Time Magazine Article: France Is Struggling With Gay Marriage Becoming Legal In 2013 Some Feel It Will Destroy French Civilization.
By Bruce Crumley Nov. 08, 2012
This week, the leftist government of French President François Hollande initiated draft legislation legalizing marriage and adoption for same-sex couples. But it’s a bill already generating stronger opposition than many expected in this famously progressive society. Indeed, while the bill unveiled on Nov. 7 aims to fulfill one of Hollande’s more popular campaign pledges, recent polls show support sagging for moves to extend gay couples the same rights enjoyed by heterosexual unions. Some reports claim even the President may be less than convinced about the necessity of reform.
The clamor against gay marriage in France flies in the face of a country famous for its supposedly open-minded attitudes on a host of social and behavioral issues. And ironically, that hesitation also comes just as American voters — whom many French consider pathologically puritanical — passed same-sex-union ballot initiatives in three states on Nov. 6. Contrasting with those progressive American election results are comments by French industrialist and conservative legislator Serge Dassault on the same day. Responding to Hollande’s same-sex-marriage reform, Dassault warned that its goal of giving gay and lesbian couples the same legal status as heterosexual unions meant the “end of the family, the end of child development … an enormous danger for the entire nation.”
(PHOTOS: A Visual History of the Gay-Rights Movement)
“Look at history — it’s one of the reasons for the decadence of Greece,” Dassault told France Culture radio in comments about legalizing same-gender marriage. “There will be no more reproduction, so what’s the point? Do we want a nation of gays? If so, in 10 years, there’ll be no one left. It’s stupid.”
Just who’s the prude now, chers français?
The French legislation, dubbed Marriage for All, was introduced on Nov. 7 at the weekly Cabinet meeting as the first stop in its journey toward parliamentary debate in January. Its stated objective is to “open marriage to couples of the same sex” and “consequentially also open the path to adoption for married people of the same sex”.
Extending same-gender couples the same legal recognition and rights as married heterosexuals was a major plank in Hollande’s campaign platform earlier this year. It was also one of the main social reforms on which he clashed with French conservatives, who repeatedly rejected the idea during their decade in power. Given the left’s parliamentary majorities, there’s little risk the politically and socially symbolic bill will fail to gain passage and become law by mid-2013.
“This is a step toward equality that took too long in coming and is moving toward reality,” said Women’s Rights Minister and government spokesperson Najat Vallaud-Belkacem during a weekly press briefing on Wednesday. “It doesn’t represent a victory of one category of people over others, but a victory for society as a whole.”
Not everyone in France sees it that way. In the run-up to the bill’s introduction on Wednesday, thousands of demonstrators joined protests across France denouncing the measure. A petition opposing the draft drew more than 1,000 signatures from mostly conservative mayors. Rightist politicians have challenged the bill with varying degrees of fury — Dassault representing the more bombastic extreme.
Jean-François Copé, leader of the right’s main Union for a Popular Movement party, called on Hollande to pull back what he called a badly prepared text creating change that France is not ready for. Christine Boutin — a former Cabinet member and Catholic fundamentalist — last month warned Parliament “the logic of this situation is if we have marriage [for everyone], we’ll move toward polygamy.” A fellow conservative official did Boutin one better, throwing incest into the mix of new deviant trends the legalization of same-sex marriage and adoption would spawn.
More dignified opposition has come from a rare interfaith protest bloc. Leaders of all major religions in France — Catholic, Muslim, Protestant and Jewish — have decried the measure for upending traditional definitions of marriage and family. During an address to French bishops on Nov. 3, Roman Catholic archbishop of Paris, André Vingt-Trois, also denounced the reform as “a sham” catering to a social minority, under which the definition of “marriage of a few [is] imposed on everyone.” He wasn’t alone in viewing the initiative as political pandering.
(MORE: International Gay Marriage)
“There will be neither courage nor glory in voting a law that relies more on slogans than arguments and conforming to dominant political correctness out of fear of scorn,” writes Gilles Bernheim, chief rabbi of France, in an open letter opposing the initiative.
That pushback would have materialized in any case, but it’s also being fueled by signs that French public support for the reform is waning. Though recent polls show a majority of people still supporting same-sex marriage and adoption rights, those levels appear to be dropping. A survey this month by Ifop for Le Monde shows support for legalization of same-sex marriage still at its historical high of 65%, but the level regarding adoption dropping to 52%. An annual poll published on Nov. 3 by BVA showed significant declines on both questions.
