London 2009 - Part 2

I'm only now getting a chance to catch up on writing about some of my activities in England. There was one shared computer at the hotel, and I hated to blog while people were waiting to use it. That said, there was one rather impertinent young lady who didn't give a hoot and was blogging incessantly, even while people were waiting to use the computer. Such nerve! In any case, I'm catching up now, writing this from my Brooklyn abode.

The image you see here is one of my favorite paintings by John William Waterhouse, Saint Eulalia (1885). The painting is owned by the Tate, but it currently is hanging at the Royal Academy for the exhibition J.W. Waterhouse: The Modern Pre-Raphaelite. If you think you’ve heard about Waterhouse on this blog before, you’re correct. Back in November I wrote about Elizabeth Prettejohn, one of the curators who gave a talk about the exhibition during the NAVSA conference at Yale. Last Friday morning I had coffee with another of the curators, Peter Trippi (who also was a guest speaker at the Why Victorian Art? symposium), and then I visited the exhibition. The show at the RA is smaller than it was in its first venue in The Netherlands, which is unfortunate, but it still is excellent. The exhibition is biographical in nature and the works unfold chronologically from about 1870 to his death in 1917. Waterhouse is one of the later Pre-Raphaelites. He was older than others in the original Brotherhood (Millais, Rossetti, etc.), so Waterhouse’s take on their style comes off seeming nostalgic. Yet, he also gives it his own spin. His subjects respond more to issues of the day like women's rights and the surging interest in the occult. In addition, his brushstroke is looser and broader than the tight, linear style associated with Pre-Raphaelitism, suggesting his awareness of new influences coming from France with plein-aire painting, Naturalism, and Impressionism. The exhibition consists of 40 oil paintings with subjects ranging from classical literature to Arthurian lore, but it's complimented by drawings and illustrated books. I find Saint Eulalia to be an amazing picture. She was an early Christian who refused to worship the pagan gods and was martyred for her beliefs. According to legend, when Eulalia died, a dove miraculously sprang from her mouth and it began to snow. The dove then represents her soul and the snow becomes a metaphor for the passing of nature in winter. Compositionally, the picture hangs so that you stare at the very center. But the foreshortening at the bottom means you're in the role of a viewer, looking down at the dead girl, whose appearance is both erotic and eerie. Her hair is splayed out, suggesting blood on an otherwise pure corpse. Your eyes move over her naked breasts and follow her limbs upward, where they suddenly point to the dove whose wings unfurl and lead your gaze toward the white space in the center and the shrouded girl in white who gazes at her. It is as if only this young girl and you the viewer have witnessed the miracle. It's an incredible painting and even more impressive in person. If you're in London, I highly recommend you look for it. You can see the exhibition until mid-September, and then it moves to Montreal.

Afterwards, I visited Apsley House, the home of the Duke of Wellington (1769-1852). General Arthur Wellesley (as he was known) was raised to the peerage after his military successes against Napoleon, finally defeating him at the historic Battle of Waterloo in 1815. Wellington remains to this day one of England’s great military heroes (and in case you’re wondering, yes, he designed the utilitarian boots that became a pseudo-fashion trend and were named for him). Upon buying Apsley House, located just down the block from Buckingham Palace, he expanded and redecorated it to reflect the Neoclassical Georgian taste of the time. He inherited many works of art from the fallen Napoleonic monarchies, including one of the best pictures in the collection, The Waterseller of Seville (c.1620) by Velázquez. The most famous work in the collection, however, is probably the work seen here, Canova’s monumental nude sculpture of Napoleon as Mars the Peacemaker (1802-6). The sculpture was commissioned by the Emperor, but when he saw it he was embarrassed by the nudity and unhappy that it did not represent his true, calm demeanor (so he believed). It was only after the Napoleonic Wars were over that the figure was bought by the British crown and given to Wellington as war booty for defeating the French. One funny bit about the statue’s history, however, is narrated by the present Duke on the audio guide to the house. Properties near the house were bombed by Germans during World War II, and Apsley House suffered some damage. The only resident in the house at the time was the housekeeper, Mrs. Dow. Fortunately, she was fine, but for her insistence that of all the cleaning up to be done, they first needed to replace the statue’s fig leaf, which had blown off during the bombing and was now revealing the statue in all its apparently indecent glory.

