Still Witty After All These Years

It's a busy time for theatre critics. Last week it was Keegan Theatre's 1776. Last night it was Keegan's The Importance of Being Earnest (see below). Tonight it is Signature Theatre's U.S. premiere of The Witches of Eastwick. Sunday it will be the Shakespeare Theatre's Hamlet. Hardly time to breathe, much less compose a review -- especially considering the commute from Charlottesville to D.C. and back.

Here's one for today. Perhaps more to come over the next 72 hours.

The Importance of Being Earnest:
Still Witty After All These Years
Rick Sincere
Metro Herald Entertainment Editor

(ARLINGTON) --- The Importance of Being Earnest is one of those plays that, despite being produced frequently and upon multiple viewings, never grows stale.

The Internet Broadway Data Base (IBDB) lists eight known Broadway productions of Oscar Wilde’s comedy of manners between 1895 and 1977 (though none since). This does not include the Broadway production of Travesties, Tom Stoppard’s 1975 Tony-winning play that uses large portions of Earnest as a play-within-a-play. There have been nine film or TV versions (including one with an all-black cast, directed in 1992 by Kurt Baker), according to IMDB.

Benefiting from being in the public domain (like Shakespeare’s plays), The Importance of Being Earnest lends itself to being kneaded, rolled, snipped, rearranged, reset, recostumed, and even mauled (as in Joe Banno and Jeff Keenan’s hilarious but ultimately unsatisfying all-male version for Source Theatre Company in 2000, relocated to Washington and Rehoboth Beach). The most recent film took the play out of the drawing room and brought it into the wider social world of late-Victorian London and the English countryside, even including a hot-air balloon landing for a dramatic entrance.

Because the flexibility of Earnest lends itself to so much experimentation, it is refreshing to encounter a production that pares the play down to its essence, letting the words and characters shine through without frills.

This is what Keegan Theatre’s New Island Project has to offer at Arlington’s Theatre on the Run, an intimate black box that is perfectly suited for hearing Wilde’s epigrammatic dialogue delivered, generally, with aplomb.

Director Dorothy Neumann has reduced the set to a few wooden benches, a tea cart, a movable doorframe, and a piano (used to great effect). The costumes are full and reflective of late-19th century England, but not so elaborate as to inhibit the actors’ movement.

Neumann has a flair for pulling line readings from her actors that are just-so. With surprising turns of vocal modulation, she and her cast have transformed many of Wilde’s witticisms from the clichés they have become through a century of repetition into surprising and trenchant comments on life and society.

The two pairs of lovers – and by this I mean Mike Innocenti as Algernon and Christopher Dinolfo as Jack, and Suzanne Edgar as Cecily and Erin Buchanan as Gwendolyn – fit together delightfully. Unfortunately – or perhaps this is what Wilde intended – the male-male and female-female pairs have far more chemistry between themselves than the male-female pairs that are the ostensible stimulant for the plot. As an example of this chemical bonding, the set-piece in which Cecily and Gwendolyn share tea on the terrace in near silence evoked guffaws from the audience, even as the two of them did little beside refusing to look at each other.

Barbara Klein, as Lady Bracknell, ostentatiously enjoys one of the meatiest roles for women-of-a-certain-age in the theatrical literature. Wilde gives her the lion’s share of his best epigrams, and Klein revels in them without overdoing it. She says as much by raising an eyebrow as she does by bellowing “Prism!” in the revelatory third act unraveling of Wilde’s thickly-plotted (and nearly Dickensian), interwoven storylines.

Prism, played by Rosemary Regan, and the Reverend Chasuble, played by John F. Degen (returning to the stage after a two-decade absence, long overdue), suggest autumnal romance and affection that drifts dangerously close to lust, but without crossing that line. The tension that results from Prism’s prissiness and Chasuble’s self-effacing shyness is spot on.

One odd choice Neumann makes – perhaps out of necessity – is her casting of a woman as Lane and Merriman (respectively, Algernon’s and Jack’s manservants). Played as a female character (in full Victorian housemaid’s costume), Melissa Hmelnicky’s presence and responses as Lane to Algernon’s commentary on marriage and courtship lends an edgy, if not awkward, aspect to the dialogue, and one that is not entirely believable in the context of the play and its times. (The problem is not so evident in the scenes with Merriman, whose presence is more utilitarian.)

My only quibble with this show is that there were a few moments in the play where the actors stumbled over Wilde’s lines, which require a precise delivery. For the most part, these stumbles were minor and probably unnoticed by the majority of the audience. Perhaps this was due to the actors having had a few days off between the opening weekend and the performance we saw.

Still, as I say, this is a small quibble and should not discourage anyone from heading to Theatre on the Run to enjoy the delights of The Importance of Being Earnest.

The Importance of Being Earnest, by Oscar Wilde, continues through July 7 at Theatre on the Run, 3700 S. Four Mile Run Drive, Arlington. Performances Thursday-Saturday at 8:00 p.m.; Saturday matinees at 2:00 p.m. Tickets $20 general admission, $15 students and seniors. Special group rates for groups of ten or more. To reserve: telephone 703-892-0202 or email newisland@keegantheatre.com.

The Outing of Tyler Whitney

"Politics ain't beanbag," as the saying goes. The rough-and-tumble aspects of politics are not unknown -- just ask future former Virginia state Senators Marty Williams and Benjamin Lambert. Or remember that, a year ago, nobody knew what "macaca" means.

The din and discord of political life may, in fact, be a major attraction for those of us who become involved in it. So we know what to expect.

Denizens of the blogosphere know, however, that sometimes people cross the line from assertive to meanspirited. Even in Virginia, there are some bloggers who use words like "pervert" when they refer to their gay neighbors. And the list of examples, on line and off, of those who call conservatives "fascists" is too long to repeat.

That said, in most cases the targets of abuse are seasoned veterans who can endure it. They have been through college and law school, have settled into a job, put a few campaigns under their belts, learned a bit about equanimity and how to handle passionate moments -- in other words, matured.

