As many of you might have heard, Central Valley activist Robin McGehee was arrested last week in front of the White House, apparently protesting DADT. I’ve known Robin for a long time and I have a lot of respect for many things that’s she’d done to help further the cause of gay right and equality for our community. As of late, she has taken a razor sharp focus on gay marriage, despite her own relationship seemingly falling apart late last year. Here is my issue with Robin’s arrest…
Just days before Robin’s arrest, her and Kip Williamns announced the launch of their own national organization GetEqual. If you’ll remember, Robin and Kip had a very public departure from Cleve Jones and the Equality March folks very soon after helping to organize the event in Washington, D.C. So here’s my issue: If you announce the launch of a new venture, don’t you lose or damage your credibility if you get arrested “protesting” two days later? Was this really activism or simply a timely publicity stunt aimed at garnering free press?
Being persecuted for what you believe is one thing, seeking the spotlight or intentionality trying to get in front of the camera in order to get your name out there is quite another. Maybe it was just poor timing or perhaps she got caught up in the moment. I think leaders should probably show better judgment in such matters or maybe I’m being too hard on her. All I know is that it felt odd to me and it struck me as a bit…staged.
So. As we work on what it means to be freed of the o nect of our fears we’re having these little IDE’s of understanding. One of which is how we deal in relation to sex these days.
Well frankly Philip, it’s a tangle (The Lion In Winter). For most of our life, up to the last six months, we had to deal with alot of physical pain around sex. This has been fixed so we now have this new toy, orgasm, which frankly is a really marvelous thing, right? Because the pain is gone, we are able to be there for it. Another marvel. By not dissociating to avoid that horrid ouchie we have a shiny new toy that frankly takes up alot of our thought. Understandably so. It has been especially great for our marriage, which is pretty obvious why. We get to figure out how it works which is well just the bee’s knees haha.
There’s a very scary component here. As there are very many scary things about sex for any survivor. Since we’re awake we have to deal with the emotional connection that grows. We are happy in it but there is that frust bugaboo that’s so tough to work with. But we are getting there. Well worth the risk as we are finding out.
Also we are on hormones for menopause, one of the pleasant side effects of which is a spiked libido. Nice.
So there are all of these great things going on around sex, but there is one place that really really stings. And thanks to it we objectify the whole sex thing. Which as a feminist is just so much not so much.
It has to do with body ownership and the right to do with it what we want. If seems our body was fakeN from us by our perpetrators when we were so you g that we hasn’t really formed a sense of physical ownership. And since our violations came at a level of bodily integrity…that is all that we know. The concept that we physically belong to ourself seems so foreign we can’t wrap our head around it. We don’t even really know what it can mean. When you cross this concept with issues regarding acceptance of sex as something we get to have now, consensual and all, things get really painful and confusing really quickly.
So in order to claim our physical being and it’s right to have a sexlife we have had to distance ourself from it. Keep it outside ourself so we can look at it. Toss it around in our brain.
And that means objectification. Ugh, how completely unflattering. T mentioned the other day that we sound like a frat boy of something and she is absolutely right. But we know of no other way to sort of “try on” these issues of ownership from a connected place. Hurts just way too much. Just way too confusing.
We getthat this is a very temporary way to handle this whole thing. It is not who we are at all. But for right now we have no other ideas as to bow to go about putting sex in it’s context that’s appropriate for us. We’re trying to see it as an opportunity foe growth and to no judge ourselves too harshly. Bu it is not easy, we do ‘t naturally let ourselves off the hook.
SElf-realization is a truly great gift. But along with the good discoveries there must also be areas that need some…work. So here’s a very unflattering one. Not so much.
I just finished watching 2 documentaries. One on the current Haiti post earthquake and the other on the Boxing Day 2004 Tsunami. Last weekend, I had watched a tsunami one using footage filmed by people at the sites while the waves destroyed everything and they were interviewed about what they went through and who they lost.
It’s impossible to watch these without crying. It astonishes me how in the Haiti one, the geologist who’s the on camera narrator and main character, insomuch as documentaries about events and science have a main character, is able to go about his photos and observations without crying.
I guess at some point the horror is just too overwhelming, but I couldn’t help but interprete some real glee and excitement in many of the geologists in talking about we knew this was going to happen, we just didn’t know when.
