Michael’s Story On Hold – Ending to be decided by the legality of same-sex marriage in Australia

Same-sex marriage is a divisive issue here in Australia at the moment, with a plebiscite a real possibility (money better spent on igloos in FNQ).

It almost feels like we’re moving towards a make or break kind of situation and I want the ending of Michael’s Story to reflect what unfolds, so please bear with me.

Alien Abduction – Science Fiction

Along with LGBT fiction, I also dabble in other genres. Have just published a science fiction called “Nash: The Abduction” for anyone interested.

Also, Michael’s Story is getting there. I wanted it out sooner, but work is my priority at this stage. Definitely before the end of the year, though. Work will quieten down as winter rolls in, so I’ll be much better placed to get it finished.

Am I a horrible person?


(Be honest. I welcome the harsh reality and differing points of view)

When I look at the Syrian refugees on TV, I feel nothing. When I hear the plight of people on the African continent, I feel nothing. In fact, if I had it my way, I’d ban Australia from accepting Syrian refugees and would stop all African aid. Well, maybe not all aid and maybe I’d accept some refugees, but only gays and atheists. Because—though I hate believing it—a lot of people in the Middle East and Africa deserve persecution and endless strife.

For years, gays and atheists have faced severe penalties throughout the two regions. Gays have been lynched, atheists have been thrown in jail and the outrage is mainly confined to outside their borders. The tolerance towards LGBT people across most of Africa is nil. We’re hunted, we’re bashed and we suffer horrendous attacks in the form of governmental legislation, even in places such as Morocco and Egypt, but especially in places such as Uganda and Somalia.

So when ebola hit, I didn’t raise a brow, I didn’t donate money, I simply hoped that the wild populations of ape (gorilla, chimp, etc) managed to pull through okay. I didn’t give a shit about human fatalities. People were sick and dying, I saw them on TV every night, but I switched to something more interesting and quickly forgot about them.

And when it comes to Syria, meh. Just another homophobic country where the people and their attitudes don’t warrant my compassion. In actual fact, a lot of them deserve to suffer the brunt of persecution. Yes, I just inferred that again. A lot of people in Syria and Iraq deserve it. Don’t get me wrong, though, the children don’t, but almost every parent, politician, teacher, whatever, across those two countries that would impede LGBT rights deserves every lost relative, every beheading, every dead fucking wife.

My compassion extends to people that stand up for people that don’t deserve to suffer, and them only. But guess what, gays suffer in every facet of their lives. Their own parents are likely to kill them, not just the terrorists. I know that’s not true of every mother or father, and I know 100% of the population isn’t quite so extreme, but people that hold extreme prejudice are the clear majority and everyone knows it, including Amnesty International who struggle with the backward locals when trying to save LGBT persons.

But let’s not forget atheists. They live in hiding, too, forced to live in countries ruled by morons, and if you’re actually suspected of being one, well, the rule of law dictates execution – and that’s if the thug ‘vigilantes’ don’t drive you out with machetes first.

The views I express above are extreme, cruel and unhumanitarian in nature, but it’s the way I feel and I don’t see them changing anytime soon. I don’t actively wish for these people to suffer and I hope the right people make it out safe, but to all the rest, what goes around comes around and until such time I see change for the better in the lives of minorities in those countries, fuck you.

The fear and persecution faced by ordinary civilians in a town occupied by ISIS, is the same fear and persecution faced by almost every single gay man, woman and child across the entire Middle East and majority of Africa. This is why my compassion doesn’t extend beyond my personal minority. This is why the only refugees I’d accept are from my personal minority. This is why I defy conventional and naive liberal wisdom and meet the hostile attitudes of these medieval factions with cynicism and indifference regardless of what they’re fleeing.

I may feel differently tomorrow, but my compassion is battered to a pulp by the continual hardships faced by LGBT persons at the hands of these people I’m ‘meant’ to feel sorry for. I’m sick of hearing things like Muslim refugees throwing Christians overboard; I’m sick of hearing things like Christian Amnesty workers refusing their duty to help innocent people; I’m sick of hearing things like ordinary civilians rushing in to stone gay men thrown off buildings by ISIS. I’m just sick of these deluded idiots and I don’t want them polluting the liberal west with ideological extremism that seems impossible to counter despite offering them freedom. And I’d be lying if I said that the amount of Mosques popping up all over the country didn’t unnerve me.

