Grand Marshall - Did Sir Ian out Elijah Wood in an interview with the SF Chron? You be the judge!

Q: There's been some discussion over the fact that [McKellen's boyfriend Nick] was the only significant other not shown while the nominees' names were being read.

A: I think it's just that they didn't do their homework. They probably thought he was Elijah Wood's boyfriend.

MTV - Tune in tonight to MTV's True Life special about coming out.

Cher's Biggest Fan - News of a 400-pound, tanktop-wearing, flask-swilling hooligan at a Cher concert in Philly.

All Gay, All the Time - Seems like we're all about the "homosexual agenda" on Beaverhausen this week, but it is that time of year, after all. Therefore, direct your attention to the Village Voice, which is filled with interesting articles this week, about gays in the media, public sex, "homocons" and online hookup safety tips.

Also, in the NY Times today is a report on a challenge to marriage laws in New Jersey.

And finally, on a very light note, mother of the Grand Marshall of my favorite kind of pride parade, Margaret Cho's mommy is featured in the LA Times.

Of Men and Myths - I am acutely aware of the first time I heard of Mark Bingham. Good Morning America interviewed his mother, Alice Hoglan, on the morning of September 12th. She was relating the phone call he made to her from United Flight 93, just before he and his fellow passengers staged an ill-fated revolt that brought the plane down in western Pennsylvania rather than letting it crash into its intended target on Pennsylvania Avenue. As Alice was being interviewed, pictures of Mark from his college graduation and rugby days appeared on the screen. I'm not sure why, but at that moment, I found myself wondering if he might have been gay. Perhaps it was the plane's destination -- San Francisco. Perhaps something about the way his mother talked about him. Perhaps it was the lack of any obvious references to wife or kids.

My partner Jamie had joined the Washington Renegades only a few weeks before and had played in his first match ever on September 8th, so rugby was very much on my mind. As it turned out, Mark had visited Washington, D.C. in May 2001 to attend the first international gay rugby tournament to be played in the United States, hosted by the Renegades. Jamie and I had gone to a couple of parties for that event, but we only knew a handful of people at the time and were not introduced to Mark. After 9/11, word spread quickly among the close-knit brotherhood of gay rugby that one of its own had perished in the day's calamitous events. We realized that for many of the Renegades, Mark was the closest friend to have lost his life on that fateful day. Later in September, on a previously planned trip to San Francisco, we met a number of his teammates from the Fog and came to know what a special place he held in their hearts.

Right from the start, Mark was presented as not just an American hero, but also a gay hero. Literally a poster boy for the post-gay generation, a real man who could run with the bulls in Pamplona and work on John McCain's presidential campaign but still prefer the intimate company of men. When Falwell and Robertson blamed gays for 9/11, Mark Bingham was the rhetorical response. His name became a politcal rallying cry for gay equality in the new era of "United We Stand." HBO Sports did a special on his team and his legacy.

Yet Bingham was not an activist. The closest thing we have to a manifesto from him is an email message posted to the Fog's listserve only a couple of weeks before he died. Bingham wrote:

When I started playing rugby at the age of 16, I always thought that my interest in other guys would be an anathema -- completely repulsive to the guys on my team -- and to the people I was knocking the shit out of on the other team. I loved the game, but KNEW I would need to keep my sexuality a secret forever. I feared total rejection.

As we worked and sweated and ran and talked together this year, I finally felt accepted as a gay man and a rugby player. My two irreconcilable worlds came together.

Now we've been accepted into the union and the road is going to get harder. We need to work harder. We need to get better. We have the chance to be role models for other gay folks who wanted to play sports, but never felt good enough or strong enough. More importantly, we have the chance to show the other teams in the league that we are as good as they are. Good rugby players. Good partiers. Good sports. Good men.

Gay men weren't always wallflowers waiting on the sideline. We have the opportunity to let these other athletes know that gay men were around all along - on their little league teams, in their classes, being their friends. This is a great opportunity to change a lot of people's minds, and to reach a group that might never have had to know or hear about gay people. Let's go make some new friends...and win a few games. Congratulations, my brothers in rugby.

Now, it is time again for the world's "rugby clubs that are predominantly gay" to come together to celebrate a sport and a lifestyle that breaks the stereotypes. The tournament will be held in San Francisco this year, and its trophy will memorialize Mark Kendall Bingham. Seems like a fitting tribute to a man whose actions always spoke louder than his words, and whose guiding philosophy of life was best spelled out in a ruck on a muddy pitch. It will be a privilege to be in the stands watching Jamie and the others play. And to Mark I say, cheers, mate!

The Bachelor - The Washington Post reports a surprising phenomenon. Fewer men seem to be making it to college and then graduating. The results could mean trouble for eligible bachelorettes. "Some researchers and college administrators believe that the shifting male-female balance on campus portends a seismic shift in the nation's social norms, with college-educated women having growing problems finding mates of equal educational footing." One explanation being offered is that men are lured by popular culture into spending large amounts of time watching television, partying and exercising, rather than studying. Don't believe the hype -- girls can be just as wild.

The Mother of all Battles - Prompted by an uncharacteristically bloggish link from Drew, I've been exploring the pop literary phenomenon of Left Behind. If I were an evangelical this sort of stuff would have a strong appeal to me. Even as an unbeliever, I'm a bit intrigued by the sci-fi/fantasy aspects of the genre. Ripping images from today's headlines to promote the idea that the apocalypse of St. John is upon us surely makes for fascinating fiction. Frankly, the book of Revelation reads like a very bad LSD trip, yet drawing parallels between those warped visions and current events is a venerable tradition that's a thousand years old. Mankind needs his myths, of creation as well as end times. Don't kid yourself that reason and enlightenment are the prevailing human philosophies of this or any other time.

Proud - The LA Times reports on the annual uproar over the commercialism of San Francisco's Gay Pride Celebration. Is it true that "the community is not the same as it was 32 years ago"? God, I hope so. I can't say I'm bothered by the corporate sponsorship, but then again, I celebrated when the Pottery Barn at Castro and Market opened. It's not like other major events in SF aren't also sponsored, such as the Precious Cheese North Beach Festival and the SF Examiner Bay to Breakers race. And while for many the Pride festivities are, indeed, an opportunity to "celebrat[e] hot bodies and a good time," there are other less frivolous events that coincide with the parade and festival, such as the SF Gay & Lesbian Film Festival and the Bingham Cup rugby tournament.

Meanwhile, the Chron has an appropriately tiny AP piece on West Hollywood's pride event.

UPDATE - Matt Welch has some interesting things to say about the original LA Times article, plus an additional story about goings-on at the Y.

Buzzworthy? - Drew makes good with a post about Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate (and sometimes-commentator on NPR's Marketplace / former U.S. Secretary of Labor) Robert Reich. Reich has taken a position to support and expand the concept of gay marriage. Let's hope that support from Corey Johnson is enough to get him elected.

On another note, however, Drew once again makes it painfully clear that pop culture allusions are his not strong suit. My advice is to stay away from Hollywood and stick to footie and the BBC for you references.

Gay Art Lite - I recently read this article on "gay literature" by Philip Hensher. He makes an exceptionally relevant point, with regard to the types of novels written for gays, by gays, stating that "the gay novel started, overwhelmingly, to fit two genres. The first was the AIDS novel ... The second... the coming-out novel."

