“Tangled Roots” by Marianne K. Martin— Looking Back

tangled rootsMartin, Marianne K. “Tangled Roots”, Bywater Books, 2014.

Looking Back

Amos Lassen

One of the authors I always look forward to reading is Marianne Martin and she never disappoints. “Tangled Roots”, her new book, is quite a story. We meet Addy Grayson, now an old woman who has lived through a great deal. During the Civil War, she was at the mercy of Sherman; her lover was murdered and she has had to live as a widowed woman in the South where, unfortunately people openly talk about their biases. Addy was lucky that she did not lose her land or her family and she has held on to her secrets. It’s a different world now and Addy is raising her grandchildren in it and she is not sure that she will make it through. The novel is set in 1916 and while the country is not as advanced as it is today, for Addy it is plenty modern. She knows of the fears that her granddaughter Anna faces.

Anna and Nessie, her best friend have dreamed of getting jobs and making enough money to go away to college, learn a career and making a difference in the world. They have actually dared to love each other at a time in history when that was the love that dared not speak its name. Looking at the south at that time, dreams like theirs were forbidden.

Anna is the daughter of very comfortable white landowners. She has everything going for her and her father expected her to marry well. It was also expected of  and demanded by her by the society of the time. Nessie, on the other hand, came from a family who had been slaves prior to the Civil War and she is expected to keep her land and protect her family.

This is a story about having the right to choose and Martin brings us these two women and shows how they come to terms with the times and love each other regardless of the circumstances. As girls, the two were constant companions and as the world was turning upside down with the somewhat newly freed slave population and overt racism and restrictions on women, they grew to love each other. They had to face unbelievable and unacceptable choices which determine how their relationship was going to last. Interracial relationships were heavily frowned upon as were partnerships of two people of the same sex. Anna and Nessie have to find a way to deal with a Southern community that is all too eager to destroy what they have. They can only love each other secretly. They are forced to live according to the way others think they should.

Marianne Martin writes of their passion for each other and as she does, we get a look at how it was back then and there is no comparison to the way we live now. It was a world based on stereotypes and we all know that a stereotype is a commonly held lie. Martin has created two wonderful characters here and they manage to stay strong in what they believe even though the times will not let their love bloom. We get to know both Nessie and Anna and they seem to be very, very real. I believe that many of us have forgotten how things once were for same/sex couples and this is a brutal reminder. What is really interesting here is how Martin brings to civil rights issues together—race and sexuality and then writes about them with carefully chosen beautiful language. She does the same with the emotions of the characters and I found myself swept up in the story—so much so that I did not stop reading until I finished the book.

“Wicked Reflection” by Hank Edwards—A Nameless Threat

wicked reflection

Edwards, Hank. “Wicked Reflection”, Wilde City Press, 2014.

A Nameless Threat

Amos Lassen

 Kirk Stanford dreamt about the day when he will be able to buy his own home but when that finally happened there were a few surprises. As soon as he moved in, strange occurrences took place. Suddenly there were messages on the mirror in steam and he was warned about an unnamed threat. Someone was also trying to break into the house trying to find something yet Kirk has no idea what it is.

Kirk and Damon, his boyfriend, checked into the history of the house and they learned that the former owner was murdered and there were threatening letters written to him by someone  named Sam.  When the person who tried to break in several times returned one more time, Kirk and Damon realized that they might be murdered before they ever learn the truth about the mystery.

I have read Hank Edwards several times and I always enjoy his work and while this is not the first paranormal mystery he has written, I am going to say that it is his best. Just as Kirk and Damon wonder about what is going on, so did I and I had no hints or clues how to solve the mystery. This is one spooky read. This is also a romance and if you have read Edwards before, you know that he is a fine romance writer. Kirk and Damon share their love with the reader.

Kirk did not know that his new house came with a resident ghost. When he saw the messages on the mirror, Kirk was not sure whether he was being warned or being threatened. Then he learns that his neighbor caught someone trying to break into the house and chased him away. Is into wonder that Kirk was beginning to have misgivings?

