HOMOPHOBIC MUMBO JUMBO FROM CRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALIST

This interesting article from the online daily email "care2" should be read, and followed up by the letter below it from Peter Stokes of SaltShakers fame. The article says what many of us have said for many years, and at last a little research - hopefully the beginning of a much larger one - says it like it should be said:

Study: Homophobia Masks Gay Feelings

by Steve Williams
• April 10, 2012

A new study indicates that those who are homophobic may secretly harbor self-hatred over their own same-sex desires.

Reports Science Daily:

“Individuals who identify as straight but in psychological tests show a strong attraction to the same sex may be threatened by gays and lesbians because homosexuals remind them of similar tendencies within themselves,” explains Netta Weinstein, a lecturer at the University of Essex and the study’s lead author.
“In many cases these are people who are at war with themselves and they are turning this internal conflict outward,” adds co-author Richard Ryan, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester who helped direct the research.

The research report, issued by researchers from the University of Rochester, the University of Essex, England, and the University of California in Santa Barbara, suggests that repressed same-sex desires due to negative reinforcement through authoritarian parenting are prominent factors in developing intense feelings of loathing and even hatred of gay people which may in later life lead to hostility towards those who are gay or perceived to be gay.

The paper drew evidence from four separate experiments conducted in the United States and in Germany. Each study involved an average of 160 college students and provided empirical evidence that corroborates longstanding psychoanalytic theories that intense negative feelings toward gay and lesbian people can stem from repressed same-sex desires.

In order to investigate the difference between how participants identified and what their implicit sexual attractions were, researchers carried out a number of experiments. In one such investigation, researchers charted the differences between respondents’ self-identifying statements and how they reacted during a split-second timed task where they were shown words and pictures and asked to label them as “gay” or “straight” while a computer tracked their response times. A faster association of “me” and “gay” and a slower association of “me” and “straight” indicated implicit homosexuality.

Researchers also used a series of questionnaires to assess whether respondents had a controlling upbringing. For example they were asked whether during their childhood they felt free to express their individuality or whether they felt pressured to conform. They were also asked questions relating to homophobia in the household, assessing whether respondents agreed with statements like “My dad avoids gay men whenever possible.”

Researchers then sort to gauge participants’ own levels of homophobia, again both explicit and implicit. Researchers used another series of questionnaires and a second round of quick-fire associations designed to track the amount of aggressive responses the word “gay” elicited when applied to themselves and to others.

The trials revealed a clear pattern: where participants had supportive and accepting parents they were more likely to be in touch with their implicit sexual orientation. However, when participants came from strict anti-gay homes they were less likely to be aware of their implicit sexual orientation. Additionally, participants who identified as being more heterosexual than their implicit scores were more likely to be hostile to gay people. This discrepancy between self-identification and unconscious responses predicted a variety of homophobic behaviors including hostility toward gay people, endorsement of anti-gay politics, and discriminatory bias.

There were of course limitations to these findings given that all participants were college-age students. Researchers now want to test whether these results are similar in other age groups and whether attitudes may change overtime.
In their report the study’s authors also suggest this pattern may be the reason why prominent anti-gay figures have later been caught engaging in or having engaged in same-sex sexual activities, citing examples such as evangelical preacher Ted Haggard who vocally opposed gay marriage (and still does) but found himself the center of scandal in 2006.

The study’s authors caution that while we may find this hypocrisy amusing, homophobia stemming from self-hatred may also at least partly contribute to cases like the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard.


Here is a letter from Peter Stokes - of Salt Shakers fame, although it doesn't say so in his letter in The Age newspaper on Sunday 15 April 2012.

After his letter I have written my version of how his letter could have been written from a gay or lesbian perspective.

To say that Stokes's letter is crass and unacceptable is to be kind to it. As ever. he is comparing homosexuality with paedophilia and theft. This man has no shame, no understanding of the harm he causes, no intelligent approach to his diatribe.

He should take a look at our web pages on homophobia to read how the cristian ministries in the USA and Australia have been discredited with research and studies proving their mumbo jumbo to be just that - unsubstantiated rubbish with no reality in the real world in which they live.

First the Stokes letter:

Right to try

MICHAEL Lallo suggests that ''ministries are preying on gay shame'', based on the feeling of people who have tried to change [their homosexual tendencies] and failed.
Does the same premise stand for those who have tried to give up alcohol or illegal drugs and failed, for the thief who wants to reform or the paedophile? Are they damaged by those who try to help but fail?

What about the ones who succeed? Is it wrong to try to help someone out of their ''shame'' of an addiction? Of course not, because the people who seek help know that what they are doing is wrong. Guess what? So do those homosexuals who try to leave their sexual addiction behind. Some do, some don't, but they all deserve the right to try.

