Category: is it just me?

civil rights, is it just me?, mixed media, venting, well?

shows like 24, the portrayal of Islam, and what we do with that

by  •  • 6 Comments

I just read an article on CNN.com that kind of had me a little confused, and well, frustrated. See, apparently, since the premiere of this season’s anti-terrorism, action-thriller show 24, Muslim groups are speaking out that they are worried that the portrayal of Islamic fundamentalists will somehow prevent Americans from distinguishing fiction from reality; and as a result, profile all Muslims as terrorists (leading to more violence and hatred towards Muslims, based on those beliefs).

While I do understand the concerns of Muslims, mainly because they were (and still remain) such a targeted and singled out group because of American beliefs about 9/11, I find frustration in their doubt that Americans can distinguish reality and fiction. I feel this frustration, mainly because on the show (for those that watched it), they went out of their way to show how the racial profiling of Muslim people was both defamatory, and inconsistent with where the actual blame for the attacks should be placed. They went so far as to highlight one person working with a type of Muslim consulate standing up to the FBI, and even getting arrested, when they came in to cease records; stating how unconstitutional and wrong it was (incidentally, she is the president’s sister).

My frustration from the protests of the show come from the simple fact that not only is it very obvious the show is fiction (I mean, who doesn’t need to pee or ingest any food or water in 24 hours… seriously), but they (the show that is) have gone (in my opinion) above and beyond to prove that this type of profiling and finger pointing is not only wrong, but defamatory and dangerous for innocent people; even though the terrorists they are fighting this season are Muslim. Again, the show made it a main point to say that this type of profiling and grouping of blame to people who look or believe a certain way is wrong and dangerous.

Now you see, part of my issue, is that my frustration runs deeper than that. It is true that my frustration, in this instance, comes initially from the fact that people still get scared that the actions and beliefs of one fundamentalist extreme group (albeit fictional) would still potentially be spread to all people of similar skin tone, ethnicity, or religious belief. But my frustration grows when I think that some people will actually believe that, and in this case, believe it from a obviously fictional TV show.

I am a person that always tries to look for the best in people, but living in a country that still touts Muslims as terrorists, it is really hard to see good in people that can believe something like that. Additionally, I understand where the Muslim groups that are protesting the show are coming from, but I find that I am also frustrated with them for thinking we are unable to distinguish fact from fiction; and again, I am even more frustrated with those that can’t realize that what happens on a TV show isn’t real.

I really worry that if we are still living in a society and a time where there are people that gain such impression from television and media that it leads to racial/ethnic profiling, defamation of religious groups, and inability to distinguish reality from fiction, well, then I am really afraid of this society. I am afraid of a society that has seemingly allowed itself to become two-sided; those that perpetuate stereotypes (be it real or invented), and those that fear being labeled as a stereotype. I know what it is like to be a member of a highly hated group, and I know what that fear feels like when you think you could be harmed simply because of who you are believed to be; but I would like to believe that there could be a time where we could all stop having to live in that fear. I would like to believe that there is a time when these issues will not plague our society, and we can all stop profiling, and being profiled.

And in this particular instance (and other instances where this is the case), I would truly like to believe that we are already at a point where fictitious television programs have no influence in our ability to delineate these divisions, and stop stereotyping and finger pointing. Because, if TV is really that dangerous, we, as a society, have a hell of a long way to go to stop fear and hate amongst ourselves. And that, is enough to frustrate just about anyone, you know?

What do you think? Do you think that the show really does blur the lines so much that people will be confused? Or do you think that the Muslim groups are being a little too timid about a fictional TV show? Or do you think that they have reason to fear, because people in our society really are that ignorant and potentially hateful? Do you think that it is reasonable to expect people to be able to watch TV and NOT carry their impressions of a show and turn them into hatred or fear? What do you think?

