Strategic Initiatives
12091 stories
·
45 followers

Mel Gibson Consulting Excommunicated Archbishop on Resurrection of Christ

1 Share
  • Production Consultation: Mel Gibson is collaborating with excommunicated Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò on the film project The Resurrection of the Christ.
  • Ecclesiastical Conflict: Viganò was excommunicated in 2024 for rejecting the authority of Pope Francis and the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
  • OnSet Presence: Reporting indicates that Viganò has visited filming locations south of Rome, including the UNESCO World Heritage site of Matera.
  • Cast Overhaul: The sequel features an entirely new main ensemble, including Jaakko Ohtonen as Jesus and Mariela Garriga as Mary Magdalene.
  • Film Structure: The upcoming project will be divided into two separate films, both scheduled for release in the year 2027.
  • Studio Partnerships: The religious epic is being produced by Icon Productions in partnership with Lionsgate, employing a crew of over 500 workers.
  • Creative Direction: Scriptwriter Randall Wallace and Gibson have developed a narrative focusing on the resurrection that the director describes as an acid trip.
  • Historical Success: The original 2004 film earned 610 million dollars globally, becoming one of the highest-grossing independent films in history.

Mel Gibson is consulting with excommunicated Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò — who has called the late Pope Francis “a servant of Satan” — for the “The Resurrection of the Christ,” his follow up to 2004’s “The Passion of the Christ” that is currently still shooting in Italy.

Viganò, who is the Vatican’s former ambassador to the United States, was excommunicated in 2024 for refusing to recognize Pope Francis’ authority and rejecting the Second Vatican Council that modernized the Roman Catholic Church. He has repeatedly referred to Francis as a liberal “servant of Satan” and a “false prophet” in public statements. Viganò is also known to be a big fan of U.S. President Donald Trump, a critic of gay rights and a supporter of anti-vaccine positions.

Related Stories

[

Jurassic-Park-Super-Bowl-Commerical-Xfinity

](https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/comcast-reunites-jurassic-park-trio-xfinity-super-bowl-1236649023/)

Original 'Jurassic Park' Stars Sam Neil, Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum Reunite for Xfinity Super Bowl Commercial

Gibson, who publicly defended Viganò when he was excommunicated, has been receiving input on “The Resurrection” from Viganò according to Italian press reports that were confirmed by sources. Viganò — who though excommunicated, is allowed to keep his Archbishop title — has been present on the set of the sequel that is currently doing exterior shoots in various locations south of Rome. These include the ancient town of Matera, a Unesco World Heritage site known for its prehistoric whitewashed caves where “The Passion” was shot. Viganò and Gibson are seen on set in the social media post below.

Popular on Variety

Variety has reached out to Gibson’s publicist Alan Nierob for comment.

As reported exclusively by Variety, shooting on Gibson’s long-delayed follow up to “The Passion of the Christ” started in early October at the new Studio 22 facility at Rome’s Cinecittà Studios with its main ensemble cast having been entirely recast. Finnish actor Jaakko Ohtonen (“The Last Kingdom”) is playing the role of Jesus, replacing original star Jim Caviezel. Mary Magdalene, a role held in “Passion” by Monica Bellucci, is being played in “Resurrection” by Cuban actress Mariela Garriga, and Smutniak is replacing Maia Morgenstern as Mary. A crew of more than 500 film workers has been employed on the big-budget religious epic in Rome.

More than 20 years ago, Gibson shot the original “Passion of the Christ” at Cinecittà, which became one of the largest-grossing independent films of all time with a worldwide box office of $610 million. As previously announced, “The Resurrection of the Christ” will be split into two films, with both set to release in 2027.

“The Resurrection of the Christ” is being produced by Gibson, Bruce Davey and their Icon Productions banner with Lionsgate as the studio partner.

The original film, which is spoken in Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin to create a more historically accurate and immersive experience, followed the final 12 hours before the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Gibson has described the sequels as an “acid trip,” adding that he “never read anything like” the scripts, which the filmmaker wrote alongside “Braveheart” screenwriter Randall Wallace. As the title suggests, the plot is expected to focus on Jesus Christ’s resurrection. Other story details are being kept under wraps.

Jump to Comments

Read the whole story
bogorad
12 hours ago
reply
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete

EDITORIAL: England's migration awakening | Washington Times

1 Share
  • Election Reversal: Prime Minister Keir Starmer has retracted a decision to cancel local elections amid declining support for the Labour Party.
  • Public Concern: National surveys indicate that United Kingdom citizens identify immigration as the country's most significant problem at rates higher than any other nation.
  • Reform Momentum: The Reform UK party, led by Nigel Farage, achieved significant electoral gains in local contests compared to the Labour Party.
  • Crime Inquiry: Political figures have initiated investigations into crimes committed by asylum-seekers, alleging that victims were failed by protective institutions.
  • Law Enforcement: Accuastions have been made that officials avoid prosecuting foreign nationals for certain crimes to maintain community cohesion and avoid accusations of racism.
  • Criminal Convictions: Recent court cases have highlighted violent offenses committed by individuals who arrived in the country via small boats shortly before their crimes.
  • Information Transparency: Proponents are calling for a public petition to mandate the free publication of court transcripts to ensure transparency regarding criminal proceedings.
  • Political Shifts: Recent polling suggests Reform UK has overtaken Labour in popularity, potentially signaling a shift toward right-of-center coalitions in future governance.

England’s migration awakening

Conservatives bring attention to the recent arrivals preying on the public

Farage determined to jolt Britain back to greatness illustration by Alexander Hunter/ The Washington Times

Farage determined to jolt Britain back to greatness illustration by Alexander Hunter/ The Washington Times Farage determined to jolt Britain back … more >

[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=facebook&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_source%3Dsocialnetwork&source=Shareaholic)[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=twitter&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_source%3Dsocialnetwork&source=Shareaholic&templates[twitter][body]=${title} - ${short_link} - @washtimes)[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=truthsocial&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Dtruth_link%26utm_source%3Dtruth&source=Shareaholic)[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=reddit&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Dreddit%26utm_source%3Dnews&source=Shareaholic)[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=copy_link&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Dcopy_link%26utm_source%3Dbookmark&source=Shareaholic)[](https://www.shareaholic.com/api/share/?v=1&apitype=1&apikey=1b4cd6dea80b282c132df03b8b3fd9ac&service=mail&title=England's migration awakening&link=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/feb/17/editorial-englands-migration-awakening/%3Futm_campaign%3Dshareaholic%26utm_medium%3Demail_link%26utm_source%3Demail&source=Shareaholic)[Print](javascript:window.print\(\);)

Google Add us as a preferred source on Google

Commentary

By Editorial Board - The Washington Times - Tuesday, February 17, 2026

OPINION:

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer retreated Monday from his cynical decision to cancel upcoming local elections. The Labor Party leader knows his team is about to be clobbered at the ballot box because Britons aren’t happy.

A Gallup survey earlier this month concluded: “The United Kingdom is more likely than any other country in the world to cite immigration as its top national problem.” This awakening has boosted the political fortunes of Reform UK, the alternative right-of-center party committed to making Britain great again.

