Hate crimes in Michigan up 133% in the last year

Yes, while some states creep forward (California, New York), others remain a dangerous place for gays and lesbians. Blogger Sara Whitman of Suburban Lesbian Housewife, gives some personal insight into the realities of life for LGBT families:

As a woman, I have been raised with a certain level of fear about my safety. Girls are always told to watch where they go, never walk alone, don’t dress too provocatively, and know that men basically only want one thing from you.

We are taught to be afraid, and to live accordingly.

I don’t want to raise my children to be afraid. I am tired of being afraid. But I am a mother and my first instinct is to protect. When I told my children about the California decision, my middle son Zachary said, 'Now we can live in California, too.'

Massachusetts and California. That’s it.

What a joy it was for me to be in Provincetown for a week, and be able to walk down the street holding my sweetie's hand. Sure, wherever we are we sometimes hold hands and hug, in public. But never, never without a lingering thought that we could be in danger of bodily harm for doing it. That's the fear. It embodies itself as a constant self-consciousness over who I am and what other people think of me. And an understanding of where I am safe -- and where I am not.

I can't imagine how hard that must be to see that in your children. But as Sara says, a mother protects her children, and whether you call it being afraid or respecting danger, this is the reality of the world we live in today. It's not right, and it's up to us to change it.

It’s not acceptable in our society to be violent against someone because they are different. It is not acceptable because violence is not acceptable. We have fundamental human rights.

Please read Sara's entire post at GayWired.com. In addition to knowing where all the good restaurants are in Ptown, she's a damn good writer.

Clinton Talks, Obama Balks

That headline is from the Philadelphia Gay News, which requested interviews with both of the Democratic candidates, as well as Sen. McCain, the presumptive Republican candidate. Only Hillary Clinton took the time to meet with this publication, even as the battle for delegates and superdelegates continues and the media spotlight shines now on Pennsylvania. I've said it before and I'll say it again, one of my concerns with Barack Obama is that he seems to court the LGBT vote when he needs us (close contests in Ohio and Texas) and ignore us when he doesn't (Pennsylvania is predicted by most people to go for Clinton fairly strongly).

Some highlights from Clinton's interview:

[M]arriage is in the province of the state, which has actually turned out to be lucky for us, because we didn’t have to get beaten on the Federal Marriage Amendment because we could make, among other arguments, that it was such a stretch for the federal government and it was wrong to enshrine discrimination in the Constitution. 

Even states that have civil unions, domestic partnerships or even marriage laws are running into roadblocks with the federal government when it comes to federal benefits and privileges. Of course, immigration is a federal responsibility and I am going to do everything I can to eliminate any disparities in any benefits or rights under our law at the federal level so that all people will have available to them every right as an American citizen that they should, and that would include immigration law.

I will have a comprehensive review, and I think a lot of that work has already been done, to look at everything that is discriminatory in the tax code or in any other aspect of federal law. And we will try to eliminate all of that discrimination. I think we will have a good argument, ironically, because I think we can say, look, the states are making determinations about extending rights to same-sex couples in various forms and the federal government should recognize that and should extend the same access to federal benefits across the board. I will very much work to achieve that.

You can read the rest of the interview with Clinton here.

Et tu, Obama?

To be young and gay, often means to be dead

"The real issue is not the kid coming out, but the kid sitting next to him."

You haven't seen this story on the evening news, and none of the presidential candidates has mentioned it. But earlier this week, a 15-year old boy was shot in the back of the head by a classmate. Students were just sitting down in their seats when the 14-year old assailant suddenly pulled out a gun and shot Lawrence. He shot Lawrence because he was gay and it freaked him out.

From the LA Times:

Police have not determined a motive in the slaying but said it appeared to stem from a personal dispute between King and the suspect.

[S]everal students at the south Oxnard campus said King and his alleged assailant had a falling out stemming from King's sexual orientation.

The teenager sometimes wore feminine clothing and makeup, and proclaimed he was gay, students said.

"He would come to school in high-heeled boots, makeup, jewelry and painted nails -- the whole thing," said Michael Sweeney, 13, an eighth-grader. "That was freaking the guys out."

