thomascwaters.com

The linked story below is actually about the state of Virginia where the current Attorney General is trying to deny LGBT’s rights, and the Governor has come out issuing an order against discrimination. Here is a clip from the story:

One thing having an impact is that Northrup Grumman is looking to relocate its headquarters to the DC metro area.  The company has a clear non-discrimination policy and offers benefits to domestic partners.  People in Maryland were using Cuccinelli's approach on the issue to try to get the company to disqualify Virginia as a location.

Does Pennsylvania want to be attracting large corporations like Northrup Grumman? Seems like a silly question, yet the reality is that companies make choices based on a number of factors, bit at least a part of it, is selecting states and locations consistent with their internal policies regarding non-discrimination and domestic partnership benefits.

Wake up Pennsylvania! We are already slipping behind and are less competitive than many other states, stop that decline and bring companies and jobs to our state by making Pennsylvania a state free from discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations. Pass PA HB 300, and stop discriminatory legislation such as SB 707!

via Daily Kos: BREAKING – Gov. McDonnell separates from AG, issues order against discrimination.

The linked post is from the blog, Open Left, and describes some really good news in the battle for Marriage Equality. While we in Pennsylvania are looking to see what our State Senate is going to do with SB 707, our neighbor to the south, West Virginia has again killed a bill that would have added discrimination into the state constitution. Time will tell if the PA Senate will be as enlightened as our neighbors.

So, who is really winning in the battle over marriage?

• This week, the West Virginia House of Delegates voted to kill a effort to put a statewide constitutional amendment on the ballot by a vote of 68-30.
• The Attorney General of Maryland has determined that Maryland will recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
• Washington DC permits same-sex marriages within the district, and recognizes marriages performed in other states.

Incidents such as these suggest that we are making real progress when it comes to Marriage Equality. Yet, groups like the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) which should be named, the National Organization against Gays and Lesbians, tell a different story. They point out that in every state where same-sex marriage has been put to a vote by the people, same-sex marriage has been defeated. They suggest this proves that the American people do not support or approve of same-sex marriage. So, which is it- the country is moving forward towards same-sex marriage, or it isn’t?

The Wrong Question

That may be a worthwhile question, but it may also be a hard one to answer. Marriage Equality advocates ignore it, or only point to the wins for our side, or  use any defeats to elevate themselves to victim status. But I think it is the wrong question to get concerned about. Marriage equality is essentially connected to a broader issue: the acceptance of gays and lesbians. When gays and lesbians are more fully accepted, and seen as “just like straight people,” then the right to civil marriage will be a no brainer for everyone. Gay marriage fails at the ballot box, because opponents are still able to paint gays and lesbians as monsters (at the worst of it) or at the very least, evoke high levels of fear among the majority of voters. The questions revolve around some sense of “is homosexuality acceptable,” and when a voter is either not sure, or is negative about homosexuality, we lose, and groups like NOM have accomplished their goal.

Framing the Question

So, on a different question, “who is winning the question of how the issue gets framed in the minds of voters.” it is clear the anti-equality folks are winning, and one reason for that is their focus on “the homosexual” as compared to our focus on being gays and lesbians who deserve equal rights. We are not only losing on this one, we aren’t really even on the board as a player! The GLBTQ community does little to counteract or confront this oppressive tactic of painting us as “homosexuals” and not referring to us as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Yes, it is a clear and intentional strategy employed against equality. And it is working!

In a recent survey, when polled asking about homosexuals in the military, the majority of respondents were opposed, but when asked about allowing gays, and lesbians to serve the results were vastly different. This framing of the issue as being about “the homosexuals” as opposed to be about gays and lesbians, is an aspect of the struggle where not enough energy or focus has been placed, and it adds to the inability to move this movement further. As it stands, there are two sides who are speaking past each other. One reason for this is that most of us (gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders) don’t think of ourselves as homosexuals, and we treat that as old-fashioned language. But if we continue to fail to recognize how and why that language is so potent, we will continue to fail on this part of the struggle.

In One Word, What Are We?

There is another problem with this language thing. As a collective, we are a set of communities that we label with a various combinations of the pink alphabet soup. LGBT, GLBT, LGBTQ, are just a few examples, and sometimes the letters, “I” and “A” are also included- maybe a few others too. But marriage equality doesn’t touch all of these various parts of our diverse communities. So, are we working for LGBT civil rights when we seek marriage equality, or are we seeking rights for some while leaving transgenders and bisexuals with nothing? Another reason why the term “homosexual” has plays a role in the discourse, is that it allows the bigger issue of marriage as a civil right (and for whom) to go undiscussed. When we (in the LGBT community) operate from a victim stance (we have been wronged and treated as second class citizens), we need to speak with one voice and appear as one unified group. but we have no good way to identify as a single group past the pink alphabet soup. The term, “homosexual,” by default sets up the dichotomy of straight people, and everyone else, who the opposition mislabels as homosexual. While we know it is a mislabel, some don’t get too caught up in fighting it, because it implies a unified we, with that being those who are not straight.

