I was annoyed earlier this week because of a phone call. I was impersonating a German woman on the phone (as one does) to get adsl installed at her house (at her request) since she doesn’t speak Spanish. It didn’t occur to me to disguise my voice. Voices come in all timbres, independent of gender, right? Lauren Bacall & Kathleen Turner certainly don’t sound like Fran Drescher. The attendant on the other side of the phone insisted I was not the lady in question. In fact, she said you’re not a woman. Evidently that’s true, but what if I were? It made me think that trans people probably have to deal with this sort of thing all the time. It must be infuriating. I did the whole I want to speak to your supervisor schtik, and insisted she apologize to me. When I was a teen I was accused of having certain characteristics that were deemed feminine. I was said to be too interested in the arts, in fashion, in how I groomed myself. I suppose that left me with the impression that there was something overtly feminine about me. To the point that I could pass myself off as a woman on the phone (obviously not taking into account that when I wake up I sound like Barry White).
That brought me to how skewed a view of ourselves we can have. People say things to us and we presume they know what they’re talking about, although their perspective may be entirely biased. For example, people talk about me as being a recluse. I do reject the majority of invitations we receive. There are really only a handful of people I interact with socially, that’s true; But as I was reviewing this blog, I was surprised to note, I seem to go out a whole lot. Lunch here, dinner there. It seems, to my surprise, that I have a very active social life. This week we’re going to drinks on Wednesday, then a lunch on Thursday, then another one on Friday. How could this recluse myth possibly have become a socially accepted truth? So much so that even I started believing it.
Are you sure you are who they say you are? Who you think you are?
An online petition has been set up demanding that Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn is fired in the wake of the death of a transgender primary school teacher.
Lucy Meadows, 32, was found dead in her home in Accrington, Lancashire. Police confirmed her death was not being treated as suspicious.
Meadows previously taught at St Mary Magdalen’s School as a man, Nathan Upton, and was due to return after gender reassignment surgery. School authorities wrote to parents to tell them of the plan and that children should refer to her as Miss Meadows at the start of spring term.
Melanie Nathan, Lawyer and human rights activist and Kristina Lapinski, Filmmaker, from GAY U.S.A. the Movie participate in the GetEQUAL UGANDA ARREST ME TOO Campaign.
There are two things the U.S.A. LGBT and supportive community can do to help Ugandan LGBT community while the Anti-Homosexuality Bill (Kill the Gays Bill) is about to pass Uganda’s Parliament:
“It was in the late 70’s, when ‘Women Reclaim the Night’ was transformed into what we are marching for at ‘Reclaim the Night’. If ‘women’ was dropped from the title, why are we still marching for just women – what about trans?
The Reclaim the Night website states the aim as being to end male violence against women. It explicitly uses ‘women only’ countless times. I understand why this limitation was there initially, but the opinions beliefs and fight should never be limited to ‘women only’.
Reclaim the Night is about giving women a voice. Sexual violence and abuse has primarily targeted women. What about our voice? The obstacles trans survivors face are the same barriers faced by all survivors of abuse – worry, self-doubt, and shame. We have to consider and support the barriers that trans survivors also have to overcome.”
Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo has voiced his support for a Maryland ballot initiative that would legalize same-sex marriage in the state. In response, Maryland state delegate Emmett C. Burns, Jr. (D-Baltimore) wrote a letter to Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti urging him to “inhibit such expressions from your employee.” In the open letter below, Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe responds to Burns.
There’s a very amusing example of this in the form of the American Evangelical community’s promulgation of the work of (Dr?) Paul Cameron. In the early 1980′s he founded something called the Institute for theScientific Investigation of Sexuality (located in Nebraska)which was later renamed The Family Research Institute. In practice it doesn’t do any research on families, or any real research at all for that matter. The name is a cover for Anti-Gay Pseudo-Science Discount Outlet. Cameron’s been dubbed the “one-man statistical chop shop”. His “studies” have been passed around (and continue to be passed around) and quoted by a number of Christian anti-gay hate groups. In 1992 he (self) published ”What Do Homosexuals Do?” Among other things, the study claimed that 17% of LGBT people enjoy consuming human feces. Note to self: never visit a gay bar in Nebraska!!! I was somewhat surprised at the figure since I’d read somewhere on the interweb that 34% of Nebraskans enjoy consuming human feces, so the number for gays is surprisingly low in comparison.
Fortunately, long before 1992, the scientific community responded en masse.
On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that “Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists” by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron’s claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.
At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it “formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality.”6
In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA)adopted a resolution which asserted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism” and noted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research.”7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of “critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron.”At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee’s report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, “The Paul Cameron Case,” is to be published inFootnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron’s frequent lecture and media appearances.”8
The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism and thus, it formally disassociates itself from the representation and interpretations of scientific literature in his writings and public statements on sexuality.
Cameron’s credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985),Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallasreferred to “Cameron’s sworn statement that ‘homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,’” and concluded that “Dr. Paul Cameron…has himself made misrepresentations to this Court” and that “There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron” (p.536).9
That’s their guy! Whenever you hear a surreal line about gays having a lifespan of 42 years, you now know who came up with it. When you hear about links between homosexuality and pedophilia, well, this is the guy who came up with the study.
…but here is where things get interesting!
Extremist Christians (who are, btw, making a ton of money by pushing their anti-gay agenda) are generally prepared to dismiss science at their earliest convenience. They decry science if it regards evolution. They condemn studies that prove the children of gay couples are just as well adjusted as children of straight couples- and then they ask society to ignore all real, peer reviewed science and take instead the word of their guy. Paul Cameron. Science doesn’t count to them unless it’s their version of science, junk-science.
Shane touches a very interesting topic which concerns the long-game.
“Gallup polls suggest that young adults between the ages of 18 and 34 are overwhelmingly in favor of LGBT rights, and 76 percent of them support legalizing marriage for gay and lesbian couples. The Higher Education Research Institute’s annual Freshman Survey corroborates this support for same-sex marriage and also the fact that three quarters of college students today support adoption by gay and lesbian couples.”
From a commercial perspective Huckabee’s appreciation day was a one off. How many appreciation days would it take to outweigh the loss of permanent customers. The Crazy-Christians were, one presumes, already customers- I can’t imagine the numbers could stack up positively in the long run with an entire new generation who refuses to support the marginalization, exclusion and persecution of the LGBT community.
Absolutely fantastic open letter from John Carrol to Bailey Hanks, here’s the best part:
“Just a reminder: You were plucked out of obscurity by a team of gay men, gay men who not only believed in you and gave you the chance of a lifetime but treated you with loving kindness and respect — the same gay men you discriminated against by publicly supporting Chick-fil-A. You were chosen to star in the show Legally Blonde specifically by the director/choreographer, who is a gay man. The associate choreographer and vocal coach who helped you win the reality show you were on are two gay men. A few of the Broadway show’s producers (the ones who paid you) are gay. Your costume designer is a gay man, as is the designer of the wigs and makeup you wore. You were taught the choreography and put into the Broadway show by a gay man, and you were supported and made to feel safe and part of the Broadway community by the many gay people in your cast. These people are not only my coworkers, Bailey, but, more importantly, they are my friends. After your time on Broadway (surrounded by gay people), you did not run screaming home, where the hills have eyes. You stayed here, in Sodom and Gomorrah. You auditioned and continued to make friends and work with — guess what — more gay people. We invited you into our homes and offered you a place at our table. You stayed for dinner, ate all the food, even stuck around for dessert, and now vomited it all up in our faces. Your website describes you as “sweet, kind, caring”; perhaps you should add “unless you’re gay.”
“I’ll never know what went through my father’s mind when he found pictures of me dressed up in drag on the Internet, but I know that the phone call that came after changed my life forever. I was standing outside in the snow when he called me, spitting rage through the phone.
“I’m not here to buy your dresses,” he said. “You’re not a quiet gay. You’re a liar. I showed the pictures of you in drag to your 10-year-old brother and he cried because he couldn’t understand why his hero would do something like that. Deal with me as a man. Listen to me, son. Who would give a job to someone like you? Say, ‘Yes, sir.’ Did you hear me? Say ‘Yes, sir.’”
Fluhr has transformed his life into a play, if you’re in or near NY:
‘Our Lady’ is playing at the Living Theatre at 21 Clinton Street in New York City on August 13 at 7, August 18 at 3:45, August 20 at 4, August 23 at 10 and August 25 at 12. All showings are in PM. Tickets are $15 in advance and $18 at the door. Tickets are available for purchase here or more information, check out www.ourladytheplay.com or tweet @ourladytheplay or @alexandergold.
Today Derek Broes in Forbes was making a puerile attempt to resurrect the tired semantic argument, civil-union vs. gay marriage. It’s the last socially acceptable home of anti-gay bigotry. Let’s not kid ourselves, despite Mr. Broes assertion that “I, nor<sic> most Christians I know, have neveropposed gay couples having equal rights to heterosexual couples, they have only been opposed to the church being forced to redefine what it has recognized as marriage for thousands of years within the church,“ many anti-gay campaigners would like gay sex to be banned. Not too long ago a number of them were decrying the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence vs. Texas. Others would like to see Gays expelled from the military as was revealed by the Republican primary debates. Other anti-gay activists would like Gays to be “cured” of their homosexuality. The Chick-fil-A cupola has made donations to a number of groups who espouse these nefarious beliefs and pursue a virulently anti-gay agenda, including The Family Research Council and Exodus International, the latter a promoter of reparative therapy. To pretend they’re concerned with the name of a legal contract is only the most recent way of fomenting the marginalization of the LGBT community without having to trot out the many nefarious myths linking gays to pedophilia, disease and the destruction of the Roman Empire.
