![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(Queer) News Roundup
Tuesday, February 1st, 2005 12:07 pmThe big news is, of course, the Iraqi election, votes for which are being counted as I write. I'm hoping for a big Shiite majority just so that Bush can go down as the American president who put a bunch of mullahs in power, but I'll refrain from further comment, as this has already been blogged to death, and shall instead concentrate on less heterophallogocentric issues.
February is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month (thanks to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
ankh156 for alerting me to this fact). Try getting that into a festive greeting: "All the best for Lesbian, Gay, er, Transvestite, no sorry, Transgender and what was the other one?" This attempt to get as many groups as possible into the same sentence must have been the result of many hours of heated arguments in the relevant committees, and I bet that even after the shortlist was narrowed down to four (after the S/M delegates walked out in protest) there was still much shouting about the order ("Why do bisexuals always get put in the middle?" "Because that's where you are, traitor!"). Couldn't they have just called it "Kinky Sex History Month"? That sounds snappier and much more enjoyable. Personally I don't blame the Left for providing conservatives with such an ideological windfall (as Nick Cohen points out). I reckon it's a conspiracy by historians to make history sound more interesting. Florence Nightingale? Lesbian. Shakespeare? At least bi-curious. Napoleon? He said "Not tonight, Josephine," because he had a hot date with Marshal Ney. Catherine the Great? Oh hang on, is bestiality politically correct or is it a violation of animal rights?
Just to show that in terms of history, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights are still in the Dark Ages, at least in Northern Ireland, Ian Paisley Jr. has criticised David Trimble for having an advisor who is in a gay marriage. Ian Paisley Sr. is remembered for his "Save Ulster From Sodomy" campaign, as well as his view that the Pope was the Antichrist. (Of course liberal theologians would interpret this as meaning that while the Pope may not be the literal Antichrist, he represents a principle which might be symbolised by the Antichrist.) I suspect Paisley the Younger is mainly worried that gay marriage is the thin end of the wedge: if we start by allowing gays to run the country, they will be followed by Catholics.
While Ulster Protestants are divided on gay rights, those who dig with the other foot are starting to show some division over condoms. Cardinal Georges Cottier, theologian of the pontifical household, has argued that condoms could be used to help prevent AIDS. If his views are adopted, it would not be a sin to use a condom if you were having sex with a high-risk partner (say, a drug-using prostitute), but would only be sinful if you were doing so in order to avoid having children by them. Personally, I am confused by the term "pontifical household". Doesn't conservative morality state that a household consists of a man and a woman bound in wedlock, plus their children (which in the case of Catholics, should be numerous)? I don't see a Mrs. John Paul in evidence, nor are the corridors of the Vatican filled with the pattering of tiny feet.
February is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month (thanks to
ankh156 for alerting me to this fact). Try getting that into a festive greeting: "All the best for Lesbian, Gay, er, Transvestite, no sorry, Transgender and what was the other one?" This attempt to get as many groups as possible into the same sentence must have been the result of many hours of heated arguments in the relevant committees, and I bet that even after the shortlist was narrowed down to four (after the S/M delegates walked out in protest) there was still much shouting about the order ("Why do bisexuals always get put in the middle?" "Because that's where you are, traitor!"). Couldn't they have just called it "Kinky Sex History Month"? That sounds snappier and much more enjoyable. Personally I don't blame the Left for providing conservatives with such an ideological windfall (as Nick Cohen points out). I reckon it's a conspiracy by historians to make history sound more interesting. Florence Nightingale? Lesbian. Shakespeare? At least bi-curious. Napoleon? He said "Not tonight, Josephine," because he had a hot date with Marshal Ney. Catherine the Great? Oh hang on, is bestiality politically correct or is it a violation of animal rights?Just to show that in terms of history, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights are still in the Dark Ages, at least in Northern Ireland, Ian Paisley Jr. has criticised David Trimble for having an advisor who is in a gay marriage. Ian Paisley Sr. is remembered for his "Save Ulster From Sodomy" campaign, as well as his view that the Pope was the Antichrist. (Of course liberal theologians would interpret this as meaning that while the Pope may not be the literal Antichrist, he represents a principle which might be symbolised by the Antichrist.) I suspect Paisley the Younger is mainly worried that gay marriage is the thin end of the wedge: if we start by allowing gays to run the country, they will be followed by Catholics.
While Ulster Protestants are divided on gay rights, those who dig with the other foot are starting to show some division over condoms. Cardinal Georges Cottier, theologian of the pontifical household, has argued that condoms could be used to help prevent AIDS. If his views are adopted, it would not be a sin to use a condom if you were having sex with a high-risk partner (say, a drug-using prostitute), but would only be sinful if you were doing so in order to avoid having children by them. Personally, I am confused by the term "pontifical household". Doesn't conservative morality state that a household consists of a man and a woman bound in wedlock, plus their children (which in the case of Catholics, should be numerous)? I don't see a Mrs. John Paul in evidence, nor are the corridors of the Vatican filled with the pattering of tiny feet.
