The Unbearable Lameness of Australian Media


Woman gets tits out: Seen by some! This should be the headline for the latest boring Australian ‘scandal’. A photo of a topless woman wearing a Richmond football club premiership medal was circulated among some members of the team. Circulating a photo of someone else undressed without their permission is of course wrong, but is it really a scandal worthy of a weeks worth of opinion pieces in the national newspapers? Are we so desperate for something to be outraged over these days? Or is it just the failing media companies looking to justify their existence with endless chatter chatter chatter?

The Australian media is committed to being as vapid as possible. Our ‘scandals’ come in only four varieties:

  1. Radio host says something vaguely offensive on air
  2. Shock elimination from The Bachelor/Bachelorette
  3. Australian arrested overseas for doing something stupid/drugs
  4. Football player does something stupid/drugs

(Occasionally a beloved children’s entertainer will be found guilty of a decades-long systematic campaign of child rape, but I’ll leave that as it really just throws off the curve graph.)

Britain gets things like three footballers filmed getting their arseholes eaten out in a Thai brothel (real scandal by the way – the video is kind of hot). The US has pick anything Trump says/does. We have the winner of the 1999 series of Popstars picking a ‘husband’ from a line-up of probably-steroided, definitely-gay models.

It is somewhat unfortunate, for the sake of tabloid journalism, that this ‘scandal’ occurred at the same time as the news of Harvey Weinstein’s alleged sexual misconduct broke. With the treatment of women in the media under the spotlight, the newspapers were forced to bring out the feminist red-bob-brigade to critically analyse women’s rights, rather than trawl through the woman’s life and breathlessly report every sordid detail they could find. Like they did with Cocaine Cassie, the Australian arrested in Colombia for drug trafficking. The Richmond woman remains anonymous, her photo censored, unlike Cassie, who had that photo of her boobs taken from her Craiglist ad and splashed across every front page in the country (I kept count) and every person connected to her chased by journalists. Who could forget the riveting interview with the man who owned the fish and chip shop next to the brothel she once worked at! It was awful, but entertaining.

There’s a Damned Whores/Gods Police feminist essay in there in regards to the different treatment of the two women, but I’ll let the Fairfax columnists have that one to fill up their word count. I don’t care anyway. Call me when a rugby gangbang video leaks that shows at least three shafts.


The Case Against Decriminalising the Intentional Spread of HIV


In the progressive paradise California it is no longer a crime to intentionally infect someone with HIV. Because apparently not being allowed to do that before was a human rights violation or something?

Democratic Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill (SB) 239, which was authored by two fellow democrats,  Sen. Scott Wiener and Asm. Todd Gloria. The law lowers the crime of knowingly exposing a sexual partner to HIV from a felony to a misdemeanour. They and their partners in developing this bill say they want to ‘end the criminalisation of people living with HIV in California’. Though the ‘Trump will put us all in death camps’ crowd likes to believe that every action they perform, from protesting to taking a dump, is in America a criminal act and deserving of victim points, the fact is that being HIV-positive is not a criminal offence and it is the act of telling people it is that stops them seeking treatment. The offence is intentionally giving someone else that disease without their consent. They say that due to recent medication developments HIV is not the death sentence it once was. Is it ok to spread a disease just because the symptoms stop short of death? May I bury toxic waste under a school because the child survival rate for leukemia is 85 percent? These lawmakers have obviously never sat in a waiting room of a sexual health clinic scared to death after receiving a phone call to “come in immediately” or held a friend all night crying because he had been infected by a cute boy he thought he could trust. Nor have they tried in vain to get through health department bureaucracy to report people intentionally spreading HIV, which is a depressingly common occurrence and who’s identities are an open secret in Australian urban gay communities.

