You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May 2007.

In more of my recent great discoveries on YouTube is a handful of very talented comedians. I don’t have cable now, but even when I did, I didn’t watch the Comedy channel very often, in part, because I didn’t see much on that I actually thought was as funny as some of these clips. (there’s some profanity but it’s not crude sexual stuff)

Steve Harvey – Blacks and the Titanic

Cedric the Entertainer – Gay stuff, but specially Gay animals (at the end of the clip)

Peter Russell – Indian Slaves (that is Indians as from India) will find the link later

Jeff Foxworthy talking about Rednecks is really funny too – but they don’t have any real good clips on YouTube – these are some artificial videos.

And the only time I had previously seen Jamie Foxx was in “Ray” (Charles) , I had been impressed by what I thought was a talented black actor — but now I discover, with some of his “comedy” routines, how misogynist he is, he is such crap. Too bad he got the part on Ray, one more trash of a black man regarding women.

Is there anything not worse than having no scandals? Yes, there is. It’s having scandal prototypes, scandals that are like the bombs that fizzle out at the very last minute and sit there, in silence, staring at you with a smirk. We’re going to cover it all up. Mum’s the word.

Now, I can care less for entertainment celebrity scandals, unless I hate the celebrity and the more they get embarrassed, the better, but the prestigious who are corrupt and unethical – specially if they are famous but a slime in their private life, now there’s where we ought to have our scandals – served on a silver platter, no less.

And what is currently happening? We are having these horrible fizzle-out, severely contained sex/personal-related scandals. Jesus. And the only one that still might turn into something is the Wolfie saga, but there’s very little chance of that. McGreevey’s Dina, pffff. Lord Browne in England and his homo prostitute exploitation habits, it’s been CONTAINED. Not a single word on it anymore anywhere. Isn’t there a smart journalist wanting to get some money fast? Write a tabloid book on it, for Christ’s sake. We got one little article, the guy was brought down, and the lover-rent-boy went into hiding. If he isn’t dead yet 🙂 Maybe he has “insurance” info that he didn’t give to the media – just in case. The Palfrey scandal… nothing (Tobias doesn’t count, it was so ridiculous, when we know there are thousands of names). Any info ABC got, it looks like they prefer to use it next year around October. Mark Foley has disappeared into the shadows. What is the only thing the media must drum on forever? Paris Hilton.

Please. Even in its role of scandal promoters or censors the media establishment ensures to feed us only inanities, insulting our right to know about bigger and better scandals.


In yet another setback for the embattled World Bank president, Paul Wolfowitz’s girlfriend Shaha Riza announced that she is resigning as Mr. Wolfowitz’s girlfriend, “effective immediately.”

While Riza’s role in the conflict of interest scandal involving Wolfowitz and the World Bank had placed her in the eye of the media storm, few had expected her to relinquish her girlfriend post without a fight.

But according to a source close to Riza, the increasing pressure on the high-profile couple in recent days had convinced her that she “could no longer function effectively as Paul Wolfowitz’s girlfriend.”

A joint communiqué released by the couple indicated that the decision to leave her girlfriend post was entirely Riza’s, but sources close to Wolfowitz suggest that the idea had originated not with her, but with the World Bank president himself.

According to one source, “Paul had dinner with Shaha last night and told her they should start seeing other banks.”


This is a nice and useful explanation of: Gaslighting, a form of psychological abuse.

It was mentioned by one of the commenters regarding tactics of psychological abuse that homosexuals use against their heterosexual spouses.

(from wiki) It uses persistent denials of fact which, as they build up over time, make the victim progressively anxious, confused, and less able to trust his or her own memory and perception. A variation of gaslighting, used as a form of harassment, is to subtly alter aspects of a victim’s environment, thereby upsetting his or her peace of mind, sense of security, etc.

Gaslighting is a common tactic/symptom of some mental disorders such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), and other Personality Disorders. People having BPD will use gaslighting (conciously or unconciously) along with a wide variety of psychologically manipulative/abusive tactics to fend-off criticism of their own actions that they deem too painful to accept responsibility for. (See Denial). However, there are a variety of reasons, other than gaslighting, why people suffering with these disorders may make untrue statements (and authentically believe them to be true) such as confabulation and dissociation. These reasons are not considered gaslighting by virtue of their not being intentional.

Cultural connections

The term was coined from the 1940 film Gaslight and its 1944 remake in which changes in gas light levels are experienced several times by the main character. The classic example in the film is the character Gregory using the gas lamps in the attic, causing the rest of the lamps in the house to dim slightly; when Paula comments on the lights’ dimming, she is told she is imagining things. Paula believes herself alone in the house when the dimming occurs, unaware that Gregory has entered the attic from the house next door, and is searching for jewels he believes to be hidden there. The sinister interpretation of the change in light levels is part of a larger pattern of deception to which the character Paula is subjected.

I found the comments below rather depressing and a sad, disturbing reminder of how much goes wrong in marriages for so many people. The comments were left regarding Dina Matos McGreevey’s PR tour of her book on ABC, including her claim to total naiveté regarding her contestedly bisexual (or homosexual) husband. As I have posted before, I think her claim is a joke. (See the final commenter who presents interesting statements concerning the issue).

At any given time in the United States, there are an estimated 2 million marriages where one spouse is straight, the other gay, according to an organization called the Straight Spouse Network.

I selected comments mostly from women who alleged they were seriously deceived. The perpetration of deception claim is usually against their homosexual husbands, but sometimes they admit there were signs along the way and they themselves were in the denial. I think these are the more lucid of the women.

I don’t think this question of perceiving adultery or homosexuality is a simplistic issue. However, if there is a case where the “deceived” woman was not in denial, and still didn’t pick it up after years and years, it’s one in a billion. Individual experiences of denial can be quite complex, exactly because denial itself is a very complex mechanism, and it can involve semi-conscious or unconscious dynamics, of which someone can have little or no control (when they are not conscious!). So to really understand an experience of denial, we need to investigate the reasons and the context that caused the denial in the first place — and people are not always to blame for those, or they are in a context where there are profoundly unhealthy things done to them, which they cannot find a good way to escape or deal with.  (See the explanation for gaslighting above — mentioned in one of the posts as well). Denial, in this case, is a result of a psychological coping strategy that is the only strategy the person affords in determined situations, exactly because they are lacking  appropriate and more psychologically healthy choices.

Nevertheless, I believe it is simply not possible for a woman with at least an average education and exposure to sexuality issues, who is not invested in being in denial, to not feel something is amiss with her husband. I’m not talking about knowing everything there is to know about someone if you go on a couple of dates, this could be very well impossible in most cases, but after several years of living together and interacting as husband and wife?

Even just regarding faithfulness, I think you can feel if you can trust your husband or not, after you get to know them at a more profound level. The more you know someone, the harder it is for them to be able to lie successfully to you. You pick it up. If you don’t have your head in the sand, you start to feel something is wrong when somebody is lying to you, if you know them really well. But that’s because you yourself are not willing to turn off your red flag “radar.” And this doesn’t apply just to sexuality, it applies to being lied to about any profound issue.

In any event, it just amazes me that women could remain in a garbage of a marriage for so long; so many women seem so submissive and to settle for such crap without hardly any revolt.

And more than one woman mention something that I had never heard of before: homosexual husbands who are abusive to their heterosexual wives! Is that ugly, or what?

It will be 8 years next month since my divorce to a gay man. We were married for 30 years and I’m still trying to go on with my life. I understand Dina’s comment that her ex choreographed their lives. I was a corporate wife of a Fortune 500 company and I did whatever he told me to do. If I didn’t, God help me…because he was also an expert with his fist. HItting me where it wouldn’t show. Of course, calling the police was out of the question….he had so much power (and the money) and I had shame. I left him with $7.00 in my purse so a good attorney was out of the question. Dina, you hang in there and fight for what is right. Thank you for telling your story….you’re not alone. beenthere56

Posted by:beentheretoo May-1

There is also a comment from a man deceived by his bisexual wife. Sad.

