Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Lon Watts: My Partner’s Sister Took Our Home Because We Weren’t Married

Years back I got into an email spat with a Catholic friend of mine—who, for the record, while maintaining her Catholicism, had sex outside of marriage, used birth control, and lived with a man without benefit of marriage—about same-sex marriage. 

I explained that gay couples don’t have the same protections, rights, benefits, and privileges of marriage as she and her husband take for granted, and she suggested that, if all I was concerned about were ‘rights’ like visiting my partner in a hospital, being allowed survivorship benefits, inheritance rights, and all, that perhaps, and I’ll quote, “Maybe you and Carlos should adopt one another.”

Yes. She did. But then that just proved to me both her hypocrisy—in citing her Catholic faith as to why The Gays shouldn’t marry, even though she ignored her Catholic faith while she fucked guys on both coasts—and her bigotry; she did actually say this to me, and, again, I quote, “I know a lot of gay people,. A lot of gay people are my clients [she’s in real estate]”

Doesn’t that just smack of the ‘Some of my best friends are Black’ idiocy? But she didn’t get it, and a lot of folks don’t understand why it’s important for all gay people to be allowed marriage rights.

And here’s just another story to prove my point:

Lon Watts and his partner, Jim, have been together for 34 years. About six years ago, Jim was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and his sister filed for guardianship of her brother—despite Lon having power of attorney—and she was able to take their home and Jim’s finances through the courts.
Lon Watts, on Facebook: 
“She put him in a Nursing Home and had criminal trespass orders against me to keep me away from him.
She got his bank account from Social Security Disability and sold his house out from under me. I had 2 weeks to vacate uur [sic] home of 12 years. If we were EQUAL in the eyes of the law we would be together till the end. But as it stands in Texas, a money hungry greedy relative was able to steal our life and toss me out as trash to pad her pocketbook. I pray God has mercy on her soul for her evil deeds. I am content knowing the world is coming around to acknowledge that ALL HUMANS ARE CREATED EQUAL and SHOULD HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS.”
So, for anyone who thinks that marriage equality doesn’t matter, think about being, in your eyes at least, married for 34 years to the person you love, and then having your home and bank accounts seized, and taken away from you. Is that fair? Is it equal? Is it right?

And anyone who claims that the needs and rights of same-sex couples can be protected through some legal forms is mistaken, because, since we don’t have the right to marry, we must abide by the laws of the states in which we live and each state handles LGBT issues differently. Opposite-sex couples, like my former friend--and she is a former friend because I don't abide bigots--don’t have to worry about any of this; they just get married and get over 1100 rights, automatically.

So, again, if you think marriage equality doesn’t matter, just think about Lon Watts. He’s lost his partner, his lover, of nearly four decades, and he’s lost their home that they shared for twelve years. All because it’s illegal for him to say ‘I do’ to another man.

Washington Senator Mike Hewitt's Office Says The Gays Should Fend For Ourselves In The Face Of Discrimination

We all know that Washington State has some pretty cool politicians because they passed marriage equality there last year and, well, the state hasn’t fallen into the sea or succumbed to earthquakes and such.

But, while most people are okay with The Gays and marriage, we all know that Barronelle Stutzman was not. As the owner of a flower shop she gladly took money from The Gays for flowers for years, but then, lo and behold, when a gay couple asked her to do the flowers for their upcoming wedding, suddenly Stutzman conjured up the Baby Jeebus and he told her not to do floral arrangements for The Gay Marriages.

Then Washington state decided to get into the act and charge her with discrimination—which is what she’s doing—and then the Washington state Republicans decided to push their snouts into the mix and are working to pass a bill to make discriminating against The Gays legal. Yes, they want to make discrimination legal.

Well, Jay Castro, a reader of Slog—from whence this post came… see HERE—called Washington state Republican Senator Mike Hewitt's office to ask about Hewitt's co-sponsorship of that bill to legalize discrimination of The Gays and Castro says he was told this:
“Gay people should be prepared to fend for themselves.”
Now, Jay Castro, and most people capable of rational thought, knows that the likelihood of a bill legalizing discrimination will not likely pass, but Castro was concerned that other businesses might try to follow the lead of Barronelle Stutzman. So, during his round of phone calls to legislators, he posed this question:
"What are rural gays supposed to do if the only gas station or grocery store for miles won't sell them gas and food?"
And he says a staffer at Hewitt's office replied:
"Well, gay people can just grow their own food."
Yes, we can grow our own food if stores refuse to sell to us; we can make our own clothes if a department stores ban us; we can form our own colony, hopefully surrounded by barbed wire, when people won’t rent to us, or sell to us. This is what the asshats in Senator Hewitt’s office suggest The Gays do.

