GLR May-June 2026

about the show. Though your tone lacked warmth; in fact, it seemed a little bitchy and grudging. I didn’t see the reference to Russ ian policy as “modest.” Have another look. It’s pointed, especially given its context. Same with safe sex. It’s pointed; you seem to have missed it. I got the impression that Rachel Reid intended to write a plain narra tive, albeit with some thoughtful, even beautiful passages. Like you, I thought the series was better. I thought it was brighter, created by a superior intelligence, but there are some passages in the book that clarify events, like when Shane is overwhelmed by what’s happening between them and flees. The book explains and deepens that event in a way that the series does not. I was enchanted, entirely taken in (you might say) by the delicate rendering of the growing self-awareness of these two young men, their growing understanding of their dilemma, and their growing acknowledge ment of their love for one another, a love that trumps (forgive me) everything else in their lives. Including their stardom, even in cluding their singularity as public heroes and public property. You’re right: “This isn’t the world most of us live in.” Is Hamlet , The Importance Of Being Earnest , or Marty Supreme the “world we live in”? It’s a story! It’s not “the world we live in”! The sooner we grasp that, the happier we’ll be. “I need.…” “What do you need?”

“You know.” “No, tell me.” “You. I need you.” It’s a wonderful show; sorry you missed it. Jeffrey Gillman, Oakland, CA To the Readers: I appreciate the variety of responses to Heated Rivalry , a series our community will probably continue discussing for a long time. As Jeffrey Gillman observed, I wrote two versions of my review: one for The G&LR ’s website while the show was airing, another for the magazine after it concluded. I warmed to the series somewhat after the final two installments, which are focused less on sex and more on connection than are earlier episodes, but I retain reservations about its glossy consumerist fantasy world. I don’t expect the show’s many loyal fans to agree, nor should they expect me to over look elements I consider flaws. Jeremy C. Fox, Managing Editor Providing Context for the Quakers To the Editor: I was raised in Friends Meeting and greatly enjoyed Daniel Burr’s review of Brian Blackmore’s book on Quaker in volvement in gay liberation [in the March April 2026 issue]. His review ends with a note that “most Quakers today are conserva tive evangelicals.” That is true if all Quak ers are lumped together. However, there are differences between the two main groups,

usually known as Friends Church (like a Baptist church with a pacifist core) and Friends Meeting, which is more like a blend of Unitarian and Mennonite or Amish. There is no central mandatory authority for Friends Meeting. The North Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends, largely made up of Friends Meeting people, has taken the following positions. According to its website, in 1979, it re fused to meet at a Baptist facility that in sisted on taking down signage mentioning gays and lesbians. In 1992 it “affirmed Friends belief that the Spirit of God is pres ent in all loving relationships regardless of the genders of those involved” and “en dorsed efforts to protect the civil rights of all persons regardless of their sexual orien tation.” In 1997, after several years of con sideration, it supported the legal recognition of same-sex marriages without mandating this for local meetings. In 2004 it opposed “all attempts to deny legal recognition of marriage of same sex couples.” Although I am not a Christian, I take pride in my family’s longtime affiliation with the Meeting. Alan Contreras, Eugene, Oregon Correc ti on The last issue, March-April 2026—not 2025!—included the kind of error that every editor dreads: last year’s date right on the cover. Life lesson learned (again): beware the peril of templates!

F RIENDS OF T HE R EVIEW F RIENDS OF T HE R EVIEW are readers who donated $150+ to The Gay & Lesbian Review , a 501(c)(3) educational corporation, in 2025. All gifts are fully tax-deductible.

L EADERSHIP C IRCLE ($5,000+) Anonymous

Daniel Crewe Thomas B. Depriest Robert Hardman James Hess & Robert Herald In memory of Charles S. Longcope Jr.

Michael Manganiello SueReamer In memory of Jim Stepp Dean Waller

Eric Anderson & Roger Beck In memory of Wade S. Bentson Ken Borelli

Jack Padovano & Phillip Baker Kevin Schack Curtis Scribner RonSeidle Laurence Senelick Mike Sullivan & Paul Loeffler Stephen B. Thayer & Howard E. Terry Jim Thomas & Fred Provencher Dr. R.O. Valdiserri Douglas J. Warn

David E. Hopmann & James W. Taul Jr. Michael Jarvis and Craig Larson Alice Jay Harold Koda Caroll Edward Lahniers William Lauch Paul D. Lerner & Stephen Reis Fred Martin Raymond Matta M.D. Al Monetta & Bruce Voss Mark Mullin Maury Newburger John Newmeyer Robert Nicoson John T. Nolan Brian Oleksak & Gonzalo Avila

Richard C. Alter & Eric. D. Johnson Tom Armitage & Paul Selwold

Geoff Corso &

Marshall McClintock Stanley Cushing & Daniel Lyons

Michael Barrett Richard Bekins Allen W. Bernard RodBoren

Raymond J. DeAngelo Edward J. Donahue III James J Dowd Jr. Bill Evans Alex Frondorf Marc Geller Thomas Gerber Thomas J. Gormly William J. Gracie Jr. Seth Grosshandler & Kim Wainwright John Hager & Ron Gaetz James & William Harrison Mike Hughes

Samuel D. Brown Rocco Buonpane Denis Cagna & Carlos Medina Michael Carson & Ron Steigerwalt, PhD Kevin A. Ceckowski & Robert J. Christie Donald J. Cimilluca Stewart Clifford Frederick Cruickshank

B ENEFACTORS

($1,200–4,999)

Stewart Watson Jr. Robin Weingast & Claire Zeppieri Chuck Whelan Thomas A. Zanoni