[as always, the picture isn’t mine, it came from the internets]

civil rights, is it just me?, venting, well?

stop the name calling

by  •  • 20 Comments

Remember that petty ass Grey’s Anatomy name calling thing a few months ago? Well, if not, here’s a recap: the out gay actor was called a faggot by a fellow cast member, who not only denied he ever did it, but didn’t really apologize, either. Well, Mr. Bigot was all about discussing the event the other night after the Golden Globes, and said he never called him a “faggot” (mentioning it, AGAIN).

Now, I can’t help but sit here and wonder, why is this guy just throwing around faggot like it isn’t that big of a deal? I mean, when will people realize that derogatory and shameful terms used to describe others isn’t okay? I think that the guy from Seinfeld figured that out, as did (hopefully) Mel Gibson; so why is it something other people have such a hard time with? Faggot is not a word you are allowed to use without consequence. Stop the name calling; because I am pretty sure if they tables were turned, you would take great offense at some words that could be used to hurt you, okay?

Seriously, why can’t we just live in a world where there isn’t so much hate and fear? When will be able to just be kind and peaceful? Will we ever? Little things like this make me doubt we ever will. Ugh. (article)

civil rights, is it just me?, politics, well?

stem cells and Jimmy Carter

by  •  • 17 Comments

Two things that as I sit here thinking about, don’t really make sense to me:

1) Why Bush (or anyone) is so opposed to stem cell research, especially because of the amazing benefits that it can bring in curing many different incurable diseases, like cancer and Alzheimer’s. More importantly, why Bush should be the final say in the decision for the stem cell bill that passed recently with a vast majority.

Okay, so you don’t agree with abortion. Fine. I get it. It may mean you are a little narrow-minded, but you don’t like it, I understand that. I still stand by the position of, “if you don’t like abortion, don’t have one”, but I understand that doesn’t work for everyone. But why attack stem cells? First of all, these cells are not the reason people get abortions. The source of stem cells may come from aborted fetuses, but they also come from embryos that were slated for in vitro fertilization; that is, eggs that were fertilized outside of the body for later transplantation, that for whatever reason, were not used. Now, the only other option, is to throw these cells away. You can also clone these cells, but I can see where some are against cloning too; but if it is only for the purpose of research, and the cells are going to be destroyed anyway, why not? Especially when the benefits are so potentially great? That doesn’t make sense. Think of what the world would be like without surgery. They had to practice it and try new things when it was first developed; do you think people didn’t die? At least in this circumstance, people wouldn’t be dieing; it would be cells slated for destruction, cells that could potentially allow someone who is paralyzed be able to walk again. Making this decision as one man, is completely selfish and unrepresentative of the people that live in this country, and those that will be living here and affected by this narrow-minded decision in the future. I just don’t understand that, especially because, hey, don’t we have 3 arms of government? The two should keep the third in check, right? So why does he just get come in and veto it? It just doesn’t work for me.

2) How people can be saying that Jimmy Carter is anti-Semitic with his book, and why 14 people decided that he is so “evil” that they resigned from the board of the Carter center.

First of all, it is pretty clear that anyone that calls Jimmy Carter an evil man is a pretty delusional person. The man won the Nobel Peace Prize, is an amazing diplomat, and possibly most contradictory thing to the “evil” label, is the fact that he is a renowned humanitarian. Jimmy Carter is not anti-Semitic, in fact, he isn’t anti-anyone; which is why he wants peace in Palestine, and not apartheid, which is basically enforced discrimination and separatism resulting in the denial of human rights. The statements he has made in favor of peace for Palestine (and Israel) make complete sense if you look at them in context. People have said that he is anti-Israeli because of his stance against bombing Lebanon and Palestine; but he is against this because he is against war and killing. He stated that Israel has no right to destroy and reclaim Palestine, because, well, they don’t. Just because you believe “God” ordained something for you to have, doesn’t mean that you can take it by force. Sure, Palestine doesn’t have a spotless history, but when do you stop and say, “let’s think about our future?” A great man once said, “An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.”, and you know what, Gandhi was right. Continued fighting over the right to this tiny piece of land will bring about nothing but death and destruction in both places, and what Jimmy Carter is highlighting with his book, is that it doesn’t have to be like that. A call for piece is a call for survival. It is a call for humanitarianism, and should never been seen as anything but civil and just. People have got to stop hiding behind religion and killing each other over land and differences of opinion… and that is what Jimmy Carter sees. We as a nation have no right to stand on either side of that fence and state “we agree” with either side; it is not our place. But if we have any involvement in the region or the discord between these two nations, it should be one of peace making and diplomacy; something that Jimmy Carter knows a lot about. That is why I wonder how people can still think he is anti anything, other than anti war, anti death, and anti hate. I don’t know about you, but he sounds like a pretty good guy to me. UPDATE: After several conversations, I feel the need to follow up on these statements I made about Jimmy Carter, and have done so in this blog post. Please check it out.