All this comes by way of prefacing my anger about an episode in Michigan that came to light on Wednesday, and in turn lit up the blogosphere -- particularly the left blogohemisphere.

A few weeks ago a conservative blogger named Joe Sylvester mentioned in passing, in a short item about the summer whereabouts of young Michigan conservatives, that

Tyler Whitney is also working in DC on a Presidential campaign. The brash young paleo-libertarian will be spending his weekend with gay conservatives and libertarians in Dupont Circle for the City's Gay Pride Festivities. Tyler is said to have relocated to DC permanently.

It is not clear from the context -- and I do not know enough about Sylvester to ascribe motives to him -- whether this was an innocent remark about something he thought was common knowledge or whether it was a deliberate attempt to force Tyler Whitney out of the closet.

Whatever the case, that little item was picked up by a Michigan gay newspaper, Between the Lines, and published on its web site.

An article by Todd A. Heywood begins:

An 18-year-old leader of Young Americans for Freedom and a conservative campaign operative is coming out of the closet.

Tyler Whitney, the immediate past chair of Western Michigan University YAF, the chair of the Michigan Teenage Republicans, or TARs, and the current webmaster for the Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) for President website, has been telling other conservative activists for about a month of his coming out journey.

"Yes I am aware of that," said Joanna Varnavas when asked if she knew Whitney was coming out of the closet. "He told me about a month ago."

She said he confirmed it again last week in a text message exchange.

Varnavas was the spokesperson for Michigan State University Young Americans for Freedom until November, 2006 when she resigned because of the hate-speech of the group. The Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project later listed the group as a hate group.

Other conservatives have confirmed Whitney has told them he is gay, but would not go on the record.

One thing you have to give credit to Heywood for -- at least he, unlike Sylvester, multiple-sourced his report.

So far there is not much to be concerned about. The problem came when gay bloggers like Michelangelo Signorile and Dan Savage wrote about Mr. Whitney, eliciting vitriol from their readers like nothing seen since Stalin fumed about Trotsky.

The way these bloggers had it, Tyler Whitney is the second coming of Joe McCarthy, Sheriff Clarke, and Jesse Helms rolled into one. Signorile, in particular, engages in character assassination based on guilt-by-association. Calling this 18-year-old, low-level campaign worker a "high profile" staffer who is a "rising star" in the Republican party, the man who turned outing into an art form wrote:

Whitney was handpicked to run a YAF chapter at Western Michigan University by the leader of the MSU chapter, Kyle Bristow. Bristow, who has championed "Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day" and appeared on The O'Reilly Factor, has said that “homosexuality kills people almost to a degree worse than cigarettes… these [pro-gay rights groups] are complicit with murder.” (Michigan Republicans actually defended him after this, something Democrats criticized them for.) Bristow calls gays "deviants" and says he's "against the notion that deviants deserve extra rights." According to Between the Lines, "Bristow has opined that if he had a gay son he would kill him, and that homosexuals should be in prison."

Advice columnist Dan Savage, meanwhile, suggests that hypocrisy of higher ups is reason enough to breach the privacy of underlings:

Bay Buchanan, Senior Advisor to Tancredo, says Whitney’s “sexual preference is a personal matter,” and that it should have “nothing to do with the campaign.”

Sorry, Bay, but gay-bashing conservative thugs—people like you, your horrible brother, your vile candidate—can’t have it both ways on the gay issue. If Whitney’s sexual preference is a personal matter, if Whitney’s sexual preference shouldn’t have anything to do with the campaign, then neither should mine—or the sexual preferences of any other Americans. Until your candidate lays off the gay bashing, until the GOP stops attacking the rights and humanity of gay and lesbian Americans, then Tyler Whitney’s sexual orientation—it’s not a preference, Bay, and you know it—is fit for public debate.

The comments from Savage's readers, however, are truly vile. Some examples:

I don't have any sympathy for Tyler Whitney. We've all got mistakes in our past, but seriously: What. An. Asshole.

* * *

Out the bastard. The little sh*t should be dragged kicking and squealing from his padded red closet. Junior can hate himself all he wants, but once he starts spraying his execrate all over normal people, it's open season. Actions have consequences.

* * *

There's a sadistic, hateful streak at the core of the Republican Party, and this junior Karl Rove needs to be taken down a notch.

* * *

Whether or not he is too ignorant to understand, he is being used to perpetuate hate. He needs to learn the hard way that what he is doing is far, far beyond unacceptable.

No sympathy for tools of hate. If he needs to learn, then let us and the rest of the world teach him.

I am appalled by the cruel comments made here and elsewhere. (And I just gave the most family-friendly sample I could ooze out of the mud on Savage's blog.)

You would think that none of these people had never gone through the anxious, raucous, frightening, unpredictable process of coming out. Their comments suggest that a kid fresh out of high school has as much maturity in his political/philosophical/social views as a 30-year-old law-school graduate.

Granted, Tancredo would not be my choice to support (today or when I was 18), but the offer of a job on a presidential campaign at that age has to be enticing. Talk about a resume-builder.

But that's only the most cynical view of why he might have taken this job. Has anyone thought about the possibility that a job in Washington was Tyler Whitney's ticket to liberation? It took him away from a hostile environment (if what Between the Lines describes about YAF chapters in Michigan is true) and offered him a chance to go to a big city with an active, welcoming gay community that includes conservatives as well as liberals, libertarians as well as socialists.

A Tancredo campaign is not likely to last very long, is it? But to use it as a stepping-stone to another job in a cosmopolitan area, rather than remain behind in a more stultifying environment -- that is a clever move. (And who knows? Maybe Tyler was following not just his political bliss, but his romantic dreams too. Could there be a boyfriend attending Georgetown or George Mason to whom he wanted to be nearer?)