It’s also no longer a crime to donate blood to a blood bank despite knowing you are HIV-positive. I am against the ban on gay men being allowed to donate blood, our blood is not automatically poison, but allowing HIV-positive individuals to donate blood because to do otherwise would be exclusionary or some shit is just too far. There’s a chilling scene in Randy Shilts’s And The Band Played On where the blood mobile rocks up to the 1980 San Francisco pride parade because the gays are such good donors. The path that blood takes through the rest of the book is a chilling indictment of how medical companies cannot be trusted to regulate their own products when profit is involved – and profit is huge. Blood in America is a $4.5-billion-a-year business, but competition is strong and margins are getting squeezed. This law will take us back to the 1980s when the executives of medical companies sat around the board table looking at pie charts figuring out how many of their clients it was ok to infect with HIV.

And while we are on the subject of medical companies, I find disturbing this part of the statement from the ACLU praising the bill:


And HIV-negative individuals can take medication, known as PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis), to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV by up to 99 percent. SB 239 ensures that these advances inform our laws and the manner in which we address our public health response to HIV.

This combined with the decriminalisation bill says to gay men: Take PrEP or you are on your own to avoid HIV. It confirms to me what I wrote in a previous blog post Truvada Troopers: Who is Behind the Push for PrEP? that leftist organisations are attempting to control the gay population by making PrEP almost mandatory then controlling supply. The fact that my PrEP blog post became my most popular tells me that I am not alone in being sceptical of PrEP.

Also according to the ACLU, this law is consistent with California’s “Getting to Zero” plan to reduce HIV transmission. I don’t know how allowing people to spread disease prevents disease, but then I’m not a doctor or a liberal arts major. No one wants to go the Typhoid Mary route and isolate people with HIV like some kind of HIV…Mary. But we cannot allow to go unpunished behaviour like that of the British hairdresser who ripped condoms to deliberately infect four partners with HIV then sent them text messages such as “Maybe you have the fever cos I came inside you and I have HIV, lol. Whoops!”

Are these the kind of psychopaths the left really wants to defend? Is the next stage of ‘resistance’ rallying for the people that tape used syringes to petrol pumps and bury them in playgrounds?

No One Mourns the Triggered


I don’t know why I should be so shocked that the Yes side of the marriage equality debate in Australia should be so triggered by the fact some people believe marriage is between a man and a woman, it seems some can’t even handle basic biology. In The Australian today is an article by Rebecca Urban “Call to strip gender talk from sex-ed classes” about the push by Damien Riggs and Clare Bartholomaeus of Flinders University in South Australia to rid school sex-ed of ‘gendered’ genital terms.

This Safe-Schools, gender-neutral, men-can-give-birth-too bullshit is nothing new, though I am freshly disgusted by the suggestion that ‘erectile tissue’ should replace the words ‘penis’ and clitoris’. Way to take the joy out of sex. I want to suck your erectile tissue? Ew, no thank you, you most likely serial killer. And you if think men have difficulty finding the clitoris now, wait till he’s groping around in the dark for ‘sensitive nerve endings’. Mr Riggs believes this kind of non-gender specific language will reduce HIV, unplanned pregnancies and coerced sex. More realistically it will take us back to an age when teenagers didn’t about their anatomy or what was happening to their bodies until a baby plonked out in the middle of class.

And anyway, what else do we expect from Damien Riggs, a man who is President of the Australian Critical Race and Whiteness Studies Association, and Clare Bartholomaeus author of such illustrious articles as ‘Girls can like boy toys: junior primary school children’s understanding of feminist picture books’.

No, what rankles my circular flesh anew is the quote from Mr Riggs that:

…”the language of sperm and eggs can produce dysphoria for some young transgender people. It is entirely possible … to speak about combining the two gametes as resulting in a pregnancy, without referring to egg and sperm per se.”
No, no it is not! Screech about queer theory all you want, debate the sex/gender/roles arguments till your face is as blue as your hair. You do you. But when it comes down to the creation of a baby you need a sperm and an egg. That is a fact. And that is what they are called. Sometimes they meet in a test-tube, sometimes, as I intend my child to be conceived, it is inside a poor Indian woman strapped to a table in a Mumbai baby factory. But you need a sperm and an egg. If you can’t handle that fact you are either fucking five and have just learnt about sex, or you need to reassess your life because this world will eat you alive.
N.B Can we take a minute to appreciate Australian Christian Lobby Managing Director Lyle Shelton. He looks like a saucy church daddy with a big erectile tissue hiding in his Sunday best pants.

