Blogs and Stories
Morehouse College's Gay Travesty
AP Photo
This week the historically black college banned crossdressing. Elizabeth Gates on why the decision disgraces a school that once groomed iconoclasts like Spike Lee and Martin Luther King.
Atlanta might have one of the largest, most colorful gay communities in the South, but apparently none of them belong at historically black Morehouse College.
Morehouse recently updated their “Appropriate Dress Policy,” implemented specifically for “five students who are living a gay lifestyle that is leading them to dress a way we do not expect in Morehouse men,” according to Dr. William Bynum, Morehouse vice president for student services. The new dress code has banned do-rags, baggy pants, walking on campus with bare feet, and finally, “the wearing of clothing associated with women’s garb (dresses, tops, tunics, purses, pumps, etc.) on the Morehouse campus or at college-sponsored events.”
To tell a student that his sense of self is only as good as his ability to conform is to reduce this student, and Morehouse at large, to the exact consciousness it fought so hard to defeat.
Some students laughed at the new rules, others cringed, and a few men on Morehouse’s campus lost their identities. It’s simple to brush off—or even support—a ban on men wearing dresses, especially at a historically black intellectual Mecca like Morehouse College. You could argue it’s distracting. It could be interpreted as a sign of rebellion, or worse still, it could go against some misinterpreted detail of the Bible’s version of masculinity, thus embarrassing the whole campus in the eyes of a suddenly judgmental God.
But individuality has no dress code. I attended Spelman College, Morehouse’s sister school, for three strong years, leaving at the tail end of my junior year because, in many ways, I saw this coming. I watched gay men toy with the idea of presenting their full selves to their critical peers, often deciding against it for fear of a backlash. I watched the world beyond our campuses grow to accept and support homosexual love, intimacy, and partnerships, and I felt trapped in a time capsule of sexual politics. I loved being at Spelman. It was the only college I applied to out of high school. But as my ideals began to extend beyond my own socialized standards, I knew I couldn’t stay.
The year before I left, a boy was brutally beaten with a baseball bat in a bathroom stall at a Morehouse dorm for “looking at” another student in the shower. The victim was rushed to the hospital and underwent emergency brain surgery that saved his life. The abuser was sentenced to serve two consecutive 10-year sentences in prison. Astonishingly, the campus was left divided about whether or not the incident should be considered a hate crime. Shortly thereafter, I packed my things and left.
To educate a black man was once unheard of—to teach him to love himself was nearly impossible. Morehouse once dared to do both. Since its inception in 1867, the college has upheld a tradition of greatness: positioning Martin Luther King to lead our community toward equality in a world that said we weren’t worthy of basic human rights, helping Spike Lee build a foundation for numerous films that would single-handedly give the world a vivid glimpse of our normal, human struggle, and offering Samuel L. Jackson firm shoulders to launch an acting career from. It allowed countless others who have come and gone to leave with one profound truth: that they, too, were groomed in a place that allowed them to be their very best, most powerfully free selves.
This time there is nobody to blame but us. No finger to point. No crutch to lean on. This is about our community and the pain we inflict upon each other. “The Man” does not exist here. It’s not a secret that the black community has struggled with identity for years, often forcing us into the dark corners of our own self-loathing. Black masculinity has often raged against itself on street corners in Brooklyn, after-school programs in Chicago, even in open-air parks with young children standing by. We are so disjointed as a people that we no longer recognize ourselves in each other; we divide ourselves based on class, color, social status, and now the manifestations of homosexuality.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Sarah Drops the Act
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Palin's Gold Mine
Duff McDonald is a contributing editor at New York magazine and a former contributing editor at Condé Nast Portfolio. His book, Last Man Standing, about Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, was published by Simon & Schuster in October.
Duh! Of Course Fashion's Racist
Elizabeth Gates is a style correspondent for The Daily Beast. She is a graduate of The New School University and a former intern at Vogue magazine.
The War Over Black Hair
Elizabeth Gates is a style correspondent for The Daily Beast. She is a graduate of The New School University and a former intern at Vogue magazine.
Backstage Beauty
Elizabeth Gates is a style correspondent for The Daily Beast. She is a graduate of The New School University and a former intern at Vogue magazine.
My goodness, what is clothing but a bunch of fabric cut and stitched to make (some) people look pretentious.
