Joy-Ann Reid

Joy-Ann Reid
Pembroke Pines, Florida, USA
December 08
Journalist and talk radio personality in South Florida. Also blogging daily at


Editor’s Pick
APRIL 28, 2009 12:44PM

Perez Hilton is an asshole. There, I said it.

Rate: 35 Flag

Perez HiltonFar be it from me to start agreeing with Matt Drudge's assistant, but Andrew Breitbart is right on this one. Perez Hilton's gutter-level attacks on Miss California were out of line. I don't care how celeb-fab you think you are, or how passionate you are about gay rights. You shouldn't get to call any woman the c-word (or the b-word for that matter,) and get away with it (and how desperate was the Miss USA pageant for cool points that they put such a controversial, to say the least, celeb hunter on that dais in the first place...?) If say, Mel Gibson, or Don Imus, had called a beauty contestant, or any woman for that matter, a c---, the hew and cry would have lasted for weeks, and careers would be hanging in the balance. African-American actor Isaiah Washington lost his gig on "Gray's Anatomy," alon with his career and livelihood over an anti-gay slur that doesn't come close to the "c-word" in terms of sheer repugnance (when word leaked that he and his wife would soon be kicked out of their home, Perez cheered his misfortune...) Michael Richards, formerly of "Seinfeld," committed career suicide by using the "N-word" at a comedy club. And yet, the "Queen of Mean" gets away with his slur because ... what ... Carrie Prejean's a religous rightie? ... Because she's "just a pageant girl"...? Because ... he's gay? Well he shouldn't have gotten a pass for any reason, and shame on the media, and on my side of the political spectrum for not calling him out.

Meanwhile, while onstage, she mangled the syntax, and while there is clearly growing support for gay marriage in the U.S., and Republicans risk even further diminishing themselves by continuing to harp on it, Miss Prejean's views (and those of fellow gay movement scourge, Rick Warren,) are hardly shocking. In fact, they turn out to be precisely the same as those of the president of the United States. Remember him? And millions of religious Americans, who by no means "hate" gay people, are conflicted on the issue, indeed, many struggle sincerely with it. Are all of these people c---t's and bitches, too? Or in the vernacular of a certain British MP, maybe they should all just be killed.

One thing Breitbart gets wrong in his Washington Times column, is his contention that there was no comparable backlash from pro gay marriage groups against African-Americans, who mostly oppose same-sex marriage and voted mainly in favor of Proposition 8. In fact, the attacks on African-Americans in the wake of Prop 8's passage, particularly online, were often vicious, accusatory, and sometimes, downright racist, (and sometimes scary,) repleat with cries of "you people owe us!" ... and yes, the gay community's anger WAS directed against Barack Obama, too.

Like any movement, the gay marriage cause has two sides: one reasonable and thoughtful, the other ranging from snarky and entitled to downright nasty. (Perez Hilton, it seems, belongs to the latter, and you can throw in a rather awful strain of mysogyny in his brand, too.) And yet, both sides lay claim to the civil rights movement of the 1960s (which is one reason blacks often shut down on the issue.) On that score, it's helpful to remember history with a sense of proportionality. During segregation, whites who opposed integration and "intermarriage" weren't "uncomfortable" with blacks, they wanted blacks to remain a servant class, physically separated from society and denied the basic rights of citizenship, and they held literal life and death power over an entire class of people whom many literally thought to be subhuman. Opponents of gay marriage don't want to turn gays into servants or property, they simply hold to traditional religious notions of human coupling. Not exactly equivalent. Meanwhile, the movement the gay marriage cause hopes to emulate was one Dr. King patterned after Mohandus K. Ghandi, whom I suspect would never have called even the worst of all colonialists a c---.

Cross-posted at the Reid Report.

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
I agree that Perez Hilton is an asshole. But, I still think that Miss California is "unenlightened" in her views on gay marriage, to say the least.

Those two opinions are not mutually exclusive.
Miss Cali is entitled to her opinion on gay marriage. Perez Hilton is not entitled to attack women with that kind of language on national television and then walk away. And where are the liberal women rising up in outrage! Do we only get mad when a straight man calls us out of our name?
Miss California's answer was so rambling it was barely obvious what her position was. Had she clearly enunciated that she was opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds, but respected others' right to a different opinion, she might have come away with a little more credibility.

