Dogged Blog

Friday iPod Challenge, the VIDEO EDITION, because I'm COMPLETELY INSANE

I have no spare time on my hands at all, and yet.... I did this. Enjoy. A whole new kind of random iPod ten.

I did what I always do, and set my iTunes to randomly shuffle my music -- and then this time, I posted each song with a video clip!

The list:

1. Melissa Etheridge and Jewel, "Foolish Games"
2. Marianne Faithful, "As Tears Go By"
3. Leonard Cohen, "Suzanne"
4. Kristine W, "Fly Again"
5. Gloria Gaynor, "I Will Survive"
6. Everything But the Girl, "When All's Well"
7. Dolly Parton and Melissa Etheridge, "Jolene" (Live)
8. Cocteau Twins, "Pearly Dewdrops Drops"
9. Caterina Caselli, "Perdono"
10. Erasure, "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme (A man after midnight)"

This is frighteningly addictive. Don't try it at home. Videos under the jump.

More common ground: Ending the "adoptable" debate

Crossposted at Pet Connection.

My SFGate.com column yesterday, about the common ground between those who support and those who oppose mandatory spay/neuter, drew a lot of comments that reminded me of something that happened back in the dawn of time — excuse me, in the early 90s which for many of you is the same thing. That’s when the San Francisco SPCA did something most people considered completely outrageous: They decided to stop doing animal control for the City and County of San Francisco, and to put into place an innovative program whereby they’d stop killing cats and dogs.

Back then, there were no seminars on the “No-kill Nation,” no other towns, communities, and even states that had begun going down that same road, no organizations like Maddie's Fund, financing community programs to work towards a “no-kill” goal, nor any successful implementations of a program like this for SFSPCA to model itself on.

People who ran or worked in many other shelters in the region — and let me remind you I live here; this is all coming from my own personal experience and things said directly to me or in my presence — ranted and raved that SFSPCA wasn’t actually “stopping the killing,” they were just letting someone else do it, by which they meant them — other area shelters, or the newly-built San Francisco Animal Care and Control Center. SFSPCA doesn’t even take in strays or owner surrenders, they’d add. They just cherry pick the best of the best and stand around being proud of not killing. And we get stuck with the “unadoptables” while SFSPCA looks good.

And they were right. They were absolutely right.

And yet today, San Francisco — not the SFSPCA, but the entire county — sends more dogs and cats alive out of the shelter system (86 percent) than all but one other county in the United States (Tompkins County, New York, which releases 91 percent of its dogs and cats).

Again: Not that one shelter. The whole county.

So you’d think everyone would be happy about that, and say wow, why do we need punitive and intrusive breeding bans and mandatory spay/neuter? Why don’t we just do what San Francisco did?

“What worked in San Francisco can’t work anywhere else,” they said gloomily. “San Francisco is special.”

Then when other communities did what San Francisco did — communities in rural areas, in the South, communities with lots of pit bulls and poverty — they said it was just a numbers game. Definitions of “adoptable” and “unadoptable” and “treatable” and “healthy” were being manipulated to make the numbers look good. San Francisco and these other communities, they said, are just lying. They say they don’t kill treatable animals, but they do.

And I know a lot of you, like some of the people who commented on my column, are sitting there now going “GOTCHA!” You’re wondering how I’m going to argue my way out of that one.

But I’m not. Because you’re absolutely right. While there are certainly definitions of “healthy” and “adoptable” that almost everyone will agree on, they are still ultimately subjective terms and thus, subject to interpretation and “spin.” And do they get “spun”? They sure do.

And so I say, let’s not define them, argue over them, or debate their meaning. Let’s stop using them.

See, I don’t give a damn about how the animals in a community are categorized or defined. I just want to know one thing: How many leave your shelter system alive?

Unlike words, numbers tend to be hard to spin. Not impossible, of course, but much more difficult. So if you focus on the live release rate, what happens to the whole argument over definitions of “adoptable” animals? Poof. Gone. Everyone won.

The No Kill Advocacy Center suggests the goal live release rate should be over 90 percent for a “no-kill” community. This basically means that the only animals killed by a shelter system would be those animals that any loving owner would euthanize for reasons of severe illness, injury, or aggression.

Will there still be some treatable animals, those who with some care could have their illness, injury, or aggression resolved, wrongly put to sleep? Yes. But I see loving pet owners wrongly putting pets to sleep every day, because they couldn’t afford their vet bills, or their vets were unaware of possible new treatments, or because the owner had a prejudice against a certain kind of treatment, such as amputation. We might like to daydream about a perfect world in which no mistakes are made, but that’s not the world we live in. Arguing about that ten percent is a tactic meant only to divide, to divert attention from an achievable, meaningful and relatively objective goal.

