Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Fran Lebowitz "Cannot understand why Gays Want To Marry"

In her words Gay marriage is...

"a kind of unbelievable tedium. I still have the same car that I bought in 1978 because I’m not tired of it. A human being? Please. My idea of a long relationship is a three-day weekend. I don’t have that kind of ability to not be bored."

btw she also says some of her best friends are Republicans

by Anonymousreply 10511/09/2012

Who?

Oh, yeah. That "writer" who hasn't had a book in a couple decades.

ZZZZZzzzzzzz.

by Anonymousreply 111/03/2012

She has an awesome car. I love her and wish she were on the internet.

by Anonymousreply 211/03/2012

In fairness, she also says she's in favor of gay marriage; she just doesn't want one.

by Anonymousreply 311/03/2012

Fran on gay marriage:

by Anonymousreply 411/03/2012

Fran will be getting her own HBO talk show soon, and I cannot wait. I believe Fran is the only person I ever agree with 100%.

by Anonymousreply 511/03/2012

Hey op, thanks for posting this!

by Anonymousreply 611/03/2012

You can watch Martin Scorcese's doc on Fran, "Public Speaking," right here. Well worth it.

by Anonymousreply 711/03/2012

She enjoys being controversial.

The article says that she doesn't think children are so special. The fact is that she prefers them to adults. She has told me this, and has written "better to be a mere child than a mere adult."

And despite her claims about "a three day weekend," she has had several long term relationships.

Granted, some of her best friends are Republicans. She has also spoken at a memorial to Jerome Robbins. He was a friend of hers, but she had no illusions about him.

by Anonymousreply 811/03/2012

Incidentally, Fran's incomprehension of gay people who want to marry is matched by her incomprehension of why straight people want to marry.

by Anonymousreply 911/03/2012

We here this all the time. Marriage is "boring", why would you want this?

It's so stupid. It's about having the choice, it's about having legal protections resulting from that choice. No one has to get married. We all know there are negatives as well as positives.

Fuck her.

by Anonymousreply 1011/03/2012

R10, learn to spell "hear."

by Anonymousreply 1111/03/2012

r5 - that is great news. I don't always agree with her, but she is always brilliant. I will have to watch it in illegal places since we all know that HBO won't let any of their stuff get out.

by Anonymousreply 1211/03/2012

I agree with Fran about cars.

However, "wanting" to marry and "having the right" to marry are two different things. But the fundamental issue is equality. And that's the fight.

by Anonymousreply 1311/03/2012

Is she ... like ... relevant to anything?

by Anonymousreply 1411/03/2012

She is right. Marriage is bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 1511/03/2012

Just because she can't be monogamous and have love doesn't mean others can't.

by Anonymousreply 1611/03/2012

Scorcese's documentary was too fawning to be truly good. Such cringe-worthy questions like "What's it like to be right about everything?" Come on. She rattled on about how people need to do work. If Scorcese wasn't so enamoured, he would have prided into why she has written anything in ages. But too many balls were dropped in order to make a cinematic equivalent of a monument.

She's too smart and clever to be reduced to that. It's like what Pauline Kael said about Streisand "You don't go easy on her. That's the last thing she wants or needs."

by Anonymousreply 1711/03/2012

I find that when some people make this comment, there are a lot of people on DL that do not understand what is being said. And they get angry.

by Anonymousreply 1811/03/2012

Frank Lebowitz should question why she never publicly came out. Is it because it might hurt her "lucrative" career?

by Anonymousreply 1911/03/2012

Prided ball dropping and cinematic monument equivalency? I blame auto-correct. Can I do that? Prided?

by Anonymousreply 2011/03/2012

What car does she have?

by Anonymousreply 2111/03/2012

A gray pearl Checker cab

by Anonymousreply 2211/03/2012

Folks like Fran can think whatever they want, just as long as they aren't trying to take away the right to be married from LGBT's.

by Anonymousreply 2311/03/2012

How does she make money?

by Anonymousreply 2411/03/2012

She never said anyone of the sort, R23.

by Anonymousreply 2511/03/2012

Fran was surprisingly sexy when young. She still looks great, considering her smoking habit. Her novel, "Exterior Signs Of Wealth", was described as being like "Bonfire Of The Vanities", seemed to be near publication, then...nothing. Great news about her HBO show.

by Anonymousreply 2711/03/2012

You are thinking of Annie Leibowitz, r26.