They must know the pain of persecution; know what it’s like to be born a person at odds with the people in charge; know what it’s like to have their lives destroyed, their friends killed and their justice miscarried by self-righteous, misguided, ignorant, ideological, cruel and ARROGANT men of a different leaning – and then change for the better, otherwise no one will want them, especially their god, and rightly so. It’s an opportunity for their society to progress.

To conclude, I hate feeling this way and I’m frustrated that I can’t seem to rise above the same selfish and ignorant antics of the people that lead me here – not to mention the antics of the far-right. But the disgusting and glaring hypocrisy of these people seeking refuge is too hard to ignore. And trust me UN, there is NO side to rally, especially as the fall of Saddam Hussein quickly becomes one of the USA’s biggest and most ill-advised mistakes of all time. All it’s achieved is handing extremists the power to not take down these regimes built on Islam but become new regimes built on an even more extreme version.

And just an FYI, culture is no excuse. Human rights are borderless, raceless and non-negotiable. A gay man deserves to be respected and accepted, even if he’s born on the streets of Riyadh.



Further reading. Some quotes and facts to leave you with:

Obama, on his most recent African visit, stressed the importance of gay rights in Africa, to which the President of Kenya, Uhuru Kenyatta, replied: “There are some things that we must admit we don’t share. [LGBT persons] are not really an issue on the foremost minds of Kenyans.” – This isn’t surprising, of course, when surveys show nine in ten people in that region believe homosexual acts, therefore LGBT persons, to be unacceptable. So, do Kenyan’s deserve international aid? I don’t think so. Help is for people willing to change for the benefit of all citizens. Besides, they’re so fucking corrupt, I doubt money would end up being spent on those who need it.

As for where the murder of gay people is legally sanctioned… Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. But even if you look beyond written legislation or countries with no actual legislation regarding the issue, most LGBT persons born across the Middle East and Africa are destined for a life of hell, and I won’t support countries or persons that inflict it upon them #NoAid

By the way, the same countries that generally murder or persecute LGBT persons also murder and persecute atheists. For a laugh (and cry) Google the story of Mubarak Bala.

Here’s another joke, this time brought to you by the former president of Iran:

“In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country,” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at Columbia University in response to a question about the execution of two gay men. “In Iran we do not have this phenomenon,” he continued. “I do not know who has told you we have it.”

The only nations that deserve a helping hand are the ones where there’s an increasing move towards the protection of all citizens, such as South Africa.












Australian Politics: Sophisticated Brutality

Organized Chaos?


I’m losing count of how many prime ministers we’ve had in the years I’ve been alive (mild exaggeration). It seemed like, in my childhood, John Howard would be prime minister forever. Then Kevin happened, then Julia, then Kevin again, then Tony and now Malcolm (in the space of 2-3 years). Australian politics is a brutal, cutthroat affair. Some would say dysfunctional, which it can be. But there’s a silver lining: the Australian public has influence.

In this country, unpopular thugs would find it exceedingly difficult to hold their grip. Because if the public doesn’t like you, goodbye. That’s not to say you were a terrible prime minister. But you’ve taken the baton of false promises, bluff, question skirting, back peddling and passed it on to the next chap.

Why this constant reshuffling isn’t all bad in dot points:

  • Proves little media sway. Left and right leaning media outlets aren’t pressured by the Government. This is the better of two evils.
  • Political foes aren’t shot dead on obscure, dark streets, they’re stabbed in the back in front of the entire nation. We can all see your dirty laundry.
  • Polls win. More Australians would prefer you as PM? Australia has the chance to see if you’re better without having to wait.
  • Legislation still passes. Promised a change? You still have time.
  • This brutal environment doesn’t let you get comfy. The Australian public is your master. You have the job because we put you there, not because you’re a power-hungry thug with a god complex.
  • Dysfunctional, but still functioning.
  • Change sooner rather than later is usually better.