The next thing was the appearance of a private eye and with that the mirror messages became more cryptic. Kirk really has nowhere to turn except to Damon and the two of them soon are fighting to stay alive and wondering if the ghost could save them. At this point, my summary ends because if I were to continue, I might spoil a “fun” read.

One of the aspects of Hank Edward’s writing that I have always liked in the way he builds his characters. The seem so real that we can imagine them into the room with us. We watch as the strong Kirk of the beginning becomes a shattered person as the novel continues. Just as he is pulled into what is going on, so are the readers and at times we are not sure if Kirk (and Damon) will survive.

There was no way for me to guess what was to happen and so I read the story very quickly sitting on the edge of my seat.

“(A)SEXUAL”— No Sex Please

asexual poster


No Sex Please

Amos Lassen

Let’s face it—we live in a sex-obsessed world and because of that there are many stereotypes and misconceptions, and a lack of social or scientific research  about asexuals; people who experience no sexual attraction. They are struggling to claim their identity. This documentary, “(A)sexual”, looks at the two words “No thanks” as a legitimate sexual preference. We have a community that challenges current paradigms and understandings of human sexuality.  Over the last few years we have seen a huge growth in enlightenment and understanding of human sexuality and sexual preference.  There have been huge strides in technology and these have resulted in people being able to find communities with similar taste and attractions and this has opened our minds on morality, sexuality, and personal relationships. David Jay is a good-looking young man in his 20’s who told his parents that the was asexual and then he built a network of support and information about others who feel the same way.


The definition of an asexual person is one who is not sexually attracted to either the opposite sex or their same gender.  Most of the people who express themselves as such have no desire to go along with society’s expectations of them and have no sexual intercourse at all. The film looks at the  usual assumptions that are thrown around about this group of people and then invalidates them.  There is no proof that they were abused as children or that they are impotent, inexperienced, scared, just out of a bad relationship or just physically incapable.  David Jay tells us that asexuality is not a choice one makes as it is in one’s make up just like being gay is.

 David Jay’s story is fascinating and I do not think that I have ever been so challenged by a movie as I was watching his story. I have never really thought about the impact of a sexual relationship in creating intimacy in a relationship or about the challenges that are faced with sex and the electricity and energy it creates and it becomes clear that our behavioral attributes are part of relationships.

His group is called  AVEN (Asexual Visibility Education Network) and it was started in San Francisco to give the group some visibility, and they chose to participate in the Gay Pride March.   Dan Savage the witty Sex Therapist says that perhaps LGBT should be changed to Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual, Transgendered, Genderqueer, Questioning Women, etc., etc. and now a group wants to add asexual. Neither to Savage or to me does this makes any sense at all. Why would asexuals want to join the Pride march, one that celebrates all the freedoms that gay people have fought hard just to be able to have the sex they want when what they want is the right not to have any sex at all?

A problem I had here was that throughout the film there were constant comparisons of asexuality with homosexuality and the only thing that they share in common is that they are both considered to be deviant from what  society considers as its  norm (whatever that means). Then there is the problem of understanding romance without sexual intimacy.


 David Jay explains that he has devised a strategy for evaluating and building relationships known as ‘the three Ts': time (the amount of time you dedicate to a person), touch (physical or verbal expressions of feelings) and talk (clearly communicating expectations for the relationship). Then it kind of made sense— an asexual can date, fall in love and even marry (as they did during this film) without wanting to have sex with their partner.

 At the end of the film David is interviewed two years later.  AVEN is still growing strong, but David has had a major re-think.  It’s not that he wants to have sex BUT now aged 29 he has come to the conclusion that the fulfilling relationship that he so craves with one person can only be complete and reach intimacy if he has sex.   Including this last interview and seeing this very earnest young man struggle with reality of his beliefs didn’t make us doubt how sincere he is but it certainly is confusing. left me more than confused than him.   

