Architecture Wednesday: 20 Taylorwood Drive

Gorgeous. Modern, Contemporary. Sleek.

20 Taylorwood overlooks a private ravine on a 30,000 square foot lot with over 7500 square feet of living space inside, all sleek and clean and bright. There are 5 bedrooms, 7 bathrooms, including the spa like master bath, a gourmet chef’s kitchen, the perfect wine room, gym, nanny's room, and incredible entertaining space.

And it’s yours for $3.6 million …. Click to emBIGGERate.

HomeDSGN

My Two Cents: Bruce Jenner

So … Bruce Jenner.

I’m of two minds on the topic. The first is, that I wished he hadn’t been playing the ‘is he or isn’t he’ game for the past year or more. I mean, we’ve all seen the pictures of the facial transformation, the longer hair, the rumors that he’d had his Adam’s Apple shaved down, the fingernail polish. And we all talked about it. Is Bruce Jenner transitioning? Is he transgender? Is it any of our business?

I don’t know the actual, factual, answers to those first two questions, but I do know that it’s not really any of our business, except that he’s been doing this change in public, but also privately, because he doesn’t speak about it, which is where I get this feeling: I’m annoyed by him.

I don’t like that he plays his life on a “reality” show; I don’t like that he plays his life in public, but when his appearance changes, and the rumors grew, he said nothing; that bothers me on two levels.

First, it bothers me because, if you’re going to be on a TV show, playing the part of yourself, then you need to talk about yourself. Having the show depict you as a person undergoing changes in appearance and then not addressing them — given the rumors — makes it seem like there is a sense of shame involved; that being transgender — if that’s the case and not just that Bruce loves plastic surgery — is somehow too shameful to speak about, then I think it sends a bad message to the younger T in the LGBT spectrum.

Secondly, to learn that, after this season of Keeping Up With The Kardashians, Bruce will appear in a reality show, or docu-series, to address these stories is bothersome. Is he selling his transition for a spot on TV? That bugs me, and yet it elates me, too, because then this might be a chance for those people questioning their orientation to see an actual person go through the process. It might give people who are hiding, the hope to step out and say, This is me.

And, like I said, I’m annoyed that for right now he is saying nothing, yet allowing people like Kim Kardashian to hightail her rather large posterior over to Entertainment Tonight to tell the world that Bruce is “on a journey” and has his own story to tell. I hate that people like That Woman are talking about Bruce and his changes as being his story. If it’s his story let him tell it, and you media whores stay out of the picture as his transition doesn’t concern you, except in the realm of your own understanding of what he might be going through.

I’m also annoyed because his mother is speaking about it, as though it’s a given, which feeds into that sense of shame about what it means to be transgender while at the same time, I applaud Esther Jenner’s understanding and support, when she told People magazine:

“I just learned about [his transition]. Bruce filled me in, and we had a very long, long, long talk about it. I have never been more proud of Bruce for who he is, himself as a father, as an Olympian, a wonderful public speaker. He instills enthusiasm in people. He’s gifted. Right now I am more proud of him for what he’s allowing himself to do. I am more proud of him now than when he stood on that podium and put the gold medal around his neck. He deserves all the respect.”

It appears that the secret is no longer a secret, though we have yet to hear from Bruce; we’ll be waiting until May when his interview with Diane Sawyer airs, just as his E! docu-series begins.

So, yeah, I’m annoyed that, by keeping this quiet, and yet not at all very quiet, he’s perpetuating the stereotype that many people have about being transgender, but, as I said before, I am of two minds on this, which leads me to say …

I’m happy for Bruce. I’m happy that, if he is about to transition, that even at age 65, he’ll finally be his, or should I say ‘her,’ one true self. I have a small inkling of what that feels like; every gay person does. It’s called the closet, where you keep your secret; where you hide yourself.

But coming out as gay, while difficult for many, is nothing at all like coming out as transgender. People don’t understand transgender; they don’t understand being assigned male at birth, for example, but feeling as though you are actually female. Many people think there are males and females and if that’s how you were born, that’s how you are, and should be always.

