Thirsty's RVA

Thirsty's RVA THIRSTY’s Q***r Bar is a LGBTQ+ space, Allies welcome, we are always 18+ and there is never a cover. We open at 3pm except mondays.
(426)

We close at 11pm tuesday-thursday, and 1am friday and saturday. The Green Room is reserved most nights for community events

🏳️‍🌈🏺extra 2-Gay in History: Bible 15🛐🏳️‍🌈This is the closing post of our Bible series — The Bible is more than you’ve b...
05/30/2026

🏳️‍🌈🏺extra 2-Gay in History: Bible 15🛐🏳️‍🌈

This is the closing post of our Bible series —

The Bible is more than you’ve been told, and certainly more than you’ve ever been quoted from a pulpit. Just read the Song of Solomon — the most erotic book in scripture — and watch how the church tied itself in knots trying to spiritualize and suppress it, because inconvenient texts have always made institutions nervous. That instinct to control the text is the same one this series has been tracing all along.

This kind of q***r exploration was something John Boswell famously began decades ago in Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homos*xuality, and the scholars who followed him have built a substantial body of work.

We’ve drawn on a lot of it here. But we want to be honest: not every argument in this series carries equal weight. The authorship of the Secret Gospel of Mark is genuinely contested. David and Jonathan being more than brothers is suggested by the language but never named by the text. Some readings are mere possibilities. Others — the pais/doulos distinction, the rhetorical trap of Romans 1, the manuscript evidence behind the silencing of women, the interpretation of S***m as violence to strangers— are confirmed by the text itself, and the scholarship is solid.

Then there is all the hypocrisy of ignored passages on polygamy, divorce, dietary restrictions, and slavery, while homos*xuality alone is held up.

We’re not asking you to take any of this as gospel. We’re asking you to sit with the reasonable doubt. Because the burden of proof was never ours. It belonged to the institution that wanted to exclude us from the love of God that Jesus preached — and reading the whole text, it turns out they didn’t have nearly as strong a case as they pretended.

What we can say with confidence is this: q***r people are in the Bible: not as cautionary tales, and not just in the margins. In the covenant with Naomi. In the grief of David. In the faith of the centurion. In the intimacy of the Beloved Disciple. In the promise Isaiah made to the eu**chs, fulfilled in Acts on a desert road. In the very words Jesus chose when he described people who fall outside the binary and said simply: let anyone accept this who can.

The institution spent centuries deciding that what the text said could not mean what it said — because the people it honored could not be holy. Feminist scholars started dismantling that project fifty years ago. Q***r scholars have begun doing the same work ever since. Both projects are the same: reading the whole verses, refusing the interpretations and lies layered over them, and insisting the Bible is large enough to hold the people it always contained.

That work is now showing up in pews and pulpits. The United Church of Christ has ordained LGBTQ pastors since the 70s. In 2003 the Episcopal Church, ordained an out partnered bishop; and along with the Lutherans (ELCA) and the Presbyterian Church USA, all mainline denominations are now fully affirming, even allowing same-s*x marriages to be performed. Just in May 2024, the United Methodist Church — the second largest Protestant denomination in America — voted with 93% approval to lift its ban on LGBTQ ordination and called s*xuality “a sacred gift.”

Christianity is not a monolith. There are communities where you are not just tolerated but celebrated. Where your love is not a problem to be managed but a gift to be blessed. Where a place at the table is waiting for you.

And if institutional faith isn’t for you — for one reason or another — know this: you were always in their story. Before the translations. Before the councils. Before the sermons and the rulebooks and the schisms. The Bible reflects and has space for the full human spectrum.

You were always there. The text of the Bible records it.

More available on our website ThirstysRVA.com.

