Cruel Mother Russia: Pinko Pogrom

pinkoSome of you may recall the halcyon days (ha) of the 20th century Soviet Union, where we in the USA had a clear and substantial enemy, the McCarthy hearings had teeth and any hint of Communism could result in blacklisting.  “Pinko” was a very real and harsh anti-Communist slur.  What cruel irony that Communism has retired only to give birth to the worst kind of proto-Nazism in the Russian fight against the “pink menace” – outlawing any/all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender people or ideals.

I usually don’t see the point in any sort of country-hating; all our governments are deeply flawed in my opinion, usually with some ridiculous or outrageously unfair laws and far too many greed-based policies & unnecessary military actions.  However, on very rare occasions, some individual country goes so far beyond the pale (e.g., Nazi-era Germany, Apartheid-era South Africa) that it merits a special kind of loathing.

I feel terrible for [most] of the Russian people, lacking free and fair elections, living under extreme government corruption and a new anti-LGBT pogromThey are literally beating & murdering gay people.  It is abhorrent.

There’s not too much we can do from afar, but we can boycott some of the most iconic Russian products, especially Stoli vodka.  For more about the Russian anti-LGBT pogrom and explanation of the boycott, see:

Boycotts 101: Why the gay boycott of Russian vodka is already working

Full-Frontal Marriage: Here & Queer

Last week, the Supreme Court of the USA struck down a key provision of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (the provision which prevented the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages legalized by certain states and districts) in United States vs. Windsor and denied the proponents of California’s anti-same-sex marriage amendment standing to defend their proposition (which a lower court had made an injunction against) Hollingsworth vs. Perry.

This is indeed good news for same-sex couples, who can now marry in California, the most populous state, and will have federal recognition of their legal state marriages (in those 10+ states/districts where it is currently legal), receiving all the previously witheld federal benefits.  Moreover, married same-sex couples previously endured second class marriages, in which they were recognized by states, but considered “unmarried” by the federal government. Now, having the “second class” stigma removed reframes those same-sex marriages as completely legitimate relationships, which is an important cultural signifier that will help us move towards full equality.

Also, although, unlike Lesbian and Gay folks, some Bisexual and Trans folks were previously able to take advantage of full marriage benefits (depending on their partner and current legal sex), this helps to removes any gender bias that might restrict their choices (at least, in those 10+ states/districts in which it is legal). I believe this will help us move towards more open same-sex relationships and [trans/queer]gender expression, which is definitely a good thing for me.  🙂

However, while I totally support same-sex marriage (because marriage benefits shouldn’t be exclusive to opposite-sex couples and for reasons stated above and elsewhere in this blog), I wonder that we’re missing a few significant points: Continue reading “Full-Frontal Marriage: Here & Queer”

Holey Matrimony

With May comes “wedding season,” but even though I’m fortunate enough to be in a successful long-term relationship with a highly compatible partner, I don’t plan to marry.  Why not?

Although I support and am happy for my family and friends who have chosen (or will chose) to get married, for me personally, the institution of marriage is holey [sic].  In brief, traditional marriage seems to:

  • Privilege “normal” romantic relationships over all  other kinds of relationships, including close friendships and kinships.
  • Be gender-essentialist and (generally) reinforce gender role stereotypes.
  • Represent a “unity” of two people which is incompatible with my fierce independence and my current (excellent) relationship.
  • Be an out-dated tradition that creeps out a rebel like me (as so many traditions do).

Continue reading “Holey Matrimony”

Missed Opportunity 4 Gay Rights

With the mainstream Gay Rights movement laser-focused on marriage equality, I feel it is missing an opportunity to advance more fundamental changes.  The heterosexuals at large (including those in label only) are growing more and more tolerant – so that very few of them (mostly older, rural folks) even dislike gay people, let alone hate them.  The vast majority seem to understand that gay/queer people are regular human beings and should be able to live their lives as full citizens.  But many people, even some well-meaning, gay-friendly straights, feel a bit squicky about gay marriage – probably because they’ve had the princess and prince charming straight-marriage-is-bliss fantasy drilled into their head since they first experienced language.  This is the vulnerability that the haters are exploiting.

The growing tolerance for difference is triggering backlash from the haters, a potent minority, who keep framing the discussion around “traditional marriage” where they can avoid offending the gay-tolerant majority while still preaching bigotry.   Were the Gay Rights movement to play this smart, they could pull a rabbit out of the hat by responding to the haters who proclaim not to hate the gay people, but only to be fighting for “marriage-as-straight”.  I say, let them have it for now.  Let’s call them out at their word.  Gay people are not hated, but they just want to “protect” traditional marriage?   Fine, we’ll let the gay marriage fight go (leaving state and federal laws as is), how about universal, federal protections for LGBT folks for employment, housing and medical coverage?  How about the basic legal protections that straight individuals have without question? Continue reading “Missed Opportunity 4 Gay Rights”

The Radical Case for Queer: Marriage & Military

First of all, it’s important to understand that the fight for legalized homosexual marriage and likewise the fight for allowing openly homosexual soldiers in the military are not radical in nature.  Sure, these fights are liberal, but fundamentally, they are assimilationist, which is basically attempting to join the current system of privileges, rather than changing the system in any significant way.

Gay marriage advocates do not seek to restructure the social or legal benefits of marriage, they only seek to expand those benefits to all monogamous adult couples.   However, even for those radical liberals who may oppose the institution of marriage, there is good reason to support gay marriage advocacy. The institution of marriage is so strongly enshrined and honored in world culture, that having homosexuals in recognized marriages will help to normalize homosexual relationships in a way that nothing else can.  Married same-sex couples will significantly expand the cultural awareness and acceptance of those relationships and the legality of their relationships will help drive more important legal protections (e.g., if same-sex health benefits became legally required due to marriage, then other anti-discrimination laws such as for housing and employment will quickly become universal, as has more-or-less been the case in Massachusetts). Continue reading “The Radical Case for Queer: Marriage & Military”

How Anti-Abortion Fervor Unexpectedly Protects Girls

While it might seem that Anti-Abortion extremists disrespect women, since they are trying to control what women do with their their bodies, prioritizing procreative function, their anti-abortion fervor actually protects and promotes girls, in a weird way.

Imagine a society with a strong preference for men, a preference for baby boys, for “sons” – then imagine that same society without the stigma against abortion, where abortion is considered a free choice that anyone (woman or family) can make, for any reason.

You would have a culture where many of these son-preferring folks would exercise their freedom to choose, by selectively aborting female fetuses in favor of bringing male fetuses to term.

You would have India

“…The shortfall in the number of girls under six compared to boys has risen sharply from 4.2 million in 1991 to six million in 2001 and 7.1 million this year.”

You would have China

“In 2005 , they found, births of boys in China exceeded births of girls by more than 1.1 million. There were 120 boys born for every 100 girls. Continue reading “How Anti-Abortion Fervor Unexpectedly Protects Girls”

you get what you don’t pay for

Ladies who expect male dates to pay for everything up front (1st date and beyond) should expect that those men will in turn be expecting things. Perhaps sex, perhaps housewifey things, but certainly some level of sublimation.  After all, who would pay for something (that is not charity) and not expect to gain something from their purchases?

If women are serious about gaining equality, it means everything. All the boons of being a “helpless” woman fall away, including the financial ones and all of life, including romantic life, must be balanced.  Those who expect to get things without paying, get what you’d expect – debt.  Have fun cooking, cleaning and primping for your gentle-man, entitled ladies.

Chivalry Seesaw

privilege prickles
benefits mask detriments
pay in other ways

Self-Made Bed: One lesbian’s journey into the obvious

A month or so back, I received a strange package in the mail from an old friend I’d lost touch with; it was Norah Vincent’s “SELF-MADE MAN: One Woman’s Journey Into Manhood And Back Again” and it was a fascinating and infuriating read.  What was fascinating to me was not so much the topic of the book, but the neuroses and narcissism of the author, a self-proclaimed butch lesbian who seemed incredibly ill-suited to this particular experiment. What was infuriating to me was that nearly all her conclusions were painfully obvious – either reinforcements of cultural stereotypes or “insights” about the problems men face (which should be obvious to all those with a relatively open mind who have long-term interactions “as” men; i.e., anyone [male or female] who has been perceived as a man for years).

The topic of the book is Norah’s year-long drag-act as “Ned,” a bookish, slight man with perpetual 5-o’clock shadow (courtesy of some drag lessons by a friend).  I use the word “drag” very intentionally here because Norah clearly has no aspirations to become a man permanently (she’s not at all trans and, oddly, never even touches on the subject of trans-men in the entire book); for her, it really is an “act,” albeit one that goes further than she had perhaps intended. She puts herself in typical or extreme masculine environments such as joining a bowling league, frequenting strip clubs, “Red Bull” sales jobs, a men’s support group and even tries “heterosexual” dating as a man.

I have to commend the author on the bravery of going through with this experiment despite the risks and her not insignificant misgivings. All in all, she did it mostly full-time (at least in public) for a year and a half.  However, I do not understand the rationale of most of her decisions. Continue reading “Self-Made Bed: One lesbian’s journey into the obvious”

hedwig and the angry millimeter

1 in 1000. That’s how many babies are born in an intersex condition. That’s people who are not clearly male or female. Sometimes it is a chromosomal aberration (XXY); other times, it is a hormonal aberration; in all cases, the human could end up with “mixed” sexual characteristics (ambiguous genitalia or secondary sex characteristics that don’t seem to match the genitalia that we expect).

1 in 1000 people are neither male or female. Physically. Biologically. Born that way. And yet, we only acknowledge the existence of two sexes. The medical establishment has been aware of this for ages (although they often hide the fact by “fixing” the intersex children); the Olympics have been aware of intersex people for decades (note, however, that the article’s definition of intersex is incomplete as it is not only chromosomal & the Olympics still insists on the male/female categorization since it is more convenient).

How could a minority of people numbering approximately 300,000 people (in this country alone) be so completely invisible? Unacknowledged. And this is not even getting into the subject of people who may appear to be one sex, but identify otherwise. 3 genders, 13 months (moon-cycles) per year. The natural truths that we choose to define out of existence.

lost in the border

I’ve always felt a bit… transparent. Ever since I was a kid. Never quite one thing or the other, I slid between the lines. People often told me I was one thing or another (white, child, boy), but it never quite felt like me.

People don’t call me a child anymore, but they’re still always throwing labels on me. It’s hardest and most interesting these days with children – they often wonder, “is that a boy or a girl?” I want to stop and tell them “neither,” but that’s too much explaining. Much as children live their imagination, they also live in a world of rigid boundaries – they don’t [generally] understand the grey areas.

A few years back, a little girl of about 3 (my cousin) got extremely offended and started hitting and yelling at me after I “tricked” her by not talking for our first hour of knowing each other. I tried to be tolerant, but it’s not fun to have someone screaming in your face. But at least she wasn’t hiding anything (sometimes it feels like adults are silently screaming in my face, when they’re not pretending I don’t exist). Some children playing on the street the other week demanded to know if I was a boy or a girl. I just smiled and didn’t answer that question, slightly delighted as I walked away that they were still wondering aloud. Continue reading “lost in the border”