Sunday, October 02, 2005


Just a few excerpts from here

Just wondering—what exactly was the news value of the New York Times’s huge front-page Metro-section spread yesterday: A Sex Stop on the Way Home? Subtitled Just Off a Park’s Playing Fields, Another Game Thrives, with an eye-catching cropped photo of the gut (but not the shoulders or head) of a beefy man in shorts and pink socks standing just inside his SUV’s open door, the story recounted in jaw-dropping detail the pick-up rituals of anonymous homosexual sex in a Queens parking lot. The lot adjoins athletic fields used by both youth and adult teams.....

No, the reason the Times found this story so worthy of the public’s attention was certainly the claim made by the older gay regulars that the “vast majority” of cruisers are family men drawn to the parking lot’s blandishments. One “longtime parking lot user” tells Kilgannon: “I can’t tell you how many guys I’ve had here who were wearing wedding bands, with baby seats in the car and all kinds of kids’ toys in the floor.”

This makes the parking lot even more of a “paradise” for the Times’s anti-bourgeois staff: it allows them to throw mud for the ten-millionth time on the Leave-it-to-Beaver “normalcy” (scare quotes courtesy of Timesian world-view) of the white-bread suburbs. One would have thought that the Times’s own story this summer about the new “multicultural” suburbs would have finally provided these long-suffering neighborhoods a respite from elite scorn. Alas, it was not to be. Undoubtedly chagrined by the findings in the latest nationwide sex survey that only 2 percent of men self-identify as homosexual, rather than the 10 percent trumpeted by gay activists, the Times has found a rebuttal: self-declaring heterosexual married fathers with a “suburban . . . house, a mortgage, a wife and children” perform gay sex acts with strangers in the privacy of their SUVs.

Given the amount of time Kilgannon obviously spent at the lot researching his piece, you would have thought that he could have confirmed this crush of family men seeking gay sex in Queens. But he provides no independent evidence for the claim......

One does wonder, though, who the Times thinks its (inexorably declining) readership is. Presumably, some families share the paper in the morning; some parents may encourage their children to read it to increase their involvement in current affairs. By now, many a parent has undoubtedly learned to dispose discreetly of the twice-weekly “Style” sections, unfailingly devoted to the latest gay trend. But does the Times regard its report on a parking lot Doubling as a Trysting Place for Gay Men (the headline over the jump) as suitable for family consumption? Would the Times’s editors happily pass yesterday’s Metro section to their preteen kids, along with the Cheerios? And what about the “donate your vacation papers to schools” program that the Times relentlessly promotes—would yesterday’s Metro section provide valuable reading material for a 9th, or even 12th, grade civics class?


People infected with HIV can be refused visas to Australia regardless of their circumstances, the Federal Court has ruled. A Zambian national, Misheck Kapambwe, was denied a student visa four years ago on the grounds he was HIV-positive. The student, who planned to study for his PhD in Australia, was required to undergo quarterly blood tests to monitor his infection and needed antiretroviral treatment. The cost of his prescribed antiretroviral drugs was estimated at $1188 a month and other treatment amounted to $1069.80 a year for five years.

His visa application was denied by the Immigration Department and the Migration Review Tribunal. But Judge Ray Finkelstein in the Federal Court quashed the tribunal's decision in April, resulting in an appeal to the Federal Court by the Immigration Minister, Amanda Vanstone. The Full Bench of the Federal Court yesterday overturned Justice Finkelstein's ruling, saying that under migration regulations, the Immigration Department was not obliged to consider the circumstances of an applicant's illness but the effect of a hypothetical case.

A spokesman for Senator Vanstone said the Government did not believe taxpayers should foot the bill for foreigners infected with HIV.

But the human rights group Rights Australia described the ruling as cruel and inhumane. "[The] Federal Court decision effectively means it is impossible for short-stay visa and student visa applicants with HIV to enter Australia," said Greg Barns, a spokesman. "This is discriminatory. "Rights Australia urges Minister Vanstone to take note of the injustice caused to Mr Kapambwe and alter the regulations so the migration authorities have to consider the circumstances of each case. "As we know, HIV can manifest itself to varying degrees, and a blanket ban on people with HIV entering Australia is inhumane."


No comments: