Tampa On My Mind

GLBT Week Ended August 30, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW


Tampa On My Mind

It pains me to watch the Republican convention, but as a political junkie, I have no choice. It’s like being an alcoholic when the liquor store is closed. You’re stuck with the crème de Cassis that’s been sitting in the back of the bar for a couple of years.

Even so, I resisted much of Tuesday’s opening acts, flipping over to MSNBC for several minutes of angry rhetoric from the second and third string speakers before returning to a taped copy of “Nine to Five.” Finally, I forced myself to watch Ann Romney’s pretty good speech, and Chris Christie’s self-serving train wreck of a keynote.

Small aside: My computer tries to convince me to type “Ann Rostow” whenever I type “Ann Romney.” A little disturbing.

How do people like Christie get away with accusing Democrats of being “divisive” in the course of making a divisive speech?

“Those un-American bastards on the other side keep trying to divide this nation! Let’s send them back to Chicago and take this country back!” A paraphrase perhaps, but he did suggest “taking back the country.” Taking it back from whom?

And how about the calls for “bipartisan” leadership from a group that represents the most intransigent opposition in modern history? Do they think we’re stupid?

All and all, I await the Democratic convention like an overdue shipment of vintage Champagne (to continue the analogy).

For the record, the analogy stems from an actual incident when our group of election watchers drank through the contents of two Manhattan apartments on election night in 1980. Reagan was bad enough, but as New York Democrats we also had to stomach Al D’Amato ascending to the U.S. Senate. That last defeat led us to finish a bottle of unidentifiable alcohol that had been collecting dust under the sink for longer than we could remember.

Moving on, it feels as if the News Train has paused in Tampa and New Orleans for a week, leaving the GLBT passengers stranded with nothing to talk about it. But there was a little sumthin sumthin. Namely, a bunch of pranksters at Continental Airlines who removed a dildo from a gay man’s luggage, covered it with lube and attached it to the outside of the suitcase as the bags arrived on the conveyor belt in Norfolk, Virginia. The man and his partner are filing a lawsuit.

I’m not sure whether the sophomoric antics can be laid at the feet of the airline, or the TSA agents who have been given the intrusive power to rummage through our stuff at will. News reports blame Continental baggage handlers, but why would they be looking inside customers’ suitcases? In either case, I see this less as an attack on gay men, and more as a reflection of a certain idiocy that pervades our post-Millennial dumb-and-dumber society.
--


Angels in Tasmania

We are making progress towards marriage equality in New Zealand, Tasmania and France, which is very nice for gay people who live in New Zealand, Tasmania or France.

Some guy attacked someone with a hammer for calling him “gay.” And I was reading about a Christian former elementary teacher from Joshua Tree, California, who was nailed for abusing a number of young boys back in the day.

Normally, I’d jump on that last story, but the scenario is no longer an ironic oddity. It’s actually pretty common for sick molesters to wrap themselves in antigay and/or evangelical vestments. I’d go further and say that these days, if you’re a gay or lesbian adult, born after Stonewall, and you’re living your life in the closet, you’ve got a problem.

Perhaps you live in a conservative or highly religious environment. I won’t judge you. Maybe you live in a rural outpost. Or perhaps you’ve been in the service. Fine. It’s understandable to pretend to be straight.

But barring these reasons, if you’ve been a grown up over the last couple of decades with a good sense of your sexual orientation, the closet is increasingly a strange choice rather than an acknowledged necessity of life. And adults who not only stay in the closet but present themselves as antigay despite their same-sex attractions are truly screwed up.
--


Can’t Put a Lid On It

Listen. Are any of you stuck with the theme song to the “Mr. Lid” infomercial rolling around in your head? I think I’m particularly susceptible to internalizing advertising jingles. I was haunted by the “five dollar foot long” Subway song for months and months. Now it’s Mr. Lid. It swirls around my head in the early hours of the morning before I’ve completely woken up.

“Mr. Lid…
“It’s safe in the microwave!
“Mr. Lid…
“Etc. etc.”

I think part of the problem is that I know that I have this inclination, so my fear of being overrun makes it happen. I read a book by Oliver Sacks about various mental disorders that manifest imaginary music and I think, were I to suffer the appropriate brain injury, I would have those symptoms. Even now, without having had a stroke to my knowledge, I fantasize music and believe, for example, that I hear my cell phone ring when the device is silent.

If I close my eyes and concentrate, I can replay the full orchestrated “Intermezzo” of “Manon Lescaut” in my mind. Or whatever I want to hear. So I ask you: Why do I subconsciously decide to wake up with “Mr. Lid” instead of Puccini? I think the answer isn’t pretty.
--


The Print Run

Every other week I get to set my own deadline, and as luck would have it I decided to delay this column by a day in favor of watching the U.S. Open. It turns out that I am a very lenient editor. Who knew?

I read this morning that some GOP conventioneers threw peanuts at a black CNN camerawoman, yelling that this is how “animals” are fed. The offenders were thrown out of the event by Republican officials, and CNN is looking into the disgusting incident.

In other revelations from the morning newspapers, there was a profile in the Times Style section about Bianca Kosoy, the 40-something creative director of the Equinox fitness chain, a tattooed, scotch-drinking lesbian who sounds like someone you single ladies might look up on your next visit to the Big Apple.

And finally, my own hometown rag, the Austin American Statesman, informs us that UT sociology professor Mark Regnerus has been cleared of scientific misconduct by a committee that looked into his controversial study of gay parents.