I support gay marriage, but I don’t think that it being legal will stop some of these men. It certainly would not have stopped my ex. It’s not so much that they are hiding from society, but they are proving something to themselves, and using women to do it. Also, they want children, and don’t mind using women for that – and then working very hard to remove the woman from the child. It is a mindset that is not shared by many gay men, but this “mccreepy” type really wants to destroy the mother of his child. They always use our motherhood as a weapon, and it messes the family incredibly. Has nothing to do with acceptance of gays. Again, I am so glad she is talking about how this type of gay man abuses women. What will he teach his female children about fatherhood? That it is ok to censor, threaten, attack, and defame their mothers for not going along with him? A friend of mine who is the daughter of a gay man is still afraid to contradict her father, and she is now in her 50s. The memory of how he systematically destroyed her mother financially, physically, and emotionally is still a powerful one. That whole experience really interfered with my friend growing up powerful and unafraid. But she can’t talk about it because she’s afraid people will think she hates gays. So she just does what McGreevey wants his wife to do – keeps quiet and suffers alone.

Posted by: mcmama2245 May-3

I need to respond to your statement about HIV testing. My husband, as well as, Dina’s husband were having sex with men in a variety of settings. They were also having sex with us. It is not ridiculous to realize the implications on our lives-our health. Right now, HIV is increasing in numbers to women-women who have been married to gay men. Check your statisics and get back to me. We are not stupid. We were exposed to God knows what-by our cheating husbands. HIV is only one of the gifts that we could have that keeps on giving. Annfondly

Posted by: Annfondly May-3

When you dearly love your spouse you don’t look for warning signs like if they are gay! This woman loved that man, she gave him a child, your kept his home, she stood by his side, she attended his public events…when did she have time to discover he was gay? He kept it from the public until his gay lover tried to give him up…so if it can be kept from the public that easily then why can’t it be kept from her. He is sick to be beding a man while his wife is in the hosptial having given birth to his child. Now that is sick!

Posted by: donnachelsea May-3

I was married for 30 years to a man that I believe is gay. I think that the woman (as myself) lives in a state of denial because she just does not want to believe it. As long as he denys it to her, she is kept in a state of confusion and does not trust her insticts. I asked my husband nurmerous times if he was gay and he denied it. Yet it was a question that came up throughout our marriage. I could not believe my instincts or trust my judgements because I was getting mixed messages from him. For those that can not understand how the wife can not know, all I have to say is that, that person never lived though it to understand. A gay man should never marry a straight woman, it is a horrible thing to do to a person.

Posted by: elevy13 May-3

My father left my mother after over 20 years of marriage and 4 children because he was gay. She said that looking back, she can see signs of it all along, but did she really know? I don’t think so. Most people think that if you have been together that long and have children that you both love, then your sexuality is not an issue. He divided our family completely and it has been horrible on all of us. We all love our dad but we hate him for what he did. Don’t blame the governor’s wife, blame him for going into a marriage knowing that he could never be fully committed.

Posted by: rts0419 May-7

I really felt for Mrs. McGreevy. I know how horrible it is to hear from your husband that he is gay. It is the worst feeling in the world. All of a sudden your whole world seems like it will crash down around you. You need to think about your kids and what is best for them. The worst thing to do is to have a knee-jerk reaction. Don’t be so quick to judge her just because she did not move out immediately. I’m sure Mrs. McGreevy really felt like she needed time to gather her thoughts on what she needs to do. Her husband was Governor, they were both in the public eye. She needed to think things through before making a decision. Decision? What decision? He is gay, what decision do you need to make besides divorce him now? Believe it or not, not all gay men are like the ex-Governor. As far as I could see, he was in this marriage for political gain, however, she really loved him. It was hard for her to imagine her life changing so dramatically. But some gay men truly love their wives when they marry them and wish to remain married to them. Not to hide their sexuality, but because they truly love the women they married. That is the case with me and my Husband. He is a wonderful man, a wonderful father and a good person. He also loves me more than anything. There is a place on the internet called Alternatepaths. It is a Yahoo group. They have been so wonderful in giving me the support I need to feel like my marriage can work with a gay man. If anyone is going though the same thing as Mrs McGreevy, I really sympathize with you. I have been dealing with this for 3 months now. It is not easy, but you get through it with baby steps and lots of support. So, visit Alternatepaths and get the support you need. Divorce is not the only option. Especially if your marriage is so much more than the gay thing. Best friends, lovers, true partners in life. It can work!

Posted by: Zio1966 May-6

When this happened to me and I told my friends I was treated like a leper. It was devastating. And now Dina is being treated the same way. Please stop judging Dina. Whether she knew or not about her husband does not negate her pain. She was in love with him even if she may not have been before hand, as some of you seem so determined to believe. You cannot live with a man and have his child and not feel some love and attachment to him. Until you have had your entire frame of reference ripped out from under you as we have, you cannot understand. And in this case, ignorance is indeed bliss. The Straight Spouse Network, bless all the ladies and men there. They do not judge and they do not condemn.

Posted by: aspasiafranco May-4

I met my husband when I was 16 and he was 17. He was terrorized as a small child in many bad ways. I don’t know if that contributed to his decline or his orientation. He was a very sensitive soul when young. I felt tremendous compassion for him and we loved each other dearly. He was so tragically sweet and so smart. Eventually, we had four children and I became a homemaker and he became very successful in the IT industry. He truly was my prince charming in so many genuine ways. I can say that I knew him and who he wanted to be seen as. I can say that I never knew the awful things he eventually did until the very end. I have always seen sexuality as a spectrum and not two sides of a coin. The hetero and the homosexual communities both want their members to commit, “to come out”, and that is a shame for so many people. He could not accept his urges and they became twisted and dark. He lied to be accepted in both worlds as he lived a double life. He eventually crossed many borders in an attempt to deal with his own feelings of terror, victimization, and self loathing for being attracted to men as well as women. He did not intend to take away my choices or to become a bad person but he like the rest of us made his life what it was one choice at a time. We all have to take responsibility for our actions. Hurting people because we are hurting — is not acceptable. I am 44 and we divorced this year. I think he will be in prison within the next six. It is his choice to lie, to not get help, to hurt others – and himself. It is his chosen path. It was mine until I felt I could leave. I am no longer in shock, denial, fear, anger, or bargaining. Life is good and I find happiness now after many painful years of watching my sweetheart’s decline, standing with him feeling helpless and traumatized. Never give up to hopelessness. Find a new path in the desert.

Posted by: ekps1234 May-4

I discovered my husband was gay after being married for 15 years. Prior to the discovery he was a loving and caring husband. Upon my discovery he became horribly abusive in every way imaginable. I felt like my husband died and I couldn’t tell anyone. For the first year I remained silent. I wanted to tell someone, needed to say the words out loud, but felt too ashamed and embarrassed. I would call the local number for “Time & Temperature” and tell the recorded voice on the phone “My husband is gay and he left me for a man”. Sadly that was the only place I felt safe to say those words. What was I afraid of? Exactly what has been going on here and on Oprah’s message board – I was afraid of being blamed for being too stupid to see the signs, or too stupid to leave my husband, or too homophobic if I dared tell anyone how much I hurt. There was no place that was safe for me because too often people want to blame the victim. Thankfully I found the Straight Spouse Network. SSN gave me a place that I felt safe and could tell my story. The more you tell your story, the more power you have, and the less power your story has. I no longer feel like a victim, and now I am now able to help people who come to SSN find the survivor within themselves. Please, please stop criticizing us. I am afraid that people who need our help will not seek it out because they don’t want to be called stupid or homophobic. To any of the straight spouses out there who need support, please contact us, we are a safe place for you. CLW

Posted by: clwinohio May-4

I discovered my ex-husband was a cross dresser after 10 years of marriage (and believe is a gay) — I didn’t have a clue! These individuals are liars — they pretend so well that you believe. There are no signs (if they do not want you to see any). For people to say, “you should have seen signs” or”why did you stay in the relationship once you found out”, do not understand because they did not experience it. Most of us still love these men (we were “inside the box”) — we feel in love with who they pretended to be — and it leaves you in denial, it leaves you hurt and scared — scared of being alone, scared for your children, finances — numerous emotions are flying and trying to figure them out is not an easy task. You will never know why they have pretended — an unknown that will haunt you for life. It is a devastating, destructful “game” to be a part of — you lose so much of yourself. Kudos to all who have had the courage to move on — I am quite certain there are many who are “stuck”.

