courtesy of Inside Higher Ed

It is, as Wikipedia will tell you, a “highly pejorative term.” But what kind of understanding are we creating when we cannot even talk about the situation without using abstractions? The laughter from the reporters in the press conference and the subsequent erasure of the word and the details by most media outlets suggests that most know there is something wrong with the word. But what exactly it is remains more ambiguous.

A University of Hawaii football coach was recently fined and suspended for using the word “faggot” in a public setting.  But what does the fact that he apparently felt so comfortable using the term say about “jock” culture in America?  And what does it say about athletics vis-a-vis our public higher education system?

Click here to read the rest at insidehighered.com

Maybe we were wrong …

Forty years later, when reading about the events surrounding the Stonewall riots, we’ve all thought something like, “boy, we’ve come a long way …”  Police don’t raid gay bars for no good reason anymore, do they?  Police don’t beat up gay people without any apparent fear of repercussion, do they?  And the police chief wouldn’t use the gay panic defense to support the actions of his officers, would he?

Apparently so.  Recently, in this season where the world’s gay community is celebrating the 40th anniversary of Stonewall, that’s exactly what happened in Fort Worth, Texas.  And one man is still in the hospital with brain injuries as a result.

You can read more about it in The Daily Dish from the Atlantic

And be sure to check out columnist and activist Dan Savage’s take on the issue

The good news is that internal affairs has launched an investigation into the raid and the Fort Worth PD has suspended joint operations between Fort Worth police and the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission for the time being.  This article from the Fort Worth Star Telegram details some of the events that have been happening in the wake of the raid.

I guess we still can’t let our guard down.  These cops, based upon the eyewitness accounts, were no less brutal and no less homophobic than their bretherin from 40 years ago.  Sure, this probably wouldn’t have happened today in New York or California, but what about West Virginia?  If the police should happen to come into your bar in a manner such as this, you should stay out of their way, do exactly what they tell you to do, and don’t give them any reason to want to hit you.  On the flip side, get out your phone and take plenty of pictures and videos.  Contact local news organizations and your local political representatives as soon as you safely can.  You may not be able to fight back in the moment, but you can make sure people know that in this day and age, the whole world really is watching.

an update: In light of TABC report, raid at Fort Worth gay bar looks uglier

As we approach the season of Gay Pride observances, I think it’s important to reflect for a moment.  The Stonewall Riots, which we often look to as a cornerstone in the gay rights movement, began in New York City’s Greenwich Village on the last weekend of June in 1969.  That’s why the GLBT community chooses the month of June to celebrate.

But on this 40th anniversary of the riots, there’s one thing that I hope the queer community never quite loses sight of — the Stonewall Inn, the sleazy dive bar at 52 Christopher St. in Manhattan, from which this very organization derives it’s name, was not a place where high-minded intellectuals went to sip herbal tea and discuss politics.  Rather, it was populated by a indecorous assortment of drag queens, hustlers, students, and men who wanted to pick up drag queens, hustlers, and students.

People drank a lot of booze at the mafia-owned Stonewall Inn, even though the bar had no liquor licence, and drug use was common, to say the least.  I’m sure that all of the various behaviors that you’d expect to find in a lot of less savory gay bars today were going on at the Stonewall.  Most of us know that the events of that night began in response to a police raid on the bar.  (Police raids on gay bars happened fairly often in those days.)  But did you know that the single moment that supposedly kicked off the rioting happened when a 17-year old drag queen, reportedly stoned out of her gourd, turned around and slugged the cop who was shoving her into the paddy wagon?

Now, I’m definitely not endorsing drug use, prostitution, or violence against police.  But if this organization is going to call itself the “Stonewall Democrats,” and if GLBT folks and our allies are going to march in parades all over the world in commemoration of the Stonewall Riots, it behooves us to remember where we’ve come from.  And let’s not forget that many of the early leaders of the gay liberation movement would never have been caught dead in a suit & tie!

I’m not going to use this space to argue for marriage equality, or to outline the reasons why it’s important.  We all know what it’s all about.  I just wanted to take a little time and write about a couple things that have been on my mind today.  And needless to say, the following article represents my own opinions and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the KSD or the National Stonewall Democrats.

Over the past couple of years I’ve come to the realization that the government shouldn’t be in the “marriage” business in the first place.  Civil partnerships, sure, but marriage?  Marriage, as such, ought to be between you and your spouse, along with your friends, family, and faith community (if any).  This blogger doesn’t think that it’s something that should be legislated in any way, shape, or form.  I favor the French model, which, as I understand it, allows any couple (gay or otherwise) that shares a residence to receive the legal benefits that we traditionally associate with civil marriage.

That said, we’re never going to change the nature of the debate so substantially.  So we’ve got to work with the terminology we’ve got.  Critics accuse us of wanting to change the definition of marriage.  And they’re correct — we do.  I mean, they really are not wrong when they say that marriage has traditionally been defined as the union of a man and a woman.  But so what?  Traditions change and definitions change.  Traditionally, for instance, women worked in the home while men went out and made money.  Traditionally, non-whites and non-Christians in this country were treated as second-class citizens.  That’s how things always used to be, right?  That doesn’t mean that we can’t acknowledge today that those beliefs were wrong.

One interesting side note to the whole marriage debate is the opinion of the gay liberationists.  The argument goes that we’re betraying the movement by even wanting to get married.  They oppose what they perceive as a desire to assimilate into mainstream “straight” society.  Liberationists see a conflict between those who desire to gain acceptance from society at large and those who want to establish a new gay society that’s more-or-less divorced from “straight” America.  And honestly, they have a point.

The “modern” gay rights movement, which we date from the Stonewall riots of 1969, sort of began as a revolution.  Many of the earliest leaders were radicals and anti-establishment types.  They didn’t want to adapt to mainstream society, they wanted mainstream society to adapt to them.  And still today, of course, a lot of gay people conduct their relationships in ways that have nothing at all to do with any definition of marriage, traditional or otherwise.  I’d like to think that someday, American society can come to accept all of us as we are, whether we choose to pair off in monogamous couples or not.  Personally, I am happily monogamous, but I recognize that isn’t what gay life is all about for a lot of my GLBT brothers and sisters.  And even for those of us who do share our lives with a partner, our “chosen families” are usually at least as important to us as our biological ones.

What I think we really ought to be fighting for is equal rights for all.  Marriage equality advocates talk about things like health insurance, hospital visitation, and inheritance rights.  And those things are all incredibly important.  But on the flip side, shouldn’t I be able to legally bequeath my estate to whomever I want to, whether or not I’m married to the person?  Shouldn’t everyone have equal access to quality health care?  Should the government tax a person who chooses not to be married differently than a person who does?  I just think there are more issues to think about here than initially meet the eye.

I know I’ve rambled a bit, and I have strayed from the points I was originally going to discuss.  This essay was a bit of a stream-of-thought work.  I’m not sure if I even said anything of substance, or whether it’s just a bunch of gibberish.  Anyway, I’d love to know what you think.  Are we betraying our roots by trying to “assimilate” into straight culture?  Are we so starved for acceptance that the only way we think we can achieve it is to emulate our oppressors?  Or do we just want to share in the same legal rights that are enjoyed by everyone else?  I know I’d certainly like to enjoy the benefits of a civil marriage … a marriage that I already acknowledge in my heart … but the liberationist argument makes logical sense, too.  If you’ve got an opinion on the matter, please let me know!

One of the more idiotic arguments I’ve heard against extending hate crime legislation to include gender orientation is that religious leaders “might be prosecuted for what they preach.”  There’s an easy way to test if that’ll be true, however … race and religion are already protected by similar laws, right?  Well, has anyone in the KKK or other white supremacist groups been arrested or put in prison simply for what they’ve said or written?  If not, then why would religious leaders get in trouble for preaching heterosexual supremacy?  Even when the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Bill becomes law, I assume that the First Amendment will still protect freedom of expression.  The opponents of equality need to stop their lying.  If you’ve got a real argument, let me hear it.  Otherwise, let’s get together and move this nation forward.

P.S.  I apologize that this space has been silent for so long, with so many important events going on in the world concerning GLBT equality and civil rights.  I don’t want to promise anything, but I’ll try to do better from now on.

The anti-discrimination bill won passage in the West Virginia Senate, but we still have an uphill fight in the House of Delegates.  Please be sure to call or write your delegates and let them know that you support SB 238.  Tell them to do the right thing and vote Yes when the bill comes to a vote in the House.  You want to keep your message polite and keep it brief, but be sure include a little personal detail to let them know why this bill is personally important to you.

