I’m not a fan of all of President Obama’s policies, but I have to put in thanks for this, overcoming the strange and terrible compromise that was the Clinton-era DADT (which Gore was absolutely against). To Defense Secretary Robert Gates for being sensible. As well as United States Navy Admiral Mike Mullen. I don’t agree with Joe Lieberman very often at all, but he did the right thing, as did Scott Brown of MA. Unexpected, against party line, but the right thing. I’d like to think that shows somewhere dialogues can happen, and divisive lines in the sand do not have to be the norm. Franklin, Feingold, Bennet, Schumer, Gillibrand and the liberal regulars were all there, and Joe Manchin of WV disappeared. Well, his state has some mighty big problems with incredibly destructive mining operations. Didn’t need him.

Two thoughts. First, there has been comparison of DADT and the military position on LGBT persons in the armed forces to segregation. The arguments are similar to same-sex marriage and interracial marriage. God was against it. And if not God, other persons in the community would be horribly offended/uncomfortable. Eventually, that was overcome with regard to race. Considering how similar we all are biologically, how race is a social construct, and that racial hatred is socially unacceptable and the subject of civil rights laws is important. Being gay or lesbian, or transgender, is biological. Categories are social constructs. Eventually, soon I hope, homophobia will be socially unacceptable and the civil rights are slowly coming along. I don’t care if you don’t like me, don’t accept me, think I’m one of Satan’s minions for what I am and what I feel. But soon you will have to keep that shit to yourself.

Second. A student discussed with me the urgent issues internationally, compared to same-sex marriage. Most notably, Uganda, whose legislature is considering a bill that would make homosexuality a crime punishable by death. Other gay-related ‘crimes’ carry life imprisonment or jail time. An article presented by the usually careful both-sides-must-be-told NPR makes a stark point that American evangelicals are supporting the raging homophobia in Uganda, leading to magazines printing names of gays/lesbians and encouraging violent attacks against them. The Advocate has a more in-depth piece about what is going on in that country. Truly, as the Obama administration recently and finally did, we must speak out over the absolute wrongfulness of this legislation and the attacks against people as a human rights violation. But, I still feel that same-sex marriage (meaning repeal DOMA), the repeal of DADT and federal protection in the workplace (What’s going on with ENDA, Barney?) are/will be important to fight international discrimination as well. Other countries can point and say, see? The U.S. hates it gays, so why can’t we? Changing the military makes a voice, a presence that says discrimination is no longer acceptable. Gay marriage will also tell the world we feel that discrimination is wrong. For the American evangelicals and others who are in other countries encouraging their hatred–because you think Jesus wants you to spend your time interfering with private acts between consenting adults, or biological orientations of people, rather than hunger, disease, war, torture and so on–how do you justify this?

DADT is a first step to making those people looking like fools.

I did like Dan’s story of his early life, and why he started the It Gets Better campaign in the first place. Giving a lifeline of hope is important. There needs to be more open acceptance, inclusion–more presence in everyday society. I hope this younger generation will be the one whose presence turns the tides.

Link here:

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/12/20/dan-savage-and-jane-lynch.html

1. The Possibilities in the Lame Duck Congress

Reports are coming out that a last-gasp push to repeal DADT before the gridlock free-for-all expected to take place when the new session of Congress begins next year. Even Senator Joe Leiberman (I-CT) has apparently ponied up support along with Dem Maj Leader Harry Reid (NV) and usual suspects Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, (D-CA); Mark Udall (D-CO); Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY); Patrick Leahy (D-VT); Al Franken and Amy Kobuchar (D-MN). Franken is supporting an antibullying law. What do you suppose will be the justification for the conservative Dems and Republicans to denounce that one? Bullying is free speech, perhaps.

2. Public Figures Offer Support

I have to give credit to Cindy McCain. Imagine the dinner conversations in that house as Ms. McCain makes a public stand against DADT in a video, while her husband, ‘maverick’ Senator John McCain (R-AZ) is vowing to initiate the filibuster to keep the utterly ridiculous and outdated policy alive and well. Personally, I think not only should DADT be immediately be put out of business, but any former military personnel who was discharged dishonorably solely on that basis should receive an immediate change of status. Just as a reality check, nations that allow homosexual persons to serve in the military include: Australia, Austria, Canada, Columbia, Denmark, France, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom. Several of these countries are highly religious. Some were former dictatorships. Yet they have more open policies than the U.S. Things that make you say hmmmmm……what the fuck are you waiting for already, U.S. policy makers?

3. Ugandan Media Continues Attacks

In moves evoking the worst of Richard Nixon, the Ugandan paper Rolling Stone continues its exposure of LGBT persons in the nation, with public information of names and addresses, as well as photos. This has led to some outed persons going into hiding. Remember, this is the same country which had considered execution or lifetime imprisonment for gays.

