August 3, 2013
Broadway Cab driver suspended after allegedly forcing same-sex couple out on I-84 Oregon Live, July 28, 2013 
Gay couple
(Shanako M. Devoll and her partner Kate Neal say a Broadway Cab driver ditched them on the side of a Portland freeway around midnight Thursday because of their sexual orientation.)

Devoll said she was showing affection to Neal when the cab driver started making inappropriate comments.

“I was holding her hand and we kissed a couple of times in the back seat, minding our own business,” Devoll said. “He made homophobic remarks that were very hurtful to us. We did not want to be in his cab.”
But the couple asked to be let off at a safe spot, Devoll said.
“This was an unsafe situation. We told him ‘we can’t get out on the freeway. We’re not getting out on the freeway,’ ” she recalled. “If people are working in customer service they need to be able to accept people for who they are.”
Neal said the driver was yelling homophobic remarks at them, and they offered to pay the fare of just under $40 if he’d just let them out at a safe spot, off an exit ramp of the freeway. But Neal said he refused.
“When this happened, you’re in shock and you’re not believing that it’s happening,” Devoll said. “There is no reasoning. You just need to get out of the situation.”
They ended up out of the cab, on the side of eastbound Interstate 84, just before 102nd Avenue. 
Neal said their driver had radioed to another Broadway Cab driver, and a second cab pulled up alongside the freeway where they were let out. The second driver told the three on the side of the freeway to get into his cab, and they did, Neal said.
There was some communication between the first driver and the second outside of the cab, and suddenly the second cab driver told the group in his back seat to get out, according to Devoll and Neal.
“That second cab driver came back and ejected us from his cab,” Neal said.


You can PROVE Anything About Boys Without Fathers

August 10, 2011
Why are we playing Lysenkoism with children?

Lashawn Barber
From fatherlessness flows many things…

Fatherless children are more likely to be poor, perform poorly in school, engage in premarital sex, become teen parents, abuse drugs, and commit crimes than children from intact families. Black children are significantly less likely than other children to be raised in intact families. In 2004, a mere 35 percent of black children were living with two parents, compared to 83 percent of Asian children, 77 percent of white children, and 65 percent of Hispanic children.
Despite decades worth of research on the damage wrought by illegitimacy, a research psychologist named Peggy Drexler attempts to argue that lesbian couples and “single by choice” mothers do a better job of raising boys than married couples in Raising Boys without Men: How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men.
Drexler, a mother of two and married for 36 years, interviewed a small and limited number of lesbian couples, heterosexual women who volunteered to deprive their sons of fathers, divorced mothers, and their sons. Her “maverick moms” reject “social judgments” and stress “communication, community, and love” in their roles as mothers.
In one form or another throughout the book, Drexler sets up the strawman, “Mother love doesn’t hurt our boys.” I have never heard reasonable people make such a claim. Unlike Drexler, most people believe that “mother love” and “father love” need to balance each other, which is why intact families are best for children. Drexler often exaggerates and uses the most extreme examples throughout the book to support her biases.
Raising Boys Without Men will give aid and comfort to single mothers, but a house full of them, no matter how well off, won’t ever change the fact that boys want and need fathers. Considering the utter devastation fatherlessness has caused in black communities, it would be easy to go off on Drexler, but she makes clear that she focused on mostly white, affluent lesbians and single mothers.

Time Magazine: The data that Gartrell and Bos analyzed came from the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS), begun in 1986. The authors included 154 women in 84 families who underwent artificial insemination to start a family; the parents agreed to answer questions about their children’s social skills, academic performance and behavior at five follow-up times over the 17-year study period. Children in the families were interviewed by researchers at age 10 and were then asked at age 17 to complete an online questionnaire, which included queries about the teens’ activities, social lives, feelings of anxiety or depression, and behavior.

