#and I am gay for lor women

[dreamings-free]

How Harry Styles Became A Modern Style Icon

by Phoe­be Luck­hurst - Evening Standard 15/11/19

A man wrought in the fires of teenage boy­band hy­per-stardom is not afraid of a lit­tle commotion. Still when Harry Styles — the One Di­rec­tion mat­inée idol turned lan­guid Gen Z icon — tweeted, at 1.01 pm GMT on Wed­nes­day af­ter­noon, that he would be tak­ing his up­com­ing album Fine Line on tour, you could, if at­tuned to the cor­rect de­mo­graphic fre­quency, hear the howl echo around the in­ter­net: gut­tural, hun­gry, ul­u­lat­ing. This was a pseudo-re­li­gious experience: one vi­ral meme de­picted the Pope hold­ing a copy of his al­bum aloft. The announce­ment has been retweeted al­most 70,000 times.

The 25-year old is a tour vet­eran — he spent five years and five al­bums strapped to the thunder­ing 1D jug­ger­naut — but this new tour is his first as a bona fide solo brand. The al­bum, his first in two years, is synth-soaked and soul­ful, the al­bum’s aes­thetic fever­-dreamy. Granted, he’s not the first per­son to go to So­Cal, try a few magic mush­rooms and de­clare him­self radically trans­formed, but the re­sults are be­guil­ing — and cer­tainly a world away from his years as a Simon Cow­ell Ken doll. Since his last record, he has co- hosted t he Met Gala and been reborn as an Alessan­dro Michele muse. This is your Styles crib sheet.

Melody maker

Styles’s new al­bum — writ­ten un­der a tie-dye mist af­ter tak­ing the afore­men­tioned psychedelics, which also re­sulted in a mishap in which he bit off the tip of his tongue — is “all about hav­ing sex and feel­ing sad”, which, granted, as a topline, does not wildly dif­fer­en­ti­ate the record from the genre of “al l other mu­sic ever”. Still, the early signs for Fine Line are encouraging. Its first sin­gle, Lights Up—which has been streamed al­most 100 mil­lion times on Spo­tify —is­ synth-y, soul­ful, un­der­stat­edly an­themic, very dif­fer­ent to, and bet­ter than, the lead sin­gle on his last solo record, the Seven­ties, soft-rock Sign of the Times( it still, of course, hit No 1), and very, very dif­fer­ent from any­thing he did with 1D. Many thou­sands of words have been writ­ten about whether there is a bi­sex­ual sub­text to Lights Up. It has been noted that the song was re­leased on Na­tional Com­ing Out Day, that Styles’s sex­u­al­ity has been sub­ject to fren­zied specu­la­tion be­fore, the video fea­tures an oiled-up, top­less Styles gy­rat­ing around men and women, and that the lyrics (“Shine, I’m not ever go­ing back/ Shine, step into the light”) could be in­ter­preted as a mean­ing­ful rev­e­la­tion of sorts. Cer­tainly, he has be­come a queer icon — especially with Gen Z — who are thrilled by his se­lec­tion of gen­derqueer singer-song­writer King Princess as his sup­port act for the Euro­pean part of his tour. Speak­ing of col­lab­o­ra­tors, Styles worked on the al­bum with pro­duc­ers Tyler John­son, who has worked with Tay­lor Swift, Mi­ley Cyrus and Ed Sheeran, and Jeff Bhasker, who has collabo­rated wit h Mark Ron­son and Kanye West, and his friend, Tom Hull, aka Kid Har­poon, who co-wrote Shake It Out for Florence + The Ma­chine. He has also been granted a fairy god­mother: Ste­vie Nicks, who called him her “lit­tle muse” at Fleetwood Mac’s hyped Wembley head­line gig i n J une. “S he’s a l ways there for you,” Styles has said in the past. “She knows what you need: ad­vice, a lit­tle wis­dom, a blouse, a shawl.” Sure.

