"This is an action for damages and other relief by Pepin A. Tuma, who was detained, arrested and humiliated by Defendant Officer James Culp without any lawful basis and with the sole and illegitimate purpose of harassing Mr. Tuma because of Mr. Tuma’s criticism of the police and Officer Culp’s perception that Mr. Tuma is gay," the complaint reads.

Tuma—accompanied by friends Luke Platzer and David Stetson on U Street that night—admits to engaging in some light taunting prior to his arrest. From his complaint:

Across the street, on the north side of U Street, several police cruisers were parked with their lights on and several police officers were engaging in what appeared to be a traffic stop of a single civilian. Mr. Tuma noticed the police cruisers and commented to his friends that this seemed to be another example of excessive policing. As Mr. Tuma passed the police cruisers, he said, in a sing-song voice, “I hate the police; I hate the police.” Neither Mr. Tuma nor his friends stopped or slowed down as they walked. They did not approach, address or gesture to any of the police officers.

Then, Tuma claims:

Within seconds . . . Officer Culp charged across U Street shouting, in substance, "Who do you think you are? Who do you think you’re talking to? You can’t talk to me that way!" . . . When Officer Culp reached Mr. Tuma, he forcefully pushed Mr. Tuma up against a utility box . . . handcuffed him, and dragged him across to the north side of U Street to the police cruisers where he was searched and placed under arrest. Mr. Tuma did not resist in any way. When Mr. Tuma asked why he was being arrested, Officer Culp replied, “Just shut up, faggot.” . . . Mr. Tuma later learned that he had been arrested for disorderly conduct.

According to the complaint, Tuma filed complaints against Culp with the Second District police station, the D.C. Office of Police Complaints, and D.C. police chief Cathy Lanier. Tuma's complaint says that Culp was disciplined over the arrest. Tuma, who is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, is now suing Culp and D.C. for violating his constitutional rights, false arrest, assault and battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress—as evidenced by the slur.

Tuma seeks compensatory damages—and "an injunction directing the District of Columbia to expunge all records of his arrest . . . and authorizing him to deny that he was arrested on July 26, 2009." I have an e-mail out to MPD for comment.

D.C.-based rapper Wale, after dropping out of, then rejoining, D.C. Black Pride, provides his thoughts on homophobia: "It's one of those situations where like, it might have been hard to understand like ten years ago. But it's 2010 . . . There's gay people that are like heads of companies,you know just like functioning human beings, you know what I'm saying?"

According to a Gallup telephone poll conducted in 2006, "only" 27 percent of Americans would not like to live near "homosexual" neighbors. (No word on American attitudes toward neighbors who are simply "gay."). That figure is down from 30 percent homosexual-neighbor-intolerance in 1995 and 38 percent intolerance in 1990. Americans still dislike gay neighbors more than they dislike Muslim and immigrant neighbors, though that's changing! From 1995 to 2006, American dislike of Muslim neighbors jumped 10 percentage points; dislike of foreign neighbors jumped 9. [Via Racialicious].

District resident Anthony Wright, 42, has been found guilty of "Bias-Related Simple Assault and Bias Threats To Do Bodily Harm" for harassing and threatening a neighbor over a period of two years. The harassment, which centered on his neighbor's sexual orientation, culminated in Wright attacking his neighbor outside his home, threatening to stab him, and then telling him, "They don't lock you up for hitting faggots."

The details, from District anti-hate crime group Gays & Lesbians Opposing Violence (GLOV):

WASHINGTON DC, May 7, 2010 — A DC Superior Court jury found 42-year-old DC resident Anthony Wright guilty of Bias-Related Simple Assault and Bias Threats To Do Bodily Harm in a June 6, 2009 assault against an elderly man in SE Washington. Wright repeated threats to the same victim on August 27, 2009.

The USDOJ chronicled two years of a nearly constant barrage of name calling and harassment the 67-year-old gay man was subjected to by his neighbor which eventually escalated into an unprovoked attack in front of neighbors and friends on June 6, 2009. Wright was quickly released but continued to harass the victim, proclaiming, "They don't lock you up for hitting faggots."

On August 27, 2009 Wright confronted the victim in his own home and threatened to stab him and was again arrested. Wright was found guilty on both counts on April 28, 2010 and is scheduled to be sentenced on May 12, 2010.

While GLOV commends the work of the USDOJ and MPD to bring the hate crime charges forward successfully, we are anxious to see that Wright recives the maximum penalty for his egregious crimes and for the suffering he caused his victim to endure for so long.

West Virginian Bruce Barilla, a long-shot candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives, lays it all out there in this campaign video, in which he explains that we must fight an "unnecessary hate crimes bill" because it supports  "gay sex." Points for transparency! Bonus: Supporters can proudly display their refusal to support gay sex to the world by placing a box of Barilla pasta in their car windows. (Barilla says he has "No relation to and not sponsored by Barilla pasta").

So I logged on to the High Times Web site today, as you do, and I came across a typical ad targeting pot enthusiasts: A woman dropping her lacy panties alongside the teaser, "Want to see more? We know you want to!" Users who are interested in seeing more are introduced to  "The Whizzinator," a dildo that really looks like a penis.

At first, I was confused by the marketing strategy here. How effective is it to lure people into purchasing a fake (but highly realistic) penis by implying the promise of a vagina? Perhaps I am underestimating the target audience for High Times advertising, but I imagine that many a typical heterosexual dude who eagerly clicks on those panties only to find a selection of penises would be hit with such a raging case of homo- and transphobia that he would be unlikely to invest in the services advertised. But then I investigated the Whizzinator further, and things became even curiouser.

The Whizzinator, as the name implies, is a dildo that facilitates faux pissing. "The Whizzinator Strap-On XXX is the cleanest way to get dirty," the ad copy reads. "This ultra hygenic and sterile ultimate wet sex simulator is designed with sensual pleasure in mind." A Whizzinator comes with a syringe, "synthetic urine pack," heat packs, an instruction manual, and a condom. "Golden Shower" refills of freeze-dried pee are also available.

That's where the Whizzinator's next advertising turn comes in—though explicitly marketed to those who want to incorporate safe, clean urination into their sex lives, a colleague reminded me that the Whizzinator might also be of particular use to men who use drugs, and may resort to fake-peeing through a prosthetic penis in an attempt to pass a drug test. A-ha, so the Whizzinator is of immediate interest to the High Times' target audience.

So why send them through these various marketing hoops in order to get them to purchase a negative test result? I imagine it has something to do with those phobias. When you're trying to sell lifelike penis accessories to hetero men, perhaps it helps to give the more sensitive among them an excuse to say, "Hey—I found this penis accessory by clicking on some naked chick."

The Whizzinator retails for $139.95. And the strangest thing about the marketing here? It is available in white, brown, black, tan and "Latino."

I noted Tiger Beatdown's "Visions of Manliness" series in today's Sexist Beatdown, but I wanted to highlight a particular post in the series because (a) "Visions of Manliness"? How can I say no? and (b) VOM guest-blogger B. Michael Payne made a really interesting point about who qualifies as a homophobe in our culture and who doesn't.

Payne focuses his critique on Deadspin sportswriter Drew Magary, the kind of guy who can write a post bemoaning the fact that America will never see an out, gay major sports star anytime soon—and then end the post with an ironically homophobic sentiment like "Also, Jimmy Clausen eats cock."

Margary, as he'll tell you, isn't a homophobe. He knows this because he used to be one. Payne highlights this interesting autobiographical admission in Margary's work:

I’ll go ahead and freely admit now that, when I was in high school, I could easily be characterized as a homophobe. I used the word faggot all the time (even more than I do now!). I adored Dice Clay. I didn’t think gays deserved rights or anything else other than ridicule. I didn’t LIKE gays. At all. And not for any sort of bullshit moral reason. No, I was that way because I enjoyed it, and I suspect many other homophobes also hate gays simply because they like to hate them. I could blame youth or growing up in the ’80s for how I felt, but that’s a bullshit excuse. It’s embarrassing and shameful and I wish I’d never felt that way.

It's great that Margary is getting his historical hatred of gay people out of his system, but note the language up top there. When Margary was in high school, when he used the word "faggot" all the time, when he believed that gays did not deserve equal rights, when he hated gay people because hating them gave him pleasure, he could "easily be characterized as a homophobe." Not that he was a homophobe—that he could have been characterized that way. "I’ve emphasized Magary’s characterization of his homophobia as being ‘characterizable as’ rather than being a full-blown case of hating the gays," Payne writes. "But then he goes on to say that… he liked to hate gays."

Margary doesn't then go on to insist that this "characterization" of his hatred of gay people was an unfair characterization; instead, he sincerely apologizes for being a homophobe. Payne notes that it's "really difficult to start out a paragraph by saying ‘I was a homophobe’"; it's a lot easier to avoid the label, admit to the substance of the accusation, and emerge as a good person who happens to have thought some bad thoughts and said some bad words. Unfortunately, homophobes don't allow gay people the same opportunity to define their own nuanced, subjective experiences. In this word, "faggot" is a bad word, but "homophobe" is downright oppressive.

Most humans who don't hate gay people have come to a consensus that being a "homophobe" is a bad thing. What we can't seem to agree on is that almost everyone helps perpetuate homophobia in some way, intentionally or not. And in fact, one way this whole thing is perpetuated is by pinning homophobia on distinct, identifiable "homophobes" (who are certainly not us) while justifying the behavior of us remaining not-homophobes as necessarily not-homophobic. Margary performs this trick on himself when he admits that he still employs the word "faggot" and makes jokes about gay shit, but that he's not a homophobe like his former self because he no longer takes pleasure in hating gay people. One has to wonder what the true distinction between making homophobic jokes and taking pleasure in hating gay people is; but one also wouldn't want to mistakenly characterize a smart writer and seemingly good guy like Margary as a homphobe.

Payne writes:

Magary’s beliefs are like the beliefs of basically everyone about basically everything. There’s a supposed law of logic called the Law of the Excluded Middle, which says briefly that it’s impossible for a thing to be a thing and not be that same thing, simultaneously. You can’t be alive and dead at the same time. Of course, we know that that’s not true at all in practice. What about the person in a coma? The patient etherized on the table? The cubicle drone? People all over the world are simultaneously alive and dead. In the same way, Magary (and us, very likely) are simultaneously homophobic and not homophobic. Most of our friends who say things like, ‘That shit’s so gay’ are not the same people who would beat the living hell out of a homosexual. But the sedimented notions of sexuality perform a subtle alchemy on our day-to-day lives that leads imperceptibly but inevitably to casual rape culture, misogyny, hate crimes—all the ugly shit no one owns up to but everyone contributes to.

Photo via George Eastman House.

Last week, readers theorized as to why art students avoid drawing the penises of nude models. Both David Quammen and John Hammack attest to students avoiding their genitalia by inserting an obscuring shade or a set of imaginary shorts over their crotches. Is homophobia and sexual repression to blame, or is free penis sketching a matter of training and experience? Discuss.

Amy says a drawing of the hand is easier than that of the bush:

having been an artist in a figure drawing class, I can tell you that the ‘tender parts’ tend to be just as difficult to draw as a hand (especially if you’re circumcised). Perhaps more difficult than a hand. I can practice drawing hands from observation by looking at my left hand, but only the guys in class can practice drawing male junk without a model—and even that they can’t practice while doodling in their notebooks during other classes.

So the avoidance of drawing your tender parts may be less shyness than lack of ability.

Stephen Kosciesza says he routinely gets snipped:

Amy, funny you say that about “it” being hard to draw, “especially if [we're] circumcised” I’ve been a model for 15 years. I’m an uncircumcised man. And I’ve seen it over and over: in college age classes, the young women tend to draw my “it” circumcised. I have to wonder if they’re not comfortable actually looking at “it” (especially on an older man), and they draw what they expect. And of course, here in the USA, if you haven’t seen many, there’s a good chance you’ve only seen circumcised.

PL suggests that the penis is "taboo":

I can appreciate that Mr. Quammen might attribute an amateur male artists reluctance to work with a male models to homophobia. However, it would seem to me that this is using a rather broad brush. There could be several reasons that amateur male artists are not comfortable with depicting male models, probably the most reasonable being that depiction of male genitalia in popular and modern culture is practically taboo.

I would suggest to Ms. Hess that she could have been more careful in illustrating that it is Mr. Quammen’s opinion that she is reflecting, and that not all male artists that have struggled to attempt to depict male models suffer from homophobia.

Saurs disagrees:

“There could be several reasons that amateur male artists are not comfortable with depicting male models, probably the most reasonable being that depiction of male genitalia in popular and modern culture is practically taboo.”

Yeah, the phallus as an architectural shape, for example, is so seldom used, I’ve forgotten what they look like.

Jon explains what "homophobia" is:

PL, Mr. Quammen is using the real definition of homophobia, not the more popular but incorrect definition (not liking gays). Homophobia is pretty much exactly what is described in the article, not wanting to draw or look at male junk (if you are male) basically being uncomfortable looking at or being close to those who are the same sex as you.

Stephen Kosciesza insists that genital avoidance is no homo(phobia):

I’ve been a male art model for 15 years. I suppose you might say that I’m a charter member of the Guild. I believe that explaining a man’s reluctance to draw a nude male model—and to draw a penis—as “homophobia” is just way too simplistic.

Nudity among non-intimates is something that most people in our society are not used to, and there’s bound to be discomfort and uncertainty at first. I’m sure many men AND many women feel some nervousness and discomfort when faced with drawing from the live nude model for the first time. No doubt, the nature of that discomfort would depend first on who they are themselves. And then it would likely depend on whether the model happened to be of their sex or of the opposite one.

A woman might very well feel awkward drawing the nude man in front of her, too. And a man might feel uncomfortable the first time actually looking at the nude woman modeling in front of him.

It’s human nature, and as with everything about human nature, there’s rarely one, simple explanation. And since when we’re talking about human nature, we’re talking about individuals, generalizations are noteworthy mainly for their exceptions.

I think to boil male reluctance to draw the male nude as homophobia is way too easy and dismissive an answer.

Adrienne:

Stephen K, it’s human nature to feel uncomfortable with the human body? Really? It seems to me a clear case of the exact opposite, of a reflection of how societal constructs and expectations actually inhibit true “humanity” (whatever that is).

There’s no “natural” reason for men to be uncomfortable with the sight of a nude male body. I wouldn’t go as far as to say every man who is uncomfortable is homophobic (I don’t think the article was saying that, either) but there is an idea pervasive among many in US culture that for a man to look at another man’s body is “gay” and therefore wrong. We don’t have a cultural space for the appreciation of the male form as a work of art (certainly not like, say, the ancient Greeks), so to see a nude male body is jarring for many people. The biological penis has so much cultural weight as a tool of sex that it’s hard for a lot of people to get out of that mindset, and for some men this manifests as homophobia.

This is the exact opposite of “human nature” which, if anything, would dictate that people be, by default, comfortable with nude bodies of all genders.

I know we probably agree on a lot of this (being uncomfortable with nude men not being an exclusively male trait) but it bugs me when people bring out “human nature” to justify/explain away behavior that is actually learned and socially constructed.

Sketch, with penis intact, by Keli Anaya

City Paper contributor Trey Graham subscribes to Living Social, a Web site that alerts him to daily deals in the D.C. area. Today—the first day that gay couples in D.C. can legally be married—LivingSocial offered Graham a very special discount at Too Hotties Haircuts, an Alexandria-based salon for "manly men" who aren't into all that gay shit. The ad:

We know: You manly men are a little sick of the froufrou salons. All you want is a good hair cut, not a pink-haired Angel razoring your locks and slicking them with 80-dollar "molding cream." So, how about this? $20 for $50 worth of high-class barbershop services from Too Hotties Haircuts—a man-centric salon with massage chairs, an Xbox 360, and plenty of HDTVs. Each haircut ($25) comes with shampoo, cut, style, hot-lather razor neck shave, second shampoo (to get rid of those itchy clippings), and a scalp massage. Also available: a classic shave ($25) with hot towels, citrus mint facial cleanser, shaving oils, and that decadent hot lather; or a haircolor for men ($25), using a "Camo" color that blends away gray in 10 minutes. Lest you ladies feel left out, Too Hotties offers a full line of services for women as well. Our thought: A good deal to double up on. While your highlights are processing, Mr. Perfect can get his shoe's shined ($5), then play a game of pool (free).

Sexist Translation:

THIS SALON IS NOT A GAY SALON. It is a "manly" salon. It is a "man-centric" salon. It is stocked with an X-Box and "plenty" of HDTVs. We can't even count them they're so plentiful! The only thing this salon does not have is some pink-haired dude touching your neck hairs, because that would be gay.

And we're not gay! We're just a couple of dudes, hanging out, applying some decadent hot lather to each other. Don't be shy. Slap on some "haircolor for men"—it's  "Camo" colored. Relax with our totally un-homosexual citrus mint facial cleanser. It's manly because there's an X-Box in the room—kind of like how a perfectly straight dude can get together with another dude and "feel the other man’s penis bump up against his own," as long as there's a vaginal wall between them, neutralizing the gayness.

Bring your girlfriends.

Graham, who is gay, was understandably disconcerted by this auspicious gay marriage day greeting, and called LivingSocial to tell them so. Something tells me that today's happy same-sex couples won't be getting their pre-wedding pamper at Too Hotties.

Today, the much-anticipated Fred Phelps counter-protest finally came to fruition—albeit a couple of hours after Phelps' homophobia parade got going. City Paper photog Darrow Montgomery was on-hand to document the results. (See all of Darrow's photos of D.C. gay marriage day here).

Below, counter-protesters utilize the Burger King Guy, God Hates [Blank], and unclear messages about vaginas in order to protest Phelps' bigotry.

It's no "REACH AROUNDS FOR JESUS," but it is confusing!

I'm not sure what this message says in full, but it includes "vaginas" and more than one "nom," so it's got to be something important.

Good start.

Why is the Superbowl commercial line-up, hailed as an achievement in advertising industry creativity, often so casually sexist, racist, and homophobic? Credit the watchful eye of the CBS Standards and Practices department, which ensures that Superbowl ads bring in millions of viewers looking to be shocked—without offending the delicate sensibilities of the American people.

In order to achieve this difficult balance, ad-makers are forced to play within a very small range of acceptably "outrageous" topics. Since casual sexism, racism, and homophobia are main sources of shock-jock humor—and since these attitudes are too pervasive to inspire true outrage in the average American—companies compete to put the most creative twist on the lazy stereotyping without going too far off the deep end. And so: CBS bans an ad that shows two gay men kissing, but greenlights several commercials that play off "gay" stuff for laughs. It bans an ad that shows a guy's head up his own ass, but lets fly a commercial that makes fun of those silly, backwards South Asians who answer your tech support calls (racism: officially less controversial than asses). Even the advertisement decried as the most "controversial" of the evening—college football superstar Tim Tebow's anti-abortion ad—concluded not with a politically controversial rallying call to life, but with Tebow totally sacking his own mother. That's gotta sting!