Led by Nigel Farage, Reform dominated last year’s local contests, racking up 781 wins compared with the paltry 134 council races where Mr. Starmer’s acolytes emerged victorious. Members of Parliament who aren’t afraid of being British have gained traction by spotlighting the nightmare Labor and the Tories created with their open-border policies.



Another conservative faction leader, Restore Britain’s Rupert Lowe, just wrapped up a “rape gang inquiry” that heard from the victims of asylum-seekers. “Meeting these women, and men, listening to how severely they were failed by those tasked to protect them? My views have changed forever. I knew it was bad. I never knew how bad it was,” Mr. Lowe explained on X.

Mr. Lowe intends to release findings that should help bring to justice malefactors let free by cowering officials who refused to apply the law to uninvited foreign nationals lest they be seen as racist. “I started this inquiry because so many others failed. Speaking honestly, I did not understand how deep this evil is rooted in our society,” he wrote.

Last week, the Warwick Crown Court found Ahmad Mulakhil guilty of kidnapping and assaulting a 12-year-old girl playing on a swing in a park in July. A co-conspirator filmed the despicable deed, leaving little doubt in the minds of jurors about the Afghan national’s culpability.

The politically correct police force initially concealed the perpetrator’s identity, lest the public realize that the predator had arrived on a tiny boat four months before the crime. Warwickshire County Council member George Finch, a Reform UK member, tried to warn his constituents.

“I was told that if I released this, I would be in contempt of court, that I cannot release this due to this phrase ‘community cohesion.’ That’s the problem,” Mr. Finch said. Liberals don’t want the public to notice that Mulakhil was living in a taxpayer-funded rental house as part of Labor’s scheme to disperse illegal aliens throughout the nation without the community’s knowledge or consent.

Parliament will soon consider a public petition demanding the publication of court proceedings at no cost to prevent authorities from covering up inconvenient facts. “We must obtain the full horror of the rape gangs from these court transcripts. The British people deserve to know the unredacted brutal truth,” Mr. Lowe said.

Word is getting out. A January Ipsos poll lists Reform as the top political party, beating Labor by 8 percentage points. If so, Reform could secure a parliamentary majority in a coalition with conservative groups.

Unfortunately, that’s not likely to happen for a while. The public handed the keys to 10 Downing St. to Mr. Starmer in 2024, and he doesn’t have to give them back until 2029. Perhaps the growing wave of regret across the Atlantic will inspire Americans to recognize the importance of their civic duty.

What’s happening in once-great Britain also happened on our shores. An unwise public choice in the midterms could stop President Trump’s ongoing effort to reverse the damage.

Copyright © 2026 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.



Latest Video

Read the whole story
bogorad
16 hours ago
reply
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete

The quantum world reveals reality is made of relations, not objects | George Webster » IAI TV

1 Share
  • Relational Ontology: Scientific and philosophical inquiry suggests that relations are more fundamental than individual objects, challenging the intuitive worldview of distinct entities like particles or people.
  • Evolutionary Bias: The common-sense perception of a world populated by objects is a product of evolutionary survival and practical utility within a limited observational window.
  • Quantum Indistinguishability: Observations in quantum statistics, such as permutation invariance in bosons, indicate that particles are not distinct objects but are defined by the symmetries governing them.
  • Theory Persistence: Scientific progress often involves the replacement of theoretical objects, yet the mathematical structures and relationships within those theories frequently remain preserved across paradigm shifts.
  • Structural Realism: By prioritizing mathematical structures over provisional entities, structural realism offers a way to explain scientific success without committing to specific, potentially transient objects.
  • Analytic Limitations: Traditional logic and set theory are ill-equipped to describe a relational reality because they are built upon the assumption of prior, independent objects and variables.
  • Primary Difference: Gilles Deleuze proposes an inversion of traditional metaphysics where difference is primary and identity is a derivative outcome of fundamental processes of differentiation.
  • Morphogenetic Modeling: Drawing on embryology and differential calculus, Deleuze provides a conceptual framework for understanding how physical objects and structures emerge from underlying intensive gradients and mathematical relations.

We assume that objects are more fundamental than the relationships between those objects. However, philosopher George Webster argues that quantum mechanics upends this common-sense picture. In the quantum world, relations like symmetry are more real than the particles themselves. But neither our everyday language, nor the language of logic favored by philosophers, can make sense of this. Webster suggests that we turn to the weird and wonderful language of Gilles Deleuze to truly comprehend the quantum picture of reality.

The everyday picture: a world of objects

We ordinarily think of the world as a collection of things or individual objects: tables, trees, planets, particles, people.

This way of thinking is not only intuitive but also tremendously useful. Whether crossing a busy street or hunting prey, we survive by tracking the motions of objects—judging their distances, anticipating their paths, and timing our actions accordingly. Evolutionarily speaking, this is a worldview to which humanity owes its continued existence.

But it is also a worldview motivated by a very specific practical context. We occupy an extremely limited perspective on the world, and we have little reason to believe that that perspective (i.e., an observational window ranging from millimetres to miles and from milliseconds to a century or so) accurately represents the universe at its grandest quantum and cosmological scales.

Indeed, not only do we have little reason to suppose that our practically motivated model of the world accurately reflects reality, but we also have positive reason to believe that it fails to do so. This is because science—and recent philosophical reflection on the sciences—suggests an alternative account. That is, one according to which not objects but relations are the ultimate constituents of reality.

___

What is fundamentally real are not particles as such, but rather the laws and symmetries (such as permutation invariance) that govern their behaviour.

___

But this is a strange thought. Relations such as “being in love with” or “standing taller than” or “moving faster than” all seem to presuppose the objects between which they obtain. Relations, in other words, seem to depend upon objects for their existence. So why invert this picture? And how does a figure seemingly irrelevant to contemporary philosophy of science (the twentieth-century “post-modern” French philosopher, Gilles Deleuze) help us to make sense of this inversion?

Quantum theory and why objects are not fundamental

Cause for a relations-based worldview can be found in quantum theory (or, more specifically, quantum statistics).

Two coins flipped simultaneously will produce one of four outcomes—each occurring with equal frequency when the experiment is repeated continuously. Two elementary particles (in this case bosons), on the other hand, fired through an appropriate experimental setup designed to measure analogous properties (e.g., spin-up and spin-down), will produce three outcomes—each occurring with equal frequency.

Capture copy

In the case of the coins, the fourfold probability distribution is explained partly by the fact that we can count a mixed result in two distinct ways: one coin displaying heads and the other displaying tails, and vice versa. Even though the coins may be the same denomination (e.g., both fifty-pence pieces), they are distinct objects and so exchanging them counts as a different physical state.

The quantum case, however, requires an alternative explanation. If exchanging our particles yields no observable or statistical difference (i.e., if our particles are “permutation invariant”), then we are forced to conclude that the exchanged states are in fact one and the same physical state. And though there are further steps in this interpretative story, an upshot that must be taken seriously is that exchanging elementary particles makes no difference because they are not distinct objects and so must be understood relationally. Some structural realists, for example, take this to show that what is fundamentally real are not particles as such, but rather the laws and symmetries (such as permutation invariance) that govern their behaviour.