Castro asked the staffer’s name, but the man refused, and reportedly said, "I don't have to tell you that," then, "Don't call here again," before hanging up the phone.

Again, this bill will most likely never pass because, well, people, most people, aren’t that stupid in Washington, but it does raise the question of what some legislators and their office staff would like to do to The Gays.

Round us up and put us in communes where we can exist alone without bothering anyone. What was that thing that happened the last time people, who were deemed different, were rounded up and sent away?

Yeah. Of course, that won’t happen here, right? It couldn’t, right?

Monday, April 29, 2013

Washington Republicans Hope To Legalize Discrimination Against Gay Couples

Out there in Washington, where marriage equality is legal, there are a group of twelve Republican state senators in Washington who want to make discrimination legal, too; I mean, if the discrimination is geared toward The Gays, that is.

It all began when Barronelle Stutzman decided to tell her longtime gay clients that she would not create flower arrangements for their wedding because the Baby Jeebus told her to be mean to The Gays.

Well, the story went viral—in fact, I wrote about it HERE and HERE—and then Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed a lawsuit against Stutzman for discrimination. In response, Republican state Senator Sharon Brown, along with 11 other of the 23 Republicans in the Washington state Senate, have decided to legalize discrimination against gay and lesbian couples by passing Senate Bill 5927. But, they don’t want folks to discriminate against The Gays just because the Baby Jeebus says so, they say their bill not only covers religious exceptions, but will allow discrimination based on “philosophical beliefs” or even “matters of conscience.”

Senator Sharon Brown
The bill says, in part:
“The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, philosophical belief, or matter of conscience may not be burdened unless the government proves that it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest.”
The bill also notes that it does not allow the denial of services to anyone considered a protected class under federal law; race, religion and disability are all protected classes under federal law, but LGBT people are not.

So, they’re basically saying that since The Gays are not a class of people protected against discrimination, then, well, just go ahead and do it. But, let’s be clear, if say race and religion weren’t protected classes, imagine Barronelle Stutzman denying service to a Black couple or a Baptists couple.

Would you find that acceptable? And if you would, and you’re a business owner, please put signs in your windows saying ‘Straights Only’ so I know which stores to avoid.

Jason Collins Comes Out: He's America's First Openly Gay, and Still Playing, Professional Athlete

Well, we all thought it was going to be a football player, but NBA star, and free agent, Jason Collins has come out as America’s first openly gay and still-playing male professional sports athlete.

Jason Collins:
I'm a 34-year-old NBA center. I'm black. And I'm gay.
I didn't set out to be the first openly gay athlete playing in a major American team sport. But since I am, I'm happy to start the conversation. I wish I wasn't the kid in the classroom raising his hand and saying, "I'm different." If I had my way, someone else would have already done this. Nobody has, which is why I'm raising my hand.
My journey of self-discovery and self-acknowledgement began in my hometown of Los Angeles and has taken me through two state high school championships, the NCAA Final Four and the Elite Eight, and nine playoffs in 12 NBA seasons. I’ve played for six pro teams and have appeared in two NBA Finals. Ever heard of a parlor game called Three Degrees of Jason Collins? If you're in the league, and I haven't been your teammate, I surely have been one of your teammates' teammates. Or one of your teammates' teammates' teammates.
Now I'm a free agent, literally and figuratively. I've reached that enviable state in life in which I can do pretty much what I want. And what I want is to continue to play basketball. I still love the game, and I still have something to offer. My coaches and teammates recognize that. At the same time, I want to be genuine and authentic and truthful.
Welcome out Jason, and congratulations on being the first. You’re going to blaze a trail for other gay athletes to follow, and you’ve done so with eloquence and a positive outlook.

Naturally, as we like to do here at HOMO HQ, we’ll be sending you a copy of The Gay Agenda, and the obligatory Coming Out Toaster Oven.

