Skip to main content

Queerty just fell off my blogroll...

As of today I realized that the Merriam Webster dictionary just got a new definition of counterproductive, and that definition linked me smack in the middle of one of my former favorite websites, Queerty... While the men may be hot, the politics smell funny. Queerty enjoys being instigators of controversy, rather than part of the solution. I may say some off the wall things in Ameriqueer, but you can shoot me between the eyes with a concealed weapon in church (its legal in Illinois) if I EVER do something to intentionally set back the LGBT community just for readership. I really mean that. I, of course like ALL BLOGS, want more readers to read this, but I also want to have equal rights, which seems to be more than the Queerty editors want--by posting as much counterproductive and anti-movement stuff they can get their hands on.

If you're a regular Queerty reader, you've probably fallen into the wrong URL, I'm sorry to say. The boys are pretty, but the brains are not. If you belong there, I suggest you unsubscribe from my site quickly and pretend this never happened. Because I'd rather be talking to an empty room then EVER be in cahoots with an entity that is working against our equality.

Queerty are the queen conspiracy theorists in our community. If you enjoy Ameriqueer, you enjoy many diverse viewpoints--but I'm proud to announce I will NO LONGER be linking to Queery EVER EVER EVER (as Bernice and Mitzy would say and Queerty would likely ban me from saying) again.

By the way, Queerty, You can feel free to bash this site and its readers now. I DON'T HATE quite like you do, so therefore, probably don't fall into line with your view of the (white suburban) gay community. So sorry to interrupt. You can get back to your counterproductive hatred now! So sorry there's just about noone left to listen to you hate!


Topher said…
So what did they do?
for real said…
I'm not a regular queerty reader, but I have followed a few links over there in the past. I was a bit mystified by this post, and even went over to queerty and I didn't really see anything terribly offensive.

I hope you can enlighten me as to what they posted which could be described as "counterproductive and anti-movement."

I'd be very interested to know . . .

Popular posts from this blog

Chris Geidner: In Iowa, judges are ousted.

Via Chris Geidner's Poliglot blog at Metro Weekly:


In Iowa, which declared Iowa's marriage ban unconstitutional under the state's constitution in 2009, the National Organization for Marriage got one of its first electoral victories this year. The judicial retention elections appear to have resulted in the replacement of all three justices up for a vote this year.

Here, as of 3:35 a.m. and with 1767 out of 1774 precincts reporting, are the Iowa Secretary of State's election results:

Supreme Court Justice David L. Baker
Yes 443437 45.75%
No 525865 54.25%

Supreme Court Justice Michael J. Streit
Yes 442459 45.6%
No 527921 54.4%

Supreme Court Chief Justice Marsha Ternus
Yes 437118 44.99%
No 534486 55.01%

The court was unanimous in its 2009 ruling that Iowa's constitution required marriage equality."

Can we trust Rasmussen anymore?


Happy Hour Roundup will be coming late today. Fortunately, there is lots of news to report on! Unfortunately, there will be no time for me to collect it and send it. Expect it between 5pm and 6pm!