Posted by: CTCANC May-4

These men are cowards, sociopaths and pathological liars that make Scott Peterson look like a boyscout. They should not be confused with gay men who are leading true lives. I was married for 26 years, four children, when I found my husbands profile on He forgot to log out on his way to a “party”. I sat all night in front of the computer in complete shock. My entire life was a lie. After I filed for divorce, I discovered the extent of his deceit. He had emptied our bank accounts and left us in serious financial trouble. Long story short. We lost our home. He died of AIDS. I have little chance of surviving this. My life is over and I never really got to live a true life. He took everything from me. Whoever wrote “Some gay men still fall in love with women…” is in serious denial. Gay men do not love women, it is as simple as that.

Posted by: veritesanspeur May-3

My friend is about to marry a man that is bisexual. Any advice? She knows about his affairs with men yet he has convinced her that it is over.

Posted by: missedclues May-3

Denial, Delusion and Self Deception are powerful tools that people use to cope with unpleasant situations. He knew, she knew, their friends knew, their families knew but no one would talk about it. I know dozens of gay men who are married and refuse to tell their wives. They all lead secret lives, many pretending to be “best friends” with their boyfriends. So sad and a waste of precious time. Come out, get it over with and live your life.

Posted by: elaygee May-3

I never suspected my strong, masculine, educated husband was gay. After nine years and three children I got the shock of my life…so, I believe her. I often got flowers, at work or at home for no reason…little did I know that he was secretly apoligising for his guilty transgressions. Everyone thought he was so romantic. It was the most hurtful, sad thing that ever happened to me. Life goes on, but nothing is ever the same…especially one’s level of trust.

Posted by: JOValerio May-3

I truly loved my wife of 35 years. So it was devestating when I learned she was having an affair with a young woman, someone half her age. I had absolutely no idea she was gay. I did not see it coming. I still wonder how this could have happened; how could she could have lied to me for so many years? The “other woman” has not felt any ill effects from her behavior. To her, it was a casual fling. For me and my child, it is a different story. It destroyed my marriage and my life. After all, how do you start over at age 60. You don’t. You just struggle to survive, one day at a time, by taking medications and seeing psychiatrists.

Posted by: perhapsinanotherlife May-3

I was saddened to hear Dina Mc Greevey words…To many people assume that she had to have some idea that her husband was bisexual…My ex is a psychiatrist and was having sex with some of his female patients and not only did I not have any idea, the Ethics Committee, which he was head of, never knew, nor did the hospital, colleagues, friends, or anyone else know.. When some people’s committment is only to themself they become completely capable of deceiving everyone else around them

Posted by: phylllll May-3

My husband is bisexual. I hated this interview. I feel for Dina, but the public cannot possibly understand the “how did you not know?” question. There are lots and lots of married couples where one spouse is straight and the other is gay, and the marriage WORKS. I wish it was more accepted and I wish there was more positive support for people like me and my husband. If your spouse has come out to you, or if you know that your spouse is gay, YOU ARE NOT ALONE, there is support. Alternatepath (a Yahoo group) is a positive support group for the women who are married to a gay/bisexual/transgender, and who want to remain married.

Posted by: factor1994 May-3

When I was engaged to my husband, I remember saying to his sister that if I walked into our bedroom and found him in bed with another woman, and he told me there was nothing going on, that I would believe him … that’s how much I trusted him. Well, right church, wrong pew. Within a couple years of marriage, my husband started his secret life of random homosexual encounters. Some of you ask, how could you not know? Because I had given over my heart, my life to this man. I stayed home to raise our two wonderful sons, to create a caring and supportive home, to be a good wife, mother, daughter and daughter-in-law. I did sense the change in the relationship, but thought if I lost weight, cooked a special meal, tried to be creative in bed, somehow he would love me as a WIFE … not a mother, or a sister, or a friend. Sixteen years later I found an email he had received confirming a meeting, and a few clicks later I was at the site of a male hooker. I confronted him and he lied, as he had lied when I found a book in his bureau on gay bars, and when I found charges on a credit card for a gay #### site. But this time I had PROOF. And you know what? I hung on for another two years, trying couples counseling and reading everything I could on the subject of why gay men marry women. You ask Dina why she hung on for three months???!!! Because you don’t want to lose the love you THOUGHT YOU HAD. My husband still does not think he is gay … he “floats on the sexual spectrum.,” though I was the only woman on that line. Meanwhile, I continue to hide his cowardly little secret from our sons and his parents while we battle through an acrimonious divorce. For you who criticize or mock Dina, there but for the grace of God … and for Dina, this from a poem by William Butler Yeats: “… For how can you compete, being honor bred, with one who, were it proved he lies, were shamed neither in his own nor in his neighbors eyes.” Stay strong, Dina.

Posted by: LAD122 May-3

My camelot had nothing to do with politics, but had more to do with a college cheerleader marrying a college fraternity boy. I had been homecoming queen in high school and raised in a home where sex before marriage was absolutely, positively not tolerated by my Roman Catholic parents. I didn’t have a lot of experience with sexual intimacy before marrying my husband, but from what I felt, he was incredibly respectful, loving, and if anything, after we were married, I felt like I was the one who had to “catch up” in the sex department. My husband was diagnosed with cancer three months after we were married, at 23 years old. We survived that, and later we were blessed with three beautiful daughters. Within months of “coming out” of the closet, my husband was begging me for a fourth child and joining the Catholic church to unite our family in one religion. So what, exactly, are wives of these wonderful husbands who are gay supposed to suspect? Was it the fresh flowers he walked in the door with every Friday afternoon? Was it the deep devotion he had towards his children by designing a secret garden for them, balet studio, building castles for their birthday parties and carriages to go with their halloween princess costumes? He worked in an extremely conservative company, complying to the point of being promoted faster than those around him. I was envied by all of our friends, and my husband was hated by all of their husbands because they just couldn’t compete. So was I suposed to suspect because of how wonderful he was? Shame on any of you who criticize Dina for being blind, and shame on those of you who think she bought into the life in order to further her own agenda. And further shame on you for critical comments relating to her parental responsibility. I have bent over backwards to keep my family in tact after my huband left me with three daughters, one, two and four years old. You do what you feel is best for your children, or at least you should.

Posted by: jkn29 May-3

I was married to a gay man who still has no clue he is gay. His behavior became so strange and unacceptable that I eventually packed up the kids and left. Years of being blamed for his sexual dysfunction, telling me what a terrible woman I was, man crush after man crush(our pastor called me once and asked, “…is he gay?”)…and such a religious man. To this day I have a hard time hearing or saying a pre-meal blessing because I still hear his words spilling out about how wonderful God is *and He is wonderful* and how blessed we are and all the while knowing there was something terribly wrong with this man. His hypocracy and public charade of ‘family man’ made me sick. I do love him as a person and continue to help him in some areas of his life where he needs it (and have not told his daughter that he is gay) but the damage he did to my self esteem took me years to get over.

Posted by: Asillem4 May-3

I’ve been with him since I was 16 years old and married him at 18 and him 21. Were married for 27 years Been divorce from him 6 years, the first 3 years of the divorce I was still protecting my 3 children and me. Now these past 3 years, I had some kind of a mental breakdown. I was sitting home blaming myself reliving and doubting every moment I had with this man. My whole life this man deceit, lies and cheated on me. I don’t have a past, because if I tried to think about something happy, then the next question in my head what was he doing? There were signs, he always had good answer. Why would I doubt this man, he worked hard we did everything together with our 3 children, friend and families. I believe these types of men they have arrogance about them, deep inside they know what they are doing. They been doing this for so many years, he was planning all the time what to do if he got caught. My ex is still in denial, right now he is dating a woman. He has some demons in him that he could not face. Still blaming that it has been my entire fault he went with men. Know one believes me, except few family and close friends. Hope you find peace, because I am still searching for my peace. SAM

Posted by: onitac May-3

I was married for 10 years when I found out that my husband was gay, we have three children, working with ministers all over the country. Traveling and he was the pianist for different preachers in revivals thinking that nothing could shatter our dreams of our family, and our love for each other, we were in love or I really believed him. Then when he went to on tour with one preacher he cme back and said he did not want do go away without his family again. I knew then that something was wrong, one thing lead to another and in one painful moment he told me he was gay. We tried to stay together for the kids but that was too much for both of us and we seperated. After year he up and moved to another state and whenin 6 months he died from aids one of the first in that state, as they where not sure how to handle the funeral. It me took down another road of having to explain everything to my kids, and doubting myself and what was wrong with me. If it had been another woman you could fight that but how do you fight against a man for your man? I tried to turn to the preachers that we knew but their response was he got what he deserved and they turned thier back as if it was my fault.. It took me 10 years to trust again and love another man who I am married to now. We don’t speak of this in my house or with my kids as they are embarrased from it all about thier dad. His parents didn’ t attend his funeral.

Posted by: taxeygirl2003 May-3

I know what Dina is going through. I was married for 25 yrs. when my ex-wife left us for another girl. She said she has known she was gay since she was 10 years old. If this is the case why would you bring two fantastic kids into this world only to rip them apart down the road and to throw 25 years of my life away to start over at 45 as a single parent? She was 45 at the time and left for a 19 year old. She is old enough to be this girl’s mother! My kids and I have gone thru hell for the last 2 years. My kids went a full year before they started to speak to her again. I had to ask them a question,( How would you feel for the REST of your life if Mom were to pass away and you had not spoke to her) I know this may sound harsh but it’s REAL, after all she is still their mother weather I or they like it or not. The town where I live and where she grew up is where we moved to when we got married. I have always been active in the community with the park committee, a member of the Active member of the Vol. Fire Dept. and also run with the Vol. Ambulance as a First Responder. After all this took place these people started telling me that they were sure she was gay but, could not understand why she married a man. I just wish someone would have spoke up before hand to let me know I have two children a son who will be 18 in July and a Daughter who is 14. My daughter has C.P. and is in a wheelchair and I am disabled with D.D.D. and can not collect S.S. because they say I’m too young and since I have done the house work around her for the last 2 years that I could continue to do this. I don’t get paid for this I do it because it’s my responsibility as a parent. Yet I am having trouble making ends meet and we are losing ground FAST!! This has REALY affected our lives in all kinds of ways. So Dina YOU ARE NOT ALONE I feel for you and your kids. This is not going to be easy for a long time. Keep doing what you’re doing and ALWAYS PUT YOU AND YOUR KIDS FIRST.

Posted by: kmfisk May-3

I too was married to a gay man and didnt know it when I got married. No one can know the pain of going through this horrible tragedy unless you have done it. He started playing around after about 10 years of marriage. When I first found out, I was totally numb. I went through it more then 10 years ago when I did not realize there was other women like me out there. You can not understand what it is like to have your whole marriage and life for so many years (20 years for me) be a lie. Your best friend, lover and person you trusted everything to decieve you and use you. It still feels like a dream I went through but it was real. I still have trust issues to this day. It took me years to get back to my “normal” self. People look and me and can not understand. Yes, it would have been easier had it been another woman. He will never apologize or admit to any wrong doing. He will never understand what he has done to his innocent children. This has shaken me to my core and taken everything I have to come back around and help my children through this mess. Remember I never asked for this, I only married the wrong person.

Posted by:syrmom47 May-2

Unless you’ve been through something like this you will never know how hurtful it feels. I took care of myself, am attractive and yet could not keep the attention of my husband of 24 years. I thought his lack of desire was offset by his love for alcohol but I was wrong. After my divorce I continued to find out painful things about the double life he had led which I knew nothing about. The worst thing is that I look crazy to friends and family, many whom I lost due to my divorce. I kept quiet to spare my two children the hurt and embarrassment they would experience if I blabbed the truth. He is still in the closet, married a younger women and currently has had two babies with her. That hurts in many ways more than his lies because he won’t fully admit to anything he has done.

Posted by:loz876 May-2

I was married to a gay man who is still in the closet – we were married for 15 years. Lots of people “knew” but smirk smirk, well, you poor thing you, they just never told me. All I got were weird smiles when I tried to confide to anyone about it. I got so much help from the straight spouse network. ( It was such a relief to meet with others, three full years after my divorce, and learn that I was not the only one, and we all have so many different stories and circumstances. Not only am I not the only person this ever happened to, but I am not the only person who knows her husband is gay and has been told that he’s not. I know what I know. I know the hatred and deception that husbands like this put women through when we do not do just as they tell us. This isn’t the kind of gay guy who has friendships with women who is fun and honest about himself. These gay husbands and their boyfriends are very different. They need someone to blame, and the wife is often the target of their viciousness. It is unlike anything most people can imagine. I am so grateful that Dina is telling her story, and in a way, mine too.

Posted by: mcmama2245 May-2

I have an estranged husband who has many secrets, also. He has kept the finances secret from me, going so far as putting them on his work computer and taking them with him when he travels, and having 10-15 e-mail accounts, all with secrets pass codes he won’t let me have access to, half the computer is off-limits to me with secret passwords. I can’t live with it anymore, and we are now separated and getting a divorce, but these men always have an excuse, they are self-righteous, and have a way of defending their behavior that sounds believable, at least in the short term, until all the lies begin to multiply, and there is always something outrageous! ei0ul 3:50pm

Posted by: ei03wd May-2

I just got home from school and heard people talking on the bus about this show. I didn’t join in. I am 16 and a girl. My dad is bi. He has never “come out” but the giant iinvisible elephant in our living room made a mess that my family had to pretent to not see for years – we loved him. When I finally realized the invisible elephant was actually a light shade of pink…I was okay with that. But like this Jim guy, my dad is a liar (about everything). He cannot take resposibility for anything in his life that he does wrong and it is always someone elses fault. We went without so that dad could be a player. Mom went without to cover for him. He eventually developed a drug and alcohol problem and was abusive to us and my mom and because he was prominent in the community and we were afraid of ridicule and of him losing his job we stayed silent. When we went to court finally after many years of more and more crazy behavior and I told on him – he called me a liar, too. (He’d picked me up by my hair once and shook me like a doll by it.) I don’t feel sorry for him. I have a lot of gay friends and I think I may be bi-sexual but I don’t know yet. But I want to believe that my generation can act with integrity and not drive themselves and their families crazy because they can’t accept themselves or want to get ahead without any regard for the consequences to those they create, like me. I’ve been in therapy now for a while. I told my dad I don’t want to talk to him anymore. Its not cause he’s gay or bi or littles small animals in bodily orifaces. Its cause he hurt me and my family physically and emotionally just like Dina’s husband has hurt her emotionally. I don’t know why some of you can’t appreciate that very real hurt and that its a very real problem that should be condemned. Its pretty clear to those of us that got to deal with it first hand.

