Ms. California the New Anita Bryant?

Perez Hilton wrote in a post recently:



He brings up an interesting comparison between the current Ms. California controversy and Anita Bryant. After her singing career, Bryant became the spokesperson for Save the Children. Currently, Ms. California is in the firing line because it seems she is leaving her platform of the Special Olympics to concentrate on the fight to keep traditional marriage, or opposite marriage as it is now known.

Interesting facts:
*When Anita Bryant was pied in the face, she prayed for them. When asked for a response to Hilton calling her a "dumb bitch," she said she would pray for him.

*Both were beauty pageant queens.

*Both were DEVOTE Christians.

*And both have to "protect" things from gay people. Bryant had to protect the children, and Ms. California is protecting marriage.

It seems like the extreme right needs a pretty, soft woman to help be the spokesperson for their cause. After all, if somebody attacks the nice pretty girl, they are the monster (or beast as Hilton was called after he released his video). The same situation happened with the Republican party and Sarah Palin during the last election. The things that makes me the most upset about this whole incident is people like the National Organization for Marriage and other ultra-conservatives say things like, "All she did was state her opinion in a polite manner and now she is being attacked/punished for it." You know what, her opinion IS hurtful. It doesn't matter how it is said or what language is used.

I have a feeling this debate, and Ms. California is not going to go away soon. Next Tuesday, Donald Trump is going to make a decision is she will be removed of her crown. On a personal note, I wish he would, but on the other hand, this will just add more fuel to the fire that she is being punished for her opinions. But what people don't understand, that the same argument that they are using against Hilton in favor of Ms. California happens the other way too! Their opinions on marriage is punishing millions of people across the country.

And, just FYI, if you have to say "No offense to anyone," chances are good that the statement being said is going to be offensive and should not be said at all. If you have to prepare people that your words are going to hurt them, it is probably not right to say it.

Gender in Sports

For my research paper, I wrote about "Transgender & Competitive Policy." Basically, how different sporting arenas handle transgender athletes. One of the stories that lead me to writing this paper was the story of Sarah Gronert, an intersex woman climbing in the ranks on the Women's Tennis Association (WTA).

An opposing coach complained because Gronert beat his player in a recent tournament. 'There is no girl who can hit serves like that, not even Venus Williams,' said Schlomo Tzoref, the coach of Julia Glushko, who Gronert recently beat on her way to winning the Raanana tournament in Israel in early March." First off, what did he mean by "not even Venus Williams? Is she the limit to how hard a woman can hit and if someone goes over, then she must be a he?

Gronert was born with ambiguous genitalia and had surgery when she was just a baby to "fix" it. She has lived her entire life as a woman, but that is not good enough for some. Tzoref continues, "This can not be. This is not a woman, it's a man. She does not have the power of a woman and no woman has such a technique. She serves like a man. It's very strange."

People are not upset about this because she is intersex. People are upset because she is beating everybody. Players are complaining and her wikipedia page was even deleted because of "abuse" from users. What would happen if she wasn't winning so many tournaments?

In the end, the WTA cleared her and she is allowed to play in the WTA and the International Tennis Federation (ITF). Unfortunately, she had to undergo a "gender verification." "Sarah Gronert is legally and biologically a woman," somebody with the ITF said, "and as such perfectly entitled to compete in ITF Pro Circuit events and, at some point if her ranking warrants it, in WTA Tour events."

The world of athletes is a tough one for transgender and intersex individuals. Not only growing up having to worry about tight uniforms, locker rooms and puberty, but the division for boys and girls sports creates more confusion. In my research, I have found that the majority of sports don't have a policy regarding this issue. One is created when one is needed. And mostly, it happens in woman's sports. In my research, I have yet to find a single case with a professional male athlete. One could wonder if there would be as much cries of "unfair."

Religion, Sexuality, Gender

I will be the first person to admit, that I can be to harsh on religion (ALL of them). That is something I am working on, and I take full ownership of it. But I have a hard time accepting something that intentionally excludes people and their rights. It is not because I think it is crazy to believe God created everything. Honestly, I think it is equally as crazy to believe that the universe has been around forever and nothing created it. Religion has been the biggest excuse for homophobia in the past and present. With the current battles for marriage equality, the religious right is battling hard. I recently had a couple of experience with religious memorabilia that made me think about my stand when it comes to my beliefs regarding religion and sexuality.

The first was a cute figurine I saw at an antique store in Austin:



The little girl is holding up her dress and shows that she has on shorts underneath. The script reads "Dear Lord, If you are still making little boys, can't you change me into one?"

This was a positive encounter for me. It is not often you find something that encourages breaking gender roles, especially something from the 50s (at least that is what was listed on the tag). It reminded me of the modern poem by Every Girl, Every Boy. We talked in my Human Sexuality that sexual orientation is one of the most enforced gender roles. And I thought this was a very positive idea and showing that not everybody has to conform to who they are told they are suppose to be.