While marriage equality is important and will help a huge number of people, it is also played a role in stripping apart the little cohesion that the LGBTQI-whatever-letters-you-want-or-don’t-want. We are so focused on marriage while transgenders still lack basic protections in housing and public accommodations, even in some states where gays and lesbians can marry.

This doesn’t make marriage equality or the people working for it bad or discriminatory. It does mean that broader dialogue about who we are as a collective of communities and how together we can work for civil rights for all the various parts of our diverse coalition is needed.

Some would say that if we gain marriage equality, but further marginalize trans women and men we haven’t accomplished much. Others will say that they are all steps forward to greater equality, and the struggle continues. Who is winning depends entirely on what question you are considering, and what terms you are using to define the various players in the struggle.

Equality Will Prevail

There are few better indicators that marriage equality can prevail, than the aggressive efforts of our opposition. They are working so hard to kill equality precisely because they know how close we are to achieving it, and as we make gains on any level, the battle will only intensify. but will it be a year? 10 Years? or 50 years till we see full equality? That answer may be more connected to which other questions we are asking? If our focus is on if we are winning for marriage, I believe we will slow the process. Or, if we lack a sense of urgency because equality seems inevitable, we will not see it in our lifetime. If on the other hand, we remember that marriage is one facet of the greater push for civil rights for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenders, we can truly see progress for all. If we act with a sense of urgency, and persistence, being treated as first-class citizens will be just around the corner so to speak.

I’m interested in your thoughts, so leave a comment!

via Open Left:: Two good pieces of news on marriage equality.

Gary Van Horn, President of Delta Foundation announced that one of the speakers for this year’s Advocacy Rally will be Cleve Jones.

ADVOCACY RALLY ANNOUNCEMENT: Cleve Jones, a long time gay rights activist and friend of the late Harvey Milk will be joining us at Pittsburgh Pride’s First Adovocacy Rally on the steps of the City/County Building – Friday, June 4th at 6PM

The Advocacy Rally is a new addition to the Pride activities this year. Many are familiar with other aspects of Pride, such as the Pride in the Streets, street dance and party, Pride March, and PrideFest, a day long festival. These activities happen over the weekend of June 12-13, and the rally is being added as a kick-off event on the Friday starting the week-long Pride. During the week following the rally and culminating in PrideFest will be a series of events sponsored by various groups. Last year, this blog, in cooperation with Equality Advocates, STeel City Stonewall Democrats, and the Women’s Law Project sponsored an Advocacy training that was well attended, and a similar event will be planned this year as well.

More information about Pride: http://pittsburghpride.org/

I wrote the other day about this story. Republican California Senator arrested for DUI after leaving a gay bar. It really wouldn’t be much of a story- there are gay politicians and politicians who get in trouble with the law. But it was a big deal because this particluar closet case senator is also highly active as a far right, anti-gay politician. This is your tax dollars at work!

Often this type of story is a big deal because it is the thing needed to get the a**hole out of office and stop his attacks on gay rights, but no such luck this time. Due to term limits he was already barred from further damage. No, has already had a number of terms to wreck havok for civil rights!

The really damning indictment of this incident is aimed at the gay rights/activist community of California. These are the individuals who ought to be hanging their heads and offering apologies for allowing this self-hating fag to do damage for so long.

I want to be clear: everyone including self-hating homos deserve the right to self-disclosure or hide in the close closet, and their privacy should be protected all the way up until they start voting against equality and civil rights. That’s the moment at which they give away their right to privacy and gay activists have the obligation to shine a light on the hypocricy.

That California gay rights activists are out of touch or out of control may not seem like news. However I doubt that this is a California specific phenominon. It may be that anywhere, as gay rights group grow and gain structure as well as prestige, it becomes harder for them to act on the defensive and scrappy. To both, be at the table and serve as watchdog becomes a challenge. Or is this really a matter of just turning a blind eye? In how many other capitol cities, let alone, in DC, does this happen?

Are you helping to hide any self-hating homos, who in their official work capacity work to treat gays and lesbians as second citizens? Think about it: who does this help and who does it hurt?

