New Playlist.com Player!!

I've decided to put a Playlist.com music player on the sidebar of this blog. I want my readers to be able to enjoy the music I do. So if my taste jives with yours pull up the blog and let it play! I'll occasionally add new music and create a post referencing the new song addition.

What are your thoughts on the music automatically playing when you open the page? I personally find that annoying when I'm visiting a site - especially one like this one that has heavy reading material - but I want the attention drawn to the music and I figured people can just do what I always do and hit pause if they find something they want to read.

Tell me - should I keep the automatic play or just leave the player sit on the side and the visitor can hit play if they want?

Can I care if you're fat?

Can I care if you’re fat?

Really, can I care if you do anything that doesn’t promote healthy living, like smoke? Even though I don’t know you?

What about if you don’t recycle?

What about religion…believing that religion is not good and is counter-productive to a healthy world, can I care that you’re religious? If you said no, let’s flip it: Do you care that I’m not religious? ...or would you if you met me? Do you/would you care that I’m an atheist? Do you find me to be a lost person who is a potential harm to the well-being or goodness of society? I would guess that that makes things a bit different for my reader if they are religiously inclined themselves. But regardless, religion isn't at all the most important issue here. I included it kind of as a "hmmm...."

("Imagine no religion." - John Lennon)

I thought about rephrasing my questions “should I…?”, but no. I really do mean can I? Will society allow me – or do I have the right or even the duty - to care about the bad decisions you make in your personal life? I don’t mean to sound invasive. I’m carrying on like some social conservative... caring about what you do in your personal life. Although I guess unlike most social conservatives I’m not trying to limit the choices you make based on my religious beliefs or traditions, but of course I’m still basing them on something. Also unlike most conservatives, I'm not trying to limit what makes you different from me. Right now I'm using just words. I'm just concerned with hypothetical questions regarding life choices, for which I believe you should still have the option to make them, regardless of if they are good or bad for you, as long as they don’t harm others - but wait! Oh no…that’s what I’m making a fuss about to begin with, isn't it!? This is my problem... I’m a bit worried because technically and logically I should be concerned with your personal life if I consider its indirect effect on the society in which we both live! The choices you make do indirectly affect me because they affect the society of which I am also a part! So, I’ll take some time to examine this and see what I can come up with. Regardless of what my political orientation tells me to believe, I mustn’t discard any question or thought just because it doesn’t fit the mold of with what I assume I already identify. From that idea springs my exploration...

_________________________________

I guess all these questions are really asking if I can care if you’re different from me? Can I care that you and I find different things important? And then based on this, do I, feeling confident in my beliefs, have a duty to worry about you making bad life choices that contradict what I find to be truthfully good or right? If yes, then of course the problem is by whose definition of goodness do we use? You and I likely value different things. (And if your answer is no, you will either stop reading if you've already made it this far and move on to something else - or continue and then share your thoughts as to why in a comment below!)

But I don’t believe that’s what I’m really asking. I’m not asking if I have the right to care if you’re different than me, for which I would obviously be inclined to say that I certainly do not care because realizing and even appreciating difference is a necessary part of life. Again that’s where my conflict becomes apparent, however, because while I believe that differences should be embraced, these differences lead to in what way one leads their life. The selfish (perhaps primitive) human that I am is naturally concerned with survival and tells me to watch out for anything that harms me in my life - including how others live theirs. If you don’t see the connection I’m making between a person’s poor lifestyle and myself, then understand this: If you are failing to fully participate in society, you are harming me since I am expending a great deal of effort and energy to better the very same society in which you choose not to participate or to damage. Of the things I mentioned above – well, maybe religion is debatable depending on your viewpoint – they’re all not really questions of “am I okay with you being different than me?” They’re questions of “am I okay with you ignoring the resources and intelligence we have today providing us with the know-how to make optimal life choices?” Are our viewpoints different? Perhaps. But this isn't about difference alone. It is about difference only because one of us isn't basing our decisions on positive-proven logic or evidence-supported suggestions. This is a question that must be answered by realizing that we are indeed given much information about the world, the mind, and the body on which to base life decisions. If I were to rephrase the question yet once more, “Can I get angry when you choose not to make a healthy decision despite all that we know about ourselves and our world today?”

Examples:

1) We know for certainty what causes obesity and other health-related diseases or deficiencies, and steps – often simple ones - can be made to avoid them or improve them.

2) We know specifically the harmful effects of cigarettes, excessive alcohol, and other drugs on the individual’s body and mind. It is a choice to use these drugs or misuse them.

3) We know the benefit of recycling and see the negative effects of waste on the planet. And yet many do not take the time. Meanwhile, they have no problem taking the time to watch an episode (or several episodes) of whatever the latest show is on television...Jersey Shore, Real Housewives of Wherever, etc.

What about something like voting – or making informed political decisions. Not only should I worry if you don’t care to make a vote, but when you do, I should be upset if you’ve not done an extensive amount of research followed by an even greater amount of thought and consideration. Right?

In the workplace, shouldn’t I be angry when I see you slacking just because you can get away with it?

In school, shouldn’t I have the right to get angry when you cheat by plagiarizing online sources to write a paper while I take the time and effort to properly research and write mine? I'll admit you’re doing the most harm to yourself because you’re not learning anything, but yet again, one must understand that that is precisely my point. Although you aren’t directly harming me, you had the opportunity to gain but because you were lazy, unfocused, unorganized, or all of the above, you missed out on an improvement of skills and intellect that would later be put to use in your life as a contributing member to society. Which may not even seem to be an indirect cause of harm to me as I’m claiming it is, but one must realize that if they had the opportunity to gain and chose to pass it up, they did in fact play an active role in remaining less fit or able to serve society in the future - the very society for which I’m expending extra effort to improve.

Perhaps I’m looking for the answer in the wrong place – or maybe the answer isn’t what I want to hear, or maybe there is no answer! (Well of course there’s an answer…everyone just might not agree on the same answer. And it is possible that this is the answer to my ultimate question here!) The problem with asking these questions is that I’m assuming that I'm making the right choices in how I view the world and how I choose to live. (And yes, that means you, too, are probably guilty of assuming the same about yourself.) You may very well find my life to be counter-productive to society. I think, however, that there is one giant, objective key to understanding this which minimizes the allowance for differences in opinion. I’ll get to that in just a bit.

I initially asked “Can I care if you are overweight?” …especially to the point that you would be considered obese?

A funny thing about people is that they constantly use a system of comparison to other people to gauge and guide their life choices rather than comparing who they are to the ideal version of themselves created in their own mind. When an overweight person sees another overweight person, either consciously or subconsciously they feel a sense of acceptance.* “It is okay to live this way because other people are doing it.” “It’s okay to cheat on this test because a lot of people are doing it.” “It’s okay to smoke pot because even some successful people do it.” Yes, indeed! Other people are failing to make optimal lifestyle choices! A lot of people! It is sever self-deception, however, to think that you will be able to accomplish as much as someone else who also smokes pot daily despite their success in life because there are many other factors. There are many other choices that they’re making that have nothing to do with pot...some of the opportunities they're handed about which to make choices are likely to never even cross your path! So to pick and choose which choices you want to focus on is just silly - especially if the ones you pick are modeled after another person. A maximally optimal society depends on maximum optimal individual choices. ...sort of like the old saying that the team's is only as good as its weakest player.

(*Realizing my lack of support for my above statement about acceptance of oneself amongst those who share similar traits, I must point out that I do in fact find this to be true in my own life as a homosexual and in the lives of my peers and friends. While it is something for which I have no sources to cite, I can attest from a daily list of personal examples. It is much easier to be a minority as long as the presence of the minority is known to the individual. It's a very real characteristic that seems almost hardwired into our brains: the desire to fall in line with everyone else. ...and if everyone else is doing something "different," then that apparently makes it okay for you to do it as well regardless of its benefit to you or to others. I felt the need to expand on this idea and therefore need to clarify that that doesn't mean homosexuality is wrong or that it's a choice to be or not be gay. It just means that, like making bad decisions - or more generally any decision - it is easier made when you aren't the only one, just like acceptance of one's true sexuality is easier knowing there are others with whom you may identify.)

Here's an excerpt taken from WebMD.com in "Percentage of Overweight, Obese Americans Swells: Americans Are Eating Poorly, Exercising Less, and Getting Bigger, Survey Finds"-->

More Americans are becoming overweight or obese, exercising less, and eating unhealthy foods.

That’s the finding of the latest Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, which shows that 63.1% of adults in the U.S. were either overweight or obese in 2009.

That was a small but measurable increase from 62.2% the previous year. The survey finds that 36.6% of Americans are overweight and 26.5% obese.

How is it that, despite the increase in education and increase in medicine and science and despite America's intellectual and economic prowess, we still have a rise in health issues related to weight? America is the (THE) most obese country in the world. In case this wasn't an observation you made yourself: over half - a little over 3/5 - of Americans are overweight or obese according to this survey! Some published articles point out that all American adults will be obese by 2030. This tells us that being heavy is quite the norm and, clearly, most people don’t seem to want to do anything about it! The conclusion of the WebMD article coincides with what I'm suggesting: "The report concludes that obesity is still on the rise and that reversing this trend may require the involvement of communities, businesses, and governments." Hmmm...those three are all highly-structured societal institutions.)

I believe that overweight people are indirectly harming me by 1) cementing an unhealthy norm in the psyche of the culture and 2) being unable to participate in many of life’s activities to the same standard or at the same speed and efficiency as a physically primed person could participate, thus affecting society at large - if even in a small way.

There is no doubt that some would be offended reading what I've said. (If I may be typical me...then "why must I refrain from asking these things? Because it makes you upset? Ahhh yes and now WHY does it make you upset?" Anyway...) Maybe I don’t think it’s a problem for me to phrase my thoughts so brutally honest because I’ve been desensitized by people telling other people what they believe is wrong with them. Our society has no problem telling me that something I never even chose – being homosexual – is wrong…and this status I hold due to innate forces is discriminated against frequently both directly and indirectly by others. And they are very vocal about their beliefs. Many claim to have a free license to discriminate – it’s called religion. They hold this special license that prevents them from ever being tested. It is not right to question a religious person about their faith. Why? It’s just not! We don’t do it because it’s not acceptable. (Yes, but why!?) BECAUSE IT’S JUST NOT. Likewise, we are taught not to ask questions like the one(s) I’m asking. Why? Because it’s not right!

The real reason is that people don’t want to admit the truth: that they have failed in some aspect in their life - and it makes it even more difficult to deal with and more embarrassing because the steps to avoid the failure are very simple ones that anyone can choose to make. So - I will continue to say what I think out loud because I believe in transparency during discussions like this. We can critique a chef's work. We can critique a person's singing voice. We can critique a politician's ideas. We can critique a fashion designer's line. We can critique a coach's decision. But I cannot openly critique someone's health (or religion/smoking habit/drug use/low education/wasteful lifestyle)?* Yes, actually, I can. And I will. ...despite that doing so makes some people uncomfortable.

(*This line of reasoning was actually introduced to me in the brilliant scientist/author Richard Dawkins' book, The God Delusion.)

So again, obesity is just one example of a number of things that could be seen as a negative choice one makes in life. The origin of this question dawned on me after leaving the gym and feeling great about myself and about the direction in which my life appeared to be headed one day. Nothing new had occurred. I just felt great being in the gym and making an effort to become as fit as possible. I thought to myself, though: “What if I weren’t in the gym, and what if I had allowed myself to become severely overweight to the point that I couldn’t function or complete the rest of my day’s activities as quickly and efficiently - or perhaps at all? How would I feel?” (I guess this is the actor/artist in me. I like to put myself in different mind states like that quite a bit – or I imagine that someone is next to me who is, for example in this case, very obese, and I have fake conversations with them to see what they tell me.)

I suppose I’m suggesting some ideal dream society where everyone is almost robotic in their quest for health and knowledge. It sounds crazy, but all it takes is a visit to a city that actually has a higher number (statistically proven!) of physically fit people, diversity, or higher education level.

When one visits these samples of desirable society, one wonders why everyone doesn’t make an active choice to live that way! I understand that weight-management is a struggle for many people. But what would happen in other areas of these people's lives if they were allowed to slack because it wasn't easy? That's just not how life works (if we assume you are trying to be successful). But again, no one likes to put it that bluntly. If you'd like a great overview of the problem in America with obesity, I'd recommend, amongst others, this article as a starting place: "Obesity in America" by DowntoEarth.org. I could include numerous excerpts highlighting the societal pressures and the acceptance of bad habits, including the literal re-definition of the word "food" in America, but these aren't necessary in this discussion so we'll keep moving...

Indeed, I see obesity in America like The Plague! I can walk through virtually any place in America and see a plethora of overweight or obese people. It’s like a sea of blubber. [Rude, I know. But I’m speaking on the presumption that I’ve decided these people are harming me!] I know there’s a person inside that body with feelings and a mind, but why don’t those feelings and that mind do something about it!?

Last night I was in T.G.I. Friday's. The draft of this article waiting to be posted on my MacBook came to the forefront of my mind as I realized the significant proportions you get when you order there. These proportions are significantly larger than I remember them being when I was even just five or sic years younger. You're also suggested both appetizers and desserts - all of which are equally as immense in size as the entrees. You're encouraged to sign up for their "stripes program" which gives you several freebies or discounts on their food when you eat enough of it. I looked around and noticed the 63% figure quoted above to be very accurate. Some tables had only overweight or obese people sitting at it while others had, of four seats, at least one filled with a blob of blubber - but likely two or three.

One can sit and favor these people telling me I’m downright cruel or that these people can't help it, when the actual fact is that when I see these people while I'm out they're sucking down ice-cream cones and eating giant high-fat/high calorie/no-nutrition meals in a [likely] fast food restaurant, to which their trip to the restaurant was the only exercise they may have gotten that day! They also allow their young husky children to order the already-too-large-for-adults adult-sized meals! ...and when the child cleans their plate, they get a "Bravo!" from the entire family. "Nice job, son! Don't want to WASTE any! Oh look there's the waitress. Uh-excuse me, we're going to have four slices of the triple layer chocolate cake. And it's Sonny's birthday. Does he get a treat?" Do NOT tell me these people are trying. If they are, it's not hard enough.

Dare I say: Sinful. ...on behalf of the parents.

So does all that seem harmful to the individual? Absolutely. Especially when phrased that way. Is it harmful to me, though? Yes! I believe it is. Indirectly.

For example, does the action of smoking a blunt directly affect society at all? No, I don’t believe so - although purchasing it may, but I'm not sure. I'll not go too far with the pot example. But does the lifestyle of a typical pot-smoker directly affect society? Yes, it does. In fact the contribution of the individual (or rather the lack thereof) is the very material that builds and holds a society together! It really can’t get more direct than that.

So with marijuana, for example, it is not an issue of simply smoking pot (unless of course it is habitual enough to cause health decline, and then it matters for the same reasons as the fatties - pun intended). It is really an issue of the lifestyle that accompanies smoking marijuana. And I don’t know exactly where I stand on the legalization of marijuana. I’m about 70/30 in favor of it being legalized. But this isn’t a question of marijuana’s legalization; it is about how to base one's life choices knowing that it is illegal and knowing that it isn’t a healthy choice (smokers are inhaling hot, unfiltered smoke into their bodies), not to mention the time lost preparing and smoking it accompanied by the wasted time under the influence of the drug, and then asking “does it indirectly harm me?” Yes, it does.

…or eating frequent Big Mac meals with large fries and a soda. …or not staying physically fit. Over and over I'll provide these examples. These are, in and of themselves, seemingly harmless activities to a society at large. But they are not smart choices for individuals, who then make up society. I realize that they differ greatly from such actions as blowing up buildings, dismantling road signs for shits and giggles or spreading computer viruses, which are all actions that have a directly negative impact. But living a poor lifestyle still has a negative effect, despite that it is an indirect one. So shouldn’t I be concerned?

One argument against what I’m suggesting might be an overweight person's or a habitual pot-smoker's genetics or perhaps some kind of health handicap. And if not a genetically acquired trait, perhaps it is a memetic trait that the child inherits from their parent, thus they have a difficult time overcoming it later in life. True. I get that. But that isn’t an excuse for laziness! In fact, it only brings about the necessity for harder work! And these people have it easy in a way because they know what their handicap is! You cannot tell me that the majority of overweight people do not know they're fat. ...or that a smoker doesn't know the health-issues, or that a potential voter doesn't know it is time for an election. No - these people are aware and should be happy that they know what their weaknesses are! If anything, they are a victim of self-deception like the way that I mentioned above. These people are lucky because many go through life and never realize their personal handicaps. Life is not easy for any of us. But what of that? We must shoot for our highest goals.

In life, we often compensate. People who have been dealt a bad hand might be inclined to acquire the mental skills to more easily overcome future bad hands. The best and most recent personal example is my conquest of the gym which I mentioned earlier. I am not physically gifted. While not shockingly thin to the point of being underweight, I desire to have a bigger/stronger, more fit, and an overall healthier athletic body. (What’s more important, though, is that obtaining this prime body is necessary for my line of work in performance and entertainment. Talk about directly influencing society!) After years of beating myself up and playing mind games with myself, I’ve finally realized the necessity of proper nutrition and exercise to meet this goal – and to be honest, after finding this for myself, I’ve never felt better. I was skinny and compensated with supreme knowledge. So, I eventually mind-talked my way into realizing a healthier life for myself.