Relations instead of objects in the philosophy of science

Reflection on a canonical puzzle in the philosophy of science also suggests that we abandon our object-oriented worldview and embrace a metaphysics of relations.

The best explanation for the effectiveness of our theories is that they provide true descriptions of the world. If a model successfully predicts voting patterns by assuming a particular distribution of sentiments across a population, then a good first-pass explanation of that model’s success is that those sentiments are in fact present and distributed in the way the model claims. Likewise, the successful application of quantum theory to technologies like computer chips, GPS, optical fibres, and MRI machines is best explained by the existence of the various particles and fields to which the theory refers.

___

A promising solution is to recognize that, while their objects may change, the mathematical structure of theories is often preserved.

___

But the history of science is riddled with discarded theoretical terms (e.g., caloric, phlogiston, the luminiferous aether), some of which featured in theories that enjoyed success. The caloric theory of heat, for example, was incredibly explanatorily successful. And yet, we no longer think that caloric exists.

Thus, the argument goes, we have no right to endorse the existence of our current theoretical posits (electrons, quarks, neutrinos, the Higgs boson, etc.). And this because we have little reason to believe that our current theories won’t be superseded by more successful theories involving different posits, just as the caloric theory of heat was superseded by our kinetic theory.

A problem therefore arises. We can either explain the effectiveness of science (by committing ourselves to the existence of our theoretical posits) or respect the realities of progress and theory change (by refusing to do so). But we cannot do both—or at least, so it would seem.

In fact, a promising solution is to recognize that, while their objects may change, the mathematical structure of theories is often preserved.

Much of the structure of Augustin-Jean Fresnel’s early-nineteenth-century theory of optics, for example, is retained in James Clerk Maxwell’s successor theory later that century. That is to say, the same mathematical relationships are described in each; it’s just that Fresnel postulated light waves as propagating mechanically through a luminiferous aether (akin to soundwaves travelling through air), whereas for Maxwell they are disturbances in an electromagnetic field.

23 05 10 AI will revolutionise financial advice3.dcSUGGESTED READING AI will revolutionise financial advice By Jack Solowey

So, if we restrict our metaphysical commitments to what is preserved through theory change, we get the best of both worlds. We can explain the success of science without committing ourselves to entities that history suggests are provisional. The upshot, however, is a revised worldview according to which all that exists (or, at least, all we can know) are the functional relationships represented by mathematical structure—a further motivation for structural realism in the philosophy of science.

This is part of the scientific and philosophical background against which a relational metaphysics has gained traction. And it is also the background against which some limitations of analytic philosophy—our dominant philosophical tradition—come into view.

The limits of analytic philosophy

The idea that relations might be ontologically fundamental is well motivated by contemporary science. But it remains deeply counterintuitive. As we have seen, we tend to think of relations as secondary or derivative—as dependent on objects with intrinsic properties. Everest can only be taller than Kilimanjaro, for example, because there are first two mountains, each with a determinate height.

This intuition is reinforced by the descriptive machinery of analytic philosophy (i.e., modern logic and set theory), which prioritizes objecthood from the start. By describing the world in terms of objects represented by variables, to which properties are attributed or which belong to sets, modern logic and set theory hamstring structural realists, making it difficult for them to express their metaphysical view.

___

Objects do not come first and then differ; rather, objects emerge out of more fundamental processes of differentiation.

___

If we are serious about the possibility that relations come first, then it’s worth looking beyond the analytic tradition. It is here that Gilles Deleuze enters the picture. Though Deleuze is often mislabelled as “postmodern,” and so associated with a form of scepticism about science and truth, he in fact offers a way of making sense of the relational implications of science, drawing directly and explicitly on scientific ideas themselves.

Deleuze: difference comes before identity

Deleuze argues that the concepts of difference and identity have been systematically misunderstood throughout the history of philosophy. Traditionally, difference is treated as derivative or secondary—as a relation of non-identity between already constituted identities or individuals. In other words, identity is logically and ontologically prior to difference because things differ only in virtue of their already established properties (as in our mountains example).

Deleuze argues that this picture should be inverted. On his account, difference is primary and identity is derivative. Objects do not come first and then differ; rather, objects emerge out of more fundamental processes of differentiation.

This reversal has profound consequences. It undercuts the very intuition that makes a relations-based metaphysics seem incoherent. But what motivates such a reversal? And what descriptive language, if not modern logic and set theory, can we employ to make sense of it?

To answer these questions, we can turn to Deleuze’s engagements with science.

Deleuze and the sciences

To make sense of how objects emerge from relations, Deleuze draws on embryology—and specifically work on morphogenesis from the early twentieth century. These theories explain how a complex, three-dimensional organism emerges from an egg. And, crucially, they do so by invoking “gradients” (e.g., intensive differential relationships in temperature or chemical concentration) that induce folding and layering movements, effectively 3D-printing an animal body from cellular material.

In vertebrate development, for example, a process called “neurulation” involves the folding of a sheet of cellular material into a tube, itself ultimately developing into the central nervous system. Drawing on these gradient-based embryological theories, Deleuze claims that all such developmental processes are precipitated by relations—that is, intensive differences in temperature or chemical distribution and the processes through which they are equalized or cancelled out.

Deleuze argues that embryology provides a model for thinking about the world in general. All phenomena, on his account, are generated by analogous differential relationships. Air currents, tornadoes and hurricanes are given their structure by temperature and pressure differentials; the Earth’s geological structure is formed by similar differences that drive currents of magma or sediment; and perceptions and emotions are synthesized out of all sorts of subconscious cognitive processes and interactions.

Deleuze’s engagements with embryology may shed light on how one might understand the relational constitution of objects and states of affairs in the world. Nonetheless, the very idea of a fundamental difference or relation (i.e., a relation not derived from the properties of objects) may still seem bizarre and inarticulable. It is here that Deleuze’s engagements with mathematics, and specifically differential calculus, become important. He argues that the calculus provides a technical language for describing fundamental relations, and itself implies a metaphysics of relations.

The calculus, ubiquitous in the mathematical articulation of scientific theories, is a tool for describing instantaneous rates of change. We can use it, for example, to determine the speed of a continuously accelerating object at any given point on its journey. Drawing on various elements of its history, Deleuze argues that this mathematical machinery suggests that such rates of change, or “differential relations,” actually precede the things they relate. A key example here is a 1701 note by Leibniz, “Justification of the Infinitesimal Calculus by that of Ordinary Algebra,” in which he shows (on Deleuze’s view) how the proportional relationship between the sides of a triangle remains even when the lengths of those sides are reduced to zero, in effect demonstrating the primacy of relations over their relata.

By foregrounding calculus (and other parts of contemporary mathematics), Deleuze derives a novel descriptive and conceptual vocabulary for his metaphysics of relations, sidestepping our above concerns regarding the appropriate language in which to articulate such a worldview. Indeed, this strategy predates, by more than half a century, the analogue “mathematics-first” approach very recently endorsed by contemporary structural realists.