Why didn’t she interview black single mothers and fatherless boys in inner cities, mothers whose fatherless sons are in and out of the criminal justice system, and boys who are fathers themselves by the time they’re teenagers? Drexler writes:

Like mine, most research in this area has concerned a primarily White and privileged population. Lesbian identity among socioeconomically subordinate groups is generally less visible or less affirmed than it is among more prosperous, White, educated, urban populations. Ethnographic evidence suggests that closeted lesbian and gay people of color often value racial solidarity over sexual adhesiveness. Racial/ethnic allegiances may deter disproportionate numbers of people of color from coming out.

In other words, interviewing poor or economically disadvantaged, black heterosexual or closeted lesbian mothers would not have yielded the results that Drexler, an advocate for white, affluent, lesbian-headed households, was seeking.
Incidentally, the feminist movement traditionally has been a white and affluent phenomenon, although its effects have reverberated through all levels of society. The late Betty Friedan was a suburban homemaker who likened her home life to a concentration camp. For whatever reason, she was unhappy being married and trying to raise decent human beings. It sounded like a personal problem to me, but her book, The Feminine Mystique, marked the unofficial beginning of the feminist movement and sparked a revolution.
Although women had legitimate claims, especially when it came to equal wages for equal work, feminism went much further by waging war against the last standing pillar of society: the traditional family.
Feminists argued that women should be free to work outside the home and to be sexually promiscuous (and irresponsible). Chasteness until marriage was Victorian and repressive, and marriage was stifling and demeaning. A new crop of young women became sexually available to men without the shackles of commitment. The archaic idea of marrying the woman you impregnate was thrown out with the rest of the garbage.
Women from affluent, intact families were able to bounce back from sexual irresponsibility (oh, the irony!) in ways that women from lower-classes, especially those who grew up without fathers, were not. In 1964, a year after Friedan’s book hit the streets and a year before Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan issued a report that warned of the increase of female-headed households in low-income urban areas and associated social pathologies, close to 25 percent of black babies were born to unmarried women. In 2006, the rate is 70 percent.
The irony of ironies is that despite the “independent woman” meme pushed by feminists, too many of their inner city and low-income “sisters” are not independent nor are they dependent on husbands-oppressors, either. They are dependent on the government. The state is the provider. The children grow up mired in a cycle of poverty that is passed from one generation of fatherless children to the next.
A recurring theme in Raising Boys Without Men, despite Drexler’s best efforts to downplay it, is the boys’ desire for fathers. They wanted men — masculine men — in their lives. The clear message of the book is that the boys’ hunger for fathers was trumped by the desires of their progressive “maverick moms.”
The feminist movement spawned generations of selfish women, absentee fathers, and shattered families. Some women may want to be free of husbands, but children certainly don’t want to be free of fathers. And no study will ever prove otherwise.

So what does this prove? If you want to you can prove anything with a study!

Image via Study Shows that Children of Lesbian Parents Are More Well-Adjusted Than “Normal” Kids – Zelda Lily, Feminism in a Bra @
Our daughter switches back and forth between Mommy and MamaMama or Mommy. To bypass the mayhem, Nora sometimes just calls us by name. “Don’t call me Erika!” I plead. “I like being called Mommy. You’re the only one on this planet who can call me Mommy.” But I’m not the only person on this planet she can call Mommy. Says, A lesbian mother wants to be the only mommy on Mother’s Day.

The Decline of Men or Just the Rise of Women?

Do Lesbians exist?

June 15, 2011

Or are they just a rumor, like Yeti or Bigfoot, supported by a few ardent believers and writers of erotic fiction?
Just asking.