Much like Hensher, I find that "the coming-out novel is not one which reflects my own experience. I have encountered little hostility and, as far as I can tell, no psychological traumas. It is a similar story with AIDS." I could certainly find pieces of such books that mirrored parts of my own experience, but for the most part, books like Andrew Tobias' The Best Little Boy in the World mostly served to depress me. I think that many gays in my generation felt similarly, spawning what I would argue is a third genre that came about during the late 1990's.

As I sought to recommend intelligent, meaningful, well-written gay books to friends, I found this third category equally unsatisfying: the pop-culture-allusion-filled humorous adventures of a newly-out, young, gay man. Now, on a personal level, I find this third genre highly enjoyable, but "literature" it is not. This genre is typified for me by books such as Dennis Hensley's Misadventures in the (213), Christian McLaughlin's Sex Toys of the Gods, and Matthew Rettenmund's Blind Items. Each of these books is unapologetically gay in its characterizations, but the plot and settings tend more toward the wacky hijinks that ensue in the gay ghettos of West Hollywood and Chelsea. This genre marks a departure from the traumatic tales told of coming out and death, also lack the depth that novels that tackle these types of subjects have. However, perhaps the most entertaining book of this genre is Peter Lefcourt's The Dreyfus Affair, a love story about two baseball players that takes place in decidedly unhip San Fernando Valley, not WeHo, and written by a straight man. The protagonist was a father and baseball player first, and a man who fell in love with another man second. He does eventually come out, but that's not the entirety of the plot.

One author who inhabited and then transcended these genres is David Leavitt. His first book, Family Dancing fell squarely in the "coming out" category, and subsequent works included aspects of the "AIDS" genre. However, in his later books, but especially the semi-autbiographical story in Arkansas, his tone changed, and the plots became less about being gay. As Leavitt grew up and times changed, so did his writing, moving beyond coming out and AIDS and even humorous adventures. The recent books started to reflect scenarios that were about life in general, where being gay was not necessarily the central traits of the characters. I think that the age and maturity of the authors, medical advances against AIDS, and a greater societal acceptance of gays all help to make more authors of gay literature to widen their subjects, "writing about homosexuals because of their views on politics, or because they might rob banks or, in fact, do anything but represent the fact of their sexuality." It's only in the recent past that gays have had the luxury to not worry as much about being ostracized or fearing for their lives.

Finally, the author makes reference to the fact that "every big bookshop now has a gay section; gay novels have spread into the mainstream," echoing a theme that appeared in the NY Times earlier this week. While a suburban Borders or Barnes & Noble will almost certainly never cover the breadth that a gay bookstore would, the fact that a gay literature section exists at such stores lends further credence to the argument of greater societal acceptance, which in turn could leader to greater freedom in writing by gay authors. So, I think we are on course to read a point where, as Hensher says, books by a thinking gay writer can be called "gay novels," even if they don't fit into a stereotypical genre.

Crime Spree - For the first time in a decade, the number of major crimes is up nationwide from last year. But the rate for the District of Columbia actually fell. And all without Lamar Burgess and John Anderton.

Commentary - Really, I meant for this post to be just a comment and not a post of its own. However, due to the limitations of our comments system, I have opted to post my response here.

I think it's very interesting that even though you found the movie to be a "bore" and dissent from the critics that you still gave it a B+. I don't think that our reactions were all that different, I would only give it a slightly higher grade of A-. As you mention in your final thought, the difference comes in our expectations. I wholeheartedly agree that it wasn't a masterpiece, but the fact that a high-profile, big-budget, typical Hollywood summer blockbuster could also be thought-provoking is what led me to call it my favorite movie of the summer, so far.

However, I do disagree that the bleak neon wastelands of A.I. represent a more coherent sense of a future aesthetic. That movie contrasted staid, safe, modern suburban communities with the seedy, colorful world of the mechanical with no middle ground to be seen. I don't think that the audience necessarily needed to be shown the details of how new, futuristic high-rises surrounding DC mesh with the existing historic buildings, because, in a sense, it's an experience we live every day. There are glassy new towers that surround the city while portions of Georgetown remain crowded with the facades of grand old buildings. But I certainly see your point that Spielberg didn't show us the integration between the two. The sprawl can be viewed at the official website.

You ask the question "Is this treatment believable?" about the pre-cogs living in goo. I think it is believable, in that we are supposed to think that they are being exploited, treated as though they were not human, in order to conduct this experiment. They were well cared for, to a degree, but clearly, as shown at the end of the movie, these three drug-addict babies had the capacity for a more "normal" life. Also, you raise the issue of Anderton's wife's explanation for their breakup. I think that grief, increasing isolation, and drug taking constitute a believable reason for the breakup.

And, as with A.I. many of the explanations for why things exist in the movie can be found on the Web. I think that the details of the Pre-Crime referendum wasn't something that really needed to be explored within the context of the film. (And how very Californian to think that the idea of citizens creating law would go nationwide).

Finally, while I don't buy it myself, let me defend the screenwriter on the notion of why no one seems to be objecting to the invasion of civil liberties with the Department of Pre-Crime. It is oft-repeated in the film's dialogue that we are six years into the experiment and not a single murder has occurred in the District. I believe that the "six year" figure is reiterated because the audience is supposed to just assume that the legal challenges have come and gone during that period.

The Real Minority Report - Okay, so the movie didn't wow me. In fact, it kind of bored me. (Do all Spielberg movies have to end 20 minutes too late?) Yes, I know that the critics seem to have universally loved it. As they say, I respectfully dissent. The heart of the story, about a frame-up for a murder, broke no new ground. Being the wannabe geek and lawyer, I also have a very high trigger level for suspending disbelief when it comes to (a) future technology and (b) legal procedure and ethics. It didn't help that I find it impossible to believe a single human emotion eminating from that utterly terrifying Superior Life Form Tom Cruise. Frankly, the whole thing failed to make the leap from likeable, Twilight Zone-ish pulp fiction short story to Summer blockbuster. This is not Spielberg's best work.

Where to begin? How about the urban landscape? The future skyscrapers hardly "coexist" with famous Washington landmarks and nineteenth century rowhouses. I found the juxtaposition jarring and unbelievable (and not just because John Anderton's coldly modern condo was about 150 stories right above the cosy little garden apartment I live in). Cruise's salary must have soaked up a lot of budget, because I saw very little effort to update "the Sprawl" to place it 50 years in the future and tie it into the other scenic elements. Instead we seemed to hop from an underworld that was completely derivative of Blade Runner to modern skyscrapers paved with superhighways down their facades (why?) to elegant mansions and cottages (and Georgetown shops) with barely a wisp of futuristic style or sensibility. The idea that such things might coexist is certainly not groundbreaking futurism -- but try to make your segues a little smoother. If you want a much more imaginative and coherent sense of a future aesthetic, go watch A.I. if you can. On the brighter side, perhaps we should all give thanks that Hollywood had the optimism to believe the District won't be a smoldering pile of radioactive dust in 2054. Oh, wait, that's Baltimore.

