Well, it’s officially been sanctioned that it’s harmful to be forced to play for the other team. But it’s not all cheering from the sidelines.
The American Psychological Association earlier this month repudiated gay-to-straight counseling in a report, stating that this reparative therapy actually led to depression and suicidal tendencies. And, by the way, it totally doesn’t work.
When I first heard the news, I let out a whoop. The whole notion of using psychology to “change” someone into something more “desirable” left a bad taste in my mouth to say the least.
Under the guise of helping people, gay-to-straight therapy introduced the patently false idea that orientation – indeed a viable identity – could just be changed for the sake of hewing to a societal norm, whatever that is these days. It also brimmed with the cruel irony that idea that steering someone from something “unnatural” was actually betraying that person’s nature.
It’s good to know that an organization that just 40-odd years ago saw homosexuality as a mental disorder is now advising its members, and implicitly all psychiatrists and psychologists, to stop getting clients to magically turn straight.
However, there’s a fly in the ointment, and it’s a buzzing, annoying one.
In addition to instructing members not to seek to change a patient's sexual orientation via therapy because there is no evidence that this is successful, the APA also issued additional guidelines advising therapists how to deal with a patient struggling with their sexual identity. And these guidelines explicitly state that it may sometimes be appropriate for a therapist to help a client deny his sexual orientation because of his faith.
Basically, if the client still believes that affirming same-sex attractions would be sinful or destructive to his faith, psychologists can help him construct an identity that rejects the power of those attractions, the APA says. That might require living celibately, learning to deflect sexual impulses or framing a life of struggle as an opportunity to grow closer to God.
Oh, yeah, that sounds lovely and fulfilling. I don’t belittle faith as I have it in abundance. But it seems to me this exception is a back door method of placing the conflicted person back in the land of shame. Sure, shrinks no more are saying they can or should change orientation, but they will facilitate making the orientation into an eternal struggle that can’t be fulfilled and is violating the person’s Maker.
So, the APA’s new report isn’t quite the progress it seems on the surface. But at least it helps that you have seen ex-ex gays decry their reparative therapy. And fresh on my mind is the Sigourney Weaver TV movie “Prayers for Bobby,” based on the true story of Mary Griffith, a gay rights crusader whose teenage son committed suicide due to her initial religious intolerance. The story painfully conveys the tragedy of shame and self-hatred of one’s sexuality.
I wonder about those gay men and women visiting their therapists who are no longer pushing the fallacy of an orientation change but aren’t encouraging them to embrace who they are. Those poor folks are in a no man’s land. They don’t even have a team of their own.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
One Moment In Time
The NAACP just turned 100 and we’re at a crossroads in more ways than one.
In an address to thousands of civil rights leaders, President Obama marked the centennial of the NAACP by paying tribute to its history but calling on activists to tackle modern-day problems. One of these problems was homophobia, and Obama addressed it head on in his discussion of how the pain of inequality long felt by African Americans is felt by people everywhere.
Obama said: "By African-American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and gender. By Latinos made to feel unwelcome in their own country. By Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion for simply kneeling down to pray. By our gay brothers and sisters, still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights."
Considering the historical reluctance of the African-American community to embrace gays – not to mention the inherent furor for some that gay rights can ever be mentioned along with what’s traditionally seen as “civil rights” – I can imagine that statement was met with polite applause if not a stony silence by some members of the audience.
But that tide is turning. The NAACP's LGBT Equality Task Force was unveiled at a session that spotlighted anti-gay hate crimes and discrimination in schools, employment and marriage. Even five years ago, you wouldn’t have caught me guessing that LGBT issues would be dealt with directly inside the NAACP.
And luckily there are some who are eradicating this false line between the black and gay world. As the National Black Justice Coalition's "At the Crossroads" reported, black LGBT men and women can be disproportionately hurt by government policies harming gay families because, for example, black same-sex households are nearly twice as likely as white ones to having children.
While the traditional civil rights movement is becoming more gay-friendly, it is also incumbent upon gay rights leaders to be more black-friendly. If there was one thing that the Prop. 8 debacle called attention to is that black and gay leaders were not communicating with each other.
The NAACP’s new president Benjamin Jealous seemed to throw down the gauntlet. In an interview, he said, “If gay rights groups want to change the opinion polls in the black community, they have to invest in it. It’s a long-term conversation. The battle to oppose Prop 8 could have been much better run. They came to the black community late, with the expectation that they were going to get certain results.”