Well, fine. Perhaps the good professor technically followed the rules, but his study compared stable straight households with families in which one parent came out of the closet and left or divorced the other parent. Not surprisingly, the kids from the broken homes fared worse than the other cohort.
--


But Enough About Me, Not

I have to admit that the RNC stepped up from Tuesday’s smarm fest to Wednesday’s red meat. Huckabee and Rice were excellent (and of course I’m talking about style not content) and Paul Ryan put on a good performance as well.

Susana Martinez, by contrast, relied on the now familiar theme of “All About Me” in an ego-driven speech that poured cold water on the electricity Huckabee had managed to spark. (He’s gained a lot of weight, don’t you think? You remember that at one time, Huckabee managed to lose a hundred pounds.) As for John McCain, did we really want to put U.S. ground troops in Libya? Do we want to wage war on Assad? Do you think we should fly bombers over Tehran? Frightening stuff from the weathered veteran.

I just hope the Democrats resist the urge to bore us to death with irrelevant autobiographical tidbits and personal chest thumping.

Moving on, the marriage equality campaign in Washington is planning to spend something like five million smackers in the run-up to the statewide vote in November. The other side has a tenth of that money on hand, so while optimism is always dangerous, I suppose it’s not misplaced in the Starbuck State. When last I checked, our side had about 50 percent approval and the other side was in the low 40s.

Still, as the saying goes, once bitten, twice shy. And we’ve been bitten how many times? Dozens. I’ve lost count. So, as far as predicting victory for marriage in Washington, Maine, Maryland and Minnesota, I’m very very very shy.
--


Pass the Crazy Juice

California has banned reparative therapy for gay kids as the Golden State continues to lead the country when it comes to GLBT legislation and policy.

By the way, I’m watching cable news as I write, and I have to interrupt myself to observe that Cindy McCain is looking a thousand times better than she did in 2008. It’s all in the hair.

So here’s an NPR blog headline that caught my eye: “Some Gay Republicans See Platform Setback as Sign Victory is Near.” Say what? Not only does the GOP platform include a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would ban same-sex marriage, it also recommends that we go back in time to prohibit openly gay men and women from serving in the military.

Meanwhile, as you probably know, not only does the Democratic platform call for marriage equality and an end to DOMA, but the Obama administration itself considers sexual orientation discrimination presumptively unconstitutional. As such, the Justice Department has sided with gay couples in our legal challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act. In addition, Obama policy calls for immigration officials to refrain from deporting foreign gay spouses, although the government does not offer spousal green cards.

According to NPR, however, the fact that GOP platform authors were so adamantly antigay is interpreted by some of our brothers and sisters on the right as a signal that the fight for gay rights is heating up in some positive way.

"When you back someone into a corner, they fight back twice as hard," explained Casey Pick of the Log Cabin Republicans, who went on to admit that the platform was “ugly and harmful.”

Quoting Gandhi, Pick found the bright side: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Really, Casey? With all due respect to the father of Indian democracy, there are several unmentioned stages between “fighting you” and “then you win.” These include many decades of vicious antigay bigotry from the evangelical base that spent an extra generation or two deciding that African Americans should (in theory) have equal rights.

You don’t have to be a single issue voter to wonder how sane members of our community can shrug off entrenched bigotry and sing the praises of a party that prides itself on pegging us as perverts. Please! Maybe the adjective “sane” is a tad misplaced.
--

arostow@aol.com

Run Todd, Run!

GLBT Week in Review August 23, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW


Run Todd, Run!

Before we start, let’s clarify something about the word “rape.” It’s not true that you can’t parse the word. It is true that some rapes are worse than others. Statutory rape involving consensual teenagers is not what we think of when we use the word. And as horrible as it may be, alcoholic fueled date rape seems different from the scenario where a stranger grabs you in an alley and pulls out a knife. Gang rape, meanwhile, seems even more traumatic than other varieties.

Of course, these distinctions don’t really matter. The impact of rape is not tied to the level of physical injury or fear. It’s tied to the profound violation of the act itself, however and wherever it occurs.

That said, the real problem with Mr. Akin is his implied belief that rape is not such a tragic event unless the scenario involves a Christian woman of good character who is suddenly and brutally confronted by a vicious criminal. These are the women with the capacity to shut down their reproductive systems in terror. As for the floosies, the loose women, the feminists, the girls who have had a few drinks, they’re not really damaged during a so-called “rape.” They used bad judgment. And look! The proof is that their bodies didn’t seem to mind the intrusion because they got pregnant just the same.

This Congressman doesn’t just represent an extreme pro-life viewpoint. He represents the extreme misogyny and sexism that we thought we left behind us many decades ago. Witness his overlooked remark that “there should be some punishment” for rape, emphasis on “some” as if the possibility exists that society might simply dismiss the matter. The Akin controversy is not about whether or not Republicans support a rape exception to their anti-abortion policy. It’s about whether or not the Party is infused with a deep disdain for the average woman.

As for Akin, we have also learned this week that the man is a narcissist of the highest order, casting aside the entreaties of his political partners out of blind ego. Democrats around the country are in his debt for that.

But before we leave the subject of Congressmen behaving badly, what do you think of the Kansas guy who took a nude dip in the Sea of Galilee last summer? When I first heard about it, I thought it was pretty funny. What later brought me up short was the news that while a large group jumped into the sacred sea, Kevin Yoder was the only one who stripped down to his birthday suit.

Say what? It’s one thing to break from the crowd, rip off your clothes and plunge into the local waters in a gleeful moment of nighttime spontaneity. It’s another thing when all of your buddies are frolicking around in their boxers and bras, to decide that you alone will expose your member to the members. Why do that?