Man, I have been thinking way too much lately. A nice 3 day weekend is just what the doctor ordered. Hope everyone has a great weekend, and a great Monday remembering such a wonderful man, Martin Luther King, Jr.!

is it just me?, politics, venting, well?

answers, accountability, and more importantly, change; we need some NOW

by  •  • 5 Comments

After hearing Bush’s “new” plan for Iraq, I find myself scratching my head and asking myself a few questions. Of course, we know that this in fact is not a new plan, because he said pretty much the same thing he said 3 months ago. Well, that plus the surge of more troops. Here’s hoping that the funding is killed before he can send any more American men and women to their deaths.

After seeing the speech, and realizing the obvious lack of any real change in our “plan” to “win” Iraq, there are a few things I would like to know:

1) Who is Bush listening to with regards to actually trying to end this war? Because it is pretty clear he isn’t listening to anyone that doesn’t have monetary gain at stake; those serving to make money through this war are just getting richer, and there is no desire for it to end for them. It is pretty clear to me that he is listening to them, but not us… and why not? Isn’t his job to represent our interests (after all, we are paying for this war, and will be for a LONG time to come)? Isn’t that what a Democracy is supposed to do?

2) When is he going to realize that more than 70% of Americans have made it clear that the war has got to end now? (This piggybacks on the last question.) Bush needs to realize that we elected a new majority to speak for us, and that voice needs to be taken seriously. I ask, because his approval rating doesn’t seem to matter to him one bit.

3) Does he really care about the soldiers that have died, as well as those that have been injured (which total WAY more and are, for some reason, never mentioned)? Because he doesn’t seem to have an ounce of remorse, especially as his new plan will call for more deaths.

Quoth the Bush: (source)

Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue – and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties.

Um, when will be in a position to not EXPECT more casualties? What if the plan doesn’t work? Will that mean even more dead? As of right now, there have been over 3000 soldiers lost, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths. That sounds like enough is enough to me, one more death is one too many. And no more soldiers need to be subjected to injuries; these people are coming home without arms, legs, genitals, etc. That is just not right.
4) If we are trying to end the war, why is there a surge of new troops being deployed? I mean, if the plan is (was) to provide support to Iraq, and help them build up their own military, why hasn’t that worked, since we have been doing that from the beginning? Are more troops really what we need to do something we haven’t yet been able to accomplish? And are 20,000 troops really going to be able to make it happen? Or, is it more plausible that we can’t attain this “goal”, and the best thing to do is make things right (since we started by making them wrong) by ending the war? There have to be better strategies… Oh wait, there are several, but Bush didn’t seem to pay attention any of those. Remember what happened in 2001 when he ignored some good advice… I’m just saying.
5) Since it is obvious that there is no desire to end the war, what will the next steps be? Are we ever going to bring home our troops? If so, is there a plan for getting them out? If there is, what is this plan? To me (and many others) this seems like he is just passing the buck, holding out this war until his term is over. He won’t admit defeat or failure (his lame ass “I accept responsibility” last night was weak and pathetic), and as a result, he will pour everything we have into making it look like we are “making it work”. How is that making things right?
6) Why haven’t we ever acknowledged, and therefore altered our plans accordingly, that the people responsible for the attack on 9/11 are not the ones we are gunning for? And why is that, because wasn’t why the war was started; a war on terror? WTF? I know there are volatile people in the region, but most of those are insurgents gunning for us because we invaded and continue to occupy THEIR COUNTRY. Why aren’t we trying our diplomatic hand at making things better in the surrounding countries; who now are continuing to get more and more pissed at US, and will soon be coming for US??!
As a fellow livejournaler invoking the spirit of Kelly said, “George Bush is a douche-bag…. I want to send that guy a douche bag in the mail.”. Seriously, folks, this guy is a real sadist and mass murderer. Calling him anything less would be inaccurate.