They wonder that, if you were say assigned male at birth, and have always been attracted to women, are you a lesbian after transitioning; or, if you were assigned male at birth, but sexually attracted to men as a male, are you a straight women after.

It gets confusing. So, I prefer not to think about whom Bruce Jenner sleeps with, now, or in the future. I prefer to think that, if this story is true, and we are in a holding pattern essentially until Bruce decides to talk, I prefer to think of the huge weight being lifted, the huge sigh of relief being expelled, that sense of joy …

I am myself. And isn’t that all any of us deserves? So, as annoyed as I can be with the media hype, and the media blackout, as annoyed as I can be with the ‘is he, or isn’t he,’ I will stand behind Bruce Jenner and hold him up as he begins to do whatever it is that makes him say, I am myself.

Cumberbatch And Fry Seek Pardons For "The Other 49,000"

After portraying war hero Alan Turing in The Imitation Game, Benedict Cumberbatch has joined the call in England for overturning the so-called "indecency" convictions handed down to gay men like Turing.

Turing, you may recall, was a computer scientist and mathematician who cracked the Nazi’s Enigma machine World War II, leading to the Allied victory. Turing was also gay, and in 1952 was prosecuted for being gay under Great Britain’s indecency laws; instead of being imprisoned for his "crime," Turing chose chemical castration.

Alan Turing died two years later; and nearly sixty years after that, in 2013, his "crime" was pardoned by Queen Elizabeth II.

After a recent screening of The Imitation Game comedian Stephen Fry started the call to pardon the thousands other gay men who were convicted under the indecency laws, and Cumberbatch agreed:

"Alan Turing was not only prosecuted, but quite arguably persuaded to end his own life early, by a society who called him a criminal for simply seeking out the love he deserved, as all human beings do. Sixty years later that same government claimed to ‘forgive’ him by pardoning him. I find this deplorable, because Turing’s actions did not warrant forgiveness — theirs did — and the 49,000 other prosecuted men deserve the same."

Cumberbatch is right, though, when he says these men, like Turing, do not need to be forgiven for being gay; the government of England needs to ask for their forgiveness — at least of the 15,000 men still alive today who were convicted under this archaic law — and pardon every last one of them.

New ads for The Imitation Game — nominated nominated for several Oscars, including Best Picture — appeared this week, highlighting the plight of Alan Turing and the “other 49,000”:

“Honor this movie. Honor this man. And honor the movement to bring justice.”

An open letter has been addressed to Her Majesty’s Government, imploring young political leaders, like the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, William and Kate, to see that these “convictions” are overturned; the letter reads, in part:

“The apology and pardon of Alan Turing are to be welcomed but ignores over 49,000 men who were convicted under the same law, many of whom took their own lives. An estimated 15,000 men are believed to still be alive. The UK’s homophobic laws made the lives of generations of gay and bisexual men intolerable. It is up to young leaders of today including The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to acknowledge this mark on our history and not allow it to stand.”

In a sad side note: Prince William and Catherine have opted not to publicly support the campaign to pardon these thousands of men because as a palace spokesperson explained that the royal family felt as if the issue was a purely governmental affair and that they had no place in the discussion.

Some say it was less about that, and more about the royal’s decision to distance themselves from this particular campaign because of the less high-profile men who would be exonerated.

I guess if you were imprisoned for being gay but weren’t a war hero, but just a regular bloke, the royals don’t give a fig for you.

Hopefully, without the help of these fools, the movement will keep on and men punished simply for being who there were, and are, and simply for loving who they loved, will one day no longer be considered criminals.

Can’t say that for the royals, though.

via Huffington Post

In The "Equality" State ... The House Passes Anti-LGBT Discrimination Bill

Well, well, well, what a day we’ve had here at ISBL; we’ve spent the morning with the likes of Mike Huckabee, who has gay friends, y’all, but says that being gay is a lifestyle like people who drink or swear. And then we had a delightful afternoon with Tony Perkins, of the hate group Family Research Council, who says that if gays post picture on Facebook pages we are persecuting Christians.