If the movie's predictions of a complete breakdown in urban planning can be forgiven, it does little better in prognosticating technology. The movie scores easy points for "video" newspapers on soft, flexible screens, iris-scanning from public cameras and weapons firing a non-lethal "pulse" blast, but they will all be reality in 20 years or less. As for the annoyingly confrontational product placements, let the seller beware. The Gap is poised to follow the footsteps of Ma Bell and Pan Am, who were featured prominently in the granddaddy of all space commercials, but didn't live to see the day. The three-dimensional chase on rocket packs was enjoyable -- look for it to be imitated. The coolest gadgets in the movie were the "spiders" that did the police's dirty work in identifying the denizens of a tenement. I'm not sure that 50 years is enough time to see that kind of intelligent nanotechnology, and when we do I wouldn't expect the tiny creatures to have such cartoony puckishness about them. This Spielbergian anthropomorphism probably dulled the most striking feature of that scene -- the utter lack of resistance from the people whose most private moments were invaded by these police robots. It was once axiomatic that sci fi was about fear of technology. Now that same technology is being presented as a benevolent -- even cutesy -- intermediary between the state and the individual.

Which brings me to the much talked-about big issues of the movie. Spielberg has given us a morality play about pre-destination and free will, presented in the context of a local D.C. police state that knows when its citizens will commit murder and has the authority to arrest them to prevent "future" homicide. The gimmick that sets the stage is a threesome of pre-cognitive youths, who can see future crimes, but only if they involve murder. Besides a passing reference to the ACLU, the movie presents little public consciousness about the use of such evidence in criminal arrests. At least we observe some process, as Anderton's SWAT team must obtain a warrant before breaking in on the would-be murderer. Afterwards, however, we seem to have dispensed with the ideas of conviction and sentencing, skipping instead directly to a rather cruel and unusual form of imprisonment. How is it that there is no interest in rehabilitation after such lengths are taken to intervene before a "pre-criminal" does wrong? The movie doesn't really address these points other than in the context of Anderton, who is a blameless victim backed by the sympathies of the theater audience. (I'm ignoring the 30-second denouement of the movie, which puts everything right by Hollywood standards.) In effect, the weighty matters of original sin and redemption are raised but neglected.

On the other hand, we are given a bit more pathos for the "pre-cogs," who spend their days in a warm bath of nutrient liquid, connected by wires and sensors to the police computers. (Jamie asks: in the future why are people always living immersed in goo?) Apparently this is a better life for them than when they had no one to comfort them about their nightmarish visions. Is this treatment believable? I also found the setup for the Federalization of the Department of Pre-Crime to be rather flimsy. There are references to a national referendum on Pre-Crime and the influence of the Attorney General, but that backstory is terribly underdeveloped considering that it has important implications to the movie's final showdown. Not that the motivations of any of the characters are particularly understandable. Sure, Cruise's character would have been tortured by his son's death, but is the resulting behavior believable? His estranged wife's explanation for their breakup isn't easily swallowed either. Ironically, I found myself rooting for Colin Farrell's G-man, whose actions at least made sense.

All in all, I was reasonably entertained, but somewhat disappointed. This Spielberg-Cruise vehicle suffered greatly from the the curse of raised expectations. I'll give Minority Report a B+.

Minority Report - Minority Report is my favorite movie so far this summer, and the first to actually make me think and ponder the implications of the story I watched unfold. I don't feel compelled to give a synopsis of Report because so many others have already done it better than I could. PopMatters.com discusses how the film raises issues from "the ethics of taking predictions as 'facts' to the political and ideological ramifications of a society premised on surveillance." Salon discusses another analogy that can be seen in the movie, how "visions of murders-to-come...make possible a kind of Ashcroftian security state in which individuals are literally imprisoned within their own heads, without trial, for crimes they haven't (yet) committed." The film raises the issue of choice vs. fate, squarely coming down on the side of people being in control of their own destinies rather than a preordained state of affairs in the universe. The movie also asks the question about the nature of privacy, as the line between thought and action becomes ever harder to distinguish

Roger Ebert, praises the film, giving it four stars, making a point I agree with, seeing as how Report takes place only 52 years in the future, it's realistic and interesting to see "futuristic skyscrapers coexist with the famous Washington monuments and houses from the 19th century" rather than a completely high-tech Jetsons version of the future. Steven Spielberg brought together a group of noted futurists to brainstorm how things might be in the year 2054 in order to more accurately depict the types of technology available. One of the things that hasn't changed in the future is product placement and advertisments. I know many critics disagree, but I tend to side with the LA Times, the other from the LA Weekly.

Finally, one note about the previews I saw before Minority Report. God help me if I have to watch that preview for the Road to Perdition one more time! I swear I've seen it before every movie I've gone to see for the past two months. Enough! Every time I see the preview revealing the entire plot of the movie, it makes me less and less inclined to see the full-length feature in the theater. However, I am waiting with bated breath for the premiere of Swimfan. While it sounds like a bad rehash of an episode of Buffy or a generic "It's Fatal-Attraction-at-fill-in-the-blank," I'm sure I'll go see it. High school swim meets, Instant Messenger threats, Erika Christiansen from Traffic...what's not to love?

Collegiate Gays - Education Week reports on how colleges are attempting to attract gay applicants. This effort to increase diversity on campus is complicated by the fact that many gay high school students are not yet out of the closet. However, the subtle way in which schools are marketing themselves as gay-friendly is an intelligent move. The atmosphere on a campus is important, even to those students who are, and may remain, closeted. So even though they may never join the campus LGBTQ group, knowing that the environment will not be hostile could be an important consideration to a questioning student. PlanetOut.com attempted a guide to gay life at colleges last year. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but it is a place to start. Nice to know that those bastions of liberal elitism are redoubling their efforts to keep up with societal trends!

Reckless Endangerment - HIV crime is in the news again, as the Washington Post reports on a local case. Clearly, we have here a perpetrator acting with malice and an innocent victim. In the world of gay sexual encounters, we are still locked in the eternal debate of who is to blame, the poz guy who doesn't tell or the neg guy who doesn't ask. The Washington Blade waded into the controversy a couple of weeks ago by penning a broadside against HIV+ gay men who act with reckless indifference to their sexual partners. They raised hackles with the provocative and un-P.C. title "Sometimes gay sex ought to be a crime," playing for irony the continuing illegality of gay sex in several states. More interesting, though, was this signed letter to the editor in the June 14th edition:

I am outraged at your call for jailing people who test positive for HIV and don't say to their sex partners, "Oh by the way, I have AIDS." Viewpoints like this are why I have advised promiscuous individuals to boycott the HIV test ever since it came out. These laws will surely make many people regret taking the test.

I only have sex in circumstances like the woods and the sex clubs, where risk is presumed and nobody asks. If someone asks if I am "clean," I say that I am promiscuous by choice and could have something, but have no known infections and am untested. If people who choose a risky lifestyle avoid sex with monogamous and other low risk people, the disease can be contained without the kind of draconian measures you support.

The "traditional" wing of the gay community has enough enemies in the form of the "Christian Taliban" fundamentalists and the developers who want to close our clubs and parks to raise property values without the treachery of monogamous gays who want to jail drag queens and hustlers, raid the parks and clubs, force people to take HIV tests, and so on.

With as many enemies as we already have, we cannot afford to have traitors like whoever turned in that South Dakota couple undermining our security position.

Please reconsider this position and try to stop the sharp right turn the Blade has taken since its corporate takeover.

Never mind that sex in the parks is already illegal. You almost have to think this is a joke, the proverbial strawman argument that no one could believe. What on earth is wrong with someone who feels this way about a deadly disease? Getting sick as a political statement? I guess I betray my libertarian principles, but lock this idiot up!

Cause and Effect - A Princeton professor and his colleagues take on the notion that poverty causes terrorism. Remember, it's the lack of MTV that does it.

