"In 2022 he claimed credit for organizing a notorious dinner for Mr. Trump and Mr. West that also included the white supremacist Nick Fuentes."

"(Mr. Yiannopoulos claimed the meeting was an ambush, meant to 'make Trump’s life miserable.') Two years later, Mr. Yiannopoulos joined [Kanye] West’s exploratory campaign for president. Mr. Yiannopoulos, who was openly gay and often said he was attracted to Mr. Trump, announced in 2017 that he had been married to a man who is a U.S. citizen, but never revealed the full identity of that person. He later claimed that he was 'ex-gay,' and had 'demoted' his husband to the role of 'housemate.'"

From "Milo Yiannopoulos, a Right-Wing Provocateur, Is Arrested by ICE/Mr. Yiannopoulos, a prominent early supporter of President Trump, was detained at the New Orleans airport. The Trump administration publicized his arrest and shared a mug shot" (NYT gift link).

• Is there some kind of idea that if you're not sexually attracted to your spouse you're not married anymore?! Good luck in divorce court.

• Here's the 2022 NYT article about the "notorious dinner": "Trump’s Latest Dinner Guest: Nick Fuentes, White Supremacist/The former president’s table for four at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday also included Kanye West, whose antisemitic statements have made him an entertainment-industry outcast."

• Being a prankster may cause you to imagine that the rules don't apply to you, but no one really thinks they don't. 

Devilish imagery.

 

That's at the top of the WaPo home page.

The red glow of the photograph is transfixing. If you can tear your eyes away from it and look to the text, you see "Mike Collins" and "KKK and Nazi." Emotional tainting accomplished. There's little potential for your mind to travel on to pull out "former... staffer" and "what appear to be," let alone to click through to investigate whether there's really anything to damage Collins.

Clicking gets you to this article (gift link):

"I’m sorry to be crass about it, but I don’t think the point of the magazine is for self-pleasure. You no longer need a print magazine for that."

"It weirdly offers an artistic and highbrow view of the female nude, at a time when that is hard to come by."

Says Phillip Picardi, quoted in "I’ll make Playboy playful again, says its new gay editor/Phillip Picardi, a Catholic former Condé Nast wunderkind, also wants to attract women to the £30 magazine with more ‘artistic’ nudes and robust writing" (London Times).

He wants to “destigmatise male sexuality”, he says, and “help men to build a healthier relationship” with the women in their lives. “I’m hoping we can be a space for men who feel caught between needing to be manosphere-adjacent and needing to be the performative liberal male,” he says.... “We should promote the idea that we can be excited about sex and we can be excited about each other and excited about touching each other,” he says with a cheeky grin.

How Catholic is he? We're told he's "a lapsed Catholic who recently completed a master’s at Harvard Divinity School in order to rediscover his faith (his thesis was titled: Is Jesus Kinda Hot?)." Is religion part of making "playful again"? You can find "an artistic and highbrow view of the female nude" in church:

This reminds me of a sequence in the movie "Blue Moon," about the songwriter Lorenz Hart, who was gay, though not openly. The character has this conversation with the bartender. From the brilliant screenplay by Robert Kaplow (commission earned):

HART: You know what the sexiest thing on the planet earth is? A half-erect penis. 

EDDIE: Jesus Christ, Larry, nobody wants to hear this. 

"I am QTBIPOC and an immigrant, he is cis-white-straight/ish citizen, a decade older than me and didn’t even know what queer or BIPOC meant before meeting me...."

"The question is: How do I know I am not only doing this 'under the influence' of love?..."

A nutty question to a WaPo advice columnist, in "I planned to always be a queer, single cat-mom aunt. Then I met him. How does she know she’s not changing her life plan 'under the influence of love'?"

If love is the wrong reason, what is the right reason?

"[A]nti-queer' crimes more than tripled in [Berlin] between 2016 and 2025. Violent anti-queer crimes rose by half."

"Both violent and nonviolent offenses peaked in 2023 and have fallen since the city began its strategy, but both types of crimes remain historically elevated.  Much of that effort has focused on countering growing hostility from Germany’s far right; in Berlin, far-right ideology was the most frequently cited specific motivation for homophobic attacks in the city in 2025. But on Sunday, after the authorities said the perpetrator had attempted to join the Islamist terrorist group ISIS, community leaders said they were increasingly worried about threats from a wider range of political and religious motivations...."

From "Even Before Attack, Berlin’s Gay Community Felt ‘More and More Unsafe’/The killing of a woman in what officials called an act of Islamist terrorism rattled a community that has seen a surge in threats, including from the far right" (NYT gift link).