The hypocrisy of an anti-gay senator and those who protected his secret | San Diego Gay & Lesbian News.

http://sdgln.com/commentary/2010/03/05/hypocrisy-anti-gay-senator-and-those-who-protected-his-secret?utm_source=Empowering+Spirits+Foundation+News&utm_medium=twitter

On Monday, March 8, 2010 The Lancaster City Human Relations Commission is sponsoring a community discussion about Pennsylvania HB300

7:00-9:00PM at the Southern Market Center, City Council Chambers, 100
South Queen St., Lancaster, PA.

The public is invited to attend.

Participating in this panel discussion/question/answer forum will be Stephen A. Glassman, Chairperson of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, P. Michael Sturla, State Representative of Lancaster City, Representative Dan Frankel of Pittsburgh, who introduced this legislation, and Representative Babette Josephs of Philadelphia, the chairperson of the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee which approved the bill. Also taking part in the discussion will be Rev. Susan Minasian, College Chaplain, Franklin and Marshall College, and Franklin A. Miles, Jr., Esquire, VP, Secretary & General Counsel of Hershey Entertainment & Resorts Company. J. Richard Gray, Mayor of Lancaster & Louise Williams, President of The Lancaster City Council will also participate.

Co-Sponsors of this event are the Lancaster Chamber of Commerce, The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, SEIU Healthcare PA, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, and the Central Pennsylvania Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. For more information on the forum, please contact Linda Martin at 717-393-2883.

I received an email today from Dana Elmendorf, a Pittsburgh activist who has been very active for some time in issue advocacy. Not only is she a wealth of knowledge about advocacy work, but she has been at it for some time, and this history gives her a unique perspective. She was commenting on a letter she had received back from PA Senator Costa concerning PA SB 707. She wrote:

I am acutely aware of the work that was done with Senator Costa over the last four years.  Personal meetings and outreach happened with him and clearly that is now paying off.  There is, at times, a sense of impatience with advocacy work by the general community.  Change is like throwing stones in a pond.  A ripple starts and one thing leads to another.  Senator Costa’s clear support of our community is an example of that.

Many of us may get involved in advocacy work because of a specific situation or event. Like the November 2008 election where Obama won, and Prop 8 passed in California. These two votes happening at the same time galvanized a new generation of gays and lesbians to get involved in the political process and want to fight for equality. For me, the event was the 1987 March on Washington and seeing the AIDS Quilt display there. But as Dana suggests, change comes during the reverberations of events and situations, the ripples as it were, and it is seen over time.

Last week, Daylin Leach, the PA Senator who sponsored a Marriage Equality bill in the PA Senate (SB 935) was a guest speaker for the GLEC meeting here in Pittsburgh. We brought him in via conference call, and he stressed developing relationships with your elected officials. That translates into what Dana was referring to as “outreach over the past four years.”

We may start that relationship with a personal letter to our elected official, and follow it with phone calls, and then meeting with him or her. And over time, we keep contact. I don’t know here Senator Cost was 4 years ago, on issues of equality, but I know where he is today because of that ongoing contact- not by just one constituent, but by a number of folks.

I also received this in an email message from a someone who had attended the GLEC meeting:

This ia a new thing for me, I’m almost ashamed to say, but everything in its own time, I guess. But I do feel the time is now to be actively interested and attentive politically.

It is never too early to start this relationship if there is a specific issue or bill that is important to you and others. But real change isn’t about one legislative bill or one issue. So, it is never too late to get involved in issue advocacy work if real equality is important to you. We need to find a balance in a pursiut of urgency for individual parts of the whole and endurance as we seek the whole of equality.

For me, PA SB 707 is at the top of my list of issues, followed closely by PA HB  300. At the top of the blog are buttons that lead to pages with info of what you can do about these important issues.

I want to close this with another quote from Dana, which sums it all up:

I want people to know that advocacy work happens by everyday people just doing everyday things like having a conversation.

Nationally syndicated radio talk show host Bev Smith will give the keynote address, “Loss of Liberties and Social Injustice: It’s All About Perception.”

For more on Bev: www.bevsmithtalks.com

• When: Sunday, March 21 at 7:00 p.m.
• Where: Manchester Craftsmen’s Guild – 1815 Metropolitan Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15233.

Greater Pittsburgh Chapter Annual Meeting :: American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.

Remembering What the Struggle is About

Saw this on Twitter this morning, and it reminds me of a few things that I thought I’d share.  As background, the Dallas Principles- do you know what they are? Prepared in May 2009 by a group of 24 “thinkers,” they lay out a set of principles for equality. This is important, not only because this story concerns one of the 24, but because the Principles, in and of themselves form a foundation for any progress we can expect in the areas of equality and fairness for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queers, (GLBTQ).