Welcome out, Jason, welcome out!

ISBL Asshat of the Week [Again]: Stacey Campfield

Stacey Campfield, a Republican state Senator from Tennessee and frequent Asshat of the Week here on ISBL, is at it again. See, in order to, as he now says, highlight the hypocrisy of lawmakers working for gun control, he posted an illustration of a pressure cooker—like the ones used in the Boston bombings—to mock gun control advocates.

“Here comes Feinstein again” Campfield titled the post, in a reference to Senator Dianne Feinstein, who authored an assault weapons ban after the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. Campfield labeled the pressure cooker illustration with features similar to those of a gun – like a “tactical pistol grip” and “folding stock.”
“Large-capacity, can cook for hours without reloading,” it also says.

And, as gun control advocates and victims of gun violence asked him to remove the image and the commentary for its tastelessness, Campfield refused, telling ABC News:
“I think it’s tasteless when Obama will drag everybody he can up to Capitol Hill and try to pass gun control. I think that was classless and tasteless.”
Um, actually, Obama was putting a face, and faces, to the need to stricter gun control and backgrounds checks, Mr. Campfield. And maybe, had we had stricter background checks, Adam Lanza’s mother might not have had an arsenal in her home within easy reach of her son’s hands; and maybe, you delusional asshat, just maybe Newtown wouldn’t have had to bury twenty-six young souls.

Tasteless and classless? No, that’s on you. Campfield then said:
“I was showing the hypocrisy of Dianne Feinstein, the gun grabbers—of their inability to realize that it is a person that does activity, not an inanimate object, be it a gun or a pressure cooker.”
Yes, Senator Asshat, it is the person that does the activity, and had we had in place stricter background checks, maybe that person wouldn’t have had access to guns. And, to be clear, you lying pandering ass-kissing lapdog to the NRA, no one, not even Senator Feinstein, is trying to “grab” your guns. They’re trying to grab your attention and realize we have a problem with gun violence in this country and need to do something about it.

Then, to show just how out of touch he is, Campfield had no idea he might offend anyone in Boston who was hurt or maimed by the bombs, or the families of anyone in Boston killed by the bombs:
“Really? If my post was inappropriate talking about ‘crock pot control’ then where is the outrage from the left when they push for gun control after the Sandy Hook shooting? I’m sorry if I exposed your double standard....Well, not really.”
Congratulation Tennessee, Stacey Campfield represents you, and you let him say the things he says, and spit in the faces of victims of gun violence, and victims of terrorism, because he wants to keep his hand out for an NRAS payoff. But, what can we expect from a man who tried to stop teachers and school administrators from saying the word ‘gay’ and the man who tried to force teachers and school administrators to ‘out’ any student they suspected might be gay.

He’ s so out of touch with what people want—90% of Americans want stricter background checks—and yet you keep sending him back into politics, Tennessee. Thanks so much for that.

more ISBL on Campfield: HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE

Saturday, April 27, 2013

I Ain't One To Gossip But ....

I didn’t watch American Idol last year because, well, it sucked. Idol? Not so much. One hit wonder? At times. Soon to be forgotten hacks? Most definitely. But this year Nicki Minaj is on board and people love her or hate her; I’m in the ‘love’ category because the girl says what she wants and sometimes it’s cray-cray and sometimes it’s high-larious. Like last week when Nicki was giving her critique and Moo-riah Carey started trying to talk over her.

Nicki: Okay okay simma’ down, sir.


But the real gossip on AI is that, ahem, ALLEGEDLY, the producers grew so tired of Mariah Carey this season that they tried to fire her halfway through the gig. Trouble was, Mariah’s team of Rabid Dawg Lawyers found out and threatened a huge lawsuit and demanded that Mariah be paid her full 20 million for this season and 20 million for next season if the producers tried to dump her. So she's still there and still awful.

And, to make it worse for Moo-riah, is the rumor that producers wanted to fire her and rehire last year's diva, Jennifer Lopez. See, the ratings for the JLo season were higher than this year so the producers thought last year was all, as Carlos calls her, Jello, and this season's Downward Facing Ratings were all Mariah’s fault. Not taking into consideration that the show hasn’t produced a real Idol since Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood almost ten years ago!