PETER STOKES, Bayswater

My take on the above letter - rewritten to show the absurdity of the religious right

Right to try?

MICHEL Pallo suggests that ''gay and lesbian groups are preying on christian shame'', based on the feeling of people who have tried to change [their christian tendencies] and failed.

Does the same premise stand for those who have tried to give up homophobia or gay-bashing and failed, for the protestant who wants to reform or the Catholic? Are they damaged by those who try to help but fail?

What about the ones who succeed? Is it wrong to try to help someone out of their ''shame'' of an addiction? Of course not, because the people who seek help know that what they are doing is wrong. Guess what? So do those christians who try to leave their god-addiction behind. Some do, some don't, but they all deserve the right to try.

MANNIE DE SAXE, Preston

RUSSIA'S FAVOURITE AND MOST REMEMBERED COMPOSER IS THE HOMOSEXUAL PYOTR ILYICH TCHAIKOVSKY

This article was received from LGBTQNation by email:

Russia rejects G8 statement affirming rights, freedoms of LGBT individuals

Posted: 13 Apr 2012

WASHINGTON — Russia is openly distancing itself from language included in a joint statement released by the G8 Foreign Ministers Meeting Chairman on Thursday that supported the rights and freedoms of LGBT individuals.

Following a meeting in Washington, the statement of the G8 Foreign Ministers Meeting Chair read, in part:

“The ministers reaffirmed that human rights and fundamental freedoms are the birthright of all individuals, male and female, including lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender individuals.

“These individuals often face death, violence, harassment and discrimination because of their sexual orientation in many countries around the world.”

A footnote indicated that the Russian Federation “disassociates itself from this language,” with Russia’s deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov saying Friday that “under the pretext of protecting the so-called sexual minorities, in effect there’s aggressive propaganda and the imposition of certain behavior and values that may insult the majority of the society.”

Ryabkov added that the international law has no separate norms for the protection of people according to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Russian lawmakers in the National Duma (Parliament) are considering a bill that would impose fines for spreading gay “propaganda” among minors, a measure that is similar to legislation adopted in February in St. Petersburg, Russia’s second largest city.

That law bans “homosexual propaganda” directed at minors, with fines of up to $17,000 for offenders.

Two people have already been prosecuted for displaying a sign reading “being gay is normal” near a youth club. The city’s lawmakers are pushing to have the law enacted in the whole country. Three other Russian regions have also enacted similar laws.

The Duma has four times rejected drafts banning “homosexual propaganda,” saying that homosexuality is not a criminal offense, unlike in the former Soviet Union, and therefore promoting it isn’t illegal.

However, according to a recent poll by the Levada Center, 74-percent of Russians consider homosexuality an amoral mental deviation, and less than half of those polled think that LGBTQ people should have equal rights.

The G8 (or, Group of Eight) is a forum for the governments of eight of the world’s largest economies, and includes the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Russia.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FAILS YET AGAIN ON SELLING HOMES AND AGED CARE

Not surprisingly, the Federal Government is using its usual spin to force the elderly and often impoverished and ailing pensioners to sell their homes to fund aged care which ought to be the government's responsibility.

However their main concern is to show that we don't live in a welfare state and the elderly must understand their responsibility to payment for their care in their own homes or in aged care facilities for which they will need to sell their residences in order to afford the "privilege and luxury" of modern-day aged care.

The over-60s are the fasted growing demographic in the country and the baby-boomers must not expect the state to cushion their old age.

This letter says it all:

Letter in The Age 9 APRIL 2012:

Truth of the big sell

I WISH to contradict a Council on the Ageing report that, at 31 meetings held by Minister for Ageing Mark Butler around Australia, ''usually one or two people … expressed concern at having to sell their principal residence (to meet nursing home bonds), but this concern was not generally picked up and supported by the majority of the audience'' (The Saturday Age, 6-7/4).

I attended several meetings. I, and others, were applauded when we expressed opposition to selling homes for any care. I asked Mr Butler whether he knew of any other health area in the world where mortgaging or selling the home was a prerequisite for receiving care. He did not.


Currently many people have to sell their homes to pay an accommodation bond for low-level care. The Howard government tried to introduce bonds for high-level care, but was unsuccessful because of public opposition. There will be disappointment and anger if the Labor government introduces such legislation.

Shirley Bains, Blaxland, NSW

BRADLEY MANNING POSTERS - SPREAD THE MESSAGE!

These posters have been displayed in the USA and they should be displayed internationally to demonstrate the US government's torture of one of its own citizens who was in the US army and who exposed the corruption of the government and the military.