I looove fashion, but if an organization emphasize this much power over outfits, then it might not be as deep as I think it is.
What up with blacks being so anti-gay (or, in this case, anti-"gay lookin'")? First they helped to vote down Prop 8 in California, and now this.
As with Republicans, whenever I see a group soooo vehemently opposed to homosexuals, I think to myself: "There's some folks with a strong subverted desire to toss some salad."
Crossdressing is a gender issue, not a sex issue. If you don't know the difference, then you're not a credible source on this subject.
Heterosexuals can be crossdressers and homosexuals can be repulsed by crossdressing. While homosexuality and crossdressing are related issues, they're not one in the same.
I do believe that one should be able to should whatever they choose but, that is not the world we live in, and that's not just an issue for homosexuals. You've glossed over most of the new dress code and focused on one specific part. I disagree with the school's decision and it would affect my decision to attend the school. But, I know their intention wasn't to discriminate, it was to prepare their students for the corporate world.
Clayton-- It's certainly true (as you pointed out) that crossdressing is not unique to homosexuals. But, I do think it IS an issue of identity. And, as such, denying someone the right to express that is unfortunate.
But I think the broader issue you raise about being "prepared for the corporate world" is even more complicated.
Is it appropriate for a school to ask students to dress professionally? Yes. But, professional dress has nothing to do with gender or gender identity. It is entirely possible for someone to a male to wear a woman's business suit.
If I am the Dean at Morehouse, this isn't my policy. But, there is nothing in the policy that points to discrimation towards homosexuals. There is plenty of discrimation towards transgendered and African Americans but, not homosexuals.
Or is there? Are we associating attire with idenity? Do the clothes you have on, say who you are? I really hope that's not the case.
Right. It should also be pointed out that crossdressing isn't really a term used all that often by people who dress in clothes to traditionally are associated to a different sex or gender. But we use it nonetheless because it is easily definable and facilitates conversation.
But gender and sex can't be separated into two categories. They overlap and it is nearly impossible to talk about only sex or only gender because the terms are culturally interrelated.
Terms are adopted by cultures and subcultural groups and definitions are pliable. The urban Black gay community uses terms and definitions that differ from those of the "mainstream" and much more visible white gay community. So let's not write off anyone for not being super current on their vocab.
Morehouse's stated mission isn't "to churn out corporate tools"; it is "to develop men with disciplined minds who will lead lives of leadership and service." That's a noble goal, but, where the dress code is concerned, they seem to have confused discipline with conformity.
Superfancy. You rock! "...they seem to have confused discipline with conformity" That is EXACTLY the issue and you said it perfectly!!! Thanks for adding your two cents.... toddlegislator
It takes alot of discipline to conform.
MajorDude - 'It takes alot of discipline to conform.'
But the reverse can be true. Sometimes it takes discipline to not conform.
You "know their intention wasn't to discriminate"? How would you possibly know that?
Or perhaps Morehouse is preparing their students for discrimination IN the corporate world by warming them up to discrimination in college?
i am black and gay, didn't go to a HBCU, i went to UT. We had coming out days. I find it really sad that Morehouse could be so rigid about the future of Black men. Well if blacks really wanted conformity, why go to morehouse. I believe expression of finding your identity prepares you for the real world if there is such a thing. Trust me, all the kids, including myself who dyed their hair, got nose rings and tongue rings, took all that stuff out when it was time to get a real job. I now know Morehouse is not a university to be respected but a prison: which requires mandotary uniforms.
"James Baldwin, Octavia Butler, Bayard Rustin, Audre Lorde, Countee Cullen, Angela Davis, Alvin Ailey, Ma Rainey, Langston Hughes, Josephine Baker, Bill T. Jones, Billie Holiday, Johnny Mathis, and Bessie Smith." None of them CROSSDRESSED!! Ms. Gates and most of you missed the point of the Dress Code. Morehouse isnt telling anyone NOT to be gay, they're simply saying it's a private and prestigious institution that has always had pride in the image of its students. Young PROFESSIONAL men. They don't want baggy pants, doo-rags or men in dresses. Noone is telling them don't have a boyfriend, just to dress appropriately.