But even with a set of principles, it is easy for anyone (including a co-author of those principles) to let emotions get the better of him or her. I hope that explains comments made by Charles Merrill to a post of Queerty, where Merril writes:

If Judge Walker lets Prop. 8 stand he ought to commit suicide. He hates himself and we don’t need gay internalized homophobes to tell us we are worthless.

I don’t know about Charles, but I am not fighting for equality because i think the actions of others either label us worthless or validate our worth. I know I am a person of worth, and we as a collection of diverse communities are a “people” of worth. And I think this is critically important! Every gay activist out there, needs to get a grip, and stop reacting to each and every piece of struggle in the battle for equality, as if it were the single most important thing in the world. We will fight battles and win some and not win others, and our goal has to be to set a battle plan that allows us to string together wins, and build momentum towards accomplishing our principles.

The case before Judge Walker , wasn’t begun expecting that Walker’s decision would be the end of it. It was known (and planed) to be just the first step in a long string of judicial battles moving up through the court5s towards the Supreme Court. It may or may not make it all the way there, but I think most believe that will will eventually end up there. We can agree or disagree, if the decision to take this into the federal courts, at this time in the overall battle, was a good one or a bad one, but to what end? The decision was made, and it is time to be committed to that game plan, and follow it through to the end (which is not Walker’s decision).

What is most appalling, however, is the ease at which Merrill believes he can know what Walker might do, and why he might do it. and- I can’t believe I even have to point this out- while chastising the Judge for how his decision will talk about worthlessness, he himself treats the Judge’s life as worthless.  This is no different than the Ugandan government wanting to execute gays! Merrill wants someone who doesn’t act in the way Merrill feels is the correct way, to be dead. and if that isn’t enough, this is happening far before a ruling has even been issued!

My take on the ruling and the court strategy: the lawyers went into this possibly expecting to win the first trial, but expecting the decision to be appealed. They went in knowing that even if they lost, they would appeal. The Judge’s decision helps build the legal stage upon which this battle will continue to be fought. Either way he decides, it will add to that foundation.

I call upon all the authors of the Dallas Principles to issue a statement about this and condemn the suicide language used by Charles Merrill. If Merrill is an example of our collective leadership, we need new leaders!

NGblog: Dallas Principles Co-Author – If Judge Walker lets Prop. 8 stand he ought to commit suicide.

Here is the original  Queerty Article and comments

What do you think? Do, we as a movement start calling for suicides from anyone in authority who doesn’t act in a way that someone finds wrong? Is there only one way to act  or feel or see issues if you are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or queer? Leave your comments here!

Yesterday, I came across two stories of gay men getting married to women to prove a point: that for heterosexuals, anyone can get married, and the sanctity of the institution or other things that supposedly make a marriage special are nothing more than bull shit excuses used to deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights as the breeders (there I said it!). I mentioned one in my blog yesterday, and I heard about the other on the MichaelAngelo Signorelli show yesterday afternoon. Signorelli was interviewing this guy- I turned in with the interview already in progress- was marrying a woman he had never met, only spoken to via email. He was doing it to make a point. That simply because they each were of different genders (and therefore could have sex and possibly make a baby) they could get married. There didn’t need to be love or anything between them other than the possibility of procreation. Neither the guy, nor Signoreli used the term “Breeder,” a very derogatory slang for straight, but that is what his little experiment would prove. Our government’s role in animal husbandry for the primate we refer to as human being.

The far-right christian crazies make no bones that it is all about procreation, or at least the possibility of procreation, since the infertile can marry, and so can the elderly who are no longer able to bear children, but even the most rabid of them like Maggie Gallagher or Tony Perkins won’t own up to the animal husbandry element of it. The Eugenics of it. One man and one woman doesn’t really go back to the Bible (just look at the Hebrew Scriptures). Rather, this requirement is rooted in patriarchal power, and the importance of controlling lineage and wealth. From our own American history, we know that many (most?) males who owned slaves including Thomas Jefferson, had babies by slave women. In other words, the women where used as sex objects, but the slave owner’s wealth was controlled and kept “in the family” because he only had one wife and eligible children by that wife.

This is an interesting thing to explore, but I also think it is not the most fruitful (pun intended)  possible action that those who are discriminated against because of who we are. Why not make Valentine’s Day, a gay activism day instead? We are going to accomplish little in trying to show straight people that for them, it is all about the control of breeding, and heredity lines. Most straight people aren’t going to like that and feel looked down upon (either justified or not), but many straight people may respond to a different argument. That we are really, in so many ways just like them. Or rather, there is no concrete demarkation between us and them. All of us are individuals who seek to couple, form families and be happy. Some people never find love, and are always looking, others struggle with being able to have lasting and/or meaningful relationships, while others seem to make love and relationships look like the easiest thing in the world. Some want children, and others do not. But all of us want to be loved for who we are as individuals, and treated with respect.

