Matthew Yglesias writes about my continuing Cruising for Dean saga:

Mostly I've been linking to these posts just because they're funny, but it occurs to me that Dean's strong support from the gay community has been seriously under-noted in the coverage I've seen of the campaign thus far. It's something worth paying attention to, though, because it looks to me like the 2004 primary could mark the emergence of gays and lesbians as a distinct and at least somewhat influential interest group within the Democratic Party alongside the unions, racial minorities, feminists, lawyers, etc.

Unsurprisingly, I'm inclined to agree. Some of the comments on Matthew's post are skeptical: aren't gays already voting democratic, etc. (this seems to miss Matthew's point a bit).

On the ground, as a gay democrat, things certainly feel different now. Not log ago, back in college, we were excited when Democratic candidates would send, almost in secret, minor functionaries who would express some kind of broad support for gay rights. This didn't do much to inspire us to go out and campaign.  Sure, we it, but halfheartedly.

Nothing like what I felt watching the video of Dean speaking at the Howard Dean Meetup.

Certainly, the social atmosphere has changed fantastically in the past ten years: I don't really like Will and Grace, but I'm glad that it's on. Coming out in high school, while not always easy, is enormously more common than it was just ten or 15 years ago.

As one of Matthew's readers remarks:

Um, the days of mere "tolerance" are ending. The climate of public opinion on gay issues and gay relationships is shifting to acceptance and even celebration. Polling data on the opinions of young people is especially encouraging. Republican opponents of gay rights are looking increasingly like Republican opponents of civil rights. Republican opponents of gay marriage are looking increasingly like Republican opponents of interracial marriage. Gay marriage is now a reality in Canada. Gay marriage will likely soon be a reality in Massachussetts. It's pretty obvious which way the wind is blowing. Anti-gay Republicans, which is most of them, are increasingly being seen for the bigots that they are.

Posted by: Don P at June 18, 2003 03:32 AM

But why does this mean, as Matthew claims, that gays are now emerging as as "a distinct and at least somewhat influential interest group within the Democratic Party"?

I agree with this hunch but it's hard to say why. Simply because they have not before been tapped for campaigning and outreach efforts? Does it have something to do with the recent research, cited in The Emerging Democratic Majority, about the positive correlation between the prevalence of out gay people in an area with economic growth, perceived quality of life. and the general desirability of living there?

Perhaps it's simply that politicians can now embrace us fully, much of the stigma associated with homosexuality having eroded over the years -- and that we worry about the possibility of the clock being rolled back. The embrace of the democratic party no longer seems forced, and we feel it.

We are more enthusiastic about democratic candidates. Ready to campaign, write, organize, contribute ideas. And as we become more evolved we do indeed become a more influential group -- because of the value of what we are contributing and it is recognized that we are needed.

Crap: a non-comic post in my Cruising for Dean thread. Hope people will still read. Skip to the next post for the pratfalls.

Someone should find out what that guy is planning.

Stanley Kurtz, talking in some squalid corner or something (ok, the NRO), promises a big fight against gay marriage with "new information."

"New information"?

You have to wonder what this intrepid gay marriage researcher could have found out. Maybe:

"It turns out that married gay men are monopolizing our wives with endless, endless dinner parties, and it's frankly affecting the birth rate. This must be stopped!"

Good lord. Anyone care to speculate on what lunacy this bigot thinks he has found?

Here's the quote:

Jonah, of course you?re right that the momentum right now is all on the side of gay marriage... But a serious dogfight is by no means impossible. We are not yet Sweden, and the public still does not favor gay marriage. And Ramesh?s points about Santorum are dead on. After Massachusetts, I?m going to be making the case against gay marriage at a level of detail, and with new information, that I believe will help take this debate to a new level. I can see lots of ways in which what I?ve been finding out in my research could change the shape of our national debate. So while I agree that your current assessment has a lot going for it, I?d also ask you to withhold final judgement until we?ve had time to see how the Massachusetts decision plays out. [emphasis mine]

CNN Health:

People who frequently "exercise" their brains might also be warding off dementia in old age...

Not good news for Shrub, so much praised for his ability to delegate, who has clearly delegated all higher-level cognitive activity to someone else. We'd better start watching for signs.

Oh, wait, I forgot about this.

Bush:

"Do you have blacks, too?"—To Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

After reading the Antic Muse's Corner round up, I had to read the "gays have won" piece. Now hear this:

The gays have won.

The problem is no one will admit it. 
The biggest and latest news is that Canada is poised to legalize same-sex marriage. But the signs of the gay victory have been all around for us for years. 
The sitcom "Will and Grace" features openly gay characters who joke about their sex lives in ways that little more than a decade ago would have sparked complaints if uttered by heterosexuals, let alone homosexuals...

And then:

For the popular culture this signals the final stage of mainstreaming homosexuality. After repeated protests from gay groups in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Hollywood stopped casting gays and lesbians as villains (think of "No Way Out" and "Basic Instinct").

Of course, I know: this is just a rhetorical trick of his to downplay the daily murderous reality of homophobia, the everyday homophobic abuse of children by their parents, a trick to rally the fellow bigots to new acts of hatred and abuse.

