Yup!

(via elijahbrent)

gaywrites:

When we talk about the recent victories in Delaware and Rhode Island or the hopefully impending repeal of DOMA and Prop 8, are we talking about “gay marriage” or “marriage equality”? Or both?

LGBT activists have taken lately to using the latter term over the former, myself included. The standard argument is that all marriages should be treated equally, so there’s no sense in distinguishing “gay” ones from straight ones. But HuffPo columnist Murray Lipp doesn’t agree, arguing that there is value in specifying which marriages are between couples of the same sex.

His primary argument in defense of the phrase “gay marriage” is that it brings visibility to same-sex unions, upending the assumption that marriages are inherently heterosexual. Plus, the term is well-known and easily recognizable. Here’s why he wants us to use both “gay marriage” and “marriage equality”:

“Gay marriage” refers to the actual phenomenon of same-sex marriage, the legal union between two people of the same sex. It’s something which is legal or not in any given part of the world. “Marriage equality,” on the other hand, refers to the equal allocation of rights and benefits to all married couples, regardless of whether those couples are opposite-sex or same-sex. It does not describe a type of marriage. It describes an outcome, an achievement or goal, that being the attainment of equality.

When a same sex couple marries, yes it’s a “marriage,” but it can also be described as a “gay marriage” — the adjective “gay” adds further descriptive value which may have significant communicative utility depending on the context. Using the word “gay” helps specify difference but it does not imply “better than” or “less than.” Furthermore, when a same-sex couple marries that marriage is not called “marriage equality” — the term does not describe a type of marriage.

The attainment of “marriage equality” is impossible without “gay marriage” first being legalized. When a given state or country legalizes same-sex marriage and additionally provides equal rights and benefits to all married couples irrespective of whether a couple is same-sex or opposite-sex, then it can be said that “marriage equality” has been achieved in that region. While “gay marriage” is now legal in various states of the USA, “marriage equality” has not yet been achieved in the USA nationally as the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages.

I’m not certain I totally agree with this, mostly due to the portion I bolded above. I am hesitant to focus too explicitly on the difference between a “gay marriage” and a “straight marriage,” particularly because the premise of the fight for marriage equality is that all marriages are the same, gay or straight. Or is pointing out the existence of these “different” marriages key in eventually having them treated equally?

Clearly I need to better organize my thoughts, but only because there’s a lot to say about this. What’s your take on this topic?

I think when people state marriage equality they automatically know that it is because gay marriage is illegal in parts of the world, so it’s not important to use both but both pretty much gives the same idea at what is needed to be achieved.

gaywrites:

Former Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe announced today that he’d be released from his team, and many suspect that his outspoken LGBT activism may be a contributing factor. 

Months ago Kluwe famously sent a letter to a Maryland legislator berating him for suggesting Baltimore Ravens player Brendon Ayanbadejo be released for speaking out in favor of marriage equality. He’s been one of the faces of the allied movement for gay rights ever since.

Kluwe’s age, salary and Locke’s talent all are factors in Kluwe’s release. So is Kluwe’s willingness to be outspoken on a variety of issues, despite the usual “Punters are seen, not heard” mandate. Kluwe says he wouldn’t change a thing.

“I think the sacrifice would be worth it,” Kluwe told Chip Scoggins of the Star Tribune. “Now, I would hope that I would get the chance to play football again, because I think I can still play. But if it ends up being something that costs me that position, I think making people aware of an issue that is causing children to commit suicide is more important than kicking a leather ball.”

He’ll continue to be great wherever he ends up, football or not. 

The bolder but right at the end! That’s the sentence a lot of people just can’t understand!

gaywrites:

Scientists in Denmark are conducting clinical trials on a new strategy for combating HIV that they say could be the breakthrough needed to finally find a cure for the virus. 

Lead researchers studying the treatment told Telegraph that initial signs are “promising.”

“I am almost certain that we will be successful in releasing the reservoirs of HIV,” said Dr. Ole Søgaard, a senior researcher at Denmark’s Aarhus University Hospital.  “The challenge will be getting the patients’ immune system to recognize the virus and destroy it. This depends on the strength and sensitivity of individual immune systems.”

The Telegraph reports that 15 patients are currently enrolled in clinical trials for the treatment, and if they are successfully cured of HIV, the treatment will be rolled out on a larger scale, administered in combination with an immune-system booster. 

SCIENCE. This is unreal. 

Early days but if this works what a result for mankind and one of its battle!

kidshit:

This makes my feet hurt more than they already do.

I really don’t know why, but slightly aroused

And we need never to speak of that sickening invasion of privacy again.

askbarrydylan:

askraygillette:

oh my god

Idiot

Ray: ‘Bravo’
Archer: ‘Thank you!’

valereth:

You’re in the danger zone Lana. You know. From Top Gun

Fuck yes! Would you say we’re venturing in a zone of danger?

squidwurd:

I want to cry

Disturbingly hilarious!

(via kidshit)