Bernard Waber Beloved Author Of ' Lyle the Crocodile' Dies At 91

I was saddened to read of  Waber's passing.  Lyle the Loveable Crocodile was one my favorite bedtime stories when I was a child.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(via the Associated Press)

NEW YORK — Bernard Waber, the author of such children's favorites as "The House on East 88th Street" and "Lyle, Lyle Crocodile," has died.

Waber died May 16 at his Long Island home after a long illness, publisher Houghton Mifflin Harcourt announced Monday. He was 91.

Waber's "warmth, energy, artfulness, elegance, and abiding respect for children were epitomized in his books," Houghton's senior vice president and publisher of books for young readers, Betsy Groban, said in a statement. His 33 books have sold 1.75 million copies, the publishing company said.

Waber debuted as an author in 1962 with "The House on East 88th Street," which introduced readers to the loveable Lyle, first spotted in a bathtub in an Upper East Side brownstone. Lyle's story continued in "Lyle Finds His Mother," "Lyle and the Birthday Party" and other works. Waber also wrote many non-Lyle books, such as "Ira Sleeps Over," in which a boy fears he'll be teased for bringing a favorite stuffed teddy bear to a friend's house.

Waber was a native of Philadelphia and a graduate of what was then known as the Philadelphia College of Art.

He is survived by his brother, three children and four grandchildren. His final book, "Lyle Walks the Dog," was a 2010 collaboration with his daughter, Paulis.

Funny Odd Film Review - Star Trek Into Darkness

In 2009  director JJ Abrams confidently  strolled into a cultural  lions den, by re-imagining  one of the most iconic  franchises  in not just science fiction,  but  in popular culture as a whole, with his "reboot" of Star Trek.

The film worked,  and it worked  really really well.  Yes,  hard core fans (of which it can be said, I am one...)   had our  nit-picky issues  with  the film, but  overall most  "trekkers"  accepted  that  this was something  NEW,  and  as such would be  very different  from  everything that came before.   And it worked,  it showed us characters and  concepts we thought we  knew by heart,  in a brand new context and gave Star Trek, a totally new  story arc.

 It also gave  Abrams and his team the  ultimate come back to  the criticisms of  uber-nerds  who  were horrified  at the changes. "It's a whole new timeline,  everything you are complaining about never happened in this universe, so get over it!" 

Like most Star Trek fans, I embraced it, and was eager to see where JJ Abrams would take us next. SPOILER WARNING- The following review will contain key plot points from the new movie, so if you haven't seen it and don't want to know what happens, don't read any further. Otherwise read on....

Star Trek Into Darkness,  is a  really  good  sci-fi action movie.   It is (mostly) well acted,  well directed and  visually  stunning.    I know you are  hearing  the  "but...."  that  is about to come, so before  we go there,  let me tell you  what  I really liked about this movie.

The Cast.  Most of  the  core cast  have  grown  into their characters  and  turn in strong and  believable performances.   Chris Pine's  Jim Kirk is   heroic,  human and  believable.   Likewise  Zac Quinto's Spock wonderfully takes  the elements we know and love from Leonard Nimoy's Spock, and combines that with the journey this "new" Spock  has taken  since the  destruction of  his home and family in the last movie.    Zoe Saldona kicks ass,  in a major way   giving  Uhura  the gravitas  and  depth  that  must  be  making  Nichelle Nichols  very  proud.  

Simon Pegg turns in a much stronger  and less cliche'd performance  as Scotty this time out,   and takes great strides in making the character his own.   I know that for many fans,   plot element of having Scotty  resign and leave the Enterprise , (over the potential risks posed by the new  "photon torpedoes")   is  unbelievable,  and something "Scotty would never do",  but  that's the point.   It is something  Jimmy Doohan's  Scotty would never do.   This Montgomery Scott,  hasn't  lived  that life, or  at least  not yet.   So  Pegg's  reboot of Scotty  works better this time around.


Bruce Greenwood brings a fatherly  presence as  Admiral  Christopher Pike and as the bad guy, "John Harrison"   Benedict Cumberbatch delivers the right balance of fire, ice  and mayhem.   Where you never really  believed   Eric Bana's  Romulan villain in the last movie  was  a serious threat to Kirk & Co.  "Harrison" (yes I know.. I keep putting his name quotes,  we'll get to that in a minute...)  is at the outset, a believable baddie.

So again,  Star Trek Into Darkness is a fun, entertaining, well made  Science Fiction Action movie.  But...   and here comes  the  "but".   This movie  simply does not work as a Star Trek film, even as a JJ Abrams "universe"  Star Trek film .    Abrams himself  said  he didn't make a movie for Star Trek fans, but rather for movie fans, and in that goal he has been very successful, but  as a Star Trek story,  the movie falls flat.  The most generous praise I can muster in this regard is, Into Darkness is to Stark Trek what "Quantum of Solace" was to James Bond.  A well made action movie that when taken in the context of its own cannon, makes absolutely no sense.

