Who says gay guys don't know their way around an auto body shop? No, we're not talking about the porn fantasy where you go to pick up your ride and the hot mechanic rolls out from under the car, covered in grease, his jumpsuit open halfway down to his navel—and next thing you know you're both naked and screwing. We're talking about honest-to-goodness, everyday guys who love their cars and know a thing or two about how to fix them.

When people think of gear heads and car geeks, the image of the masculine, lady-chasin' straight guy likely comes to mind. But since we launched our new feature, At The Wheel, we have found out that gays break yet another stereotype: we love cars just as much as anyone else. This new section asks readers to tell us about their relationships with their cars—why they love them, where they take them, how they fix them up. We post pictures and interviews with the readers and some of the stories are pretty cool. We have guys who can take cars apart and fix things themselves and others who just love the feeling of being behind the wheel.

Another stereotype being broken? That lesbians are all good at fixing things up. People might think that lesbians are all about getting their hands greasy and riding a hog (that's a motorcycle for the uninitiated), but so far, not a single lady has submitted a story about her car. What's up with that? We want to hear your stories, too. Don't let the guys dominate the spotlight.

We all have memories of time spent in or around our car. Road trips during summer; driving to college; hooking up in the backseat. You probably never think about how much time we all spend in our cars—yet it might be one of the best friends we have. Our cars get us to and from work, out to dinner and over to a friend's place when we need to let off a little steam. People say that a dog is man's best friend, but could it maybe be his car?

If there was ever something that could bring straight guys and gay guys together, it might be the obsession with our cars. Hell, it's likely the only time we can both have a relationship with something we refer to as "her" or "she." God knows most gay guys would rather get under this hood.

(Images courtesy of Getty)

What a day. What a day. Is anyone else famous going to die? Let's hope not.

It was hard when Barbara Walters told me over my morning latte that Farrah was close to death, and when she died about an hour later I felt immense sadness. As a child growing up in the '70s, I saw Farrah everywhere. She was gorgeous. She was seductive. She was an icon. And I got to sleep with her in my bed every night—that sex kitten image in her bathing suit was on a satin pillow my dad bought me when I was about eight. Little did he know I wasn't pining away for her as he had hoped, but still loved rubbing against that pillow (can you blame me? It was satin!). She was an Angel. Not only Charlie's, but mine, too, and for so many others. Even though she somewhat disappeared from the spotlight over the next few decades, she was still that lovable Farrah. Hearing about her being diagnosed with cancer a few years ago was sad, but knowing it was there softened the blow of her ultimate death.

And then came the most unexpected news of the day. Michael. How could the King of Pop, self proclaimed or otherwise, be—gasp!—dead? It was unbelievable even to hear he'd suffered cardiac arrest. And then was in a coma. Then just moments later, we heard the news, which still is surreal. When my partner called me in the car on my way to a wine tasting, I screamed. Not like a little girl, but an audible shock that was done in unison with anyone who has been touched by his music. Michael Jackson dead? And just when he was going to, maybe, make a comeback. He lived a reclusive life and many people wrote him off as a freak. We didn't hear about him that often since his 2005 child molestation case, but he was still around. His music was still played in clubs, on the radio and at home. We didn't have to see him for MJ to have an impact.

They say celebrity deaths come in threes and the only thing that could be worse for gay community today would be if we, god forbid, received news that Cher, Bette or Madonna (or Liza or Diana for that matter), too had died. But fortunately for us, Jackson was actually the third tragic death this week; Ed McMahon, the lovable sidekick to Johnny Carson and host of "Star Search," where it could be said he kicked off Britney's career, died on Tuesday.

The news of Jackson's death sadly overshadows that of Farrah's, but you can't argue the impact both had on so many people. Around the world today people talked how much both meant to them. Throughout the morning, people Twittered their condolences and memories of Farrah. And as the afternoon turned into evening, fans around the globe played Michael Jackson songs and danced in the streets. A friend told me that in the heart of Chicago's hippest 'hood, Wicker Park, hundreds of people gathered at the main intersection and randomly started singing "Billie Jean."

Gay friends emailed to say they left work early because they were distraught over both deaths. People got together in the early evening for drinks to toast the pair. And as the night dragged on, more glasses were raised to the man whose music will live on forever.