"Some people at the memorial on Sunday said German leaders had contributed to a sense of insecurity. They singled out the far-right Alternative for Germany party, which has climbed in national polls with a platform that defines a family as a man and a woman with children. Others criticized Friedrich Merz, the chancellor, who defended a decision not to fly a Pride flag over the federal parliament building last year by saying Parliament was 'not a circus tent.'..."

"Why are Republicans so obsessed with gay people, men especially?" — Don Lemon asks Hunter Biden, and Biden says there is a "cabal."

Listen for yourself:

It's hard to transcribe Hunter's speech, but it's hard to listen to it too, so I'll try to give you transcript:

BIDEN: There is a contingency, a cabal — a word that is, you know, gives it too much credit  —of gay Republican men that are closeted and have an enormous amount of self-hate... In DC.... We all know who they are. 

LEMON: Yes. Was Lindsey Graham one of them? 

BIDEN: Of course he was.... Why have none of your colleagues outed these people? Why when when they absolutely know?... I think that part of it has to do with the with the um with something that is real is that it is really really really dangerous to go down the path of outing anyone for any reason because of the horror and the history of it.

LEMON: Well, that I think that's why. But but if you're a hypocrite, it's different.

BIDEN: Oh, I don't I don't disagree....

"Let me be clear. I don't think the homoeroticism is the weird part...."

Says Democratic Congresswoman Becca Balint (D-VT), talking about Pete Hegseth and testosterone:

"There are so many people in this administration that have some weird, like, intense homoerotic feelings toward men while also being incredibly homophobic and not just homophobic but, like, hate mongering, fear mongering about the LGBT community. Let me be clear. I don't think the homoeroticism is the weird part. The weird part is that they pretend that that's not what it's about. And so, Pete Hegseth was, like, the example of this, like the manly-manly rugged macho man, and I don't know if you know who Tom of Finland is. Tom of Finland — this is gay male porn that was drawn by a man, and, like, Pete Hegseth is the embodiment of that. So I feel like they must be looking at that as, like, their example of what men look like...."

I blogged about Tom of Finland back in 2014 in a post titled, "Finland issues stamps honoring an artist whose 'sleek sado-masochistic drawings with abundant amounts of beefy male nudity' portrayed 'a sensual life force and being proud of oneself'" ("The first quote in this post title is the way the NYT described the work of Touko Laaksonen, AKA Tom of Finland, and the second quote is from someone in Finland who chose the particular images for the stamps, who added: 'There is never too much [sensual life force and being proud of oneself] in this northern country'")(the only image at my post is of one of the stamps issued by Finland).

Balint gets pretty excited about her ideas in that clip, and that made me want to look up what she studied in college.

"Mr. Frank was also known for championing gay rights, civil rights and women’s rights. He did so by force of personality and by example."

"He insisted that his male partner be invited to all events to which the spouses of other representatives were invited. In 2012, at age 72, he married Jim Ready and became the first sitting member of Congress to wed someone of the same sex. He also worked quietly behind the scenes to advance his causes. In one of many examples, according to his memoir, 'Frank: A Life in Politics From the Great Society to Same-Sex Marriage' (2015), he helped persuade President Bill Clinton not to appoint Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia as secretary of state because of his track record of homophobia...."

From "Barney Frank, Gay Pioneer and Liberal Stalwart in Congress, Dies at 86/Often voted the 'brainiest,' 'funniest' and 'most eloquent' member of the House, he was also the first to come out voluntarily and helped normalize being openly gay in public office" (NYT).

"Justices Reject Colorado Law Banning ‘Conversion Therapy’ for L.G.B.T.Q. Minors."

"Colorado and more than 20 other states restrict therapists from trying to change the gender identity or sexual orientation of L.G.B.T.Q. clients under the age of 18."

The NYT reports.

“Colorado may regard its policy as essential to public health and safety,” Justice Neil M. Gorsuch wrote for himself and seven other justices from across the ideological spectrum. “But the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.” 

Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, reading a lengthy summary of her opposition from the bench.

Here's the opinion: Chiles v. Salazar. 

The Times headline needs to be sharpened up. The Court didn't "reject" the whole "law." The opinion says that the therapist, Chiles, "stresses that she provides only talk therapy, employing no physical techniques or medications." And the case returns to the lower court to apply the correct standard — strict scrutiny.

Jackson's idea:

Trump answers the question "Did the CIA tell you that Ayatollah Jr. is gay?"