So how about we stop wasting time, and diverting attention and energy, with pointless, unresolvable debates over categorizing animals? Let’s focus instead on one more patch of common ground: Sending almost every animal who comes into the shelter system out alive.

Quick note about comments

I don't know if some of my filters were disabled after the Big Power Failure yesterday or if it's just random, but I got hit by a lot of spam in my comments section last night. I'm going to turn on comment moderation for the rest of the day -- I'll turn it off tomorrow. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Common ground in the spay/neuter war

I'd have posted this sooner, but apparently San Francisco exploded or something and all the power went out in the part of the City where all the Internets are, and Six Apart went down -- taking it with it Typepad, Vox, Word Press, and LiveJournal. Also taken were Craig's List and Technorati. It wasn't pretty, and in fact, it's still not pretty, because only around half those things are back, even though the power's been on for a while now. There would be widespread rioting in the streets, if everyone wasn't catatonic for lack of access to their blogs and stuff.

The power stayed on in my part of the City, but I wasn't able to get here to tell you that, as promised, I have something doggish (and, in this case, cattish). My column at SFGate this week:

Take two groups of people who mistrust and dislike each other. Take a law that one side wants and the other side hates, about an issue they don't even agree exists, or if it does, what defines it.

That describes the recent battle over AB 1634, which would have mandated the sterilization of all California dogs and cats over the age of 6 months with the goal of reducing the number of these animals euthanized in state shelters. But what might surprise you if you take a closer look at those two diametrically opposed groups of people is that both are motivated by the same thing: A tremendous love of animals.

So despite the gaping chasm between us, I can't help but wonder if we aren't missing a pretty amazing opportunity to huddle together on the little patch of ground we share. Because let's face it: Both sides of the mandatory spay/neuter war share the goal of reducing the deaths of dogs and cats in animal shelters. In other words, we want the same thing.

In a previous column, I outlined all the reasons I don't think the proposed law would reduce shelter deaths, and how I thought in some ways it might even make things worse. But I very much do want to see the number of dogs and cats who end up in shelters, or who are killed in shelters, to be reduced.

Because AB 1634 was withdrawn by its author at least until January, I'd like to ask everyone who cares about this issue to pretend for, oh, the 10 minutes it will take you to read this column that legislation is off the table, and you still have to solve the problem.

How about starting not with any particular action or strategy, but by trying to think about the issue in a different way? Forget all the rhetoric on both sides, and just keep the goal clear in your mind: Reducing the number of dogs and cats who die in California shelters.

Read the rest here, and remember: You can post comments on my my articles there now!

The Hot 100 Thing

AfterEllen.com thought these women were hot... I'm getting old, I didn't know who half of the "Hot 100 Women" were, but Lucy Lawless and Renee O'Connor were there, as was Battlestar Galactica's Katee Sackhoff at EIGHTY FOUR? WTF, lesbians? Are you out of your minds? See photos, kthnx.

Over on AfterElton.com, where the boys did their nominating and voting for the "Hot 100 Guys," Gale Harold (there go my blog hits) was number 4, with a pretty lame bio (she says, hoping her editor is NOT reading her blog), and at number 34 is his former co-star on Queer as Folk, Randy Harrison. I mention him here because his hair in that photo? Perfect. And you know, for me, it's all about the hair.

And don't tell Gina, Ginger, or my mom, but George Clooney? Barely there at 92.

[Update:] A reader just emailed me that Queer as Folk's Robert Gant is number 14. In this case, it's not the hair. It's the dog in the photo, under the jump.

Friday iPod Challenge, on Saturday: How songful

I was ranting the other day on AfterElton.com that I have a thing against artsy films that don't tell a story or have compelling characters. I feel the same way about books. I certainly think filmmakers and writers should create whatever they want to create, and not worry about what I think; I'm all about the freedom of expression. But me and art films and literary fiction, not so much.

Along with liking stories, I like songs. When I interviewed him, I had to admit to Stephen Kijak, who made a brilliant and not at all "art film" biography of musician Scott Walker, that I, like other heathens among Walker's fans, don't care for his more experimental recent works. I suck. I freely admit it.

