In 1993, the organizers of the gay rights March on Washington sent out pamphlets to participants pretty much ordering them into polos and khakis. The marchers were told not to embarrass the organizers of the march with flashy dress, or by dressing in drag, or other gender atypical attire. The marchers were supposed to look and act like mainstream suburban conservatives. The organizers didn't want to scare middle America. There was to be no radical Queer Nation liberationist sentiments expressed by the marchers. We were all going to be a nice amalgamated cohesive unit that sold well in Peoria.

This is the attitude that has taken hold of the mainstream gay rights movement. Play it safe. Be "softly sweet" boys next door that would be great housesitting while the Jones were away on their European vacation. So, even though 40% of homeless youth are GLBT, the biggest issue to the mainstream gay rights organization is the one thing that really makes gay people perfect for suburbia: marriage.

Don't get me wrong, I fully support marriage equality. But why is that the biggest gay rights issue? Why has the wealthy elite white gay males that run the gay rights organizations ever done a damned thing for gay homeless youth --- you know the ones who have no one to love them? The marriage fight is, after all, for those who have someone who loves them.

Back when I was a teen rock music was cool. The lead singer of the band would wail away with the power of a god in his vocals, the guitarist held his guitar down around his knees --- Eddie Van Halen style making the thing look like an enormous phallus. and it was meant to. And they had awesome outfits. None of these guys looked like they walked a cul de sac. They were sexy, crazed, maniacal entertainers who just blew you away, and the press would say things like "the girls all want to be with them and the boys wanted to be them." This was just the courteous way of saying these rock gods oozed so much sex that even boys got a sexual thrill from them.

And there was a great deal of erotoplay between lead singer and lead guitar. That's right --- sure as the sun would come up --- at a rock concert in the 80s, male on male sex play was on display. It was time for the guitar solo, and the singer had nothing better to do so he's slide over on his knees at the feet of the guitarist and swirl his head around at the giant guitar-phallus. Talk about simulated oral sex!

One bit of criticism that I hate about music today is the phrase: "pop excess." It's uncool and self-indulgent to be excessive with your music making today. Queen would be loathed today. You can't find more excess than Bohemian Rhapsody. You can't find more flash than Freddie Mercury strutting about at the end of a concert wearing a giant crown, holding a scepter in one hand (another phallus), and long bright royal red cape flowing behind him. Excess was effing awesome!

Then the 80s ended, and at least among white male musicians, something changed.

I love Kurt Cobain and his music. Nirvana was effing awesome! But I hated what he did stylistically to rock music. I turn on MTV in the early 90s and there was this awesome but hardly decipherable driving tune --- Smells Like Teen Spirit. Didn't understand a word that came from Cobain's mouth. But something was wrong here. This was a rock band and they were wearing tee shirts. A tee-f--ing shirt?

Elvis didn't wear a tee shirt. It's rock music. It's glorious. It's dramatic. It's unnerving. Will you please dress to match? This concert ticket costs a hundred effing bucks --- I want to see costumes! Wear a tee shirt on your own time.

Before you knew it guitarists were no longer wearing their guitar around the knees. All in the name of "keeping it real." Real? Rock music isn't real! It's out of this world. It's, pardon my stealing a phrase, "for your entertainment."

Rock music stopped being sexy too. It was toned down. It was down to earth. It wasn't sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll. It was just drugs and rock-n-roll. Actually now it's just feels like being drug down. But's its safe and friendly, and well behaved. That's not rock music is it?

It's as though the same memorandum that the mainstream gay rights organizers sent out to their marchers were sent out to rock musicians all across the planet.

Dear rock musicians, don't do anything that might lead someone to think you act gay.

Did you know that there's actually a website dedicated to teaching gay men to act straight. No, I don't mean Exodus International or any such gay reparative therapy offerings from right wing Christians. I mean a website by gay men for gay men. It's called straightacting.com. I tell you no lie.

This is an eternal struggle. Not just within the gay community or other minority communities, but throughout the history of human civilization. What is the best way to advance the cause of humanity? Of civilization? Well, for starters, we should all dress and act real nicely, we should all conform to a rigid set of mores, you know, assimilate and be a nice amalgamated cohesive unit that plays well in Peoria. Play it safe.
There are two atrocious stereotypes of gay men. Both are equally dehumanizing and while they are opposites of one another, they are effectively, just the flip side of the same coin.

One is the propaganda put out by the likes of the Family Research Council, whose mission is to distort legitimate research, take it out of context, and demean gay men as nothing but a bunch of sexually obsessed deviants that can't get enough sex. Did you know, for example, that the average gay man has 500 sex partners in a lifetime? (jealous aren't you?) Well, that comes from those freaks. This view denies, if you will, the gay man's platonic existence. Just a bunch of sex whores here, thank you very much.

The other view loathed even by the mainstream gay rights organizations even while it is perpetrated by them. You know, the one where gay men are completely non-erotic cutesy puppy dogs who dress so fashionably, have nice apartments, and will help you pick out a new dress, or redecorate your home. This is propagated largely by broadcast television (I'm looking at you ABC). This is dehumanizing because being an adult human being also entails being a sexual, erotically moved individual.

Then there is Adam. The Adam that GLAAD refused to defend today. The Adam that would've been banned from the 1993 March on Washington. The Adam that is too hot for ABC. The Adam that entertains. He dresses up, he's provocative, he wears his sexiness on his sleeve, he dares to be excessive.

This is the rock star the Disneys of the world have been out to rid us of since, well, Elvis. They thought they conquered the nonconformists. They thought even the gay people were on board with the McMansion Exurban lifestyle (thank God the economy collapsed, that putrid dream is now dead).

Adam is banned from ABC not because of a formal complaint to the FCC. Do you know how many formal complaints are made to the FCC? Adam is banned from ABC because he doesn't assimilate. Adam is banned from ABC because he isn't a good gay guy. He's one of those gay guys that nascently out-of-the-closet gay guys squirm around with such epithets as "he gives gays a bad name."

Adam doesn't play it safe. He has resisted being part of the amalgamated cohesive unit.

In his first two releases, Adam has shown us his erotic side (For Your Entertainment) and his emotional side "Whataya Want from Me." He is, then, the personification of the complete adult human being. He is everything we should strive to be: unique and liberated.