Talking about being uninformed...

by Anonymousreply 2811/03/2012

OP did you wander astray from ONTD?

Fran is a liberal through and through. Even though she does not understand or desire marriage, she still votes for everyone else to have it. She has said these things many times.

Find a new target.

by Anonymousreply 2911/03/2012

Some people are just dense, R29. Incapable of sophisticated thought.

by Anonymousreply 3011/03/2012

Be glad Fran Lebowitz doesn't post here, bitches.

She would own W&W and eat she would eat every last one of us alive.

by Anonymousreply 3111/03/2012

Unlike me, who apparently cannot sentence construct sentence a.

by Anonymousreply 3311/03/2012

r26 cracked me up. WRONG PERSON dumbass. LOL

by Anonymousreply 3411/03/2012

[quote] It seems if you deal with royalty in a public way you ought to understand all the ramifications involved

I'll say.

by Anonymousreply 3511/03/2012

Doesn't Lebowitz sell La-Z-Boy recliners?

Who cares what she thinks. I want to know where Rent-A-Center stands!

by Anonymousreply 3611/03/2012

R26/R32 you're an idiot. Own it. But it does not entitle you to call these people cunts.

by Anonymousreply 3711/03/2012

Fran herself, checking in at R38.

by Anonymousreply 3911/03/2012

Personally, I appreciate anyone who doesn't know Annie Leibovitz.

BTW, thanks to R7 for posting the youtube link. This has been on my wishlist at Amazon for a while, but I'm poor.

by Anonymousreply 4011/03/2012

Is she a "top"?

by Anonymousreply 4111/03/2012

the one who snaps the pictures is a babe, the one who's still not writing is a dog.

by Anonymousreply 4211/03/2012

Fran has a very hairy crack & hole

by Anonymousreply 4311/03/2012

W&W R35

by Anonymousreply 4411/03/2012

She has this awesome white checker cab that is like a tank. It's in the documentary. I found sort of pic at the NYT. It's gorgeous.

by Anonymousreply 4511/04/2012

R29 why pick on the OP?

These are Fran's own words.

by Anonymousreply 4711/04/2012

John Waters has also said that he always thought the two advantages of being gay was not having to serve in the military and not having to marry. Like Fran, he was K I D D I N G.

by Anonymousreply 4811/04/2012

R48 Fran wasn't kidding

by Anonymousreply 4911/04/2012

R46 YUMMY YUMMY

by Anonymousreply 5011/04/2012

r45: it is NOT white; it is pearl. Fran says that only heterosexuals refer to her car as "white".

by Anonymousreply 5111/04/2012

She's a hottie.

by Anonymousreply 5211/04/2012

the one who snaps the pictures is a babe, the one who's still not writing is a dog.

Annie Liebowitz is a babe? Now I've heard it all.

by Anonymousreply 5311/04/2012

No! Fran is the hottie, and I'm so glad I was reading DL yesterday else I wouldn't have discovered her.

by Anonymousreply 5411/04/2012

Where does she get her money? She lives a lavish lifestyle and she owns a co-op (didn't know she owned a vintage car, too.)

What is her secret?

by Anonymousreply 5511/04/2012

Well, she's on Law and Order and has a new show coming up.

Before that, I assume she made all her money much like Susan Sontag--the college speaker circuit.

by Anonymousreply 5611/04/2012

r47 because Fran is allowed to have a different opinion on shit than yours/OPs. Get over it.

by Anonymousreply 5711/04/2012

Poster 8,

In what sense did you mean that she had no illusions about Jerome Robbins?

by Anonymousreply 5811/05/2012

R58, she knew that he was a louse to many, many people, naming names during the McCarthy era. But he was kind to her.

As for R55, she sold the coop.

And she teaches at Princeton, which pays something.

by Anonymousreply 5911/05/2012

Fran Lebowitz has repeatedly asked her 'people' to approach The View about guest co-hosting from time to time at the table.

Barbara Walters has repeatedly refused.