Posted by:muffinandturtles May-2

I am just one more women who after 20 years of marriage and two children found out my husband was gay. I, however, found out when he was tested positive for Hepatitus B which he caught through one of his trists. I was tested and thank goodness was negative as well as for HIV. Not only did this man steal 20 years of my life, he put it in danger. Now that he is “out” he is I guess releaved because since he no longer needs the cover of a family he does nothing for the children. Unfortunately I did not have my family to rely on since I am an only child and my parents were deceased. Next best place to turn I thought was my faith and my church-yeah right- the man my husband was seeing was not only a member of our church- he was an employee. Seems there are quite a few gays there and the minister and church has chosen to look the other way. The hurt continues……

Posted by:empiii May-2

This hits home with me! I have lived through this, I’m divorced but I always thought my spouse was lying to me throughout our marraige but I never thought he was gay. He married another woman and he claims he did all the cheating with various men because he was “confused”. I hold this secret because I don’t want my kids to find out and he always asked that I didn’t tell anyone about his affairs but I wish I could SCREAM and YELL and get this off my chest, I still carry this burden and it’s been 10 yrs ago, it’s doesn’t go away, if I could confront it maybe I could put closure on it. I’m glad to see that you are talking about it and not feeling ashamed , like so many of us. Good for you Dina, you go girl!

Posted by: Brina_916 May-2

Dear Dina, I just want to let you know that I have had a similar experience with my ex-husband who “came out” after 17 years of marriage. My son and I were devastated at the time, but have since moved on with our lives after 10 years of separation and divorce from such a deceitful person. My son was 18 at the time and made a choice at the age of 20 to no longer have anything to do with his dad. He felt that his father continued to lie and hide things from him about his double life and my son could no longer tolerate his father’s behavior. Just know that there will be sunny days again as you move on with your life. I went back to graduate school and earned my Ph.D. and currently teach at a 4 year university. My life is better and after several years of personal therapy, I have learned to love my life and know that I was not responsible for the failed marriage. Marriage is a contract and when one person enters into it with deception, the contract becomes null and void. Congratulations on getting out of a bad relationship. I wish you healing and great joy at the end of this current journey. My prayers and encouragement are with you. Please let Diane and the GMA folks know that it has been very uplifting that they cover such a story as yours for all of us out here who have experienced this type of family tragedy. Sincerely, DAL

Posted by:deannlech May-2

I was married for 15 years to a closet homosexual who still insists he’s not gay, I’m just crazy. This despite the gay ####, the gay friends, the secrets, and the rendezvous that I know about. But it is so much easier for people to believe that there is something wrong with me for thinking this, rather than believe anything bad about him. Amazing the people who think you should have known. They are liars and each situation is different. The acting is so good you are gaslighted and scripted into a drama and you have no idea what is going on. I got a lot of help from the straight spouse network. I really think that there are gay men who are bisexual enough to seduce women but really hate them – and all the tolerance for homosexuals and openness about it will not stop these men from marrying women and lying and gaslighting and denigrating the wife publicly when she departs from script or opens the closet door.

Posted by: mcmama2245 May-2

Any man that would find it acceptable to have a large nude poster of a male or female in the face of a child has a bigger problem than is being addressed. Why does he feel the need to introduce a male nude to a child? If he is comfortable with this poster why would any one think he and his partner would not be comfortable presenting their nude bodies to his little girl. Wake up and call it what it is, unnatural, inappropriate, sad. Mary Bernard

Posted by: magnumopus53 May-2

“We are blamed, either for the homosexuality, or as an enabler who knew all along.” — Yes, that is a good question (the latter). Some of the reasons people blame you for knowing is that it is possible to be married to someone and to get to know them over the years. And it does raise interesting questions about people who claim they don’t know anything about their spouses, specially when it stinks. My husband went to prostitutes and I didn’t know it, my husband abused children and I didn’t know it, my husband had hundreds of affairs and I didn’t know it, my husband brought home a million dollars on a janitor salary and I didn’t know there was anything fishy, my husband is part of a profoundly corrupt political machine and I didn’t have a clue he is not an angel, my husband and I clap along to any homosexuality fad that is promoted and I didn’t know he went both ways. One does ask in such cases, what was really going on? Because, to not know someone that you spend little time with, that is human, but the person with whom you are supposed to be most intimated with — for years and years? What type and quality of a relationship was there? These are questions that people who don’t like to fool themselves (or others) do ask.

Posted by:alessandrabarros May-2

How could she not know? Every cop in the state knew.

Posted by:camro01 May-2

Unless you live in NJ, you cannot comment on what people knew or did not know. The media was all over McGreevey for what he was doing & there were REPORTS about his questionable actions in office about why he named someone who was not an American citizen and who had no experience as a terrorism expert, so you are way off base with that one. All of us people that do live in NJ did heard the rumors, so I find it especially hard for Dina to say she saw no red flags… it is a load of bull. And as far as it not being reported during the campaigns- let’s see- I know for a fact during the second one McGreevey’s camp basically told Schuster’s camp that if they reported to the media McGreevey was gay they were going to go public with Schuster accepting kickbacks and bribes from the mob. I suspect something similar happened during the first because Whitman’s camp knew too and didn’t report it to the media. Plus, you have to realize that if they had went to the media saying he was gay it could have very easily backfired on their campaigns causing them the election. What a number of people commenting from other states don’t realize that New Jersey is considered a very liberal and progressive state on many issues, so it wouldn’t have mattered to anyone that he was gay.

I’m not blaming Dina for McGreevey’s actions or am I vilifying her. I read what she wrote and I am taking issue with that. She saw no red flags but I see red flags with her description of her marriage. I’m not saying she didn’t love him, or that her anger isn’t real. I am taking issue with her using the Straight Spouse Network and being deceptive about what she knew during her marriage to McGreevey. All I can say is she knew. I don’t care that she is trying to make a buck off of her marriage to the sleazeball but tell the truth. Is that so hard to do? She takes issue with McGreevey being deceptive and telling her in cowardly installments that he was gay but yet fails to mention that she did in fact know about the rumors well before anyone else did. Her owns word “I didn’t have time to pay attention to the rumors.” Excuse me? Again I’m not saying she isn’t hurt or angry- he did cheat on her and I know she is in pain. I just cannot stand liars but the truth doesn’t sell does it?

Posted by: tammymarie36 May-7

These excerpts from a post/discussion on Reason, asking why prostitution hasn’t yet been legalized. As you will see with my comments, I am highly critical of this libertarian perspective.

Cathy Young wrote:
Yet prostitution is perhaps the ultimate victimless crime: a consensual transaction in which both parties are supposedly committing a crime, and the person most likely to be charged—the one selling sex—is also the one most likely to be viewed as the victim. (A bizarre inversion of this situation occurs in Sweden, where, as a result of feminist pressure to treat prostitutes as victims, it is now a crime to pay for sex but not to offer it for sale.) […]

It’s the criminalization of prostitution that does take actual victims. […]
It’s hard to see who benefited from the fact that the authorities in Maryland spent a lot of taxpayer money to investigate and prosecute a woman for discreet and private sexual encounters with men—encounters that would have been perfectly legal if, instead of directly paying her for sex, those men had spent an equivalent amount on dates and gifts.

As with other victimless crimes, the criminalization of prostitution creates a vast breeding ground for corruption, hypocrisy, and morally dubious law enforcement tactics. Thus, open advertisement of escort services is widely tolerated under the flimsy pretext that clients are paying for companionship, “modeling,” “role play” and other non-sexual activities, and that when sex occurs it’s by mutual choice unrelated to any fees. Selective enforcement is the norm, as is entrapment. Anti-prostitution campaigns are also frequently accompanied by the Big Brother-ish practice of state-sponsored public shaming. Not to mention how black market constitution makes it more difficult to police the sex slave trade, where the prostitutes really are victims.

Unlike some defenders of prostitution such as “Mayflower Madam” Sydney Biddle Barrows, I do not believe that selling sex should ever be seen as an empowering or liberating way of life, or an affirmation of female sexuality. (If anything, it perpetuates the notion that sex is something women do for male enjoyment.) I do not believe, as sex-positive feminist Susie Bright has written, that “sex-work professionals are [among] the future’s largest contingents of the new het-sex liberation front.” Nor do I think that disapproval of sex for profit invariably stems from a residual notion that sex is bad, or that “sex work” should be destigmatized as just another career. But there is a vast difference between social stigma and criminal prosecution, between personal moral judgment and the nanny state.

