Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 123

Transphobia As An Apparent Government Function

Sometimes, one can't help but wonder if one of the functions of state and local government is transphobia. Below are two stories on agents of government allegedly behaving badly.

Story 1.) You may remember Amber Yust. She's the California transgender woman who filed for a new driver's license, only to allegedly have the DMV employee who assisted her send a letter to her home.

The letter was framed in antigay terms. The letter tied her name change to "[t]he homosexual act," and went on to say:

Supporting those who commit this act and encouraging and justifying those who have the orientation also lead one to hell.

The letter quotes and highlights scriptures from Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, Romans, and Genesis.

The Santa Cruz Sentinel has added to the story in their article DMV employee put on leave after allegedly sending hate mail to transgender woman. In the article, learned the name of the DMV employee that allegedly wrote to Amber Yust: His name is Thomas Demartini. From the article:

[Below the fold: More about the California DMV Employee (Thomas Demartini) and the DMV's action so far, and the DC Trans Coalition press release, entitled DCTC Condemns Alleged Anti-Trans Assault by MPD Officer].

Yust received a letter at her home from Demartini that was dated Oct. 22, the day after he processed the changes to her DMV record.

The one-page document lists biblical references that imply homosexuality and gender transitions are mortal sins. In the letter, Demartini apparently begs Yust not to complete her gender transition.

"Jesus clearly prohibits gender change operations," Demartini wrote. "If an operation like this is the reason for changing one's name, then one has made a very evil decision."

The ABC affiliate in Los Angeles is reporting DMV employee in transgender case suspended -- apparently Thomas Demartini has been suspended with pay.

The San Francisco Chronicle, in their piece Transgender woman says DMV clerk warned of hell, reports the following (emphasis added):

The same day, Yust said, a DVD arrived from a fundamentalist church warning of eternal damnation for anyone "possessed by demons" of homosexuality. The DMV employee's letter had referred her to the church's website as a source of "critical information for your salvation."

What's more, the DMV had kept the employee on in 2009 even after he refused to process another transgender woman's name-change application, Yust said in a damage claim filed with the state, the precursor to a lawsuit.

I had "the demon of transvestism" cast out of me in 1979. I know all about how Evangelicals and Pentecostals -- basically, Christian fundamentalists -- feel about transgender people. Too bad Thomas Demartini never closely read Matthew 19:12; Isaiah 56:3-5; Acts 8:25-40; Judges 4; and 1 Samuel 16:7b, and learned that his God respected gender variance, and that while folk like him look at people from the outside, his God looks at people's hearts.

Anyway, UPI is reporting in their piece DMV worker faces lawsuit:

In a damage claim filed with the state, preliminary step in the filing of a lawsuit, Yust alleged the DMV retained Demartini on its payroll following an incident in 2009 in which he refused to process a name-change application for another transgender woman.

California's DMV needs to take antitransgender behavior very seriously -- I know I'm planning on telling the DMV that via their General Drivers License and Registration Information number, which is 1-800-777-0133, that I want to know if transphobia is something they take seriously. Hey, I found the number on the DMV Phone Directory webpage -- I plan on asking for the management official who is in charge of their antidiscrimination policy.

2.) The DC Trans Coalition has a new press release out, entitled

Still, it does seem strange that alleged antitransgender behavior by agents of the government occurs still in parts of the country where gender identity or expression is a protected class. And, that antitransgender behavior by agents of the government isn't treated by the managers of these agents of the government as seriously as other kinds of bad behavior by agents of the government would be.

I ask the question of myself and others -- what can do we do to affect changes in the way government deals with antitransgender discrimination? What can we do to make sure enforcement of antidiscrimination laws and policies based on gender identity or expression are approached with the same level of seriousness that we would expect antidiscrimination laws and policies based on race, gender, and disability would be treated?

