Captain Obvious: The Liberal Media is a Myth

With the firing/retiring/whatevering of Keith Olbermann at MSNBC, there are fans who are feeling sad, and FOX fans who are dancing a Snoopy dance. He had the channel's highest rated show--in fact the highest rated news commentary show not on FOX "News." The most recently known ratings for these shows has Glenn Beck (frequently but wrongly called Olbermann's flip side) at 1.780 million viewers to Olbermann's 1.106 million. Hardly a chasm of difference there, yet "nobody watched" Olbermann's show or his channel, according to detractors.

There's a lot of talk from both sides about Comcast's role in this, if any. There are people worried (or hoping) that this will lead to similar departures by Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz and Lawrence O'Donnell. Most people couldn't name all of those people. But that right there is pretty much the list of the top liberals in the media.  On talk radio, where the percentage of conservative-to-liberal shows is in the high 90s in the conservatives favor, there are a few other names: Randi Rhodes, Tom Malloy, Thom Hartmann, Stephanie Miller.  None of them has the name recognition of a second or maybe even third tier conservative host.

Nobody watches Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Nobody's heard of Randi Rhodes. Air America Radio is dead, and almost nobody can tune in to liberal talk radio on their car radio, even if they want to. Newspaper sales are down. Newsweek practically went out of business. CNN gets anemic ratings, only rarely stepping up into MSNBC's "nobody" zone. FOX "News" is the king of cable "news"--and yes those quotes are required. Comcast's takeover of NBC (and thus MSNBC) puts ownership of media in the United States into even fewer hands. All of those owners are enormous corporate entities with conservative leanings.

So somebody tell me please. Where is this "lamestream media" Sarah Palin keeps whining about? Or the "drive-bys" that Rush Limbaugh sputters about? Let's just face it. The right-wing talkers who used to be the far right fringe are now squarely mainstream. The most moderate, most middle-of-the-road, objective reporter now looks like a leftist by comparison. And the actual left are now called "far left." So they can stop complaining about the liberal media. They can stop squinting their eyes and finger wagging about the mainstream media. The conservatives have it. They are the mainstream media. But they're still not news.

What is Open-Mindedness?

This is quite interesting, even if the narrator's tone might lull you to sleep. Grab a cup of coffee first, then watch!

Daylight Saving Time Starts Sunday. Why?

I love Daylight Saving Time. One of the only good things the Bush Administration did was to extend DST by several weeks. I get more done, and am just plain happier when the evenings are light longer. Especially here in Las Vegas, where we are on the leading edge of the time zone, and are sitting in a valley. Without DST, our evenings would simply get dark to quickly in the summer for my comfort.

But why do we do it? It turns out, just about every explanation you've ever heard (and probably believe to be true) is a myth. I'll tell you something though, it's been a boon to battery companies, who somehow convinced us all that we need to change our batteries in our smoke detectors twice a year, on the nights of the time change.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Gay Thing: A Primer

Ever since I've been writing this blog, I've wanted to address this topic in a thorough way. I've tried several times, refuting the ridiculous rantings at FreeRepublic, or with a news item of the day. But I've never been satisfied with the result. There is such disinformation out there regarding gay people, that it is difficult to know where to start.

In the online world, you'll find gay-friendly sites, where all the realities of gay people are a given. Explanations are not needed, because the people that go there already know the skinny. On anti-gay sites, disinformation, stupidity, bigotry, juvenile humor and willful ignorance rule. And their overall wrongness is so broad, tackling each level of wrong can be daunting. But I'm going to take one more stab at it, this time giving a brief "wrong" belief, followed by the reality. And I'll probably still be disappointed with the result. On we go. . .

Myth #1: Gays are out to indoctrinate or convert people, specifically children

Nope. There is no need. Heterosexuals continue to produce gay offspring. There is no shortage. Even if this were not true, a straight person cannot be "converted." A bisexual could possibly be shown that he/she is more gay than straight, but that's about it. Honestly, straight people, could you be converted? And if so, how straight are you?

As for children, that is a whole different category, distinct from homosexuality. Pedophiles exist in all sexual orientations, straight, gay and bi. They harm people that cannot legally consent. Like all kinks and 'philes, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation.

Myth #2: The Gay Agenda

Gay people are not a cabal. We don't have membership cards, and we don't go through orientation. We are as diverse as straight people, and are more loosely affiliated than most any other minority group. Nobody speaks for all gay people, and no two gay people are alike. No matter what you've read, or what sources you cite, you cannot claim that anybody or anything speaks for all gay people.

Myth #3: Gays are an insignificant minority

This one makes me laugh. While Dr. Kinsey's "10%" figure has been disputed, my belief is that it is not far from the truth. For every gay person I know, I've known of the "straight" guys who they've hooked up with. One of my best friends was a straight-guy magnet, through no fault of his own. There are a lot of "straight" guys out there who are fond of other guys.

Beyond that, any survey that gives you a 1%-2% figure, remember this: a lot of people are excluded in these surveys. 1) People who will not reveal their sexuality for a survey. 2) People who have not reconciled their own sexuality yet. 3) Bisexuals. 4) People too young to have considered the category. 5) People who are gay, but don't admit it. 6) Any other sort of rationalization.

And if gays are so insignificant, why are there legions of anti-gay websites out there? What kind of threat is such a minuscule population?

Myth #4: Gays want to shred the fabric of society

This one kills me. I've read countless posts from people who claim that same-sex marriage and gay acceptance aren't the real goals of "the gay agenda." No, we want to subvert society, rend the structures of civilization, destroy religion, and turn the country gay! Where do they get this stuff? Most gay people just want to be left alone, and be afforded the same rights as any other taxpaying citizen. We want nothing more than you have. It's the ultimate paranoid fantasy to justify homophobia.

Myth #5: The Gay "Lifestyle"

This term, as near as I can figure, stems from euphemisms used in the 70s when "gay" and "homosexual" couldn't be printed in "family" publications. It has since been latched on to by opponents (and unfortunately has entered the lexicon effectively enough to be used by actual gay people). It is a meaningless term, but it conjures the image of the promiscuous, drug-using party boys. Such people exist, and in fact many gay people do phase through it.

But it isn't the life of most gay people. Sure, many of us go through a sort of delayed adolescence, and some of us do come swinging out of the closet on a rope. But generally, we settle down into a typical--not all that different from straight folks--domesticated existence. My life is no different in any significant way from that of my heterosexual married friends. And this is true for more gay people I know than not.

Myth #6: Gay guys want to be girls/Gay girls want to be guys

Um, no. I can understand the confusion. The most noticeable gay people can feed into this misconception. Drag queens, butch lesbians, effeminate gays. All exist (and I cast no dispersions), but these folks don't necessarily want to be the opposite gender. The people that do are called "transsexuals," and you have to admit that the people that want to change their sex by surgically cutting off and/or modifying their bodies must be serious about it.

But most gay folks are just men attracted to men, or women attracted to women. No great mystery about it. You go with the one who turns your head. You can't fake it or "choose" it. This brings me to. . .

Myth #7: Being gay is a choice. Gays are not born.

This one is perhaps the most stupid. Right-wingers will claim this, though they are "100% straight" and would really have no way of knowing, right? Even though most surveys will tell you that about 95% of gay people will claim that they were "born that way," or at least had no conscious choice, right-wingers will say we're all lying.

Yes, at our last big gay meeting, we all decided to lie about it. Seriously, most gay people--if they're lucky--realize and acknowledge their sexuality right about puberty. There ain't no faking attraction. And there is no great mystery as to what causes arousal. A straight guy isn't going to look at gay porn and go, "Hey, wait a minute! That looks fun! I'm a-goin'-gay!" That's just ridiculous.

The craziest thing about this myth, is that those that hold it also often hold that they can "tell" a lesbian or a gay man by looking at them. Yes, they have "gaydar." This is cognitive dissonance at its finest. That someone could look at a Paul Lynde, Elton John or a Charles Nelson Reilly, and say at the same time, "what a flamer," and "they had a choice" ought to disprove this myth once and for all.

That's it, I'm out. Ha! Not sure if I've wrapped it all up yet, but it's a start. . .

UPDATE:

Myth #8: The gay rights effort does not compare to other civil rights struggles

This one comes up a lot, because comparisons are sometimes made to the African-American civil rights struggle, women's suffrage, etc. That is because there are analogous issues, and because gay rights issues fall into the category of "civil rights." The comparisons are not 100% perfect--as most analogies are not--but they are not apples and oranges either.

The arguments against interracial marriage--for instance--are nearly identical to those used against gay marriage. Is race the exact same thing as sexuality? Of course not. But both are immutable, and both have faced ignorance and discrimination for no good reason.

But don't trust me on the issue. I'm a white guy, raised to be a straight, Republican Christian. The only thing I still am in that list is a white guy, but I can pass for the rest. Ask a black gay person, or better yet, a black lesbian if race, gender and sexuality are analogous when discussing civil rights. I'm betting you get a high 90-percentile who would say "yes."