The line needs to be drawn somewhere. If you wanna dress like a thug, wear dresses or wear daisy-dukes and cut-off shirts, then go to a PUBLIC school and you can wear what you want. Morehouse can make what rules they want to make, and if you don't like it, don't attend that school.
"Crossdressing is a gender issue, not a sex issue. If you don't know the difference, then you're not a credible source on this subject."
Totally agree with your statement. While I do think that Morehouse's new dress policy is a message to its gay population to get back in the closet, this is an issue of gender. This is an attack on black masculinity, a way of reigning it back in and forcing it to fit in some idealized (read: White) mold.
Morehouse has just shown its queer-phobia. Shame, shame, shame.
ItsClayton -- I understand your point, the distinction is important. The epitome of our contemporary distinctions between sex, sexuality and gender allows for two heterosexual cross-dressers to engage in a sexual relationship w/o anyone missing the point about their "identity." But I think it's important to understand that Morehouse was not hedging against "crossdressing" or "crossgendered" behaviour, speficially. This was the classic African-American backlash against homosexuality, and Elizabeth was right to make the jump to sexuality.
I completely disagree with this new policy. I don't believe it was created out of the need to prepare our young men for entree into the corporate world. As an institution of higher learning the education that these young men receive is preparation enough. Marginalizing students and creating a Stepfordian environment will only stifle intellectual discourse and individuality which are the building blocks of entrepreneurism. I see many successfuly black men in the corporate world who rock sagging jeans and do-rags to work - granted they own the company. Do you really think a Morehouse grad would report to a job interview with his resume in hand and a do-rag on his head? Let's get real and not stifle the next generation's creativity and individuality.
I am from the south as well and while I am not fro Georgia I know full well that people are still shocked when they see a black gay man walking around. There were numerous hate crimes in my small town (against gays) and if someone was daring enough to actually wear women's clothing they would have been shot.
Especially a black man.
Again, Gates. Brilliant job. Just great.
Most cross dressers are indeed heterosexual (Eddie Izzard for example).
"Living a gay lifestyle"......gender identity or sexual orientation if you prefer, is not a lifestyle. Did straight people choose to be straight?
Homophobia is deeply rooted in the black community as Prop. 8 highlighted.
Bottom line: stick to the script. Appropriate attire. Put them all in standard uniforms: shirts and ties (yes I see this as being standard no wiggle room in the definition) and be done with it.
"and we are not saved..."
"We have become so warped by trying to squeeze ourselves into the talented tenth that we are willing to off our own kind to reach an ideal we aren't even sure exists. " Tina, Arrianna wouldn't be caught dead publishing shit like this. George Patton
I truly believe that people who oppose the Dress code are missing the point. This is not about stifling someone's individuality its about being appropriately dressed on a campus of higher education. As a recent college graduate and someone who currently has friends who are both still attending Morehouse and are recent graduates I can say that these "Dress Guidelines" are the least of their concerns. It has become the norm for young people at colleges and universities to get up and go to class in whatever! Be it saggy pants, pjs, daisy dukes and other inappropriate clothing. This should not be allowed under the guise of individual expression! Morehouse College has a history and tradition of churning out EXCEPTIONAL young men and at $30,000 a year these young men ought to dress the part instead of coming out of the house like who done it and why. I'm sure that even the men that Ms. Gates referenced as alumni would not be proud to see the way some of these young men carry themselves on the campus of their alma mater. Call me old-fashioned but there is a time and a place for everything and dressing like a mini thug or a woman when you are supposed to be concerning yourself with your education is not that.
I'm also a recent college grad and would have been abhorred if someone told me how to dress in class every day. College is about education, yes, but it's also about finding yourself - discovering all the things about you that make you YOU. I grew in my 4 years at school in immeasurable ways, as I'm sure you did too, and simply can't fathom anyone promoting rules that literally strip these men of a way to express themselves.
And who, exactly, gets to decide what "dressing the part" for success looks like? If these men truly feel successful and at their best in a dress, then why not allow them 4 years where they can dress that way without scrutiny and without punishment before they enter this harsh real world.
College should be a haven, not a prison.
Ms Gates, good job.
This was written very well, and I find myself fighting to agree with it. I understand everything that you're getting at, but for some reason, I have no problem with the dress code.
Like Rob said, just put them in standard uniforms, it's not unheard of, and I think it would help.
George Patton - That is an outstanding sentence. This girl is outspoken, to the point and in charge.
As I keep saying, I am a white woman, IN fashion and I truly check the beast for Elizabeth's work. She has educated me on so much.
Sweet Trouble: to quote ms gates: "to promote the idea that to dress the part is as important as the standard of education is to mock the legacy of empowerment Morehouse has held fast to for so many decades."
Saiday: As per my previous post, I strongly disagree. To dress the part is to act the part and acting the part helps one rise to the degree of distinction, legacy and tradition the college is known for.
Asking students to come to class appropriately dressed should be a non-issue. One can empower oneself and have a high degree a individuality while still dressing appropriately.
While I respect Ms. Gates opinion, I still strongly disagree.
saiday:
I was going to respond to Patton's post, but you beat me to it. Amen!
That's a gem of a sentence. Could it be that Mr. Patton's issue with the words, and with the author, is the simple fact he cannot understand either one?
OK. Explain to me what that sentence means. In English, please. George Patton
sure.
"Talented tenth" was a term W.E.B. Du Bois used to describe his belief that one in every ten black men could/would achieve success. Du Bois felt the most viable means was through higher education.
In trying to "off our own kind," Ms. Gates refers to black folks undercutting one another's efforts in order to achieve some perfect standing in the eyes of white folks. But truth is, there is no way to achieve this because regardless of academic achievement, professionalism- expressed through dress, speech, or performance, there will always be some white folks who don't want black folks anywhere near their turf-whatever turf that may be.
Noontime... good response, I am glad that I better understand.
I agree there maybe some white folks that don't balck folks around. I am sure there are some places where black folks don't want white folks around either... How many white folk are there at Morehouse?
yes, GPatton, great question, am hoping for a translation of the sentence!!
Basically Noontime,
Gates is a college drop-out who writes in slang. She deals with fashion and should not be in the position of writing articles about academic institutions. No doubt Spelman University is glad that she doesn't claim to have graduated from their school. There are many smart and talented Spelman grads who should have been given the opportunity to write this article instead.
Unfortunately GPatton: Gates is no different from Meghan McCain who DID finish college but also can't write a real essay to save her life. These two women have these positions simply because they are daughters of famous men. Leaving more talented female writers out in the cold.
crymeariver -- college drop out? really? i'm guessing *you* didn't graduate from college if your post is any indication of your research skills. just because she left one school doesn't mean she didn't transfer, you dolt. (hint: this is the internet... try clicking on her name.)
Georgie Boy. Hon: This same post auto-publishes at HuffPost. Arianna = Queen Aggregator. We can only bow in RSS humbleness. Matter if fact, it's already there. Here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wires/2009/10/18/morehouse-college-no-cro s_ws_325393.html
Amazing what you can do when you divorce up.
Pardon me, GP. HuffPost's picker thingee picked-up an Advocate.com post on the same topic. Not Daily Beast. Not yet at least. Gosh darn it all. Branding is tough in a new media world, eh?
;) SpaceyG on Twitter
Ms Gates. Your words are truly inspiring. I attended Oglethorpe University in Atlanta, where homosexuality was just another part of campus life. The heterosexual men there became used to it and they saw us as friends. I am deeply saddened for my fellow gay men attending Morehouse. This horrid policy may have been brought about by just 5 men, but there are considerably more than 5 gay men at Morehouse. This policy will only further the divide between the heterosexual and homosexual men on that campus. I can only hope the the men of Morehouse will unite under one goal, and hopefully that goal will be acceptance.
RYFM? As a graduate of Spelman, I wish they too had a dress code. I attended Spelman when there was still a curfew, which I loved. I believe in tradition, but I also believe that we must accept changes in our society. That being said, the campus should embrace homosexuality, just as I thought that Spelman should have. However, that does not mean that acceptance includes dressing any way you wish. I wish the men wore shirts and ties. Your job as a student, is to go to school. After school, do what you like. It's like work. Most companies require that you dress a certain way, after 5 pm, go for it. This is no different.
Elizabeth, I find it incredulous that you left Spelman College in your junior year because, "You felt trapped in a time capsule of sexual politics." Nonsense. It is hard to imagine that the sexual politics at Morehouse would affect a student attending Spelman so gravely. My impression is that you are grandstanding simply for attention and recognition. There are many institutions in this country that require a controlled, displined environment to function effectively: the military, workplace,church, college campuses, etc. Morehouse is no exception. The adminstration should do whatever is required to create a conducive learning environment. Your piece reminds me of the work of Lawrence Otis Graham, and to some extend Henry Louis Gates, it's all for self-grandizement.
Exactly! As a Spelman grad, c/o '08, I find it utterly ridiculous that such a flimsy excuse as (and I am paraphrasing here) "Well, the sex/gender politics as Morehouse seemed too archaic"... Anyone who attends Spelman and Morehouse know that these two campuses, while sharing an entwined history and tradition, are inherently different when it comes to how they choose to mold graduates for success. Sure, while I went to Spelman, I didnt agree with all of Morehouse's policies. At all. But that never made me want to leave SPELMAN; I was never so affected by what went down on Morehouse's campus (on an administrative level) that I just had to leave my own school. I cannot emphasis enough that these are different schools, with different administrations and different codes of conduct. Fleeing Spelman College, a feminist-leaning all women's school, because you DISLIKED Morehouse would have gravely disappointed all the wonderful Spelman graduates who carved out significant places in this world without the influence of men. Let's be real-- your statement here reeks of insincerity and while I cannot gage why you chose to leave Spelman with ONE year to go, if it is for the reason you stated, then Spelman was probably better off.
did you read the article? she left spelman for a lot of reasons, and one of them was the beating of a student and the fallout therefrom ON spelman's campus.
One big problem with your article: You write that crossdressing is a manifestation of homosexuality. It is not.
The issue is appropriate dress in PUBLIC. People dress however they want at home or out with friends. SInce there is no self-restraint anymore, it's not unreasonable for the college to have a dress code. Yes, college is about conformity - to some degree - to keep the focus on learning.
Today, the rights of the individual are paramount and that's too bad. It's what's lead to this 'me' generation, political correctness and the end of the middle class. To curb one's individuality to support the society is honorable. "Discretion is the better part of valor."
Morehouse is wrong. Â Liza is right!Â
How can Morehouse sensor "individuality"? Â I hope this article brings some heat and their administration is able to readdress this discriminatory "dress code" rule. Â My best friend was beat up in grade school for dressing like Tina Turner...I thought he looked wonderful. The trauma that he faced in that third grade circumstance plagued him throughout highschool until he was able to liberate himself in college. Â College is a time of self discovery. Â Morehouse is taking that right away from these young men - and making them into cookie cutter clones that in my opinion is BORING and lacks creativity!!
Brilliant job, Liza! Â Â
I believe that Ms. Gates has conflated cross-dressing and homosexuality when the two are not necessarily related.
And I'm torn between the argument that enforcing a dress code contributes to self-esteem and educational focus and my dislike of baggy jeans, particularly when the underwear is visible at the top. BUT, THIS IS AMERICA, and I think that we should value freedom of expression above all else, particularly in an education environment for while students are paying good money.
So let them cross-dress! Who are they hurting?
This is a private school. They can make what ever rules they want. If you don't like it, go somewhere else, where they find it acceptable. That is America. The private school has a choice in its rules. The potential student has their choice of attending that school with its rules.
On another note what % of professional jobs allow you to cross-dress, where do-rags, baggy-jeans?
I think Colin Powell spoke about this subject.
i attended a big, southern, public, liberal arts university and saw all manners of dress and drag, and while it can be distracting or construed as disrespectful to push the boundaries of what is publicly acceptable attire, that is what happens when you put young people in an open community/environment that asks them to examine themselves and their values and ideas. i'm sure there are people out there looking for a little attention, but there are also people who are freely themselves and to deny anyone the freedom to be themselves, especially at a place of higher learning, is a travesty. i'm not going to beat the 1st amendment dead horse, but you get the idea. and if we're going to force gay people to conform, why not force people to 'deal' with gay people, or cross-dressers, or racists, or idiots, or geniuses, or asians, or dog-lovers? why can it not be a two-way street when it comes to living among all kinds of people? it takes all kinds, and learning that is a big step in maturity. and college is a great place to learn the diversity lesson b/c in theory, you can talk about all the sticky issues exposure to diversity and new experiences brings in a safe and intellectually supportive environment. unless the people asking you to examine yourself place limits on your self-examination and self-expression. and that's part of what ms. gates is getting at - that any university or community or society that wants to grow people's minds and selves that subsequently places limits on that growth is self-defeating and undercuts it's own ideals and principles. there is a level of trust between the student and the university, and it seems that Morehouse has abused their position in that relationship, and greatly to their discredit.
