08/15/2007
News: Flight from Hell, John Mayer, Grand Tetons, Madonna
Gay man shut out of the estate of his deceased lover of 14 years: "B.C. Supreme Court Justice Marion Allan has ruled 42-year-old Reza Chowdhury has no claim to an East Vancouver home he says he shared with Peter Argenti. The court agrees Mr. Argenti had a 14-year relationship with Mr. Chowdhury but kept it a deep secret, fearing his conservative, Catholic family and friends would never understand if he admitted his homosexuality. Mr. Chowdhury was a refugee from Bangladesh. He says he lived with Mr. Argenti in the home and has a claim to it as a common-law spouse. But the court says there is no indication of a connection between Mr. Chowdhury and anything to do with the house, even though Mr. Chowdhury lived there while managing and cooking at a restaurant owned by Mr. Argenti."
A Socialite's Life steps inside GLAAD's annual summer cocktail fundraiser and finds "Robert Gant ("Queer As Folk"), Wilson Cruz ("Noah's Ark"), Tony Tripoli ("Fashion House"), Jai Rodriquez ("Queer Eye"), Marc Cherry (creator of "Desperate Housewives"), Paul McCullough ("The Next Food Network Star"), Chad Allen ("Save Me"), Honey Labrador ("Queer Eye for the Straight Girl"), Ian Roberts (former pro-rugby player), Reichen Lehmkuhl ("Amazing Race") and Christine Devine (Fox 11 News)."
Stephen Colbert and Richard Branson in on-air water fight: "Branson was apparently upset that he wasn't able to give a direct plug to the new Virgin service and doused Colbert with his guest mug of water. Stephen was drenched. He took a beat, then signalled for his own ammunition for about twenty seconds until Alison (Silverman) ran and gave him her bottle of water, and Stephen retaliated. The two of them sat for a very uncomfortable second looking like two wet cats. Then Stephen thanked him for coming. I really don't think it was planned, since Stephen had another bit to introduce and a full interview left to do. They had to get him a new jacket and even broke out a blowdryer."
The Grand Tetons, Jupiter, and the Milky Way have a three-way.
Passengers aboard a Continental flight threaten to sue after trip from hell: "Because of bad weather, Continental's July 19 Flight 1669 from Caracas, Venezuela, to Newark, N.J., was diverted to Baltimore-Washington International Airport, where it landed at 1:50 p.m. Passengers said after sitting on the grounded plane for hours, they began protesting by banging on overhead compartments, clapping their hands and even signing a petition asking to be let off...At 6:30 p.m., homeland security officers finally allowed passengers to exit the plane, but their troubles didn't end. The officers led them into a room, where they were held for two additional hours. 'We were removed from the plane and were forced to walk single file against the wall, flanked by armed officers one of whom had an attack dog.'"
John Mayer shops till he drops.
Madonna shoots up in front of passengers on transatlantic flight: "Just before landing she brought out the phials of vitamins and injected herself. Seven hours is a long time to go without eating. She was also very quiet and only spoke to the air staff to ask for water."
Posted 12:45 PM EST by Andy in Canada, Gay Rights, GLAAD, John Mayer, Madonna, Stephen Colbert, Transportation | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
It's sad that that guy isn't getting any of his partner's estate, but since he's in Canada, it's not really an outrage. They could have gotten married.
Posted by: Gitai | Aug 15, 2007 12:53:33 PM
Why does he need a whole house if he's used to living in a closet.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 15, 2007 1:12:17 PM
Madonna does commercial aviation?
No way.
Posted by: Digger | Aug 15, 2007 1:17:09 PM
Good one, Zeke!
How fitting that a soulless group like SAAD's current politburo would pimp Repug-fave Needless Markups for their fashion show. Was there a Coors fountain, too? As for this catalog of the alleged "Who's Who" of Gayland, only Chad Allen, Robert Gant, Ian Roberts, and Wilson Cruz have done very much for the community, while the rest are philosophical nonentities whose activism primarily amounts to jerking off their own egos. I wonder how many more fools The Queen of Them All, Reichen. signed up for his "Lift the [DADT] Ban" cruise to Cabo, whose profits from its $1300 and up rooms are sailing nowhere near that fight but only into Reichen's pockets? And with apparent A LOT of unsold books left, "He'll read from... HERE’S WHAT WE’LL SAY, and YOU may even have a CHANCE to take a picture WITH HIM as he signs YOUR copy!"
Posted by: Leland Frances | Aug 15, 2007 1:49:37 PM
14 years in the closet?! Not to lash out at the deceased-God bless his soul, but why should the lover be entitled to anything if their relationship was never officialized?!Gay marriage or even common-law benefits are "monnaie courante" here in Canada so Chowdhury should have known better having lived here all these years. Sorry, buddy!
Posted by: Shabaka | Aug 15, 2007 2:02:06 PM
Leland, it seems you have issue with celebrities. They have feelings and needs also.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 15, 2007 2:06:30 PM
I had actually the fourth comment to be "Uh oh Andy mentioned Reichen again...cue Leland's anti-Reichen rant" but thought better of it and erased it. But I am glad to see Leland that you, if anything, are still very predicatable.