Perez Hilton has always been an asshole.
I think that Miss California is entitled to her views on gay marriage. But, I also think that Perez Hilton is entitled to have a bad opinion of her, and even to use nasty language.

And they will both have to deal with the consequences of what they said.
Sorry but Miss California's opinion is about gay mariage a bullshit!!!#@! She is NOT entitled to talk like that. As Miss America she MUST respect everyone. Well today she is against to gay marriage. I'm sure yesterday she was against to interracial marriage!

I'm NOT rating this post , not because I like Perez Hilton, just because you are supporting antigay bigot Miss (innerugly) America!
You and your girl friend Mis America should have tea together I'm sure you guys have A LOT OF common!
Free speech means that they both get to say what they want. And both were offensive in their speech for me.

Of course, Perez also has a fondness for drawing splashes of semen coming from the photographed mouths of stars and starlets. So, he's a dude from way back.

But I agree that one doesn't cancel the other. Both said offensive things.

And the President is wrong, too, just classier about saying it.
I concur with Jeanette and Odette (I'm a poet and I don't know it!)--Miss California is entitled to give her opinion on gay marriage, especially since she was asked and wasn't offering it up out of nowhere. We can choose to agree or disagree, but we are entitled to hear it to help us make up our minds about it, and her.

Similarly, Perez Hilton--while not free to marry the person of his choice--is free to express his opinion in four letters or forty about Miss California and her response. We can choose to agree or disagree, but we are entitled to hear it to help us make up our minds about it, and him. He has done the gay community no favors with his opinion, but he undeniably has the right to express it.

Freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend--and, as Jeanette pointed out, responsibility for one's offensiveness and its consequences.
You got it, Joy-Ann. He's an asshat. So she's wrong -- doesn't make it okay to drop the c-word. (I flinched as I typed it, for chrissakes.)
Thank you for calling out this "Perez Hilton" character. You made very good points.

I am too very surprised at the latitude given to this person. I was flipping channels the other day and found him speaking on a reality show throwing the Bitch word around as if it was a formal salutation for any woman.

The media and viewers seem to allow misogyny to run unchecked.... But what can you expect from a culture that devalues intelligent debate and opts for demeaning one another?
Yeah ... I am sure Andrew Breitbart has never called anyone the c-word ... and it's worth mentioning that he voted for a man who called his wife the c-word.

Honestly, if I were typing this anywhere else, I would type out the c-word, but OS is P.C. Central so ... I won't.

It's just a word. Perez Hilton shouldn't have said it, but multiple columns should not be dedicated to it. It's just a word. If Perez were British, this wouldn't be a big deal ... because ... it's just a word. In my book, unless you're a white person calling a black person the n-word, anything goes. They're just words. Period. Sometimes, high-minded literary crowds can give words too much power.

It's just a word.
Wait one second- Perez Hilton wasn't using the B**** word or C*** word to refer to women in general. He was using those words to refer to one specific woman. What's wrong with calling a stupid dumb b**** a stupid dumb b****? Are you of the opinion that all women are noble and good, and that there are no stupid dumb b****es in this world? Or are you saying there are plenty of stupid dumb B****es in this world, but we're not allowed to call any of them that?
Excellent post Joy-Ann

I did not hear that Perez had called Miss California the C word. Surely this is not the type of behavior the pageant promoters envisioned when they selected Perez to be on the panel of judges. I agree with most of your respondents, that we all have the right to speak our minds, as long as we are prepared to accept the consequences. The consequence for Miss Cali was that she did not win the pageant. What befalls Perez Hilton remains to be seen. In the short term, I concur that the lack of public outrage sends the wrong message. In my opinion it is totally unacceptable for a media personality such as Perez Hilton to refer to anyone in such a profane manner, simply because they disagree with their point of view. If Perez was attempting to channel Andrew Dice Clay for pure shock value, he was successful. The uncomfortable reality is that Perez has shown you his true self, and absent any public outcry has just been issued a license to behave similarly in the future.