Words are ever evolving. Once, the word salary represented the salt allowance Roman soldiers received as payment for their service: Salarium, from sal (salt.) Yet, we do not see people protesting that the meaning of the word has evolved and they are now paid their salaries in cash rather than salt.
The meaning of marriage itself has changed significantly through the years. Once it was a business transaction where people were paired off with the highest bidder. That’s still the case in some parts of the world. By rejecting that practice Western societies have changed the definition of marriage that had existed for millenia. When women were afforded property rights and custody rights, the definition of marriage evolved. When people were allowed to marry freely despite social class, skin colour or background we changed the definition of marriage. It’s not the only word that has evolved.When women received the right to vote, society changed the superficial meaning of the word vote. For millenia, from the first democracies in Greece, only MEN were allowed to VOTE. And yet, by allowing blacks or women to vote, we didn’t change the true meaning of the word, voting stayed the same, the only change was that suddenly another sector of the population could also participate. When women were finally allowed to become LAWYERS and JUDGES, we didn’t change the definition of those words, we simply accepted that gender was not the factor that determined one’s ability to participate in either of those professions.
Marriage is a civil contract that gives two citizens certain rights. The main point of that contract isn’t the gender of those who enter into it, it’s the rights and obligations said contract gives to the subscribers. It’s odd that in this day and age there are still people capable of presenting this absurd semantic argument with a straight face.
The False Premise: It’s About Freedom of Religion
Freedom of religion, like most freedoms afforded to citizens of the civilized western world, is an individual freedom. What does that mean? It’s actually very simple. An individual freedom is one I can apply to my own life, not one I can force other people to apply to their lives. If I did, I would be interfering with their right to freedom of religion! Specifically, it means each one of us can:
A) Choose a (any) religion freely.
B) Choose how often (or not) we participate in religious rituals.
C) Follow as many religious regulations (or not) as we choose.
D) Change to another religion at any given moment.
E) Not join any religion.
In practical terms that means:
It’s not the right of Orthodox Jews & Muslims to forbid me (or anyone else) from eating bacon.
It’s not the right of the aforementioned religious groups to force women to cover their hair with scarves or wigs.
It’s not the right of Christians to tell people when, how or with whom they should or shouldn’t use their genitalia.
It’s not the right of Christians to tell their fellow citizens how they should or shouldn’t live their individual freedoms.
Freedom of religion is about the right to choose and follow your religion, it’s not about the right to force other people to live according to the tenets of your religion. Going down that road goes against the basic principles of a free society. What anti-gay activists propose is that the regulations of their religion be the paramaters for the law for all, even though they continue to be free to follow all the regulations of their religion that they choose.
When we let one person’s religion define other people’s rights, this is what happens:
It’s About Authoritarianism
What Mr. Broes and his ilk propose is that society, as a whole, conform to his religion’s definition of marriage. He says “Christians get married before God and not the state,” and in doing so seems to imply that everyone else in society, Jewish, Hindu, Atheist et al, must adopt the limited definition of marriage as stated by his particular version of Christianity. I’d like to remind Mr. Broes that the Catholic definition of marriage precludes divorce, yet divorce is legal and there are no protests outside of Catholic Churches decrying their particular definition of marriage. In an extremist Muslim society, their definition of marriage means a woman who is unfaithful can be stoned to death.
Blood On Their Hands
I’ve got to wrap this up with what all of this really means, and that takes my mind back to Tyler Clementi, Kenneth Weishun, Asher Brown, Seth Walsh, Raymond Chase, Justin Aaberg, Billy Lucas, Zach Harrington, Jamey Rodemeyer- and so many others. It means that a certain sector of our society is creating an atmosphere where free citizens feel so marginalized and excluded they feel life is not worth living. So, congratulations Chick-fil-A, Mike Huckabee and Derek Broes- I suppose you’re reaching your goals by hook or by crook, if not by donating to viciously anti-gay groups, by creating an environment where gay teenagers feel they’re better off dead than in the environment you help create.
The next time you bite into a Chick-fil-A burger, think about this:
There are two things the U.S.A. LGBT and supportive community can do to help Ugandan LGBT community while the Anti-Homosexuality Bill (Kill the Gays Bill) is about to pass Uganda’s Parliament:
