“The mouth is for eating, not for sex. We know the address of sex,” says President Museveni.
By Damola Durosomo/Okay Africa
Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni has issued what he calls a “public warning” against oral sex.
The president claims the practice has been pushed on Ugandans by “outsiders,” and argues that the mouth is solely for eating.
“Let me take this opportunity to warn our people publicly about the wrong practices indulged in and promoted by some of the outsiders,” he told the press during an address.
“One of them is what they call oral sex. The mouth is for eating, not for sex. We know the address of sex, we know where sex is,” he continued.
According to the Daily Mail, back in 2014 Museveni stated that performing oral sex could cause people to get worms. “You push the mouth there, you can come back with worms and they enter your stomach because that is a wrong address,” he is quoted as saying.
That same year he passed the “Anti-Homosexuality Act,” which makes being gay illegal in Uganda, and makes it a criminal offense to not report someone for being gay.
Though it’s sadly clear that Museveni is serious about his disapproval of oral sex, folks online have managed to find the humor in his comments.
president of Uganda declared that your mouth is for eating and he is going to BAN oral sex
He was called the conscience of the conservative movement. His wife is the assistant director of an Anti abortion rally called “March of Life”
Earlier this month Westley Goodman was allegeldy discoved having sex with man on the his desk in one of the state offices.
Mr Goodman was elected to represent the 87th District, in north-central Ohio, just last year. Prior to that, he worked as an aide to US Representative Jim Jordan, a highly conservative, anti-LGBT Republican.
The Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBT advocacy group in the US, named Mr Jordan in their Hall of Shame in 2014 for attempting to block marriage equality in the District of Columbia
There were rumors about Goodman being gay. Ohio House Speaker Cliff Rosenberger heard rumors that Goodman was gay and cheating on his wife as early as May 2016, a House spokesman confirmed Tuesday. But little could be done because Goodman denied those rumors when confronted, and they never involved another lawmaker or House employees.
Cleveland.com first reported Saturday that Goodman, a married man, had sex with men while working in Washington, D.C. and sent unsolicited, sexually inappropriate messages to younger men he met in conservative circles. Goodman, 33, continued sending messages while he was a sitting legislator, men who received the messages say.
Johnny Hadlock, a former congressional staffer, told the AP he engaged in sexual banter by text and had phone sex with Goodman while the two worked in Washington in the early 2010s. He said he was furious when, years later, he saw Goodman campaigning on the issue of “natural marriage” between a man and a woman, “because I knew differently.”
“Wes is a good guy. He’s a nice guy. He’s a gregarious guy. He’s a good networker. But he’s a hypocrite,” said Hadlock, whose story was first reported by cleveland.com. “He’s engaged in things with me and with others that I know are the antithesis of what he’s publicly proclaiming and standing for in his public life.”
The Washington Post reported Friday that another conservative group, the Council for National Policy, handled internally a complaint that Goodman fondled an 18-year-old college student while he was sleeping in a hotel room at its 2015 conference.
The student’s stepfather brought details of the encounter to president Tony Perkins, who also heads the prominent Family Research Council.
“If we endorse these types of individuals, then it would seem our whole weekend together was nothing more than a charade,” the stepfather wrote to Perkins, according to the Post. “Trust me… this will not be ignored nor swept aside,” Perkins replied. “It will be dealt with swiftly, but with prudence.”
In early summer, a non-House employee came forward with evidence of computer and cellphone screenshots suggesting Goodman had been unfaithful to his wife in suggestive or explicit photos and messages. The activity involved all appeared consensual, but Goodman was called in and warned that if he ever engaged in acts with House staff or on state property, it would become Rosenberger’s business.
“Representative Goodman denied all of it and said that ‘fake screenshots’ were being circulated,”
When he resigned his House seat, Goodman said in a statement that he hadn’t served his constituents “in a way that reflects the best ideals of public service.” He has not responded to repeated requests for comment on media accounts published since then.
This story isn’t over, men are slowly coming forward saying Goodman either fondled them, had uncomfortable conversations with him. Some of the men have released explict conversations Goodman had with men on Twitter and Craigslist.
In China – where same-sex unions are not legal and homosexuality remains taboo – gay men and women are marrying each other
When Xiaoxiong and her lesbian lover wanted to hide their relationship from their parents, they decided to find men willing to marry them. They had a specific type in mind: gay.
Searching out suitors for such a marriage of convenience proved difficult, so she created an online matchmaking forum to help others like her conform with family and societal pressures in China, where same-sex marriage is not legal and homosexuality remains taboo.