Now, according to one French news report on Thursday, even (the unmarried) Hollande is not that convinced the measure is as socially, ethically or legally important as it is politically significant.
Christiane Taubira, the French Justice Minister sponsoring the bill, dismissed any doubts about Hollande’s commitment to the bill, or the government’s determination to remedy long-standing injustices. “This is the audacity of equality,” Taubira told a press conference on Wednesday about the reform. “This is about respecting values of equality for everyone and acting in the best interests of children.”
It’s unlikely external opposition — and even some waffling among leftist politicians — will prevent the bill from becoming law. Yet its passage still won’t allow France to stake out any particularly lofty progressive high ground vis-à-vis European partners, or even some U.S. states. Twelve countries — including the U.K., Sweden and Denmark — have already enacted laws placing same-sex marriages on the same footing as heterosexual unions. On Wednesday, Spain’s Supreme Court struck down the final legal challenge to a law legalizing same-sex marriages and adoption.
Several other countries and U.S. states, meanwhile, allow gay and lesbian individuals and couples to adopt children — even in some places where same-sex marriage as such isn’t recognized. On Wednesday, voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington State cleared the way for legalization of same-sex marriage by passing state initiatives on the issue. In Minnesota, a proposal to alter the state constitution to prohibit recognizing same-sex couples as married was defeated.
Now, those and other U.S. states that have previously adopted equal or neutral positions on same-gender unions and parenting must wait to see if the famously live-and-let-live French will take the same steps as their less puritain American peers.
MORE: Marriage Victories Are (Slowly) Transforming the Notion of Family
Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/11/08/is-gay-marriage-too-progressive-for-the-french/#ixzz2BfwYwRki
German Interview Der Spiegel: Orlando Cruz Talks About His Struggles As A Gay Man In The Macho Sport Of Boxing.
SPIEGEL Interview with Orlando Cruz’Something Had to Change’
SPIEGEL: Mr. Cruz, is it important as a boxer to conform to the image of a tough man?
ANZEIGE
Cruz: Boxing is a sport that is largely dominated by machos, by men who think we have to conform to a very specific role model. The ideal boxer doesn’t think too much, is raw and brimming with strength. I am also fascinated by strength, but for me style is a part of that.
SPIEGEL: At the beginning of October, you announced that you were gay. Then two weeks ago in Florida, you climbed into the ring for the first time since you came out. How did your fans and your opponent react?
Cruz: I had the feeling that the spectators accepted me. They kept calling out my name, much louder than during my earlier fights. My opponent, the Mexican Jorge Pazos, had said beforehand that what I did outside the ring was none of his business. I think that is the right attitude.
SPIEGEL: Once, when Pazos missed you, you shrugged your shoulders. Another time, you beat your chest wildly with your fists.
Cruz: Those gestures were my way of saying: “This is my ring, my moment. No one is going to take this away from me.” My body language was also important because I wanted to prove to people that I am not a girl in the ring. I am a man in every sense of the word. That is how I want the spectators to see me.
SPIEGEL: So you do have to fulfill a few clichés about boxers?
Cruz: No, but being a bit macho is part of the game in the ring.
SPIEGEL: You have been a professional boxer for twelve years. Why did you come out at this particular point in time?
Cruz: I have earned myself respect as an athlete. I have only lost 2 out of 22 professional fights. I knocked out some of my opponents in the first round. But I never really received respect as a person. That’s something I had come to realize over the past few years. The end of my boxing career is no longer that far off, and it was time for me to make peace with myself. And there was a second reason for me to come out: I hoped it would make me a better boxer.
SPIEGEL: How do you mean?
Cruz: Until now, I have kept my personal life and my career strictly separate from each other. No one was supposed to know that I’m gay. This game of hide-and-seek was incredibly strenuous and it took a lot of energy out of me. Now I’m hoping that I can put that energy into my training.
SPIEGEL: Did you fall in love when you were a teenager?
Cruz: And how.
SPIEGEL: With a girl or a boy?
Cruz: With a girl, she was the great love of my youth. We split up when we were seventeen. She was the person who gave me my first kiss.
SPIEGEL: When did you realize that you were gay?
Cruz: I was 19 years old. I was boxing at the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. I met a man there. And when I got home, I sensed that something in me had changed.
SPIEGEL: How did you feel about that?
Cruz: Awful, I was in a very bad state.
SPIEGEL: Why?
Cruz: Because I wasn’t prepared for it. For a long time I didn’t want to accept that I was gay. Better said: I couldn’t accept it because I was too afraid. Homosexuals were discriminated against in Puerto Rico back then, sometimes even killed. I had a friend named José, but we called him Linoshka because he was a transvestite. He was stabbed to death in the street at the age of 19 by a homophobe because he had taken part in a gay-pride parade.