Posted by: Derek | Aug 15, 2007 2:08:45 PM
predictable
Posted by: Derek | Aug 15, 2007 2:10:59 PM
I have to agree with the judge .
Even before we had the right to marry we had common law agreements in place, for gay and straight couples alike, in this country.
If we as a community, or as individuals, demand that our rights be taken seriously.
Be an adult and stand up for yourself.
They where so well hidden in the closet that there was no paper trail to show a relationship beyond that of room mates.
Sorry guys...in this case you reap what you sow.
Posted by: Griffin1573 | Aug 15, 2007 2:14:32 PM
How does that twat Madonna get needles past security at the airport? And how come she can't wait six hours to shoot up until after she gets off the plane? What the fuck, is she a junkie?
Posted by: junkie say what? | Aug 15, 2007 2:20:06 PM
No, I object to people whose only accomplishment is being a celebrity. Not someone who is a celebrity [celebrated] for their accomplishments as actors or singers or dancers or authors or athletes or businessmen or women or bloggers or fill in the blank. Even fashion designers or chefs, but the bar has just been set low, it's practically subterranean. As someone mentioned in another thread, there are a FEW good "reality shows" and I wouldn't condemn anyone simply for having some notoriety for WINNING them [where competition is involved].
But, again, my larger point was speaking to, as is my right, those who bring more than their egos to the table in the form of contributions to society, and how much SAAD is now a perpetuator of the latter problem and not its solution. As for anyone's "feelings and needs," any adult who willing puts his/herself in the public eye is submitting themselves for criticism [or praise].
Posted by: Leland Frances@aol.com | Aug 15, 2007 2:23:13 PM
what strikes as iffy with shooting up B's on the plane, is not the debate of mainlining vitamins (of which there is definite concern) but that airline cabin pressure is enough of a health risk, nevermind adding hypodermic poking into that mix.
Posted by: A.J. | Aug 15, 2007 2:30:42 PM
I would have no objection to organizations like GLAAD or HRC using celebrities to raise money, but the real scandal is A: the celebs are paid for their appearances--a lot and B: the "money" raised is used to get at the real cash--federal matching grants--which owing to various ways of book-cooking is often 10:1 or 20:1 more than the actual direct donations. Not to mention C: the salaries paid to executive in these orgs often draining them of any money to execute their supposed missions. These orgs become little more than govt. sinecures. The celebs are a sideshow used like bait to get some actual donations (a few dollars is all it takes really).
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Aug 15, 2007 2:35:01 PM
Three years ago, an article in the "Blade" revealed that then SAAD head Joan Garry [who castrated the group while in power] was paid [two years before that, i.e., 2002] more than ANY other head of 18 national gay groups—some $208,000 a year including benefits. The greater shock and shame was that her salary was FIVE TIMES the percentage of the group's annual revenue as then HRC head Elizabeth Birch'es salary was even tho HRC brought in 5 times more money.
And as of a year and a half ago, these were some of the salaries HRC is paying with YOUR money:
Joe Solmonese, Executive Director
$226,678
Cathy Nelson, Development Director
$170,330
Cynthia Stachelberg, Legislative Director
$161,936
David M. Smith, Policy Director
$160,060
Cheryl Jacques, Former Executive Director
$159,916
Susanne Salkind, Management Director
$134,482
Andrea Green, Treasurer
$124,933
Kevin Layton, General Counsel
$118,916
Elizabeth Seaton, Legal Director
$111,089
Mary Breslauer, Board Member
$103,000
Timothy Bahr, Major Gifts
$79,456
Mark Shields, Coming Out Project
$77,269
Daryl Herrschaft, Workplace Project
$76,181
Matthew Bayer, Major Gifts
$72,770
By rough sum, nearly a million & half dollars in salaries a year just to open their doors each day. And that doesn't include what they pay their board of directors, their dozens of other employees or the mortgage payments on their palace, er multistoried headquarters....
http://www.washingtonblade.com/2004/1-23/news/national/glaad.cfm
Posted by: Leland Frances | Aug 15, 2007 3:23:39 PM
Actually, Leland, it would be worse than the numbers indicate because most heads of charities receive deferred compensation, meaning they get a large chunk of their salary after they leave office. Then there are perqs such as expense compensation, cars, private jets, long vacations, working vacations, child/spouse health benefits and generous pensions. They also become well connected enough to sit on corporate boards, the boards of other charities and foundations, etc.
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Aug 15, 2007 3:41:39 PM
I have the same question as DIGGER: why is Madonna flying commercial?
And Zeke, that's quite a quote!
Posted by: peterparker | Aug 15, 2007 3:42:59 PM
Paid Board Members! Are you sure? Paying board members at a not for profit should be frowned upon. Please be sure before you make accusations. You should go to charitynavigator.org to find out for sure. I've never been a fan of HRC or GLAAD, so it wouldn't surprise me.