Rugby and Marriage Equality


It seems Australia looked at the NFL anthem protests tearing apart the sport in the US and thought “yeah, nah, true I’ll have some of that”. It’s the only explanation I can think of as to why we have ended up in the situation where our politicians are debating the merits of Macklemore like it’s a 2012 house party.  Macklemore wants to sing his song Same Love at the NRL grand final to support the push for same-sex marriage here.

Damn social activists. In an update to my last blog post, they are now up in arms about Sportsbet allowing betting on the outcome of the marriage equality vote (Star Observer 28/09/2017). Don’t tell an Australian they can’t bet on anything. Right now my family is betting on when my grandma’s going to die. Beer, gambling, now rugby league, what part of Australian society don’t they feel the need to inject their politics into?

In all fairness though, this isn’t the first time that the NRL has become involved in gay issues: The 1989 NRL promo is the gayest fucking thing I’ve ever seen in my life (Link). It’s more homoerotic than Bromans.

Tina Turner sings over shot after lingering shot of lascivious rippling man flesh gratuitously displayed, whether the players be running:

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.26.41 pm

Or running in groups:

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.27.47 pm

Or licking their lips:Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.28.36 pm


Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.29.07 pm

Having their crotches filmed for no particular reason:

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.30.10 pm

Reclining in the surf:

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.30.39 pm

Or just plain squirting themselves in the face:

Screen Shot 2017-09-29 at 12.32.02 pm

A gay man made this ad, that’s something I would bet on. The whole political commentary/outrage machine is just so exhausting. Let’s just go back to 1989. Let everyone do their own thing. NRL fans get to release their suppressed manly feelings by having a day they can scream homophobic slurs with impunity and the gays get to watch the display of young men with the bodies of gods pinning each other down with their bulging biceps and massive thighs. And if something happens to slip out of the tiny shorts, well that’s just gravy.

Stop over-thinking your liberal guilt and just enjoy the glory that is the Burgess brothers:

George_Burgess,_Sam_Burgess_&_Tom_Burgess_2013 (1)

Especially George:


Google ‘George Burgess nude twitter leak’ and you might just lactate out your eyes. I’m going to end this blog post now before I start posting every sports star dick pic leak and my site turns into *shudder* Queerty. Besides, it’s been a long day and I just want to curl up with a good book.




Betting on ‘No’ to win the marriage equality survey


I may not be your ‘typical’ Australian, but there’s two Australian activities that I know well: Gambling and opposing those who proclaim moral superiority over others. That’s why I’m betting on the No case for same-sex marriage to win the postal vote. Literally betting. Today on Sportsbet I placed $20 on a win for the No vote at odds of 3.00 for a $60 payout.


I may not understand how office footy tipping works, and I choose my Melbourne Cup horse based on the funniest name, but I know politics. I got a sweet little earner on Brexit, and made 2 week’s worth of rent by betting on Trump. Now I’m hoping that the Yes case wins, but have no moral qualms claiming my win and spending it frivolously if it doesn’t.

A month ago I would have bet the other way, but the crazy left, cocooned in its inner-city graphic design studios and campus safe spaces, and  has completely misread the Australian national character and seems intent on alienating as many people as possible. We hate being told what to do and we hate people who think they are better than everyone else. But, as the left is wont to do, every time the Yes campaign gets called out for inappropriate behaviour it doubles down on its self-indulgent moral posturing:

Celebrities and business leaders, poppies that Australians are all-to-ready to cut down anyway, have jumped on the Yes campaign, missing the signals from the US (eg. the declining ESPN and Emmys viewerships) that people are sick of the elites telling them how to think. Australians have been hurting for years with stagnant pay and sky-rocketing living costs. The last thing they want is a lecture in ‘fairness’ from vocal Yes-campaigner Alan Joyce, Qantas CEO, a man whose pay in a year has risen from $12.9 million to $25 million while he slashes his own staff, freezes pay for the rest, and increases ticket prices while reducing service on the national airline.