NATIONOFCHANGE VIDEO ABOUT MONSANTO

This was received from Nation Of Change who are trying to raise money to pay for a billboard exposing more of Monsanto's excesses to the world.

Here is the video

SUPPORT BRADLEY MANNING - IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE!

We received the following letter after sending a donation to assist in the payment of Bradley Manning's defence.

We felt that the message should be spread as widely as possible in the hope that protests around the world will expose the United States and the Obama administration's brutality and illegal and illegitimate use of torture against its own citizens who are incarcerated unlawfully and in appalling conditions.

When you have read the letter click on to the link to the Bradley Manning Support Group and help in any way you are able to:

The letter:

"With your help, we've been able to cover over $125,000 of Bradley's legal defense expenses so far! And we're building an international grassroots campaign in parallel to the legal efforts now underway.

In December (2011), we organized 300 friends of Bradley's to march on Fort Meade, Maryland, during his pre-trial "Article 32" hearing - his first court appearance following 18 months of confinement. I was able to sit a few feet behind Bradley during most of the seven day hearing. He looked healthy, which was a relief in light of the torturous conditions inflicted upon him during his nine months at the US Marine Corps Base Brig at Quantico, Virginia.

Back in May 2011, we won much improved conditions for Bradley at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas because 600,000 individuals took the time to write letters and sign petitions, because thousands called the White House, because 300 top legal scholars decried Bradley's conditions as a clear violation of our Constitution's 5th and 8th Amendments. We won this battle because a hundred citizens engaged in civil disobedience at the White House and at Quantico.

Bradley is again back at Fort Leavenworth awaiting court martial at Fort Meade this spring or summer. As soon as the trial date is announced, we'll again move to organize nationwide events and rallies.

"Brad is aware of the fact that events are happening [to support him]... He has asked me to express how very thankful that he is for the support that he has received so far. Brad has also told me he looks forward to the day that he can express his gratitude in person to those that have rallied to his defense." - Bradley's attorney, David Coombs

Please check out

www.standwithbrad.org

today to sign the new public statement if you have not already.

Sincerely,

Jeff Paterson

Courage to Resist project director for the Bradley Manning Support Network

www.bradleymanning.org

DID YOU HAVE ANY IDEA? with Nozomi HAYASE / Juice Media RAP NEWS from CaTV on Vimeo.

SBS article in the Green Guide 8 March 2012 by Debi Enker

Those of us who watched SBS during the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s watched it precisely because it provided the best news available on television in Australia and always superbly delivered by Mary Kosatakidis and Anton Enus.

The films they showed, the film reviews by David Stratton and Margaret Pomeranz provided entertainment that was unique in the Australian context.

The advertisements were never in the middle of programmes and one was able to put up with them precisely because they didn't affect one's viewing pleasure.

This all changed dramatically at the end of 2006 because the person who was the CEO at the time, Shawn Brown, destroyed the jewel in the crown of Australian television in a matter of days.

Mary Kostakidis was insulted and treated appallingly so that her position became untenable and she had to leave.

That was the beginning of the end, and that was followed soon afterwards by the departure of David Stratton and Margaret Pomeranz for the ABC. What was SBS's loss was in this instance, the ABC's gain.

SBS just went from one disaster to another and became literally unwatchable - a view obviously shared by many thousands of television watchers.

We are now watching with bated breath to see whether the management change will restore SBS to its former glory. It has a long way to go!!

Here is the SBS article in the Green Guide 8 March 2012 by Debi Enker

One of the dumbest decisions made by SBS in recent years was the introduction in late 2006 of advertising within its programs.

The desperate, short-sighted move by the cash-strapped network infuriated viewers, who were unanimous in their disapproval, and severely damaged the broadcaster’s standing, undermining its unique place in the media landscape.

Before 2006, ads on SBS appeared between programs, or during natural breaks in sporting events. The change in policy eroded precious goodwill and alienated viewers at a time when the free-to-air TV market was becoming increasingly competitive due to the proliferation of digital channels.

The intrusion of ads within programs made the multicultural broadcaster look like a cut-price commercial network.

Unsurprisingly, the initiative failed to provide the projected boost in revenue while also allowing governments that were not keenly committed to funding the broadcaster with a handy excuse to reduce their support.

Last week, a bill to phase out the disruptive breaks was introduced in the Senate by the Greens communications spokesman, Scott Ludlum.

This would be a good time to contact your local member of parliament, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy or shadow minister Malcolm Turnbull, urging them to fund the multicultural broadcaster properly, support moves to end a spectacularly unsuccessful initiative and bring to a close a bleak period that has succeeded only in driving SBS viewers to change channels.