Maybe Australian politics is in a sorry state right now, but look what we’re not… Think Russia, think the GOP, think almost every country across the Middle East and Africa… In this country, our opinion matters. Tony is gone because the Liberals knew that if he wasn’t, losing the next election would be a sure thing (almost). Party funding just isn’t enough to keep you in power (sorry Christian right, sorry big business).

We can bemoan the sorry state of affairs, but it highlights the fact we still have power. A Putin will never run this country. Dirty laundry is hung out to dry in the front yard and the media is free to savage you like a pitbull, which means corruption is a very risky business. This all equates to a more educated public. The media is, perhaps, a little too strong, but the left and right freedom balances it out.

Of note: they all suck anyway. Here’s why in dot points:

  • Pro same-sex marriage at 60 – 70% and growing. Still not legal.
  • Pro Euthanasia at 80% and steady. Still not legal.
  • Pro Islamifcation safeguards. Hard to put figures on it, but Australia says no to Islamifcation, yet Islamic seeds are free to take root (no controls against Islamic immigration).

Majority/ consensus still means nothing despite the Government’s desire to please the nation. The fact euthanasia for the terminally ill is consistently ignored by the two major parties both astounds and infuriates me. It’s why I haven’t voted in the past two elections. I will never support a government that ignores people that are suffering.

Euthanasia – The Ultimate Human Right

If there’s one issue that drives me stir-crazy, it’s euthanasia. To me, there’s nothing more sensible, considerate, humane and justified than assisted suicide, and I find myself incensed with anyone that disagrees. In fact, at my most impassioned, I pray that those who oppose it die in the most excruciating, painful and humiliating ways imaginable. I want their every swallow like razorblades, their every breath exhausting. I want their final moments to be dragged out for months on end, with unimaginable pain not even an entire field of poppies will relieve.

That’s how much I abhor the people that stand in the way of assisted suicide. I hate them with every ounce of my being. They make me sick. Why do they even oppose it? Well, I’m sure it doesn’t come as a surprise that those most vocal in their opposition of euthanasia are pushing religious agendas. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby (England), recently wrote that he, along with members of other religious cults, believed that England’s push to change euthanasia legislation went beyond “merely legitimizing suicide to actively supporting it”.

There are a couple of problems here, first being yet another religious numbskull believing it their right to dictate the rights of everyone including those that don’t share their delusion. Is there anything more annoying? No really, is there anything—ANYTHING more annoying than someone trying to impose their religious dogma on someone that doesn’t share their faith? In my opinion, no. It’s selfish, rude and unbelievably arrogant to assume that your fallacy-ridden, unprovable and scientifically impossible belief system can be forced upon those that aren’t gullible nor stupid enough to believe it. I mean, this isn’t some pastor speaking in front of his own congregation, this is an Archbishop trying to influence the conscience of democratic MPs.

The second problem this Archbishop can’t seem to wrap his head around is that suicide is a right held by all, whether you’re terminal or not. I cop a lot of heat from this assertion, but I stand by it. Let me explain: no one owns us. Not our parents, not our friends, not the state, not even the God these people believe in. We’re the sole determiners of our destiny. Life or death is our choice alone. Am I actively supporting it? No. I don’t believe being dumped by your boyfriend or girlfriend is reason enough to kill yourself, nor is going bankrupt or boredom. In actual fact, I believe suicide to be exceedingly selfish and downright reckless – depending on circumstance. This is where the Archbishop fails to grasp reality. According to his logic/ stance someone committing suicide on account of their relationship woes is comparable to that of a terminally ill patient who’s ready to die. He mightn’t have said that per say, but that doesn’t mean he’s not painting every case of suicide with the same brush while completely ignoring key factors such as quality of life.

Death isn’t pleasant. “How We Die” by Sherwin B. Nuland explains in graphic, yet captivating detail the mechanics of clinical death and what most of us can expect in the lead up, and the truth is that death is seldom peaceful. Whether we’re struck down by a heart attack or stroke, a near death experience can be terrifying and leave those that survive with debilitating cases of PTSD. But in many cases, survivors of such health scares recover and, in a lot of cases, go on to lead happy and fulfilled lives. But what if you’re terminal? What if a change in lifestyle isn’t going to make you better? What if an operation or medical treatment isn’t going to take away the pain and fear? What then?

Here’s the Government’s answer in countries where assisted suicide is outlawed: “Don’t care. None of our business. Anyone that helps end your suffering is liable for criminal prosecution. If, one night, you’re on death’s door, we don’t care that you’re not surrounded by family, we don’t care that it may be in the middle of the night. Death with dignity is a criminal offense and will be treated accordingly.”

I’m not exaggerating. In places where assisted suicide—on the basis of terminal illness and suffering—is illegal, torture is a government sanctioned and endorsed practice. “We’re too good for capital punishment, but we sure as hell won’t put stop to punishing those diagnosed with terminal disease. Die in pain, die without dignity, we refuse to show you mercy, unlike your dog.”

Why isn’t assisted suicide a common legislative process around the world? Poll after poll in my native Australia shows strong support for assisted death for those that are terminal and suffering, ranging consistently in the region of 80% or more. Yet despite our longstanding democracy, the public servants (MPs) of this country refuse to heed the will of the people. Is this a failure of democracy? Are Australians too stupid to decide for themselves? Or, like so many places on Earth, are we hampered by the personal and moral agendas of those that have been placed in a position of power?


Standing in the Way

Those that oppose euthanasia always confer “the line”… where do we draw it? They usually speak on terms of humanity as a whole, that it’s somehow a group decision when it comes to assisted suicide (should it be legalized). But it’s only ever been the decision of those that are dying. The person dying is the sole decision maker and proper legislation can be set in place to ensure that remains the case whatever the situation may be. Allowing these people their right to die doesn’t quash the value of human life. If anything, it empowers it, as it shows compassion, it shows humanity. It shows objectivity in the face of moral dilemma, which has always been a weak point of mankind. We’re too easily influenced by our personal ideology that we forget human rights aren’t ours to delegate how we see fit. And I have yet to hear a convincing argument suggesting otherwise, especially when it comes to euthanasia.

Another tactic common among those that oppose euthanasia is to stir imagery of evil doctors or money-hungry next-of-kin. They envisage a world in which legislation does not exist or work to protect those most vulnerable, and in some cases it doesn’t. But you don’t subject everyone to disadvantage or misery just because of the inevitable instances where bad, scheming people do bad scheming things, especially when criminal law is available to bring them to justice.

People Are Hurting

I can’t stand suffering. I can’t stand it. So if something can be done about it, then it’s our duty to make it happen, but only in a way that ensures doctors, loved ones and the terminally ill are protected.

I’m forever saying: “I’m not scared of death, I’m scared of dying” and that’s true of so many. Assisted suicide gives the terminally ill the ability and power to seek a more peaceful end, one they can spend in the company of their loved ones, one stripped of anxiety.

I’m sick to death of misguided ‘morals’ standing in the way. These people hold onto an ideology that’s in conflict with reality. But guess what, death is an earthly matter. If you’re religious or don’t believe in euthanasia, fine, suffer until the very end, but don’t you dare impose your ideology on others. People have the right to shag who they want, believe what they want and die when they want, and any legislation that can safeguard these rights within reasonable and rational parameters can not and must not be delayed, obstructed or prevented.

Weaponized Children

“A child deserves a mother and a father”


The above statement is now the preferred term when arguing against gay marriage. It’s the go-to statement for lobbyists/ activists that fear backlash and reprisal. ‘I’m not prejudice, I’m only thinking of the children’. Well, isn’t that nice. You’re thinking of the children like any honorable citizen would. You’re often a member of a religiously affiliated organization, but you’re untouchable now that a child’s wellbeing is your main objective.

