European Gaycation

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Sphere: Related Content

To Gay Or Not To Gay?

In what may be one of the odder lawsuits that I've heard of, we have three bisexual men who are suing a national gay-athletic organization for telling the men that they're not gay enough to participate in their Gay Softball World Series. Or something. It's hard to say. But it's odd.

Here's the scoop: According to the Seattle Times, "Steven Apilado, LaRon Charles and Jon Russ...played on a team called D2 that qualified for the 2008 Gay Softball World Series". First of all, what is a D2? How is that the name of a team? Do they play against R2? I don't get it. But here's what I really don't get: According to the article, "Each of the three plaintiffs was called into a conference room in front of more than 25 people, and was asked "personal and intrusive questions" about his sexual attractions and desires, purportedly to determine if the player was heterosexual or gay." Um, wait. What now?

Called into a conference room? What the what? Asked "personal and intrusive questions"? Like what, exactly? Look, I don't know about the straight guys that you know, but the straight guys that I know are not going to be posing as gay or bisexual in order to play on a gay softball team. They're just not. If they're going to play softball at all, they're going to be playing on a straight team or, at the very least, a team that doesn't care. There aren't a lot of guys looking to sneak into the gay softball world just for a chance at winning some trophy. There just aren't.

It says that they asked "questions". Plural. Why would you need more than one? That one being, "So, ever done it with another guy?" Because in my book, if you're a guy and you've willingly had sex with another guy, you're gay enough for me. Again, I know a lot of straight guys and there aren't any of them that are going to actually have sex with another guy, let alone admit to it, solely for the purpose of getting on a gay softball team. They're just not going to.

Now then, "The alliance's rules say that each World Series team can have no more than two heterosexual players." That's what it says. What it doesn't tell us is why. It's the GAY World Series. Heterosexual players aren't very GAY! And also, "At one point during the proceedings, the lawsuit alleges, one of the plaintiffs was told: "This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series." Um, no. See, if you're allowing two heterosexual players per team, then that, by definition, IS a bisexual world series! I'm beginning to wonder if the folks in charge of this Gay World Series thing are aware of the definition of gay. 'Cause it kind of seems like they're not!

What the guys want out of the lawsuit is "$75,000 each for emotional distress. They're also seeking to invalidate the alliance's findings on the men's sexual orientations and to reinstate D2's second-place World Series finish." That's right. They somehow were allowed to compete in the World Series and then I'm gathering that they lost and that's when they decided to strip them of their losing title. Place. Thing. Something. I don't understand any of this. But I do think I understand that they don't need $75,000 for emotional distress. Seriously? $75,000? There's no emotional distress is being told that you're not gay enough. Now, if you were a straight guy and were told that you weren't straight enough, that might cause some emotional distress! (I kid. I kid!) That just bugs me.

And maybe this is why it bugs me. "The men also are asking the court to toss out the alliance's rule limiting the number of straight players on each team." Toss out the rule? Limiting the number of straight people? But it's the GAY AMATEUR ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION that sanctions the GAY WORLD SERIES! It's right there in the name! GAY! You don't need to have a RULE limiting the NUMBER of STRAIGHT people! It's limited in the name ITSELF! GAY! What is so hard to understand about that? Are there no straight softball teams in the Seattle area? I know the folks there are kinda wispy and all, but I highly doubt that none of them are straight.

The article goes on to point out that "Hypothetically, that could mean a team of all-straight people could form, but "it would be extremely unlikely for that to happen." Yes! That WOULD be unlikely! Why? Because, AGAIN, it's the GAY softball league! Why would straight people WANT to play in it?! I don't understand any of this. It makes no sense. If the guys are gay and are upset because they couldn't convey their gayness to the point where it was believable, that's one thing. But if that were the case, why are they all upset that there is a limit to the number of straight people on the teams that are for GAY PEOPLE?! None of this makes a lick of sense. I'm going to go watch hockey playoffs.

Sphere: Related Content

In Other News

Oh, yeah. By the way, Adam Lambert, the American Idol runner-up this year, says he's gay.

In other news, the sun? Still hot. Water? Still wet.

Back to you.

Sphere: Related Content

Lesbianism Cleans Up Train Wrecks

Lindsay Lohan used to be a train wreck. Not a train wreck waiting to happen. But an actual train wreck. Off the rails, bashing into something (or someone), inoperable and crumpled into a pile, unable to move without assistance. A lovely picture, indeed.

And really, do you blame her? I mean, her parents are lunatics. And growing up in the Hollywood limelight/spotlight? I don't care how much you think you'd like that, you wouldn't. (You might at first (for like an hour), but after that, it's going to get old and it's not going to be looking back.) So you have the child actress with the ridiculous and incompetent parents (who, naturally, get divorced, adding yet another ingredient into this recipe for disaster) and she's growing up in that whole Hollywood/entertainment industry (as the cash cow/gravy train conductor for her family) surrounded by the usual drugs and alcohol and people who want to be your "friend" because you're famous. It sounds horrible, if you're asking me.

