#GayMarriage

Conservative Candidate for Costa Rica's Presidency Lost After Spreading Anti-Gay Rhetoric

Costa Rican citizens are still celebrating the surprise presidential win of gay marriage supporter Carlos Alvarado Quesada.

Many were surprised when the novelist and former labor minister won, because most were expecting his opponent, Fabricio Alvarado Munoz, to come out victorious. This is because Fabricio Alvarado won the initial round of voting back in February.

That said, many are now saying that Fabricio Alvarado’s loss (with only 39% of the population’s support) is due to his aggressive campaigning.

Fabricio Alvarado came on strong in the relatively laidback nation. He pushed an extremely conservative campaign that emphasized on opposing a court ruling supporting marriage equality from earlier this year.

But, as we reported earlier this week, Fabricio Alvarado’s opponent offered a different option for Costa Rican voters.

Though the two share a last name and later found out they are distant cousins, they were both on the opposite ends of the political spectrum. Plus, not only did Carlos Alvarado approve of the same-sex marriage ruling, but he also tried to steer the debate towards the country’s economy.

You see, Costa Rica is currently facing a record fiscal deficit and has had four credit rating downgrades in the last five years. As NBCNews reports, Fabricio Alvarado was poor in his focus towards the country’s lowering economy.

“There’s no question that Fabricio’s extremism created fears and doubts among people,” said Alejandro Abarca, an economics professor at the University of Costa Rica.

“Fabricio was horrible in the debates. He came across as unprepared,” Abarca added.

That said, Carlos Alvarado pledged to make his main focus be the lightening of the country’s deficit.

“I call on lawmakers to move forward in debating the fiscal reform bill,” Alvarado said in his victory speech to supporters in the capital San Jose. “Costa Rica needs to resolve this.”

While it’s important to acknowledge that the right candidate won due to his focus on the important issue of economics, we here at Instinct have to share that we’re breathing easier for Costa Rican citizens now that Fabricio is out of the picture.

Like in many areas in the world, there has been a sweep of conservative notions in Latin America. Having Fabricio Alvarado as the Costa Rican president would have only increased this surging wave. Luckily, the Costa Rican people recognized that homophobia and intolerance is not acceptable. Especially when there are bigger problems afoot.

h/t: NBCNews, Bloomberg

Marc Jacobs Proposes To BF With Flash Mob At THIS Fast Food Restaurant!

 

I'll have the brown rice, pinto beans, chicken, mild sauce, and epic wedding proposal please! Congratulations are in order for out and proud fashion designer Marc Jacobs, and not just because he popped the question to his adorable boyfriend Charly "Char" Defrancesco. Jacobs pulled off a truly epic flash mob in the most unexpected place possible - a Chipotle - and seemed to catch his beau quite off guard! 

In a video posted to both boys' Instagram accounts, Jacobs and Defrancesco can be seen taking in the dancing, with Defrancesco unaware that his life is about to change forever. Jacobs then gets down on one knee to pop the question, to which Defrancesco replies with a resounding "Yes!" 

 

 

A post shared by Marc Jacobs (@themarcjacobs) on

 

The song of choice - Prince's Kiss - is more than appropriate as Jacobs and Defrancesco then share a passionate smooch to celebrate the moment. Get you a man who can somehow make a Chipotle glamorous! Defrancesco captioned the Insta evidence with:

GET READY FOR THE ALL TIME GAG!!!!! Thank you to everyone who helped make this happen.​

While Jacobs' caption reads:

And this happened...”Charly Defrancesco will you marry me”?

Love is always in fashion. And so is Chipotle!

 

 

Who remembers Jay and Silent Bob?

A post shared by Char Defrancesco (@chardefrancesco) on

Major disrespect for this gay couple remembering their mother

In Dallas, Texas, another story of religious righteousness is plaguing a gay couple who recently lost their mother, Brenda Light. Barry Giles and John Gambill, who are married and have been together for 31 years, were heartbroken to learn that Gambill’s name been stricken from Giles’ mother’s obituary in a local newspaper in Olto.

The couple shared with Fox News 4 that they originally submitted the lines “those left to cherish her memory include her son, Barry Giles and his husband, John Gambill of Dallas” and were shocked to see Gambill’s name had been removed—as if he never existed.

But why? Well because the paper’s publisher, Phillip Hamilton, expressed that two gay men could NEVER be married—in God’s eyes. So in response, he removed that piece of writing because his paper couldn’t be tainted with that.

According to Raw Story, Hamilton shared:

It is my religious conviction that a male cannot have a husband. It is also my belief that to publish anything contrary to God’s Word on this issue would be to publish something in the newspaper that is not true. The newspaper respects the First Amendment rights of those who express such opinions. The newspaper’s decision to edit the obituary is both ethical and lawful. It would be unethical to publish a news item that is known by the editor to be false. Based on the truth found in the Word of God, I could not in good conscience identify Mr. Gambill as the husband of Mr. Giles.

What a damn, bitch! If they paid for the obituary, which they probably did because nothing is free with newspapers, they should take him to small claims court or at least get their money back.

How horribly offensive and disrespectful, especially to Giles’ mother who must have loved that Gambill for over three decades.

Here is the news report from Fox News 4:

Tea Party Patriots Co-Founder Doug Mainwaring Says Same-Sex Marriage is The Antithesis of Marriage

Earlier today, I was looking around the internet when I discovered an article on LifeSiteNews.

The article was penned by Doug Mainwaring who’s a co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots, and an openly gay man against same-sex marriage.

Now, I could focus this article to discuss and debate Mainwaring’s views on same-sex marriage, and surprisingly there are some aspects that I agree with, but that’s not the point of this article.

In the LifeSiteNews article, Mainwaring directly uses Instinct Magazine to express his perspective on gay sites/blogs and same-sex marriage. Using five articles, he states that same-sex marriage is the antithesis of marriage.

“It is anti-conjugal and anti-complementary. It is genderless. It is sterile.”

“It exists to normalize sodomy, which is the sole binding element holding the entire LGBT movement and culture together.”      

“At the same time, the lowest common denominator virtues of monogamy, sexual self-control, personal modesty, parental role modeling, and paternal care are completely, unashamedly absent from these truth-based articles.”

But, of course, Mainwaring’s reasoning and defense are deeply biased and nonsensical, and I’ll explain how.


The five articles used were last week’s top story posts found at the top and right of the home page.

While it seems that Mainwaring is a frequent reader of Instinct, as he started the article talking about an advertisement that’s been playing on the site “for a few weeks,” he didn’t bother to go through the site to back his perspective. He only used what could be found on the front page.

The first article reference, which he also acknowledged didn’t back his theory, was an article I wrote. It’s a short piece explaining that a male prostitute outed several priests in a 1,200 page dossier that was sent to the Vatican.

Simply put, this article has nothing to do with same-sex marriage, so let’s move on.

The second article covered actor/singer Ricky Martin’s thoughts on his role for American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace in which he plays a man in an open relationship.

While some fault belongs to the initial Instinct Magazine article for incorrectly quoting Martin’s words, Mainwaring falls for it and then incorrectly uses it to defend his perspective.

You see, the Instinct article wrongly quotes Martin’s response to being asked if he’d met the real Antonio D’Amico. Martin responds yes and then says he told D’Amico that he wanted to correctly represent him and his love of Versace.

“I want to normalize relationships like this. It’s good for the world; it’s good for me as a gay man with kids. It’s important that we shed some light on power couples like this, even though he was quiet and behind the scenes and he was just there supporting his man for 15 years.”

I believe, in this moment Martin was focusing on gay relationships in power and not just open relationships. He meant that we need to celebrate strong gay love on tv (including this particular open one), because that representation can impact our views in real life.

That said, the second part of the quote on the IM post does actually talk about open relationships.

“The level of commitment after 15 years. The level of security between them and trust between them is so solid. We want to normalize another kind of reality for open relationships. And that’s what we’re doing. There’s absolutely nothing wrong. We’re just two very self-secure men that are completely in love with each other, that trust each other to the maximum level, and here we are.”

The IM post jumps to a later section in the Vulture article when Martin talks about being committed to the role and representing this real life relationship, but there’s still a mistake here.

The full quote for this section reads:

“The silent person behind the scenes, yeah. One of the toughest scenes that I shot [was] the first, the interrogation when the FBI is investigating Antonio. It was a very excruciating scene for me. I mean, this guy was opening every door that was a secret from Gianni’s and Antonio’s relationship. I’m talking about bringing men into our lives. I’m talking about bringing escorts. That exposure is very heavy, and it can be extremely uncomfortable for me, for the family, but I’m here doing a job, and the story, once again, needs to be told, for people to see the level of unity between these two. The level of commitment after 15 years. The level of security between them and trust between them is so solid. We want to normalize another kind of reality for open relationships. And that’s what we’re doing. There’s absolutely nothing wrong. We’re just two very self-secure men that are completely in love with each other, that trust each other to the maximum level, and here we are. But the scene was very intense and painful. Excruciating. It was a long day.”

Here, Ricky Martin isn’t so much championing the open relationship cause, but stating that he had to act the part of a man in a loving and stable open relationship, and represent it well to audiences that don’t understand that life.

Simply put, Martin was not discussing the importance or role of open relationships in real life, but talking about acting as a member of a real life open relationship. As such, both that one Instinct article and Mainwaring are wrong for trying to use Martin’s words to push their agendas.