The Last Word - I promise this post will be my last on the Nick News special, but wanted to share this mostly even-handed commentary on the show's bias from The New Republic.

Gay Youth Study - PlanetOut.com has a report on a new study about to get underway that examines the implications of coming out for gay teens. One of the study's leads say that she "hopes this study will show how family, community and positive role models can help prevent the spread of HIV as well as reduce the risk of GLBT pregnancy, depression and suicide." But what if it doesn't? What if the end result shows that coming out as a teenager has a negative impact? By interviewing youth and family members who know they are gay, hasn't the study already selected teens whose families are at least comfortable enough to discuss the matter? Will this be an accurate depiction of out gay youth in America? The study is being conducted through San Francisco State University. The article makes no mention of geography, but if the interview subjects are located in the Bay Area, won't that skew the results further? It's not that I don't think this study is important, it's just that I would hope that the conclusions could be as unassailable as possible.

View Askew - Kevin Smith's inside joke has turned into an actual entertainment news site. One notable contribution, a report on a panel discussion with members of the cast and crew of Buffy, giving insight into the recently completed season and previews of the direction for next season as well.

Fun & Games - Play the Ikea Game! Can you match the Swedish word to the Ikea product it describes? World culture at its best. See also the Verizon-bashing game, patterned after the Wacking game!

Camelot's Number One Export - Salon has a wacky interview with Lizzie Borden, who makes fringe porn, that she claims, comes with a moral story. She insists that men who are turned on by the violence are actually being taught a lesson, arguing "If you watch it and don't fast-forward it, and if you think about it, you'll see there's a moral to it!" Obviously, she doesn't read back issues of Salon!

Two tickets to Paradise - Southwest Airlines is now going to make fat people buy an extra fare if they can't fit between the armrests of their planes' all-tourist-class cabin seats. Look for there to be an uproar among those affected (and their admirers). I guess we won't see SWA flying back into SFO any time soon, since this policy would surely violate the city's notorious short and fat law. After all, this is the town that forced Jazzercise to reinstate an overweight instructor, ruling that displeasing aesthetics were not sufficient reason to bar the woman who could otherwise perform the routines. Fatties of the world can look on the bright side, though. Doesn't this mean they can get two meals with their flight?

More Transportation News - Wouldn't want anyone to think we're ignoring transportation issues here on Beaverhausen, so here's a calvacade of items to whet your interest. First off, a new study about traffic congestion has been released. Guess what? Traffic sucks! No big revelations there. Yay, California! Back on top again. And props to Chicago for acheiving bronze metal status. Sorry, DC. I think we need to build more roads, but I know some naysayers will disagree.

Next up, a report from the SF Chron about the changes underway to accomodate the giant new Airbus A380. Will the public flock to ride in one of these giant behemoths? I know I will always take a flight on a Boeing 777, if possible...the personal video screen makes it all worthwhile.

Finally, in light of recent announcements by the Bush Administration, the Sac Bee speculates on the potential for a post-Amtrak future for California railroad lines.

Nick News Recap - For all the heated debate surrounding the Nick News special on tolerance, not all that many kids watched anyway. Lisa de Moraes of the WaPo breaks down the ratings for the Tuesday night airing, showing that only about 145,000 people in the teenaged demographic watched. Probably, most of them were busy watching the first audience elimination round on American Idol anyway.

Prison Rape - The National Review has a provocative piece on prison rape today. Unfortunately, instead of evoking the intended emotion in me, it upset me that this problem is one that we should even care about. People are in jail for a reason, and while no one should be subjected to unduly torturous conditions, (anyone take issue with that point?) I don't think that devoting more resources to fight it is a top priority. We're not talking about this type of thing happening in a minimum-security white-collar country club correctional facility. How about putting more money into education instead of corrections in order to prevent criminals from committing crimes and being imprisoned in the first place? Well, I guess I must be "without compassion." Hasn't the author seen American History X? Once Edward Norton's character is forcibly sodomized in the prison shower, he starts to understand that his neo-Nazi activities were unforgivably wrong. Shouldn't such brutal, graphic depictions be deterrent enough?

You should have the body - The on-going legal debate over the rights of terrorists took a dramatic twist yesterday when the Justice Department filed a brief outlining the reasons why an American citizen deemed an "enemy combatant" by the President should not have access to the judicial system for review of that determination. As you can imagine, the liberal press doesn't like the idea. I don't either. I'm no screeching alarmist on this issue, but it seems to me that some kind of process should be available to American citizens, and available on a reasonably prompt basis.

So far the government's treatment of similarly situated detainees has been all over the map. John Walker Lindh and Zacharias Moussaui (a French citizen) have legal counsel and are being tried according to normal Federal criminal procedure. Hamdi is being held incommunicado at the Navy brig in Norfolk, while Jose Padilla is being held in military custody in Charleston. Then there are the inmates of Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay. Lindh, Hamdi and the Gitmo gang were caught on the battlefield in Afghanistan, but Padilla and Moussaui were apprehended in the United States. If nothing else, the government urgently needs to bring some coherence to its approach to these people.

Apparently, one of the chief reasons for denying counsel to American detainees is the belief that they may know something that could help prevent future attacks. As I understand it, interrogation isn't technically a right under the Geneva conventions applicable to prisoners of war. There's a right to refuse it under the United States Constitution. However, the government desperately fears that any access to counsel will cut off this investigatory technique. I've got mixed feelings on the subject. Of course, I want see appropriate steps taken to prevent further attacks. On the other hand, it's chilling to see American citizens having absolutely no recourse to the law. Think of the Japanese-Americans interned during WW2. Or imagine if the source of terrorism had been domestic, the Army of God instead of Al Qaeda. Would any of us put up with these tactics in those situations if they occurred today?

One of the more sensible approaches I have heard discussed is to create a new system of due process for American citizens held as enemy combatants. It would relax many of the rules normally associated with criminal procedings to permit, for example, the introduction of inadmissable evidence which might be reviewed only by the judge and counsel, not the detainee. Perhaps the hearing would be closed to the public. But it should happen, and happen rapidly, not whenever the military finds it convenient. Various precautions are acceptable given the nature of the threat, but let the citizens have access to counsel, and let their cases be heard. At least we would be seeing some kind of safeguard that the President isn't merely locking people up on a whim.

It was written a long time ago that "No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned,...or in any other way destroyed...except by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land." This founding principal of freedon was later enshrined in law and ultimately became a basic American right. For an executive to deny such a thing to our citizens is what revolutions are made of.

hy·poc·ri·sy - Leslie Carbone, in the National Review makes the sad and distorted statement, "After years of haranguing the Boy Scouts of America for refusing to place young boys in danger of sexual abuse, the liberal intelligentsia is now condemning the Catholic Church leadership for doing exactly that." She goes on to claim that "there is a strong enough correlation [between gays and child molesting] to mean that the BSA's policy is prudent and responsible" (emphasis added). Using the same inaccurate data previously decried by John, she makes sweeping generalization designed to panic the reader.

No Threat - Following up on yesterday's item on unconfirmed plans for terrorism off the coast of Los Angeles, Steve Lopez of the LA Times conducts a hard-hitting investigation of the non-threat.

Tough Breaks - Poor Martha, first the SEC investigation, now a stalker!