Jealous clearly expects gays to mobilize African Americans instead of the other way around, and that’s not a bad idea. There will be a moment that, despite our different histories, we will see that we’re fighting some of the same battles against larger society. And we’ll remember there are those who are African-American AND gay, and we need to fully acknowledge that.
There’s no reason that moment can’t be now.
In an address to thousands of civil rights leaders, President Obama marked the centennial of the NAACP by paying tribute to its history but calling on activists to tackle modern-day problems. One of these problems was homophobia, and Obama addressed it head on in his discussion of how the pain of inequality long felt by African Americans is felt by people everywhere.
Obama said: "By African-American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and gender. By Latinos made to feel unwelcome in their own country. By Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion for simply kneeling down to pray. By our gay brothers and sisters, still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights."
Considering the historical reluctance of the African-American community to embrace gays – not to mention the inherent furor for some that gay rights can ever be mentioned along with what’s traditionally seen as “civil rights” – I can imagine that statement was met with polite applause if not a stony silence by some members of the audience.
But that tide is turning. The NAACP's LGBT Equality Task Force was unveiled at a session that spotlighted anti-gay hate crimes and discrimination in schools, employment and marriage. Even five years ago, you wouldn’t have caught me guessing that LGBT issues would be dealt with directly inside the NAACP.
And luckily there are some who are eradicating this false line between the black and gay world. As the National Black Justice Coalition's "At the Crossroads" reported, black LGBT men and women can be disproportionately hurt by government policies harming gay families because, for example, black same-sex households are nearly twice as likely as white ones to having children.
While the traditional civil rights movement is becoming more gay-friendly, it is also incumbent upon gay rights leaders to be more black-friendly. If there was one thing that the Prop. 8 debacle called attention to is that black and gay leaders were not communicating with each other.
The NAACP’s new president Benjamin Jealous seemed to throw down the gauntlet. In an interview, he said, “If gay rights groups want to change the opinion polls in the black community, they have to invest in it. It’s a long-term conversation. The battle to oppose Prop 8 could have been much better run. They came to the black community late, with the expectation that they were going to get certain results.”
Jealous clearly expects gays to mobilize African Americans instead of the other way around, and that’s not a bad idea. There will be a moment that, despite our different histories, we will see that we’re fighting some of the same battles against larger society. And we’ll remember there are those who are African-American AND gay, and we need to fully acknowledge that.
There’s no reason that moment can’t be now.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
American Idle?
Well, my favorite American Idol contestant Adam Lambert lost last night. He was easily the best vocalist of the season. And even with his second-place showing, this marks the first time an openly gay contestant has made it this far….whoops! Can’t say that!
Well I kinda just did. But Adam hasn’t really said it. And he still may wait awhile, that coy son of a gun. When he was cornered by the paparazzi a couple of weeks ago and asked, “So if you win, how would it feel to be the first..?” the interviewer veered into silence and hoped Adam will fill in the oh-so-obvious blank. But Adam just smiled and pretended to be stumped. “First what?” he responded with a smirk.
On one hand, Adam’s ascension speaks volumes on how far the country has come in its attitudes on sexuality. Here’s a contestant with all the gay tropes – spiky hair, sequined jackets, super tight pants and jeans, painted fingernails and more eyeliner than Tyra Banks. Oh, and there was that picture of Adam playing tonsil hockey with another man blasted on the Internet. Yet he sailed through the competition, soon surpassing Danny Gokey to become the favorite.
It’s worth remembering that American Idol, at least until recently, was a red state show. The first five winners were from the South. The winners were solidly middle-of-the road, easy-to-root-for types with inspirational backstories. No one was ever too edgy, certainly not “theatrical,” the adjectives the judges and the media loved to use to describe Adam when they weren’t using “Broadway.”
On the other hand, his sexuality, which infuses his work, becomes something forbidden for discussion or acknowledgment. And it’s an odd and perverse step backward for us. Did Adam worry perhaps that being more out would have cost him votes and he wouldn’t have been the runner-up? Did he not want to be an instant role model? Was he already worried about how he could be marketed (You know his CD will drop in about a year, and he has a good chance of outselling Kris Allen)?
Some may think people like me who make a point about his sexual orientation are the ones stepping backward. Haven’t we come to a place where it doesn’t matter? Well, not quite.
Haven’t you noticed that American Idol goes crazy with hometown footage that mines the personal stories of his contestants? I heard 500 times that Danny lost his young wife to cancer not even a few months before his audition. I learned about Kris’ wife and church group. But Adam I learned hardly anything about. Yeah, I saw his proud parents, but everyone has those.