It wasn't that long ago that most of us -- liberal and conservative alike -- were facing the daunting prospect of inching out of the closet. As for myself, it took many years. A few friends knew about me when I started college, but the rest of the world -- including my family -- was not told until I ran for the Virginia House of Delegates in 1991. I was 32 years old before most people knew I was gay.

Luckily for me, in that time of my life when I was working at conservative think tanks, there was no Michelangelo Signorile or John Aravosis to force my closet door open before I was ready. The consequences of that would have been very grave for me; I know that for others they could potentially be deadly.

Have any of these gloaters thought about the personal consequences for Tyler Whitney, the consequences that any one of us might have faced had we come out to the wrong person or at the wrong time? How will it affect his relationship with his parents, his grandparents -- or even, perhaps, with his boyfriend (if he has one)? Could he be disowned, disinherited, sent to an ex-gay treatment facility where he would be scarred by psychotherapeutic quacks?

People like Tyler Whitney need sympathy and support, not opprobrium. I'm tempted to say he should be given a chance to grow up -- since his detractors have obviously not taken the time to do so.

P.S.: What's with this left-wing obsession with Young Americans for Freedom chapters in Michigan and Tyler's connection to them? Anyone who understands the conservative movement knows that YAF is a spent force, and has been for years. It has none of the influence that it once had in the 1960s. The infamous St. Louis convention took care of that, and YAF has since been superseded by several other groups. So Tyler Whitney's critics are not just cruel, they are ignorant and uninformed.

Update, 8:48 a.m.: Thanks to Matt Comer, a North Carolina advocate for LGBT youth (and himself just 21 years old), for linking to this post and for offering his own sensitive, sympathetic analysis of the Tyler Whitney situation.

Further update, 8:55 a.m., June 15: GayPatriotWest was unaware of this news item until I brought it to his attention. He has posted his views on Tyler Whitney's outing, with an active conversation among his readers in the comments section.


Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter!

Bob Barr on DADT

Last week at the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire, several of the candidates (including Dr. Ron Paul) were asked their opinions on the military's policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which effectively prohibits openly gay or lesbian Americans from serving their country in uniform.

All ten of the candidates indicated their general support for the policy, though some were more vocal than others.

Now former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr, a Republican best known for his authorship of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex relationships (even legal marriages in states like Massachusetts or civil unions in states like Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont), has come out swinging against DADT.

In an article titled "Don't Ask, Who Cares" in today's Wall Street Journal (available on line -- unfortunately, only to subscribers), Barr says:

As a conservative Republican member of Congress from 1995 to 2003, I was hardly a card-carrying member of the gay-rights lobby. I opposed then, and continue to oppose, same-sex marriage, or the designation of gays as a constitutionally protected minority class. Service in the armed forces is another matter. The bottom line here is that, with nearly a decade and a half of the hybrid "don't ask, don't tell" policy to guide us, I have become deeply impressed with the growing weight of credible military opinion which concludes that allowing gays to serve openly in the military does not pose insurmountable problems for the good order and discipline of the services.

Congressman Barr emphasizes the conservative nature of his opinion:

The fact is, equal treatment of gay and lesbian service members is about as conservative a position as one cares to articulate.

Why? First, true conservative political philosophy respects the principles of individual freedom and personal privacy, particularly when it comes to what people do in private. The invasive investigations required to discharge a service member are an unconscionable intrusion into the private lives of American citizens. Worse, while supporters of don't ask, don't tell claim the policy only regulates behavior and not identity, the distinction is disingenuous. A service member could be discharged for being overheard remarking that, "I can stay later today since my partner will be taking the dog for a walk."

Second, and on a more practical level, the ban on gays openly serving in our armed forces is hurting a military that is stretched thin, putting further strain on an institution conservatives claim to love. The U.S. has fired over 11,000 people under the current policy, and in the process has lost over 1,000 service members with "mission-critical skills," including 58 Arabic linguists.

Later in the article, Barr points to a study led by former Secretary of Defense William Cohen (also a former Republican Senator) that concluded that DADT has cost American taxpayers upwards of $360 million.

Bob Barr's piece is quite persuasive, yet it fails to mention that the armed forces of America's allies -- including Israel and Great Britain -- have integrated their ranks with openly gay and lesbian soldiers and sailors without an adverse effect on performance or morale. He does note that the majority of returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan say they would be comfortable serving with openly gay comrades -- no doubt because most of them have already done so, despite the failed Clinton-era policy.

One has to wonder why Bob Barr is not among the field of hopefuls seeking the GOP presidential nomination. A man of his intellect and perspicacity deserves a chance at higher office.

More Carnivals

I found a couple of additions to my recent post about blog carnivals.

The Adult Online Dating Carnival -- hard to believe there is such a thing, isn't it? -- has just three entries in its June 12 edition, including my piece on eHarmony.com. The others are these:

pointlessbanter presents Avoiding the MySpace Mistake: A Reply to A Business Week Article posted at Buzz Networker, saying, “How to use MySpace to successfully market yourself or your business.”

pointlessbanter presents The Bachelorette: Prison Style at pointlessbanter.net posted at Seventee Magazine Questions Answered, saying, “Kevin tries to use a prison online dating site to land a girl.”

Principled Discovery once again hosts the Carnival of Principled Government (number 7 in the series). To my surprise -- since I had submitted nothing to this edition of the carnival -- my post on the visit Tim Hulsey and I made to Jamestown last week was listed first as an "editor's choice." followed by two other entries with history themes:

The following submissions were submitted by the blog owners except the two marked (EC) for editor's choice. These actually were emailed to me, however, although not specifically for inclusion in the carnival. . . .

Established in 1607, Jamestown was America's first permanent English colony. Thus, we are celebrating our quadricentennial this year as, in a way, America celebrates her 400th birthday. Rick Sincere had the opportunity to visit Jamestown recently, and shares his thoughts and an interview (EC). If only we had learned our lesson about communal property back then...

Rethink takes a close look at the Gettysburg Address. We all know at least its opening lines. If only we all took the time to really reflect on what it means...