Now, I know that the Bush supporters/conservatives out there are going to go all ape-shit on this post, but I don’t even care. These questions are based on what has been said and what is currently going on… much of it without opinion. Say what you want, and argue all you want, but this war is wrong, and Bush’s plan is plain wrong for suggesting we continue down the same old road. Something has got to change, and I hope that change comes soon. Come through for us Congress! Come through!!

And to you, John McCain, shut the fuck up. You have no idea what you are talking about you douche. You can’t say the “failure” of the war is from the consequences of actions taken by Congress NOW… if anything, that failure has already happened, we are dealing with a mess that needs to be cleaned up ASAP, ass. I might send him a douche bag in the mail too. If you were in Vietnam, and you see the same thing now, how can you continually bury your head in the sand little man? Wake up! (source)

is it just me?, venting

who are these magazines for?

by  •  • 7 Comments

Details. GQ. Both are men’s magazines. Both are also magazines that I have personally subscribed to for years. Both of these are magazines I have been getting since I was in high school. Why? Because both of these are men’s magazines that are all about fashion, gadgets, etc., and things that men, men like me, like to look at and read about.

But, last year, I cancelled my subscription to GQ for one big reason; I don’t think that magazine was meant for me, at least not anymore. Reason being, that almost every single thing they advertise and hype in their fashion and gadget sections are WAY out of my price range. And I am not talking, “oh, that’s just expensive, I could never afford a $400 coat”, no, I am talking like a $40k-watch-out-of-my-price-range, price range. Seriously, who has this magazine begun to target? Millionaires? Billionaires? Because these are the only people that I can foresee being able to afford to drop a couple thousand dollars on one bag or one pair of shoes, or afford a $7000 suit. Not to say that I don’t like those things, but I do have an idea of what it means to be extravagant, and just plain stupidly indulgent and wasteful. Seriously, if you spend $40k on a watch, you just have too much money, and you are just wasting it because you can’t think of anything else to do. That has to be it, because it is JUST a watch, after all. I can even see spending a couple thousand on a watch, if it is what you want, and can afford, but not $40k. That is overly excessive and insulting to those that go hungry every day (now, I am not saying that they have to do anything else, I am just saying, I would never spend that much money like that. I think it is crazy.). So, long story short, that is why I cancelled my GQ subscription. It sucked a little bit too, because I always liked looking through it and reading about fashion and whatnot. But I just felt so distant from the target demographic they have started going for, that I really had nothing in common with it anymore.

But at least I still had Details. Details is a sorta-gay-friendly watered down version of GQ; not as high and mighty, and a little more level headed when it comes to fashion and personal spending. Even when GQ started to slide more towards the superfluousness, Details still maintained a sense of staying grounded. There was a feeling of youth to Details, and you could tell it really was made for men like me. But alas, just as GQ zoomed off in a multi-million dollar jet, it seems that recently, they have doubled back in order to pick up Details and take them for the ride. Low and behold, there was a feature in a recent Details that hyped “indulgent” items, and there was the $40k watch, staring right back at me. Ugh. And it highlighted what I didn’t like about GQ, Details is no longer targeting normal guys like me… indulgence isn’t a $40k timepiece or a $700 steak, it is MUCH MUCH less than that; that is more like wastefulness. So I ask, who are these magazines for? Apparently, it has become so out of sync that you must be a multi-millionaire to have “nice” and “indulgent” things… I mean, we live in a country where stores can sell a normal t-shirt for $100. And I am talking a regular shirt just like the Hanes T you can get at Target, 3 for $10, but with a D&G logo screen-printed on the front. No other differences.