So, I have a playlist on my iPod called "Just Sing." It has a lot of songs that I love because they're, well, songful. So I set iTunes to randomly shuffle just that playlist, and here is a songful random ten:

1. Don't Let the Teardrops Rust Your Shining Heart by Everything but the Girl (ever so slightly biographical although I'm the "you"):

I used to drive all night for you
While the children were asleep
And as the dawn broke on your room
Back into my house I'd creep
Where my husband slept alone
Of course he must have known
But we always hide the truth
For fear of losing what we own

2. Deeper Well by Emmylou Harris (from the incredibly brilliant Wrecking Ball, an album Stephen Kijak turned me onto, so maybe he won't hate me forever):

I went to the river but the river was dry
I fell to my knees and I looked to the sky
I looked to the sky and the spring rain fell
I saw the water from a deeper well

3.  Angel of Harlem by U2:

Blue light on the avenue
God knows they got to you
An empty glass, the lady sings
Eyes swollen like a bee sting
Blinded you lost your way
Through the side streets and the alleyway
Like a star exploding in the night
Falling to the city in broad daylight
An angel in Devil's shoes
Salvation in the blues
You never looked like an angel
Yeah yeah...angel of Harlem

4. Hunter's Lullaby by Leonard Cohen

Your father's gone a-hunting
Through the silver and the glass
Where only greed can enter
But spirit, spirit cannot pass

5. Valentine's Day is Over by Billy Bragg

Thank you for the things you bought me
Thank you for the card
Thank you for the things you taught me when you hit me hard
That love between two people must be based on understanding
Until that's true you'll find your things
All stacked out on the landing
Surprise, surprise
Valentine's Day is over

6. Breakdown by Melissa Etheridge (lesbian couples never break up, we  just call each other at 3 am):

So you're having a breakdown
So you're losing the fight
So you're having a breakdown
And you need me tonight
I found my place in this downtown
Salt air and yellow street lights
So you're having a breakdown
And I'm driving and crying
Unraveled and flying
I'm coming to your breakdown tonight

7. The Moon and St. Christopher by Mary Chapin Carpenter:

Now I've paid my dues because I have owed them
But I've paid a price sometimes
For being such a stubborn woman in such stubborn times
Now I have run from the arms of lovers
I have run from the eyes of friends
I have run from the hands of kindness
I have run just because I can

8. Diamonds and Rust by Joan Baez

Now I see you standing
With brown leaves falling around
And snow in your hair
Now you're smiling out the window
Of that crummy hotel
Over Washington Square
Our breath comes out white clouds
Mingles and hangs in the air
Speaking strictly for me
We both could have died then and there

9. Crying by Roy Orbison and kd lang

I thought that I was over you
But it's true, so true
I love you even more than I did before
But darling, what can I do?
For you don't love me
and I'll always be
Crying over you, crying over you

10. A Rainy Night in Soho by the Pogues (I have never listened to this without crying. Never):

I'm not singing for the future
I'm not dreaming of the past
I'm not talking of the first time
I never think about the last

Now the song is nearly over
We may never find out what it means
Still there's a light I hold before me
You're the measure of my dreams
The measure of my dreams

Okay. Ten songs. Not just music. SONGS. Gimme.

Falling for Grace

I feel something doggish coming on, I really do, but before that, yes, it's another movie review.

I saw a sweet, funny little romantic comedy Tuesday night that opens tonight here in San Francisco, and next weekend in Washington DC. It's probably the most heterosexual movie I've ever reviewed other than Princess Bride,  which might make you ask, okay, so, exactly why did you review it, and for whom, oh Miss Lesbian/Gay Media Hack?

Trust me, darlings, I can can gay up ANYTHING -- although it wasn't really all that hard with this:

For a totally conventional hetero Cinderella romantic comedy without even an Obligatory Gay Best Friend, Falling for Grace, which opens this weekend in San Francisco and next weekend in Washington, DC, is kind of a who's who of the queer and near-queer.

It stars Queer as Folk's Gale Harold as the JFK Jr-esque Andrew Barrington, Jr. He's vying for the affections of Grace Tang (Faye Ann Lee) with Steven, played by gay actor B.D. Wong (M. Butterfly, Law & Order: SVU). When Grace, who has been mistaken for a Hong Kong heiress by a group of upper-crust New Yorkers, falls for Andrew, Steven turns his sights on her best friend, Janie, brought outrageously to life by every gay boy's best friend, Margaret Cho.

Speaking of Steven and Janie:

(T)he film's best couple is B.D. Wong and Margaret Cho's Steven and Janie. From their first date at a performance of Mamma Mia -- where Janie's tight yellow mini-dress and go-go dancing win Steven's heart and, I confess, mine -- to the pivotal scene at the Gatsby Ball, where the secondary Cinderella storyline gets resolved, their playful rapport and exuberant campiness dominate every frame. And I'm avoiding the spoiler thing here again, but the scene where Steven leeringly plants a kiss on Janie's shoulder before sweeping her off to get a drink? Totally brilliant. Those two should have their own movie.

Since every time I mention Gale Harold on my blog I get 4568798 hits from Google blogsearch on that term, yes, he was good in it -- charming, sweet, charismatic, and just slightly quirky. The film itself is very conventional and there's nothing "indie" about it other than the small budget and lesser-known stars, but when what you want is nicely-done escapism with a happy ending, Falling for Grace will get you there. Probably the single thing I liked the least about it was the score. Better music would have helped this film a lot.

