says:
"Oh, get the F over it! Unless you travel exclusively on private roads, generate your own electricity, have always used nothing but your own well-water, educated yourself, and can guarantee me that your cattle (if you have any) have never grazed on Federal Land, and you recieve no: Farm Subsidies, price supports or anything of the kind and do not participate in any programs administered by the USDA or the state of Texas, never went to a state university, and inherited exactly nothing, go eat a damn cowpie, Tex!"
First I never said taxes were wrong. I pay my fair share, trust me. And as far as the assumptions that I drive only on private roads, I do for the most part, but out here, you have to. We don't get all the tax dollars way out here, for roads sewers and public water.
We have our own well water because there's not enough $ coming into our area to provide anything else. We DO generate over 50% of our own electricity in the form of windmills, at OUR OWN EXPENSE! And we pay through the nose for the rest of the electricity we get. It's not free to us out here, trust me. I went to college, yes I did, but it was not a public school. I went to a University in California and earned my Masters in Genetic Engineering, and worked the entire time to pay for it. I borrowed NOTHING and my family didn't pay much more than a few dollars here and there. All their money goes into the ranch to keep it afloat.
Oh, and by the simple definition of Ranch, look it up bucko, we have a LOT of cattle, and not ONE of them have ever grazed on public lands! We have also never received any farm subsidies because we don't raise crops, but cattle and hay only. Oh, we are totally self supporting in that area too. We grow all our own hay. So remember that next time you bite into a nice piece of beef or put on a nice pair of leather shoes that YOU spent way to much for!
And as far as inheriting exactly nothing, well, I'll probably inherit the ranch, along with my brothers, by the way, there's three gay boys in my family, all work the ranch equally. And I really won't consider it an inheritance, I worked my butt off all my life to maintain this lively hood for my family. So it won't be handed to me on a silver platter.
So you had it all wrong. THIS is what's dangerous, someone spouting off assumptions without EVER knowing anything about me.
Oh, and WHAT luxury items are you talking about anyway? I drive a truck that's over 10 years old with more than 250,000 miles on it. I have to, a new truck cost's over 50,000.00.
And I have NO idea where you are getting your numbers about .1% of the Federal Budget going to assistance programs, but you'd better be getting your head out of the sand and do a little more research! Federal Entitlement programs received 14% of all funds in 2006. That doesn't take into consideration Medica
That doesn't take into consideration Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security.
If your numbers were correct, that would only be $300 per person. You and I both know more than that is spent on social programs.
And I'm assuming you are reading the liberal propaganda when it comes to what the "upper tier" is giving these days.
And my last thoughts regarding your assumptions and way off comments is this, every one has their way in dealing with their "coming out" process. I bet you did, as well. Not everyone has the same process as you. And since when does being gay have to be at the forefront of everything you do, say or believe? I've never understood that myself.
My family knows, my closest friends know, even some of the locals know, but it's not something that I proclaim from the mountains.
I am gay, yes, but it's only a part of who I am and it's not something that is most peoples business. And if you think others really care as much as you say they do, well guess what, bucko. Most folks don't care one bit! So get past the "it's all about me" deal and move on!
And, and I have a partner, 20 years now. We have all of our legal papers in order. So there will be no surprises or arguments if one were to pass before the other. We have a good relationship with both sets of families. He will get part of this ranch if I die first, family has no problem with that, he's earned it.
So if you think that shoving your homosexuality into someones face will get you anywhere, you're wrong. You see, I sat down with my family and friends and spent quality time with them, telling them what, and who I was, and they listened because I'd earned their respect and didn't get "in their face" about it.
You get more attention with honey then vinegar, trust me.
OK, now I'm done. Time to deal with the cow patties as you so aptly put it!
Oh, and mcQuaid, the name is Paul not Tex!
Y'all take care
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Paul - I know what the dictionary says for the definition of Rhetoric. Well, my Webster's College doesn't have your 3b definition - language that is pretentious, insincere etc.
The first definitions refer to skill in using language effectively. That doesn't make it false (or true I suppose) but to dismiss anything on this post as "rhetoric" - may demean the writer if you don't specifiy which definition you are using.
If, as is strongly implied in your post, you are using "rhetoric" in commons usage, then you imply everything here is false or vacuous. It is like the words "circumstantial evidence." Most people interpret "he was convicted on "only circumstancial evidence" to mean a flimsy case. In legal definition (which is NOT how most people talk) circumstantial evidence in reality is most of the evidence at trial - the only other kind of evidence is eyewitness (which we all know can be notoriously unreliable).
Finally, I don't have to know Merv personally. He said himself he was quatre sexual - for a quarter he would do anything. The vast majority of straight men would never hedge like that. They are proud of their prowess with women.
And while everyone posting here may not be telling the truth about getting fired or whatever, it is also unlikely that everyone is lying as well.
For your consideration.....
Paul, you only think people don't care or try to convince yourself people don't care. Believe me, if you do the normal, everyday things straight people do- put a picture of your significant other on your desk or wall at work, wear a wedding ring (which can invite questions), talk about what you and your other did over the weekend, bring him to the company picnic, have him pick you up at work... yes, Pollyanna, people will care. Unless you are a total moron, you don't even believe yourself. Merely you keeping a secret doesn't mean others don't care. It doesn't work that way.
What annoys me about Merv Griffin was that with hundreds of millions of dollars, he didn't have to play these stupid games of self-deception.
Cowboy,
I agree that it’s not a fair characterization to assume that Republicans/conservatives are all greedy and money hungry (which I didn’t). A recent study found that people that identified themselves as being conservative gave more to charity than those who identified as liberal. I see the difference as being more of a philosophical point of view. Conservatives think that it’s their money (which it is) and they should decide who needs their extra cash the most, and liberals think that the government is a better judge of who needs help and we should all pay based on our abilities (taxes). Personally I do think the government should be responsible for caring for those who need it the most, but that we are still responsible as individuals to help those who slip through the cracks.
As far as there being fewer homeless gay youth because society is more accepting, you could not be further from the truth. As GLBT youth come out at earlier ages there are more of them kicked out to the street. Personally I’ve given money to the Matthew Shepard Foundation, the Trevor Project, and local GLBT youth groups. From an article in the January 2007 San Francisco Chronicle:
"This report documents that there is an epidemic of homelessness of LGBT youth, and at the same time it's a national disgrace that the national government has completely failed to respond," said Matt Foreman, executive director of the task force, which is based in New York.
Merv most certainly didn’t publicly give money to fight AIDS or to help GLBT groups, and with his fear of being outed, I doubt that he made any large private anonymous donations. For all that he had, it seems he had a very lonely life.
"Sex wasn't all that important to Merv. You can see that from how he behaved. Power and wealth was what was important."
WTF?! The truth is exactly the opposite. Sex was so important and overpowering to Merv that it controlled the whole facade he presented to others. If sex hadn't been supremely important to Merv, then he would have just casually let it pass as a minor 'vice' of his like smoking cigarettes. Did Merv spend an enormous effort hiding his smoking habit as if it was a prominent controlling influence in his life? Of course not.
Henriette Wayne, I understand what you are saying, sort of. As I stated in an earlier post, I do have a partner, of 20 years. We do wear matching "wedding" rings, on the right hand but I guess that's where it stops. You see, we both work together on the ranch, so we don't have offices to hang pictures up, tho' his is on my desk at the home office and everyone see's it when they come into my space.
We DO go pick each other up on occasion, and even give each other hugs, say at the airport and such. But not living in the big city, I don't have those other things go consider.
I speak from my experience and not anyone elses.
It's not a secret, as I've said before, to anyone in my family, most of who I consider my good friends and some of my ranch hands know. But I still don't see this great need to tell every soul, either.
Why do y'all think you have to have EVERYONE know it? If that were the case, then do you say "Hi, my name is so and so and I'm gay"? Is that what you want? I don't know very many straight folks or for that matter, gay folks that seem to thing that's something they need to do.
And another point. If everyone would just be a good citizen, do their work, be responsible for their own well being and not forcing the issue so blatantly then maybe, just maybe, more people wouldn't care if you were gay or not.
Just like Heterosexual Woman said in her post earlier, there are a lot of people that don't care. And no, I'm not a Pollyanna, either. Gosh, I live out in the middle of Bubbasville and most folks don't care out here. They know me and respect me because I DON'T get in their face with it!
If you think so many people care, then you must be searching out those that do. And don't blame it on the preacher and the church goes either, as I don't know a lot of gay folks that cared to maintain a lot of their religious values or morals for that part.
Just one mans opinion!
Now y'all have a good one
a cowboy in Texas
Cowboy, you are the saddest example of a Gay man I've ever seen... I bet if you were a Jew in Germany, you would have voted for Hitler...
Damn Uncle Tom!
I can't agree with Michelangelo that Merv never discussed the A.I.D.S epidemic with the Reagans. We don't know what thier private conversations entailed, we can only speculate. But Merv Griffin was gay. That is fact. Him being in the closet may or may not have harmed certain people in the gay community. Here's a simple little phrase that I try to follow and if you are straight it applies anyway. Your "sex" life should be private but never your sexuality. Maybe Merv should have followed this advice.
Everyone and anyone has the right to stay in the closet. It is very disgusting to see queers think they have a right or a duty to meddle in another persons personal life. The sad, insecure, envious, bitter queens that "out" people are a blemish on the gay community.
"Cowboy, you are the saddest example of a Gay man I've ever seen... I bet if you were a Jew in Germany, you would have voted for Hitler...
Damn Uncle Tom!"
And there you go folks. Heaven forbid that another gay man might a different view point. Where's the tolerance? I dare say it's not exemplified by GayLibs comment about me.
Seems once again, my points being made all the time. Many of you think you have the right to try to conform some of us into your mold of what a good gay man should be. Well yer just gonna have to get off your high horse and accept the fact that not everyone has to be like you. Get it? Understand it? Deal with it like a grown up!
I'm fine with who I am and what I believe. I'm a very happy gay man. I have a good man in my life that's been around a LOT longer than most gay men could ever dream. I have a family that knows about my homosexuality, loves and cares for me. I have the best job in the world and think I'm a good example of a gay man despite what GayLib says.
I'd probably turn the table and say you, Gaylib, might be a sad gay man. You have some sort of bitterness about something. Angry about something enough to say I'd vote for Hitler.
Boy howdy, you couldn't be further from the truth. And it's really sad that you have to resort to attacks like that. But hey, that's YOUR issue and you have to go to bed at night knowing you've way overstepped that boundary.
But then again, like I've said before, this is the USA and we all have a right to say what's on our minds, don't we? Oh yeah, that includes me, too.
Y'all enjoy your evening, ya hear!
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Damn Paul!!!!!!!!!!! Bet that is the first time you've been called "Uncle Tom". HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
To whover it was that said the rich on the right aren't doing their fair share.....check the numbers, the wealthy on the right out donate the left 20 to 1.
I donate a good deal, I'm not going to give a dollar amount, but my money goes where it will do the most good IMO.
I like Paul work extremely hard for what I have, yes I live on my private land, drink water from my well, eat buffalo meat that I raise, have a garden and a couple of windmills to generate all the electricity that I use. I do use public roads, but that's why gasoline and diesel taxes are there along with what it costs to register my pickups and trucks.
O yeah, I'm one of those evil oil companies that actually get the oil out of the ground to make gasoline and diesel for everyone else to drive around on.
Until this country turns socialist, I'll decide how my money is spent. But then if it does turn socialist, me and my money will be in Australia.
Sexuality is a private choice and I don't believe Merv or anyone owes anyone a 'coming out' party. Nor do they owe anyone the chance to be a martyr. Having worked in the media about twenty years ago, I can tell you probably way over 50 percent of the actors, dj's, and television personalities were gay. It was well known in the insular worlds we were employed in, but the outside world figured we were all straight I guess. It would have been professional suicide for most of these folks to 'come out' at the time. So they made and do make choices trying to have it all. These are personal choices and as long as they aren't harming the community by their silence or allowing prejudice to reign unchecked in their social circles (i.e. playing into it to seem a part of it)...their choices and options are their own. Do I like closets...no, but I am not my brother's keeper or conscience.