But Nigel Lythgoe, the not-gay producer of Idol, denies there was ever an attempted coup, but then says the rumors started when producers wanted JLo to sing—I giggle because I said JLo and sing in the same sentence—at the finale.

But, um, why have an ex-judge come back and sing when three of the four judges—let’s not forget the Adorably Aussie Keith Urban—are singers and maybe they could perform?

I smell a cover-up, and if it covers up Mariah you know it’s got to be big, huuuuge.
Let me clarify this first by saying that sifter she was arrested for disorderly conduct in Atlanta last week, Reese Witherspoon released a statement with a fully realized and real apology for being a bit drunk in public. I admire her for that.

But, still, Good Girl Reese’s people are trying to do damage control for her “Mom image” and yet no one is talking about just how drunk Reese was at the scene.

Until now. According to Atlanta Police, Reese’s unconventional, eyes down mugshot is the most unusual mugshot ever seen. But, as a police officer explained, “She was wobbly. She didn’t need help walking, but she wasn’t at a point where we could get a really clear picture.”

Too drunk to hold your head up?

According to the source—and if it happened in a police station, chances are it was Lohan—the police took more than one photograph and chose the best one: “On another picture, she sort of bent down at the waist and we got the top of her head. She wasn’t being difficult or rude, but her motor skills weren’t what they needed to be.”

Motor skills! Good thing she wasn’t “motoring” the car that night. Still, some folks think she did get preferential treatment: “You can’t look down in the photograph,” says Atlanta criminal defense attorney Peter Odom. “The whole point of a mugshot is for identification purposes. To my knowledge, there is no exception to this rule. When someone is in custody, there isn’t a lot of personal space. They will grab your head and move it into the right position to get the right mugshot. But in this case, protocol was definitely not followed.”

Yet most folks agree that the charges against Reese are so minor that there was no need to grab her by the hair and jerk her head up—a la Diana Ross as Billie Holiday in the opening sequence of Lady Sings The Blues.
I am not really a fan of Beyoncé. I mean, for a hot second I liked Crazy In Love and for a hot half-second I liked Single Ladies, but most of the seconds I find her a little full of herself with the sequins and the wind machines and the hair.

Cut it all out and sing.

I was also annoyed when, after the Superbowl performance, where she sang for a little bit and then strutted like a stripper the rest of the time, that she tried to stop people from posting still photos taken of her performance where she looks, well, unattractive, would be polite. I mean, stop and take a gander at that Superbowl performance pic on the left, and then at the Beyoncé -approved photo on the right.

See, because she wants to control her image in every single moment, she has decided to hire her own personal photographer and videographer to follow her around 24-7 and only release picture perfect-retouches of her tour.

F.Stop. Because you just know now that anyone with a camera—and doesn’t everyone have a camera on their phones these days—will be trying to get a Beyoncé Grunt-o-graph to sell to the highest bidder.

I know I'll post 'em.
Tara Reid—AKA Lindsay Lohan BEFORE We Had the Real Lindsay Lohan—has kind of gone all Reese Witherspoon of late.

Tara has been a hot, drunken, dress falling off mess for years and suddenly Reese &^%*$ing Witherspoon is trying to cut in on her drunken antics? Oh.No.She.Di’in’t.
After Reese got drunk and Don’t you know my name wacky in Georgia, Tara Reid got all drunk and Who am I in LA.

The American Pie ‘star’ was seen shopping at LA’s All Saints boutique last week, where she was overheard berating employees for refusing to give her a discount because of her “fame,” and then was booted.

“She was screaming,” said a source—again, probably Lohan, trying to score coins before rehab. “She had to be escorted out by security. She seemed drunk.”

See, here’s the deal: Tara was off to Coachella, where drunks and sluts go, and decided she needed a new outfit. At All Saints she “demanded a discount” and when the store declined, Reid insisted she deserved the break “because of her fame.”

Let that sink in. Her fame is mostly because she’s a drunken party girl who sometimes let’s her dress fall off while she walks a red carpet to show off her surgically enhanced boobs.

But, after screaming Don’t you know me? Reid was escorted from the store by security.
Tara’s people—and you know it’s a bartender somewhere—said Tara gets a huge discount with All Saints in the UK and Paris because she’s a walking billboard for them: “We told them we get a discount, and they said they’d email the press team.”

Which they did, and the All Saints press team apparently said Tara who?