I'm know I'm starting with a phone call to the California DMV about how Amber Yust was allegedly treated. If I lived in the District of Colombia, I'd be calling the Metropolitan Police Department, the city Mayor's office, and LGBT organizations based in DC -- specifically to ask them to take action regarding the alleged behavior against Chloe Moore.

~~~~~

Related:

*California DMV Employee Tells Trans Woman In Letter She's Made A "Very Evil Decision"

.

Video: Antonin Scalia to teach Michele Bachmann's Constitution class

Thank Right Wing Watch for this Looney World offering...would you like to be a fly on this wingnut wall? Watch Minnesota's gift to the U.S. House tell Lou Dobbs about her guest lecturer...

Dobbs: You've got a terrific idea that you're going to implement with the new Congress: a course on the Constitution for incoming Congressmen and women. Tell us about that.

Bachmann: We're going to do what the NFL does and what the baseball teams do: we're going to practice every week, if you will, our craft, which is studying and learning the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

Justice Scalia has graciously agreed to kick off our class. The hour before we cast our first vote in congress, we'll meet in the Capitol, we'll have a seminar on some segment of the Constitution, we'll have a speaker, we'll have questions and answers, we'll wrap our minds around this magnificent document [and] that'll set the tone for the week while we're in Washington.

I think it's great and I'm hoping all the members of Congress will partake; it's bipartisan.

Service Women's Action Network, ACLU file fed suit to obtain military data on rape, sexual assault

Thank heavens someone is going after the military establishment on this. Instead of fretting about gay men and lesbians sleeping in the same quarters as straight service members, they need to clean house regarding its horrendous record of prosecuting service members who engage in rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment of colleagues, who are often left serving in silence without resolution of criminal acts against them. From the Service Women's Action Network (SWAN) press release (you can read the filing here):

The Service Women's Action Network (SWAN) and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit today with the U.S. District Court in New Haven, Connecticut against the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs for their failure to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests seeking government records documenting incidents of rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment in the military. Tens of thousands of service members each year are estimated to have experienced some form of military sexual trauma (MST). These acts occur nearly twice as often within military ranks as they do within civilian society.

"The government's refusal to even take the first step of providing comprehensive and accurate information about the sexual trauma inflicted upon our women and men in uniform, and the treatment and benefits MST survivors receive after service, is all too telling," said Anuradha Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and Executive Director of SWAN. "The DOD and VA should put the interests of service members first and expose information on the extent of sexual trauma in the military to the sanitizing light of day."

The lawsuit filed today states that the goal of the lawsuit is to "obtain the release of records on a matter of public concern, namely, the prevalence of MST within the armed services, the policies of the DOD and VA regarding MST and other related disabilities, and the nature of each agency's response to MST."

"The known statistics on military sexual trauma suggest that sexual abuse is all too prevalent in our military," said Sandra Park, staff attorney with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. ""But we know that many service members who suffer from abuse are not receiving the treatment they need. The truth about the extent of this abuse and what has been done to address it must be made known."

MST is particularly widespread among servicewomen, many of whom struggle to return to civilian life after suffering sexual assault or harassment while serving. While the number of homeless veterans has declined over the past 10 years, the number of homeless women veterans has doubled. In fact, 40 percent of homeless women veterans have been sexually assaulted while serving in the armed forces.

Survivors' VA disability claims are often rejected because they cannot prove an initial assault or rape, even if the veteran has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder by a VA military sexual trauma counselor.

"The government is failing to care for the overwhelming number of women who so desperately need help coping with something as devastating as rape, sexual assault and harassment," said Andrew Schneider, Executive Director of the ACLU of Connecticut. "These women have already put their lives on the line by serving their country. The least that the government can do is disclose the scope of the problem."

SLDN files complaint against gov't -- reinstate three service members booted under DADT

A complaint was filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco today by Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) and Morrison & Foerster LLP calling for the reinstatement of three service members discharged under DADT.  The filing argues the current law and the regulations, policies, and guidance that implement it, are unconstitutional. From the document:

This is a civil action to reinstate plaintiffs Michael D. Almy and Anthony J. Loverde into active duty in the United States Air Force, and to reinstate plaintiff Jason D. Knight into active duty in the United States Navy, following the plaintiffs' unlawful discharges from their respective branches of the military by defendants on account of the federal law colloquially known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," concerning gay, lesbian, and bisexual armed forces service members ("DADT").

