By Steve Weinstein
By Devon Maloney
By Tessa Stuart
By Alison Flowers
By Albert Samaha
By Jesse Jarnow
By Eric Tsetsi
By Raillan Brooks
LETTER OF THE WEEK
Look back in pity
Bravo, Michael Musto, for your brave and brilliant article about John Paul II's relentless gay bashing and intransigent backwardness when it came to sexuality ["Pope Springs EternalBut Why?" April 13-19]. For those of us queers who have been enraged by the Vatican's toxic brew of medieval nonsense about sexuality and unabashed hate-mongering, your article was just what we needed. I broke with the church many years ago and never looked back, except perhaps in pity for those gays and lesbians who still vainly hope that one day, maybe under some other pope, they might be regarded as human beings instead of demons from hell. My only cause for optimism is the steady decline in the church's authority and influence, Wojtyla's personal popularity notwithstanding. But then, as Musto points out, hating queers is an ecumenical sport. So even if Roman Catholicism were to become extinct (I can dream, can't I?), there would always be reverends, rabbis, and imams eager to pile on. "Imagine no religion." If only!
As the co-founders of Columbians for Academic Freedom, the independent student group formed to support students' rights at Columbia University, it is important to point out that in "Report From the Upper West Bank" [April 6-12], John Giuffo repeats a false claim made often by those who have jumped to the side of professors like Joseph Massad who have bullied students: that we protest professorial conduct in order to censor pro-Palestinian opinions. This is not the case. Professor Rashid Khalidi, who Giuffo claims is among those called out by students during the recent course of events, is a case in point. We have defended his reputation as a decent professor on radio, in print, and before large audiencesdespite the fact that many of his views may be deeply offensive to us. We do so because academic freedom should protect not only those you agree with, but those you disagree with; people such as Professor Joseph Massad and his supporters have yet to learn this. In denying students the right to express their position supporting Israel's right to exist, they hurt the academy as a whole by justifying censorship and preventing genuine debate. We hope the Columbia community will rise above petty political tagging and see the heart of the matter: protecting the students' right to dissent.
Giuffo presents much of the story, but not all. As a Columbia grad school alumnus (1967), I wrote President Bollinger about my distress at seeing the issue framed as the intimidation of students when the intimidation of faculty by groups such as Campus Watch has been going on for several years now. Moreover, the issue was framed that way by a shadowy outside Zionist group, the David Project, whose main evidence was the word of a couple of pro-Israel studentsthat's alland the avowedly Zionist New York Sun.
Columbia replied to my letter, incredibly, with a packet of materials, including four pages describing the richness of Jewish life on campus, the many Jewish courses available, and (I could hardly believe my eyes) a reprint of an article by an outspoken Zionist professor that was published in the very paper that spearheaded the attack against Professor Massad, the Sun. In short, Bollinger's major concern was not free speech and fairness, but satisfying those Jewish trustees, chair endowers, and faculty so prominent in the schools of law and medicine in particular. The university has certainly fallen from those days when it supported Professor Edward Said unflinchingly.
Michael Musto put into words every reason why I have little respect for the pope and am sick and tired of all the endless fawning over him by newspeople who never question the oppressive side of the Catholic Church ["Pope Springs EternalBut Why?" April 13-19]. I will never consider anybody in a position of great religious power who teaches that women are second-class citizens and gays are evil as being anything other than extremely harmful to the world. I don't care how many times the pope apologized to Jewsthe fact that he was capable of doing that makes it all the more reprehensible that he was so blind in other areas.
Not to be outdone
I've always been a fan of Michael Musto, but I admit he has outdone himselfin both eloquence and wit.
I am, I said
Musto's article is pretty much what I said to my family this weekthat I didn't relish an old man's suffering but, come on, he did encourage the whole world to hate me as an American; a woman unfit for the priesthood; a lesbian; a lesbian mother; a lesbian who wants to marry her partner of 23 years; a capitalist who is pro-democracy, pro-choice; and a secularist who is against tax breaks for churches so they can cover up for pedophile priests.
This was one of the best articles I have ever read. I felt that Michael put my very own thoughts to paper. While realistically depicting most of the Church's outlandish and outdated thinking, he was still able to portray a true reverence for the Holy Father.
Musto says that he wasn't accepted by the Catholic Church because he's gay. He's right and he's wrong. That I enjoy threesomes probably makes me unacceptable to the Catholic Church as well. No, it definitely does. Well, shucks, I'm still Catholic. I atone for my sins; I try to not to hurt anyone. As far as the consequences, I guess I'll see how it all comes out in the wash. I certainly don't propose that the church change to suit me. Why can't he practice his faith with his homosexuality being the one thing that he might have to answer for?
Howell, New Jersey
I am a gay Christian, although not Catholic. I appreciate and share Musto's feelings. I am 35 and have been abstinent for 14 years. That's a long time waiting for God to heal me, and it seems to me like a joke that the church has offered no answers.
Sex, lies: an epidemic
Michael Musto's story on the death of Pope John Paul II is brilliant. The pope was a hateful man, bitter toward gays, women who undergo abortions (regardless of the circumstances), women in general (all of those who wanted to be priests, for example), and AIDS sufferers, to name a few. Oh, and let's not forget that barely mentioned BBC report on how the Vatican urged priests in Africa to spread lies that condoms cause AIDS.
As perfectly as Musto expressed my views, I would like to add that nothing that John Paul II ever did or said galled me as much as his statement that if there is an increase in violence against gays, they bring it upon themselves by their insistence on increased visibility.
Jackson Heights, Queens
The Natalie Krinsky blog [Natalie Does New York, villagevoice.com] is beneath the Voice. It smells desperate, like a grab for some younger, snappier demographicwhat the moussed folks in Hollywood like to call "edgy," like, "My, that Adam Brody on The O.C. is very edgy." Young people are fine. Without them, we'd have no idea which Pumas to buy. But Krinsky's blog is naive, frivolous, and alarmingly free of wit. And it's a retread of a retread. (Sex and the City ended its run a while ago; Wonkette is on Charlie Rose every other week .)
Her scope is ludicrously narrow. Her wispy, post-Ivy musings start and finish in a kind of gilded bubble, a fascination with sophistication without actual sophistication. She writes about herself and her life, and it's boring. We know it can be daunting to enter post-graduate life. All those new bills and shaky infrastructures, and the lack of meticulously organized multi-racial house parties. And not nearly so many people talk about Kant.
Please, for the love of New York and culture and provocative thought and all things you should stand for, rethink this girl. I'd say "woman," but I'm sure, like Gap moll Sarah Jessica Parker, Ms. Krinsky enjoys being a girl.