no_I_am_zoe's blog http://www.blogher.com/blog/22743/atom/feed 2009-06-26T14:04:52-05:00 Gold Stars, Silver Stars, Lucky Stars http://www.blogher.com/gold-stars-silver-stars-lucky-stars 2009-10-16T01:49:11-05:00 2009-10-16T07:06:16-05:00 no_I_am_zoe So a funny thing happened on the way to this blog post. I was going to write about... well I wasn't sure what I was going to write about, but I had few ideas I was researching. And then I got distracted by shiny things." Gold Stars" to be exact.

]]> So a funny thing happened on the way to this blog post. I was going to write about... well I wasn't sure what I was going to write about, but I had few ideas I was researching. And then I got distracted by shiny things." Gold Stars" to be exact. Actually, I was first distracted by a post written by Marc Wilson, a gay man, about how he slept with a woman for "science." I really don't know what sort of outcome he expected; if you're not attracted to someone, I don't care how much booze is involved, the sex is not going to be good. Anyway, that's not the point. In the comments, someone mentioned how he lost his "gold star." And I thought, "Ooo, shiny things," and then I couldn't focus on anything else.

In my world, that would be the GLBT one, a "gold star" is someone who has never slept with someone of the opposite sex. Why it's called "gold star," I do not know. If anyone knows the origin of this terminology, please fill me in because I'm interested in knowing and I'm not having any luck finding it. I did find Star Gays, which can be used to qualify your level of gayness. According to Star Gays, a "Gold Star" is someone who has never slept with anyone of the opposite sex. A "Silver Star" is someone who has slept with one person of the opposite sex, and a "Bronze Star" is someone who has slept with two or more people of the opposite sex.

It sort of seems like there should be a star or two that comes after Bronze. I mean the difference between two, or more, can be quite vast. Or more, could be 3, or it could be 103. It would make more sense if "Bronze Star" was like 2-5 people, followed by "Nickle Star" 5-10 people, followed by "Copper Star" 10-15 people, followed by "Super Nova."

I've seen a few references to stars other than gold, and they all seem to, mean something a little different. Sasha, of Card Carrying Lesbian suggests the following star rating:

So you see, I’ve been sleeping with women for two years longer than I was mistakenly sleeping with men. Maybe we can get some sort of credit for that? Like a silver star once you’ve slept with women for as long as you slept with men? Or once you’ve slept with more women than men. You get a bronze star once your time in Homo City has surpassed your time in Hetero-Ville.

Shoot, maybe we could get a tarnished gold star once we get married to the woman of our dreams and adopt a bi-racial baby? -read full post, Born Again Gold Star Lesbians?

Does gold tarnish? I don't know. I kind of think once the genie is out of the bottle, there is no going back. You've either slept with someone of the opposite sex, or you haven't. You're either a "gold star," or you're not. But really, does any of it even matter? Does being a "gold star" make you more gay, or a better gay than someone who is a "super nova." So what if someone spends a few years looking for love in all the wrong places. What matters is where they find love now. So while it's fun to talk about what kind of star you might have, does it really mean anything?

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm taking my somewhere between "bronze" and "super nova" star and heading to bed to join my "Super Star." Hmm.  Now I'm starting to think that really, I'm a "Lucky Star." 

What do you think, does "gold star" mean anything? What about the rest of the star rating system. 

Check out these "gold stars" by other bloggers:

 

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also writes about her life most ordinary at gaymo

.

]]> Sunday, October 11th Is National Coming Out Day. It's a Day for Everyone. http://www.blogher.com/sunday-october-11th-national-coming-out-day-its-day-everyone 2009-10-08T05:01:52-05:00 2009-10-08T10:31:29-05:00 no_I_am_zoe It seems like it's just been a few weeks since I last wrote about National Coming Out Day, and yet it's been a year. Crazy, I know. But, here we are. It's almost October 11th, National Coming Out Day (NCOD), again. Where does time go?

]]> It seems like it's just been a few weeks since I last wrote about National Coming Out Day, and yet it's been a year. Crazy, I know. But, here we are. It's almost October 11th, National Coming Out Day (NCOD), again. Where does time go? And I hear time only passes faster with age, which is why a day like NCOD is the perfect reason to slow down for minute and reflect. Share your story. Show your support. Be visible. Visibility is key to acceptance. People who know GLBT people, tend support GLBT rights. That's why it's so important to be out, if you can.