2. This action is also brought to declare unconstitutional the discharges of plaintiffs Almy, Loverde, and Knight under DADT, and to declare the DADT statute, 10 U.S.C. ? 654, and the regulations, policies, and guidance that implement it, unconstitutional on their face.

SLDN's Executive Director and Army Veteran Aubrey Sarvis:

"This filing is a shot across the bow as we prepare to pursue and sustain an aggressive far reaching litigation strategy if the Senate fails to act this month to repeal the law. This dispute can be resolved by Congress or by the courts. With this filing we put Congress on notice that a cadre of service members and our national legal team stand ready to litigate strategically around the country. The plaintiffs are three service members who want to serve their country again. They represent some of our best and brightest who were fired because of who they are, despite their decorated records. More than 14,000 have already lost their jobs and the investigations and discharges still continue. We are also preparing litigation on behalf of young people who would enter the armed forces to serve our country but for this terrible law. Another suit we're working on involves clients discharged under 'Don't Ask' who want to enter the reserves or a guard unit, and we plan to file such cases early next year if Congress fails to act. Clearly there is an urgent need for the Senate to act on legislation this week."

Statement by Morrison & Foerster's M. Andrew Woodmansee:

"Today we are asking the Court to allow these three brave Americans to fulfill the commitment they made years ago when they joined the military. They simply want to serve their country, and it is fundamentally un-American to refuse their service merely because they are gay -- especially when our all-volunteer military is stretched thin as we fight wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Throughout our nation's history, citizens have turned to the courts to remedy injustices when Congress would not act. If the Senate will not meet its obligations by ending this unconstitutional law, we will ask the Court to step in to protect the rights of my clients as well as all men and women who wish to serve this country in the military."

The AP's Lisa Leff spoke to one of the plaintiffs:

"I don't feel like I'm going up against the military, I really don't. I just feel like this is a necessary step for doing away with this policy," said former Air Force Staff Sergeant Anthony Loverde. "I believe the military, the majority of troops I've served with and those who have been studied to death are with us."

At LGBTPOV, Karen Ocamb spoke to Dan Woods of White & Case, the law firm handling the Log Cabin Republican's federal lawsuit

"Major Almy and Sgt. Loverde were witnesses at our trial and the court's opinion in our case described their testimony and praised their credibility so our lawsuit has helped theirs.  We were aware that this was coming and have had conversations with Major Almy and the lawyers for the three service members.  Their lawsuit should not have any direct impact on ours, although it may provide additional ammunition to those seeking repeal in Congress.  The update on our case is straighforward:  we won, the government appealed, and the government's opening brief is due January 24

If repeal does not pass in this Congress, there are many possibilities, one of which might be to ask the government to withdraw its appeal but the chance of that happening would be slim, in my view."

More about the plaintiffs and background below the fold.

Via SLDN:

ABOUT THE PLANTIFFS:

 

Plaintiff Michael D. Almy

 served for thirteen years in the United States Air Force, including four deployments to the Middle East.  He is a highly trained communications officer.  During his thirteen-year Air Force career, former Major Almy received numerous military awards and decorations.  In 2006, he was discharged from the Air Force under DADT.

 

Plaintiff Anthony J. Loverde

 served for seven years in the Air Force.  He is a trained C-130 Loadmaster and Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory Technician.  During his seven-year Air Force career, former Staff Sergeant Loverde received numerous military awards and decorations.  In 2008, he was discharged from the Air Force under DADT.  He is currently a contractor serving in Iraq, doing effectively the same job with many of his old coworkers, as an openly gay man.

 

Plaintiff Jason D. Knight

 served for a total of five years in the United States Navy.  He is a trained Cryptological Technician Interpretive, Linguist.  During his five-year Navy career, former Petty Officer Second Class Knight received numerous military awards and decorations.  Mr. Knight has the unique distinction of being discharged twice under DADT.  In 2005, he was discharged from the Navy under DADT.  Mr. Knight was recalled to active duty in 2006 but was discharged again in 2007 under DADT.

 

AWARDS/DECORATIONS: Michael D. Almy

--Distinguished graduate,  Air Force ROTC  – 1992

--Officer of the Year for the entire group – 1999

--Air Force Achievement Medal – April 1999

--Air Force Commendation Medal – 1998

--Air Force Commendation Medal – February 2000

--Air Force Commendation Medal – October 2001

--Joint Service Commendation Medal – July 2003

--2004 Lt. Gen. Leo Marquez Communications-Electronics Award, Field Grade Manager Category

 

AWARDS/DECORATIONS: Anthony J. Loverde

--Air Medal with 1 oak leaf cluster

--Air Force Commendation Medal

--Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with 3 oak leaf clusters

--Air Force Good Conduct Medal

--National Defense Service Medal

--Global War on Terrorism Service Medal

--Air Force Overseas Ribbon: Long

--Air Force Expeditionary Service Ribbon with Gold Border

--Air Force Longevity Service

--Air Force NCO PME Graduate Ribbon

--Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon with 1 service star

--Air Force Training Ribbon

--Distinguished Graduate, Basic Loadmaster Course

--Distinguished Graduate, Airman Leadership School

--Airman Below-the-Zone promotion *Early promotion

 

AWARDS/DECORATIONS: Jason D. Knight

--Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal

--First Good Conduct Medal for Period Ending April 3, 2004

--National Defense Service Medal

--Global War on Terrorism Service Medal

--Navy Pistol Markmanship Medal

--Armed Forces Reserve Medal 2/”M” Devise

--Navy Good Conduct Medal

--Navy Rifle Sharpshooter Ribbon

--Sea Service Deployment Ribbon

--Navy and Marine Corps Overseas Service Ribbon

--Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal

--Member served in Imminent Danger Pay Area from September 11, 2006-April 18, 2007

--Mobilized in Support of Operation Enduring Freedom

 

LEGAL BACKGROUND

:

 

The legal team will ask the Court to apply the so-called Witt standard and order that the plaintiffs be reinstated.  In the case of Air Force Maj. Margaret Witt, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit – which governs the Northern District of California – held that discharging a service member violates the Constitution unless: (1) the government advances “an important governmental interest;” (2) the government shows the intrusion “upon the personal and private life” of a service member “significantly furthers that interest;” and (3) the government shows the intrusion is “necessary to further that interest.”

 

Legal team biography: M. Andrew Woodmansee, Partner, Morrison & Foerster: 

Legal team biography: Aaron Tax, Legal Director, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network: http://bit.ly/b2aCNm

Justice Monica Marquez becomes first Latina and first openly gay justice on Colorado Supreme Court

[image error]

photo credit AP

Justice Monica Marquez was sworn in last week as Colorado's newest Supreme Court justice.  Although Gov. Ritter appointed this former assistant attorney general because of her ability to be an excellent justice, there is no denying that her confirmation to the state's highest court also represents an important breakthrough for Latinas and for gays, and serves as a great reminder that many of us have overlapping identities.

The appointment of Monica Marquez to the Colorado Supreme Court moves the state past a couple of ethnic and sexual-orientation milestones.

But as he pondered his choice among three qualified candidates, history wasn't important to Gov. Bill Ritter.

"It is not because Monica is a Latina or because she is gay," he said. "I chose her because of her analytical ability and her keen intellect." [snip]

"I look forward to serving the state of Colorado in this new capacity, and I promise to bring an exceptional work ethic, a collaborative spirit, an open mind and a reverence for the rule of law," Marquez said.

Oregon also has two openly gay justices on its Supreme Court bench, Justices Rives Kistler and Virginia Linder.

Letter to President Obama on the Stalled VA Policy for Trans Veterans

(I felt the need to appeal to the President via E-mail on getting the stalled policy for the proper treatment of trans veterans out of the VA black hole.  The letters I keep getting from trans veterans of their mistreatment have been getting to me for a long time.  I hear they have people reading all E-mails at the WH, but I doubt it will go anywhere.  My phiosphy is that there is no shame in failure, but there is in failure to try.  I had to try.)

Dear Mr. President,

I am the President of the Transgender American Veterans Association, an 8-year organization to help trans veterans with their VA problems.  Trans veterans have been mistreated in the VA for decades, even those with 20 or more years of service.  We did a survey in 2007 and the results are horrible.  You can view it at  http://www.tavausa.org/Survey_Results...

In 2008, TAVA and NCTE worked with the VA to draft a new policy that would resolve the problems we saw in the survey.  However, the VA has been sitting on it since July of 2008 and no one can tell us why.  We even appealed to Sec. Shinseki and he hasn’t been able to help.  This is a final appeal to someone who may listen and I am hoping you care about veterans still having problems with the VA.

I know that you have more on your plate than a sumo wrestler in an all-you can eat restaurant, but I received two new stories from trans veterans in the last 24 hrs that made me want to write this.  We have read dozens of similar problems since July of 2008 and the new policy would have helped, but the VA is still allowing the mistreatment to continue unchecked.

I had “hope” that you would treat all veterans with the respect they deserved and you have gone a long way in that manner.  I thank you for that.  But, the job is not anywhere over.  There are still veterans who are treated with disdain and discrimination simply because of the direction their lives took AFTER they served this country.  They fought for this country.  They protected this country and the people in it.  They even bled for this country and gave their limbs for this country.  And yet, the US still treats them like 3rd class citizens.  Is that the right treatment they deserve?

Mr. President, I am begging you to help.  It can’t be any more simpler than that.  Please ask the VA to release that policy, called, “Providing Healthcare for Transgender and Intersex Veterans.”  I did eight years in the Navy, my father was a veteran of three wars, my grandfather was a veteran, my brother and his son are veterans.  My son served 4 years in the Marines and did two tours in Iraq, so you are getting this appeal from a long line of people who have served proudly.  Since TAVA has met with closed doors for 17 months, I felt a need to turn to you for help.  On behalf of the thousands of trans veterans in the US, I ask for your help.  Thank you, Mr. President.

Monica Helms

President, TAVA