So as I sit here, with "The Way You Make Me Feel" playfully bouncing around my head, and the image of Farrah with her pearly whites beaming back at me, I mourn the loss of two icons. Icons for very different reasons, but icons—to the gay and straight worlds—nonetheless.

How did their lives impact you? What did you do last night to remember Farrah or Michael or both? Let us know. Talk to each other. It's a sad day in the entertainment world and no one wants to go through it alone.

(Photos: Amazon.com and Getty Images)

There was a time when as a collective group, gay people needed to band together to have our voices heard. We were persecuted, had our bars raided, had our homes taken when our long-term partners passed away and their families didn't approve of our relationships or lifestyles. Our government turned a blind eye when thousands of us started dying from a mysterious disease, so heroic people within our community formed advocacy groups. These groups supported our "families" and gave us a place to turn for help when we needed it since it didn't seem that many others cared. We had medical groups, social groups and, of course, activists. It was this last category that showed America what it had turned its gay community into: angry, frustrated people who weren't going to sit back and be ignored anymore.

One of these groups, Queer Nation, eventually adopted a slogan that many of us have embraced over the last 20 years. "We're here. We're queer. Get used to it" became a rallying cry, a line chanted at parades, outside government buildings, at events. But over time, as gay people became more and more accepted into mainstream society through TV, movies and everyday regular people feeling more comfortable to come out at work, "We're here" became something people used to toss off a joke or just say, "Hey, pay attention to me. I'm talking and I'm gay!"

The line still has an impact but is it necessary today? Yes, we still aren't fully integrated into American culture and, yes, we are fighting for the basic civil right to marry our loved ones. But is telling people that we're gay and around and to basically, well, get used to it, a little aggressive?

An article written by Christopher Ott on Salon in 1999 had a headline "We're here, we're queer, I'm sick of it," which talked about how the gay "agenda" morphed its focus from a political activist viewpoint to one of partying, when in reality we should've been focusing on obtaining equal rights. It's interesting that we're still talking about this last point today.

That said, maybe it's time to come up with a new slogan that we can all embrace and get behind. Someone jokingly said to me that we should say, "We're gay, we're pretty, please don't beat us up," at which time I told him to shut the hell up. We don't want people to think of us as weak or meager, but as equals. Not every straight man is butch and into sports. Not every straight woman is soft and feminine. Just in the same way that not every gay man or woman can be pigeonholed into stereotypically categories.

So yes, we're here and we are queer and yes, people need to get used to it. But do we need to throw it into their faces? Can't we just live our lives and let people get to know us as people and not as gay people? Of course we need people to know who we are otherwise we will never get our rights. But we've advanced tremendously in the last few decades. So is it time for a new slogan? What do you think? Throw us your ideas. We want to hear from you.

Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut (D) published an editorial in a Connecticut newspaper on Sunday where he announced that he has changed his mind on same-sex marriage. The editorial, which has also been published in full on Dodd’s senate web site, enumerates his reasoning for having opposed same-sex marriage in the past and why he’s changed his mind.

Dodd also cites the Connecticut Supreme Court decision in the editorial. “While I’ve long been for extending every benefit of marriage to same-sex couples, I have in the past drawn a distinction between a marriage-like status (“civil unions”) and full marriage rights. The reason was simple: I was raised to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And as many other Americans have realized as they’ve struggled to reconcile the principle of fairness with the lessons they learned early in life, that’s not an easy thing to overcome. But the fact that I was raised a certain way just isn’t a good enough reason to stand in the way of fairness anymore. The Connecticut Supreme Court, of course, has ruled that such a distinction holds no merit under the law. And the Court is right.”

Dodd goes on to credit his young daughters’ outlook with contributing to his change. “My young daughters are growing up in a different reality than I did. Our family knows many same-sex couples – our neighbors in Connecticut, members of my staff, parents of their schoolmates. Some are now married because the Connecticut Supreme Court and our state legislature have made same-sex marriage legal in our state. But to my daughters, these couples are married simply because they love each other and want to build a life together. That’s what we’ve taught them. The things that make those families different from their own pale in comparison to the commitments that bind those couples together. And, really, that’s what marriage should be. It’s about rights and responsibilities and, most of all, love. I believe that, when my daughters grow up, barriers to marriage equality for same-sex couples will seem as archaic, and as unfair, as the laws we once had against inter-racial marriage.”