Then she gets a DUI. Then another. Somewhere along the line I'm pretty sure she wrecked at least one Mercedes. And I know that cocaine was involved at least once. And she was arrested. And the list goes on. And on. And on. Oh, and most of this was before she turned 21. Nice.

And I'll be the first to admit, I was calling Vegas hoping that some sports book had odds on when she was finally going to do herself in. (I was looking to put down at least $20 on an Over/Under bet as to whether or not she lives to be 30. I really wanted the Unders.) Remember for a while there how it was Lindsay and Paris Hilton and Britney Spears all just crashing and burning at the same time? (My God, you couldn't go 10 minutes without hearing about the fiasco du jour from the diva du jour for like 6 months straight.) Turns out, Brit might be the one who is the most off the path these days. Who knew? (Paris Hilton is just dumber than a box of hair, so we never expected much from her. And I see that as a good thing, actually, because if you think about it, what would we expect from her? Ugh.)

But back to Lindsay. Lately? Not so much of a train wreck. Not even really so much of a train. She seems to be the kinder, gentler Lindsay. The Lindsay that no one knew was in there. I don't think that even she knew she was in there. How could you when you're surrounded with the environment that she was? Actually, she kind of still is in that environment. So what's changed? Why the different Lindsay?

While there hasn't been any official-official confirmation (but loads of speculation), it would appear that our little Lindsay has become quite smitten with another individual. One who appears to have become quite smitten with her as well. They seem to spend an awful lot of time together, they seem to be happy when they're seen in public together and it would seem as if they are 'together'. But no one's saying for sure. Why not? Because the alleged object of Lindsay's affection is another chick.

DJ (yes, a DJ) Samantha Ronson (who looks a bit like the Superman antagonist Mxyzptlk) has been constantly with Lindsay for the better part of about a year now. A few photos have surfaced here and there of them "kind of" kissing. The day after her 22nd birthday, she called Ryan Seacrest's radio show (who better to not talk to about not being gay?) and told him that she'd like to "spend the next year being with the person that I care about." Do you think that Ryan was able to strap on a set of balls and ask who that might be? Of course not. (I don't know necessarily that he should have asked. But I do like making fun of little closeted gay Ryan Seacrest.) But what she said says a lot.

I don't know a lot about Samantha Ronson. Hell, I don't know a lot about DJs in general. But I know that Lindsay was a disaster waiting to happen just a little over a year ago. And I know that lately, when I see photos of her in the tabloids, they're not mugshot photos. And I know that she looks a lot better in the non-mugshot photos of late than she did when she was on a diet of Red Bull, vodka and cocaine. And as I briefly skim through uninteresting stories about how her and Ronson were grocery shopping together, I know that it seems normal. It seems like it's the most normal her life has ever been. And good for her.

And maybe she is gay and maybe she isn't gay, I don't know. But I'm pretty sure that it's not important. I'm pretty sure that she doesn't need to come bounding out of the hypothetical closet simply to satisfy the curiosities of others or to make some sort of statement or to act as the unofficial, but publicly appointed poster child for 'Gay is OK'. (And I don't mean Oklahoma.) That there is so much speculation about if she "is" or "isn't" makes it pretty obvious as to just how much people are missing the point. (And it also hammers home the reality that the tabloids are just in it for the exploitation of celebrity.

Look, she isn't crashing her vehicles into lampposts and getting strung out on coke and being arrested for DUI because of one reason. (Well, kind of two, but they're really sort of the same.) So here it is: She's freaking happy. (AND, probably for the first time in her life, she feels like someone actually loves her just because of who she is and NOT because she's Lindsay Lohan. That has to be an incredible relief.) And for as interested as people were in why she was such a train wreck, I find it amazing (but not totally shocking) that people can't pay attention to what it is that's really important to people and can make such a big difference in their lives. (But again, people are morons, so what do I expect?)

And I don't know if she's gay or not. And I really don't care. If she feels like she wants to tell the world that she's gay (IF she is), that's up to her. (But Lindsay, since I know you're reading this right now, I'm going to have to advise against it for now. Just enjoy your new found inner peace and happiness. And don't screw it up and make me look like an idiot for thinking that.)

I really don't know what it was that provoked my Lindsay Lohan diatribe today. I don't know, maybe I'm just happy for someone who can find that kind of happiness with someone else. I do know that if I had been able to put my $20 down on the Unders, I'd be pretty happy to lose that bet.

Sphere: Related Content