Also taking a look into the past, Why Homeschooling reflects on some of our founders during a trip to Virginia. If only we had the same vision for our country as they had (minus the dirty politics!)...

More carnivals next week. Stay tuned.

Charlottesville Ballot Now Complete

It was partly a nail biter, with two candidates turning in the last of their paperwork just minutes before the deadline at 7:00 p.m., but when all the petition signatures had been checked and all the notary seals had been stamped, a total of 15 local candidates qualified to be on the ballot in the City of Charlottesville this November.

The five candidates for City Council had been known previously, three Democrats (nominated by convention) and two independents:

David Brown
Holly Edwards
Satyendra Huja

Barbara Haskins
Peter Kleeman

Voters will be asked to select three candidates to serve on City Council from among these five.

For the city's second School Board election, there are four seats to be filled and seven candidates:

Colette Blount
Grant Brownrigg
Llezelle Dugger
Alvin Edwards
Kathleen Galvin
Sean McCord
Lynette Meynig

All except Edwards are first-time candidates.

And in the city's first-ever election for the post of Soil and Water Conservation District Director, there are three candidates for two seats:

Richard Collins
John Conover
John Pfaltz

In that race, Collins and Conover are the incumbents, having previously been appointed by City Council (as was Alvin Edwards on the Charlottesville School Board). Pfaltz was previously a candidate for City Council in 2000.

Also on the ballot will be two unopposed candidates for the Virginia General Assembly, incumbent Delegate David Toscano and state Senator Creigh Deeds.

Joe Bishop, RIP

It is primary election day in Virginia, a perfect occasion for remembering longtime Republican activist Joe Bishop.

On Saturday morning, former Charlottesville City Councilor Rob Schilling called to give me the sad news that Joe Bishop, secretary of the city's GOP committee, had passed away. Last night at the Albemarle County-Charlottesville Republican Flag Day picnic, there was a public announcement by Keith Drake of Joe's passing.

Charlottesville voters will know Joe as the stalwart precinct chief at Venable School, standing out in the parking area on every election day, passing out literature in support of Republican candidates or for or against ballot measures. Rain or shine, hot or cold, Joe was there at Venable.

Joe Bishop was a veritable walking encyclopedia of knowledge about local and state politics in Virginia. Were one to ask him a question like, "Who was the Republican gubernatorial candidate in 1947?," he would respond with "There was no election for governor that year, but two years later there were these candidates trying for the nomination ..." beginning a disquisition on the state of politics in that year, describing all the players, their strengths and weaknesses, and their ties to other political figures, inevitably relating his story to something relevant to the present day.

In his breadth and depth of local political knowledge, Joe was matched only by Charlottesville journalists Bob Gibson (of the Daily Progress) and Chris Callahan (of WINA-AM) -- or perhaps by his college classmate, the pundits' favorite professor, Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia.

Joe Bishop graduated from the University of Virginia in 1974 and was a lifelong member of the Jefferson Literary and Debating Society. In fact, it was Joe's absence from the Jefferson Society's reception during the UVa Reunions Weekend earlier this month that caused some concern about his health and whereabouts, which eventually led to the discovery that he had died.

Joe was equally comfortable in conservative and libertarian circles. Unless there was a conflicting Republican event, Joe would invariably be found in the audience of lectures or social occasions sponsored by one of UVa's libertarian organizations, such as Students for Individual Liberty or the Classical Liberal Roundtable. Like Ronald Reagan, Joe recognized that libertarianism was the core of conservatism, and he quietly worked within the Republican party to promote libertarian ideas. Still, he retained a sense of pragmatism about intraparty disputes and how best to serve those ideas through electoral victories and legislation that could actually make it through the General Assembly.

As secretary of the Charlottesville Republican Committee, Joe also served as parliamentarian, and his mastery of parliamentary procedure was legendary. He was often called upon at state or congressional district conventions to lend his opinion to a question regarding Robert's Rules of Order or the official RPV (Republican Party of Virginia) plan.

For all these reasons, Joe Bishop will be missed by Virginia political activists of all parties.

Arrangements for a funeral or memorial service are pending.

Update, August 29: A non-denominational memorial service will be held for Joe Bishop on Sunday, September 2, 2007, from 3:00 to 4:00 P.M. at Jefferson Hall (The Range, University of Virginia).

Speakers will include former Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia James Gilmore and the former First Lady of the Commonwealth Roxane Gilmore. The University Pep Band will also play some of Joe's favorite songs.

A reception will immediately follow in Jefferson Hall; no RSVP necessary.

Recent Carnivals

The latest Catholic Carnival, hosted by Living Catholicism, notes my post on "Jesus, the Pope, and a Rabbi," perhaps unintentionally (in light of my "choirboy" status at St. Thomas Aquinas) juxtaposed with a mention of a piece on church music:

We all love music. And A Catholic Life gives us more with Music for the Catholic Soul. It is a list of websites that have Catholic music, especially Gregorian Chant. Other suggestions are welcome.

An old joke gets revived – in a different way – on Rick Sincere News and Thoughts with Jesus, the Pope, and a Rabbi. It looks at Pope Benedict XVI’s recent book and his discussion of another book written by a rabbi.

This carnival points to a lot of interesting posts from around the Catholic blogosphere; I recommend it. (The next Catholic Carnival his scheduled to be hosted by Deo Omnis Gloria.)

On a lighter note, Free Graduation Cards is hosting a new carnival about -- naturally -- "Celebrating Graduations." (It was actually posted on June 4.) It mentions my video-enhanced memories of my graduation from Marquette University High School:

The theme for this carnival is "Looking Back and Stepping Forward". I really have to thank Rick Sincere who posted about May 22, 1977, which he wrote is "A reminiscence of my own high school graduation 30 years ago ..." A big thanks also goes to Ted Reimers who gives us CampusGrotto - Advice for Freshman Year saying "Here is some advice for high school graduates going on to college."