Some advertisers choose to side-step this paradigm, of course, with varying success (See: Cute farm animals in love; everyone has T-Pain's voice; coffin filled with Doritos). The ones that don't end up being mildly but reliably offensive, and extremely boring.

RACISM:

This was one of the only Superbowl ads I noticed that featured people of color. The other was a Doritos ad where a black man walked into his date's house, checked out her ass at length, and then received a firm slap in the face from his date's small child. In Superbowl ads, people of color are never employed to, say, return an Orca to the ocean after a wild bachelor party; they're just here to get some laughs out of racial stereotypes.

SEXISM:

Welcome female sports superhero Danica Patrick, who stars in the most Meta Controversial ad of the night. In this series of commercials for GoDaddy.com, Patrick is going around living her normal life—receiving massages, appearing on television news programs—when she unwittingly finds herself at the center of a "controversial" Superbowl ad. Wherever she goes, blonde ladies are just itching to take down their hair, rip off their shirts, and become the next scandalously hot Superbowl GoDaddy girl. This ad could have been a clever subversion of standard Superbowl bodice-ripping if Patrick's character had been allowed to point out how totally fucking weird this is. Instead, viewers are asked to head online to check out the even sexier action. Just a reminder that even women who excel in traditionally male fields (a girl who's really good at driving!) are still forced into traditionally female representation (boobs!).

Ah yes: the "men have turned into demoralized, overly feminine wusses who can only be saved by big machines that go RRRRARRRR" category. This ad, for the Dodge Charger, really opened my eyes, you guys: It really sucks to be a man, especially one in a serious relationship with a woman! (Seriously, guys, if it's this bad, just break up with us. We're not worth it). I have one question, though: Why are you carrying my lip-balm? As a member of the gender generally expected to carry an expansive purse instead of utilizing her limited pant pockets to store items, I have often carried this proverbial lipbalm for my significant other. And it has never been so traumatizing that I've been forced to shell out $30k for a Dodge Charger to heal the pain. But then again, I don't know what it's like to be forced to carry lipbalm as a man. I'm sure it's very tough.

Did you know that men are also extremely stupid? Men are only interested in beer, sports, and sex; women are from Venus.

[youtube:v=RrJnv2peeZw]

HOMOPHOBIA:

This ad subscribes to the same theory of gender as the Dodge Charger ad, but this time men can only be saved from their spineless, overly feminine lifestyles if they buy a hand-held television. Bonus: this ad is even clearer in its assertion that men who do anything attributed to the mysterious realm of "female shit" aren't true men. Change out of that skirt, Jason.

I believe that this Megan Fox ad contains the Superbowl's sole same-sex couple: Two guys who slap each other with dramatically limp wrists when they discover that one of them has been checking out Megan's sexy pix on the Internet. Apparently, gay men can only be represented in Superbowl ads in the pursuit of hilarity. We are truly living in a post-sexual-orientation America, people.

At first, this Careerbuilder.com ad was is headed firmly down the casual homophobia route: Naked dudes! Around other dudes! Touching their own nipples! But then a couple of underwear-clad female co-workers show up, and the ad refuses to go the aggressively heterosexual route with them. Careerbuilder.com actually reveals itself to be the rare Superbowl advertiser that doesn't exploit boobs for faux "sexy" controversy. Ah, the complexity of Superbowl ad politics.

It's World AIDS Day, the one day a year when members of Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church emerge from their Topeka, Kan. congregation to share their irrational hatred of gay people with the world. Oops, that's every day. But today, the church is particularly peeved. According to Phelps spawn Megan Phelps-Roper's Twitter feed, "God" doesn't just "Hates Fags" today. He also hates Michael Ian Black. (God still loves the respectfully clever comedic stylings of Rainn Wilson, however).

Will Phelps-Roper lose sight of her aggressive homophobic agenda in her excitement at virtually hobnobbing with minor television personalities? Twitter takes us inside the star-crossed homophobic mind of @meganphelps, after the jump:

First, @MichaelIanBlack flatters her:

@MeganPhelps flirts back:

But soon, @MichaelIanBlack gets too forward:

@MeganPhelps is dismayed at the direction @MichaelIanBlack's career has taken as of late:

You know @RainnWilson could come up with something mildly clever! Something . . . like . . . this:

"What do the 'N' word, the 'W' word and the 'F' word have in common?" asks Tim Bloedow of NoApologies.ca, a Web site dedicated to "punching a hole in political correctness." According to Bloedow, refusing to use these racial, sexist, and homophobic slurs (the 'F' word isn't fuck here) displays a "complete disregard for using God's name in vain."

Bloedow explains why refusing to invoke the "N" word, the "W" word, and the "F" word is insulting to the almighty. (Note: I won't use those words here, because I'm an atheist, but be warned: Bloedow is a man of God, so he gleefully invokes the three slurs throughout the video):

"The Third Commandment says don't take the name of a larger God in vain," he says. "As Christians, we see the Lord's name taken in vain everywhere—on the TV, in movies, in the news, in just about every area of life, as we walk down the street, among our colleagues. Constantly God's name—'God,' 'Jesus Christ,' are used as cuss words and nobody seems to blink an eye. Yet I've been very frustrated in the last couple of weeks as I've observed the self-censorship in our media over other areas of sensibility."

To recap: White dude in a sweater and a mustache who records himself announcing racial slurs over the Internet? The work of God. Saying "Oh my God, that Tim Bloedow dude appears to be a huge racist"? Sacrilege.

The Westboro Baptist Church, proud owner of godhatesfags.com, is hitting up the Equality March in Washington D.C. this weekend, Joe My God reports. If the church's nonsensical picket schedule can be believed, Fred Phelps and friends will be hitting up three D.C. locations in one big anti-gay tour: The D.C. Jewish Community Center, the Annual HRC National Dinner, and the National Equality March. See what Phelps and the gang have planned for their protests, after the jump. Spoiler alert: Antichrist Obama is gonna be there!

Protest: Queer Simchat Torah Celebration

Date: Saturday, October 10, 5:30 to 6 p.m.

Location: D.C. Jewish Community Center, 1529 16th Street NW

Commentary: "Jews Killed Jesus, and love fags, go figure," the schedule reads. "Antichrist Obama, who loves fags way more than you Jewish dummies, is going to be in DC. He is speaking at the fag event, but not for you Jews. Get the message?!"

—

Protest: HRC National Dinner

Date: Saturday, October 10, 6:15 to 7 p.m.

Location: Washington Convention Center, 809 Mt. Vernon Place NW

Commentary: "Obama Hates You dumb fags," the schedule reads. "He is going to use your money and your resources and then when he shows himself for what he is, he will merely destroy you along with the rest of this nation of self-loathing hypocrites. . . . But more to the point, God has done this thing. You have so enraged Him that he has sent you this creature to be your ruler."

—

Protest: National Equality March

Date: Sunday, October 11, 10 to 11 a.m.

Location: Between 15th and I Street and the Capitol Building.

Commentary: "You are not equal with God, Silly," the schedule reads. "What, oh WHAT are you going to do when Obama has completely destroyed this nation's economy by the hand of a Sovereign God? You know what kind of money it takes to keep up those various facades! That is going to be some funny, scary stuff."

Photo by k763

For last week's paper, I wrote a story about a group of Beta Theta Pi fraternity brothers at the George Washington University who are working to eliminate homophobia from campus Greek life. Judging by the comments section, they have quite a way to go!

Larry gets the ball rolling:

Fuckin' fags!

While Clay voices concern about the persecution of homophobes on campus:

I don’t agree with Molldrem that “weeding out the homophobes with the hungry” is a good strategy for Fraternity recruitment. The goal should not be to exclude segments of the student body, as doing so would make his organization equally guilty of discrimination. Providing food or dinners for recruitment is not masculine food porn and offering Maryland blue crabs certainly isn’t “typical.” The point is that Freshmen are on a budget and offering a nice meal is a good way to get a large turnout at an event- regardless of attendees sexuality. The Fraternities can THEN speak to attendees about Greek Life at GW, debunk myths, and talk about what the organizations are about.

Offering an event entitled “Frat vs. Fraternity: Myths Debunked” will not attract anyone who isn’t already interested in pledging a Fraternity and will never provide the opportunity for Beta to change the misguided perceptions and stereotypes of Greek Life possessed by many Freshmen who base their opinions off rumors and television. I believe Beta’s strategy here is counterproductive to the rest of the Greek Community at GW. It would be nice if Beta could be more accepting of all diversity as it would provide them an opportunity to break down barriers and educate as many people as possible about tolerance, instead of just catering to those who “get it” and “weeding out” everyone else.

Greg is mostly concerned about Larry's campus presence:

I graduated from GW 18 years ago, was active in the gay students’ group, and had many friends in fraternities (Kappa Sig especially) who had no problems with me or my friends, even in the late 80s/early 90s. I was glad to see this article linked to the beloved City Paper from TowleRoad.com, and judging by the range of comments, it seems that GW is still pretty much filled/associated with a wide variety of people who are basically live and let live …

Except for Larry, who reminds me of the people the campus mobilized against in the fall of 1989 following the last time the NAMES Project Quilt was displayed in its entirety on the mall … we were called pedophiles for being gay and the student community wouldn’t stand for that or for the LGBT community being condemned to death from AIDS based on pure homophobia and hate. As we said at the time, people who think like this are threatened and tortured inside by sexual insecurity and, oddly, an inability to spell correctly.

Larry counters:

Greg I think i remember you, you were the ass muncher that got caught giving head to the basketball team in the gelman bathroom. have you made the move to san francisco or are u still scraping your knees and walking bowlegged from the black queens in dupont circle?

Greg responds:

Wow, Larry. You really seem to have the pulse on gay life at GW … I didn’t know the basketball team hung out in the bathrooms in Gelman Library, considering that they play in the Smith Center. Maybe you just play in Gelman and with the black queens in Dupont who, no doubt, would turn you out and upside your head. You’re projecting so badly and loudly that it is causing traffic up here in Connecticut. At least you used spell check this time.

this is stupid lives up to his name:

there is no room for homosexuals in greek life. end of story.

Conrad Davis:

With well supported and reasoned arguments like that, how could anyone disagree?

Thanks for highlighting greek life’s commitment to intellectual excellence!

. . . The last comment was snide, but truthfully in my mind there’s a very strong correlation between Greek life and the stupid. This article, more than anything I’ve read in a long while, has changed that opinion.

And Robert Loggia wants his money back from the free newspaper he didn't buy:

This is an utterly ludicrous, insipid, waste of time and effort. Whoever believes this is news is not thinking clearly. I do not understand why Beta feels the need to publicize something like this. If they were in such support of diminishing homophobic stereotypes pertaining to Greek Life, why don’t they actually concentrate on recruiting high quality individuals? How is this article supposed to make homosexual individuals who are rushing Beta or wherever feel? It was mentioned that homosexuals don’t want special attention and just want to be accepted. This article seems counterproductive. If people and fraternities are good matches, then that should be good enough, regardless of sexual orientation, ethnicity, what have you.

This is trash and I will be writing an additional letter to the editor demanding some sort of compensation for the time I wasted reading this slop and writing this response.

Pssssst, Robert, you can try to rack up the cash by writing that letter to the editor here. Note: Authors published in the Washington City Paper comments section may not receive financial compensation for their work. But they can rest assured that they're wasting my time, too!

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

According to fraternal historian ­Nicholas Syrett, America’s fraternity culture has thrived on a fear of homosexuality since the 1920’s. All-male fraternal organizations, Syrett writes, “compensate for what might be perceived by outsiders as either feminine or gay behavior by enacting a masculinity [of] aggressive heterosexuality.” In order to preempt homosexual interpretations of the fraternal bond, the brothers employ ritualistic paddling, frat house sex, and homophobic epithets to fight their way back to straight.

The Syrettian fraternal tradition poses some pre-professional problems for the young men on the campus of George Washington University.

After all, GW’s fraternity brothers are the nation’s future congressmen, investment bankers, and CEOs. They won’t reach those positions if their Google profiles turn up associations with homophobic and misogynistic fraternities. So GW’s frat boys—and don’t call them that!—are straining to undo the legacy of “aggressive heterosexuality” and gay-bashing forged by their predecessors. It’s an effort that involves a good deal of re-education, some new alliances, and a compensatory vice or two.

RUSHING. Each September, GW’s potential pledges navigate a monthlong schedule of university-sanctioned rush events. The activities provide a brief introduction to each fraternity’s social reputation. Will the future fraternity brother enjoy s’mores at Kappa Sigma’s “acoustic jam” or feast upon Kappa Alpha Order’s steamed Maryland crabs? Will he chat up Sigma Chi’s favorite sorority ladies or help Sigma Nu launch a frozen turkey down a Slip ’N Slide? Will he scarf Lambda Chi Alpha’s Chipotle burritos or watch the brothers of TKE take a sledgehammer to a car?

This year, Beta Theta Pi decided to trade the food porn and the masculine displays of destruction for a more meaningful approach. “The events that I rushed into initially were food-focused,” says Stephen Molldrem, the fraternity’s vice president. “This year, we’re trying something completely different. Other fraternities will pick men who share their values out of the ones who show up for the Maryland blue crabs. We attract men of values, and we then just happen to serve them Maryland blue crabs when they show up.”

Beta Theta Pi Vice President Stephen Molldrem

That formula—values first, crabs later—helps weed out the homophobes with the hungry. In Beta Theta Pi’s first rush event this year, titled “Frat Versus Fraternity: Myths Debunked,” Molldrem and his brothers discussed popular misconceptions about “frat boys” with potential pledges.

William Zelenty, the fraternity’s rush coordinator, says the strategy had helped establish Beta Theta Pi as an organization of principle. “In the past, the fraternity was about upholding the status quo and letting the sexist and homophobic stuff fly,” he says. “Now, we’re dealing with it. If you’re the kind of person who goes around and says that kind of stuff, you’re not the kind of person I want involved in our chapter. Not everyone is perfect, but if any homophobic comments arise in a meeting or on the Listserv, I can tell you right now that it’s quelled immediately.”

Also not welcome at Beta Theta Pi: stereotypical comments about sexist and homophobic “frat boys.” “It’s just patently offensive,” says Molldrem, who is gay. “Even using the words ‘frat boy’ together can connote a bias.”

Beta Theta Pi rush coordinator Will Zelenty

HAZING. When one GW sophomore pledged an off-campus fraternity last year, he was relieved that the hazing process did not involve the “grotesque display of homosexual actions and physical pain” he had heard rumors of back home in Alabama. But what the hazing lacked in homophobia, it made up for in Kentucky Gentleman.

The night he officially pledged the fraternity, the student and his pledge class assembled in the frat house. “A trash can was brought out and put into the middle of the floor, and we were told to stand around the trash can,” he says. “We were then asked to drop our pants, but to leave our underwear on,” he says. The light homoeroticism—and the trash can—proved red herrings for the main event. Once the pants were dropped, the student says, “a bottle of Kentucky Gentleman bourbon was introduced to the circle, opened, and passed around among the circle of pledges.

As the pledges drank, the brothers sang. “You would have to drink until they stopped singing,” he says. “The first time, it was not that bad—they didn’t sing for that long,” he says. “The second time, they sang for maybe 10 to 12 seconds—an extremely long time.” When the bottle was finished, the pledge pulled up his pants as a newly minted member of the fraternity. “Shortly after that, I blacked out,” he says.

The student awoke in Georgetown University hospital to learn that he had left the post-pledging party, entered another student’s dorm room, and urinated all over his possessions. The student called the University Police Department, which administered the pledge a breathalyzer test. He blew a .24.

All hazing activities—from “paddling” to “scaveneger hunts”—are banned on the GW campus, and many fraternities honor school rules. When GW frats do haze, the activities—low on the homoerotic domination, high on the blood alcohol content—comport with the campus’ progressive nature. When fraternity brothers don’t fear associations with homosexuality, they’re a lot less likely to turn their hangups into a good paddling. But chugging alcohol is universal. Stereotypically, “frat boys are thought of as sexist and homophobic, but I don’t know if I’ve ever really heard that at GW,” says Josh Brown, rush coordinator of Zeta Beta Tau. Brown, who doesn’t drink, says that even GW’s wildest frat parties involve only “drinking to prove yourself,” not “drinking to get a girl drunk.”

PARTYING. Todd Belok, a GW sophomore, was a member of the school’s Naval ROTC program when he decided to pledge Beta Theta Pi. Belok wanted to make sure his potential brothers “didn’t hate who I am,” so he casually informed a couple of brothers of his sexual orientation over the course of the pledge process. “I was taking a course with one of the brothers who happened to be in my class,” says Belok. “I asked if I could bring my boyfriend to [a fraternity] party, and he said that would be completely fine.” Later, inside the Beta Theta Pi house, another brother “pulled me over and told me it was totally OK, and they didn’t have a problem with it here.”

Beta Theta Pi brother Todd Belok

The fraternity house quickly became a safe haven for Belok. A few weeks later, Belok was again partying with his boyfriend in the Beta house when a couple of Belok’s fellow NROTC midshipmen saw the couple kissing and reported the infraction to their superiors. “I had seen the guys at the party, and I was a little bit concerned,” says Belok. “But I thought it was really wrong to keep on hiding.”

The incident, which led to Belok’s dismissal from NROTC under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” revealed a growing rift between two of the nation’s most masculine traditions—fraternity life, which embraced Belok’s sexual orientation, and military life, which rejected it. Belok’s dismissal hasn’t prompted Beta Theta Pi to take a more discriminating approach to its guest policy. “What are you going to do? Stop everyone at the door and ask them about their thoughts on various social subjects?” says Belok. But it has renewed the house’s commitment to its idea of fraternity culture. “A lot of the brothers were really angry that it happened,” says Belok. “And they were really angry that it happened here.”

Photos by Darrow Mongtomery

Alas, there is not yet any conciliatory  "Gay for McDonnell" campaign merch to speak of. The McDonnell for Governor online store does, however, offer up a host of campaign materials for McDonnell supporters of every other conceivable interest group—including hunters, paramedics, and babies. All of which, I'm betting, are much more likely to feel McDonnell's message than are the ladies.

There's Hunters for McDonnell:

Paramedics for McDonnell:

Golfers for McDonnell:

Under-socialized children for McDonnell:

Sauna enthusiasts for McDonnell:

Babies for McDonnell:

And for the low price of $54.99, you can even become a Chump for McDonnell:

Oh, C'mon Bob: That seductive Life Size Right Wing Wall Cling is just screaming for the votes of ladies and gays!