“I was so relieved that there was a way to please my parents without getting trapped in a marriage with some poor straight man,” said Xiaoxiong, self-described tomboy, who did not want to give her surname to protect her privacy.
“Some of us wish we could trick ourselves, too,” the 35-year-old added.
She lives with her partner, Xiaojing, 36, their dog and two cats in Shenyang, the capital of northeastern Liaoning province, one of China’s more conservative regions.
But during holidays and special occasions, they separate to be with their husbands and families, pretending to be traditional wives.
In China being openly gay is still fraught with difficulties. Dressing a certain way or public displays of affection can draw stares and lead to family turmoil.
Some Chinese parents have even brought gay children to “conversion” clinics for treatment.
Homosexuality was classified as a mental illness in China until 2001 and a crime until 1997, and authorities have arrested gay rights activists.
Around 90 per cent of 20 million gay men in China are married to women who are usually straight and do not initially know their husband’s real sexual orientation, according to a 2012 study from Qingdao University. The study did not look at lesbians’ behavior.
But gay men and women are increasingly marrying each other in so-called cooperative marriages.
There are no estimates on the number of gay-lesbian marriages, but several websites dedicated to them have popped up in recent years.
The largest one, Chinagayles.com, says it has amassed more than 400,000 users and facilitated more than 50,000 cooperative marriages in the past 12 years.
Homophobia in China
“When I turned 25, my parents started to really pressure me to get married. So I searched the internet for ideas,” Xiaoxiong said.
She started her own forum on the popular QQ social media platform to help gays like herself find the ideal fake spouse in northeast China.
Some of the men she spoke with had unrealistic expectations, such as wanting her to grow out her buzz cut or move to a different city to live in the same house as in-laws.
In 2012, she married a high school maths teacher 10 years her senior whose laid-back demeanour immediately made her feel comfortable.
But she cringes at the wedding photos of herself in a white gown and curly black wig. The video makes her “want to vomit”, she concedes.
Within weeks of the ceremony, Xiaojing, her partner for eight years, had also wed a gay man.
The two women run a traditional Chinese medical practice together, and they dedicate several hours each week to answering questions on the online matchmaking forum.
But Xiaojing warns people interested in cooperative marriages to be prepared for potential complications.
“Some people rush into a marriage with someone they barely know,” she said. “But just like real marriage, it only works between people who agree on important things like where to live and whether to have children, and who genuinely care about each other.”
But some gay rights activists frown upon such arrangements.
“By pretending to be straight and enjoying the social benefits, they are abandoning other LGBT people to face the pressure alone,” said Ah Qiang, a prominent activist who leads China’s PFLAG group – Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.
“I think a reason homophobia is still so strong in China is that many straight people don’t know any openly gay people,” he said.
Xiaoxiong and Xiaojing believe their families likely know the truth about their relationship, but nobody wants to acknowledge the obvious.
“We don’t wish for much,” Xiaoxiong said. “When we are home, when we are sitting side by side, we just feel so peaceful and happy.”
Marriage equality could be legal by Christmas after 61.6% of participants in the voluntary survey approve a change to the law
Marriage equality advocates in Melbourne celebrate as the result of the postal survey is announced. Photograph: Scott Barbour/Getty Images
By: Paul Karp/UK Guardian
Australia has taken a decisive step towards legislating marriage equality by Christmas after 61.6% of voters in an unprecedented national postal survey approved a change to the law to allow couples of the same sex to marry.
With a turnout of 79.5%the result in the voluntary survey is considered a highly credible reflection of Australian opinion and gives marriage equality advocates enormous momentum to achieve the historic social reform. Australia’s chief statistician, David Kalisch, announced the results at a press conference in Canberra at 10am on Wednesday, revealing 7,817,247 people voted in favour and 4,873,987 voted against.
At a press conference in Canberra, Turnbull said that Australians had “spoken in their millions and they have voted overwhelmingly yes for marriage equality”.
Turnbull said the result was “unequivocal and overwhelming”, implicitly warning conservatives including in his own government that the public are “our masters” and the parliament must now deliver on the result.
“They voted yes for fairness, yes for commitment, yes for love. And now it is up to us here in the parliament of Australia to get on with it, to get on with the job the Australian people asked us to do and get this done,” he said, stressing the law should change before Christmas.
“And I just want to make one promise: today we celebrate, tomorrow we legislate,” he said.