“THE DREAM CHILDREN”— Finding Meaning in a Superficial World

the dream children

“The Dream Children”

Finding Meaning in a Superficial World

Amos Lassen

Steven Evans (Graeme Squires) is an Australian TV personality but he lives a life of superficiality. The sad thing is that he created this himself and now he wants to find some meaning in his life. He has been materialistic  and the fact that he is a known celebrity puts him in a special category. The only time that Steven feels that he gets away from his world is when he goes to the ocean where he has meaningless sexual encounters. Steven does have a partner, Alex, (Nicholas Gunn) who decides that it is time for them to become fathers but Steven is reluctant. However that soon changed when he finds the situation to be filled with love and he soon feels a very strong bond to his new family.

the dream

That changes, however, when an unexpected visitor arrives and a series of events pushes Steven and his family into a situation of loneliness, grief and self-destruction. As a celebrity, Steven was is very hot and in demand and both men and women love him. He has a secret that only Alex, his biggest fan knows and partner knows. However, Steven knows that if he wants to continue in his career, he must remain in the closet totally.

Because of having to deceive everyone both Alex and Steven are not happy and they search for ways to deal with this. Steven does so by having anonymous sex with strangers and Alex  throws himself completely into his project of building a new home for himself and Steven on the beach. Then at a meeting with his architect, Alex changes the house design to include a nursery.  This throws Steven off but once he eventually realizes that Alex is really serious about starting a family, he slowly accepts it.

There is one problem though. At the time the film takes place (early 2000’s), gay adoption was not yet legal in Australia and neither was gay marriage. Alex met a very pregnant young woman, Nerine, who is having a hard time financially and does not want to keep her baby. He and Steven are willing to pay for it and Nerine, while apprehensive of giving her baby to two gay men, agrees to sell them her child. They name him Sammy and he becomes an integral part of their lives.

the dream2

We get a sense of the happiness that has come the two men until a couple of years later when Nerine turns up at their home with a very rough companion and Steven’s and Alex’s world is turned upside down.

The film is directed by Rob Chuter, a noted Australian director and he chose not to downplay the passion about the subject matter, and  he reminds us  of how very difficult some situations were, and still are, for same sex couples. The two leads are both excellent and buff enough to participate in naked sensual lovemaking scenes, but that they are both very talented well-known Australian actors. Make sure you have tissues handy; there is a lot of emotion in the film.

“THE WAY HE LOOKS”— Opens Nationwide on November 7, 2014





Starring Ghilherme Lobo, Fabio Audi and Tess Amorim

Opens Nationwide on November 7, 2014

View Trailer
YouTube Trailer: http://youtu.be/rcb0VnB2vnQ
Vimeo Trailer: https://vimeo.com/104667446

Winner of the FIPRESCI Prize and Teddy Award, Berlin International Film Festival
Winner, Audience Award, Frameline Film Festival
Winner, Audience Award, Outfest 
Winner, Audience Award for Best Feature, NewFest

Set against the music of Belle and Sebastian, Daniel Ribeiro’s coming of age tale, THE WAY HE LOOKS is a fun and tender story about friendship and the complications of young love. Leo is a blind teenager who’s fed up with his overprotective mother and the bullies at school. Looking to assert his independence, he decides to study abroad to the dismay of his best friend, Giovana. When Gabriel, the new kid in town, teams with Leo on a school project, new feelings blossom in him that make him reconsider his plans. Meanwhile, Giovana, grows jealous of this new found companionship as tensions mount between her and Leo.
96 Minutes • Drama • Not Rated • In Portuguese with English Subtitles





“BEAUTIFUL BY NIGHT”– Older drag performers in San Francisco— A New Documentary

“Beautiful By Night”

Older drag performers in San Francisco


 “Beautiful By Night” by James Hosking is a 30-minute documentary that focuses on  three older drag entertainers at Aunt Charlie’s Lounge in San Francisco’s Tenderloin. It’s an intimate look at Olivia Hart, Collette LeGrande, and Donna Personna.

Starting out with how they transform themselves from middle-aged men into lip-syncing divas, it then follows them to Aunt Charlie’s for their evening performance. It’s a great look at people who are still holding to the drag ideas of the past, before the sharp and rather arch performers of today took over. It’s a perhaps more ramshackle style but it has warmth.


“A Gathering Storm” by Jameson Currier– Gay in the South

a gathering storm

Currier, Jameson. “A Gathering Storm”, Chelsea Station, 2014.

