Chinese Police Close Down Gay Cultural Festival
While many gays on the left think that America has entered some kind of new repressive dark age since President Bush was re-elected with increased Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, the reality of our social life belies this bleak scenario. I just returned from seeing Brokeback Mountain, a gay flick directed by an “A-list” director and featuring two “A-list” actors. Not only is this film being shown at a premiere Los Angeles venue, it is also being released in commercial theaters across the country (rather than in hidden underground screening rooms as it would be in the America described by the gay left). There is no danger that police will close it down.
In addition to this flick, there are gay film festivals across the country, many universities have courses (if not programs) in gay and lesbian studies (as well as gay and lesbian centers), major publishing houses publish gay books, leading theaters produce gay plays while gay characters appear in countless TV shows and movies. Not to mention gay-themed art exhibits.
And while Americans can experience gay stories in a variety of cultural media, the London Times reports that police in Beijing “shut down the opening of China’s first gay and lesbian culture festival yesterday.” After telling the owners of the trendy 798 complex in northeastern Beijing that they would not allow “a festival of films, plays, exhibitions and seminars on homosexuality” to proceed,” 30 participants tried to move their fest to “On/Off, a Beijing gay bar.” Police surrounded the bar and closed it down — before the event had even begun.
Let’s see if those gay groups who fall into high dudgeon whenever any Republican says something even moderately politically incorrect will have anything to say about this.
(H/t: Reader Scott from Atlanta. I encourage you to read the whole article as it provides a good short summary of polices toward gays in Communist China. And provides an interesting historical anecdote about broken sleeves.)
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
28 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
There’s no question that communist China represents the worst elements of Marxist ideology (dare I say “religion?). But then we have our OWN administration spying on OTHER Americans without the usual and necessary court orders. But, hey, the Chinese are “commies,” and we are . . . (remember George Orwell, anyone?). Then there is the Patriot Act that abridges numerous consitutional rights, not the least of which is habeas corpus. Such happens to BOTH American citizens and “militant combatants.” Lincoln invoked it, so why not GWB?
But, all is not lost. GWB has finally capitulated to McCain and 90 Senators who have demanded that U.S. torture cease and desist. On the one hand, GWB claimed “we” didn’t torture anyone; on the other hand, GWB has ignored the Geneva Conventions, while dozens died in our “camps.” Then he threatened to veto any prohibition on torture, until the veto-proof amendment was assured. Which is it George? We “don’t” torture, but we “do” too?
There’s no question that Marxist China is a horrible state of affairs. I can’t even imagine the curtailments. But when the U.S.A. can’t even abide by its own best instincts, and pundits and apologists simply look the other way, I don’t think WE can throw stones when our glass house is just as vulnerable. But then, SOME people refuse to even acknowledge our own overt and covert McCarthyism. It is, after all, the reverse side of the very Marxism we claim to despise.
Comment by Stephen — December 17, 2005 @ 1:50 am - December 17, 2005
Once again, Stephen, your comment makes me laugh. First of all, the president never ignored the Geneva convention. When a prisoner has died in U.S. custody, it has been investigated and where appropriate, charges have been filed.
As to the alleged spying by this Administration, I’m sure that when this is investigated, we will learn that the proper procedures have been followed and that (especially in the immediate aftermath of 9/11), the government had good reason to “spy on” the individuals in question.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — December 17, 2005 @ 2:02 am - December 17, 2005
Once again, Stephen, you’re using our comment area to deliver dishonest (and over-the-top) broadsides against the president. To make sure this thread doesn’t stray far from the post to which it is attached, let me note that I find it striking that you refuse to acknowledge how gay culture continues to flourish even in George W. Bush’s America.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — December 17, 2005 @ 3:09 am - December 17, 2005
Eh, whenever anyone points out how ridiculous left-wing hysteria is on any issue, they merely shift the subject without missing a beat.
Don’t worry. Next week you’ll post something on how the domestic surveillance was perfectly legal, only to get “gays are persecuted in America!” in reply.
Lefties have five arguments, like five cards on a table. Remove one, and they’ll simply pick up one of the other four in reply as if the fifth never existed. Remove one of the other four, and that fifth card will reappear as it has ever been.
It’s an ingenious little system of slippery, multi-tentacled thought, rubbery and impervious to reason.
Comment by Robbie — December 17, 2005 @ 5:57 am - December 17, 2005
You have no constitutional right not to be investigated. And as it happens, though the leftwing NYT buried it in the story, the only “spying” was done on internationals, and was responsible for the arrest of several terrorists.
What are you going to say to those who die as a result of this idiotic hysteria? That you were “protecting” their non-constitutional rights?
There is no documented torture, this bill did nothing, because torture is already illegal, other than once again intrude on how the military conducts war. You’d think after Vietnam we’d have learned to keep Congress from sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong, but no, it makes you “feel good” so why not.
And again, what will you say to those who die because of your “feel good” Al-Qaeda declaration of rights? That you were “protecting” them?
