FangBANG.

'Kay you guys, so obviously True Blood's huge, and biting it's way to the top with a vengeance. Love them or hate them, vampires have a sexual edge in American culture (as well as many other cultures, i.e. succubi, inccubi, etc.) and pose fascinating questions about the human psyche: love of S&M, blood play, dominance/submission, and all that bloody jazz. Even if you are absolutely disgusted by the idea of such things, the average human holds a morbid fascination for what they imply. I mean, what the hell else do ladies' church circles talk about (not that I would fuckin' know)?

One thing that fascinates me (and this could actually be stemming more from my knowledge of the books to the actual series) is that vampires in the show/books do seem to allow for sexual ambiguity. A bunch of people are getting up in arms about this, stating that the show demonizes gays, stating that the vampires on the show represent the homosexual minority metaphorically (in the book, the author, Charlaine Harris, describes the act of vampires exposing themselves to humans as "coming out of the coffin"):

If these murderous, evil creatures are figures for gay people, then they are figures for the religious right's worst nightmare of what gay people are. Their orgies are soaked in blood, and one sip of their v-juice can convert anyone to a mindless, lust-wracked pervert.

Show creator Ball has made ambivalent comments about the way his vampires seem uncannily to resemble gay people. “For me, part of the fun of this whole series is that it’s about vampires, so it’s not that serious," he told the Los Angeles Times. "However, they do work as a metaphor for gays . . . for anyone that’s misunderstood. At the same time it’s not a metaphor at all."

Article entitled "Let's Face It: 'True Blood' Hates Gay People"

I shall respectfully disagree. While, yes, some of the characters on the show do seem to get a little blood-happy and murder scores of southern belles yearning for a sexual thrill, I'd actually tend to believe that it is a form of sexual empowerment (Evan Rachel Wood can murder the FUCK out of my thighs, buffet-style, any day of the week), not necessarily exclusively for homosexuals (the bars in which they convene depict more of an S&M theme versus a gay club. You wouldn't catch Eric sniffing poppers and jamming to Lady Gaga). The vampires in the series, while they could have remained anonymous creatures of the night, and preyed upon unsuspecting humans, actually did take the step to ally themselves with the human culture. They voluntarily subjected themselves to the shitshow that is human nature, which is rarely (in my opinion) forgiving. These creatures are highly superior in a multitude of ways: supernatural abilities, such as flying, super-speed, etc., immortality, blah di blah. They could have easily overpowered us, with their superior political skills (the kingdoms of the culture are outlined more thoroughly in the books than the series) and the multitudes of human lackeys that would guard their unconscious forms throughout the night, simply for the privilege of being their midnight snack upon awakening. Instead, the vampires chose to coexist, and assimilate themselves into a culture whose primary function, to them, is fucking food. Vampires have sex, at will, with those who are willing to submit, often with little to no regard of the gender of the submissive. These hyper-evolved beings who have suppressed their love for human juice in favor of assimilation, despite their obvious advantages over humans...have a tendency to not care whose junk they're bumping. 'Tis aaaaall about the lovin'. Hearts not parts, am I right?



Don't really care if I'm right, it's an interesting concept. Even virginal heroine Sookie Stackhouse casts aside her conservative upbringing, submits to Bill's appetite for blood, and enjoys every second of it. He drinks from her every time they have sex. P.S. There are a lot of opinions flying around about the Bella/Sookie dichotomy, which is hilarious to me. One is the voluntarily impotent protagonist spewed from the subconscious of a sexually suppressed Mormon housewife... and then there's Sookie. Say whatchu like, but anybody who'd bitch-slap a Maenad with a sparkling white light of doom can handle themselves. Sookie's got a couple of big ole' balls rolling around in her junk drawer.

So, if Sookie can embrace the darkness of the vamps, even revel in it, why can't we embrace the "darkness" within ourselves? Vampires are a creation scraped from the blackest, stickiest parts of the Id. A superior race with a tendency to fuck who they like? Vampires know what they like, fuck who they want, and chose to coexist with humans rather than stick them on a spit and suck. It's the perfect combination of sex, compassion, and (bet you saw this coming) rock n' roll.

And I just have one word: Lafayette. A black, MAC-slathered gay man smearing fabulous-ness all over Louisiana. If that's not empowerment, I don't know what the hell is.



So...I'm gonna leave my window open. And don my laciest garb. And pop some anti-coagulants. If any lady vamps are making time to read this, you know where to find me ;).