Churches are being vandalised and religious gatherings are being blocked and disrupted. At a Coalition for Marriage event protesters chanted ‘Crucify Christians’ and unfurled a banner saying ‘Burn churches not queers.’ Not only are they threatening violence, they are equating voting ‘No’, a democratic right, with burning people. I have been disgusted to hear my peers say that voting ‘No’ should be classed as a hate crime.

We have hateful shrews like Genevieve Callaghan getting paid by the tax-payer funded national broadcaster to demand that straight couples put off their weddings until gay couples can marry too (Don’t invite me to your straight wedding until we all have the right to marry). The left says that ‘Love wins’, but apparently love can only happen on their dictated terms.
Protip: Keep being a joyless harpy that uses your friends celebrations to make political points and you won’t be invited to any more weddings ever. Problem solved.

The last straw has been the equality campaign’s door-knocking drive and their mass unsolicited text message yesterday. Australians truly do regard their house as their castle, and we take seriously people violating its boundaries. The number of telemarketers my dad has made cry is testament to that. Inserting yourself into another Australian’s house, either physically or electronically, and especially to push your agenda, is a sure fire way to turn an apathetic ‘Yes’ into an angry ‘No’.

I do not blame those who are questioning the intentions of these door-knockers. Are they really just there to have a friendly chat and remind people to post their votes? Or are they gathering information about the ‘No’ voters in their community for future retribution? People who have expressed support for the ‘No’ case have been harassed, threatened, fired and publically shamed. Make an Australian feel threatened in their own home and you have lost your cause.

The results of the survey will be known on the 15th of November. I’ve already chosen the $60 gingham shirt I’m going to buy on the 16th.

Love is Blind Items

They tell me because they regard me as safe. All of them, they make their disclosures to me in the same spirit that they might tell a castrato or a priest – with a sense that I am so outside the loop, so remote from the doings of the great world, as to be defused of any possible threat. The number of secrets I receive is in inverse proportion to the number of secrets anyone expects me to have of my own. And this is the real source of my dismay. Being told secrets is not – never has been – a sign that I belong or that I matter. It is quite the opposite: confirmation of my irrelevance.

– Zoe Heller, Notes on a Scandal

The above quote sums up how it is that I have come to be burdened with some deep secrets of the LGBT community. I take pride in keeping the confidences of others, even when I suspect their confidence in me is more to do with my position outside the gay community than any real personal trust.

But with the gay activists pushing the ‘Yes’ case for marriage equality in Australia becoming increasingly demented, I’ve decided to loosen my tongue. Why should they claim the moral high ground when their own behaviour is questionable? In my last blog post I talked about my own hypocrisy, now I will reveal theirs:

  • There are the two mid-forties males who the media presents as the poster couple for stable monogamous gay relationships, but who in actuality have an official third in their relationship – an 18 year old. Their secrecy around this is so absolute that they have even installed a secret back entrance in their house so that their establishment neighbours do not see him coming and going. You may recall a similar relationship ending poorly for the founder of Lenard’s Chicken.
  • There is the genderqueer activist who is no longer allowed to be unsupervised with a young female relative after the last time she babysat resulted in the young girl using terms for her genitals that were “incongruent with her stage of sexual development”.
  • There is the gay male leftist power couple seen at every rally kissing as publicly and explicitly as they can – but who privately never touch each other, only having sex with strangers from apps and using the encounters to manipulate each other’s mental health. I call their relationship ‘Who’s Afraid of Virginia Fisting’
  • There is the campus queer activist who has been unofficially warned about their predatory behaviour towards the first-year students, both male and female, but has everyone too scared of their wrath to have it taken any further.
  • There is the polyamory proponent who declares free love for all – but dropped his latest boyfriend instantly when he found out he was ethnically Jewish.

Now, let’s have a little less of the moral grandstanding, shall we?

Bonus secret: Which high-profile AFL player is in a sham relationship to hide his true sexuality? The truth will not shock you.