But the Antic Muse is right about his author photo: gay gay gay.

Is the Antic Muse's apt description of the homosexual panic going on today at The Corner (no link for you!) But, hey, it's all over, the NRO has declared that the gays have won. As the Antic Muse reports:

Corner contributors are, in general, obsessed with gay marriage (some more than others). But today's a veritable gay-a-polooza. The headline for today's Corner contributions, to paraphrase Brent Bozell, should be: "Gay celebration tonight!" Or, "The Corner: Never gayer!"

The gay-a-thon stems in part from a relatively harmless Jonah Goldberg column (whose author photo, btw, looks very gay) in which he concedes that "The gays have won."

This prompts a hissy fit from John "Must I Be Bombarded with Propaganda for the Homosexual Agenda?" Derbyshire (Is that a gay name or what?):

The Antic Muse also remembers to link to the so-appropriate South Park send up:

Gay, gay, gay, gay, gay gay gay.

And, of course, blame Canada.

Gah! Why didn't I think of mentioning that song! Her muse is clearly antic.

Driving home today I caught the middle of some story on NPR. They were discussing a proposal to tax flatulent farm animals. Well, ok. But... there are more flatulent things out there.

Given the U.S. budget problems, I'm beginning to wonder if we might be able to save social security and fund a manned mission to Jupiter if we applied that tax to Sen. "Man-On-Dog" Rick Santorum.

Nice quote from the Reader's Opinion page on the New York Times:

Jajwm: "Anyone who has spent time in Canada will understand why same-sex marriage rights have been obtained apparently so easily. Liberal Canada is evolving while the U.S., chained to the right wing, is sinking into a devolutionary morass. For years, while the U.S. was deporting gay human rights abuse victims or making them live here illegally, Canada was granting political asylum to gays. Thanks to former Sen. Jesse Helms, people with H.I.V. are banned from immigrating here (or are required to go through a lengthy waiver process); not so in Canada. This is not an isolated phenomenon: our neighbor to the north has always treated Native Peoples, Black people and immigrants better -- far better -- than we, and now they have left us in the 19th century dust when it comes to equal marriage rights."

Ah, is there such a thing? How many of you guys in the Castro are out there blogging?

Just as I'm speculating about how much better gay high-schoolers have it today, here comes this, reported on CNN:

Lawyers who filed a lawsuit on her behalf in Manhattan federal court said 14-year-old Natalie Young is openly lesbian and that a teacher laughed at her, calling the garment and its reference to the popular Barbie doll "inappropriate."

Young alleged that the principal held her for three hours in an office at the school in the borough of Queens on April 10, 2002 and refused to allow her to return to class while she wore the T-shirt.

A spokesman for the city education department, a defendant in the lawsuit, declined immediate comment.

Just playing around with Userland categories. You can now read the entire Cruising For Dean saga here or on the link on the left. Yeah, I know, the links on the left are...not quite a blogroll, not quite what they should be.

I'm thrilled to to find pro-gay sites for youth, and at the same time more than a bit jealous that I didn't have access to these resources when I was in high school. Instead, in a public school in Louisiana, a school for Louisiana's "gifted" youth, we were treated to a mandatory sex talk conducted by several nuns.

They even attempted to present some Freudian theory (which they clearly misunderstood) about the dangers that could lead to homosexuality, and what we must to to avoid them. NUNS spewing this stuff at a public school. All these years since, I still remember the sense of outrage and betrayal that I felt. I was tempted to go through a point-by-point refutation of their mangled Freudian mush (clearly just a cover for their real homophobia, which they certainly knew that they could not espouse outright.) But what was the point?

It wasn't even, really, about what they said. It didn't matter that what they said was clearly incoherent. The real point was simply a demonstration of power, that they were able to say this us, could force us to listen, in a public school.

I'm reminded of the many dissections of the Bowers v. Hardwick decision, and how poorly the majority opinion was argued. This is hatred in a pure form, when it is has power, and knows that it only has to pretend to make an argument, and that they know that you know they they are only pretending to make an argument. A simple demonstration of power without ground, that shows that it does not have to justify itself.

Very funny piece in the San Francisco Chronicle.

I have my doubts, however. Did these raging homophobes really know that Canada is in fact "a really, really big country?"

Did they in fact know that it was right next door? This was probably as big a schock as the news about gay marriage.

Stop The Gay Canadians! First icky legalized homosexual marriage, then the apocalypse. Conservative America trembles By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist		Friday, June 20, 2003
Hordes of quivering GOP lawmakers and vast throngs of proudly homophobic right-wing Christian Americans fell into an adorable tizzy the other day as the entire really, really big country of Canada announced it will change its law to allow full-on homosexual marriage anywhere in the whole country including Vancouver and Toronto and even "that weird province with all the gay French people." Hysteria and open weeping and panicky looks accompanied the uncontrollable overeating of many stale Ding-Dongs, as millions of sexually confused Bush-ites and members of self-righteous Bible-icious anti-everything groups like the American Family Association, along with entire towns such as Colorado Springs, were absolutely certain the world was coming to an end, like, immediately. I mean, Canada's right next door!