Aww, I miss the '80s, when the media pumped a veritable sea of licentiousness into American ears through the radio waves instead of this half-assed T-Pain shit. Also: He's talking about Prince, right?

Steven Anderson, the gay-hating pastor who preaches that Barney Frank is a paedophile and that Barack Obama deserves to die, operates out of the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Ariz. That means that Anderson's religious sermons declaring that gays are rapists, child molesters, "animals meant to be taken and destroyed," and also secretly bisexual (?), are all being created and disseminated like fifteen minutes away from the house I grew up in! Wow. I knew there was something else I didn't miss about home.

The men about town in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho want to be fabulous. You can tell from their bare chests, draped in button-downs unbuttoned past their pecs. You can tell from the wingspans of their long-sleeved crew-necks, illustrated with flowers and encrusted with rhinestones. You can tell by their goatees—finely tuned, from mustache to soul patch. These men want to be fabulous, but what they really, really don't want to be is gay—you can tell by their incessant dropping of homophobic epithets. Amanda Marcotte has argued that homophobia comes down to an insane jealousy of the gay community's unbridled fabulousness. So how does a homophobe achieve fabulousness? Compartmentalize your repression!

In a recent trip to the Inland Northwest, I found that Northern Idaho bar-hoppers have agreed upon a few heterosexually acceptable displays for expressing one's fabulous urges—without shattering their whole homophobic worldview:

1. Ed Hardy T-shirts. This T-shirt (above) features a fabulous purple snake sitting atop a heart adorned by roses. Not gay fabulous: Ed Hardy fabulous. In communities where gay men are visible, acknowledged, and accepted, Ed Hardy is just a t-shirt worn by both gay and straight dudes. In fabulous Northern Idaho, "Ed" and "Hardy" are the magic ungay words that allow you to express your inner vamp while still ridiculing feminine gays. Of course, wearing an Ed Hardy T-shirt still runs the risk of drawing some homophobic epithets your way. In the face of criticism, never own your shirt's gayness! Simply hurl back this common retort: "This shirt isn't gay—you're gay."

2. Flame tattoos. Yes, these tattoos are literally flaming. One tattooed Northern Idahoan I saw accompanied his flame with a "Peterbilt" logo—signifying that his arm was a big flaming tool. How are the homophobes going to get around this one, you ask? Well, by the time that flamin' graphic it's permanently etched into the skin, Northern Idahoans must defend the heterosexual fabulousness of their tattoo to the death. I wouldn't test them.

3. Facial Hair. Northern Idaho is a veritable cornucoupia of exquisite goatee work. The most fabulous dude on the Coeur d'Alene bar scene last week was a big, bald biker with a silver braid hanging from his chinny chin chin (not pictured). On Saturday night, a friend of mine called out to him as he passed our table, commending him on his facial tableau. "You must have a boyfriend or a husband," the biker lamented. "The only women who will talk to me are always attached. Single women are always intimidated by the way I look." He then clued us in on how to break the ice with scared women in bars: Wrapping his hand around the goatee braid and pulling his mouth open and closed like a Pez dispenser. Sometimes, it worked.

Cue studio-wide "awwww," right? What a sweet, misunderstood biker dude with an evern sweeter goatee braid! That's what I thought, too, until the conversation meandered into a tirade about how he didn't have a "problem" with gay men, as long as they (a) announced themselves as gay immediately upon meeting him; (b) never fucking touched him; and (c) "acted like real men." Biker dude then relayed a story to prove his tolerance: Once, he approached a gay man alone in an elevator, took him by the shirt, and shook him. He then loudly informed the man that the rumors he had heard about biker dudes being gay bashers were totally untrue, and that the man had nothing to worry about.

Let's review: Straight dudes with finely groomed goatee braids, misunderstood; Gay dudes, understood to be secret predatory man-women who discriminate against goatee braids. Yeah: Maybe the ladies in the bars weren't just reacting to the facial hair, after all.

Flame tattoo photo by Photography for the Blind.

Some French videogame developer named Stéphane Aguie has created a videogame about killing homosexual rapists. The English version is called "Watch Out Behind You, Hunter," and the goal is to "shoot gay men who pop out of the bushes before they 'rape' the player." There are a couple of problems with this game: It is sickening, and it is also very, very boring.

QUICK QUIZ! This means that Stéphane Aguie is probably

(a) "edgy"
(b) "un-PC"
(c) Le 45-Year-Old-Boy residing in Chez Parents' Basement
(d) lazy
(e) all of the above.

Find out in this edition of Sexist Beatdown—where Sady of Tiger Beatdown and I discuss the finer points of how to protest bullshit violent videogames without channeling Tipper Gore.

SADY: why hello my good woman! care to speak about the evils of video games?

AMANDA: corrupting our children!

SADY: i know! the youth today! once i would have been not-serious about this but now i am not so sure.

AMANDA: i know, i think i'm getting older :(

SADY: well, also: it turns out that videogames, if you research them, are terrifying! like: RAPELAY, the world's leading rape-simulator for your home system. or this new game, in which the goal, i guess, is to run away from rape-minded gay men whilst shooting them in the face?

AMANDA: i played this game.

SADY: did you? did you really? how was your gaming experience?

AMANDA: well, the first thing to know about this game is that it debuted in french. and if you run the French title through some sophisticated language translators, you will find that the original name of the game was "Takes Guard Has Your Buttocks, Hunter!”

SADY: oh, MY.

AMANDA: the second, and most horrifying, relevant point about this game is that the gameplay is extremely boring. and so, we may conclude that the only possible draws of the game are a) shootin' queers or b) briefly catching sight of tiny cartoon penises.

SADY: I'M SORRY I CAN'T HEAR YOU I'M PLAYING TAKES GUARD HAS YOUR BUTTOCKS. but not really. i am just looking at it, some more.

AMANDA: hahahah

SADY: yes, i think that the creators were adamant about it being "humor?"

AMANDA: yeah—there's always this defense from Creators who are criticized over the content of their product. where they contest that the Game is something More than it Appears, when really it's a very simple and boring flash game with no point, except to depict murder and rape as easily and speedily as possible

SADY: right, exactly. but, i mean, these are the perils of online media. this game has peen in it, and raping, and it allows one to pretend to shoot dudes in the face for wanting to fuck you, and in this manner, it appeals to douchebags and gets traffic. it also has peen, and raping, and allows people to pretend to shoot dudes for wanting to sex them, and in this manner, it draws outrage from people such as myself and gets traffic. either way, TAKES GUARD WINS.

AMANDA: and then i played the game! which allowed me to say, This game is not fun and games!

SADY: (i appear to be playing this game wrong, by the way, as no naked men have jumped from the bushes to assault me yet.)

AMANDA: you gotta walk past them!

SADY: (perhaps i have clicked on the new, "non-offensive" version of Takes Guard Has Your Buttocks, in which you just shoot at rocks.)

AMANDA: Takes Guard Has Not Your Buttocks, Carry On Hunter

SADY: ah, well. well: i mean: i think this kind of stuff is actually endemic to a lot of entertainment, particularly entertainments such as this, which are aimed specifically at young straight dudes and are meant to get word-of-mouth. i mean, ladies play video games too! yet most of the videogames i have played are like being hit in the face with a jockstrap, that is how lowest-common-denominator-sexist they have been.

AMANDA: yeah, and i hate to take a Think of the Children approach to this, but i think that many of The Children persuasion also wish they weren't being so obviously pandered to. because anytime a filmmaker or gamemaker passes off gratuitous rape scenes or sexist jokes as "edgy" or "un-PC," what they're really saying is, "i'm lazy."

SADY: exactly. they are like, "LOOK, what we are saying is that men who want to have sex with dudes are predatory and rapey and you should kill them. maybe the reason that you are offended is that you have NEVER HEARD HILARIOUS JOKES ALONG THESE LINES BEFORE." like: no, dude, i have. i really really have. also, don't quite think you understand the definition of the word "jokes." and obviously, i follow a lot of ladies on the Twitter who talk about videogames and sexism and also love the crap out of videogames, so i don't think this is a problem with the base (except for the lazy portion of the base) so much as it is a problem with creators. although the Shoot Dudes Before They Have Your Buttocks Game is a flash game, so, you know. dealing with a whole other subsection of the genre here, primarily there to get you to click on some advertisements for adult friends or whatever.

AMANDA: right. but i think you've touched on something interesting, which is that women are consuming things, but there are often a lot of real barriers to getting women making the things, too.

SADY: OR, they can participate, but only insofar as they are making what is deemed "marketable" within that genre.

AMANDA: although i think the only qualifications you need to make an internationally famous flash game is being 14 years old and having access to Babelfish. right – you're lucky to be involved anyway, so don't try making any changes, because making us accountable for the terrible sexist and homophobic shit we put out would be SO like a girl. in conclusion, when is sarah palin getting into video games?

SADY: um, i believe AERIAL WOLF HUNTER is already a videogame. if it's not, it should be. the wolves fight back! with LASERS! but, you know. if you've solidly defined your audience as "14-year-old boys who are dumb," maybe making stuff that appeals to other people seems like a risky business move. i can understand that! personally, i am designing a game right now where you take away the computers of the Buttocks guys and hit them over the head with their own laptops repeatedly. i think it will be a hit!

AMANDA: will there be blood?

SADY: there will be panicked calls to their moms to come down into the basement and save them. i think that's its own reward.

I've always found Sacha Baron Cohen's "Brüno" schtick simplistically hilarious: Flamboyantly gay Austrian journalist travels to America's homophobic heartland to wring laughs out of just how much those people fear and hate gay people.

But just as the hypocrisy construction allows liberally-minded people to freely ridicule Sarah Palin's kids for having sex (because it's hypocritical), razz Miss California for bearing her beasts (because it's hypocritical), and make fun of Larry Craig for acting gay (because it's hypocritical), the Sascha Baron Cohen construction allows liberally-minded people to freely laugh at gay shit—because we're really laughing at the Southern rednecks who are laughing at the gay shit, right?

A.O. Scott's New York Times review of Brüno's big-screen debut does a really excellent job of explaining this dynamic—while not devaluing Sacha Baron Cohen's as a humorist:

In his various incarnations — Ali G, Borat and now, at feature length, Brüno — Sacha Baron Cohen leads his audience in a two-step of squirming discomfort and smug affirmation. Like “Borat,” “Brüno” (Mr. Baron Cohen’s new vehicle, also directed by Larry Charles) offers both succor and sucker bait for liberal-minded viewers who may feel harassed and hemmed in by prevailing and ever-shifting cultural sensitivities.

We all know, for example, that it’s wrong to laugh at foreigners, that making fun of their accents and customs is worse than passé. But Borat, with his outlandish attitudes and offensive behavior, granted an exemption to anyone who was in on the joke. You could titter and guffaw at his backward, ignorant buffoonery because, of course, the real xenophobes were the people on screen who fell for the hoax that this guy was a journalist from Kazakhstan.

And we all know how Borat played in Kazakhstan. This time around, Brüno's impact is lessoned—as Scott points out, "the success and notoriety of [Borat] diminished the ranks of potential patsies"—but both of his targets (gays and homophobes) are on-hand on Cohen's home-turf. Will Cohen lose his audience by taking homosexuals down with homophobes? Or has he shrewdly keyed into an even larger fan base—people who hate gay people, and people who hate people who hate gay people?

It is a simple formula for both comedy and political commentary:

Take a public figure (Sarah Palin) who holds disagreeable views (abstinence-only education). Zero in on an aspect of her personal life counter to those views (her own teen daughter, Bristol Palin, becoming pregnant). Reveal the comedic irony and/or hypocrisy of the public/private contrast. Repeat ad nauseam on blogs, 24-hour news channels, and late night talk shows.

We should all beware this construction. Though very easy to pull off—and often journalistically and comedically sound—it is a trap. And it will render us all hypocrites. Three lessons from history, after the jump.

SARAH PALIN

[youtube:v=-X6FUwBmclo]

DISAGREEABLE VIEW: Too many to count, but in this case, it's the abstinence thing.

HYPOCRITICAL MOVE: When Palin's 17-year-old daughter Bristol became pregnant months before Palin rose to political fame as John McCain's running mate in the 2008 presidential election, political commentators and comedians held up Bristol's pregnancy as evidence that abstinence is futile—even under the roof of your state's no-sex-before-marriage Governor.

IT'S A TRAP! The revelation came at the height of election season fervor, and liberal commentators ate Bristol's sexual activity up with a spoon. The term "knocked up" became par for the course. When the baby's father, Levi Johnston, told Tyra Banks that he and Bristol had practiced safe sex, Tyra et. al dismissed him as a liar. The late-night comedy cycle feasted on the Bristol-is-a-slut jokes. Even Palin family cheerleader Greta Van Susteren asked Bristol if she had been "lazy."

We forgot that even the most responsible of 17-year-old condom users don't put it on right every time. We forgot that condoms break. And we forgot that, when you're the governor's daughter in the small town of Wasilla, requesting birth control from your family doctor, seeking Plan B at a local pharmacy, or even buying condoms—anywhere—could cause such a shit-storm for you, your boyfriend, and your family, that it would have been hard to mount the courage to even approach the counter.

At some point, we forgot about why Bristol having sex was funny to begin with. The insane glee that we all derived from a teenage girl having sex before marriage became counter-intuitive—and downright creepy. We had crossed the hypocrisy bridge. We were no longer making a point about how young women should be free to choose to be sexually active. We no longer joked to show how bogus abstinence was. We joked to show that Bristol Palin was slutty, and that was enough to make it funny.

—

CARRIE PREJEAN

[youtube:v=8XMvviFbkf0]

DISAGREEABLE VIEW: During the Q-and-A section of  the 2009 Miss USA pageant, Miss USA California Carrie Prejean described her views on same-sex marriage this way:

"I think it's great that americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage, and in my country, and my family, I think that I believe that marriage should be a man or a woman. No offense to anyone out there, but that was how I was raised, and that's how I think it should be. Between a man and a woman. Thank you."

HYPOCRITICAL MOVE: After rising to blogosphere infamy—with the help of question-asker Perez Hilton's videoblog declaring her a "bitch"—Prejean's past modeling career caught up to her. When topless photos of the 21-year-old Prejean surfaced on the Web, Prejean was accused of both violating her pageant contract and preaching inconsistent moral views. Who is she to preach good Christian values when she's flaunting her assets for cash?

IT'S A TRAP! Wait a second—since when did we start caring about women upholding the contractual obligations of beauty pageants? Pageants are among the most sexist and anti-feminist of American traditions. They encourage patriarchal views about the traditional roles women and men should hold in society. And guess what—gays don't have a place there.

But the patriarchy is also responsible for one of the most damaging of all hypocrisy constructions: the virgin-whore dichotomy. Shaming Carrie Prejean—a woman we've elevated through beauty pageants—for taking topless modeling photos is a very short leap for shaming gays and lesbians for expressing their sexuality. That's why this whole thing was hypocritical in the first place—but perhaps we're all too distracted by Carrie Prejean's boobs to remember. We may keep posting them in the interest of "revealing hypocrisy." But we all know the real reason they're on the Web: It's not hypocrisy anymore; it's hotness.

—

LARRY CRAIG

[youtube:v=xWjXedX7pLA]

DISAGREEABLE VIEW: As a Republican Senator from Idaho, Craig often championed conservative moral values. William Saletan got specific in 2007, pointing out that Craig "helped to enact the military's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," revealing his "anti-gay hypocrisy."

HYPOCRITICAL MOVE: In June of 2007, Craig was arrested for soliciting sex from a male undercover cop in the Minneapolis airport:

According to the report filed by the officer who arrested Craig at the Minneapolis airport in June, Craig stood outside the officer's bathroom stall for two minutes, repeatedly looked at the officer "through the crack in the door," sat in the stall next to the officer, tapped his foot, and gradually "moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot … within my stall area." Craig proceeded to "swipe his hand under the stall divider for a few seconds" three times, palm up, using the hand farthest from that side of Craig's stall. Most of these gestures, the officer explained, were known pickup signals in a room known (and hence under surveillance for) public sex. When the officer took Craig outside and told him so, Craig claimed he had been reaching down with his hand to retrieve a piece of paper from the floor. The officer wrote that no such paper had been on the floor.

IT'S A TRAP! I'll admit it—this is rich, fertile ground for the hypocrisy construction. Craig blows Palin and Prejean out of the water with this Perfect 10 hypocritical move: enacting anti-gay policies in law, and being gay in private. Jokes at Craig's expense were easy, valid, and very popular.

Conservatives, when not denying that any of this happened, joined in the shit-throwing. After all, this is the stuff homophobes' nightmares are made of—strange gay men attempting to have sex with them while they're taking care of business in a public restroom. For them, Craig reinforced the idea that homosexuals are sick and disgusting individuals just waiting to pounce on your unsuspecting bare penis. In other words, gays can pose a very real threat to their heterosexuality, and Craig proved it.

And yet, those who railed against Craig's institutionalized homophobia were the ones who took the most immense joy in the gay jokes. So—again—reveling in jokes about Larry Craig being gay began to lose their hypocritical anchor. On some level, the hypocritical construction allows people with pro-gay political views to indulge in some homophobic ribbing of their own. They see a rare window where making fun of gay sex is politically acceptable, and they sieze it. It's the same tale with Sarah Palin: People who support progressive sexual health policies, like comprehensive sex education, sieze the opportunity to make jokes about sluts. It's the same tale with Carrie Prejean: People who rail against patriarchal values, like "opposite marriage" and beauty pageants, sieze the opportunity to make sexist jokes.

So, let's all try not to descend too deeply into the hypocrisy construction's rabbit hole. Fall too far, and we become ripe for ironic commentary ourselves.

I have a confession to make: I love Dude Comedies. Any film where Two to Five Douchey Guys Shirk Their Societal Obligations to Embark on a Night They'll Never Forget can probably coax ten bucks out of me. I'll even watch the Dude Comedies where all female characters are relegated to the Fun-Hating-Wife or Slutty-Sex-Object category, as long as it allows for maximum high jinks. Superbad: Loved it! Old School: Great! 40 Year Old Virgin: Totally convinced me to overlook the whole chastity message! Talladega Nights: Watched it!

I understand these movies are literred with sexism and homophobia and penises; I am simply immune to it. My condition has become so severe that this is looking pretty good to me, honestly.

But no Dude Comedy can draw me in as douchily as the Judd Apatow Dude Comedy. I am powerless to it. I have a theory: Paul Rudd is often one of the dudes. But even a Clueless pedigree can't justify my apparent obsession with man-children, marijuana-fueled Lord of the Rings fantasies, and underlying date-rape themes.

Help me.

In this week's Sexist Beatdown, Sady of Tiger Beatdown tries. We laughed, we cried, we had a shmashmortion.

SADY: hello there lady. are you prepared – prepared, that is, to debate the fine points of dude comedy?

