Reporting the REAL Gay News -- Part II

by Eric Payne
guest essayist

In the weeks following Milk's assassination, there was no aspect of his life, or of his aborted political agenda, that didn't get heavy play, both in the gay and mainstream press. Eventually, the story grew old for the mainstream press; the minutia of the events leading up to the trial of Milk's assassin, Dan White, just didn't have the "stuff" of newsworthiness at a national level. The trial, itself, was a different matter, but all the little stuff leading up to it - the arraignment, the continuances, the defense attorney motions, the DA's motions... none of it really mattered, except to us; our fag rags came into their own as newspapers, then, both on a local and national level. The publications in major outlets - New York, SF, LA, Miami, Philadelphia and others - began subscribing to the Associated Press and United Press International news feeds. There was neither a political local race or local news story, in any state, that featured any sort of "gay component" that didn't receive coverage in our media - it was important to our publishers that their readers knew if a music teacher in, say, Davenport, IA, had been removed from their position due to that teacher's "sexual preference." If a local community in, for instance, Bangor, MA, wanted to adopt or repeal gay rights ordinances, the gay press picked up on it. The rags were on their way to becoming real, honest-to-goodness newspapers.

Except...

Milk's death received tens of thousands of column inches, just in San Francisco's two weeklies, alone - if the references to his death, up to today, were included, that total would likely jump to hundreds of thousands of column inches. And while the weeklies - Bob Ross' "Bay Area Reporter" and Ray Chalker's "San Francisco Sentinel" - were striving to become real news outlets, including editorial content and individualized, by-lined regular columns (everything from "life in the bars" to "week-in-review" type columns), there was one area that had been purposely omitted from the gay newspapers.

Obituaries.

Most gay newspapers simply didn't run them; noted public persons who died and were either gay, or labeled as "gay-friendly," were the subjects of hard-news stories about their lives. There was no section where deaths of just your average, everyday gay person could have their passing away noted, and their life briefly memorialized. After Milk's death, requests for inclusions of someone's obituary began rolling in, but the publishers simply ignored them; the papers were still caught between being party of the fun-loving bar scene and being a committed news outlet.

Then Bob Ross began noticing the numbers picking up... mostly of men... primarily in their mid 30s, who were living in Alameda, or San Jose, or Santa Clara, or Livermore, or Walnut Creek, or any of a hundred towns scattered across the San Francisco Bay Area; all of them were dying from pneumonia... or skin cancer... or simply wasting away. Ross began running an obituary page in 1980, but uncomfortable with actually writing the obituaries, ran, verbatim, those submissions given the paper by loved ones/friends/next-of-kin. In the 29 years since that first obituary, there has not been an issue published that has not contained at least one obituary. Other community newspapers followed his lead, and nationwide, the actual toll of unknown-pathogen related deaths in the gay community began being known with more clarity.

(SIDE NOTE: I've just become aware that beginning December 1st - World AIDS Day - the entirety of the BAR's obituaries library will be made available online.)

Randy Shilts not only followed those obituaries, but frequently had first-hand knowledge of those lost; after all, everyone seemed to know each other. Everyone went to the same sex clubs and bathhouses. In a way, everyone had either slept directly with each other, or with someone who had slept with that other person. As he later wrote, somewhere in the back of his brain, he'd already put two-and-two together, and immediately stopped going to the sex clubs and the bathhouses. He began a series of articles, in the San Francisco "Chronicle" about the decimation of the gay community in San Francisco and the possibility of some unknown pathogen; at almost the same time, the "New York Times" began its own "investigative reporting" into the same issue, but on the East Coast. If one were to go back and read the stories coming from both coasts, today, they'd immediately see a difference between the editorial outlook of the two series that either went unseen at the time or, more likely, was seen, but ignored. Randy's pieces (out of which would eventually grow "And The Band Played On") were about an unknown pathogen killing people; the NYT articles were about an unknown pathogen killing GAY people.

Even though the NIH (National Instutes for Health) and the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) did their initial investigations in San Francisco, based on the overwhelming number of deaths in the Bay Area, these two federal government agencies allowed the tone of the NYT series to set the parameters for their investigation a pathogen; the federal government looked for what sexual activities were prevalent in the gay community that were not normally practiced in the heterosexual community that would allow for transmission of this unknown pathogen. At first, the federal government decided it was the much more common use of amyl nitrate as a stimulant in the gay community; that theory never bore fruit, but it didn't matter. Gay men quit using "poppers." The chemical composition of "poppers" today is not that of amyl nitrate, but some other compound. Then, the feds decided it was the practice of fisting; which would later become the prevalence of the practice of anal sex - without ever explaining how anal sex between two men could cause the creation of this pathogen, but anal sex between a man and a woman couldn't.

Instead of running wild rumors, the gay press became... well... RESPONSIBLE, and didn't waste column inches on government conspiracies to kill gay men, nor did the press simply run, unchallenged, the press releases of the fed's health agencies. The gay papers had staff reporters, now those staff reporters turned to national, eminent, medical researchers, asking those researchers to comment on the press releases of the CDC and NIH. When there were no treatments coming from the government, the press began covering local mens' groups who, with or without the assistance of a medical professional, were using themselves as guinea pigs to test certain medicines, and combinations of medicines, to fight some malady that didn't even have an official name. The gay press began counting the dead, and from issue to issue, became more bold in holding the government responsible for that death to some degree, if just because the presumed contagious pathogen had not even yet been identified, or named. Then, for a brief period of time, it got named - and suddenly, every news outlet in the nations was all over the story, almost three full years since the BAR's first obituary.