As regular readers know, I used to teach middle school. So I know, it doesn't take much to freak out the guys. I also know that when something like this happens it is imperative that the adults make a clear sign that this is wrong -- very wrong -- and it will not be tolerated.

Yet the LGBT community is still waiting to hear one of our "adults" (i.e., elected officials and those who would hope to be elected) stand up and make a statement about this tragedy. As blogger Sara Whitman has noted:

The message of hate is getting through to our kids, loud and clear. It’s okay to kill someone who freaks you out because they don’t fit a gender role to your liking.

And think about these words spoken by Lorri Jean, CEO of the L.A Gay Center, at a memorial for Lawrence King:

No one is born hating gay and transgender people or believing that we should be denied equal rights. Such hatred and bigotry must be learned. It is learned in families that don’t accept their own children if they’re different than the norm. It is learned in right wing churches where ministers preach abomination or in schools where teachers and administrators don’t protect LGBT kids from bullying and harassment. It is learned from political leaders who support blatant discrimination again us or whose leadership fails them when it’s time to speak out and take action on behalf of our equality and our humanity.

Superdelegates? Really? Michelle Obama's clothes? Clinton's campaign manager? Is that what's important? Of course not. So when will either Clinton or Obama show some real leadership, refocus on the priorities, and make a clear statement denouncing this act? 

President Gore supports gay marriage, shouldn't you?

Somewhere — in the alternate universe that is "reality" — Al Gore is the President of the United States. In that universe, we are not fighting a war over oil, we are funding alternative energy sources, and wow: we have civil rights for all Americans! Yes, in that alternate universe we have a president who is not afraid to support gay marriage (I mean, this guy's even comfortable saying the "L" word!).

Please watch:



Here in Maryland, legislation will soon be introduced under the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act. It is important that this bill be passed to ensure my rights to enter a civil marriage contract with my partner, while ensuring your right to maintain whatever misguided beliefs you and your church have about homosexuality. See? It's win/win!

Now, back to your universe and a look at the man some of you chose over President Gore (warning — safe for work, just gross):

If you're happy (and gay) and you know it, clap your hands!

From Pam's House, a good analysis of how Obama's campaign has whiffed on the issue of gay rights. If you haven't been following this story, a brief summary from Pam:

In another attempt to connect with people of faith in South Carolina, presidential hopeful Barack Obama has decided to reach out by going on a concert tour with gospel artists, including known homophobe and recloseted homosexual Donnie McClurkin.

McClurkin believes one can pray away the gay, that it is a choice, and, according to Keith Boykin, Donnie compares gays and lesbians to liars.

It soon became clear to Obama's loyal followers in the gay community that they were being thrown aside in an effort to court another political demographic. Sure, the Obama campaign tacked on an openly gay (but white) preacher to the event. And, oh yeah, Obama didn't show up at the concert in person but appeared via video feed.

More from Pam:

The concert was to be the highlight of this outreach and while the crowd left excited, it was clear the campaign still regarded the controversy as complicated. Aides gave reporters a three-page memo detailing McClurkin's and Obama's views on gay rights that noted in capital letters "MCCLURKIN DOES NOT WANT TO CHANGE GAYS AND LESBIANS WHO ARE HAPPY WITH THEIR LIVES AND HAS CRITICIZED CHURCH LEADERS WHO DEMONIZE HOMOSEXUALS," with quotes detailing those statements from the singer.

It's too easy to say this is a battle between the secular and religious, but campaigns try mightily to simplify things. The inconvenient truth is that there are people of color in the faith community who are LGBT. These people are ignored, because for politicians, the complexity of addressing that matter is not worth the political cost. It's about the numbers game, and LGBT minorities of faith are to be tossed out like yesterday's trash.

The most disappointing aspect of this whole Obama/McClurkin affair is that Barack Obama, because of his race, actually was best positioned to address it (politically speaking, since we know white pols loathe to take it on, lest they get zapped on that third rail). Ironically, because of the ludicrous questions about his racial "authenticity" from the black community, it appears that his camp cravenly decided that Obama could cleave to the community by enabling its homophobia, rather than challenging it.

That's audacity, all right.