~~~~~
Related:
* DADT and the TAVA Survey Revisited
* TAVA And The Palm Center: A Look At Transgender Military And Veteran Experiences

The Family Research Council tries to declare war on the Southern Poverty Law Center

crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters

Rumor control has it that the Family Research Council is taking its war against the Southern Poverty Law Center to another level.

FRC is supposedly launching a Start Debating, Stop Hating campaign designed to make it seem that SPLC is unfairly targeting the organization and other religious right groups for their stances against gay marriage.

For the record, SPLC is not targeting FRC nor any other religious right groups for their stances against gay marriage, but for their continued pushing of anti-gay falsehoods and propaganda which has been refuted more times than many of us have fingers to count.

But leave it to the Family Research Council make an attempt to obscure the issue.

On its webpage, FRC has a statement announcing the campaign. The organization is also inviting folks to sign its petition.

FRC's statement was nice but I felt that it needed work, therefore I made a few minor additions that I think puts proper perspective not only on FRC but the other organizations which were either named as hate groups or profiled.

Parts of FRC's statement are in bold and my "tweaking" is below each statement:

The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination.

" . . . hatred for men, which is very typical of a lesbian experience" - Kristi Hamrick,  October 16, 1996, Family Research Council web site.

"Homosexuals say they don't want the children, but boy they put a lot of energy into going after them." - Robert Knight of the Family Research Council writing in a Focus on the Family newsletter, quoted by People for the American Way, "Hostile Climate," 1997, p.15

"The homosexual rights movement has tried to distance itself from pedophilia, but only for public relations purposes." - "Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys," FRC publication, July 1999

The group, which was once known for combating racial bigotry, is now attacking several groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including marriage as the union of a man and a woman. How does the SPLC attack? By labeling its opponents “hate groups.” No discussion. No consideration of the issues. No engagement. No debate.

"Militant homosexuality is fundamentally opposed to religion, family, and anything that presupposes a natural moral order, a transcendent God, or something else higher than ourselves. The activist homosexual agenda and worldview are fundamentally incompatible with Christianity or any form of true religion, because homosexuality is ultimately narcissism" - THE ASSAULT ON CHRISTIANS BY THE MILITANT HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT, Steven A. Schwalm, Family Research Council.

"In fact, most mothers are more concerned with protecting their children from homosexual activists, who insist on their supposed 'right' to propagandize young schoolchildren." -  Americans for Truth About Homosexuality  press release, July 12, 1998

"Judge Walker has already decided this issue for himself, and has no business putting himself in a place where his own personal value judgments could be substituted for the express will of the people of California. He is Exhibit A as to why homosexuals should be disqualified from public office. Character is an important qualification for public service, and what an individual does in his private sexual life is a critical component of character. A man who ignores time-honored standards of sexual behavior simply cannot be trusted with the power of public office." - American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, August, 2010

 

This is intolerance pure and simple. Elements of the radical Left are trying to shut down informed discussion of policy issues that are being considered by Congress, legislatures, and the courts.

Christian homophobes have misused my writings on the biology of homosexuality, particularly "Gay Genes, Revisited," published in Scientific American in November 1995. -John Horgan, a science journalist and Director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, August  2010

" . . .our research is being used by select groups in US and Finland to suggest that gay and bisexual men live an unhealthy lifestyle that is destructive to themselves and to others. These homophobic groups appear more interested in restricting the human rights of gay and bisexuals rather than promoting their health and well being. " - Robert S Hogg, Steffanie A Strathdee, Kevin JP Craib, Michael V O'shaughnessy, Julio Montaner, and Martin T Schechter,  International Journal of Epidemiology, December 2001

Our debates can and must remain civil - but they must never be suppressed through personal assaults that aim only to malign an opponents character.

"How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn. […] American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die." - National Organization for Marriage board member Orson Scott Card, April 2009

"You've got these Mujaheddin on the battlefield setting out these syringes with the HIV virus in it as a way to carry out terrorism.This is exactly what happens when two males have sex with one another. If one of them is HIV Positive, then it's just like injecting his partner with a needle with HIV. That's domestic terrorism. I don't know what else you'd call it." - American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, September, 2010

We, the undersigned, stand in solidarity with


Family Research Council  - “(Gays) are luring kids into a homosexual behavior. There is a strong undercurrent of pedophilia in the homosexual subculture.” - Robert Knight, Family Research Council, Rolling Stone, March 18, 1999

American Family Association  - "Hitler recruited around him homosexuals to make up his Stormtroopers, they were his enforcers, they were his thugs. And Hitler discovered that he could not get straight soldiers to be savage and brutal and vicious enough to carry out his orders, but that homosexual solders basically had no limits and the savagery and brutality they were willing to inflict on whomever Hitler sent them after."- American Family Association's Bryan Fisher, May 2010