So the recurrent problem in my article is precisely that. How do I know that my choices in life are indeed healthy choices for society?? Am I blinded by my own ego? The answer to that question, of course, is simple, and this is how we know that being overweight is bad, that smoking is bad, that cheating is bad, etc.

SCIENCE. It takes one read of the definition of the word to give me delight and satisfaction. According to my MacBook Pro,

“the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.”

Good and bad should not be based on any type of religious morality standards, but rather on scientific research and experimentation. It frustrates me beyond end when people confuse the idea of what constitutes good and bad. When talking about life decisions like these, it is not a matter of referencing some previous tradition or code to find the answers. Good and bad in the sense that they are based on religion or tradition do not exist! (I'll reference Dawkins' The God Delusion once more. He makes a very convincing argument that we do not get morality from religion despite what the religious would have us believe.) Rather, "good" and "bad" are words we assign to mean “that which advances us” and “that which does not advance us.” As the definition states, science gives us data through observation and experimentation and from these results we can find what advances us or not. And furthermore, the definition states it is practical!!! From science, we get results that have actually been tried and have been found to have a certain specific outcome! This is in contrast with other perceptions of morality which are cloudy because they come from a pre-existing subjective ideal with an alternative agenda.

So, the answer to my question was really within my question all along! “Am I okay with you ignoring the resources and intelligence we have today providing us with the know-how to make optimal lifestyle choices?” “Can I get angry when you choose not to make a healthy decision?” “Can I get angry when you defy proven logic or ideas?” YES. The answer is that I can. …because it’s not a question of me imposing my beliefs onto you. It is a question of putting your choices (and my choices, too!) up against a rigorous and ever-increasing amount of knowledge that we have about life in this universe to make healthy decisions which allow you to contribute to my – to OUR – society.

One might say that in life all we really have control over are our ideas and our choices. We may get an idea and keep it or dispose of it. Of the ones we keep, we may choose to act upon them or not. I think many people go wrong by failing to acquire an important human characteristic that is likely common amongst all successful people. At some point, they should have received the social structures (provided by their family or upbringing?) to form a focusing system that unconsciously instills in the individual the desire to work toward increasingly higher goals. It is like an addiction to improvement…and/or a predisposition to make things work out in one’s favor the majority of the time. Some people simply have this ability – and I think they tend to be all around intelligent, sociable, honest, humble, and healthy people. They proactively go through life realizing the importance of timing and balance, when to give and when to get, when to push and when to step back, when to work and when to play (or combine them into one?), and when to speak and when to stay silent. There are always the select few who just seem to “get it” or “have it all together.” They are admired, lusted after, sometimes idolized, and even fought after.

To be brutally honest, this is the life I try to life. Whether I am close to it or not is for others to decide. But this is my idea of success, I suppose.

And as for why we find these people attractive as partners, as pupils, as friends, and as employees, we must see that it is due to evolutionary tendencies and laws pertaining to natural selection. We prefer those with genes linked to strong, successful traits - whatever that means at the time. A successful person is attractive because that’s what we ultimately need to survive and continue! We need successful partners. I'm no biologist, but I wonder how we've gotten in this state if we need partners who are healthy and if we need to optimally contribute to society. Maybe we’re at a new point in history with new challenges and our prehistorically packaged mind and body can only react to the modern world in this lazy way. When handed survival on a silver platter (or on the sleek rectangular white plates at T.G.I. Fridays) like we are, perhaps it’s only natural for us humans to “conserve energy” by being lazy.

Now that I've answered my questions, what do I (we) do!? I've decided that I care that you're fat. I even decided that I have a duty to care! So what?

Well - I could write an equally lengthy description of my thought processes on what I think we should do about you being fat. And so then my action there would be limited to words. I don't believe I should do too much to change you directly. Just as you are harming me indirectly, the best I can do is raise awareness and lead by example, which is an indirect way of telling you to stop your bad choices. I can try to live an optimal life in hopes that it will indirectly inspire you to make a change for the better.

My goal: active discussion and trying to live an extraordinary life. The rest I will leave up to nature. It shall take its course and the mind of the society will respond to whatever is thrown at it.

_________________

So there you go. That’s my bit for the day. I truly wish I didn’t feel the necessity to pursue a career in the arts. Formal study of evolutionary psychology, sociology, and gender/sexuality studies attract me and excited me beyond description. Maybe that will be one of my pursuits later on down the road. I always joke with myself that I’ll be in school the rest of my life.

