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

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

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!

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!

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.

As we all are likely aware, the attempt pass anti-discrimination including gays and lesbians in the West Virginia legislature has stalled. Senate Bill 238 pass the WV Senate, yet didn’t make it out of Committee in the House. Reasons for this are relatively unknown, but we suspect that it didn’t garner the support that it needed. As frustrated as well are, we’re going to keep on trying. We’ve got to.

One thing to keep in mind is this. The Legislature successfully defeated a proposed amendment to the WV constitution that would ban the possibility of gay marriage. This is a BIG deal. BIG.  We all know that marriage equality is the right thing to do and that it will come eventually. There will be many battles, but the war is over. The other side knows this.

Now, do not become complacent. The battles are just as important. These are people’s lives and livelihood at stake here. We must keep pushing. Together we will succeed.

Join us.

KSD will hold a Board Meeting at 6:00pm on Sunday, April 5th at 501 Elizabeth St (rear entrance) in Charleston. All members are welcome to attend.

View Larger Map

Earlier this month, the resolution stalled in a house committee and the Family Policy Council of West Virginia paid for a telemarketing campaign that some West Virginia Democratic lawmakers said was designed to “intimidate” them. But that effort failed to move the bill, so last week they pressed GOP lawmakers for action and that prompted Republican delegates to move by to force it to the full House.

Tim Armstead, Kanawha(R), was quoted in this WHCS article with a rather ridiculous comment.

“30 other states have passed amendments to their constitution to protect their definition of marriage,” said Armstead. “We should be in that majority and I can’t explain why we’re not.”

Armstead. You know why we’re not in the majority? It is because the House feels that this is completely unnecessary and a complete waste of tax-payer money.  It is both.

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?