With this public declaration, Dodd becomes the latest elected official to add his support to same-sex marriage. Dodd is currently involved in a re-election bid and while some may consider the change in stance to be posturing in a politically liberal state, the end result remains the same: another slow step in evolution.

Dodd ends his statement with a message to those individuals who still struggle with accepting same-sex marriages, even the liberal ones. “I understand that even those who oppose discrimination might continue to find it hard to re-think the definition of marriage they grew up with. I know it was for me. But many of the things we must do to make our union more perfect – whether it’s fighting for decades to reform our health care system or struggling with a difficult moral question – are hard. They take time. And they require that, when you come to realize that something is right, you be unafraid to stand up and say it. That’s the only way our history will progress along that long arc towards justice.”

How important are single voices like this when it comes to turning the tides in support of gay marriages?

President Barack Obama, whose gay and lesbian supporters have grown frustrated with his slow movement on their priorities, is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees but stopping short of a guarantee of full health insurance, a White House official said.

Obama planned to announce his decision Wednesday in the Oval Office, the official said. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because Obama had not signed a presidential memorandum putting his plan into place.

The decision is a political nod to a reliably Democratic voting bloc that has become impatient with the White House in recent weeks.

Several powerful gay fundraisers withdrew their support from a Democratic National Committee event June 25 where Vice President Joe Biden is expected to speak. Their exit came in response to a Justice Department brief last week that defended the Defense of Marriage Act, a prime target for gay and lesbian criticism.

Gays and lesbians also fretted as the White House declined to intervene in the cases of enlisted military members facing courts-martial for defying the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policies. Gays and lesbians can serve in the military now if they do not disclose their sexuality or engage in homosexual behavior.

White House officials say they want Congress to repeal the policy as part of a "lasting and durable" solution, instead of intervening on individual cases.

"The president agreed that ... the policy wasn't working for our national interests, that he committed to change that policy, that he's working with the secretary of defense and the joint chiefs on making that happen," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said last month.

The administration has tried to make small, quiet moves to extend benefits to gays and lesbians. The State Department has promised to give partners of gay and lesbian diplomats many benefits, such as diplomatic passports and language training.

But Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's promises left out financial benefits such as pensions.

Obama's move Wednesday would direct the State Department to take into account same-sex couples and their children when assigning housing for foreign service officers. Those same-sex partners also would be allowed access to medical facilities at diplomatic posts abroad — all end-runs around Congress' limit on benefits.

White House officials said Obama would respect existing laws, which block many benefits such as health care. But the decision would allow employees' domestic partners to be added to a government insurance program that pays for long-term conditions, such as Alzheimer's disease.

The memorandum also would allow employees to use sick leave to take care of domestic partners and their children.

Richard Socarides, a New York lawyer and former senior adviser on gay rights issues to President Bill Clinton, was taking a wait-and-see attitude on Obama's announcement.

"If it doesn't include health insurance, if he doesn't talk about the military and about the (Justice Department) brief, I think it will fall short," Socarides said in an e-mail late Tuesday. "Right now, people are looking for real action."

John Berry, head of the Office of Personnel Management and the highest-ranking gay official in the administration, told a gay rally last weekend that Obama planned to take action on benefits soon.

___

PHILIP ELLIOTT
Associated Press Writer
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.

No one likes to get pushed around, but unless you can kick someone in the nuts and run real fast (or get on a fast-track to a black belt in karate), most kids don't have the strength or support to do something about it. If you go to a teacher or a parent, the bullying may get worse (at least you think it will) and therefore remain silent taking this other kid's crap.

Bullies are a mean lot and now that we're adults, we know they're usually picking on someone smaller or weaker to make up for some insecurity or lack of love or affection in their personal lives.

Were you picked on as a kid? Did it affect your ability to make friends or do things you wanted, like have hobbies or play sports? I don't know if things have gotten worse or if adults don't take as much of an interest (or maybe I just know more now than I did when I was a kid), but it seems like bullying—especially when it comes to perceived gay youth—has moved to a higher level. Young kids are killing themselves as a way to escape everyday pain surrounding them. And it's not just gay kids who get bullied. We hear about stories in the news all the time about girls brutally beating other girls; young boys being lit on fire. But bullying doesn't have to be physical. Words can be just as bad—and if you think only sticks and stones can break your bones, but names can never hurt, you have another thing coming.