Finally, I’ve always assumed that when you’re elected to Congress, junkets and boondoggles are part of the job. Fine, fine. Have a little fun as long as you also put in a few late nights drafting legislation, negotiating across the aisle, making a few compromises and passing some bills. For these bozos to do absolutely nothing for over a year, for them to nearly derail our economy for no reason, for them to posture and pose and then fly off to have dinner and drinks on the Israeli coast--- that pisses me off.
--


DOMA’s Doomed

Boy, it’s getting crowded over there on the Supreme Court’s petition board. Earlier this week, the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders asked the Court to take direct review of the Pedersen case, a federal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act out of Connecticut that was recently settled by a lower court judge who found that DOMA was unconstitutional.

The Supremes are now considering petitions for four DOMA cases, of which only one is technically ripe for review. The Massachusetts DOMA case was decided in our favor by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in May. As expected, it was then appealed to the nine justices.

But we didn’t necessarily expect that our side would then ask the Court to take direct review of three other victories against DOMA that had yet to face a federal appellate panel. In California, Lambda asked the Court to hear the Golinski case. In New York, the ACLU asked the Court to take on Windsor. And now, GLAD has petitioned for Pedersen to leapfrog intermediate review. Since each of these suits contain different mixtures of facts and issues, we are hoping that the Court will take them all and give DOMA the fullest possible analysis.

It goes without saying that most legal analysts believe the Court, like almost every federal judge who has evaluated the 1996 law, will find that DOMA violates Equal Protection, and maybe the Due Process Clause.

The justices meet to consider petitions in late September, so we’ll soon discover whether or not they will accept one or more DOMA cases. They will also be considering whether to take review of the Prop 8 case. And finally, they’ll be looking at a Ninth Circuit ruling that upheld a preliminary injunction blocking Arizona from cutting partner benefits for gay state staff.

That last sentence was a mouthful. Or maybe a word-processor-full. But far better to stuff the Arizona details into one sentence than to discuss it at length, don’t you think?

I realize that I am constantly rehashing the contents of the Supreme Court’s gay plate, but first of all, it’s important. And second, we keep piling on new ingredients. If you find it tedious, please know that I am skipping over all sorts of related items, including news of briefs, motions and appellate court schedules that may become moot.

You’re welcome!
--


Death Be Not Ridiculous

I just read about a U.S. Open tennis referee who has been arrested for killing her 80-year-old husband with a coffee cup. I guess the woman tried to pass off his death as an accident, but eventually police became suspicious. A bizarre piece of news on many levels, but surely not a case of premeditated murder. You simply cannot deliberately plan to kill someone with a mug.

Or who knows? I saw one of the most absurd plots on CSI Miami the other day. This woman lures a giant alligator into a man’s swimming pool using some kind of meat as bait. Later, the man gets in without looking, turns his back and leans over the edge facing away from the pool, and gets eaten by the alligator! But how could she have assumed that her target would not notice a twelve-foot alligator in a small swimming pool?

It’s like the killers in early James Bond movies who try to kill 007 by releasing a cobra or a tarantula into his hotel suite. Why don’t they just shoot him?
--


Let’s Get Real

Moving on, we have yet another case of faked gay bashing, this time from a thirty-something former Nebraska women’s basketball star who carved antigay slurs on her own body and presented herself to the world as a bloody victim of violent discrimination. You may remember the man from a week or so ago who got drunk, attempted a Gabby Douglas-inspired back flip on the sidewalk, and landed facedown on the curb. He then told police he was gay bashed, temporarily winning love and support from the GLBT community in Missoula, Montana, until a video of his inept gymnastic appeared on You tube.

This time, the unhinged grandstander is Charlie Rogers, who came up with a wild story to explain her injuries on July 22. Four days earlier, USA Today reports, Rogers wrote a Facebook post that read: “maybe I am too idealistic, but I believe way deep inside me that we can make things better for everyone. I will be a catalyst. I will do what it takes. I will. Watch me,”

Rogers told police that she was attacked in her house by masked men who carved a cross in her chest and slurs on her legs and stomach. But Rogers had already shown someone the cross carving days earlier, and receipts from Ace Hardware showed she herself had purchased the box cutter and gloves that were found at her house. The various “crime scene” items, including the gloves, contained DNA from Rogers, and none from any male.

After weekend rallies in support of Rogers, four statewide gay groups released a statement praising police with doing a thorough job of investigating the incident and urging the community at large not to focus on the actions of any one individual.

Come on, guys! Shooting up the Family Research Council headquarters and inventing hate crimes in not exactly the community image we need, now is it?

But speaking of hate crimes, here’s a nice story from Roanoke, Virginia, where a local college student had his car vandalized four times this year with antigay scratchings. Try as he might, Jordan Addison could not restore the car’s surface, and the estimate for a full repair was an unaffordable $2,500. In stepped auto body shop owner Richard Henegar, who fixed the car for free. Henegar was then joined by a dozen other local business owners, who chipped in for $10,000 worth of extra work to make the car sparkle. Addison said the car looks better than he’d ever seen.

Just as hate crimes are so deemed because they have a visceral impact on a whole community, so lovely gestures like this one operate in reverse, giving a lift to every GLBT person in Roanoke—and beyond I might add. I feel it. Thanks Roanoke.
--


A Little Dignity, Please

There’s a story on my list about a mean father who left money for all his grandchildren in his will except for the progeny of his gay son. That son is required by the will to marry the mother of his children in order for any of them to inherit. This means that he and his partner’s son will miss out on a six-figure trust.

But instead of talking about that (because what can you say?) I’m drawn to the openly gay Minnesota state legislator who was caught having sex with a 17-year-old boy in the woods near a highway rest stop. Democratic Rep. Kerry Gauthier did not break any laws, since the age of consent in the Land of a Thousand Lakes is 16. But the man is 56!