Cowboy - they are envious. They have miserable lives.
One key component of homophobes is that they need to feel superior to another group in order to make their own station in life not seem so miserable - thus they feel the need to "keep gays down". Well, there is a similar component in the minds of the radical queers - they need to feel less insecure, so they "pick on" any other gay that does not do what they say.
The left-wing gay thought police are becoming more and more marginalized and they "fight back" by slander, outing, rumor-mongering, and that old refuge of the insecure, they attempt to sieze the moral high ground.
These thought police are no longer "in charge of" the gay community and now they are very bitter.
question for Paul - you said you don't need to tell every living soul. If you had a wife, would there be any question who she is?
Hugging at the airport is hardly radical - guys have been known to do that. The question is would you kiss your wife at the airport? if so, then why wouldn't you kiss your partner?
And don't get hung up on the above example - I still say if you and your partner treated each other like husband and husband, (much more than likely...) you wouldn't NEED to tell anyone the nature of your relationship.
"Sexuality is a private choice" ??? Oh, brother, where did you come from? The town of Bedrock... with a hole in the bottome of your car for your feet?
And listen, Texas Cowboy, I know several people from Texas. They say y'all, but never write y'all. I think you are a put-on, as is your hillbilly story of tolerance. The simple things that straight people do under normal conditions, to you and some others here, is "flaunting it." Nobody is telling you what to do. What some people are saying is that they would like the right to do simple things- y'know, like not living in fear and lying and being secretive all day.
"Sexuality is a private choice" ??? Oh, brother, where did you come from? The town of Bedrock... with a hole in the bottome of your car for your feet?"
Well Henriette--it comes from believing that some of us don't want to share our most private moments and thoughts with the rest of the world. If someone asks I tell the truth, but I'm not wearing a sign to proclaim. Maybe it is my age group, but I was taught one has the right to make private choices.
I type y'all all the time, so do a lot of people I know. Don't start bashing Texans (or as we "sometimes" say, Texicans, that's from a John Wayne movie, it has nothing to do with mexico. I know, I refuse to capitalize it).
Something else I and a lot of people do, or should say don't do, is show affection in public. I've never kissed or hugged a partner in public, my parents didn't either. That's just one of the "wierd" ways some of us were raised. To me it's just s sign of politeness, not embarassment.
Are you really an idiot or just putting everybody on? What effin "private" moments? Nobody wants to hear about your damn sex life. But straight people can talk about going to the beach with their other, a vacation, shopping, dancing, a terrible argument, making up, dinner and a movie. The things that straight people have a right to do, is for you- schmuck- "flaunting private moments." I feel nothing but sorry for your burdens- the shame of your life, plus your lack of comprehending basic English.
Henriette, While straight people do have the right to show all of that in public, if they have any class at all, they don't. Being able to does not mean you should.
Ron, you are an object of pity, knowing that others around you, who do the same job and pay the same taxes, have a right- whether they care to exercise it or not is irrelevant- that you do not. If you can trick yourself into believing there is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, and that's the American Way, more power to your sorry ass.
Pardon me. I don't remember hurling insults at anyone.
Just one more example of overreaction and name calling.
tsk tsk
And just to clarify, there are only five people in the world who can and will do my job. Every single day that I leave for work, there is a 50/50 chance that I won't make it home. And I do it 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
Before you run off at the mouth next time, know your audience.
Any minority that remains invisible will never obtain equal rights!
Well, Ron, why don't you tell us what that job is, since the only thing most of us do 7 days a week, 365 days a year (if we're lucky) is take a crap.
I think you and your friend the Texas Twister are full of it. There's something so damn conveniently fake about the bios - everything, down the last little detail is a rebuke to any of the negatives of being "conservative."
I mean, hell, I haven't managed to adhere perfectly to all my leftist ideals, (I even shop at Nieman's occasionally) but somehow, you guys are just the epitome of everything that is Decent and Good and Kind in the Rightwing.
You hate taxes and slackers, but you give millions to charity, nonetheless. You're a model of tolerance and anyone who would question some of your choices or suppositions about how the world works are bitter. You dont' agree with everything the GOP says, but gosh darnnit who needs "special privileges"? Just don't "throw it in people's faces" and everything will be fine and just ignore that second class citizen status.
What exactly are you two doing in this forum? What attracts you to Michelangelo Signorile's site in the first place since he is the Grand Emperor of In Your Face?
Nah, not buying. BTW, where in Texas is that ranch?
Oh and by the way, what we're discussing here is not a "sex life," it's a "love life." You might want to consider what your choice of words says about how you see yourself and your relationship.
I was also wondering, WTF are you doing, reading Signorile?
Listen, some people DESERVE to be insulted. You, who live life walking on eggshells and fearful of offending deserve to be called on it when you expect all of us to. If you think the Republicans actually respect you, you are so full of self-deluded crap, it's not funny. I'll go a step further- it's inconceiveable that Democrats respect you either. Absolutely nobody would have a modicum of respect for anyone who voluntarily gives up the constitutional rights of free speech and association, and doing the simple everyday things straights do. Pity, sure. Respect? Don't make me laugh.
Ron, I have to assume that the 50/50 chance at making it home every day is a bit of an exaggeration (or it refers to something less fatal, like hooking up and spending the night at a trick’s house) as it becomes very implausible that you could survive 365 days of this:
With a binary distribution, the odds of a particular outcome (in this case it would be successive wins) is 1 in 2^n. For 365 days this becomes 1 in 2^365, or 1 in 7.5153362648762663292463379097259e+109.
If people on the left and right can't speak to one another without resorting to polarizing assumptions and ad hominem shrieking, then how will we ever be able to elect a crossover candidate for gay rights? American democracy isn't an underground club filled with alienated hipster purists, nor is it an exclusive country club filled with libertarian shut-ins. It's a vast impure amusement park crowded with whatever people happened to wander in: we're all "those people."
If we need a consensus to elect a decent candidate, then what's the point of limiting free exchange by resorting to personal attacks and invective? I'm a leftist from the get -- my grandfather was actually targeted by Feds for protesting in favor of socialism in the 40s -- but I can't see the no point in trying to shame the opposition out of a debate that involves all voters. The object of one's derision might disappear from your personal view, but their votes still count and lingering ill feelings play a part in national elections.
And to the people who want more support for Kucinich as a candidate: I agree. The point isn't whether or not he'll be elected. It's to shock the Democratic party into honoring his platform by showing massive voters' support for his ideas.
By the way: That last post was mine; I forgot to fill out the name. (I'm not trying to be *even more* anonymous than my primary pseudonyum allows.)
Folks, I left the T out of my comments on outing, simply because outing a T is much more likely to put that person at very serious risk of violence than outing a L or G or B. If a T individual has chosen to "pass", there well might be a concern about personal security. I think the level of violence against T people is such that any outing of passing T individuals should be done by that individual only.
Marty, thanks for that pretty basic calculation. The braggarts really ought to become a little more numerate.
Gay or not, Merv was a good man.
mcQuaidLA and Henriette Wayne
It just bothers the heck outta y'all that there could be folks like Ron and I on a forum like this doesn't it?
mcQuaidLA, why do you want to know so much about my ranch anyway? What, do you not believe there's a few of them in Texas anymore. Just so happens, that's ALL there is in the part of Texas I live in. Which, if you must know, is in the Panhandle, where it takes about 15 acres per cow just to keep them fed.
And what "bio" are you talking about that so "conveniently fake". Once again, there are people out here that don't fit into your mold. So, does that make us fake?
Why does it bother you so much that there are different ideas and lifestyle choices that some people make that differ from yours?
Could it be that you are trying to make everyone "fit" your idea of what a model gay person should be? Sure sounds like it to me.
And as far as why guys like Ron and I are on this site, well, I can't at all speak for Ron, but I can speak for myself just fine.
I came across the site, just yesterday as a matter of fact, and saw just how nasty, mean spirited, condescending and vindictive some of y'all are to a man (Merv) that was dead and couldn't defend himself. And so I thought maybe, just maybe I might be able to say something that might shed some light on why some people do what they do.
But once again, instead of being civil and cordial to someone else's ideas, you criticize, make fun of and ridicule us.
And if you do that to one of your "own" then I can only imagine how, and what, you might do to someone not of the same bent. A straight person.
And you wonder why more straight people don't embrace you. If I were straight, I wouldn't consider any sort of conversation with you either. You don't seem to be open to intelligent conversation. You don't seem to be willing to hear anyone else's ideas and viewpoints without ridicule and cheap attacks. And you can't see why the "right" has a problem with some of us. I think I can put my finger on at least one reason, and you proved my point about it yet again.
You don't seem to be able to handle anything beyond your own narrow minded way of thinking, the very things you can't stand about straight people that have a problem understanding and accepting gay people.
Talks about hypocrisy! My gosh, you are the epitome of it! How in the world are you going to EVER further the cause of the gay person with behavior like you've shown over the past 20 hours with me?
Do you really, I mean REALLY believe for one minute that your conversation tactics would ever win over a straight persons respect and desire to make things right for the gay person?
Listen to yourselves, will ya. I mean, go back and read all the nasty hateful things you've written just since I logged on yesterday. Then pat yourselves on the back and walk around proud. Be proud of your attitude of intolerance and arrogance that you have THE only way
mcQuaidLA and Henriette Wayne
Listen to yourselves, will ya. I mean, go back and read all the nasty hateful things you've written just since I logged on yesterday. Then pat yourselves on the back and walk around proud. Be proud of your attitude of intolerance and arrogance that you have THE only way to live a gay life.
My gosh, I knew there were mean gay people out there, but I had NO IDEA how mean till y'all started to reply to my, and a few others, comments.
Just my own opinion
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
Oh, and another thought about why I'm here. I know I don't "fit". But it seems to me that you'd welcome new ideas, thought's and viewpoints. Isn't that what the progressive, open minded gay thinker is all about?
Otherwise it's just a site where everyone that thinks the same way can come together and share the same ideas and same criticisms and gang up on those of us that bring new ideas and considerations to the table.
And Henriette Wayne I find it hilarious that you'd pick "y'all" to have an issue with. You say you hear people use the term, but no one writes it. Well, congratulations, you know one now.
And as far as the "hillbilly" comment, I figured you'd say that. Seems that anyone that might live a more rural lifestyle (that by the way, feeds and clothes you, thank you) might be a hillbilly. Why would a hillbilly, which is about as disgusting a word as you can choose for someone that might be less educated or privileged as you must be, even consider a retort with you?
Now, when you can bring some sort of intelligent conversation to the site instead of insults and attacks, then we can converse. Otherwise everything you've said, up to this point, has been lost to cyberspace.
Y'all have a good day
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
mcQuaidLA,
Very simply, my business is drilling oil and gas wells and producing them. Everything I'm around everyday either burns or explodes. I work with high explosives and gamma ray radioactive materials. If that's not dangerous enough, I have to keep anywhere from 5 to 20 people from blowing themselves and me up on different jobs. Add on to that me driving over 300 miles a day for over 20 years without an accident. Top that off with being a FtoM T in an industry that is full of cowboys, rednecks, roughnecks, and convicts. Some of them know who I am, some wonder. I never hide who or what I am, but I don't go around waving a flag either.
The few mishaps I have had earned me 4 plates, 16 screws in my face, and 6 plates and twelve screws in my neck.
Then just for fun I have advance Crohns' disease and have to have IV remecaide treatments, 6 units each time, every two weeks in day surgery to be sure it doesn't put me into anaphalactic(sp) shock.
All together, a pretty boring life. HA HA
Vindictive and y'all in the same sentence? You are either a straight high school or college student with some free time before classes. That's my last word, not coming back here, it's boring as shit, the same shameful baggage of secrecy.
Ohhh please!!! Get off your Gay soapboxes and get a fricking clue..