Of course, as we all know, gay wedding ceremonies double as transition ceremonies whereby one of the grooms/ brides to be spontaneously grows the reproductive organs of the opposite sex in order to fall pregnant during their same-sex engagement. The groom or bride does retain the form of their original gender as to not alter the definition of their same-sex marital status, and soon gives rise to the inevitable event that happens with every marriage: childbirth. Because if they didn’t, their commitment would be deemed null and void and essentially pointless. Marriage after menopause? Pointless. Remarriage after the kids have left the nest? Pointless. Marriage where neither party wants children? Pointless. Marriage between two or more infertile peoples? Pointless. Marriage between two people of the same sex? You got it, pointless.

So what is marriage? Is it a commitment between a man and a woman? Is it a commitment between two people? Is it a commitment between one man and multiple women? Is it the commitment between one man and one child bride? Or is it the commitment between one woman and multiple men?

LOL, you obviously knew I was joking about that last option. What a joke that would be. That shit ain’t legal anywhere, including the polygamous African and Middle Eastern regions of the planet (three cheers for the everlasting double-standards of the human race). Anyway, my point is that marriage differs and is as much a cultural practice as it is a legal one. It’s a celebration of commitment to one’s spouse(s) that’s ultimately ratified by the government. Emphasis on the word ‘government’, not church, government. And if you’re a citizen of a democratic nation, they work for you and uphold your rights (or are meant to).

But that begs the question: is marriage a gay right? It hasn’t been recognized in the past, nowhere in modern history was same-sex marriage ‘a thing’ until 2003 when the Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalize it, Belgium next. So how can gays be so arrogant as to assume the longstanding tradition between a man and a woman extends to them? In my opinion, sexual orientation. Marriage is hard enough as it is if divorce rates are any indication, so why complicate if further by marrying someone who’s not interested? Because a society that doesn’t approve of nor recognize the LGBT community is a society where the LGBT community is forced into hiding, and while in hiding, they will marry those of the opposite sex and, in many cases, lead a double life. That in itself directly damages society. Also, for much of modern history, people didn’t get it. Homosexuality was a deviance and ultimately a choice. Same-sex marriage didn’t exist because society was ignorant and in the dark ages of understanding. Marriage is steeped in heterosexual tradition for that very reason: selfish ignorance.

With all those obvious points out of the way (obvious to the Netherlands, Belgium, South Africa, New Zealand, Canada, etc), here’s another: Some will always believe that gay people don’t make good parents, but I know they can, and I intend to be one despite the legality of my marital status. A wedding ring doesn’t dictate the function of my reproductive organs nor does the government dictate my reproductive rights. There are multiple studies on the children of gay families that prove time and time again that they’re just as well-adjusted and psychologically healthy as those of traditional families if given the chance, so the anti-equality bandwagon are going to have to find another weapon in their arsenal. Because if they truly care about the wellbeing of children, tackle the ice epidemic or start on a minority group who, statistics-wise, nurture a worse environment than gay people have ever shown to provide (African American, Australian Aboriginal, the poor and single-parent households, for example. Not very PC to mention, but if child welfare is their paramount, best start at the bottom and work their way up).

Believe it or not, I was a kid once. In fact, most of the LGBT community were. And for many of us, this hostile and negative environment really harmed our wellbeing and psychological health, which probably accounts for the disparity in suicide rates between us and our hetero peers (aka, friends and family). I know I would’ve loved to have been exposed to an LGBT-friendly environment, but was instead exposed to the onslaught of heterosexuality. Funny that I still turned out gay despite society’s best efforts to make sure I didn’t, which—to me—appears to be the anti-gay bandwagon’s ultimate objective.

For some, life-long monogamy is an impossible achievement. But that doesn’t make it any less wonderful, so it should be legal for those who choose to make it their goal, which—for a community still reeling from the HIV epidemic—can only be a good thing.

The LGBT community transcends all races, economic classes, cultural divides and borders, proving itself to be a product of mankind, NOT the Western World. And if the government wants to ratify monogamous commitment, it should be a right all citizens can strive for. So let’s cut the lies and deception and foster a society where straight women don’t fall victim to doomed marriages, where straight men aren’t with women who can’t stand the thought of being with them, and where a gay person can feel safe and comfortable enough to be honest with themselves and therefore more able to commit to a relationship they’re biologically primed for.