“I didn’t start this with my name because… I thought people wouldn’t take it seriously, me being a straight man,” he said.
He felt secure that no one would discover his true identity until the story of Amina started to unravel. He said his connection to Amina was purely coincidental and started when Amina commented on a post on the Lez Get Real site in February. It “was a major sock-puppet hoax crash into a major sock-puppet hoax.”
In the guise of Paula Brooks, Graber corresponded online with Tom MacMaster, thinking he was writing to Amina Arraf. Amina often flirted with Brooks, neither of the men realizing the other was pretending to be a lesbian. via

we can now say with confidence that the American male needs a shot of ego confidence. Feminism has gone way too far. These guys have a major inferiority complex. It seems to be an epidemic. image of The Real Paula Brooks via

‘A Gay Girl in Damascus’ comes clean? But the Washington Post attacks blogging. Go figure a paper attacks blogs

‘A Gay Girl in Damascus’ comes clean? But the Washington Post attacks blogging. Go figure a paper attacks blogs

June 13, 2011
the problem is with bleeding hearts who need to make up an emotional story, not with blogging. Newspapers have not won a war against the people, rather it is people who have proven that it is better to go with the truth then some feminist story…

The gay girl in Damascus confessed to being a 40-year-old American man from Georgia.
The persona he built and cultivated for years — a lesbian who was half Syrian and half American — was a tantalizing Internet-era fiction, one that Tom MacMaster used to bring attention to the human rights record of a country with severe media restrictions that make traditional reporting almost impossible.
The problem is not people not being reliable.  Newspapers are just as unreliable.  To answer people’s question as to the reliability of truth on the internet getting out there is that this guy got exposed!   end of story.

At Washington Post, “‘Paula Brooks,’ editor of ‘Lez Get Real,’ also a man.”
And don’t miss Jonah Golberg, “The ‘Gay Girl in Damascus’ hoax is worse than a lie. It’s propaganda” (via Instapundit).

the other theory… Halal Weiner

June 12, 2011

Rep. Anthony Weiner Who is Huma Abedin dating?Hillary ClintonI proposed the theory that the relationship with Clinton was greater then the relationship with Weiner and the marriage is nothing but a facade…,

These are not twisted sorority girls trying a different flavor, Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin must be in a secret lesbian coven. If Weiner were a prop to masquerade their Pro-Israel credentials it would explain somethings. If this is a closet case situation here for Weiner’s wife, the pregnancy would be all part of the greater charade.

this is the other theory… which is that Weiner is becoming a Muslim. I would prefer to say he is creating his own religious concoction that allows him to be powerful… so he can be a greater perv.
I won’t include the silly feminist left theories of therapy and the oh so vain theory that he has sainted his wife as perfect and therefor can not sleep with her. That kind of analysis generally go to uptight English cultural scholars like William Morris.

Omar Abu-Namous is the imam of the Islamic Cultural Center in New York and he is encouraging Huma Abedin – a practicing Muslim – to stand by her husband, New York congressman Anthony Weiner. Why would this imam support Anthony Weiner, who was raised Jewish, in a marriage with a practicing Muslim woman?

EVERY ISLAMIC SCHOLAR  agrees that it is forbidden for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim. Former Muslim Walid Shoebat has translated the Arabic declarations relative to the validity of the marriage between Weiner and Abedin last year. One such publication Shoebat translated was the Al-Marsid newspaper, which reported on the Weiner/Abedin marriage specifically:

Dr. Anwar Shoeb of the faculty of Islamic law in Kuwait declared that the marriage between Anthony Weiner and Huma Abedin is null and void, considering it adultery as confirmed in the Sharia position, prohibiting the marriage of a Muslim woman to a non-Muslim, regardless of whether he is a Jew or a Christian. In this case, he assured the invalidity of the marriage certificate between them.

Abu-Namous is in direct opposition to his Islamic superiors? Why? Huma Abedin was raised in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. In 2007, the New York Observer wrote (in an article no longer available but cross-posted at that her mother is a professor in Saudi Arabia and that her father was an Islamic scholar before his death.
Weiner was raised Jewish but admitted to growing up in a non-religious household. If Abedin remains a practicing Muslim and her religion forbids her from marrying a non-Muslim, isn’t she failing to practice Islam? Wouldn’t that be the case unless Weiner converted to Islam? The New York Times reported that Weiner “sometimes fasts with her (Abedin) during Ramadan.” This would indicate that the congressman is more amenable to practicing Islam than Abedin is to practicing Judaism.