I wonder why?

by Anonymousreply 6011/05/2012

Sharon Osborne has had both breasts removed. She said she didn't want them hanging over her while they contain the breast cancer gene. She's a colon cancer survivor.

by Anonymousreply 6111/05/2012

"Some reviewers have called her a modern-day Dorothy Parker.[citation needed]"

Indeed.

by Anonymousreply 6211/05/2012

I like Fran and could listen to her talk all day. Unfortunately, I think she's gotten stale. I saw her at Town Hall in NYC recently, and almost everything she said was rehash of things I've heard her say before. Her gay marriage stuff was the same old stuff plus some tacked on stuff about not having to visit your sick or dying partner being a plus, not a minus. It was pretty lame, actually.

Also, her proud Luddite status is starting to catch up with her. It's not nearly as cute as she seems to think it is.

That said, I can't wait for her talk show. First I'm hearing of it.

by Anonymousreply 6311/05/2012

I agree with ol' Frannie. How or why gay rights activists decided to start spending so much time, money, resources and energy on gay marriage, I'll never know? Maybe 5% of gay men I know, myself included, really give a fuck about it when there are so many other more important, pressing issues (gay youth, hate crime laws, etc.)

I truly believe the push for gay marriage is boring straight society's way of trying to trick and tame gay men.

by Anonymousreply 6411/05/2012

Anyone know why Babs refuses to have Fran on The View?

by Anonymousreply 6511/05/2012

AIDS did that, and cultural maturity, not gay marriage, r64.

by Anonymousreply 6611/05/2012

They don't want anyone intelligent

by Anonymousreply 6711/05/2012

Are u saying Joy Behar is not intelligent?

by Anonymousreply 6811/05/2012

R66, I don't think HIV spiked such a vested interest in gay marriage. If anything, many HIV activists would argue that gay marriage steals away tons of $$funding, resources and energy that could be used for HIV education/prevention. I would argue that most gay men are no more interested in boring heterosexual-like relationships than before. Look at the boom in apps like GrindR, Scruff, Craigslist, etc.

It's all one big trick, I tell you.

by Anonymousreply 6911/05/2012

Actually, Whoopi Goldberg strikes me as intelligent. And Barbara Walters herself has a certain animalistic intelligence -- hardly the erudition with which she credits herself, but an ability to create a career without charm or good looks. But the fat woman and the blonde airhead clearly lack any intelligence whatever. Are there others on the panel?

by Anonymousreply 7011/05/2012

R70 that is why Fran's can't understand why she is repeatedly denied a chance to GUEST co-host. She thinks she would be perfect.

But Babs doesn't want her.

by Anonymousreply 7111/05/2012

You seem to know more about the range and depth of gay promiscuity than I do. I bow to your superior investment in interest. I still think gay marriage is a shrewd and wise avenue to mainstream access to legal parity.

by Anonymousreply 7211/05/2012

I too think marriage is silly- really outmoded or outdated. BUT- for those who want to get married it imparts legal rights- that regard children, estate planning and taxation etc. THAT is the reason for the absolute necessity for equal treatment. The question is less about whether you want to get married or not rather if you do- you get equal treatment.

Not everyone wants to borrow money. Some people never want to borrow money. Now imagine if there different laws for straight people who borrow money (they get lower interest rates for example than gays.)

That is what this issue is about. Equal treatment before the law.

Just goes to show that smart people can be stupid- Gore Vidal did it all the time. Some people get too carried away with themselves and their ideas and lose sight of the real interests of others. Such is the case here.

by Anonymousreply 7311/05/2012

[quote]That is what this issue is about. Equal treatment before the law.

Then Gay marriage is a Big Fail -- if you have to be married to get certain rights, there is no equal justice. Gays could have been on the forefront of correcting the real problem, but instead, they never looked farther than the current system's benefits that many just want for themselves.

by Anonymousreply 7411/05/2012

R74 makes an excellent point.

by Anonymousreply 7511/05/2012

But if he wears a hat, no one will see it.

by Anonymousreply 7611/05/2012

[quote]if you have to be married to get certain rights, there is no equal justice.

Um, the rights are SHARED rights between two people in a marriage. It's not like everyone who gets married receives a pony, while single people get nothing. It's the benefit of linking two unrelated people together as family, which straight people enjoy but gays are currently deprived of due to prejudice.