“Civil partnership” is not a good compromise. It’s a bureaucratic bitch-slap completely devoid of romance and reeking of the same double-standard bullshit that plagues the human race. And given the multitude of evidence proving the capability of same-sex parents, the fact LGBT persons pay tax and the fact gay marriage will help tackle the issue of infidelity by fostering an environment in which people marry for the right reasons instead of social expectation, same-sex marriage is a right that everyone should be entitled to. Children just aren’t a good enough reason to deny it, especially when children aren’t even the envisioned future for many of those in the LGBT community seeking to wed.

(I intend to make a blog post entirely devoted to LGBT parenting covering all sides of the argument, including my own personal misgivings at the thought of raising a child as a gay man. So make sure to subscribe if you wish to be notified of new blog posts)

The Jihad Joke

Jihad: the struggle against non-believers, or war in the minds of extremists. This is a wonderful example of religious arrogance. What I believe is the truth and any of those who contest me or do not share my beliefs is an infidel, is a sinner, is destined for hell, is threatening me, IS WRONG. Muslims, converts especially, have one hell of a nerve if you ask me. They’ve created an enemy out of thin air and expect the other side to join the fight in order for them to triumph.

Take for example ISIS, the most extreme example of jihad. Anyone who doesn’t believe or practice their extremist ideology is NOT human. Their lives have NO value. They’ll happily torture/ mutilate/ kill Christians, atheists, gays and OTHER MUSLIMS. Why? Because their imagined/ interpreted mythology permits it. Mythology with no scientific backing whatsoever. It’s this kind of shit that floors atheists, agnostics and secularists alike. This brutal arrogance isn’t human, it can’t be.

But what kind of environment leads to this augmented reality, this seemingly nonsensical behaviour? One in which questions are frowned upon or whose answers come directly from the source in question. Take for example this comment: Jesus’ teachings are proof of the creator. Now, any uncompromised adult with a brain will be able to figure out why this is a fallacy. But some can’t, usually those raised in faith-mad households, because they’ve been taught/ conditioned to accept their belief is the foundation of the proof. This, quite frankly, is a heinous and fatal human error with disastrous consequences.

Of course, the threat of execution is enough to keep people believing. For example, anyone who is Muslim or simply born to one and then denies the teachings, is a murtadd – which is punishable by death in Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen and various other countries that’ve adopted Islam as the state religion. So how would a Christian, who asserts Jesus as saviour and the only way into Heaven, justify the fact anyone who remains Muslim in the face of apostasy is destined for hell? Arrogance, if you ask me. More bloody arrogance and a total disregard of human life.

But now we get to the true struggle, the genuine struggle, the ONLY struggle, and that’s Muslims alright, those wishing to question, contest or LEAVE the faith. It’s already a crime punishable by death. But they’re not the only ones to face such hardship. No, this is a struggle faced by ANYONE who rejects Islam, those who aren’t or never were religious included. It might be easy to let theists believe whatever they want, but when they’re a bully in the playground wanting to start the fight, what do you do? What do you do when their “struggle” isn’t a struggle but an act of war, a provocation, a demand of submission and conversion? Do you ignore the senseless brutality and murder? Do you ignore every beheaded Christian, gay, educated woman? Or, do you fight back and let them have the fight, the battle, the war that has them frothing at the mouth in anticipation?

Extremism is poison; ultra conservatism is the same thing, and while these attitudes remain—fester, nothing will change. All I know is war/ fighting will never help. It only strengthens allegiances and fosters resentment and hatred for the enemy, who is, a lot of the time, created out of thin air based on unsubstantiated fallacies or personal prejudices – and that’s one of the major themes in my gay teen series. It highlights the fact an enemy is made out of people that don’t consider you one. But that’s what it’s like in this world sometimes… “difference” is assumed to be an attack, a divergence; questioning is blasphemy and a free, critical mind will get you killed–or worse: silenced.