And let’s be honest. I know you guys love to trick and treat. But rolling around at the highway rest stop with a teenager that you picked up online is a tad tacky for a 50-something state legislator, n’est-ce pas? Gauthier has not commented on the scandal. And last week, he spent several days in the hospital experiencing shortness of breath, UPI reports.

Let’s wrap this up with the news that Singapore’s highest court will consider whether or not to uphold the nation’s sodomy ban, now that an appellate court has questioned the law. That would be something, wouldn’t it? Isn’t Singapore the place where it’s illegal to chew gum in public?

I was also intrigued and disturbed by the three women at a Delaware child care center who arranged toddler fights and video taped themselves urging the little ones to battle. “He pinched me!” one cried. “No pinching!” warned one of the refs. “Just punching.” Did they place bets?

And more good news about red wine, which can help senior mobility and reduce the likelihood of falls. Bring on the Pinot Noir, by all means. And send a note to the famous committee that’s going to determine how to streamline Medicare costs. Maybe a small wine subsidy would be in order. It’s cheaper than a hip replacement.
--

You can reach Ann at arostow@aol.com.

Let’s Get Sirius

GLBT News for the Week Ended August 16, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW


Let’s Get Sirius

Do any of you by chance recall Michael Leisner, the man who set fire to the front lawn of General Mills headquarters in order to protest same-sex marriage the other day? Of course you do! He was trying to light a box of Cheerios, but he lost control of the flames and a line of fire took hold across the plaza. At any rate, the 65-year-old Leisner died of a heart attack in his car while waiting for his kids to finish a game of tennis. It’s not quite enough for a Lifetime made-for-TV movie, but it’s fine fodder for a GLBT news column in the middle of August.

One of his friends on Facebook compared him to John the Baptist and Elijah, or some other worthy Biblical squire. And I gather he spent quite a bit of time and effort manifesting his disapproval of gays and lesbians in a variety of ways. We won’t speak ill of the dead, but one does wonder what people like this think about in their final moments.

Speaking of August, or the Cannicula as I like to call it, my beloved cousin worried about the news slowdown that coincides with the Dog days and sent me some links. Among other things, she couldn’t help notice the disturbing social dilemma posed to the Sunday New York Times Style guy last week by some parents.

Seems their son had fallen in love with a man they disliked. At some point, the bad boyfriend hooked up with their daughter, who now wants to bring him by the summer house and cavort around as if nothing had ever happened. The son wants them to ban the man from the clan. What to do?

I think the expert suggested that the parents keep the two sides apart, but I say, tell the sleazy boyfriend and the oblivious daughter to find another place to hang out, period. Actually, I might suggest that all the kids find their own loci of activity for the summer. If they’re old enough to be drama queens on this level, they’re old enough to rent their own beach house. Why are they all still running with the old folks to begin with?
--


Chain Chain Chain

We have a lesbian general now. Ten hut! Congratulations Sister, Sir. Taiwan may have recognized a same-sex marriage, or be on the verge of doing so, and Madonna deliberately raised the subject of gay rights during a Russian tour in violation of a gag order by the city of St. Petersburg. Take that Ruskies. Let’s not forget who won the Cold War.

But other than that, the news is sluggish. Nor is the torpor limited to events in the GLBT community. Have you listened to the political talking heads lately?

Joe Biden used the phrase “they’re going to put you in chains!” in front of mixed race audience. Although the Veep was talking about the dangers of easing banking regulations, he was promptly accused of making a reference to slavery. Not only that, but some on the right suggested Biden be dropped from the ticket as punishment for the supposed allusion.

Okay, that’s absurd. But one or two pundits went on to ask: “Is this possible?” Talk about manufactured controversy. This is the Potato Buds of campaign news. For those who are drawing a blank, Potato Buds were little flakes in a box that turned into a white mush when you added water. They were not to be confused with actual potatoes, or any edible side dish.
--


Ryan’s Hope

So speaking of Veeps, what do you think of Mr. Ryan? Personally, I think he is in the process of descending from a pedestal and walking among us like the regular old Washington insider that he is. For so long, he’s struck an iconic pose, more a symbol than a real person, representing a “bold” and “courageous” public figure with the “guts” to offer specific budget plans with nary a care for the political consequences.

How bold and courageous! Now that the political consequences are front and center, he is becoming as mealy mouthed and halting as the rest of his colleagues on the right, hedging his bets and choosing his words with care.

The latest GOP talking point, that Obama cut $700 billion from Medicare, seems like an odd attack. The people who support health care recognize that the money was stripped from insurance subsidies and went to Obamacare. And the people who hate entitlements, on the other hand, should in theory approve of a big cut. Wouldn’t it sound worse to say that Obama added $700 billion to Medicare?

I don’t get it. Frankly, I don’t know why I continue to torture myself by watching cable news. But I suppose it’s like anything else. Why eat a bag of chips only to feel sick? Why fix an elaborate brandy drink at bedtime, only to wake up with a pounding headache—every time? It seems like a good idea at the moment.

By the way, do you think Ryan’s complete lack of foreign policy expertise will hurt the ticket? What about his rigid views on social issues? I think he is on the edge of opposing contraception. Did you see the shot of a grinning Ryan with a deer carcass? Did you read that he “noodles” catfish? And how about that work out obsession? Does it strike you as a tad self-absorbed?

Meanwhile, Mitt looks overshadowed and testy these days, accusing Obama of running a campaign based on “anger and hate.” Say what? All and all, I’m feeling cautiously optimistic about our chances.
--


Deadline Be Damned

So, I’m writing this column on Thursday rather than Wednesday because yesterday was Mel’s last day of vacation as a public school teacher and we chose to play 54 holes of golf in the last two days with the temperature in the low hundreds. I discovered, to my pleasure and distress, that I qualify for the 55-and-over senior discount on the most expensive public course in my area, a discount that cuts the green fee by a significant amount.

This is my first senior discount by the way, but I can’t complain about getting older considering the nonstop wild and fun antics that have packed every year of my life since I was old enough to climb out my bedroom window and run around the streets of Washington DC in the middle of the night. I think I was about ten. I’ve earned that discount.

At any rate, I’m in a position to comment on another campaign theme, to wit, the idea that people over 55 won’t be affected by Paul Ryan’s Medicare voucher system.

First of all, that seems not necessarily accurate, considering that other reports say we’ll pay $6,000 a year more for health care under his system. But regardless, since when do people vote based on their specific personal status? Am I supposed to be indifferent to scholarship subsidies because I’ve already gone to college? Am I supposed to blow off global warming and energy policy because I’ll be dead by the time something really bad develops? Are we supposed to ignore the national safety net because we’re not broke? Be oblivious to the unemployed because we’ve got jobs? You get the picture.
--


Aloha Ha

I do have a little GLBT legal news, as always. A conservative sounding federal judge in Hawaii echoed the old themes of antigay judicial reasoning that we haven’t heard in years, ruling that the state’s ban on same-sex marriage did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. In the course of the opinion, the judge (whose name I don’t feel like looking up) said the Supreme Court’s 40-year-old one-sentence comment in Baker v Nelson is controlling marriage law, and also stood by the Ninth Circuit’s semi-ancient antigay opinion in High Tech Gays.

Judge Whatever (Alan Kay if you must know) determined that sexual orientation discrimination should not be held to a high legal standard, and threw in the contorted idea that the fundamental right to marry does not apply to gay couples, because there is no “fundamental right to marry a person of the same sex.”

Meanwhile, Lambda’s case against the state of Nevada will go to oral arguments in late November. Our legal eagles say the Sin City State may not offer the equal rights of domestic partnership while denying the status of marriage. Sound familiar? It’s Prop 8 all over again with one distinction; Nevada never stripped couples of an existing right to marry. Still, the case is very similar, and since the Ninth Circuit has ruled in our favor (sort of) we have precedent on our side. Thaty precedent may also serve us well in the appeal of Judge Kay's antideluvian ruling.
--


Don’t Tase My Brand, Bro

Woah Nelly! I just heard about the gun-toting gay activist who barged into the DC headquarters of the Family Research Council and shot a security guard (non-fatally Thank God).

Thanks for nothing, Mr. Maniac. For years, our community has fought the baseless charge that we react to political opposition with hatred and violence. We’ve been able to take the high road, because the charge is not true. We react with protests, with boycotts, with political action, with op-eds. While abortion foes kill doctors, ex-gay groups damage lives, street bullies attack gay men, and Fred Phelps pickets funerals with vitriolic signs, we’ve never had a crazy killer.

Now we’ve got one, and the far right will certainly use him as a tangible example of our community’s murderous fury. Floyd Corkins is his name, a 28-year-old who volunteered for the local gay organization and who clearly has one or two wires loose. Fortunately, he only shot the guard in the arm. But that damage he did to the hapless security man is nothing compared to the damage he may have done to our cause. We’ll see.
--


Party On

What else is new, you ask? Well, it looks like the Democratic Party Platform will include a flat call for marriage equality. No vague appeals to equality or “all families.” Marriage equality for same-sex couples, period. Did I need another reason to be a Democrat? No. But I’ll take it none the less.

By the way, the bizarre Log Cabin Republicans managed to hail Paul Ryan, a man who thinks of us as immoral perverts deserving zip, simply because he once voted for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act back in 2007.

I have no idea why Ryan backed ENDA five years ago. But I do know he has voted for the federal ban on same-sex marriage. He voted against the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. He has voted against every other gay rights proposal. He opposes, not just marriage rights, but civil unions, domestic partnerships and adoption by gay couples. And yet, he voted for ENDA that one time. Strange, but surely a thin reed to support the endorsement of a otherwise hostile candidate don’t you think?

Yet this is nothing new from our Log Cabin friends. They will back any Republican who doesn’t call for an AIDS quarantine or a return to sodomy laws. I feel a pang of solidarity every now and then when the Log Cabiners are banned from a GOP convention or dissed by their fellow elephants in some way. And I agree in principle that gay Republicans should unite to have a positive influence on their party. But these sad sacks don’t really do that, do they?

They used to argue that issues like national security took precedence over gay rights. Fine. And so what’s their excuse for this election?
--

arostow@aol.com

Ix-Nay the fil-A

GLBT Week in Review August 8, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW



Ix-Nay the fil-A

Last Friday, despite my reluctance to make a fool of myself in public, Mel and I went to our local Chick-fil-A and joined the kiss-in. I did manage to avoid the circle dance outside the restaurant, although I appreciated the concept. But after that, a sizable group of us went inside and milled around for awhile under the watchful gaze of some security guards and random customers. We then staged the kiss-in, hung out for a bit longer, and I observed to my horror that some of our hungrier gay male brothers in arms actually chowed down on some food. Guys? Do you understand the point here?

Over the days that followed I read another dozen articles about Chick-fil-A and the nature of free enterprise, blah blah blah. Of course I agree that far rightwing business owners have a right to pursue their commercial activity. It’s just that we don’t have to support them and the first dozen articles I read made this obvious distinction over and over again.

But then, I read an essay by a guy who loves Chick-fil-A and has driven miles to indulge this passion in the past. The writer, who was making the courageous decision to boycott from now on, described the taste and texture of Chick-fil-A sandwiches in such succulent terms that I felt a powerful desire to try one.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve never actually eaten at Chick-fil-A, which I thought was a kind of KFC place with bread. Now, after reading this man’s gustatory paean to the addictive chicken treats and crisp waffle fries, I’m going to need some self control to resist a politically inappropriate trip to the franchise.
--


Waiting for the Supremes

Before we get to work, has anyone else had enough of Michael Phelps, his toothy smile and dimwitted remarks to the press? I know he’s off the stage at this point, but for a time I felt as if I couldn’t get away from him. I made this observation to some friends and got a lecture about how unbecoming it is to trash talk a great champion for no particular reason. Mea culpa, I’m sure. But I was just wondering if I was alone in my gratuitous dislike for the man. Readers?

As you know, we won our fifth federal DOMA challenge the other day with a victory in the Pedersen case, brought by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders in Connecticut. The others, of course, are Gill in Massachusetts, Golinski and Dragovich in California, and Windsor in New York. Gill, Golinski and Windsor have all been appealed to the Supreme Court even though the latter two cases are still pending in the lower courts.

This state of affairs has led to some confusing case schedules that I am not in the mood to sort out. Oral arguments were delayed in Golinski, for example, although written briefing is still due. I’m not sure what’s going on in the other challenges, but since the High Court is expected to take up the issue in the 2012/2013 session, I see no reason to keep track of these soon-to-be-moot details.

Meanwhile, in addition to the three DOMA challenges, two other gay rights cases have been appealed to the High Court. The Prop 8 people finally petitioned the Court to hear their appeal of their Ninth Circuit loss. And the state of Arizona has asked the justices to review a Ninth Circuit decision in favor of gay and lesbian state employees who were stripped of partner benefits by the legislature. I’m reminding you about the Arizona case because it seems to be constantly overlooked amidst the excitement of our marriage litigation.

In another piece of legal news this week, a federal court in Sin City will hear arguments on Friday in the challenge to Nevada’s marriage ban. Lambda filed a federal suit against the state a few months back, arguing that the state cannot reserve the title of marriage for heterosexuals without violating the U.S. Constitution. Sound familiar? Lambda is aiming to piggyback on the Prop 8 victory by filing related suits in other Ninth Circuit jurisdictions.
--


When There’s a Will There’s a Way

I have more legal news, but I’m going to spare you an extended rundown. Instead, let’s talk about the guy in Minnesota who lost his husband to an unexpected heart attack in April of 2011. James Morrison met and fell in love with Thomas Proehl a quarter of a century ago in college. They married in California during the 2008 marriage window, but moved to the twin cities a few years later.

Still relatively young, the men had not written wills when Tom died at the age of 46. Since Minnesota does not recognize same-sex marriages by law, it appeared that Tom’s assets, including his share of the family house, might automatically be transferred to Tom’s parents.

As it happened, Tom’s parents sided with John, considering him a son-in-law and a legal spouse. Luckily, a probate court has recently agreed, ruling that the marriage, though barred in the state, still makes John the legal heir. The decision seems to fall into a pattern of increasing accommodation and recognition of gay marriages by the courts in general. Where once a good ruling was the exception to the rule, the reverse is now true.

But what would have happened to John, and what might still happen to the next gay husband or wife, if Minnesota voters decide to entrench a marriage ban in the state constitution next fall? Although polls suggest the amendment could fail, we’ve also been betrayed by optimistic polls in the past.

The moral of the story is that gay couples of any age should write wills, period. Even in states that flatly refuse to recognize gay unions, a will remains perfectly valid. If you can leave your money to your dog, or a charity, you can certainly leave it to your wife, partner or husband. But without a will, he or she could be left high and dry if you live in one of the many antigay states. Like Texas, just to pick one at random.

Did you notice, by the way, that my state just nominated a Senate candidate to the right of Rick Perry himself? Ted Cruz? At least we didn’t nominate an antigay Democrat to fight for the left. That’s what happened in Tennessee, where the chief of the Democratic Party has refused to support the winner of the Senate primary, Mark Clayton. Clayton beat out a field of seven or eight, despite the fact that he runs an operation that has been designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

My other computer just went black as I was writing that last item, so I can’t tell you the name of Mr. Clayton’s hate group. But it’s definitely antigay and has a deceptively bland name like the “Public Policy Foundation,” or some other innocuous sounding thing. But really. How does such a screw up happen in modern politics? The U.S. Senate is not dogcatcher. Why didn’t the party groom a nominee? Why didn’t the other candidates highlight Clayton’s background? And why did so many of Tennessee’s Democratic voters mindlessly punch the first name on the alphabetical primary list like lab chimps hoping for a banana? That indeed is the general explanation for the odd outcome.
--


Olympic Hopeless

My computer returned to life, but I’m not returning to the Clayton story. Instead, let me mention an AP piece about a 67-year-old Tennessee man who called 911 at least nine times, at one point asking emergency crews for a ride to the store so that he could get some beer. Police went to the house of Allen Troy Brooks to give him a citation, but the man kept insisting that he didn’t have a phone and wasn’t responsible for the calls. Since this was in fact, not true, Mr. Brooks was arrested and brought down to the station where he was charged with abusing the 911 system. I’m guessing Brooks could have been one of the voters who picked the first name on the list to send to the U.S. Senate.

So, did you hear about the guy in Montana who claimed to be a victim of a gay bashing attack near a bar? Turns out he injured himself trying a Gabby Douglas-style back flip on the sidewalk and landing on his face. The moron, one Joseph Baken, proceeded to give police a fictitious, self-serving account of an alleged assault, complete with homophobic men calling him “faggot” and the usual ingredients of your basic hate crime.

The GLBT community of Missoula rushed to his side with sympathy and support, only to learn later that the 22-year-old invented the story. If you’re interested, you can watch the attempted back flip on youtube and hear his drunk friends react with “Holy Shit!” as Baken cracks his brow against the curb. Later, Baken tells the gang “I’m fine,” an overstatement of major proportions on many levels. When all was said and done, Baken was given a six month suspended sentence and ordered to pay a $300 fine for providing a false police report.
--


Here Comes the Cat!

Mitt Romney has confirmed that he thinks all men and boys should be able to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of sexual orientation, although he also believes the Scouts should be able to set their policy. The seemingly liberal announcement was not a move towards the center. Instead, the candidate was forced into the gay friendly stance by his own comments in a 1994 interview when he was running against Ted Kennedy for Senate. You may remember that Mitt insisted in that campaign that he would do more for the GLBT community than Kennedy himself.

But I’m more interested in a sidebar about the predatory nature of cats. According to a new study, the average cat kills about two creatures per week, including lizards, snakes and frogs (41 percent), small mammals (25 percent), insects and worms (20 percent) and birds (12 percent).

The researchers monitored 60 cats in the Athens, Georgia area, determining that the furry engines of death ate about a third of their prey, left about half to rot, and brought home the rest to present to their owners.

I had a stray cat in my backyard for a time. One time I saw him with a plump squirrel in his mouth and about two hours later there was nothing left but the tail. We named him Hector, after Hannibal Lector. He was simply a killing machine. But a cute one. He was run over by a car so we buried him under the fig tree with a little headstone. That’s my cat story.
--


Methinks Thou Dost Protest Too Much

Finally, how about the bozo who decided to light a box of Cheerios on fire to protest the gay friendly policies of General Mills? The grounds caught on fire and the man and his camera pal both took off running. Then, the man’s son posted the whole thing on youtube and seems to have triggered a police investigation.

What is it with posting your own dumb stunts for all to see? Catch the egomaniac straight guy who ordered a cup of water and then berated a Chick-fil-A drive through waitress, asking the pleasant girl how she could live with herself while working for such a hateful organization—oh, and filming all the while. The man lost his job and subsequently posted an eight-minute apology, which again, was all about him. (Not that I listened to all eight minutes.) Our insufferable straight ally made a point of telling the waitress that he was heterosexual, “not a gay in me.” Good, at least our community does not have to answer for his antics.

And did you read about the little boy who stuck a Lego wheel up his nose and couldn’t breathe for three years? The doctors just gave him antibiotics until one medic finally noticed the inanimate object. Hmmm.

Prop 8 Finally Appealed to High Court

News for the Week Ended August 1, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW


Prop 8 Finally Appealed to High Court

Another week, another petition to the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the proponents of Prop 8 asked the justices to review the 2-1 ruling from a Ninth Circuit panel that struck the California marriage ban on narrow terms last February.

In their lengthy brief, which I decided not to read (it’s summer!) the Evil Ones reportedly asked the High Court to take on the fundamental question of whether a state has the right to define marriage as a heterosexual union. The Ninth Circuit’s opinion left that question unanswered, ruling simply that a state may not offer all the benefits of marriage to gay couples while denying them the designation “marriage.” To do so, absent a legitimate reason, was unconstitutional.

Since California is the only state that has legalized marriage and then taken away the right to use the word, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling technically is limited to the Golden State. But other states in the Circuit’s jurisdiction come close to violating the ruling by offering the rights of marriage under a different name.

Because the Ninth Circuit’s opinion was so closely crafted, the High Court has the option of rejecting the petition and postponing an inevitable day of reckoning when indeed the justices will be obliged to rule on the core question of same-sex marriage.

But if the Court were to accept review, the scope of their inquiry would be at the discretion of the justices. And since many observers fear the time is not yet right for an opinion that would legalize gay unions throughout the country, the prospect of allowing the Court to sort everything out on its own is frightening. With the Court expected to review the several challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act in its next term, quite a few activists hope that the justices will decline to open the Pandora’s box of the Prop 8 case.

Speaking of challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, a Connecticut judge has become the latest federal jurist to rule that DOMA is unconstitutional. Bush Two appointee Vanessa L. Bryant issued a 100-plus page ruling that called for sexual orientation to be subjected to heightened legal scrutiny like cases which involve race or gender bias. That said, Judge Bryant proceeded to rule that DOMA violated the Constitution under the easiest legal test.

No, I didn’t read her ruling either. Perhaps I have gotten lazy in my old age. Perhaps I have read so many court opinions that I could dream of a gay marriage decision and read sixty coherent pages in my sleep. Perhaps it’s the Olympics. Perhaps it’s summer.

The Olympics, by the way, sound more exciting in theory than in actuality. I’ve been looking forward to the Games, but now that they’re here I’m having a hard time paying attention. I have two TVs on at present, one with men’s beach volleyball and another with women’s water polo. Wake me for the gold medal match please.

And is it my imagination, or didn’t we once see more international athletes? As far as I can tell, NBC is offering an all-American program where we only care about our own team. And please get rid of that stupid commercial starring a giant green humanoid bush that lumbers around the Olympic campus shutting off water and lights in an attempt to save the planet. What’s that about anyway?
--


Isabella Has a Crazy Mommy

I read a fascinating article in (wait for it) the New York Times, recapping the bizarre saga of little Isabella and her two mommies, Janet and Lisa. These are the women who contested custody in repeated court battles between the states of Vermont and Virginia. After the Good Mommy (Janet) finally won custody of their daughter, Bad Mommy (Lisa) kidnapped Isabella and ran off to Nicaragua to live with a group of Mennonites. In a disturbing detail, the Times reports that Lisa left a cage full of pet hamsters to die when she made her escape.

Why does that bother me even more than the kidnapping itself? It shouldn’t, right?

Couldn’t she have at least let the little creatures loose to forage in the back yard? Or else, she could have left them at large in the living room with a bag full of hamster food and tons of water. Surely they would have survived long enough for someone to come checking up on Lisa.

Moving on, the man who arranged for Lisa’s escape has been charged with, um, helping a kidnap I suppose, and will go to trial on August 7 in Burlington, Vermont. According to the Times, even the Mennonites in Nicaragua are getting nervous, and hadn’t realized that they were violating international law by welcoming a criminal into their midst. Lisa and Isabella have since left the Mennonite community and are now thought to be hiding out in an even more remote Central American location.

I won’t rehash the multi-year litigation that pitted Janet against her born again Christian ex-partner. But I will say that Lisa has seemed more and more unhinged as the years have gone by. According to the Times article, she and Isabella have been unhappy in Nicaragua and one of Lisa’s allies, Timo Miller (no relation), says Lisa tends to see the world in “black and white.” Coming from a supporter, that sounds to me like a euphemism for derangement.
--


Chick Flicks

So here’s a question; Do you think it’s OK for politicians to take action against Chick-fil-A on account of the company’s antigay positions? I’m not talking about us, the GLBT activists who swear off the franchise and are planning a kiss-in at Chick-fil-A stores this week. (I’ll boycott, but Mel and I are not going to make fools of ourselves making out in a public protest. We’ll leave that to the under-30 crowd.)

Writing in the Washington Blade, Kevin Naff made the critical point that public officials cannot deny business licenses or strong-arm a corporation as punishment for political views. At the same time, politicians are free to dissent and express their disapproval of bigotry, wherever it may raise its ugly head. In fact, the support of local leaders, including mayors and aldermen, is a welcome buttress for our movement.

Where’s the thin line? It might be the one drawn by New York Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who asked NYU to evict Chick-fil-A outlets from its campus. Quinn, who appeared to be writing on behalf of the council or the city itself, backtracked last week and made clear that she was writing as a private citizen.

Quinn just married her partner last month, by the way.

I couldn’t help but notice that Georgia just refused to let the KKK adopt a section of highway, a move that would appear to be a First Amendment violation similar to denying a business license to Chick-fil-A. In fact, several years ago the Klan went to court to force Missouri to allow them to adopt part of a Show Me highway, a successful case that sort of reminded us all of the Nazi rally in Skokie back in the day.

I gather that Georgia claims that a KKK sign in the middle of the road would be a distraction to drivers, but I don’t think they’ll be successful in court with that public safety argument. Naturally, our First Amendment heroes from the ACLU will be representing the white supremacists when the time comes.

Look, if I can support Fred Phelps, the Nazi party and the Klan, I suppose I can support the First Amendment rights of Chick-fil-A. But that doesn’t mean any of us have to be silent in our opposition, and that includes politicians speaking on their own behalf.
--


Longhorns Diss Study

I see that the American team won their beach volleyball contest while we were talking about Chick-fil-A. Yay! Go USA! Whatever. Did any of you agree with me that the Russian gymnasts were a bunch of crybabies? I know it’s tough to lose, but a silver medal’s nothing to sneeze at. Show a little poise, ladies.

What else is new, you wonder? Well, it looks as if the Democrats may put a marriage equality plank in the party platform. That would be very nice. Considering the sort of extremism we read about in the GOP platform, I don’t even think it would be a particular stretch to come out in support of gay unions. If I’m not mistaken, the Republicans are even in favor of letting hamsters starve to death.

And do you remember that gay parenting study that emerged from the sociology department of my own hometown University of Texas? The study, funded by rightwing sources, was to a large extent based on an examination of households in which a parent had come out of the closet and abandoned the family. Not surprisingly, the kids in those households were not as successful as other cohorts.

Now, a university investigation has called the study into question, calling the peer review process biased and flawed. Only two of the households investigated by Professor Mark Regnerus included kids who were actually raised by a same-sex couple.

Oh, there’s also a homophobic bakery in Colorado that refuses to make a wedding cake for two men. Bad bakery. And Gore Vidal is dead. But you knew that.

Forgive me dear readers if I abandon you early this week. I was going to talk about a Title VII case out of the Fifth Circuit, which ruled last week that homophobic trash talk by a bunch of construction workers did not amount to sex discrimination under the federal statute. All the men involved were straight, and the verbal abuse was reportedly spread around, ergo the situation did not involve sex stereotyping or discrimination.

I’d have to read the opinion in order to comment further. But you know how I feel about reading opinions this week. Not. Going. To. Happen. Plus, I have women’s volleyball ahead and I’m going to make veal shanks which takes three hours. There’s not a moment to waste. (And I don’t want to hear about the veal.)

But before I go, I have to say that Mitt Romney’s feigned indifference to his wife’s Olympic dressage horse struck me as one of the most disingenuous postures we’ve yet seen from this posturing pol. I guess someone asked him if he was following the competition or something, and instead of saying “of course” like a normal person who has a close tie to an Olympic athlete, he made a point of saying that the horse was Ann’s business, adding that he didn’t even know when the dressage event was scheduled. That’s either bullshit or incredibly self-centered.

Oh, and I heard that the horse dined on watermelon during his or her flight over to London. I thought that was sort of cool.