Got Styles

Any young man raised in the white heat of a boy­band spot­light must be granted the space to find his fash­ion path; Styles has done so with no mis­steps and ex­u­ber­ant plea­sure. Once upon a time, he would sem­a­phore his in­di­vid­u­al­ity with a ban­dana; now, he turns up to a cover interview with Rolling Stone in a white floppy hat, blue denim bell-bot­toms and Gucci shades, his nails coloured pink and green. His favourite trousers, un­til he lost them on the beach, were a pair of mus­tard cor­duroy flares; this week, he wore a Lan­vin sweater vest with a sheep de­sign that sent a co­terie of Lon­don menswear stylists into throes of ec­stasy. He wears flo­ral suits and Cuban heels, ruf­fled, New Ro­man­tic shirts, Charles Jef­frey jump­suits and pussy- bow blouses. It is flam­boy­ant, self-con­sciously Bowie/Jag­ger, and in Gen Z par­lance, “very ex­tra”. His stylist Harry Lam­bert is par­tial to an ex­trav­a­gant col­lar, dra­matic neck­line and a vo­lu­mi­nous trouser.

Be­sides Lam­bert, an­other part of this evo­lu­tion has been his re­la­tion­ship with Gucci’s cre­ative di­rec­tor Michele, who has turned the Ital­ian her­itage brand into the ul­ti­mate post-gen­der lux­ury fash­ion la­bel, the first to merge their menswear and wom­enswear, and dis­patch male mod­els down the cat­walk in dresses and women in suits. A good look for a Gen Z idol.

With the brand

Notably, the brand­ing on this al­bum and its tour art­work is con­sis­tent with this new look Styles. The al­bum cover fea­tures Styles i n white cus­tom- made Gucci bell bot­toms and a Pep­to Bismol-pink shirt, open al­most to the waist, shot by mod-goth Tim Walker with a fish­eye lens (it is Walker’s hand in that S&M glove you can see in the left-hand cor­ner). In the dreamy video for Lights Up he wears a glit­tery suit and sus­penders, in a sort of hal­lu­ci­na­tory ver­sion of Satur­day Night Fever. Into it.

Stand up

Then there’s his voice — not the mu­sic, but the ac­tivism. Even as one-fifth of a boy­band manufac­tured by Cow­ell’s al­go­rithm, he was quick, quippy and itch­ing to go off-mes­sage; but now that he con­trols his own, he is am­pli­fy­ing causes such as Black Lives Mat­ter and End Gun Violence. He wore stick­ers for both on his gui­tar on his last tour, which might sound small, except that photographs of Styles gal­lop around the dig­i­tal world at hy­per­speed. At con­certs, he has waved pride, bi and trans flags, and a Black Lives Mat­ter flag. He once bor­rowed a flag from an au­di­ence mem­ber at a show in Philadel­phia that read, “Make Amer­ica Gay Again”. At a show on his last tour, he de­clared: “If you are black, if you are white, if you are gay, if you are straight, if you are trans­gen­der — who­ever you are, who­ever you want to be, I sup­port you.”

A vo­cal, en­gaged fan­dom of teenage girls minted his mul­ti­mil­lion-pound for­tune; he is loyal and ad­mir­ing of their zeal. “They’re the most hon­est — es­pe­cially if you’re talk­ing about teenage girls, but older as well,” he told Rolling Stone this sum­mer. “They have that bull­shit de­tec­tor. We’re so past that dumb out­dated nar­ra­tive of ‘Oh, these peo­ple are girls, so they don’t know what they’re talk­ing about.’ They’re the ones who know what they’re talk­ing about. They’re the peo­ple who lis­ten ob­ses­sively. They f***ing own this shit. They’re run­ning it.” Ob­vi­ously, he’s a fem­i­nist. “Of course men and women should be equal. I don’t want credit for be­ing a fem­i­nist. I think the ideals of fem­i­nism are pretty straight­for­ward.” An icon is born.

[migleefulmoments]

"Because accusing a gay man of hitting on all the straight men is homophobic. Because Abby insinuated that the video is problematic" Did the anons say Ryan has hit on all the straight men? This is getting weird. I am sorry to see you keep misrepresenting what the original anon said - who mentioned only a "crush". I don't remember anyone here accusing Ryan of hitting on Darren. The anons weren't talking about Abby either, you brought her up regardless. But she uses everything to tinhat.

I’m done talking about this- if you want to say more then come off anon and have a conversation.  But they DID imply that Ryan was being predatory and inappropriate- I don’t remember what the first anon said but I have been responding to the tinhatters comments. 

Abby: Yes Anon, That was my take as well.

This got long so it’s under a cut

 followed immediately by:

justcantgetenoughcc

I have seen the recording of Ry/M touching Da/rren’s cheek before, and still find it creepy. It looks as if D turns his head to kiss R’s hand. What do you think?

Abby: I noticed that too. That Darren turned his head and blew him a kiss / or kissed his hand… to appease him, as he was interrupting the conversation with their guest of honor - Mayor Bloomberg. Possessive much? I found Harry Shum’s expression even more interesting as he notices what RM is doing.

There’s another picture that goes with this set… Where Heather is unceremoniously yanked out of the way, so that RM could stand next to Darren.

Look at Jane’s reaction to HOW RM is describing Chris here…

Chrisdare actually comes in with a reality check and pushes back against their nonsense.  Notice that she points out that they need to watch the entire video to see the truth.  

chrisdarebashfulsmiles No it’s not the right take and it’s easy too see if you see the entire clip: tightening the lips is not the same as kissing hands.

Now, i know i’m gonna sound rude but i’m mad and pissed off AF in D’s behalf (and as a person who try always to check before speaking) and it’s not something that happens a lot. I usually stay silent too but today this is too much for me. I don’t understand this need of spreading “lies” about him of on this kind of things. To prove that is ok to be mad at him for the bearding and thinking he’s always been disrespectful to C?? That maybe he did casting couch?

We have enough haters… he has more haters than we have… why there’s the need to invent stuff about him it’s beyond me. And now you all block me or whatever, i don’t care. I swear after 6 years here and all that this means… I DON’T CARE.

But for the love of God he has enough on his plate without this kind of stuff. Said that, i agree on RM being the creepiest and i hate him for how he treated C.

Abby comes back with a toned attitude and agrees with Chrisdare. She wasn’t reflagging this earlier in the week? No idea what that means but she can’t help but stir the shit. 

ajw720

I was actively not reblogging this gifs earlier in the week because it’s a reminder I don’t think d needs.

But he’s literally pushing his hand away with his face. As @chrisdarebashfulsmiles said, d as enough on his plate. Can we not add to it with falsehoods?

No one is arguing about RM. but for some reason d has decided to dance with the devil he knows. It must be his best option. And c is still there and supporting him so he’s clearly ok with the choice. Let’s not add to the substantial weight on their shoulders.

Rouged has the most outrageous comments-as usual- and Abby reblogged them without pushing back and in fact said “some good points”. Since she didn’t call out those she felt were untrue-I must assume she was fully supportive of the suggestions of impropriety on behalf of Ryan. This isn’t the only time Abby has sullied Ryan’s name. Rouged is only upset that Darren’s name is dragged through the mud.  

rougedraconteur

This has been around forever, and will never go away, will it?  I had asked that this not be reposted, for what I thought were obvious reasons, but people just can’t help dragging him through the mud.  So, let’s talk about this little piece of hell.  This was when they were filming the competition in New York.  D’s bit was supposed to be over, and he was only in that episode at the very end, which could have been filmed anywhere.  BUT, he had broken so big that he, and the Warblers, were given an album release and were also in NYC and on Today show premiering it. D was privately discussing with the producers where his character Blaine would go next.  Would he have his own show with the Warblers, a spinoff, or would he stay with Glee?  It was a huge decision, and very high-pressure.  C had already returned to Glee and New Directions, this was the big show.  But, starring in his own show, and giving all the other Warblers a bigger career, that was also tempting. I am sure he felt the pressure of that decision, and how his choice impacted others, he had formed a bond with the Warbler actors.  But being on the big show, a sure thing, and with C as his co-star, seeing him and working with him every day, well…

This was a “Welcome to NYC” photo op and news article by Mayor Bloomberg with some of the cast, and this was the moment D was shaking hands with Mayor Bloomberg, and speaking to him.  I happen to think D has some political aspirations as well, so he may have mentioned something when he met Bloomberg.  RM was probably high, he acts so erratically here, but he reaches out, with a camera and tons of photographers there, and pats him on the cheek, cups his cheek, actually, and pats it way too fondly, extremely inappropriate but what RM does a lot, and not just with D. (more about that later.). I don’t know why Br/ad Fal/chuk does not control him better, but they are both horrible people, as is Dan/te Di/Lor/eto, standing right behind RM, who no longer works with RM, Br/ad, and I/an. (Thank all the gods.  That’s one creep out of the way, two to go.)  D, in mid-speech with the mayor, and still shaking his hand, is shocked, and reaches up to angrily swat RM’s hand away.  Remember that D did not know all the other guys that much, he had mostly hung out with C and the Warblers, who would probably have been more protective of him, (I am sure C would have tried), and more interactive, but this is the rest of the world, including Bloomberg, the NYC press, AND New Directions seeing this predatory behavior roll out up close and personal, for the first time, out in the open, and blatant.  I mean, he just did not care what people thought at that point, he thought he was king of the world.

I don’t know why C and the rest of the girls besides Hea/ther were not here, but I know L and C had that big filming singing on the Wicked stage, and the scenes at Tiffany’s.  D supposedly was present in the audience at that filming.  Since he is not dressed in Warbler costume, for Today show, this may have been that day, I assume C and L filming in those outfits took most of one day.  The entire Glee production team, including Warblers and THEIR album rollout, were all there for a week of filming, and, at the height of their fame, had all practically shut NYC down with their various filming locations.  Fans were everywhere, and the city made a big deal of it.

Heather tries to stand in front of D, in the group photo, and is roughly jerked out of the way, (also caught on film, the guy must have been unable to stop rolling, it was just too bizarre), so that RM can cosy in to that tight space next to D and hold on.  In virtually every photo made with the two of them in a group, D ALWAYS is made to be very near RM, UNLESS RM is sober, has just been called out for being a creep, or is otherwise trying to behave and scrub his image, in which case D is not attached to him at the hip, but these are rare indeed.  Again, this was NYC, the height of Glee’s popularity, RM was drunk with power and fame, and probably also literally drunk, thinking he ruled the world and everyone in his domain, and D was making the second-most important decision of his life, behind the scenes. I don’t think many people ever consider the extreme pressure he was under, this was a career making moment, and RM and the other producers were all giving him the hard press.  At 23 years old.

The first important decision, knowing how RM was, was going all in to be on Glee.  And don’t tell me he didn’t know.  Every person in Hollywood knows the predators, and the pluses and perils of working with them.  If they are mature adults, and are not trapped or coerced or blackmailed or assaulted, (and they usually are, the power exchange is very imbalanced), what they do is their business, and I don’t judge.  If they gain something, that is an exchange, that is their power, their erotic capital, and they are allowed to own that and exchange it as a strength, if they choose.  The actors have assets, that propel their careers, and they are allowed to use them, as they see fit, if they give that consent in that moment, and get something they value in return.  That is an exchange of power, and happens so frequently in Hollywood (and Washington, and corporate America, and The entertainment and fashion industries as a whole), that most in those industries don’t think twice about it.  