GRIDS. Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Some unknown pathogen was destroying the immune systems of gay men; they were dying of infections and illnesses to which the human race had long since built immunity, as a species. The name didn't last long; when a woman in NJ was discovered to have the same symptoms, and that woman was identified as heterosexual, the name was changed to AIDS - Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. But for some, even today, GRIDS it was, and GRIDS it shall be, forever and ever, amen (even though those same people will argue there is no biological component to being gay; yet them wanting to believe it's all a "gay disease" should make them see they're saying there is a biologic component all (or a majority of) gay men share that allows for this pathogen to "turn on.").

During the early days of the AIDS crisis, the gay press - for lack of a better term - found their balls. Reporters for the gay press asked the tough questions; the mainstream press watched thoughtfully, then followed up with tough questions of their own. Very, very little was allowed to be swept under the rug; both the gay and mainstream media tore apart then-President Ronald Reagan's National Institutes of Health for AIDS-related funding, and the administration attempting to label cancer research as "AIDS research." The NIH was vilified in all press outlets for building a human research facility for which the guidelines for admission in the program were so severe (a candidate for admission must be at Point A in the presumption of illness, but not at Point B), that no human ever qualified for admission into the study. It was the sheer single-mindedness of the gay press that changed FDA policy concerning experimental drug medication on human subjects, allowing GRIDS/AIDS patients to become human guinea pigs for the drug companies. No official, anywhere, was allowed to escape scrutiny. If a religious based organization, such as the Catholic Church, received a grant in Boston, MA, to care for "x" number of AIDS patients, the gay newspapers in Hawaii demanded a recounting by the Church of exactly what it did, for whom, and what the outcome of the research/care was.

The gay press - the gay and lesbian newspaper reporters - were aggressive. Press releases were no longer even nearly enough. Personal statements were demanded; those personal statements were going to be run by other experts to be either confirmed or called into question. Everyone was being affected; everyone knew someone who had died, knew someone who was dying... or was dying themselves. There was, simply, no more time to stand on the sidelines and wait to be asked to dance; we headed out onto the dance floor on our own and made it our own.

And this is about where I entered the picture. I do not place myself on the same level of Randy Shilts; I was merely one of the thousands of people for whom he paved the way. In his later years, between "Band" and "Conduct Unbecoming," I would meet Randy; we became correspondence friends (which became much easier with the advent of email!), and I miss him to this very day.

I wrote, simply, news stories. Beginning with the local fag-rag in San Jose - "Our Paper/Your Paper" - which attempted to be an "all encompassing" periodical, to keep the straight/gay mix of the advertisers happy, I'm afraid when I came along, that balancing act couldn't be maintained anymore. Funnily enough, more of our gay advertisers - businesses that were either gay owned or gay managed - flew the coop than did our straight advertisers. One of the first things I investigated was a nasty practice of one of our advertisers (gay owned travel agent) who actually charged gay customers more for the same vacation packages being offered to heterosexuals. I forget the bizarre reasoning of the owner of that agency at the time - something about there being more straight vacationers than gay vacationers... whatever it was, it was utter bull - and I wrote about it. And my publisher published it; page one, above the fold. After that, I was off on a run, becoming free-lance; ultimately balancing hard news with two opinion columns (that ran in contrasting weeks) entitled "Payneful Realities" and "AIDSpeak." I self-killed "Speak" with the publication of its December 31st, 1995 column. Six months later, I killed "Realities," then, a year after that, left writing altogether. I couldn't do it anymore; I was simply burnt out. In that last "year end" "Speak" column, I culled the previous year for AIDS related news, not even knowing how I would be putting that last column together. Then I had an idea, and searched for news articles concerning AIDS in 1985 - a full ten years earlier, and the first year of the identifiable "AIDS epidemic." I was able to match headlines from 1985 with news stories from 1995, so that's what I ran - a column that said, essentially: "So, looking back over the last year, we have..." then giving the headline, followed by a brief description of the news item itself. In what some editors considered to be the closing paragraph, I revealed my ruse - that the news items had come from 1995, while the headlines came from news stories of 1985... that nothing had changed. And some editors, as I said, cut the column there. The column actually went on, another 11 paragraphs. The first paragraph was short - "So, in ten years, the only concrete, incontrovertible news about AIDS is:"

Each paragraph of the next ten paragraphs represented one year of the 1985-1995 decade, and listed the names of persons who had been openly identified as having died of AIDS or AIDS-related illness during each of those calendar years. It was this column for which I was nominated for a few awards; of the four, I won three of them.

I asked the hard questions, of everyone. At some point in my writing career, I interviewed everyone from a San Jose bathhouse owner who had recently lost his first lover to AIDS, to the Republican Governor of California who had vetoed a piece of gay rights legislation he had promised to sign into law when campaigning for office just six months previously. No one got a free pass. I was aggressive. I was persuasive. I was loved. I was loathed. I loved every second of it; I hated every minute of it.

But we're now back in a cycle where gay newspaper reporters believe there's nothing more to report than the press release, because there's a self-proclaimed "gay advocate" in the White House. We have reporters who are simply happy to be invited to sit at the kids table this Thanksgiving after, metaphorically speaking, being forced to eat in the garage with the dog for the previous eight years.

Passive or aggressive? I can't answer that, except to say I have no doubt, had I been toiling in the profession for the last nine years, I'd still be in someone's face demanding to know the answers to certain questions... attempting to pin any lawmaker I could find, at any level, to the floor on their true stance concerning marriage equality. Every legislature with whom I spoke would still be being peppered with questions asking that law-maker if they believed allowing the citizenry of a state - ANY state - to deny civil rights to another section of the state's citizenry was permitted under the Constitution of the United States? I'd want to know from the previous President's press liaison office how a homosexual prostitute had been given a set of White House Press Corps credentials when simple individual questions from real reporters were routinely ignored? And I'd want to know from the current President if he would have expected America's women, or blacks, to simply say "oh, okay. Whatever you say," if they were told "the time isn't right" to give them equal rights.

At last, some of the mainstream media are beginning to ask those questions; too often, though, the mainstream simply accepts the rote and trite answers given... and look at the gay and lesbian press with disdain when the issue is pressed.

The cycle's beginning again; the gay community is in for a lot of collective pain before we get our balls back; the mainstream media isn't going to give a damn about us - and will even paint us, as a whole, negatively, until we find the brass ones, again.

We're not going to find our balls again through passivity.

And, just like an email from Randy saying "do you believe this crap?", I miss it. I miss being on thatt edge, every single day.

Pioneering REAL Gay News Reporting -- Part I

Illustration from: http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/robert-jensen-teaching-journalism-with.html
by Eric Payne
guest essayist

Since for over 15 years I was (and here, I tout my own horn, for which I apologize in advance) an award-winning free-lance writer, specializing in "gay news," I might take a stab at answering your question...

When I began in "the gay press," most publications were simply a collection of press releases reformatted to fit the pages of that specific periodical. Sure, there were a few "gay papers" that utilized new material by free-lance writers - The "Bay Area Reporter," the "San Francisco Sentinel," "Frontiers" (in Southern California), the "Village Voice" (yes, though now "mainstream," the VV was once considered a "fag rag"), and a few other scattered newspapers/magazines around the country. But those periodicals (outside of the VV) existed, primarily, to showcase the "pornographic" advertisements that supported their publications. The industry's thinking was: Since the rags are distributed in the bars, no one's going to concern themselves with actually reading it; the text is just something to hide behind while checking out the hot guys, both the ones in the bar, and the ones in the ads offering in- and out-call services.

Fag rags were just another element of the whole bar scene; just one more cog in the gears of the "I want to get laid!" gear. None of the rags considered themselves a serious journalistic effort. Their advertisers simply cared about the number of copies distributed. The writers normally focused on local, special events - nearly all of which were held in one of the bars that distributed the paper.

Then, almost simultaneously, Harvey Milk, Anita Bryant and Randy Shilts happened... and all three were game changers.

There's not a lot about Milk and Bryant that hasn't been already said, but the emergence of both as news stories in a very short period of time made the rags in the bars seem completely superfluous. Suddenly, the younger gay men in the bars wanted to know what they weren't seeing in the "real" news outlets. After several unsuccessful runs at political office (almost ANY political office, it seemed) in the City of San Francisco, it appeared Harvey Milk might actually get elected to public office. The very thought that an out-of-the-closet gay man might get enough votes - without even once apologizing for being homosexual, can you believe it? - made the election of a lowly City Supervisor a national news story. In California, on that election night in 1977, it seemed the only political race in California that had any importance, at all, was the City Supervisor race in San Francisco.

And the San Francisco "gay press," created itself, almost solely to follow Milk's race. Suddenly, there was a political candidate who was not afraid to give a "sit-down" to a gay newspaper reporter; though he was "one of ours," writers became emboldened, and began requesting interviews of other candidates; the reporters began requesting and obtaining "official" press credentials, allowing them access to press conferences. Newspaper editors - primarily Bob Ross, of the Bay Area Reporter - began realizing the little pieces of fluff they'd been turning out could actually make an impact with their readers and the community as a whole. Almost overnight, the formats for the major weeklies changed - once one-sections, with ads and press releases interspersed, the papers grew. News was printed in the first section, peppered with "regular" advertisements; there appeared a completely separate second section, housing the advertisements of a "sexual" nature. Press releases that ran unchanged were pushed to the last half of the front section, the first half of the news section was given over to free-lance writers. The scope of the free-lancers had changed from "what's going on in the bars" to "what's going on in the state/country/world, and how does that affect us?". The editors of the newspapers began publishing their own opinions, as well as inviting others to share their opinions via letters to the paper, or guest opinion columns - though, admittedly, in the late 1970s, those opinions almost always coincided with the opinions of the editor(s). It was their game, after all, and they were beginning to enjoy playing it.

At almost exactly the same time, nationwide, the political climate changed to a vehemently "anti-gay" viewpoint (a reaction to an unrepentant fairy being popular enough to be elected, maybe?), and two other people bubbled out of the soup, the presence of whom helped define the "gay press" as it exists, today.

