France Abandons Bid To Appoint Openly Gay Man as Ambassador to the Vatica

France is dropping its bid to appoint a gay man as ambassador to the Vatican after a nine-month battle with the Catholic Church.

French President François Hollande hoped Laurent Stefanini (right) would serve as France’s official representative to the Holy See but now officials inside Hollande’s government are saying, “It’s dead.”

The Guardian reports: 

Laurent Stefanini, a widely respected chief of protocol to François Hollande, was named as the French president’s choice to serve as ambassador to the Holy See in January. However, without explicitly rejecting his nomination, the Vatican has not accepted his credentials. A new ambassador’s credentials are normally accepted within weeks.

Stefanini was reportedly well qualified for the diplomatic post. He was “France’s second-in-command at its Vatican embassy between 2001 and 2005″, and his appointment was supported by the archbishop of Paris. The rejection of Stefanini provides another confounding moment for gay rights activists who see Pope Francis’ reign as pontiff replete with mixed messages on homosexuality:

Philippe Levillain, a papal specialist and French historian, told the paper the Vatican did not want to be seen as homophobic. “There’s a flagrant contradiction between the openness Pope Francis is showing towards homosexuals and the refusal to accept Laurent Stefanini’s nomination. It’s not a very charitable attitude,” Levillain said.

A report in the French satirical title Le Canard Enchainé in April claimed that Francis had a “very discreet” meeting with Stefanini, in which the pontiff said his objection to the appointment was not personal but an indication of the Vatican’s disapproval of France’s 2013 gay marriage law.

Around the same time, the Élysée palace said France would be sticking to its choice of ambassador. “Laurent Stefanini is the only candidate nominated by the republic and the council of ministers,” it said.

The post France Abandons Bid To Appoint Openly Gay Man as Ambassador to the Vatica appeared first on Towleroad.

Sean Mandell

France Abandons Bid To Appoint Openly Gay Man as Ambassador to the Vatican

Anti-LGBT Groups Absolutely Deserve Their ‘Hate Group’ Designations

This week, the Associated Press profiled the Liberty Counsel, the conservative legal group representing Kim Davis, but was far from charitable. It opened with a recent incident where their chairman, Mat Staver, falsely claimed that 100,000 people rallied in Peru to support his most famous client. It then cast doubt on the group’s account of a meeting between Davis and Pope Francis. The title of the piece referred to Liberty Counsel’s designation as a “hate group,” a label the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) first gave it over a year ago.

The new “hate group” press prompted swift outcry from both the Liberty Counsel and other anti-LGBT groups that share the designation. In a press release on its website, the Liberty Counsel attacked the SPLC and claimed that it only called them a hate group for their political positions on same-sex marriage, hate crimes laws, and ex-gay therapy. “The SPLC’s false labeling of people or organizations would mean that every civilization and its people and every major religious denomination would be similarly labeled by the SPLC as a hater or hate group,” the group wrote. “It is SPLC that demonizes good people and organizations and spews false accusations against those with whom it disagrees. The SPLC is reckless and its false labels are dangerous.”

The Family Research Council (FRC), itself a hate group, also came to Liberty Counsel’s defense. FRC has long blamed the SPLC’s “hate group” labeling for the actions of a shooter who targeted FRC because of its anti-LGBT rhetoric, an accusation the Liberty Counsel repeated. FRC insists that SPLC “inspired” the shooting, and this week claimed that “despite the SPLC’s agenda of intimidation, the media is using the organization to bludgeon Liberty Counsel and Kim Davis. But instead of exposing any wrongdoing on their part, the media is only exposing its own hostility toward Christians. Which sadly, only furthers the extremism that’s silencing religious freedom in the first place.”

But these groups’ strategy of downplaying the SPLC’s “hate group” criteria — while implying that all Christians share their radically anti-LGBT beliefs — requires ignoring exactly what evidence the SPLC uses. Indeed, it is an attempt to completely whitewash the dangerous rhetoric these groups promote, false information that fuels discrimination and often deadly violence against the LGBT community.