Like most people.
How does Gwyneth do it? I mean, she went straight from the Most Hated Celebrity in Hollywood--voted on by actual people--to being named People magazine’s Most Beautiful Woman--orchestrated by her publicist because she has a new movie coming out next month. But, while she has yet to mention being The Most Hated, she has commented, of course, on being The Most Beautiful:

“Oh, lord,” said Gwynnie at the premiere of Iron Man 3. “It’s very sweet and I’m so embarrassed, but I’m so happy. “It’s so weird, it’s crazy. It’s very sweet. I’m so flattered. I’m thrilled.”

Well, I'll agree that it is crazy.

But then Paltrow's head swells when asked if her husband, musician Chris Martin, now has to tell her how, gulp, pretty she is--like that wasn't part of their marriage deal to begin with--and Paltrow purrs, “It’s like the American version of a knighthood basically. My title just got longer.”

Okay, first of all, shut up. 

Second of all, I imagine the only thing your husband tells you is to shut up.

Third, shut up.

Friday, April 26, 2013

PR 11 Ep 14: The Finale .... The Lone Wolf Kills It

Top Three! Top Three! But it ain’t over. Michelle has to glam up her styling and ditch some of the bits’n’pieces—compasses, purses, saddle bags, messenger bags—from her looks, while Stanley has to sew, sex it up, sew, sex it up, sew, and Patricia needs to make her collection look like a collection and not a thrift store rack—albeit with some cool and funky clothes on it.

I think the producers, maybe hoping it would be more of a photo finish, once again decided to offer up another trip to Mood and another $500—because, apparently, the original $10,000 to create 12 looks wasn’t enough. Patricia got leather, Michelle got some more fabric, and Stanley tried to find four finished dresses among the swatches, but couldn’t, so he settled for trims and zippers. M’kay.

Back to 1407, their design assistants—Layana the Complainer, Amanda the Helper, Richard the Why-Is-He-Here—scramble to make it work; well, most of them. We don’t get a lot of photographic evidence that Richard is doing anything except eating and talking about the collections.

That said, let’s rip …..
He’s still stinging from being Bottom Two last week, and knows that he needs to sex his collection, cut his collection ... sew his collection. Seriously. He needs to make four more looks for his collection. How did he get here? Stanley seems out of it; I cannot understand how he let himself get to Fashion Week without 12 looks. I mean, he knew he’d have to tweak some things, and fit some things, but to actually have to create some things? Craziness.

I know instantly Stanley will not win. And Tim, Michelle and Patricia are also worried he won't finish—with good reason, because he doesn’t—but he does keep plugging along. As Tim studies his re-imagined looks, Stanley says he took the judges advice and changed a lot. I didn’t see it; and Tim says it looks like a shopping spree at a Vintage Store. Stanley tells Tim he took Nina’s advice and shortened one skirt, but Tim reminds him that Nina never said that; in fact, what Nina said was to pair the skirt with a top that wasn’t a match, and put the top with a pair of pants. Stanley must have been in dreamland while Nina spoke last week. Never a good idea. Never.

I think Stanley, who’s been at this, with a modicum of success, for a long time, doesn’t like being told what to do, so he begrudgingly does some of what the judges suggested, but leaves the rest alone. Of course, maybe he didn’t have the time to sexify his looks because he still had :::gasp::: four looks to make and about two hours in which to do it. At the end of the day he still wasn’t finished, so the next morning, before the show, his dressers, whose job it is to help the models dress, coordinate the looks, perhaps steam out the last few wrinkles, are actually sewing dresses onto the models.


Stanley called his collection "Urban Opulence" but I didn’t get urban—unless it’s Upper East Side Ladies Who Lunch Urban—and there really wasn’t Opulence, unless you viewed his collection from the 1960s.

The dress he showed last week, that he cut off into a peplum this week, and put atop a pencil skirt, looked a little Carol Burnett Show sketch to me. His blouse and skirt pieces looked nice, but the length suggested Barbara Walters interviewing George Bush in the White House; too long, too staid. When the blond in the gold coat walked, I turned to Carlos and said, “Grace Kelly is alive??” Which shows you just how old looking the collection is. His closing gown, well, I did like, although when Michael Kors—welcome back to The Korange—called it ‘Betty White on Dancing With The Stars, I knew it was not a winner.

