Category: rights

Pride II

I was jumping around and stumbled over Joe-my-god’s post about pride. He makes a great point and a powerful reminder. I’ve already shared my thoughts on Pride celebrations but I felt the need to weigh in again. If you aren’t part of “the scene” or “into the gays” but still identify as gay, that’s ok. Just don’t bash the rest of us. I usually try to avoid using such terms as they are completely subjective. Often times referring to a very limited portion of gay culture in general.

The mostly white bread, self-haters over at the LCR would have us believe drag queens, leather daddies, circuit boys, punk queers, etc are the doom to our culture and rights. You have it backwards boys. If anyone is holding us back, it’s you and your conformist attitudes. You make the same mistake our straight counterparts make. I shouldn’t have to conform to your views just to have equal rights. I was born a human being. That gives me the same rights of any other human. Who I sleep with and how often isn’t part of the equation. I don’t need to ‘play nice’ to gain equal treatment.

I’ve always been an oddity unto myself. I’ve never really felt like I fit in w/any “scene”. I sort of lurk on the fridges of all of’em. I go to clubs/parties. I go to drag shows. I go to leather bars. I workout often. I’ve even been seen in a few goth clubs. I also go to sex clubs bathouses, etc. None of which defines me, I just happen to like aspects of each. Some might say, I’m the ‘typical fag’. Does that somehow preclude me from being able to share my life w/another man? Leave my wordly possession to who I choose? Or prevent me from being able to celebrate the hard-earned freedoms gained in the last 20 years? In a word, NO.

Our narrow-minded brethern have mistakingly assumed that by “fitting in” we can advance our cause. How’s that going boys? From out here, I’m not seeing it. Maybe you should spend less time worrying about us ‘freaks’, and more time trying to accept that not everyone wants to be a corporate logo queen.

As pride week approaches and parades all over the world march the cause, take a moment to look back on your life. The pain, the sorrow, the disappointment is not unique to one. Many of us have “been there, done that”. Rejoyce in your freedoms and in each other. I know I sure as hell plan to.

the SHOWER room

I was reading this rant from the SHOWER room and was greatly disturbed. As long as people like this keep getting away with it, they’ll keep doing it.

The gist of the story is one guy gave another guy water laced w/ghb. (a date rape drug of choice for the gay community among other things). The victim proceeds to pass out and the guy “has his way w/him” then has the audacity to act like it’s no big thing. The vicitm isn’t even sure if he wants to press charges.

Read the whole story for the details. Mind you it’s 2nd hand but very disturbing nonetheless.

Pain or Pride?

The weekend fast approaches and with it comes Gay Pride celebration. The city is already a buzz w/visitors arriving early. The Castro is crawling w/tourists and newbies gawking, giggling, laughing, etc. Not that I mind at all. The eye candy is always stimulating. It just makes things a bit difficult when you are trying to get from point M to point Q and everyone stops w/o notice in the middle of the sidewalk. No, I don’t mind at all.

My annoyance is fleeting however. I support Pride celebrations 100%. That said, I’ve already noticed the pride-bashing on several blogs. Gays who think they are above pride or look down on it because it shows the more ‘colorful’ side of our community. I, for one, am grateful for the more flamboyant side of our culture. After all, they helped to jump start our movement in the first place. The excuse that it does nothing but hurt our cause doesn’t hold water in my opinion. The only people who dislike pride celebrations hate us already. Oh and the pathetic attempt at ‘decency in front of children’? Oh please! My straight parents inflicted way more harm on me than seeing a half naked man/woman at a parade ever could.

I guess the point I am trying, not so elegantly, to make is Pride is not about all the hoopla you see at parades. It is about what you feel inside. Acceptance of yourself. The realization that you are not a freak, a disease, or an abomination as so many would have you believe. You are a human being, like every other, born into an imperfect world. A world that, for all it’s advances, hasn’t managed to grow up yet. Empower yourself this Pride. Whether you’re out on float dancing your ass off or home, as usual, doing what it is you do, take a moment to reflect and be happy w/the life you’ve been given. Good or bad, it is what you make of it. That is true of all of us – gay,straight, bi, whatever.

Good Ole Texas!

Ok, so that’s normally not something I say often. Let’s face it, Texas doesn’t have the best reputation when it comes to being “open minded”. So it is w/no small amount of pride that I offer today’s tidbit. Thanks to Towleroad for catching the story.

Apparently, there is one ‘christian’ legislator who has had enough of all the hate-mongering. They passed the despicable amendment but god love her for calling a deuce a deuce!