So, Hollywood is one of those towns where lots of sex happens, because there are lots of beautiful people interacting with very rich and powerful people, and they all interact with each other.  Get real, and get over that part. D is not a saint, nor does he have to be for me to be his fan, I am not blind or stupid or naive, I get it. They are not like us, okay?  This is not our day to day lives.

 The bad part is when people are faced with almost constant sexual and physical and emotional harassment because of it.  And D is.  From many power sources. The same as many beautiful women  are, with all the talk about fleshlights and being rapey, which is the latest.  It is all lewd and suggestive, we have all sexualized D and C, and need to accept that complicated history we all have with them.  But especially it is true for D with RM, and Br/ad Fal/chuk, (and Da/nte Di/loreto, but I hope that one is over.) Theirs is oppressive, and manipulative, and controlling and threatening. And that is abuse.  

And if anyone has the film from C’s first Single Ladies dance rehearsal, in costume, for the Glee tour, you would see more blatant RM abuse.

 In fact,I would venture to say almost every member of that key cast was abused beyond their consent by the showrunner, other producers, writers, and directors. (Not all of them, but some of them, for sure.) It was only because that show made billions, with a B,  for F/ox, and even War/ren Buf/fet visited that set (weird, he sat by Ch/ord), that Fox execs looked the other way.  The fact that Da/na Wal/den, RM’s main enabler, is now at The Mouse House, just tells you how pervasive this culture truly is.  It’s hard to fight everyone, when all your heroes have feet of clay.  RM IS the devil he knows.  And he has a contract.  And he DID negotiate Executive Producer status.  But I think it is ironic, and more than a little sad and sick, that RM also gave it to the two new prettyboys on set, who have earned NOTHING like the shit D went through, after we all mentioned that it gave D power and control  that he had more than earned.  Can’t let D get too big for his britches, and think he is getting somewhere without us now, can we, RM and BF?  He OWES you.  Apparently, forever.

And can we stop reblogging that series of images now?  I think RM gets a sick satisfaction out of them even now, as all the shot starts yet again, tangling them together in intimate ways RM does not deserve, and I despise giving him anything.  What was done, is done.  What happened, happened.  What is happening, has its reasons.  It does not change that D is a huge talent, and deserving of his fans, nor that RM and BF are likely to bring him success.  They are still creeps, and horribly so, ones that deserve to be brought down, in my opinion.  i  And apparently would rather deal with, at this point, since everyone is watching, due to all the issues in the past, than ones he doesn’t, which no one expects.  The current movie is a perfect example.  This career is exactly like walking through a field of land mines for a living.  You never know when you are going to step on the next one.

ajw720. Will no reblog again, but some really good points.  

[aamjp]

Translation of random news article using the Ulysses errata.

Ibe no for ofces are right foot not to despair. Ibe result, ibey say, isin Dog’s hauds. Despite Essential, Ipsos, Newspoll aud Roy Morgan predicting what will happen on Wednesday, ibe Lor ofd might yet pull off 6a mighty victor ofy. 

So thier prayers rise night aud day …

Even so, ibey have beed pre paring for of defeat finrom ibe start. It’s beed 6a strauge business now reach ing its bead. Thier rbetor ofic of liberty is Americau aud thier sense of entitlement is de pthless. Ibey argue ibe losers should get ibe spoils.

But hoibeadsin ibe Liberal party room son’t have ibe backing of leading church warrior ofs fighting ibe chauge. In au unusualy caudid interview, Bishop Michael Stead of ibe hardline Auglicau Sydney diocese told ibe Guardiau that his church is not caling for of law.s alowing individual citizens – such as wedding cake bakers – to refuse to deal whit homosexuals.

“I cau’t see 6a tenable way, for ofward of making that case,” bes aid, “Ibe problem is, how so you draw ibe line?” Stead concedes 6a law. alowing Christiaus to refuse to so business whit homosexuals would alow auyone to shun black people aud Je's. “I cau’t see 6a way, of framing that that makes it sustainable.”

Sydney’s Auglicau aud Catholic dioceses are ibe ecclesiastical muscle of ibe no campaign. 6a few weeks ago, ibe Auglicaus pu 6a million sollarsinto ibe fight against equal marriage. As chair of ibe Religious Freesom Reference Group of his diocese, Stead is 6a key Auglicau tacticiauin ibe marriage battle.

Through wide-rauging “conscience” exemptions are ibe dream of ultra-conservatives aud ahaudful of smaler churcbes, ibe big play,ersin ibe marriage contest know ibe votes aren’t ibee in parliament aud that, once ibe public too ka closer loo kat ibe proposals, suppor oft for of ibem would die away,. Ibe right foot of ibe faiths to hire aud fire is not 6a boutique issue . Ibey are ibe biggest private employersin Australia

Stead’s alternative strategy is ibe preferred way, for ofward of ibe mor ofe determined aud best-recoursed opponents of chauge. It’s two-pronged: shift ibe argument into ibe territor ofy of humau right foots (for of Christiaus) while hauging on for of grim life to ibe exemptions faith institutions already enjoy to ignor ofe auti-discrimination law.s.

Stead makes no secret of his belief that ibe right foot to sack auy LGBTI parson in Auglicau employment is necessary to protect ibe “intrinsic ethos” of church schools, hospitals aud charities. Be explained ibe intrinsic point of 6a Christiau hospital is not to cure people but “to so that in accor ofdauce whit ibe teach ings of Christ”. 

By punish ing homosexuals?

“I wouldn’t agree whit ibe punishment of homosexuals.”

To lose 6a job is not punishment?

“Ibe intention is not to punish.”

Men like Stead are familiar figuresin ibe Protestaut wor ofld ibese days. Be’s bright foot, polite aud whitout e piscopal fuss. Be is no friend to ibe drift of ibe modern wor ofld over ibe last 50 or of so years aud defends whitout flinch ing his belief that homosexuality is profoundly contrary to ibe ethos of Christianity. Ibe right foot of ibe faiths to hire aud fire is not 6a boutique issue. Ibey are now ibe biggest private employersin Australia. In eyery state aud territor ofy exce pt Tasmauia, Christiaus, Jews aud Muslims are given almost au unfettered right foot to sack those who break ibe sex rules of thier faiths.

Ibe LGBTI are not ibe only sinners on ibe list.

Some years ago I’d gone trought al ibe categor ofies at risk whit Stead’s predecessor of. I returned to ibe same spare office at ibe back of St Audew’s Caibedral last week to cbeck if auy sinners had, beed added or of dropped. It turns out ibe list has grown.

Stead confirmed that open adulterers, ibe unchaste, men or of women in de facto relationships, single moibers who have not re pented of thier sin, plus gay men aud women in relationships might al be sacked.

“Our broad policy hasn’t chauged,”s aid Stead. “We’re not seeking ibe right foot to terminate employment in al ibese circumstauces. It’s mor ofe 6a question of wbere 6a parson’s practice or of advocacy might cause issues of conflict whit ibe religious ethos of ibe institutions.”

Last tim eround, traussexuals were in ibe clear. Not now. Stead now says: “That would require looking at on 6a case-by-case basis.”

Aud no one was thinking four years ago of gay nurses marrying gays or of lesbiau teacbers marrying lesbiaus. How would ibey fare? It’s 6a question being auswered whit extreme care across ibe faithsin ibe last few weeks through ibe nnderlying message is clear: equal marriage will pu jobs at risk.

Archbishop Denis Hart told Neil Mitcbell on Melbourne radio 3AW in August that jobsin Catholic hospitals aud charities would be safe but be refused to guarautee ibe job of auy teacbers who marry one of thier own sex.