Gay in the South

Amos Lassen

When I learned that Jameson Currier’s new book was about a young gay man in the South, I was very anxious to read it. First, Currier never disappoints and is a writer that I look forward to reading. Secondly while I live in the North now, I will always be a son of the South. Currier gives us the story of a hate crime in the South that was inspired by real events.

The novel is set in a small and unnamed town, the home of a university, somewhere in the South. Danny is a student at the school and one Monday night right after school began, he met two guys, Rick and A.J. in a local bar and the three left together. Danny did not come—he was left to die after he had been savagely beaten and tied to a fence. He was found until the next day and in addition to his wounds he suffered from exposure and was taken to the hospital. It did not take long for the news to spread and soon the town was deluged with media people and the news spread quickly to the entire country. I am sure that this story sounds familiar to many who remember what happened to Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming and there are other similarities as well but what struck me the most was that Currier actually began this book some ten years ago before the Internet was quite as popular or fast as it is today and I will write of that a bit later. Currier does tell us in his introduction that the Shepard case was the initial inspiration for this book.

The novel opens with the crime that indeed resembles the Shepard scenario and then two different stories that come together follow. One of the stories deals with how the crime affected the people in the college town and the other relates what went on during Danny’s lost day of life. As we read we become aware of the way Danny’s story changes during the week and we see how is community deals with the story, how it is viewed by the media and by the others as they understand the story and then use it for whatever purpose they might have.

I want to be clear in that this is not just another telling of Danny’s story—it is much more. We hear from Danny’s family and his friends, by those who perpetrated the crime, by some of Danny’s schoolmates at the university and by those who were affected by the crime even though they had never made Danny. We get details that we might not otherwise had known. For me, this is what makes this book special—Currier tells us about how the community was affected immediately afterwards and what in the community allowed it happen in the first place. Because the community was small, there were secrets that might otherwise have never come out and the myth of life in a small town falls apart.

The effect of technology certainly played an important part in the news getting out. Moving ahead to today when we get news almost immediately, we can only imagine how this would be handled. Perhaps the greatest difference would be how something that was a big news story one day becomes almost forgotten two days later when another story takes it place. We see something else here and this is how the news of the crime affected individuals and the way that they reacted to it.

I remember all too well how we reacted to the Shepard case and then little by little the picture changed but not right away. When I lived in New Orleans I was friendly with two guys from Laramie who told me a completely different version of what happened to Matthew Shepard that was far from what everyone else heard. Then in the last two years, another book was written that reinforced the story that I heard but the author came under severe reprimand for having published what he did because it was at odds with the “accepted” hate crime interpretation. Jameson Currier shares with us in his “Author’s Note” that he indeed did research to write this novel and further reminds us that this is a work of fiction. Details have been changed and we certainly get a much more emotional read than if this had been nonfiction. There is a lot to be experienced here and Currier tells his story with style, grace and his traditionally beautiful prose and this is a story we need to hear, fiction or otherwise.

What is important to note is that even though Currier set his book in the South, it could have happened anywhere. Currier organized the book so that chapters go back and forth between the story of what happened to Danny and what happened afterwards. Danny knew and accepted that he was gay but he was dismayed that it would be impossible to find romantic love in his small town and it would be just as hard to be out about his sexuality.

Currier chose the present tense for the story and that makes it so very real for the reader. He also looks at the lives of A.J. and Rick and this adds something new to the story.

This is not an easy read but then it is never easy to read about hate. Yet this is something that we must be aware of so that if it happens again, we know how to deal with it. Some of it is very hard to read and that it why it has taken me so long to sit down and write about it. Death is permanent and we do not want to see anyone wind up that way because of unnecessary hatred.

“The Golem of Hollywood” by Jonathan and Jesse Kellerman— A Supernatural Mystery


Kellerman, Jonathan and Jesse. “The Golem of Hollywood”, 
Putnam Adult, 2014.

A Supernatural Mystery

Amos Lassen

The story of the Golem of Prague seems to be a story that will last forever—each new generation is taken with it. The Golem was a creature fashioned by a sixteenth-century rabbi to protect his congregation and it is now lying dormant in the garret of a synagogue or so was thought. It appears that the Golem is no longer.