Stunning Pictures - Indeed. It's not a good time for the U.S. Forest Service to ground its fleet of C-130 fire fighting aircraft. Ben, ever consider how wildfires are like the hurricanes of the American West? They don't strike without warning the way earthquakes do. Instead they slowly and often inexhorably advance, and those communities most at risk are those built on the edges of nature, including, sometimes, the most lavish resort homes. At some point evacuations are ordered. Later, people return to pick up the pieces. Of course, we don't yet have the hubris of thinking we can control the course of hurricanes, do we?

WIHT - Washington's Hot Hits - "Brought to you by the Evil Empire®." Move over satellite radio, you've got terrestrial competition for universal coverage. Adam sent me this article from the NY Times on a subject near and dear to his heart: the evils of big radio. But Adam, wasn't it little radio that stiffled your fondest dreams of DJ'ing Madonna to the masses?

Die Ausländer - I'm curious about the Euro-terminology for Pride celebrations known as "Christopher Street Day." I understand the reference, but am curious why it seems to have spread overseas while being rejected in the States. Perhaps one of our readers who will be attending such an event in Berlin this weekend (Adam) can shed light on the etymology.

My Family is Different - My gut reaction to the Nick News Special was to be startled by the rhetoric of the Christian children on the panel, referring to "homosexual acts" and speaking authoritatively, as though they had read, studied and fully understood every word of the Bible. Intolerance is a virtue that is taught, not born.

When Clayton, the fashionably dressed young man sitting next to Rosie O'Donnell says "personally, i believe that [teaching about homosexuality in schools] is wrong" and cites examples of the "best" kinds of families, I'm disturbed, but not necessarily because of his message. My disbelief comes from the fact that he's only barely a teenager! How is a child able to speak with fully-formed convictions on any topic yet? At that age, you should still be learning about the world and the people that inhabit it. It's disheartening to see the way some of the children spout off the party line about tolerance from their churches, without having any real world interaction with families that are different from their own.

The show is a good jumping off point for families to have discussions about tolerance, to start a dialogue for households that may not know any gay people but also haven't taught their children about homosexuality and the Bible from an early age. Not that I had any doubt that the program would air, but kudos to Viacom for taking the issue of tolerance to the airwaves.

The New Prozac? - Salon dares ask the question, can semen cure the blues? The study sounds a little hare-brained to me, and mostly avoids the issues of disease prevention and gay male sex. Basically, it's just a lurid little story to start your morning off on the right note.

Everything I need to know - I learned in stress management for kindergartners.

Preemptive Strike - I found this item about a potential terrorist attack on Los Angeles via The Weigh In. However, why is it that I can't seem to find similar reports on LATimes.com or the other major newspapers? Terrorists: you'd better "fasten your seatbelts," Rev. Moon and the Washington Times are on the case!

Cut It Out - Alanis Morissette's mid-90's anthem of female empowerment You Oughta Know is about DAVE COULIER? Why am I just learning this now?

UPDATE - Also, see this incredible diatribe on Full House.

Linda Tripp, I presume? - Ben, did OneMillionMoms.com break the law by tape recording a conversation with Volkswagen's PR department and sharing it on their website?

That's SO Gay - Despite the best efforts of the One Million Muthas, Nickelodeon is committed to its Satanist agenda and will air a Nick News special on gay parenting tonight at 9pm. Curiously, their online schedule does not explain what the special is about. What could be more natural than a storm of controversy, and the NY Times chimes in with its two cents. (Isn't it hard to believe that the Gray Lady was once considered homophobic?)

Who remembers the similar brouhaha over the airing of It's Elementary on PBS a couple of years ago? The same folks at Womedia also produced That's A Family. Looks like they are a formidable foe to decent American values. While Donald Wildmon and his gang were less successful at pressuring Viacom than local PBS affiliates, don't expect them to give up hope. Next target: those bastions of ungodliness, Wendy's and Hallmark! By the way, if you really want to piss these guys off, support all 10 of "TV's worst advertisers" on this list.

UPDATE: Ben, kudos to you for first posting on this subject. Nice find!

Sullivanisms - While I'm stealing ideas from Drew, I might as well direct folks to his blog. Our favorite BBC denizen chimes in from the porch hammock in Provincetown with critiques of two wonderful essays, one from the right and one from the left. The leftist one, from the Nation, is well worth reading even if I disagree with its premise. I really can't abide Mary ("all homos are pedophiles") Eberstadt, so I'll spare you the link.

A Different Kind of Father's Day - This article is for John in Florida, Robert in New Hampshire, and Sean in Washington, as well as the many other young men I've met online over the years. Some of you have made it to this point with your families. For others, this still lies in the future. I love you guys, and I say a prayer that you all find this sort of peace soon.

Movie Time - Saw the two big films opening this weekend, The Bourne Identity and Scooby Doo.

The Bourne Identity was a tight, entertaining thriller, with a much more accessible plot and and more engaging characters than The Sum of All Fears. Matt Damon is convincingly able to convey distaste for the violence his character is forced to commit and unlike Fears' Kathy Ryan, Franke Potente's character actually has some substance. Matt Damon beefed up for the role, but I was a bit disappointed that there was so little skin shown. Only one shirtless scene, barely showing his shoulders and biceps? I guess he wouldn't want to appear like he was flaunting too much.

Scooby Doo is visually exciting and distinctive, carefully establishing a cartoonishly "spooky" theme throughout the sets and locations. I enjoyed Scooby, but I'm not sure I could recommend it. It's definitely aimed at kids, relying very heavily on slapstick humor and fart jokes. The computer generated images aren't always entirely well integrated into the scenes, but the actors seem to be having fun. I couldn't help but wonder how much more I would have enjoyed an R-rated version of the film, with more innuendo on Velma's lesbian tendencies and Shaggy's attraction to Mary Jane. But, as it is, the movie is faithful to the cartoon original while very gently poking fun at its conventions. Salon does a fantastic job of reviewing the movie as well.

Pure Fluff - A fluffy, but amusing report on ceiling fans and Trading Spaces.

Coverage of Missing Persons - The Journal Sentinal highlights the case of a missing African-American girl from Milwaukee whose case has not reached the public outside of Wisconsin and compares it to the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart from an upper-class neighborhood in Salt Lake City. While there are certainly disparities in the ways these cases are being covered, I'm more interested in why these cases are national news at all. What is it that makes people across the nation want to learn more about cases that, while tragic, mostly only have a local impact? Look at the case of Jon Benet Ramsey, as well as that of Elizabeth Smart, and I would argue that the answer is not just about race, it's about wealth. Hiring a publicity machine makes sure that the maximum number of viewers learn about the case is something that not every family can afford. And while I think viewers genuinely care about the fate of the girl, it's also an opportunity to see the cracks that occur within a "perfect" family living in a 6,600-square-foot house with seven bedrooms and an indoor racquetball court. Could that be why people latch onto such a story and want to keep abreast of the latest developments?

Riding on the City of New Orleans - Adam sent me this story from the NY Times Magazine, which reminded me of the Arlo Guthrie classic, one of my favorites from childhood.

A Compassionate Conservative? - The Washington Post has a Page One profiler of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who hails from Sacramento, as a potential choice to replace Stanford-educated Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Rehnny is thought to be considering retirement during the Bush Administration. Kennedy would appear to be a middle-of-the-road conservative and therefore more likely to navigate the Senate's approval process than Nino Scalia, the far right's shining star. Along with fellow Stanford alum Sandra Day O'Connor, Kennedy forms the swing-vote block between the Court's four liberals and the three-man conservative wing of SCOTUS.