OOooooh, So THAT'S Why His Sandals Were So Fabulous....

"There is nothing in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) which specifically identifies Jesus' sexual orientation. The Bible does not say clearly whether Jesus had a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. It is silent on whether Jesus was celibate or sexually active; single or married, childless or with children. ₂ However, a few theologians have asserted that Jesus had, and presumably still has, a homosexual orientation."

Quoted here.

Yes, Jesus was gay. Just like unicorns. And also like unicorns...fictional.

Abortion Is A Good Idea Because We'd Have Less of THESE People.

Let me begin this humble post with a definition. I think most ladies n' gents would agree that Merriam-Webster is a fairly reliable source, and so:

Logic: # Pronunciation: \ˈlä-jik\
# Function: noun 1 a (1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning (2) : a branch or variety of logic

I've been perusing the prop 8 front, juuuust for fun, why not, right? Let's see what the fuss is about. Upon reviewing the website, I stepped into my third-party pants, and pretending I was an undecided voter, simply gathering information. The first step, I would gather, would be to figure out why it would be a good idea to support this measure. So, naturally, I clickity clicked on the link, entitled "Why Vote Yes?"
Here's what we got, direct quote:

The Issue
California voters passed Proposition 22 in 2000 by more than 61%, saying that a marriage in California is between a man and a woman. Earlier this year, four activist judges based in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people's vote, legalizing same-sex marriage.
The Consequences
The Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage did not just overturn the will of California voters; it also redefined marriage for the rest of society, without ever asking the people themselves to accept this decision. This decision has far-reaching consequences. For example, because public schools are already required to teach the role of marriage in society as part of the curriculum, schools will now be required to teach students that gay marriage is the same as traditional marriage, starting with kindergarteners. By saying that a marriage is between “any two persons” rather than between a man and a woman, the Court decision has opened the door to any kind of “marriage.” This undermines the value of marriage altogether at a time when we should be restoring marriage, not undermining it.

http://www.protectmarriage.com/about/why

...um, you didn't answer a question. You provided a stilted, biased viewpoint in favor of bigotry and prejudice. And yes, the word bigot has negative connotations, but again, here's the MW definition:

bigot: # Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
# Function: noun :a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Dunno, call me batshit, but I'd say that preventing a group of people from obtaining a set of constitutional rights would fall under the category of intolerant. Small side note, as well, in response to your reference to the "61% of voters": from 1654 to 1865, it was legal to own people. A majority of people supporting a measure does not make it constitutional. That's why we had to fix it (google "ammendment").

'Kay, so you've given me your viewpoint. You think that only a man and a woman should get married. 'Cause giving same-sex couples the right to marry is bad.

::Wraps lips around megaphone, inhales deeply::...WHYYYYY????

What could possibly happen? Honestly? The gays gather their marriage licenses, their eyes go opaque, teeth lengthen and sharpen, and they begin bolting through the village square, biting heteros and pumping their homo venom into the veins of innocent children?


Here's the best part:

"Proposition 8 is NOT an attack on gay couples and does not take away the rights that same-sex couples already have under California’s domestic partner law."

So, basically, we have our water fountain, and you have yours. Everyone's happy, right?


"Equal rights for all, special privileges for none." -Thomas Jefferson. Yea, that guy. The one who wrote The Declaration of Independence? You know, one of the documents upon which this nation was founded? Maybe pull your nose, first, out of your bible, and then your head out of your ass, and educate yourself. Your personal viewpoints DO NOT MATTER. What matters, kids, is doing our very best to uphold and honor the rights of all American citizens.

::Steps off soapbox, snaps, goes into kitched to mix a gin and tonic::.

HOMOSECTUALS IS DANGERUS.

Homosexuality is a SIN

&

God Hates Sin

If you are looking, for the right to continue
in that which is clearly called a perversion,
then you have found the wrong site!
Homosexuality is a SIN period!
Not only that but it is unnatural
The same as sex with an animal is unnatural!

---

The Bible doesn't speak much of the sin of Homosexuality?
It also doesn't speak of incest or bestiality much more neither?
Guess you want to make them legal and not a sin also!

http://www.freejesus.net/views/sin.php


Not only, sir, is your grammar absolutely atrocious, but you paint such a hateful picture. Allow me a retort:





Now, how could such a happy, carefree creature possibly be evil? Deserve such scorn? Homosexuals are beacons of joy, you silly bigot :)

Spread love, not Christianity. Namaste.