This discussion is only schematic. But it indicates the relevance and advantages of cutting across traditional philosophical boundaries. The thought of Gilles Deleuze in many ways anticipates and supports the structural realist project, helping us to discover and express, in his words, “the metaphysics science needs.”

Read the whole story
bogorad
19 hours ago
reply
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete

An experiment finds X's feed algorithm favored conservative content, and switching to the "For you" feed shifted users' views toward more conservative positions (Ece Yildirim/Gizmodo)

1 Comment

Ece Yildirim / Gizmodo:
An experiment finds X's feed algorithm favored conservative content, and switching to the “For you” feed shifted users' views toward more conservative positions  —  The algorithm also doesn't like posts by traditional news media, the researchers found.

Read the whole story
bogorad
20 hours ago
reply
"new academic study, conducted by a team of researchers from Italy’s Bocconi University, Switzerland’s University of St. Gallen, and France’s Paris School of Economics" -- all you need to know.
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete

Inside the Gay Tech Mafia | WIRED

1 Share
  • Systemic Dominance: High-ranking gay men are characterized as a dominant force in Silicon Valley, influencing venture capital, major tech firms, and elite social circles.
  • Exclusive Networking: Professional and social activities often occur in closed environments, such as private group chats, fitness clubs like Barry's, and "men-only" industry parties.
  • Mentorship Dynamics: Established leaders frequently promote and bankroll younger male proteges, creating a cross-generational support system often referred to as the "Gay Tech Mafia."
  • Resource Allocation: Despite widespread perceptions of a "gay advantage" in fundraising, statistical data suggests LGBTQ+ founders receive only 0.5 percent of total venture capital.
  • Hypermasculine Culture: The elite strata often emphasize physical fitness, merit-based hiring over diversity initiatives, and traditional masculine aesthetics, sometimes sidelining women and other queer groups.
  • Blurred Boundaries: Professional interactions, mentorships, and social lives frequently overlap with personal intimacy, leading to a culture where social and physical connections can influence business deals.
  • Exploitative Risks: Some industry participants report instances of unwanted sexual advances, "sex pest" behavior, and a "casting couch" environment where career advancement is linked to social or physical compliance.
  • Conspiratorial Backlash: The perceived concentration of power has fueled various digital rumors and resentment among outsiders, ranging from lighthearted memes to extreme anonymous allegations.

Listen•37 minutes

00:00/36:47

No one can say exactly when, or if, gay men started running Silicon Valley. They seem to have dominated its upper ranks at least the past five years, maybe more. On platforms like X, the clues are there: whispers of private-island retreats, tech executives going “gay for clout,” and the suggestion that a “seed round” is not, strictly speaking, a financial term. It is an idea so taken for granted, in fact, that when I call up a well-connected hedge fund manager to ask his thoughts about what is sometimes referred to in industry circles as the “gay tech mafia,” he audibly yawns. “Of course,” he says. “This has always been the case.”

It had been the case, the hedge funder says, back in 2012, when he was raising money from a venture capitalist whose office was staffed with dozens of “attractive, strong young men,” all of whom were “under 30” and looked as though they had freshly decamped from “the high school debate club.” “They were all sleeping with each other and starting companies,” he says. And it is absolutely the case now, he adds, when gay men are running influential companies in Silicon Valley and maintain entire social calendars with scarcely a straight man, much less a woman, in sight. “Of course the gay tech mafia exists,” he continues. “This is not some Illuminati conspiracy theory. And you do not have to be gay to join. They like straight guys who sleep with them even more.”

Ever since I started covering Silicon Valley in 2017, I’ve heard variations of this rumor—that “gays,” as an AI founder named Emmett Chen-Ran has quipped, “run this joint.” On its face, a gay tech mafia seemed too dumb to warrant actual investigative inquiry. Sure, there were gay men in high places: Peter Thiel, Tim Cook, Sam Altman, Keith Rabois, the list went on. But the idea that they were operating some kind of shadowy cabal seemed born entirely of homophobia, the indulgence of which might play into the hands of conspiracy-minded conservatives like Laura Loomer, who, in 2024, tweeted that the “high tech VC world just seems to be one big, exploitative gay mafia.”

Image may contain Advertisement Poster Body Part Hand Person Adult and Publication

Over time, though, the rumor refused to die, eventually curdling into something closer to conventional wisdom. Last spring, at a venture capitalist’s party in Southern California, a middle-aged investor complained to me at length about how he was struggling to raise his new fund. The problem, he explained, boiled down to discrimination. I took him in as he spoke. He had the uniform down cold: a white man with a crew cut, wearing a tasteless button-down stretched over mild prosperity, and a fluent conviction that AI was, thank god, the next big thing. He looked exactly like the sort of man Silicon Valley has been built to reward. And yet here he was, insisting that the system was rigged against him. “If I were gay, I wouldn’t be having any trouble,” he said. “That’s the whole thing with Silicon Valley these days. The only way to catch a break,” he claimed, “is if you’re gay.”

Over the course of 2025, similar sentiments bubbled up on X, where Silicon Valley tech workers joked about offering “fractional vizier services to the gay elite.” Anonymous accounts hinted at an underworld of gay Silicon Valley power brokers who influenced and courted—“groomed”—aspiring entrepreneurs. At an AI conference in Los Angeles, an engineer casually referred to a top AI firm’s offices, more than once, as “twink town.”

By the fall, speculation intensified, and then a photo appeared on X of a group of Y Combinator–backed founders crowded near a sauna with Garry Tan, the incubator’s president. The image seemed innocuous enough: a few young, nerdy men in swim trunks, squinting into the camera. But almost instantly, it set off a round of viral gossip about the peculiar intimacies of venture capital culture. Not long after, a founder from Germany, Joschua Sutee, posted a photo of himself and his male cofounders—apparently naked, swaddled in bedsheets—submitted as part of what seemed to be a Y Combinator application, a move that appeared designed to court a knowingly erotic male audience. “Here I come, @ycombinator,” the caption read.

The notion that Y Combinator was grooming male entrepreneurs makes little sense—for lots of reasons, and for one in particular. “Garry is straight straight straight straight,” says a person who knows Tan. “But he believes in the benefits of the sauna.” When I ask Tan for a comment, he is blunt—some founders were over for dinner and asked to use his recently installed sauna and cold plunge. From there, Tan says, “rejects” of Y Combinator “manufactured this meme that it was somehow more than that.”

And yet, similar rumors persisted and compounded, originating as often from outsiders (sometimes with dubious political motivations) as from insiders. When I call up my longtime industry sources to get their thoughts on the gay tech mafia, not only have they heard of it—they have highly specific notions of how it works. These are credible people who believe seemingly incredible things. One San Francisco investor tells me that he believes the Thiel Fellowship is a training ground for gay industry leaders. (When I run this notion past a couple of former Thiel Fellows, they tell me they met Thiel one time at a dinner, where he appeared “slightly bored,” says one of the fellows, a straight man. “I mean, I wish Peter tried to groom me.”) Meanwhile, people’s gaydars are practically overheating. I hear, more than once, that anyone in Silicon Valley who has achieved outsize success is probably gay.