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s🗓️🏳️‍🌈🤠—Wednesday 💅🏾 Hot Girl Drag at 9:30📖 Bear Book will discuss Gay Like Me by Richie Jac...
05/27/2026

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s🗓️🏳️‍🌈🤠

—Wednesday
💅🏾 Hot Girl Drag at 9:30

📖 Bear Book will discuss Gay Like Me by Richie Jackson at 6:30

—Thursday
🍿Tangerine 2015 Trans, Christmas, s*x work, modern classic, all shot on iPhone. 7:30 with free popcorn

🌈 Q***r Carnage Poetry 8:30

Friday is always Kareoke with Jason at 7

—Saturday is a fifth Saturday
So let’s get a little country before Pride

🤠Q***r Country Fair at 9 with DJ Amy Alderman. Dress your best Country/Western, hide your six shooter but let people know you’re packing. Bring a bandana but check the hanky code, Partner. And of course save a horse

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History 🏺🏳️‍🌈May 25th marked 131 years since Oscar Wilde was convicted of "gross indecency" after the firs...
05/26/2026

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History 🏺🏳️‍🌈

May 25th marked 131 years since Oscar Wilde was convicted of "gross indecency" after the first trial ended in a hung jury, but persistent prosecutors got Wilde sentenced to the maximum of two years of hard labor - effectively ending his career and his witty gay spirit.

The day before that, was Pans*xual Visibility Day, Oscar was almost certainly not pan, but more than two decades before that Wilde trial, another poet was dragged into court over someone who he loved.

Poet Paul Verlaine was married to a young woman, but fell deeply in love with the teenage genius Arthur Rimbaud. Rimbaud, for his part, went on to have a later relationship with poet Germain Nouveau in London, keep a female companion in Abyssinia, and leave his servant Djami a bequest in his will. These were pan or bi lives before there was a concept.

Rimbaud was a literary prodigy by 17 when he met the decade older poet. Together they went on a whirlwind tear around England and Belgium, abandoning Verlaine's young wife and engaging in rampant s*x, drugs, and poetry. On and off like their relationship, both poets wrote furiously, between fights, separations, drugs, and reconciliations. Their collaboration was the first sparks of the symbolism literary movement.

But living fast for two years had consequences and their passion lead to frequent drama between the two cursed poets. In July 1873, after a violent quarrel in Brussels, an unstable and altered Verlaine shot Rimbaud in the wrist. Their fight got Verlaine arrested. He was tried and convicted for the simple assault, because Belgium, operating under the Napoleonic Code, had long since decriminalized homos*xuality. The frustrated police couldn't persecute who Verlaine loved, so instead they subjected him to a forced invasive examination to document the s*xual nature of the relationship and gave him the maximum sentence of two years hard labor, just like Wilde.

Rimbaud writes A Season in Hell from the romantic fallout and guilt, his first published work. He then travels the world, joins the army and immediately deserts, all the while having relationships with men and women but none as tumultuous or as productive as his love of Verlaine, in fact he never writes again after age 21. He lived in Africa for a decade before illness forced him to return home and lose his leg.

Verlaine reaffirms his Catholic faith once free and attempts to reconcile with his wife, but still champions Rimbaud's work. Failing to reconnect with his still young wife, he moves to England with a former student, Lucien Létinois - whom he loved so completely he bought him a farm and wrote 25 poems mourning him after his early death. Verlaine's addictions brought him to poverty repeatedly, but his peers named him the Prince of Poets and when he died at only 51 he was very well regarded, his verses often being set to music.

Both Verlaine and Rimbaud are considered some of the greatest French poets.

A quick aside: The British legislation in 1885 that later convicted Wilde, also raised the age of s*xual consent for girls in that same bill from just 13 to what it remains at 16 in much of Europe. It was still 13 in France and Brussels in Verlaine’s time. They do love policing q***r and female bodies.

Happy Pan Visibility Day. We were always here, even when no one labeled it.

All Pride Month, we're following the cases, convictions, and rulings that shaped q***r life in America. We'll see you in court.

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s🐻🏳️‍🌈🍿 Thursday’s movie is Port Authority (2021) a young man struggles with his own identity...
05/21/2026

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s🐻🏳️‍🌈

🍿 Thursday’s movie is Port Authority (2021) a young man struggles with his own identity as he is pulled into the Kiki ballroom scene and a Trans romance. Free popcorn

🐻 Saturday is Bear and Bo***ge with DJ Amy at 9 pm, lounge open for Bear cuddles 7-10

⛓️ Kink Demo is Ni**le Play, CBT, and Sounding at 10:30

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History: Bible 14🛐🏳️‍⚧️Jesus never said anything about gay people. We’ve heard that — and it’s technically...
05/20/2026

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History: Bible 14🛐🏳️‍⚧️

Jesus never said anything about gay people. We’ve heard that — and it’s technically true. But he did welcome people who fall outside the male/female binary.