Posted by: ANON | Aug 15, 2007 3:48:19 PM
NO, Madonna does NOT fly commercial. Do not believe everything you read.
She has several gulfstream aircraft of her own. And anyone worth almost $600 million would certainly not fly commercial.
And like you could get needles past security anyway unless you had a medical condition. Bitch, please... that story is laughable it is so stupid.
Posted by: Jordan | Aug 15, 2007 4:25:24 PM
Were there any black gay people at the GLAAD's annual summer cocktail fundraiser event or invited to this event. I did not see any in the few pictures that were posted; also there were no mention of any names. I realize that you can not take a picture of everyone so I am inquiring.
Also I long since decided to stop giving to gay organization as so many of them are not using the monies correctly.
Also gay men if you are in a country that does not allow "civil unions" and even if you are in a civil union, you must have a will. Please take note: GET A WILL!! Far too many gay men over 30 do not have a will, get it done. You have retirement and other benefits that need to be decided upon.
Posted by: TheTruth | Aug 15, 2007 5:04:14 PM
You didn't look at the list very carefully. Mary Breslauer, paid $103,000, is identified as, "Board Member." [This information, by the way, is drawn from information included with their IRS Form 990, ending March 31, 2006.] I'm sorry that I seem to be suggesting that anyone was paid "as a Board member"—though I don't know that they don't. I was referring to the seeming conflict of interest which they try to dispel [and fail I believe] in their 990 statement:
“During the fiscal year, two Board members were paid at fair market value for services that were provided independently from their Board roles. Dan Salera left the Board prior to his work as a consultant to HRC. .... He was paid $29,000 for his services. While serving on the Board of Directors, MARY BRESLAUER received $59,000 for services unrelated to her duties as a Board member. Subsequent to her resignation as a Board member, she continued to provide professional services to HRC and received additional compensation of $44,000.”
Their site currently identifies 29 major salaried employees But, again, that doesn’t include their whole payroll. According to the 990, salaries alone for that reporting period paid with YOUR money totaled nearly SIX AND ONE HALF MILLION DOLLARS—NOT counting benefits.
Despite the fact that ONE POINT TWO MILLION of that money went to “fundraising,” for some reason they still spent ANOTHER TWO MILLION DOLLARS of YOUR money for “PROFESSIONAL fundraising fees.” HUH???
They spent nearly a MILLION dollars of YOUR money on travel. OVER a MILLION on “conferences, conventions, and meetings.” Both of these amounts no doubt included the cost of flying in and housing, etc., their absurdly large board of directors—nearly 40 people.
And people wonder why I call it the Human Rights Champagne fund and repeatedly ask how much BANG are we getting for all these bucks?
Posted by: Leland Frances | Aug 15, 2007 5:19:12 PM
NewsFlash: The liberal gay community is just as corrupt as the conservative straight community.
Posted by: TheTruth | Aug 15, 2007 5:44:03 PM
Though I am skeptical that one could get needles on a plane unless they are medically necessary, Madonna has stated that she is going to be flying commercial ever since she performed at Live Earth, where all performers were encouraged to practice what they preach.
Posted by: Ryan | Aug 15, 2007 7:03:36 PM
why wasn't he in the will then???.great quote Zeke!!
Posted by: alan brickman | Aug 15, 2007 8:28:38 PM
madonna will always be "in trouble" because she spoke out about aids and gay rights when the media or a certain republican gov't wouldn't....it's just that simple....
Posted by: alan brickman | Aug 15, 2007 8:32:36 PM
madonna will always be "in trouble" because she spoke out about aids and gay rights when the media or a certain republican gov't wouldn't....it's just that simple....
Posted by: alan brickman | Aug 15, 2007 8:34:16 PM
Madge has a new CD coming out.
...let the underhanded PR/media manipulation begin. She's a pro at this by now. God love her.
Posted by: Derrick | Aug 15, 2007 8:42:16 PM
A fund raiser in the format of a summer cocktail, featuring a fashion show, models, and an assortment of fancy sell-ebrities d'jour? How 90's and soccer-mom-40th-birthday-party it all sounds! Weren't we gays known as the trend setters of society? Even Barbara Bush could have come with a much smarter and updated idea. Come on, guys!
Posted by: Cristian Cravello | Aug 16, 2007 9:23:35 AM
Christ, who fucking cares about Madonna, what is really awesome is that NASA picture. Occasionally, the vapidity of our times makes me want to put my head in the oven.
HRC can go jump in a lake. Ever since they endorsed Al D'Amato for US Senate they haven't gotten a dime of my money nor will they ever again.
Posted by: Will | Aug 16, 2007 9:23:45 AM
My god Derrick, you are right.
Madonna IS working on a new album, so that means she'll be up to all sorts of antics for publicity.
Does that mean she'll wind up buying some more children from a Third World country?
As much as I love her, she is the MASTER of publicity and scandal, and could teach those at Wharton a thing or two about it.
(and us silly queens fall for it all every time ;)
Posted by: Jordan | Aug 16, 2007 10:06:09 PM