The script suffers from  a number of flaws,   John Cho,  Anton Yelchin, and Karl Uban  as  Sulu, Checkov and "Bones" McCoy,  all  try to make the best of what they are given.  Yet they can't seem to  make it work in this film.    Urban particularly  struggles to make his McCoy more than just crotchety,  but never quite gets there.

Then there are the  "Easter eggs".  A Hollywood phrase meaning small plot points or references hidden in the film  to be discovered along the way.  Inside Jokes if you will,  planted there for  Star Trek fans to find, that the average non-trekker  wouldn't  get.   These, while  amusing  for the most part,   come across as more post-it notes stuck on the movie that say "Look!  See!  It's a Star Trek reference! "     The biggest egg of course,  is the fact that  "John Harrison" is in fact  Khan.  Yes, as in "Star Trek II,  The Wrath of Khan ". The problem with this,  (well,  one of the problems, there are several...)  is while Cumberbatch is entirely believable as an ex-star fleet  special ops type hell-bent on revenge, he just is not convincing as Khan.

Which brings us to the  core problem  with this movie.  If you are going to reboot something  like Star Trek,   you have two choices. You either do a complete  re-imagining ,  as was done  with  Battlestar Galactica where  all the characters and their context is completely  changed, while putting them in basic key elements of the original cannon.

 Or,  you do as was done with Doctor Who,  you  totally redesign the look,  the feel, the sound,  but  stay  completely true  to everything that came before.   The problem with Star Trek Into Darkness,  is JJ Abrams is trying to  have it both ways.

The Easter eggs don't work. They come across as a forced rehash of Star Trek II. You can't have all the key characters be entirely recognizable as their original namesakes, and then pull out a villain we all know very very well, and completely re-image him.

 You can't redo the story from the best of the original cast films and expect it to work for Trek fans in this new context.  It feels fake, like the production team sat down and tried to think of things they could  just throw in  that would keep the Trekkers happy, while making a big budget  sci-fi action movie that  would appeal to the average movie-goer. 

Reversing the plot point of having  Kirk "die" from radiation in the engine room instead of Spock was powerfully acted and an emotional moment in the movie.   But  in the context of the story, it  was rendered  silly  when it turns out  all they need to do bring Kirk back from the dead is inject some of Khan's blood into him.  In his cameo as "Spock Prime", (another easter egg that felt forced)  Leonard Nimoy's Spock  tells  his  younger self  that  defeating  Kahn  for him and his shipmates  came at  great  cost. But in this film, while a visual roller coaster,  it all felt  just  too... easy.   

The musical score for the film by Michael Giacchino, continues the themes from the previous movie and works very well and at the end, incorporates the famous  opening bars of  Alexander Courage's  original theme.   The costumes look great, aside from the  ridiculous  dress gray starfleet uniforms with the silly over-sized caps. The Enterprise still looks like the Enterprise,  and we get to see the Klingons in this movie, forehead ridges and all.

So what's my verdict?  I really enjoyed  the movie.  It's a fun scifi roller coaster ride and  certainly  worth  going to see in the theatre and in 3D.   Yet  what is clear  from  this movie, is  JJ Abrams  needs to make a choice on which direction  he wants to take  Star Trek, because trying to go both forwards and backwards at the same time  just leaves you stuck.

Star Wars fans should take note.  JJ Abrams is set to take on that reboot next.

Thoughts on Minnesota Marriage

The "impressive clergyman" in the movie "The Princess Bride" put it best when he said "Marwiage is what bwings us togewer ... today!" The irony is, that now more than a decade into the twenty-first century, marriage and all the issues that surround it, are exactly what some folks feel is tearing America apart.

But first… let’s recap.

In the past 9 years there have been dizzying advances in Marriage equality, It started with Massachusetts back in 2004, then San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome opened the floodgates on this issue when he began issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples in February that same year.
More than 18,000 couples got married between February 12 and March 11, 2004, before the courts stepped in an put a halt to it. 

This eventually led to the passage of and fight against, California Proposition 8. Leading up to the  Perry Case to have it tossed out as Unconstitutional . 

Fast forward to 2013.

Yesterday Minnesota became the 12th state to legalize marriage equality. Joining 11 other states and the District of Columbia in legalizing same-sex marriage, meaning that about 18 percent of the population of the United States has the option to marry regardless of gender.    So let’s see... none of those 11 states have slid into the sea, burst in hell fire and brimstone, it hasn't rained frogs or locusts and as far as I can tell not one heterosexual marriage has been “destroyed” by any same sex couple getting married.