I have served in this body a lot of years, and I have seen a lot of promises broken… So… now that blacks and women have equal rights, you turn your hatred to homosexuals, and you still use your misguided reading of the Bible to justify your hatred. You want to pass this ridiculous amendment so you can go home and brag — brag about what? Declare that you saved the people of Texas from what

(snip)
If you want to make your hateful political statements then that is one thing — but the Chisum amendment does real harm. It repeals the contracts that many single people have paid thousands of dollars to purchase to obtain medical powers of attorney, powers of attorney, hospital visitation, joint ownership and support agreements. You have lost your way. This is obscene…

“I thought we would be debating economic development, property tax relief, protecting seniors’ pensions and stem cell research to save lives of Texans who are waiting for a more abundant life. Instead we are wasting this body’s time with this political stunt that is nothing more than constitutionalizing discrimination. The prejudices exhibited by members of this body disgust me

It is nice to know there are some respectable folks left in politics. Even in Texas.

Hon! Have You Seen My Morals?

I often find that conversations involving morality (and monogamy but thats another rant ) always seem to end up in a bitch fight. Neither side is willing to listen or relent and both end up vehemently attacking the other.

I’m trying to collect my thoughts to make this rant sound coherent but ideas keep colliding w/each other so I’ll ask you to bear w/me. . . I guess what I’m trying to say is I’m tired of the factions within the gay community constantly at war w/each other. One side uses their morality as a shield w/their self-righteous speeches proclaiming they’re superiority because they have morality on their side. The other side uses their sexual freedom as an ax to chop away at the traditions society has built up for years and years. Yet, neither side really tries to listen to the other. No one tries to find a middle ground. It’s always “my way or the highway!” Ya know what folks, that same attitude is what has this country in the political quandry its in today!

I still feel like I’m still missing my point. Maybe I can focus on the term itself.

Morality is defined as

1. descriptively to refer to a code of conduct put forward by a society or,
1. some other group, such as a religion, or
2. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.

At first read, both definitions sound the same. If you read it that way, re-read it until you see the difference. It is pointless to read further until you understand the above definitions differences.

*ok I stopped here out of frustration. I couldn’t find the right words so after several hours of reading, I found what I was trying to say, albeit not so elegantly.*

…. it is not useful to adopt a definition of “morality” as meaning the code of conduct accepted by the members of a society because in many large societies, not all members of the society accept the same code of conduct. Nor is it useful to adopt a somewhat more general definition of “morality” as the code of conduct accepted by the members of a group because it is not only always possible, it is often the case, that not all members of any group accept the same code. A natural outcome of these problems is to switch attention from groups to individuals. If what is important is what code of conduct people accept, and members of a group do not always accept the same code of conduct, then why be concerned with groups at all?

This consideration leads to a new descriptive sense of “morality.” “morality” is taken to mean that guide to behavior that is regarded by an individual as overriding and that he wants to be universally adopted. [See R. M. Hare, Moral Thinking] In this sense of “morality,” it refers to a guide to behavior accepted by an individual rather than that put forward by a society or any other group. But “morality” does not refer to just any guide to behavior accepted by an individual, it is that guide to behavior that the individual adopts as his overriding guide, and wants everyone else to adopt as their overriding guide as well. This sense of “morality” is a descriptive sense, because a person can refer to an individual’s morality without endorsing it. In this sense, like the original descriptive sense, morality has no limitations on content. Whatever guide to behavior an individual regards as overriding and wants to be universally adopted is that individual’s morality.

This quote was taken direclty from Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Now we are getting somewhere! The picture once fuzzy becomes clear. (well at least for me.) We begin to see that morality is an ambiguous term at best. How can we expect to come together as a group if we are all focusing on our morality instead of our equality. It should be quite clear that we’ll never have the same morality as those who oppose and hate us.

If we don’t learn to move beyond our multi-cultural/racial views on morality, frankly folks, I think we are doomed as a species.

Well, I’ve beat this horse to death so I’m moving on now. Discuss, comment, or bitch as you will.

No Tramp Zone

I’ve been catching up on my blogrolling and I stumbled across Dunner’s posts on gays and public sex. On his first rant, I think he sorta failed to explain himself. I guess after a spirited debate he decided to clarify his positon. On his second rant, he is much more to the point. That said, I still think he is missing the bigger picture.