If anyone with expertise in any of this happens to stumble upon this post, I’d really love them to take a few minutes and explain some of what they’re thinking about in response to my questions and discussion, particularly thoughts of a psychological, sociological, spiritual, scientific or otherwise nutrition and fitness-related or philosophical nature. And as usual, anyone else with ideas should leave a comment as well. After all, if you agree (or especially if you think I’m nuts,) don’t you have a duty to care? Don’t you have a duty to help me live more productively by correcting me if I ask for your opinions? I don’t know…maybe you do, maybe you don’t. But my post here says yes, you should.

From My Quotebook: #17

"Truth is something which can't be told in a few words. Those who simplify the universe only reduce the expansion of its meaning."

-Anaïs Nin

(If this doesn't define the purpose and meaning of this blog...I don't know what does.)

Political Gaga

More like a political rally than a concert (isn't that amazing!?), Lady Gaga speaks at her concert in Phoenix, Arizona, in response to SB 1070 and being asked to cancel her show to boycott the state:



"I want you to free yourself. I want you to let go of all of your insecurities. I want you to reject any person or any thing or any law that has ever made you feel like you don't belong."

"We have to be active. We have to actively protest - and the nature of the Monster Ball is to actively protest prejudice and injustice and the bullshit that is put on our society. ...because you're a superstar no matter who you are or where you come from and you were born that way!"

"I will hold you and we will hold each other and we will peaceably protest this state. Don't be afraid, because if it wasn't for you immigrants, this country wouldn't have shit."

Pride / Gay Games Cologne

One month after the end of National Pride Month in America, we continue to see pride festivals and events spring up throughout the rest of the world. Most recently:

Sweden
Tens of thousands gathered
Finance Minister Anders Borg said "It is a major demonstration for openness and tolerance. We want Sweden to be a modern country where it is possible to choose how and with whom you want to live." Politicians were among those who marched in the parade with numbers or people reaching 35,000.

Belfast, Ireland
10,000+ in attendance

Jerusalem
3,000 in attendance and were met with opposition
(notice the Star of David, pride flag, and peace above)

(now notice the noose in the lower left photo)
There were a few cases of homophobic violence.

Also, amongst others, San Diego, Cincinnati, Madrid, Nebraska, Europride 2010 in Warsaw, Vancouver.

In the months to come we'll see, amongst others, Amsterdam, Annapolis, Montreal, Budapest, Boulder, Savannah, South Carolina, Delaware, Dallas, Memphis, Nashville, Atlanta, and Bangkok. Just to give you an idea - this is a tiny few - of just how many Pride festivals there are.

Currently, the 2010 Gay Games are being held in Cologne, Germany.


Participants of all sexual orientations (and skill level!) are invited to attend and/or participate. 12,000 people from 70 countries participate in the games.

The Federation of Gay Games states that

"The purpose of the Federation of Gay Games is to foster and augment the self-respect of lesbians and gay men throughout the world and to engender respect and understanding from the nongay world, primarily through an organized international participatory athletic and cultural event held every four years, and commonly known as the Gay Games."

The openly-gay German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle was in attendance at the opening ceremony as well as Australian Olympic gold medalist Matthew Mitcham...

Why a GAY games?? According to Matthew,

"There are a lot of sports that have this macho mentality, and a lot of gay and lesbian people might not feel comfortable in that kind of environment," he said. "I think the Gay Games is a great way for people to actually participate in sport where they might not normally have felt comfortable enough."

John Amaechi, a retired professional basketball player for the American NBA and official ambassador for this year's games, comments:

"You look at the Olympics, that's an organization that we're supposed to believe is all about spreading peace and love," he said. "But we will have this coming Olympics in London, teams that are sent from countries that will have no women in them. So sport is not equal."

Gay Games 2014 is supposed to be in Cleveland, Ohio. (Although I've heard talk that it may take place at the FGG's second choice for 2014: Washington, D.C. Third choice is Boston.)
Next time, I'll be there!

(And it has been announced that London has placed a bid to host Gay Games 2018. But we'll worry about that when it's a little closer...)

"If you think you're perfect already then you never will be."

Weekly Address: Moving Forward with the Economy vs. Moving Back

"I know the character of this nation. I know that in times of great challenge and difficulty, we don't fear the future - we shape the future."

1,000 Words: #17

A picture is worth a thousand words...

Question #3

How old would you be if you didn’t know
how old you are?

How BP Works

An inside look of how BP handles issues like spills...

From My Quotebook: #16

Those who can make you believe absurdities
can make you commit atrocities.
- Voltaire

National LGBT Pride Month

National LGBT Pride Month has come to a close this year. As I've said before, Pride month is a very important time for the LGBT community.

With hundreds of pride festivals that took place this year in America alone, in addition to the others around the world (Toronto and London, for example, both drew in over a million participants each) we have plenty reason to celebrate the success we've made thus far. ...and "we" means not just member of the LGBT community, but also friends, family, and co-workers. However, there is still much progress to be done. We are no longer fighting for a place in our country. We are now fighting for an equal place. A safe place. A peaceful place. A place where we can be as happy and as successful as our neighbors, brothers and sisters, friends, peers, and teachers. We are simply asking for the same rights as our heterosexual brothers and sisters enjoy - nothing more and nothing less.

I've made an attempt to capture as much LGBT news as possible this past month, turning Expansion of Space into a heavy gay-activism blog. I will continue to provide my side of this battle along with my responses to those who choose to not agree with the ideals of freedom, equality, happiness, respect, honesty, and the truth.

In case you missed them or if you'd like to go back and take another read, here is Pride month as represented on this blog:

Pride month began with the official proclamation made by President Obama.

I made posts about a few bigots who, despite the national and world trends, try and persuade this nation's people against equality for all people. Mike Huckabee, Yvonne Moore (who sued her church for allowing same-sex marriage **UPDATE: and has since decided to drop the case haha), Apple surprisingly censored a gay comic but then reversed its decision after it was brought to the corporation's attention that this was unfair since comics featuring heterosexual characters are left uncensored, and of course Bill O'Reilly said some crap about the gay ad aired in France by McDonald's and compared gays to terrorists.

We saw one study which helps to reveal homosexual relationships in a scientifically-researched more realistic light than anti-gays prefer. The study shows that Lesbians make excellent mothers - in fact better than heterosexual couples - even if they split up. In addition, a recent poll shows that more Americans know gay people compared to the past and acceptance of homosexuality on moral terms is on a constant rise.


A number of celebrities and sport teams increasingly come out in support of gay rights. The Backstreet Boys, The Chicago Cubs and the Blackhawks, Hillary Clinton, James Franco, Eminem, Wale, and Cristiano Ronaldo. Musician Vanessa Carlton came out as bisexual this month.

I also discuss the important economic power the LGBT community has in securing its rights. I wrote about "The Gay Dollar" and "My Boycott of McDonald's."

I discussed America's changing masculinity and presented gay blogger Davey Wavey's video clip about sexuality.


Gay marriage was unanimously made legal in Iceland and Iceland's prime minister married her now-wife! In addition, Sweden was named Europe's gayest country. Although I didn't mention it previously, Ireland has legalized civil unions, the British government has moved toward legalizing gay marriage, and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said that, if elected governor this fall, he would push to legalize gay marriage in New York during his first year in office.

Lady Gaga's Alejandro music video is said to be a response to D.A.D.T. and the necessity of its repeal.

And while we're on D.A.D.T. - Bryan Safi has a great little video about Pride...but reminds us what we still have to work for:

“I have tasted freedom. I will not give up that which I have tasted. I have a lot more to drink."
“All young people, regardless of sexual orientation or identity, deserve a safe and supportive environment in which to achieve their full potential.”
“If a bullet should enter my brain, let that bullet destroy every closet door.”
-Harvey Milk

Mike Huckabee: Professional Homophobe

Here is a man we are paying to be a professional homophobe. ...in a sense, a covered up and decorated bigot. Mr. Huckabee has some very unoriginal things to say about the gays. I know from experience that what he recently said makes its way around conservative social circles. But what I'm surprised by is that it was said in public...by a prospective 2012 Republican Presidential candidate. (Oh great. If he gets in office we're doomed.) A politician who is against freedom and equality is one thing, but derogatory comments are another. Well, they naturally get a response by the other side. And here's mine:

So what did he say? I'm put off by his comment that there is an "ick factor" to homosexuality.

“I do believe that God created male and female and intended for marriage to be the relationship of the two opposite sexes. Male and female are biologically compatible to have a relationship. We can get into the ick factor, but the fact is two men in a relationship, two women in a relationship, biologically, that doesn’t work the same.

Excuse me? Not the "same?" See it there...hidden in that phrase is the underlying assumption that heterosexuals are indeed better/correct/more normal than homosexuals because he is denying that homosexual relations are valid on the basis that they aren't the same as the "correct" heterosexual relations. Just plain silly.