Isn’t it strange, one San Francisco–based venture capitalist muses, how a certain defense-tech executive achieved so much success at a relatively young age? “Isn’t he gay?” the VC asks. “He must be.” I tell him he is mistaken—the executive is married to a woman. “Sure,” he replies. “But have you ever seen them together?” Another entrepreneur who raised capital from two well-known gay investors tells me that he’s accustomed to fielding scrutiny about his sexual orientation. “People say I’m gay,” he says. “There’s always jokes. Like, ‘How’d you get the money, bro?’”

Then there are the anonymous X accounts amplifying allegations of misconduct. Their posts are calibrated for attention: detailed enough to suggest insider knowledge of the Valley, vague enough to invite darker interpretations. I take the bait and, one afternoon in late November, spend nearly an hour texting one such account owner over Signal who agrees to speak to me only if I keep his handle secret.

This person describes the Valley as a place known for “ecstasy, psychedelic fueled gay sex stuff.” Has he experienced any of it himself? No. But he knows people who have—people who are “pretty afraid” and “young af.” He won’t name names, won’t connect me to anyone, but he swears that any negative rumor I’ve heard about gay men in Silicon Valley is true. He suggests a conspiracy so sprawling it rivals QAnon and implicates the entire US government. He gives me vague reporting advice: “It should be easy to find. 2nd page of Google type thing.”

Finally, frustrated by his evasiveness, I ask what he thinks will happen if he tells me what he knows. “I truly believe,” he says, “killed.” Then he offers a suggestion. The only way to expose this blockbuster of a tale is “project veritas style: Take a 20 year old dude, make an X acc[ount]. Send him to the right places in SF and you’ll break the story if you go deep enough.”

Men sitting in an office hot tub

ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY; GETTY IMAGES

The problem with conspiracy theories, even offensive ones, is that they are rarely wholly invented. They almost always arise from some fragment of truth, which imagination then contorts. The difficulty with this particular rumor is that, while I was unable to substantiate darker allegations, parts of the story still resonate. In conversations with 51 people—31 of them gay men, many of them influential investors and entrepreneurs—a portrait emerged of gay influence in Silicon Valley that is intricate, layered, and often contradictory. It is a world in which power, desire, and ambition interweave in ways both visible and unseen, a world that is, in some ways, far richer—and more complicated—than the rumors themselves suggest.

Most of the people who speak to me for this story do so on the condition that their names be kept confidential. Some of it is just garden-variety caution. “It may not be wise for me to be talking to a reporter describing all these parties,” says one, “because people would be like, Geez, why would we invite you?” Other excuses are murkier: “It’s not so safe to speak about this in too much detail,” says a founder who works in AI. “Anyone involved is an operator or a VC, and it might lead people to wonder about who is getting advantages.” Amid the deflections and whispers, though, there seems to be an unmistakable truth: Gay men are rising.

“The gays who work in tech are succeeding vastly,” an angel investor, who is a gay man, tells me. “There’s the founder group of gays who all hang out with each other, because the gays always cluster together. By virtue of that, they become friends and vacation together.” Even more importantly: “They support each other, whether that’s to hire someone or angel invest in their companies or lead their funding rounds.”

Some of these networks have begun to spill into public view. There is a Substack called Friend Of, written by Jack Randall, who formerly worked in communications at Robinhood, that chronicles gay ascendence into the centers of power. “We run the tech mafia (see Apple, OpenAI),” Randall writes. “We hold top government posts (see the Treasury Secretary). We anchor primetime news and the NYE Ball Drop. Our dating app’s stock outperforms its straight peers. And in the US, gay men are, on average, better educated and wealthier than the general population.”

A new company called Sector aims to formalize this network. Founded by Brian Tran, a former designer in residence at Kleiner Perkins, Sector has a website that features photos of handsome men on beaches and at dimly lit dinners. One member describes it to me as a curated network where introductions unfold between well-heeled gay men with shared interests. “It’s up to you to decide,” the member tells me. “Is this professional, is it platonic, or is it something romantic?” In an interview with Randall, Tran said, “I think we could displace Grindr in the coming years.”

On any given week in San Francisco, Partiful invites float around the community. If there is a “regular Halloween party, the gays will have their own Halloween party, and Sam Altman will be there,” says Jayden Clark, a straight podcaster who hosts a tech culture podcast and was not invited to the gay Halloween party. (Altman attended dressed as Spider-Man, a nod to Andrew Garfield, who played the superhero and has since been cast as Altman in an upcoming film.) I hear of not one but two White Lotus–themed gay tech parties, both equally extravagant. “Girls are not present,” says that same angel investor. “They are just not there.” There is also a “Gay VC Mafia” group chat that is, as one member describes it, “60 percent business” and “40 percent hee hee ha ha” about “classically gay topics.” With a steady churn of tech events aimed at gay men, the social incentives stack up fast. Connections blur—“professional, physical, or sometimes romantic,” as an AI founder puts it. The pull of this bubble is so strong, he continues, that it’s “an uphill battle to socialize with straight people.”

None of this is necessarily unfamiliar in the clubby world of Silicon Valley, where the smart, successful, and wildly rich have always formed in-groups. There’s the so-called OpenAI mafia and the Airbnb mafia, and before those the PayPal mafia—alumni of moonshot companies who bankroll the next wave of startups. So some of what reads as advantage is, on closer inspection, structural and unremarkable. San Francisco combines two things in unusual density: one of the country’s largest gay populations and a tech industry that has reshaped global power. “For sure, gay men are overrepresented and have had an unbelievable run in the Bay Area,” says Mark, another gay entrepreneur who runs an AI startup. “In a city that has the most venture capital in the world, it isn’t surprising that this money is going directly to gay men.” (This perception, for what it’s worth, runs counter to statistics: Between 2000 and 2022, the years for which data is available, only 0.5 percent of startup venture funding went to LGBTQ+ founders.) “It’s not that there is some kind of gay mafia,” Mark continues. “But if I told you who are my friends that I want to invest in, they happen to be gays. Who are the people without kids who can grind away on the weekends? It’s the gays.” (Sources identified in this story by a first name only, like Mark, preferred the use of pseudonyms.)

Imagine this, Mark says: You are a young, nerdy, closeted gay man. You grow up never quite fitting in. Your parents start asking questions. Why don’t you have a girlfriend? You tell them you’re too busy for a relationship. Eventually, you move to San Francisco, a city that, as one person puts it, is like “Disneyland for gay men.” Your world opens up. You meet other people like you—men who are openly out, many for the first time in their lives. These men happen to be working at influential companies. They are building technology that is astonishing. And slowly it dawns on you: Maybe you, too—a person who has spent a lifetime overlooked and underestimated—can build something extraordinary. “Gays feel,” Mark says, “that they have something to prove.”

This is, more or less, the nature of how power and money have moved throughout networks since the dawn of time. And gay networks seem naturally aligned to the dynamics of venture funding, where established wealth meets emerging talent. “One of the key things to realize is that gays are different than straights in many different ways,” says a longtime gay venture capitalist. “Gays are cross-generational.” While straight people tend to spend more time with people their own age, “that is not true with gay men. I can hang out with someone at an event who is 18 years old, and Peter [Thiel] might also be there.”

Just because you are gay and work in tech does not necessarily mean you are part of the so-called gay tech mafia. Much of the queer spectrum is conspicuously absent from events geared toward gay founders. “There are barriers within the community,” says Danny Gray, a leader at Out Professionals, a networking organization for LGBTQ+ businesspeople. “Cis gay men are the biggest gay group within the acronym, and it is much harder for other letters.” Lesbians tend to be sidelined; when I ask the hyperconnected tech journalist Kara Swisher about the gay tech mafia, she says she wasn’t aware there was one. And even if you are a gay man, inclusion is not necessarily guaranteed. “I’ve found it hard to break into this group myself,” one gay investor tells me. “I probably need to lose 20 pounds.”

It may be that what outsiders perceive as the gay tech mafia is not gay people working in tech, or even, broadly speaking, gay men, but a small, self-selecting group with shared politics and sensibilities. They are assumed to prize aesthetics and the masculine physique, scorn identity politics, reject DEI in favor of MEI—“merit, excellence, and intelligence”—and lean right-wing, if not MAGA. I’ve heard straight entrepreneurs describe them as “the Greco-Roman gays,” part of “an insular, hypermasculine culture” in which “women are seen as totally redundant and completely unnecessary.” (A woman who once worked for a gay Republican startup founder describes it like this: “You get about the same amount of misogyny, but not the sexual harassment. So that’s nice.”)

Where, then, might these almighty power gays be observed in their natural habitat? This is one of the guiding questions in my research, the answer to which perpetually evades me. When I ask a gay investor if perhaps I can attend one of these parties as a fly-on-the-wall observer, he tells me no, because it would be weird, given that I am—unfortunately for the purposes of this story—a woman. “People will be like, ‘Is that your sister?’” he says. I float an idea past my editor that I attend a party disguised as a man. Perhaps, I suggest, we should discuss the budget for my makeover? While not entirely disinterested in the idea, my editor offers another suggestion, that he—a gay man—come along as a kind of chaperone, “for safety” purposes. Neither of us revisits the idea.

Image may contain Body Part Hand Person Wrist Baby and Wristwatch

ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY

There is one place, though, that is mentioned again and again: Barry’s, the fitness bootcamp, which has become a gay mecca, thanks in part to the high-profile investor Keith Rabois, who has long been one of its most avid devotees, to the point of teaching occasional classes. And one Barry’s in particular keeps coming up: “The Barry’s in the Castro is ranked supreme,” says that same gay angel investor. “It is all guys, all gays, and everyone has abs.” (“From what I’ve learned working here, gay men do love to work out,” confirms a female employee at the Castro Barry’s.)

The fact is, most people seem eager to talk about this, no deceptions on my part necessary. Many of them reply almost immediately to my vague inquiries. Even more surprising is their willingness to talk at length. Calls often run for hours, blending measured observations about life in a masculine-dominated culture with tours through the most salacious industry intrigue of my entire career. There can be an edge to the gossip, though—an implication that one of the most reliable paths to power in Silicon Valley may run through the bedroom. Some men are eager to hop on a call to ask what I may or may not have already heard about them. One gay founder tells me how a rumor has been circulating (a version of which I have, in fact, heard) that he and his husband slept with a gay investor in exchange for a down payment on their home. “Do people really think,” he wonders, “that we can’t afford a condo?”

Many have, at some point or another, been suspected of romantic involvement, even if they’ve never been in the same room together. When I call up Ben Ling, an investor and early Google employee, to ask about long-standing speculation that he might be a good match for Tim Cook—a pairing intriguing enough to be referenced in The Atlantic—he laughs. “People make up these rumors because they have nothing better to do,” he says. “Tim Cook does not know who I am.”

And while it is true that at least some of these men know and see each other socially, these meetups do not reliably lead to romance. A friend of Rabois tells me that Rabois likes to tell a story of the time, years earlier, when he invited Sam Altman as his plus-one to an event. “He said that Sam brought two phones and was texting on both of them the entire time,” the friend says. “Keith says it was the worst date he ever went on.” (Use of the word “date” has, by relevant parties, been disputed.)

For rising figures who have formed genuine friendships with powerful gay industry leaders, success sometimes comes with a penalty: the assumption that it is borrowed, not earned. Brad, a gay industry leader, has long lived with rumors about his friendship with Peter Thiel—rumors that followed him even as his career advanced. “When I started working with Peter so long ago, people would be like, Oh, did you sleep with him? Blah blah blah.” The answer, he says, is no. And yet, “for some reason everyone felt perfectly comfortable asking me about it. Straight people were interested in it generally, but the people who were really fucking fascinated were other gay guys. Guys would be like: What does he have that I don’t have? So then they assume, Well, Peter must have thought you were cute.” (Thiel did not respond to requests for comment.)

Still, it’s naive to insist that intimacy with power is without its advantages. When Altman’s former boyfriend, early Stripe employee Lachy Groom, raised a $250 million solo venture fund while still in his twenties, some observers read the achievement less as an anomaly of talent, I’m told, than as an artifact of access. This interpretation, according to a gay investor close to both Groom and Altman, is not entirely fair: “When Lachy and Sam were dating, Sam was kind of famous, but not nearly as famous as he is now, and Lachy was a person in his own right,” the investor says. “I did give a reference to [an investor in Groom’s fund] saying, ‘Yes, he’s unproven as an investor, yes, he’s young. But he is in the network, and he is Sam’s ex-boyfriend.’ But Lachy didn’t date Sam to get these things.” (Groom declined to comment on the record, as did a representative for Altman.)

Meanwhile, when straight men attempt to tap into the gay network, the gay investors chat amongst themselves. Mark, who hosts dinner parties and events for the gay tech community in San Francisco, says that he noticed one man constantly RSVPing to his events. “We don’t have a purity test,” he says, “but someone said that guy is definitely not gay, he just goes to the gay man events because he wants deal flow.” It isn’t like straight men are excluded per se, but they are not exactly a welcome addition to the world of gay capital. The joke, if a straight founder does show up, is: Just don’t tell anyone you’re straight.

“I have seen straight men do untoward things,” says a gay investor. “There is a straight guy who is not important enough to be named who would pitch all the gay investors, and in one meeting at the VC partnership he was talking to a gay general partner who I know. And in the meeting, this guy put his hand on the GP’s leg under the table. It is so inappropriate. It became a running joke, like, not this guy again.”

One person in particular has helped fuel the notion that being gay can benefit one’s career: Delian Asparouhov, the mischievous, 31-year-old cofounder of Varda Space Industries, who was once hired as Rabois’ chief of staff. Rabois, who helped Thiel start PayPal and was later a partner at Thiel’s venture firm, Founders Fund, was a subject of corporate scrutiny years earlier. While at Square, Rabois was accused of sexual harassment by a male colleague, an episode that ultimately ended with Rabois’ departure from the company. (After an internal investigation, the company backed Rabois.)