Kind of makes you wonder what all the fuss is about?

Like many people, when I hear the pundits of talk radio and cable news say that same sex marriage is a “redefinition of marriage." I have to laugh. By that standard interracial marriages was a redefinition. Doing away with polygamy was a redefinition. Not treating women as property was a redefinition. None of these self-proclaimed defenders of marriage would ever tolerate what is the true definition of “traditional marriage

Saying that letting two people of the same gender get married would in any way "redefine" the marriages of heterosexuals, is the same thing as saying that equal rights for racial minorities would "redefine" being white. That argument is a smoke screen and a scare tactic, and not even the real issue, so spare me the stale talking point. It doesn't hold up to even basic fact checking. 

And spare me the tired fear mongering rhetoric that allowing same sex marriage will lead to polygamy, bestiality, pedophile marriages, sunspots and tooth decay. The has ONLY ever been about two and ONLY two consenting adults of no direct family relation. Find me the person who truly wants to marry their dog, and find me the dog who is over 18 years old, and can sign a marriage application and clearly say the words “I do”. 

 If Shaggy and Scooby show up in a Las Vegas chapel, I might take this argument seriously, but otherwise it just makes you look desperate and stupid.

Next we have the idea that opposing Marriage Equality is "defending the very fabric of society." How is the fact that two legal adults of no direct family relation being allowed to live in a stable, monogamous legally protected and, I might add, legally binding relationship in ANY way a threat to society? How is anyone's marriage harmed or even threatened by this? It isn't. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that 

Opponents of Marriage Equality had their day in court where they were asked to prove that marriages of heterosexuals would change if same sex couples were allowed to marry, and they couldn't produce even one shred of evidence to support the claim. So they fall back on “Its about Children!” The insane notion that allowing same sex couples to marry is “denying children a Mother and a Father”. Again, where that truly the case older and infertile couples should also be denied the right to Marry, and divorce should be illegal.

Funny you don’t see Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh banging on that drum….

Then we have the argument that we have to let people vote on whether or not a minority gets equal rights. Well by that logic we would still have slavery. If in 1860 you had put emancipation to a popular vote, it would have failed. If in 1960 you had but integration to a popular vote it would have failed. For that matter if in 1776 you had put independence to a popular vote it would have failed. We are a democratic republic, we elect our government officials to enact laws on our behalf. The idea that the majority gets to vote on the rights of a minority is the most Un-American concept ever. 

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

So what is the real issue here? It's the truth. Or the lack of it, in this debate over marriage. First we need to say to those who claim we need to "defend marriage." Fine, let's talk about divorce then. Let's talk about adultery, let's talk about illegitimacy. If opponents to gay marriage are serious about defending this sacred institution, then divorce, a far greater threat to marriage, needs to be much harder to get. Adultery, a far greater threat to marriage needs to punishable by criminal prosecution. Fines and perhaps even jail time. Anyone who makes a child out of wedlock should then by law be forced to marry the other parent. Or if they are already married legally adopt the child.

Strom Thurmond has never been so lucky to be dead.

Any one who says they  want to "defend marriage" and does not support the provisions I just listed, are not interested in marriage. They just don’t like Gays and Lesbians, and want to deny them equal treatment under the law. Nothing more. Now let’s be clear, as an American you have the RIGHT to dislike anyone you want. You don’t have approve of same sex marriage. If you don’t want gay marriage, it's pretty simple,   don’t get gay-married. 

Yet the same United States Constitution that protects the right to hate who you want to hate, also protects MY right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And the courts have ruled that my rights do not in any way infringe on yours, that means you don’t get to infringe on mine. Yet many on the cultural and political Right in the United States can’t seem to grasp this basic truth of our democracy, and continue to put forward the idea that equal rights for all Americans is somehow an attack on them.

It is time that we call these self-proclaimed defenders of marriage what they are. There is no difference between those who say marriage is sacred and must be defended against "gay attack", and those who said racial integration was a threat to America. Wearing a cross necklace and going on TV to say Gays and Lesbians are unfit to raise children is no different from wearing a white hood, and standing in front of a burning cross and saying "the darkies are coming for your daughters."

Saying America must be defended against a radical gay agenda, saying books like “Heather has Two Mommies” are dangerous, saying the media is controlled by a gay Mafia. This is no different from those who 70 years ago posted signs saying "Germans wake up! Don't buy from Jews!”.

Government saying an entire group of people are a threat to families, government saying who can and cannot get married or raise children, is no different from a Senator waving around a list of names of people who he wanted to government to say couldn't teach, make movies, write books, or work in science, medicine or law.