Anyone who is out, and has been living out, knows that coming out is not a one time event. Coming out is an on going, life long experience. But once you get more comfortable with telling people that you're gay, you don't really actively think about it too much. We all have to go through telling that first person(s) that we're gay. Or bi. Or trans. Most of us are terrified to reveal our secret, but reach a point that we have to tell someone. Then we have to tell someone else. Then someone else. With each next person, it becomes a little easier. Eventually, being out, just isn't as hard as we once might have thought it would be. But the ease of being out doesn't happen over night. It takes time, and the support of others. Gay and straight, both.

Those of us who have been out for more of our lives than not, may not see much value in National Coming Out Day. But I think it is important to share our stories with one another. I guarantee your story will inspire and encourage at least one person. Maybe your words will give someone the courage to come out. Maybe your words will change hearts and minds, and create allies. Even if it's just one person. That one person may one day influence one other person, who may influence one other person, and so on.

mindschmootz wrote a fantastic post for National Coming Out Day, reflecting on her journey to self-acceptence and coming out

In a rare moment of nondiscriminatory, personal exposure, I responded to an email question last night that made me start thinking about my pilgrimage toward bravery. How did I get brave? To borrow a phrase from Velma Kelly, I couldn’t have done it alone. Though I made the first step myself, I enjoyed the sustenance and the encouragement from an unwavering friend supporting my progression. I allowed myself to fall in love, true love, and she not only championed me, she challenged me. She continues to challenge me every day.
-read full post, National Coming Out Day Oct. 11th

While many may see National Coming Out Day as a day for teh gays, I think it's equally important for our straight allies to tell their stories. How has knowing a GLBT person(s) changed the way they view things. It's important for our straight allies to speak about why GLBT rights matter to them and why they should matter to everyone. It may also be a good time spark conversation between staight allies and the GLBT community.

Geekgirl, a straight ally, has written a series of post at jaysays called LGBT Lessons for Straigt People. In her Coming Out Day post, she writes,

I know that for me and many straight friends, support goes unsaid. So why does it go unsaid and how can we say it? Perhaps more importantly, I would love to hear from LGBT folks what clues you look for to know that it is safe to come out to someone?
-read full post, LGBT Lessons for Straight People: Coming Out Day is For Everyone

There are many ways to share your story. I would of course, recommend writing a blog post. But, you could just post a badge on your site; for example, one that looks like a name tag and says, "Hello, I'm bisexual." You could submit a video of you telling your story, to Our Scene TV, for the Guess Who's Coming Out of the Closet project. You could twitter about NCOD. You could donate your Facebook status to the HRC's Conversations From the Heart app. You might be able to find an event by your area Pride group. I know our local Pride group is having an event which includes a session for sharing coming out stories. Or you could just, call a friend.

What do you think about National Coming Out Day? Are going to do use the day as a catalyst?

Other intering post on Coming Out Day:

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also writes about her life most ordinary at gaymo

.

]]> Florida Federal Court Dismisses Lawsuit of Lesbian Denied Information About and Visitation with Dying Partner in ER http://www.blogher.com/florida-federal-court-dismisses-lawsuit-lesbian-denied-information-about-and-visitation-dying-partne 2009-10-02T03:08:38-05:00 2009-10-02T03:14:47-05:00 no_I_am_zoe I hesitate to write another post about gay marriage rights, especially since I just wrote a Respect for Marriage/Down with DOMA post last week. And, I've written 2 or 3, or 10, or more other marriage posts here at BlogHer in last year and half. I fear that if I keep writing about it over and over again, it will start to become background noise, and people will tune out. Stop reading. But then life happens, and courts make rulings, and I get so frustrated that I can't not write about it.

]]> I hesitate to write another post about gay marriage rights, especially since I just wrote a Respect for Marriage/Down with DOMA post last week. And, I've written 2 or 3, or 10, or more other marriage posts here at BlogHer in last year and half. I fear that if I keep writing about it over and over again, it will start to become background noise, and people will tune out. Stop reading. But then life happens, and courts make rulings, and I get so frustrated that I can't not write about it. I do not understand how, regardless of personal convictions on the issues of homosexuality and same-sex marriage, some people can lack such compassion for their fellow (wo)man.

So why am I so agitated? A few days ago, a U.S. District Court for Southern Florida dismissed Janice Langbehn's case against the Public Health Trust of Miami-Dade County, Jackson Memorial Hospital and 3 doctors. For those unfamiliar with, or don't remember Janice's story I'll give you quick synopses.