Ms. Gates left Spelman because the students there nor the students at Morehouse were socially progressive enough for her?
In choosing to attend Spelman, she chose an institution steeped in black bourgieness. Like much of society, the black elite don't accept or embrace conspicuous displays of homosexuality or any behavior that suggests confusion about one's identity.
Crossdressing isn't necessarily indicative of homosexuality, as other commentors have noted, but I think it's safe to say that a male who presents himself as a female is going out of his way to color outside the lines.
Well, society punishes, marginalizes, ignores or, in some cases, greatly rewards people who color outside the lines. That's the chance one takes.
i think ms gates pointed out that they lost their identities when the "dress guidelines" were made, so i don't think they were confused about their identity - in fact, quite the opposite. they know their own identities, but what the society in question reads into their displays and/or how that society thinks a person should outwardly communicate their identity is what's being discussed. and i agree that society marginalizes or rewards those outside the lines, so maybe if Morehouse left those societal mechanizations work to their own ends, they wouldn't have had to address the 'dress guidelines' and thus avoided the flap altogether.
elisabethtehsavant:
First, I love all your posts. Because of you, this is one of the more intelligent discussions in these parts.
But I think the core issue is a bit more specific.
I think Morehouse is more or less telling its students: "hey, unless you're Tyler Perry and you have the talent (?) to make wearing a dress your means of establishing an entertainment empire, then you'd best be prepared to blend with corporate America."
To say that a man who dresses as a woman knows his identity is, I think, a stretch.
There's a difference between who a person is and who a person wishes he were.
As to Morehouse taking a laissez-faire approach to finding one's self, why should the administration allow its students to behave/appear in a way that would be rejected out of hand in, say, corporate America? For that matter, service industry employers wouldn't take much of a shine to a male who arrived at a job interview wearing a ruffled cardigan, blouse, skirt and heels.
What I find telling is that no one seems to be pushing the identity argument in response to the school's decision to ban do-rags and baggy jeans. This, in my mind, suffices as proof that what passes for acceptable ultimately depends upon who has the final say.
Or would those who contend that Morehouse's male students shouldn't be banned from dressing as women have it be that no one and everyone has the final say?
This is not about cross-dressing.This is about homophobia in the African-American community. As black 'phobes equate gayness with "being like a woman" y're using the dodge of a "dress code" to tell black gay men that their existence will not be tolerated.
Gays aren't the only men who cross dress, which is to say that Morehouse's dress code isn't about so-called homophobia. Why is it that whenever [some] gays are inconvenienced, the homophobia card gets played?
And anyway, Morehouse isn't telling its students not to be gay or that homosexuality won't be tolerated. It's telling its students, all of them, to appear like what they are: male college students.
Again, why isn't anyone objecting to the school banning do-rags or saggy jeans? To be sure, some of the men who wear such are gay. What gives?
For as long as there've been colleges there've been crossdressers, and I'm sure that the first college male to stroll across the yard in drag wasn't a Morehouse student. That Morehouse felt it necessary to specifically ban crossdressing says that some students had taken their freedom of expression to the extreme (whatever that looks like). Let's not forget that Morehouse is a men's college.
Good for Moorehouse. Colleges have the right to institute an appropriate dress code. There is such a thing as pc gone amuk and this is one of those times. How distracting this will be when students are learning. If the students do not agree they are able to enroll at another school that does not have any rules like that.
Let's just take this to another level. How could the school not allow it if a professor comes in the classroom with a tee bearing a rebel flag or one with a swastika or kkk emblem? No one is stopping them from wearing such attire outside the school and that is how it should remain. I sincerely hope the school does not back down.
And you're right "Noontime" they all just LOVE Tyler Perry -- a big ol' cross-dressign closet queen who fires anyone who works for him from joining a union, connives to get name actors to work for him for scale, and mouths about GAWWWWDDDD 24/7.
When is someone going to out this creep?
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.