By the way, there is already a subsequent edition of the Celebrating Graduations carnival, published on June 7.

eDisharmony?

News from (where else?) California notes that a lesbian, fresh from the break up of her long-standing relationship, has sued the matchmaking company eHarmony.com because it did not allow her to seek another woman as a partner through its services.

The AP reports:

Linda Carlson said she tried to use the Internet site in February to meet a woman but could not based on her sexual orientation. When Carlson wrote to eHarmony to complain, the company refused to change its policy, according to the lawsuit filed on her behalf in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The lawsuit claims that by only offering to find a compatible match for men seeking women or women seeking men, the company was violating state law barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

"Such outright discrimination is hurtful and disappointing for a business open to the public in this day and age," Carlson said in a statement.

For its part, eHarmony gives a perfectly reasonable explanation for why it is unable to serve gay or lesbian clientele: It is simply not set up for it:

"The research that eHarmony has developed, through years of research, to match couples has been based on traits and personality patterns of successful heterosexual marriages," a company statement said. "Nothing precludes us from providing same-sex matching in the future, it's just not a service we offer now based upon the research we have conducted."

In a way, Carlson's suit is parallel to a vegetarian suing a butcher shop for not selling tofu. Or an airline for not offering ocean cruises.

More than that, though, Carlson is excruciatingly shortsighted. If she prevails in her suit -- and, given that she filed the suit within the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals geographic reach, she may well do so -- then gay-oriented dating and matchmaking services (like gay.com or myPartnerPerfect.com) will have to accept straight clients on an equal basis with gay clients. That will dilute their purpose and make them less safe and inviting for the very people they are intended to serve.

As legal analyst Walter Olson (who presides at Overlawyered.com) told San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders:

Olson noted that Carlson has "a much better chance with existing dating services." But she is suing, Olson noted, because diversity and tolerance have come to mean, "It's not just that you get the choices you want, but also choices you don't approve of have to be taken away."

And: "Diversity in theory is the enemy of diversity in practice."

This case also has parallels to the Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale. In the arguments leading up to that ruling, Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty contributed an amicus curiae brief that said, in part:

Gay organizations often seek exclusively gay environments. There are exclusively gay social and activity clubs, web sites, retreats, vacations, and alumni and professional organizations. Lesbian organizations and institutions, in particular, often seek to limit membership and participation. Many lesbian bars and clubs bar all men, straight men, or unaccompanied men, and many women's music festivals exclude men. Sometimes organizations have no explicit policy excluding straight people, but their names indicate that they are meant to be gay organizations, e.g. Federal Gay Lesbian or Bisexual Employees. Finally, while many organizations do not insist on an exclusively gay membership, there would be resistance to leadership by heterosexuals. For instance, gay people certainly would not wish to force a group like Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays to accept as a leader someone who was also active in Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays, a group that counsels that gay people should try to become heterosexual.

Such threats are far from theoretical; at least one anti-gay group has already sued a gay parade for the right to participate and protest... For gay organizations that wish to keep consistent the ideological perspective of their leaders, and for lesbians and gay men who want to preserve spaces that are exclusively lesbian or gay, a decision in favor of the Boy Scouts will protect their ability to maintain and control their expressive associations. (pages 24-25; numerous footnotes omitted)

At bottom, one has to wonder why Linda Carlson would seek to find a partner through an organization that admittedly was ill-prepared to provide the best service for her. Wouldn't it make more sense for her to take advantage of one of the numerous web sites or social clubs that cater specifically to lesbians?

Twenty or thirty years ago, when there were limited possibilities for gay men and lesbians seeking social or romantic connections -- that is, before there was an Internet -- Carlson's disappointment at being turned down by eHarmony, and her subsequent reaction, might have made some sense. In today's world of virtually limitless possibilities, her litigiousness raises genuine questions of motive. One doesn't have to be a cynic to see that.

Update: Thanks to GayPatriot and Overlawyered.com for linking to this post!

The Rudy-Ron Debate Challenge

Longtime conservative activist and direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie -- whose first job in politics was under the tutelage of Marvin Liebman, the father of conservative grass-roots organizing through direct mail communications -- has issued a challenge for a series of Lincoln-Douglas-style debates between presidential candidates Rudolph Giuliani and Ron Paul.

In his press release on the topic, Viguerie says:

Are you fed up with politics-as-usual, including poll-driven sound bites crafted behind closed doors by for-hire political marketing professionals?

These do not add up to any understanding of the issues at stake. The American people deserve better. We are not buying a bar of soap. We want real debates on issues of importance.

Let's start NOW by challenging Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul to a one-on-one debate on American foreign policy and the Iraq war. These are crucial issues that deserve in-depth discussion.

It is obvious from the Republican presidential debates held so far that these two candidates have strong feelings but divergent opinions about these vital issues. Both of them are knowledgeable and articulate on the subject.

They have the capability to recreate the famed Lincoln-Douglas debates on the foremost issue of our day. Let's do it!

Viguerie points his readers to another web site, www.aRealDebate.com, where they can sign a petition calling on both candidates to participate in a series of one-on-one debates on foreign policy.

While cynics might say that this is merely a means by which Viguerie's company collects names and addresses for future fundraising efforts, the fact that he identifies the philosophical divide between Giuliani and Paul as a definitive key to the future of the conservative movement is telling.

Ronald Reagan once told Reason magazine that libertarianism is at the core of conservatism:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Will it remain so into the 21st century? Or are "conservatives" going to reject their Goldwater-Reagan roots and define themselves as something other than libertarian at their core?

A debate (or debates) between Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani may go a long way toward finding the answer to this question.

Confounding Einstein

What can possibly be the explanation for how socialite Paris Hilton has stretched out her Warhol-allotted 15 minutes of fame far beyond six years?

There is only one: Somehow this bubble-headed blonde has learned how to warp space and time in a way that confounds Einsteinian physics.