What a “hate group” label really signifies.

In the AP article about the Liberty Counsel, SPLC senior fellow Mark Potok explained that “a group that regularly portrays gay people as perverse, diseased pedophiles putting Western civilization at risk are way, way over the line.” The SPLC notes on its page about anti-LGBT groups that these organizations have “disseminated disparaging ‘facts’ about gays that are simply untrue — assertions that are remarkably reminiscent of the way white intellectuals and scientists once wrote about the ‘bestial’ black man and his supposedly threatening sexuality.”

Speaking to ThinkProgress, Potok clarified that the “hate group” label has a very specific approach. It has nothing to do with whether the group promotes violence or criminality, but addresses whether an organization espouses defaming ideology. “Does a group, in its platform statements, say that an entire group is somehow less?” This could be about any group with an inherent characteristic, like “all white people,” “all Jewish people,” etc. SPLC first started looking at what was being said about “all gay people” after a spate of teenage suicides in 2010 suggested that young people and their families were receiving too many anti-LGBT messages.

“We were very explicit and said that the listing has nothing to do with opposition to same-sex marriage or to believing that the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin,” Potok explained. “We decided that many years ago that we’re not going to get in the business of arguing what anybody’s Scripture says. We’re not going to pretend we’re theologians. What we came to was that what really made these anti-LGBT groups hate groups was the propagation of known falsehoods. As a practical matter, that has turned out to be, in most cases, the myth that gay men are, at vastly disproportionate rates, child molesters.”

Constantly broadcasting such ideas translates into anti-LGBT violence. “There are not a lot of worse things you can call a person than a pedophile, a child molester. This gives permission to hate criminals to beat people up with baseball bats. They are giving permission to the kind of people who want to attack gay people to do so. They’re giving them moral authorization.” As an example of this, Potok highlighted the two Boston men who recently beat up a 58-year-old homeless Latino man because they were “inspired in part” by Donald Trump’s racist, anti-immigration rhetoric.

As another example, Potok pointed out how in 2010, anti-Muslim hate crimes skyrocketed by 50 percent. “There was no Charlie Hebdo or ISIS activity” in 2010, he explained. “It was a quiet year for Jihadist violence.” But it was the year that Pamela Geller ginned up controversy over the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” project in New York City. Karl Rove said on Fox News that building the mosque was like Neo-Nazis holding a meeting at a Jewish hotel. Newt Gingrich suggested it’d be like Nazis putting up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum or the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. This kind of rhetoric had an impact.

“We’ve seen time and time again how statements made in the public square demonizing certain minorities ultimately turn into criminal hate violence,” Potok said. “When these kinds of statements are made, especially by people who are very much in the public eye, they do ultimately translate into violence.”

“These kinds of statements make real demons out of their targets.” That demonization then serves as justification for violence, he explained. “Our experience with hate criminals is that an awful lot of them don’t think of themselves as street thugs; they think they are brave young men defending their communities. If you think that you’re attacking someone who is a child molester, an immoral pervert, someone who’s putting Western civilization at risk, it’s very easy to think of yourself as a hero, not a hate criminal.”

LGBT activists have long been successful at pointing out that the polished talking points anti-LGBT groups deliver to mainstream press outlets often doesn’t match the more incendiary rhetoric that they use in their own circles and to their own supporters. When journalists use the “hate group” label, it breaks down the public relations walls that these groups have set up for themselves, as is obvious from their attempts to downplay the designation. Indeed, the evidence against groups like the Liberty Counsel and Family Research Council in no way matches what they claim informs SPLC’s criteria.

How Liberty Counsel has earned its “hate group” stripes.