The third article referenced was about Tom Daley’s latest photo leak. Mainwaring used this as an opportunity to criticize the sanctity of Daley’s marriage to tv creative Dustin Lance Black and their plans to have a child through surrogacy.

My response to Mainwaring’s use of this article doesn’t need a big rundown, because simply Mainwaring shows bias here.

So what if Daley had a photo leak? While yes, you could make an argument about the promiscuity of Daley, that does not largely affect his capabilities as a husband and potential father.

How many straight people have had sex before marrying and having children? Why is it a problem that Daley has had sex with people other than Black? Because pictures show proof of this past? This is a non-issue.

And the same could be said for the third article which was about actor Russell Tovey’s fiancé Steven Brockman potentially being a former gay porn star.

While many may have their own thoughts about someone being a porn star, no one can assume how a relationship will flourish or deteriorate.

Even if Brockman was a former porn star, which he never confirmed, does that make him incapable of being a loving husband? Absolutely not.

Lastly, the LifeSiteNews article references the coverage of porn director Michael Lucas who’s decided to record every sexual interaction he has. Basically, this man, who’s married, is making a business out of his bedroom.

While I personally grit my teeth at this story, I can also recognize that this isn’t the norm for same-sex marriages. Michael Lucas doesn’t represent all gay people and their relationships. To think so is beyond silly.

And that’s what Doug Mainwaring’s article boils down to, beyond silly. It’s beyond silly to equate four articles as not only representative of all gay sites but also of all same-sex marriages.

And for the record, these stories generated the most on Instinct Magazine in that week or two because sex sells. Despite what we all like to believe or wish were true, a story with scandal or sex appeal will always generate more clicks (trust me, I’ve had many headaches about this fact). That’s true for gay sites and straight sites.

That said, that doesn’t mean Instinct or gay sites don’t share stories celebrating monogamy and dating only one person.

Doug Mainwaring argues that gay sites like Instinct Magazine don’t cover stories with “the lowest common denominator virtues of monogamy, sexual self-control, personal modesty, parental role modeling, and paternal care.”

Yet, he didn’t bother to dig further into the site to discover stories like:

These are only a few of the stories that I’ve written in the past year, so imagine that plus the stories written by my peers here at Instinct, and then imagine all the other stories written on other gay sites.

Same-sex marriage is not the antithesis of marriage and at the same time it is not the same as straight marriage.

Same-sex marriage is still something we are understanding more by the day. That said, same-sex marriage is as diverse as straight marriage and shouldn’t be put down because one man has a bias against it.


PS: This article is not anti-open relationships, but simply a reaction to the LifeSiteNews article. In addition, I apologize to the other Instinct Magazine writer for low-key calling him out. I'll buy you a coffee sometime.


PPS: This post is the opinion of this contributing writer to Instinct Magazine.  Opinion pieces do not always reflect the stance of the magazine or the other contributing writers.

20 Questions From A Gay Guy Who's Never Used A Dating App

 

Conversations with my single gay friends inevitably involve the handing over of the phone to check out a cute guy on a dating app - or, later in the evening after we've had some vodka waters  - that same guy's junk. Dating apps permeate gay culture, and while even a couple of years ago a happily-ever-after that started with an app was frowned upon, now Grindr, Tinder, Scruff, and the like are the dating norm for many gay men.

As a married thirty-one-year-old, I just missed the app craze. But considering that I've met my friends' hookups, boyfriends, and just plain friends that they met through apps, I feel that swiping is tangentially a significant part of my social life. However, I've never had the thrill of having my own accounts - knowing that my one true love or an evening of hanging from the rafters with half of a gay soccer league could be just one swipe away.

In comparison to the dating lives of my friends that would be unrealistic for even an episode of Jersey Shore, mine was Little House on the Prairie. I met my husband in grad school at Wash U. We were in the same class of twenty-five. We had a mutual friend that steered us towards each other. We began going on bike rides together and eventually dated. We moved to Cleveland and then Chicago - where he proposed to me on the swings at Navy Pier - and we now have a dog. Try making that into a reality show. It will be called Bottle of Ambien.

 

 

The excitement I get when my besties let me swipe for them is unnerving. I feel like I really would have rocked this dating app thing. While I wasn't interested in pre-app hookup Internet hot spots such as MySpace or Craigslist, apps are something that I can't deny I wish I had the chance to try out. So here are my brutally honest questions for those who have.

 

1) Do you have more sex than if you didn't use dating apps?

 

2) Do you think people like me who never experienced swiping are tragic?

 

3) Is the "paradox of choice" real, AKA do you find that having too many choices makes choosing more difficult?

 

4) Or does casting a wide net simply increase the likelihood of meeting "the one?"

 

5) Is every morning like Christmas morning, but with men instead of presents?