And I know that data is critical to gather while it’s fresh, but it’s just a bit hard to take watching a calm man get excited over cracks in the ground, upthrust areas and sunken areas, while in the background of the shots, people are digging through rubble trying to find loved ones or some in tact item from their former life.
The geologist talks about the overwhelming stench of death in the air, and it strikes me that that isn’t all that has a bad odour.
A huge part of what caused the enormous death toll and destruction wasn’t the heavily populated area on a fault line, but the lack of a building code and no infrastructure to enforce any.
Most heavily populated areas are in some kind of disaster zone. The next time Vesuvius blows like it did for Pompeii, and 2 million + people live in the immediate area…… well, it would be the worse natural disaster in recorded history.
It’s the word, natural, that kept jumping out at me while watching the documentaries.
In the Five Years later, one village had been reduced from 6000 people to 1200 – with only 400 women and 8 children five years later. The older children who had survived were now teenagers, orphaned, and largely leaving the village without an education for other places for work.
While the village had been rebuilt – and to new stronger building codes, the tourists were not returning. Partly because no destination hotel or resort was rebuilt and this was largely owing to a fundamentalist Islamic group that had descended on the site in the immediate aftermath to help clear debris, bury bodies and begin the rebuilding.
But, they didn’t leave. They remained and told everyone that the disaster was divine punishment. They put Sharia Law in place and they police the village. Some villagers became devote, others, not as much and for the most part, these are the ones who are leaving.
How do you make sense of the senseless? The destruction, the loss of life, not even being able to bury the body of your loved one.
My mind goes blank trying to comprehend it even.
But, what doesn’t make sense is to accept that the disaster was somehow caused by human social or moral behaviour. Nor does it make sense to then turn to the very deity that, let’s face it, pretty much allowed the disaster to occur.
Disasters really should spell the end for deities. If deities are all powerful, then why allow a disaster to kill so many, destroy so much. Do you really want to beleive that all the dead babies were going to be evil? Or that their parent or sibling are, so the baby had to die to punish them?
Really? Evil babies?
We know what causes disasters – the tectonic plates shifting, subduction, releasing pressure and the earth quakes and when that shift displaces water, we have the tsunami. Wind and differing water/air temperatures cause hurricanes, and wind conditions tornadoes. Volcanoes are welling super heated magma from the earth’s mantle.
There is no reason to think that any deity is using this natural events to punish people.
There’s no reason to think that a deity spared particular people either. What kind of so called loving deity picks and chooses?
When Katrina happened, many religious leaders claimed it was to punish sinners and because abortion was legal and gays/lesbians were tolerated.
Imagine hearing that – you’re in New Orleans, your city is under water, your home is gone, you are separated from your family, there’s little in the way of water, food or help.
And some moron in a suit’s biggest concern is Roe v Wade and gay marriage?
One of the underlying issues of disasters is being prepared for them. And most of us are not.
Cities need to prepare with building codes and enforcement to minimize damage before it happens. With infrastructure, disaster routes and an informed population.
At higher government levels, there needs to be first responders and aid agencies on call. And that needs funding.
What it doesn’t need are fundies of any religious bent.
Consider a fundie politician who genuinely believes that disasters are divine punishment.
What this means is that he is certain that the disaster is the deity’s plan. Is he really going to vote for funding to mitigate a disaster and thwart a deity’s plan?
Is he going to be willing to vote to spend money on aid to help people the disaster missed?
Is he going to be willing to spend money on large scale mitigation, like proper levees, water barricades, public disaster shelters?
And then you have to wonder, will these same politicans also vote to protect the environment locally and with climate change on the horizon, especially when that conflicts with business?
After all, if the rapture is coming and the deity is going to fix it all, why should we now?
Or, if we’re all or most of us are doomed, again, they are going to interfere with that?
So, as much as I thought that the geologists weren’t emotional about the disaster because they were too focused on learning what they could about the disaster in front of them, I realize that the reason this focus is there is so that they can learn and save lives in the future.
Something that the religious zealots are not interested in. They want to hurry the endtimes and be rewarded now. Because they fear dying and things like the rapture are along the lines of Don’t Pass Go, Don’t Collect $200, go straight to jail – only the opposite good mean – don’t die, go direct to heave where you get to look down and see everyone suffering on earth.
And it’s really funny to me that people who believe that there’s an afterlife, fear death and dying.
Funny weird and to a lesser extent, funny ha ha.
People who understand that disaster are natural and arbitrary, know that life is precious because it’s the only one we have.