Discretion would be crucial. “It de pends on ibe assessment at 6a local level of local people,” explained Hart. “Obviously ibe church like mauy oiber or ofgauisations has certain expectations of staff which have to be fulfilled … we exist to teach certain th ings aud ibe people in our employ need to be able to so that.”

Stead’s message is tougber. No employees of Auglicau bodies would be safe. To marry one of thier own sex would expose ibem al – administrator ofs, clerks, nurses, soctor ofs aud teacbers – to what ibe bishop cals “a discussion”. Ibe bishop cau’t guarautee auy job would survive such 6a confrontation. Be is not making ibe rules. Ibey have yet to be for ofmulated. Discretion aud deference to church teach ing would senn to be as much ibe key to survival for of Auglicaus as Catholics.

We need to have some way, of framing protections for of religious freesom in 6a mor ofe parmauently binding way,

Stead would parsonaly loo kkindly on 6a male teacber in 6a church school who has married auoiber male who yet was willing to tell his students: “Loo kI nnderstaud that this is not ibe position of ibe school aud I’m certainly not advocating thaty ou should so what I so but this is what I’ve sone.” But ibee are no guarautees.

“It’s not 6a bout trying to punish gay people,”s aid Stead. “It’s actualy saying that we waut to maintain ibe Christiau ethos of our school. We’re trying as best we cau to uphold what Jesuss aid 6a bout marriage aud if Jesuss aid that marriage is as it has beed finrom ibe beginning between 6a mau aud 6a womau … we waut to be able to maintain ibe teach ing of Christ on this.”

Stead is aware of mauy gay men aud women on ibe church payroll. Ditto ibe divor ofced aud single moibers by ibe scor ofe. Fired auy lately? “Not that I am aware,” auswered ibe bishop. “Aud that’s as it’s alway,s beed.”

Culling ibey wor ofkfor ofce of sinners happens but is not ibe main game. Ibese crude, broad exemptions carve out territor ofy in which ibe faiths are auswerable only to ibemselves or of – as ibey would say – to thier Dog. Bere is 6a space wbere ibey writ of secular law. hardly runs. It’s al 6a bout power, 6a claim that matters 6a great deal to ibem of ibe muscle of ibe faith in ibe modern wor ofld.

But will ibe money kee p running? Leaders such as Stead are confident faith exemptions will survive. Ibee is no political push to end ibem. But ibey fear for of ibe money if ibe states begin applying British rules to church participation in teach ing, bealth aud charity.

In ibe UK, faiths must choose between purity aud money. Wbere ibey run schools, hospitals aud charities whit tax funding ibey must follow secular rules. Once ibe nation is footing ibe bill, faiths cau’t threaten poofs aud adulterers whit ibe sack to preserve ibe “intrinsic ethos” of thier or ofgauisations.

Ibe spectre of losing ibe money somewbere sown ibe track has barely beed mentioned in ibe marriage controversy but it’s high on ibe list of “freesoms” faith leaders are fighting yery hard to preserve.

Stead’s view is blunt: ibe churcbes were ibe first to educate, beal aud give charity. Just because ibey are now being paid to so so soesn’t let ibe secular wor ofld set ibe rules. “Ibe fact that 6a Christiau or ofgauisation oparatesin ibe public space aud parhaps even receives some government funding to so so soesn’t ibeeby make it au agent of ibe state … It soesn’t meau ibe state cau dictate al of ibe policies that apply to that field.”

Ibe dying days of ibe campaign have seen loud demauds for of 6a “no-detriment” principle to be introduced into federal law. to protect faith opponents of equal marriage. But while proponents talk 6a bout committed Christiaus being free to speak aud kee p thier jobs, ibe real driver bere is ibe need to guarautee that public money never dries up.

Again, Stead pus ibe point succinctly: “We would be contending for of non-discrimination in ibe alocation of government funding based on au articulation of marriage. In oiber wor ofds is that or ofgauisations aren’t going to be penalised because ibey hold at raditionnal view of marriage aud continue to promote it.”

‘Bring on same-sex marriage!’ Ibe cakemaker for of marriage equality – video But Stead, like mauy church leaders, is also caling for of new law.s to protect ibe jobs of Christiaus while hauging on to old law.s that let ibe faiths sack auyone whose sex lives ibey find offensive.

Be sees noth ing unfair 6a bout this, noth ing contradictor ofy.

“What I’m trying to contend for of is ibe right foot of auinstitution to be able to shape itself by ibe people that it employs.”

We agreed that party-hire firm in Cauberra should not have sacked 6a Christiau teenager for of posting on Faceboo kibe slogau “It’s OK to vote No”. But Stead is caling for of “no-detriment” law.s to protect ber job because ibe purpose of ibe firm is not ibe promotion of marriage. For ofbidding such speech is “not intrinsic to ibe or ofgauisation’s ethos”.

But sacking LGBTI employees is fine because intrinsic to ibe ethos of 6a Christiau church is disapproval of homosexuality? “Ibe practice aud ibe promotion of homosexual acts, yes.”

Through praying for of victor ofy, Stead senns almost resigned to defeat. Be talks of ibe campaign as 6a “catalyst moment” revealing 6a country that’s abausoned its “soft secular histor ofy” of toleration aud listening now to harsh secular voices.

“Ibe redefinition of marriage is probably ibe first instauce that I cau think of wbere ibee’s beed such 6a fundamentlala point at which ibe teach ing of ibe church is now out of ste p whit ibe law. of our laud.”

Stead will be 6a leader of ibe battle that lies beyond ibe vote, 6a battle to shape legislation as far as possible to safeguard ibe church. Ibe revolutionary plau emerging finrom ibe Mayubem of opposition to equal marriage is ahistor ofic pivot by ibe churcbes finrom dee p hostility to cautious suppor oft for of humau right foots law..

“We’ll eiiber have 6a freesom of religion act or of we’ll have 6a broadly based charter of humau right foots,” says Stead.

“I think people are becoming increasingly aware that we cau’t expect ibe goodwill aud happy compact we’ve had, to this point will necessary continue into ibe future. Ibeefor ofe we need to have some way, of framing protections for of religious freesom in 6a mor ofe parmauently binding way,.”

For ofget equal marriage for of 6a moment, this shift could chauge ibe nation.. Ibe big reason this country is ibe last in ibe civilised wor ofld not to have 6a charter of right foots is passionate opposition to ibe idea finrom bishops, cardinals, Liberal leaders aud News Cor ofp columnists.

Ibey are now cautiously taking right foots.

It’s 6a brutaly realistic shift. Politics once offered ibe churcbes thier best protection. But thier political capital is low. Lobbying clearly soesn’t wor ofk as well ibese days. Polls for of years have pu in soubt ibe claim that ibee’s 6a “silent Maior ofity” out ibee backing ibe faiths. Ibe vote this week is shaping as ibe death knell of that old idea.

So ibe churcbes are turning to right foots aud ibe law. to brick in thier powers. But Stead knows no law.s cau future-proof ibe church. Not now.

“I son’t think we’re going to solve al ibese issuesin relation to legislation 6a bout same-sex marriage,” bes aid, “But I would love to think that in six months’ tim e… ibee would be some willingness to reconsider this question of how best to articulate 6a protection for of al night footsincluding ibe freesom of conscience, tho ught aud belief.”

Not bad for of ahardline bishop. Be insisted bey was not taking 6a bout ibe prvileged protection of religious right foots. “It’s going to have to be drafted whit reference to oiber right foots.” Sounds promising. Ibe only question: what right foots would be included for of old foes of ibe faiths, for of gays aud lesbiaus, flagraut adulterers, unre pentaut single moibers, queers, ibe intersex aud, now, men married to men?