While Kennedy swung to the right in Bush v. Gore, the big question is whether Kennedy's liberal policies on gays and abortion would be too much for Bush's Bible-thumping base to swallow. My guess is yes, since any person I would see as an improvement over Rehnquist would likely be considered too much for the right-wingers. Their opposition may be enough to torpedo any Kennedy candidacy. These fellows managed to block Marc Racicot as Attorney General and so we got John Ashcroft instead. Of course, that was before the Senate went to the Democrats, so watch for the Fall elections to be determinative.

P.S. Wouldn't it be just like the liberal Post to try to get out in front on this story to build support for the moderate candidate? Hmm...

Fascism by any other name - It has been observed that the Christian right has a lot in common with the Islamo-fascism found in such nations as Sudan and Iran. But did we know they were actually working together?

Dead Lesbians - Ben, comment? Oh, and there was a hottie homo on Buffy? Why wasn't I notified of this?

Condi - The Merc marks the rise to power of National Security Advisor, and former Stanford University provost, Condoleezza Rice. Condi was a much respected and accessible figure on the Stanford campus, regularly being seen at Jamba Juice (née Juice Club) in Palo Alto, so it's always good to hear more about her successes at the White House. The SF Chronicle has the recap of her commencement address at Stanford on Sunday.

All Too True - Pity the poor, persecuted public company honcho. Not even the multi-thousand-acre ranch in Montana can provide solace in this time of hardships. But how about some sympathy for us devil's advocates, eh? We're the ones who have to keep the lawman at bay.

First Monica, Now This - I don't think I would want to be a White House intern these days. Do we think the disk was lost or "lost"?

Rant from the Left Coast - Oh, those damn California liberal hippies and sodomites. The SF Chronicle's Mark Morford discusses being taunted with the oft-heard playground insult, "you're gay." I'm not sure there's any other way to dismiss the comments, but his ever-so-San-Francisco response probably just adds fuel to the fire for homophobe-types.

This Homeland is Your Land - Forget about whether the new Department of Homeland Security should swallow up the CIA and the FBI, it's the name we don't like! That's the opinion of Peg Noonan and Mickey Kaus, anyway. I tend to agree. The term "Homeland" does tend to conjure up images out of a Leni Riefenstahl movie. It never bothered me when it was attached to Tom Ridge, since it's hard to picture that man as being much of a threat. (Al Qaeda probably feels the same way; where's the "Draft Rudy" website?) Now that this little White House office could grow to become one of the largest cabinet departments, I'm starting to feel a bit differently.

School's Out - Yes, it's that time of year again, when blissfully happy students mark the end of the "best years of their lives" with prom and graduation. The NY Times weighs in with an article about how prom, as a concept, can get lost in the translation for immigrant students and their parents. Mr. Deng has been in the U.S. for seven years and he doesn't understand what a prom is? Or is it more likely that he's a geeky wallflower who can't be bothered with such trivial frivolity?

On a related note, the Washington Post observes that gay students would bewelcomed at proms in the DC area, yet doesn't quote any students. The article is noble, but a bit idealized, I think. I mean, DC is no Toronto. Even in the Bay Area, a separate, area-wide gay prom is held so that students can feel comfortable and safe.

Now, onto graduation. Two Westlake High School (Go Warriors!) students are recognized for being valedictorian-athletes, heading to the Ivy Leagues. Stanford must not have admitted anyone from WHS this year. Not that I'm bitter or anything, but I know of a varsity athlete and topped-ranked scholar at WHS, who was recruited to play volleyball at both Harvard and Yale. Where was her article?

Teacher-Student Relations - With all eyes turned to the Catholic priest sex abuse scandals, scant attention is being paid to another group with access to children: teachers. Even in the past couple of days, new cases are being reported in Atlanta and Seattle.

However, unlike the Church scandals being perpetrated by male priests, the most notorious recent examples of teacher-student improprieties involve female teachers, Mary Kay Letourneau and Pamela Smart. (In Ben's Fame Tracker Index, Pamela whips Mary Kay's ass, having inspiring two movies, To Die For with Nicole Kidman, as well as made-for-TV movie Murder in New Hampshire starring Helen Hunt. Mary Kay only got a basic cable tribute with B-list star Penelope Ann Miller).

We're jarred (and a bit titillated) by the notion of a woman teacher seducing a young man. I know it's politically incorrect of me to have a double standard for men and women, but time and time again, popular culture acknowledges that it's a dream come true for many adolescent boys to be with an older woman. These examples are just a reminder of the fact that ephebophilia doesn't exclusively affect the male of the species--gay, straight or "celibate."

And We Think Our Media Is Bad - Well, the Beijing Evening News has issued a correction for their Onion-based laugher, but they still don't seem to get the joke. Where are the Chinese bloggers on this one?

Spies R Us - In the movies, James Bond always has the coolest gadgets (thanks to Q). One wonders where spies got this technological cachet, since they work for the government, after all. The Washington Post reminds us that, in real life, law enforcement and other government departments don't have the computing power of your typical WalMart. My libertarian friends would cringe, but I just don't see why having the government pry into your personal life is really any worse than letting your credit card company do it. It's not like we have real privacy anyway. We gladly barter it away to gain über-consumerist powers, why not for physical security too?

American Idol - I'm so pleased to see my Paula Abdul back in the spotlight. All of America is watching, are you? This manufactured schlock-fest (featuring LA's Star 98.7 drive-time DJ Ryan Seacrest) offers absolutely nothing redeeming. It's an overhyped piece of fluff. And it's wrong to delight in watching other people fail. I plan to tune in for every single episode.

The Lady Doth Protest Too Much - Here's a rather defensive piece by the editor of Outsports on the subject of the real motivations behind many gays' interest in sports. With all due respect to Miss Kournakova, I do believe Mr. Ziegler overstates the point. Yes, straight men are pretty sex-obsessed, and there are certainly elements of sports that play into that. But if that was as important as Mr. Ziegler makes it seem, then shouldn't women's sports be more popular, especially among younger men, than they are? In my experience, the many facets of sports - from playing to spectating to discussing last night's game at the water cooler - is far more concerned with the phenomenon of male bonding than it is about sex. I'm reminded of a scene in City Slickers where Daniel Stern's character is reflecting on his relationship with his estranged father. I don't have the direct quotation, but basically he explained that at a time when the two men seemed to have nothing else in common, they found a common language in sports. I've experienced this personally. Socially or in the business world, there is generally no better icebreaker in a conversation with a new (straight) male acquaintence than to start talking about sports. Interestingly, the inability to talk about sports on at least some level can be a real impediment in such circumstances. Lament that if you like, but if libido is what it takes to get some gay men watching the games, then perhaps they will at least find it pays off when [horrors!] the time comes to interact with straight men.

Matt Welch, Ben? - Who, wha? Are we just keeping the righties and the lefties even? Please explain yourself.

Do the Math - The Opinion Journal credits a blog called The American Mind with the the startling discovery that "$78 per keyboard" is being spent to replace the "W"-less keyboards that were vandalized during the "destruction" wreaked by the departing Clinton administration. While that figure is a bit high, it's too bad the FBI didn't try to pull the same stunt, maybe then they could have updated their systems too.

Facing Reality - On the heels of long-awaited Napster bankruptcy, the major record labels appear to be ready to throw in the towel and release cheap, copyable music via download. Maybe Hilary Rosen can now get back to raising her kids.

Muni Comes to DC? - Maybe Washington will someday revive its own version of San Francisco's on-street light rail.