Matrimony Sanctimony: My own Hypocrisy


What is the marriage equality debate in Australia about? Two people of the same sex getting married? Wrong! In the months since postal vote was announced, and the debate began in ernest, it has become about political correctness, the safe schools program, freedom of speech, boys in dresses and political leadership brinkmanship. Throw in some defaced Captain Cook statues for some intersectional nonsense, because why not at this point? No one comes out of this looking good. Marriage equality has exposed deep divisions in Australia and thrust the LGBT community into the centre of Australian political and social debate where they have been exposed as the vindictive, intolerant group it has become since being taken over by the socialist activists.

The debate is getting ugly, with most of the ugliness, as I expected, coming from the Yes side. At this point the only remaining No voters are those who will forever cling to their traditional ideals. There is no use, or joy, in debating these people, so the masochistic Left has decided to destroy them, while picking up as many victim points as they can along the way. Fake gay hate posters? 20 points to Gryffindor! Their latest target is a doctor who is campaigning for the No side. They have started a petition to deregister her as a medical professional because of her political point of view (amongst the usual death and rape threats). You know you’ve gone to far when even that liberal scream sheet the Sydney Morning Herald thinks you’ve gone too far.

But marriage equality has also exposed my own hypocrisies.

While Australia as a whole may be progressing on social issues, until the marriage equality issue there was reluctance among politicians and the media to discuss ‘gay’ issues (Dear Home and Away, I’m still waiting for that story line about the lithe tanned surfer boy exploring his sexuality in the sand dunes, just FYI). I can’t even remember the last time an LGBT issue was this prominent in Australian discourse or went on for so long. Perhaps the 1997 decriminalisation of homosexuality in Tasmania, which, good lord, was 20 years ago now. But don’t take that as a complete complaint. There’s a degree of comfort in being ignored by society at large and being able to slip in and out of politics as you wish. Being one of those annoying “I’m not like the other gays” gays, I was happy having gay issues stay out of the spotlight because it meant I didn’t have to think too hard about my own hypocrisies and uneasy relationship with my sexuality. Even if it meant I was not taking part in debates that were determining my own future as a gay man. That’s what the activists are there for, right?

Now staying out of politics is impossible. Now the uncomfortable questions I have avoided for so long are demanding answers, especially in relation to my conservative identity. The divisions I created between my gay lifestyle and conservative ideals and the excuses I use to justify the excessive behaviour of each have become increasingly untenable as the community splits over same-sex marriage.

It’s easy to criticise activists as rabble-rousers when you’ve always been too busy or lazy to take part in a protest. And it’s easy to identify with a conservative political party, and shamelessly ignore its darker side, when they are talking about power prices or GST distribution. Less so when they are talking about the intimate details of your lifestyle and comparing it to marrying a bridge. Even with the moderates in charge of the Liberal party, and a Prime Minister in support of it, marriage equality could not go to a parliamentary vote. And who knows how much longer he will be around for (Three more months. That’s how long). If the extreme right of the party takes back the prime ministership their backlash to the excesses of the Yes campaign will be swift and ruthless. And I honestly don’t know how I feel about that.



Going Postal Votes


Today the deflating souffle that is Australia’s leadership voted down the plan for a compulsory national plebiscite on same-sex marriage and instead the measure will go to a non-compulsory postal ballot costing $122 million dollars. Will this process ever bloody end? Attorney-General George Brandis says same-sex marriage will be law by Christmas. I think there’s a greater chance that by Christmas he’ll be nibbling mince pies in the London Embassy.

There are worse ways to decide this, I suppose. As a precedent for the Australian government asking the public for opinion on policy, Mathias Cormann cites the 1974 phone poll of 60,000 randomly selected Australians to ask for their view on changing the national anthem. Try that these days and not only will the participants skew heavily towards the older generation who still have landlines, but you’ll end up with a result of 50 percent for ‘yes’ and 50 percent for ‘fuck off calling me a dinner time, call again I’ll shove the phone up your bloody arse’

So with a postal vote all but certain (today at least), here is a list of pros and cons of this political shirking of duty by democracy:

Con: Waste of my money and time

Fact: That money would have been wasted anyway. And you spent all day yesterday on the couch watching The Bachelor. Shut up.