When Stanley told the judges he designed for the ‘working woman, and the woman who shops’ Michael Kors—I missed his special brand of snark—almost fell out of his chair. He said it didn’t look at all like a working woman, that it was too dressy. He did love the Grace Kelly Coat and the strapless bubble dress, and the white beaded number, but called the closing gown old—and Betty White—and Holly Hobby. He also dubbed the ring Stanley added—possibly to sexify the dress—an appetite suppressant because the woman couldn’t lift a fork to her mouth it was so heavy. He called it a good-looking collection; not so very high praise.

The Adorable Zac Posen™ didn’t like that Stanley farmed out the beading, and called the collection the dreaded ‘Nice’. He also called it dated, though he did mention that some of the bling was done well.  But he pointed out that Stanley was stubborn to some of their critiques from last week, keeping many of the same dress lengths.

Heidi—and this is where I question her taste level—loved the cut-down dirndl dress but also mentioned what looked like last minute sewing and uneven hems and such. She also loathed the gown, and said it looked like something from a catalogue, which caused Kors to say it looked like a mother of the bride dress left behind at the motel. Have I mentioned that I missed Kors sarcasm? Korsarcasm?

Nina, making it a sweep, hated the gown, too, and wished Stanley had listened to her when she said to mix up some of the sequined tops with some of the pants; it would have done wonders in the younger vision, sexy vision department. It wasn’t modern.

Stanley was out. I thought he’d win, but he didn’t listen to the judges and thought he knew best. Plus, and I’ll say it again, how do you arrive at Fashion Week a few days in advance and still have as many as four looks to make?

Cute Stanley. Stubborn Stanley. Bad Time Management Stanley.
While Stanley worked to create something Patricia needed to tie all her looks together. Her collection is all over the place—don’t get me wrong, I liked it, but it didn’t seem to be one collection—and she’s all over the place, with boxes of fabrics and missing scarves and losing Stanley’s leather glue. I mean, look at her workspace and you can see why her collection was such a mish-mash—again, though, I liked much of it.

I also liked that we had less snark from Layana this week, though I think it was there, but was edited out. And I hope they lost that footage so that we could get Patricia and her kids doing their Happy Dance in the workroom. Amid all that stress and mess, Patricia still found time to dance with her kids and I liked that.

Meanwhile, back at her collection, she has made a pair of leather pants for one look, but the leather has two holes in it. There is talk of patching, there is talk of gluing, there is talk of scrapping the pants; but then Patricia, in a bold move, decides that she’ll make the holes a feature, and so she cuts more holes in the pants to make it look like an ‘on purpose’ and not an ‘oops’. Gotta love that!

What I didn’t love was the collection. I loved pieces, like the blue number with the Smurf hat; it looked fun. And the red mini was cool, too. But how did those looks jibe with ponchos and horsehair and hippie dresses? When the models made their last pass on the runway, you could see some great fun clothes, but you didn’t see a collection. And that was Patricia’s downfall.

Patricia makes great fabrics—hell she makes her own sequins and fabric dyes—and she has some good ideas, but I think she really needed to stand back from all those looks and see that they weren’t part of the same group.

Michael Kors declared her collection fabulous, spectacular, though he mentioned that when the show started he got “The art teacher’s on an acid trip” vibe. But he loved her craft, and her technique, and that some of her clothes looked urban. He was less impressed with the Woodstock-wear, though he admitted he loved a good hippie dress. He said her use of horsehair was so insane that he loved it. Heidi liked the oddity of Patricia’s looks, and noted that the crowd instantly fell in love with Patricia’s quirky collection; it was joyful and different, and she wanted the long dress of the handmade fabric, though she’s lose the shirt beneath it.

The Adorable Zac Posen™ called it ‘techno pow-wow’ and loved her handmade textiles and sequins. He did feel that some of the fabrics seemed to look older—you know, older is bad in fashion—and wished they could have been more abstract. Nina, not a fan, really, said she loved Patricia’s talent, and called her technique unique; she said there were some strong pieces, but there was a disconnect with some of the silhouettes. Clean it up,” she commanded.