Attempts to legally create second class citizens are not new. We have seem them before. They had different names though. The inquisition, Jim Crow, “States Rights”, Reich Racial Purity Laws, the blacklist. It is time we call the people who are trying to do  this again, but to gays and lesbians what they really are. They are the inquisitors, they are the brown shirts of Krystalnacht, they are the Klansmen of Mississippi burning, they are the dogs on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they are Joe McArthy's committee. They are an affront to everything our nation has ever stood for.

They are the American Taliban. A small group of even smaller minds, who would seek to take religious beliefs and codify them into civil law, then force them on everyone else. They are completely un-American, and yesterday the great state of Minnesota joined the growing number of places in the United States that have soundly rejected them. 

To people of Minnesota, I say congratulations. To the Dobson’s, Fisher’s, Bachman’s and Brown’s of the world, I say welcome to the 21rst Century, how sad it must be to see your particular brand of snake oil isn’t selling anymore.

Catch Up Blogging....

Okay...  I admit  I have been neglecting  the blog  for  the past  few weeks,  I  don't  really have a good excuse , other than  I just  wanted to take  little break and  see how  the world unfolded  while I wasn't    paying direct attention.   While I've been  away from the keyboard  there are been a few interesting developments...

Delaware, Rhode Island  both legalized  same sex marriage, and as I write this,  the Minnesota State Senate is in it's final debate on the legalization of marriage equality in that state.    Meanwhile  the right wing nuts of the American Taliban  have pretty much slouched in to petulant  depression over  the forward march of the civil rights of people they don't like.  Clinging to the hope that States with anti-gay constitutional amendments will form a firewall for the preservation of bigotry.

Matt Baume in San Francisco  brings us up to date...



Which of course brings us to  the other front in the Marriage equality fight, where pretty much Everyone is in waiting mode...  Waiting for the United States Supreme Court  to  issue  rulings  on two key  cases.  The  Perry Case, which will decide the fate of  California's  anti-gay  Proposition 8, and the Windsor Case, which deals with the constitutionality of  sction 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act  (DOMA).  Both rulings are expected  by the end of June.

All of which has groups fighting for immigration rights  for  bi-national  same sex couples hopeful that the demise of DOMA  will help clear at least one path  for couples like us  to  sponsor our spouses for immigration  to the United States.   The other path is the comprehensive immigration reform effort currently in mark up  with the Senate Judiciary Committee.   The bill  is  intended  to  provide for increased  border security, added  immigration enforcement resources, a pathway to legal status  for the more than 11 million undocumented  immigrants currently living in the United States, and lastly,  provide for immigration rights for the non-american partners in bi-national same sex unions.

All good things right?  Who could  have a  problem with that?  Certainly not the Republicans, who after getting  seriously  trounced in the 2012 election, couldn't possibly want to further alienate Latino voters by trying to kill the first real effort at immigration reform since 1986, just so they can appease what is left of their base?   Or do they?

Cue Rachel with  the oh so predictable and inevitable spectacle of GOP bigotry.

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

Meanwhile my two favorite delusional wing nuts  Senators "Grampa Simpson"John  McCain, and "Waylon Smithers" Lindsey Graham, have respectively, gotten off his lazy-boy,  and poked his head out of his deep dark closet,  to claim that  any provisions for immigration rights for  same sex couples would "kill immigration reform".

Really?....  So just to be clear.   John McCain and his gal-pal Lindsey are willing  to  throw 11 million Latinos and Asians under the political bus, effectively ending any hope the GOP has of ever winning another national election,  just so they can show how much they hate same sex couples.

Wow... good luck with that one kids.    Oh wait,   here's the kicker.  That may actually work out for them, and get them what they want; Immigration Reform without any rights  for  same sex couples because... (wait for it....)  the  Democrats  have once again  seemingly forgotten they won the last election.  Now it is Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and MY own Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) who are all too willing to trade rights for same sex couples in return for GOP playing nice.   John A, over at  Americablog  brings us all  the gory details.

Gay advocates had hoped that any immigration package would include the Uniting American Families Act, a bill that sought to put gay and lesbian couples on equal footing in the immigration system with heterosexual married couples. However, on Sunday afternoon, Sens. Schumer, Robert Menendez and Dick Durbin convened a conference call with gay rights groups to inform them that the legislation — at least the initial bill — will not include language to address LGBT concerns, a source familiar with the call told POLITICO.

“They blamed it on the Republicans…. Schumer was very matter of fact about it, very Machiavellian,” said the source, who asked not to be named. Gay advocates were told that Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) will offer an amendment in his committee to protect gay couples.

And in a classic first term-esque twister move,  the  Obama Administration  tries desperately  to  speak out of both sides of it's mouth on  this issue. Where words like  "bi-partisan" and "compromise"  once again  seem to mean,  "we are folding like a cheap card table, because we don't want the Republicans to be mean to us..."