First off, I have a lot of respect for Dunner and he is one of my favorite reads. I often find his rants to be very insightful and fair minded. I’m usually in agreement w/him on most topics. I think he is more articulate than I am which only serves to increase my interest. That said, I do find at times, like today, our opinions differ. I think it has a lot to do w/age. Granted at 34, I’m only 10 years his senior. But 1o years on the hard side of life can be a good teacher. From what I’ve read of Dunner, his life, while not w/o tribulations, has been blissful by my own standards. If anything, I’ve learned that when it comes to life and society, there is never an easy answer or quick fix as it were.

In a nutshell, Dunner states that if we ever expect society as a whole to accept us then we have to curtail our promiscuity in public.

It’s the same reason why we need to expose hypocrites like Jim West, politicians who spit antigay rhetoric and then expect pity when they own up to their homosexual behavior. If we create a society where it’s clear that gay relationships and gay sexuality are to be as respected as their straight counterparts, life will be easier for all homosexuals, and true equality will be found. But if we’re to expect to gain equal respect for gay sexuality, we gotta cut out the tomfoolery in the public steam room and instead find healthy ways to express it.

As I see it, that is sorta putting the horse before the wagon. If we are still battling for the right to even get married, how can we expect to “find healthy ways to express it.” Our over zealous need for sexual release stems from our constant repression. So from my perspective, we have to fix the problem itself before we can work on fixin the symptoms it has created.

Pop on over and have a read if you haven’t already. Andymatic also weighs in on the subject. What say you?

Marry Me?

This past Sunday I got a chance to watch the first showing of “Pursuit of Equality“. Made here in SF, the film documents the controversy of Mayor Newsom allowing SSC’s (same sex couples) to marry this past year. It has not been released yet as the producers have yet to find a distributor. Anyway, 5 minutes into the film, I’m bawling my eyes out. The sheer joy on the faces of the couples gathered at City Hall that day were just overwhelming. Watching the first lesbian couple, who have been together 52 years, exchange their vows in the Mayors office was a truly historic event.

I urge you to see it is picked up. I’m sure it will be part of the film festivals around the country. Spend the bucks and see it!

A Day of Days!

Today is a Day of Days folks! (Bonus points if you know where I stole this quote from) Ok, so apparently I should watch the news more often. I got to work and plugged in before I knew this ruling came out!

San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ruled that keeping gays and lesbians from getting marriage licenses is unconstitutional.

If the ruling is upheld on appeal, it would pave the way for the nation’s most populous state to follow Massachusetts in allowing same-sex marriages.

Kramer’s opinion came in a pair of lawsuits that were trying to overturn the state’s statutory ban on gay marriage.

Talk about a scandal and a half. Someone call Martha! I can only hope it survives the appeal. Ok, scratch that, I didn’t actually find out on the news. I read it on T’s blog. Dunner and Towleroad got in on the act too. Check’em out for more details if you haven’t already.

Justice?

So it was nice to see even in Wisconsin Joe Schmoes can’t use the “gay panic” defense to kill gays. What is shameful are attorneys still trying to use this as a form of defense.

(Full Story Oshkosh, Wisconsin) A jury has ignored claims that a Wisconsin man was murdered in a case of “gay rage” and ruled that Gary Hirte, 19 was sane when he killed Glen Kopitske in July 2003….
He said Hirte had been drinking at home and went to a boat landing and sat on the hood of his car. Kopitske approached and invited Hirte to his house.
The men had oral sex and Hirte left and returned to his car. A few hours later he drove off in what his lawyer Gerald Boyle described as an “unbelievable rage”, got a shotgun and knife, returned to the house and killed Kopitske…

If the jury had found Hirte insane he would have been sent to a mental institution, where he could petition every six months for release. It’s just a shame they don’t offer the death penalty in Wisconsin. Me thinks he’d make a great candidate? What say you?

Gay Genes – No, not Jordache

Yet another study on human genetics playing a role in human sexuality. Pretty soon, there will be too much irrefutable proof for even the bible thumpers to ignore. Of course, I’m sure they’ll find some other reason to hate us.

But this study examined genetic information on all chromosomes, including genes from the father. The findings show that identical stretches of DNA on three chromosomes were shared by about 60% of gay brothers in the study compared to the about 50% normally expected by chance…
…The genetic scans showed a clustering of the same genetic pattern among the gay men on three chromosomes — chromosomes 7, 8, and 10. These common genetic patterns were shared by 60% of the gay men in the study. This is slightly more than the 50% expected by chance alone.
The regions on chromosome 7 and 8 were associated with male sexual orientation regardless of whether the man got them from his mother or father. The regions on chromosome 10 were only associated with male sexual orientation if they were inherited from the mother.

I’ll be the first in line asking for an apology.