We have to learn as much as we can to prevent and reduce future deaths. We have to see that disasters are natural. And we have to spend money to mitigate and reduce disasters before they happen, whether they are going to happen in 10, 50 or 100 years.
We need to look at cities that are below sea level and vulnerable and build the safety systems to a 500 year standard – if we ensure the defenses can withstand a category 6, then anything else below that is inconvenient, not utter destruction.
We need to look at cities in any danger zone has appropriate and enforced building codes, exit routes, close by disaster relief resources, and capacity to evacuate if there’s an ability to give notice or after to relocate and reunite people (and their pets).
We need warning systems that span regions, not just here and there in an uncoordinated manner.
The earthquake in Alaska in the 1960’s caused tsunami damage down the coast of British Columbia and into California – where deaths occured. No one at the time knew that the event were related.
We improve technologies, we conduct research and explore new ideas about disasters and we can save lives and the property and infrastructure damage is minimized to help those lives carry on.
It’s okay for people to turn to a faith for personal comfort, but it’s not okay to rely on those religions to help us avoid or recover collectively from those disasters.
College of the Sequoias professor Robin McGehee was arrested today in front of the White House, for participating in a “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” protest rally. Also arrested was Lt. Dan Choi, and Capt Jim Pietrangelo, after they handcuffed themselves to the fence in front of the Executive Mansion.
Lt. Dan Choi and Capt. Jim Pietrangelo handcuffed themselves to the White House fence. Both were later arrested. More at America Blog.
Pictures from MeetintheMiddle for Equality, Huffington Post and America Blog.
This post is the seventh post in a series of coverage from the Midwest Bisexual Lesbian Gay Transgender Ally College Conference 2010, that took place Feb. 19 to Feb. 21, at the University of Wisconsin – Madison.
Kate Bornstein discusses binaries and overcoming them at MBLGTACC.
Kate Bornstein — transgender femme and author of Hello, Cruel World: 101 Alternatives to Suicide for Teens, Freaks and Other Outlaws; Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women and the Rest of Us; and My Gender Workbook — asked the audience about life and what makes it worth living.
While there is a myriad of answers to that venerable question, Bornstein cited fair and equal access to the resources people need as a life essential.
People have identities and desires that intertwine with power, determining one’s access to resources. This has nothing to do with how much money one has, but how someone uses power to meet their needs. Identity, desire and power intersect; building up one of them, raises up the other two as well.
Social norms or rules influence identities and desire, with most individuals obeying the rules of society; however, these rules can be deadly if the person doesn’t fit into them, creating a hierarchical system of oppression. The kyriarchy, or intersectional top of the identity heap, comes out on top.
Binaries, like the gender binary of male and female, are social structures used to marginalized people.
“Binaries mark systems of oppressions,” Bornstein said. “The only time two elements of a binary are equal is in a vacuum.”
Race is also a binary: A person is either white or not. There are lots or different races, but the binary system masks the inequalities between the two. These either/or situations can become very dangerous.
Bornstein indicated deconstructing these binaries is the key to overcoming them.
To deconstruct these binaries, coalitions must be built among groups fighting to end all types of oppression. Bornstein denounced the notion of allies; she wants community members, suggesting we add a few more letters on to LGBT:
The either/or binary occurs when a culture or community tries to improve life, so how do we make our community a safe, fun place to get real and live queer? Bornstein advocates one mantra: Don’t be mean.
“I know how to stay alive in a world that would rather see me dead,” Bornstein said. “Please do anything it takes to make your life worth living, except be mean.”
The gay rights movement in recent decades has led, slowly but surely, to the gradual emancipation of homosexuals. In the more developed and democratic countries of the world, the estimated 10% of the population that are homosexual is no longer forced to hide behind closed doors, but may enjoy a fruitful ‘out’ life. Yet it is still glaringly obvious that our society is filled with those who are disillusioned with the increasing acceptance of homosexuality. They hate, and discriminate against homosexuals, for a variety of reasons.
Being the passionate rights activist that I am, I of course, on many grounds, oppose such baseless hatred. However, unlike many of them, who make their claims based on completely unfounded assertions, as I will show below; I will prove my belief today, to be one backed up both by our common sense and human empathy, as well as pure, solid logic.
The premise of the views I wish to express today is based on two fundamental beliefs, which I must declare here in full openness, so that you too may understand. Firstly: the belief that homosexuality is not a choice.