The second encounter wasn't as positive. I am still on the fence about how I feel about this one. I don't know if I am having the reaction I am because of my criticism, or because this negativity actually exists in this product.



This was a shirt I saw in a Christian book store in Tennessee. Now, when I first saw it, I immediately thought of the Human Rights Campaign. When you say "There is no equal" and have a picture of an equal sign, I took great offense. I saw it as "There is no equality. Christians reign supreme." Now, as time has passed, I began to think, maybe that wasn't the intention. But with the current equality situation in the country, it is hard not to think about it. Here is the HRC logo:



Now, they are very similar (although most equal signs do look alike). But it is basically the colors reversed. So my question with this post is, am I just looking for a fight against an opponent and subject I feel passionate about, or do I have legitimate concerns? It is a struggle I fight with on a constant basis. We are a very religious society, and I am working on finding where the hatred ends and the love begins.

RuPaul's Drag Race ~ Start Your Engines!

More Gay & Lesbian Video At LogoOnline.com

Although the season may be over, Rupaul and the eight up-and-coming drag queens will forever stay with me. When the show first aired, I was nervous. I didn't know what people's reaction would be to a group of men dressing as women. The show not only featured the final looks, but the men's process of getting there (hair, makeup, clothing, the works!). I didn't know if the country was ready for it.

Here is a quick summary of the show. Eight contestants competed to be Drag's next big superstar. Under the guidance of the legendary Ru, the contestants competed in challenges geared around their drag persona. Some of the challenges were "Drag on a Dime" where they had to make an entire outfit out of stuff found at the dollar store and "Drag Ball" where they had to create three different outfits inspired by a specific fruit.

I first saw the show on VH1. But is also featured on Logo, an LGBT television station that is a part of MTV. (FYI, the entire season is online for you to watch free!) The contestants entered the show as their drag persona, competed in the first challenge, and went back to the changing room to wash off all the makeup. That was interesting to me, because it is not common to see queens off of the stage. In fact, at the start of the show was the first I had ever seen Rupaul without the dresses and wigs. Although they showed the men in both lights, they never mentioned the birth names. One contestant on the show said that generally, they always call each other by their drag names.

Another reason why this show is very valuable to the community because it bust a major myth about drag queens. BeBe Zahara Benet said it best herself, "Just because I dress in women's clothing doesn't make me any less of a man." I think this show is great at showing that drag is entertainment. It doesn't mean that these men want to be women.

The video above was the intro to the "Never Before Seen Clips" episode. I think this was a good representation of not only the show, but Ru starts the show with a look at some of the past and notable drag queens because, "don't forget, it was a drag queen that threw the first brick at the Stonewall riots that started the gay liberation movement."

Now, sashay away!

Heterosexual Agenda

In my Human Sexuality class, the professor went on a sidebar in class against people who are saying people are promoting the "homosexual agenda." I've had some issues with this professor because he can tell some really offensive jokes. He is great when we are just talking about culture, science and the human body, but he will do anything for a laugh. So when he went on this rant, all was forgiven for a second. At the end of his speech, he said, "if anything, the country is promoting the heterosexual agenda." For an assignment, he asked us to all come up with 10 ways that prove this statement was accurate. Here were the things that I came up with:

1. Relationships portrayed in movies, television, advertisements, novels, etc. are dominantly heterosexual.

2. As a society, we tend to allow straight PDA (Public Displays of Affection), but not PDA from gay couples. ex. "I don't care if they are gay, but I don't want to see it [or flaunt it]."

3. We try to "fix" people in the community. This is especially true around religions. (And calling it a choice falls under this category.)

4. We have a very gendered language, especially about relationships. Asking a girl, "Do you have a boyfriend," or asking a guy, "Don't you think that girl is hot?"

5. When we see a gay couple, we assign gender roles: "So, which one is the man, and which one is the woman?"

6. Films get higher MPAA ratings if sex between a same-sex couple is shown. (Watch This Film is not Yet Rated)

7. In classrooms, especially elementary, children learn about one type of family. And if teachers teach others, they can be persecuted or fired.

8. Our government protects straight couples, and individuals, more than people in the community. Marriages laws (and the benefits that come with it) especially support this statement.

9. In magazines and made-over shows for women, the headlines are dominated with stories like "How to attract a man."

10. As a society, we force people "out." We are so curious about people's sexuality, especially if we can't figure it out quickly. We don't force straight people to talk about their sex lives, why do we do it with LGBT individuals? Gay celebrities are especially subjected to this behavior.

So, that was my 10 ways. Can you think of any others? I know there are millions, and the more we start to recognize them, hopefully, the faster we can overcome them.


*P.S. I say "We" as a whole culture and country. If you personally don't fall into any of these, thank you!