To his credit,  Senator Leahy did  add two amendments the bill  incorporating  UAFA provisions into the bill.   It nice to see  at least one Democrat  who is willing to call the GOP's bluff, and make them choose between electoral  redemption and their own bigotry.

Computer Games and Visibility

I am not what you could call a “Gamer” by any stretch of the imagination. The only home video game system I had as a kid was the late 70’s early 80’s the epic commercial failure - RCA Studio II “home TV programming system”. It was about as basic and basic gets.

It had some simple built in games like ping pong, bowling and a very basic drawing/doodling program, and you could play others off of cartridges that you plugged into the console.   

During this time, my parents, were going through a phase in their approach to child rearing, I like to refer to as their “Stalinist thugs who didn't believe in joy” era. Hence their idea of fun computer games was essentially limited to the “schoolhouse” series of cartridges,

The 'games' included things like "History Quiz" and of course, Dad’s favorite , one thrilling and very exciting little gem called "Math Fun"...

Now I am not making this up. It was having to play “Math Fun” in tandem with one particularly incompetent 5th grade teacher that is largely responsible for my rabid aversion to mathematics which persists to this day.

A few years later my Dad noticed my interest in the works of the late, great Science Fiction/Comedy author Douglas Adams, (in whose honor this blog is named.) , and for Christmas in 1984 got me the interactive computer game for Adams’ book “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy”.

In 1984 to say a computer game was “interactive” meant the display was all text. There were no graphics or sounds. The game roughly followed the basic outline of the story and featured a series of puzzles and quests, the solutions to which, were largely determined by actions and choices that you, the player made over the course the game.

I thought it was brilliant, and was hooked instantly. Even with no sounds or graphics I found the story, and the fact that my path through that story was in part determined by ME, to be irresistible. I would spend hours and hours on it.

Earlier this year, my Dad shared a story of how he and my Mother were concerned about the amount of time I was spending playing the game, and how it might be affecting my study skills. So late one night, after I had gone to bed, my Dad booted up the game and tried to play it. After a spending a futile two hours trying to get past the first puzzle, he told my Mom that if I could solve the problems in the game they needn't worry about my cognitive abilities.

HHG2TG  Game Screenshot

There was one real side effect of all this though. As a result, of being bored by the games we had with sound and animation, and getting practically addicted to a text-only experience, I never really got the “video game bug. “ 

Fast forward 15 years. While living in South Korea, my boyfriend at the time, introduced me to my first “modern” computer game. It was “Oddworld – Abe’s Odyssey” . It combined state of the art (for 1997) graphics with interactive story telling and it had a soundtrack. We would end up spending entire Saturdays playing it non-stop.

But that is pretty much where my experience with computer games ended. I have never owned a playstation, Nintendo or any other kind of gaming system. I haven’t really followed what was going on in the gaming world , and for the most part could mention only a handful of popular games, based on nothing more than having seen television commercials for them.

And, being honest, I didn't really know or care what I was missing. Computer games really were not something I was interested in or paid any attention to.

Then last year, Games makers Bioware and Electionic Arts (EA) released the third installment of their Mass Effect trilogy of games. For those of you who are not familiar with this, the “Mass Effect” games tell the story of the crew of the spaceship SSV Normandy, who have to save both Earth and the galaxy from being destroyed by a race of synthetic life forms known as “Reapers”.

The first two installments (Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2) take you through a series of adventures in the run up to what in the third game is an all out galactic war to save pretty much …well, everybody from the big bad reapers.

I immediately ran out and purchased the whole trilogy. Not because I was interested in shooting big ugly aliens and blowing up various pieces of space hardware, but rather because of news reports about the new customization options that were introduced with Mass Effect 3. In the first two games, you could always pick what gender wanted the main character to be.

There is both a Male and Female Commander Shepard. As such you were able to flirt with and have a relationship with, a whole selection of other characters in the games. But whereas flirting could go pretty much any way you wanted, (Male, Female, Human, Lizzard, whatever…) actually having a romantic relationship, was limited in games 1 and 2 just to opposite genders.  

Male & Female Commander Shepard

All That changed in Mass Effect 3. In the final installment your Shepard has the option for a romantic relationship with either a male or female partner.   You know what's coming...

 Right on cue, we have the oh-so-predictable outrage on the American wingnut conservative right….

------------------------------------------------------------------------

WED 04 APR 2012 7:49PM GMT / 3:49PM EDT / 12:49PM PDT 

EA is standing up for same sex relationships in games despite outrage from some

EA has been inundated in recent weeks with whatGamesIndustry International understands to be "several thousand" letters and emails protesting the inclusion of same sex or LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) content in its video games, most notably Mass Effect 3 and Star Wars: The Old Republic. When asked, EA confirmed that this has indeed been occurring, and unsurprisingly, EA has no plans to censor any of its games.