My friend CC came down from York for one night while I was in London. I had made arrangements for us to tour two private art collections. (I’m purposely not saying anymore about this to protect the privacy of the owners, but rest assured it was very posh and we saw beautiful works of art.) We also met up with our friend DE, and over a lovely Italian dinner at Paradiso we gabbed and gossiped about art history and other fun things.

London 2009 - Part 1

I cannot tell you how surprised I was that my plane not only took off early from JFK last night, but it also was only half-full and we got into Heathrow early this morning. When I got to my hotel at the Ridgemount Hotel, my room wasn't ready yet, so I went out for coffee and decided to head to the National Gallery, which I had not been to since 2005. It's always great to see some of their incredible masterworks of art. Some that remain memorable with each visit are Titian's Bacchus and Ariadne (c.1525), Holbein's The Spanish Ambassadors (c.1535), Gainsborough's A Morning Walk (c.1785), Constable's The Hay Wain (1821), and Delaroche's Execution of Jane Grey (1833). There was also a special exhibition on 19th-century French landscape painting from Corot to Monet, all works from their permanent collection. I'm not typically a big fan of landscape painting, but the sketches by Corot, not to mention his Times of Day series, are beautiful, and the Barbizon landscape paintings by Diaz de la Peña are luminescent and simply gorgeous. The exhibition closes in September.

I also went to St. Paul's Cathedral today, which Christopher Wren designed after the 1666 Great Fire. It's a spectacular Baroque cathedral, but my purpose was to see all the 18th-century and 19th-century sepulchral monuments to soldiers from the Napoleonic Wars. I have to confess some of them are a bit over the top, but others are quite lovely in their Neoclassicism. Shockingly, though, the cathedral has an active gift shop that sells everything imaginable, but not a book about the sculpture. There aren't even postcards of the monuments. And of course you can't take pictures inside. Most frustrating, I can tell you!

I also went to the National Portrait Gallery this evening. I cannot even remember the last time I was there, but it was definitely worth visiting again. Seeing all the portraits of monarchs like Elizabeth I and her father Henry VIII was worth it. They have the entire museum arranged so that if you follow it room-by-room numerically, you see all the faces of British history, including monarchs, members of Parliament, artists, writers, you name it. I also went there today, though, because I wanted to see a special exhibition there that just opened a few weeks ago: Gay Icons. I think I may write a separate post about the exhibition specifically because there is quite a bit to talk about, but it was an interesting visual assessment that considers who is a gay icon and why people perceive others may or may not be a gay icon (even if they're not gay). That exhibition closes in October.

Merry Old England

I'm flying to England tomorrow, so postings on bklynbiblio may be sporadic. I'll be in London most of the time (where I may see Tower Bridge again; I took this picture of it during my visit last year). I am planning to see exhibitions at the Royal Academy, the British Library, and the Victoria & Albert Museum, among other places. I'll also be at a conference over the weekend in Bristol, a city I have not visited before, so that should be interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing my friends CC and DE in London too. I'm sure I'll have lots to write about very soon. Cheers!

Brooklyn Botanic Garden Revisited

On Thursday morning, I decided to relax at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden and took the pictures you see here. The BBG is turning out to be one of my favorite places in NYC (you may recall from a few months ago my pictures of the cherry blossoms). As you can see, the lilies are in full bloom. At the Japanese Hill-and-Pond Garden, I sat in the bamboo pavilion and watched the koi for quite some time. It's fascinating to see them swim about, their enormous heads, eyes, and mouths bubbling from just below the surface of the water. They move in and out among one other like a form of synchronized swimming. Most are black, but others are gold, white, orange, or a motley of colors combined. Their eating habits can be a bit bizarre. Every so often a group will swarm with their mouths opening and closing above the water. It can look like a scene of sucker monsters from a horror movie if it weren't so funny to watch. I discovered that they make noise too. At first I thought it was a water filtration system, but then I was startled to realize some of the koi were actually eating algae off the wooden posts along the water bank. They were making this loud brushing-sucking noise as they used their lips to brush the algae off the posts and take it in. Who knew they had such powerful lips!?

This Torii gate points to a Shinto shrine nestled in the pine trees above the pond, dedicating the area to the god of the harvest. The characters on the gate read "Dai-myo-jin," Great Illuminating Deity, or Spirit of Light (according to the sign outside the bamboo pavilion; I can't read Japanese).

Just nearby the Japanese garden is the Celebrity Path. This is a trail with stepping-stones inscribed with the names of famous Brooklynites past and present. There are stones for poets like Walt Whitman, artists like Lee Krasner, actors like Marisa Tomei, and then of course there is one of the most important Brooklynites...


The lotus blossoms were also in bloom. In Eastern religions, the lotus plant is associated with the Buddha's teachings. Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are often shown in art sitting on a lily pad and holding flowering lotus buds. The lotus shows how the teaching of the Buddha grows out from the murky mud of the materialistic world, but rests above this on the water's surface, then blossoms and points to the great spiritual heavens of Nirvana.

Do you know how hard it is to get a dragonfly to sit still and pose for a picture? I'm very happy this one came out.

Return of the "Happy Dog"

One of the earliest posts on bklynbiblio was a recap of my August 2008 trip to Provincetown, where I wrote about Coffey Men, a boutique with original designs by the talented men's fashion designer Scott Coffey. Scott recently posted photos of some of his latest looks for men, including the return of the Happy Dog. I love this t-shirt! Mine is navy with an orange dog. This one is spring green with a blue dog, and still only $24. There are other colors too. He also has mermaids, elephants, and other great logos. Check out all Scott's stuff at http://coffeymen.blogspot.com/.

Review: Brüno

Last night (thanks to DC for coordinating things), a group of us gay boys went to see Brüno (here's a link to the official trailer; embedding was disabled on YouTube). I would have thought everyone would know about this movie, but a few days ago I was having dinner with a gay friend from out of town and he didn’t know anything about it. I also suspect people like my father are also unaware of it, and in his case maybe it’s better if we keep it that way. The movie is a mocumentary about the gay Austrian fashionista Brüno and his goal to become an international celebrity. After crashing (quite literally) the Prada show in Milano wearing a prototype Velcro suit, he’s blackballed (but not the way he likes) from the fashion industry. This doesn’t stop Brüno from wanting to be famous. He goes to Los Angeles and from there drama ensues. The movie shoots off like a rocket and performs at high-octane for 90 minutes (which he loves). There is never a release (he likes releases), and when it ends you’re filled with a sense of heightened anxiety, as if you’re still waiting for the climax (uh-huh!), which comes when you’re in a group (yeah baby!) later on chatting about the movie. (Okay, I promise, no more double entendres).

Brüno stars Sacha Baron Cohen from Borat fame. Both Brüno and Borat are characters in his comedic repertoire. Cohen has been demonstrative in promoting this new film around Europe and North America, staging public events wearing many of his often-revealing and frequently-disturbing outfits (the pink bull costume with swinging appendage is among the more memorable). For the record, let me point out that I have not seen Borat nor have I ever seen the television portrayals of his characters, so this was my first true experience with Cohen. To his credit as writer and actor, the film is hilarious. It is outrageous, shocking, over-the-top, and downright hysterical. Everyone in the theater was laughing through the entire film. It has some great one-liners, like when Brüno asks the defense instructor in his Austrian accent, “How do you defend yourself against a man with a dildo?”, and when the big-breasted dominatrix exclaims, “Suck my spike!” The clincher with Cohen’s work is that parts of it are unscripted. People think his character is real and so they participate in his interviews. Some cannot take it and walk away, but others just don’t seem to know what’s real or not, making them look idiotic. The one scene where Brüno interviews Paula Abdul is an excellent example. She’s sitting on…how shall we call it?...“mobile Mexican furniture,” and you can see that she’s uncertain if this interview is real or staged, although she doesn’t seem too disturbed to be sitting on a Mexican’s back. There was another scene in the film where he interviews LaToya Jackson, but this was edited out after Michael Jackson’s death. (I’m sure it will return on the DVD version.) The point of scenes like these is to showcase Brüno’s outrageousness, but it’s also to poke fun at celebrity culture.

Indeed, that is the crux of the film. By appropriating an excessively flamboyant character and showcasing all (and I do mean all) of his sexual antics as shock-extremism, Brüno tries to make you feel uncomfortable. It works, more than you ever wanted to know, and it continues to get worse as the movie progresses. His desire to make peace between Israel and Palestine, for instance, will have you staring at the screen with your jaw hanging open. (Who knew that hummus and Hamas weren’t the same thing!?) The fact that Cohen actually got out of the Middle East alive is shocking. Cohen pokes fun at celebrity charities, the adoption of African babies, blonds, rednecks, sexuality, and the religious right. Some of the best scenes are when he has a conversation with a preacher who is going to help Brüno become straight, or when he goes hunting with a group of rednecks. When you hear the preacher speak—and presumably this isn’t staged—you cannot believe that people like this actually exist in America.

Cohen uses Brüno to draw attention to things that make mainstream society uncomfortable (specifically flamboyant homosexuality and gay sex), and then he shows us how ridiculous that discomfort is when seen against the kaleidoscope of other things going on in America and the world. What’s most disturbing, however, is that the more hilarious you find all of it, the more disturbing you realize it also is. Hatred against homosexuals in this country has not diminished by any means. This film challenges heteronormativity by instilling discomfort in the most straight of straight people. From that perspective then, it’s a good thing. Or is it?

In a place like New York City, we easily can sit in a movie theater in Chelsea with an audience made up largely of gay men and watch this movie. We can greet one another with hugs and kisses in friendship and hold hands as couples. We can guffaw and scream out in laughter too, because we’re protected in our gay-friendly neighborhood and open-minded urban environment. But would we laugh so hard if we lived in the Bible-belt South? Would the movie have sold out, or even played at all? Would we have entered the theater unscathed, or would we have had to cross a picket line of fundamentalist Christians boycotting the theater, declaring we were sinners and going to hell? There are advantages living in a progressive environment where we can laugh aloud at what is, essentially, a mirror. Brüno is a reflection of the gay population. Admittedly, this is a reflection seen in a warped, fun house-like mirror, but he is still a form of us. And the world in which he sets the film is the world in which we live, a world filled with ignorance, intolerance, fear, and anger. One can only hope that the message this movie sends out will be received in a positive way. Brüno is satire. It is meant to poke fun at issues so as to minimize their intensity. But will audiences outside of largely urban environments understand that? Or will Brüno be forever more nothing but a freak to be laughed at?

Freak or gay Wünderkind, it’s worth remembering that Brüno is simply a character, a costume worn by a straight comedian. Is that partly why we find this so funny, because we know the man behind the mask is straight? Does it make him and his message safer for middle America? Since the mid-1990s, there has been an ever-increasing encroachment of things formerly seen as aspects of gay culture into the mainstream: tribal tattooing, gym physiques, fashion apparel, and so on. The metrosexual look had its origins in women wanting their men to look as fashionable as their gay male friends. Sexy straight models from Mark Wahlberg to David Beckham have been hired to sell underwear ads targeted in large part to gay men with their supposedly expendable income. Television has been doing this for some time now as well, with straight Eric McCormack playing gay Will on Will & Grace. Hollywood is churning out male-male relationship comedies too, like the recent Paul Rudd movie I Love You, Man with its theme of man-dating. Why are major Hollywood studios willing to support gay-themed movies when they are produced and star straight men, when true “gay” movies like Were the World Mine (see my review) and Lilies barely register on the radar. Even those that are sponsored by major studios, like Brokeback Mountain and Philadelphia, had to star straight actors in order to succeed in America. The world of pornography also has seen straight appropriations of gay sexuality. No longer is simply being gay enough for porn websites. Now so-called straight guys can group masturbate and have sex with each other because they’re being paid for it, implying that if they choose to do it and cash is involved then they’re not gay. Don’t disregard this reference to pornography, because even that once-taboo subject is now subjected to appropriation by the straight community. The other “gay” film premiering this weekend, Humpday, has two straight male friends dare themselves to enter an amateur gay porn contest, with the previews showing them acting squeamish by having to do something as shocking as kiss one another. All of these examples demonstrate the appropriation of queer culture by the straight community, but for a specific purpose: control. The more that heterosexual male culture appropriates queer culture, the more straight men control gay men. The more they can laugh at homosexuality, the more they can subjugate it. And once they govern it, they never have to accept it or even tolerate it. They can quash it.

Some may think I’m exaggerating, but how would we react if Brüno were real, or if Cohen was gay? I suspect things would be somewhat different. Mind you, everyone would still laugh. How could you not? Brüno is so flamboyant he makes Liberace and RuPaul look like Harley Davidson-riding rock stars. He is an exaggeration, not just of humanity but of homosexuality. Reinforcing his hyperbole as a gay person is his absence from a gay community. I would have liked to have seen Brüno interacting with gay people in the movie. Placing him in, say, a parade during Gay Pride, or having him interact with people at the Gay and Lesbian Community Center, would have added to the hilarity. Or would it? Would that mean he would be making fun of gays and lesbians too? Or is he already doing that simply be being Brüno? How would we react if Brüno was in our midst? Do gay men (let alone lesbians) really want someone like Brüno around them? Or are they ultimately as horrified by the reality of a Brüno as the redneck hunters on the camping trip are with him? The mixed reception in the GLBTQ community has shown that he is controversial. And remember we’re talking about a fictional character! Indeed, Brüno the flamboyant queen can only be a caricature. He cannot be real, because in truth no one (except for his sidekick Lutz, who obviously needs therapy) can truly tolerate him, not for real. In that sense, then, Brüno stands alone. By isolating him from other gays and lesbians, he becomes a pseudo-gay Übermensch, someone beyond the boundaries of all things queer. But for the average American Joe Plumber, seen frequently, and ridiculed frequently, in this film, Brüno is just another fucking faggot. He becomes a stand-in for all gay people. That frightens me.

These are all important issues whether one sees them in this film or not. As my friend JM said to me after the movie, it’s just a comedy. He seriously doubts Cohen had anything even remotely like these issues in mind. Fair enough, I can concede to that. After all, the movie will make you laugh your ass off, so you should definitely see it. But I challenge you as the viewer also to see that there is more to this movie than just a comedy, and its timing is appropriate in some ways. Gay marriage is debated heatedly across this country, and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is still crucifying well-educated men and women who joined the military out of pride for the United States. We can laugh all we want at the issues satirized in this film, in particular those regarding homosexuality, but it’s the reception of what we see that really is at stake here. Laugh all you want, but never forget what is behind the laughter.

Review: Were the World Mine

When it comes to gay-themed movies, I'm continuously horrified by how bad so many of them are. I'm not sure if it's that they are usually low-budget (i.e. few major studios want to fund such risky ventures) and thus come off amateurish, or if the actors/writers/directors are just too damn pig-headed to have people other than their friends give them feedback on their work, which might actually improve the storylines and production. I don't want to seem hypercritical though. There are some great gay movies. Two that immediately come to mind are the intensely lush period drama Lilies (1996) and the hysterical comedy But I'm a Cheerleader (1999). To this list of great gay movies I am adding Were the World Mine, which was released in theaters last year and is now out on DVD. It has won quite a few GLBTQ film awards and has been a favorite with audiences since its release. You can visit the film's official website at http://www.weretheworldminefilm.com/.

The story is a gay fantasia with a plot tagline that reads: "If you had a love-potion, who would you make fall madly in love with you?" Timothy, a gay student at an all-boys high school, is teased as the queer misfit, but when he decides to try out for the school play of Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream, he learns how a little magic can be both good and bad. The acting is solid. Tanner Cohen (Timothy) and his love interest Nathaniel David Becker (Jonathon) are the main boys around him the story revolves. It helps that they're both absolutely adorable and have amazing "sets of pipes" (to quote Jonathon). Singing Jessica Fogle's original music in an angelic tenor/falsetto range, you cannot help but stop, listen, and find yourself drawn into their world. I downloaded the soundtrack afterwards and for the past few weeks still keep finding myself humming lines, such as the brief but beautiful "Oh Timothy" and "What angel wakes me from my flowery bed?"

All of this takes into consideration then the writing by director Tom Gustafson and co-author Cory James Krueckeberg. They've brought together a good script, but then again, they are borrowing on Shakespeare, so it's difficult to go wrong with one of the greatest authors of the English language. Indeed, what's fascinating to me from an academic perspective is their use of Shakespeare throughout the play, particularly in the songs. They don't adapt specific monologues, but combine the words of various characters. (And if you're questioning how I know this, I actually did run out after seeing the movie to buy a copy of Shakespeare's play and reread it.) As a result of this textual shuffle, no single character in the film comes across as one individual figure from Shakespeare's play. They all take on various roles, male, female, and faerie, and this fluctuating gender/sexual transference works perfectly with a story about magic, fantasy, and social acceptance for all forms of love. For instance, in the main song "Were the World Mine," the following lines of Shakespeare phrases are just some of the words that appear in the song as it's sung by Timothy and Jonathon:

(Act 1, Scene 1)
Helena: My ear should catch your voice, my eye your eye, / My tongue should catch your tongue's sweet melody. / Were the world mine.
(Act III, Scene 1)
Bottom: I see their knavery: this is to make an ass of me, to fright me, if they could ... and I will sing, that they shall hear I am not afraid. ...
Titania: What angel wakes me from my flowery bed? ... I pray thee, gentle mortal, sing again.
(Act III, Scene 2)
Puck: Up and down, up and down, / I will lead them up and down.

I've included two video clips from YouTube. The first is the song "Were the World Mine." The dance segment toward the end is a bit hokey so it's okay to laugh at it, but the rest of it is quite engaging. The second video clip is the trailer for the movie. Both definitely set the tone for the film, so enjoy. As for me, I have a flower to conjure up to make a certain someone fall in love with me...