Thankfully, I am not into the Hollywood and entertainment gossip scene. If I was, Perez Hilton would be someone I would consciously avoid.
He's just a bitchy little faggot. Miss California (snort) pushed his button. Bread and circuses.
Perez Hilton has been given too much power.
One thing: In the MSNBC interview in question, Perez said "I called her the 'B' word but I was thinking the 'C' word--but I didn't say it."

That's as close as Perez came to calling her a see-you-next-Tuesday on television.
He's an asshole, but he's got great hair.

What we ought not to be doing is looking to him for anything more than updates on the latest Britney Spears derailment and to find out if Angelina is pregnant again. Asking him to Lob political or socially relevant questions at the easily stunned and inarticulate seems well out of his melee. But I'm in an opposite marriage, so what would I know.

:) Rated
You're so right! Great post!!
I don't disagree with the general lunacy of Perez, but, uh . . . how again does he represent this monolithic "gay community."? (Are there potlucks and barn-raisings I just never get invited to? Do I have to pay dues?)

Also: You stay classy, Gordon Wagner!
I think there is far less sensitivity about the use of anti-female slurs than the use of anti-gay or racist slurs. And this is from both women and men. Not sure what that is about.
ZBitch (interesting moniker...) This is what Carrie Prejean said:

" ... When asked by judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, whether she believed in gay marriage, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, said "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." ..."

Hateful? I don't think so. She said, in her own stumbly fashion, that others can choose to disagree, but in HER belief system, marriage is between a man and woman. ..."

Are you saying she's not entitled to her belief system? I'm entitled to believe there's life on Mars. In my universe, that's the way it is. If she said she hated gay people, I must have missed it. But in a way that's not the point. Perez and that idiot MP from Great Britain are essentially saying that if she's not for this specific issue -- gay marriage -- then she's by definition a bigot and a ... well, no need to use even the first letter of the word again ... women on both sides of the gay marriage issue should be disgusted by what looks to me like Perez's hatred ... of women. What makes him any better than your run of the mill, second rate rapper who calls women bitches and ho's because he can't think up complex lyrics that rhyme?
Whatever word is appropriate for a person who did not want school desegregation or was against the rights of interracial couples to marry is befitting of Miss California. Although I never approve of the "C-word," I don't think you get a free pass on bigotry because "its how you were raised." Many of us grew up that way and with the help of education and a spirit of equality, found ourselves on the right side of this human rights debate.
So, no one should be held accountable for their "belief system", as long as it's religiously based, even though that "belief system" is discriminatory?

You're absolutely right to come down hard on Perez Hilton, but you seem to be giving a pass to a "belief system" which says that certain persons are not entitled to the same rights as others.
Well said. The same rights that protect Perez protect Miss CA. Why is that when someone expresses their opinion that is against liberal thinking they are crucified by the same people who claim to be ultra-hip and open-minded?
Miss CA's opinion was just that an honest answer to a controversial issue. While it might not have been PC it was honest. Maybe they should go back to asking questions about world peace.
nutjob, so you took from my post that I think EVERYONE should have whatver rights they want? Thanks for that cogent analysis.

Talk about missing the point.
Or questions like can you cook, how many babies do plan to have, or describe your ideal? date?
I'm so with you, Joy.

Trudge, I understand what you're saying. Miss California wasn't PC, but she honest. OK.

Couldn't the same be said about Hilton? That he wasn't PC, but he was being honest?

Also, I agree that they should go back to asking less inflammatory questions. Like why Americans can't find the U.S. on a map. That one's always good for a laugh.
Great post!

Perez hilton is a moron and has proved to be a whiny drama queen and is doing more harm then good, but we shouldn't be shocked really, I mean this is the same twit who "outs" celebs just for kicks. The guy is a prick.

I agree. She's a bigot. No doubt about it. Also, not much of a believer in America, as she doesn't believe in equal rights for all.

Again, both have the right to say whatever they like in our country, short of threatening someone's life. So, have at it. But Perez's behavior doesn't excuse her behavior.
Perez Hilton is a blessing and a curse. Some would say he celebrates the worst of who we are - some would say he says what other people are already thinking, and is therefore just reflecting us back to ourselves. I think both things are true.