"Every one of EA's games includes ESRB content descriptors so it's hard to believe anyone is surprised by the content. This isn't about protecting children, it's about political harassment," Jeff Brown, VP of corporate communications told us.

The letters have been directed to EA's executive team, creative heads, its board of directors and just about anyone at a high level. Many of them threaten to boycott EA's titles if the publisher refuses to remove same-sex relationship content.

-------------------------------------------------

So essentially,  when I heard  the  American Taliban had it’s  knickers in a twist  over two soldiers of the same sex in a computer game falling in love while they save the galaxy,  how could I not run right out and buy it?   If for no other reason  than as  a vote of support  to  the makers of the game for  designing  inclusive content.

The discs sat on my bookcase for  three months  until  about two months ago I noticed them and figured  I may as well  try playing the game.   I installed  the needed odds and ends on my laptop and thought as I wasn't really all that interested in seriously playing the game  I'd just  jump in and start  with  Mass Effect 3.  I was intrigued to see who  made up the  voice cast .

Simply put the production values  were  incredible,  This is not  what I thought a computer game was.  This is  essentially a motion picture that you  are part of.     The thing  that  really grabbed me and would not let go,  was the story.   Just like in a  really good movie  you find yourself actually caring about what happens to  these characters.   Then there is the  added element of  the "customization options" that has the Wingnuts and on the right  so upset.     

The story arc  for  a same sex relationship is something you have to deliberately choose.  There isn't anyway you can accidentally  end up Gay in Mass Effect 3.    But  just like any good, believable  romantic story,  the same sex romantic plot line doesn't  force itself into the narrative.  If you choose to "go that way"  it progresses  as naturally  as you would expect any love story to,  

Only this one  also involves  blowing stuff up and saving the galaxy.  

I am thoroughly  enjoying my trip through the Mass Effect Universe and plan later this Summer when I have the time,  to go back and play the first two installments in the series.   I have no plans to become a "gamer", but  I can;t help but  be  grateful to  EA and Bioware for having the courage to make a game that  sends a clear message to  Gays and Lesbians  that they exist in the virtual  world too. 

A Brilliant Response to Bigotry and Stupidity...

New Zealand  just became the  13th country in the world to legalize  Marriage Equality for its citizens.   MP Maurice Williamson  rose  to speak in favor of the  bill that  would eventually be passed.  Just watch it.

Well now it's official...

While the United States argues and counter argues about whether or not  it will ever  treat me the same as every other citizen ,  the United Kingdom  without any fuss, drama or debate, today gave me this...

Ok the really really bad digital picture aside,  in the eyes of   Her Majesty's Government, all that was  needed  for my  relationship to be  given the full  legal rights,  responsibilities and  protections  as any other legal spousal relationship, was simply  the fact that Eric and I are Civil Partners.

No need for a public vote on our rights,  no  national debate on whether or not  England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are "ready" for something as "controversial" as equality.   Just a simple application process and the amazing feeling  of being  treated no differently  than any other legal spouse in the UK.  

As I  walked up Oxford Street heading to my office this morning after picking up my new biometric permanent  residency permit card, (The UK equivalent of a US "Green Card"),  I looked around at the hustle and bustle  of London  and  one thought ran through my mind;  The bigots of the American Taliban can go to Hell.  There is nothing they could do to deny us this,   Because  We live here.   What's more,  the full force of  the Government of this nation,  by the act of  issuing a simple plastic card,  just said  to us..

"Congratulations Gents,  and  Dave... Welcome Home."

Meanwhile, back across the Atlantic..

Kinda puts the whole DOMA debate back in the United States in perspective,  doesn't it?

Feeling a little Homesick...

The same day I read that The director of Immigration Equality said today that she does not expect that gay couples will be in included in the immigration reform bill about to be introduced in the US Senate,  the Huffington Post  puts this video up...

Sigh....

A glimpse inside North Korea

Thoughts from DOMA Exile...

The past two weeks have been fairly busy.    Eric and I recently attended  two separate events sponsored by the London chapter of the group  Immigration Equality.    (From their Facebook page)

Immigration Equality is an organization that works to end discrimination in U.S. immigration law, to reduce the negative impact of that law on the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive people, and to help obtain asylum for those persecuted in their home country based on their sexual orientation, transgender identity or HIV-status. Through education, outreach, advocacy, and the maintenance of a nationwide network of resources, we provide information and support to advocates, attorneys, politicians and those who are threatened by persecution or the discriminatory impact of the law.