4. Hospital Visitation Bill Goes into Effect

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has implemented President Obama’s directive to allow patients to designate visitors, including same-sex couples. Anyone who remembers the tragedies in the early years of the AIDS crisis in the 1980s knows that many dying gay persons were denied final visits from partners at the behest of the medical facilities but more from the families of the patient–even if the patient did not have a close relationship with the families members who decreed who might and might not visit. By the way, patients should designate this for themselves via a health care proxy anyway.

5. Antibullying Advocacy Continues, as does Bullying

Schools are starting to implement anti-bullying measures and education for the students, and predictably, parents are protesting that children shouldn’t be made aware that LGBTQ people exist or shouldn’t be bullied. Bristol Palin has issued a non-apology for her sister’s derogatory comments. Buffalo Bills running back C.J. Spiller apologized for using the F word against a rival as Cleveland’s Scott Fujita announces his support for marriage equality.

Let’s take a look at Mel’s history of questionable statements:

In 1991, his utterly charmingly-stated opinion of gay men in El Pais.

In a 1995 Playboy interview, Gibson said that men and women are unequal, so women should not be priests.

His statement, “Feminism is a term invented by some woman who just got jilted.”

The depiction of Jews in Passion; the apparent homophobic depictions in  Braveheart–many have probably forgotten his offensive and insulting stereotyped gay bit in Bird on a Wire.

The 2006 DUI with his classic “F*****g Jews…the Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world,” remark.

Of course, his recent alleged vile remarks to Olga using the n word (not just using the n word, but using it in an unbelievably nasty phrase), and referring to Mexicans as “wetbacks.”

And his “distancing” himself from Heath Ledger because Heath chose to play gay cowboy Ennis Del Mar in Brokeback Mountain.

In fairness, he has apologized for some, not all of the remarks, and sometimes absolutely refused to, attributing the El Pais interview to vodka. He also asked for forgiveness particularly for the Anti-Semitic remarks. He has also been a significant philanthropist. He has a right to his beliefs on whatever he believes in. But people and peers also have a right to distance themselves if they can’t tolerate his intolerance.

In response to the plaintiff’s contentions that DOMA should have the strictest review applied to it, Judge Tauro said, “This court need not address these arguments, however, because DOMA fails to pass
constitutional muster even under the highly deferential rational basis test. As set forth in detail below, this court is convinced that “there exists no fairly conceivable set of facts that could
ground a rational relationship” between DOMA and a legitimate government objective.” Note that Judge Tauro is 79 and appointed to the bench during the Nixon administration. Judge Tauro applied common sense to the issue of same-sex marriage and dismissing the specious arguments against it, including that 1. ability to procreate is not a precondition to marriage anywhere in the country (And, really, would any state seriously try to keep heterosexual people who cannot procreate from marrying?); 2. Denial of marriage does not help strengthen heterosexual marriage and parenting, but just serves to deny children of same-sex couples from advantages of a stable family.

People keep insisting that same-sex couples can’t procreate, as if adoption is somehow just not a legitimate means of having children, and as if in vitro methods have not been around for 20 years. But then, those who are against same-sex marriage, feeling this is “special rights,” against the norm of society, etc. will continue their arguments, and seriously hateful people will continue to cry and thank God when a governor decides to keep second-class citizenship going, as recently happened in Hawaii, an appalling spectacle. (Do those spending their time waiting for anti-gay decisions and thanking God for them spend as much time doing the actual work that Jesus suggested?)

Judge Tauro’s opinion

Race is a good play anyway, offering a chance to explore themes of guilt and shame and how African-Americans and Whites perceive each other. The story is set in a law office, as law partners Jack Lawson (Izzard) and Henry Brown (Dennis Haysbert) are criminal defense attorneys considering whether or not to take the case of Charles Strickland, a very wealthy White man accused of raping an African-American woman.

Afton C. Williamson, Kerry Washington’s understudy in the original cast, plays Susan, the firm’s associate and Jack’s protege. She is very quiet in the beginning of the play, observing in a manner than anyone who was served as an associate or intern can recognize. Jack is teaching her his aspects of the law–the strategy, the evaluation of a case. Henry has his reservations about Susan. Susan has her reservations about Strickland. In the end, Jack and Strickland end up surprising either themselves or being surprised, while Henry and Susan play their cards and suspicions about each other and the other characters.

The play isn’t just about race, it involves gender roles and power roles, including what wealth can bring and how power can be subverted by will. From the moment the curtain is up, each play stalks the stage with an agenda, either reluctant or all too willing to reveal secret motivations. When characters disappear behind the office door (all except Jack leave the stage at some point) the metaphor springs up about what is going on in one’s subconscious motivations.

The dialogue is harsh, amusing, funny and on-target about the law and the realities of lawyering. Each performer sizzles with a different characterization–Izzard is the realist and the lofty mentor. He uses Susan as a means of planning his strategy without worrying about Strickland’s guilt, but Susan ends up forcing him to admit his own. While the New York Times had issues with his performance, I thought he hit just the right notes of a professional cultivating a protege who ends up utterly taken by surprise. Haysbert, in his first B’way role, brings cynicism and grounding. His character is more of a realist than Jack’s character, and he is able to see more of what is going on realistically because he is not trodding delicately around the race subject. Haysbert is a powerful figure, filled with unspoken knowledge. Richard Thomas, an original cast member playing Strickland, is able to project both a strange arrogance and deep sorrow, and you cannot tell which is the true self. He seems to be on a discovery that is taking him to the point of breaking down, but this could just be another role a wealthy person is able to play. Since Thomas has such identification with past roles as the prototypical good guy, the ambiguity is pleasing to watch. Finally, Williamson, the sole female figure, ensures that Susan will not be forgotten by any means. She can melt into the background to do the lawyers’ bidding, but she waits like a cat about to pounce to insinuate herself in the debates of the case. Williamson characterizes the fierce anger, pride, and cunning of the character, showing how three characters far above her in experience or wealth can be forced to deal with her as a female force.

Gay life in New York City is detailed by the participants and witnesses to that summer of change in 1969, including reporters from the Village Voice, gay men and women in New York at the time, and the Deputy Inspector of the NYPD’s Morals Squad, Seymour Pine. At the end Pine is regretful of the need for such raids on gay bars like Stonewall.

Stonewall Uprising is not a great ambitious documentary. However, it has some of the best part of a documentary—real life participants sharing their memories, which is much better than what we’ve seen in some documentaries on film—annoying commentators. Nonetheless, it might have been better served by a strong narration than simple title cards. As example, an excellent documentary is The Celluloid Closet, narrated by Lily Tomlin. The narration helps bridge the gaps and set the tone.

Much of the tone in Stonewall Uprising is brought by various clips from old morals shorts. In addition, some film clips of real life protests and some reenactments and photos are included. Few photographic reminders of Stonewall exist.

Remember that at the time, being homosexual was a crime. There were few places where LGBTQ persons could hang out and socialize safely. Bars were one of the few social centers that existed, for what couldn’t even be called a community at that time. While some official organizations existed—the Mattachine Society, Daughters of Bilis—they could not make much headway with the public or with legal victories. One of the saddest clips in the movie is an interview with the president at the time of the national Mattachine Society, who assured the interviewer that gays and lesbians did not want to marry or adopt, just to be considered legal to exist. The president himself went to pains to insist that he no longer engaged in homosexual activity.

In the 20th Century, homosexuality was seen as a mental illness, leading to forced commitment and even lobotomies. One such hospital, Tascadero, was described as a “Dachau for Queers.” Gay men were seen as with effeminate or perverts. For those who we know who were around in the Sixties, the word gay wasn’t used. Homosexuals were considered a bad influence on children. In a clip from one film short, an older gay man lures a young boy into his trap. In another, a police detective lectures a large group of children. If you don’t avoid homosexuals, you are liable to be one, he says. One out of three persons are. He does his best to terrify the students. And although some in the audience were laughing over statements that are now—in the mainstream, anyway—considered ridiculous, in fact this detective is very frightening. It wasn’t that long ago, and too many prominent persons and organizations still think this way.

New York was not a Mecca, but allowed gays to at least have some anonminity. As one person said in the movie, in a small town everyone would know, and one’s life could be ruined. Police could arrest you and make your “crime” public. Family and jobs lost.

What did the politicians say? Mayor Lindsay both cooled down persecution of gays and ramped it up for the World’s Fair—to clean up the Weirdness. Ed Koch makes a spectral appearance in the documentary. Knowing that Koch did his share of gay-baiting and encouraging gay harassment, his presence is rather disturbing as he tries to justify the attitude of the times.

Ultimately, the documentary is a good addition to history and LGBTQ studies, not complete but with excellent stories to tell. What I most appreciated was the narratives by the men and women who lived in that period and shared their lives with us, the audience.

Now Gallagher has reached the nadir of Jon Voight, John Raztenberger, Victoria Jackson, etc., in right-wing meltdown. Race and Gay-Baiting as a side-dish.

The last comment in West’s story is rather droll, although Bill Hicks often devolved from sharp observations to mean-spiritedness. Still, Bill Hicks was actually talented, and made for a great Joe Rogan blog post on joke-stealing comedians, totally calling out Carlos Mencia.