Now what does he say? His response to the backlash:

"It was not an indication of personal aversion, but rather a reference to an established phrase used mostly from same-sex marriage advocates and militants – not one I created."

WHAT? Sorry, buddy, but I've never heard any LGBT person refer to us or others using any sort of phrase involving "ick." We love ourselves and love whatever gender we're into just like a bunch of 30-something heterosexual beer-belly-forming couch potato NFL watching pizza and popcorn munching know-nothings dressed in team t's and basketball shorts. Talk about ick factor!! Or as many other blogs and gossip sites have said, the real "ick factor" is thinking about Huckabee doing his wife...probably all the while fantasizing about some young male intern stud he's got working for him. Sorry didn't mean that... :-{

Now watch this-->

UPDATE:

So that's what Huckabee has to say. I'm sorry, buddy, but none of this does anything but bring new questions...like what were you doing snooping around in gay literature? But I'd really like to point out how typical of a response this is from someone like him. LIKE USUAL, trying to take some statistic or poll and twist it and/or use it vaguely to support a specific agenda they have.

Some things to think about:
1) just because, as Huckabee says, the "majority" of the American people don't approve of gay marriage doesn't mean it shouldn't be legal! Like a parent raising a child, before the child has acquired the knowledge and/or experience to ration a decision, it is left up to the parent to know what is right for the child who may not, even after the outcome, realize why the right choice was the one their parents made for them. Democracy doesn't work by votes made by the whole to make the decisions for perhaps the same reason. Our system works be representation through a select group of individuals whose job it is to look out for the interest of their "children" - basing their decisions on knowledge and experience that they acquire through reasonable means. These select individuals are representing many different people of all walks of life and of all ages. When making these choices, I believe that it is not the personal want of the politician or the fulfillment of his present-day political platform that matters, but rather the future of the people. Not only is the gay marriage view changing quickly amongst American people of all ages, but it is changing most rapidly in the younger generations - the generations of tomorrow (which is no doubt a more educated and aware generation than the prior, as will the next be, and so on.)

I would indeed consider the majority of Americans "under-educated" on the matter of homosexuality, stemming really from a difficulty in being aware of and accepting difference. They are not familiar with current gay lifestyles, desires, personalities, etc., generally because they do not personally know gay individuals. Of those who do, I bet the support of gay marriage would be overwhelming.I'm not saying that those with poor social awareness shouldn't be included, but it does mean we can't really rely on the "majority wins" system. Get everyone on equal playing ground - something like each person in the poll must know (from work, family, or other social circles) at least 5 people who identify as gay for at least three years each, and let's say they must have just simply met at least 15 gays in their life in addition to those familiar five. When that happens - when all people surveyed have taken the time and energy to get to know gay people and give them a fair shot like anyone else they'd meet - then a "majority rules" poll would be more legitimate. But that's not the case. Most people who criticize homosexuality DO NOT have close relationships with gay people, which clearly explains their misunderstanding. And this is something that has been discussed and supported previously on this blog.

2) Mr. O, Don't interrupt your point and fucking throw in the Democrat President's name because in doing so you make your statement incredibly bias. I hate when you conservatives are sneaky about the sources you cite...it's like "Oh but see according to studies done on YOUR side, what I'm saying is actually true! So why are you yelling at me!?" ...and finally

3) His whole double standard argument about gays saying "ick" so then he should be able to is so overused and exhausted that I don't need to argue it...and I don't even know the context in which "ick" was used, but I can promise you it wasn't meant as you used it, Mr. Huckabee. Yours was derogatory. It implies disgust. I highly doubt that the context in which an LGBT person used "ick" was to insult themselves or their fellow brothers and sisters. ...besides, whether right or wrong, (and I do believe it is wrong), everyone knows gays can call each other "faggot" but the second YOU do - especially as a PUBLIC FIGURE - there's no way getting around that. Well "ick factor" is the same. ...and this rule is no different for any other minority group. You should just apologize...but you don't think you've done aaanything wrong. And that's what makes you an idiot - amongst other things.

I guess you should watch this old biggoted hag...

The question I've always (but never actually) asked black people who are anti-gay,

"With the civil rights movement so close to us in our history, how could you possibly be against the LGBT community gaining access to the same rights that you would not have had you been born just sixty years ago!?"

...or in this case, that YOU LIVED THROUGH!? ...bitch.

I don't care if it is for religious reasons...people used to cite the Bible for racism as well. There is actually material in the Bible that promotes slavery and promotes killing those who are not of your "group." ...but no one ever wants to talk about THAT...