Condoms..Safe Sex...plain and simple...Who cares if Merv was Gay or not..He worked all his life,struggled to get where he was and made wise business decisions.He supported many causes.He just wasnt the type of man to go bragging about it.He lived a long life, whether he was openly gay or not,to bash the man is just wrong. One rich man isnt going to stop AIDS. If you are going to stick it out there,cover it up or face the fact that you will contact this dreaded disease. Celebrity,Gay,Straight,Bi-it makes no difference. AIDS doesnt discrminate.
The real blame belongs to those who are spreading it around, not the celebraties who do or dont admit they are gay.
A word about the term "Kappo." It comes from Latin, and means "head," and was a term used by Jews for other Jews who collaborated with the Nazis in order to get special treatment. Kappos in the concentration camps shaved the heads of other Jews, determined which Jews would be exterminated, and got more food and other privileges. This did not mean that Kappos always survived, but the other Jews hated them as much as they hated the Nazis, and the Nazis often hated the Kappos, too, and felt that they were the epitome of everything they hated in Jews: they were spineless, weak, and sniveling.
Yes, I'd describe ol' Merv as a Kappo—but I've known a lot of closeted queens who are Kappos, and some of them I thought were pretty dangerous: they'd do anything to keep their own status aloft and going. Merv doesn't seem to be that way; he was too dumb to be dangerous. Again, you don't have to have genius to make a lot of money, just hardass grasping. So, suck that, Donald Trump.
I'M GONNA CAP MY RESPONSES TO THIS, NOT BECAUSE I'M SHOUTING OR ESP EMOTIONAL, BUT TO MAKE IT EASY TO DIFFERENTIATE. mcQuaidLA
It just bothers the heck outta y'all that there could be folks like Ron and I on a forum like this doesn't it?
NO, ACTUALLY IT DOESN'T, IF YOU FOLKS ARE WHO YOU SAY YOU ARE, BUT I'M JUST KINDA THINKIN' Y'ALL ARE BOTH "TROLLS."
mcQuaidLA, why do you want to know so much about my ranch anyway? What, do you not believe there's a few of them in Texas anymore. Just so happens, that's ALL there is in the part of Texas I live in. Which, if you must know, is in the Panhandle, where it takes about 15 acres per cow just to keep them fed.
Y'ALL MEAN UP BY DENTON?
And what "bio" are you talking about that so "conveniently fake". Once again, there are people out here that don't fit into your mold. So, does that make us fake?
MY "MOLD" IS WHAT, EXACTLY? LET'S SAY YOUR BIO IS ACCURATE. TELL ME WHAT I ASSUME ABOUT YOU.
Why does it bother you so much that there are different ideas and lifestyle choices that some people make that differ from yours?
WHAT BOTHERS ME, TEX, IS THAT FOLKS LIKE YOU SEEM TO THINK YOUR "LIFESTYLE CHOICES" OCCUR IN A VACUUM. YOU ALSO SEEM TO THINK THAT EVERYONE'S CIRCUMSTANCES ARE IDENTICAL TO YOURS. WHAT YOU FAIL TO REALIZE IS THAT MANY OF THE "CHOICES" YOU FEEL FREE TO MAKE, YOU CAN MAKE BECAUSE YOU WERE BORN INTO A PRIVILEGED POSITION IN THE PECKING ORDER. YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME WORRIES, NOR THE SAME LEVEL OF EXPOSURE THAT MANY OTHER QUEERS EXPERIENCE.
YOU CAN MAKE WHATEVER "CHOICES" YOU LIKE, BUT YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER THE CONTEXT IN WHICH YOU MAKE THEM, WHICH MIGHT MAKE YOU A BIT MORE SYMPATHETIC TO THE DECISIONS OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO MAKE.
Could it be that you are trying to make everyone "fit" your idea of what a model gay person should be? Sure sounds like it to me.
WELL THEN, YOU'RE MISUNDERSTANDING ME. THERE IS NO ONE WAY TO BE GAY, BUT WE ARE, IN FACT, A MINORITY WITHOUT THE PROTECTIONS OF THE MAJORITY OR OTHER MINORITIES. WE ARE "LESS EQUAL" THAN OTHERS. JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T EXPERIENCE OR "FEEL" IT IN YOUR LIFE, DOESN'T MEAN IT ISN'T DEFORMING MILLIONS OF OTHER LIVES. AND YES, THOSE OF US WHO ARE PRIVILEGED HAVE RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP THOSE OF US WHO AREN'T - THAT'S JUST PLAIN OLD BEIN' A GOOD PERSON.
And as far as why guys like Ron and I are on this site, well, I can't at all speak for Ron, but I can speak for myself just fine.
I came across the site, just yesterday as a matter of fact, and saw just how nasty, mean spirited, condescending and vindictive some of y'all are to a man (Merv) that was dead and couldn't defend himself. And so I thought maybe, just maybe I might be able to say something that might shed some light on why some people do what they do.
I THINK MERV COULD DEFEND HIMSELF JUST FINE WHEN HE WAS ALIVE, AND HE'S NOT HEARING ANYTHING WE'RE SAYIING ABOUT HIM NOW, UNLESS WE'VE GOT THE WHOLE DEATH
I IT'S PICKING ON PEOPLE WHO CAN'T DEFEND THEMSELVES - POOR PEOPLE, DISABLED PEOPLE, THE ELDERLY, CHILDREN THAT'S THE MARK OF A BULLY.
But once again, instead of being civil and cordial to someone else's ideas, you criticize, make fun of and ridicule us.
I THINK YOU CAN TAKE IT, YOU SEEM CAPABLE OF DEFENDING YOUR VIEWPOINT JUST FINE. AND, BEING FROM THE SOUTH MYSELF (AND TEXAS IS, IN MANY WAYS, THE SOUTH) I KNOW WHEN THE KNIFE IS BEING SUGARCOATED. YOU MAY FOOL THESE YANKEES WITH YOUR FAUX-CORDIALITY, BUT YOU'RE NOT FOOLING ME, FRIEND.
And if you do that to one of your "own" then I can only imagine how, and what, you might do to someone not of the same bent. A straight person.
AND HERE'S WHERE YOU START MAKING SOME REALLY OFF-BASE ASSUMPTIONS.
And you wonder why more straight people don't embrace you. If I were straight, I wouldn't consider any sort of conversation with you either. You don't seem to be open to intelligent conversation. You don't seem to be willing to hear anyone else's ideas and viewpoints without ridicule and cheap attacks. And you can't see why the "right" has a problem with some of us. I think I can put my finger on at least one reason, and you proved my point about it yet again.
FIRST, I REALLY DON'T NEED EMBRACING BY SOMEONE WHO THINKS IT'S THEIR RIGHT TO "APPROVE" OR "DISAPPROVE" OF ME. I LIVE MY LIFE HONESTLY AND I'M THE BEST PERSON I KNOW HOW TO BE AND ALWAYS LOOKING TO IMPROVE THAT - AND THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH, SINCE IT' SEEMS TO BE ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
I HAVE AS MANY FRIENDS WHO ARE HETEROSEXUAL AS I DO QUEERS - AND MY "STRAIGHT" FRIENDS KNOW ME AS WELL AS MY "GAY" FRIENDS DO. I'M EVEN A PROUD GODFATHER TO ONE OF THEIR CHILDREN.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WOULD PREFER TO THINK THAT THE RIGHT HAS A PROBLEM WITH US BECAUSE WE'RE "MEAN" OR "BITTER," BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF AWFULLY NICE QUEER PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ATTACKED ON THE STREET, EVEN KILLED, WHILE MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS, AND THE KILLERS - WHO ATTACKED THEM FOR BEING DIFFERENT - DON'T EVEN GET JAIL TIME.
YOU MIGHT ALSO WANT TO CONSIDER HOW WE'RE REQUIRED TO CONDUCT OURSELVES IN THE MILITARY, I SUGGEST YOU GO TO THE SERVICEMEN'S LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK AND READ A FEW STORIES.
YOU MIGHT ALSO CONSIDER FOR A MINUTE THE ACTIONS OF FRED PHELPS. NOW CONSIDER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU TOOK THE WORD "FAG" OFF HIS SIGNS AND HIS WEBSITE AND REPLACED IT WITH THE WORD "N----ERS" OR "SP-CS" OR "C-NTS" OR "CH-NKS." WHO WOULD DARE?
You don't seem to be able to handle anything beyond your own narrow minded way of thinking, the very things you can't stand about straight people that have a problem understanding and accepting gay people.
THE ONLY STRAIGHT PEOPLE I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ARE STRAIGHT PEOPLE WHO THINK A DIFFERENT SET OF RULES APPLY TO ME THAN TO THEM. I ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH STRAIGHT PEOPLE WHO THINK THEIR LIVES AND THEIR CONCERNS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN MINE .
THIS IS NOT ABOUT
THIS IS NOT ABOUT A POPULARITY CONTEST, EVERYONE IS FREE TO LIKE OR DISLIKE ME AND HOW I LIVE MY LIFE. WHAT EVERYONE IS NOT FREE TO DO IS INTERFERE WITH MY FREEDOM TO LIVE THAT LIFE. WE DESERVE THE SAME FREEDOM OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS THAT STRAIGHT PEOPLE DO. WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO FATHOM, AND WHY IS IT SUCH A CONTINUING CHORE TO GET IT?
Talks about hypocrisy! My gosh, you are the epitome of it! How in the world are you going to EVER further the cause of the gay person with behavior like you've shown over the past 20 hours with me?
MY FRIEND, DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT "BEING NICE" IS GOING TO GET US WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE? UNFORTUNATELY, NO MINORITY GROUP EVER ACHIEVES EQUALITY BY BEING NICE. WE WILL ACHIEVE EQUALITY BY BEING SMART, BEING GOOD, AND BEING ORNERY WHEN THE SITUATION DEMANDS IT.
AND AS FAR AS MY BEHAVIOR WITH YOU - HAVE YOU NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED ON THESE ISSUES? HAVE YOU NEVER BEEN CALLED UPON TO DEFEND YOUR NATURE, OR YOUR CHOICES? HAVE YOU SPENT YOUR WHOLE LIFE SURROUNDED BY "YES"MEN? IT CERTAINLY APPEARS THAT WAY AND THAT, PERHAPS, IS WHY YOU'RE SO ARROGANT.
Do you really, I mean REALLY believe for one minute that your conversation tactics would ever win over a straight persons respect and desire to make things right for the gay person?
IF YOU'RE WAITING FOR THE MAJORITY TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT FOR US, I HOPE YOU'RE NOT HOLDING YOUR BREATH. WE MUST MAKE THINGS RIGHT FOR US. WE NEED FRIENDS, BUT FRIENDS ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL HELP US BECAUSE IT'S SIMPLY THE RIGHT THING TO DO, NOT BECAUSE THEY THINK WE'RE "NICE" OR "CUTE" OR "RICH" OR "CREATIVE."
AND AS FAR AS TRYING TO "WIN" PEOPLE'S RESPECT? WITHOUT SELF-RESPECT, IT'S A LOSING BATTLE. DO YOUR BEST AND THE PEOPLE WHO MATTER WILL RESPECT YOU.
Listen to yourselves, will ya. I mean, go back and read all the nasty hateful things you've written just since I logged on yesterday. Then pat yourselves on the back and walk around proud. Be proud of your attitude of intolerance and arrogance that you have THE only way
Paul | 08.16.07 - 6:43 am |
PAUL, FROM YOUR COMMENTS, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT YOUR EXPERIENCE IS RATHER LIMITED. IT'S VERY NICE THAT YOU HAVE A RANCH AND A PARTNER AND YOUR FAMILY IS ACCEPTING OF YOU AND YOUR BROTHERS, AND EVERYONE IN TOWN LOVES YOU, ESP BECAUSE YOU DON'T RUB THEIR NOSES IN YOUR GAYNESS AND BECAUSE YOUR RANCH IS A BIG ECONOMIC ENGINE LOCALLY (could that have something to do with it?) BUT YOU'RE THE ONE WHO CAME IN WITH THE FULL-BLAST CRITICISM ON HOW "NARROW MINDED" EVERYONE WAS, ETC. ETC. RATHER THAN ASKING QUESTIONS AS TO WHY PEOPLE WERE IN SUCH A TWIST AND WONDERING IF YOU MISSED SOME ASPECT OF THE POINT.