As a gay man, I'm conflicted because he's choosing to be extremely vocal on an issue that is very emotional for those of us who are gay - and he's calling out hypocrisy when he sees it. The bottom line for me is this: You can have whatever beliefs you want, but YOU DO NOT GET TO LIMIT MY RIGHTS BECAUSE OF YOUR BELIEFS. And if you try to, we are going to fight back, and we are going to keep fighting until we win. Period.
But since when does Miss CA, Miss America, Miss Universe or even Miss Porn have the power to sway the masses? I mean just because someone famous spouts an opinion does not mean I'm going to knee-jerk support them. If this were true, we would all be Millionaire's thanks to Publisher's Clearinghouse. Or I would give my entire earning to Psychic Friends.
As someone once said, "Opinions are like a---holes, everybody's got one". I think it was a disgruntled Gallup Poll employee or a toilet paper mogul.
@ Jeanette, I support his rights too. But as a straight man if I were to start bad-mouthing him, I would be labeled a homophobe which I'm not. Actually, I support gay rights and gay marriages.
"Perez's behavior doesn't excuse her behavior." Yes, that's it.
Consider the source. I do. He's just a diva with no talent and a good head for marketing himself. He's no different than Hannity, O'Reilly or Coulter he just thinks he is because he plays the gay card so f'ing much. He's here, he's queer, so f'ing what. I ignore his sorry ass. The girl lost the pageant because it was a beauty pageant, emphasis on beauty and Miss North Carolina was clearly more beautiful, on the inside and out.
But rated for saying what many won't. I happen to agree and I avoid him like the plague.
I don't recall Perez signing on to be a representative for gay culture. Miss CA however, did. When she was awarded her crown she was to represent her state. I agree with Jeanette. I also believe that when someone is up against the wall they might say things that are harsh. As a gay man, Perez is up against that wall. Miss CA can marry whoever she wants to in her opposite marriage. Mr. Hilton cannot.
Oddly enough in her comment LadyMiko referred to Perez Hilton as a prick which didn't seem to be that big of a deal; despite the fact that the P word and the C word are gender specific cognates. In each case a somewhat harsh synecdoche is used to reference stereotypically gender specific unpleasant behaviour. The only difference seems to be that the men-folk don't insist on being treated like fairy tale royalty who's feces carry no discernible odor.
Joy-Ann, so well said. Except for one minor detail. In the OS world, I think the groundswell word is ass HAT.
He is an asshole. We all have to remember that people have the right to their opinions without being subjected to bile like that.
Gabby Abby: LOL
I'll keep it in mind! :)
The fact that Perez Hilton is an asshole is old news. And so are brain-dead and blow-dried beauty queens.
He's Rona Barrett with a penis. Who cares what he thinks?

I don't understand the fascination with gossip and its perpetrators. Are people's lives THAT empty?
I cannot account for actions of Miss California.

However, Perez Hilton should not be a model in any way for the LGBTQ community especially, or even for the homosexual citizens.

He seems quite uncivilized if you ask me.

There are always radicals in every cause, whether the majority of a population or group, support the cause or not.

I would say I would be more frightened to be an African American woman in the nineteen fifties, than a homosexual in the twenty first century.

Not to imply that the LGBTQ community, has a majority to make overstatements, about our oppression. However as you said, there are understandable people, as well as radicals in the strive to have equal rights for gay marriage. As well, as I said, just as in any cause.
So, what if she had said"

"We live in a land where you can choose mixed-race marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a white man and a white woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." ..."

So. Is her 'right to free speech' supported with that statement? Then why would it be supported with her original statement. Both statements show a marked disrespect for a group of American citizens. Both seek to use hysterical and closed minded 'family tradition' to deny the rights of a minority.

The problem is that if she had said what she said above, she would likely have been run out of the pageant completely and not have her face shown on tv (except for those hard right wingnut groups like Bob Jones University?)

Hate speech comes in all forms. Recognizing it sometimes is difficult but in order to eliminate it, it has to be recognized... Why do you think that the right wing (and Fox News) are in such a fluster over the hate speech bill introduced recently...

For the longest time, black people couldn't marry. Then it was a black person and a white person. Now it's two men or two women. Social evolution is never easy but rarely do the hysterical ravings of the opposition come forth...
Actually, the First Amendment WOULD protect your hypothetical Miss Cali's right to say blacks and whites shouldn't marry. She would look pretty silly saying that today, and most people would dismiss her as a crank. Had she said it in, say, 1940, however, many Americans in the viewing audience would have agreed with her (and a hypothetical black gadfly who insulted her femininity would have had to fear for his safety, or his life, and definitely stay out of the south...) The point is that times change, mores change, and public attitudes change. In 10 years, or maybe two, that same gay marriage answer from a future Miss California might seem equally silly and outdated to most people, but for now, a bare majority of Americans (especially Christians) simply agree with her, including the president of the United States. [Although I do have to say, there are a LOT of Americans, white and black, who STILL think whites and blacks shouldn't date or marry each other, and who would fall out on the floor if their son or daughter brought home someone of another race... that's just life!]
Okay, stipulating that there was no widespread use of television in 1940, but you get the point... :)
He's just a bitchy little faggot. Miss California (snort) pushed his button. Bread and circuses.

@Gordon Wagner

Umm... you do realize this is a post about someone calling someone else something completely inappropriate, right? Yes, he is an asshole, but calling him a "bitchy little faggot" makes you just as awful as him for calling Miss Cali the c-word. Congratulations.
I'm so tired of hearing " Miss Cali. has right to say what she thinks. Miss Cali said this with light heart...."
Blah! Blah!

Miss Cali. is a C...!! (with capitol C!)
There I said it!!!
Boo Boo! Don't hate me!
Ok, Joy. I wasn't directly referring to the first amendment in my comment because too many people are saying that she has 'a right' to say whatever she wants. People confuse the idea of a right to free speech with the ability to say *anything* that you might want to put your lips into spewing. There is no defined right to say whatever pops out of your mouth.

The idea that a black person would defend someone, even a hypothetical person, being a bigot is rather interesting. Did you honestly feel that it was 'no big deal'? Would you accept it if the right wing went all KKK and started 'racial purity' laws again?

Racism died because society didn't tolerate it, couldn't tolerate it. Homophobia will suffer the same fate. Unless too many people take the idea that 'it will be accepted at some time'. But not at this time... If not now then when?

But I have to clarify something. I am hetero and am happy being such. I guess that is perhaps the biggest difference. You can't hide black skin.
And I kept hearing about 'Perez Hilton' and I hoped that the parents of Paris didn't procreate and name a child after that dictator...

He's a loudmouth little bully. A gay Bill O'Reilly? But perhaps Bill O IS gay...
Dear Joy-Ann Reid

I want you to read JL Davis's excellent posting about Miss Cali.
Here is the link

After reading that posting, you should take down your posting, because it became very irrelevant.
And you should apologize from Perez and all gay & lesbian people on OS.
After all Perez turned out to be smart one NOT asshole!
Clearly, Miss Cali. is a CUNT!!!
I'm happy to read the article you suggest, but you lost me at "c---." And apologize to Perez? Good luck with that. You might want to check yourself. You do your arguments no good at all. Think Bachman ... Michelle... Coulter ... Ann ... yknowwha'mean?
Just tragic to see! Some people think that bigots are just fine! You are just one of them! As I said earlier. You girls should have tea together. You guys have a lot in common. You deserve to be friends with Miss Cali.
There, I said it! OH it feels goooodd!!
Trying to live up to your moniker, ZBit dear? Here's what's funny. You're assuming, because I'm not interested in getting down into the gutter with you and your online friends that I oppose gay marriage. Guess what? On this one, you're about as savvy as the second runner up in a beauty pageant who doesn't know to demur and give a PC non-answer to a loaded question from a guy wearing a pink wig.

See, I'm what you call a social libertarian -- I could care less who gets married, who sleeps with whom, etc., as long as everybody's legal, and I look forward to the day when everyone agrees with me (John Cole made some good points in the other thread about sharing "marriage privileges" granted by the state with ALL couples, including unmarried heterosexual ones. Fine by me... though I notice no one responded to him ... much more fun to call a pageant girl names, yeah?) But here's the thing: people like me, who are otherwise open to the arguments for gay marriage, or civil unions, or whatever, (even if we were raised to believe what, like 99 percent of the world believes about marriage...) become completely turned off to the cause by people like YOU. Your type thrives on the gutter level of discourse -- the nastier and uglier the better. And guess who gets on a band wagon like yours: very, very few people (and all of THEM already agree with you.)

You know why so many young people, including people my kids' age (elementary and middle school) are cool with gay relationships? Because it has been made less and less of a big deal by people in my generation (X) and younger. It was not, I have to break it to you, because enough people called them stupid f--ing c---ts that it finally broke their spirits.

The actual civil rights movement -- the one that gay marriage proponents, most of whom, ironically, are rather well off white men -- succeeded not because black folk got up in the faces of white people and told them off, (though my mother was that age and I know they wanted to) but because its leaders were smart about "marketing human empathy" to that little old white lady sitting at home watching television, who was "raised to believe in segregation," but who physically shuddered at the sheer ugliness of watching it put into practice by police, their dogs, their water hoses, and their pro-Klan elected officials. The Kingian movement succeeded by putting the ugliness of THE OTHER SIDE on display (something you're doing the opposite of -- hey, maybe we could call it "opposite activism!") If Dr. King privately thought that white people were "dumb-ass, knuckle dragging, narrow minded, stupid-ass cr--kers," he sure didn't say so publicly, and if he had, he might have done you and Perez proud, but he would have gained no support, and the movement would have failed.

It clearly feels good to you and some others on these boards to get all feisty with a beauty contestant who has neither the wit, nor the proximity, to respond. Hell, you apparently haven't figured out that she also doesn't have the power to do a got-damned thing to you, or to anyone else. (Ironically, those who kind of DO, like, um, the anti-gay marriage President of the United States, you don't call names. Huh. Go figure...) But now that Perez in his brilliance has elevated Miss Cali's stature beyond that of the actual pageant winner by attacking her for answering his damned question, she will now be a genuine right wing celebrity, and probably has a Fox News show in her future. Congratulations, Perez. You've created a monster. And guess what: she's pretty, telegenic, and trained to speak in a pleasing and appealing manner while smiling, waving and wearing a swimsuit. Not too bright, you say? Have you WATCHED Fox News??? Yeah. She'll really kill the "marriage equality movement." Great work!

Not long ago, the mayor of a town here in South Florida invited an African-American NBA star to visit him and his partner and their adorable daughter, and hang out for a day, this after the athlete made some ugly comments about gays on the radio. (The mayor was first gay mayor of the town, a coup since the town is largely black and Catholic.) Now, he could have tried what I'll call the ZBitch Method: calling the athlete a dumb-ass n--- and writing a nice, long, nasty blog thread about him. Instead, he made the invitation on the radio, (including on a show I was hosting at the time. Very cool guy.) As a result, the mayor came off the hero, even to those who "disagree with his lifestyle." THAT, my dear ZBit... is how you win friends and influence people. Not saying Perez should have invited Miss Cali to dinner -- but hell, if Elton John could play piano for Eminem, surely he could have come up with a public statement that didn't have to be bleeped on cable, or at least been funny about it like Michael Musto.

But I take it all of this is lost on you and that I'm wasting my time even cybertalking to you. So kindly get on with it, call me a c--- n--- b--- ho or whatever and move on. I'm going to bed. I've spent way too much time on this and you've given me a freaking headache.
this is just great.

I marvel sometimes at how a Voice can emerge, using such similar language, themes, and phrasing as snarkier, emptier writers, yet nonetheless breezily reveal a thinker, someone who is meditating and mediating these things. You have such a Voice. I can imagine a salon for Salon, a back room at some ancient soho bar, where we meet at times, and I would want to be at your table.

We are too fierce with each other online. I struggle with it too, and at last i almost always succeed. Our thinking is what matters. We cannot "win" our fights using this medium. You make your case well, that Perez et al are at times shrill haters, playing to fellow snarkettes.

The real enemies? Those who abandon all lovingkindness. The ones who make cheap demonizations. The ones who think very complex issues are black and white. And they are present and loud on all sides of every issue. Taking a side does not give us a free pass on being humane.

Thanks for this. Good stuff.
Z-tard, I think you need to save your comments until you get out of high school. And if you're out of high school then you need to go back, because you're an idiot.
Thank you Asian-fart! For the advice!
I should keep studying. Tell me which schools you did go, so I shouldn't be going there. Clearly they don't give good education.
Look how you turned out! Sad! :(
Dear Joy

Assuming! You are single. One day you will get married and be happy. Well! I have a bf for 8 years. Turned out I cannot get married. We had to go a lawyer and paid shit-load money to prepare our wills and living wills etc. Taxes are very high on us. And all those bullshits...
Instead of taking issues to race platform! (Obviously you are trying to take it there) You should think about people's life.
That dumb bimbo could say anything to be in spotlight!
What do you think?! She can't go somewhere and work from 9 to 5
She is doing this to get attention. HEY HELLO!!
I would rather someone with a pink wig instead of dumb bimbo with peanut size brain!
Thank you for proving my point, I am now done with you. Have a nice life and keep that helmet strapped tight.
Thanks, man (blushing). You're way too kind. Have a terrific weekend!
I'm with you on giving up on that particular person.
Worm: I called Hilton a prick for the simple fact that the guy encourages controversay (sp?) where ever he goes and its sad.
He is alot like Donald Trump, both of them are dull of hot air and Ego. :D

"The only difference seems to be that the men-folk don't insist on being treated like fairy tale royalty who's feces carry no discernible odor."

Sure, some women feel that way, but only those who are inmature.
Jeanette D got it right, about consequence & accountability. As did Paul T about the access and visibility afforded Perez H by the media. Why do they think we want this guy giving us his lip? Because he gets reactions and we tune in, giving them an audience to advertise to. The only power we have to control this crap in our lives (the only c-word I'm interested in using) is to tune him out. The only response we should ever give anyone like Perez Hilton whether gay, straight, man, woman of any race, creed or color is that their abusive style is unacceptable to us, and to turn away. By turning away from everything he participates in we diminish his staying power. Maybe he'll clean up his act and continue to brandish his message in a more appropriate way. Maybe he'll fade into irrelevance. It's the only way we get to keep our world a reasonable place to function in. The media is not going to do it. They just want "hits". Don't care if they get them through outrage or approval. Perez Hilton is bringing them "hits". Perez Hilton is a sad little man constantly grappling for 15 more minutes. The media conglomerates that put him in our faces are our enemy.
jesus, you'd think the "moral" side would be more secure. unfortunately, you're really nothing more than authoritarians who want to control other people's behavior, even when it causes you no harm. why aren't you angry at the misogynists who won't allow two lesbians to enjoy the legal benefits of marriage? you're unwittingly espousing a misogynistic worldview that says their love can't be real because there's no penis involved. why are you so limited as you call for women to stand up to perez hilton, because he called some idiot a nasty name?

if you think the comparison to the civil rights movement is tenuous, you've obviously not considered the way white people once thought about marriage rights:

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
Leon Bazile, Loving v. Virginia

really now, what's offensive about that judge simply sharing his belief about what god would want? is it the words he used or the reality people had to live with because of it? he's not saying there's anything wrong with those other races, but blending the races through marriage just isn't the way it was ever intended to work.

according to god and tradition, that is. why was he wrong then, but not now?

incidentally, you should read mildred loving's thought's on the subject. why does she, a black woman, who actually fought for her right to marry, disagree with you? if it's helpful to remember history, then maybe we should see what the folks who lived through it thought...

"Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights."
Mildred Loving
I'm a gay man and I've never "laid claim" to the civil rights movement. I think people make comparisons but they don't claim anything: that part of your post I distanced myself from but, I agree with all the rest. And it's very well said.

I don't think that gay people are at all racist or trying to hijack the history of Civil Rights--I think many gay activists are ignorantly desparate for something to look forward to, that being the outcome of the 1960's for women, blacks, and other groups. I don't by any means think that someone elses history, someone elses battle, should be donated and deflated for my own "selfish" causes.

I hope you aren't comparing words here either. "Faggot" is the most derogatory word you could call me. But that's because I'm gay. The "C" word--as you have censored--is offensive to women because it's directly at them. It's not fair to say your pain, your suffering, is better/worser than mine.

That should say 'directed'... *eye roll*
My apologies.
@Devin -
Well said, and I believe you. Unfortunately, those at the forefront of the gay rights movement do not. I have been lectured more than once about how the oppression of gays via laws restricting marriage are exactly identical to what blacks went through prior to the 1960s. I think what most blacks react so negatively to, is the ease with which white men in particular, coopt the idea of racism, civil rights, etc. It's the irony that gets us -- the fact is that gay male households are the highest income households per capita in the country. Black households are the lowest. There's simply no comparison between the unmitigated evil of slavery and the terrorism and apartheid inflicted on blacks for 100 years after the civil war and the discomfort some people feel with changing the definition of marriage, which has been understood to be man and wife for, like, ever. I'll bet you as a gay man grew up believing that marriage was between a man and woman, too... you changed your mind. Most people are changing their minds. Anyhoo, that said, I recognize how painful and frustrating the marriage equality struggle must be. But just as you can't go around calling everything equal to the Holocaust, it would be nice for people to leave the civil rights movement to its time, and work on each cause in its own right.
I agree. I think new ideas need to be given to the gay community and our cause, especially this one. Coopting history is downright disrespectful. I don't believe anyone has the intention of doing so, nor do they believe 'you owe us'. Maybe fringe and the internet. Not all.

We can compare stats all day, too. Here in Michigan, violent crime against gays is the highest in the nation and far surpasses per ratio violent crime against women, and blacks. Marriage is a small part of the gay rights movement--I'm more concerned about an 11 year old killing himself because gay people are bad because gay marriage is lesser than 'opposite' marriage. (thank you Miss CA).

There is a lot wrong with the process gays are going through politically and I think respecting each others lives and history is really important.
I may not phrase things quite as they are put here, but at last I am seeing a post that understands the immediate reaction of many people in the world looking at America through the media on that day.

It was a "beauty contest", not a political forum, and a judge used it to ask a question that was designed to bring out a political statement, and a statement that would only be acceptable if it matched his views. People out here looked at the media presentation and said there is a very biggotted person, looking at ......... Perez Hilton! The shock was increased when the media did not appear to want to condemn his biggotry nor his foul language, nor his hypocrisy. The harrassment, however, was against the girl who was pushed into a corner, and continued to be pushed into the corner in the time that followed. When someone is pushed into a corner, do not be surprised about what may come out of the situation on the long term.

Hopefully, things will change, or is that pssible in a "politically correct" kind of world?
I'm with you, Devin. Someone in the gay rights movement needs to give you a major platform. You're an eloquent and classy spokesman for the cause.
You, too! It's nice to talk about this stuff with someone other than rwnutjob or random OS trolls. It's nice to see some honesty in the blogosphere.
LOL. Are there a lot of nutjobs out here in cyberworld or WHAT?
A fascinating thing happens when the genesis of your fame is being verbally (and MS Paint-ically) foul: you set a precedent and thusly get to be crude for the remainder of your infamy. Pop culture observers will give Perez Hilton a pass on this because it's not a pass at all - it was expected.
While I agree that no one should ever use the word "cunt" as an epithet, I disagree with you on two counts: first, Perez Hilton was perfectly justified in attacking Miss California for her hateful and bigoted comments--and yes, they were hateful and bigoted, no matter how you spin it (there IS a clear and definite parallel between the movement against interracial marriage and the movement against gay marriage, as many of those against gay marriage believe gays and lesbians to be subhuman, just as did opponents of interracial marriage view African Americans); second, the word "faggot" is just as repugnant as "cunt," if not more so. Calling a woman a "cunt" demeans her, identifies her as being merely her genitalia, and worth no more, and while this is certainly offensive, is it any different in this respect than calling a man a "dick"? Calling a gay man or woman a "faggot," on the other hand, implies that he/she is bound for hell because of whom he/she loves--a "faggot" being, literally, a bundle of sticks for burning (hence the British term "fag," meaning cigarette), particularly those used to stoke the flames of hell. So which, really, is more offensive? An epithet that implies that a woman's only value is sexual, or one that implies that a person, because merely of his/her nature, is such an abhorrence that he/she will suffer eternal hellfire?