It was widely rumored that Huma was Hillary’s lesbian lover

Before people should start believing that Abu-Namous is of the more moderate persuasion, consider what he was quoted as saying in 2001:

A unified Muslim state would be the ideal instrument to convince the world that Islam is the last version of God’s word. God meant his word to be obeyed.

Moreover, Abu-Namous spoke alongside the director of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) at the First National Summit of Imams and Rabbis. ISNA is a Muslim Brotherhood group. Abu-Namous is on record as having said there was no conclusive evidence that Muslim were responsible for the September 11th attacks. Ironically, former ground zero mosque imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a permanent trustee with with the ICC. Abu-Namous’s predecessor at the ICC blamed the Jews for 9/11.

Presiding over the wedding of Weiner and Abedin was none other than Bill Clinton. It took place at the Oheka Castle in Huntington, NY on Long Island – barely more than thirty miles from the ICC where Abu-Namous served as the imam.

If Huma stays with Weiner, it might be because in Islam, a man can have 4 wives and any number of mistresses

The Al-Marsid newspaper reported what Bill Clinton said. Shoebat translated: Clinton spoke, presiding at the wedding about how the two met and how Abedin rejected Weiner in the beginning but the persistence of the latter did not make him give up….
Did Abedin reject Weiner because he was not Muslim? Why is a New York imam with ties to the ISNA and Feisal Abdul Rauf defending a non-Muslim male with a Muslim female?
Perhaps there is a more important question that needs to be answered. Did a secular Jewish man convert to Islam or did his (still) practicing Muslim wife abandon her religion by marrying him?

looks like I’m not the only one who is thinking this: Who is Huma Abedin dating?

June 12, 2011
bobbyfinger:  I can’t take credit for it, but this is the best GIF, the only GIF, and the queen of all GIFs.These are not twisted sorority girls trying a different flavor, Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin must be in a secret lesbian coven. If Weiner were a prop to masquerade their Pro-Israel credentials it would explain somethings. If this is a closet case situation here for Weiner’s wife, the pregnancy would be all part of the greater charade. View results By Politicass via

Garofalo, clinging to hope that Anthony Weiner will still be mayor someday?

People who believe marriage is a business arrangement… have a tendency to believe marriage is nothing but a business!
“Former President BIll Clinton, who officiated at Abedin’s and Weiner’s marriage, has said, “I have one daughter. But if I had a second daughter, it would [be] Huma.” The Clintons are reportedly very upset with Weiner. via