Comments worth reading 🙂Bill Pope | May 7, 2007, 5:29pm | #

I agree that we’ll never get rid of prostitution, but Cathy please don’t treat it as just another career choice offered by the market. The average age of entry into the trade is 14, and that entry is ususally motivated by abusive homes and addiction to drugs. There is really nothing terribly consentual about this arrangement from the provider’s point of view, especially if addiction is what keeps her in the profession. Please be cognizant of these realities when commenting on the issue.

Kwix | May 7, 2007, 5:41pm | #

The average age of entry into the trade is 14, and that entry is ususally motivated by abusive homes and addiction to drugs. There is really nothing terribly consentual about this arrangement from the provider’s point of view, especially if addiction is what keeps her in the profession.

Much of this is because both prostitution and drug use are underground economies where the only interest the police have in it is sending all participants to jail. If prostitution were legalized, police could concentrate on getting coerced prostitutes (girls, young teens, imported sex-slaves, etc.) the help they need and busting the “pimps” that force them into the work.

Alessandra | May 10, 2007, 2:22pm | #

1-The question to ask is: Why should society sanction the use of force to keep people (mostly women) from engaging in sex for money, if it is done consensually?
2- I really don’t understand the arguments that hiring a prostitute for her “body part” is any different than hiring a circus strong man for his physical attributes.

The argument that prostitution is illegal? That’s a laugh.

Above is a parasitical perspective. Saying that there’s no difference between prostitution and sitting at your computer terminal, and it’s all “just work,” is like a propaganda slogan.

Ask these pro-prostitution guys if they would encourage their wives to be a prostitute, or be a prostitute themselves, and usually we get a no. If it were just another “job,” they and their wives wouldn’t mind prostituting themselves to hetero and homosexuals alike — since it’s all claimed to be just like a sports massage, or being a hairdresser. But that usually doesn’t

apply. Why stop there? They could do the same with their own children. If there’s nothing wrong with prostitution, why not their own kids (of legal age)?

If prostitution is “just work,” we are sure that any of these guys would take their own daughters and sons, and instead of telling them to work at McDonalds to earn some extra cash, they would encourage them to prostitute themselves, starting at the legal consent age of 16 in DC, for example.

And since prostitution is “just a service,” instead of mowing the neighbor’s grass, they would offer their children to perform sex to the entire neighborhood, including the 60 year old pervert down the road, the alcoholic, the 3 homosexuals with syphilis (using a condom, of course, because this is a responsible father who prostitutes their own children!) I’m sure they would love to see their own children sucking other human beings for a buck — that’s what kind of men they are. And they could use their job connections to get clients with more money to pay for their kids’ services – that’s how much they care.

I could go on, but I think you get the picture. The truth is parasites are really comfortable with all kinds of sexual abuse and exploitation as long as the damage and hurt remains with someone else’s kid. ( And we might add, given the epidemic rates of child abuse, the latter can only be said for the non-abusers ).

And this isn’t even delving into all the studies proving the high degree of sexual/domestic abuse victims that get trapped into prostitution, etc. Although this is not saying all prostitutes have this same battered profile, this very violent reality also cannot be negated for millions of children and adults caught in prostitution systems around the world.

How much do you have to be a parasite regarding human relations on a personal level and how much do you have to destroy a context of dignity, intimacy, respect, and love to begin thinking that degrading forms of sexual interaction are legitimate and good? And harmless?

The answer is a lot. Sadly, these kinds of attitudes are being increasingly normalized in society, and the damage they cause go way beyond some little DC madam scandal.

There is no space here to go into the question of the “consensual” label masking an enormous web of underlying problems as well; that’s a key issue too in prostitution.

(p.s. and we can also note that pornography is not different than prostitution in many of these respects as well.)

Charlie | May 11, 2007, 12:45pm | #


You make some very good points, but not for criminalization. Criminalization of any type of consensual behavior only makes the problem IMMENSELY worse. Look at our government’s previous attempt at prohibition concerning alcohol. It caused tremendous crime. Look at the issue now, with alcohol being legal – you don’t see Budweiser pushing beer at the playground, do you? Also, look at another of our “leader’s” current attempts at prohibition – since the inception of the “The Drug War” the drug problem is HUGELY worse. Why? Simply because of prohibition, nothing else.

Alessandra wrote:


There is absolutely no space here to discuss here what can be done about prostitution. (It takes at least a book, given that there are so many things a society can do that go way beyond the legal/illegal decision). Your analogies to drugs and alcohol are very faulty and simplistic, starting with the fact that so much in prostitution systems is not consensual and does not include free nor informed choices.

If you really want to delve into the issue, there are books with comparative studies regarding prostitution measures around the world, including underage prostitution.

You are wrong to think that no country has ever had measures put into place that didn’t have a significant ameliorating impact on the prostitution problem (to diminish it, and to reduce violence and suffering — which included keeping prostitution illegal). But you need to address the issue from a root perspective, the entire social context and causes, not a parasitical one which just wants impunity for sexual exploitation of people.

By the way, you forgot to mention smoking — is the problem better or worse now that it is largely prohibited and unmasked for the crap that it is?

And this comment really strikes at an issue that most lay people don’t like to address:

“$300 an hour to $2,500 a day for her services… discreet and private sexual encounters with men—encounters that would have been perfectly legal if, instead of directly paying her for sex, those men had spent an equivalent amount on dates and gifts.”

How dysfunctional do you have to be to go to a prostitute then?

And this comment, asks from a legal perspective what I also noted from a more broad perspective regarding the similarities between pornography and prostitution. It shows one of the most profound contradictions in American culture nowadays.

Dave | May 7, 2007, 6:14pm | #

If there are any lawyers posting here, maybe you can answer a question which has long perplexed me: How is it that prostitution is illegal, but paying a woman to have sex in a pornographic movie is not? I’m not saying morally, I’m asking from a legal standpoint. How does the porn industry not get charged with prostitution? Does the fact that both (or more than both) participants are being paid make a difference? Big-name porn actresses tend to get paid much more than the male actors they often film with, so if you pay a prostitute $400 and she pays you $5, would that make it legal? If you have a camera in the room, does that make it legal? Is there anything to stop a prosecutor from bringing charges against Jenna Jameson?

Kwix | May 7, 2007, 7:01pm | #

You are correct that an adult vid is a)protected under Amendment 1 and b)you are paying the actors for, well, “acting”. That they have sex together is immaterial to what it is you are compensating them for, which is their portrayal of sexual deviants on film.

Pi Guy | May 7, 2007, 7:09pm | #

How ’bout this: If you pay a woman to havae sex with you, it’s illegal. However, if you pay a woman to have sex while you video it and put on the intertubes, well that’s just peachy!

Jay | May 8, 2007, 10:20pm | #

Ultimate in ‘victimless crimes’? The legalization of prostitution in Germany having two deleterious effects: (1) it has made those in the sex industry legitimate employers who could make job offers to the unemployed, which triggered the state to say that if the unemployed person refused the offer that she would lose her benefits;
(2) Russian organized crime syndicates moved in got involved in human trafficking and the state has less incentive to prioritize intervention

[[ This is really interesting, the fact that Russian organized crime took advantage of the legalization of prostitution, a move that I assume was at least minimally conceived of to ameliorate the worst degrading and violent aspects of the prostitution problem in Germany. And if they did it in Germany, I’m sure they (and others) would do it anywhere else, if conditions allowed. Which also brings us to this question:]]

Bob Mnemos | May 8, 2007, 11:13pm | #

Go to any neighborhood where there are some reasonably good marriages and ask the wives (doesn’t matter if they’re liberal or conservative) if they’d mind if a few prostitutes plied their trade in the neighborhood. I think you’d find out pretty quick why in the Real World ™, which no here seems to be from, prostitution has never been openly accepted in society. Even the places where it’s “legal” are heavily restricted for that very reason.