Things have just gotten so out of control, and I guess the magazines are just reflecting the inflation… but in the process, they have alienated me, and I would guess many other middle class men like me. I know that I won’t be renewing my subscription, because like GQ, they are not concerned with my demographic anymore. But they probably won’t notice anyway, since I’m no longer their target. Sigh.

all about me, is it just me?, near and dear, the catch-all-egory

what does blogging mean anyway?

by  •  • 6 Comments

I feel like lately, I haven’t had anything to say that would be worth reading. More importantly, I feel like the things I would write aren’t things people want to hear about anyway. Negative, negative, negative; sometimes, life can just be that way. But should that be what I am blogging about? Do people want to hear that stuff??? What does blogging mean anyway? What does it mean to you?

For me, I started this blog because I wanted to share my thoughts with the internets. I still feel that way just as strongly today as I ever did, but what I am going through right now prevents me from being able to focus in the ways I did in the past. It prevents me from opening a can of whoop ass if I need to, and it prevents me from even thinking sometimes. Sometimes, it is all I have not to just sleep the day away. But is that really what I should be blogging about? I know that I am in essence doing that very thing right at this very second, but I guess that is as good a way as any to bring it up, right?

I love my blog. I brings me a lot of joy. I hope others like it too. But I worry that I don’t have the right stuff to keep it healthy and thriving, you know? I also feel like I have lost so much by going through this craptasticness, and even though I want to just be like “stop idiot! let’s get back into the light!”, for whatever reason, I ain’t moving. I guess one good thing about that, is that it shows that I am not going anywhere (with regards to this blog and all), and that eventually, I will begin to see the landscape around me again… I hope.

is it just me?

acknowledging attraction vs. actually acting on it

by  •  • 18 Comments

Yes. There’s a difference. There is a big difference between acknowledging attraction to someone, and acting on it. See, I will admit it. I am definitely attracted to lots of different people. Lots of different types of people. Men. I love to look at men. I look at men all day long, and never get tired of it. Does that mean that I act on those attractions? No. Does that mean that I am any less attracted to my partner? Absolutely not! I identify that I am very visually oriented, and I like looking at things (in this case people) that I am attracted to. But, it doesn’t mean that I would ever step outside of my relationship for one second; that’s not something I would ever even think about, or want to do. See, I love James with all my heart. He is the most beautiful, sexy, awesome lover/friend/partner that I could ever imagine. I consider myself the luckiest guy alive, because I found someone that really does compliment me well, and he is hot as hell, and we totally love each other.

Does that mean that I instantly shut off my eyes and stopped being attracted to other guys? NO! That’s silly to think that. But, it does mean, that as long as I am lucky enough to be with James, that James is the only man for me. Period. I love to look at men (James is a man too, you know), but I as far as actually being with another man? Nope. Not going to happen.

The reason I bring this up, is because I find that sometimes people hear that you are attracted to someone, or comment that someone is hot or whatever, and instantly that person thinks you would be willing to cheat on your partner; but I don’t understand that. I think that is why I wanted to write this post, was to get a perspective of what you all think. When your partner mentions someone else is attractive (or you mention it for that matter), what is your reaction? How does your partner react when you say someone is attractive/hot? James just needs acknowledgement that I think he is hot, and so that is what I give him. It’s a small thing that makes him feel good about the fact that I can be attracted to other men. I mean, all those of you out there that watch porn, isn’t that for some level of attraction? Don’t you find yourselves attracted to the people (well, at least with gay porn, they tend to use hot actors, I can’t speak of the men in straight porn) in the videos? Why is it that when we acknowledge our attraction, it is interpreted as a desire to cheat? Can’t we just think someone else is hot, and keep in in our pants? I know I can… but I guess I just wanted to know why people instantly think that? hmmm… thoughts? I know of at least one person that this issue pretty much destroyed his relationship (boyfriend was uber jealous because he acknowledged other men were hot, but he never cheated, nor gave him reason to believe he would), and I wanted to get some perspective here.