The first event was a lecture and Q&A  by  Professor Joeseph Landau of the Fordham Law School,  on the upcoming US Supreme cases dealing with the issue of Marriage Equality.   The two cases of course, are the Perry Case, challenging  California's Proposition 8, and  the  Windsor Case, which challenges the  Federal Defense of Marriage Act..

The second event was last night here in Central London.  We attended a special screening of the soon to be released movie  "I Do".  The movie  tells the  story about Jack, a Gay British  man living in New York, where has been since he was student. After his brother is killed in a traffic accident, he cares for his Brother's American widow and daughter.  When his visa runs out, he is forced – by discrimination – to  enter into a sham marriage with Ali, his Lesbian best friend to get a Green Card  so he can remain in the US to care for his family.

Things  are complicated when  Jack  falls for Mano, a handsome Spaniard  who happens to be an American citizen.  For Jack,  balancing his responsibilities as a surrogate dad, being a "green card” husband, and beginning a new relationship, becomes too much for him.

After Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detain and interview Ali and Jack, Ali realizes she’s in over her head and files for divorce. Mano, ready for a commitment and believing since he can legally marry Jack in New York,   he can keep him in the country and  proposes. Their immigration attorney, however, informs them that even though Mano is an American citizen, immigration is a Federal level right not afforded to gay marriage on the State level. Therefore, their getting married won’t make any difference. Jack will be deported unless he marries another woman.

The film which is making the rounds on the film festival circuit,  powerfully shows the very real impact DOMA has. What’s left in the balance are families and couples often split apart, especially those with bi-national makeups. Immigration, which most heterosexual couples take for granted as a given, complicates same-sex relationships, even in states where marriage is now legal.

Both events were attended by a number of couples like us. Bi-national same sex couples where the American partner had to leave the United States in order to be with their legal spouse.  There were  even some couples who like us,  had  been featured on other pro-immigration equality websites,  such as  The DOMA Project,  profiling their stories.

In talking with the other couples,  we discovered that  all of us  had come away from both events with two basic reactions,    The first, was a greater appreciation of how lucky we are to live where we do.  The United Kingdom, like most of the European Union, gives same sex couples all the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples.   Even if, like here in the UK, it is not called "marriage". (Here the official term is "Civil Partnership".)   We can have a long debate over  what's in a name, and I have blogged on that topic in past.  But,  from the point  of view of  many here, since  the rights are the same, the rest is just semantics.

The second  thing we found, was that the other couples we met all shared the same frustration we struggle with.   The fact that  we had no choice but the  leave  the US and become "DOMA Exiles".   The question  we all get asked a lot is;  "So,  if the Supreme Court struck down DOMA and you could  move back to America with your spouse, would you?"    That is a very complicated question, that  frankly doesn't  have a simple Yes or No answer.

For most  Americans living  in  DOMA Exile,  having been forced to make the choice between Love or Country was both deeply emotional, and logistically difficult.  Leaving, friends,  family, jobs and basically everything  else you have known behind, simply to be with the person you love is an exhausting experience. Also one that is naturally is tinged with a certain degree of  resentment  at your own country,   for treating you as a second class citizen, and for treating your legal spouse as something even less than that.

Like many bi-national couples here in London,  the idea of  packing up our lives (again) and moving across the world after having done so once, is a daunting prospect.  So  for us,   it's not so much  about waiting with our bags half-packed, in  breathless anticipation  for DOMA to be struck down so we can jump on a plane and move back the the U.S.  It's more about being treated equally under the law,  and thus having the option to move back to America.  An option that thanks to the blatant  discrimination  of DOMA, we don't current have.

Yet like many of our fellow DOMA Exiles, and  those couples in the United States who are facing  DOMA induced separations, we will be watching  carefully next week when  oral arguments in both the Perry and Windsor cases  begin  at the U.S. Supreme Court.  

So, next week, when you hear  self-proclaimed "Defenders of Marriage" say how striking down  laws like  CA Prop 8,  and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is "an attack" on "traditional marriage",  realize that the truth is, the  Tony Perkins', Brian Browns' and  Bryan Fishers' of the world have no interest in defending anything other than their own bigotry.

What's more you will hear  these mouthpieces of hate, all next week spew their bile of how the  idea that  all Americans should have equal rights under the law, is  somehow an attack on them.

It is very difficult to predict how the rulings will go  when they are handed down in June.   But  we are excited and hopeful that the court will see this is a moment that history will remember.    It is for moments like this that America's founding fathers  created  the separation of the Judiciary from the Legislative and the Executive branches.      Just like with decisions past, such as  Dred Scott,  Brown v. Board of Education or Roe v. Wade,  for those nine justices, this fork in  the road of American history is clearly marked.

We can more forward, or  we can stumble back, and history is watching...

Republican Amnesia..

You really gotta love Rachel Maddow!

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

Ok.. I'm Officially Excited

Best Oscar Opening EVER....!