American Idol studiously avoided delving into Adam’s personal life. What are his friends like? Where does he go for fun? What are his hobbies? It’s like everyone was complicit in the code of silence.
If we embrace Adam, than why is there a hesitancy to embrace all of him, least of all by Adam himself? Just today at Entertainment Weekly online, a reporter directly asked Adam about his sexuality. Adam said, “Like I said, I think speculation keeps things very, very interesting.” He’s still not budging.
Some blogs have already speculated whether homophobia played a part in dark horse Kris stealing the crown. That’s not too likely. First, Kris is actually talented, very cute, and connects with the audience. And he was an underdog, and we love our underdogs. Besides, if homophobia were that rampant, Adam’s campy persona would have robbed him of votes a long while ago.
If there’s anyone holding anything back it’s Adam himself – and American Idol itself. It’s ridiculous that a talented queer singer is hiding in plain sight.
Well I kinda just did. But Adam hasn’t really said it. And he still may wait awhile, that coy son of a gun. When he was cornered by the paparazzi a couple of weeks ago and asked, “So if you win, how would it feel to be the first..?” the interviewer veered into silence and hoped Adam will fill in the oh-so-obvious blank. But Adam just smiled and pretended to be stumped. “First what?” he responded with a smirk.
On one hand, Adam’s ascension speaks volumes on how far the country has come in its attitudes on sexuality. Here’s a contestant with all the gay tropes – spiky hair, sequined jackets, super tight pants and jeans, painted fingernails and more eyeliner than Tyra Banks. Oh, and there was that picture of Adam playing tonsil hockey with another man blasted on the Internet. Yet he sailed through the competition, soon surpassing Danny Gokey to become the favorite.
It’s worth remembering that American Idol, at least until recently, was a red state show. The first five winners were from the South. The winners were solidly middle-of-the road, easy-to-root-for types with inspirational backstories. No one was ever too edgy, certainly not “theatrical,” the adjectives the judges and the media loved to use to describe Adam when they weren’t using “Broadway.”
On the other hand, his sexuality, which infuses his work, becomes something forbidden for discussion or acknowledgment. And it’s an odd and perverse step backward for us. Did Adam worry perhaps that being more out would have cost him votes and he wouldn’t have been the runner-up? Did he not want to be an instant role model? Was he already worried about how he could be marketed (You know his CD will drop in about a year, and he has a good chance of outselling Kris Allen)?
Some may think people like me who make a point about his sexual orientation are the ones stepping backward. Haven’t we come to a place where it doesn’t matter? Well, not quite.
Haven’t you noticed that American Idol goes crazy with hometown footage that mines the personal stories of his contestants? I heard 500 times that Danny lost his young wife to cancer not even a few months before his audition. I learned about Kris’ wife and church group. But Adam I learned hardly anything about. Yeah, I saw his proud parents, but everyone has those.
American Idol studiously avoided delving into Adam’s personal life. What are his friends like? Where does he go for fun? What are his hobbies? It’s like everyone was complicit in the code of silence.
If we embrace Adam, than why is there a hesitancy to embrace all of him, least of all by Adam himself? Just today at Entertainment Weekly online, a reporter directly asked Adam about his sexuality. Adam said, “Like I said, I think speculation keeps things very, very interesting.” He’s still not budging.
Some blogs have already speculated whether homophobia played a part in dark horse Kris stealing the crown. That’s not too likely. First, Kris is actually talented, very cute, and connects with the audience. And he was an underdog, and we love our underdogs. Besides, if homophobia were that rampant, Adam’s campy persona would have robbed him of votes a long while ago.
If there’s anyone holding anything back it’s Adam himself – and American Idol itself. It’s ridiculous that a talented queer singer is hiding in plain sight.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Victor/Victorious
Just last week, transgender rights took a huge step forward.
A federal judge awarded Diane Schroer of Alexandria, Va., a former Army Special Forces commander, nearly $500,000 because she was rejected from a job at the Library of Congress while transitioning from a man to a woman. When Diane applied for a terrorism analyst job, she was still a man named David Schroer. When David announced he was having surgery to change his gender, the offer was suddenly rescinded. The judge ruled that was sex discrimination and Diane was entitled to back pay and damages.
I have my own trans workplace story. And no, I didn’t used to be a “Woman About Town.” When I worked as a reporter at one of my former newspapers about a decade ago, I had my first face-to-face experience with someone who is transgendered.
S/he worked on the business side, and was a very nondescript man I barely saw or remembered. Then one day, he came up in the newsroom wearing heels, a skirt, blouse, and badly applied make-up (hey, he was a beginner). The hair was a little different, too, not that you noticed it with all of the other stuff going on.
I adjusted my eyes. Honestly, it was kind of funny, like a homemade moment from “Tootsie.” Did he lose a bet? Was he trying to be funny? What was the deal? A few of us snickered about it. But soon someone told me that he was trans, the real deal. Apparently, he felt he needed to become a woman and he aha started talking pre-surgery hormones. And he decided upon the change in dress and appearance to begin the transition.
I didn’t realize he had on-going conversations with his co-workers in his department and his boss to tell them about his decision, and how that would go medically and socially. So the downstairs folks knew, but the upstairs folks like me had to learn about it through gossipy leaks. Someone else mentioned he was formerly married with children. Someone else whispered one or more of his kids weren’t talking to him/her anymore and s/he would lose custody. I certainly wasn’t going to ask him, um, her. Why delve into his, um, her personal life when I barely knew the (wo)man before?
I did learn the new name: Amanda. (I can’t recall his former name.) One of my co-workers couldn’t resist with a joke: “Maybe he chose that because people respond, “He was really ‘a man…duh!’” Sorry, it’s reporter humor. When I went downstairs for a matter, I would notice his co-workers calmly called him Amanda and didn’t react abnormally at all. Soon, we all did that. Once we discovered what was going on, it was no biggie. Besides, he learned how to do his hair tighter, and he started wearing better ensembles.
When first confronted with the new Amanda, I was a little weirded out, puzzled and uncomfortable at first, especially not knowing what was happening in Amanda’s life. And I can imagine that’s what the Library of Congress officials felt. Soon, it wasn’t about the qualifications, it was about feeling unsettled by a change they didn’t understand.
Well, it’s too bad they ignored the transition period and let fear and discomfort morph into hostility and discrimination. Perhaps if they had the time my co-workers and I had to learn the situation and become a little educated, they could have realized being transgender didn’t have to negatively affect the job or themselves.
Because people seem to wake up when they suffer financially, perhaps this will be an alert to employers on this type of discriminatory behavior. Transgendered people have to make a living, too, and they need a modicum of respect that should be afforded to every other type of human being.
The judge’s ruling is a victory not only for Diane, but also for Amanda.
A federal judge awarded Diane Schroer of Alexandria, Va., a former Army Special Forces commander, nearly $500,000 because she was rejected from a job at the Library of Congress while transitioning from a man to a woman. When Diane applied for a terrorism analyst job, she was still a man named David Schroer. When David announced he was having surgery to change his gender, the offer was suddenly rescinded. The judge ruled that was sex discrimination and Diane was entitled to back pay and damages.
I have my own trans workplace story. And no, I didn’t used to be a “Woman About Town.” When I worked as a reporter at one of my former newspapers about a decade ago, I had my first face-to-face experience with someone who is transgendered.
S/he worked on the business side, and was a very nondescript man I barely saw or remembered. Then one day, he came up in the newsroom wearing heels, a skirt, blouse, and badly applied make-up (hey, he was a beginner). The hair was a little different, too, not that you noticed it with all of the other stuff going on.
I adjusted my eyes. Honestly, it was kind of funny, like a homemade moment from “Tootsie.” Did he lose a bet? Was he trying to be funny? What was the deal? A few of us snickered about it. But soon someone told me that he was trans, the real deal. Apparently, he felt he needed to become a woman and he aha started talking pre-surgery hormones. And he decided upon the change in dress and appearance to begin the transition.
I didn’t realize he had on-going conversations with his co-workers in his department and his boss to tell them about his decision, and how that would go medically and socially. So the downstairs folks knew, but the upstairs folks like me had to learn about it through gossipy leaks. Someone else mentioned he was formerly married with children. Someone else whispered one or more of his kids weren’t talking to him/her anymore and s/he would lose custody. I certainly wasn’t going to ask him, um, her. Why delve into his, um, her personal life when I barely knew the (wo)man before?
I did learn the new name: Amanda. (I can’t recall his former name.) One of my co-workers couldn’t resist with a joke: “Maybe he chose that because people respond, “He was really ‘a man…duh!’” Sorry, it’s reporter humor. When I went downstairs for a matter, I would notice his co-workers calmly called him Amanda and didn’t react abnormally at all. Soon, we all did that. Once we discovered what was going on, it was no biggie. Besides, he learned how to do his hair tighter, and he started wearing better ensembles.