Turnbull, same-sex marriage supporters in Australia’s ruling Liberal-National party Coalition, the Labor opposition, Greens and other cross-bench parties have reached a consensus around a cross-party bill that makes minimalist changes to protect religious freedom without legalizing discrimination by commercial service providers, such as cake makers, as some conservatives in the Coalition government have demanded.
Appearing alongside Turnbull, the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, said the cross-party bill was a “good starting point” but he believed “there is a need for some additional religious protections”, signalling amendments could still be contentious within the government.
The bill will be introduced in to the Senate on Wednesday for debate on Thursday and Shorten has offered the opposition’s support to help “stare down the conservatives seeking to delay marriage equality”.
A bill is expected to pass, with many opponents of marriage equality in parliament promising to respect the result, although parliament may consider amendments. Coalition parliamentarians, who were previously required to vote against marriage equality will now be given a free vote, Labor MPs are almost universally in favour and a majority of crossbenchers will also support the bill.
On Tuesday, Turnbull said the government “would not countenance”legalizing discrimination against same-sex weddings by commercial service providers and warned a rival conservative bill to do so would have “virtually no prospect” of passing parliament.
In a speech after the result Equality Campaign spokesman, Alex Greenwich, said: “Today love has had a landslide victory.”
“Together we have achieved something truly remarkable, a win for fairness and equality, not only for the LGBTI community and our families, but for all Australians,” he said.
“In doing so it has delivered an unequivocal mandate to federal parliament to vote this through by the end of the year.”
With the positive result, Turnbull, a supporter of same-sex marriage leading a party that straddles both liberal and conservative traditions, looks to have finally achieved a win against reactionaries in his party that oppose the social reform.
Some conservatives have suggested they will put forward their marriage bill in the Coalition party room in two weeks, but senior ministers including Cormann have protected the prime minister’s position by insisting the parliament will choose which bill and amendments to allow.
Same-sex marriage has been banned in Australia since 2004 when the Howard government changed the Marriage Act to define marriage as between a man and a woman. As many comparable countries such as the US and Britain allowed or legislated for same-sex marriage, Australia looked increasingly out of step. After the successful marriage equality referendum in Ireland in May 2015, pressure grew on the Australian government to legislate but the Coalition party room agreed on a national plebiscite instead, although there was no legal requirement to do so.
When Turnbull took the prime ministership from conservative predecessor Tony Abbott. In September 2015, he retained the Coalition’s commitment to hold a national plebiscite on same-sex marriage before changing the law.
Labor, the Greens and other opposition parties blocked the proposed plebiscite in the Senate in November 2016 and August 2017, leading the Turnbull government to launch a $122 million voluntary national postal survey to fulfill its election commitment to give Australians a say.
In a bruising three-month campaign, opponents of marriage equality including the Australian Christian Lobby, and the Catholic and Anglican churches in Sydney, claimed same-sex marriage would have far reaching negative consequences for gender education. Former prime ministers Tony Abbott and John Howard warned that religious freedom and freedom of speech were at risk.
The yes camp’s Equality Campaign combined with moderate Liberals, Labor, the Greens, unions and progressive campaign organisation Get Up to argue that same-sex marriage was a matter of equality and fairness.
The campaign featured everyday Australians, their friends and families, emphasising that the only question was whether LGBTI Australians should be able to marry the one they love.
Despite assertions from Turnbull that the survey would be overwhelmingly respectful , the campaign has been marred by homophobic incidents and campaign material which continued largely unabated despite a special law passed to apply electoral law safeguards to the survey, such as authorization requirements for campaign materials.
The campaign also featured two unsuccessful high court challenges against the expenditure of $122m for the survey, as marriage equality advocates fought to prevent the poll seen as an affront because it determined LGBTI people’s equality before the law by a majoritarian vote.
Public polling throughout the campaign showed consistent support for marriage equality and weekly estimates showed the survey was on-track for a record turnout.
The no campaign took increasingly bizarre turns, with Abbott using an assault that even his attacker said had nothing to do with marriage to rally Australians to his cause, and conservatives attempting to use rapper Macklemore’s performance of his hit Same Love at the rugby league grand final to claim the national campaign they called for had inappropriately politicized Australian institutions.
The cross-party bill will be debated in the Senate on Thursday and the parliamentary sitting week beginning 27 November, with supporters of marriage equality aiming to pass a bill through both houses of parliament before they rise on 7 December.