Sharing social security benefits, hospital visitation, and so on... These are not rights that are being deprived of single people in order to privilege and advantage a favored majority. There is no way a single person could exercise those rights so whining that you're not getting them is ludicrous.

Moreover, focusing on marriage has transformed gay people's position in our society for the better. It has benefitted all gay people.

Your "Me, Too! Me, too!" is just ridiculous. "I want the right to visit my sick um, um...well, I don't have a partner... If straight people can share social security benefits with their partners, I want um... umm.. Well, I feel I deserve SOMETHING, DAMMMITTT!!!

And if in the end, fighting for marriage equality isn't your thing, fine. There are thousands upon thousands of gay organizations working away at every aspect of our movement that could use your help. Don't let anyone stand in your way in becoming a leader of those parts of the movement you think most worthwhile.

by Anonymousreply 7711/05/2012

[quote]Then Gay marriage is a Big Fail

Like the civil rights movement was a big fail because not all black people ride the bus or want to sit at the lunch counter at Woolworth's.

by Anonymousreply 7811/05/2012

I thought this was about Fran Drescher. I always confuse them.

Anyone know her gay ex-husband? That deserves its own thread.

by Anonymousreply 7911/05/2012

No- R74 makes no sense. Marriage is a legal contract between two people; traditionally two heterosexuals of the opposite sex. Once married they have legal rights that they did not have while they were a couple. Now when one dies the other inherits the deceased spouses estate without taxation. They can file joint income taxes and in most cases reduce their tax bite. They can adopt children as a couple. These are rights that come by virtue of a legal marriage. Gay men and women in most states cannot adopt as a couple. When your life long live in partner dies, you will pay the going rate on inheritance taxes assuming you have prepared a will- I could go on an on.

When you say "equal justice" (which is redundant by the way), you have to put it into a context. Marriage is such a context. R74 provides no context. Prejudice cannot be legilated away R74. But laws should not set up legalized prejudice. That is really the only way to chip away at prejudice: Get rid of legalized bigotry.

In 1964 it was pretty much impossible for a black person to get a mortgage in NYC. In 1968 denying people a mortgage based on the color of their skin was made illegal by a Federal Law (cannot recall the detailed law- sort of an addendum to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.)

by Anonymousreply 8011/05/2012

[quote]Sharing social security benefits, hospital visitation, and so on... These are not rights that are being deprived of single people in order to privilege and advantage a favored majority. There is no way a single person could exercise those rights so whining that you're not getting them is ludicrous.

No -- you're ludicrous. Why should my SS benefits revolve around my personal life? They should be rewarded to individuals, regardless of who is sharing their house. If people pair up to share assets, that falls under business dealings, and they should incorporate, not marry.

by Anonymousreply 8111/05/2012

[quote]In 1964 it was pretty much impossible for a black person to get a mortgage in NYC. In 1968 denying people a mortgage based on the color of their skin was made illegal by a Federal Law (cannot recall the detailed law- sort of an addendum to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.)

They were denied benefits because of who and what they were -- the same as single people and unmarried couples are denied benefits. Everyone should be free to decide who should visit them in the hospital, and who (as in the famous Philadelphia case) should be the one to inscribe their lost partner's tombstone, married or not.

by Anonymousreply 8211/05/2012

R72, and I bow to your condescending sense of moral superiority, simply because you or people like you have some vested interest in mimicking straight people.

Meanwhile, I will choose to concern myself more with things that I think actually matter, such as gay youth suicide prevention, and continue to donate my $$ to LGBT youth-related programs.

by Anonymousreply 8311/05/2012

OK, Fran, but why should the question be any different addressed to gay people than when addressed to straight people?

It's a question that all couples should have the right to make.

End of story.

by Anonymousreply 8511/05/2012

[quote]Oh -- and Lebowitz is a Jew.

Oh -- and why does this matter to you?

by Anonymousreply 8611/05/2012

[quote] Lebowitz, who is a lesbian, supports the idea of gay marriage, but cannot understand why [italic]anyone[/italic] would want to get hitched

- from the article, please reference r85 and r84

Italics are mine

by Anonymousreply 8711/05/2012

R86? It's a difference between her and Paglia, you ninny.

by Anonymousreply 8811/05/2012

I wonder if she's ever eaten any pussy? I bet she would STILL be holding a lit cigarette while she was doing it and even taking puff breaks in between while she had her tongue in some snatch.