In February 2007, Janice Langbehn, Lisa Pond, and their 3 children traveled to Florida for an R Family Cruise. But before the ship left port, Lisa collapsed and had to be rushed to a hospital. Janice and their children followed, arriving shortly after. The hospital refused to take information about Lisa's medical history from Janice, even after a copy of Power of Attorney had been faxed to the hospital. Janice and the children were not given any information about Lisa, and were denied visitation even after the doctor had indicated that there was no medical reason Lisa could not have visitors. In the mean time, other families, including children, were taken back to visit with patients in the trauma unit. The only visitation Janice was allowed in the ER, was 5 minutes while the priest to delivered last rites. At some point during the ordeal, Janice was told by a social worker that she was in an anti-gay state and city, and she would not be acknowledged as family. Apparently, that went for their adopted children too.

When Lisa was finally moved from the ER to a non-trauma room in the hospital, Janice was not notified. She had to find out from Lisa's sister, who was told by the hospital staff when she arrived. It was more than hour after Lisa had been moved. Yes, Lisa's sister had more rights than her partner of 18 years did. Later, Dade County Examiner and the State of Florida both denied Janice a death certificate, which she needed for life insurance and social security benefits for the children.

The court ruling, says the trauma unit does not have and obligation to allow the patient's family, health care surrogate, or other visitors, access to the patient. And since she was allowed in for the 5 minutes of last rites, that's good enough (my words). The ruling found that since she was briefly consulted twice, the Power of Attorney had not been denied or ignored. The ruling also stated that there was not enough evidence to show a fiduciary relationship. This has some bearing as to why it's justifiable under the law to keep loved ones apart, but I don't understand why. Since I am not a lawyer, and all of this legal speak makes eyes glaze over, this is about as much as I got out of reading the ruling. For a more in depth discussion of the ruling and it's implications, check out Leonard Links post Federal Judge Dismisses Tort Claims Against Florida Hospital and Staff Who Failed to Accord Compassionate Treatment to Life Partner of Dying Lesbian.

What I find so scary about this case, is that even with all the legal paperwork that should have protected them from this sort of thing, they still were treated with such disregard and disrespect. I find it hard to believe that anyone could really think it fair and just and keep loved ones from attending the bed side of their dying family member. How can someone be so cold and callused. Hell, it's just downright cruel. And while I may not be a believer and all, I have serious doubts that that's what Jesus would do. I only throw Jesus in here, because it's been my experience that Jesus is justification for any argument. Scripture is the proof for and the way to win any argument, don't you know?

This is why some sort of legal rights for gay couples, on a national level, are so important. And those rights must be transferable, recognized in every state within the United States. That doesn't mean that jerks will necessarily stop being jerks, but at least if there laws to protect us, we'll have some recourse.

I like to end my posts with a question, but the only question I have is how someone can reasonably and rationally justify the sort of treatment Janice's family received? Because I just don't understand it.

Read what other bloggers have written about this:

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also blogs about her life most ordinary at gaymo

.

]]> Respect for Marriage Act introduced in the House http://www.blogher.com/respect-marriage-act-introduced-house 2009-09-25T05:10:47-05:00 2009-09-25T05:10:47-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Last week, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), along with 90 cosponsors, introduced H.R. 3567 in the House of Representatives. The purpose of H.R. 3567, called the Respect for Marriage Act of 2009 (RMA), is to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton. At the time DOMA became law, there were no states in which same-sex marriage was legal.

]]> Last week, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), along with 90 cosponsors, introduced H.R. 3567 in the House of Representatives. The purpose of H.R. 3567, called the Respect for Marriage Act of 2009 (RMA), is to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton. At the time DOMA became law, there were no states in which same-sex marriage was legal. Today, there are 6 states in which it's legal (or will soon be). There are also the 18,000, or so, same-sex couples who are legally married in California, though it is no longer legal for same-sex couple to marry there.

DOMA was a states' rights law, born of fear during the time when it looked like gay marriage might become legal in Hawaii. The states were afraid they would be forced into legalizing same-sex marriage, because they would have to recognize gay marriages performed in states where it was legal. The solution was DOMA. But DOMA went beyond just protecting states' rights. It also defined marriage with respect to federal laws pertaining to marriage, as a legal union between one man and one woman.

The same legislation that was created to protect states' rights, is now infringing upon them. Because DOMA included a section to define what the federal government would recognize as marriage, the federal government is now not recognizing the power of states to govern themselves. By not granting marriage rights to legally married same-sex couples, the federal government is, in effect, invalidating the states' judgment in determining its own laws. The proposed solution is the Respect for Marriage Act.

