Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 43

Saturday With The Transsexual Empire

Homophobia and transphobia are the ugliest when they come from inside the community.

~Calpernia Addams

In a manner somewhat similar -- and significantly different -- to Keith Olbermann having Fridays with James Thurber, I'm going to have a few weeks of Saturdays with Janice Raymond. I'll provide have some excerpts from The Transsexual Empire: The Making Of The She/Male, as well as add some commentary.

The reason is pretty simple: I want to show what the ideas of radical, second wave, lesbian-feminism from the 1970's looked like then, and show that a good number of the ideas Raymond expressed are still being kicked around in some circles today.

I'm also aiming to show trans people what ugly, rigid thinking looks like to from our community's Devil, and asking us to compare what she said then to how some in our community address others not only in trans community, but also how some of us address others in the broader lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. In other words, I believe we need to metaphorically hold a mirror up to ourselves and ask if what we appear to be is what we actually want to be.

So, today's excerpt from The Transsexual Menace is from Chapter IV, Sappho by Surgery. These paragraphs -- especially the last two highlighted -- are probably the main reason Janice Raymond is considered to be The Devil herself to many trans community members:

...What is also typically masculine in the case of the transsexually constructed lesbian-feminist is the appropriation of women's minds, convictions of feminism, and sexuality. One of the definitions of male, as related to Webster's, is "designed for fitting into a corresponding hollow part." This, of course, means much more than the literal signification of heterosexual intercourse. It can be taken to mean that men have been very adept at penetrating all of women's "hollow" spaces, at filling up the gaps, and of sliding into the interstices. Obviously, women why are in the process of moving out of patriarchal institutions, consciousness, and modes of living are very vulnerable and have gaps. I would imagine that it would be difficult , for example, for Olivia Records to find a female sound engineer and that such a person would be absolutely necessary to the survival of Olivia. But it would have been far more honest if Olivia had acknowledged the maleness of Sandy Stone and perhaps the necessity, at the time, to employ a man in this role. As one woman wrote of Sandy Stone and the Olivia controversy: "I feel raped when Olivia passes off Sandy, a transsexual, as a real woman. After all his male privilege, is he going to cash in on lesbian feminist culture too?"

Rape, of course, is a masculinist violation of bodily integrity. All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves. However, the transsexuality constructed lesbian-feminist violates women's sexuality and spirit, as well. Rape, although it is usually done by force, can also be accomplished by deception. It is significant that in the case of the transsexually constructed lesbian-feminist, often he is able to gain entrance and a dominant position in women's spaces because the women involved do not know he is a transsexual and he just does not happen to mention it.

...Because transsexuals have lost their physical "members" does not mean that they have lost their ability to penetrate women -- women's mind, women's space, women's sexuality. Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women so that the seem noninvasive. However, as Mary Daly has remarked, in the case of the transsexually constructed lesbian-feminists their whole presence becomes a "member" invading women's presence and dividing us once more from each other.

Sandy Stone's story, relating to this passage, is on Wikipedia. She went onto into academia after that incident, writing a piece defining posttranssexualism in her 1987 work The "Empire" Strikes Back: A Posttranssexual Manifesto.

From the last paragraphs of the manifesto:

[More below the fold.]

Transsexuals who pass seem able to ignore the fact that by creating totalized, monistic identities, forgoing physical and subjective intertextuality, they have foreclosed the possibility of authentic relationships. Under the principle of passing, denying the destabilizing power of being "read", relationships begin as lies--and passing, of course, is not an activity restricted to transsexuals. This is familiar to the person of color whose skin is light enough to pass as white, or to the closet gay or lesbian... or to anyone who has chosen invisibility as an imperfect solution to personal dissonance. Essentially I am rearticulating one of the arguments for solidarity which has been developed by gays, lesbians and people of color. The comparison extends further. To deconstruct the necessity for passing implies that transsexuals must take responsibility for all of their history, to begin to rearticulate their lives not as a series of erasures in the service of a species of feminism conceived from within a traditional frame, but as a political action begun by reappropriating difference and reclaiming the power of the refigured and reinscribed body. The disruptions of the old patterns of desire that the multiple dissonances of the transsexual body imply produce not an irreducible alterity but a myriad of alterities, whose unanticipated juxtapositions hold what Donna Haraway has called the promises of monsters-- physicalities of constantly shifting figure and ground that exceed the frame of any possible representation.

The essence of transsexualism is the act of passing. A transsexual who passes is obeying the Derridean imperative: "Genres are not to be mixed. I will not mix genres." I could not ask a transsexual for anything more inconceivable than to forgo passing, to be consciously "read", to read oneself aloud--and by this troubling and productive reading, to begin to write oneself into the discourses by which one has been written--in effect, then, to become a [look out-- dare I say it again?] posttranssexual. Still, transsexuals know that silence can be an extremely high price to pay for acceptance. I want to speak directly to the brothers and sisters who may read/"read" this and say: I ask all of us to use the strength which brought us through the effort of restructuring identity, and which has also helped us to live in silence and denial, for a re-visioning of our lives. I know you feel that most of the work is behind you and that the price of invisibility is not great. But, although individual change is the foundation of all things, it is not the end of all things. Perhaps it's time to begin laying the groundwork for the next transformation.

To "read oneself aloud" -- I embrace the concept for myself. It is a posttranssexual experience for me to embrace a transgender experience as my own, diversity-minded experience. I know that reading myself aloud, this being out and proud as both transsexual and transgender, has been defining for who I've developed into. I certainly will not pay the extremely high price of silence for personal acceptance within any portion of our broad society.

When as a community of trans people we embrace reading ourselves aloud, and work towards the freedom, justice, and ordinary equality of not just our individual selves, but for the othered inside and outside of our own community as well, then we live up to our potential as instruments of change. We have the ability to change the world for the better for then next generations of trans human beings who will come after us.

So is it rape for we male-to-female trans people to call ourselves women, and function in society as women? Are we trans people embracing societal sex stereotypes, or are we embracing experience that is poststereotype?

I would argue there are many types of women -- African-American women, Latinas, Christian women, Pagan women, disabled women, women veterans, lesbians, heterosexual women, etc. -- I argue that trans women are just another kind of woman, not people to be othered as lesser, false beings. We are accepting an essential truth of who we know ourselves to be, and a rejection of societal sex roles and sex stereotypes are essential components of knowing and embracing that essential truth about ourselves.

But here we trans women are, sometimes very welcome and very sometimes unwelcome in the community of women. Janice Raymond expressed unwelcoming attitudes towards accepting transsexual women as women, and expressed it in a sharply worded rape metaphor. Her use of a rape metaphor to make her point is a sad reminder that language that incorporates homophobia or transphobia really is the ugliest when that kind of language comes from inside community.

Trans people should remember how ugly both homophobia and transphobia really are when we ourselves speak and write unflatteringly about other individuals within our LGBT community. Whether we'll be individually judged as being as evil as Janice Raymond has been judged by many of us in trans community will depend greatly on the terms, metaphors, and manner in which we speak and write about those we disagree with.

Sadly, I've witnessed over the years that many of us trans folk can be just as homophobic and transphobic as those outside of trans community.

I don't think it too controversial to say that hate speech is detestable, and that pejoratives, as well as charged metaphors and acrid speech directed at minority populations, are examples of speech that the best of us should no doubt take great effort to avoid.

.

$140K flushed away: retired subway worker invests life savings in 5/21/2011 Rapture ads

Continuing our little countdown to The Rapture on May 21, here's one guy who is going to be S.O.L. on May 22.

A retired MTA employee has pumped his $140,000 life savings into an ad campaign warning that the world will end on May 21. Robert Fitzpatrick, a follower of the notorious California Evangalist Harold Camping, has posted his Doomsday message on 1,000 subway car placards and at bus shelters throughout New York city.

...According to the predictions of the Family Radio ministry, on May 21 a massive earthquake will shake the world apart, littering the ground with 'many dead bodies'.

The calculations for Doomsday (or the day we are free to take the Rapturee's earthly possessions when they head up to paradise) is "explained" in the article:

Taking a passage from 2 Peter 3:8, in which it is said a day for God is like a thousand human years, the church reasoned that seven 'days' equals 7000 human years from the time of the flood, making 2011 the year of the apocalypse.

In its second 'proof' the exact date is revealed by working forward from the exact date of the of the crucifixion - April 1, 33 AD.

According to their reasoning, there are exactly 722,500 days from April 1, 33 A.D. until May 21, 2011 - the alleged day of judgement.

Related:

* Are you rapture ready - fundie billboards say the end is near: May 21, 2011

* More Rapture-readiness: MN jeweler launches 50% off Second Coming Sale

Q for the weekend - how about the diversity in your personal life?

My cousin Julie asked this of her Facebook friends, and I thought it would provide interesting and enlightening discussion here if you all are open to honest discussion.