THE WILLFUL OBTUSE POSE ISN'T WORKING FOR ME.
YOU HAVE A LOVELY DAY AND STAY DRY. I HEAR ANOTHER STORM IS HEADED YOUR WAY.
mcQuaidLA
McQuaidLA - You have put forth a valiant effort with Paul/Ron. Funny they didn't even respond to my last one. But anyway, I think you have approached and surpassed the Singing Pig Point - Never try to teach a pig to sing - it only wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Just for the record though, as a white person who was a member of a black group (we raised money for college aid for poor black college aspirants) - I can definitely say many many black individuals and groups pleaded, demanded and begged the government and the courts to no avail. It was only violent action that led to civil rights, when the majority white folks got scared! I wish this was not necessary but it seems to be so.....
Jaro, you're right and I fall for it every time! Those guys don't come in here looking for a discussion, they come in here to take a passive/aggressive crap on everything and then whack off while idiots like me engage them.
I'm starting to think that actually, the best way to engage folks like that is with a shotgun. "Oh, is that how you see things? I'm sorry, then you're going to have to die..." BLAMMO! LOL
And yeah, isn't it sad? Nobody gets anything in this country until you frighten the folks who occupy the power structure, and then, you have to be willing to accept casualties, because they will have some of you killed, and frame others for crimes, etc. etc.
Eldridge Cleaver wasn't whistling Dixie when he said "Violence is as American as cherry pie."
Jaroslaw and mcQuaidLA,
I haven't responded until 6:47 PM because I have been out working all day.
Don't even start with the silver spoon bullshit. I grew up poor, decided I didn't like it, and worked my way to where I am now. I didn't sit on my ass and bitch and moan about how unfair life was to me. I worked my ass off for every thing I have. It just pisses lazy fucks like you off (that was my first insult by the way, you've thrown many) that some of us won't sit beside you and bitch with you. We make you look bad because we do go out and make our own way. You crybabys are just like union workers, someone new comes in who works like hell and they get told to slow down because they are making everyone else look bad. Sorry, but I'm not slowing down or backing off. People like you need to catch up.
When someone like Paul or myself try to offer a different opinion we get called traitors, fakes, plants, or trolls. Typical, you've grown to believe noone can work their way up the food chain, so when someone does, it just can't be real.
You pity me? HA! You pity yourself enough for everyone.
Thanks Ron, you said all that needs to be said.
a cowboy from Texas
Paul
O yeah, I forgot. David Ernstien (or however you spell it) said "IOW your ass is mine". Really? Was that a threat? I don't know what IOW means, I'm not up on all the computer terms. But anyway, David, don't bite off more than you can chew. LOL In my world, you are nothing.
Sure, fellas. You betcha...
Let's see...
Liberals are cheap and hypocritical.
We want to take your money.
If we would just stop being mean to the straight folks, they would like us.
Why do we need to discuss "private things" anyway?
I have four thousand head of cattle, three gay brothers and a lover of twenty years. We shake hands, why can't you?
I drive 300 miles a day (that's six hours in the car, btw, assuming you're not blowing the speed limit.)
I pulled myself up by my own bootstraps.
I am an FTM trans person.
I'm searching for new oil prospects in Texas? (I will be searching for a very long time.)
Everyone else here besides my boyfriend, Tex, or my boyfriend, Ron, is mean and a loser and wants to take my money.
You people have no right to question or criticize anyone's point of view or actions particularly if they're rich.
Ending with "Unions and people who belong to them suck and are lazy." (I knew we'd get to that eventually.)
I can't believe you both forgot to mention that Freedom is on the March in Iraq, it's all Bill Clinton's fault, George Bush was a great governor and is making a super-terrific President, we're in a war against Tur, the only reason constant government surveillance is a problem is if you're guilty.
Have I left anything out?
Just leave me a note here, I've got to get to sleep now, I think tommorrow's the day my public assistance check arrives and I plan to spend every last cent of it on drugs, hookers and porn. If I have any leftover, I'll treat a nice pregnant, Christian girl to an abortion, "on the house."
'cause that's just the kind of drain on society I am.
The Truth on Merv Bubbles Up...
see the the top of the blog
The whole if he had talked to the Reagans idea is pathetic. How do you know that he didn't?
Reagan declared war on AIDS in his state of the union speech and began federal funding of AIDS research. Is this because he knew Merv or just because Ronald Reagan was naturally compassionate?
Here's the deal about Merv for me ... I too get angry about his being in the closet. And I wonder, WHY?? He was a dude who did WHEEL OF FORTUNE, for Christ's sake! LOL.
For me it boils down to this: There's something about being forced to partake in his lie that makes me have a knee-jerk reaction. He paraded around with Zsa Zsa and made the appearance of being "Straight" so he wouldn't have to deal with the unpleasantness of people's reactions to him being gay.
Fine.
Just don't expect me to join in on the charade.
Ultimately, I do not respect closet cases like Merv Griffin. I've gone to therapy, dealt with the ugliness of my family's reaction to me being gay, and live with the fear that my boyfriend and I may get "gay bashed" for holding hands on the street. Merv Griffin made a lot of money and perpetuated the public perception that he was NOT gay.
So I don't like that.
You go McQuaidLA - your last post is probably the best so far.
They guy is dead, it's water under the bridge.
Move on now and worry about your own sexuality and being out of the closet if you want.
Go "out" a living conservative homophobic biggot now.
I would like to forego any comments until the will is read.
Yeah, Zsa Zsa...Because, when older straight men think of hot babes or solid female companionship, Zsa Zsa's their "go to" girl...
Sort of like the time Kevin Spacey told a reporter "I don't mind if women think I'm gay. They try to convert me and I let them."
Obviously, he's been intimate with some super-intelligent women - and clearly he understands women well. And we all know that when hetero women think of gay men they wish were straight, Kevin Spacey is right at the top of that list.
I, too, wish he was straight.
Matt,
Too bad Reagan's war on AIDS wasn't as enthusiastically waged as his war on the poor and his war on the mentally ill.
If it had been, AIDS would definitely be walking the streets of a major city, covered in filth, muttering to itself and occasionally soiling itself this very minute.
Joe:
The fact that you enclose the word "out" in quotes shows you're a troll in the truest sense. That's the most imbecilic trick in the armchair fascist's repertoire -- dismissing someone else's integrity by saying their hard-won honesty is really dishonesty -- and is best illustrated by the quintessentially idiotic slogan, "Jews are Nazis."
I'm not comfortable calling Ron or Paul trolls, but your sneering use of the phrase "worry about your own sexuality" (as if gayness were something that ought to trouble us) reveals you to be the "conservative homophobic bigggot [sic]" you've insisted doesn't exist.
But none of that shouldn't worry you, of course (and I'm sure it doesn't). You're the sort of grinning insensate twit anyone can squash without conscience pangs. Feel free to parade your cerebral inadequacy in front of us again.
HMMM. Wow! Such strong comments from some! I guess we that live in free nations,should Thank God that we also
have the freedom of free speech! 
Oops! Some might be offended by the "Thank God" comment, better retract or ammend that, as that may offend some people as well! *sigh*
The simple truth is that there will NEVER come a day when EVERYONE in the world will all suddenly agree with all political,moral,sexual,religious, or other issues/practices/beliefs that we all share and express in this world. We are all unique,different,
and have a right to believe what we believe,and try to live as we each feel fit,that is our right!
I am gay myself, but professionally, it is not yet a possibility for me to be open to all of my clients, although I am to many of them, and I find that they have accepted it very well,I am lucky for that much.
However, IMO, I always felt the definition of "Closet" was to C-Carefully,L-Lock,O-Oneself,up E-Evading,T-Truth. Unfortunately for some,(myself included)it's not always possible to openly step out of the closet in our Butchiest,Queerest,or Drag Queen Style attire,with our accept me or not attitude flaring, waving or even on fire, while we turn around andtry to lock that door on the closet we came out of. There is a good chance that if we do that, we just might find ourselves naked and being shoved back into that closet forcefully, the door being locked behind us on the outside,and our clothes being used as torches to light the closet on fire with us in there!
I don't know about anyone else,and I feel everyone is entitled to their own feelings and all,but I can think of no worse,or more painful way to leave this life! No thanks!
I will continue to live my life as "out" as I can, but will also keep my track shoes close by in case I need to make a mad dash to the
"Closet" in those unfortunately necessary times.
Roll over Beetoven, Mervs on the way!
Peace,luck,love and laughter to all!
Tecwiziam
To Paul:
I read McQuaidLA's "sugar-coating the knife" comment with interest, as I'm quite familiar with that aspect of Southern style. It's one of the reasons certain great Southern writers are hilarious to read, and also explains how a friend from San Antonio got to be surgically accurate in his use of the stealth insult (the kind the victim doesn't feel until hours later). That's why I hope you'll answer me without malice, since I haven't uttered a single unkind word about you:
Do you believe that the comments you've directed at leftist gays, liberals and union supporters who've insulted you on this board also apply to those who didn't and wouldn't insult you? Are you accusing all liberals of being lazy, bitter failures or are you speaking specifically about individuals you've quarreled with here? Please respond, as your answer will say more about your level of tolerance than any anecdotal description of your personal life. Your response will also reveal more about your integrity than fruitless inquiries into the truth of your bio. (This is the internet after all -- dozens of people who've used pseudonyms on this thread could be challenged about the truth of their own ostensible histories.)
I also want to know if your feelings about mean-spirited liberals carry over to mean-spirited conservatives. I ask because one of the things I hate most in our country is the systematic polarization of the left and right. I believe your side started it, but I also believe it's a bad idea for the polarization to continue.
Historically, the name-calling began with Joe McCarthy, then Nixon and his Senatorial campaign against a woman he arbitrarily dubbed "the Pink Lady," then against Mondale via his mental history after the Watergate break-in -- and then things got really ugly.
Long before Rush, right-wing radio hosts fostered an air of incivility toward liberals for generations as those same liberals sat listening in shock. (I was a little kid then; I remember feeling amazed that anyone could be so single-mindedly hateful and dishonest.)
PART TWO FOLLOWS.
PART TWO.
If you're really upset about incivility and are not simply making accusations for political reasons, then I hope you'll learn something useful from this exchange: how it's felt to be a liberal in America for the past twenty years.
You've complained of individuals attacking your character and calling you names on this thread. I can understand that -- I'd probably react negatively as well. But many angry liberals and leftists are people who were targeted and called names -- targeted throughout their lives by loud and obnoxious members of your party. What you're seeing, I think, are people who are not only out sexually and politically, but are also lashing out after having been bullied by right-wing pundits. The so-called "liberal press" hasn't been owned by liberals since the days of Citizen Kane (see Norman Solomon's Unreliable Sources). The level of right-wing invective against liberals in the press hasn't changed since my earliest memories of television, car radios and newspapers: hate, hate, hate.
Your reap-what-you-sew admonishment to David E. and McQuaidLA (who, in his later all-capped responses, was actually nicer to you than you were to him) was understandable, and I do sympathize, but it also applies to you and Ron. The right stereotyped and castigated liberals for years. Delayed incivility is merely the result. Think of it as a Flannery O'Connor moment: Enraged at last, the abused becomes the abuser. That's why neither side benefits from degrading the discussion.
I'll gladly verify one thing you and Ron have said repeatedly: Among my closest friends, most of whom tend toward the left, the two conservatives who have stuck by me are as kind as anyone else I know (though I still consider their politics unkind).
Only, please don't tell me you're unaware of what would happen to me if I went to the wrong bar in San Antonio with a liberal friend and got into a conversation criticizing GWB. During his first term, I'd have gotten punched out in certain bars here in New York City for talking that way. I feel your outrage, Paul, but getting yelled at on a gay web board doesn't even come close to that.
Erratum:
The following sentence appears above:
But none of that shouldn't worry you, of course (and I'm sure it doesn't).
It should have read as follows:
But none of that should worry you, of course (and I'm sure it doesn't).
Just as an FYI, Entertainment Weekly mentions Griffin's sexual orientation in their obit. It's on newsstands today -- the fall movie preview issue.
Must off. More anon.
Bob
MMM, let's see, where to start......
mcQuaidLA, 300 miles a day only takes 5 hours at 60 MPH average, I average closer to 70 or 75, the speed limit here, but you are right, I ignore the speed limit anyway.
Robespierre, If I may be so bold as to interject. I think it would be much more difficult to point out who started throwing insults or names around. My (and only mine) problem is people lambasting me for daring to work hard enough to grow out of the group of people depending on government handouts. The Liberal left can only survive as long as they have victims to cater to. That is the biggest reason Liberals want all 12 to 20 million illegal aliens to be given a green card, so there is a whole new crop of victims, aka voters.
Granted, the sorry ass republicans who want illegal aliens, aka voters, here want them for cheap labor, which I do not, never have, and never will support.
Now, you want to talk about being mean. When ever we make a point that people like mcQuaidLA can't answer, they retort with "you just hate" or "you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth" or try to change the subject, or, and the best yet, "you are just ignorant and don't understand the complexity of the situation". I love that one.
It boils down to two ideals that can never, and will never agree. In the end, it will come down to the person left standing will win the debate. It's sad, but I fear it's true.
Knowing a number of out and closeted men and women of that generation and their stories (and, yes, sometimes excuses), I do not believe that it is simple as most of the above comments state the Griffin case to be. Liz Smith was similarly cavalier in not discussing openly her 18 year relationship after dishing everyone else's life story. With their power and with changing times they both SHOULD have come out for the benefit of others and especially since much of their resulting behavior appears to have been hypocritical.
BUT, I am more disgusted by folks of more enlightened, recent generations who grew up in a much more open world, like Anderson Cooper, who continues to live "openly in the closet", deliberately failing to mention it in his own autobiography while spouting off the most intimate details of his mother's sexual liaisons and his brother's suicide.
Folks like Cooper could do so much by only having to say very little. He doesn't have to wear it on his sleeve, but he could at least openly "own it".
And everyone lets him and so many like him get away with it with a wink and a nudge...
Our generations need to evolve where our forebearers failed to.
mcQuaidLA, 300 miles a day only takes 5 hours at 60 MPH average, I average closer to 70 or 75, the speed limit here, but you are right, I ignore the speed limit anyway.
YOU MUST NOT HAVE MUCH TRAFFIC TO CONTEND WITH, EITHER.
Robespierre, If I may be so bold as to interject. I think it would be much more difficult to point out who started throwing insults or names around.
I'LL HELP YOU, IT WAS YOUR SIDE. PEOPLE WERE ENGAGING IN SOME CRITICISM OF THE CHOICES MERV GRIFFIN MADE IN HIS LIFE AND YOU FOLKS BLASTED EVERYONE FOR HAVING THE NERVE TO CRITICISE THOSE CHOICES.
My (and only mine) problem is people lambasting me for daring to work hard enough
CRITICISING YOU FOR "DARING" TO WORK HARD? PLEASE SHOW US WHERE THAT HAPPENED...AND OF COURSE, YOU CERTAINLY DIDN'T MEAN TO IMPLY THAT THOSE OF US WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU DON'T WORK HARD, AND WANT TO TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY. NO, YOU DIDN'T IMPLY IT, YOU CAME RIGHT OUT AND SAID IT.
to grow out of the group of people depending on government handouts.
DID YOU DEPEND ON GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS AT SOME POINT? WELL, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THOSE HANDOUTS WERE HELPFUL IN GIVING YOU A LEG UP ON THE LADDER, AND LOOK WHERE IT GOT YOU! YOU'RE THE EMBODIMENT OF THE AMERICAN WORK ETHIC NOW!
The Liberal left can only survive as long as they have victims to cater to.
WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THE ABOVE TO ME, PLEASE, SINCE THE WHOLE POINT OF MY LIBRUL POLITICS IS TO REPLACE THE VICTIMS AND VICTIMIIZERS MODEL WITH SOMETHING A BIT MORE PATRIOTIC AND COOPERATIVE.
That is the biggest reason Liberals want all 12 to 20 million illegal aliens to be given a green card, so there is a whole new crop of victims, aka voters.
WE DO? ANOTHER HELPFUL EXPLANATION OF MY LIBRUL REASONING. THANKS. SO YOU'RE IN FAVOR BEING TAXED TO SUPPORT A WHOLE NEW BUREAUCRACY THAT WOULD DEPORT 12-20 MILLION PEOPLE.
Granted, the sorry ass republicans who want illegal aliens, aka voters, here want them for cheap labor, which I do not, never have, and never will support.
WELL, WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE THEN? YOU DISAPPROVE OF ORGANIZED LABOR. YOU DISAPPROVE OF CHEAP LABOR. WHAT'LL IT BE, MAC? DO THEY STAY? DO THEY GO? WHAT DO YOU WANT?
Now, you want to talk about being mean. When ever we make a point that people like mcQuaidLA can't answer, they retort with "you just hate" or "you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth"
EXAMPLES, PLEASE?
THIS NOTION THAT ANYONE MAKES IT COMPLETELY ON THEIR OWN IS A RIGHTWING FANTASY SERVED UP FOR THE DELECTATION AND DELUSION OF THE ELITE AND EXPLOITATION OF THE UNDERCLASS. WE ARE ALL STANDING ON SOMEONE'S SHOULDERS. WE HAVE ALL HAD HELP, WHETHER IT'S CIRCUMSTANTIAL, FINANCIAL, EMOTIONAL, WHATEVER. HARD WORK IS ONLY PART OF IT.
I CERTAINLY HAD HELP GETTING TO WHERE I AM. NOW IT'S MY TURN. IT'S CALLED GIVING BACK.
or try to change the subject, or, and the best yet, "you are just ignorant and don't understand the complexity of the situation". I love that one
I'M GLAD YOU LOVE THAT ONE, BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT THERE ARE PLENTY OF SITUATIONS YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, MAINLY BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN UNDERSTANDING THEM - PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT YOURS.
It boils down to two ideals that can never, and will never agree. In the end, it will come down to the person left standing will win the debate. It's sad, but I fear it's true.
ACTUALLY, I THINK IT'S LIKE COOKING A TURKEY. YOU HAVE TO HEAT IT FROM BOTH SIDES TO COOK IT THE RIGHT WAY.
MY PROBLEM WITH YOU FOLKS IS THAT RATHER THAN TRYING TO ADVANCE YOUR IDEAS (SOME OF WHICH MIGHT BE SOUND) YOU'VE SPENT THE LAST THIRTY YEARS EFFECTIVELY TRYING TO DESTROY ANY WAY YOU CAN, BY ANY MEANS DIRTY OR OTHERWISE, NOT ONLY DIFFERENT IDEAS AND THE DEBATE, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO HOLD THOSE IDEAS.
AND THAT IMPULSE, FRIEND, IS WHAT MAKES ME DOUBT THAT ANY OF YOU ARE WHO YOU PURPORT TO BE, THINK HOW YOU PURPORT TO THINK, OR WILL DO WHAT YOU SAY YOU WANT TO DO. IF YOU REALLY BELIEVED WHAT YOU SAY YOU DO, IF YOU REALLY FELT THAT CONFIDENT ABOUT YOUR APPROACH, YOU'D BE HAPPY TO ENCOURAGE A WIDE-RANGING NATIONAL DISCOURSE ON THE ISSUES. BUT YOUR SIDE HAS DEMONSTRATED TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT IT FEARS IDEAS AND FEARS BEING CHALLENGED. YOUR LEADERS HAVE DEMONSTRATED AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT IF THEY WANT SOMETHING, NO LIE IS TOO BIG, NO OBFUSCATION TOO COMPLEX, NO ETHIC TOO DISPOSABLE IN THE EFFORT TO GET IT.
WHICH MAKES ME THINK THAT EITHER DEEP DOWN INSIDE, "CONSERVATIVES" KNOW IF THEY WERE TRULY HONEST ABOUT THEIR AMBITIONS, THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WOULD NEVER ACCEPT IT, OR THIS IS JUST THE MIDDLE OF A FAR MORE RADICAL AGENDA TO TAKE AMERICA IN THE DIRECTION OF A TOTALITARIAN CORPORATIST SECURITY STATE, AND BY THE TIME THE VOTERS FIGURE IT OUT, SO MUCH OF THE APPARATUS WILL BE IN PLACE, IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR AVERAGE PEOPLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
I'LL GIVE YOU FOLKS THIS: YOU'RE GETTING WHAT YOU WANT, THAT'S FOR SURE.
Well aren't we all worked up into a lather. Too bad it isn't over a dead man. Too bad we all think so highly of our fine selves that we can spew all over the memory of a dead man. Too bad we all have time in our busy lives to find fault with so many others lives. Too bad we have no ability to understand the stupidity of the universe we spin round in. And David E. I find you and yours an assault on the very humanity you hope one day to join if enough of us can simply come out come out and play like the fine fine specimens that you hope us to be. You sir, are a joke and a hypocrite. Based on what I am reading in this one blog comment thread alone I wouldn't care to ever have you bear the banner for my community. You seem to have nothing better to do that chastise each and every person who has an opinion that differs from your own. I am quite sure it is a vapid life you lead.
I am confused. How exactly is a billionaire who throws fabulous pool parties in his private palatial estate, a billionaire who is known to be gay in a Hollywood which is respecting his desire to be private and which employs staff who are aware of and fostering his penchant for gay guests, just how is he not out. He was certainly out to those that accepted his invitations. He was out to the sponsors that allowed him to cash all those billions of checks. He was out to the power brokers in Hollywood. He was out. He simply did not see a need to smack you in the face with his lifestyle.
Really now boys. You have made a huge assumption considering the life and times of Mr. Griffin. His peers gave him the respect he deserved and allowed him to live his life in relative peace. His billions were earned by allowing his sponsors to sell detergent and soup and all the other plethora of daily life. Sponsors prefer the 9 of 10 buyers rather than the 1 of 10. Mr. Griffin had some respect for the men and women who paid his salary. And he still managed to live his life.
Of course, today you would have a swarm of helicoptors racing over the sky to snap pictures of his pool parties and his face would be on the evening news like a deer stuck in the headlights of life.
As for men who feel threatened by an "Old Troll" like Merv, let's not forget he was an old troll with a rather large bank account. Beautiful men with more abs than brains often seek out these kinds of trolls and work them. As for those he fired for being out, perhaps they felt it was more important to be out than to do the work they were hired to accomplish for the man who signed the checks. Probably not all, but most probably deserved to get an appropriate pink slip.
Well aren't we all worked up into a lather. Too bad it isn't over a dead man. Too bad we all think so highly of our fine selves that we can spew all over the memory of a dead man. Too bad we all have time in our busy lives to find fault with so many others lives. Too bad we have no ability to understand the stupidity of the universe we spin round in. And David E. I find you and yours an assault on the very humanity you hope one day to join if enough of us can simply come out come out and play like the fine fine specimens that you hope us to be. You sir, are a joke and a hypocrite. Based on what I am reading in this one blog comment thread alone I wouldn't care to ever have you bear the banner for my community. You seem to have nothing better to do that chastise each and every person who has an opinion that differs from your own. I am quite sure it is a vapid life you lead.
I am confused. How exactly is a billionaire who throws fabulous pool parties in his private palatial estate, a billionaire who is known to be gay in a Hollywood which is respecting his desire to be private and which employs staff who are aware of and fostering his penchant for gay guests, just how is he not out. He was certainly out to those that accepted his invitations. He was out to the sponsors that allowed him to cash all those billions of checks. He was out to the power brokers in Hollywood. He was out. He simply was not on display. There is a difference.
Really now boys. You have made a huge assumption considering the life and times of Mr. Griffin. His peers gave him the respect he deserved and allowed him to live his life in relative peace. His billions were earned by allowing his sponsors to sell detergent and soup and all the other plethora of daily life. Sponsors prefer the 9 of 10 buyers rather than the 1 of 10. Mr. Griffin had some respect for the men and women who paid his salary. And he still managed to live his life.
Of course, today you would have a swarm of helicoptors racing over the sky to snap pictures of his pool parties and his face would be on the evening news like a deer stuck in the headlights of life.
As for men who feel threatened by an "Old Troll" like Merv, let's not forget he was an old troll with a rather large bank account. Beautiful men with more abs than brains often seek out these kinds of trolls and work them. As for those he fired for being out, perhaps they felt it was more important to be out than to do the work they were hired to accomplish. Probably not all, but most deserved to get an appropriate pink slip.
It is indeed very sad and troubling that Merv Griffin as well as other powerful-closeted folks have a negative impact to the progress of the LGBT communities throughout this country.
Merv and other powerful Americans could be an important beacon for change and help to break barriers of hate and ignorance. We who are OUT can use them as examples to our LGBT youth as whom one SHOULD NOT being.
Robert? Let me explain the reasoning behind being "out" since you clearly don't understand it.
For a person like Merv, being "out" to your friends and business associates doesn't really accomplish anything. The point is to be out to the millions of people who are your fans. See, if you're out to all those people, it helps them get over their prejudices and their homophobia regarding gay people because they now know of someone they consider admirable who is also gay.
it's also helpful to gay young people who don't know that there are other people like them who have lives and are successful, etc. etc. When they're out, people like Merv are role models for other gay young people. They look at Merv and think "He's gay and he has a terrific life, I can do that, too."
See, this is why people were so annoyed with Rosie for staying in the closet while she had her talk show and was America's Sweetheart. It would have been so great to have her come out then and people would have said "Rosie's a lesbian? I love her! There must be other nice gay people like her, too."
Now, she's finally out for several years, and good for her! But sometimes she seems so bitter I wonder if staying in the closet all those years while she was making her bones has something to do with it. Doesn't matter, she accomplishes a lot of good still.
I hope this helps clear up your confusion.
I frankly wish Tab Hunter had just stayed in the closet. He's a right-wing asshole! I don't want to have to claim him!
McQuaid, I'm on your side but maybe you could start using italics for the quoted sections rather than screaing caps? They're very off-putting. Italics are simple - just put angle-bracketed "i" and "/i" around the italic part. Thanks!
"He was gay --SO WHAT?"
Actually it DOES matter, certainly to the zillions of gay kids who have no role models, so that they can affirm that they can aspire to greatness "even if" they are gay.
I don't know what the incidence of suicide is amongst gays is now, but not so long ago, it sure had the highest incidence amongst teens, and teaching about great homnosexuals in history may have helped them transcend the taunting, teasing and bullying which is endemic in our schools.
To this day, most schools in America or TV have never taught about famous homosexuals in history. Most homophobes get great joy from listening to the music of Tchaikovsky or Schubert, but mention the fact that they were gay at the time, they will scream bloody murder. They think that if their kids hear that, they will somehow will themselves into becoming gay. What ignorance! But what do you expect from a nation where 80% still refuse to believe in evolution?
Dargis of the New York Times famously panned the movie "Alexander", even stating that it was "cruel to animals" (an outright lie) clearly because of her homophobia and unwillingness to credit the greatest military leader in history for being gay. In non-puritanical Europe, the film was a hit.
I don't put Griffin on the same par as Alexander, but you get my drift.
mamazboy: If I knew how to do the italics, I would. Maybe you can help me: I'm on a mac and I use Firefox. Total techtard here.
mystic: I know Dargis, not well, but professionally. Don't always agree with her opinions, but have never known her to be phobe-y.
mcQuaidLA: You want to type the following:
Open carat, small i, close carat, then the quoted text, then open carat, back-slash, small i and close carat. It will look like this, without the spaces:
< i > The quoted text you're responding to < / i >
No need to use any formatting for your responses to the italicized quoted text.
I'll respond to Ron myself late tonight or tomorrow; I'm going out for the next three hours or so.
Sad, that Paul dropped out of the debate the moment someone was nice to him. Perhaps the whole premise of his coming here -- that he was appalled at the rudeness of liberal and leftist gays -- fell apart when someone pointed out the longstanding tradition of rudeness and personal attacks on his side of the political fence. (Wasn't it Bush senior who tried to make the Presidential debate all about "character" as opposed to policy and voting histories?)
To McQuaidLA,
You need not explain "out" to me. It is perverse that you believe that if on one day, all the closets were flung open and everyone announced they were gay that all would be well, and all would be received with open arms and that all young gay men and women would suddenly find role models for the lives they should be able to lead. Roles models are built on character my friend. Character developed by a truthful life lived, not a public life on display. Rosie O'Donnel is a perfect example and I am glad you used her. She has millions. She came out. She is as bitter today as ever because she lacks character. Because she expects everyone to agree with her and to understand her wacked out politics. She is a character but she lacks character. See the difference. At some point, you need to take responsibility for telling your local young gay men and women that they should look up to anyone on the planet that has character. Gay men and women do not need to see themselves as isolated from the rest of humanity. That is the crux of the problem you face. Your gayness does not make you a better person. Your humanity does. If as most believe above Mr. Griffin was a creep, somehow advising the world he fucked men would not have changed the fact that he was a creep. What would have made him such a great role model for your boys and girls? He was a better role model as a businessman in the public eye who was able to traverse a minefield in a time when an open lifestyle was not acceptable. He had respect for the industry he work in. He had respect for the politics he undoubtedly regarded as his and he was a friend to many. What is wrong with that being enough for most young men and women gay, straight or otherwise to find admirable. Be careful who you condemn. You might just run out of candidates for mentorship sooner than you think.
You need not explain "out" to me. It is perverse that you believe that if on one day, all the closets were flung open and everyone announced they were gay that all would be well, and all would be received with open arms and that all young gay men and women would suddenly find role models for the lives they should be able to lead.
Yeah, you're right on that count. I've always said Gay people are still people, meaning we have just as many odious characters as anyone else. But you cannot truly believe that invisibility - especially for young people in search of a clue about what their lives will be like when they're adults - doesn't place us at a serious disadvantage. C'mon! Even if we're blessed with terrific parents, we are different from most of them in one very profound respect, one that they will not be able to mirror for us.
Roles models are built on character my friend. Character developed by a truthful life lived, not a public life on display.
Oh get real! You're talking about world of daguerreotypes and stage coaches, man. Like it or not, everyone's life is on display now and that genie is not going back in the bottle. And it appears that even his personal life was highly compartmentalized between his straight "important" friends and his "discreet" gay life.
and Rosie O'Donnel is a perfect example and I am glad you used her.
Yeah, I walked right into that one, huh?
She has millions. She came out. She is as bitter today as ever because she lacks character. Because she expects everyone to agree with her and to understand her wacked out politics. She is a character but she lacks character.
I would disagree with you, there. I think Rosie is as narcissistic as any performer, and as with Elton John, I don't think it takes particular courage to wait until no one can touch you or your freshly-minted millions to come out. I do, however, think she attempts to be a force for positive change and she's willing to speak her mind even if it gets her in trouble, and that does take strength of character.
See the difference. At some point, you need to take responsibility for telling your local young gay men and women that they should look up to anyone on the planet that has character. Gay men and women do not need to see themselves as isolated from the rest of humanity.
I'm not getting your point here.
That is the crux of the problem you face. Your gayness does not make you a better person. Your humanity does. If as most believe above Mr. Griffin was a creep, somehow advising the world he fucked men would not have changed the fact that he was a creep. What would have made him such a great role model for your boys and girls?
I think you're missing Michelangelo's point (and mine) Merv's closet was the crucible of his creepiness and dishonesty. To all reports otherwise, he was a nice man. But when it came to expressing his sexuality - he was basically a s
I think you're missing Michelangelo's point (and mine) Merv's closet was the crucible of his creepiness and dishonesty. To all reports otherwise, he was a nice man. But when it came to expressing his sexuality - he was basically a swine - asserting ownership not only over his male employee's time and talents, but also over their bodies and their personal lives. The speculation is that had he been less duplicitous about who he was (character) he would have been; a healthier, happier person (character) who would have found more appropriate and less exploitative and demeaning modes of expressing and gratifying his own sexuality. This speculation is not a "winged pigs" scenario, it's based on fairly commonplace observation of similar people in similar scenarios.
He was a better role model as a businessman in the public eye who was able to traverse a minefield in a time when an open lifestyle was not acceptable. He had respect for the industry he work in. He had respect for the politics he undoubtedly regarded as his and he was a friend to many. What is wrong with that being enough for most young men and women gay, straight or otherwise to find admirable. Be careful who you condemn. You might just run out of candidates for mentorship sooner than you think.
What in the world do you mean here? He "traversed the minefield" by misrepresenting himself, sexually exploiting employees and terminating others for reasons which had nothing to do with their job performance and everything to do with his personal issues. Second, I wish to God we could dispense with the word "lifestyle." It's not a "lifestyle, it's a "life" for fuck's sake! You go on and on about "character" and then you give this guy a pass for his dishonesty, abuse of power, sexual harassment and unfair employment practices why? Because he was "successful" in business, was a friend to powerful people and had a lot of money. I don't see any evidence of integrity here, and I wish you could point some out to me.
I mean, hell, at least Rosie and Elton, et al, are trying to make up for lost time. All Merv has done is provide a cadaver for the tragic post-mortem.
They guy didn't "mentor" young talent, he fucked it. And if he couldn't fuck it, he fired it. He befriended and supported people who were downright vicious to gay people, he impeded people's ability to earn a living for being honest in a way he couldn't bring himself to be or when they wouldn't make themselves available sexually to him. Those are awful things to do! We have all done crappy things in our lives, no one is saying otherwise, but Merv's power and money enabled him to do crappy things to other gay men with impunity. If you think about it, it's really not unlike the Michael Jackson scenario except Merv, having progressed at least to a late-adolescent stage in his sexuality, liked 'em older. I'm missing the integrity here, you could say this: "He was a genius businessman, but h
You could say this: "He was a genius businessman, but his personal life was a mess because he couldn't figure out a healthy way to integrate his attraction to men into his life and it made him rather evil toward other gay men.
Itals: Special thanks to mamazboy...
Actually, it was I who explained italic formatting to you (unless of course you're referring to private correspondence from mamazboy). Your only problem is that the formatting's reversed. Normally, the quote is italicized and the response is in Roman (i.e., not formatted; the term originally meant Times Roman).
Forgive me if I sound pedantic. It's just that I've worked in publishing for years and want you to have the correct information.
Merci, Robes.
Believe it or not, I also toil in the exciting, high-paying world of Publishing as well. In fact, I was right in the middle of counting my money when I got wind of your new posting. One sec - two, three - okay, done.
Of course, you are correct. I did transpose the formatting. What can I say? It's these distracting aneurysms I keep getting when I read what some of these folks have to say. I sometimes feel as though half the world is on some psychoactive drug or something and I didn't get any, or I skipped school the day they taught the class on how we should always do our best to accommodate and affirm wealthy people because they are not only richer than we, they're simply a more advanced and precious being and not subject to the same rules the rest of us are.
Barbara Bush will be happy to fill us in on the details, I'm sure.
Sorry I've not responded, nor will I today. I'm at a rodeo and won't be back to the computer for any serious tho't for a couple of days.
Oh, and Denton TX is in North Texas, I live about 200 miles to the north west, in the panhandle.
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
I am turning off my "notify" about new comments. Some people on this post either can't read or think or both at times (Paul, Ron, Robert). For those who keep answering them, thanks for trying,really, but it now seems to be self-torture (?)
Yeah, Jaro. Waste of time.
an effete liberal in Los Angeles
mcQuaidLA
To Mr's Jaro and mcQuaidLA,
I am happy to be included amongst the names Ron and Paul for I have read their words and find then both intelligent and cogent in their thoughts and comments. I am not sure they would feel likewise but thank you anyway.
A final word...
Retrospect is a dangerous lens with which to view your world.
thanks for your "obituary" on Merv. you're right . His being in the closet hurts us and so do all who are in the closet.
and any Gay that says otherwise needs to take a look at thier self-hare and internalized homphobia.
you've got my vote.
ruthie
I'm not interested in his sexual orientation but really would like to know if he wore a toup
éé. My wife claims to having seen a picture of him in his band-singing days When he was glabrous
It's amazing how much controversy this is creating. Merv Griffin came from a generation where Business and Gay were like oil and water - you simply didn't discuss your sexuality. He was married for 18 years, had a son and several grandchildren, and was therefore, "officially" straight. I know a number of people over 60 who were the same way. Once they retired, their closet doors flew off their hinges. Merv never really retired, so he never experienced that luxury. Heck, there are plenty of us over 40 who still have a hangup or two about it.
Personally, I always saw Merv Griffin as a likeable person who was very successful financially, and in ways that most of us have benefited, either from the entertainment he provided or thoughts he provoked as a talk show host, or just as being a likeable guy. What difference did it really make whether he was gay or not, any more than that my neighbors are straight?
Of course there are many questions, and even more answers, depending on how you look at things.
Was he gay? Maybe.
Is it anyone else's business? No.
Was he justified in being afraid to come out? Absolutely.
Would it have helped "the cause" if he had come out (if he was gay)? Yes.
Does it really hurt that he didn't? Not really.
Was he entitled to his own privacy? Yes.
Do we have a right to bitch about it? Yes.
Does complaining accomplish anything? No.
Was he successful? Yes.
Is there anything wrong with his being successful? No.
Did he come out to the Reagans? Probably not.
Would it had made a difference? Probably not.
Can we go back and do it over? Duh!
Do we have a right to question his right to privacy? No.
Did he live a full life? Yes.
Could it have been more complete? Probably.
We all have our choices, and we have to live with them. Ours is not to judge, but to understand and learn from the experience.
| 08.19.07 - 1:00 pm | #
Sorry for my absence. I was out of town for a few days.
To Jaro mcQuaidLA
"I am turning off my "notify" about new comments. Some people on this post either can't read or think or both at times (Paul, Ron, Robert). For those who keep answering them, thanks for trying,really, but it now seems to be self-torture (?)"
"Yeah, Jaro. Waste of time."
Hey, that's y'alls choice. Good luck with that. Take good care.
Clearly self-torture for you. And you know, it's OK to not use the biggest words you can find in your thesaurus or dictionary to post here. Sometimes simple words just work better.
.......................
So then someone tell me a simple yes or no, is this posting board a place where one comes with a different view, hoping that someone will change it for them? Is this the place where only ONE idea can be heard? Is this the kind of venue that can't handle diversification? If so, then I guess I read the rules wrong. I figured that I had the go ahead from the head honchos that run this site to voice my opinions, even if they might make some of you mad. (tho' I was actually hoping it would make you think)
Is it your hope to try to "fix" me as if I were broken in my thinking? Sounds like an archaic idea considering the liberal left is supposed to be so open minded. I guess a lot of them are, as long as others open mindedness matches theirs.
Kinda sad that a few of you (notice I didn't say all y'all) seem to think that everyone else has to tread the same path you do, thinking it's the only right way to go.
And thanks Robert, I'm honored, even grateful, to belong to a very small minority on this posting board. But trust me, the three of us (probably a few more that post on here as well) are not the only folks that think this way. Though on here we might be small in numbers, we're not afraid to tell it like we see it.
And as far as the "self torture" aspect, you're probably right. I guess it's natural for you to feel that way, we all have a problem when others disagree with us, present company included. Hey, we're all humans.
I can't speak for Robert and Ron, but I don't think there's been one iota of "evidence" here that will change my mind about the way I think or live my life. And if you assume that name calling and blasting us for our views is gonna win you points, it's not going to happen. You've got to get out and meet some other people with some different ideas and lifestyles for a wider view.
Then maybe, just maybe we can have some healthy bantering back'n forth, maybe enlighten each other on why we think/believe, like intelligent adults. Would a little decorum kill ya?
Free Speech, ain't it great!
a cowboy in Texas
(one that obviously can't think or read)
To Mark
I really liked most of your take on the whole Merv Griffin thing.
He was who/what he was.
It is/was what it is/was
His life was HIS and his alone to live the way he deemed fit for his place in life. Just as it's yours to do the same thing. You start taking that away from someone else, trust me, it'll be taken away from you someday, as well.
a cowboy in Texas
I always liked and enjoyed Merv. But as a gay man myself have always known Merv was a gay man. At the same time i've always wondered why he would not come out and help gay America in a time he could have impacted AIDS Reasearch, Equal Rights, Homophobia, and the way America treats anyone who is different.
I can't help saying it-- this Paul creature is a plant, a joke, a prankster, writing "yall's" and "kinda" and all sort of homespun
homophobic jibberish posed as Old Fashioned Americana if he were Floyd the Barber on the old Andy Griffith Show. After half a century of television, a few people still talk like that, but nobody writes like that. Ignore him, and like a sore on Paris Hilton, eventually he might go away.
Self confident gay people do not need a gang of gay boys to make themselves feel swell about being gay. They don't need their ego's boosted by commonality. They don't need their minds massaged by telling each other how wonderful they are, how brave they are and how delightful they are on an hourly basis. They don't need flags waved over their heads. They don't need special magazines to advocate for their agenda. They don't need special movies to confirm they have a place at the table or a self congratulatory Oscar to help them heal the wounds of professional bigotry. They don't need special days or special rights or special legislation or special anything to rise above.
Confident gay men and women simply go about the lives they lead and live.
If you want to move your people forward, simply move forward. Otherwise, you will be as obsolete as the ladies who lunch on the unborn.
1. All condoms all the time.
2. Civil Unions work just fine.
3. Plan your estate and communicate.
Times have changed. Like old hippies who can't toss the tiedye, old mo's will pass and the next gen will find it easier to find common ground. We will owe our predecessors for kicking open the doors but we will also hold them responsible for building walls.
Mr. Griffin kicked a few doors and built a few walls. He was blessed with untold riches for his life work and he has paid a price for the walls. In death, we should remember him as we would want to be remembered.
Punishing a dead man is just plain stupid and a waste of your time.
What doors did Merv Griffin kick down so that others had better access, you self-loathing ninny? And what price had Merv Griffin ever paid? Dinner at the White House one night, gay pool party with hot men the next?
Nobody would like anything better than to just go on living their lives in a normal manner. Being secretive all the time, not being allowed to marry the person you love, and accepting second class citizenship while paying full taxes is not normal. Get a clue. First, get therapy.
To Robert:
YEHAW!
So simple, so true. I, and most of my gay friends out here, live exactly what you described. We don't have to have the "community" behind us, pushing us forward, to be happy gay men. We ARE happy (contrary to popular "belief on this site).
Thanks for being so concise for many of us that don't "follow the leader" (who ever that is) but march to our own drum and what's right for us.
I don't have a responsibility to anyone but myself, just like everyone else. Ultimately each individual has to make their life the way they want it to be. And like you said, Robert:
"1. All condoms all the time.
2. Civil Unions work just fine.
3. Plan your estate and communicate."
I'd add one more thing in the communication department...........
Sit down with more folks that will listen to you story and what you've gone thru' as a gay person. Maybe, just maybe, they might "get it". It sure won't hurt! I'd much rather have someone talk to me in a manor that makes me want to listen instead of the "in your face" tactics. Hard to convince someone to jump ship on what they may have always believed, to change their minds, if they are being hyper criticized and mocked.
Heck, that's what you want, right? To be understood?
And I know this one might get a LOT of folks riled, but this is the USA and it is everyones right to believe they way they want. And some folks just might never "get it" and continue to believe that being gay is wrong. I don't like it any more than you do, folks, but they DO have that right.
I said it before, you start taking away folks rights to believe and say what they want, then you, my friends, may just one day, have your rights taken away from you, too.
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
to Henway, part 1
You really take the cake don't ya?
"A plant"? What a hoot! A plant for who? Does it bother you that much that there might be a gay man that leans "right" on some issues and says "y'all"?
I don't know where you live, but where I come from, that's not uncommon at all. Oh, and before you say anything derogatory about how "unedumacated" we'ns out here are out here in West Texas are, I, and most all of my friends and neighbors, have a college degree's (no, not off the internet, thank you). Contrary to popular belief, there are many intelligent and well educated people that choose to live, and work, in a rural area. You might thank a farmer or rancher the next time you eat by the way.
And a homophobe too? Gosh, I've admitted I'm gay to all that I feel needs to know. I don't know to many homophobes that do that. No, the mayor doesn't know, but then again, maybe she does, but she's not said anything to me when I see her on the street. No, I've not told the preacher at the local church, tho' I know he knows, (and he's NOT ONCE crossed the street when he saw me coming. Instead he's shaken my hand like he does everyone else.) I've adopted the policy, if they ask, tell them, they must be ready to hear the answer. If not, it's none of their business. So nope, not a homophobe here.
What I will say, is that I don't like the way a lot of the gay community seems to put "the issue" at the forefront over EVERYTHING while letting a lot of other important issues fall thru' the cracks. Those will come back to haunt you eventually! Being gay is NOT the only issue in my life, and I'd assumed it wouldn't be in yours either. But if that means I'm a "homophobe" for it NOT being the all-that-ends-all, then by your narrow minded definition, I guess I am.
And "jibberish", I could say the same about many of the posts I've read here by those that oppose my viewpoints. I've never seen so many "big words" that some of Y'ALL use to impress someone. You don't like my Mayberry-esk vocabulary, just as much as I could use a little less of your thesaurus generated verbiage. Funny though, you seem to be able to understand everything I'm saying, that is, I'm not speaking in such "gibberish" (and yes, it's spelled with a G not a J) that you don't get my gist.
And "maybe he'll go away" well. I might get tired of what's going on here, but I'm not going away. I, Henway, am furthering the cause of the rural gay man in a way you don't seem to get. I've helped many people come to understand that being gay is not a choice. That being gay is not a sin. That being gay is a way of life that can coexist with those of the straight bent. I have sat down with folks and told them "my story" and they respect me. No, some of them don't understand it completely, just like a lot of gay people don't understand what makes a straight couple "tick" either. So you see, no matter what you think or say, I'm NOT
To Henway, part 2
.......So you see, no matter what you think or say, I'm NOT going away, instead, I'll continue doing my part to further the "gay mans plight" where I live the way I know how. The way I know it works here. I hope you can say the same. But I see we are doing it very differently.
I'm helping the straight person come to an understanding and acceptance of the gay person. So they well be ok with finding out that there are gay folks all around them. Thus it becomes easier for the gay person to "come out" and not fear the wrath or misunderstandings.
You, on the other hand, seem have this odd need to PUSH people out of the closet just to see them squirm and to see the reaction of the straight people that don't understand, so you can yell "bigot" and right wing "ninnys". Not at all thinking of the gay persons needs and personal desires. Seems you don't know how to respect someones desire to stay closeted or at the least, out to only a few. You think you know what's best for every gay person out there. WOW that's amazing!
I personally think my way works better for me and the area I'm in. After all, isn't what you want? A safe environment for gay folks to be in?
And I didn't know you knew Merv so well. How'd you know he was at the White house chattin' with the "enemy" one day and the next day having a gay pool party? And even if that DID happen, I don't understand why a supposedly gay man can't be friends with a Republican and then have a few gay friends over to swim. Should he have hated all folks that lean right, or even yet, fall over to the right? Might that be the same hate you surely don't want from the "right", correct? Kinda smacks of hypocrisy.
You have NO idea what type of conversations he had with the Regan's do you? You will never know what kind of impact he might have actually had on Ronald and Nancy regarding homosexuality and AIDS. Or are you "all knowing"?
and on that note, y'all have a good evening.
a cowboy in Texas
Paul
I never said the Reagans were "the enemy," you twit with too much time on his hands 'til the next semester begins. Nor did I say Merv's pool parties were merely for having drinks. His parties were for hooking
up with hot young aspiring actors, unless a lot of people in Hollywood, including Merv's own employees, are lying. Of course Merv was a guest at the White House, and stayed close to the Reagans after they left office.