We would also like to encourage you to send an email to House Speaker Richard Thompson at Speaker.Thompson@verizon.net You want to ask Speaker Thompson to support SB 238 in the House Rules committee, of which he’s the chairman, and to allow the bill an up or down vote on the House Floor.

Also, be sure to send a cc to House Judiciary Chairwoman, Carrie Webster at cwebste1@mail.wvnet.edu She is the bill’s main sponsor in the House of Delegates, and she needs to know just how many people are contacting the Speaker of the House regarding this legislation.  Anti-gay bigots are trying their best to keep this bill from passing, and we have to make sure that they don’t get their way.

It’s very important that you take the time to make your voice heard.  If this legislation fails to pass this year, who knows how long it’ll be before we get this far again?  If we can get Speaker Thompson to take note, it will go a long way toward getting SB 238 through the House.  Please send out those emails and pass the word to all of your friends to do the same.

The destiny of GLBT West Virginia?

The Honorable Tim Armstead
West Virginia House of Delegates
Room 264M, Building 1
State Capitol Complex
Charleston, WV 25305

Dear Minority Leader Armstead,

I am writing to you to express my feelings about your quote in the Sunday, February 22, issue of the Charleston Gazette-Mail. Your statement that there remains some discussion regarding whether or not homosexuality is a choice is both misguided and potentially harmful.  As a gay man myself, I suppose that my own personal experience could be regarded as purely anecdotal, but I know for a fact that I never chose to become homosexual.  Why would any rational person choose to become a member of a group that is still so widely despised in this country and around the world?  Of course, I suppose that there may always be a small number of people who set out to shock others with outlandish behavior, but what about the tremendous majority of gays and lesbians who live their lives as ordinary, law-abiding citizens?

Furthermore, I know I’m correct when I say that the overwhelming preponderance of scientific evidence points to the fact that sexuality is an innate part of a person’s biology.  You ought to assign an intern or assistant to check this out.  For that matter, I challenge anybody to show me even one study published in a reputable, peer-reviewed scientific or medical journal within the past two decades which concludes that sexuality can be chosen.

It is my considered opinion that the whole idea that homosexuals choose their orientation is clearly absurd.  Imagine choosing to be gay in the “bad old days” of the 50’s and 60’s when homosexuals were regularly rounded up by the police and taken to jail simply for dancing with someone of the same gender, or even just for being at a known gay bar.  What about people who live today in countries like Egypt or Iran where homosexuality is a crime punishable by death?  Such men and women would have to be literally insane to make a conscious choice to be anything other than heterosexual.

Then there’s the acknowledged fact that gay and lesbian youths are far more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual counterparts.  Surely these scared and damaged children didn’t choose to be considered freaks and outcasts by their peers, did they?  By opposing equal protection under the law for gay and lesbian citizens of this state, you are sending those kids the message that they deserve to be miserable.

I hope you will reconsider your opinion and lend your full support to HB 2454.

On “Orange Tuesday” (June 7, 1977), voters in Dade County, Florida, repealed an ordnance that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  When the news broke, thousands of gay residents of San Francisco, on the complete opposite end of the country, took to the streets to protest.  They chanted “We are your children,” and “Two, four, six, eight / Separate the church and state.”  We still celebrate the courage of those early pioneers in the struggle for gay equality.

But that raises a series of questions in my mind.  As you all should know, the West Virginia Legislature is currently considering a measure that would make discrimination against gays and lesbians illegal in our state.  Last year, a similar bill passed the state senate on a unanimous voice vote, but died a slow death in the House of Delegates.  Was there a protest in response?  Maybe, but I didn’t hear about it.

My point isn’t that we should necessarily take to the streets waving signs and blowing whistles, although it probably couldn’t hurt.  What I’m saying is that our community has to get involved.  We must get involved.  I’ve been guilty in the past of being an idle bystander in the fight for gay equality, but I don’t think we can afford to take things lying down any longer.

The more I think about it, the more depressing it is that, by and large, the gay community in West Virginia is disturbingly a-political.  We have to get angry, we have to take action, and we have to do it now.  Are we afraid of how our fellow West Virginians might react?  Are we afraid that we might lose our housing or our jobs?  Well, that’s exactly why we need to make our voices heard and get this legislation passed.  As a community, we need to stand together, be courageous, be strong, and do whatever we have to do to make sure our rights are protected.

Harvey Milk said it best back in the 70s – the best thing you can do to advance gay equality is to come out of the closet.  Come out to your family, come out to your friends (if they really are your friends), and come out at work.  There are people in this state who think this issue doesn’t affect them because they don’t even know anyone who is gay.  Some of those people might be your aunts and uncles, your bosses and coworkers, or the guys you bowl with on Thursday nights.  If they think they don’t have a personal stake in this fight, it’s up to us to let them know that they do.

What else can you do?  You can get involved.  You can join the Stonewall Democrats or PrideWV or the ACLU.  You can join the Senate Bill 238 Coalition on Facebook and invite all your friends to do the same.  You can write letters to your representatives in the state house or even pick up the phone and call them.  (Click here to learn who your legislators are and to find their contact info.)  If there’s a public hearing, and if you have the time and resources to do so, you can come to the Capitol and address the committee face-to-face.

But what are we going to do if this legislation fails to pass again?  What are we going to do if Jeremiah Dys and his cohorts succeed in getting an anti-marriage initiative on the ballot?  We can do what we always do, which usually amounts to either writing angry blurbs on the internet or maybe going out to the bars, drinking our drinks and complaining.  Or else we can get involved and let people know that we’re not going to sit idly by and just take it any more.

The days of hiding in the closet and pretending that we don’t mind being treated as second-class citizens are over.  We must demand equality.  We have to stop the exodus of our LGBT brothers and sisters who feel they have no other option but to leave West Virginia behind.  We especially have speak up for the next generation of gay and lesbian youth.  We have to give them the knowledge that it’s okay to be gay and that there is a community out here that cares what happens to them.  As Harvey Milk said, “You have to give them hope.”

Cleve Jones may not be the most famous or most popular figure in the gay movement, but he is responsible for one of the most well-known and emotional symbols in modern America – the AIDS Memorial Quilt.  In Stitching a Revolution: The Making of an Activist, along with coauthor Jeff Dawson, Jones discusses not only the genesis of the Quilt and the NAMES project, but also his own thought-provoking personal journey.  He began his activism as an angry kid with a hand-me-down bullhorn and continues the struggle today as one of our movement’s elder statesmen.

Like the Quilt itself, Jones’ memoir is made up of a variety of small vignettes stitched together into an inspiring whole.  He sets out by discussing his childhood and his coming-of-age, his initial forays into politics as a protege of Harvey Milk, and his gradual development as a grassroots gay-rights activist.  With the advent of the AIDS pandemic in the 80s, and his own positive diagnosis, his activities became even more focused.

As someone who is relatively new to the world of gay advocacy, politics, and activism, I had formerly been only peripherally aware of the history of the fight for gay rights.  I knew a bit about Stonewall and I had heard of Harvey Milk, but beyond that, I never really thought much about it.  I became increasingly angry and more radical during the long, dark years of the Bush administration, however.  I finally decided to get involved in a small way during the 2008 elections, although I freely admit that I’m still just beginning to venture ever so gingerly into the deep end of the pool.

Additionally, seeing the movie “Milk” made me want even more to learn about the history of our cause.  I had heard the name Cleve Jones in connection with the Quilt, but knew next to nothing about him before seeing the film.  When I discovered that he had, in fact, written an autobiography, I immediately sought it out.  I was happy to discover that the Kanawha County Public Library actually possesses a copy and I read it through in a single weekend.

For those of us like myself, who were really too young to appreciate the struggles of the 70s and 80s, this book is an important and engaging educational resource.  For those who remember those days, it will be a reminder – perhaps a very painful reminder – of what our community went through.  As an eyewitness to history, Jones doesn’t pull any punches, and his anger and indignation shine through.

Of course, I don’t want you to think that the book is all Sturm und Drang. There are plenty of lighter moments, too, and Jones mixes fond and funny memories along with the serious ones.  On one hand, Stitching a Revolution is the touching story of one man’s life and the battles he fought, both private and public.  But it is also the story of a momentous era in American history.  Some parts of this book will doubtless make you sad, and other parts (I hope) will make you furious, but ultimately, you’ll feel uplifted and ready for action.