So many homophobes try to assume, whenever they belittle the gay population, that they have made a conscious lifestyle choice to become homosexual. I believe that they are wrong on two grounds. Firstly, it is very much an argumentum ad ignorantiam to say that they have made a choice simply because no one can prove that they have not. Homophobes, assuming their own heterosexuality, simply are unable to possess a homosexual and understand his psyche – just as we can never truly comprehend someone’s soul. But with the limitations of human anatomy, is it not sufficient for us to believe that homosexuality is not a choice when so many homosexuals say so themselves? Do we really need to see it to believe it? Secondly, it is absurd to think that when someone makes a conscious choice about their life, they would choose a path which would guarantee them hatred and prejudice from so many people. Surely a choice is meant to obtain the greatest happiness possible. If homosexuality was a choice, knowing that so many blind and ignorant fools would oppose their ‘chosen’ sexuality, why would 10% of the population be so stupid as to raise the ire of such large numbers of people? Common sense, my dear friends – I doubt anyone would be quite as asinine as that.
Secondly, I believe that homosexuality is born, not made. This is different from saying that homosexuality is not a choice, since there are those who contend that homosexuality is the cause of the environment in which children grow up, so while they do not make a choice, they are made into homosexuals, rather than born with the genetic codes that tell them they are homosexual. The reasons they give us include: a dominant father, a dominant mother, a weak father, a weak mother, and other reasons attributed to family and friends. I note with interest the contradictory reasons that are thrown up – indeed, when all environmental factors are considered to be causes of homosexuality, the conclusion is that NO environmental factors are. To throw even more cold water over this ridiculous assertion, science has proven to us that homosexuality is a genetic trait – it is inherited, just like your eye colour, your ability to roll your tongue, your hair quality (whether it is curly, wavy, or straight) and so on.
Homosexuality is not a choice. It is innate.
These two beliefs underpin all my further analyses today – and I urge those of you who already heartily disagree with my two stated beliefs above, not to continue to plough your way through this piece. Let us first look at some of the common reasons given for opposing homosexuality:
1. Homosexual sex is unnatural (and disgusting)
It goes without saying that for two gay men (the most common recipients for discrimination based on sexual orientation), they can only enjoy penetrative sexual relations either by oral sex or anal sex. The latter form of sexual enjoyment is one that has historically aroused much controversy. I find homophobes claiming this to be highly hypocritical – after all, there are many heterosexual men who enjoy anal sex themselves, with women. Yet their hate is singularly directed towards homosexual men. I will explain this below, but let me just point out here the obvious double standards employed. If a man and a woman can enjoy such a ‘disgusting’ sexual act, surely a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, surely have such a right to enjoy it as well. As for it being unnatural – when science has revealed homosexual sheep that mate exclusively with fellow males, it really does not add much weight to that particular argument. You could argue for it being unnatural because it does not lead to reproduction, but then neither does oral sex, yet teenagers – especially those in North America, no offence intended – enjoy a ‘quick blow’ so frequently that it almost seems likely a vast majority of the population take part in unnatural sex anyway.
2. The Bible says it’s wrong!
Religion – how great its influence can be, and how much is everything related to it! ‘No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that,’ it is written in Leviticus. If we take the Old Testament by its every word though, we would have to accept as rightful Sarai actually telling Abram to sleep with her slave, Hagar, and then chasing her from the house when she got pregnant. We would also have a people marching into foreign, occupied lands, burn down their cities and destroy everything though they were entirely unprovoked. I do not undermine the Christian faith in any way, but the Bible is not law. Its literal interpretation is not the Christian faith – rather, it is the reinforcement of the values that are dear in any faith, the main gist, message and corollary of the whole text that is meaningful. The same goes for any other religious text. Do not oppose anything – such as homosexuality – based solely on your faith, but try to analyze, to understand, and to learn more, before making an informed judgement.
3. Homosexuality…next we’ll have bestiality, paedophilia and incest running rampant
This is one of the most common, yet most skewed arguments I have ever heard against homosexuality – the legendary slippery-slope of disappearing moral values. How homosexuality would ever lead to bestiality, to paedophilia and then to incest I simply do not understand. This reflects nothing except the obvious misunderstandings and misconceptions many people have about homosexuals. How does being attracted to someone of your own sex mean that you are attracted to animals, or to children, or to someone in your own family? I do not think this point really needs more condemnation. It falls of its own accord, and is a joke of an argument.