You can read more of my ponderings on this Chinese-American Cinderella story over at AfterElton.com.

I want my lesbian detective/gay man sidekick TV series and I want it now

So, I got asked to review a movie at the San Francisco International LGBT Film Festival, and I went down and picked up the screener and popped it in the DVD player last month.

And then I sat there and went, how did someone who I have never met and in fact, hadn't even heard of, make the absolute perfect movie for me?

It's a lesbian detective with a gay man as her sidekick and she wears high heels and a has a little gun in her purse and she never, ever doesn't know what to do. I love that in a woman:

It's in a genre all its own — the lesbian/gay buddy movie gone sexed-up noir thriller — and it has a mystery at its heart. Add lots of girl-on-girl kissing and our dyke detective running around in high heels and a tight dress with a gun, and you've got 2 Minutes Later, a film by Robert Gaston (OpenCam), currently making the rounds on the LGBT film festival circuit.

I particularly loved this comment by Gaston:

"Attending GLBT film festivals with my last film, OpenCam, I kept seeing the GLBT community divided as men and women went to their separate theaters for separate experiences," he said. "It's been a goal of mine in recent projects to try to appeal and celebrate the sexuality of a cross-section of the community. I developed the characters of Abigail and Michael because I wanted to show gay men and lesbians working together, and depict a relationship I'd not see on film before."

It worked really well for me, with lots of snappy banter and terrific acting and a nice little mystery to tie it all together. And I totally want this to become a television series. I would watch it every week for the rest of ever.

Here's the full review, and that's Jessica Graham, who played Abigail, in the photo. One guess what else I liked about the movie.

And now for something completely political

Having gotten all the Lucy Lawless/George Takei fangirl media entertainment writer stuff that I'm actually paid to write about out of the way, time for a trip into the wonkish side of my world.

Those here only for the dogs and the shoes and the Xena may want to move along.

When I heard that George Takei, who played Mr. Sulu on the original Star Trek series and Lucy Lawless of Xena:Warrior Princess and Battlestar Galactica were going to be at the Human Rights Campaign's annual gala here in San Francisco, I was right there with my hand in the air to cover it for AfterElton.com/AfterEllen.com. But fangirl squeeage aside, I was equally excited to see Elizabeth Edwards (pictured, right, with HRC president Joe Solmonese) would be giving the keynote address. Political machinations aside, her statements in support of full marriage equality, as well as her forthrightness and courage regarding her political beliefs and fight against cancer, have made her one of my personal heroes.

Before the dinner started, there was a VIP reception where all the A-gays of the Bay Area -- and many straight LGBT rights supporters -- were mingling in tuxes and fancy dresses, sipping drinks from the open bar and greeting friends. Even though I'm a native San Franciscan, I only recognized a tiny number of them, including San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom -- who, like me, was born here.

I told him that I was a fourth generation native, and like all San Francisco politicians do when you tell them that, he gave me his full attention.  I thanked him for having the courage and vision and simple basic humanity to hand out same sex marriage licenses at San Francisco's City Hall, and said that I just wanted him to know that some "old time" San Franciscans are also queer San Franciscans.

We bonded for a while over our mutual San Franciscan-ness and growing up in the City and when I told him I'd gone to Mercy High, he said, "You're a Mercy girl? That's like a cult." So true. And how amusing to be called a "Mercy girl," possibly for the first time in almost 30 years.

I've already recounted just about every utterance of George Takei and Lucy Lawless, so I'll skip over that and go on to the speeches.

Given that I've practically made  a career of liveblogging in the last few months, I'd brought my laptop with me. But alas, no wi-fi was available in San Francisco's Civic Auditorium.

So I did it anyway, even if it's not exactly "live," but at least this time I've had the chance to clean up the typos and misspelled words in advance. Remember this is a report, not a transcript; only those things in quotation marks are direct quotes. Everything else is a paraphrase or summary.

A little more Lucy from the HRC gala

I'll have the political post up shortly [UPDATE: it's here], but for now, a tiny little bit more of Lucy Lawless at the Human Rights Campaign annual gala over on AfterElton.com:

It's been well established that gay men love Xena, but now we know: Xena loves you back.

At Saturday night's Human Rights Campaign awards gala in San Francisco, I told Lucy Lawless she had a lot of fans on her our website, and her face lit up. "Really? That's wonderful," she said. "I’m always counting on the women, but I love beautiful men. I love doing things with beautiful men, so I say bring it on. And bring your friends."

Read all this and more, with more photos from KT, here. Click many many times. Convince them that the demand for more Lucy journalism is a wave threatening to engulf the planet.

Photo of Lucy with HRC President Joe Solmonese by KT Jorgensen. More KT photos from the event here.