Concerned Women of America - "Do you believe school children as young as 13 should be exposed to explicit, detailed discussions and instructions on homosexual practices (including sodomy) as are being conducted by homosexual teachers and activists right now?" - March 2009

National Organization for Marriage  - For a time, NOM’s name was used by a bus driver named Louis Marinelli, who drove a van for NOM’s “Summer for Marriage Tour” this year. Marinelli called himself a “NOM strategist” and sent out electronic messages under the NOM logo that repeated falsehoods about homosexuals being pedophiles and gay men having extremely short lifespans. In homemade videos posted on his own YouTube page, he said same-sex marriage would lead to “prostitution, pedophilia and polygamy.” But this July, NOM said it was not associated with Marinelli. - Southern Poverty Law Center, Intelligence Report, Winter 2010.

Liberty Counsel - “one man violently cramming his penis into another man’s lower intestine and calling it ‘love.’" - Liberty Counsel member Matt Barber describing gay relationships.

and other pro-family organizations

 

These groups include: Traditional Values Coalition - "Reverend Louis Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition has come out in favor of quarantining AIDS patients in what he calls 'cities of refuge.' " - Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

Family Research Institute - “Untrammeled homosexuality can take over and destroy a social system. If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one’s own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get- and that is what homosexuality seems to be-then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm.” - Family Research Institute head Paul Cameron, Rolling Stone, March 18, 1999

Addendum about Paul Cameron: "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" - American Sociological Association, 1985

"The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism." - The Canadian Psychological Association, 1996

Faithful Baptist Church - "I do hate homosexuals and if hating homosexuals makes our church a hate group then that's what we are." - Steven Anderson, pastor at Faithful Baptist Church, December 2010.

Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment - " . . .while having separate barracks for homosexuals and heterosexuals would help solve the problem of homosexuals ogling or sexually harassing heterosexuals, it would probably exacerbate the problem of homosexuals ogling or sexually harassing each other since they are sexually attracted to each other and they would be confined in close quarters. Oddly enough, in order to ameliorate that problem it would make some sense to mix male homosexuals with lesbians in the same barracks because they do not sexually attract each other. This mixing would reduce the amount of sexual desire or tension in homosexual barracks. " - statement on the group's web page

that are working to protect and promote natural marriage and family. We support the vigorous but responsible exercise of the First Amendment rights of free speech and religious liberty that are the birthright of all Americans.

Perhaps instead Stop Hating, Start Debating, FRC should name its campaign We can't stop trying because we are afraid to admit that we have been lying.

(The statements from FRC and other religious right groups have been taken from various web pages, including my blog and I stand by each statement.)

Related posts:

Peter LaBarbera's ramblings exposes the Family Research Council's deception

Do not censor religious right groups. Demand that they answer questions

 

Guest column by Jim Neal - DADT: Behind the Scenes

Friend of the Blend, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Neal (D-NC) wanted to share his latest piece on DADT with the coffeehouse. It's a peek behind the political curtain...

DADT: Behind the Scenes

By Jim Neal

Given my overexposure to US politics and the lessons gleaned from my unsuccessful candidacy for the Senate in 2008, I now get to be soothsayer of sorts. I advise clients on how certain legislation of interest is likely to exit the Congress. What I do is piece the mosaic together in a similar fashion to how a detective investigates a murder.

The public, even most of those supposedly in-the-know, often don't grasp the dynamics of political inside baseball. The best illustration is how people interpret roll call votes. The overwhelming majority of pundits and activists assess a politician's vote on a piece of legislation with the strict constructionism of a Justice Scalia. In reality, roll call votes are quite deceptive and misleading. Today's murder of DADT by the Senate is a case in point.

A strict interpretation of the 57-40 roll call vote to proceed to debate over repealing DADT suggests that if Democratic Senators Joe Manchin (D- W.Va.) and Blanche Lincoln (D- Ark.) been present and voted Aye- bumping that tally to 59- then Senator Scott Brown might have felt pressure to get in line, given his expressed public support for repeal of DADT and upcoming re-election bid. That scenario seems all the more probable given the biggest surprise of the day. Senator Susan Collins (R- Maine), who had agreed to support repeal of DADT only in the event that four days were allotted for a full debate, apparently abandoned that position and voted in favor of repeal.

That yarn is simply not the reality. The cloture motion was doomed from the moment Speaker Reid impulsively decided to bring the vote before the Senate today. Here's the real skinny as best I can piece it together.

Senator Collins did not soften her conditions. She was able to make a symbolic Aye vote because she knew -- as did others -- that she had cover from her Republican colleagues, either or both of Senators Murkowski and Brown. In turn, Speaker Reid cared less about how the arch-conservative Senator Manchin voted. It didn't matter. The Speaker wanted to clear the docket and get DADT out of the way. Other legislation in the pipeline takes priority, namely the tax cut bill and ratification of the START Treaty.

As for Senator Lincoln, she was at a dental appointment . What has gone unsaid is that she also wasn't aware that Speaker Reid was bringing the cloture motion before the Senate today. That is the only reason she wasn't present. She wasn't needed. If she were, the  vote would have been delayed.

With that as a backdrop, the drama will now move forward with a stand-alone bill to repeal DADT to be sponsored by Senators Lieberman, Collins and Udall (D- Colo.). Using a Senate procedure known as Rule 14, Speaker Reid can bring the legislation directly to the floor and bypass the Armed Services Committee.

Any hope of repealing DADT under a prospective Lieberman bill will require very tight coordination and communication between Senators Collins, Lieberman and their caucuses. Clearly there will have to be ample time allotted for GOP Senators to excoriate the legislation. However, this bill has no future if the Senate does not stay in session beyond December 17th as is currently planned.

Most Senators are anxious to get home and open Christmas presents and toast the New Year. They need to consider the peoples' business first. Given that the President has effectively ceded control of the Senate calendar to the GOP via his so-called compromise framework on tax cut legislation, Democrats have no choice but to roll with the punches. That will require Speaker Reid to keep the Senate in session for as long as it takes. Only then might Senator Collins- with Senators Murkowski and Brown covering her back- take center stage as the Diva of DADT.

I hope that I will hear the Lady from Maine sing by the end of this session. Talk about an operatic production....

Follow Jim Neal on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JNealNC

PHB weekend open forum: dealing with chronic pain

I Tweeted and Facebooked this afternoon:

Battling bad, bad diabetic neuropathy today. Even capsaicin won't tamp down pain. Can hardly walk. Dammit.

It naturally generated a lot of kind "get well" responses, but what's noteworthy is that there were a number of people who contacted me who either knew someone living with chronic pain or experienced it themselves and were offering tips and tricks or war stories. There were enough reactions in that vein that I thought it might be worth a post so see how others are dealing with it.

Some folks were theorizing that since I'm recovering from surgery, that I might be in a heightened pain response mode in my case. It could be related to my fibromyalgia. In my case, for instance, pain from diabetic neuropathy is something that flares up many times with fibro. Not this time.

Who knows what's going on, since pain management for those with chronic pain can be an elusive, frustrating battle.  What I do know is all the tricks in my neuropathy playbook were not helping to relieve the burning, stinging, both numb and ultra-sensitive feeling in my feet all last night. It hurts so much that I cannot put any shoes on other than some really padded slippers. Walking to the bathroom, only a few feet away, is cringe-inducing.

This may clear up on its own if I can get to sleep; since my fibro is fairly well-controlled with a combo of Lyrica and Cymbalta (it's taken years to find the  effective drugs and dosages). Even then, flares can still occur from time to time. I take magnesium and Vitamin D supplements as well. Since I have insulin-dependent diabetes as well, juggling that, particularly before and after surgery, is also taxing. But I can say that it is in great control.

The down side is that the nerve damage in my feet is apparently permanent, since tight control hasn't made a difference in pain levels when neuropathy decides to flare up. My magic bullet up until now has been the use of capsaicin cream, which is derived from hot peppers. It has proven to be helpful in counteracting the nerve pain, but it did jack sh*t last night.

All of this is not to make you feel sorry for me -- I consider myself lucky. The fact is that millions of people out there deal with some sort of chronic, sometimes debilitating pain that common pain relievers don't help, or don't have health insurance to help cover the meds (or worse, have insurance that won't cover a med). I'm also pretty fortunate that there are many days where I am nearly pain free (post-surgery pain excepted right now) when everything is in balance. But so many things can throw it out of whack - changes in weather, over-work, lack of sleep, travel - that it's a dice roll.

Many people are dealing with pain that requires them to be on narcotics all the time. I cannot imagine that, particularly since your local pharmacy is always hypervigilant about refills of something like Percocet or Oxycodone (thanks, Rushbo!), making one feel like a criminal for filling a script for a legitimate prescription medication that is abused, sold and stolen.

So here are some discussion questions:

* Do you know someone or are someone dealing with chronic pain?

* How is it managed?

* How does it affect quality of life?

* What are any issues re: health insurance?

* What alternative medicine, holistic remedies have been tried? Success?

* How have your doctors been in terms of understanding pain management?

And feel free to share other issues about it.

The Hazards of Being Bisexual

We don't hear a lot about the "B" part of LGBT. Out of our group of incredibly diverse Baristas, I'm the only one who claims that letter in the alphabet soup. It comes with with its own territorial hazards, both with straight people and within "the Family."

Telling someone I'm bi is always a hit or miss experience. I tend to run into one or more of the following attitudes:

1) Bisexual people are just confused, going through a phase, or claiming it as part of rebellion.

2) Bisexual women are really straight, but vying for male attention (aka Katy Perry syndrome).

3) Bisexuals are prone to lying and promiscuity, they can’t be monogamous because they’re always looking at the other gender and wanting what they’re missing (read: bisexual = depraved slut).

4) Bisexual people can “pass for straight” and when they have hetero relationships, they’re traitors. They aren’t really part of “the family.”

More under the fold.
To address the first attitude: I’m not confused. I have the physical and emotional capacity to be in romantic or sexual relationships with both men and women. There is nothing confusing about this. It simply is. I’ve known since age 14 that I'm attracted to both men and women. I’ve had girlfriends and boyfriends. I have been married to a man, and was partnered with another woman for three years. That’s over half my life, hardly a phase.

On the second: God, do I hate this. One of the reasons that I don’t identify myself as bi (I personally like the term queer better anyways, YMMV) is specifically because I present as a femme woman, and in our male-dominated society, a bisexual femme woman is presumed to be bi only so long as it gets her male attention. This is utter crap, based on the social norm that women's bodies are there for male pleasure (there's that gender inequitable society again!). I don’t have it on with women as a way to draw in more men. I seek out women because I love them. In order for this attitude to be overcome, we have got to have a more gender equitable society where a woman's sexuality is for her own pleasure, and not for that of straight cis men.

On the third: This is insulting, and saddening. Why the negative attitudes towards us Bs? Jealousy? Bitterness? Are there really that many people who were in relationships with someone they presumed was either a 1 or 5 on the Kinsey scale, and then were left behind for another lover, who just happened to be of a different gender? Is it projection?

Let’s all remember that for many people sexuality is fluid, and can change throughout our lives. The important thing when you’re in a relationship, no matter the orientation or gender identity of the individuals involved, is to communicate. Let’s stop blaming other people’s sexuality and gender for what, in the end, is an issue about trust, honesty, and a willingness to communicate and accept people for who they are. And leave the projection to Peter Labarbera.

On the fourth: I’m not going to pretend that bi erasure is anywhere near the kind of oppression that gay and lesbian people go through on a daily basis. As was said in another forum, invisibility through passing privilege is a far cry from oppression. I was with another woman for three years. I know what oppression of gay and lesbian people is like; I’ve lived it, both as a queer woman living under DADT, and as the partner of a lesbian servicemember. In tandem with this are gender norm expectations. I present as femme. It’s just who I am. As a femme-presenting female, I pass as straight in society’s eyes unless visibly in a relationship with a woman, hence I have straight privilege unless I declare otherwise. But I’m queer.

Identity is its own monster. Gender and sexuality are not black and white, labels don't mean much, and it gets old to be told to fit into some binary ideal. I get tired of hearing about how I’m not a "true gay" because I have at times matched the default hetero norm. My internal experience was completely valid for me, but somehow not for everyone else. And yet, when I was with my ex-partner, I was fully accepted in the alphabet soup family. It’s like oppression is a competition. I thought we were all in this together, to normalize gender and sexuality queerness in the world at large.

So what happens if the Right Guy comes along? I will be surprised as hell, probably unprepared. After a battle with my mind, my heart will win. We don’t just choose whom to love, after all. The heart wants what it wants, and no amount of attempts to segment and label will change that. I realize that in that situation I will pass for straight, and my relationship will have automatic societal respect. I would have straight privilege. It won’t stop me from being bisexual. But it will mean that for all practical purposes I’ll be trading in my “queer” credentials for a membership card that says “ally,” and all my past experiences be damned.

Why should that be? Because I’d have fallen in love with one of the genders I’m attracted to, that makes me some kind of traitor? That just sucks, because so much of my life is wrapped up in being queer, in combating oppression, and normalizing queerness in general society. A straight relationship status wouldn’t invalidate any previous experience of homophobia, nor would it influence me to stop working for equality. But I’m almost afraid to contemplate a hetero relationship for fear of changing that part of my life. I invested so much time and energy in coming to terms with being out as a woman who loves women. I lost a lot of friends and family over it, and to have to go through all that all over again on the opposite side of the coin is daunting.

Bisexual Blenders, speak up. What are your experiences with being bi? What have you found to be true for you?