When first confronted with the new Amanda, I was a little weirded out, puzzled and uncomfortable at first, especially not knowing what was happening in Amanda’s life. And I can imagine that’s what the Library of Congress officials felt. Soon, it wasn’t about the qualifications, it was about feeling unsettled by a change they didn’t understand.
Well, it’s too bad they ignored the transition period and let fear and discomfort morph into hostility and discrimination. Perhaps if they had the time my co-workers and I had to learn the situation and become a little educated, they could have realized being transgender didn’t have to negatively affect the job or themselves.
Because people seem to wake up when they suffer financially, perhaps this will be an alert to employers on this type of discriminatory behavior. Transgendered people have to make a living, too, and they need a modicum of respect that should be afforded to every other type of human being.
The judge’s ruling is a victory not only for Diane, but also for Amanda.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
The Young and the Fearless
I didn’t go to last Saturday’s Youth Pride Day celebration at P Street Beach to join in the celebration, although I thought fleetingly about going by.
No, I’m not twinkie hunting, especially as I’m partnered. Rather, I liked the idea of seeing happy LGBT teens and young adults, already and fearlessly out and proud. I admit I’m a little jealous.
I always envied friends and exes of mine who came out early, particularly in their teens. Sure, the merciless high school caste system is hell for almost everybody who doesn’t fit into the designated norm. But I always felt like they got their “real lives” started a lot sooner.
They quickly learned who among their friends and family was a true supporter. They had open dating lives sooner and no double lives (at least as an adult). They freely participated in social or political activities in high school, college, or beyond. Crucially, their sexuality, accepted and embraced, becomes integrated in the development of their adult selves – character, personality, dreams, and goals. They don’t have to begin again, as it were.
But, with most things, there is a shadow that covers some of the brightness. Over the past couple of weeks, two kids, who never even identified as gay, killed themselves because of anti-gay bullying. Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover, an 11-year-old sixth-grader from Springfield, Mass., hanged himself with an extension cord in his family's home after being subjected to continuous anti-gay harassment at his middle school. Less than two weeks later, Jaheem Herrera, an 11-year-old fifth-grader from DeKalb County, Ga., also hanged himself at home after being the subject of anti-gay taunts from classmates.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth are up to four times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers, and those who come from a rejecting family are up to nine times more likely to do so. Two of the top three reasons secondary school students said their peers were most often bullied at school were actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender expression, according to a 2005 report by GLSEN and Harris Interactive.
In the same report, more than a third of middle and high school students said that bullying, name-calling and harassment is a somewhat or very serious problem at their school. Furthermore, two-thirds of middle school students reported being assaulted or harassed in the previous year and only 41 percent said they felt safe at school.
In addition, The Trevor Project fields tens of thousands of calls from young people each year, both straight and LGBT-identified, with rejection and harassment by peers being one of the top five issues reported by callers.
The flip side of youth embracing their true nature is that there are others who are ready to quash it. My fear is that teens who are emboldened to be true to themselves become fewer in number because they may see their well-being – and very lives – are at stake. I wonder if conservative political activist Alan Keyes’ daughter Maya ever thought her father would literally throw her out on the street and cut her off financially because she was a lesbian. But he did. Luckily, she rebounded with outside financial help and attended college, ready for the world professionally and personally.
But it’s disturbing to have such a wicked dichotomy of a more modern time when gays are more accepted but homophobia, and its violent offspring, is still steady. What’s more, plenty of families still soundly reject or disown gay members.
What I hope are those young adults still find the strength to be who they are and find the support they need. Youth Pride Day is making a bold statement just in the fact that being part of the LGBT community is reason to celebrate. Now we need to work on ensuring the bright future they are positive about comes into being.
No, I’m not twinkie hunting, especially as I’m partnered. Rather, I liked the idea of seeing happy LGBT teens and young adults, already and fearlessly out and proud. I admit I’m a little jealous.
I always envied friends and exes of mine who came out early, particularly in their teens. Sure, the merciless high school caste system is hell for almost everybody who doesn’t fit into the designated norm. But I always felt like they got their “real lives” started a lot sooner.
They quickly learned who among their friends and family was a true supporter. They had open dating lives sooner and no double lives (at least as an adult). They freely participated in social or political activities in high school, college, or beyond. Crucially, their sexuality, accepted and embraced, becomes integrated in the development of their adult selves – character, personality, dreams, and goals. They don’t have to begin again, as it were.