So, to carry on that theme, let’s end the day with another idiot: Nathan Winters. 

Winters is both a Pastor — well, he says he’s a pastor, but he sounds very un-Christ-like — and a State Representative out there in Wyoming, who just saw his bill, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act [RFRA] pass the Wyoming House.

As originally written, it was basically a bill that allowed people to cite their religious beliefs as an excuse for not serving The Gays, but it was amended to ensure that The Gays will not be discriminated against by state employees, you know, like clerks who are hired to issue marriage licenses and such.

But, if Winters’ bill passes the state senate and if Matt Mead, the Republican governor of Wyoming, sign it, anyone … anyone … in the private sector will be able to refuse to serve any LGBT person merely by citing their supposed deeply held religious beliefs.

We’ve seen these bills before, but what makes this so hilarious, and offensive, is that the “Good” Pastor, and the “Asshat” Representative, Nathan Winters says his bill does not “provide the right to discriminate”: but is more of an anti-coercion bill because it doesn’t force someone whose religion opposes a situation, i.e. the LGBT community, to do something they disagree with … like serving a gay person.

He says the bill affirms the right of people to practice their faith but, correct me if I’m queer, I didn’t realize that anyone on Wyoming wasn’t allowed to practice their faith. Oh, by practice their faith, he means to discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientation because that’s what God wants.

So LGBT folks in Wyoming — ironically the state’s nickname is the Equality State … no lie … and it’s motto is “equal rights” — will become ‘less than’ if Winters’ bill passes and is signed into law. Sure, no state agency can refuse to serve The Gays but every single other business in the state will be allowed to do so if they utter those simple words:

“God hates Fags.”

via NCRM

The Height of Stupidity: Gay People Posting Photos Of Gay People On Facebook Is Christian Persecution

Okay, so we all know that Tony Perkins, the wingnutted, asshatted, goose-stepping president of the anti-LGBT hate group the Family Research Council [FRC] is a loon, right?

Well, last week on his little radio hatefest he tried to calm down an irate caller who had seen a photo of "two naked guys sitting on each other" on Facebook., Now, rather than simply clicking the ‘Hide’ feature, or simply deciding to unfriend, or unfollow, the person responsible for The Gay Photo, the caller told Perkins he reported the photo to Facebook "in a nice, respectful Christian way."

Of course, Tony Perkins responded with:

"Jesus said that we are to pray for our enemies, for those who persecute us, that would be those who mock and ridicule us, absolutely we should pray for them. … This is being shoved into people’s faces, and if, like you, they say, I don’t want this on my Facebook page, I don’t want this, I don’t want to see this, look, do whatever you want to do but don’t involve me in that – that’s not good enough, there’s this effort of forced acceptance and affirmation, and we just can’t do that."

See, putting a photo on Facebook of a gay couple, or just a gay person, is Christian persecution. My wedding picture with Carlos is persecuting the Christians. Any gay person’s new photo is an attack on religion if posted to Facebook.

Perkins went on to call the posting of ‘gay pictures’ — though he never did detail exactly what a ‘gay picture’ was — as a "lack of tolerance" from gay people though he has no problem with Bible thumpers putting their Jesus pictures everywhere. I find it the height of stupidity that Tony Perkins says posting a picture on Facebook is persecution of Christians, when Perkins has said, of The Gays:

“They are intolerant. They are hateful. They are vile. They are spiteful”

He also said that LGBT activists are going to "start rolling out the boxcars" and carting away Christians a la the Holocaust.

He’s said that pedophilia is “a homosexual problem” and has used the FRC to distribute a pamphlet that claims gay men are more likely to molest children.

Funny, that he calls The Gays murderers and pedophiles, and even like the Nazis, but it's The Gays that are doing all the persecuting because we put our pictures on Facebook.

Sit down Tony. And stop looking at ‘gay’ pictures on Facebook. There are whole websites devoted to that and, besides, everyone knows that Facebook is for Cat Videos and pictures of what you had for dinner last night and vaguely passive-aggressive status updates.

Sit down, and be quiet.

via NCRM

An Open Letter to Mike Huckabee: F**k You!