Merv was Nancy's escort at her vegetable hubby's funeral, and Nancy attended Merv's wake with Merv's son Tony, obviously conceived in the dark while Merv was thinking of the young Burt Reynolds or Alain Delon.
What did they discuss? Probably what a wonderful girl Eva Gabor was to have around the house, wink-wink. Yes, a wonderful double life. You know something, y'all, you are a buffoon and a fraud, lacing your prose with dripping homespun crap, likely a straight teen having a little fun with the gay folk. Shouldn't you be stealing somebody's panties, or whatever kids do now at college?
Henway,
If Paul's a teenager, as you make assumption he is, then I'd enjoy conversing with this witty young man. He's said some things on this board that many "dyed in the wool" hard core militant gay man might take note of. He seems intelligent and well spoken to me, even with the "prose with dripping homespun crap".
I think his comments have been most eyeopening and enlightening.
I, for one, do not think he's anything less then he's portrayed himself to be.
Hard-core militant? Yeah, wanting pure 100% equality, no more/no less, is being a hard-core militant. Up yours.
1) It makes no sense for someone portrayed by "Paul" to take any interest whatsoever in the writings of Signorile, or hang around gay rights blogs. 2) People talk with a rural twang; they don't WRITE with a rural twang. He is an urban straight boy playing games. 3) I am turning off my Haloscan and not coming back, this is a fucking bore.
I am intrigued by all those that feel gay men and women can't lead as normal a life as any other productive human individual. That we are incapable of duality. That we must conform to a dictum of some pink mafia hiding out over at the Advocate whilst they wait for an invitation to join the party at Out. Take a peek at your own doctrine boys and girls. You insist we are everywhere just waiting to come out. Hello darlings, we are out, to our friends and neighbors, our bosses our families and anyone close enough to simply take notice. What we have learned and what makes us wiser is that we don't feel compelled to prop you up. It's not what grownups do boys and girls. When Henway can move on up to the real world and cease the expectation that the world meet him or her all the way rather than half the way, his or her eyes will be opened. There is no movement. It's over. You won. Pat each other on the back and get on with your lives. What did you expect? Flowers and a cake. Quaint!
And Henway...
Therapy ROFLMAO...
I think it would be safe to assert right here and now that the plethora of psychotherapists milling around aimlessly is the cause of all your pain and misery. Imagine a profession where they tell you what a crud you are and for a few hundred bucks an hour and enough chit chat, you'll be all better until next week darling. Same time same place. The next time I'm lied to, cheated on , beaten up or beaten down, I'll find a friend or my pastor and we'll have a nosh, a chat and the world will look better after a hard days work. Oh my... still LMAO.
And Paul...
Thanks my friend. I don't know you but you can ya'll my way anytime. Genuine or not... don't care. Like your style and appreciate your words.
Dear Henway,
Precisely why you will never get the equality you expect. Assume he is a straight frat boi abs and all sitting in his dorm room spanking the keyboard among other stiff things.
1. He is here because he is interested in knowing more about you.
2. He has engaged you in a dialogue.
3. You berate him at every turn.
4. You fail to see his interest as your opportunity.
5. You dismiss him as unworthy.
6. You walk away in disgust.
7. How exactly are you helping him understand you.
8. How exactly are you worthy of his interest.
9. What makes you think he should do anything but dismiss you.
10. You are right back where you started not better off for the excercise.
Paul and I and a few others are doing our best to help you understand you have to try harder. You have to earn your place. You have to work at tolerating all interested parties. You need to at least seem interested in the process. Life is a negotiation. You get out what you put in. Just exactly who told you anything was fair or equal. Whomever it was I assure was a total and complete failure in life and should be tossed onto the heap of ruin that will be your life if you don't wise up.
Robert,
I guess you ran off Henway with your nasty comments, tsk tsk tsk. Interesting after he showers us with immature insults and childish name calling he runs when he's called on the carpet.
To bad folks like that can't speak intelligently and maturely about what point they feel like they want to get across, 'eh?
I have to wonder what's going on inside someone that's spews hate like that. (though he/she sure won't admit that's when they are doing, give me a break, I know the difference)
And thanks, Robert, for the kind words. I'll "Y'all" ya anytime.
a cowboy in Texas
Hey Paul,
I have found it interesting that when confounded by an alternate opinion, the meek can only run and hide. I actually like discussion. I believe it improves life in general. I can be persuaded. I just need a convincing argument. That most of these comments only rise to the level of "put down" is evidence to me that these twits don't deserve to represent a community worthy of inclusion into the broader American conversation. Parroting remarks of others, agreeing in concert is not a way forward. It's just noise. I hope life in Texas treats you well and that only success comes your way. I think its down to you and me on this thread so I hope I find you again somewhere else. It would be a pleasure to confound a few more another day. Cheers.
all this "to do about nothing" that merv was queer. has anyone mentioned that there may have been deep rooted psychological reasons for his remaining in the closet? no. maby comming out would have put him in the looney bin. when was the last time any of you were on a hollywood set and noticed that mostly all the men were queer? some in, some out. who cares.
tons of gays in showbusiness are closeted. for example, i do not recall johnny mathis writing a book or revealing in print that he is gay.
will we rip him apart when he dies?
grow up. in the words of the late actress patsy kelly, gay- shmae. who cares. what someone does in there personal life is their own business.
what difference does it make anyway, said kate hepburn.
really, what difference would it have made if he came out in life? nothin kids. people in this country have rights to do anything they damn well please. and if that means not comming out, so be it. this is america. freeedom means freedom.
however, it would be nice if he left some of that money to aids research.
and it would be even nicer if his son got hip and contacted elizabeth taylor about the best place to donate queer money today in search of a cure for aids.
a thought from a mature gay radical shrink
Leave Merv alone-for chrissakes he is dead and was closeted-so what! Get a grip-its none of your damned business that he didn't come out. Do your crusading for the good of others and shut up about Merv. He was a fabulous entertainer and had the best talk show in the 60's. Yea-and he's fat so he's an easy target. Michael Signorile used to beat up fags as a youth-why don't you pick on him!
I knew Merv was gay years ago.
I discovered that while attending a friends weekly cocktail parties in Carmel California (Merv owned a home there, as did other celebrities. Did I care? No. Am I surprised his being gay has not been discussed since his death? No.
I just think this is typical of American news, which I avoid, but like most people, I do have the internet. American news is censored and slanted to the media mogals personal views.
Rupert Murdock are you reading this?
I prefer my news unvarnished and uncensored which is all you get through American media. I get mine about this country through BBC, German and Canadian sources. It is more accurate since they can report the news without fear of retribution from Bush or his band of flying monkeys.
Merv doesn't owe jackshit to any of you queens vilifying him. He was an entertainer and a businessman who kept his private life private. He has no responsibility to anyone but himself and his family. What he did in the bedroom was HIS business and nobody else's. How DARE you criticize him for not taking up AIDS causes and the like. You want to do that, fine. Don't saddle him with YOUR agenda. Merv entertained the world for more than half a century and will continue to do so with the two most popular game shows in syndication that he created, "Jeopardy" and "Wheel of Fortune". There's gotta be a helluva talk show going on up there with Johnny Carson, Jack Paar, Steve Allen, Tom Snyder, and now...Merrrrrrrrvin. Rest well, Mr. Griffin. You will be missed.
Do I detect an odor of self-righteous cynicism here? Have I never met any self-righteous, self-hating queer men before . . . never--and I am shocked, shocked, shocked! Poor, billionaire Merv is dead, and there are so many guys running to rescue his name and rep. Yep. You guys are the real heroes of this argument, because without your help, the whole mess that we live with could not continue itself. Next time I'm invited to a sleep-over at the White House, I'll tell George, Jr., how much he owes you. And he'll reward you all.
Merv Griffin! Hmmm.......
First of all Hollywood is a State of mind.
As a gay male, my gaydar sensed that Dear Mervin was gay as I watched his tired talk show from Hollywood where Eva Gabor was a frequent guest. Merv always came off as "one of the girls" as he gabbed with guests like Eva Gabor or Virginia Graham.
A straight male just wouldn't be THAT bitchy as he held his tea parties on stage.
I recall one program where Nina Blachard(spelling), owner of a famous modeling agency was a guest. Merv loved surprises. He brought out a stage hand working on his show to meet Nina. Merv was gushing over his young, handsome employee to Nina.
He asked her to give him a chance as a model in her agency.The male employee was prettier than Tom Cruise ever was.
Using Eva Gabor as his beard was fairly obvious to the gay crowd.
Ok, now I do not hold Merv remaining in the closet in any way responsible for the spread of AIDS or any other contagious diseases.
That is ridiculous.
Merv's appearance on Politically Incorrect one evening where he lambasted Clinton for the Lewinski affair....and proudly stated that he was a "Republican"......does not make Merv Griffin a demon; however in my opinion it certainly makes him a disgusting phoney!
His enormous wealth obviously played a major role in his "coming-out-smelling-like-a-rose" after numerous males filed lawsuits against him for unwanted sexual advances.
The average 9 to 5 gay man faced with similar legal problems would either go to jail or owe his soul in civil court.
To come out or not!
Liberace did NOT need to come out. His entire persona was that of a drag queen seated at the piano.
My gaydar tells me that both John Travolta & Tom Cruise are gay.
I will however excuse Mr. Cruise for not publicly declaring his homosexuality.
He is a top box office superstar who attracts millions of adoring female fans to his films.
George Michael was an idol with female record buyers up until his "gay" experience in a public restroom with an undercover cop hit the front pages! His career tanked.
Unlike George Michael, Elton John has been open about his homosexuality for years & years. He has probably sold more records than The Beatles.
But Elton John acheived his enormous success in the music business through talent..........not any particular fan base that required he be heterosexual.
Merv Griffin was an enormously wealthy, gay, windbag.
Speaking about his homosexuality is not wrong. Remaining in the closet when most of the gay world knew he was a fairy...........discourages other gays from facing the reality of their orientation with a sense of pride.
Signorile: nice plug for your own book in the middle of the piece.
As a gay man in his mid-50's, I can say that many of you younger gay men may not realize that coming out was risky for us, not really the simple "political choice" it is for you today.
It's easy to vilify Merv. How reliable are these stories from his "ex's"?
I grew up seeing Merv on TV in one way or another. He was rich, he was intelligent. His gay life was his own business. I am surprised that it is now such a BIG news item. If he had wanted it to be so, he had ample opportunity throughout the years to make it so. I believe in the American Heart Association, but I don't take up a place in working for the AHA. WHY is Merv being criticized after being Dead, about his lack of involvement in the AIDS education of the 1980s/90s?? If anyone had such a problem about it THEN, why not say so to his face when you had the chance? I wonder about our American focus on ENTERTAINMENT items as opposed to things that truly have some importance. I don't support the gay/lesbian lifestyle, but neither is it any of my business as I am not either. I am a heterosexual and a Christian......God said to love everyone....not just those who meet a certain criteria. I don't have to agree-but I'm certainly not supposed to treat others with anything less than the love that Jesus showed-TO EVERYONE. We are ALL God's children.....
If what you say is true, David, it was real simple with Merv. He loved cock . . . but he loved money and power even more, and had internalized a modus operandi that was not going to threaten the latter by being open about the former.
Yes, in the generation he came up in, it was probably harder for a person to be "out." But it is hard for people to change . . . especially when they are older . . . even though the times change around them.
Certainly, Merv was a tortured person. He liked men, but deep down in his soul, he was probably TERRIFIED of the consequences of being public about it . . . to the point that other that were public about it that worked for him, threatened him as well.
And for those on this board that are attacking Mike for "outing" someone like Merv, especially now that he's dead, or for blaming Merv for being more of the problem rather than the solution, I suspect that your irrational comments have to do with YOUR OWN PATHOLOGY and UNRESOLVED ISSUES.
Maybe Merv's private life was none of your damn business, Mr. Mike Signorsackashit. And who runs the media? Liberals. And I don't remember many of them standing up for gay people in the 80's at all. Face it, Mike, you're just a big fag who likes to denigrate his betters, which isn't hard for you to do.
Commenting by HaloScan