"They did say that. I think a lot of people are saying that, which puts him off to a bad start in that particular country. I sort of have to smile to myself when I see people trying to defend the Palestinian regime for women — women for Palestine — but they kill women if... you don't wear a certain cloth all over your face, you have no chance of living. When I look at gays for Palestine  — but they kill gays. The kill 'em instantly. They throw 'em off buildings. And I'm saying, who are the gays for Palestine? They have a significant amount of gays for Palestine. Now... you know, I did very well with the gay vote, okay? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, okay? And I think it probably helped me, but I did great. No Republican has ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I'm very proud of it, I think it's great. Perhaps it is because I'm from New York City, I don't know. But the gay national anthem was my walk-off and I think it probably — but think of it, gays for Palestine, but they kill gays in Palestine. So when they hear that I think probably we can talk about it but it shouldn't be too hard."

If you like Trump answers that contain miscellaneous material, this episode of "The Five" is a feast. If Trump's weave makes you anxious/angry/insane, buckle in.

"Walking hand in hand with the one I love/Ooh, how I love the rainy days."

Neil and his Grandson sing. You can tell Neil is so proud of him! Looks like it they enjoyed it! pic.twitter.com/ur4rvKe7iN

— Johnny Midnight ⚡️ (@its_The_Dr) March 3, 2026

At the time of his death (last week), Neil Sedaka was still married to that grandson's grandmother. They'd been married for 64 years. I thought Neil Sedaka was gay, but I see that he was one of those heterosexual men who seem gay to a lot of people. I think it's good for heterosexual men to see that it's fine to be... whatever it was that made people think Neil Sedaka was a gay man. 

Lovely grandparenting! 

"... writhing in the throes of transphobia—expressed as homophilia..."

A striking phrase, found in Nell Zink's "Sister Europe: A Novel" (commission earned).

A bit of context: "He felt an unexamined, eminently absurd pity for the lonely royal. In parallel (the two trains of thought never crossed), he felt that additional exposure to him would be good for Demian, who was writhing in the throes of transphobia—expressed as homophilia—and clearly hoped Nicole would emerge from her gaudy chrysalis as just another twink in golf duds."

"In just four years, anti-gay bias rose by around 10 percent.... Just as bias against gay people fell especially steeply before 2020..."

"... it has surged particularly sharply since. Perhaps most surprising is that these trends were distinctly robust among the youngest American adults — those under 25. This group increased its animus against marginalized groups in general and gay people in particular at a faster rate than older Americans did. Also surprising is that although anti-gay bias has risen faster among conservatives, it has also risen among liberals. What explains this decline in tolerance?"

From "Americans Are Turning Against Gay People" (NYT).

Tolerance?! I would think it's considered homophobic just to use the word "tolerance," which connotes minimal acceptance and little more than a willingness to refrain from discriminating or saying actively mean things. In fact, I'd suggest it is the demand to do so much more — to celebrate pride in sexual matters and to endure indoctrination sessions that force feed questionable fine points — that has made people resistant and more likely to check a less gay-friendly box on the survey.

The authors of the NYT article reject the speculation that it's a reaction to the push for transgender rights or worry about sexually grooming children. They prefer to speculate that the decline in "tolerance" for gay people is tied to 1. "social instability" — "the Covid pandemic, economic strain and intensifying political conflict” — and 2. "a loss of confidence" in the establishment combined with a perception that gay rights is "an establishment position."

***

My rankling at the word "tolerance" was influenced by George Washington. In his famous 1790 Letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, he wrote: "It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights."

"They’re trying to turn it into something scary, something sinister. But folks, it’s not really about anything that’s all that complicated."

"At its core, it’s about giving every American an opportunity to be treated with the basic decency, dignity and respect they all deserve."

Said ex-President Joe Biden, about transgender rights, quoted in "Biden Slams Republicans for Using L.G.B.T.Q. Identity as ‘Political Football’/The former president defended his support for transgender rights, a stance that has provoked second-guessing among some Democrats" (NYT).

So it's all very simple and anyone who says otherwise is sinister, and to boil it down to that isn't politicizing anything. It's the other side that's doing the politicizing, those bad people over there. 

I remember when Democrats liked to portray themselves as sophisticated, seeing all the complexity and nuance. Now, they're pushing the idea it's all quite simple. It's black and white. So... binary.

The top-rated comment over there is interesting. Jose writes:

"As a 'very, very effeminate boy' growing up in Baltimore, Ben Appel was teased mercilessly. At school, where he was regularly bullied, the other kids called him 'Bengay.'..."

"But when Appel later enrolled at Columbia University, eager to learn about the theories behind his activism, the rhetoric he encountered felt more like dogma than inquiry. 'According to queer theory, if you're a man who behaves in "unmasculine" ways or wears eyeliner you must be a woman inside, which I thought was regressive.... Saying that those superficial attributes are what make women women, and that any variation on the rough he-man stereotype means you're not a man, reinforces these rigid sex roles, and I thought we were supposed to be against those.' In his book 'Cis White Gay: The Making of a Gender Heretic' [commission earned] which comes out next week, Appel argues that gender ideology is 'illiberal, regressive and anti-gay'...."