Matthew 19 opens with the Pharisees testing Jesus on divorce. He gives a stricter answer than they expected, one most modern Christians seem to gloss over. His disciples respond: if that’s the standard, it’s better not to marry at all and Jesus doesn’t correct them.

“Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eu**chs who have been so from birth, and there are eu**chs who have been made eu**chs by others, and there are eu**chs who have made themselves eu**chs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”

Three categories of people: the third — voluntary celibacy for the kingdom — is the one churches focus on exclusively ignoring the first two.

Jewish tradition has long recognized multiple gender categories. The Talmud distinguishes between the ‘saris hamah’ — a person born with male-identified characteristics who naturally develops otherwise — and the ‘saris adam,’ eu**chs made so by human intervention. Those categories map exactly onto Jesus’s list, we may not practice castration any more, but Jesus is describing inters*x people and people who have had their gender changed, without excluding either.

It gets more complicated though. In the ancient world “born eu**ch” often described men who lacked attraction to women not just genitalia— a category that included what we would now call some gay men. Even Robert Gagnon — the most prominent conservative anti-gay biblical scholar — concedes that born eu**chs in the ancient world probably included homos*xually inclined people, which he acknowledges contradicts the claim that the ancient world couldn’t conceive of people born with same-s*x attraction.

Jesus casually includes them without calling them to repentance or qualifying or conditioning their place in the kingdom. He simply acknowledges they exist and moves right along.

Jesus seems to be aware that not everyone could accept these people and yet he seems to include all non-binary and trans people, and even by extension gay people using the only language he had for it before holding up celibacy, but the only thing the church heard was celibacy.

We covered earlier in this series how Isaiah 56 promised eu**chs — those barred from the assembly in Deuteronomy — an everlasting name better than sons and daughters. And how in Acts, Philip finds the Ethiopian eu**ch reading that very prophet and baptizes him on the spot. Jesus’s words in Matthew are just part of that same thread.

“Let anyone accept this who can.”
Jesus doesn’t ask you to be comfortable. He asks for acceptance. The people who can’t seem to manage that aren’t following a harder teaching than Jesus gave — they’re refusing the one he did.

I will share some closing thoughts on the series next week.

More available on our website ThirstysRVA.com.

🏳️‍🌈👨‍✈️Third Saturday is Leather Night👨‍✈️🏳️‍🌈This month’s theme is boots and boxers. Lockers available and boot black ...
05/14/2026

🏳️‍🌈👨‍✈️Third Saturday is Leather Night👨‍✈️🏳️‍🌈

This month’s theme is boots and boxers.

Lockers available and boot black on site.

No cover ever at Thirsty’s but we will be fundraising for Virginia Pride

Hosted by RVA Leather
Social at 7 then DJ Bear Bonez at 9

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This week at Thirsty’s👨‍✈️📖📖 Wednesday is Q***r Horizons Book Club. At 6:30 we’ll discuss Cemetery Boys by Aiden T...
05/13/2026

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This week at Thirsty’s👨‍✈️📖

📖 Wednesday is Q***r Horizons Book Club. At 6:30 we’ll discuss Cemetery Boys by Aiden Thomas.
💅🏾 Wednesday at 9:30 Hot Girl Drag with Amber St. Lexington

🍿 Thursday at 7:30 Q***r Fan Cinema
Twilight Kiss (2019) follows two older closeted men in Hong Kong as they navigate a new relationship in the gay underground of China.
with free popcorn.
🌈 Q***r Carnage Poetry at 8:30 in the Lounge

👨‍✈️Saturday is Leather Night: Boots and Boxers with a social at 7 and DJ BearBonez at 9. Lounge is strict dress code.

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History:Bible 13🛐🏳️‍🌈Paul says that women shouldn’t teach, but that’s not what Paul said.In his own letter...
05/12/2026

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History:Bible 13🛐🏳️‍🌈

Paul says that women shouldn’t teach, but that’s not what Paul said.

In his own letter to Rome — the same letter containing Romans 1 — Paul closes with greetings to Phoebe, whom he calls a deacon; Priscilla, his fellow worker in ministry; and Junia, whom he names “prominent among the apostles.”