Liberty Counsel’s record of demonizing the LGBT community is storied, but here are a few highlights that extend far beyond opposing same-sex marriage, hate crime laws, and bans on ex-gay therapy:

• Defending the practice of ex-gay therapy, the Liberty Counsel has repeatedly claimed that young people’s same-sex “confusion” is “caused by the likes of a Jerry Sandusky abuser.”
• In 2014, the Liberty Counsel argued that same-sex marriage should remain banned in Michigan because of the impact of “homosexual-specific health problems.”
• Two years prior, Liberty Counsel circulated a meme image that claimed, “Just like smoking or drug addition, [homosexual] behavior should not be encouraged or promoted by our government.”
• Matt Barber, formerly part of the Liberty Counsel, once wrote a letter to gay teens telling them that if they’re depressed, it’s not because they face homophobia, but because they’re sinners.
• Barber has also claimed that affirming a transgender child’s identity is “nothing short of child abuse.”
• The Liberty Counsel long opposed ending the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay Scouts and leaders because it helps “protect young boys from homosexual pressures and predators.”
• Liberty Counsel has long supported laws that criminalize homosexuality. Most notably, they filed an amicus brief in the 2003 Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas urging the court to uphold sodomy laws as constitutional: “This Court again should decline to deprive states of the power to enact statutes that proscribe harmful and immoral conduct.”

This handful of examples doesn’t include all the evidence the SPLC includes on its own site laying out why Liberty Counsel is a hate group, nor the countless other examples that have been catalogued by RightWingWatch. The Family Research Council has its own similarly lengthy record of caustic and demonizing anti-LGBT rhetoric.

When Liberty Counsel defends clients like Kim Davis, ex-gay groups, or Scott Lively, they are not simply defending religious liberty. They are taking advantage of an opportunity to further demonize and discriminate against LGBT people in the public eye, and that is precisely why they are deserving of the “hate group” label.

The post Anti-LGBT Groups Absolutely Deserve Their ‘Hate Group’ Designations appeared first on ThinkProgress.

Zack Ford

thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/10/09/3710468/liberty-counsel-hate-group/

Only Kyle Chandler Was Man Enough To Play Cate Blanchett's Husband In 'Carol'

Festival crowds have extolled Cate Blanchett’s and Rooney Mara’s performances in “Carol,” the 1950s-set story of a demure retail worker who begins a romance with an older, married woman. Blanchett and Mara have been at the forefront of next year’s Oscar talk since the movie premiered at Cannes in May. But a third performance has received quieter kudos: Kyle Chandler in the role of Blanchett’s husband.

Chandler’s role is full of resolve, his character struggling to reconcile the love he still feels for his wife while recognizing that she does not share the same desire. His screen time is a fraction of Blanchett’s and Mara’s, but it turns out Coach Taylor has just the brooding masculinity and underlying sweetness to capture the sexual stifle of ’50s suburbia — and Todd Haynes knew that from the start.

The director, whose previous movies include “I’m Not There” and “Far From Heaven,” participated in an hourlong Q&A on Saturday as part of the New York Film Festival’s Directors Dialogue series. There, he dissected his “Carol” influences — namely the 1945 British drama “Brief Encounter” — and explained his casting choices.

Blanchett had signed on before Haynes was involved, when “Brooklyn” director John Crowley was attached to the project. When Mia Wasikowska dropped out due to scheduling conflicts, Haynes selected Mara based on the eclectic body of work she’s established in less than a decade, which includes “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” and “Her.” But for Chandler, the director knew he needed one thing in particular: “You have to cast, without sounding sexist, a real man opposite Cate Blanchett.”

“You need a guy who’s grown up, and a lot of actors don’t seem grown up, no matter how old they get,” he said. “They just seem like juveniles with gray hair or something, and he seems like a grown-up. He can hold his own with her. That’s not always easy.”

Haynes, who worked with Blanchett on her Oscar-nominated turn as Bob Dylan in “I’m Not There,” said he’d seen enough of “Friday Night Lights” to be “so impressed” with Chandler.

“That guy is so gifted, and he’s made for the ’50s, too,” he said. “As soon as he got into those clothes, it was like, ‘Oh, my God.’

“Carol” opens Nov. 20.

