Marriage Is a Constitutional Right
New York Times Editorial - Aug. 4, 2010
Until Wednesday, the thousands of same-sex couples who have married did so because a state judge or Legislature allowed them to. The nation’s most fundamental guarantees of freedom, set out in the Constitution, were not part of the equation. That has changed with the historic decision by a federal judge in California, Vaughn Walker, that said his state’s ban on same-sex marriage violated the 14th Amendment’s rights to equal protection and due process of law.
The decision, though an instant landmark in American legal history, is more than that. It also is a stirring and eloquently reasoned denunciation of all forms of irrational discrimination, the latest link in a chain of pathbreaking decisions that permitted interracial marriages and decriminalized gay sex between consenting adults.
As the case heads toward appeals at the circuit level and probably the Supreme Court, Judge Walker’s opinion will provide a firm legal foundation that will be difficult for appellate judges to assail.
The case was brought by two gay couples who said California’s Proposition 8, which passed in 2008 with 52 percent of the vote, discriminated against them by prohibiting same-sex marriage and relegating them to domestic partnerships. The judge easily dismissed the idea that discrimination is permissible if a majority of voters approve it; the referendum’s outcome was “irrelevant,” he said, quoting a 1943 case, because “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote.”
He then dismantled, brick by crumbling brick, the weak case made by supporters of Proposition 8 and laid out the facts presented in testimony. The two witnesses called by the supporters (the state having bowed out of the case) had no credibility, he said, and presented no evidence that same-sex marriage harmed society or the institution of marriage.
Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in their ability to form successful marital unions and raise children, he said. Though procreation is not a necessary goal of marriage, children of same-sex couples will benefit from the stability provided by marriage, as will the state and society. Domestic partnerships confer a second-class status. The discrimination inherent in that second-class status is harmful to gay men and lesbians. These findings of fact will be highly significant as the case winds its way through years of appeals.
One of Judge Walker’s strongest points was that traditional notions of marriage can no longer be used to justify discrimination, just as gender roles in opposite-sex marriage have changed dramatically over the decades. All marriages are now unions of equals, he wrote, and there is no reason to restrict that equality to straight couples. The exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage “exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage,” he wrote. “That time has passed.”
To justify the proposition’s inherent discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation, he wrote, there would have to be a compelling state interest in banning same-sex marriage. But no rational basis for discrimination was presented at the two-and-a-half-week trial in January, he said. The real reason for Proposition 8, he wrote, is a moral view “that there is something wrong with same-sex couples,” and that is not a permissible reason for legislation.
“Moral disapproval alone,” he wrote, in words that could someday help change history, “is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and women.”
The ideological odd couple who led the case — Ted Olson and David Boies, who fought against each other in the Supreme Court battle over the 2000 election — were criticized by some supporters of same-sex marriage for moving too quickly to the federal courts. Certainly, there is no guarantee that the current Supreme Court would uphold Judge Walker’s ruling. But there are times when legal opinions help lead public opinions.
Just as they did for racial equality in previous decades, the moment has arrived for the federal courts to bestow full equality to millions of gay men and lesbians.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Potter County Library Faced Protests Over Gay Documentary
Thanks to good reporting by the Harrisburg Patriot-News, the truth about the smear campaign being waged by the Potter County Tea Party and the Venango County-based American Family Association of Pennsylvania about a recent screening of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Coudersport is starting to come out.
The whole sad affair reminds us of comments that a Venango County school district superintendent made a few years ago about the American Family Assoc. of Penna.'s president, Diane Gramley:
"She likes to start a fire, then throw gasoline on it."
Potter County Library Faced Protests Over Gay Documentary
by Donald Gilliland for The Patriot-News:
After several hours of people pointing their fingers in her face and telling her she was going to hell, Keturah Cappadonia cracked.
In tears, the 28-year-old librarian in this rural town of 2,500 people typed an e-mail to Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer canceling the planned screening of their award-winning PBS documentary about the challenges of being openly gay in rural Pennsylvania.
Wilson and Hamer are traveling the state with their film “Out In The Silence,” and Perry County is on the list of future venues.
The film recounts the men’s return to Oil City after a plea for help from the mother of a gay high school student being bullied at school.
It has been reviewed favorably by the American Library Association and Christianity Today, but it’s getting resistance in some of the rural counties where Wilson and Hamer think it most needs to be seen.
Several churches in Potter County launched a campaign to force the local library to cancel, and the president of the Potter County Tea Party called for the library’s funding to be revoked if it didn’t comply.
The 58-year-old library board president, Jane Metzger, decided she would have none of it.
Regardless of what she thought of homosexuality, she was not going to compromise the library’s mission “because of the very loud voices of a few folks.”
“Basically we’re looking at intellectual freedom,” said Metzger. “That’s the bottom line. That’s what a library is for.”
A quick series of calls to the other members of the board resulted in a unanimous decision: the screening would go forward as planned.
The leader of the Potter County Tea Party, through a local blogger, claimed the library was allowing conservative Christians to be “attacked for our beliefs at a public library we support with our tax money. This is wrong and cannot be tolerated.” Later, he apologized for using the Tea Party name to express his personal opinion.
In the meantime, the filmmakers issued a press release, and the local blogosphere lit up in a bonfire of anonymous comments and accusations.
By the time people began to arrive for the screening two days later, Cappadonia looked shell-shocked.
“I don’t like controversy,” she said. “I know it’s a conservative community, but I never imagined it would get such a knee-jerk reaction.”
Some were saying Christian views would never be allowed an airing at the library because of separation of church and state. But the the library has six shelves of Bibles and Christian books in the non-fiction section, and Christian fiction is “wildly popular,” said Cappadonia.
Many Christians in Coudersport support the library. One said, “This is not a town that burns books.”
Cars quickly filled the library parking lot. Then they filled the lot for the neighborhood park next door. Then they began pulling onto the grass.
When the lights went down, all seats were full. People were sitting on the floor, sitting on bookshelves, standing between the stacks and against the wall. Many could not see the screen, but stayed just to listen.
As the film neared its conclusion an hour later, there was a flash of lightning outside, a sharp clap of thunder, and a double rainbow filled the sky.
Inside, a few opponents of the film offered their brimstone and walked out.
Applause erupted when a woman told the library board, “I think it’s good what you’ve done here.”
Some attempted to speak at length about “God’s Law,” and expressed frustration when they were asked to let others talk, too.
Openly gay members of the town — teenagers, adults and senior citizens — spoke briefly. Some said they felt embraced by the community and lucky to live there; others much less so.
Walter Baker, former chairman of the local Republican party and a member of the vestry at the Episcopal church, has owned a hotel in the center of town as an openly gay man for over 30 years.
“The people here are probably the most friendly people around,” he said. “They’ve been more than generous to me knowing who and what I am.”
A man from a town nearby said his church was very important to him, but when he came out of the closet “the people who considered themselves the most religious wrote me horrible letters.”
The discussion got loud a few times, but the consensus afterward was it was worthwhile.
When everyone was gone, Keturah Cappadonia locked the door.
Library board member Terri Shaffer sat on the floor and began ripping up the tattered duct tape patching the carpet.
The carpet “was good stuff when it was put in,” said Metzger. “June 1973 to be exact.”
Although the local Tea Party claimed “$1.5 million of local taxes” go to the library, the reality is its total budget last year was $117,000 - with less than $42,000 from local governments.
“I think it was a good experience,” said Shaffer. “Who cares if people get a little loud and speak their mind?”
Maybe the experience will bring in some donations — “especially from Harrisburg” she quipped.
Just then, there was a knock at the door.
It was one of the local ministers who spoke against the “homosexual lifestyle.”
When Cappadonia opened the door, he apologized to her.
“I feel badly about people coming in and badgering you,” he said.
Then he addressed Shaffer, saying “Terri, I hope I didn’t disappoint you too much.”
“It’s not my job to judge you,” she said with a smile.
The whole sad affair reminds us of comments that a Venango County school district superintendent made a few years ago about the American Family Assoc. of Penna.'s president, Diane Gramley:
"She likes to start a fire, then throw gasoline on it."
Potter County Library Faced Protests Over Gay Documentary
by Donald Gilliland for The Patriot-News:
After several hours of people pointing their fingers in her face and telling her she was going to hell, Keturah Cappadonia cracked.
In tears, the 28-year-old librarian in this rural town of 2,500 people typed an e-mail to Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer canceling the planned screening of their award-winning PBS documentary about the challenges of being openly gay in rural Pennsylvania.
Wilson and Hamer are traveling the state with their film “Out In The Silence,” and Perry County is on the list of future venues.
The film recounts the men’s return to Oil City after a plea for help from the mother of a gay high school student being bullied at school.
It has been reviewed favorably by the American Library Association and Christianity Today, but it’s getting resistance in some of the rural counties where Wilson and Hamer think it most needs to be seen.
Several churches in Potter County launched a campaign to force the local library to cancel, and the president of the Potter County Tea Party called for the library’s funding to be revoked if it didn’t comply.
The 58-year-old library board president, Jane Metzger, decided she would have none of it.
Regardless of what she thought of homosexuality, she was not going to compromise the library’s mission “because of the very loud voices of a few folks.”
“Basically we’re looking at intellectual freedom,” said Metzger. “That’s the bottom line. That’s what a library is for.”
A quick series of calls to the other members of the board resulted in a unanimous decision: the screening would go forward as planned.
The leader of the Potter County Tea Party, through a local blogger, claimed the library was allowing conservative Christians to be “attacked for our beliefs at a public library we support with our tax money. This is wrong and cannot be tolerated.” Later, he apologized for using the Tea Party name to express his personal opinion.
In the meantime, the filmmakers issued a press release, and the local blogosphere lit up in a bonfire of anonymous comments and accusations.
By the time people began to arrive for the screening two days later, Cappadonia looked shell-shocked.
“I don’t like controversy,” she said. “I know it’s a conservative community, but I never imagined it would get such a knee-jerk reaction.”
Some were saying Christian views would never be allowed an airing at the library because of separation of church and state. But the the library has six shelves of Bibles and Christian books in the non-fiction section, and Christian fiction is “wildly popular,” said Cappadonia.
Many Christians in Coudersport support the library. One said, “This is not a town that burns books.”
Cars quickly filled the library parking lot. Then they filled the lot for the neighborhood park next door. Then they began pulling onto the grass.
When the lights went down, all seats were full. People were sitting on the floor, sitting on bookshelves, standing between the stacks and against the wall. Many could not see the screen, but stayed just to listen.
As the film neared its conclusion an hour later, there was a flash of lightning outside, a sharp clap of thunder, and a double rainbow filled the sky.
Inside, a few opponents of the film offered their brimstone and walked out.
Applause erupted when a woman told the library board, “I think it’s good what you’ve done here.”
Some attempted to speak at length about “God’s Law,” and expressed frustration when they were asked to let others talk, too.
Openly gay members of the town — teenagers, adults and senior citizens — spoke briefly. Some said they felt embraced by the community and lucky to live there; others much less so.
Walter Baker, former chairman of the local Republican party and a member of the vestry at the Episcopal church, has owned a hotel in the center of town as an openly gay man for over 30 years.
“The people here are probably the most friendly people around,” he said. “They’ve been more than generous to me knowing who and what I am.”
A man from a town nearby said his church was very important to him, but when he came out of the closet “the people who considered themselves the most religious wrote me horrible letters.”
The discussion got loud a few times, but the consensus afterward was it was worthwhile.
When everyone was gone, Keturah Cappadonia locked the door.
Library board member Terri Shaffer sat on the floor and began ripping up the tattered duct tape patching the carpet.
The carpet “was good stuff when it was put in,” said Metzger. “June 1973 to be exact.”
Although the local Tea Party claimed “$1.5 million of local taxes” go to the library, the reality is its total budget last year was $117,000 - with less than $42,000 from local governments.
“I think it was a good experience,” said Shaffer. “Who cares if people get a little loud and speak their mind?”
Maybe the experience will bring in some donations — “especially from Harrisburg” she quipped.
Just then, there was a knock at the door.
It was one of the local ministers who spoke against the “homosexual lifestyle.”
When Cappadonia opened the door, he apologized to her.
“I feel badly about people coming in and badgering you,” he said.
Then he addressed Shaffer, saying “Terri, I hope I didn’t disappoint you too much.”
“It’s not my job to judge you,” she said with a smile.
Pa. Tea Party Apologizes for Documentary Controversy
By Jeffrey Gerson for The Advocate:
George Brown, president of the Potter County Tea Party, has issued a public apology for his protest of the acclaimed documentary Out in the Silence when it screened at a local library on its tour throughout Pennsylvania.
In an interview with The Advocate, Joe Wilson, co-director of Out in the Silence, explained the project’s mission: “The purpose of the whole tour was really to use this film to raise awareness and visibility about the lives of LGBT people in rural communities and small towns and help strengthen the ability of LGBT people in these communities to begin organizing for change.” The tour has so far covered over half of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties. Yet upon setting up shop in Coudersport, Pa., Wilson and Dean Hamer, his partner and codirector, met with controversy.
The film was set to be screened at the public library, Wilson explained, emphasizing, “just as any community group can do, or any citizen can use the public library for a program.” All was well until the duo received a call from the library director announcing that the event would have to be canceled. “She was receiving angry calls from local pastors for having scheduled a gay and lesbian program at the library. They were making threats that they were going to call for the library to be defunded,” Wilson said
An article that ran Monday on CoudyNews.com provides quotations both from Pete Tremblay, pastor of the Free Methodist Church and the Tea Party's Brown. Tremblay issued a request for people to “call the library ... and in a Christian manner inform them that this event is not a benefit to our community, and ask that it be canceled.” Brown took a different approach: “Should this agenda be continued, we may need to ask if the library should be defunded.”
The library's board of directors ultimately supported the film, saying they would not be threatened. The event was a success, Wilson reported: “It was the largest event in the library in a long time. We had a very supportive crowd from high school students all the way up to elderly people. There were conflicting viewpoints present during the discussion, though Hamer believes these were positive as well, as it made it clear how challenging it can be to be LGBT in that kind of environment.”
Brown issued an official apology for his actions Thursday, stating, “The Tea Party is not concerned with a gay movie, but I as a person was concerned with the library being the venue for the movie, and frankly that had little to do with our Tea Party mission either. In retrospect I should of used my personal email to voice my opinion.”
George Brown, president of the Potter County Tea Party, has issued a public apology for his protest of the acclaimed documentary Out in the Silence when it screened at a local library on its tour throughout Pennsylvania.
In an interview with The Advocate, Joe Wilson, co-director of Out in the Silence, explained the project’s mission: “The purpose of the whole tour was really to use this film to raise awareness and visibility about the lives of LGBT people in rural communities and small towns and help strengthen the ability of LGBT people in these communities to begin organizing for change.” The tour has so far covered over half of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties. Yet upon setting up shop in Coudersport, Pa., Wilson and Dean Hamer, his partner and codirector, met with controversy.
The film was set to be screened at the public library, Wilson explained, emphasizing, “just as any community group can do, or any citizen can use the public library for a program.” All was well until the duo received a call from the library director announcing that the event would have to be canceled. “She was receiving angry calls from local pastors for having scheduled a gay and lesbian program at the library. They were making threats that they were going to call for the library to be defunded,” Wilson said
An article that ran Monday on CoudyNews.com provides quotations both from Pete Tremblay, pastor of the Free Methodist Church and the Tea Party's Brown. Tremblay issued a request for people to “call the library ... and in a Christian manner inform them that this event is not a benefit to our community, and ask that it be canceled.” Brown took a different approach: “Should this agenda be continued, we may need to ask if the library should be defunded.”
The library's board of directors ultimately supported the film, saying they would not be threatened. The event was a success, Wilson reported: “It was the largest event in the library in a long time. We had a very supportive crowd from high school students all the way up to elderly people. There were conflicting viewpoints present during the discussion, though Hamer believes these were positive as well, as it made it clear how challenging it can be to be LGBT in that kind of environment.”
Brown issued an official apology for his actions Thursday, stating, “The Tea Party is not concerned with a gay movie, but I as a person was concerned with the library being the venue for the movie, and frankly that had little to do with our Tea Party mission either. In retrospect I should of used my personal email to voice my opinion.”
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Franklin, PA: Are You Listening? Learning?
This example from New Zealand about how to deal with discrimination in the educational setting might be helpful for Venango County's Franklin Area School District, whose board promoted to the position of principal, rather than investigated or fired, an assistant principal widely alleged to have engaged in abusive and discriminatory behavior against LGBT students and students of color.
NZ School Sanctioned for Firing Gay Sports Coach
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) -- A New Zealand Christian school has been ordered to pay undisclosed compensation and apologize to a sports coach it fired because he was gay.
Board members of Middleton Grange School in Christchurch -- on New Zealand's South Island -- will also attend courses on human rights awareness, school principal Richard Vanderpyl said Thursday.
''We're thinking of the impact on him,'' Vanderpyl said. ''We care for him and respect him.''
He said he offered to rehire the 28-year-old coach, but the man had already found a new job at another Christchurch school.
The coach, whose identity has been withheld, was employed in February to coach the girls' netball team but was dismissed when the school board discovered he was gay.
''At first I was shocked. I've never felt so small in my life,'' the man told New Zealand media Thursday. ''It's hard enough to go through finding yourself and accepting yourself and being 'out' in the first place. Having to go through discrimination doesn't help.''
The school board refused to comment, citing a confidentiality agreement.
NZ School Sanctioned for Firing Gay Sports Coach
WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) -- A New Zealand Christian school has been ordered to pay undisclosed compensation and apologize to a sports coach it fired because he was gay.
Board members of Middleton Grange School in Christchurch -- on New Zealand's South Island -- will also attend courses on human rights awareness, school principal Richard Vanderpyl said Thursday.
''We're thinking of the impact on him,'' Vanderpyl said. ''We care for him and respect him.''
He said he offered to rehire the 28-year-old coach, but the man had already found a new job at another Christchurch school.
The coach, whose identity has been withheld, was employed in February to coach the girls' netball team but was dismissed when the school board discovered he was gay.
''At first I was shocked. I've never felt so small in my life,'' the man told New Zealand media Thursday. ''It's hard enough to go through finding yourself and accepting yourself and being 'out' in the first place. Having to go through discrimination doesn't help.''
The school board refused to comment, citing a confidentiality agreement.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Big Lies
Anti-equality forces don't just lie about gays, they lie about democracy as well
by Sean Bugg
As gays and lesbians, we're not unused to hearing lies told about us. For decades, homophobes and anti-gay activists have relied on the big lies to stoke fear of equality: the myth of recruitment, the specter of deviancy. In more recent years, foes of marriage equality such as Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage, have told different lies: lies about our relationships, lies about our children, lies about their own heterosexual marriages.
Each lie is a slap in the face, but to some extent tolerable because we're confident that eventually our truth will win. The untruths spread by Anita Bryant in 1970s, Jerry Falwell in the 1980s, and James Dobson in the 1990s, have lost much of their sting as society has grown in its acceptance of gay and lesbian people. It's not unreasonable to think that the lies that led to the passage of Proposition 8 will lose their sting over time as well.
But perhaps the most pernicious lie being foisted on the nation by those opposed to gay and lesbian equality is the lie about democracy -- namely, the idea that the value of our lives should be determined by majority vote.
It wasn't that long ago that anti-gay groups lamented the fact that the gay movement had achieved many of its gains through the court system -- overturning Colorado's Amendment 2, ending sodomy laws with Lawrence v. Texas -- claiming that any pro-gay action by a court amounted to judicial activism. Legitimacy, we were told, could only come through the legislative process.
So when we began achieving victories through legislation as well, the definition of legitimacy changed. For those opposed to marriage equality, convincing a democratically elected legislature is now no longer enough.
Tuesday night, Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle (R) vetoed the civil-unions bill that had been passed by the state's legislature, calling it ''marriage by another name,'' and saying that it ''would be a mistake to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made by one individual.''
Well, of course it would be a mistake for one person to make a decision of that magnitude. That's why a legislature -- pretty much by definition consisting of more than one person -- considered, debated and passed the legislation.
Lingle attempts to cloak her cowardice in the symbols of democracy, claiming the decision on civil unions should be decided ''by all the people of Hawaii behind the curtain of the voting booth.''
I wish I could say that I was surprised by what is either ignorance of or disinterest in the American political system. We don't live in a direct democracy in which every issue, from the most pressing to the most frivolous, is put to the vote. As P.J. O'Rourke wrote, majority rule is ''not only worth dying for; it can make you wish you were dead. ... Every meal would be a pizza. Every pair of pants...would be stone-washed denim.''
And, it seems, every family would be ethnically homogenous and heterosexual. Of course, easy divorce and other things that actually have an impact on marriage rates and stability would continue to be legal because the majority tends to keep things cozy for itself.
But, flippancy aside, it's depressing to watch as people try to chip away at the fundamentals of representative democracy. I can only take some small comfort in knowing that no matter how feverishly they move the goalposts, in the end we'll still win.
by Sean Bugg
As gays and lesbians, we're not unused to hearing lies told about us. For decades, homophobes and anti-gay activists have relied on the big lies to stoke fear of equality: the myth of recruitment, the specter of deviancy. In more recent years, foes of marriage equality such as Maggie Gallagher and the National Organization for Marriage, have told different lies: lies about our relationships, lies about our children, lies about their own heterosexual marriages.
Each lie is a slap in the face, but to some extent tolerable because we're confident that eventually our truth will win. The untruths spread by Anita Bryant in 1970s, Jerry Falwell in the 1980s, and James Dobson in the 1990s, have lost much of their sting as society has grown in its acceptance of gay and lesbian people. It's not unreasonable to think that the lies that led to the passage of Proposition 8 will lose their sting over time as well.
But perhaps the most pernicious lie being foisted on the nation by those opposed to gay and lesbian equality is the lie about democracy -- namely, the idea that the value of our lives should be determined by majority vote.
It wasn't that long ago that anti-gay groups lamented the fact that the gay movement had achieved many of its gains through the court system -- overturning Colorado's Amendment 2, ending sodomy laws with Lawrence v. Texas -- claiming that any pro-gay action by a court amounted to judicial activism. Legitimacy, we were told, could only come through the legislative process.
So when we began achieving victories through legislation as well, the definition of legitimacy changed. For those opposed to marriage equality, convincing a democratically elected legislature is now no longer enough.
Tuesday night, Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle (R) vetoed the civil-unions bill that had been passed by the state's legislature, calling it ''marriage by another name,'' and saying that it ''would be a mistake to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made by one individual.''
Well, of course it would be a mistake for one person to make a decision of that magnitude. That's why a legislature -- pretty much by definition consisting of more than one person -- considered, debated and passed the legislation.
Lingle attempts to cloak her cowardice in the symbols of democracy, claiming the decision on civil unions should be decided ''by all the people of Hawaii behind the curtain of the voting booth.''
I wish I could say that I was surprised by what is either ignorance of or disinterest in the American political system. We don't live in a direct democracy in which every issue, from the most pressing to the most frivolous, is put to the vote. As P.J. O'Rourke wrote, majority rule is ''not only worth dying for; it can make you wish you were dead. ... Every meal would be a pizza. Every pair of pants...would be stone-washed denim.''
And, it seems, every family would be ethnically homogenous and heterosexual. Of course, easy divorce and other things that actually have an impact on marriage rates and stability would continue to be legal because the majority tends to keep things cozy for itself.
But, flippancy aside, it's depressing to watch as people try to chip away at the fundamentals of representative democracy. I can only take some small comfort in knowing that no matter how feverishly they move the goalposts, in the end we'll still win.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Towns Fill Void On Gay Rights In Pennsylvania
With no state law like New Jersey's, students and others are winning local bans on LGBT discrimination.
By Julia Terruso for The Philadelphia Inquirer
Jason Goodman didn't set out last year to be the face of gay rights in Lower Merion. He was just a college student looking for a summer job.
But as he flipped through employment manuals, the openly gay resident made a discovery he deemed "shocking."
Basically, he had no equal-employment rights. And state and federal legislators weren't about to give him any.
Anyone could deny Goodman a job because of his sexual orientation, with no law to stand in the way. Nothing federal, nothing statewide - nothing even, the University of Pennsylvania senior said, "in the community that I love and have grown up in."
Fast-forward one year, and Goodman, 21, who lives in Bala Cynwyd in the township, finds himself at the fore of a small but growing trend in Pennsylvania. He is prodding Lower Merion to join 16 other municipal and county governments in Pennsylvania that have enacted laws protecting members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community from discrimination.
On July 7, Goodman and members of his group, Equality Lower Merion, watched as 13 township commissioners voted without dissent to draft an ordinance he proposed.
Next month in Doylestown, the Borough Council is poised to pass an LGBT antidiscrimination ordinance.
And in Radnor, another college student - Pennsylvania State University sophomore Taj Magruder - is trying to replicate Goodman's success in his hometown.
"We're ready to change the world, and we're not afraid to go out and to start doing it," Goodman said of this youth-driven activism.
In 21 states - New Jersey, Delaware, New York, and Maryland among them - his ardor could have been spared for other causes. But Pennsylvania legislators have been loath to consider adding an LGBT clause to the state's antidiscrimination statute.
"The whole world is inexorably headed in the direction of recognizing civil rights for these folks," said State Rep. Dan Frankel (D., Allegheny), who has introduced such legislation for the last 10 years. "As usual, Pennsylvania is late to the table on anything with even a semblance of progressiveness."
On one hand, Frankel said, most Fortune 500 companies provide employment protections for LGBT people. On the other, "I have colleagues who insist that they've never met [an LGBT] person."
In increasing numbers, local governments have begun to fill that void. Area municipalities that have passed laws include Philadelphia, Lansdowne, Swarthmore, West Chester, and New Hope.
Typically, the laws forbid discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations based on sexual preference or gender identity. Most set up human relations commissions to investigate and adjudicate complaints, and to assess civil damages if necessary. Many include a public education component as well.
Federal and state laws have long banned discrimination based on race, age, religion, ethnicity, and disability.
"If you fire someone and say, 'I fired you because you're black,' you've got three laws that apply," said lawyer Katie Eyers, who drafted several of the ordinances. "If you say, 'I fired you because of your sexual orientation,' there's no claim that can be brought."
As municipalities consider these laws, the questions are almost always the same, said Stephen Glassman, chairman of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. "Is it necessary? Is it legal? And how much will it cost?"
To be sure, some of the laws seem more public statement than public necessity.
New Hope, long known for diversity and tolerance, passed its law in 2002 but has yet to handle a complaint.
"We said, 'If New Hope doesn't pass it, who will?' " Borough Councilwoman Geri Delevich said. "So we really passed it to set an example and to deliver a message."
Activists in nearby Doylestown, however, say they saw a need, even in a town with a progressive reputation.
Marlene Pray said a group of LGBT youths had been asked to leave a restaurant several years ago - and had been called "fags" on the way out.
"They called me and asked me what they could do," said Pray, long involved with social-justice and sexuality issues. "But there was no law that had been broken."
Doylestown resident Nancy Reilly, a lesbian, said she and a date twice had been served much more slowly than heterosexual diners seated well after them - by the same server in the same restaurant.
"We said, 'Did that just happen?' " Reilly said. "But it happened twice. We kind of blew it off the first time."
While such incidents might not be fodder for a full-blown human-relations hearing, educating business owners "would make people aware that Doylestown is not a town that will accept that type of behavior," Reilly said. "It is only 8,000 people, but how many thousands of others come here to have dinner, to shop, to do other things?"
Some Doylestown Borough Council members questioned the cost of possibly hiring a full-time human relations staffer - estimated by Glassman to be $50,000 to $60,000 a year.
Councilman Don Berk, the law's leading proponent, responded: "I'm hard-pressed to think of where I would rather spend my money other than fighting discrimination."
Not everyone agrees.
In June, Lancaster County Commissioner Scott Martin proposed dismantling the county's $500,000-a-year Human Relations Commission after activists began demanding that LGBT rights be added to its purview.
Martin said he had acted after discovering that the county's commission duplicated many of the roles of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. "Tight budget times" demanded letting the state handle the complaints, he said.
As for adding LGBT rights to the county's laws, Martin said that "would not be initiated by me. That's not an issue that I support."
Philadelphia was the first to pass a local LGBT ordinance in 1982; many others popped up after a 2005 Commonwealth Court opinion that affirmed the right of local governments to enact such laws.
Most ordinances tend to pass in "pretty accepting areas," but that doesn't water down their importance, Goodman said.
"Preventing cases and addressing them sends the message that we value you, you're a part of this community, we will stand with you, we will not tolerate homophobia," Goodman said, "just like we will not tolerate racism or any other form of discrimination."
By Julia Terruso for The Philadelphia Inquirer
Jason Goodman didn't set out last year to be the face of gay rights in Lower Merion. He was just a college student looking for a summer job.
But as he flipped through employment manuals, the openly gay resident made a discovery he deemed "shocking."
Basically, he had no equal-employment rights. And state and federal legislators weren't about to give him any.
Anyone could deny Goodman a job because of his sexual orientation, with no law to stand in the way. Nothing federal, nothing statewide - nothing even, the University of Pennsylvania senior said, "in the community that I love and have grown up in."
Fast-forward one year, and Goodman, 21, who lives in Bala Cynwyd in the township, finds himself at the fore of a small but growing trend in Pennsylvania. He is prodding Lower Merion to join 16 other municipal and county governments in Pennsylvania that have enacted laws protecting members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community from discrimination.
On July 7, Goodman and members of his group, Equality Lower Merion, watched as 13 township commissioners voted without dissent to draft an ordinance he proposed.
Next month in Doylestown, the Borough Council is poised to pass an LGBT antidiscrimination ordinance.
And in Radnor, another college student - Pennsylvania State University sophomore Taj Magruder - is trying to replicate Goodman's success in his hometown.
"We're ready to change the world, and we're not afraid to go out and to start doing it," Goodman said of this youth-driven activism.
In 21 states - New Jersey, Delaware, New York, and Maryland among them - his ardor could have been spared for other causes. But Pennsylvania legislators have been loath to consider adding an LGBT clause to the state's antidiscrimination statute.
"The whole world is inexorably headed in the direction of recognizing civil rights for these folks," said State Rep. Dan Frankel (D., Allegheny), who has introduced such legislation for the last 10 years. "As usual, Pennsylvania is late to the table on anything with even a semblance of progressiveness."
On one hand, Frankel said, most Fortune 500 companies provide employment protections for LGBT people. On the other, "I have colleagues who insist that they've never met [an LGBT] person."
In increasing numbers, local governments have begun to fill that void. Area municipalities that have passed laws include Philadelphia, Lansdowne, Swarthmore, West Chester, and New Hope.
Typically, the laws forbid discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations based on sexual preference or gender identity. Most set up human relations commissions to investigate and adjudicate complaints, and to assess civil damages if necessary. Many include a public education component as well.
Federal and state laws have long banned discrimination based on race, age, religion, ethnicity, and disability.
"If you fire someone and say, 'I fired you because you're black,' you've got three laws that apply," said lawyer Katie Eyers, who drafted several of the ordinances. "If you say, 'I fired you because of your sexual orientation,' there's no claim that can be brought."
As municipalities consider these laws, the questions are almost always the same, said Stephen Glassman, chairman of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. "Is it necessary? Is it legal? And how much will it cost?"
To be sure, some of the laws seem more public statement than public necessity.
New Hope, long known for diversity and tolerance, passed its law in 2002 but has yet to handle a complaint.
"We said, 'If New Hope doesn't pass it, who will?' " Borough Councilwoman Geri Delevich said. "So we really passed it to set an example and to deliver a message."
Activists in nearby Doylestown, however, say they saw a need, even in a town with a progressive reputation.
Marlene Pray said a group of LGBT youths had been asked to leave a restaurant several years ago - and had been called "fags" on the way out.
"They called me and asked me what they could do," said Pray, long involved with social-justice and sexuality issues. "But there was no law that had been broken."
Doylestown resident Nancy Reilly, a lesbian, said she and a date twice had been served much more slowly than heterosexual diners seated well after them - by the same server in the same restaurant.
"We said, 'Did that just happen?' " Reilly said. "But it happened twice. We kind of blew it off the first time."
While such incidents might not be fodder for a full-blown human-relations hearing, educating business owners "would make people aware that Doylestown is not a town that will accept that type of behavior," Reilly said. "It is only 8,000 people, but how many thousands of others come here to have dinner, to shop, to do other things?"
Some Doylestown Borough Council members questioned the cost of possibly hiring a full-time human relations staffer - estimated by Glassman to be $50,000 to $60,000 a year.
Councilman Don Berk, the law's leading proponent, responded: "I'm hard-pressed to think of where I would rather spend my money other than fighting discrimination."
Not everyone agrees.
In June, Lancaster County Commissioner Scott Martin proposed dismantling the county's $500,000-a-year Human Relations Commission after activists began demanding that LGBT rights be added to its purview.
Martin said he had acted after discovering that the county's commission duplicated many of the roles of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. "Tight budget times" demanded letting the state handle the complaints, he said.
As for adding LGBT rights to the county's laws, Martin said that "would not be initiated by me. That's not an issue that I support."
Philadelphia was the first to pass a local LGBT ordinance in 1982; many others popped up after a 2005 Commonwealth Court opinion that affirmed the right of local governments to enact such laws.
Most ordinances tend to pass in "pretty accepting areas," but that doesn't water down their importance, Goodman said.
"Preventing cases and addressing them sends the message that we value you, you're a part of this community, we will stand with you, we will not tolerate homophobia," Goodman said, "just like we will not tolerate racism or any other form of discrimination."
Saturday, July 17, 2010
"The Passion" of "Traditional Family Values"
The Good News About Christian-Right Darling Mel Gibson
By Frank Rich
FOR Fourth of July weekend fireworks, even Macy’s couldn’t top the spittle-spangled eruptions of Mel Gibson. The clandestine recordings of his serial audio assaults on his gal pal were instant Web and cable-TV sensations — at once a worthy rival to Hollywood’s official holiday releases and a compelling sequel to his fabled anti- Semitic rant of 2006. A true showman, Gibson offered vitriol for nearly all tastes, aiming his profane fusillade at women, blacks and Latinos alike. The invective was tied together by a domestic violence subplot worthy of “Lethal Weapon.” There was even a surprise comic coda, courtesy of Whoopi Goldberg, who, alone among Gibson’s showbiz peers, used her television platform on “The View” to defend her buddy’s good character.
The Gibson tapes — in plain English and not requiring the subtitles of some of the star’s recent spectacles — are a particularly American form of schadenfreude. There’s little we enjoy more than watching a pampered zillionaire icon (Gibson’s production company is actually named Icon) brought low. The story would end there — just another tidy morality tale in the profuse annals of Hollywood self-destruction from Fatty Arbuckle to Lindsay Lohan — were it not for Gibson’s unique back story.
Six years ago he was not merely an A-list movie star with a penchant for drinking and boorish behavior but also a powerful and canonized figure in the political and cultural pantheon of American conservatism. That he has reached rock bottom tells us nothing new about Gibson. He was the same talented, nasty, bigoted blowhard then that he is today. But his fall says a lot about the changes in our country over the past six years. We shouldn’t take those changes for granted. We should take stock — and celebrate. They are good news.
Does anyone remember 2004? It seems a civilization ago. That less-than-vintage year was in retrospect the nadir of the American war over “values.” The kickoff fracas was Janet Jackson’s breast-baring “wardrobe malfunction” at the Super Bowl, which prompted a new crackdown against televised “indecency” by the Federal Communications Commission. By December Fox News and its allies were fomenting hysteria about a supposed war on Christmas, with Newt Gingrich warning of a nefarious secular plot “to abolish the word Christmas” altogether and Jerry Falwell attacking Mayor Michael Bloomberg for using the euphemism “holiday tree” at the annual tree-lighting ceremony at Rockefeller Center. In between these discrete culture wars came a presidential election in which the Bush-Rove machine tried to whip up evangelical turnout by sowing panic over gay marriage.
It was into that tinderbox of America 2004 that Gibson tossed his self-financed and self-directed movie about the crucifixion, “The Passion of the Christ.” The epic was timed to detonate in the nation’s multiplexes on Ash Wednesday, after one of the longest and most divisive promotional campaigns in Hollywood history.
Gibson is in such disgrace today that it’s hard to fathom all the fuss he and his biblical epic engendered back then. The commotion began with the revelation that his father, Hutton, was a prominent and vociferous Holocaust denier and that both father and son were proselytizers for a splinter sect of Roman Catholicism that rejected the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, including the lifting of the “Christ-killers” libel from the Jews. Jewish leaders and writers understandably worried that “The Passion” might be as anti-Semitic as the Passion plays of old. Gibson’s response was to hold publicity screenings for the right-wing media and political establishment, including a select Washington soiree attended by notables like Peggy Noonan, Kate O’Beirne and Linda Chavez. (The only nominal Jew admitted was Matt Drudge.) The attendees then used their various pulpits to assure the world that the movie was divine — and certainly nothing that should trouble Jews. “I can report it is free of anti-Semitism,” vouchsafed Robert Novak after his “private viewing.”
Uninvited Jewish writers (like me) who kept raising questions about the unreleased film and its exclusionary rollout were vilified for crucifying poor Mel. Bill O’Reilly of Fox News asked a reporter from Variety “respectfully” if Gibson was being victimized because “the major media in Hollywood and a lot of the secular press is controlled by Jewish people.” Such was the ugly atmosphere of the time that these attempts at intimidation were remarkably successful. Many mainstream media organizations did puff pieces on the star or his film, lest they be labeled “anti-Christian” when an ascendant religious right was increasingly flexing its muscles in the corridors of power in Washington.
Both George and Laura Bush expressed eagerness to see “The Passion.” There were reports (spread by the film’s producer and never confirmed) that the very frail Pope John Paul II had given a thumbs-up after his own screening at the Vatican. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, which would publish several encomiums to “The Passion,” ran a sneak preview likening the film to “a documentary by Caravaggio.” Even The New Yorker ran a deferential profile of Gibson — in which the star said he wanted to kill me and my dog (though, alas, I had no dog) and have my “intestines on a stick.” Far more troubling was the article’s whitewashing of Gibson’s father’s record as a Holocaust denier. In the America of 2004, Mel Gibson, box office king and conservative culture hero, was invincible.
Once “The Passion” could be seen by ticket buyers — who would reward it with a $370 million domestic take (behind only “Shrek 2” and “Spider-Man 2” that year) — the truth could no longer be spun by Gibson’s claque. The movie was nakedly anti-Semitic, to the extreme that the Temple priests were all hook-nosed Shylocks and Fagins with rotten teeth. It was also ludicrously violent — a homoerotic “exercise in lurid sadomasochism,” as Christopher Hitchens described it then, for audiences who “like seeing handsome young men stripped and flayed alive over a long period of time.” Nonetheless, many of the same American pastors who routinely inveighed against show-business indecency granted special dispensation to their young congregants to attend this R-rated fleshfest.
It seems preposterous in retrospect that a film as bigoted and noxious as “The Passion” had so many reverent defenders in high places in 2004. Once Gibson, or at least the subconscious Gibson, baldly advertised his anti-Semitism with his obscene tirade during a 2006 D.U.I. incident in Malibu, his old defenders had no choice but to peel off. Today you never hear conservatives mention their embrace of “The Passion” back then — if they mention Gibson at all. (Fox News has barely covered the new tapes.) But it isn’t just Gibson who has been discredited. Even as he self-immolated, so did many of the moral paragons who had rallied around him as a culture-war martyr.
Take, for instance, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals. During the “Passion” wars, he had tried to blackmail Gibson’s critics by publicly noting that Christians are “a major source of support for Israel” and that Jewish leaders would be “shortsighted” to “risk alienating two billion Christians over a movie.” That evangelical leader was Ted Haggard, the Colorado megachurch pastor since brought down by a male prostitute. Gibson’s only outspoken rabbinical defender in 2004, the far-right Daniel Lapin, would be sullied in the scandals surrounding the subsequently jailed Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff. William Donohue of the Catholic League — who defended Gibson in 2004 by saying, “Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular” — has been reduced these days to the marginal role of attacking The Times for reporting on priestly child abuse.
The cultural wave that crested with “The Passion” was far bigger than Gibson. He was simply a symptom and beneficiary of a moment when the old religious right and its political and media shills were riding high. In 2010, the American ayatollahs’ ranks have been depleted by death (Falwell), retirement (James Dobson) and rent boys (too many to name). What remains of that old guard is stigmatized by its identification with poisonous crusades, from the potentially lethal antihomosexuality laws in Uganda to the rehabilitation campaign for the “born-again” serial killer David Berkowitz (“Son of Sam”) in America.
Conservative America’s new signature movement, the Tea Party, has its own extremes, but it shuns culture-war battles. It even remained mum when a federal judge in Massachusetts struck down the anti-same-sex marriage Defense of Marriage Act this month. As the conservative commentator Kyle Smith recently wrote in The New York Post, the “demise of Reagan-era groups like the Christian Coalition and the Moral Majority is just as important” as the rise of the Tea Party. “The morality armies have failed to inspire their children to join the crusade,” he concluded, and not unhappily. The right, too, is subject to generational turnover.
As utter coincidence would have it, the revelation of the latest Gibson tapes was followed last week by the news that a federal appeals court, in a 3-0 ruling, had thrown out the indecency rules imposed by the F.C.C. after Janet Jackson’s 2004 “wardrobe malfunction.” The death throes of Mel Gibson’s career feel less like another Hollywood scandal than the last gasps of an American era.
By Frank Rich
FOR Fourth of July weekend fireworks, even Macy’s couldn’t top the spittle-spangled eruptions of Mel Gibson. The clandestine recordings of his serial audio assaults on his gal pal were instant Web and cable-TV sensations — at once a worthy rival to Hollywood’s official holiday releases and a compelling sequel to his fabled anti- Semitic rant of 2006. A true showman, Gibson offered vitriol for nearly all tastes, aiming his profane fusillade at women, blacks and Latinos alike. The invective was tied together by a domestic violence subplot worthy of “Lethal Weapon.” There was even a surprise comic coda, courtesy of Whoopi Goldberg, who, alone among Gibson’s showbiz peers, used her television platform on “The View” to defend her buddy’s good character.
The Gibson tapes — in plain English and not requiring the subtitles of some of the star’s recent spectacles — are a particularly American form of schadenfreude. There’s little we enjoy more than watching a pampered zillionaire icon (Gibson’s production company is actually named Icon) brought low. The story would end there — just another tidy morality tale in the profuse annals of Hollywood self-destruction from Fatty Arbuckle to Lindsay Lohan — were it not for Gibson’s unique back story.
Six years ago he was not merely an A-list movie star with a penchant for drinking and boorish behavior but also a powerful and canonized figure in the political and cultural pantheon of American conservatism. That he has reached rock bottom tells us nothing new about Gibson. He was the same talented, nasty, bigoted blowhard then that he is today. But his fall says a lot about the changes in our country over the past six years. We shouldn’t take those changes for granted. We should take stock — and celebrate. They are good news.
Does anyone remember 2004? It seems a civilization ago. That less-than-vintage year was in retrospect the nadir of the American war over “values.” The kickoff fracas was Janet Jackson’s breast-baring “wardrobe malfunction” at the Super Bowl, which prompted a new crackdown against televised “indecency” by the Federal Communications Commission. By December Fox News and its allies were fomenting hysteria about a supposed war on Christmas, with Newt Gingrich warning of a nefarious secular plot “to abolish the word Christmas” altogether and Jerry Falwell attacking Mayor Michael Bloomberg for using the euphemism “holiday tree” at the annual tree-lighting ceremony at Rockefeller Center. In between these discrete culture wars came a presidential election in which the Bush-Rove machine tried to whip up evangelical turnout by sowing panic over gay marriage.
It was into that tinderbox of America 2004 that Gibson tossed his self-financed and self-directed movie about the crucifixion, “The Passion of the Christ.” The epic was timed to detonate in the nation’s multiplexes on Ash Wednesday, after one of the longest and most divisive promotional campaigns in Hollywood history.
Gibson is in such disgrace today that it’s hard to fathom all the fuss he and his biblical epic engendered back then. The commotion began with the revelation that his father, Hutton, was a prominent and vociferous Holocaust denier and that both father and son were proselytizers for a splinter sect of Roman Catholicism that rejected the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, including the lifting of the “Christ-killers” libel from the Jews. Jewish leaders and writers understandably worried that “The Passion” might be as anti-Semitic as the Passion plays of old. Gibson’s response was to hold publicity screenings for the right-wing media and political establishment, including a select Washington soiree attended by notables like Peggy Noonan, Kate O’Beirne and Linda Chavez. (The only nominal Jew admitted was Matt Drudge.) The attendees then used their various pulpits to assure the world that the movie was divine — and certainly nothing that should trouble Jews. “I can report it is free of anti-Semitism,” vouchsafed Robert Novak after his “private viewing.”
Uninvited Jewish writers (like me) who kept raising questions about the unreleased film and its exclusionary rollout were vilified for crucifying poor Mel. Bill O’Reilly of Fox News asked a reporter from Variety “respectfully” if Gibson was being victimized because “the major media in Hollywood and a lot of the secular press is controlled by Jewish people.” Such was the ugly atmosphere of the time that these attempts at intimidation were remarkably successful. Many mainstream media organizations did puff pieces on the star or his film, lest they be labeled “anti-Christian” when an ascendant religious right was increasingly flexing its muscles in the corridors of power in Washington.
Both George and Laura Bush expressed eagerness to see “The Passion.” There were reports (spread by the film’s producer and never confirmed) that the very frail Pope John Paul II had given a thumbs-up after his own screening at the Vatican. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, which would publish several encomiums to “The Passion,” ran a sneak preview likening the film to “a documentary by Caravaggio.” Even The New Yorker ran a deferential profile of Gibson — in which the star said he wanted to kill me and my dog (though, alas, I had no dog) and have my “intestines on a stick.” Far more troubling was the article’s whitewashing of Gibson’s father’s record as a Holocaust denier. In the America of 2004, Mel Gibson, box office king and conservative culture hero, was invincible.
Once “The Passion” could be seen by ticket buyers — who would reward it with a $370 million domestic take (behind only “Shrek 2” and “Spider-Man 2” that year) — the truth could no longer be spun by Gibson’s claque. The movie was nakedly anti-Semitic, to the extreme that the Temple priests were all hook-nosed Shylocks and Fagins with rotten teeth. It was also ludicrously violent — a homoerotic “exercise in lurid sadomasochism,” as Christopher Hitchens described it then, for audiences who “like seeing handsome young men stripped and flayed alive over a long period of time.” Nonetheless, many of the same American pastors who routinely inveighed against show-business indecency granted special dispensation to their young congregants to attend this R-rated fleshfest.
It seems preposterous in retrospect that a film as bigoted and noxious as “The Passion” had so many reverent defenders in high places in 2004. Once Gibson, or at least the subconscious Gibson, baldly advertised his anti-Semitism with his obscene tirade during a 2006 D.U.I. incident in Malibu, his old defenders had no choice but to peel off. Today you never hear conservatives mention their embrace of “The Passion” back then — if they mention Gibson at all. (Fox News has barely covered the new tapes.) But it isn’t just Gibson who has been discredited. Even as he self-immolated, so did many of the moral paragons who had rallied around him as a culture-war martyr.
Take, for instance, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals. During the “Passion” wars, he had tried to blackmail Gibson’s critics by publicly noting that Christians are “a major source of support for Israel” and that Jewish leaders would be “shortsighted” to “risk alienating two billion Christians over a movie.” That evangelical leader was Ted Haggard, the Colorado megachurch pastor since brought down by a male prostitute. Gibson’s only outspoken rabbinical defender in 2004, the far-right Daniel Lapin, would be sullied in the scandals surrounding the subsequently jailed Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff. William Donohue of the Catholic League — who defended Gibson in 2004 by saying, “Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular” — has been reduced these days to the marginal role of attacking The Times for reporting on priestly child abuse.
The cultural wave that crested with “The Passion” was far bigger than Gibson. He was simply a symptom and beneficiary of a moment when the old religious right and its political and media shills were riding high. In 2010, the American ayatollahs’ ranks have been depleted by death (Falwell), retirement (James Dobson) and rent boys (too many to name). What remains of that old guard is stigmatized by its identification with poisonous crusades, from the potentially lethal antihomosexuality laws in Uganda to the rehabilitation campaign for the “born-again” serial killer David Berkowitz (“Son of Sam”) in America.
Conservative America’s new signature movement, the Tea Party, has its own extremes, but it shuns culture-war battles. It even remained mum when a federal judge in Massachusetts struck down the anti-same-sex marriage Defense of Marriage Act this month. As the conservative commentator Kyle Smith recently wrote in The New York Post, the “demise of Reagan-era groups like the Christian Coalition and the Moral Majority is just as important” as the rise of the Tea Party. “The morality armies have failed to inspire their children to join the crusade,” he concluded, and not unhappily. The right, too, is subject to generational turnover.
As utter coincidence would have it, the revelation of the latest Gibson tapes was followed last week by the news that a federal appeals court, in a 3-0 ruling, had thrown out the indecency rules imposed by the F.C.C. after Janet Jackson’s 2004 “wardrobe malfunction.” The death throes of Mel Gibson’s career feel less like another Hollywood scandal than the last gasps of an American era.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
You Belong (in your legislator’s office!)
A Town Hall Forum and Training Session
Join Jason Crighton of the Western Pennsylvania Advocacy Initiative for an informative and exciting evening - July 8 @ 7:00 PM - Craze Night Club, 1607 Raspberry St, Erie, PA
LGBT issues remain a flash-point at every level of government, but especially at the state and federal level where legislation that would benefit lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals and families is stalled.
You can play a key role in changing that! Democracy is a participatory activity!
In this town hall forum learn about the status of pending legislation and the things you can do to assure the passage of these critical protections. You will leave with step-by-step ideas about how you can make a noticeable difference towards achieving equality.
This event is sponsored by the Western Pennsylvania Advocacy Initiative.
For more info, contact Jason Crighton at (412) 206-0874, or check out the Delta Foundation of Pittsburgh's Facebook page or their web site at www.pittsburghpride.org.
Learn more about the event HERE.
Looking forward to seeing you there!
More about the Delta Foundation
Join Jason Crighton of the Western Pennsylvania Advocacy Initiative for an informative and exciting evening - July 8 @ 7:00 PM - Craze Night Club, 1607 Raspberry St, Erie, PA
LGBT issues remain a flash-point at every level of government, but especially at the state and federal level where legislation that would benefit lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals and families is stalled.
You can play a key role in changing that! Democracy is a participatory activity!
In this town hall forum learn about the status of pending legislation and the things you can do to assure the passage of these critical protections. You will leave with step-by-step ideas about how you can make a noticeable difference towards achieving equality.
This event is sponsored by the Western Pennsylvania Advocacy Initiative.
For more info, contact Jason Crighton at (412) 206-0874, or check out the Delta Foundation of Pittsburgh's Facebook page or their web site at www.pittsburghpride.org.
Learn more about the event HERE.
Looking forward to seeing you there!
More about the Delta Foundation
Friday, June 25, 2010
Coming Out in Smalltown USA
As the expected smears & attacks against OUT IN THE SILENCE & LGBT People & Our Allies in Venango County finally come from Diane Gramley of the American 'Family' Assoc. of PA & Jane Richey of 'Christian' Radio Station WAWN / Lighthouse Ministries of Franklin (See item#7 in the June 23 Fishermens Net Newsletter), a recent review of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Christianity Today offers a more reasoned view of what's possible in the quest for fairness & equality for all.
It's time to stand up, speak out, and join with the courageous folks working for change in rural & small town America like never before!
Review of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Christianity Today: A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction:
Documentary Explores a Pennsylvania Town's Attitudes About Homosexuality
by Mark Moring, June 21, 2010:
When Joe Wilson got married, he put an announcement in his hometown newspaper in Oil City, Pennsylvania. Nothing unusual about that, except that Wilson had married another man--and a picture of the two of them appeared in the paper. Angry, even hateful, letters to the editor poured in; one said that it would've been better for Wilson not to have been born. Wilson responded not in anger himself, but by revisiting his hometown, with his partner and a couple of camcorders, to look into the town's attitudes.
The result is Out in the Silence, a 65-minute documentary that ends up following four main subplots in Oil City. First, a gay teen who was verbally and physically abused at the local high school, and the quest that he and his mother take to confront those attitudes and the school district's refusal to make things right. Second, a lesbian couple that buys a crumbling downtown art-deco theater and renovates it into a functioning civic showcase again. Third, a woman representing the American Family Association who seems to be on a crusade against gays, more anxious to speak out against their "agenda" to take the time to meet or listen to any of them.
Fourth -- and likely most interesting to CT readers -- a local Christian pastor and his wife who had written one of the letters to the editor decrying homosexuality, only to later show tolerance and love toward the filmmakers as they got to know them in the months ahead. The pastor didn't compromise his biblical beliefs at all; he continues to believe that homosexuality is a sin. But, for the first time in his life, he actually gets two know gay people, and by the end of the film is calling them friends. There's some interesting dialogue between the two "sides" as their unlikely friendship unfolds throughout the film. It's really a Christlike response from the pastor.
Though the film is made by two gay men, it doesn't seek to promote a "gay agenda" or to stereotype the "religious right." It's simply a matter of trying to understand attitudes in small-town America. The filmmakers end up advocating for the teenager to the school board and in a civil rights lawsuit, and the local school board ends up admitting they should've done more to help the boy who was abused; they incorporate staff training as a result. Despite some initial opposition, the two women end up re-opening the theater to a warm reception of both gays and straights. The AFA rep never changes, and refuses to look the gay men in the eye or even have a conversation with them. And the pastor and his wife seem glad to have made new friends, though they clearly disagree with their lifestyle.
The film is showing at the Human Rights Watch Film Festival in New York today, followed by broadcast on New York's two largest public television stations, WLIW (June 26, 3 p.m. ET) and WNET (June 27, 11:30 p.m. ET). For more on the film, click here. Watch the trailer here:
It's time to stand up, speak out, and join with the courageous folks working for change in rural & small town America like never before!
Review of OUT IN THE SILENCE in Christianity Today: A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction:
Documentary Explores a Pennsylvania Town's Attitudes About Homosexuality
by Mark Moring, June 21, 2010:
When Joe Wilson got married, he put an announcement in his hometown newspaper in Oil City, Pennsylvania. Nothing unusual about that, except that Wilson had married another man--and a picture of the two of them appeared in the paper. Angry, even hateful, letters to the editor poured in; one said that it would've been better for Wilson not to have been born. Wilson responded not in anger himself, but by revisiting his hometown, with his partner and a couple of camcorders, to look into the town's attitudes.
The result is Out in the Silence, a 65-minute documentary that ends up following four main subplots in Oil City. First, a gay teen who was verbally and physically abused at the local high school, and the quest that he and his mother take to confront those attitudes and the school district's refusal to make things right. Second, a lesbian couple that buys a crumbling downtown art-deco theater and renovates it into a functioning civic showcase again. Third, a woman representing the American Family Association who seems to be on a crusade against gays, more anxious to speak out against their "agenda" to take the time to meet or listen to any of them.
Fourth -- and likely most interesting to CT readers -- a local Christian pastor and his wife who had written one of the letters to the editor decrying homosexuality, only to later show tolerance and love toward the filmmakers as they got to know them in the months ahead. The pastor didn't compromise his biblical beliefs at all; he continues to believe that homosexuality is a sin. But, for the first time in his life, he actually gets two know gay people, and by the end of the film is calling them friends. There's some interesting dialogue between the two "sides" as their unlikely friendship unfolds throughout the film. It's really a Christlike response from the pastor.
Though the film is made by two gay men, it doesn't seek to promote a "gay agenda" or to stereotype the "religious right." It's simply a matter of trying to understand attitudes in small-town America. The filmmakers end up advocating for the teenager to the school board and in a civil rights lawsuit, and the local school board ends up admitting they should've done more to help the boy who was abused; they incorporate staff training as a result. Despite some initial opposition, the two women end up re-opening the theater to a warm reception of both gays and straights. The AFA rep never changes, and refuses to look the gay men in the eye or even have a conversation with them. And the pastor and his wife seem glad to have made new friends, though they clearly disagree with their lifestyle.
The film is showing at the Human Rights Watch Film Festival in New York today, followed by broadcast on New York's two largest public television stations, WLIW (June 26, 3 p.m. ET) and WNET (June 27, 11:30 p.m. ET). For more on the film, click here. Watch the trailer here:
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Oil City Urged To Adopt Human Rights Policy
Community also asked to embrace ‘Out in the Silence’ film
By Judith O. Etzel for The Derrick:
Oil City Council has been asked to embrace a film that explores tolerance in small American communities, specifically Oil City and Franklin, and recognize it as a major marketing tool for the community.
At the same time, local resident George Cooley urged the city to adopt a formal human rights policy and create a city events office to promote the arts and community activities.
Cooley, a West Second Street resident who operates an Internet business in his home and is an active member of the Oil City Arts Council, took the city to task for ignoring what he believes is a great opportunity to promote itself via the film “Out in the Silence.”
The award-winning 2009 “Out in the Silence” documentary tells the story of a gay high school student and explores small-town reaction to same-sex marriage. The film’s director is Joe Wilson, an Oil City native whose 2004 marriage to his partner, Dean Hamer, was announced in The Derrick. The announcement stirred controversy in the community and eventually led to the film that tells the story of a gay Franklin student who came out to his classmates and faced discrimination.
The film, supported by the Sundance Institute, the Pennsylvania Public Television Network and Penn State Pubic Broadcasting, also explores various aspects of the Oil City and Franklin area as the Wilson tries to connect with church and community leaders who are strongly opposed to homosexuality and finds others who are supportive.
Last month, the American Library Association reviewed “Out in the Silence” and recommended it for all viewers, noting “it deserves a place in all library collections, particularly those libraries serving small and rural communities.”
Noteworthy ‘art’
The film, said Cooley, “may be the most successful art project to ever come from Oil City ... (and) is a great public relations tool for Oil City” as it lobbies to bill itself as a community trumpeting its arts revitalization successes.
“Positive energy developed by this movie for our town is priceless, and much larger communities would pay a great deal for what we are getting for free,” Cooley told council. “Unfortunately, Oil City seems to have all but ignored this great opportunity.”
In describing Wilson and his film as supporting a movement “for fairness, equality and human rights,” Cooley said the arts council intends to recognize Wilson for his art and invite him to show the film in Oil City. There have been two recent showings — one private and one public — in the city.
In urging city council to “grab ahold of this opportunity,” Cooley suggested the city should honor Wilson in a “key to the city kind of recognition.”
Wilson’s message on the need to safeguard human rights should also be incorporated into Oil City’s organizational framework, said Cooley. He recommended council adopt a “statement of fairness, equality and human rights for all people” and create an ordinance to that effect.
Finally, Oil City should create an events office that would coordinate community activities. The new department should include a film office to coincide with the “Out in the Silence” film fame as well as the region’s Digital Film Festival and other local video projects. Initially, the events coordinator could be the city manager, said Cooley.
Mayor Sonja Hawkins told Cooley she and other city and school district representatives met with Wilson prior to a film showing here. Noting they had “a great conversation,” Hawkins suggested council should talk further about Cooley’s proposal.
Hiring an events coordinator would be fantastic, said council member Lee Mehlburger.
That was tempered by caution offered by council member John Bartlett.
“We share some of your desires,” Bartlett said to Cooley. “But, we face the reality of how to pay for it.”
By Judith O. Etzel for The Derrick:
Oil City Council has been asked to embrace a film that explores tolerance in small American communities, specifically Oil City and Franklin, and recognize it as a major marketing tool for the community.
At the same time, local resident George Cooley urged the city to adopt a formal human rights policy and create a city events office to promote the arts and community activities.
Cooley, a West Second Street resident who operates an Internet business in his home and is an active member of the Oil City Arts Council, took the city to task for ignoring what he believes is a great opportunity to promote itself via the film “Out in the Silence.”
The award-winning 2009 “Out in the Silence” documentary tells the story of a gay high school student and explores small-town reaction to same-sex marriage. The film’s director is Joe Wilson, an Oil City native whose 2004 marriage to his partner, Dean Hamer, was announced in The Derrick. The announcement stirred controversy in the community and eventually led to the film that tells the story of a gay Franklin student who came out to his classmates and faced discrimination.
The film, supported by the Sundance Institute, the Pennsylvania Public Television Network and Penn State Pubic Broadcasting, also explores various aspects of the Oil City and Franklin area as the Wilson tries to connect with church and community leaders who are strongly opposed to homosexuality and finds others who are supportive.
Last month, the American Library Association reviewed “Out in the Silence” and recommended it for all viewers, noting “it deserves a place in all library collections, particularly those libraries serving small and rural communities.”
Noteworthy ‘art’
The film, said Cooley, “may be the most successful art project to ever come from Oil City ... (and) is a great public relations tool for Oil City” as it lobbies to bill itself as a community trumpeting its arts revitalization successes.
“Positive energy developed by this movie for our town is priceless, and much larger communities would pay a great deal for what we are getting for free,” Cooley told council. “Unfortunately, Oil City seems to have all but ignored this great opportunity.”
In describing Wilson and his film as supporting a movement “for fairness, equality and human rights,” Cooley said the arts council intends to recognize Wilson for his art and invite him to show the film in Oil City. There have been two recent showings — one private and one public — in the city.
In urging city council to “grab ahold of this opportunity,” Cooley suggested the city should honor Wilson in a “key to the city kind of recognition.”
Wilson’s message on the need to safeguard human rights should also be incorporated into Oil City’s organizational framework, said Cooley. He recommended council adopt a “statement of fairness, equality and human rights for all people” and create an ordinance to that effect.
Finally, Oil City should create an events office that would coordinate community activities. The new department should include a film office to coincide with the “Out in the Silence” film fame as well as the region’s Digital Film Festival and other local video projects. Initially, the events coordinator could be the city manager, said Cooley.
Mayor Sonja Hawkins told Cooley she and other city and school district representatives met with Wilson prior to a film showing here. Noting they had “a great conversation,” Hawkins suggested council should talk further about Cooley’s proposal.
Hiring an events coordinator would be fantastic, said council member Lee Mehlburger.
That was tempered by caution offered by council member John Bartlett.
“We share some of your desires,” Bartlett said to Cooley. “But, we face the reality of how to pay for it.”
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Daring to Be Gay in Small Town USA
Film Review of OUT IN THE SILENCE by Amanda Bransford for the IPS News Agency:
NEW YORK, Jun 21, 2010 (IPS) - Washington, D.C. residents Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer weren't expecting to become filmmakers when they placed an announcement of their wedding in Wilson's hometown newspaper.
A similar announcement they had placed in the New York Times garnered only congratulations, but in Oil City, Pennsylvania, the reception to a same-sex wedding was not so warm.
"It was a fascinating contrast," said Wilson, when the Oil City paper received angry letters instead of good wishes.
Wilson went through high school closeted and had long felt unwelcome in his hometown, so the chilly reception to his happy news was no great surprise.
Then Wilson received something that did surprise him: a letter from Kathy Springer, the mother of CJ, a gay Oil City teenager who had been harassed so badly in his public school that he had quit in favour of home schooling and barely left the house.
The school board refused to help CJ, and his mother didn't know where to turn. "I was the only openly gay person she knew of," said Wilson.
The movement for gay rights has tended to focus on urban areas, said Wilson, and, though Wilson and Hamer had not made a film before, they wanted CJ's story to be told.
"We realised that if we wanted this documented, we should start filming," said Hamer.
Over the course of three years, the two men traveled frequently to Pennsylvania to shoot, eventually receiving a grant from the Sundance Institute.
In the process, Wilson and Hamer were struck by the silence in which GLBT people in small town U.S.A. are forced to live. CJ had become a target by daring to break that silence and come out in high school – something no one did when Wilson was growing up in Oil City.
The increasing visibility of GLBT people has had mixed results for teenagers like CJ, said Hamer.
"The good side is that kids like CJ know that they're not the only gay person in the world, but the bad side is that there's been a backlash as a result," he said. "It's made bullying even worse as a way to tag kids that are gay."
Oil City's vocal conservative Christian community was making life especially difficult for GLBT residents.
Hamer says while that the anti-gay activists in Oil City may have seemed like an extreme fringe group, "They have power because no one wants to make them upset."
Despite the efforts of these activists, Wilson and Hamer were surprised to find an accepting community in Oil City that Wilson, growing up in silence himself, had overlooked.
"I was terrified of beginning to understand who I was," said Wilson of his adolescence. "The general dominant culture said that this was not good, and I was not seeking a community out."
Returning to document CJ's story, though, Wilson, along with his husband, forges relationships with lesbian neighbours he never knew he had who are facing their own struggles. He is even able to find common ground with some of those who had complained about the wedding announcement.
"It changed my perception of my home town," Wilson said.
Wilson and Hamer have now become unlikely ambassadors of a sort for struggling Oil City.
They took their finished film to the city council, said Wilson, and told them, "Either you can deny this all happened, or look at it as a tool to show what a great place Oil City is becoming. They did the latter."
A subsequent screening at the local community college sold out, and the filmmakers have brought "Out in the Silence" to other towns in hope that Oil City's progress can serve as a model.
"This is not just film for film's sake," said Hamer. "It's a powerful tool for community activism."
Human Rights Watch expressed interest while Wilson and Hamer were working on the project, and the film will screen Jun. 21-23 at the Film Society of Lincoln Centre as part of the Human Rights Watch Film Festival.
"Human Rights Watch saw that this isn't just a domestic political issue as people sometimes see gay rights. It's tied into the global struggle for equality," said Wilson.
OUT IN THE SILENCE also screens in the Tribeca Cinemas: Doc Series on June 28.
NEW YORK, Jun 21, 2010 (IPS) - Washington, D.C. residents Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer weren't expecting to become filmmakers when they placed an announcement of their wedding in Wilson's hometown newspaper.
A similar announcement they had placed in the New York Times garnered only congratulations, but in Oil City, Pennsylvania, the reception to a same-sex wedding was not so warm.
"It was a fascinating contrast," said Wilson, when the Oil City paper received angry letters instead of good wishes.
Wilson went through high school closeted and had long felt unwelcome in his hometown, so the chilly reception to his happy news was no great surprise.
Then Wilson received something that did surprise him: a letter from Kathy Springer, the mother of CJ, a gay Oil City teenager who had been harassed so badly in his public school that he had quit in favour of home schooling and barely left the house.
The school board refused to help CJ, and his mother didn't know where to turn. "I was the only openly gay person she knew of," said Wilson.
The movement for gay rights has tended to focus on urban areas, said Wilson, and, though Wilson and Hamer had not made a film before, they wanted CJ's story to be told.
"We realised that if we wanted this documented, we should start filming," said Hamer.
Over the course of three years, the two men traveled frequently to Pennsylvania to shoot, eventually receiving a grant from the Sundance Institute.
In the process, Wilson and Hamer were struck by the silence in which GLBT people in small town U.S.A. are forced to live. CJ had become a target by daring to break that silence and come out in high school – something no one did when Wilson was growing up in Oil City.
The increasing visibility of GLBT people has had mixed results for teenagers like CJ, said Hamer.
"The good side is that kids like CJ know that they're not the only gay person in the world, but the bad side is that there's been a backlash as a result," he said. "It's made bullying even worse as a way to tag kids that are gay."
Oil City's vocal conservative Christian community was making life especially difficult for GLBT residents.
Hamer says while that the anti-gay activists in Oil City may have seemed like an extreme fringe group, "They have power because no one wants to make them upset."
Despite the efforts of these activists, Wilson and Hamer were surprised to find an accepting community in Oil City that Wilson, growing up in silence himself, had overlooked.
"I was terrified of beginning to understand who I was," said Wilson of his adolescence. "The general dominant culture said that this was not good, and I was not seeking a community out."
Returning to document CJ's story, though, Wilson, along with his husband, forges relationships with lesbian neighbours he never knew he had who are facing their own struggles. He is even able to find common ground with some of those who had complained about the wedding announcement.
"It changed my perception of my home town," Wilson said.
Wilson and Hamer have now become unlikely ambassadors of a sort for struggling Oil City.
They took their finished film to the city council, said Wilson, and told them, "Either you can deny this all happened, or look at it as a tool to show what a great place Oil City is becoming. They did the latter."
A subsequent screening at the local community college sold out, and the filmmakers have brought "Out in the Silence" to other towns in hope that Oil City's progress can serve as a model.
"This is not just film for film's sake," said Hamer. "It's a powerful tool for community activism."
Human Rights Watch expressed interest while Wilson and Hamer were working on the project, and the film will screen Jun. 21-23 at the Film Society of Lincoln Centre as part of the Human Rights Watch Film Festival.
"Human Rights Watch saw that this isn't just a domestic political issue as people sometimes see gay rights. It's tied into the global struggle for equality," said Wilson.
OUT IN THE SILENCE also screens in the Tribeca Cinemas: Doc Series on June 28.
Friday, June 18, 2010
OUT IN THE SILENCE on ABC News
OUT IN THE SILENCE, a documentary about courageous local residents confronting homophobia and the limitations of religion, tradition and the status quo in their conservative small town in the hills of western Pennsylvania, Venango County's Oil City, featured in an ABC News segment on the Human Rights Watch International Film Festival.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
U.S. Evangelicals Promote Genocide Against LGBT People
The Struggle Abroad and at Home: Ugandan Bishop Senyonjo Is Fighting for LGBT Rights
By Andrea Shorter, Deputy Director of Marriage and Coalitions, Equality California
Bishop Christopher Senyonjo is a hero. The 78-year-old civil rights leader from Uganda has paid a heavy price for speaking out for equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Bishop Senyonjo is the religious leader in Uganda who is leading the fight against the country’s proposed "Kill the Gays" bill, which would allow people with previous convictions for homosexuality and people who are HIV positive to be sentenced to death. Created at the encouragement of radical right-wing Christian leaders from the U.S., including author Scott Lively and Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, this hate-driven bill authorizes the country to engage in genocide of its LGBT citizens. "With the introduction of this new bill," the Bishop has said, "there is a lot of fear what might happen... That is why we are talking against this bill. It is a draconian bill. Inhuman."
Why are U.S. evangelicals crossing the Atlantic Ocean to try to pass anti-LGBT policies? They know that they cannot imprison LGBT people in the United States, so they are trying to spark a movement in places where our communities are less supported and less able to fight back. The LGBT movement around the globe depends on us all rallying to defeat this bill.
The Bishop has been touring internationally to raise awareness of the repression of LGBT people in his home country. He met with White House officials last week, along with Right Reverend Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in a major Christian denomination. Both men are faith allies in the movement for LGBT equality and provide an important link between religion and LGBT issues. With U.S. anti-LGBT activists encouraging prejudice and hate abroad, Bishop Senyonjo’s work in the U.S. encourages LGBT supporters to also get involved in this crisis and stop the hate.
At the end of May, the Bishop’s tour brought him to the LGBT Community Center in San Francisco, where an ecstatic audience greeted him with a standing ovation the very moment he entered the room. He shared his story of advocacy for Uganda’s LGBT community, a story that started more than ten years ago when he began to act as a counselor for people questioning or struggling with their sexual orientation. Hearing the stories of many people who were afraid and often under threats of violence for simply being who they are, he became a fierce advocate and straight ally. He helped to found an LGBT community center and began to speak out for equal rights.
During his visit to San Francisco, Bishop Senyonjo told stories of harassment and rejection that he has faced simply for being an LGBT ally. "When I was passing along the road, people said oh, there is that man, that man supports something which is wrong," he told the crowd at the Center. "One time, one old man, I was talking to him, I said, I know these people are also loved by God. He said, ‘what do you mean by that?’ He slapped me."
By Andrea Shorter, Deputy Director of Marriage and Coalitions, Equality California
Bishop Christopher Senyonjo is a hero. The 78-year-old civil rights leader from Uganda has paid a heavy price for speaking out for equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Bishop Senyonjo is the religious leader in Uganda who is leading the fight against the country’s proposed "Kill the Gays" bill, which would allow people with previous convictions for homosexuality and people who are HIV positive to be sentenced to death. Created at the encouragement of radical right-wing Christian leaders from the U.S., including author Scott Lively and Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, this hate-driven bill authorizes the country to engage in genocide of its LGBT citizens. "With the introduction of this new bill," the Bishop has said, "there is a lot of fear what might happen... That is why we are talking against this bill. It is a draconian bill. Inhuman."
Why are U.S. evangelicals crossing the Atlantic Ocean to try to pass anti-LGBT policies? They know that they cannot imprison LGBT people in the United States, so they are trying to spark a movement in places where our communities are less supported and less able to fight back. The LGBT movement around the globe depends on us all rallying to defeat this bill.
The Bishop has been touring internationally to raise awareness of the repression of LGBT people in his home country. He met with White House officials last week, along with Right Reverend Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in a major Christian denomination. Both men are faith allies in the movement for LGBT equality and provide an important link between religion and LGBT issues. With U.S. anti-LGBT activists encouraging prejudice and hate abroad, Bishop Senyonjo’s work in the U.S. encourages LGBT supporters to also get involved in this crisis and stop the hate.
At the end of May, the Bishop’s tour brought him to the LGBT Community Center in San Francisco, where an ecstatic audience greeted him with a standing ovation the very moment he entered the room. He shared his story of advocacy for Uganda’s LGBT community, a story that started more than ten years ago when he began to act as a counselor for people questioning or struggling with their sexual orientation. Hearing the stories of many people who were afraid and often under threats of violence for simply being who they are, he became a fierce advocate and straight ally. He helped to found an LGBT community center and began to speak out for equal rights.
During his visit to San Francisco, Bishop Senyonjo told stories of harassment and rejection that he has faced simply for being an LGBT ally. "When I was passing along the road, people said oh, there is that man, that man supports something which is wrong," he told the crowd at the Center. "One time, one old man, I was talking to him, I said, I know these people are also loved by God. He said, ‘what do you mean by that?’ He slapped me."
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
The Tipping Point on LGBT Equality Has Arrived
by Wayne Besen for Truth Wins Out:
A couple of week ago I wrote, “The war over gay rights in America and other modern nations has been largely won. Too many people have come out of the closet and will never go back in for the clock to be turned back.”
This trend towards acceptance has only accelerated since my column and may have reached a tipping point. New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote about a new Gallup Poll that found, for the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. Also, for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
Blow attributes these advancements to LGBT people coming out and the realization that it is primarily weirdoes and socially stunted hypocrites who are obsessed or threatened by homosexuality.
“Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality,” wrote Blow. “Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.”
Blow is correct. Normal, healthy, functional heterosexuals do not become paranoid or fixated on homosexuals. It is primarily people with sexual hang-ups, extreme religious indoctrination or deep, dark secrets that are preoccupied and consumed by the sexual orientation of others.
Of course, this does not mean that all supporters of civil rights for LGBT people are comfortable with the idea of gay sex. The good news is they don’t have to be. While speaking across the nation I have found an easy way of diffusing this issue. I ask the crowd to look at people they assume are heterosexual in the audience. Then, I ask if they would want to see all of the people they stared at having sexual intercourse.
The answer is inevitably and resoundingly, “No”. Then, I simply make the point that there are many people, heterosexual and homosexual, they would not want to witness in bed. And, they never have to unless they elect to do so – making any objections in terms of the “ick” factor moot. As simple as this sounds, it works and audiences “get it.”
Adding momentum to the LGBT struggle for equality is a cute McDonald’s television commercial in France that dealt with a teenager who had not yet told his father he was gay. The message of the campaign is, “come as you are, just leave a little fatter.” Okay, I added the last part.
While such an ad is not likely to air in the United States anytime soon, it does not have to in order to have a positive impact. Thanks to the Internet and talk shows, millions of people will see the ad and associate the message with their beloved Golden Arches.
Speaking of the impact of social media, in Newsweek, Joshua Alston made the case that websites such as Facebook are accelerating the demise of the closet. He wrote about the, “painstaking labor that goes into being secretly gay in the age of information sharing.” His advice to a friend who was outed by a seemingly innocuous tweet: “if you want to be in the closet, you can’t be on Facebook and Twitter.”