Who knew, when the season started, that artsy-fartsy Patricia would get to The Tents and come in Second Place? I loved her looks, loved her artistry, but I can see that her looks are for a very limited customer. I do hope that her customer finds her, because I’d like to see some Patria, AKA Water Lily, on a red carpet.
She’s mostly about hair and make-up this week, and taking the compasses and extra bags off her girls. She does create one new look, with a pop of color and a tie-in to her closing gown, but mostly she’s just tweaking and fitting her models and talking with Amanda. Lucky.

At Tim’s final critique he tells her he loves her looks, calling the collection "innovative" though he takes issue with her sweater that has an actual bleeding heart on it, and I was right there with him. When Michelle said she was going to leave it in, I thought, Dear lord, what will Nina say? How wrong I was, eh?

Her collection was the most cohesive of all; it was also the most modern.  There was toughness there, with the leather shoulder pads that looked almost like metal to me, and the same silhouette in many of the looks. There was some sex in those tight skirts and shorty short shorts, and my favorite was the one with the layers of chiffon and neoprene with the quilted harness. I did beat Michael Kors to the punch with the Robin Hood comment, because those cute hats were cute, but didn’t seem to fit the collection.

Heidi loved Michelle’s ‘story’ of the Lone Wolf, and how Fashion Week was the ‘kill’ that Michelle needed. She also thought Michelle’s was the most cohesive collection, though, oddly enough for Heidi The Sexy, she thought some of the silhouettes were too form-fitting. Nina loved the first look, loved the silhouettes, loved that there were a lot of pieces to sell, and, well, she begged to have Michelle send her the Bleeding Heart sweater.

Kors also praised the first look, but thought the felt—or whatever the fabric was—on the closing gown was too stiff; he also noted that the gown didn’t fit into the collection, and mentioned that she didn’t have to do a gown to close her show. The Adorable Zac Posen™ thought her clothes were beautifully made, but took issue with the chiffon scarves tied like a man’s tie; he found them cartoonish, while Kors found them costume-y.

Boy, she did play this like a Lone Wolf. She was on losing team after losing team, and could have been sent home, or could have decided to just get out. But she stuck to it and she killed it. I liked her collection because it was a collection, and it was modern and urban and cool, and quirky.

Congrats Michelle.
The right one won. I had wanted Stanley because, well, shallow, he’s cute, but because he made beautiful clothes. But he couldn’t bring them up to date.

I loved Michelle’s quirky side, with the compass and all the extra baggage. It is a distinct POV. I can see her going far.

I love Patricia’s story and her talent and her viewpoint, but she needs to clean up her workspace and her message a little bit.

I loved The Adorable Zac Posen™. He’s just so adorable. But I missed me some Kors snark and was glad he was back for the finale.

Next week, the reunion, and Michelle’s Wolf Claws come out, but first ….

What did YOU think?

I Didn't Say It ....

Kurt Warner, former NFL Quarterback and devout Christian, on gay players in the NFL:
"It's unfortunate that if there were individuals that felt they couldn't be who they were in an NFL locker room or because of the nature of the game that's a detriment to our society and to what we did in the National Football League or in football in general. I'm interested to see what happens because it is an interesting culture when you're talking about a 'man's sport' or a 'man's game' and how that is all gonna be construed, but I hope that the NFL and football in general, and sports in general accepts it the way that they should accept it and be able to move forward. We should never stand in the way of people being who they are and allowing that to affect their career."

More and more past and present players are coming out for the openness of a gay player.
It's going to happen, sooner, rather than later.

Reese Witherspoon, apologizing after being arrested this week for disorderly conduct [Reese gave the officer the ‘Do you know my name? You're about to find out who I am. You're about to be on national news.’ business:
"I clearly had one drink too many and I am deeply embarrassed about the things I said. It was definitely a scary situation and I was frightened for my husband, but that is no excuse. I was disrespectful to the officer who was just doing his job. The words I used that night definitely do not reflect who I am. I have nothing but respect for the police and I'm very sorry for my behavior."

I was surprised to hear that she acted and reacted like this, but, again, under the influence of alcohol there is that tendency to say what you might not otherwise say.