The ‘Palestinization’ of lesbian activism

March 22, 2011

On February 22, the New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center cancelled an upcoming Israeli Apartheid Week fundraising “party,” whose organizers planned to raise money for another flotilla to “break the siege of Gaza.”
Michael Lucas, a pro-Israel activist and gay adult filmmaker who belongs to the Center, insisted that this anti-Israeli-Apartheid “party” would be “anti-Semitic.” His opponents are mainly Jewish lesbian feminists who believe that the cancellation undermines their right to free speech. Over the years, most lesbian feminists have strongly supported pornography as a First Amendment right. Only now are they demonizing Lucas as a “Zionist” pornographer.
According to Sherry Wolf, a spokeswoman for a group called SeigeBusters, and an outspoken proponent of the cancelled anti-Israeli-Apartheid “party”: “It’s atrocious that after 28 years, [the LGBT Center is] becoming yet another occupied, homogenized space that only powerful and, frankly, white people dominate.” She subsequently organized a demonstration that took place on March 5, the date the fundraising event was to have taken place. On March 14, at a forum organized to debate the issue, SeigeBusters and its supporters outnumbered the pro-Israel activists by more than two to one.
When I was much younger, I took an idealistic view of gays and lesbians — invariably associating them with divine artists, writers, dancers, composers, playwrights and civil rights activists. But then, when I began working with real lesbian and bisexual women as part of my feminist activism, I discovered that — like everyone else — lesbians were neither angels nor devils. Like men, many lesbian feminists I met had internalized sexism and homophobia, and did not really respect or trust other women. In many cases that I observed, they used their intimate groups to bully, isolate and then shun any lesbian feminist who was “out of line” — despite the common pretense that feminist groups are leaderless and free-thinking.
In particular, I discovered that lesbians, bisexuals and “queers” often are expected to toe a party line when it comes to the Middle East. I am talking about the Palestinianization of lesbian feminists, including — perhaps especially — Jewish lesbian feminists, who are more concerned with the rights of a country that does not exist, “Palestine,” than with the rights of real Muslim women who are forced to veil themselves, accept arranged marriages and whom are victimized by honour killings when they are seen as too western or disobedient.
I have seen these North American lesbian “queers” at university-based Israel Apartheid Week events in America and Canada, wearing kaffiyas, sporting buttons that say “I am a Palestinian,” “I am a Jewish anti-Zionist” or “Jews For Justice in Palestine.” Many wear military buzz cuts and boots, carry heavy backpacks and sport other insignia of the European-Arab Street and ACT-UP-style protests. Were these women to dress this way in the West Bank or Gaza, they would be persecuted for their appearance — or worse.
What is going on? According to a group called Jews Against the Occupation-NYC: “It’s no coincidence that queers have been at the heart of Palestine solidarity groups for decades … The demonization and dehumanization of Palestinians under occupation resonates loudly for queers, as do other forms of racism and militarism.”
In emphasizing their view of Palestinians as the quintessential innocent victims, these politicized lesbians do not see themselves as others see them: Privileged, educated and free American “queers.” Instead, these activists imagine themselves to be outcasts, pariahs, “occupied” by Western patriarchy. And so they long to be somehow “Palestinian” in spirit, a posture that allows them to share in the Palestinians’ victim status. Perhaps they also feel victimized by the Jewish families, and by homophobic strains of Judaism, that have rejected them for their sexuality; in turn, they reject the Jewish state.
Ideologically, such Jewish lesbian feminists tend to be anti-racists. They seek to relive the good old days of the fight against South African Apartheid. This romantic, backward-looking attitude blinds them to reality. They do not view Palestinian terrorists as “terrorists” but as freedom-fighters. They do not understand that, at many points in history (including this one), Islam has been the largest practitioner of both religious and gender “apartheid” known to humankind.
Groups such as Seigebuster ignore the fact that there are gay-pride parades in Israel, and that “out” gay soldiers serve in the Israeli army. For years, Israel has been providing asylum for Palestinian homosexuals who have been tortured and near-murdered by their own Arab leaders.
For example, in 2003, the BBC reported that there were 300 gay Palestinian men secretly living and working in Israel. One 22-year-old gay man who fled from Gaza told a reporter that he fled after he was almost killed when his family discovered his sexual orientation. “[My brother] brought a stick and hit us,” he said. “He tied us up with an iron rope and went to call my dad, and tell my partner’s [family]. Then he came back and hit us again.” He only survived because he persuaded his mother to release him.
I have seen gay and lesbian contingents marching together with leftists and Arabs outside presentations I have given; they have heckled, hooted and tried to silence me in the lecture hall. The loudest chants of “From the River to the Sea — Palestine will be free” are coming, not only from the Muslim student associations or from the Palestinians with loudspeakers; they are coming from the mouths of American Jewish lesbian feminists whose very lives, certainly their political identities, are strangely bound up with Arab territorial claims.
The Jewish lesbians among them are not “self-hating Jews.” They are political opportunists obsessed with their own victimhood posturing — even if it means they must sacrifice the cause of both women and homosexuals in the process.
National Post
Phyllis Chesler, PhD is an emerita professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies at City University of New York. She is an author, psychotherapist and an expert courtroom witness.