When detective Jacob Lev awakes one morning, he is confused and befuddled. He thinks that he picked up a beautiful girl in a bar the night before but he can’t really remember anything more about it and she is suddenly gone before he realizes it or has a chance to ask a question. This is but a minor mystery when we consider his new case. He is sent to investigate a murder scene high up in the Hollywood hills. He has received a new assignment to a Special Projects squad, one he did not know ever existed. No body could be found and all that was there was a head, unidentified, on the floor of the house. Burned into the wooden kitchen counter was the word “justice” written in Hebrew.

This case will take Lev on quite a journey—Los Angeles, other parts of America, London and Prague and it will test all that he has learned and believed. Jonathan and Jesse Kellermans (father and son) give us a book that is part mystery, part folklore, part fantasy, and part biblical history lesson. There are parallel stories and we meet the following characters: Jacob Lev, a discredited alcoholic former LAPD detective, busted to traffic patrol, the family of Cain and Abel, Jacob’s father Sam, rabbinic and Kabala scholar who is dealing with the memory of Jacob’s bi-polar (schizophrenic) artistic mother, a mysterious faction of the LAPD, calling themselves “Special Projects,” that mysteriously enlists Lev to solve a bizarre case and then there are giant bugs, the Golem of Prague and Rabbi Loeb/Loew who created the Golem back in 1580

Lev is given a credit card, a computer, some forensic assistance, and instructions to solve the case. As he moves to begin his investigation so does the Cain and Abel family. Lev travels though Hollywood, to Prague and beyond, hunting down the perpetrator(s) of the crimes and the mysteries behind them. Actually solving the crime is no problem—it is how Lev solves it. The story begins in the present and we learn that Lev had once been a religious Orthodox Jew who is now an agnostic. Because of his religious background he is put on the case and then the action of the story moves back in time to the Bible and to the story of Cain and Abel. In fact the entire book moves back and forth in time.

 There are chapters about Lev, his police work and personal life and then there is the Biblical story and then there is the story of the 16th century Jewish mystic, the Maharal of Prague, and his legendary golem. It does help if you know some of the Jewish background but it is not really necessary.

So we have these story lines going on and eventually they merge but much later. Lev’s story is straightforward and cleverly printed on white paper while the biblical story of Cain and Abel is printed on pages with a tint. In this way, it is possible, but not recommended, to read each story separately.

 The Detective Lev story is presented to the reader on white pages. The story of Cain & Abel story comes to us on white paper which has a kind of misty tint to the pages. If you wanted, you could read the stories separately because the white pages stand out clearly from the tinted pages.

The two stories take place in cultures which are entirely different from each other and which are separated by thousands of years. Both are excellent reads with great dialogue, plot and characters. Then we add the Golem story which does not come together with the others until the very end. There were moments when I admired the ambition of the authors but then were also moments when I felt that this had to be one of the most ludicrous books I have ever read. Here we meet a cop who at 31 one years old is washed up in his career, has been married and divorced twice, a Harvard dropout and a drinker. But he is also a Jew, albeit a lapsed one and we do not find too many Jewish cops (in California anyway). Because of this, he gets a special assignment and our story begins. And this is also where I stop summarizing and chide you to get a copy and have a great time reading this book.

“Parting Ways: Jewishness and the Critique of Zionism” by Judith Butler— Judith Butler Has Her Say and Falls from the Ivory Tower

parting ways

Butler, Judith. “Parting Ways: Jewishness and the Critique of Zionism” (New Directions in Critical Theory), Columbia University Press, 2012.

Judith Butler Has Her Say and Falls from the Ivory Tower

Amos Lassen

Judith Butler was one of my heroes when I was both a graduate and undergraduate student. But then Butler took a turn and lost many who loved and respected her. I am so reminded of what happened to Hannah Arendt and how she was left alone after having done so much academically. Butler, however, is a much more serious case. She is a critic of political Zionism and she maintains that it uses illegitimate state violence, promotes nationalism (dud!) and state-sponsored racism. She looks at various thinkers— Edward Said, Emmanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Primo Levi, Martin Buber, Walter Benjamin, and Mahmoud Darwish and then gives her new political ethic which while indeed political is not in any way ethical. She has decided to dispute Israel’s claim to represent the Jewish people. She tries to show that a narrowly Jewish framework cannot suffice as a basis for an ultimate critique of Zionism. She then “ promotes an ethical position in which the obligations of cohabitation do not derive from cultural sameness but from the unchosen character of social plurality”.