The R&B singer’s music and backstory took on a mythical quality when she disappeared from public view. Now a retrospective is retelling her story
Anyone imagining the life of a black transgender woman in the American south of the 1950s and 60s may expect a world of taunts, misunderstanding and fear. Jackie Shane, who lived that life growing up in Nashville, claims she never experienced any of those things. “I’ve never had a problem, not once,” Shane says. “Even in school, the other kids accepted me. So did their parents. There was something about me that drew them.”
Years later, that something made Shane a highly improbable star, based on a deeply soulful singing voice, and a courtly presence, that drew interest from Motown and Atlantic Records, an invitation to appear on Ed Sullivan’s powerful TV variety show and talks with George Clinton about joining Parliament-Funkadelic. Her music from that period is getting a surprising second life through a compilation of blistering studio and live performances from the 60s compiled by the archival company Numero Group for the new set Any Other Way.
More than five decades ago Shane headlined clubs in her adopted town of Toronto while sporting full makeup, wigs and sequin tops. Her presentation didn’t stop her from performing on television, or from scoring a No 2 hit on Toronto radio with a cover of a soulful song of acceptance, Any Other Way.
The singer – who is now 77 – speaks with a preacher’s belief, filling her conversation with advice and entreaties to “ignore the lies of ignorant people” and to “live and let live”. Shane always knew she was a woman, though others didn’t always identify her as such. “At five years old, I would dress in a dress, hat, purse and high heels and go up and down the block – and enjoy it.”
In Italy, trusting a partner to do the best by you isn’t always a safe bet.
In a gay relationship, 50-50 isn’t an equal proposition and can unexpectedly leave a trusting partner on the brink
My move to Italy in 2001 sharply curtailed my career possibilities and earning power. The best I could do was become an English instructor, a job that would never pay well or give me much chance for advancement. My companion Alberto, on the other hand, was a doctor with a secure position in a local hospital. What’s more, he already owned a modest apartment in Milan and had inherited part of a house on Lago Maggiore.
Many people still hold to the idea that one partner, usually the man in a heterosexual relationship, must be the primary wage earner, the so-called breadwinner. My father told me this in no uncertain terms, calling me a “parasite, living off Alberto’s money.” While it’s true my standard of living is higher than what I could manage on an English teacher’s salary, I still pay my own bills, including half of our second-hand car and our old boat. Though I share living expenses with Alberto, we don’t split things 50-50 and he contributes more.
If anything were to go wrong between us, Alberto could continue living as he does now. I’d have to return to Canada and find a way to reinvent myself in the workplace.
I married Alberto in Canada, but the Italy I moved to in 2001 contained no legal mechanisms to protect me. Same-sex civil unions didn’t exist. Alberto named me as his heir in his will. He added an insurance policy and also drafted a contract stipulating I had rights to a certain percentage of his estate. Unfortunately, as many wives would attest, not all husbands are as careful or considerate.
There was a time when the lines were clearly drawn, roles defined. When it came to dating, it was the man who paid. It was the man who decided where the couple was going to dine.
This was pre Phil Donahue, and Murphy Brown.
After Donahue, there were some feminists who believed the man wasn’t obligated to pay and that equal rights meant just that, equal. Separate checks leveled the playing field between men and women as some men believed dinner, obligated women. On the other side, were the traditionalist, the man pays the man made the decisions. A women role was supportive as it was for their mothers and grandmothers.
It was a very confusing time, especially for men. In the eighties, you never knew who who was paying until the check arrived. Was she a feminist or traditionalist? Most men struggled with the notion of a women paying. For some men, a women picking up the check was demoralizing. For many years, my former wife would slip the money to me, my fragile ego wouldn’t allow her to pay in public.
The world has changed since Murphy Brown went off the air in 1998. The internet and social media looms large in this new age. However what hasn’t change is who picks up the check on a date, especially the first date?
As in the eighties, there seemed to be more traditionalist then feminists who believed the man should always pick up the check. It didn’t matter who earned more,the man paid.
There are some traditionalists in the gay community who believes the person who initiates the date pays. There are many young gay men and women online who have never experienced dating. Preferring to wait to be asked out.
Susan Johnson Taylor’s “The Etiquette of Paying for Dates Today” ( For US News Magazine) Who should pick up the check on a first date? In a 2014 poll, three quarters of respondents men and women, said men should pay for the first date.
Many men want to treat and provide. Some women expect to pay, while others feel diminished or less special if they aren’t treated to the date. Its a conundrum.