Pro: Will be run by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, not the Australian Electoral Commission, which means the government does not need senate approval to fund the vote. Hopefully that means that the activists determined to stop the vote will not be able to.

Con: The Australian Bureau of Statistics crashed out on the census and they had five years to plan. This would have to happen in months. Also, the legal challenges have already begun.

Pros: Postal ballots can’t be hacked by the Russians.

Cons: If the ABS stuffs this up they’ll probably blame hackers anyway.

Pro: Avoids ugly scenes at polling stations and removes people who would vote no out of resentment for having to show up.

Con: No plebiscite day sausages.

Pro: Only people who feel strongly about the issue will vote.

Con: This could result in a near 50/50 split similar to Brexit.

Pro: Brexit was the reclamation of sovereignty from a corrupt elitist system whose only goal is to enrich itself through the total control of all aspects of society.

Con: Entitled millennials dressed in the European Union flag.

Pro: There might be enough self-righteous millennials to push the ‘yes’ case over the line for same-sex marriage.

Con: Ugh, millennials.

Pro: Once same-sex marriage gets passed they might shut up.

Con: You know they won’t. One shudders to think what deluded activism they might take up in the absence of the marriage equality fight.

Pro: I wouldn’t have to go to anymore Marriage Equality fundraisers and listen to that terrible choir.

Con: The postal vote only means that parliament gets a free vote and the law might still not get passed.

Pro: There is most likely enough votes to pass marriage equality in parliament and by the end of the year same-sex couples will have the right to marry and enjoy the legal protections that that entails under Australian law.

Con: Regardless of the result, the Liberal government tears itself apart and Bill Shorten becomes our next Prime Minister.

Sigh. Well Liberal Pride Launch will be interesting now!



I’m not crazy, I’m just a little self-diagnosed

Revisit 2013-06-26: City Hall Sunburst with Rainbow Flag

A lack of same-sex marriage is making LGBT people in Australia sick, according to a statement signed by dozens of health professionals and reported on the Star Observer. Weird, I’ve never been to the doctor with an aching I-can’t-get-married or called in sick to work because of a painful green discharge of muh rights. But if we’re all going to be delicate little victims with self-diagnosed maladies that render us incapable of basic adult-functioning, I’m going to take advantage and diagnose myself with the following:

  • Retinal blindness from the technicolour-haired harridans smoking clove cigarettes and posing mournfully outside the artist commune warehouse opposite my apartment building.
  • Hepatitis caught from the one the one that keeps doing a wee behind our post boxes.
  • Sprained tongue from trying to pronounce LGBTQQIAP2, the latest term for the community being pushed by activists.
  • Epilepsy from watching 3 seasons of How To Get Away With Murder in two days and trying to keep track of the dozens of plot twists per episode.
  • Schizophrenia from losing out on a promotion to someone with the last name Beans. Beans.
  • Major depression from watching the Freo Dockers go from playing the 2013 premiership to spending the last few seasons at the bottom of the ladder doing only slightly better than the Gold Coast Suns. Suns.
  • Chronic anxiety from worry that if this continues Nathan Fyfe could go to another team.
  • Complete emotional shutdown due to the dawning realisation that Nathan Fyfe will probably never sit on my face.
  • Erectile Dysfunction after hearing Jared Kushner speak. He went from ‘daddy got me this law internship but I’ll still do anything to get ahead’ to ‘I’ll have to go speak to my manager and probably won’t be back’.
  • Narcolepsy from going home every year at Christmas to see my family and watching cricket for a week to avoid talking to said family.
  • Mesothelioma because Tumblr says we can say we have whatever these days.
  • PTSD acquired after my best friend made out with this guy in the club who was totally looking at me first, because Tumblr also says PTSD is the exact same thing as a drunken bathroom cry.
  • Intermittent explosive disorder that I got from getting fined on the tram the one time, THE ONE TIME, I didn’t touch on my Myki card, even though I was only going four stops and it’s like, youth gangs are rampaging through the city with impunity and cars can mow down pedestrians, including babies and children, across half the city centre before the police deign to stop them, and yet one little student trying to get out of the rain gets four officers instantly interrogating him and accusing him of all sorts! RAGE!