She looks back at the arguments of Zionist thinkers and disputes the specific charge of anti-Semitic self-hatred often leveled against Jewish critiques of Israel. Her new political ethic rests on a vision of “cohabitation that thinks anew about binationalism and exposes the limits of a communitarian framework to overcome the colonial legacy of Zionism”. Her ideas are drawn from Edward Said and Mahmoud Darwish and form an important point of departure and conclusion for her engagement with some key forms of thought while derived in part from Jewish resources are always in relation to the non-Jew.

Butler looks the rights of the dispossessed, the necessity of plural cohabitation, and the dangers of arbitrary state violence, showing how they can be extended to a critique of Zionism, even when that is not their explicit aim. Further she revisits and affirms Edward Said’s late proposals for a one-state solution within the ethos of binationalism. Butler presents a startling suggestion: “Jewish ethics not only demand a critique of Zionism, but must transcend its exclusive Jewishness in order to realize the ethical and political ideals of living together in radical democracy”. It seems that her purpose is to intervene in the current political discourse and give her own Jewish concern about the state of Israel and how it relates to the “other”. She says that it is possible to develop a perspective on Israel/Palestine that is not Zionist and therefore it is easier to assert resistance to the Zionist movement as a Jewish value. In doing so, Butler question what it means to be Jewish and we see that she has no idea of an answer to that question—although she thinks she does.

In effect what Butler does here is attack Israel and its policies as it has been since the  country’s birth. It is very clear that she has adopted to Arab narrative and she accuses Israel of state – violence, willful dispossession and expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs.  What she does  not do is put the conflict in proper historical context. She does not even try to look at Israel’s efforts of peace with her neighbors. She also does not consider the constant and repeated that Israel has suffered from those who wish to destroy the country (and at all costs). I am quite sure that Butler derived some happiness with the latest attacks by Hamas against Israel. Hamas clearly states that it wants to see all Jews wiped off the face of the earth and that would also include Butler herself. She says that the constant threat is minimal yet she does not argue for the expulsion of the Jews of Israel as other anti-Zionists do. Her preference is for one-state solution and she believes that if that were to happen, then social equality would prevail and become the rule. As I look at America today from my home in Massachusetts, one of the states that does maintain some semblance of social equality, I think about those Americans living in Arkansas and Mississippi who have never experienced any kind of equality much less social.

Butler here relies on Jewish thinkers of the past Hannah Arendt, Primo Levi, and Walter Benjamin to explain this concept. Two of the other thinkers she relies upon, Edward Said and Mohammed Darwish want to see the State of Israel gone. as sources for her thought. Her thought, along with theirs, delegitimizes the Jewish state.

She also goes back to Hannah Arendt but she needs a refresher course on her. Arendt worked to send refugees in France to Israel , and told her great friend Mary McCarthy before the Six- Day War that the one public tragedy which would cause her greatest pain was destruction of Israel. Interesting that she would not include this but then it goes against her thinking. Has she also forgotten that Arendt was vilified by Jews after her thoughts on Eichmann were made public? Of course Butler has Sarah Schulman on her side but Schulman is little more than a nasty voice from an anti-Semitic Jew. Schulman always needs a cause and this year’s is Palestine—next year she may rail against breakfast cereal—the cause makes no difference but Schulman must rabble rouse about something otherwise she loses reason to exist.

Butler has distorted the thought of some Jewish intellectuals but she has done something even worse— she sides with and defends the enemies of Israel at the time that Israel’s existence is in great danger with the existence of the universal against the country. What is interesting is that she, like Schulman, holds on the being Jewish while other Jews of the radical left have abandoned their religion. This, for me, is the most offensive thing of all.

Butler (and her advocate Schulman) are totally ignorant of the history of the Jewish people and their relation to the land. She does not let any facts hinder what she has to say or her agenda which is fiction. There was never a Palestinian Arab nation in the Middle East. She ignores that.

Butler is an obvious Jewish anti-Semite. Here this is not a name but a disease. She cannot see reality and. comes across as being somewhat mentally off. Israel cannot be separated from the Jewish people.

 Trying the “separate” Israel from the Jewish people has been tried before and it has failed miserably before. What I do not understand is why Butler and her kind feel they have to espouse what they think here in the United States. Would they not be more comfortable in Gaza where there are many like them? For Schulman that would be an impossibility as she is an out lesbian and we are all aware at how Islam deals with sexual “deviants”. Butler is protected here in America and she can say whatever she wants.

I do not understand how American universities hire these people and allow them to spew their hatred. These are the minds that will teach future generations of Americans—we can only hope, that for once, they do not listen. Is it wrong to hope that she would part ways with us like her title suggests?

Below is some biographical information about Judith Butler—such a wonderful mind that is used for no gain.

 “Judith Butler is Maxine Elliot Professor in the Departments of Rhetoric and Comparative Literature and the co-director of the Program of Critical Theory at the University of California, Berkeley. She received her Ph.D. in philosophy from Yale University and was recently awarded the Andrew Mellon Award for Distinguished Academic Achievement in the Humanities. Her many books include The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere (with Jürgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, and Cornel West); Who Sings the Nation-State?: Language, Politics, Belonging (with Gayatri Spivak); and Is Critique Secular? (with Talal Asad, Saba Mahmood, and Wendy Brown)”.

“Homosexuality and Masturbation Refuted” by Prof WA Liebenberg— WTF???????

homosexuality and masturbation refuted

Liebenberg, WA Prof. “Homosexuality and Masturbation Refuted”, Amazon Digital Services, Inc.. 2014


Amos Lassen

We live in a world where anyone who wants to write a book about anything can do so and Amazon will sell it. How this piece of trash ever got published I will never know nor will I understand. Let me give you the blurb in the author’s own words:

 “Most homosexuals and their heterosexual supporters argue that homosexuality is an inborn condition, and one, moreover, that is no less valid than heterosexuality. They maintain that to discriminate in any way against a person because of his or her sexual orientation is the moral equivalent of discrimination against a person on the basis of colour or religion; that is to say, “rubbish” plain and simple. Jewish law also clearly prohibits male masturbation.” (Does anyone see any connection between these ideas?).

 “I keep hearing people say that YHWH hates sin but loves the sinner. Is it really what the Bible teaches? There are of course plenty verses in the Bible about how God hates the sinner. (Where are they?)  It is mind boggling how quick Christians can ‘select’ certain verses of the Old Covenant and then leave the rest out which as they say “does not apply anymore”…” (Can you give examples?)

 “The study proves: (says who?)

• Sexual relations/acts between homosexuals are clearly forbidden by the Torah. Such acts are condemned in the strongest possible terms, as abhorrent. (They are? Chapter and verse please—at least he spelled abhorrent correctly).

• The sin of sexual relations/acts between homosexuals is punishable by death by YHWH’s standard. (It is? Chapter and verse please)

• Homosexuals and pro-gay church leaders grossly misinterpret Scriptures concerning the relationship between Jonathan and David to promote homosexuality in the Bible. (They do?)

• Masturbation is forbidden in the Bible. (Chapter and verse please—what is written here seems to be part of the author’s masturbatory fantasy).

• YHWH hates the wicked and sin. (Define “wisked and sin” as YHWH [who?] does).

 Brace yourself, this booklet will challenge you!” (I am not challenged but I am amazed at your stupidity, however).

Yes indeed—you will be challenged—I am challenged to find the jackass who wrote this book and tell him a thing or two. I have no idea what Torah he looked at but it was not the one I read everyday. I have never read such garbage in my life and this man claims to be a professor? Why am I even bothering with this poor excuse of humanity? He is a lonely turd sitting on the toilet of his own life.

I have posted this in the gay fiction category.