But, with most things, there is a shadow that covers some of the brightness. Over the past couple of weeks, two kids, who never even identified as gay, killed themselves because of anti-gay bullying. Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover, an 11-year-old sixth-grader from Springfield, Mass., hanged himself with an extension cord in his family's home after being subjected to continuous anti-gay harassment at his middle school. Less than two weeks later, Jaheem Herrera, an 11-year-old fifth-grader from DeKalb County, Ga., also hanged himself at home after being the subject of anti-gay taunts from classmates.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth are up to four times more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers, and those who come from a rejecting family are up to nine times more likely to do so. Two of the top three reasons secondary school students said their peers were most often bullied at school were actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender expression, according to a 2005 report by GLSEN and Harris Interactive.
In the same report, more than a third of middle and high school students said that bullying, name-calling and harassment is a somewhat or very serious problem at their school. Furthermore, two-thirds of middle school students reported being assaulted or harassed in the previous year and only 41 percent said they felt safe at school.
In addition, The Trevor Project fields tens of thousands of calls from young people each year, both straight and LGBT-identified, with rejection and harassment by peers being one of the top five issues reported by callers.
The flip side of youth embracing their true nature is that there are others who are ready to quash it. My fear is that teens who are emboldened to be true to themselves become fewer in number because they may see their well-being – and very lives – are at stake. I wonder if conservative political activist Alan Keyes’ daughter Maya ever thought her father would literally throw her out on the street and cut her off financially because she was a lesbian. But he did. Luckily, she rebounded with outside financial help and attended college, ready for the world professionally and personally.
But it’s disturbing to have such a wicked dichotomy of a more modern time when gays are more accepted but homophobia, and its violent offspring, is still steady. What’s more, plenty of families still soundly reject or disown gay members.
What I hope are those young adults still find the strength to be who they are and find the support they need. Youth Pride Day is making a bold statement just in the fact that being part of the LGBT community is reason to celebrate. Now we need to work on ensuring the bright future they are positive about comes into being.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
No Shelter In This Storm
Could homophobes be gasping their last breath?
If patriotism is the refuge of the scoundrel, then desperation may be the last refuge of the bigot. Case in point: This group named National Organization For Marriage has made a video clip posted on YouTube called “The Gathering Storm”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp76ly2_NoI
There is a multiracial group of people, all with forlorn faces, standing in front of a background of dark clouds and lightning bolts as an ominous piano bangs away. Essentially it’s a 60-second ad that sees homosexuality and gay marriage as a threat to American life just like, you know, terrorism. Several individuals each provide their biggest fear in succession:
“The winds are strong and I am afraid.”
“My freedom will be taken away.”
“I’m a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job.”
“I am part of a New Jersey church group punished by the government because we can’t support same sex marriage.”
“I’m a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son gay marriage is okay.”
“The advocates want to change the way I live.”
But then, lo and behold, the clouds dissipate as a man vows that a “rainbow coalition” (an ironic nod to Jesse Jackson or gay people?) of folks are coming together to do something about the problem. One of my biggest shocks was finding out this ad was produced and broadcast for $1.5 million, when it looks like a parody Saturday Night Live would air in its last half-hour.
This sketchy group, formed in 2007, is really a fund-raising and propaganda-spewing Web site fronted by the right-wing Princeton University professor Robert George and the columnist Maggie Gallagher, who was an architect of President Bush’s abstinence-only marriage initiatives.
The response has been swift … by people who think this ad is a total joke. First, there is a funny parody, also on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0pPEAdDn64. On Stephen Colbert’s show, a clip shows lightning from “the homo storm” striking an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”
What struck me most was that this seems to be the conservative’s right most prominent response to the gay marriage victories in Iowa and Vermont. But fewer people are buying this tripe. Media stories with evangelicals decrying the marriage victories as a moral apocalypse have been scarce.
Are the homophobes losing their touch? Even Miss California’s fumbling response to gay marriage in the Miss America contest – remember how she said she had to be “Biblically correct” and declare marriage is between a man and a woman only – earned her some audience boos and public derision.
Suddenly, it seems kind of ridiculous to decry gays and gay marriage. The problem is the homophobes can never really explain what the threat is and how it will manifest. Remember when they said we were coming after their children? Didn’t happen. Well, supposedly gay marriage will destroy the family and the institution of marriage. But how? They never really say but just know it will. Sorry, but my mother was the only one in my life with whom I tolerated an answer of “Because I said so.” And that hasn’t worked in 20 years.