In 2018, about 100 people attended Rabois’ wedding to Jacob Helberg, a former adviser at Palantir who currently serves as the US undersecretary of state for economic growth. The wedding was a multiday affair with a guest list that included many of the most important people in tech and culminated in a beachside wedding ceremony officiated by Sam Altman. (Rabois’ bad “date” with Altman resulted, apparently, in close friendship.)

During the wedding, Asparouhov gave a toast, which was later recalled by Fred, a longtime gay tech leader who was in attendance. “Delian said something like, ‘I’m the intern that Keith hired, and I would wear short shorts and tank tops at Square.’” Fred says he was sitting at a table with two famous tech executives. “We just raised our eyebrows,” Fred continues. “It was so embarrassing that Delian would say that at someone’s wedding. I mean, here was Keith getting married to Jacob.” (Other wedding attendees claim not to remember the contents of the speech but say it sounds like Asparouhov.)

Rumors of Asparouhov and Rabois’ dating lives have long traveled in industry circles, thanks in part to Asparouhov, who has fanned the flames online. (“Delian is like Gretchen Wieners,” explains Fred.) In 2022, a popular anonymous tech insider X account, Roon, tweeted that it was “crazy how venture capitalists have reinvented the Roman system of pederasty.” Asparouhov responded to the tweet almost immediately: “It only took a little gay and now I get to work on space factories,” he wrote. “Pretty reasonable trade.” He now says the tweet was “obviously a joke.”

But as Fred recounted, Asparouhov was known for wearing neon tank tops, short shorts, and mismatched shoes when he joined Square in 2012. “He would jump a lot—it was very odd,” says someone who worked at the company at that time. Others have similar recollections. OpenStore, the Miami-based company Rabois cofounded in 2021, which mostly shut down last year, seemed to be, according to John, who says he visited its offices, “almost like a harem, filled with jacked white men, all of them handsome and good-looking, straight and gay. People were wearing kind of inappropriate clothing: really short shorts and tight shirts even though the AC was blasting.” Rabois, when I ask him for a comment, denies this categorically. “Attire was quite standard for Florida,” he says. “And I doubt more than two of the 100-plus employees could be reasonably described as ‘jacked.’”

Rabois has been known to take extravagant vacations—helicopter trips to Icelandic volcanoes, white-water rafting in Costa Rica. Exclusion can stir serious envy, as it did with one young gay tech consultant I speak with who says he has begun a kind of “micro-journalism” project to track the appearances of a couple of guys on Rabois’ Instagram. These are “low-level” workers, he says, who nonetheless are “always posting photos in St. Barts.” “Here I am doomscrolling on the A train, and I’m like, ‘How are these guys on a private jet?’”

But how far back do these rumors really go? Has Silicon Valley always been semi-secretly, kinda-sorta gay? More than once, I’m told to connect with Joel, a gay man who works in tech and who spent a lot of time among the older in-group of powerful gay men in Silicon Valley, more than a decade ago. “So,” I say when he answers my call, “are you a member of the gay tech mafia?” He laughs. “Maybe someone thinks I’m in it, which is why you’re calling me.”

When I ask Joel to explain how the gay tech mafia works, he tells me that it’s similar to people who “went to the same college or came from a similar background or a similar town.” And it indeed started, he says, with people like Rabois and Thiel, who, after they rose to power, “brought a lot of people along. Keith hired gays at Square, and Peter hired Mike [Solana] at Founders Fund. Then there was a cohort of Google gays that Marissa Mayer ran in 2010. And there is Sam, who is friends with Keith, and Sam was running in parallel, assembling other gays around him.”

Joel tells me about the parties at the time—the exact specifics of which remain off the record. But they were, in summary, what you might expect. “There was lots of drinking that would turn into weird situations. Random people hooking up. Generally, there was a sexual tone.” But this was years ago. These types of parties, at least from what I’ve heard, have either disappeared or moved entirely underground. (“Once you get to the end of your reporting, you will find that the real story is much less explosive,” says Mark. “Like all these wild orgies: If you do find out where they are, please tell me, because I’d like to go.”)

I tell Joel that I’ve heard from some young men in the tech industry who feel pressured to sleep around to get ahead. Was that true in his experience? “Mmmmm,” he says, and pauses. Then he bursts out laughing. “I mean, in all of this, there are weird gray areas. It can be very sexual. It is not all professional. A lot of people have dated or slept with each other.” He had experienced a kind of coercion firsthand. “I definitely felt pressured to do—not overtly illegal things. But they walked the line.” Joel is older now, and while he can see how someone might describe this as an abuse of power, he resists the framing. The exchange of sex and status may not be the reason these men rose so quickly, but it can be a factor—if only because sex, as he puts it, “makes people become closer rapidly.”

As Silicon Valley has matured into the power center of the world, it has grown sharply cutthroat. Leverage is scarce, and ambition is often laced with a kind of ruthless opportunism. In gay circles, some feel the Valley resembles the old Hollywood casting couch. Many of the critics are rising gay entrepreneurs and investors themselves, for whom parts of the gay community seem steeped in the attitudes and values of the 1970s and ’80s. “There’s this feeling,” one observes, “that because there were years of historical oppressions only recently recognized, certain people think, ‘I can do this, or I deserve this, because no one will cancel me for it.’”

Image may contain Person Skin and Baby

ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY; GETTY IMAGES

This is a community that, as one young gay investor describes it, is “power-hungry, network-driven, and, at times, very horny.” The arrangement, he suggests, is tacitly understood by everyone involved: “Both sides know they are in the game and want something from each other. Which is fine, I guess, if you’re into that.” This is not, in his telling, the whole of the gay tech scene, most of which is a “lovely, amazing community that supports its people and their career progress.” But alongside that exists a sexual undercurrent—one that, he insists, is impossible to deny and especially pronounced in AI circles. “It’s like a gay nepo thing,” he says. “While it’s not explicitly for sexual favors, there is an element at work in the background. Like, you’re young and you’re hot and I’m down to hook up.”

One gay man, Dean, describes moving through a professional world in which sexual suggestion flowed freely. Early on, it came from limited partners curious about his prospective fund; after he raised the fund, it came from founders seeking capital. In one instance, a potential limited partner proposed a meeting at his home. “He was like, ‘We don’t need to wear clothes, we can just sit around and talk about your fund in my hot tub.’” Dean frames these encounters as an irritation—ambient, expected, and largely inconsequential. “Sex is devalued in gay male culture,” he says. “Often, it’s just another piece of currency.”

After Dean raised his fund, he was occasionally approached by young men, “founders looking for money who indicated they were open to whatever it takes to raise it.” At events geared toward LGBT founders, young men would ask to grab drinks one on one. Sometimes, they’d send nudes on Instagram. “Like ‘Hey …’ with a winky face. And ‘Do you like that?’ And I’d be like, ‘No, that’s actually inappropriate,’” he says. It’s not confined to Silicon Valley, he adds. Having left tech for a different industry, Dean has come to see the entanglement of sex, power, and ambition as a recurring feature of certain pockets of gay professional life.