I know that I shouldn’t care what other people think, but all of us do, whether we admit it or not. And I guess I just don’t like people thinking that just because I think someone is hot, that I love my partner any less, and would be willing to cheat on him. Anyway… tell me what YOU think.

is it just me?

how (and why) does their love change?

by  •  • 9 Comments

I saw this postcard on postsecret today, and honestly, it really stuck me hard. This card really made me wonder how people can change their love for their children, based on finding out their child’s sexual orientation. I seriously don’t understand how that can change someone so much that you stop loving them, or even start loving them less because of who they are.

I guess I just wonder this, because I sometimes wonder if my parents love me less because of who I am. They have never said anything to me about it, but then again, we never actually talk about (or even address) the fact that I am gay. All that was ever said, was said the day I came out. Since then, it has not been even a subject up for discussion, unless there have been instances where I forced the issue (i.e., my sister’s wedding, where James wasn’t going to be allowed to sit with the family, and I threw a fit.). I sometimes wonder if they have distanced themselves from me for the reason that this father/mother sent in this secret. Perhaps, they share those feelings; but I just wonder, as I said before, how can you change your love for someone based on who THEY are? All I can do to make myself feel better when I read, hear, or see things like this, is guarantee that I would never judge and criticize my child or anyone else’s child in this way. If I love someone, especially my (possible, someday) child(ren), I will do so unconditionally, and will always feel that way. I believe that once you give love, you should never take it back.

I just can’t comprehend how someone can stop loving, or change their love for their own child because that child shares who they really are with their parents. What do you all think? Where do you think this mentality comes from? How do you think people have this ability to turn their backs on those they love because of something they don’t agree with (which doesn’t make it any less true or any more “wrong”)? How do you think you can change these thoughts, or can we?

What is so wrong with people today that we turn our backs on our own children because of who they love? This really sheds light on the way that people can turn their backs on those in need… if you can do it to your own child, you can certainly do it to a stranger who has less than you, and needs a helping hand. And this is what people hide under the guise of what is right and moral? I think not.

is it just me?

do I really have to?

by  •  • 19 Comments

My parents called me on my birthday. I didn’t return their call. My sister called me on my birthday. I didn’t return her call. I am working on getting my issues with them out in the open, but it is going to take a lot of time. In the mean time, I am avoiding them.

The best possible strategy? Probably not. But I don’t HAVE to do anything.

My friend’s mom was in town this weekend, and told me I have to maintain a relationship with my nephew, whom I have never even met nor heard anything about, other than his name. But I don’t want to. I don’t see why I have to build and maintain a relationship with someone whom I have never met, and unless I go out of my way to establish said relationship and go to meet him, I will never meet.

Why is it that people only want to maintain a relationship with you if you are willing to do all of the work? Sometimes, you get to the point where enough is enough, and you start to ask yourself, “do I really have to?”. The answer is no, duane. No, you don’t.

is it just me?

it’s too damn hot!

by  •  • 14 Comments

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel like it is just too damn hot?? It is 95 degrees today, and it definitely feels like more than 99 (even though that is what this screen capture from the weather channel says). Either way, 95 or 99, I am having trouble getting my brain to work, as I am just too hot to function. Walking from your car into your office should not cause you to break into sweats… that’s just too damn hot! I for one can’t wait for winter! Hmpf!

Just as an aside, is it just me, or do you think that Lieberman should just learn to lose gracefully? I think that it is pretty low of him to run again as an independent when the people obviously didn’t choose him. I guess it goes to show that people really will do anything they can to win; no matter what the costs.