 

Also on HuffPost:

For a constant stream of entertainment news and discussion, follow HuffPost Entertainment on Viber.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

feeds.huffingtonpost.com/c/35496/f/677065/s/4a9ad732/sc/38/l/0L0Shuffingtonpost0N0C20A150C10A0C120Ccarol0Ekyle0Echandler0Etodd0Ehaynes0In0I82799720Bhtml0Dutm0Ihp0Iref0Fgay0Evoices0Gir0FGay0KVoices/story01.htm

Do you fear ‘LGBTI’ becoming part of your personal brand?

Being out at work now extends beyond coming out to your work colleagues. Do you join an employee LGBTI network? Do you mention LGBTI advocacy work on your LinkedIn profile? Do you highlight LGBTI diversity and inclusion stories on your Twitter?

In the digital age, much is made about promoting and protecting your personal brand – the impression you send out on your CV and social media channels. It’s a dilemma that many LGBTI people continue to agonize over.

And not without reason: A survey earlier this year from Anglia Ruskin University concluded that gay and lesbian jobseekers are 5% less likely to be invited to interview than their heterosexual counterparts.

On the other hand, an increasing number of firms are actively wishing to boost their internal diversity and recognize that embracing inclusivity gives them a competitive business edge.

We asked six senior people in business their opinion.

Andy Woodfield, Partner with PwC

‘One of the problems with personal branding is when people try to create an image of themselves that doesn’t match who they really are, or pretend to be something they think others expect them to be. Unless you focus on your actual strengths, it can be inauthentic.

‘Being LGBTI shouldn’t define who you are professionally. It’s part of who you are as a human being, but it shouldn’t be the primary defining factor from a professional branding perspective. Your skills, values, professional abilities and unique strengths are what makes you stand out.

‘You shouldn’t hide your sexuality, but in terms of professional personal branding, it’s the professional skills that should come first. On LinkedIn, for example, if you edit out part of who you are, you won’t engage and connect with people.

‘My LinkedIn profile talks about my work but it also talks about who I am as a person. I get emails every week from people who say, ‘It’s nice to read your LinkedIn profile as it gives a sense of who you are as a person.’ It says that I’m gay, but it’s only part of my story; it’s not the beginning and end of my story.

Liz Grant, Director, Fantail Business Development

‘Personal branding can be a complex matter. Everyone wants to stand out from the crowd but what if your defining characteristic may not be to everyone’s liking? Certainly having an LGBT moniker attached to your brand could be viewed as a little risky.

‘I had to make that choice when I became increasingly involved in LGBT workplace advocacy. Did I want to be known as the ‘Head Lesbian’ for my employer? In fact that is pretty much what happened. But it was far from being a disadvantage to me.

‘However, first and foremost, you must be good at your day job. That is far more important than linking your sexual orientation to being part of your brand. The first reason people should know you at work is for the job you do. So it’s critical that you do that well.

‘Being out and a leader in my employer’s LGBT network group in fact gave me greater access to senior executives within my firm. Honing my leadership skills and engaging at that level on this theme meant I was remembered but I was always secure in the knowledge that I was also good at my day job, after all that has to come first.’

Martyn Loukes, BEM, Business Development Manager, Transport for London

‘When I first started work in the late 80’s no-one was out. In fact, you could get sacked for just being gay. It took a change of companies for me to be brave enough to come out. It was the late 90’s and although still not protected under the law it just seemed the right thing to do.

‘I was an accountant back then, and I think that my brand became a little confused with me being gay first rather than seen as a serious accountant. This probably damaged my credibility. I found myself in the strange position of being offered a large severance package to find a job elsewhere after only 18 months.

‘Thankfully, things have changed significantly, and being gay for me at work is the new normal. I never thought twice about being openly gay when I started as an accountant with my current employer, TfL. My team really embraced it and the work culture supported me.

‘In the end it came down to the fact that actually finance wasn’t for me, and once I changed career and became a communications professional being openly gay actually enhanced my brand.

‘My role as Chair of our LGBT network OUTbound has seen me encourage others to be out. Part of the ethos behind our #RidewithPride campaign is not only to celebrate LGBT diversity in this wonderful city but also say to people that it’s ok to be gay at TfL; come and work here.

Liz Bingham, OBE, Partner at EY

‘I’ve been out at work for 25 years and I think that 20-odd years ago, yes, it was a leading aspect of my identity. People would go, “Do you know Liz Bingham? She’s gay?”

‘Nowadays, yes, it might rightly be part of my identity, but people don’t lead with it. I’m very comfortable that it is an aspect of my identity, not least because it means I can be authentic and be myself at work. I think that a certain amount of integration of your personal life and professional life is important – such as my partner being invited alongside me to corporate events.

‘The other thing I would add, and this was a really critical moment for me, was that when I did come out at work, I really felt a fundamental shift in power. The power went from others and it came back to me. No longer could there be any whispering campaign behind my back. That power shift helped me accelerate my career. It really did give that control back to me, which was really important.

Jonathan D Lovitz, Vice President of External Affairs, National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce® (NGLCC)

‘Being out in the workplace or as a business owner is perhaps the best gift you can give yourself to boost your success and opportunities. Out LGBT workers are the entrepreneurs of their own lives, having decided it’s time to stop hiding their best selves and harness the strength that comes with being an opportunity model for others.

‘Every day I hear stories from NGLCC corporate partners and certified LGBT business enterprises about how empowering it is for out workers and owners to connect their LGBT identity to their personal brand. Productivity is up, innovation is up, hiring and retention is up – all because no one has to waste time hiding, and can focus on creating.

‘My entire career has been proof that being out doesn’t define who I am, it enhances what I do.’

Claudia Brind-Woody, Vice President and Managing Director, Intellectual Property Licensing, IBM

‘Being out at work does not mean that you have to become an activist, it just means that you have chosen to be authentic. Authenticity is key as you build your brand in the digital age. Otherwise, being a liar and untrustworthy will become part of your brand in the future.

‘Building trust is very important as the online presence gets connected with job opportunities, client contacts and any other face-to-face interaction. Our clients are diverse and they will seek, trust, and value connections with others who are like them.

‘All brands work to differentiate from others. No one has ever asked for a job by saying “you should hire me because I am like everyone else.” Being out as an LGBT person is one aspect of your differentiation. It can add value as companies seek to include diversity of thought as part of their innovation strategy.

‘Authenticity, trust, connections, value and differentiation: They can all come from just being yourself – your whole self.’

The post Do you fear ‘LGBTI’ becoming part of your personal brand? appeared first on Gay Star News.

David Hudson

www.gaystarnews.com/article/do-you-fear-lgbti-becoming-part-of-your-personal-brand/

Zanele Muholi’s Transformations
A photographer known for taking striking portraits of members of the black queer community in South Africa turns the camera on herself.

Rooney Mara says ‘it’s time’ for LGBT movies
The actress says the LGBT experience in film needs to be addressed.
Mara Siegler

pagesix.com/2015/10/11/rooney-mara-says-its-time-for-lgbt-movies/

How can I tell if a guy is at least bisexual?

submitted by DannyBright
[link] [16 comments]

How can I tell if a guy is at least bisexual?
byu/DannyBright inlgbt

Out Actor Ben Whishaw ‘Baffled’ By Debate Over ‘Gay Vs Straight’ Casting

Out English actor Ben Whishaw has said he is baffled by the debate about gay actors playing straight characters and vice versa.

RELATED: Actor Ben Whishaw Confirms He’s Gay, Married To His Partner

Whishaw, who has played such characters as Q in James Bond film Skyfall and poet John Keats in Bright Star, told BT:

“With gay characters being played by straight people, straight characters being played by gay people, come on, we’re actors. I do not understand what the problem is. Actors play all sorts of things. I’ve played murderers, journalists and kings – I’m not any of them. The whole thing is a fiction, it’s about imagination, it’s play. I am baffled to why it’s such a big thing.