SPIEGEL: How did you handle it all?
Cruz: It was a painful path, but I was lucky in that my mother gave me her support. One year after the Olympics, I explained to my parents that I was gay. My mother told me she didn’t care, and that she loved me. After that, we both cried for joy.
SPIEGEL: And your father?
Cruz: That was more difficult. He was never as sympathetic as my mother. In the meantime, my parents have separated. During my fight two weeks ago, my mother was sitting right next to the ring; my father was up in the stands. But I was happy that he was there at all.
SPIEGEL: For 12 years, you tried to keep your homosexuality secret. How did you do that?
Cruz: I acted a part. I sensed the suspicion. When other guys talked about a woman’s backside, they’d pay close attention to see whether I joined in. So I played along: “Yeah, yeah, great ass.” But inside me there was only emptiness; that wasn’t me. Each time, I was denying my own self.
SPIEGEL: How did that feel?
Cruz: I had bad thoughts about myself because I wasn’t being true to myself. Inside there was emptiness, and it felt as though I was being weighed down by five tons.
SPIEGEL: Were there people in the boxing scene who knew the truth?
Cruz: That’s inevitable. Óscar de la Hoya, my former promoter, once asked me quite openly before a fight: “Orlando, tell me, are you going to tell people that you are gay?” There were other people standing around us too, boxers, managers. I was shocked and said: “No, I’m a man.”
SPIEGEL: Did people put you down?
Cruz: Four years ago, I was fighting for the world championship title in Puerto Rico. The spectators bad-mouthed me; they called me a faggot. They told my opponent to pluck my feathers. In Puerto Rico, when you talk disparagingly about a gay man, you call him a duck. That’s when I realized that something had to change.
SPIEGEL: That was the key moment for you?
Cruz: Exactly. In 2008, I moved from Puerto Rico to New Jersey. The distance did me good, also because I was able to prepare myself at leisure for my coming out.
SPIEGEL: How did you prepare yourself for it?
Cruz: First of all, I was forced recognize that I could not manage it alone. Three years ago, I went and got help from a psychologist, and we met every two weeks. He helped me to work out whether I really wanted to come out for my own sake, or whether I was being pushed into doing it. Only once it was clear to me that this was my most deep-seated wish was I was able to go through with it. Six months ago in New York, I met with the founder of an organization that fights for gay and lesbian rights. He helped me with the media relations work. He gave me tips for my press release, and we set up a Twitter profile especially for my coming out, which I now post to in English and Spanish.
SPIEGEL: Was your boxing team initiated into your plans?
Cruz: Of course. My promoter Tuto Zabala was very cautious at first. He asked all the important contacts whether anyone had problems with a gay boxer. He went to the television network Telemundo, which broadcasts all my fights in the US, and he talked to the boxing organisation WBO. They all indicated that my coming out was fine by them.
SPIEGEL: Were you nevertheless frightened?
Cruz: The preparations dispelled my fears, but I really was nervous and worried about what the reactions would be. I was prepared for a lot of nasty comments. But after I came out most people were happy for me. Professionals like world champion Miguel Cotto stood by me; he congratulated me. Ninety-five percent of the reactions were positive.
SPIEGEL: And the remaining five percent?
Cruz: The other day I was training at a boxing gym in Puerto Rico, and a group of boxers were standing next to me. They were talking about me and I could hear everything. One of them said to his pals: “Hey, we’d better not take a shower before going home today.” That’s totally ignorant. I’m a professional, an athlete. I go to the gym every day and I train hard. I don’t go there to watch anyone in the shower.
SPIEGEL: Did you confront them?
Cruz: No. In the old days that would have made me angry. But now that I’ve come out, everyone knows the truth. That’s like a protective shield against comments like that. Stupid remarks and jokes no longer hurt me, because I can stand by being gay. Nowadays I can even laugh at jokes about gays. Now I feel free, hungry and strong.
SPIEGEL: Have people outside the world of boxing also been in touch with you?
Cruz: Loads of them. There are messages from Venezuela, Poland and Australia in my mailbox. Even from Afghanistan. Many of the men who write to me have fallen in love with another man and don’t know how to explain this to their families. I can offer advice because I know what it’s like.
SPIEGEL: Do you know other professional athletes who are gay?
Cruz: If I did, I certainly wouldn’t mention their names. But there are definitely many more homosexuals in sports than we think.