Crucial to the sudden surge of success is the falling of ugly stereotypes, such as the old canard that LGBT people are a threat to children. This week, the research journal, Pediatrics, published a study by Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam. The article discussed a landmark study that measured the long-term affects on children who were raised by lesbian parents.
“We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls,” says Gartrell. “I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn’t something I anticipated.”
Finally, The Human Rights Campaign reports that Kaiser Permanente updated its Patients’ Bill of Rights to fully protect LGBT patients and their families from discrimination. These changes make Kaiser Permanente the first large health network to have a fully inclusive non-discrimination policy for LGBT people.
Sure, full legal equality may take two decades and the battle against bigotry will last forever. But, there is no denying that the LGBT movement is on the move like never before. The homophobes are finally the minority and appearing more secluded and deluded by the day. It’s not time to crack open a bottle of champagne, but feel free to treat your self to a cold beer and appreciate the progress.
A couple of week ago I wrote, “The war over gay rights in America and other modern nations has been largely won. Too many people have come out of the closet and will never go back in for the clock to be turned back.”
This trend towards acceptance has only accelerated since my column and may have reached a tipping point. New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote about a new Gallup Poll that found, for the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. Also, for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
Blow attributes these advancements to LGBT people coming out and the realization that it is primarily weirdoes and socially stunted hypocrites who are obsessed or threatened by homosexuality.
“Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality,” wrote Blow. “Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.”
Blow is correct. Normal, healthy, functional heterosexuals do not become paranoid or fixated on homosexuals. It is primarily people with sexual hang-ups, extreme religious indoctrination or deep, dark secrets that are preoccupied and consumed by the sexual orientation of others.
Of course, this does not mean that all supporters of civil rights for LGBT people are comfortable with the idea of gay sex. The good news is they don’t have to be. While speaking across the nation I have found an easy way of diffusing this issue. I ask the crowd to look at people they assume are heterosexual in the audience. Then, I ask if they would want to see all of the people they stared at having sexual intercourse.
The answer is inevitably and resoundingly, “No”. Then, I simply make the point that there are many people, heterosexual and homosexual, they would not want to witness in bed. And, they never have to unless they elect to do so – making any objections in terms of the “ick” factor moot. As simple as this sounds, it works and audiences “get it.”
Adding momentum to the LGBT struggle for equality is a cute McDonald’s television commercial in France that dealt with a teenager who had not yet told his father he was gay. The message of the campaign is, “come as you are, just leave a little fatter.” Okay, I added the last part.
While such an ad is not likely to air in the United States anytime soon, it does not have to in order to have a positive impact. Thanks to the Internet and talk shows, millions of people will see the ad and associate the message with their beloved Golden Arches.
Speaking of the impact of social media, in Newsweek, Joshua Alston made the case that websites such as Facebook are accelerating the demise of the closet. He wrote about the, “painstaking labor that goes into being secretly gay in the age of information sharing.” His advice to a friend who was outed by a seemingly innocuous tweet: “if you want to be in the closet, you can’t be on Facebook and Twitter.”
Crucial to the sudden surge of success is the falling of ugly stereotypes, such as the old canard that LGBT people are a threat to children. This week, the research journal, Pediatrics, published a study by Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam. The article discussed a landmark study that measured the long-term affects on children who were raised by lesbian parents.
“We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls,” says Gartrell. “I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn’t something I anticipated.”
Finally, The Human Rights Campaign reports that Kaiser Permanente updated its Patients’ Bill of Rights to fully protect LGBT patients and their families from discrimination. These changes make Kaiser Permanente the first large health network to have a fully inclusive non-discrimination policy for LGBT people.
Sure, full legal equality may take two decades and the battle against bigotry will last forever. But, there is no denying that the LGBT movement is on the move like never before. The homophobes are finally the minority and appearing more secluded and deluded by the day. It’s not time to crack open a bottle of champagne, but feel free to treat your self to a cold beer and appreciate the progress.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
OUT IN THE SILENCE To Screen In The 2010 Human Rights Watch International Film Festival In New York - June 21, 22 & 23
NEW YORK – Now in its 21st year, the 2010 Human Rights Watch Film Festival — the world’s foremost showcase for films with a distinctive human rights theme — creates a forum for courageous individuals on both sides of the lens to empower audiences with the knowledge that personal commitment can make a difference. A co-presentation of Human Rights Watch and The Film Society of Lincoln Center, the festival will run from June 10 to 24 at the Film Society’s Walter Reade Theater.
Thirty extraordinary works from 25 countries will be screened, 28 of which are New York premieres. A majority of the filmmakers will be on hand after the screenings to discuss their films with the audience.
“The Human Rights Watch Film Festival reflects the condition of the world we live in, including the top news events around the world,” said John Biaggi, the festival director. “No one is immune to the rippling effects when human rights are violated, whether here in our country or far away. It affects us all.”
This year’s festival is organized around three themes, beginning with Accountability and Justice. OUT IN THE SILENCE, screening on June 21, 22 & 23, delves into aspects of this theme by following three Americans caught up in a same-sex marriage controversy as they confront three of society’s most formidable forces—the church, the school system, and prevailing social norms.
The film captures the controversy that ensues when filmmaker Joe Wilson's same-sex wedding announcement is published in the newspaper of Oil City, the small Pennsylvania hometown he left long ago. Drawn back by a plea for help from the mother of a gay teen being tormented at school, Wilson's journey dramatically illustrates the challenges of negotiating the morally charged issue of sexual orientation and the potential for building bridges when people with differing opinions approach each other with openness and respect.
A Human Rights Watch Podcast of an interview with filmmakers Joe Wilson and Dean Hamer, along with HRW's Boris Dittrich, can be heard HERE.
More information about the film festival screenings can be found HERE.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Study: Children of Lesbians May Do Better Than Their Peers
from TIME Magazine:
The teen years are never the easiest for any family to navigate. But could they be even more challenging for children and parents in households headed by gay parents?
That is the question researchers explored in the first study ever to track children raised by lesbian parents, from birth to adolescence. Although previous studies have indicated that children with same-sex parents show no significant differences compared with children in heterosexual homes when it comes to social development and adjustment, many of these investigations involved children who were born to women in heterosexual marriages, who later divorced and came out as lesbians.
(See a photographic history of gay rights, from Stonewall to Prop 8.)
For their new study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, researchers Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco (and a law professor at University of California, Los Angeles), and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam, focused on what they call planned lesbian families — households in which the mothers identified themselves as lesbian at the time of artificial insemination.
Data on such families are sparse, but they are important for establishing whether a child's environment in a home with same-sex parents would be any more or less nurturing than one with a heterosexual couple.
(See a gay-rights timeline.)
The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.
"We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls," says Gartrell. "I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn't something I anticipated."
In addition, children in same-sex-parent families whose mothers ended up separating, did as well as children in lesbian families in which the moms stayed together.
The data that Gartrell and Bos analyzed came from the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS), begun in 1986. The authors included 154 women in 84 families who underwent artificial insemination to start a family; the parents agreed to answer questions about their children's social skills, academic performance and behavior at five follow-up times over the 17-year study period. Children in the families were also interviewed by researchers at age 10, and were then asked at age 17 to complete an online questionnaire, which included queries about the teens' activities, their social lives, feelings of anxiety or depression and behavior.
Not surprisingly, the researchers found that 41% of children reported having endured some teasing, ostracism or discrimination related to their being raised by same-sex parents. But Gartrell and Bos could find no differences on psychological adjustment tests between these children and those in a group of matched controls. At age 10, children reporting discrimination did exhibit more signs of psychological stress than their peers, but by age 17, these feelings had dissipated. "Obviously there are some factors that may include family support and changes in education about appreciation for diversity that may be helping young people to come to a better place despite these experiences," says Gartrell.
It's not clear exactly why children of lesbian mothers tend to do better than those in heterosexual families on certain measures. But after studying gay and lesbian families for 24 years, Gartrell has some theories. "They are very involved in their children's lives," she says of the lesbian parents. "And that is a great recipe for healthy outcomes for children. Being present, having good communication, being there in their schools, finding out what is going on in their schools and various aspects of the children's lives is very, very important."
Although such active involvement isn't unique to lesbian households, Gartrell notes that same-sex mothers tend to make that kind of parenting more of a priority. Because their children are more likely to experience discrimination and stigmatization as a result of their family circumstances, these mothers can be more likely to broach complicated topics, such as sexuality and diversity and tolerance, with their children early on. Having such a foundation may help to give these children more confidence and maturity in dealing with social differences and prejudices as they get older.
Because the research is ongoing, Gartrell hopes to test some of these theories with additional studies. She is also hoping to collect more data on gay father households; gay fatherhood is less common than lesbian motherhood because of the high costs — of surrogacy or adoption — that gay couples necessarily face in order to start a family.
The teen years are never the easiest for any family to navigate. But could they be even more challenging for children and parents in households headed by gay parents?
That is the question researchers explored in the first study ever to track children raised by lesbian parents, from birth to adolescence. Although previous studies have indicated that children with same-sex parents show no significant differences compared with children in heterosexual homes when it comes to social development and adjustment, many of these investigations involved children who were born to women in heterosexual marriages, who later divorced and came out as lesbians.
(See a photographic history of gay rights, from Stonewall to Prop 8.)
For their new study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, researchers Nanette Gartrell, a professor of psychiatry at University of California, San Francisco (and a law professor at University of California, Los Angeles), and Henry Bos, a behavioral scientist at University of Amsterdam, focused on what they call planned lesbian families — households in which the mothers identified themselves as lesbian at the time of artificial insemination.
Data on such families are sparse, but they are important for establishing whether a child's environment in a home with same-sex parents would be any more or less nurturing than one with a heterosexual couple.
(See a gay-rights timeline.)
The authors found that children raised by lesbian mothers — whether the mother was partnered or single — scored very similarly to children raised by heterosexual parents on measures of development and social behavior. These findings were expected, the authors said; however, they were surprised to discover that children in lesbian homes scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression.
"We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls," says Gartrell. "I was surprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn't something I anticipated."
In addition, children in same-sex-parent families whose mothers ended up separating, did as well as children in lesbian families in which the moms stayed together.
The data that Gartrell and Bos analyzed came from the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (NLLFS), begun in 1986. The authors included 154 women in 84 families who underwent artificial insemination to start a family; the parents agreed to answer questions about their children's social skills, academic performance and behavior at five follow-up times over the 17-year study period. Children in the families were also interviewed by researchers at age 10, and were then asked at age 17 to complete an online questionnaire, which included queries about the teens' activities, their social lives, feelings of anxiety or depression and behavior.
Not surprisingly, the researchers found that 41% of children reported having endured some teasing, ostracism or discrimination related to their being raised by same-sex parents. But Gartrell and Bos could find no differences on psychological adjustment tests between these children and those in a group of matched controls. At age 10, children reporting discrimination did exhibit more signs of psychological stress than their peers, but by age 17, these feelings had dissipated. "Obviously there are some factors that may include family support and changes in education about appreciation for diversity that may be helping young people to come to a better place despite these experiences," says Gartrell.
It's not clear exactly why children of lesbian mothers tend to do better than those in heterosexual families on certain measures. But after studying gay and lesbian families for 24 years, Gartrell has some theories. "They are very involved in their children's lives," she says of the lesbian parents. "And that is a great recipe for healthy outcomes for children. Being present, having good communication, being there in their schools, finding out what is going on in their schools and various aspects of the children's lives is very, very important."
Although such active involvement isn't unique to lesbian households, Gartrell notes that same-sex mothers tend to make that kind of parenting more of a priority. Because their children are more likely to experience discrimination and stigmatization as a result of their family circumstances, these mothers can be more likely to broach complicated topics, such as sexuality and diversity and tolerance, with their children early on. Having such a foundation may help to give these children more confidence and maturity in dealing with social differences and prejudices as they get older.
Because the research is ongoing, Gartrell hopes to test some of these theories with additional studies. She is also hoping to collect more data on gay father households; gay fatherhood is less common than lesbian motherhood because of the high costs — of surrogacy or adoption — that gay couples necessarily face in order to start a family.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Monday, June 7, 2010
So, am I proud to be gay?
Gay Pride - A Message from Betty Hill, Ex. Dir. of Pittsburgh's Persad Center, the nation’s second oldest licensed counseling center specifically created to serve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community.
During the month of June in the Pittsburgh region, we will celebrate Gay Pride. There are many events scheduled that will bring visibility to the GLBT community. Persad will be participating in an Advocacy Rally, Pride in the Streets, the Pride March and Pride Fest. In addition, Persad is sponsoring several youth activities including a dance and a picnic. A complete list of activities planned can be found at www.pittsburghpride.org.
So, am I proud to be gay? It seems like a strange question. It’s like asking if I’m proud to have blue eyes. It’s really not an option – it is simply a given. I am gay. It wasn’t something I planned. In some religious traditions, pride is a sin. It is right up there with arrogance and other forms of narcissism. So why do we celebrate Pride?
Pride is to counter all of the messages of Shame that are put upon the GLBT community. It says we will not accept Shame and Discrimination. Gay Pride is an effort to combat all of the ways that the community is made invisible and excluded. This year’s Pride theme is “You Belong”. It demonstrates the strengths and positive qualities of the community and acknowledges our significant contributions in the world.
I AM proud of our local GLBT community. I’m proud of our friends at Delta Foundation who have made Pride a significant event in the City of Pittsburgh and who have recently begun a political advocacy project that will help bring about change. I’m proud of our Gay and Lesbian Community Center that moved this year into downtown space that provides a safe place for groups to meet. I’m proud of our youth from Dreams of Hope who are moving audiences to realize the impact of discrimination. I’m proud that there are a variety of social groups that bring the community together like G2H2, Lez Liquors, Prime Timers, the bowling league and other sports groups, and GLEC. I’m proud of GLSEN and their push to teach students and teachers to make schools safe for everyone – this year providing more training programs than ever. I’m proud of the Initiative for Transgender Leadership for creating a significant internship experience for transgender youth. And, of course, I’m proud of Persad Center and our work to improve the well being of our community.
There’s a lot of positive energy and talented GLBT people working in Western Pennsylvania and making a difference. Working together we can put an end to ignorance, discrimination and shame. Happy Pride!
During the month of June in the Pittsburgh region, we will celebrate Gay Pride. There are many events scheduled that will bring visibility to the GLBT community. Persad will be participating in an Advocacy Rally, Pride in the Streets, the Pride March and Pride Fest. In addition, Persad is sponsoring several youth activities including a dance and a picnic. A complete list of activities planned can be found at www.pittsburghpride.org.
So, am I proud to be gay? It seems like a strange question. It’s like asking if I’m proud to have blue eyes. It’s really not an option – it is simply a given. I am gay. It wasn’t something I planned. In some religious traditions, pride is a sin. It is right up there with arrogance and other forms of narcissism. So why do we celebrate Pride?
Pride is to counter all of the messages of Shame that are put upon the GLBT community. It says we will not accept Shame and Discrimination. Gay Pride is an effort to combat all of the ways that the community is made invisible and excluded. This year’s Pride theme is “You Belong”. It demonstrates the strengths and positive qualities of the community and acknowledges our significant contributions in the world.
I AM proud of our local GLBT community. I’m proud of our friends at Delta Foundation who have made Pride a significant event in the City of Pittsburgh and who have recently begun a political advocacy project that will help bring about change. I’m proud of our Gay and Lesbian Community Center that moved this year into downtown space that provides a safe place for groups to meet. I’m proud of our youth from Dreams of Hope who are moving audiences to realize the impact of discrimination. I’m proud that there are a variety of social groups that bring the community together like G2H2, Lez Liquors, Prime Timers, the bowling league and other sports groups, and GLEC. I’m proud of GLSEN and their push to teach students and teachers to make schools safe for everyone – this year providing more training programs than ever. I’m proud of the Initiative for Transgender Leadership for creating a significant internship experience for transgender youth. And, of course, I’m proud of Persad Center and our work to improve the well being of our community.
There’s a lot of positive energy and talented GLBT people working in Western Pennsylvania and making a difference. Working together we can put an end to ignorance, discrimination and shame. Happy Pride!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Gay? Whatever Dude
For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
And This Is What Scares The Hell Out Of Venango County's Extremist Homophobes
The Times They May Be A Changin' ... But We've Still Got Lots Of Work To Do To Vanquish The Harm Caused By The American Family Association Of Pennsylvania And "Christian" Radio Station WAWN Once And For ALL !!
by Charles Blow for the New York Times:
Last week, while many of us were distracted by the oil belching forth from the gulf floor and the president’s ham-handed attempts to demonstrate that he was sufficiently engaged and enraged, Gallup released a stunning, and little noticed, report on Americans’ evolving views of homosexuality. Allow me to enlighten:
1. For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. (You have to love the fact that they still use the word “relations.” So quaint.)
2. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
3. This new alignment is being led by a dramatic change in attitudes among younger men, but older men’s perceptions also have eclipsed older women’s. While women’s views have stayed about the same over the past four years, the percentage of men ages 18 to 49 who perceived these “relations” as morally acceptable rose by 48 percent, and among men over 50, it rose by 26 percent.
I warned you: stunning.
There is no way to know for sure what’s driving such a radical change in men’s views on this issue because Gallup didn’t ask, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t speculate. To help me do so, I called Dr. Michael Kimmel, a professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and the author or editor of more than 20 books on men and masculinity, and Professor Ritch Savin-Williams, the chairman of human development at Cornell University and the author of seven books, most of which deal with adolescent development and same-sex attraction.
Here are three theories:
1. The contact hypothesis. As more men openly acknowledge that they are gay, it becomes harder for men who are not gay to discriminate against them. And as that group of openly gay men becomes more varied — including athletes, celebrities and soldiers — many of the old, derisive stereotypes lose their purchase. To that point, a Gallup poll released last May found that people who said they personally knew someone who was gay or lesbian were more likely to be accepting of gay men and lesbians in general and more supportive of their issues.
2. Men may be becoming more egalitarian in general. As Dr. Kimmel put it: “Men have gotten increasingly comfortable with the presence of, and relative equality of, ‘the other,’ and we’re becoming more accustomed to it. And most men are finding that it has not been a disaster.” The expanding sense of acceptance likely began with the feminist and civil rights movements and is now being extended to the gay rights movement. Dr. Kimmel continued, “The dire predictions for diversity have not only not come true, but, in fact, they’ve been proved the other way.”
3. Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality. Think Ted Haggard, the once fervent antigay preacher and former leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, and his male prostitute. (This week, Haggard announced that he was starting a new “inclusive” church open to “gay, straight, bi, tall, short,” but no same-sex marriages. Not “God’s ideal.” Sorry.) Or George Rekers, the founding member of the Family Research Council, and his rent boy/luggage handler. Last week, the council claimed that repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” would lead to an explosion of “homosexual assaults” in which sleeping soldiers would be the victims of fondling and fellatio by gay predators. In fact, there is a growing body of research that supports the notion that homophobia in some men could be a reaction to their own homosexual impulses. Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.
These sound plausible, but why aren’t women seeing the same enlightening effects as men? Professor Savin-Williams suggests that there may be a “ceiling effect,” that men are simply catching up to women, and there may be a level at which views top out. Interesting.
All of this is great news, but it doesn’t mean that all measures relating to acceptance of gay men and lesbians have changed to the same degree. People’s comfort with the “gay and lesbian” part of the equation is still greater than their comfort with the “relations” part — the idea versus the act — particularly when it comes to pairings of men.
As Professor Savin-Williams told me, there is still a higher aversive reaction to same-sex sexuality among men than among women.
For instance, in a February New York Times/CBS News poll, half of the respondents were asked if they favored letting “gay men and lesbians” serve in the military (which is still more than 85 percent male), and the other half were asked if they favored letting “homosexuals” serve. Those who got the “homosexual” question favored it at a rate that was 11 percentage points lower than those who got the “gay men and lesbians” question.
Part of the difference may be that “homosexual” is a bigger, more clinical word freighted with a lot of historical baggage. But just as likely is that the inclusion of the root word “sex” still raises an aversive response to the idea of, how shall I say, the architectural issues between two men. It is the point at which support for basic human rights cleaves from endorsement of behavior.
As for the aversion among men, it may be softening a bit. Professor Savin-Williams says that his current research reveals that the fastest-growing group along the sexuality continuum are men who self-identify as “mostly straight” as opposed to labels like “straight,” “gay” or “bisexual.” They acknowledge some level of attraction to other men even as they say that they probably wouldn’t act on it, but ... the right guy, the right day, a few beers and who knows. As the professor points out, you would never have heard that in years past.
All together now: stunning.
(I now return you to Day 46 of the oil spill where they finally may be making some progress.)
And This Is What Scares The Hell Out Of Venango County's Extremist Homophobes
The Times They May Be A Changin' ... But We've Still Got Lots Of Work To Do To Vanquish The Harm Caused By The American Family Association Of Pennsylvania And "Christian" Radio Station WAWN Once And For ALL !!
by Charles Blow for the New York Times:
Last week, while many of us were distracted by the oil belching forth from the gulf floor and the president’s ham-handed attempts to demonstrate that he was sufficiently engaged and enraged, Gallup released a stunning, and little noticed, report on Americans’ evolving views of homosexuality. Allow me to enlighten:
1. For the first time, the percentage of Americans who perceive “gay and lesbian relations” as morally acceptable has crossed the 50 percent mark. (You have to love the fact that they still use the word “relations.” So quaint.)
2. Also for the first time, the percentage of men who hold that view is greater than the percentage of women who do.
3. This new alignment is being led by a dramatic change in attitudes among younger men, but older men’s perceptions also have eclipsed older women’s. While women’s views have stayed about the same over the past four years, the percentage of men ages 18 to 49 who perceived these “relations” as morally acceptable rose by 48 percent, and among men over 50, it rose by 26 percent.
I warned you: stunning.
There is no way to know for sure what’s driving such a radical change in men’s views on this issue because Gallup didn’t ask, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t speculate. To help me do so, I called Dr. Michael Kimmel, a professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and the author or editor of more than 20 books on men and masculinity, and Professor Ritch Savin-Williams, the chairman of human development at Cornell University and the author of seven books, most of which deal with adolescent development and same-sex attraction.
Here are three theories:
1. The contact hypothesis. As more men openly acknowledge that they are gay, it becomes harder for men who are not gay to discriminate against them. And as that group of openly gay men becomes more varied — including athletes, celebrities and soldiers — many of the old, derisive stereotypes lose their purchase. To that point, a Gallup poll released last May found that people who said they personally knew someone who was gay or lesbian were more likely to be accepting of gay men and lesbians in general and more supportive of their issues.
2. Men may be becoming more egalitarian in general. As Dr. Kimmel put it: “Men have gotten increasingly comfortable with the presence of, and relative equality of, ‘the other,’ and we’re becoming more accustomed to it. And most men are finding that it has not been a disaster.” The expanding sense of acceptance likely began with the feminist and civil rights movements and is now being extended to the gay rights movement. Dr. Kimmel continued, “The dire predictions for diversity have not only not come true, but, in fact, they’ve been proved the other way.”
3. Virulent homophobes are increasingly being exposed for engaging in homosexuality. Think Ted Haggard, the once fervent antigay preacher and former leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, and his male prostitute. (This week, Haggard announced that he was starting a new “inclusive” church open to “gay, straight, bi, tall, short,” but no same-sex marriages. Not “God’s ideal.” Sorry.) Or George Rekers, the founding member of the Family Research Council, and his rent boy/luggage handler. Last week, the council claimed that repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” would lead to an explosion of “homosexual assaults” in which sleeping soldiers would be the victims of fondling and fellatio by gay predators. In fact, there is a growing body of research that supports the notion that homophobia in some men could be a reaction to their own homosexual impulses. Many heterosexual men see this, and they don’t want to be associated with it. It’s like being antigay is becoming the old gay. Not cool.
These sound plausible, but why aren’t women seeing the same enlightening effects as men? Professor Savin-Williams suggests that there may be a “ceiling effect,” that men are simply catching up to women, and there may be a level at which views top out. Interesting.
All of this is great news, but it doesn’t mean that all measures relating to acceptance of gay men and lesbians have changed to the same degree. People’s comfort with the “gay and lesbian” part of the equation is still greater than their comfort with the “relations” part — the idea versus the act — particularly when it comes to pairings of men.
As Professor Savin-Williams told me, there is still a higher aversive reaction to same-sex sexuality among men than among women.
For instance, in a February New York Times/CBS News poll, half of the respondents were asked if they favored letting “gay men and lesbians” serve in the military (which is still more than 85 percent male), and the other half were asked if they favored letting “homosexuals” serve. Those who got the “homosexual” question favored it at a rate that was 11 percentage points lower than those who got the “gay men and lesbians” question.
Part of the difference may be that “homosexual” is a bigger, more clinical word freighted with a lot of historical baggage. But just as likely is that the inclusion of the root word “sex” still raises an aversive response to the idea of, how shall I say, the architectural issues between two men. It is the point at which support for basic human rights cleaves from endorsement of behavior.
As for the aversion among men, it may be softening a bit. Professor Savin-Williams says that his current research reveals that the fastest-growing group along the sexuality continuum are men who self-identify as “mostly straight” as opposed to labels like “straight,” “gay” or “bisexual.” They acknowledge some level of attraction to other men even as they say that they probably wouldn’t act on it, but ... the right guy, the right day, a few beers and who knows. As the professor points out, you would never have heard that in years past.
All together now: stunning.
(I now return you to Day 46 of the oil spill where they finally may be making some progress.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)