The Passing of Mollie Sugden

Unless you're a fan of British television, you probably missed the news that Mollie Sugden passed away on July 1st at the age of 86. Take one look at the picture of her with blue hair that you see here, and you quickly realize Sugden was one of the best things about 1970s British television. She was part of the ensemble cast of Are You Being Served?, and with co-star John Inman (Mr. Humphries) she was arguably the best part of this show. Sugden played the middle-aged, divorced Mrs. Slocombe, one of the workers at Grace Brothers department store. Her co-workers included her younger, sexy assistant, Miss Brahms, and the aforementioned Mr. Humphries, the flamboyantly gay salesman who worked in men's trousers. Mrs. Slocombe regularly appeared with a new shocking hair color in each episode and frequently expressed concerns about her "pussy," i.e. her cat. Watching the show now, one of the things that strikes me is how much it parodied British class relations. Mrs. Slocombe, for instance, pretended she was middle class when in fact she was as working class as the Cockney Miss Brahms. The other thing that strikes me about the show is how much it objectified women, but then again American shows from the same time period, like Three's Company did the exact same thing. Are You Being Served? holds up well and is quite funny. The comedy is slapstick, but the double entendres make it hilarious, especially when expressed by Mrs. Slocombe and Mr. Humphries. Sadly, Sugden was one of the last surviving members of the show. Sugden was a television actress, having done other British comedies in her career, but she'll always be remembered best for playing Mrs. Slocombe. For more about Sugden's life and career, you can read her obituary from the Telegraph. You usually can find episodes of the show on PBS, but here are a few clips from YouTube. The first is a scene from an episode when Grace Brothers embarks on "German Week," and at the end the staff gather to perform the German dance in native costume. Watch for Sugden in the center dancing with Captain Peacock, and don't miss Mr. Humphries dancing with Mr. Lucas, especially the very end. The second is a video montage put together by Kingsley308 with clips of Mrs. Slocombe talking about her pussy.

Gay Pride 2009

This past weekend was Gay Pride. Here in NYC, it’s always the last Sunday in June to commemorate the Stonewall riots that jettisoned the gay rights movement in 1969. What makes this year special is that it was the 40th anniversary of the riots. The picture you see here (courtesy of the New York Blade) shows Governor David Paterson, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (our first lesbian council member) all marching at the head of the parade on Sunday. I must admit, it’s a great thing to live in a city where we have leadership in support of gay and lesbian rights. It gives you a sense of comfort that you cannot find in other parts of the country or world.

That said, I’m not very political, as readers of bklynbiblio know by now. I’ve never marched in a gay rights rally and I doubt I ever will. It’s just not my thing. I prefer education, not politics, as a way to make a difference. And while it would be great to see anti-gay discrimination and homophobia disappear immediately, sometimes I feel like my apolitical, education-based perspective allows me to have more patience about these issues. Things take time. Gay marriage and the dismissal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” won’t happen over night, or possibly even in 2009. They are simply too controversial for some people. But they will happen, in due time. You cannot change people’s minds by snapping your fingers, especially when religion is the foundation of their beliefs. And rather than be angered by these attitudes, I believe we should reflect on them and work to bring people around through education. Let’s face it, if it were so easy to change people’s minds, every gay man and lesbian would have been made straight by their parents ages ago. Instead, for hopefully many of us, our parents now accept and understand us, but it took them time as well. Don’t misunderstand me. I abhor intolerance. I’m also very disturbed by the ever-increasing number of gay hate crimes that have been happening all over the place. There was at least one gay bashing in Chelsea after the parade, and reports come in all the time on various gay news agencies and blogs about more beatings (note that rarely do these ever appear on mainstream news sites). But I believe we have to work through education to make people realize that we all deserve equal rights and true acceptance beyond tolerance. It will happen, with time.

For me Gay Pride is about hanging out with my friends, just relaxing and having fun. This year, friends visited from Texas and a group of us hung out all weekend. We did dinner and drinks on Saturday night, and we watched the parade march down Fifth Avenue (with thousands of other people) for over 3 hours on Sunday afternoon (fortunately from a lovely shady and elevated spot). There was all the expected at the parade: civil rights activists, drag queens, muscle boys, dykes on bikes, and everything in-between, with floats proclaiming political messages or just pulsating dance music. All in all, it was a fun afternoon.

For more on the parade and festivities, check out the following sites: a great list of many sites regarding Pride on Andy Towleroad's blog; a few more pictures from the New York Blade; Jeremy W. Peters's New York Times article "Gay Marriage Lost in Shuffle of Divided Senate" accompanied by a few more pictures deals with NY politics; and even Google was in on it, with a blog post and pictures of their employees marching and participating in gay pride events around the world.