Thoughts?

by Anonymousreply 8911/05/2012

[quote]"a kind of unbelievable tedium. I still have the same car that I bought in 1978 because I’m not tired of it. A human being? Please. My idea of a long relationship is a three-day weekend. I don’t have that kind of ability to not be bored."

lol. love it and completely agree.

by Anonymousreply 9011/05/2012

I'm shocked that anyone pays attention to her. She wrote 2 wry essay books at the end of the 70 while working with Warhol. It's almost certain she's a trustafarian as her parents owned a furniture store, and trustfund kids were the only people Warhol hung with (except trannies/porn stars).

She's just Paris Hilton for a different crowd.

by Anonymousreply 9111/05/2012

[quote]They should be rewarded to individuals

OMG, r81. social security benefits ARE awarded to individuals. They're not denied to single people.

They can only be SHARED by married couples. Again. it's not as if married people get an extra pony from social security. Straight couples are getting an unfair privilege by being able to share their benefits through marriage, which gay people cannot do.

Really, I'm trying not to be bitchy or condescending but your comment really is pretty dense.

by Anonymousreply 9211/05/2012

[quote] human being? Please. My idea of a long relationship is a three-day weekend. I don’t have that kind of ability to not be bored.

What kills me about this particularly pathetic sort of narcissism is that it's routinely given a pass as some mark of sophistication. Instead of a complete failure to engage fully with other human beings that verges on autism.

by Anonymousreply 9311/05/2012

Gay widowed partners don't get social security benefits the way married widows do.

by Anonymousreply 9411/05/2012

More from r91 who seems more interesting than Fran, please!

by Anonymousreply 9511/05/2012

[quote]Fran Lebowitz has repeatedly asked her 'people' to approach The View about guest co-hosting from time to time at the table.

[quote]Barbara Walters has repeatedly refused.

Because Fran could read that entire table to filth in five minutes and have the audience in the palm of her hand while she does it, and Barbara knows that. Fran would upstage them all.

by Anonymousreply 9611/05/2012

R93 sounds like she'd be a real [italic] [bold]BLAST [/italic] [/bold] at parties. (That is, if she were ever invited to one).

by Anonymousreply 9711/05/2012

I'm in no mood for an eccentric take on same-sex marriage. Serious topic.

by Anonymousreply 9811/05/2012

Lot of people on this thread do not get it. Maarriage is a legal contract available to heterosexuals to protect their joint interests and their children, legally. It is not available to gay men and lesbians on the Federal level- just the way home loans were not available to blacks before 1968. One does not get married to obtain rights that are not relevant (unless you are married.)

I will probably not marry in my lifetime. But if I meets someone who wants to and convinces me- well I sure hope I have the option as a straight person would.

It's just that simple. It is not about stupid rights- if you do not care about marriage, then OK- but it is important to many couple, particularly those with children.

All this is lost on Fran.

by Anonymousreply 9911/05/2012

r97 = self-hating cunt, willing to put up with every last stupidity disgorged by a pre-approved "icon." And probably autistic, as well.

by Anonymousreply 10011/05/2012

charlie, the only one who is lost on anything is you.

Fran supports (with her votes as well) the right of marriage; she simply does not see the value of it for HERSELF. For the 80th time, she is allowed to not want to get married, to deride the practice, etc. and yet still vote in support of it because "[she] know[s] the people want it".

by Anonymousreply 10111/05/2012

Here is Fran talking about gay rights and gay marriage. You can tell she's for gay marriage, but doesn't personally want it.

by Anonymousreply 10211/05/2012

I can't understand either. Marriage was created to sell women to the highest bidder. oppress and humiliate women around the world Yes marriage is between a man and women Oppressor and opress

by Anonymousreply 10311/05/2012

"I'm in no mood for an eccentric take on same-sex marriage. Serious topic."

Excellent point. It's like a black comedian making jokes that he doesn't like to sit in the front of the bus during the civil rights movement.

As a gay man, I never thought I'd address this to a lesbian but... That's not funny, Fran.

by Anonymousreply 10411/05/2012

I wish Fran would get over her computer-phobia and get on Twitter and Facebook. She is a natural for those formats.

by Anonymousreply 10511/09/2012
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.