Eh voilà, the only reason prostitution is a problem for a large chunk of society is because it bothers privileged women and their marriages. It is so tiring to live in a world where concern about human suffering is usually profoundly dictated by the privileged according to their selective needs.

There was something in this discussion that was heartwarming to see. It’s the fact that many commenters, which we can tell are just “normal” lay people, already have as part of their general culture the information that street prostitution (as the foremost example) is saturated with violence and exploitation (including the ugly drug addiction problems). This is a major gain for activists who worked for decades to unmask the cruel reality of so many aspects of prostitution systems, something I would say got its major real push with the women’s movement around the 70’s and continuing until today. Today we can see the resulting awareness shifts in the mass media, universities, and the general public regarding perceptions and cognizance of sexual violence issues. If we compare today’s awareness of the ugliness of street prostitution with how people viewed prostitution 100 hundred years ago (a total “blame-the-prostitute for everything” view), the progress is enormous. As this criminal investigator highlights:

RP | May 8, 2007, 11:21pm | #

I’m a criminal investigator and I see a great deal of prostitution. It’s strictly drugs, thugs, disease, violence, and pathetic lost women addicted to crack — who’ll do anything for more crack. They’re exploited by men who’ll use them unspeakably for a rock. Their circumstances are filthy and dangerous. Why does anybody think we can “regulate the hell” out of the prostitution business? Does anybody really imagine these people are suddenly going to play by the rules? Will regulation solve the crack problem? Please get real.

And I’ve spent the last three years after a maniac who’s killed at least 8 prostitues, attacked many more. He picks them because they are easy marks.
Prostitution is evil.

And to end, a nice reminder, of the most fundamental importance:

h | May 9, 2007, 12:01pm | #

There’s nothing reasonable about this argument. How many prostitutes does the author know? How fulfilling is their life? How much do they like degrading themselves or being forced into degrading themselves.

Prostitution is time-limited slavery. Should slavery be legal even if it were “consensual?” No, because for one human being to be so degraded all of humanity becomes degraded.

New home 🙂 Feels just like when you move in real life! Heh!

by prejudice based on race, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of state, local or tribal hate crime laws.

I wonder how the bright light bulbs who came up with the H.R. 1592 Bill consider a case where a black man offends a black woman (saying “ho”), than she calls him a “good-for-nothing nigger.” Do we have two hate crimes here? Or do they think if some one commits a hate crime, then you can commit a hate crime back and it’s OK? You noticed, in my example, she didn’t simply call him “trash” (so blasé) or another non-victim-group-based insult, she went for the horrible, the denigrating and racially based term “nigger,” that is, a HATE crime word.

Then you have a situation where a homo rubs against someone in a purposeful harassment action, and the victim says, “You homo shit!” The homo will sue for hate crime, evidently.

You have a heterosexual guy call a woman a “bitch,” and she calls him back “a sexist pig,” then we have two hate crimes ( they are both insults based on gender!)

I find the topic of “hate crimes” so amazingly fascinating, nothing, NOTHING could be more Orwellian in an Animal Farm way (and that goes for many countries, the U.S. being one of many foremost examples).

This clarification and example from the Alliance Defense Fund’s Report on the H.R. 1592 Bill.

Despite the limitation of the new federal offenses to violent crimes against persons, H.R. 1592 could be construed not to limit federal prosecution to violent “hate” crimes. Although not the most likely construction, section 4 of the Act could arguably authorize the Attorney General to prosecute violations of non-violent state or local “hate” crime laws at the request of local officials.3That would be extremely problematic because some existing state and local “hate” crime laws make “simple assault” or “intimidation” prosecutable offenses.

For example, New Jersey law makes it a “hate crime” to communicate in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm. N.J.S.A. §§ 2C:16-1(a), 2C:33-4.

Washington law makes it a crime to “Threaten[] a specific person or group of persons and place[] that person . . . in reasonable fear of harm to person or property. . . . For purposes of this section, a ‘reasonable person’ is a reasonable person who is a member of the victim’s [category].”
R.C.W.A. 9A.36.080(1)(c).

One would not expect a reasonable person to feel threatened or feel fear of harm as the result of an innocuous communication. Nevertheless, the entire faculty at Ohio State University’s Mansfield campus apparently agreed that university librarian Scott Savage was guilty of threatening behavior for a simple statement in 2006.

His “threat”? Recommending four books for freshman reading in his role as a member of OSU Mansfield’s First Year Reading Experience Committee. The four books were The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, The Professors by David Horowitz,
Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye’or, and It Takes a Family by Senator Rick Santorum.

Three Mansfield professors filed complaints with OSU’s Office of Human Resources asserting that the suggested reading list made them feel “unsafe” on the campus. The Mansfield faculty voted without dissent to file charges of sex discrimination and harassment against Mr. Savage because they believed the recommendations constituted “anti-gay hate mongering.” The charges were not dismissed until the Alliance Defense Fund came to Mr. Savage’s defense.

If the faculty at OSU Mansfield are reasonable people, Mr. Savage’s mere suggestion that freshmen read conservative books would qualify as a “hate” crime under Washington law, and perhaps under New Jersey law. And if H.R. 1592 were to be construed to permit federal prosecution of non-violent state or local “hate” crimes, he could be prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney General for suggesting the reading list in Washington or New Jersey.

Criminalizing thought – pure and simple.

For example, New Jersey law makes it a “hate crime” to communicate in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm.

Annoyance? In what way, exactly? I don’t feel like looking up the law or existing cases, if there are any. But annoyance?

This article on Slate is so disgusting, that I don’t really feel like expounding on the topic. Except to say that William Saletan reaches the absurd level of trying to equate bestiality to heterosexuality (which he constructs as all bad), and states that it is the opposite of homosexuality (which he constructs as all good). Yes, you read that right.

He does this by selectively picking anything in the characteristics of the bestiality people portrayed and how they related to the animals, and makes it into a resemblance of “heterosexuality,” (which, as we know, is all bad and disgusting). Then he says that from a cultural and emotional perspective, bestiality must then oppose the wonderfulness of homosexuality, because the latter is all good and magnificent — and the opposite of heterosexuality in every way!

At least, because he is equating bestiality to heterosexuality, Saletan spares us the line that the men portrayed in “Zoo” have a bestial gene and anyone who opposes bestiality is full of hate; he does describe the men as profoundly dysfunctional.

“It’s just like if you love your wife.” Another, who calls himself the Happy Horseman, ventures, “You’re connecting with another intelligent being.” But the more the men talk, the more this pretense unravels. “I don’t need a high level of emotional interaction,” says a zoophile who goes by the name Coyote. The Happy Horseman agrees. A horse “has no idea what Tolstoy is, or Keats,” he explains. “You can’t discuss the difference between Monet and Picasso. That just doesn’t exist for their world. It’s a simpler, very plain world. And for those few moments, you kind of can get disconnected.”

In other words, horses are bimbos.

And he has never heard of Gore Vidal who bragged about having reasonably anonymous sex with more than 1000 other homosexuals? And what happens at homo saunas? Oh, these aren’t bimbos, these are faggots, is that why we can’t equate it to the respective homosexuals who have a very disconnected psychology about sexual relations?

No, no – it’s all heterosexual if it’s bad, of course.

It’s just like a gay orgy, except that it’s the opposite.

Like when war is peace, or it’s all equal, except it’s all different. Get it?

The guys aren’t there to have sex with one another. They’re there to have conversation with one another, followed by sex with beasts whose cousins the men regard as barbecue meat. The classlessness of the society in the house conceals its abuse of the society in the barn. Later, the men return from the barn, bonded together in silent triumph. This isn’t a gay party. It’s a frat party.

