(Vanessa Williams and) All of Broadway Says Goodbye to Rosie- Page 2

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 3:31pm

Well, it's impressive that she made it to 2003 without knowing a 'mo who didn't want to formally recognize his relationship. I thought she put her foot in her mouth and I got over it; it was asked why PalJoey mentioned here, so I was just schoolin' those who weren't there.

And to me it's not so much about gay marriage (as I've never been remotely close to someone who I would have gay married, nor do I picture it in the foreseeable future) as it is about states ratifying their constitutions to prevent people from having rights that most of us never had in the first place and America's continued acquiescence to the demands of religious extremists.



Updated On: 11/19/08 at 03:31 PM

[cmleidi]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 3:38pm

Isn't Bette Midler close to Marc Shaiman? He was in a committed relationship for many years, and he even spoke out in favor of gay marriage. Her comments strike me as extremely sexist although they could be sexist and homophobic because she doesn't come out against heterosexual marriage when half or more marriages end in divorce, and martial infidelity is extremely common.

Didn't she further clarify her remarks in an interview for the Advocate? Does anyone know what she said? I'm all for giving someone a break, but I often think that people's true nature come out at moments like these.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 3:54pm

http://www.insidesocal.com/outinhollywood/2008/03/bette-midler-the-divine-one-ta.html

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 4:34pm

That's the preview. Read the whole article.
Winning Bette: The legendary Bette Midler holds forth on art, illusion, marriage, kids, and the eternal lure of Las Vegas

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 4:36pm

SEXIST? In what way is saying she didn't know any men who wanted to get married to each other sexist?

"Well, it's impressive that she made it to 2003 without knowing a 'mo who didn't want to formally recognize his relationship."

The thing is, we recognized our own relationships and recognized the relationships of our friends and we recognized the marriages of our heterosexual counterparts capsizing with great regularity.

There's a reason it was called gay liberation, and that is when Bette came up.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 4:44pm

I guess he thought it was sexist because she implied only lesbians might want to marry.

And what you said and what I said aren't mutually exclusive, Namo, but as you and PalJoey have pointed out, Bette Midler doesn't know any gay men under 50.

The movement to legalize gay marriage has more to it than just trying to ape straight relationships.
Updated On: 11/19/08 at 04:44 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 5:29pm

I know that, Phyl, but Bette also has a point about lesbians coupling. As I said in another thread, 80% of the gay marriages in Massachusetts in the first year were among women. Pointing this fact out can not be interpreted as sexist. It's the truth.

The other thing you have to know is, many of us were not invited to the meeting when the Human Rights Campaign decided gays in the military was suddenly THE issue, nor did we realize that cases that worked their way through the courts of Massachusetts, (the way we all used to be taught in civics classes as the way things change in this country) would suddenly become the de facto issue of the gay movement. Well, actually, it didn't until San Francisco had its civil disobedience action.

Which, incidentally, brings this thread back on topic, which is to Rosie O'Donnell. I believe her take that she got married as an act of civil disobedience and that she and her partner recognize that marriage is very old school activist. "We'll do it ourselves and we don't need the larger culture to tell us what we have." I get it. But it pisses off the strict assimilationists.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 8:18pm

My hope is that this won't be the issue. Just an issue. I'm still holding out hope that the silver lining is that this may bring a unity to community (LGBTXYZ and &Pi) that I haven't yet seen in my adult life.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 8:33pm

We're in a world of 30-second attention spans and I'm pretty sure one issue is all we get anymore.

The other thing is, forget the notion of unity. It'll never happen because there is no such thing as a monolithic gay community. In the 1980s, Armistead Maupin wrote a single sentence that was incredibly liberating for me to read:

No, all gay men are not my brothers.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/19/08 at 8:39pm

No, all gay men are not my brothers.

True dat, but I've met some nice lesbians lately. Maybe THEY are my brothers!

Unity was probably a bad choice of words. It's just nice to see people working together, I guess.