But you’ve been told Junias was a man? No, Junia was a common Roman woman’s name. There is no record anywhere in ancient literature of a male name “Junias.” It never existed until around the 12th or 13th century, when scribes began quietly changing her name in the manuscript tradition to an invented male form, as scholar Bernadette Brooten says: “Because a woman could not have been an apostle, the woman who is here called apostle could not have been a woman.”

Eldon Epp traced the manuscript trail and confirmed it — a woman honored as an apostle for over a thousand years had simply been renamed, a lie that wasn’t exposed until a few decades ago.

Mary Magdalene is present at the crucifixion when the male disciples have fled. She is first to the tomb in all the gospels. She is the one Jesus calls by name on Easter morning and sends to tell the others. The Eastern church has always called her “apostle to the apostles.” Her importance is not ambiguous— over and over again she is named.

But the lie you’ve been told has a birthday: on September 14, 591 CE, Pope Gregory “the Great” gave Homily 33 and merged three distinct women into one: Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and the unnamed sinner of Luke 7. He suggested the oil she used on Jesus was her perfume and that the seven demons cast out of her were the seven deadly sins, lust especially. And in one sermon, the first witness to the resurrection became a repentant s*x worker. The Catholic Church finally quietly corrected this lie in 1969 and Pope Francis elevated her feast day to equal standing with the male apostles, just 1500 years late.

Then there is Thecla, the most popular female saint after Mary in the early church, called “apostle and equal to the apostles” in the Eastern tradition. Her story was wildly well read in Greek, Latin, Coptic, Syriac, and Armenian. Eventually so impressed by her faith, Paul commissions her to go and teach the gospel. She survived two executions, baptized herself, and spent decades healing and preaching. Women across the early church used her story as inspiration to teach and baptize.

Then around 200 CE the “church father” Tertullian rages against the text by name, citing Timothy — “let them keep silence and ask their husbands at home” — to argue no woman could minister. But he was using a letter widely considered written after Paul’s death, borrowing Paul’s name, to suppress a story about Paul commissioning a female apostle in a very well known text.

The other verse he uses is much like the first: 1 Corinthians 14:34 interrupts Paul mid-argument and contradicts what he says earlier in that same letter. It also appears in different lines in different manuscripts, if at all — a pretty strong sign of later copy/paste directly from Timothy. Neither that verse from Corinthians nor Timothy appears in the most ancient collection of Paul’s letters that we have (P46), while the Acts of Paul and Thecla circulated widely a century before any of those verses appear. The church used almost definitely forged letters to overwrite Paul’s actual life and ministry.

In 1983 Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza published In Memory of Her — its title taken from Jesus’s own words about the woman who anoints him: “wherever the gospel is preached, what she has done will be told in memory of her.” She reconstructed what the early church actually looked like before imperial patriarchal structures displaced women from leadership, arguing the Jesus movement began as a discipleship of equals. The evidence was always in the text, hiding under the lies we were told.

The tools used against women are all too familiar: manuscript alteration, canonical exclusion, disputed verses cited as settled law, distinct figures collapsed into a convenient stereotype, inconvenient texts suppressed. People renamed, shamed, or silenced. Each time the church deciding that what the text said could not mean what it said, because the people it honored challenged prejudices.

When Christianity moved from a radical people’s movement to the imperially sanctioned church of empire, the cost of respectability was paid by everyone on the margins of the fiercely paternalistic Roman world.

But in the last half century scholars and feminists have done amazing work starting to uncover and restore these women of the Bible. The recovery work for q***r people is even newer and just beginning. Both projects are the same: reading the whole verses, what’s actually there, then refusing the lies and forced interpretations layered over it, and insisting the Bible is big enough to hold the people who have always been there.