AMANDA: i can't say i'm as prepared as you are, sady. but i am willing to confess: i believe that i enjoyed nearly all the films you profiled in your apatow series. when i saw them. in the theater.

SADY: yes, it's true: apatow has become my great white whale. he is basically all i think about these days. i dream in Apatowvision. well: i enjoyed some of them too! (shhhhhh.) I enjoyed "Knocked Up" immensely, for example.

AMANDA: i CRIED at the end of knocked up. i was on a really bad date, which may have had something to do with it.

SADY: OH GOD. YOU SHARE MY TERRIBLE SECRET. i cried too. also, broke up with the dude i saw it with?

AMANDA: same. well i'm glad we've cleared the air.

[youtube:v=lVam-fshUgw]
Judd Apatow craftily inserted this song into the film's end credits in order to make me cry.

SADY: yeah. my reactions to "knocked up" kind of define my relationship to the Apatow canon. I was totally digging Leslie Mann's character – oh, that poor lady! She is totally at the end of her rope! – and then left the theater, and discussed it with people, and realized that YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BE ROOTING FOR PAUL RUDD. In that particular sub-plot.

AMANDA: i think i had the same reaction as you did, honestly. i thought she was sympathetic, but totally pathetic. all of apatow's male characters are pathetic, too, but they seem to ease out of that gracefully without having to think about it too much.

SADY: right – plus, they are pathetic in a totally fun way! they get to hang out and do bong hits and fart on each others' pillows and such! so, by the end, where it's like, "sadly, we realize that procreative monogamy with one of these strange 'woman' creatures is necessary to maturation" you kind of get their sadness at giving up the pillow farts and lightbub battles. whereas women are just grown-ass-adults by the time they hit puberty, apparently. or at least they're scripted that way.

AMANDA: yeah, so the women are just haggard at the end. one thing your reviews always touch on are these coiteries of man-children that apatow scripts. and you mention the rejoinder from defenders of the movie that 'you're not supposed to LIKE or IDENTIFY with them.' and i do think that you are supposed to like these characters, and even like them for (and not despite of) their date rape punch-lines. but they're still in a context, i think, where they're there to provide a contrast to the hero of the story. their douchiness must be overcome, basically.

SADY: yeah, exactly. they're given such loving attention, and their little world of date-rape jokes and vague bromosocial lady-avoidance is presented as so much fun. so you forgive them for being immature in order to forgive your own immaturity, like, "well, my wife may be at home sobbing but i can't help it! i'm a regular bro!" and then you get a Valuable Life Lesson that sticks for maybe ten to fifteen minutes.

AMANDA: ... but they're funny!

SADY: it's true! sometimes they really really are! I subconsciously repeat Jonah Hill's pronunciation of "abortion" as "shmushmortion" at least once a week! and then i realize it's a joke about making a lady have an abortion because obviously her fetus is YOUR decision!

AMANDA: yeah. and apatow's versions of women i cannot excuse. they are either bitches or whores. but caricatures of douchebags, even lovable ones, i cannot resist. see: paul rudd in wet hot american summer. i think it's just possible to love the character and not the character if they were a real person / your boyfriend.

[youtube:v=ND7yJ7sMosk]

SADY: exactly. question: where the lady douchebags at? where are the stoned ladies that can't get it together to have an actual apartment, and get jobs that require nothing of them because they're afraid real jobs would be too much of a commitment, and pretend to be gandalf or some business when no-one's looking? the ladies who would rather watch "the muppet show," again, than do anything useful with their lives? WHERE ARE THOSE LADIES? Because I want movies about them! They exist! So I am told in a way that has nothing to do with my own personal life, at all.

AMANDA: i know, which is why I desperately want Apatow to write a movie for them. partly because i think his brain might explode, but also because i think it would be funny.

[youtube:v=V4QVGcnjZeM]

SADY: exactly. like, writing a movie about a lady that is not a sexy/stupid harlot or a knife-tongued scold would be fantastic. because the closest we've got to an Apatowomany character, right now, is Juno. I DON'T WANT JUNO.

AMANDA: sometimes i look at popular culture and i think of the female characters who have had abortions and i get really sad that like carrie bradshaw is the only one i can think of. but that's a tangent.

SADY: yes, well, my forthcoming feature movie film, "50 First Abortions," will be an exciting new direction for film, i think.

AMANDA: indeed. I think we should start a letter campaign that mirrors the request of Pixar to make a film with a heroine who is not a princess.

SADY: but, you know? i think that women have all the same maturity/commitment/not-being-an-idiot problems that these dudes have. PLUS, what with all the work we have to do to make our bodies presentable, there are many more occasions for gross jokes about our inherent schlubbiness. HUMOROUS BIKINI WAXING SCENE? I think so!

"Now all of a sudden I've got someone who wasn't a spouse before, that I had no responsibility for, who is now getting claimed as a spouse that I now have financial responsibility for," Mr. Steele told Republicans. "So how do I pay for that? Who pays for that? You just cost me money."

Finally exposed: the storied oppression of small business owners by teh gays. Oh what will he think of next!

NewsChannel 8 talk show co-host Doug McKelway threatened gay blogger Michael Rogers yesterday on live television, DCist reports. McKelway was interviewing Rogers about Outrage, a new documentary on closeted gay politicians and the activists who out them. Rogers, who advocates outing gay politicians who promote homophobic legislation, appears in the film.

"I have a problem with your community," McKelway says, before telling him (at about the 2:30 mark): "I'm going to do more than just point my finger at you. I'm gonna take you outside and give you a punch across the face."

Watch the video on PageOneQ here.

West Point graduate Lt. Dan Choi appeared on the Rachel Maddow show in March, announced he was gay, had his audio swiftly cut off, reappeared on the show the next day, then received a letter announcing he was out for "telling."

This is the letter the military sends you when you admit you're gay:

This is to inform you that sufficient basis exists to initiate action for withdrawal of Federal Recognition in the Army National Guard for moral or professional dereliction. Specifically, you admitted publicly that you are a homosexual, which constitutes homosexual conduct. Your actions negatively affected the good order and discipline of the New York Army National Guard.

Choi reiterates that he's only one of the 12,500 soldiers who have been kicked out of the army in the 15 years of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." It's a shame that Choi was dismissed, but I think it's a good sign when officers start telling, publicly, just to reveal the utter ridiculousness of the rule. Here's to hoping he's the last, President Obama.

"Does Kanye Dress Too Gay?" Elizabeth Gates writes on the Daily Beast. The speculation on the impact of Kanye West's dandy foppishness isn't invalid, but it does require a follow-up: too gay according to whom?

Gates makes the case that West dresses too gay for hip-hop, which she claims has backed off from its full embrace of flamboyant dress—see George Clinton, Dr. Dre (?), and my personal favorite, Cameo (above). But Kanye isn't too gay for the "black-male community" in general. Gates' main evidence of homophobia against Kanye's lavender suits are Internet trolls. In other words, Kanye is too gay for the most homophobic idiots ever.

Gates writes:

“Only gays wear that [crap]!” wrote blog reader “TheTruth,” while another reader advised that they should “go taste the rainbow.” “Bootylishious” wrote that he/she simply “feel(s) sorry for all those gay dudes,” and sadly, the list goes on. It seems that just as we settle into our most modern America yet, the tradition of black fashion has been lost.

Also lost in the Internet fray: decorum, intelligence, sincerity, accountability. Kanye isn't too gay for hip-hop—he's one of its biggest stars. But he is too gay to escape indiscriminate homophobic Internet trolls, a phenomenon that wasn't around when Dr. Dre was drawing on eyeliner and Cameo was strapping on a codpiece.

Clinton, though, probably would have been spared. Writes one more fop-friendly Internet commenter, "[calling Andre 3000 gay is] like saying prince is gay. prince is renown for pulling some of the finest woman of all time, in spite of being just so different. . . . oooor beter yet, like calling george clinton gay. lol, u crazy. he's just a funky individual."

Well, well, well, isn't this interesting. The National Organization for Marriage is bristling at Perez Hilton's request for YouTube to remove a NOM ad (above) which features footage of Hilton calling Miss California Carrie Prejean a "dumb bitch." Hilton claimed that NOM had violated copyright laws by lifting "about three seconds of footage" from his video blog. NOM's lawyers have appealed the video's removal to the video sharing site.

It's no surprise that NOM would fight to keep the video up—Perez Hilton is probably wrong here, as the clip is short enough to constitute fair use. The interesting part is the way NOM executive director Brian Brown has characterized Hilton's request.

It seems like only yesterday that NOM was working exhaustively to remove YouTube copies of the leaked audition reels to its now-infamous anti-gay "Gathering Storm" ad. And yet, In an interview with Bloggasm, Brown painted Hilton not just as a copyright law novice, but as a coward.

"I don’t know people’s motivations, but it seems pretty clear that Perez is embarassed about the fact of what he said," Brown said. "There’s no other reason of why he would try to take it down. . . . it doesn’t look good for him. So clearly it’s not that hard to figure out. He doesn’t want it up because he’s embarrassed by it."

Really, Brian Brown? There's no other reason? Let me throw another possibility out there: Perez Hilton is gay, you run an organization that works against gay people, and he doesn't want his image used in your anti-gay advertisements. I'd even venture to say that he probably knows that he's not going to win any copyright action, and wants to do whatever he can to be a huge pain in your ass, because anytime anyone takes action against NOM for anything they're guaranteed to make headlines.