We all know the awful truth about the "post-racial society' myth that was propogated by pundits during Obama's run for the White House. It was blown away quickly by the rancid amount of racist garbage spewed by McCain/Palin supporters on the road. It's easy to slam outlandish bigotry, but the real end of racism will come from small acts in personal lives - extending yourself beyond your comfort zone to meet and converse with people who different from you for the sake of personal enrichment.

So with that, the Q of the day:

In an average week how often do you voluntarily spend time with people who are of a different race, religion or politics from your own? (Voluntarily means, for instance, that working with someone doesn't count, but going to lunch with someone from work does.)

More below the fold.
I've been interested in people who were from different backgrounds, races, religions. I credit my time at Stuyvesant for helping to cultivate that as well. Like most schools in the U.S., the lunchroom is often a place of racial segregation. This is true to an extent, but my group of fellow-geek friends shared the desire to learn more about the differences in race, religion, ethnicities as well as what band you listened to. I guess our commonality is that we were all a bit eccentric (and there to learn, since Stuy was and is a geek school), not part of the popular crowd by any stretch of the imagination. We were, however, drawn to each other because our mutual distaste for exclusionary cliques, lol.

Hilarious photos: Left - me, 1980, in front of Stuyvesant HS in Manhattan, NYC, in a beret and wool poncho. (I was kind enough to crop my friend next to me out, though she was more fashionable than I was, lol). Right: The Morning Crew at Stuy. We all came to school really, really early to hang out on 15th Street to gab before 1st period.

It was also a time where Stuyvesant itself was more diverse than it is now, a point of contention in the news. And we see schools, like those in the Wake County system, with boards that see diversity as much ado about nothing and a nuisance, rather than a strength to enrich students with perspectives that will help them in the working world. Our natural propensity to gravitate toward those more like us than not is not an excuse to leave it unchallenged as adults out of fear or just plain laziness.

Kirsten Gillibrand: "My Goal is to Talk to All of Them."

Senator (D-Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party) Gillibrand of New York said today in a television interview that her goal was to talk to every NY State Senator, Democrat or Republican who is undecided on the issue of marriage equality.

 Listen:

My goal is to talk to all of them...All of the undecided state senators. Anyone who's vote is in play. I hope to talk to each and every one of them over the next few days...They're beginning to understand that marriage equality is when two people want to make that commitment. That commitment of love and dedication, and it’s also about children.

So where do things stand in New York?
At this point, despite polling that consistently shows a firm majority of New Yorkers in favor of marriage equality; despite marriage equality being a top issue for Governor Cuomo (he of the cosmologically immense favorability rating); despite marriage equality being favored by both of New York State's Senators; despite a television ad campaign featuring a significant number of prominent New Yorkers in favor of marriage equality; despite both former President Clinton and his daughter coming out strongly for marriage equality, despite all this...

Only 26 of New York State's 62 Senators are publicly committed to vote to legalize same-sex marriage, and all of those had done so before the push began. 

Just as with Minnesota's recent vote in their Senate on a bill to amend the constitution to ban same-sex marriage, not a single Republican seems to be willing to break out of lockstep and embrace a position that even such disparate Republicans as Dick Cheney, Cindy McCain, Laura Bush, Ken Mehlman and Arnold Swartzenegger are in favor of.  Not a single one. (Four New York Senate Democrats as well remain opposed).

It would be harder to imagine a fiercer advocate for equal rights than Senator Gillibrand. It's not like this is the only issue on her gay secular fascist agenda, yet time and time again it seems like she's there, doing whatever she can to help, from DADT repeal to women's rights to marriage equality to standing up for first responders and their families.

Senator, it's nice to know there are a least a couple of people in the US Senate it is possible to respect, and you are one of them. I don't know if your efforts in this will succeed, but

Thank you Senator! Thank you Senator! Thank you Senator! Thank you Senator!

DOMA Ruled No Bar To Gay Couple Seeking Bankruptcy

Well, isn't this interesting? New York Law Journal has a report on a Federal bankruptcy case in New York's Southern District, Sommers and Caggiano. They have decided that DOMA is not a bar to the couple seeking a joint bankruptcy action. They were legally married in Vermont. Excerpt via Daily Kos (NYLJ requires registration) much more of the excerpt is there.

The Court will not conduct its own constitutional analysis of the Act since the issue is not before the Court and has not been briefed by the parties. Nevertheless, "[t]he court has substantial discretion in ruling on a motion to dismiss under section 707(a), and in exercising that discretion must consider any extenuating circumstances, as well as the interests of the various parties." Collier on Bankruptcy P 707.03 (Alan N. Resnick & Henry J. Sommer eds., 16th ed.) (emphasis added); see also In re Atlas Supply Corp., 857 F.2d 1061 (5th Cir. 1988) (stating that a court may be guided by equitable principals in determining a motion to dismiss). One extenuating circumstance that the Court finds relevant is that the United States Department of Justice, acting under the instruction of the Attorney General and the President of the United States, argues that "DOMA may not be constitutionally applied to same-sex couples" and has stopped defending the law in cases pending in this Circuit. See Letter from Tony West to Judge Barbara S. Jones (Feb. 24, 2011) (Docket No. 10), Windsor v. United States, No. 1:10-cv­8435 (S.D.N.Y.); see also Pedersen v. OPM, No. 3:10-cv-1750 (D. Conn.). In this case, the United States Trustee, who is appointed by the Attorney General pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §581, appears to defend the law and yet has offered nothing more than a restatement of the language of DOMA. The mere existence of DOMA is not sufficient to remove the duty imposed on this Court by section 707(a) to find "cause" prior to dismissing the case. See 11 U.S.C. §707(a).

The gist of it seems to be the couple moved to file a joint bankruptcy and the US Trustee, a division of the Department of Justice sought to dismiss their joint claim, citing the Defense of Marriage Act. The court however found the DOJ's own stance that DOMA may not be Constitutional provided enough basis to deny the motion to dismiss. And concluded:

At a hearing on a motion to dismiss, the court is required to consider the impact the dismissal will have on the various entities and ascertain which direction satisfies the best interest of all parties.").

Here, the Trustee has failed to convince the Court that dismissal is in the best interests of all parties. [...]

Dismissal is not in the best interests of the Debtors, who would lose the benefit of their fresh start and would incur greater administrative costs if they sever their petition and file a second case.

Also:

Dismissing or severing the case at this stage, would duplicate work and costs for the Debtors, the creditors, the Trustee, and the Court.

With the Constitutionality of DOMA in question, the Judge in the case has decided he has enough discretion to proceed as though DOMA does not, and in the future, will not apply.

So much irony here. A gay couple seeking bankruptcy our latest LGBT rights ground breakers? I thought I read somewhere that all the gays were rich and powerful?

And of course, there's the irony that Government will deign to allow us to declare bankruptcy, but not our love before a Justice of the peace. 

Snarky commentary aside, this is very good news for LGBT rights, if not for the couple themselves. It is interesting to see a Federal Court decide to proceed as though DOMA is toothless. Every little crack in this discriminatory law is one crack closer to the ugly little house of cards collapsing entirely.

Breaking: Tammy Baldwin may run for retiring Sen. Herb Kohl's seat

We could see the first openly lesbian United States Senator soon, as Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) has indicated (as in "Sources close to Cong. Tammy Baldwin") that she will run to fill the Senate seat vacated by Sen. Herbert Kohl, who is retiring.

The announcement by the 76-year-old Kohl is a blow to Democrats who will now have to defend another open seat against Republicans in a swing state. Kohl, also owner of the NBA Milwaukee Bucks, is the fifth Democratic senator to announce his retirement ahead of the 2012 election.

Kohl is also one of only two Democrats who hold statewide office in Wisconsin. Republicans are coming off a year in which they defeated Russ Feingold, reclaimed the governor's office and both houses of the Legislature and picked up two seats in Congress.

A run by the progressive Baldwin would make for an exciting race. David Weigel at Slate describes other possible contenders:

Rep. Ron Kind (a charming wonk who survived a tough race in 2010), and Tom Barrett (the mayor of Milwaukee who lost to Scott Walker in 2010). Among the replacements on the GOP side: Former congressman Mark Neumann (who lost the 2010 primary to Walker) and Attorney General JB Van Hollen. The celebrity potential candidates on either side are Russ Feingold and Paul Ryan.

Alaska: Wasilla HS tried to ban Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody because Freddie Mercury was gay

I guess that we shouldn't be surprised by the level of ignorance at the school where Sarah Palin hails from. (LezGetReal):

Legendary Queen front man, Freddie Mercury is still causing a ruckus, even though he's been dead for close to 20 years. Principal Dwight Probasco of Wasilla High School in Alaska decided that after hearing from a graduating seniors' parents that Mercury was gay, decided to pull the jazz choir's rendition of "Bohemian Rhapsody" for senior graduation. Not sure who originally chose the song but at least it shows a great taste in music.

Perhaps the parents felt that the gay would rub off during the course of the performance, either way, Probasco was quick to ban the song in order to appease the parents.

One choir member was so outraged by this asshattery that she contacted the ACLU and the principal backed down and let the song be used - but insisted on omitting the line where Mercury refers to "killing a man."

According to the principal's logic, as some of my Facebook friends noted. that would mean no more work of these artists at Wasilla...

TchaikovskyCole PorterAaron CoplandJudas Priest (Rob Halford)Johnny MathisElton JohnMelissa EtheridgeDusty SpringfieldK.D. LangTracy ChapmanBoy GeorgeMichael StipeGeorge MichaelLeonard Bernstein

I'm sure you can add to that list, lol.

Ron Paul squeezes into the PHB 2012 GOP Clown Car

Boy, it's getting crowded already. But Ron slips in again...Welcome Ron Paul - as he hops into the PHB 2012 GOP Clown Car for another ride. He made his announcement this AM on Good Morning America.

"I am officially announcing that I am a candidate for president in the Republican primary," he said.

...The congressman and obstetrician - whose son is Kentucky Senator Rand Paul - is well known for his stance against the Federal Reserve and has taken controversial positions such as legalizing heroin or recently saying that he would not have ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden.

(Politico):

Paul has already taken several incremental steps toward a full-fledged campaign, most recently opening an Iowa campaign office north of Des Moines earlier this week. He also recently raked in more than $1 million during a one-day online "money bomb" ahead of the first GOP presidential debate, demonstrating the continued strength of the grassroots fundraising machine that turned heads during his 2008 campaign.

Let's all join together to keep tabs on NOM's lies

The National Organization for Marriage consistently talks about how the organization is working to "protect marriage" and how to "traditional marriage" isn't bigotry.

One wonders if Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown of NOM took classes from political pollster and consultant Frank Luntz in terms of how they stay on that message even the face of the fact that the message is a complete dodge.

You have to give them props for that.

However, that's all you can give them props for. In terms of integrity and truth, one almost wishes that there was a grade lower than "F" to give the organization.

So I have decided to do something as a way to remind folks of the emptiness of NOM's message.

I am keeping tabs on just how often the group and its members contradicts its claim of simply "protecting marriage."

 

To me, NOM's actions are bigotry, but it goes farther than that.  If you took a look at NOM's past actions, you would find that the organization  has been engaging in extremely un-Christian tactics in order to gain success for its endeavors. Granted, nothing illegal has been going on (at least as far as I know) but NOM's actions belie the organization's claim that it's simply an innocent group protecting marriage: 

 

The latest questionable action comes courtesy of Jeremy Hooper. On it's blog, NOM is implying that a random reader of the Minnesota's Star Tribune wrote a letter to the editor the state's marriage amendment. However, as Hooper details, the man - William LeMire - isn't necessarily random. Then there are the recent developments in New York with NOM's anti-gay marriage commercial using refuted information.NOM's supporting of a poll in the very homophobic World Net Daily, a publication which also pushes birther claims regarding President Obama.Then there is Maggie Gallagher's awful appearance at a Congressional hearing on "protecting marriage" where she contradicted her past statements against the lgbt community and same-sex households.How NOM pushed the propaganda of a known Massachusetts hate group in Maryland.And last but least, the organization's attempts to ignore state disclosure laws, resulting in several investigations into its finances.

The list isn't complete yet. But like that old saying goes - "it ain't, but it's gonna be."

After all, NOM gives us so much to work with.

Got tips? Send them to charlekenghis@aol.com

Defending traditional marriage certainly isn't bigotry but demonizing the lgbt community to defend traditional marriage IS bigotry. And lying to defend traditional marriage is even worse.


Some information for this post is taken from NOM Exposed and Equality Matters 

You can become fans of their facebook pages here and here.

UPDATE: U.S. State Department condemns Uganda's 'kill the gays' bill; Parliament adjourns - no vote

UPDATE: The bill has been shelved and Parliament has adjourned, according to the AP:

The speaker of Uganda's parliament says there is not enough time for legislators to act on a controversial anti-gay bill -- which in some cases mandates the death sentence -- before parliament's session ends next week.

Jim Burroway has more.Today the Uganda parliament is expected to debate the proposed bill that would may homosexuality a capital crime punishible by death. The U.S. State Department called it "odious" in its condemnation of the legislation. (CNN):

"No amendments, no changes, would justify the passage of this odious bill," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters. "Both (President Barack Obama) and (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) publicly said it is inconsistent with universal human rights standards and obligations."

..."We are following this legislative process very closely," Toner said. "Our embassy is closely monitoring the parliament's proceedings and we also are in close contact with Uganda's civil rights and civil society leaders, as well as members of the (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community there."

Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin has been following this story for quite some time and has the full text of the bill. A summary of what the bill will do is below the fold.
 

Despite erroneous news reports to the contrary, the bill has not been amended since its introduction in October, 2009. To understand the committee's recommendations, it's important to review what the bill would do in its current form. It passed, it would:

Clause 1: Expand the definitions for homosexual acts, making conviction easier. Current law requires evidence of penetration. The new law would expand the definition of homosexual activity to"touch(ing) another person with the intention of committing the act of homosexuality." Touching itself is defined as "touching-(a) with any part of the body; (b) with anything else; (c) through anything; and in particular includes touching amounting to penetration of any sexual organ. anus or mouth."Clause 2: Affirm Uganda's lifetime imprisonment for those convicted of homosexuality.Clause 3: Define a new crime of "aggravated homosexuality" for those who engage in sex with someone under the age of 18, who are HIV-positive, who is a "repeat offender" (so broadly defined as to include anyone who has had a relationship with more than one person, or who had sex with the same person more than once), or who had sex with a disabled person (consensual or not). The penalty for "aggravated homosexuality" is death by hanging. It also requires anyone arrested on suspicion of homosexuality to undergo HIV testing to determine the individual's qualification for prosecution of "aggravated homosexuality."Clause 4: Criminalize "attempted homosexuality" with imprisonment for seven years.Clause 5: Provide for compensation to the "victim" of homosexuality, which would provide incentives for even a consensual partner in a relationship to later claim "victim" status in order to save his or her own life and freedom by pressing charges against the other partner.Clause 6: Guarantee anonymity to people making accusations.Clause 7: Criminalize "aiding and abetting homosexuality" with seven years imprisonment. This provision could be used against anyone extending counseling, medical care, or otherwise providing aide gay people.Criminalize "promoting" homosexuality with fines and imprisonment for between five and seven years. This overly-broad provision would criminalize all speech and peaceful assembly for those who advocate on behalf of LGBT citizens in Uganda . It would also criminalize any attempt to repeal or modify the law in the future, as those moves could also be seen as "promoting" homosexuality.Clause 8: Criminalize the conspiracy to commit homosexuality "by any means of false pretence or other fraudulent means with seven years imprisonment.Clause 9: Criminalize "procuring homosexuality by threats" (No penalty specified).Clause 10: Criminalize "detention with intent to commit homosexuality" with seven years imrisonment.Clause 11: Penalize people who run "brothels" with five to seven years imprisonment for renting to LGBT people. However, it defines a brothel as "a house, room, set of rooms or place of any kind for the purposes of homosexuality" instead of the more normal definition of a place where commercial sex work takes place. Anyone's bedroom would be a "brothel" under this definition, placing landlords and hotel owners in jeopardy for renting to LGBT people.Clause 12: Criminalize the act of obtaining a same-sex marriage abroad with lifetime imprisonment.Clause 13: Criminalize "promoting" homosexuality with fines and imprisonment for between five and seven years. This overly-broad provision would criminalize all speech and peaceful assembly for those who advocate on behalf of LGBT citizens in Uganda . It would also criminalize any attempt to repeal or modify the law in the future, as those moves could also be seen as "promoting" homosexuality.Clause 14: Requre friends or family members to report LGBT persons to police within 24-hours of learning about that individual's homosexuality or face fines or imprisonment for up to three years.Clause 15: Trials for "Agrivated homosexuality" would be reserved for Uganda's High Court. All other can be tried by magistrates.Clause 16: The extra-territorial clause extends this law to all Ugandans living or visiting abroad.Clause 17: Persons living abroad are made subject to extradition.Clause 18: Void all international treaties, agreements and human rights obligations which conflict with this bill.

This is disgusting on every level. There is a petition by ALL OUT directed at President Yoweri Museveni:

STOP THE HATE IN UGANDA

Over 450,000 around the world have signed the petition to stop the "Kill the Gays" bill! The pressure is working and the bill has been delayed, but we need your help to stop it before THIS FRIDAY.

Will you take one minute to sign this petition to tell Ugandan President Museveni to stop the "Kill the Gays" bill in its tracks?

President Yoweri Museveni:



The world stands united with Ugandan human rights activists in demanding that you publicly vow to veto the Anti-Homosexuality Bill.

Don't let this bill make Uganda into a pariah in the international community.