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s 🗓️🏳️‍🌈Tuesday is Board Game Night and Vinyl Night Wednesday we have TTRPG night with MausRi...
05/05/2026

🏳️‍🌈🗓️This Week at Thirsty’s 🗓️🏳️‍🌈

Tuesday is Board Game Night and Vinyl Night

Wednesday we have TTRPG night with MausRitter this month at 6pm with MTG players welcome in the lounge

Thursday we have the smash hit Supernova (2025) at 7pm

Friday is Kareoke with Jason at 7pm

Saturday we have Shadowdark D&D lite OSR one shots in ShadowDark at 4:30

And then it’s TransJoy with NBphobic at 9pm

Sunday is Singlet Sunday in the lounge

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History: Bible 12🛐🏳️‍🌈If you grew up in a church, you know this one. Romans 1 is the passage most deployed...
05/05/2026

🏳️‍🌈🏺2-Gay in History: Bible 12🛐🏳️‍🌈

If you grew up in a church, you know this one. Romans 1 is the passage most deployed against q***r people in the New Testament, and unlike Leviticus — which most Christians quietly set aside along with the rest of the Holiness Code — this one comes from Paul, in the New Testament, and it hurts. Can’t sugar coat this one, but sugar can cover bitter medicine.

So let’s start with what the passage is actually doing.

Romans is a letter Paul is writing to a specific congregation in Rome — a mixed community of Jewish and Gentile Christians with a lot of tension between them. Right off the bat Paul opens by beating up on the Gentile, who abandoned God for idols and were thus “given up” by God to disordered passions like same-s*x acts — but also things like being boastful, ruthless, or a gossip. The Jews in the community would have finished the first chapter smiling and nodding.

But then comes the sucker punch, Romans 2:1: “Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.”

This is the bitter medicine hidden in the letter. The supposedly holy ones are condemned for judging while being no better than the Gentiles — a deliberate rhetorical setup designed to catch self-righteous people in the act of condemning others. Paul gets his audience gloating at the sins of pagans, then turns the entire argument back on them. Paul uses homos*xuality because it was so visible in Greco-Roman culture but condemned in Jewish thought, but then goes on to list numerous other sins, so long everyone feels called out.

Even the most conservative scholars acknowledge this is what Paul is architecturally doing. The passage most used to condemn q***r people was written to condemn exactly the kind of person using it that way. That’s why you should always read the whole chapter before and after the verse.

Romans is indicting the accuser and giving them a bitter pill to swallow.

But there is more.
Paul is not describing same-s*x acts as the sin — but as the consequence. The structure of the passage is: Gentiles abandoned God → God gave them up → disordered passions followed. Same-s*x acts appear as a symptom of idolatry, not as their own subject of condemnation. Paul is telling a morality tale about what happened to a specific people in a specific context — not necessarily legislating for Christian relationships across all time.

Professor Dale Martin makes the crucial point: Paul is not giving an account of homos*xual desire as such. He is describing Gentile idolaters.

The key phrase is ‘para phusin’ — usually translated “against nature.” It sounds categorical. But three chapters later, in Romans 11:24, Paul uses the exact same phrase to describe God grafting Gentiles into Israel — something Paul presents not as an abomination but as a miracle of grace. “Against nature” doesn’t mean eternally and absolutely forbidden. It means something more like “not the usual way of things” or “outside the expected order.” The ancient mind was far more concerned with excess and lack of self-control — and that seems to be what this passage is actually about.

A note on ‘malakoi’, the other word in this family of passages — see our earlier post on arsenokoitai, where we addressed it directly. The same problem applies: a word translated into a category it was never meant to carry.

But let’s be honest: Romans 1 is still the strongest biblical case against us. It is Paul. It is the New Testament. It mentions women as well as men. Even some q***r-affirming scholars argue Paul knew about same-s*x relationships beyond exploitative contexts and condemned them anyway. More on that in the comments.

But here is what does not require a footnote or debate: Paul wrote this passage as an intentional trap. He wrote it to stop people from using exactly this kind of catalog of sins to condemn others while exempting themselves — and the sin list is long, with same-s*x acts as just one among many.

And then he followed it immediately with some of the most expansive language of grace and inclusion in all his letters.
Romans was not written to give anyone a weapon. It was written to make weapons backfire.
If this passage has been used against you, you were not the one Paul was condemning. Romans 2 is the best response to Romans 1.

Address

3516 Forest Hill Avenue
Richmond, VA
23225

Opening Hours

Tuesday 3pm - 11pm
Wednesday 3pm - 11pm
Thursday 3pm - 11pm
Friday 3pm - 1am
Saturday 3pm - 1am
Sunday 3pm - 7pm

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Thirsty's RVA posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Establishment

Send a message to Thirsty's RVA:

Share

Category