Hollywood hated it,  the critics  have panned it...    But it was (to quote Peter Griffin..) Just Freakin' Sweet!



And a brilliant Closing Number to boot!


Seth MacFarlane Kristin Chenoweth Loosers song... by dm_512af5eb6ea50

Haters Gonna Hate...

One of  my closest friends called the other day,  both he and his wife  have been dealing  with people they  know who habitually parrot back nonsensical  "the gays are attacking us because they won't let us attack them!"  talking points.   They live in one of the more conservative parts of the United States, and  tell me of how they struggle when they hear  these things,  as it  stands in total  contradiction to reality of the  Gay and Lesbian  people they personally know.

Halfway through the conversation my friend  asked the questions that the LGBT community as been asking since before Stonewall...   "Why do the haters , because that's what I call then... believe that nonsense?  Don't they know any Gay people?".    I had to explain how the ultra-far right in the United States  is facing a demographic and cultural shift  that is moving solidly away from them and towards equality,   As a result,    those who have a vested interest in keeping LGBT people as the one group it is still "safe to hate" are looking at  the end of their multi-million dollar gravy train of bigotry.

On that note... it's been an interesting year so far...

2013  has certainly started with a bit of a bang.   Marriage equality  for same sex couples  was put to a vote and  passed in a whole bunch of interesting places.   Here in  the United Kingdom we had a vote in the House of Commons  on a bill to legalize  Same Sex Marriage proposed by the Tory (conservative) government led by Prime Minister David Cameron, where it passed by a vote of 400 to 175.



 The measure now goes on to the House of Lords for what is more or less a symbolic reading before gaining final approval.

Then hardly a week later,  across the Channel, France’s lower house of parliament  approved a sweeping bill to legalize gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children, handing a major legislative victory to President Francois Hollande’s Socialists on a divisive social issue.

The measure, was  approved in the National Assembly by a 329-to-229 vote.  The overall bill now goes to the French Senate, which is also controlled by the Socialists and their allies, which makes Marriage Equality in France pretty much a done deal, and  puts France on track to join about a dozen mostly European nations that allow gay marriage.

Meanwhile, back across the Atlantic,  the Illinois Senate approved a bill on Valentines day  that would legalize same-sex marriage, inching the home state of President Obama closer to becoming the 10th in the nation, plus the District of Columbia, to allow gay couples the right to wed.



At the same time all this  was going on,  the seemingly settled decision by the  Boy Scouts of America  to maintain the current membership policies  barring  Gays and Lesbians turned out to be not so settled after all.  Media reports were saying  the BSA about on the verge of allowing  local sponsoring organizations to  make their own  determinations  on membership criteria.  The resulting  media  circus / firestorm  prompted a backtracking on making  any decision.  Kicking  the  can down the road to May and having the larger National Council vote on the proposed  changes.




If all that  wasn't  interesting enough, let's  throw President Obama into the mix.  The President threw the American Taliban into fits of hysteria  when in his 2nd Inaugural  Address the President of the United States  said this...



Add to that, the reintroduction of the Uniting American Families Act .  House members reintroduced the bill earlier this month,  for the first time, with bipartisan support .  The bill would allow same-sex couples to be treated in the same way as heterosexual ones under immigration law, permitting them to petition for green cards for partners and spouses. Under the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages that are legal on the state-level. That leads to many couples being separated by immigration law or American citizens (like oh...  ME),  being forced to leave the country  if they want to be with their partner.

The issue of  same sex bi-national couples has  even become a theme in advertising  campaigns.  Like this one from home decor company  John Saint Denis. In this short film benefiting The Human Rights Campaign:  an American and his young French partner are living in an idyllic apartment in Paris, but his company is transferring him to back to the States. He has an American Passport, but his partner does not, so he is forced to face the reality he will have to go without him.

At the end of the video people can  donate directly to the Human Rights Campaign  to support the fight for equality.

I have blogged at  length  about  my views on  marriage equality and about  my feelings about the Boy Scouts of America.  So I  won't   rehash the debate here.    Predictably  the  classic cast of characters  have reacted to  recent developments  their usual over the top- completely devoid of logic shrieks of  hysterical homophobia.   Claiming any sort of rights for  LGBT Americans  is an "attack" on religious freedom.   Even going so  far as to cry that not letting  anti-gay bigots  actively attack the rights and lives of  Gays and Lesbians is discrimination against them.   

Right wing nutcase, and  Gay sex obsessed hate monger  Bryan Fischer rides the Waaaambulance in the express lane to crazytown.

As I  told my friend on the phone the other day,  logic reason, and facts are not part of the world the Fischers, Dobsons  and their ilk inhabit.   Or  to put it in a more simple way.

Haters gonna hate...