This is an update to THIS post:, which garnered the most hilarious comment ever:
"Somewhere in Siberia, there's a gay kid being gang raped while the police stand by and laugh. But he has hope because Thomas Roberts is hosting the Miss Universe Pageant."
"Somewhere in Siberia, there's a gay kid being gang raped while the police stand by and laugh. But he has hope because Thomas Roberts is hosting the Miss Universe Pageant."
Given my checkered history with Mr. Roberts, I deliberately did not weigh in on this Miss Universe situation any further, letting James St. James' (hilarious and pointed) takedown speak for me. But my friend Matthew Rettenmund does a brilliant job of thoroughly explaining just how misguided Roberts is -- especially after the MSNBC anchor sent out a "self-important" tweet over the weekend -- so I thought I would bring it to your attention:
There is so much wrong here, one almost doesn't know where to begin, but something that is crystal clear is that Thomas Roberts is no deep thinker ...
Read Matt's post HERE.
6 comments:
Hi Kenneth: I find myself in complete disagreement with over this one -- I have no problem with Roberts decision, just like I had no problem with Andy Cohen's decision not to go.
I'm 10 years older than you, lived through the heart of the HIV/AIDS crisis -- there was quite the time where sides were drawn between the HRC-types working as lobbyists to get funding for HIV/AIDS research and care VS the Act-UP crowd that went all-out aggressive protesting to get funding and care.
It took BOTH efforts -- the Act-UP protesting forced movement, ended stalling, and gained support to tackle the crisis. Act-UP forced attention when other efforts failed. BUT, it was the HRC crowd that worked/lobbied with Congress/Senate to write the actual legislation that brought funding and government action.
Imperfect, certainly. But, after 12 years of Reagan/Bush non-action, the efforts of both did indeed work.
The simple fact that an out-and-proud gay man is going to be out front-and-center in Moscow at an international event is NOTEWORTHY. This is a win, small as it may be, for our side. The marriage debate shows, exposure changes minds.
Remember all, Stonewall was only 43 years ago, when the attitude in the US everywhere was anti-gay. And it has taken all sorts of efforts to make things better, yet, there are still bashings to death, still employment and housing discrimination, and still a way to go for marriage. Is the Russian bigotery really much worse than what we have faced down? Is it worse than our own government allowing 250,000 AIDS deaths BEFORE funding care and research?
****
I'll wish Roberts well and hope his efforts are the start of something good -- a first effort MUST start somewhere, and NOW is better than waiting years to make a difference.
I agree with you Mike and you said it better. Below is my comment on Matt's Blog:
When I read Andy's statement about not hosting I was in total agreement with him and proud of his commitment. Then I read Thomas's statement and I also agree with it.
There isn't one right way of fighting, there are many battles and many strategies needed to win the war. If we were to follow your line (Matt) of thinking, then the only person the pageant should have to host is some homophobic asshole. And it's not just about LGBTQ people in Russia - this is world wide and having an out gay person host the show is kinda a big FU to Russia. You know they hate it.
VISIBILITY = POSSIBILITY=HOPE=CHANGE
Mike and Sean: This isn't Russia, so more power to you two.
I feel TR is doing it for the same reason Elton John played at Rush Limbaugh's wedding. I just wish all of them would stop pretending it's for some high-minded reason and admit that's the true motivation here.
You guys seem to let celebrity or a pretty face turn you into such $ucker$ ...
"You don't like your seat? Work on getting it moved. But don't give up your place at the table in spite of it."
Uh, Thomas, YOU'RE AT THE WRONG TABLE!
"There isn't one way of fighting" is something you might tell Thomas Roberts, who explicitly denigrated those who are in favor of boycotting in his laughably self-important letter of explanation.
The idea that sending a gay man to host Miss Universe will send a message to Russia is like saying, "That anti-gay Chick-Fil-A...I'll eat there every day just to show 'em gays are people, too!"
No one who is defending Roberts has talked about the blatant conflict of interest he has that creates and appearance of impropriety---he is on NBC's payroll, they are making bank on Miss Universe and are making bank on the Olympics. He is providing cover for NBC and others, and making money out of it, too.
It's a joke to suggest that having a gay man host Miss Universe is a major statement. It's happened before, so it's breaking no new ground. What it IS doing is it's dumping on Andy Cohen's principled action.
I respectfully disagree with anyone who argues that Roberts--who deserves and has received from me praise for many of his other actions in his career--has not made a contemptible decision here.
Aunty Thom
Post a Comment