July 2003 Archives

It seems that the New York City Schools Board has been cooperating with an independent gay-rights advocacy group called The Hetrick-Martin Institute. The fruit of this collaboration is Harvey Milk High School, a small school for GLBT students. I have two problems with this concept of a gay high school.

First, his basically says to the world, “We are queer and we are too different from you to go to school at the same place as straight people.” I don’t mean that to sound pejorative at all. Being gay does make one different, and not in a bad way. But the implication from is that gay people are so different they should continually be differentiated from the normal population. In my view such “segregation” is counterproductive given the current social climate. In the 70’s, 80’s and even to a degree the 90’s, creating a cohesive group of homosexuals was important. A community-sense allowed gay men and women to develop a political voice, to show that they were in fact here, queer, and proud of it. That period of organization is ending now. At this point it is important to show the world a social group that is every bit as “normal” and up right as the rest of the population; that doesn’t want to impose itself on society but just wants to be treated “like everyone else.” Setting up a special campus for gay students, although politically beneficial in NYC does not serve to improve the situation of the majority of homosexuals.

My second point is one that is summed up most concisely in a quote by State Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long, “Is there a different way to teach homosexuals? Is there gay math?” Gay students do not learn differently from others, they are not helped or hindered mentally by being gay. Long’s point is valid, although his feelings on this issue that don’t stem from such logical arguments as the learning style of homosexuals.

It pains me to say it, but in this case I agree in the abstract with the traditional conservative line on this issue. A gay high school is not a productive move for the gay-rights movement.

The following comments appeared on Cardiff Giant.

So George and Neill have been on me to post something and I have at last found an issue to speak out upon. (Thank God, maybe now I can get some peace.) Funnily enough I’ve chosen a homo-related topic so I’m exceptionally well-suited to discuss it.

It seems that the New York City Schools Board has been cooperating with an independent gay-rights advocacy group called The Hetrick-Martin Institute. The fruit of this collaboration is Harvey Milk High School, a small school for LGBT students. I have two problems with this concept of a gay high school.

First, his basically says to the world, “We are queer and we are too different from you to go to school at the same place as straight people.” I don’t mean that to sound pejorative at all. Being gay does make one different, and not in a bad way. But the implication from this is that gay people are so different they should continually be differentiated from the normal population. In my view such “segregation” is counterproductive given the current social climate. In the 70’s, 80’s and even to a degree the 90’s, creating a cohesive group of homosexuals was important. A community-sense allowed gay men and women to develop a political voice, to show that they were in fact here, queer, and proud of it. That period of organization is ending now. At this point it is important to show the world a social group that is every bit as “normal” and up right as the rest of the population; that doesn’t want to impose itself on society but just wants to be treated “like everyone else.” Setting up a special campus for gay students, although politically beneficial in NYC does not serve to improve the situation of the majority of homosexuals.

My second point is one that is summed up most concisely in a quote by State Conservative Party Chairman Mike Long, “Is there a different way to teach homosexuals? Is there gay math?” Gay students do not learn differently from others, they are not helped or hindered mentally by being gay. Long’s point is valid, although his feelings on this issue that don’t stem from such logical arguments as the learning style of homosexuals.

It pains me to say it, but in this case I agree in the abstract with the traditional conservative line on this issue. A gay high school is not a productive move for the gay-rights movement.

So we all know that the the RIAA and it’s fearless leader Hilary Rosen killed Napster, everyone’s favorite music source (and just when the Mac OS version was released, too!). We also know that they claim a dramatic decrease in music sales last year was due to a much higher increase in file-sharing services like Kazaa. My first argument is that perhaps the decrease in sales was due to the 13% decrease in the number of albums produced last year as well as the overall shit quality of what was released. I mean last was the year that brought us the musical wonders of a solo Justin Timberlake, Aviril Levine, Lil’ Bow Wow, Lil’ Romeo and others.

But that’s not all, oh no, not by a long shot. In addition to inundating the world with heinous tunes they have also taken to suing their customers. According to CNN “the music industry has won at least 871 federal subpoenas against computer users suspected of illegally sharing music files on the Internet, with roughly 75 new subpoenas being approved each day”. A subpoena in this case is the prelude to a lawsuit that could impose penalties of anywhere from $750 to $150,000 per song downloaded illegally. I read somewhere that based on these numbers along with the number of people the Industry claims are downloading music illegally lawsuits would total $97 trillion. Now I’m all for copyright protection and intellectual property rights for creative people. These people work hard to produce what they do and to market it as they do. What I don’t understand is why the industry fails to see that a large part of the impetus for illegally downloading music is it high cost and it’s questionable quality. Consumers are unwilling, in my opinion, to pay $19 for 9, 10, 11 songs of which they have heard only one or two, and of which only one or two more are any good. I know this is definitely the case for me, I just can’t afford it. In addition to the cost-prohibitive nature of current CDs is the ease of digital music. What is the first thing you do when you buy a CD? Rip it on to your computer? That’s what I do, because I use my computer a lot and it makes it possible for me to put it on my iPod as well (something that thank God is still legal). Digital music is easy and immediately available; it’s cheaper and easier to distribute; it has a higher profit margin because it cuts production costs significantly. Since Apple introduced it’s iTunes Music Store in April I have purchased about 3 full albums and 10 or 15 single songs. I hardly ever buy music because it costs too much and I don’t DL music much because I have a Mac and alas Kazaa, et al. don’t like us Mac users, plus it’s just easier (and cheaper) than buying a CD. Therefore digital music encouraged me to BUY and not to steal.

But the RIAA is still not done. Now Hilary Rosen has been asked by the Administration to advise the interim Iraqi government on drafting intellectual property laws. The Register has more on this, but basically the current Iraqi IP law is much more liberal (in a legal, not political, sense) than the current US IP law, and that is a good thing.

This Saturday, 21 June, is the 21st birthday of Prince William (son of Charles and Di for the irreparably dim). As this is a momentous occasion in the life of any young monarch I would like to say congratulations. And as Cardiff is the capital of Wales (William will be the Prince of Wales) I thought it appropriate for this blog.

Happy hunting. Cheers!

• Editor’s Note: No one cares about Prince William except Lars, British people, and a smattering of 13 year old girls. We apologize for presenting this as news. - Gorman

Neill asked me to post something so I think I’ll respond to Nick’s “Uraniumgate” post. There are a couple points I’d like to make right up front that may explain at least part of Nick’s annoyance about the lack of coverage focused on Uraniumgate.

1. Who is sucking off the President in the Oval Office, while completely irrelevant and inconsequential, sells papers.
2. Before the war 73% of the US was in support of the action, now though lower, support is still at 56%.

The first point goes to why there hasn’t been more coverage of the Presidents’ State of the Union. Most Americans do not want to read or watch news items about a scandal that involves complex and “boring” issues like who knew what and when but lacks any sex appeal; no sex, no story is becoming media’s litmus test. Point two just goes to show that a majority of Americans supported and still support the war in Iraq. Because we are Americans (as well as people) we don’t like to be wrong, anything that makes it sound as though we made the wrong decision is anathema. Hence, not much prominent coverage of a potential scandal or at least an upsetting use of Presidential discretion.

As for the general argument that this “lie” is merely one of many that created a myth of WMDs in Iraq: I disagree wholeheartedly. Think about it logically, Iraq is a country the size of California. Now I ask you to go and find all the illegal drug factories in California. Even with the help of locals (who in this case speak English and are probably very supportive of eliminating drugs) and knowledge of the area it would take years to find them. Now take into account an Iraqi population that doesn’t speak English, might not support America, might be afraid of retribution from Saddam’s followers, lack of proper infrastructure, a basic knowledge of the terrain, an unbearably hot summer, etc and you have a huge task on your hands. To say that after four months of occupation we have failed and will never uncover WMDs is both premature and illogical.

And in my opinion even if we don’t find WMDs the correct decision was made, regardless of its justification because Saddam Hussein was a tyrant who destroyed an entire nation, its economy and people, and set it back decades in development. Not to mention torturing, incarcerating, murdering, gassing, bombing, and generally abusing the innocent people of Iraq. He needed to go for the good of Iraq, for the benefit of the Middle East, and the protection of the whole world.

Today is a wonderful day because I got some great news! My loan for my last year at school were approved. Now I can finish my degree and stop worrying about getting loans, and start worrying about getting a job and paying the loans back. There was some question about approval but I guess they figured they might as well go whole hog and gimme another $20 grand.