 

6) Or is using a dating app more like going on a free Amazon shopping spree any time you want? (But with men instead of presents.)

 

7) What's the farthest you've traveled to meet someone you matched with?

 

8) Have you become close friends with any of your dates?

 

9) How important are dating apps to gay social life?

 

10) If I'm at a gay bar, what percentage of couples around me met through Grindr? 10%? 20%? 50%?

 

11) Would you feel like you missed out if you stopped dating pre-Grindr?

 

12) If you were dating pre-apps, would you have used available online options, like Craigslist?   

 

13) Do dating apps make you happier?

 

14) Or would you prefer to live in the Land Before Grindr?

 

15) Do you get annoyed when I want to see all the guys in your iPhone?

 

16) Do you require a peen pic before meeting a guy?

 

17) Do apps make dating safer, because you can vet someone before meeting them in person? 

 

18) Can a quiet night in really turn into an Eyes Wide Shut party in the blink of an eye?

 

19) Which is the best dating app? 

 

20) And finally, can I have your life?

These 10 U.S. Cities Have The Highest Rate of Married Gay Couples

Thanks to a new Tax report, we have a rough idea of the ten U.S. cities with the highest rate of married gay couples in them.

Using the Tax Policy Center to count as a census, we can get a better idea of how (and where) married same-sex couples live.

The report pointed out some facts we already knew like the fact that gay couples often congregate to metropolitan areas or coastal zones.

That said, there is also some other interesting news like the dispersion of married gay couples by state. The District of Columbia (D.C.) has the largest number of gay couples with them making up 4.17 percent of all married couples. Then, Massachusetts and Vermont follow behind with 0.99 percent each.

And, of course, the report also shared the cities with the largest populations of married same-sex couples (by number and the percent amount compared to all married couples).

  1. Portland, Maine (0.97%)

At the back of the pack, we have Portland, Maine. Portland made the list due to the 1,111 married gay couples living there.

  1. New York, New York (0.84%)

Are we surprised that NYC's on the list? No. New York City is full of many different people from many different walks of life. But, its also full of a lot of gay people (from different walks of life). With 13,892 married same-sex couples, this city is full of winning love.​

  1. San Diego, California (0.88%)

That's right, San Diego made the top ten, and its because of the 4,845 married couples living there. They’ve even named a street after Harvey Milk.

  1. Albuquerque, New Mexico (0.90%)

With 1,248 married gay couples, Albuquerque is an LGBTQ-friendly city that you might want to visit. Maybe, you’ll even want to retire there.

  1. Miami, Florida (0.92%)

Next, we go to the South East corner of the country. In Miami, Florida, there are 5,131 married same-sex couples, which has earned the spot the title, from Thrillist, of the “greatest gay destination in America.

  1. Portland, Oregan (0.83%)

Oregon is our next destination with it holding about 4,006 married same-sex couples within its borders. Even more interesting is that Portland is one of only a few U.S. cities where there are more married lesbian couples than married gay male couples.

  1. Boston, Massachusetts (1.04%)

Next on our list is Boston, which has earned itself a place on this list with 9,458 recorded married same-sex couples. This could be because Massachusetts legalized gay marriage all the way back in May 2004.  

  1. Seattle, Washington (1.09%)

With 9,281 married gay couples in it, Seattle is a prime living space for LGBTQ people. Not only that, but the city elected its first lesbian mayor, former U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan, this past November.

  1. Santa Rosa, California (1.25%)

The next city on our list is the city Santa Rosa, which is full of 1,416 married gay couples. This spot is so popular that US News listed it in their “20 Retirement Communities for LGBT Seniors.”

  1. San Francisco, California (1.52%)

Are we surprised? San Francisco is the gay mecca in the United States of America with an estimated 13,220 married same-sex couples.

Australia's First Married Gay Marriage Just Ended After 48 Days

Australia’s first married gay couple just ended in a heartbreaking way.

Jo Grant from Queensland married Jill Kindt on December 15 in their home’s garden less than a week after Australia legalized marriage equality.

The two had escaped the 30-day waiting period due to “exceptional circumstances” and officially became the first gay couple to marry under the new law. They were then quickly followed by 159 same-sex couples (and counting) wishing to get married.

While the two kept things private, the news of their marriage eventually made its way to parliament’s ears this Wednesday, but that came with the family’s permission.

“Jo and Jill were approved, married, and registered all in one day, after the registrar ruled exceptional circumstances,” Queensland Attorney General Yvette D’Ath told parliament.

“Jo’s mum Sandra believes the marriage renewed Jo’s spirit, keeping her alive long enough to have one last Christmas with her family.”

Unfortunately, that happiness only lasted 48 days as Grant, who had a rare form of cancer, died on January 30.

May she rest in peace.

h/t dailymail.co.uk