Sometimes, some gays just want to pretend they are straight. I’d call them the assimilationists. Often they are prudish, and can find as much fault with at least part of the GLBTQ communities as the best of the far-right crazy christian conservatives. Theirs is often a message of seeing how we are all alike, by being like straight people. They posit that if we just acted more like straights, we would find acceptance. This is flawed thinking. My notion of how we are alike is different than that I hope. I am not suggesting that we demonstrate how we are alike to hide or mask the way we are different than straights, but rather to point out that while we are different in some ways, it is the ways in which we are alike that define why we deserve fairness and equality. That the ways we are different are not a valid reason to “other” us and treat us as second class citizens.

So, how could this Day of Love be better used by the Equality movement? As a way to demonstrate our feelings and our affections for one another? I mentioned this to a devious friend, who had the idea of a guerilla effort. He suggested that gays and lesbians sneak into the greeting card aisle at every store, and when no one is looking, alter all the Valentine card messages to be something that mentions same-sex love, attraction, and affection. I’m not big on vandalism, so I can’t agree that is a good idea, but here is an idea:

Action #1: Go to your local store today to buy a Valentine card. Take a pen with you, and find a way to gay it up in front of some straight people. Liuke when you get to the counter to pay for it, comp,lain to the clerk that there were no cards applicable to same-sex couples, and then there, holding up the line, take out your pen, write on the card, and then, after it is suitable for you to share with the one you love, pay for the card.

By buying a card, you help the economy. By editing the text of the card in front of others, you give voice and make visible that gays and lesbians feel love and that our love is so often invisible or excluded. By paying for the card after editing it, you demonstrate that we do not have to settle for what society has to offer, but that we will make our own place within it. Please do not vandalize, no matter how luscious my friend’s idea may seem.

Valentine’s Day is the perfect day for other public displays of affection (PDA’s):

Action #2: At your local grocery store, home improvement store, mall or other locale where many people may be gathered, take the opportunity be be love birds! Hold hands, give each other a peck on the cheek, tell each other “I love You.” But don’t overdo this one. It is possible to take PDA’s too far. If it would be unacceptable for a straight couple, than it is unacceptable for a gay/lesbian couple. No one should be sticking their tongue down another’s throat in public- not gay nor straight. That is just wrong.

Unfortunately, for many queers as well as for many straights, Valentine’s day can be a lonely day if you do not have someone to love. I am not sure what type of action to take in this regards. Maybe one of my readers can think of something and share it. I’d only say that in the words of RuPaul:

“If you can’t love yourself, how the hell you gonna love someone else.”

Use the day to treat yourself well. Eat right, get enough sleep, exercise, and commit to taking good care of yourself everyday.

Possibly more important is to find ways to make the realness of our love, attractions and affections visible all the time, instead of just one day a year. Consider putting a photo of your loved on on your desk at work.. Remember to say, I love you often and in public. Mention your girlfriend, boyfriend, partner, (or whatever term works for you) to friends, colleagues, or others. Stop hiding your love, and let it shine 365 days a year.

Ken O’Neil’s blog “The Marrying Kind” is linked below, and it is a good read! Check it out. He tells the story of a marriage equality rally in New York. I’d quote a part of it here, except that it is such a great read, I don’t want to mess it up. So read it.

But there is a point for me. Maybe Ken would or wouldn’t agree, I don’t know. But this really isn’t about getting married, even if that is the tangible circumstances at the moment. The Equality movement is about fairness and about being treated like everyone else. OK, I’m going to pull a quote out of Ken’s blog:

Then a gay man and a lesbian came and talked to us. They told us they had just received a marriage license. Even though, they don’t love each other, or even know each other very well. They had previously tried to get licenses with the people they actually love. But since the great loves of their lives were of the same gender, they were denied.

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer people deserve to be treated the same as everyone else in all civil matters. Period.

Ken claims he isn’t an activist, a claim that could be disputed. But taking him at his word, this too is an important point. We don’t need more activists- we need more women and men to be like Ken and get engaged, no matter if they see themselves as activists or not. We need women and men who are gay, straight, bi, trans to stop allowing themselves and others to be treated unfairly. You don’t want to become an activist? Then don’t. But be like Ken.

For Ken, it was about showing up. What will it be for you?

The Marrying Kind: I Am Not Now, Nor Have I Ever Been.