Phoebe's Lil Bro - My old classmate, Dan Pintauro, Jonathan Bower of Who's the Boss fame, has an opinion on coming out. While I claim no expertise on small town life, and I will certainly be reminded of my liberal California bias, even I recognize how hopelessly out of touch Mr. Pintauro seems. I do believe that coming out is important, but only if one is adequately prepared for the potential consequences of telling people. The piece is a fine pep talk, but it fails to address the fact that small town life isn't always about Wigstock, romantic vacations to Puerto Vallarta and Pride parades. Perhaps his opinion could be influenced by reading this moving tribute in the Washington Blade that John found, showing that coming out can be as simple as an acknowledgment like "good for you." While I agree with his underlying message, in the execution it's difficult to hear from a former television star who was born in the burbs of Jersey, lived in Los Angeles, went to college in the Bay Area and now lives in Manhattan.

On a Roll - While I'm covering the homophobic right's favorite subjects, how about the old saw about gays and pedophilia? These guys don't give up, and it has an effect. Any interest in a rebuttal, Ben?

All Crimes are Hate Crimes - Heard that one before too, eh? Basically, pending hate crimes legislation provides "sentencing enhancement" for crimes that target victims based on actual or perceived sexual orientation, or allocates extra prosecutorial resources to such crimes. The least sophisticated argument against such law invokes accusations of "thought police." This falacious slogan sounds good on a bumper sticker but ignores the fact that an act of violence to person or property must be associated with the "thought" in question. Criminal law has always concerned itself with mental state of the perpetrator. Thus a killer may be convicted only of second-degree murder, because her actions were made in the heat of passion, rather than with malice aforethought. Also, the insanity defense is premised on an inability to form the necessary intent or to know right from wrong. Moreover, a criminal's character, intent and a variety of other subjective factors are universally applied in the sentencing stage of a conviction. Anti-gay hate crime law opponents don't really think "bad guys" shouldn't be punished more, they just balk at the idea that they could be those bad guys. (My advice: Just don't get physical in your homophobia.)

One of the more principled arguments against hate crimes legislation, on the other hand, is that it biases our criminal law in favor of certain "privileged" groups. Equal treatment before the law is a hard concept to argue with. Nevertheless, criminal law commonly takes into account the effects of a criminal act in meting out appropriate punishment. An act that terrorizes a community may therefore provoke a stronger reaction that one that has a more confined, personal effect. When a wide population views themselves as victims of a crime, especially where such was the intent of the perpetrator, I see no reason why the penalty cannot be harsher. Furthermore, by creating mandatory sentencing enhancements, implementation of the law becomes more uniform, with less room for prosecutorial or judicial discretion. Historically, this has been a problem as homophobic prosecutors and judges have given unequal treatment to gay victims. It seems to me this is especially important with respect to minor criminal acts. Graffiti that reads "Beat Tech!" is different from graffiti that says "Kill all faggots!" The same is true for a car vandal who only picks on vehicles with pride stickers. Not all small-town judges see it that way.

Finally, the law is intended to be instructive as well as punitive. Even the passage of hate crimes legislation protective of gays, with nothing more, sends a powerful message to the overall community that it's not alright to bash gays. As such, it's an important corrective to a societal behavior that has, gladly, begun to fall out of favor.

A Waste of Time - A common refrain these days, among the far right, who seem to find a new use for the "war on terror" every day. First, it's the gay pride observances by various government departments (though not at the Commerce Department), then it's the Senate's consideration of hate crime legislation. Both are "distracting" us from the important business of securing our nation in this dark hour. Well, never fear, the busy folks at Family Research Council and the Traditional Values Coalition were earning their keep by getting their anti-gay sound bites into the media, and good old Trent Lott was right there with them. Twisting our common battle with civilization's enemies into a weapon against fellow Americans seems especially vile, but I guess it is the nature of the great "game" that's played in this town.

From Hungary - While we're on the topic of the 'dirty bomber,' I noted with interest John Ashcroft's profound comment today: "Security secures something and what we're securing is freedom." By the way, does he need his hearing checked?

South by Southeast - Why did erstwhile dirty bomber Jose Padilla get sent to the brig in Charleston, SC instead of joining his fellow mujahid Yaser Esam Hamdi in Norfolk? Perhaps it's because cantankerous U.S. District Judge Robert Doumar had ruled in Norfolk that Hamdi had the right to an attorney, so Ashcroft and friends were looking to get out of the judge's reach while remaining within the territory of the ultra-conservative Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

What, Me Worry? - Just for John, NPR's Talk of the Nation featured a discussion today on the topic of worrying. I only caught a piece of it on the radio, but what I heard centered on the notion that worrying is at least partially based on biology, meaning that based on one's body chemistry, he would be more inclined to worry than someone else facing the same circumstances. The nature of worry is something we're born with, not something over which we have full control. Thoughts?

Just Get Married - I don't really understand the angle for the introduction of this story about domestic partnership in California. Overall, it does a decent job of outlining the issues of domestic partnership and discusses its differences from marriage. The part I find to be a bit manufacturered is the one-man-crusade for heterosexual domestic partner rights. Where's his lobbying group, website and PR campaign? Well, first of all, he could just get married. But secondly, I don't think that he'd garner much support for his plan, as it would create a parallel system of marriage for straight people, thereby undermining the holy union of matrimony between one man and one woman. Conservatives would be loathe to allow such an action to take place.

God Hates Capitol Pride - You can always count on the aggressively pro-homosexual editors at the Washington Post to provide a distorted, gay-positive view of the debauchery and filth that actually goes on at these disgusting "pride" festivals. (This sodomite wouldn't have missed it for the world.)

On the Home Front - Another reminder that Washington, DC continues to be a city under siege. This comes on the heels of a decision to close Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House permanently. That was a shame, I thought, since there seemed to be a lot of interest in building a tunnel to reconnect this major DC transportation artery, which was abruptly sealed after the OKC bomb. Apparently, such tunnels don't provide adquate security against truck bombs, especially dirty ones. In our own neighborhood, trucks are being kept off of Jefferson Davis Highway in front of the Pentagon. I frequently run down that way and see the state police and Army Humvees watching along the road for violators.

Law and Order - After being relieved from his duties as the trial judge for the Microsoft anti-trust litigation, his honor Thomas Penfield Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has moved on to weightier matters.

Real World - In response to an especially delightful episode of The Real World, Entertainment Weekly asks the question: Is Tonya crazy? I think she's the greatest sociopath the show has ever seen! A Real World cast member who eschews interactions with others? How else are you gonna get on cam, sweetie? Oh that's right, you have tens of thousands of dollars of medical bills to pay, so you simply can't ever go out with the rest of the gang. Yeah, like one minimum-wage shift at the restaurant is gonna pay that down. Tonya, you're a shifty character, with that sketchy Darren guy (your pornographer, perhaps?) and your constant phonesex with Justin. She will go down as the Stephen of RW Seattle of the new millenium.

UPDATE - Tonya comments at MTV.com, proves herself to be a prostitute and clarifies nothing!

Politically Incorrect - I am in infrequent viewer of Politically Incorrect. The show's concept is original enough, putting together four pseudo-celebrities with a host to discuss the hot-button issues of the day. And while I tend to dislike Bill Maher's attitude, I sometimes do find myself agreeing with his libertarian ideals. Ken Tucker's review, as the show comes to a close, seems to overstate its case a bit. Bill Maher's proclivity to make pronouncements without explanation is probably what has caused him the most trouble. The statements, quoted below, do reflect some libertarian notions when viewed through the proper context. But, to play devil's advocate, isn't having to contextual and explain every statement one of the cores of political correctness?