Dennis Guth, Republican Iowa State Senator, ranting about the media tricking the public into accepting gay relationships and claiming that gay relationships are a health risk to the general public:
"The media, for the most part, has bamboozled us into thinking that having a relationship outside of the boundaries of monogamous, heterosexual marriage is positive, happy and fulfilling. Movies, television shows, articles and magazines abound with this theme, giving partial information to a vulnerable audience: our children …. Just as there are multiple ways that your smoking hurts me, such as secondhand smoke, increased insurance costs, cost to society of days lost for poor health, so it is with same-sex relationships. There are health risks that my family incurs because of the increase in sexually transmitted infections that this lifestyle invites.”

Wow, so the media has made gay relationships acceptable, and here I thought it was just people learning that being gay is just fine, if you’re a gay person.
And then, to learn that I am responsible for every straight person’s bouts with STDs, well, my oh my, I have so much power.
Now, if only being gay gave me the power to have Guth instantly voted out of office, then this whole being gay thing would be more worthwhile than ever!

Matt McCoy, Democratic Iowa State Senator, and an openly gay man, in response to Guth’s idiotic rants:
”I was frankly just a little bit taken aback by some of the things that I heard today, as I know some of my colleagues were as well... Much of what you heard today on the floor of the Senate is warmed-over rhetoric that has been invented by the Christian right, extreme groups. What I heard today was ignorant and I know where it came from, and I think that I am not gay by choice. I am not gay by choice, but I choose not to be ignorant.”

One senator who was born gay and one who chose to be ignorant.

Jim Costa, Democratic California Representative and one of seven House Democrats who had not taken a stance on marriage equality, has now come out in support of it:
"In the San Joaquin Valley, family always comes first but what that family looks like is not always the same. While I respect the opinion of those who might disagree, I support marriage for all couples who wish to make this life-long commitment.”

All families look different. They always have. And a family isn’t a mother and father, or two fathers, or two mothers and children. Sometimes a family is two men or two women who love one another and want to make that commitment legal.

Joel McHale, on his boy crushes and how he feels about rumors that he’s gay:
"Ooh, boy, I have so many. Josh Gad. Brian Williams. Patrick Stewart. Nathan Fillion. Kobe Bryant. Chaz Bono. ... Oh I still see that [the gay rumor] on Twitter every day. It’s flattering. I always find it really weird when guys flip out over someone thinking they might be gay. If a guy gets offended by that, there’s something’s wrong with him. I take it as a compliment."

It is a compliment. Someone finds you attractive.
How is that wrong?

Alfred Blue, Louisiana State University football player, on gay players:
“Football is supposed to be this violent sport — this aggressive sport that grown men are supposed to play. Ain’t no little boys out here between them lines. So if you gay, we look at you as a sissy. You know? Like, how you going to say you can do what we do and you want a man?”

Oh, Alfred, gay men can do anything you can do, and do it better because they’re probably doing without bigotry and intolerance and hate.
I think you need to spend less time on the field and more time getting an education.

Alfred Blue, apologizing for being an idiot:
“I understand that my comments may have sounded insensitive to those who read the Reveille article on Friday. I in no way meant to belittle any person’s way of life and feel that everyone deserves a chance to become whatever they want to be. One of my comments that was left out of Friday’s article shows this. I told the reporter that if any person can help to contribute to the team, then that is the bottom line. I apologize if anyone was hurt by my comments and also to everyone that I may have let down."

Scroll back up and reread Reese Witherspoon’s apology.
There were no qualifications; there was no ‘if’ in her I’m sorry.
You offended people, Alfred Blue; you offended me. And I’m sorry you don’t get it; and I’m sorry to think that you probably never will.
Being gay is not a way of life; it’s life.
You need to get one.

Jim Kolbe, openly gay former Arizona Congressman, testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, urging them to adopt LGBT-inclusive immigration reform:
“On May 18th—just a month from now—Hector and I will legally marry here in the District of Columbia, surrounded by family and friends. We are immensely fortunate that Hector has now secured an investment visa that allows him to remain here with me. Many other couples, however, are not as fortunate. Even if they, like us, have a marriage, civil union or life-long commitment to each other, their ability to secure a permanent solution that would allow them to build a home, family or business together is elusive and difficult to realize. It shouldn’t be that way, and this Committee has an opportunity to fix this problem.”

It’s just another level of discrimination.
Gay bi-national couples do not have the same rights as their straight counterparts. Since marriage equality is not the law of the land—all of the land—these gay couples are forced to separate, or leave the United States simple because they’re gay.
Once wrong, always wrong.