So this empty mantra of threat gets repeated without discerning the how and why. And, despite an ever-present homophobia in this society, the logic behind that homophobia is falling away quickly. So becoming an anti-gay spokesperson is losing its luster and effectiveness. I think some of these conservatives are seeing they have little to argue against – or for. Punchy quotes only get you so far.
Look no further than Dr. Laura – she of former “gayness as a biological error and gateway to pedophilia” thinking – recently declared on Larry King committed gay relationships as “a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.” Yes, they are and just as valid as straight relationships.
If only the National Organization For Marriage used that money for something more useful, like a donation to a food bank. Their side show is playing to smaller capacity crowds these days.
If patriotism is the refuge of the scoundrel, then desperation may be the last refuge of the bigot. Case in point: This group named National Organization For Marriage has made a video clip posted on YouTube called “The Gathering Storm”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp76ly2_NoI
There is a multiracial group of people, all with forlorn faces, standing in front of a background of dark clouds and lightning bolts as an ominous piano bangs away. Essentially it’s a 60-second ad that sees homosexuality and gay marriage as a threat to American life just like, you know, terrorism. Several individuals each provide their biggest fear in succession:
“The winds are strong and I am afraid.”
“My freedom will be taken away.”
“I’m a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job.”
“I am part of a New Jersey church group punished by the government because we can’t support same sex marriage.”
“I’m a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son gay marriage is okay.”
“The advocates want to change the way I live.”
But then, lo and behold, the clouds dissipate as a man vows that a “rainbow coalition” (an ironic nod to Jesse Jackson or gay people?) of folks are coming together to do something about the problem. One of my biggest shocks was finding out this ad was produced and broadcast for $1.5 million, when it looks like a parody Saturday Night Live would air in its last half-hour.
This sketchy group, formed in 2007, is really a fund-raising and propaganda-spewing Web site fronted by the right-wing Princeton University professor Robert George and the columnist Maggie Gallagher, who was an architect of President Bush’s abstinence-only marriage initiatives.
The response has been swift … by people who think this ad is a total joke. First, there is a funny parody, also on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0pPEAdDn64. On Stephen Colbert’s show, a clip shows lightning from “the homo storm” striking an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”
What struck me most was that this seems to be the conservative’s right most prominent response to the gay marriage victories in Iowa and Vermont. But fewer people are buying this tripe. Media stories with evangelicals decrying the marriage victories as a moral apocalypse have been scarce.
Are the homophobes losing their touch? Even Miss California’s fumbling response to gay marriage in the Miss America contest – remember how she said she had to be “Biblically correct” and declare marriage is between a man and a woman only – earned her some audience boos and public derision.
Suddenly, it seems kind of ridiculous to decry gays and gay marriage. The problem is the homophobes can never really explain what the threat is and how it will manifest. Remember when they said we were coming after their children? Didn’t happen. Well, supposedly gay marriage will destroy the family and the institution of marriage. But how? They never really say but just know it will. Sorry, but my mother was the only one in my life with whom I tolerated an answer of “Because I said so.” And that hasn’t worked in 20 years.
So this empty mantra of threat gets repeated without discerning the how and why. And, despite an ever-present homophobia in this society, the logic behind that homophobia is falling away quickly. So becoming an anti-gay spokesperson is losing its luster and effectiveness. I think some of these conservatives are seeing they have little to argue against – or for. Punchy quotes only get you so far.
Look no further than Dr. Laura – she of former “gayness as a biological error and gateway to pedophilia” thinking – recently declared on Larry King committed gay relationships as “a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.” Yes, they are and just as valid as straight relationships.
If only the National Organization For Marriage used that money for something more useful, like a donation to a food bank. Their side show is playing to smaller capacity crowds these days.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Author, Author!
I’m a writer trying to get published. I learned Monday that being a gay writer was apparently an obstacle on Amazon.com.
Just a few days ago, writer Mark Probst began a nationwide furor after he posted on his blog that he'd noticed the sales rankings on hundreds of gay and lesbian books -- including the newly released Transgressions by Erastes and False Colors by Alex Beecroft -- had suddenly disappeared on Amazon.com. Even established and distinguished writers, including Gore Vidal, Annie Proulx and E.M. Forster, suddenly lost their best-seller ranking, which is the number that Amazon uses to show how well one title sells compared with another.