Writes Pamela Paul, in "The Growing Divide in the Rainbow Coalition/More gay people are speaking out against the gender ideology of trans and queer activists" (Wall Street Journal).

As the headline indicates, there's much more at the link than Appel's story. To quote just a bit:

"It’s important to note that 'sex is gay' is an idea found among the incel—or, involuntary celibate—community..."

"... most notably from neo-Nazi and self-styled incel Nick Fuentes. In 2022, Fuentes went on a rant on his show, in which he argued that his lack of sexual experience with women 'actually makes me really more heterosexual than anyone' As Fuentes explained: 'If we're really being honest, never having a girlfriend, never having sex with a woman really makes you more heterosexual, because honestly, dating women is gay, having sex with women is gay. And having sex with men is gay. Really it's all gay. And if you want to know the truth, the only really straight heterosexual position is to be an asexual incel. That's it. That's all there is…Having sex in itself is gay, I think. I think that it's really a gay act to begin with. Think about it this way: What's gayer than being like "I need cuddles. I need kisses…I need to spend time with a woman."'"

Writes Alan Elrod, in "Sex Is Gay, Rape Is Epic, No Fatties: Young Right-Wing Men Are Obsessed With Male Power and Male Bodies/The group chat leak reveals what over a decade of incel messaging and Bronze Age Pervert have done to Young Republicans" (Liberal Currents).

"Yes, she’s pregnant. Yes, it’s his. And yes — if you must know how they conceived — in Greenstone’s words, 'we birds’d and we bees’d.'"

From "He’s gay. She’s straight. They’re happily married./A new crop of couples are making content about their mixed-orientation marriages, divorced from sexual attraction but not love" (WaPo).

"You rely heavily on the history of regulating the medical profession. What's the history of regulating therapists? When did that begin?"

Asked Justice Thomas in yesterday's oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar. 

He was speaking to the lawyer defending a Colorado law that prohibited licensed therapists from delivering treatments aimed at changing a minor's sexual orientation or gender identity. 

The lawyer, Shannon W. Stevenson, responded with a surprisingly early date:

Mental health care and healthcare delivered through words were both well-established at the founding of this country. At that time, such practices were primarily carried out by physicians, whose work largely involved giving advice through words.

That's a far cry from the history of regulating therapists, but I'm intrigued by the idea of people in the late 18th century talking to their doctors about their mental difficulties. And when did the licensing of doctors begin? That is a much older idea, going back the middle ages. But I think licensing therapists is much more recent, and Stevenson quickly pivots to that:

"The medical consensus is usually reasonable and important. But have there been times when it has been politicized or influenced by ideology?"

Said Justice Alito in yesterday's oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar. He was confronting the lawyer defending Colorado's law prohibiting licensed therapy treatments aimed at changing a minor's sexual orientation or gender identity. The lawyer responds:

MS. STEVENSON: We have no facts about that in this case, but I wouldn’t disagree that it’s possible.

JUSTICE ALITO: Isn’t it a fact that it’s happened in the past?... “Three generations of idiots are enough”?

Those few quoted words invoke an infamous case, Buck v. Bell, where a state had seen fit to sterilize  a "feeble minded woman" without her consent. The Supreme Court did not object to the state's approach to medical science.

MS. STEVENSON: That’s certainly a concern. If there were evidence in the record that a standard of care wasn’t based on patient safety, that would be highly relevant.

Justice Alito didn't ask about whether the motive was correct — whether medical scientists were sincerely pursuing patient safety. He was concerned with whether the goal was pursued in a truly scientific manner and was not skewed by politics and ideology. 

JUSTICE ALITO: Isn’t that a reason to apply First Amendment scrutiny when what’s being regulated is pure speech, rather than just accepting the medical standard of care and medical consensus as the end of the matter, allowing rational basis review where anything goes?

The lawyer must resist this idea that the therapy is "pure speech." The idea she uses is that these are "words used to deliver medical treatment" (which are different from words expressing the opinion that conversion therapy is good (or bad)):

"As another man who once worked with me declares himself saddened by my beliefs on gender and sex, I thought it might be useful to compile a list..."

"... for handy reference. Which of the following do you imagine makes actors and directors who aren’t involved with the HBO reboot of Harry Potter so miserable?"

J.K. Rowling has a useful list, at X, where she also engages with many of her commenters.

It's a long list, so go to the link. I'll just highlight one item, the belief "[t]hat gay people shouldn’t be pressured to include the opposite sex in their dating pools, nor should they be smeared as ‘genital fetishists’ when they don’t?"