SPIEGEL: News of your coming out spread incredibly quickly. Were you expecting that?
Cruz: Even though I tried to be prepared for everything, it was more than I could cope with. Suddenly I was sitting on US morning TV shows. Producers were asking me whether I would be interested in a reality show about myself. I received offers to take part in a TV celebrity dancing show. Even my mother was interviewed by journalists.
SPIEGEL: Why did your coming out attract so much attention?
Cruz: It’s not just because I’m a professional athlete. It is very unusual for someone from Latin American society to openly stand by his homosexuality. In my hometown, there are still lots of prejudices against gays. We are often not considered to be fully-fledged people. The family is sacred there; having children means more than anything else.
SPIEGEL: Englishman Justin Fashanu was the first and so far only professional football player to reveal that he was gay. After coming out in 1990, he constantly felt discriminated against, and later committed suicide.
Cruz: Of course, there are still some tough days ahead for me. But I have built myself such a strong network that I can be sure of always receiving support. Some 15 or 20 years ago it would not have been possible for me to come out. Back then, people still had such narrow views, but today many of them are more liberal. Being gay is no longer a taboo in many parts of society. That has affected sports, even boxing.
SPIEGEL: Since your victory against Jorge Pazos you have been considered a candidate to fight for the World Boxing Organization title. You could become the world champion.
Cruz: Yes. But I don’t want to be seen only as a boxer who is gay. I want to be a boxer who is professional, who pursues his goals and realizes his dreams. And my biggest dream is the world championship belt.
SPIEGEL: Did you have many female admirers before coming out?
Cruz: Oh yes, I got lots of offers. The girls would come around after my fights wanting to flirt. They’d say: “Hey, you’re so cute, come on Orlando.”
SPIEGEL: What did you answer?
Cruz: Well, what do you think? I said: “Sorry, not with me. That doesn’t work on me.” I think there are a few girls who will be sad after my coming out. I’m almost a bit sorry about that.
SPIEGEL: Your last opponent had no problem with your homosexuality. What will you do if your next adversary is less tolerant?
Cruz: Oh, you know, there will be people like that, I’m sure. Someone will come along who calls me a faggot or a fairy. I’ll say: “What? You call me a faggot? Okay, if you like. But you’d better watch out, because I’m the faggot who’s going to kick your ass.”
SPIEGEL: Mr. Cruz, thank you for this interview.
Interview conducted by Lucas Eberle.
Wonderful Article: Why Mitt Romney Lost: Winning Over The Angry White Male Was Not Enough
What Mitt Romney discovered in this election is something that should be taped on the wall of every white presidential hopeful for years to come: If you cater to angry white men as the foundation of your campaign, you will lose.
The reason can be explained with one word: Demographics. There simply are not enough white men left in America to win the big prize for a presidential candidate. In order to win the presidency, you must knit together a coalition of voters that look much more like the composition of the country than the voters who checked the square for Romney yesterday.
This past May, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that for the first time there were more babies of color born over the past year than white babies. This means that over the next couple of decades, black, Latino and Asian Americans could form a governing coalition that could essentially rule the country.
The depressing future for the Republican Party was neatly summarized by Republican analyst Steve Schmidt last night on MSNBC.
“This will be the last election a Republican can possibly win as a national candidate with these types of numbers,” he said, looking at the results coming in for Obama—but before Obama’s re-election was called. “This will lead to some important moments of soul searching for the Republican party if it is going to be a national party.”
But yet, despite Romney reaching desperately for the votes of white males, in the end he couldn’t even win their stronghold—the Midwestern Rust Belt. Obama beat Romney soundly in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania—together probably the last bastion of the angry white male (aside from the South, of course). Romney began substantially behind the 8-ball with that group after declaring four years ago that the auto industry should be allowed to go bankrupt. In an area of the country where millions of jobs are dependent on that same auto industry, it was an extremely difficult haul for Romney to overcome that statement—particularly after he incorrectly said in recent weeks that Chrysler would be sending Jeep jobs to China, which was an outright lie.
Frankly, if a white male candidate can’t win Michigan and Ohio, he’s not going to win the country.
But beyond Romney’s blunders with the Rust Belt blue collar, Romney was doomed by the numbers. Namely, the coalition of African Americans and Latinos that came together and handed him a monumental loss. It was not a given that Obama would get the Latino vote—after all, Republican George W. Bush got over 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004. But yesterday, Obama got well over 60 percent of the Latino vote—some estimates said as much as 75 percent. It was policy and politics that doomed Romney with Latinos—not just his vociferous attacks on undocumented immigrants during the Republican primary, but his position on issues like healthcare, reproductive rights and taxes.