The rankings often help produce more sales. In response to a note Probst sent the online retailer, an Amazon.com representative said, "In consideration of our entire customer base, we exclude 'adult' material from appearing in some searches and best seller lists."
Apparently, it was found that this "adult" tag was also being given to Heather Has Two Mommies (remember that one??) and Ellen DeGeneres' autobiography. If you’ve ever seen DeGeneres’ writings, concerts, films, and of course TV talk show, you know the woman hovers under PG-13. And get this. The explicit memoir by porn star Ron Jeremy and Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds, which includes pictures of more than 600 naked women, are still being ranked like nothing ever happened.
There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth by me. As it is, online retailers and bookstores often marginalize LGBT literature, and literature by authors of color for that matter. We often have a small section in a store or on a site apart from everyone else. Something like this makes it worse.
It hit home with me because I’m in the middle of efforts to self-publish my first novel, and it will likely involve a print on demand option, whereby my novel would be available online and link to sites like Amazon.com for exposure. I imagined someone acquainted with me looking for my book or other books b y gay authors and not finding them.
Amazon.com later came out with a statement declaring the tag was a search error that has been resolved, adding that it also affected books in the area of erotica, health, and medicine. There apparently was no deliberate effort to shot out LGBT-themed work. I’m a little skeptical. How could Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds not have been tagged in the erotica category? I’m not even going to talk about Mr. Jeremy.
This was tantamount to an electronic, if temporary, ban of sorts. Even if there was an error, someone had to program certain key words into the system in the first place. And it makes me wonder why words like “gay” and “lesbian” – and apparently the sexual orientation of authors – became some sort of red flag that banished literary works into the forbidden category.
Would this have been corrected if no one had raised a ruckus about it? I have my doubts. I’m very concerned because amazon.com is the #1 portal for not just books, but other products online. You have to wonder if other sites that sell literature, movies, or anything else could do the same thing to censor gay content.
When it’s my turn to get out there, I don’t want to be blocked or censored. It’s enough for any writer these days just to win and maintain an audience.
Just a few days ago, writer Mark Probst began a nationwide furor after he posted on his blog that he'd noticed the sales rankings on hundreds of gay and lesbian books -- including the newly released Transgressions by Erastes and False Colors by Alex Beecroft -- had suddenly disappeared on Amazon.com. Even established and distinguished writers, including Gore Vidal, Annie Proulx and E.M. Forster, suddenly lost their best-seller ranking, which is the number that Amazon uses to show how well one title sells compared with another.
The rankings often help produce more sales. In response to a note Probst sent the online retailer, an Amazon.com representative said, "In consideration of our entire customer base, we exclude 'adult' material from appearing in some searches and best seller lists."
Apparently, it was found that this "adult" tag was also being given to Heather Has Two Mommies (remember that one??) and Ellen DeGeneres' autobiography. If you’ve ever seen DeGeneres’ writings, concerts, films, and of course TV talk show, you know the woman hovers under PG-13. And get this. The explicit memoir by porn star Ron Jeremy and Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds, which includes pictures of more than 600 naked women, are still being ranked like nothing ever happened.
There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth by me. As it is, online retailers and bookstores often marginalize LGBT literature, and literature by authors of color for that matter. We often have a small section in a store or on a site apart from everyone else. Something like this makes it worse.
It hit home with me because I’m in the middle of efforts to self-publish my first novel, and it will likely involve a print on demand option, whereby my novel would be available online and link to sites like Amazon.com for exposure. I imagined someone acquainted with me looking for my book or other books b y gay authors and not finding them.
Amazon.com later came out with a statement declaring the tag was a search error that has been resolved, adding that it also affected books in the area of erotica, health, and medicine. There apparently was no deliberate effort to shot out LGBT-themed work. I’m a little skeptical. How could Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds not have been tagged in the erotica category? I’m not even going to talk about Mr. Jeremy.
This was tantamount to an electronic, if temporary, ban of sorts. Even if there was an error, someone had to program certain key words into the system in the first place. And it makes me wonder why words like “gay” and “lesbian” – and apparently the sexual orientation of authors – became some sort of red flag that banished literary works into the forbidden category.
Would this have been corrected if no one had raised a ruckus about it? I have my doubts. I’m very concerned because amazon.com is the #1 portal for not just books, but other products online. You have to wonder if other sites that sell literature, movies, or anything else could do the same thing to censor gay content.
When it’s my turn to get out there, I don’t want to be blocked or censored. It’s enough for any writer these days just to win and maintain an audience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)