Perhaps the reason Brian Brown thinks Hilton is ashamed of calling Prejean a "dumb bitch"—has Hilton ever been ashamed of anything?—is because the theory works so nicely with Brown's own YouTube take-down campaign. Did the National Organization for Marriage ask YouTube to take down its leaked audition videos because it wasn't "fair" for other people to use their material—they were totally going to use those hilarious videos of actors stumbling over their homophobia? Or was it because the tapes made them look completely and awesomely ridiculous—in short, they were "ashamed." I'd say the answer is "not that hard to figure out."

If you're a raging conservative homophobe looking for a prime time interview spot, all you've got to do these days is suddenly pretend to be only a mild conservative homophobe, and you've got an audience on on Larry King Live.

First, noted conservative homophobe Rick Warren appeared on King's show to tell Larry that his official position on gay marriage is "oblivious" and that he wasn't the outspoken supporter of Prop 8 that he appeared to be obviously was last November:

[youtube:v=bYIWSyMrhRA]

Then, noted conservative homophobe Dr. Laura Schlessinger appeared on the show to tell Larry that everybody has gotten her previous position on gay marriage well-documented anti-gay rhetoric wrong, and she actually thinks gay monogamous relationships are "beautiful" and "healthy" (though still not "marriage" potential):

[youtube:v=WfKsgq55KrM]

If these conservative homophobes are sincerely slightly less homophobic than we all imagined, I think that's just great. But when did Larry King become the go-to guy for softening your past raging homophobia? Here's to hoping that more conservatives, hearing of Larry King's openness to declarations of a softer, fuzzier, homophobia, book appearances on the show to stage their "gay-oblivious" political realignments.

Photo via Wikipedia

Well, the National Organization for Marriage keeps bitching at someone to have its hilarious gay storm audition reels pulled down from video sharing sites like Youtube and Vimeo. Citizen bloggers keep ripping their own copies of the auditions and reposting them to those same sites, causing what must be a pretty big pain in the ass for NOM. I'm doing my best to keep the original post, "Welcome to the Gay Auditions!," updated with watchable videos.

When videos are deleted, and you know of a new place they've cropped up, leave the link in the comments. Together, perhaps we can so distract the National Organization for Marriage that they forget about spreading homophobic lies and instead spend their time declaring, "Mr. Youtube, Tear Down That NOM."

Photo by Ollie Crafoord

[youtube:v=4AzLrn5JVIo]

The Human Rights Campaign has released a report detailing the ad's inaccuracies, which is great. But the HRC has outdone itself this time by tracking down the audition reels of actors stumbling over ridiculous NOM lines like "the clouds are dark and the winds are strong, and I'm afraid." The auditions are after the jump.

Insider tip: The actress in "Audition 3" is unbelievable.

Auditions For Marriage Lie Ad, Part 1 from Joe Smoe on Vimeo.

Auditions For Marriage Lie Ad, Part 2 from Joe Smoe on Vimeo.

UPDATE: The original auditions have been pulled off Youtube. Vimeo picked them up, allowing us all to continue to laugh at unsuspecting actors duped into stumbling over ridiculous anti-gay rhetoric. Thanks, Vimeo!

UPDATE 2: Vimeo's pulled them, too. Citizen bloggers are downloading their own copies at keepvid.com and reposting them on youtube until they, too, are pulled. I'll try my best to keep this site updated with watchable videos.

Last month, Greg Hambrick at the Charleston City Paper wrote a story resurrecting the Lindsay Graham gay rumors—and the renewed effort to out him. It's largely a non-story: Graham is still single, still maybe gay, still saying he's not, and there's no more evidence to suggest he is, still. But that hasn't stopped Michael Signorile, noted gay writer and committed outer of closeted gay politicians:

"Let's have a real investigation of the rumors about South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who … has been rumored to be gay for years," Signorile says. "Like Larry Craig, Graham has voted antigay — including for the federal marriage amendment — while people in South Carolina and Washington have discussed what some say is an open secret for a long, long time."

Signorile claims that "the homosexuality of public figures—and only public figures—should be reported on when relevant to a larger story (and only when relevant)." That means that a politician's private sexuality is fair game only when he or she has spoken against it publicly. But as Hambrick notes, it's not just liberals who are working to out gay politicians—it's, duh, the Republicans, too. Writes Hambrick:

With rampant calls for a primary opponent to challenge Graham next year, it likely won't be the Dems that Graham has to be concerned about with the gay-baiting. While many in the Democratic Party have reveled at the scandalous exit of Sen. Craig, a long-standing opponent of gay rights, the most vocal calls for his ouster came from his own party, including presidential candidate John McCain, Graham's Senate BFF.

These Republican gay witchhunts don't pass Signorile's stink test. Republicans don't like gays, and they don't like Republicans who are secretly gay, so there's no real hypocrisy to be remedied here, just plain homophobia. When Republicans begin to take up Signorile's cause, I wonder if it begins to become counter-productive. Should liberals really be working to shun all Republican gays from political life because they disagree with their politics?

Most of all, though, I think Hambrick fails to pass the news test here. There's no new evidence that Graham is gay. There's no real mobilized effort to prove he is. All Hambrick has is "former Ninth Circuit Solicitor David Schwacke," outed by the Republican party, and Charlie Smith, an openly gay realtor who ran for office a couple of times. Neither have any real perspective on Graham. Why not make the story about one of them, and not about Graham, who has nothing to do with any of it?

An initiative called Phelps-A-Thon, similar to that at my high school, donated about $12 per minute to Gays and Lesbians Opposing Violence, an organization that works to counter all forms of hate-motivated violence. According to Phelps-A-Thon organizer Chris Mason, the event raised over $550. The group plans on sending a thank-you note to Phelps, telling him how much money he raised for LGBT equality.

I wonder how much money Phelps has raised so far for AIDS research, gay marriage, and hate crime awareness? This guy is a saint.

According to a study conduced by the British Psychological Society’s Division of Occupational Psychology, Brits hold the most "negative attitudes" toward lesbians, followed by gay men, Asians, blacks, and Southeast Asians. Here are the stats:

- 41 percent held prejudicial attitudes toward lesbians (!!!)
- 35 percent of those surveyed revealed negative attitudes toward gay men
- 28 percent held negative attitudes toward Asians
- 25 percent held negative attitudes toward Black populations
- 18 percent held negative attitudes toward Southeast Asians

The study is evidence for some that homophobia is a more widespread societal ill than is racism. Gay rights blogger Michael A. Jones tempers that assessment by writing that "homophobia and racism shouldn't be in a competition to outdo the other" and that both "deserved to be condemned equally."

It's worth noting the sample population the results are coming from. The study queried only 60 volunteers from a place without a significant recent history of institutionalized racism—say, South Africa or the American South. Also, the study doesn't address which forms of bigotry respondents felt comfortable relaying in a survey, and which prejudices they simply prefer to keep private.

Photo by kittyroara

I, too, enjoy indiscriminately copying a phrase from a public figure's Web site, arbitrarily deciding I disagree with it, and burying my nonsensical criticism in 400 words of jokes about the figure's perceived sexual orientation. Upon further inspection, though, I think your little lesbian Mad Lib could be a bit more to the point, no? After the jump, I've edited your hilarious homophobic euphemisms to help you say what you really mean.

You're a little old for me, Secretary of Homeland Security Elect, but boy are you tough a lesbian. According to Wikipedia, you're "an avid basketball fan who regularly plays tennis" a lesbian! That's so cute! Now, Napolitano, to be honest, we couldn't be more different. I'm not the athletic type butch, I get sports terms all mixed up, and I haven't worked up an impressive heart rate since the last millennium.

That is, until I saw your photo!!!

How did such a handsome woman lesbian manage to stay single for so long? And why is your last name so much fun to say?

But enough fawning, let's be serious for a moment. I love how, as Governor Napolitano of Arizona, you've taken extensive measures to create fiscal responsibility and to end bureaucratic waste. Maybe you could teach my own faltering state Governor, Mr. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a thing or two. For instance, yesterday I had to take a dilapidated public bus full of garbage and pathogenic microbes to stand in a three hour line for an unemployment check. I brought a library book, but two thirds of the pages were missing and the remaining third made references to the Soviet Union. [incomprehensible screed about California]. Bet that wouldn't happen on your watch! I sure wish you could ride in on a horse like Prince Charming a lesbian and save us. Then I'd hop on sidesaddle and we'd gallop off into the smoggy horizon, my hair limp and greasy from unregulated toxic emissions lesbianism.

But things get even more romantic gayer from there. We could eat spaghetti and discuss fortifying the nation's borders. I'd giggle nervously at the sight of your sturdy posture and resolute facial expressions lesbianism. We could make a real night of it; I've already invited Maddow, Samantha Ronson, and Condi several notable lesbians. Actually, Sam might not follow all the political jargon, but she could sit there chain smoking and looking exhausted gay. As for you, do me one favor: skip all the makeup and just show up in a swoon-worthy blazer or polo shirt with a rakishly aggressive collar some gay shit.

Love,
Sascha a "humorist."

Henderson rightly points out that the "lewd references to sexual acts by [openly gay police officer Matt] Mahl and a female police sergeant who is also assigned to the Third District substation" indicate that Mahl was not the only victim of the hate-based slurs. Police sources identified the male officer in the graffiti to the Blade as Matt Mahl, but didn't identify the female mentioned in the case, or describe how the graffiti implicated her. Henderson is also right that it would be interesting to note how D.C. police have discussed the case—are they, too, focusing solely on the homophobic epithets, or considering the misogynist ones as well? I'll update if and when I hear back from MPD.