Comment by rightwingprof — December 17, 2005 @ 9:53 am - December 17, 2005
Indeed, because the Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorists. That’s been hashed out many times. The fact that lefties can’t process it, or won’t, reveal a great deal about the fantasy world in which they live.
Comment by rightwingprof — December 17, 2005 @ 9:54 am - December 17, 2005
Your post reminded me of something, rightwingprof; I hadn’t seen any updates recently on the peace activists taken hostage last week.
That means they’re likely dead, and the MSM is covering that up.
Why? Because the MSM has pushed the idea, as promoted by the Democrats, that these terrorists wouldn’t do anything to us if we didn’t go running around starting wars. Indeed, the statement made by these “peace activists” mirrors the demands of the Left exactly:
“I’d like to offer my pleas to the people of America, not to the government of America, a plea for my release from captivity and also a plea for a release from captivity of all the people of Iraq,” Fox says.
He adds, “The only way that we can all be free is for the American and British soldiers to leave Iraq as soon as possible.”
Kember, speaking in a tired, raspy voice, identifies himself in the video as a “Christian peacekeeper” and a “friend of Iraq.”
“I have been opposed to this war, Mr. [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair’s war, since the very beginning. I ask of him now, and the British government, to do all that they can to work for my release and the release of the Iraqi people from oppression,” Kember says.
It wouldn’t do the Dems much good to have their “peace rhetoric” exposed as empty anti-Bush blather that ignores the reality of these terrorists’ viciousness, especially since the Dems’ entire national security plan is based on it.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 17, 2005 @ 12:01 pm - December 17, 2005
So bringing the discussion back to China — I’d point out that not everyone in the Chinese-speaking world is brutal to gays. In Taiwan, while gays still face an uphill battle there, they are free to organize, and to meet, and to have parades, with little government interference. They have been doing so for quite a while now.
Comment by Hello Moto — December 17, 2005 @ 12:21 pm - December 17, 2005
And bringing the discussion back to lack of gay Left outrage over China – all I can do is sigh. It’s all so predictable. Only America is, or ever can be, evil (in their eyes).
Comment by Calarato — December 17, 2005 @ 12:29 pm - December 17, 2005
Additionally, Taiwan is one of a handful of countries (and the only one in Asia) to grant recognition to same-sex civil unions.
Comment by timekeeperq — December 17, 2005 @ 12:31 pm - December 17, 2005
Hello Moto in #8 and timekeeperq in #10, thanks for bringing that up about gay life in China. Another reason why the West should stand up for that free nation!
Comment by GayPatriotWest — December 17, 2005 @ 2:15 pm - December 17, 2005
Taiwan has talked about same-sex unions, but I don’t think anything actually has been done. Or has it? I haven’t followed. Still, they’re much farther along than any other Asian society. I’d characterize them as probably only five years behind the US with regard to gay equality. Taiwan is actually very advanced now in terms of safeguarding individual liberty and upholding the rule of law. This may be the reason why China is so desperate to annex the island. The success of Taiwanese dmoecracy is an example of what a “Chinese” society can be, and what China is not. The contrast de-legitimizes the argument that Chinese people require centralized control because they historically never had representative government. Taiwan proves that Chinese people are capable of freedom.
Comment by Hello Moto — December 17, 2005 @ 2:27 pm - December 17, 2005
Why am I NOT surprised that GPW finds GWB’s illegal wiretapping “funny,” even “hysterical?” Of course, he does. He finds “liberal” offenses horrendous, but “conservative” ones “not as bad.” Does the name of Richard Nixon ring any bells? This is WORSE. We have a President who believes he’s ABOVE ALL laws, not only the Geneva Conventions, but also the U.S. Constitution. But as long as GWB is a “conservative,” by golly, then it’s okay. Never mind that no right-thinking conservative would EVER support the unconstitutional Patriot Act. Never mind, that GWB hasn’t done a SINGLE conservative thing since his election. You guys have become a joke. But the punch line is anything BUT funny. We have a Commander in Chief who doesn’t even know what’s going on in Iraq, must less the U.S. So many of his Administration has been indicted. But hey, I guess they’re all “patriots,” and THAT alone suffices. Maybe for you two. But the rest of America is tired of lies, deceit, illegalities, and all the other malfeasance, like providing SUBSIDIES for Oil Companies and Pharmaceuticals, as IF they needed it. And the $1.7 BILLION/week unjust war is fine by you. And the cutbacks on aid to People With Aids (PWA) so that we can finance the War to destroy WMD that didn’t even exist. You are NOT patriots. You’re plain gullable.
Comment by Stephen — December 17, 2005 @ 8:55 pm - December 17, 2005
Stephen, for once and for all, let me illustrate why it is utterly and completely pointless to listen to you.
Consider, for instance, the Kelo decision, in which the Supreme Court unequivocally stated that one may take PRIVATE land from PRIVATE individuals and redistribute it to PRIVATE companies for the purpose of “economic development”, meaning they replace existing PRIVATE homes with PRIVATE condominiums for wealthier individuals.
Of course, Bush criticized that immediately.
Now, since Bush has never done, said, or stated ANYTHING right, according to you, that must mean that “libertarians” and “conservatives” and “Goldwater Republicans” like yourself believe the Kelo decision is correct and constitutional.
If not, you fatally impair your argument, since you would have to admit that Bush was right.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 17, 2005 @ 9:25 pm - December 17, 2005
Just curious. Stephen, what part of the country are you from? I ask only because we don’t have Republicans like yourself here in apparently liberal Dallas,TX. I’m thinking that perhaps we could send envoys out to your neck of the woods to learn desperately needed lessons in conservatisim.
Comment by Bobo — December 18, 2005 @ 12:25 am - December 18, 2005
Stephen in #13, do you even read my comments. It seems you devote as little attention to them as you do to the post to which you post your own comments. I never called the president’s wiretapping funny or even hysterical. And if you read about the wiretapping (he authorized), you will find that it’s not even illegal.
No, this president doesn’t believe he’s above the law and cleared this with a judge — as well as with congressional leaders at the time. Those leaders did not then protest.
You continue to rant on and on, but barely even touch upon the points I made in my post — or in my comment above.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — December 18, 2005 @ 2:00 am - December 18, 2005
Wht bother Stephen. These gyus are so stck.
Comment by hank — December 18, 2005 @ 5:09 pm - December 18, 2005
Why bother Stephen. These guys are so stuck. Can Bush do NO wrong with you people?
Did you see Bob Barr (Rep from GA and a force behind the Clinton impeachnent) on CNN?
BARR: There is a constitution, and I took an oath to abide by it. If you have any government official who deliberately orders that federal law be violated despite the best motives, that certainly ought to concern us.
ROHRBACHER: Bob during wastime. you givethe President certain powers.
BARR. Do we have a declaration of war?
This is a hateful man, but at least he’s not stuck marching in goose-step with everything this adminisration tries to put over on us.
Comment by hank — December 18, 2005 @ 5:19 pm - December 18, 2005
#15 – Bobo – Stephen is from San Francisco. He is a longtime “nuisance ranter” who sometimes also goes here under DSH. He is a nuisance commentor in some other forums as well, where he might sometimes use D. Stephen Heersink. His arguments rarely add up to a real conservative and/or libertarian position, but he takes enormous joy in pretending the contrary, for some reason.
Comment by Calarato — December 18, 2005 @ 6:55 pm - December 18, 2005
#18 – Hank – Unfair remark. Bush can do a great deal of wrong with a great many folks here, which you would know if you came here with an attitude of goodwill. GP and GPW have bashed Bush, appropriately and constructively, on many occasions, which you would know if you read their posts.
The problem is more that, in the eyes of irrational Bush haters such as Stephen, Bush can do no right. Several of Bush’s ideas and actions have been genuinely conservative (in the best sense) and it is easy to name several – unless you’re Stephen, who has been unable to name a single one (when challenged to in the past).
Comment by Calarato — December 18, 2005 @ 6:57 pm - December 18, 2005
One doesn’t have to “bash” to be minimally objective.
And I don’t see why you and Vthe whatever his name is, have to resort to calling me names.
And skip crap about “oh he was referrimg to your”position”, not YOU personally.
Now you can call me “moonbat” or “leftie”, or whatever tactic you use
when you know theres (how that s pal?) nothing left for you to say except…”you know, you might be right”
NEVER GONNA HAPPEN ON THIS SITE
Comment by hank — December 18, 2005 @ 10:25 pm - December 18, 2005
Hank,
Please spare the faux outrage for someone who actually does call you names.
Comment by Calarato — December 18, 2005 @ 11:58 pm - December 18, 2005
Oh, and while you’re at it Hank -
Please try to address points I made, or for that matter points in what anybody said, ONCE in your time here????
Comment by Calarato — December 19, 2005 @ 12:00 am - December 19, 2005
If English is your second language, you’re doing very well.
Comment by hank — December 19, 2005 @ 12:03 am - December 19, 2005
Ummm. So Hank depends on a quote from from lame ass kook Barr to make a lame ass point. So objective, so persuasive, so unassailable. Does this mean that we can quote Barr as a source when it suits our position? If so, I suppose that David Duke, Osama and the President of Iran are in the bullpen waiting for Hank to call.
Comment by Bobo — December 19, 2005 @ 12:06 am - December 19, 2005
So, you just come here to insult people or spew hate.
Comment by Calarato — December 19, 2005 @ 12:07 am - December 19, 2005
Look in the mirror.
I see that the lunatics run this asylum, so I leave you ugly little dickless fools to paddle around in your poluted pond. Nobody gives a damn what you say anmyway.
You were just a morbid curiosity.
Comment by hank — December 19, 2005 @ 12:13 am - December 19, 2005
Promises, promises.
Keep it this time. Look at my demonstration of how to actually walk away (not just talk about it), in one of the earlier threads (I forget which).
Comment by Calarato — December 19, 2005 @ 12:14 am - December 19, 2005