So, Mike, I heard you like The Gays? Well, shoot, don’t that make me feel just like Sally Field; you like me, right now, you really like me. In fact, I heard you make that statement on CNN this week — while promoting new ‘book’ — and, well, I am just pleased as pun — wait a second. Let’s take a minute to read exactly what it was that you said:

"People can be my friends who have lifestyles that are not necessarily my lifestyle. I don't shut people out of my circle or out of my life because they have a different point of view. I don't drink alcohol, but gosh -- a lot of my friends, maybe most of them, do. You know, I don't use profanity, but believe me, I've got a lot of friends who do. Some people really like classical music and ballet and opera -- it's not my cup of tea."

So, um, being gay is like drinking or swearing? Or classical music and opera? What? I thought those were things people chose to do — I mean, I choose to swear like a truck driver and I choose to have wine with dinner — but being gay is an actual orientation that people don’t choose, but are gifted with at birth, like having blue eyes or a certain skin color.

And when people seem to suggest, even in their backhanded, offhand, way, like you do, that being gay is a choice, or something, I want to ask when you chose to be straight. I mean, if I choose my orientation, then that would suggest that everyone does. So, how many homosexual experiences did you have, Mike, how many barn hayloft circle jerks did you enjoy, or endure, before choosing heterosexuality?

That’s what I thought. And Mike, while being gay is not a choice, it is also not a “lifestyle”; and if you need my help, let me give you a definition of lifestyle, m’kay, in case you’re, well, uninformed … which, like choosing to drink or swear at the opera, is a choice:

life·style

ˈlīfˌstīl/ noun

the way in which a person or group lives.

Hmm, the ‘way in which a person lives’? See, Mike, gay people don’t live a ‘certain’; way; we live every which way because we are all kinds of people; we are Black and White, Asian, Latino; we are tall and short and thin and fat; rich and poor; smart and not so much. So you cannot lump us into a lifestyle because we all don’t fit that same lifestyle, and I’ll kindly ask you to stop saying that; it’s so last century.

And also please stop saying marriage has always been one man and one woman and hasn’t changed since God opened up a drive-thru wedding chapel on the Vegas strip; marriage has gone from being a coupling created to build a stronger family, to create more power, as a land grab; marriage has gone from being an institution where the woman is “given” to the man as property; marriage has gone from, as it was during the time Jesus walked the Earth, from being a one man and his many wives institution; it’s gone from being an institution where you don’t marry outside your race or faith or socioeconomic status.

Marriage has changed, and it will change and it will evolve, and you can stomp you feet and talk about how it hasn’t, but you’re still standing in the past begging all of us to come back and live there with you, and we won’t.

We’re changing; we understand that people are different, and come in all different shapes and sizes and colors and orientations, and just because “it’s always been that way” is not a reason to not change and grow. So, Mike, as I said up there at the top, F**k you.

Stop playing that two-headed Christian monster who seeks to deny me any form of equality because I’m gay, and then saying that you have gay friends and you like gay people, because I’ve yet to hear a single gay friend of yours come out and support you in your ridiculous rhetoric. That’s the same as the white man in the 60s saying he likes Black people, while he’s slipping into that white sheet and the pointing hat to go burn a cross on someone’s lawn; it’s a lie, and a way to make you feel better about being a bigot, a homophobe, and a hater.

Oh sure, I know you’ll never change your mind on same-sex marriage, because you keep spouting the Bible verse upon Bible verse, conveniently ignoring the ones that tell you not to judge, or to love your neighbor; well, we are not a Biblical nation, Mike, no matter what you say, no matter what you want to believe. Like The Gays, Americans are all kinds of people, in all shapes and colors and orientations and, yes, religious beliefs, so you have no business using your personal faith in your political choices. We don’t work that way in America.

So, again, Mike, f**k you.

You make like The Gays; you may have a gay friend or two, but I, as a gay man, don’t like you. I don’t like cowards who hide behind a history book; I don’t like politicians who want to use the Bible, and not the constitution, to govern this country. I don't like people who say they have gay friends and then work overtime to deny them rights because they're gay.