Steve Schmidt on MSNBC broke down just how much the country has changed over the last 24 years. Romney got about 60 percent of the white vote yesterday, but it brought him only slightly more than 200 electoral votes. The last time a presidential candidate got 60 percent of the white vote was in 1988 with George H.W. Bush—and that number of whites brought him 426 electoral votes in a landslide win over Michael Dukakis. Schmidt called this transformation “stunning.”
The complexion of the country has changed so dramatically over 24 years that nailing down a sizable portion of whites gets you a sad concession speech on election night.
In a year when the unemployment rate hovered just under 8 percent, it was supposed to be conventional wisdom that the presidential incumbent would have a very difficult time holding onto his seat. Knowing this, Romney went after the unemployment number with a vengeance, repeating about a hundred times a day that 23 million Americans were still looking for work.
But it didn’t work.
In the end, Americans chose to hitch their fate once again to a man who they felt could much more closely empathize with their fate, who more easily understood their lives. While Romney tried to sell himself as a businessman who could put America back to work, Americans more likely saw in him the unfeeling boss who did not care how hard they were struggling. He wanted to be embraced as the smart technocrat, but instead came off as a distant multimillionaire.
The lesson is that when the economy is horrible and the nation is suffering, it’s probably more important for the public to feel like you understand and empathize with their plight than for you to throw out some dubious plans for transformation.
And maybe the final lesson was this: Telling the truth matters. Romney thought he could lie with impunity and get away with it. While there was no one to order him to the principal’s office or to threaten to wash his mouth out with soap, in the end Romney probably paid the ultimate price for his duplicity: A thorough and embarrassing defeat.
Days of our Lives gay storyline: Will & Sonny Have An Argument Because Lucas Is Upset His Son Is In A Gay Relationship.
Today on Days of our Lives, Will’s father Lucas attempts to break up his gay son Will’s relationship with his boyfriend Sonny. The writers have done a good job of exploring the struggle Lucas is having accepting the fact his adult son is a homosexual. Lucas tolerates the fact Will is gay, but he doesn’t accept his son’s homosexuality. Lucas is determined to break up Will and Sonny because be thinks if their relationship is over his son will no longer be sexually attracted to other men.
Unfortunately, Lucas succeeds in creating conflict for Sonny and Will by creating doubt in his son’s mind that Sonny is some kind of sexual predator.
I commend the Days of our Lives writers for having the courage to write a realistic gay romance and discuss the topic of gay sex. Often on television shows, gay characters are with disrespect they are cartoon stereotypes such as the flaming queen, or they are asexual, or they might kiss once or twice but they aren’t allowed to have passion as the straight characters.
For instance, on the television show Glee the gay relationship is extremely chaste and not sexual. The soap opera genre is all about love, sex, and relationships. Heterosexual characters on television are allowed to have love scenes, kiss passionately and declare their love for each other. On Days of our Lives a young gay male couple is given the same freedom to be passionate, to be sexual just like the heterosexuals.
Gay sex is still an incendiary topic, on the Days or our Lives Facebook page some heterosexual viewers are infuriated and upset about the gay storyline. In this storyline, the topic of Sonny’s sexual history is important because there is a mystery about Sonny. For a long times fans of the gay storyline have complained that Sonny does not have the character development necessary for the public to root for him.
Since August, Sonny’s personality is starting to emerge he is a nice sweet guy but he also has a temper. My interpretation of Friday’s episode is Sonny was hurt and upset that Will believed Lucas lies.
Since Will is immature and easily manipulated he believes Lucas when he tells him that Sonny is only using Will for sex. Will is eighteen and he’s never had sex with another man before. Lucas plants a seed into Will’s mind that Sonny is sleeping with tons of guys in Salem and that he is not interested in a romantic relationship with Will. Will runs over to Sonny’s apartment trying to prove his father wrong by attempting to have sex with Sonny. However, since Sonny already had an argument with Lucas earlier in the week he knows that Will’s father has gotten to him. Will demands to know about Sonny’s sexual history.
I think in this episode it illustrates the age difference between Sonny and Will. Sonny is twenty one years old, he owns his own business, and he’s mature. Will is still a teenager and he doesn’t think before he acts. Sonny lectures Will about being respectful to him and he’s angry and infuriated that he believes Lucas lies. In fact, Sonny tells Will their relationship “is a mistake.” Will is heartbroken, but I think Sonny did the right thing. Will needs to realize that his actions have consequences.
Gayblackcanada 