If a libertarian is "a person who upholds the principles of absolute and unrestricted liberty especially of thought and action," then don't some of his statements make sense, even if you don't agree with them? ''I think religion is bad," he says, in that religion tells individuals how to think. "Drugs are good," he argues, because the government shouldn't regulate one's ability to control his or her own body. Finally, his statement that, "I think September 11th changed nothing," holds some weight when looking at specific things such as TV news coverage. News was supposed to have changed forever after September 11, but studies have shown that there haven't been any long-lasting effects TV news. In any case, Jimmy Kimmel discussing Barbara Walters on the trampoline is not subversive, its just perverse.

UPDATE - Ken Tucker defends and clarifies his review at CNN.com.

A Fallen Friend - Following up on last night's call-out on All Things Considered, the Post has an obituary of the Wye Oak.

Finding Fault - There's a lot this review of Buffy the Vampire Slayer has going for it. It's a thoughtful, close reading of the subtext of the series, making many provocative points. I feel strongly that the author ardently believes what he is saying, and that makes reading the essay fun. But his argument is wrong.

Tara's death cannot be attributed to her homosexuality. As I've said before, none of the romantic relationships on the show have ever been successful for any of the characters. Willow and Tara's relationship was the most realistic and loving portrayal seen in all six seasons of Buffy. To say that there's a "reluctance to show much intimacy between the two lovers" or that Willow and Tara "have appeared positively prudish" is inaccurate. While these two characters were not shown in sexually explicit situations, they were shown kissing passionately and lying together in bed this season. There was even a symbolic just-out-of-camera-range depiction of cunnilingus! That's prudish? Willow was not being punished for falling in love, Willow was punished for abusing the magicks. I don't buy the argument that "'addiction' dovetails easily with prejudices against queer sexual pathologies and excess." She wasn't going to a Magic Circuit Party and having a wild Wiccan orgy...her love for Tara was the one thing keeping her from performing black magic. Willow's degradation happened as a result of the addiction not her love for Tara, and I'd argue that Tara was never degraded. In both life and death, Tara is perhaps the most grounded and noble of all the Buffy characters.

UPDATE - See also this review in the Sacramento News & Review and a counterpoint to the original post on PopMatters.com.

Dirty Pop - I happened upon an interesting essay on the pervasiveness of cultural references in all forms of media. I'm all for an academic discussion of The Simpsons, but how can you have a discussion on allusions and linking to other works without discussing blogging and the Internet?

Nick News - Once again, OneMillionMoms.com is a step ahead of the news. Glad to see that their machine of hate is keeping us well informed. Both the Washington Post and the LA Times report a story about a campaign against a Nickelodeon Nick News show about kids with gay parents. It doesn't sound like the show has yet been released to critics for review. Be sure to Tivo it when it airs Tuesday, June 18 and look for the Beaverhausen review soon after.

Jumping the Shark - "Jumping the shark" is a phrase that is rapidly entering the pop culture lexicon. It refers to the moment or event on a television show that marks its decline. The term itself comes from an episode of Happy Days where Fonzie literally jumps over a shark while waterskiing, a milestone many fans think marks the beginning of the end. There are common themes that pop up again and again as the turning point that kills shows, like the death or birth of a character, a change in actors, or the addition of Ted McGinley to the cast.

To give recent examples of jumping the shark, we can turn to two shows that recently ended their runs, Ally McBealand The X-Files. It is generally agreed, even by fans of the shows, that both series were past their prime and should have been cancelled a few seasons back. Up for debate, the long-suffering ER. (By the way, I'd argue that the death of Kellie Martin's character marked the beginning of the end.)

I do remember Not Necessarily the News, but not necessarily fondly. I think that's a reactionary stance to my distaste for the sniglet craze that swept the nation back in the day.

Who's Inscrutible Now? - If the French love Jerry Lewis, then I guess the Chinese can have The Onion, except that they seem to think it's a factual newsmagazine. The Beijing Evening News is the latest foreign victim of comedic misunderstandings. Admittedly, the bait taken by the Chinese was one of their better stories lately. Hear NPR's Robert Siegel discuss the development with Onion editor Robert Siegel.

Speaking of spoofing the news, does anyone else fondly remember Not Necessarily the News? And Ben, can you please explain what "jumping the shark" means...

Pre-Fourth Fireworks - They found a pipe bomb in the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel this morning, about 90 minutes before I drove through on my way in to the office. The device apparently couldn't have done any real damage, yet it seems like an odd stunt to pull. I guess someone thought they could shut down a key traffic corridor with a little smoke and loud noises. Some people just hate their morning commute.

Creative Class, Revisited - I swear we've discussed this topic on Beaverhausen Blog before, but I can't seem to find the link. Nevertheless, an in-depth interview with the author of the book on the "creative class" appeared on Salon.com.

An Act of Bravery? - From today's Boston Globe, an article about the first private school targeted specifically to gay students (and the children of gay parents). A part of me asks, why would you subject yourself to such attention and potential for harassment by painting your nails? Why put yourself into the situation where you are a prime target for bullies? But, when I think about it, it's heartening to think about the openness and self-acceptance they are able to achieve at their ages. For them to take these small symbolic steps is to feel they can come out at an earlier age than those of us who aren't that much older could have fathomed. These students are not only out to themselves, not only out to their friends and families, but symbolically demonstrating their differences to the world.

Nevertheless, the article raises an interesting point for me. These kids are pulled out of mainstream schools. Now, to have made this radical change, maybe they wouldn't have been able to graduate in those settings anyway. But in the new, "safe" setting, they still won't be prepared to go to prestigious colleges, nor will they have the opportunties for extracurricular activities that a larger school would offer. The idea of a "handsome, masculine, gay football player" connotes that this student is in a tolerant environment and has the support of his peers already and probably wouldn't need to attend an inferior school targeted at gays. Moving to Dallas, away from friends and family, doesn't strike me as the best solution to this problem. In the end, I think it boils down to the fact that administrators and teachers need to ensure that the same educational opportunities are afforded to all students, no matter what their circumstances, including protection from bullying and harassment.

Six Feet Under - The second season of Alan Ball's sensational Six Feet Under ended Sunday on HBO. The Washington Post recently sat down with Ball while Salon reviewed the past season.

The point is well taken that these are some of the least likable, most fallible characters on television, and it's this unique perspective that distinguishes the show. Ruth Fisher, especially, seems so out-of-place both in the Los Angeles setting of the show, and on television in general. Most of the time, I can't stand her and that's why I admire the character. She is alternately tentative and headstrong, not always knowing how to approach her children yet storming ahead to organize a family dinner party when she sets her mind to it. A depressingly routine, emotionally guarded, excessively plain middle-aged character generally wouldn't be beloved by audiences, but the portrayal is so realistic, you can't help but think she's someone you might have sat next to on an airplane and completely ignored.

As for Brenda being "more gay man than straight woman," doesn't it seem like this recent cliché is getting a bit tired? We've heard it endlessly about Samantha and the girls on Sex and the City, but also about Patsy and Edina on AbFab. You can be a drugged-out sex addict and be straight. Nevertheless, no matter how "creepily blank" those surfers/stoners were, they were hot.