I don’t like you. And that, Mike, is a choice.

quote via CNN

The Democrats Introduce LGBT Rights Bill In Both Houses

It was just a couple of weeks ago that President Obama once again made history in regards to the LGBT community when he became the first president to mention us, all of us, in a State Of The Union address:

“As Americans, we respect human dignity, even when we’re threatened, which is why I’ve prohibited torture, and worked to make sure our use of new technology like drones is properly constrained," the President told Congress. "It’s why we speak out against the deplorable anti-Semitism that has resurfaced in certain parts of the world.  It’s why we continue to reject offensive stereotypes of Muslims – the vast majority of whom share our commitment to peace.  That’s why we defend free speech, and advocate for political prisoners, and condemn the persecution of women, or religious minorities, or people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.  We do these things not only because they’re right, but because they make us safer."

And after this morning’s award of the ISBL Asshat of the Week to Congressman Chris Smith, who said LGBT rights are not human rights, it’s fitting that legislators in both houses of Congress have reintroduced the Human Rights Defense Act, a bill that was filed during the last congressional session, but never came to the floor for a vote.

Two Democrats—Congressman Alan Lowenthal [center above], of California, and Senator Ed Markey [right above], of Massachusetts—reintroduced the Human Rights Defense Act in their respective houses of congress. 

The Human Rights Defense Act would allow the State Department to react to discrimination and violence toward LGBT communities around the world. It would immediately create a special envoy within the State Department to respond to reports of violence toward LGBT communities globally, and would require the State Department to create a LGBT section in their annual country by country report on human rights. The bill also calls for congress to adopt a global strategy to address discrimination against the LGBT community.

While a bill proclaiming the universal rights of gay people might seem a hard sell to the Republicans in charge of both houses — especially since one of their own so easily dubs us as not ‘human’ and some, running for President, maybe, are very vocally anti-LGBT —  the Democrats have one incentive this year that they didn't have last summer. If congress does not act, most of the provisions in the Human Rights Defense Act are things President Obama could do on his own with an executive order.

Because he stands by us, and for us, and with us, as do most in the Democratic party, and I don’t see many, or any, Republicans willing to do the same.

via NCRM

WTF? Anna Faris

Anna Faris showed up on my less than thrilled radar in a kind of blah dress at the Golden Globes recently, but before I saw her there, I caught sight of this photo.

I don't know if it's the hair, or the boob shelf, or the peplum, or the too-long skirt or the wiggly hem, but she looks like a melting candle.

Seriously. WTF?

ISBL Asshat of the Week: Chris Smith

Chris Smith, the Republican Congressman from New Jersey, is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, so you’d think he’d have a heart, right? Or at least a mind.

But no; while speaking at a meeting of that subcommittee, which is a part of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, last week, he said that LGBT rights are not human rights:

"I am a strong believer in traditional marriage and I do not construe homosexual rights as human rights."

You know, because The Gays, and our LBT brothers and sisters are not human, I guess.

Smith made his remarks at a hearing he chaired on Nigeria on the very day that Nigerian law enforcement arrested twelve men who were accused of holding a same-sex wedding. Smith also suggested that the Obama administration’s "views on LGBT rights affected or hindered our support for Nigeria to defeat Boko Haram." 

It’s amazing that anyone, much less someone who should be representing all of the people of his state, would decide that LGBT rights are not human rights. He feeds into the frenzy that continues still that The Gays are less than, that we don’t count, that we don’t matter.

And as such, Chris Smith should apologize immediately, and resign from any committee that has the words ‘human rights’ in its title because he clearly has no ability to discern that we are all human, we are all different, and we all deserve the same respect from everyone, especially those in positions of service.

Of course, it comes as no surprise to learn that Reprehensive Smith received $10,000 in campaign donations from the anti-LGBT hate group, the Family Research Council during the 2014 election cycle. I guess when hate pays to get you elected, then hate is what you will create.

Chris Smith, the ISBL Asshat of the Week.
via NCRM

Sunday Funnies