One was former runner-up beauty queen Anita Bryant, who didn't seem to understand the concept of heterosexuals giving birth to homosexuals and, thus, "creating" them, but believed there was some secret chain of hidden recruiting offices, nationwide, in which older, experienced homosexuals seduced unwilling young, strapping, heterosexual males into a deviant lifestyle. She stepped into the national spotlight, in an already gay-depressive political climate, and created the model for how gays are treated, politically, that still exists. "It's all about the children!" she'd cry... to anyone that would listen. Unfortunately, those people that would listen were ABC, CBS, NBC, the AP and UPI, and, really, just about any politician, anywhere in the country, at any level of government. Harvey Milk saw the threat she created; he made the gay press aware just how dangerous her rantings could be, and some of the publishers of the nascent "gay newspaper" industry not only editorialized about the Orange Juice Queen in their local rags, they deposited themselves, physically, in Florida to, first-hand, help fight the "gay rights repeal" she'd helped place on the ballot in Miami-Dade County. Unfortunately, the measure passed. Yet the rags created a spin - the measure didn't pass by nearly the numbers it had been expected to pass. The important thing, though, was that it DID pass, and set equal rights for the homosexually oriented back to 1960s level (basically, "keep it secret, perv, or you're going to jail!").

In that same period of time, the "Bay Area Reporter" had become the preeminent fag-rag in San Friancisco, if not the country. Bob Ross, the publisher of the B.A.R., decided he liked publishing a real information outlet, as opposed to just another bar fag-rag, and placed a make-or-break gamble. Submissions from free-lancers were going to be both fact-checked and edited. No longer were items going to be published simply to fill space; if he needed to, he would fill that empty space with a graphic, or a donated advertisement. While still being receiving a pay commensurate with the published column inches, free-lancers were expected to abide by the rules of journalism. Those writers who didn't know what those rules might be were told what they were. If a writer had an opinion, the writer was invited to submit a guest column - but "news stories" being built around those opinions were no longer acceptable.

But Ross's biggest gamble was to hire, in 1976, his first staff news reporter, Randy Shilts. Shilts had graduated from the University of Oregon's jouranlism school in 1975. While in college, he won awards for his editorship of the school's newspaper; he also, publicly, "came-out" as a gay man, running for election for class office with the slogan "Come out for Shilts."

He lost.

But when he graduated, Shilts relocated from Eugene, OR, to the Bay Area of California because of the attention the Bay Area had received from the national press during Milk's campaign for City Supervisor, and Randy despised that the attention given to the Bay Area as a whole was so heavy-handed and so blatantly violated the rules of ethical journalism. When he graduated, and hit "The City," Randy began sending his resume and tear-sheets to the major dailies in the area, everything from the San Francisco "Chronicle" to the daily in Tracy, CA (70 miles east), the San Jose "Mercury," (50 miles south), and those dailies in the North and far-North Bay area. Each and every one rejected him.

Randy wanted to write with the perspective of a homosexual, but adhere that writing to the rules of journalism: who, what, when, where, why and how. He wanted to write from "the other side," and have his material - which he strove to make fair and balanced; if he felt he couldn't, he self-killed many a presumptive start - seen by as many people as possible. He didn't want his material to "make a difference," so much as he, himself, wanted to make the difference in creating material that simply caused the reader to think. He just wanted to be a reporter. Bob Ross gave him that chance.

Later, in the early 80s, when for a brief period of time "going gay" was the rule for newsrooms, nationwide, the San Francisco Chronicle would hire both Shilts and Armistead Maupin - and the two represented the two sides of the "gay press" coin. Shilts remained, even in his later best-selling books on Harvey Milk, the early days of the AIDS epidemic and the treatment of gays and lesbians in the United States military, the newspaper reporter, presenting facts to his readers, letting his readers do their own thinking and drawing their own conclusions.

Maupin was the stereotypical gay-man-bitch-queen in his newspaper columns which introduced the characters of an apartment house on the fictional Barbary Lane in San Francisco; not only was Maupin a stereotype but so, too, were his characters: an aging iconoclastic landlord, an effeminate out gay man, a conservative white woman, a hippie who might (or might not) be a lesbian, the sex-addicted white man and, lastly, the creepy child molester (complete with belted rain/trench coat). Maupin was the safe side of having an "out" homosexual writer - he stuck to to the pictures and preconceptions most had of homosexual men and women.

I've always found the dichotomy of both Randy and Maupin as best selling authors to be a bit... humorous. But that's just me.

And, then... tragedy. On a massive, world-wide scale.

Milk was assassinated and, once again, the world press focused on Bay Area politics. If an out gay man being elected to local office was "news," then that same man being gunned down in his office must be news-worthy, as well. In the one year since his election - possibly because a straight, white male politician had been killed, as well - the tone changed. Milk's killing, and his life, were actually reported with respect and dignity. His photograph was no longer being televised, side-by-side with pictures of "Dykes on Bikes" or "The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence." Layered on that was the fact Milk knew, at the time of his election, there was only one way his term of office was going to end; the release of tape-recordings Milk began making the night after his election that dealt with how he wished the public would react when "that bullet enters (his) brain," and even Milk's political prescience was given its fair due. He was suddenly, in the news media, a politician riding the forefront of a national viewpoint that would, one day, be a litmus test for every political candidate, at all levels of government.

GLBT News: Aggressive or Passive?

Graphic from: http://www.walyou.com/img/old-manual-typewriters-robot-art-sculptures-1.jpg

(OKLAHOMA CITY) On a google group I subscribe to there was a discussion of how aggressive an Oklahoma-based GLBT online news page should be in its reporting of GLBT news in Oklahoma and whether the depiction of straight women as stereotypes with photo-shopped pictures is appropriate.

I would like to suggest that whatever is developing in the way of a "non-controversial" (?) alternative to www.Gossip-boy.com
is not some extension of the fawning obeisance to religion that passes in Oklahoma as "progressive politics". I appreciate the no-holds-barred attitude of Gossip-boy.

Those who object to the treatment of straight women on Gossip-boy should, it seems to me, be objecting as well to the depiction of drag queens as an icon of our community. Drag is not a barb to women but represents the playing out of the stereotyped belief of many straights that most gay men want to be women. I get the symbolic nature of the impersonation even though I find it personally belittling to gay men who haven't the faintest desire to cross-dress and are secure in their own egos. But that's an exercise in diversity, isn't it?

My point is that are we going to use all the tools we can legally, or are we going to wring our hands and worry over being seen as rude?

I ask that we not confuse the hard news section of Gossip-boy with the satirical Smack column written by "Hunter". The news articles give us information about the machinations and backstage plans of the homo-haters that the main stream media in Oklahoma, or nationally, will never touch. I'd put Gossip-boy's investigative success up against that of even Rachel Madow any day, any time.

By devoting itself to Oklahoma, Gossip-boy is able to put the magnifying glass on the legislative and social labyrinth that is working tirelessly to put us either back in the figurative old closet or in a literal new grave.

It's true that occasionally one of my own articles is posted on Gossip-boy for which I receive only the by-line and nothing in compensation so my defense of the news section of Gossip-boy is not of a fiduciary character. It's my impression that Gossip-boy has more than once been threatened with violence from some of the subjects of its stories. I doubt there are very many GLBT people in Oklahoma willing to do this. Where Gossip-boy gets its money I don't know but I'm more than glad the homo-haters are being exposed in all their viciousness, without the sugar-coating of religion and politesse we get from straight news sources. Who else knows what it's like to be gay/lesbian in "Oklahoma, America" than we ourselves?

I contend that it's the use of religion as either a defensive or offensive weapon that has made being gay/lesbian in this country the pariah class that we are. No gay/lesbian citizen should have to beg for the civil rights and equality that is already ours as a birthright of our citizenship. As Dan Barker of the Freedom from Religion Foundation ( www.FFRF.org ) said in his recent Oklahoma appearances, when religion and government mingle, they both get dirty. I'm not interested in using the tools of the oppressors to somehow liberate us gays/lesbians from one form of apartheid and then subject us to the other side of the same coin.

If any sort of GLBT news source is under consideration, it should consist of nearly all recognized and OUT GLBTs if it's going to have any credibility.

Religion is not the panacea as its adherents on either side of divisive issues like to describe it. The imposition of religious dogma retards thought and research. Just as religion was used to silence Renaissance philosophers and nascent scientists that the earth was flat and the center of the observable universe, why would such a Bronze-age frame of thinking be used to influence the acknowledgment that gay/lesbian citizens are just the same under the law as heteros?

The society of pharonic Egypt was farther along with the true nature of the solar system than Renaissance Europe. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ) The Greek, Eratosthenes, working in Egypt, unencumbered by threat of excommunication or flaming death from the civil authorities corrupted by religion was able to measure the circumference of the Earth to an astonishing degree of accuracy for his time.

There is a difference in the exaggerated and/or fabricated lies told about us GLBTs by the homo-haters and the plain and pointed truth as exposed by Gossip-boy. The real threats against our citizenship are too far advanced to quibble over the nuts-and-bolts of journalistic technique.

We already have an alternative to Gossip-boy in the Oklahoma four-state area and that's the Metro Star. ( http://www.metrostarnews.com ) Though a monthly print newspaper, it has a website that uses media alerts for major breaking news stories.

As far as I'm concerned we can use both, and more, of these outlets for investigative news about our Oklahoma GLBT equality fight.

Guest essay: America Before Roe v. Wade

illustration from: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_11-nzoYFuQU/R5UgFGABdVI/AAAAAAAABzc/dlO-eUSPmMc/s400/Roe+v+Wade+hanger.gif

Few women now of childbearing age will remember the time when abortion in America was illegal. As much as some might want you to think otherwise, it was hardly a glorious time of sexual abstinence. Women, whether married or unmarried, had unwanted pregnancies and sometimes resorted to folk or even quack “remedies”. Unknown and untraceable abortionists operated from back-alleys, kitchen tables, and rented rooms—with few guarantees of medical knowledge, professional conduct, or even basic hygiene, and with no threat of a medical malpractice lawsuit if (or when) things went horribly wrong.

The men of that era who fathered an unwanted pregnancy often responded to such news with, “How do you know it’s mine?” Fortunately, if abortion is recriminalized, with modern DNA techniques such questions will be easily answered, particularly when the issue of child support arises.

Since abortion (and, in many states, contraception) was illegal, women whose procedures were botched were at great pains to hide what had happened. A trip to the hospital to treat symptoms like massive bleeding or infection could have been tantamount to an admission of guilt. Thus, official statistics of deaths resulting from illegal abortion would undoubtedly be vastly understated and unreliable.

As another holiday season approaches, families will gather together and retell each other their stories. What about that aunt or sister or cousin (or the dear friend from high school or college) who died suddenly, or is the “black sheep” of the family—the one who’s only spoken of in hushed tones? Was she one of “the girls who went away”: to an out-of-state abortionist or a home for unwed mothers? Did she put a “love child” up for adoption, willingly or otherwise? Has she felt the shame and guilt of her family and society ever since? (On this topic, I give great thanks to Ann Fessler, author of the powerful book, The Girls Who Went Away, and those who shared their stories with her.)

These were far more common occurrences than realized today—and they never found their way into the dinner table discussions on “Leave it to Beaver”, “Ozzie and Harriett”, or “Father Knows Best”. Ask your older relatives while you still can (the National Day of Listening is the Friday after Thanksgiving). You might be surprised at what you learn from your own family history and you might help release a dear relative from a private, personal prison.

No, Americans didn’t wake up one day and decide it would be fun to destroy fetuses. After decades of painful, bloody experience, we decided to stop forcing women with unwanted pregnancies to put themselves in deadly danger.

Eddy Collins
Norman, OK

Religious Right is Demanding Special Rights

Graphic at: http://www.miketidmus.com/blog/2009/11/20/a-declaration-of-obsolescence/


(OKLAHOMA CITY) They should be able to recognize special rights as that's what they say we GLBTs are wanting. I want, and I think other GLBTs want, just plain civil equality, no fancy dress, no special treatment, just the same privileges straight people get with no questions asked.

But the bible-humpers want a special right to pick and choose which laws passed by elected legislatures they will follow, even as they already enjoy the special tax-free, IRS-granted right to avoid helping pay for the society they enjoy.

However, with the recent proclamation called "Manhattan Declaration" that fans the flames of slow-burning bigots and gives notice to state and federal governments to expect civil disobedience from the church militant, the hairy beasts of bigotry have surely trapped themselves in another hair-splitting, how-many-angels- dance-on- a-pin conundrum.

Here's the link to one of the clearest explanations I've come across that spells out the hypocrisy of the holy harangers as they take tax money as government contractors for social services, yet want to maintain their ivory tower aloofness from the same civil laws we heathens must observe.

complete at: http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2009/11/4893/ or
http://tinyurl.com/y93k8el

EXCERPT: This would be the same Catholic church that recently announced it would stop feeding the homeless in Washington D.C. if it had to obey D.C. laws forbidding discrimination against gay citizens. Let me say a couple things about this: first, if you take tax money you have to abide by the strings attached to it. There isn’t a government contractor who doesn’t understand how this relationship works. I know, because I have worked in that environment myself. This isn’t religious persecution, it’s called accountability. And the government isn’t accountable to the pulpit, it’s accountable to the pews. It’s their money gentlemen, not yours. Not until it goes into a collection plate anyway.

...if you run a business or operate a public service, you have to abide by this nation’s civil rights laws. This isn’t a new argument…we’ve been having it for ages. Where is the line between the bigot’s freedom to be a bigot and the nation’s promise of liberty and justice to all?

....you are not being asked to “bless” anything. Just do the work or provide the services you contracted with the government to do with its money

complete at: http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2009/11/4893/ or
http://tinyurl.com/y93k8el

Oklahoma Homo-Haters Trying Their Best for an Arrest

Testing Shepard/Byrd Hate Crimes Law


(Oklahoma City) Two Oklahoma City fundies, wanting to get a larger share of the bigger bigot spotlight got just that this past Monday, November 16, in Washington, DC. The only thing is that the bigger share wasn't very bright, nor did it succeed in getting them arrested, charged, or cuffed as was their fond hope. Their martyrdom for the Eternal Light will have to wait another day.

Dr. Steve Kern, husband of terorrist-snifer GOPer Rep. Sally Kern, along with Paul Blair, devoted homo-hater, were hoping to get arrested. Their public attempt at civil disobedience looked more like a childish temper tantrum resulting from their pique with Congress passing the Shepard/Byrd Hate Crime Law. http://www.olivetbaptistokc.com/ , http://tinyurl.com/yr63qo

Paul Blair of Edmond, Oklahoma, is quoted in all his goodness talking about marriage, but the Shepard/Byrd Hate Crimes Law is not about marriage, it's about inciting violence and targeting individuals as scapegoats for the superstition and fears of mentally unhealthy people who organize public rallies to drum up money and support from similarly hood-winked adults. http://fairviewbaptistedmond.org/

But the self-styled "Pastor" Blair was ejected in October from a parochial high school football game for objectionable language used towards a student player from the opposing team. Just what could a Man of Gee-sus have said to a high-school boy to get the speaker ejected by the referee? http://gossip-boy.com/Blair_Ejected.html

This story from the Washington Post quotes these charlatans in all their illiterateness about the Shepard/Byrd Law. http://tinyurl.com/ydelkkj

After reading their remarks it would seem that biblical devotion to literalness and inerrancy precludes the ability to read, interpret, and understand this section of the law, Sec. 10: paragraphs 3 and 4, which protects freedom of speech as long as that speech is within legally accepted parameters such as not inciting illegal acts of violence. http://tinyurl.com/y97awf6

But then, we know that bible fundies aren't really interested in truth, but just in maintaining their flat-earth dream world made in their own image.

More photos of the participants and their gay-hate rally can be seen here as well more commentary from www.Gossip-boy.com, an Oklahoma City-based GLBT news source. http://gossip-boy.com/DC_Hate_Rally.html

Feeling Like a Lost Raffle Ticket?

I love the Democratic Party but Will I Respect Myself in the Morning?


(OKLAHOMA CITY) As we GLBTs emerge sweaty and disheveled from our post-coital ruckus in Maine, I'm reminded that this is America and everything is for sale, including our gay/lesbian equality--that's the American way, you know. You want to know how we're going to sell it?

In 1764 an Italian nobleman named Cesare Beccaria wrote, "If we glance at the pages of history, we will find that laws, which surely are or ought to be compacts of free men, have been for the most part, a mere tool for the passions of some."

I'm referring to the heartbreakingly close, yet lost, Maine election early in November where we gays/lesbians thought we had a better-than-good chance of winning through the ballot box the recognition of our civil equality under the law.

Unfortunately, the religious right has used the referendum petition process in 31 states to turn our birth certificates of citizenship in to raffle tickets for discrimination where the prize is our continued lack of full equality and recognition of our birthright under the law. Our civil rights cause has been de-railed 31 times at the ballot box by the usual deception of the biblically-deluded using the prejudiced superstitions that gays recruit and stalk children and teenagers.

Not only are gays/lesbians still second-class taxpayers, all of the residents of those 31 states, regardless of sexual orientation, are also honorary members of the Mormon, Roman Catholic, and Southern Baptist denominations, to name only three of the biggest religious oppressors in the USA. I say this because its the oppressor's anti-gay religious POVs that have become encoded into civil law. The United Church of Christ (UCC), Unitarian, and Reform Judaism adherents have passed guidelines allowing their clergy to perform their own versions of same-gender marriage without recognition from the resident state. Their First Amendment religious freedom is blocked by the actions and money of the theocrats whose dogma trumps all attempts at fairness and fulfillment of our lives. Justice guaranteed by the Constitution is thwarted by ignorance and prejudice.

Only Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut have legislatively passed marriage equality for same-gendered Americans. The state of Washington earlier this month rejected the homo-haters attempt to overturn a law called, "Everything but Marriage."

Since the ballot box/civil rights raffle process is spent and flaccid, activists John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay are calling for a boycott or a withholding of contributions -- Don't Ask, Don't Give -- to the Democratic Party until we get the results they've promised us for years, like passage of employment protection (ENDA), removal of marriage discrimination (DOMA), and the privilege to serve in the military (DADT).
( http://bit.ly/pBUP1 and http://bit.ly/2LqEmc )

In our American two-party political system laws have been made the passionate tools to be used against us as Beccaria observed centuries ago.

The GOP couldn't care less if GLBTs lived or died. Did you see Mary Cheney at the October March on Washington? So that leaves the Democratic Party as the only game in town, politically speaking, and they think they have a monopoly on our affections but with their repeated stalling and inaction on important gay issues I'm through believing them. Remember, it took ELEVEN years for Congress to pass the Shepard/Byrd Hate Crimes Law, and only two months for Congress to pass the AMBER Alert in 2002. ( http://bit.ly/1Iv8Q0 )

The Victorian novelist George Meredith said, "It's a terrific decree in life that one must act who would prevail." If our GLBT cause is just then we must act to accomplish it; no one will give it to us freely.

Until we have a sustained, visible, assertive, yet peaceful action to justify our equality and citizenship, we gays/lesbians will continue to be looked at as just limp-wristed targets for abuse, politically and physically.

What's it going to be: always the bridesmaid, never the bride; always the best man, never the groom?

Projectile Diarrhea -- What the Oklahoma GOPers do Best

I'm always amazed at the Oklahoma GOP's use of boldfaced lies and hypocrisy which they throw around like a herd of diarrhea-infected cattle drops fecal material in a barnyard.

I'm referring to the pious, crocodile-tear streaming expressions coming from GOPer Senator Tod Lamb who is the sponsor of HB 1595, now a law being challenged in an Oklahoma County courtroom by two Oklahoma women's rights activists. This law requires doctors to send to the Oklahoma Dept. of Health the answers to 37 questions asked of women who have chosen to end their pregnancies.

A sample of these questions can be read here-- http://tinyurl.com/ygj6v4b

If Sen. Lamb is so concerned with the "sanctity of life" as he has said in public interviews why has he voted against the health and welfare of living children and their mothers? I'd say the principal author of HB1595 has abandoned both sick kids as well as women who need contraceptives to space and control the most intimate aspects of any woman's life--her own control of her reproductive decisions.

Reasonable people who want to reduce the number and need of abortions understand that the obvious requirement is to prevent pregnancy in the first place. This can be done with appropriate, unbiased medical information and planning services delivered unhindered by the medical professional of the patient's choice. Not by legislators who are practicing medicine without a license, yet this is exactly what's happening in Oklahoma.

Here's a sample of Sen. Lamb's voting record which doubles as an indictment of his hypocrisy and his deliberate violation of women's privacy used to further his political agenda for higher office.

Todd Lamb voted against the “All Kids Act” in 2007, a bill giving health insurance to 42,000 poor Oklahoma kids with money from a tobacco tax passed in 2004. This was SCHIP, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Todd Lamb didn't allow three bills to be heard about contraceptives assigned to his Health & Human Resources Committee in 2007:

1. Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergency (SB-105) - Requires health care facilities that provide medical care to rape victims to offer emergency contraception as a treatment option.

2. Contraceptive Equity (SB-104) - Requires insurance companies to cover contraceptives at the same rate that they would cover any other prescription drug.

3. Patient Protection Act (SB-555) - Requires that pharmacies fill prescriptions for contraceptives and provide over-the-counter emergency contraception, or follow guidelines set forth to fill a prescription in a timely manner.

Sen. Lamb needs to sit down and have an adult "birds and bees" lesson with a medical professional instead of a bull session with the good ole boys. But the good ole boys, and gals, are more likely to contribute to Lamb's lieutenant governor's race than will sick children and pregnant women.

photo courtesy of coloradodisasterhelp.colostate.edu

Socks Upon CXXXs Will be Outlawed

Photo courtesy of http://etnies.com/content/products/spring-09/socks/westside-crew-sock-black.jpg

Hilarious satire of Sally Kern if it weren't so threatening to women's privacy.

I can say it's hilarious, because I'm a man and I know that such a law as suggested in this piece will never pass.

However, there is a law set to go into effect in Oklahoma on Nov. 1 that WILL require all the details of a legal, safe medical procedure performed in Oklahoma to be made available ONLINE, and I mean ALL the details with the exception of the patient's name.

How's that for small government GOPer representation?

There is going to be a court hearing on Oct. 30 to try and at least get a restraining order to prevent the implementation of this invasion of women's privacy.

Here's a link to the truth:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/10/07/okla_abortion/index.html
or http://tinyurl.com/yc3lcn8


And here's a link to the satire:
http://dagblog.com/humor-satire/oklahoma-law-hold-men-accountable-sperm-holocaust-948

or http://tinyurl.com/yzjldlj

Joke-lahoman (aka Oklahoman) Editorial: Gay Men Should Quake and Quail?

Joke-lahoman (aka Oklahoman) Editorial: Gay Men Should Quake and Quail?



Recently an Oklahoma County judge found in favor of Joe Quigley, a teacher in the Oklahoma City public schools, concluding that the School Board was unable to prove its case that Quigley is an incompetent teacher of high school English.

This Joke-lahoman editorial states quite clearly that to be an out gay man, to advocate for the protection of school children, and to be a good teacher are three incompatible aspects of being human.

Unlike power-hungry, narrow-minded, straight newspapers editors, gay men and women can be experts at holding more than one idea at a time. Also, we can read and discern the meaning of words written in a judicial opinion; this one uses plain English, no Latin worth mentioning, and no obtuse legal footnotes and references.

The editorial beats around the bush yet implies that Quigley should have no right of appeal from the School Board to a higher judicial level. Is Quigley supposed to quail and quake like some feudal serf before the manorial lord?

Only when the decisions go against the Joke-lahoman's perceived order of things, does it find the rule of law to be inconvenient and flawed.

As an observer to the School Board meeting convened as a kangaroo court I'm glad to be reminded that this country has an adversarial system of justice allowing for levels of appeal and the exercise of other view points.

Along with the School Board, I think the editorial staff needs some remedial reading instruction.

As just a casual reference of not much importance, I'd like to point out that Judge Barbara Swinton is Republican with children in a public school, so, having found in Joe Quigley's favor, under the judicial robe she "must" be a closeted, wild-eyed, activist judge.

You read, you decide---

http://www.newsok.com/district-right-to-fight-for-ability-to-do-its-work/article/3401575

or http://tinyurl.com/l69h3n

District right to fight for ability to do its work
OUR VIEWS: FIRING OF NORTHWEST CLASSEN TEACHER

The Oklahoman Editorial
Published: September 17, 2009

THE Oklahoma City School District isn’t the first to have a judge intervene
in a personnel decision. But unlike many similarly situated districts,
school officials here have decided to fight to keep a fired teacher out of
the classroom.

The case involves Joseph Quigley, a longtime English teacher at Northwest
Classen High School. Quigley was fired in May for willful neglect of duty,
repeated negligence, instructional ineffectiveness and other reasons. The
school board upheld his firing, and he appealed in Oklahoma County District
Court. Last month, a judge ordered Quigley reinstated. --snip--

--------------------------------------
From Oklahoman:

"Quigley’s case is somewhat complicated by the fact that he’s gay and has long been an advocate of a more succinct discrimination and bullying policy that specifically covers sexual orientation. Inevitably, that history is intertwined with questions about his teaching performance."

From Judge Swinton:

“And all I have with regard to the end of year or end of instruction testing is that his students did well”

“And I can’t find that anything that he wished to show his students would have harmed them in any way or done anything more than help educate them in the curriculum that Mr. Quigley was assigned.”

“There have been emails sent during instruction time, but no one’s brought me any evidence that has caused a lack of learning in his classroom if it, in fact, happened.”

“to criticize a teacher and try to take his job away for not following a policy that he gets faulted whether he uses it or doesn’t use it does not appear to be a good use of the district’s time.”

“If the problems had remained the same with a different evaluator that had not made up her mind, this case would have been completely different, but the school district chose not to do that.”

And last but not least--

“So I believe it’s obvious from the parts of this case that I have just commented on that I find that in no way has the district met their burden of proof.”