Another man who works in the queer tech space puts it this way: “There is an aspect of being queer and in business and in life and having relationships that can be frankly sexual and not sexual at the same time. You can turn off and do business with someone you were hooking up with yesterday.” Plus, he continues, there is the inescapable fact that much of gay male culture tends to be sexually charged. “Straight guys have the golf course. Gay guys have the orgy,” he says. “It doesn’t mean it’s problematic. It’s consensual, but it is a way we bond and connect.”

Of the 31 gay men I spoke to for this story, nine tell me they experienced unwanted advances from other gay men in the industry. Some of these advances were mild but annoying: repeated invitations to soak in hot tubs or explore wine cellars. Others involved unwanted touches. One person, an up-and-coming gay investor, tells me that he believes that turning down a sexual advance from a senior colleague cost him a job. Multiple sources speak of “sex pests” who send unsolicited dick pics and make overt come-ons.

“What demoralizes me in the conversations around the gays in tech in San Francisco is that none of this is entirely a secret,” says one gay investor who experienced an unwanted sexual advance. “People are aware this is an issue.” Another gay man who works in tech adds: “There is an element to this story that is a cautionary tale. You take a brilliant entrepreneur who has a great idea trying to make it in the world of venture capital. And then they have to put up with someone sending them dick pics and asking for an investment meeting. It shouldn’t be normalized. And right now, everything is so gray. Like, it’s our little thing, our little world. But it has a massive impact.”

Again and again, gay men working in tech ask me: Why has this story never been written? The question somewhat answers itself. Unfair stereotypes about gay men persist, and why else would sources insist on pseudonyms? I am warned, more than once, to be careful, that figures in Silicon Valley are “vindictive.” Even as many consider this culture of sexual pressure a feature of Silicon Valley life, it is, as someone else tells me, “a true minefield” to write about.

Got a Tip?

If you have stories from inside the so-called gay tech mafia, you can send Zoë Bernard a confidential tip on Signal @zoebernard.26.

Gerald knows the feeling. He’s a young gay man in San Francisco, described by acquaintances as a “quirky individual” and a “social puppeteer.” Over a call, Gerald lays out the reasons he has hesitated to talk about his time in tech. “This is a complex subject,” he says, “and I don’t think readers can draw the distinction between some bad men being gay and all gay men being bad. It can be a slippery slope into homophobia.”

He won’t give his story to me. Not yet. But he does tell me he suspects that other stories, in the coming months, will surface. “People have a difficult time articulating power with nuance,” he says. “This is not just one story. There will be many.” From what he’s told me so far, and from everything else I’ve heard—the heartfelt, late-night confessions over the phone; the insights shared quietly and kept off the record; the admissions of dozens of funny, brilliant, young gay men competing for, yes, power and money and recognition, but also for love, romance, and a place to belong in the heart of San Francisco—I believe him.


What Say You?
Let us know what you think about this article in the comments below. Alternatively, you can submit a letter to the editor at mail@wired.com.

Read the whole story
bogorad
21 hours ago
reply
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete

Amazon service was taken down by AI coding bot // Tech giant blames ‘user error, not AI error’ for incident in December involving its Kiro tool

1 Share
  • Amazon Outages: At least two service interruptions occurred within Amazon Web Services (AWS) involving AI coding tools.
  • AI Tool Involvement: The outages were linked to errors made by AI tools, including the Kiro coding tool, which took autonomous actions.
  • Employee Concerns: Some AWS employees expressed doubts about the company's rapid rollout of AI coding assistants due to these disruptions.
  • Amazon's Defense: Amazon stated that the issues were "user error, not AI error" and that similar problems could occur with any developer tool.
  • Limited Impact Claimed: The company described the incidents as "extremely limited events" with minimal impact on customer-facing services.
  • AI Permissions: Employees noted that AI tools were granted permissions similar to human operators, bypassing normal approval processes in these cases.
  • Company Push for AI: Amazon is promoting AI tools for efficiency gains and has set adoption targets for developers using AI in coding tasks.
  • Safeguards Implemented: Following the incidents, AWS reportedly introduced additional safeguards, including mandatory peer review and training.

Amazon’s cloud unit has suffered at least two outages due to errors involving its own AI tools, leading some employees to raise doubts about the US tech giant’s push to roll out these coding assistants.

Amazon Web Services experienced a 13-hour interruption to one system used by its customers in mid-December after engineers allowed its Kiro AI coding tool to make certain changes, according to four people familiar with the matter.

The people said the agentic tool, which can take autonomous actions on behalf of users, determined that the best course of action was to “delete and recreate the environment”.

Amazon posted an internal postmortem about the “outage” of the AWS system, which lets customers explore the costs of its services.

Multiple Amazon employees told the FT that this was the second occasion in recent months in which one of the group’s AI tools had been at the centre of a service disruption.

“We’ve already seen at least two production outages [in the past few months],” said one senior AWS employee. “The engineers let the AI [agent] resolve an issue without intervention. The outages were small but entirely foreseeable.”

AWS, which accounts for 60 per cent of Amazon’s operating profits, is seeking to build and deploy AI tools including “agents” capable of taking actions independently based on human instructions.

Like many Big Tech companies, it is seeking to sell this technology to outside customers. The incidents highlight the risk that these nascent AI tools can misbehave and cause disruptions.

Amazon said it was a “coincidence that AI tools were involved” and that “the same issue could occur with any developer tool or manual action”.

“In both instances, this was user error, not AI error,” Amazon said, adding that it had not seen evidence that mistakes were more common with AI tools.

The company said the incident in December was an “extremely limited event” affecting only a single service in parts of mainland China. Amazon added that the second incident did not have an impact on a “customer facing AWS service”.

Neither disruption was anywhere near as severe as a 15-hour AWS outage in October 2025 that forced multiple customers’ apps and websites offline — including OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

Employees said the group’s AI tools were treated as an extension of an operator and given the same permissions. In these two cases, the engineers involved did not require a second person’s approval before making changes, as would normally be the case.

Amazon said that by default its Kiro tool “requests authorisation before taking any action” but said the engineer involved in the December incident had “broader permissions than expected — a user access control issue, not an AI autonomy issue”.

AWS launched Kiro in July. It said the coding assistant would advance beyond “vibe coding” — which allows users to quickly build applications — to instead write code based on a set of specifications.

The group had earlier relied on its Amazon Q Developer product, an AI-enabled chatbot, to help engineers write code. This was involved in the earlier outage, three of the employees said.

Recommended

Some Amazon employees said they were still sceptical of AI tools’ utility for the bulk of their work given the risk of error. They added that the company had set a target for 80 per cent of developers to use AI for coding tasks at least once a week and was closely tracking adoption.

Amazon said it was experiencing strong customer growth for Kiro and that it wanted customers and employees to benefit from efficiency gains.

“Following the December incident, AWS implemented numerous safeguards”, including mandatory peer review and staff training, Amazon added.

Read the whole story
bogorad
21 hours ago
reply
Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories