Well, it all makes sense, if you consider that we live in a patriarchal society.

Yes, I used the p-word.

Heterosexist, male-dominated society sees two women kissing and finds it sexually stimulating. Clearly the women are doing this for the titillation of the men viewing. It doesn't threaten heterosexual male ownership of the body and sexuality, particularly with women like Britney and Madonna who live ostensibly heterosexual lifestyles.

But Lambert's acting out of his sexuality on stage is threatening to this worldview. Heterosexual, homophobic men are threatened. Because they already see themselves as owners of female sexuality and heterosexual sex in general, if a man demonstrates public ease and comfort with homosexuality, suddenly their ownership of sexuality is thrown into question. Why do you think transgendered people and gay people have a high rate of hate crimes perpetuated against them? Why do you think that so many straight men say things like: "they can be gay, that's fine, they just better not come on to ME!" What kind of macho attitude does that reveal, a fear of vulnerability, of being placed into the "feminine" position of the conquered, rather than the owner & conqueror?

On top of this, that homosexual intimacy and sex are considered "kinky" in and of themselves is part of the problem. It's a fundamentally heterosexual skewing of what it is, which is just normal. We can have gay male characters on television as long as they're somewhat asexual or clownish (think of Will & Jack on Will & Grace). Normal gay men in normal gay relationships expressing normal gay love - it's much more difficult to find. I'm hoping that Modern Family will eventually explore some of that, but so far it's kind of Will & Grace-lite.

I don't think Lambert is that talented as a singer and performer. That's just me. But I found his performance so non-shocking and pedestrian that the outrage it generated was really a wake-up call to how sensitive folks are out there in the world.

ah, the lovely side of Christianity.

of course, this isn't really about religion, it's about politics and power.

still, kind of ridiculous. and let's not forget it's this kind of thing that got Dr. Tiller murdered. Fortunately, President Obama has the Secret Service to protect him - Dr. Tiller wasn't so lucky when he was assassinated in his church, of all places.

If I may be so bold, I'd say that this is a symptom of the patriarchy's reaction to feminism.

Allow me to explain.

Feminism comes along and says, women want to be treated equally with men. We want to receive equal rights, equal pay, equal access to medical care and legal services, equal treatment, etc.

The dominant culture - one steeped rather deeply in the couple thousand years of patriarchal history we've got behind us - says, okay, if that's what you want, then we'll give it to you.

The result? Snark. Women biting at each other, men sneering at women and saying "oh, i'm just treating you like one of the guys," and yes, pregnant women being denied seats on the subway because they "shouldn't be so goddamned entitled."

I'm a proud feminist, and feminism has allowed us to speak more freely, demand equal rights and opportunity, etc. But feminism hasn't won, and in fact is still in its infancy, if we take the whole long history of humanity into consideration. Feminism has to be about more than just equal rights, it has to be about a change in perspective.

I mean, where's the compassion? Where's the empathy? Where is the understanding that women shouldn't be punished because of their reproductive choices, whether that is to "breed" or not? Not to mention the fact that women still only make three-quarters of what men do for the same work (often blamed on 'breeding,' as well, even though that's been proved to have nothing to do with it).

Of course, much can also be said of the Internet making it easy for people to make anonymous slagging comments with impunity, and that is certainly part of the meaning-up of our popular culture. But I'd say this is a clear sign that feminism has a long, long way to go.

You can't have smaller government *and* DOMA *and* military surges and "action" against Iran and Korea. You can't deny "health care rationing" and support the revocation of reproductive health services to women.

The Republican party wants to have it both ways. But because of their right wing authoritarian mindset, they don't see the blatant contradictions in their own litmus test.

Their mantra seems to be: "please don't confuse my reality with the facts."