Instead of being confined to the Los Angeles County jail (or house arrest), she should be placed under observation in a Cal Tech physics laboratory.

Community Theatre - Part Two

In part one of this series, I posted a video from a 1977 production of The Music Man at St. Bernard's Studio Theater in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin.

After I did that, I discovered some still photographs from the show. These were apparently taken during a dress rehearsal. Most are from on stage; some are from backstage.

I would ask anyone who recognizes himself or herself to please note it in the comments section. Tell us who you are and which picture you can be seen in.

Ron and Tucker, Ron and Jon

Doug Mataconis at Below the Beltway has posted the video of Dr. Ron Paul's appearance this afternoon on Tucker Carlson's show on MSNBC. At the end of the interview, Carlson said this to his guest, in a serious tone:

Amen. I hope you can come on regularly just for a tutorial on what it means to be free, Dr. Paul. I really appreciate your coming on; it was a great explanation.

Doug has also posted the video of Congressman Paul's guest spot on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, which aired on Comedy Central on Monday, the night before the New Hampshire presidential debate.

During the interview, Stewart said:

Congressman Ron Paul: You appear to have consistent, principled integrity. Americans don't usually go for that. You seem to practice what you preach, you seem to preach it consistently. Even though people might disagree with the message, they certainly can't argue that you're [not] a man of consistent principle.

To which Representative Paul replied:

I'd like to think that I've introduced a brand new idea into this campaign. I've even suggested that we follow the Constitution.

The audience applauded that remark enthusiastically.

Dr. Paul's performance on The Daily Show was superb. He clearly understood both his interlocutor and his audience -- remarking, for instance, that there's nothing wrong with people making a lot of money (referencing Bill Gates), "even in entertainment."

For his part, when Stewart offered a formulaic wish for success at the end of the interview, he added the not-so-formulaic "continue to bring excitement to the process, because I think that's what's lacking sometimes and it's nice to see guys just throwing their ideas out there for whatever it is, and being principled."

The Jon Stewart interview with Ron Paul is also on YouTube; Tucker Carlson's interview with him can also be found there.

Size Matters ... Or Does It?

LiveScience has a report on recent research about how men and women think differently about penis size (both length and girth). It begins:

When it comes to penises, length matters more to men than to women, according to a new study that reviews more than 60 years of research and debunks numerous sex myths.

About 90 percent of women actually prefer a wide penis to a long one, according to two studies included in the review. Eighty-five percent of women reported being satisfied with their partner’s penis size, compared to only 55 percent for men.

It's not clear from the article, but I would assume the men surveyed were gay. (Straight men would have little concern for the size of their partners' penises, after all.)

Addressing a question for which many people have long sought an answer (judging by Google search terms that bring them here), the article continues:

Drawing upon the results of 12 relevant studies, the review, detailed in the British Journal of Urology (BJU) International, finds that the average erect penis is about 5.5 to 6.2 inches long and about 4.7 to 5.1 inches in circumference.

The German magazine, Der Spiegel, in commenting on the findings, concludes with this note:

Most dissatisfied men would probably be interested in an article that got the US's renowned Mayo Clinic an enviable ranking near the top of the list of Google hits for the search term "penis enlargement." According to the article, "If you are like the vast majority of men who wonder if their penis size is normal, the answer is -- yes."

Despite this reassurance, did you know that there is a psychological condition known as "small penis syndrome"? Neither did I, but it apparently has roots in early childhood:

One surprising finding was that small penis syndrome (SPS), also known as the “locker room syndrome,” is much more common in men with normal sized penises than those who have so-called micropenises (penises with a flaccid length of less than 2.7 inches). An internet survey of more than 52,000 heterosexual men found that 12 percent thought their penises were too small, even though micropenis is estimated to affect only about 0.6 percent of men.

One study suggests SPS often begin at an early age. Sixty-three percent of men with the disorder said their anxieties started with childhood comparisons, often to an elder sibling or their fathers, while 37 percent blamed erotic images viewed during their teenage years.

As Dave Barry might suggest, wouldn't "Micropenis" be a great name for a rock band?

And in the category of "Ewwwww!," the researchers add this cross-cultural finding:

The doctors point out some ancient tried and true methods for penis enlargement, but these aren’t any more comfortable. Indian Sadhus men, for example, use weights to increase their penis length, while the Topamina of Brazil encourage poisonous snakes to bite their penises to get a size boost that lasts six months.

This topic may have minimal mainstream interest, but I guarantee it will drive traffic to this blog far out of proportion to its importance. (Hey, if it leads people to the Mayo Clinic, why not here, too?)

Sort of like penis size.

Don't forget to check out quirky gifts and other items for sale at my CafePress shop!

Ron Paul on DADT

Last night, during the Republican presidential debate at St. Anselm's College in New Hampshire, the candidates were asked what they thought about the current, Clinton-era policy of excluding openly gay and lesbian people from the U.S. military, the policy known as "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (a phrase that has gained wide currency in this and other contexts) or "DADT."

While I think his direct response to the question was wrong -- if, as it appears, he means that he agrees with the current policy that excludes people on the basis of identity rather than behavior -- Congressman Ron Paul's explanation about the difference between group rights and individual rights deserves wide readership.

Here is an excerpt from the transcript of the debate as published by today's New York Times. The question was posed by Scott Spradling of WMUR-TV in Manchester:

MR. SPRADLING: Congressman Paul, a question for you.

Most of our closest allies, including Great Britain and Israel, allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military. Is it time to end “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the U.S. military?

REP. PAUL: I think the current policy is a decent policy. And the problem that we have with dealing with this subject is we see people as groups, as they belong to certain groups and that they derive their rights as belonging to groups. We don’t get our rights because we’re gays or women or minorities. We get our rights from our creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated the same way.

So if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there’s heterosexual sexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. So it isn’t the issue of homosexuality, it’s the concept and the understanding of individual rights. If we understood that, we would not be dealing with this very important problem.

The point he is making is twofold:

First, human rights inhere in us as individuals, not by dint of our membership in certain groups.

Second, the policy is only legitimate insofar as it addresses behavior that is disruptive. Gay identity is not, in itself, disruptive.

The ten Republican candidates' general refusal to oppose DADT is at odds with public opinion. As USA Today reported in February:

Polls indicate growing acceptance of gay troops. A Harris Poll this month found that 55% supported allowing gays to serve openly, up from 48% in 2000.

A Pew Research Center survey last year found that 60% favored gays serving openly, up from 52% in 1994. Support ran 3-to-1 among those younger than 30. In contrast, Pew found that 39% favored same-sex marriage.

Moreover, the policy undermines military effectiveness. That same USA Today article, written by Andrea Stone, noted

A Government Accountability Office report in February 2005 found that at least 800 dismissed gay servicemembers had skills deemed "mission critical" by the Pentagon. Among them: 54 Arabic-language specialists.

Even the most gay-friendly of the candidates, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, seemed unwilling to address this specific problem stemming from DADT. From the transcript:

MR. BLITZER: Mayor Giuliani, recently we’ve learned that several talented, trained linguists — Arabic speakers, Farsi speakers, Urdu speakers trained by the U.S. government to learn those languages to help us in the war on terrorism — were dismissed from the military because they announced they were gays or lesbians. Is that, in your mind, appropriate?

MR. GIULIANI: This is not the time to deal with disruptive issues like this. Back in 1994 we went through this and it created a tremendous amount of disruption. Colin Powell, I think, was still the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff before he left at the beginning of the Clinton administration. He came to the view that this was a good policy. And I think in time of war, in a time where we’re trying to deal with this transition to a new kind of warfare that we have to be fighting — and we haven’t gotten all the way there yet, we need a hybrid army, we need to look at nation-building as part of what we have to teach our military — I don’t think this would be the right time to raise these issues.

Andrew Sullivan, as one might expect, has a few choice comments on the candidates' response to this question:

Then there's Romney, who once again has flip-flopped. His defense of the Clinton policy which he once opposed is that "it's working." I know of no one who once opposed the policy who now supports it, because "it's working". And I simply don't believe Romney means what he says. He's an opportunist and a liar. And, of course, as the question showed, the policy is throwing out critical servicembers in a time of war. McCain and Giuliani: they know better. The lack of any real argument in defense of the Republican candidates' position combined with the blanket refusal to revisit it is a sign of only one thing: contempt for the many servicemembers who are gay. The truth is: Giuliani and McCain do not support the troops. They want to persecute and stigmatize a minority of them. These old men are out of date and out of touch.

The debate was sponsored by CNN, WMUR, and the New Hampshire Union Leader.

Images of Jamestown

In addition to the video footage I took at Jamestown on Monday, I also snapped some still photographs. Especially on a sunny day with fluffy clouds bouncing across the sky, Jamestown Island is extremely photogenic.

This statue of Pocahontas betrays a certain late 19th-century parochialism. She looks more like a Plains Indian in this portrayal. Had I not been at Jamestown, I would have thought this was meant to be Sacagawea, not Rebecca Rolfe.

This obelisk was erected in 1907 to commemorate Jamestown's 300th anniversary.

One hundred years later, the Inns of Court in England provided their own commemorative plaque.

This rock-hewn cross marks the grave that might have been the resting place of Bartholomew Gosnold, one of the leaders of the Jamestown expedition; what are thought to be Gosnold's remains are now on display in the Archaearium.

Were it not plugged up, this cannon might provide an effective defense against invasion via the James River.

(Though it may not be helpful in the case of invasion by air.)

The continuing presence of this church tower was a key clue to the mystery of the location of the original, triangular Jamestown fort ...

... discovered in 1994 by archaeologist Dr. William M. Kelso (right, in hat and glasses). Dr. Kelso chronicles his search for the evidence in Jamestown, the Buried Truth, published late last year by the University of Virginia Press.

A grandfatherly Captain John Smith -- who was actually only in his mid-twenties when he helped lead the settlement at Jamestown -- gazes out over the water.

Perhaps he's longing for a trip back home via this ship.

Discovering Jamestown

At the urging of fellow blogger Tim Hulsey, I traveled this past Monday to Jamestown, the site of the first permanent English settlement in North America. As the official slogan goes, "Every American should stand here once."

It was my first visit and it was memorable, because it included a chance meeting with Dr. William M. Kelso, the archaeologist who, through detective work and thorough historical research, discovered the site of the original Jamestown fort, which had long been thought lost to the waves and currents of the James River.

Fortunately, I had my video camera with me, so I asked Dr. Kelso to say a few words about his discovery. (On the clip below, Dr. Kelso's remarks begin at about 03:05 minutes.)

In the gift shop of Jamestown's Archaearium, I found an autographed copy of Dr. Kelso's recent book, Jamestown, the Buried Truth, which I eagerly purchased (along with a baseball cap and a t-shirt -- sometimes one just wants to be a tourist). The book tells the story of his team's discovery in greater detail than the brief interview he granted to us on Monday afternoon.

Our trip was also occasioned by an exhibit at the Contemporary Art Center of Virginia (CACV) in Virginia Beach, which features one of the four original manuscript copies of Magna Carta, along with such historical documents as the Declaration of Independence, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the official proceedings of the Virginia General Assembly from the days during which George Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights was debated and adopted.

The copy of Magna Carta is on loan from Lincoln Cathedral, where it was found after some half a millenium. It is in amazingly good shape, though only a trained expert would be able to read it -- the penmanship is crabbed and faded and, of course, the language is medieval Latin. Despite being unable to make out the words, it was a thrill to be in the same room with such an important historical document and a palpable link to our Anglo-Norman past. A new goal based on what I learned from the exhibit: to find out more about Gerard d'Athée, who must have been quite villainous to be named (along with his kinsmen) in the charter.

If you want to see the exhibition, you'll have to hurry, because "Magna Carta & Four Foundations of Freedom" closes on June 18, three days after the anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta by King John in 1215 (and six days after the anniversary of the Virginia Declaration of Rights).

The documents are accompanied by a collection of artworks called "By Our Heirs Forever: New Waves 2007" described as "a thematic, juried exhibition of contemporary Virginia artists working in all visual arts media." Some of the works are quite clever; others are subversive; some others are simply inscrutable.

Update: I have added still photographs that I took at Jamestown in a new post, "Images of Jamestown."

Community Theatre - Part One

It's hard for me to believe, but it was thirty years ago tonight that I auditioned for The Music Man, a summer production of St. Bernard's Studio Theater in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. It was the first time I tried out for a community rather than a school group. I only knew one person involved in the company, Jack Lynch, who was a freshman at Marquette High School when I was a senior; it was a chance meeting with him a couple of weeks after graduation that sparked my interest.

That audition led to a three-year, four-production commitment to a great group of people, under the leadership of director/choreographer Rozeann Campbell. (The next year, 1978, I was in both The Fantasticks and The Boy Friend, and in 1979 -- my last summer in Milwaukee -- I was in Fiddler on the Roof.)

St. Bernard's Studio Theater was a true community theater: Productions were mounted in a parish school gymnasium (with no air conditioning in July and August!). The casting process was open to all ages, from small children to grandparents. There were no barriers to participation; there was always a role on stage or a job backstage for anyone who wanted to join in. A mission statement printed in the program said:

The purpose of the Studio Theater is to provide an educational and cultural summer activity for the children, young people, and adults of St. Bernard's, Wauwatosa, and the surrounding communities. There are approximately 100-125 people in the cast and crews.

It didn't seem relevant at the time, but 1977 marked the twentieth anniversary of the original Broadway production of The Music Man, which means this year it is 50 years since Robert Preston debuted as Harold Hill, Barbara Cook created Marian Paroo, and Meredith Willson gave us perhaps the most popular tune ever played by high-school marching bands, "Seventy-Six Trombones." While The Music Man is a well-crafted, entertaining musical play (one of the few with book, music, and lyrics by the same person), isn't it incredible to note that it beat out West Side Story for the Tony Award for best musical that season?

My involvement in the play was deep enough that I borrowed from the Milwaukee Public Library a copy of Meredith Willson's second autobiographical book, "But He Doesn't Know the Territory", which vividly tells the story of the making of The Music Man. (Revealing, for instance, that Danny Kaye, Jackie Gleason, and others were first considered for the lead role, before it went to B-movie actor Robert Preston, who went on to win the first of his two Tony Awards -- out of three nominations -- for best actor in a musical.)

That summer of The Music Man -- like the two summers that followed -- was the sort that lends itself to lavish, largely inexpressible flights of nostalgia. Believe me when I say the memories are pleasant and irreplaceable.

Fortunately, I have a short (about 3 minute) record of that production of The Music Man. It was originally a silent, Super-8 millimeter film that I transferred to Hi-8 video and VHS a few years ago, and to DVD and WMV more recently. (The multiple iterations explain the degraded quality of the recording.) Take a look:

Finally, let me state for the record: I did not drop Lisa Bender that night, late in the run, during the "Footbridge Ballet." She fell; it was an accident.

Update: I have posted still photographs from that 1977 production of The Music Man in the second part of this ongoing series of articles about community theatre.

Life Insurance

This is both subtle and over-the-top at the same time, but I had to smile when I saw it:

I'll have to talk to my insurance agent about full coverage.

Guest Blogger: 'Sesame Street Live'

My sister, Cathy Biermann, turns in this report from Los Angeles, a review of the latest edition of "Sesame Street Live," adding the suggestion, "feel free to make me a guest blogger if you are short one this week":

Well, it's happened, I have officially become a mom. Not that it means I am not cool anymore, but let's just say I remember going out to concerts at 10:30 p.m. on a Saturday and now I am doing it at 10:30 a.m. Sigh.

We went to the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood (home of the annual Academy Award ceremony) and saw "Sesame Street Live: Elmo Makes Music." I have to say I was pleasantly surprised with the show and with Gavin. He is a bit young, sure [not yet one year old -- editor], but nothing makes him happier than a little PBS Sesame Street. So we got tickets for the show.

All the old favorites were on hand, plus the new characters not around in our generation. However I did notice a definite lack of Cookie Monster. He was in barely any of the group numbers but did do a solo, shorter version of "C is for Cookie," and I suppose that was good enough for me. I tend to wonder if he is threatened by the new more popular monsters, such as Elmo (better known in the parent world as "baby crack"). Or was it Elmo who was threatened by the 30+ year appeal of Cookie Monster? Hard to say.

The good news was there was a definite synergy between old and new as Rosita (the Spanish-speaking, female monster) did a song and dance with Grover about being blue monsters.

The children in the audience really treated it as if it were a rock concert. When the Count came out to show the number of the day was 8, the children ROARED. We had a little boy behind us that was so into the audience participation that I was crying with laughter. When they said "can you keep a secret" YEAH HE COULD....

The highlight of the show to me was an ode to the '70s with the cast doing "The Hustle" (talk about appealing to older parents) and a Bee Gees number where Bert came out in a silver tux and a disco ball dropped. That, too, was Gavin's favorite. He stood on my legs and squealed with joy and clapped along with the show.

Overall it was a good experience, coming in just under an hour and twenty minutes, which was surprising in that the show held the attention of the kids that long. As we left there was a long line at the concession stand for Elmo t-shirts, much like leaving a Madonna or Rolling Stones show. Only the t-shirts were in sizes like 2T. I'd go again when Gavin is a bit older so he can participate like the little boy behind me. And really I loved it too. 'Cause Sesame Street never gets old, even if we do...

For a different view of Sesame Street, check out this video.