When it comes to gay marriage, then, the wild reasons we hear about why it simply cannot be implemented can be truly mind-boggling. Ignorance, stupidity, foolishness are laced into these arguments, and it does make for much laughing:
1. The population would decrease.
I could not believe it, but in a debate training session I organized, this was a reason someone gave against gay marriage. This is unreasonable for two reasons. Firstly, let us think why the population would decrease. It would not, because homosexuals, if they are intent on pursuing a homosexual life, would not marry and would not have children anyway. Gay marriage does not change that. Those who force them into unhappy marriages are not in the majority. The population is not impacted significantly. Secondly, what if the population does decrease? It is not about the quantity of life that is important, but the quality. Having 10% of the population being upset and discontented, just because of their sexual orientation, simply cannot be justified by having thousands more to feed and clothe.
2. Their adopted ‘children’ would lack a female/male influence.
The classic argument against gay adoptions – that male gay couples would raise children that do not have a female figure in their lives to, somehow, mollify them and soften them, and the opposite for lesbian couples. I find this intriguing that the same standard does not apply to bachelors or spinsters adopting children because they have not been married – surely an adopted child in such a case would not have the influence of one of another gender either? Besides, many children even live with a single parent, either because of divorce or the untimely passing of a parent, but no one ever bars them from living with their only parent. It is absurd to adopt such differing standards – in fact, I would call it blatant discrimination.
3. It would undermine the sanctity of marriage.
Homosexuals being allowed to marry, it has been claimed, would lead to the entire sacred institution of marriage to lose all sanctity and respectability. I deplore, however, how allowing two men or two women that you do not know to marry would cause your own marriage to fall apart. Surely they would not affect your everyday life? Surely their being happy would not decrease your own happiness? It is unfair, unjust, and unreasonable to think that two homosexuals marrying would lead to, in any way, the demise of an unrelated heterosexual marriage.
After showing, hopefully logically, that the arguments against homosexuality and gay marriage are so unfounded and unreasonable, I would like to point out the REAL reason that people oppose homosexuality is actually because they are different. They naturally oppose a minority group because it is easy to oppress them, and it is easy to find allies who support you. The homosexual demographic is an easy target because of its relative smaller proportion in any population. History is filled with examples of minority groups being targeted because they are different. Afro-Americans were looked down on because of their skin colour. The natives of South America were all but exterminated by the invading Spaniards because they were so utterly different. Likewise, the stigma attached to homosexuals is unfair, but the world could not care less. Homophobia is really ill-conceived misunderstanding and perhaps fear, and I believe Voltaire’s quote summarizes it nicely: ‘Prejudice is opinion without judgement.’
We live in a society that prides itself on upholding human rights. We have a nerve to call ourselves that if we cannot even stop prejudice, cruel, unrelenting, wanton discrimination against a vulnerable minority group in our society. The rationale behind homophobia is fear and misunderstanding of people who are different. I stand for the rights of all human beings, regardless of age, origin, race, skin colour, or sexual orientation. I cherish this belief greatly, and hope that you will, too.
Tom Purcell hosts a professional men’s mixer every other Friday at various establishments all over the Fresno/Clovis area. If you’re looking for something fun and social to do before you head out on the town this Friday night, then you should check out this older, professional event. Here are the specifics:
Friday, March 19, 6pm
North India @ 80 W. Shaw
Clovis, California 93612
If you haven’t had a chance to attend or haven’t been in a while, then you should definitely check out this very chill, low key event for professional gay men.
As many of you might have heard, Central Valley activist Robin McGehee was arrested last week in front of the White House, apparently protesting DADT. I’ve known Robin for a long time and I have a lot of respect for many things that’s she’d done to help further the cause of gay right and equality for our community. As of late, she has taken a razor sharp focus on gay marriage, despite her own relationship seemingly falling apart late last year. Here is my issue with Robin’s arrest…
College of the Sequoias professor Robin McGehee was arrested today in front of the White House, for participating in a “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” protest rally. Also arrested was Lt. Dan Choi, and Capt Jim Pietrangelo, after they handcuffed themselves to the fence in front of the Executive Mansion.
Lt. Dan Choi and Capt. Jim Pietrangelo handcuffed themselves to the White House fence. Both were later arrested. More at America Blog.