My name was often mispronounced by teachers as "airy," and because I was a nice kid who wasn't into sports and had both girls and boys as friends, I got called "airy fairy." It bugged me but not that much because I was generally well-liked. I was never beat up or really picked on. The name calling wasn't constant, but obviously it made an impact if I still think about it now 30 years later. I don't brood over it, but it's in my memory bank. But so many other kids get called names and picked on over and over until they get pushed to a breaking point. Hopefully they can move beyond it before something really bad happens, but sometimes people get pushed too far.

Now that you're an adult, what would you do if you came face to face with your childhood bully? What, if anything, would you say or do to them? Would you be strong or would you revert to that scared little kid? Sometimes, it's better to face our demons so we can move past the pain, even if we think it's not affecting us now.

(Image courtesy of Getty)

A few years ago, I worked at a great Italian restaurant in Chicago's West Loop. The food was classic northern Italian, had a great wine list and the atmosphere was laid back, fun and boisterous. Most of the people who came in were usually in good spirits and knew they would get a delicious meal served by a lively staff.

Every so often, we'd get a customer who, for lack of a better term, sucked. One night in particular, a group of middle aged gay men and their requisite lady—call her the hag, Grace, whatever—came in for one guy's birthday. The entire group was pleasant, drinking, engaging with each other and their server. Everyone except for the birthday boy. From the moment he walked in, it seemed like he made it his goal to make everyone else around him—friends, wait staff, the hostess—miserable. You could tell that he wasn't upset about it being his birthday, he was just a bitter person. He snapped at the bartender, scowled at the hostess, gave me attitude when I asked him to move his bag of gifts out from the middle of the aisle (it was a weekend night and the restaurant was packed) and then got in my manager's face. She subsequently laughed at him and told him to sit down.

What is it about certain people that just makes them so bitter? Are there more gay men out there who hold this trait or is it balanced among all people? Or am I just lucky that I encounter more bitter gays in my life? As gay men, are we predisposed to a bitter gene that has a higher likelihood of "turning on" when we come out?

The idea, or stereotype, of the bitter gay man has been around for decades. When you watch movies from the '70s, like "Boys in the Band," or think about who some of the bigger gay icons are like Judy, Liza or even Britney, it becomes obvious that tragedy comes somewhat naturally to our culture. Why are we attracted to such train wrecks? Is it to help us feel better about ourselves?

If you're reading this, you know you have encountered plenty of people who fall into this group, if you're not one yourself. Walking through life bitter and pissed off takes so much energy—so much more than it does to smile at someone and say something nice. For the record, I'm a pretty easy-going guy who puts a positive spin on life. But that doesn't mean I don't get bitchy sometimes. The occasional flare-up is ok, but dealing with that all the time? Personally I couldn't do it and I try to steer clear of drama. But sometimes we get caught in the crossfire and get hit with the nasty stick.

Fortunately, many of us only get hit with the stick. Others who live like that probably fell out of the bitter tree and hit every branch on the way down. It's their life. Let's just hope they don't bring us down too often. Being bitter sucks. Play it on Halloween, but don't live there all the time.

(Image courtesy of Getty)

Since his election, President Obama has been slow to make good on his promises to the LGBT community. Most of the communications (around repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, for instance) have been along the lines of actions will be taken when the time is right. Even prominent gay leaders have been making excuses for the administration noting either that there are too many issues on the plate right now, the administration is still new to office and change takes time, or that everything is being prioritized.

Those excuses are starting to wear thin. Especially when the Department of Justice did not have too much on their plates to draft an insulting brief supporting the Defense of Marriage Act for a federal court last week. As expressed in a New York Times editorial, “the brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.”

Yup, you read that right. The Department of Justice, under the Obama-Administration-of-Change, likened same-sex marriages to incestuous unions.  In an open letter to the administration, the president of the Human Rights Campaign Joe Solmonese said, “I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones.”

The action has even led some prominent gay activists, including blogger Andy Towle of Towleroad, to announce that they are declining to attend a Democratic fundraiser scheduled for next week, hosted by out congressmen Barney Frank and Tammy Baldwin. In declining Towle said, "I've had concerns about the lack of movement from the administration on LGBT issues for some time now but I wasn't comfortable attending after that DOMA brief came out."

If this is the last straw for you, or if you are willing to give the administration a chance but still want to express your frustration with the Department of Justice’s decision, we invite you to leave a comment below. We will write a letter of concern to President Obama and forward it with your comments to the White House. Make your voice heard.