Wednesday, April 1, 2015


As I listened to well-intentioned space nerds, extolling the wonders of living on Mars, on BBC this morning, I realized that Science, as a worldwide phenomenon, has failed. Just as Religion has failed to deliver peace, justice and morality, Science has failed to truly deliver a higher quality of planetary health and general human welfare. I include Technology under the greater umbrella of Science in this idea.
Science's failure, like Religion's, is based in its inability to unite great minds worldwide in cooperative research and development. It operates on competition, based in monetary compensation. The measure of 'good science' is its applicability to profit-making. I do not wonder that Science congratulates itself as 'advanced' in an age of record corporate profits at the expense of quality of life for the masses.
Capitalist scientists would loudly disagree. They would wave statistics in my face which show a decrease in hunger, an increase in lifespan , a decrease in infant mortality. All these anthropocentric statistics would ignore the degradation of the planet's ecosystems. It would ignore the pollution of sea and air. It would ignore overpopulation's inevitable dead end.
Science, once the hope of those emerging from the devastating age of religious contention and domination in Europe, has failed to the degree that the human species itself may suffer an irreversible ecological collapse with its cause being misapplied Science. The flight of human beings back into the false security of Religion in many societies is perhaps a species-wide regression, a worldwide human thumb-sucking response to the realization that man's attempt to be free from dark superstition has led to planetary disaster.

Tuesday, March 31, 2015


A massive military exercise in the U.S. Southwest has gone largely unreported in the media. Think about it. This exercise takes place in a drought zone, which reportedly has a short life span predicted by most scientists who have studied the issue. Many millions live in this zone. Could this be a preparation for crowd control? Mass evacuations? Or is it preparation for a massive war in the Middle East? Whatever it is illustrates American militarism, not American peacekeeping.

Monday, March 30, 2015


Today in my neighborhood, Senator Ted Kennedy's memorial in the form of a U.S. Senate institute will be dedicated in the presence of both the President and Vice-President of the United States. Big deal, I guess, for some. Yet I am left with the question, "If the leaders of my government can attend a private memorial's dedication, why didn't they take the trouble to be present at the march against terrorism in Paris after the Charlie Hebdo massacre?" I speculate that dedicating mausoleums for political allies who are from aristocratic families outweighs advocating for freedom from religious terrorism against the masses.

Sunday, March 29, 2015


sunday morning peace
only frantic birdsong stirs
inner harmony

Saturday, March 28, 2015


Inhibition is a brake on liberation. Most human beings are not extroverts. The need to survive emotionally, economically or simply physically forms layers of restraint and conformity from an early age. Those who are lucky enough to be born to financial security or privilege are more likely to become intellectuals, artists, writers or actors.
As someone whose natural ability to draw and be open to people was squelched in my early childhood by a depressed mother, I have had to learn to swim back to the surface with my talents. The deep foundations of fear that were laid by physical and psychological abuse are not shaken easily.
I learned one technique soon after leaving the clutches of my childhood home. When I was out with friends in college, one of my regular pals offered to take me with him and another friend to Manhattan to see a theater production. He described a weekend in a luxury hotel on Central Park. Dining in posh restaurants and touring around. His father was an executive with an international corporation, based in Manhattan.
My head spun with reasons why I could not accept. I had no clothes suitable for New York. I might bungle table etiquette at a fancy restaurant. As a closeted gay boy of 17, I worried I might display some arousal while sharing a hotel suite with my friends. "I'm not sure," I mumbled, most likely looking like I had been slapped rather than offered a dream weekend.
"Why not?" My friend was very assertive and confident, since he was the oldest son of a wealthy family who had told him from an early age that he could be whatever he wished to be.
"Well, I don't really think I have the clothes for New York..." I started to share my prison walls.
"Why not?" He persisted. From then on, he repeated the question at every obstacle I threw up. It eventually dawned on my addled brain that he was going to do this as long as it would take. I broke out laughing when I got the lesson. "Why not, indeed?" I finally replied with resignation.
And what a trip it was. And, thanks to his lesson and others like it, what a trip is has been in the nearly half-century since.

Thursday, March 26, 2015

BIMBOSITY (bim-BOH-sit-tee)

The homosexual male culture is rapidly evolving in the wake of legally validated relationships. Unfortunately, evolution is always a messy business. The common garden slug is a good example.

The dark closet's door has opened into the bright light of new media. We are far from the small, gray-suited demonstrations of the Mattachine Society on Manhattan and D.C. streets. We now have Pride, the evolved version of human rights protests, transformed into block parties and parades with corporate sponsors. Gay men do like to party.

The development of widely popular bimbosity, the quality of the common or uncommon bimbo, in social media and other internet media heralds a new age of gayness, an age comparable to 1950s and 1960s heterosexuality, during which the blinding stardom of the bimbo blondes reigned. Jane Mansfield and Marilyn Monroe were the outstanding bimbo-portrayers of their time.

There is a subtle difference. Today's gay bimbos on Youtube and elsewhere are not portraying bimbos; they appear to be sincere and proud bimbos. I cite two examples:

Davey Wavey is a bimbosity trailblazer. He is getting long in the tooth for a media bimbo, but he has staying power. His monologue videos are done shirtless, displaying his magnificent pectorals, just as alluring to a gay man as the massive breasts of Mansfield and Monroe. Davey Wavey imparts observations and wisdom on being a young(ish) gay man, an occupation and state of being to which he was born with natural attributes and talents. The real process of the videos, however, is his ability to flirt and entice through a lens. This is a core value of bimbosity. I will add that Davey Wavey often has some good advice for the young gay man who is just coming into his stride. Like Mansfield and Monroe, he is intelligently bimbosious.

Bryan Hawn is a rising bimbosity superstar on Youtube and elsewhere. His posted resume includes being a body model (underwear), a lip-sync artist who does parodies of gay pop icons while flexing, bending and primping, a fitness expert who specializes in big butts and a zoologist(?). Despite growing up in a wealthy Atlanta home, Bryan has no real credentials (or post-secondary education) that qualify him as a zoologist, but I do see he illegally purchased a zoo animal (hyena), so perhaps he means he is a zoo-ologist.  It's an easy mistake to make, if you are a bimbo.

This advance in gay culture may strike some as encouraging. I will admit it leaves me scratching my head. Was it really worth all the trouble to swap a genuine sexual revolution for soft-porn icons and their videos? Are Davey's pecs and Bryan's ass the sum total of our liberation? To the uninitiated, I am afraid it may seem so. I dislike the thought that a blossoming gay teen in Oklahoma, or perhaps Afghanistan, will find these bimbos on line as their first exposure to what it means to be a gay man. It gives a whole new meaning to "It gets better."  I hope it does.