“And also, I’m baffled because it feels like we’re in a time where there are lots of gay people, not just actors but in all walks of life, and let’s be where we are. We’re human beings and I don’t understand why it’s really a discussion now.”

Whishaw’s comments come after Matt Damon was forced to apologize for suggesting that gay actors would be best off keeping their sexuality a secret. 

“The Matt Damon thing, it has probably been taken out of context but I don’t understand the heat around it. It feels like a story that’s trying to be drummed up, even though there are more important things we should be talking about.”

Damon later appeared on Ellen to clarify his comments.

Whishaw was speaking at a Bafta screening for his new TV show London Spy (top photo).He plays a character who is drawn into the espionage world through his lover Alex, played by Edward Holcroft.

The series premieres on BBC2 next month.

Watch Damon’s appearance on Ellen below.

The post Out Actor Ben Whishaw ‘Baffled’ By Debate Over ‘Gay Vs Straight’ Casting appeared first on Towleroad.

Michael Fitzgerald

Out Actor Ben Whishaw ‘Baffled’ By Debate Over ‘Gay Vs Straight’ Casting

Open Question: Why do Christians hate gays?
The bible said nothing bout LGBT.

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20151011222642AAbxEEA

REVIEW: The Dearborn Inn, A Marriott Hotel, Michigan

Historic hotels are reasonably easy to come by in Europe. In America, they’re a little harder to find – but, when you do, they’re usually impeccable. The Dearborn Inn in Detroit is no exception.

Located in the city of Dearborn, about a 20 minute drive from downtown Detroit, the Dearborn Inn is special not just for being historic, but also for what that history is.

It sits in the grounds of The Rouge, a factory complex of car maker Ford, and was commissioned and overseen by Henry Ford. Ford is arguably as important to American history as Lincoln or Obama, and has influenced the lives of people across the globe in the same way as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. He may not have invented the car, but he turned it into a form of mass transportation, transforming the way we travel and, consequently, the way we live our lives.

The Dearborn was built in 1931 when Ford noticed that visitors to The Rouge had nowhere nearby to stay. Naturally Ford, being one of the world’s wealthiest men, put up a hotel.

It’s colonial style, inside and out. Think a scaled-down, red brick version of the White House and you’re not far off. This means the rooms are ever so slightly on the chintzy side, but incredibly well appointed. It feels like a hotel to be seen in, yet you feel cozy in the same way you would at your great aunt’s house. The beds are among the most comfortable we’ve slept in (they’re huge) and while the rooms are large, they’re not imposingly big, as in some American hotels.

Curiously, Ford also built to-scale models of the homes of some of his childhood heroes in the Dearborn’s grounds. This means you could stay in an apartment in an exact replica of Edgar Allen Poe’s house, should you wish. They’re not to everyone’s taste, but they certainly offer a unique lodging experience.

As far as food goes, The Dearborn is good – very good. Breakfast comprises just about everything you could ever wish for. This being the USA, the pancakes are incredible, as are the omelets and the all-American sausage gravy, which we’re sure is deeply unhealthy, but is oh-so moreish.

The Dearborn’s a short drive from two of Detroit’s must-dos: the Rouge plant itself, where Ford assembled the F-150 truck, (which happens to be the most popular vehicle sold in the USA), offering a fascinating glimpse into a modern production line, and the Henry Ford Museum. The museum isn’t just a museum about cars (though these feature heavily) but a museum of everything.

There are planes, trains and automobiles (including the Lincoln limo that JFK was riding in when he was assassinated), as well as machinery, furniture and exhibits charting the civil and women’s rights movements. You can sit on the very seat Rosa Parks refused to give up while listening to the heroine tell the story of that day.

To book your room at the Dearborn Inn, visit North American Travel Service. Plan your trip to Detroit at www.michigan.org.  

The post REVIEW: The Dearborn Inn, A Marriott Hotel, Michigan appeared first on Gay Star News.

Andrew Gonsalves

www.gaystarnews.com/article/review-the-dearborn-inn-a-marriott-hotel-michigan/