Because, as you know, there is no such thing as more than two homosexuals ever engaging in sex. And homosexuals and homosexual pornography never portray anyone or anything in a way or context equivalent to “meat.”

But he leaves his greatest show of intellectual strength for the finale: apparently holding an acid grudge against Rush Limbaugh, he then goes to state that very little separates Limbaugh from one of these bestial men!

To Limbaugh, women are just like animals. Don’t take my word for it. Take his. Five months ago, he compared his cat to a girlfriend: “She gets loved. She gets adoration. She gets petted. She gets fed. And she doesn’t have to do anything for it, which is why I say this cat’s taught me more about women than anything my whole life.”

That’s the kind of frat-boy thinking that ends with a bunch of drunken idiots in a barn.

So, yes, we are surprised to hear Saletan hasn’t called PETA et al to raid Limbaugh’s house and rescue the poor cat from the bestial Limbaugh. I mean, talk about steeping low to vilify and mischaracterize a political opponent. And I can’t wait to hear Saletan’s protest on how horrible pornography is, because it does display all these attitudes he described. Maybe when hell, freezes over, that is.

If there is anything very bestial in all of this, it is surely Saletan’s writing.

p.s. Captain’s Quarters has a post worth reading as well.

(I am going to try to get a hold of Jacobs and Potter’s book and write about it. For now, a few musings on “hate crime” ideology. Given my blogging text limits, I will post the text separated in different parts, and cut into the usual tiny posts.)

The quotes below come from a review of the book by a guy with a homosexual dysfunction. Ralph Wedgwood, formerly an Associate Professor of Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is now a Lecturer in Philosophy at Oxford University and a Fellow of Merton College, Oxford. He is the author of “The Fundamental Argument for Same-Sex Marriage,” Journal of Political Philosophy (1999),

In Chapter 6, Jacobs and Potter criticize the justifications that are most frequently offered for hate crime laws. First, they consider the claim that “more severe penalties for criminals motivated by prejudice are justified because such offenders are morally worse–more culpable–than criminals who engage in the same conduct, but for reasons other than prejudice” (pp. 79-80). They dismiss this claim with the following objection (p. 80): “A con artist may defraud widows out of their life savings in order to lead a life of luxury. An ideologue may assassinate a political leader in order to dramatize his cause or to coerce decision makers into changing national policy. Are these criminals less morally reprehensible than a gay basher or a black rioter who beats an Asian storeowner? Of course not.”

The sheer irrelevance of this objection is staggering. Jacobs and Potter are objecting to the claim that crimes motivated by prejudice are more culpable than crimes that involve the same conduct but different motivation. However exactly the philosophically tricky notion of ‘the same conduct’ is to be understood, it is indisputable that defrauding widows out of their life savings is not “the same conduct” as gay bashing. The question that Jacobs and Potter should have asked is this: Suppose that a gang of young men beat someone up just because they feel bored. Is this act less morally reprehensible than if they had beaten him up just because they believed that he was gay? Both acts are seriously morally wrong, but it is far from obvious, at least to me, that the second act is not more reprehensible than the first.

Wedgwood argues that one must apply the notion of “the same conduct” to judge if two crimes are equal from a moral perspective. This is already a tricky assertion, because crime is not and should not be defined or evaluated on the basis of the type of the perpetrator’s motive or conduct alone. But more on this later.

First of all, regarding what the proponents of hate crime categories construe, what is the problem with the example offered that beating up someone because of alleged boredom is less worse than beating up someone because of some prejudice against homosexuality? It starts with the ultra-simplification of the motive, a reductionism that only serves to muddle and completely obfuscate the real complex set of motives. Boredom does not cause assault crimes. A complex set of aggregated motives need to be present to make someone who is bored commit a crime of battery.

In such a situation we would find a series of other psycho-social dysfunctions that together could lead some people to commit a crime. The perpetrators could even allege that they committed a crime “because they were bored,” but this would be a reductionist, ignorant version of the facts. They necessarily must have other issues to commit a crime and allege it was solely out of boredom. So the first problem with the comparison given and its “motive” starts there.

Next, we can also raise several issues regarding the question of a gang beating someone up because they believed he was a homosexual. Firstly, the majority of people who oppose the legitimation of homosexuality do not beat up homosexuals, therefore an opposition to the normalization of homosexuality itself does not produce violent behavior towards homosexuals, nor is it correct to say this is some form of prejudice, since opposing the normalization of homosexuality requires knowledge, not prejudice. Secondly, if the gang members had a certain hostility towards homosexuals, and this could possibly be qualified as prejudice, they would need to have some other set of ideas regarding their own social behavior (i.e. believe that they had a need to beat him up to actually do it).

Thirdly, and even more poignantly, the number of homosexuals who are pro-homosexuality zealots and who batter other homosexuals is thousands of times higher than the beatings from heterosexuals with problems.

Returning to the question of motive, we can conclude that simply stating that “prejudice produces a crime” is also not correct, just as saying that “boredom produces crimes” is also not correct.

But even if we consider a variety of crimes where the conduct was the same, and even if the motive in all of them included some kind of “prejudice,” there are a vast number of examples that will show why “hate crime” concepts/categories are invalid. What if the gang beat up another guy because he refused to be part of a gang? Or because he voted for a politician the gang didn’t like? Or because he was old and weak? Or because he was homeless? Or because he was fat? Or because he was wearing a new suit? Or because he studied hard to pass exams at school and they hated that he was a “nerd?”

Why is only the beating related to the homosexual victim enormously more morally wrong than every one of the above examples and so many more that we could conjure? Why does this case justify an abnormally privileged category?

The truth is that it is absurd to rob the other victims of their equiponderation of the harm of the crime they suffered or from the perspective of degree of evil of the crime that was perpetrated. All of the above examples would require a set of problematic attitudes from the part of the gang that would cause them to perpetrate the beating, and in all of the cases these sets of attitudes are equally bad. Furthermore, labeling the motive a mere “prejudice” is oversimplifying it.

But the most fundamental problem is that there is no moral ground to make the distinction that the prejudice against the homosexual is worse than any of the others, it is clearly the result of an “Animal Farm” logic, a distinction based on power privileges, discourse inequality, and profound injustice.

To note: depending on the “hate crime” legislation and what it defines as victim categories, some of the examples above could also be categorized as “hate crimes.” Wedgwood quotes an example: “Alabama law defines a hate crime as ‘a Class A felony that was motivated by the victim’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or physical or mental disability.'” Even then, if we include the beating of the homeless and the old man in hate crimes categories, why are they any worse than the beating of the guy who didn’t want to join a gang? On what moral ground does one assert that half of the above examples are worse than the remaining half?

How can one assert that the guy who was beaten because he didn’t want to join a gang or the other victim who been battered because he had studied hard suffered less or were assaulted less than the guy who was beaten because of his homosexual dysfunction? There is absolutely no moral grounds for the claim. This is one aspect that makes so-called “hate crime” categories highly immoral from a philosophical pespective.



As Jacobs and Potter point out, the statutory definitions of “hate crime” in fact make no mention of hatred. Instead, these statutes, in effect, define “hate crime” as “criminal conduct motivated by prejudice” (p. 11).

This is absolutely fascinating! It’s like legislation against robberies that makes no mention of… robberies!

My not-being-a-lawyer guess is that if the legal text and rationale had been construed upon the term and concept of “hate,” they would probably not be able to prove it, except in very, very rare occasions.

Thus, even in law discourses, the fake-hate-stake is burning bright.

Second point, in most cases of domestic abuse, we do find a lot of hatred from the perpetrator to the victim, such as from one spouse to other, from parent to abused child, etc. And it is interesting that regarding these types of violence dynamics, there is no one making grand speeches about “hate,” “hate-based violence,” etc. Have you ever heard anyone say, “hate-based domestic violence?” Never.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

%d bloggers like this: