The right thing to do

The last 24 hours has been a jumbled up mixed bag of emotions. We headed down to Des Moines last night in less than ideal weather to attend the Public Hearing on House Joint Resolution 6 at the State Capitol. The house was packed as we expected and many, many people were signed up to speak both for and against a proposed amendment to the Iowa Constitution that would strip not only marriage rights away from LGBT Iowans, but also make any union that they could possibly aspire for unrecognized in the eyes of the state. Some of the testimony was so uplifting and some of it was downright disgusting. Iowa at its best and worst was on display last night. That said, everyone in the gallery was civil to each other for the most part, despite the fact that we vehemently disagreed on the subject matter. That, folks, is what Iowa is all about.

Both sides got equal time and although she had signed up to speak, Heidi did not get a chance to. She did publish her prepared remarks on her blog which I encourage everyone to read. I was even interviewed very briefly by the Des Moines Register and made the article in this morning's paper. I expressed my doubts that any minds were changed by the testimonies given that night, all the while hoping beyond hope that perhaps some of those that had declared support for the amendment would have a change of heart.

I knew that this wouldn't happen. With 56 Republican co-sponsors, the bill was a shoo-in to pass. What I didn't expect were 3 Democratic representatives to join in with the GOP and vote for the resolution, passing 62-37 with one Republican representative absent. These three representatives are, in my eyes, more worried about saving their own political skins than they are about doing the right thing. When it comes to this issue, those that won't stand up and do what's right are no different from the Republicans.

Conversely, we have our own Beth Wessel-Kroeschell who has fearlessly and consistently led the charge against the amendment. She has a solidly Democratic district so I'm not sure that politically such a stand is much of a risk to her, but my appreciation of her continued support cannot be understated.

Still, despite the fact that the outcome was expected and I knew Beth would be a loud and vocal advocate, I reacted poorly to the outcome. I was sad and depressed after work. I wondered if it was even worth it to go down last night. Clearly, if these legislators could not be moved by these stories, is there anything that will work? Was there anybody that could voice support of the amendment without quoting from the Bible or referencing the Judeo-Christian God? There were times last night that I felt like I was in Sunday School, being forced to listen to Bible verses. It made me want to say a la Eddie Izzard "Corinthians letter to St. Paul, Chapter one, verses one to a million. FUCK OFF!" Tonight, I wanted to throw in the towel because it seemed like it just wasn't worth it anymore. We can't change their minds and they can't change ours. And now that they're in control, what can we possibly do?

But no, that's not what we do. The other side will work tirelessly and now they have momentum so they have no reason to let up. That means we have to keep working and educating and speaking our minds. I've been thinking a lot this week about the phrase "having the courage of your convictions." And that's what it boils down to for me. Talking the talk at this point is not enough, at least not for me. I have to be willing to give up a weeknight to drive down to Des Moines in a snowstorm to be one more body in support of all my LGBT friends. I have to be willing to be interviewed for the paper and not care who might see it. I will likely annoy a lot of people and sound like a broken record but damn it, this is too important.

As Heidi said, my marriage will never be voted on - who are you to say that some people's should be?

Two steps forward, one step back. That's how this kind of stuff goes. I know that ultimately it's going to take an US Supreme Court decision to settle this once and for all. Until then, I will continue to work tirelessly in the ways that I am able. What I will not do any longer is listen to any argument in this debate that invokes religious fundamentalism or the Christian God. At this point, it should be like using Nazis in an argument. You do it, you automatically lose.

This is my last word on this particular chapter but you can bet your last dollar I'll still be fighting for it. The problem with being passionate is you open yourself up to being hurt, but it's better than not feeling at all. And as Carly Simon says, it's the right thing to do.

Is it over yet?

I think this has been the longest election season in history. Tomorrow is Election Day and I have had enough of this. I almost don't care that the Democrats are going to get crucified in the election tomorrow. I just want the whole bloody thing to be over with. That way, the ads (which I think have been particularly horrible this year) will finally be off the airwaves. Seriously, they have been the worst ever. You can see it even on the local level. One ad I heard on the radio today was talking about how a candidate for either the Iowa House or Senate was a wife beater and a deadbeat dad. Now, if this is truly the case, well, sure he probably shouldn't hold elected office, but how much of it is true and how much of it is typical election season hyperbole? You really can't believe ANYTHING you hear any longer.

I was talking with Matt last night who is a political junkie. We talked at length about what is probably one of the more heartbreaking races here in Iowa - the vote to retain three of Iowa's Supreme Court justices. As most everyone knows, in April of 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously struck down the state's marriage law defining marriage as between one man and one woman, making same-sex marriage legal in Iowa. This (predictably) got the social conservatives' undies in a bunch, particularly perennial also-ran Bob Vander Plaats. After losing the Republican gubernatorial primary to Terry Branstad, he made ousting the three Supreme Court justices who are up for retention this year his raison d'etre. Never mind this won't change the law. Never mind that no justice has been ousted in Iowa history. NOT ONE.

It's no secret around these parts that the Supreme Court decision that allowed all Iowans to enjoy the benefits of civil marriage and not just the ones that happen to be heterosexual made me very happy. So the fact that 37% of those polled favored ousting all three judges vs. 34% who favored retaining them made me a little sad. (10% favored retaining some and I have no idea what the remainder would do.) What this really is is a referendum on marriage equality - make no mistake about it. Put to a vote now, I have a feeling that a constitutional amendment would pass. It would be a squeaker, but I think we'd succeed in putting discrimination into the Iowa Constitution.

But it's not just the question of judicial retention that has me on pins and needles. House and Senate Democrats have been pretty successful at blocking a vote on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man-one woman. Republicans promised to make it a campaign issue and honestly, I haven't seen it much. Granted, my House district is heavily Democratic so we're likely to re-elect our current representative. Our Iowa Senate candidate is a bit more of a toss-up. If you were to go by yard signs, I'd say that he has a bit of a fight ahead of him. But that's the thing - polling numbers for races like that are virtually non-existent. So we won't really know until tomorrow night. The CW says that one of the chambers has the potential to flip to Republicans, and the other is safely Democratic (I forget which is which.) But even one chamber going Republican forces a vote in both chambers and I'd rather keep pushing that off. The longer we wait, the more likely an amendment vote is to fail.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a one issue voter. But this is a HUGE issue for us and one that we're heavily invested in personally. I take solace in knowing that I'm on the right side of history when it comes to this. But just because the rest of the country isn't ready for it doesn't mean that we should have to wait for them to catch up with us.

I've been saying over the last few months that Iowa is better than this. And we are! But tomorrow night I think I'll be watching election returns through my fingers as if it were a horror film. Wake me when it's over.

And just think, the 2012 presidential campaign will begin in earnest early in 2011. I can't wait.

Senseless

I am pretty much heartbroken over the story of 18 year-old Tyler Clementi's suicide after his roommate posted live video feed of him having sex with another man in his dorm room to the internet. At first, I thought that he was merely missing and I guess until they find a body, he is, but all signs point to the high likelihood of him having jumped off the George Washington Bridge in New York City.

There are so many angles on this it makes your head spin. There was a good write-up on this on AMERICAblog tonight and really, that says what I would like to say so much better than I ever could. What I hate about this most is that this is 2010 and we are still living in a world in which society teaches our young men that it is better to be dead than gay. More than that, the simple perception that you might be gay is a fate worse than death. I would like to think that we've made progress since my high school days but apparently, we really haven't. And clearly I'm not the only one to think this. In the article I linked above is the following quote:

Gay rights groups say Clementi's death is the latest example of a long-standing problem: young people who kill themselves because they're bullied about being gay — regardless of whether they are.

I will go to my grave saying that homophobia has more to do with challenging the definition of masculinity than anything else. Anybody who doesn't fit that nice and tidy mold is immediately attacked, either directly or subtly. Gay men challenge masculinity and what it means to be a man. And thank fucking God they do because the definition we use is messed up.

The other thing that gets me is something I read in another article that (naturally) I can't find to link to anymore. But what I read was that when people first noticed that Clementi was missing, they went around to his dorm floor and asked people if they had talked to him. Only three people remembered ever talking to him. THREE. I have no idea how big the dorm floor was, but that is not very damn many. All I could think of is how shy and lonely he probably was, away at school for the first time and the to have his roommate pull a bullshit prank like that. No wonder he felt like he had no recourse other than to jump off a bridge. It's reminds me of the old adage "When I was young, I admired clever men. Now that I am older, I admire the kind ones." Or something like that anyway.

Tragedies like this just remind me how far we have to go as a society in general but as men in particular. It needs to stop being okay to refer to people as fags. It needs to stop being okay to use gay as a synonym for stupid. And we absolutely have to stop teaching men that death is a better option than being gay.

We all have to do our small part. I'm doing mine. Won't you join me?

There's something about marriage

I got home from work last night just in time to watch the initial results trickle in from Maine. Although many issues were on the ballot last night, the one we were all watching was the referendum on marriage equality - the so-called "people's veto." The state legislature in Maine approved marriage equality last summer, and the governor signed it into law, making Maine the 5th state in the US to grant marriage rights to all its citizens, not just its heterosexual ones. No sooner did this happen than those opposing it started rallying the troops and put the rights of a minority to an up/down vote.

We all know how it turned out, even though it was a real nail-biter for awhile. 52% of those voting chose to strip Maine's gay and lesbian residents of the right to marry, and in so doing, ripped away the privileges that all those in heterosexual marriages take for granted. Although these results make me sick, the fact that the majority was allowed to vote on whether or not a minority gets to have certain rights makes me even sicker. It is safe to say that most of those who voted yesterday in Maine's election were not gay or lesbian, yet here they are, determining what gays and lesbians should or should not be able to do, many (but not all) driven by fear, misinformation and religion which honestly have no place in making policy decisions.

One of the most frequent arguments I hear against marriage equality is that "it's against God's law!" I'm always amazed to hear that. I do not currently identify as a Christian, so that argument holds not one drop of water for me and the millions of others who do not subscribe to either an institutionalized religion or even to the simple concept of a God. Talk about forcing your beliefs on others. That's not to say that all Christians are against marriage equality - quite the contrary. There are many examples of that in Maine and elsewhere. What I would remind those that would be so quick to judge based on what their religion tells them to do is to remember the Great Commandment: LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. And yes, that includes your gay or lesbian neighbor whether you like it or not.

It is not until people who enjoy the invisible privilege of being in the majority are prevented from deciding that other people are second class citizens or not worthy of the same rights that they currently enjoy that this nonsense will finally stop. I think that will eventually require some kind of US Supreme Court decision which is certainly a long ways off. There was no up/down vote to abolish slavery, nor was there a ballot initiative asking that women's right to vote be rejected after it was granted. Were we to propose either of those, I'm sure it would elicit gasps of incredulousness from those who voted to reject Maine's marriage equality law. But there is no difference. Civil rights issues are civil rights issues.

I hope that the No on 1 people take this through the courts now. It is certainly an option, and one that will likely be heard. It is the job of the judicial system to protect a minority from the tyranny of the majority. While my choice of words may seem overdrawn, you may want to ask a same-sex couple in Maine if they feel that I'm being dramatic in my word choice. Chances are high that they'd feel exactly the same way. And in case you're wondering why I give a shit, as I'm neither a resident of Maine nor gay, and I currently enjoy all the benefits of a legally recognized marriage, it's about being empathetic for your fellow humans, especially those that may be experiencing a different life experience than you. Just because the system is working fine for you doesn't mean that it's working well for everyone.

Maybe it's time to get rid of marriage altogether, to chuck that word on the scrap heap of history so that those that oppose equal rights for gay and lesbian couples can stop being hung up on it. I'll gladly redefine my relationship with my wife so that my gay and lesbian friends can enjoy the same rights I have. But if we did that, those that oppose marriage equality would be forced to look at the real reasons that they oppose equality, which I bet are 100 times uglier than the religious beliefs they hide them behind.

There's no doubt that this will fade from the news cycle by the end of the week, but remember that here in Iowa, we're gearing up for a new legislative session and those that oppose the marriage equality we have here in Iowa will have a new target in their sites. To those of you reading that live within the state, I encourage you to donate time or money (or both) to One Iowa. Hell, do it even if you don't live here. The fight in Iowa is going to look a lot like the one in Maine. Outside money will pour into the state (admittedly, on both sides), and unless our Democratic leadership in the statehouse hold fast, opponents of marriage equality will demand a vote on a Constitutional Amendment here in Iowa, which is a much bigger deal than what was passed in Maine.

Time is ultimately on our side. Opposition to marriage equality will look antiquated in 50 years. But that doesn't mean we have to wait for it. And I will continue to do my small part to make sure that all citizens will be equally protected under the law.

Yet another NOM parody

And this is perhaps my favorite one yet. Those who know me know that if a YouTube video is longer than 2 minutes, I'm not liable to watch it. I watched this one. It uses the original NOM ad, but mixes in...well, just watch.



My favorite part: "Should I lose some weight?" (2:22)

But all in all, I enjoy the message at the end of the video, which shows how we will never be able to fight those opposed to equality with anything but love. I would be wise to remember that so that when victory eventually does come, the victory is not of the Pyrrhic nature.

Hyperbole

Things have been quiet around here over the last few days - on the blog at least, but not in real life. There's a really good reason for this - actually two, but they are related. We are working our tails off with One Iowa to make sure that a repeat of Prop 8 does not happen here in my home state. Also, I have hesitated posting here because this fight is very all-consuming right now and I don't want to fill this blog with daily posts re: marriage equality. That's why Heidi and I created this blog, which is where we're putting all of our activism for right now.

I posted this over there, but I simply must put it here. In reading through the news links this morning regarding marriage equality in Iowa, I found this. It is definitely in the running for the most blatant hyperbole I have seen yet on the issue. While I will give him props for mentioning how much marriage has been "attacked and dishonored" by heterosexuals (something sorely missing from most of the virulent anti-equality folks here in Iowa), the basic point is that his only argument against gays getting married is some moral imperative from an imaginary friend that I don't believe in.

Bottom line here is their only arguments are religious, and newsflash! - not everyone shares their religious views, and as such, the whole population of Iowa should not be subjected to their religious views being written into law. Conversely, the arguments for marriage equality are based on the rule of law and the Constitution of the state of Iowa, which was modeled after that of the United States, something that all of us as citizens should rally around.

Add that to the fact that the Republican caucus in the Iowa House yesterday simply redefined obstructionism by insisting that we not vote on the state budget but instead, vote on the marriage amendment. Fortunately, the Democratic majority stood strong, but they will be vulnerable next election cycle, especially with out-of-state money coming in for the opposition.

We have not yet begun to fight, but I will be there fighting every step of the way. Marriage equality is just the right thing to do and I'm proud to be on the right side of the issue.

In the meantime, ponder this. Which is more destructive? Loving people committing to each other and creating new families and social networks, or this?

It's no wonder I left organized religion. This kind of thing is just disgusting.

Filled with pride

It was a long night last night on a lot of levels. I work late tonight and have a hellacious weekend ahead. But for whatever reason, I don't care, because same-sex marriage is finally legal in Iowa. The Iowa Supreme Court upheld a lower courts ruling that it violates the equal protection clause of the state Constitution. Not only did they do that, they did it UNANIMOUSLY.

I have lived my whole life in this state. I don't imagine that I will probably ever live outside of its borders - I am an Iowa boy through and through - and I have never, NOT ONCE, been more proud to be an Iowan than I am right this very instant. It is pretty much the polar opposite of how I felt when Prop 8 passed.

As one of the articles I read said - in politics, as goes Iowa, so goes the nation. One can only hope that it applies in this situation as well.

Well done, Iowa. The people at One Iowa must just be beside themselves.

Milk

Yesterday, my mom and dad came over to watch Anna, which allowed Heidi and I to escape the clutches of parenting for a few hours. Don't misread me - I love being a parent, but, like everything else, there are times that you can use a little diversion. So we actually got a chance to have a real honest-to-God date. The fact that it was Valentine's Day was purely coincidental. We don't really celebrate it much, not because we are vehemently opposed to a holiday being thrust upon us by greeting card companies, but just because we don't need a holiday to remind us to appreciate each other.

Anyway, we ended up going to see Milk. We wanted to have seen at least one of the movies up for an Oscar (besides Wall-E) and of all the ones nominated, this was the one we wanted most to see. I knew the story of Harvey Milk pretty well. The story of his election to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is told (in condensed form) in Randy Shilts' And The Band Played On (still one of my all time favorite books) and I still remember the year that the documentary The Times of Harvey Milk won the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature even though I was only 12. So most of the details of the movie were not news to me, although I will admit to having forgotten about the Twinkie Defense.

But just because you know the story (and that the story ends tragically) does not mean that the movie was not worth watching. I mean, how many of us went to Titanic multiple times? The story is exquisitely told, even if I thought that the pacing of the movie was off, but that was largely because a big chunk of time was distilled down into two hours. Sean Penn disappeared into the role of Harvey Milk which is to his credit. He was cast completely against type, but when they ran footage of the actual Harvey Milk at the end of the film, it was hard telling the difference. This was also the case with most of the rest of the cast. Additionally, the recreation of the Castro in the 70s was amazing - you felt like you were there. It's attention to detail like that that is to be commended.

I'm not too worried about spoilers because pretty much everyone knows the premise of the movie and how it ends with Milk's assassination. And even if you didn't know that, you find out the ending within the first 10 minutes. Heidi commented that it reminded her of the set up of Moulin Rouge, where you find out that Satine is doomed in the first five minutes which makes her death at the end of the film that much easier to handle. Otherwise, you'd have walked out of the theater pissed off because they dared give you an unhappy ending. Wanting to take no chances on that, Milk does much the same thing.

Much has been made of the timeliness of the movie, especially in light of the passage of Proposition 8 in California last November. There were eerie parallels between Prop 8 and Prop 6 (aka the Briggs Initiative) that was proposed in 1978 to ban gay and lesbian teachers as well as those who supported gay issues. It was disturbing how little the rhetoric used in the movie to support Prop 6 had changed from the rhetoric that Prop 8 supporters used. It reinforced in my mind that while gay rights may have moved many miles since Stonewall, there is still a long ways to go. The fact that the same arguments that were used to attempt to ban gay schoolteachers could be used over 30 years later to ban gay marriage is shameful. We should know better.

The movie moved me tremendously, much more than I thought it would since I went in knowing most of the details. The recreation of 30,000 people marching on City Hall the night of Milk's assassination (which was a mixture of real footage and that filmed for the movie) was something to behold. The take-home message I got out of the movie was that these people believed in something. They were authentic and stood up for what they believed in, even when it was an uphill battle, which it was for most of the time period documented in the film. May we all strive to be as authentic as they were.

Ultimately, while the movie ends tragically, it is not sad. The movement was bigger than Harvey Milk, gained steam after his death and continues to this day. Heidi mentioned that you have a better understanding for the disappointment that the organizers against Prop 8 felt because they were following Milk's model. Perhaps it was the fact that it was marriage and not simply "jobs" that made it different this time. But, as one of the characters said in the movie, the minute you take away the rights of someone else, you have no leg to stand on when they come to take away your rights. That is what we should be remembering.

I had been struggling with what I wanted to write about Milk for most of what needs to be said has already been said in other places. But today, as I was watching The X-Files, Scully said something that I thought fit in well with the theme of the movie. Mulder had bought a key chain for her for her birthday that had an emblem of the Apollo 11 moon landing on it, and at the end of the episode she says:

Scully: [holding an Apollo 11 keychain] I actually was thinking about, uh, this gift that you gave me for my birthday. You never got to tell me why you gave it to me or what it means, but I think I know. I think that you appreciate that there are extraordinary men and women and extraordinary moments when history leaps forward on the backs of these individuals, that what can be imagined can be achieved, that you must dare to dream, but that there's no substitute for perseverance and hard work and teamwork because no one gets there alone; and that, while we commemorate the... the greatness of these events and the individuals who achieve them, we cannot forget the sacrifice of those who make these achievements and leaps possible.

Milk was one of these men, and I couldn't agree more with her sentiment. Although Mulder responded with "I just thought it was a pretty cool key chain."

Defense of Marriage Act

If you read only one thing today, I beg of you to make it this.

Heidi forwarded this to me this morning and wow, it is a great piece. The author of the piece basically defends marriage from those that would pick it pieces and then weaves it into a impassioned plea to support marriages of ALL kinds. He lists all the reasons why being married rocks, and none got my cheering support more than this one:

The Ball and Chain is for Losers. I can't emphasize this enough. Adult men I knew growing up, or stereotypical sitcom dads on TV, were always talking about how "the old lady won't let me" just go and do whatever fun thing they wanted to do. News flash: If that's your life, it's both of your faults for being lame, uncommunicative, lazy bastards. Don't settle for misery. If my wife or I want to go do something, we just let the other know, and if the other person's not up for it, no problem. If they wanna tag along, even better.

Let me tell you, if there is any one thing that makes me insane, it is those men who use their wives as an excuse for everything that they supposedly "can't do." There is a fine dividing line between being courteous to the needs of your partner and being a doormat. A close cousin to this are those men that have been married so long that they are now completely incapable of matching their socks without help from their wives. I do think that this is a bit of a generational thing but I still see men of our generation acting this way! Stop the insanity!

Being married, as is mentioned in the article, is not always easy. You do have to make sacrifices and you don't always get along and sometimes the other person just makes you want to run screaming from the room. But overall it is a huge net positive - at least it has been for me.

And this is the part where I beg any of my California readers to vote No on Prop 8. While I don't think that marriage equality is dead in this country if Prop 8 passes (the tide is bigger than one state), it will send the wrong message and set the wrong type of precedent. And with Iowa waiting in the wings, lets hope that those non-discriminatory voices prevail in this fight.

Oh, and it's Halloween today! It's only the best holiday ever!

What have you done today to make you feel proud?

This last weekend was Capital City Pride - delayed by the deluge from this June. I was not sure how Pride would play in autumn, but surprisingly, it was great fun, probably even more so than in the summer. A lot of that had to do with the fact that it was not 95 degrees and more humid than Dagobah, although it was still quite warm for October! Pride is always such a fun event, Anna really gets into it and the atmosphere is just so...well, it's hard to describe because while it's inclusive and celebratory, it is also very Midwestern.

Anna and Heidi rode on the One Iowa float. One Iowa, for those that don't know, is the group that is working their tails off for marriage equality here in Iowa. It still strikes me as odd that Iowa would be on the front lines of gay marriage, but then again, Iowans are pretty practical people so it really shouldn't come as a surprise. This was Anna's first time on a float and she hurled candy with the best of them. She even made sure that she threw a box of Dots my way (one of the small ones, not the big ones you get at movie theaters!)

One of the big highlights of Pride this year was Michelle Knight who is one of Iowa's premiere Cher impersonators. I have to wonder how much competition she has, but still, that is one dead ringer for Cher. Here she is riding in the parade, with "Believe" pumping out of the car. Even though the style (faux metal 80s leather Cher) and the song (late 90s dance diva Cher) were at odds, it still worked.

Of course, Anna HAD to meet Cher. We even got a picture!

Cher's comment to me right before the photo was being taken: "Oh, wait, let me hide the beer!" Anna's comment to me after the photo was taken "Dad, did you know that's a boy dressed up as Cher?"

The thing I love about Pride year after year (this is my third, Heidi and Anna's fourth) is that even though it is primarily the same thing each year, it is something that is so incredibly important to me. Supporting the gay community is something that I cannot feel more strongly about. I have long since forgotten why I got involved in LGBT rights issues, but there is no better way to get me riled up than to be idiotically homophobic. Part of it is that I have found a kinship among the gay community that has eluded me most of my life, but mostly, it is because I cannot stand to see basic rights that I take for granted being denied to people that I count as family.

Some would argue that I am using my daughter as a political pawn, not all that dissimilar to that moment in the Dixie Chicks movie where the little girl says "The Dixie Chicks suck!" But I can't imagine raising her any other way. Ultimately, if I'm wrong, I'll have to answer for it, but for now, I make the best decisions I can. And besides, she just likes to dress up like this.

I have no idea how much longer she'll want to do that, so I savor every year that she does it.

As my parting shot, here's Michelle Knight as Cher doing "If I Could Turn Back Time." I felt bad for her because she hardly got to do her routine, so many people were giving money! I doubt she had a problem with that though!



(full photo show on Facebook. I'll upload all of them to .mac eventually.)

The great divide

For those of you that don't know, I like Matthew Rettenmund's blog quite a lot. I have referenced his blog on several occasions on these very pages. He is, first and foremost in my mind, the author of the indispensible (if now hopelessly outdated) Encyclopedia Madonnica. I always enjoyed leafing through that book and have half a mind to go find it and pull it out to read before going to bed tonight. But anyway, he has also written a couple of fiction novels including Boy Culture, which was made into a feature film last year and serves as the the namesake of his blog. I have nearly added him to the blog roll several times, but there's one trouble. A quick perusal of his blog reveals post after post of men in various stages of undress, some to the point of being NSFW. And I don't want any of my mammoth readership (all 7 of you!) to be inadvertently fired from their job by going to his blog from work!

So what keeps me going back to the blog as I'm not interested in that kind of eye candy? For starters, he is a great writer whose blog is full of pop culture witticisms frequently concerning Madonna and Debbie Harry, which I can't resist. But it's not all pop culture and half naked guys over there. He has a lot of very insightful posts about important issues. And one of them came up the other day.

I saw this post a couple days ago in my Google Reader and starred it as I was reading on the fly and wanted to make sure that I came back to it and gave it a proper read. I finally got around to reading it today, and it affected me much more than I thought it would. The post concerns an editorial done by author Paul Monette for Playboy magazine back in 1993. For an editorial written nearly 15 years ago, it reads a lot like something that could have been written last week. Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing. Click on the picture on Matt's blog post and read away.

Most of that article focuses on the rampant homophobia that was so pervasive in the 90s and, in many ways, is still present today. Although it is no longer okay to make "fag" jokes, it still happens. People who wouldn't be caught dead telling a racist joke have no problem telling a joke that denigrates gays. It is my prediction that when we look back on this time 50 years from now, we will be thoroughly ashamed of ourselves for using the Bible to deny people basic human rights, for not looking past our differences long enough to realize that we all carry the common denominator of being human, whether we be gay or straight or somewhere on that continuum in between.

But what got me the most were the last couple paragraphs of the article. In those final paragraphs, I believe there are words of wisdom that all men could benefit from hearing. Here they are for those of you that didn't do your homework and click on the article (and for those of you that want to read them again - they're amazing.)

We all have closets to come out of. Gay isn't the enemy of straight. Heterosexual men have told me for years that, since college, they have no male friends to talk with. The emotional isolation caused by fear of intimacy is indifferent to sexual orientation. We're not boys anymore, trapped in the insecurities of the schoolyard. Our common enemy is ignorance, a sex-phobic bitterness and name-calling purveyed by those that are jealous of the joy of others because they have none of their own.

...As gay and straight men, we can help one another over the great divide. We make terrific friends, we queers, perhaps because we have traveled so far to reach the free country of the heart. All men deserve to live there.

Reading those words is a bit painful, in the way that seeing yourself in something can be shocking and uncomfortable. There was a time in my life when those words were my life. And in many ways, they still are. I'm sure many men can identify with them. Men are not conditioned to be honest with each other and in many ways, most of us are not ready for the kind of emotional intimacy and honesty that Monette is advocating here.

But I think there is a lesson there for all of us men, gay and straight. I am lucky in my life that I have several male friends, gay and straight and in between, that I can talk to. I know my limits with most all of them. I have no idea if they'll be in my life forever or for a few more minutes. But even if they aren't around in 50 years or 50 seconds, they're in my life right now and I'm going to enjoy them for the time that they are in my life. There was a time in my life that I really felt like the odd man out - not really able to talk the sports talk and having odd interests like Madonna and pop music and other such stuff. But with the people I have in my life right now, it feels like I just got home, as HRH Madge herself said. You all know who you are and I will not embarrass anyone by calling anyone out.

I think that the bottom line is that men have to help each other. And, like so many other things, we're not programmed for that. Hell, we don't even like asking each other for help, so how can we ever accept it? That's up to each and every guy out there. Including me. I don't know - these kinds of things fascinate me, because relationships are as fascinating as they are ephemeral.

And with that, I'm off to curl up in bed with my Encyclopedia Madonnica. I am still sick and have two more evening shifts to get through.

NYC: Ghosts

The last Saturday night we were in New York, I went off on my own and took the subway down to Christopher Street, which is in the West Village. It is also what may be considered the cradle of the LGBT movement in this country. Much like the ocean, I couldn't go all the way to New York and not go there, not when LGBT rights is a cause so close to my heart. Heidi and I actually got off the subway at the Christopher Street stop on our night out exploring the Village, but it was dark and it was our first time down there, so we weren't really sure where we were going. But when I went down on Saturday night with the express purpose of finding the Stonewall Inn, I made sure that I knew where I was going.

What is so cool about Christopher Street and the Village in general is that in many ways, it's a small town in the midst of the huge city that is New York. But make no mistake, you're still in New York. You get off the subway at Christopher Street and 7th Avenue. You can see a Starbucks and a GNC, but what you also see is a neighborhood. It's a relief from the tall buildings and detachment that seems to characterize a lot of Midtown. Although you can still see the Empire State Building from parts of the Village, it feels a lot different and is almost midwestern in many ways.

Anyway, I got off the subway and headed down Christopher Street looking for the Stonewall Inn. Naturally, I headed in the wrong direction as I only had the address but by this point, the tea had been spilled on the laptop so Google Maps was not an option prior to heading out. This was okay as sometimes the most interesting things in life (mine anyway) happen quite by accident. One thing I found quite hilarious was the fact that a Junie B. Jones Live! show was just getting over as I was walking down past the theater at which it was showing. Piles of young families were pouring out of the theater and began the walk west down Christopher Street to the subway stop. To get there, they had to walk past fetish and porn shops. It's a funny dichotomy of the Village. Family friendly, but yet, not so much. I wonder how uncomfortable some of those parents were.

Once I figured out I was headed in the wrong direction, I headed west and before long, I had found the Stonewall Inn, site of the Stonewall Riots in 1969 and the beginning of the LBGT movement in the U.S.


Here's the plaque that's by the side of the door:


And here's an article from back in 1969 describing the riots that is posted in the window.

Across the street from the Stonewall is Sheridan Square Park, which contains sculptures done by George Segal commemorating the gay rights movement.


According to the information sign that went along with this display, there was apparently a lot of public opposition to the design and it took nearly 10 years to get the statues officially placed and unveiled. Once this was accomplished in 1992,

"The initial opposition and that had greeted the project had subsided; the advent of AIDS, which had devastated the gay community in particular, added another poignant dimension to the monument its mute figures' impact."

The one thing that I took away from my entire Christopher Street experience is this: Christopher Street is haunted. You can feel the presence of ghosts of those initial victims of AIDS, who died back when otherwise healthy young men were succumbing to a pneumonia seen only in immune suppressed patients, a rare cancer usually striking elderly men in the Mediterranean and intestinal parasites not previously known to infect humans. This is the place where these men lived and died, lives cut tragically short in large part due to the government's failure to quickly recognize the threat and act decisively. And while those days are long gone (thank heavens), they should never be forgotten - something I fear is happening now that AIDS has become a "chronic, manageable illness." (which it is not.)

It was so important on so many levels for me to take that tour of what basically amounts to "gay New York." It was taken as a tribute to every single gay friend I have who are so dear to me and also as a trip through a history that we would be wise to remember.

On amendments

Yesterday, the conservatives came out in what they hoped would be droves but what ended up looking like far less than they probably hoped for at the Iowa Statehouse to demand that the Iowa legislature debate an amendment to the Iowa Constitution defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. This is in response to the decision late last summer by a judge that the state's marriage law was unconstitutional.

I have mixed feelings about this rally and the people involved in it. While I don't even remotely begin to agree with these protesters, I have to respect their right to speak their minds and feel as they feel. As much as I just wish they would shut up and keep their bigoted opinions to themselves, they have the same right that I do to speak what they feel. But what is the cost of their rhetoric? At one time, it was completely acceptable to speak in a racist fashion, now that can land you in exceptionally hot water. When will this day come for gays and lesbians? I feel like the tide is turning, but that day may yet be a long way off.

I don't know. I don't think that a constitutional marriage amendment in Iowa will gain a lot of traction unless the Democratic majority we have now is somehow voted out. What I think is quite funny is the use of a simple demand "Let Us Vote!" to sum up what is really a very complex issue.

The last thing the world needs is me spouting about it, but I will anyway because it's my damn blog. The Des Moines Register has a bunch of photos of the rally posted. I can't believe these people would allow themselves to become the "face of bigotry" but I suppose they don't really see it that way. Despite the serious nature of the story, this one made me laugh out loud.

I mean, seriously! Start over if you screw up that badly!

Red state, schmed state

Sure, we Iowans may have voted for George W. Bush in the last election, but who's to say we're really a red state? Our legislative and executive branch are both Democratically controlled, and apparently, we have some judges who interpret the Constitution to apply to everyone - and not just a select few. Observe:

Iowa Judge Says Marriage Not Just Man, Woman.

Well, hallelujah. It's about damn time.

Of course, such a thing brings out the trolls and the Bible quoters, but I do honestly believe we will look back in 50 years and realize that this is NO DIFFERENT than the civil rights movement of the 1960s. It just has a different face.

I have never been so happy to have a Democratic governor in this state, because you can bet that had Jim Nussle been elected governor, he would have put the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage on the fast track. And if we had had a Republican controlled legislature, we might be looking at that as a reality.

Do I think that gay marriage will be legal in Iowa? I'm not sure. Despite the fact that I don't think we are a red state, we are most definitely purple. There is a lot of conservatism in Iowa, mostly due to its rural nature. Western Iowa is VERY conservative. Even the county in which I live would almost undoubtedly vote predominantly Republican if it weren't for Ames. And if you look at the unscientific polls on the news site in the above link, you'll see that people react strongly on one side or the other. And we're pretty evenly split. So yes, there will be opposition. But I think that the ball has started rolling and I look forward to, at the very least, civil unions for my gay and lesbian friends.

It's not about religion folks. It's about equal protection under the law. You cannot grant rights to some of your citizens and not to others. Period.

I love my Amazon

...but do not cross the Amazon - especially when you hit a hot button issue with her (well, and me as well.) Since LJ was not posting last night for reasons completely unexplained, she ended up posting to her Mac page (or whatever it is) the result of opening up the paper, hoping to see the letter to the editor that we had written praising Anna's preschool. Instead, we opened up and saw not one but two letters full of homophobic vitriol and bigotry - brought on by the recent presence of Faith in America in Ames. As you might imagine this did not sit well with the missus.

You can read the post that LJ would not let her post here.

Heidi will always be the trailblazer among the two of us - but I am always more than happy to follow.

Perhaps the Faith In America ad that got me the most was the one on the back page of the Sunday paper a couple weeks ago (you can see it here) - it featured a cross full of smiling people and at the top, it asked "Do you know someone who is homosexual? - Would you give your life for them?" And at the bottom is says "Christ did." Now, I don't even categorize myself as a Christian these days - thanks mostly to the hateful zealotry and unquestionable bigotry of the religious right - but that got even to me.

As I have detailed in many posts here, I find myself in a strange position - a straight man whose tribe really is amongst gay men. And those hateful words are directed at every single one of those friends who are so dear to me - even the ones I do not know as well. Comments like "That's so gay!" - especially when uttered by straight people - even bother me - one would never find it appropriate to say "That's so black!" or "That's so Jewish!" which IS THE SAME DAMN THING. My natural tendency toward no-conflict-thankyouverymuch a lot of times keeps me from saying something of which I am particularly ashamed this morning.

For those who don't like my diatribe, too fucking bad. It's something I feel strongly about and as I've been up this morning, thinking about how Heidi came to bed at 3AM last night because she couldn't sleep and how this kind of crap is still ok to say in our society, I've just gotten more riled up.

This is why I feel passionate about working with the gay community - especially if it can involve work with HIV/AIDS. The gay community deserves our compassion and certainly doesn't deserve what I'm sure they are used to getting from a good chunk of the straight community.