If you question me on any of these you are ableist and should die.

Now please give me some welfare money.

Gay Media Watch: Faces (and abs) of Pride


Pride month is finishing in the northern hemisphere and much has been made of the fact that President Trump has not acknowledged it. But why should he? Is Pride obligatory? Is it some sacred ritual passed down by an ancient cabal of hooded monks like on every episode ever of Relic Hunter? Anyone remember Relic Hunter? That was a great show. They should bring it back.

Anyway, even among the LGBT community not everyone is in on this whole Pride thing.

After all, who does pride really represent? Let’s look at what the gay media shows us. Taking the most visible aspect of Pride Month, the Pride Parade, I have done a quick analysis of representation. And for all the talk of ‘resistance,’ ‘intersectionality’ and ‘inclusion’, the same old dominant images are being trotted out to represent Pride that are used every year: muscled, shirtless, mostly white men.

These are the unscientific and completely biased results of what I found. Don’t complain if the maths doesn’t add up; it’s taken several glasses of Margaret River Cab Sav to get through the hundreds of photos. Also I spent every highschool maths class writing out Simple Plan lyrics and staring at class hottie Paul Filacamo, which was quite an achievement considering he sat directly behind me.

So, here is an overview of the  results. Let’s look at some pages from Queerty:

San Diego Pride offered no shortage of sun-kissed eye candy
Shirtless men: 13 out of 25 photos (52 percent). It does not bode well that this the first photo I see in my research:


Over a million hot guys (and girls!) turned out for World Pride in Madrid
Shirtless men: 14 out of 29 photos. (48 percent) Less than 50 percent, but it should be noted that there were 4 photos of flags and just 2 of women. So much for the (and girls!). And we are already into cartoonishly buff territory. This Instagram post leads the page:


Ok, I’m just taking cheap shots here. These pages are directed towards gay men. Let’s see if Advocate, a supposedly more inclusive website, has more diversity:

111 photos show a united Pride in San Diego
Shirtless men: 59 out of 111 photos (53 percent). At this point I also started counting the shirtless men by hotness using the scientific ‘super buff’ rule. In San diego, 45 out of 59 men photographed are ‘super buff’. There’s even a ripped granddad.

99 photos of Pride making a splash in Honolulu 
Shirtless men: 68 out of 99 photos (68 percent). This is to be expected from a Hawaiian pool party of course, but of these 75 percent are SUPER ripped.

98 photos of San Francisco Pride letting the sun shine in
Shirtless men: 24 out of 98 photos. (24 percent). This was one of the more diverse photo sets, though this is how they lead it:


105 photos of gay pool party season in L.A:
Yeah, nah I don’t have enough self-esteem to handle this page.

I went through a few more on Advocate and found that the photo series that most captures the diversity of the LGBT community is in, of all places, Arkansas. Fat people, short people, old people, clothed people are all represented. Even women! This is a concept so foreign to Advocate that they headline it 103 photos of a wholesome and unique Northwest Arkansas Pride. Ordinary people – how unique and quaint! They even let Jews march, which is a big No on the East coast:


Give me an Arkansas Joe over an LA queen any day.

Dear gay publications: I accept the fact that you are always going to go for what’s sexy. It sells. Hell, I jerked off twice while researching. (It also gives our 10 percent of the male population 42 percent of the eating disorders, but I’ll let that slide for now). But don’t act like Trump is ‘erasing’ queer people by not acknowledging Pride month when we have a big beautiful diverse community unable to be seen because you hide them behind a wall of taught, sweaty golden muscle.

N.B The Huff Post is usually good for a bit of intersectional representation, but I couldn’t get past the first article in Queer Voices, in which they praise someone for soiling themselves.