Much of this is generational. Younger daters are more equitable, sharing the cost more or talking about who is paying for what’ says psychotherapist Tina Tessina. ” Older daters are more traditional , with the man paying more often, although even older women are likely to offer to pay then traditionally”
Those in the gay dating scenes don’t struggle as much with these concerns. “Since there is less gender-enforced expectation for one or the other to pay, gay and lesbian daters tend to share the responsibility by either splitting the check or by both at least offering to pay”. says Trish McMermott, dating adviser at LGBT online dating site OneGoodLove.com
Keep early dates low-key. Suggesting low-cost activities such as outdoor concerts or festivals for a first date relieves financial pressure, especially on guys who might be concerned about making less than their date or may not have the means for a lavish night on the town. “Some of the best first dates are the most simple, low-cost activities,” say Brenden Dilley, a Phoenix-based life coach. “If a man or woman suggests one of these, don’t take it as the other person being cheap or not taking you seriously – perhaps they just want an opportunity to spend more quality time with you and decide if there is a match.”
Offering to pay shows good manners. Instead of the “fake purse or wallet grab,” the other party should ask, “May I help?” Now the ball is in the other person’s court. “He can say, ‘Oh no, I got this,'” “Or, ‘Yeah, please get the tip. It’s $15.’ Or, ‘Your half is $30.'”
My first dates take place at a coffee house. It can be a long evening once you’ve learned your not a match. Especially, before they’ve served the salad. I order a small coffee, with an option for a second cup or dessert if there is a connection. Half the time I pay for the coffee. Thank you’s is crucial afterward, or in a text or preferably a voice call . Even when the date isn’t successful, I call my date and thank them.
After the first date (from Match.com) If you’re not comfortable with forking out, sensible dating advice would be to suggest that you pay half each once the first date is out of the way. If things are going well and you are both enjoying each other’s company, you may even find that your date pays for some elements of the date (such as entry tickets to a show or exhibition) whilst you pay for the drinks or food.
After the fourth or fifth date, you should be comfortable enough to take it in turns to pay for each date. Don’t worry about being the first to bring it up; he or she will be flattered that you’re keen to plan for future dates with her. Setting the tone for a happy, well balanced relationship early on is sound advice for successful dating.
Finally, if you’re still not sure about who should pay, here’s some final advice to prevent any potential dating faux-pas:
• In the initial stages of dating, try not to splash the cash too much as you’ll look too eager to impress and might give a false impression of your day to day lifestyle and what you can afford. Remember that charm and charisma go a long way and are far more important than the size of your bank balance.
• To avoid awkwardness, choose dates which don’t cost too much until you have an idea of each other’s financial limitations.
• Don’t talk too much about money in the initial dating stages. Our advice is to be subtle about this topic so you don’t come across as money obsessed!
• Remember on most outting your date will be looking for a genuine connection rather than at how much you earn. If money becomes a genuine problem on a date you should think about moving on to greener dating pastures.
Final Words From CityFella
If you waiting to be asked out, stop. A cup of coffee is a cup of coffee. Having a cup of coffee with a potential friend or partner beats being alone in front of a computer. Take a deep breath and enjoy the moment. If your not a match its not a failure, you were simply not a match. The success is leaving your comfort zone.
A sign of the times. Many individuals have become prisoners of their PC’s, they have become fearful of the real world fearing rejection. The reality is most people still meet people the old fashion way via social gatherings and referrals. The internet is a good source and just one place to meet people.
Its very difficult for some to convert online relationships into actual dates. Here are a few tips. If your looking to date, remove all sex from the conversation. Get a feel if he or she are actually wants to meet. If there a lot of hesitation or questions about after the date,there is more than a 80% they will flake. Listen to their interest, are they looking forward to meeting you?
Once you’ve established a meeting time and location. Call a few days before the date to confirm. Remember to listen.. Call the day of. Tell them your on your way and tell them your looking forward to meeting them, and once again listen. Bring a book, or your smartphone. When they arrive, put down your book and turn off your smartphone and give an upbeat summary of who you are. Full disclosure is overrated and overwhelming on the first date. Carefully, listen to your date. DO NOT ASK WHY THEIR SINGLE AND ABOUT PAST RELATIONSHIPS. Keep it light and breezy.
If your date flakes…..Stay, don’t leave, you didn’t fail. Order a dessert, look around. The next date just may be in that Starbucks. Read your book or turn on your smartphone. Look around, enjoy your victory. Don’t call the flake, no need to tell him or her off, its not worth your time because they weren’t worthy of you. If you see someone who catches your eye and they are near. Rave about your dessert, ask them if they’ve tried it. If you not comfortable on this visit, you may the next. On this day ,congratulate yourself, you’ve stepped out of your comfort zone.