The Respect for Marriage Act would preserve the states' rights to regulate marriage, while granting federal rights to all legally married couples. As long as the marriage was valid in the state in which the marriage was entered into, marital status will be conferred with respect to federal law. This, to me, seems like a win-win. Same-sex couples who legally marry could file federal taxes jointly. They wouldn't have to pay imputed income, at the federal level, on benefits offered to same-sex partner. They could collect social security survivors benefits. They wouldn't have to worry about federal inheritance taxes when their spouse dies. They could help their spouse gain citizenship...

In short, it would rectify a host of injustices that DOMA currently perpetrates upon legally married same-sex couples. Personally, I have always thought that same-sex couples should be given a federal tax credit since we contribute to benefits that we are not legally allowed to avail ourselves of. If this bill fails, maybe Tammy Baldwin should introduce a Tax Fairness For Same-Sex Couples Act.
-read Democrats Introduce Respect for Marriage Act, by Frannie

While I'm pretty surprised there are now 94 sponsors, and that Bill Clinton, and Bob Barr (leader sponsor of DOMA) both support the Respect for Marriage Act, I don't think this bill will get anywhere this year. I worry just a bit, that this is going to be Prop 8 all over again, only on a grander scale. I worry that though there are a few openly gay Representatives who are sponsors of this bill, Barny Frank is not. Does it mean I don't think we should repeal DOMA? No. Heck No. DOMA needs to go. It needs to go now. I'm just saying I worry.

What do you think? Is this the time to introduce a DOMA repeal bill? Will it divide the country? Create backlash?

Write to your Congress(wo)men, Senators and the President.

See what other bloggers are saying about this:

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She blogs about her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> That's So Gay http://www.blogher.com/thats-so-gay 2009-09-17T06:51:56-05:00 2009-09-17T06:51:56-05:00 no_I_am_zoe How is it, that phrases like "that's so gay," or "don't be so gay" are still thriving in teen vernacular? Why is it socially acceptable to say such things? How can so many people defend the usage of such words as harmless? Why don't more people find it offensive? And where are these kids' parents?

]]> How is it, that phrases like "that's so gay," or "don't be so gay" are still thriving in teen vernacular? Why is it socially acceptable to say such things? How can so many people defend the usage of such words as harmless? Why don't more people find it offensive? And where are these kids' parents?

Now I'll admit, I didn't used to think "that's so gay" was that big of a deal. It seemed innocuous enough, nothing to get bent out of shape about. Until, that is, I heard my teenage niece use it. Then it didn't really feel so harmless anymore. It really shocked me actually. Both that she said it, and how I reacted to it. Actually what she did was call someone gay, as an insult. But why should I have expected her to be any different from any other teen? They don't see anything wrong it. And apparently, no one is telling them otherwise.

The argument is that "that's so gay," and the likes, just mean lame or stupid. Not homosexual. As in, "I can't believe your parents won't let you go to the party. That's so gay." Clearly, the meaning is that the parents are lame, not that they are actually a same-sex couple. The problem is, these phrases are also used to point out gay stereotypes as insults. As in, "I can't believe he wore a pink shirt. Dude that's so gay." Same phrase. Different meaning. Both intended to have a negative connotation.

The problem is, how and where, does the mind draw the line between what's a "harmless" use of a phrase with the word gay, and what's not? If it's okay to say "that's so gay" in response to guy wearing a pink shirt, then isn't also okay to say "that's so faggy?" And why stop there? Why not just call someone gay? Meaning homosexual, used an insult. Why does it have power as an insult? And when it's okay to call people gay as an insult, then where does it end? A few weeks ago there was a twitter tending topic #uknowhowiknowuregay. Do you really think that was all good natured?

I've come to the conclusion that "harmless" phrases like "that's so gay," are not harmless. In fact, they are what helps fuel the fire for homophobia to continue to exist, and remain socially acceptable in our culture. I don't know how to solve the problem other than to let the people who I know, know it's not cool to say things like "that's so gay." The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network(GLSEN) has put together the Think B4 You Speak campaign. Currently, they have three posters:

That's so "jock who can complete a pass but not a sentence."
That's so "cheerleader who like can't like say smart stuff."
That's so "gamer guy who has more videogames than friends."

and 3 television ads which can be seen at ThinkB4YouSpeak.com. I love Wanda Sykes, but the commercial with the 2 cashiers is my favorite.

One thing I found interesting, is that much of the blog response to the Think B4 You Speak campaign, came from the gaming world. More specifically, the on-line gaming world. From what I gather, the name calling with homosexual reference can get pretty explicit and highly offensive.

Will the ads work? Eh? They probably won't have too much impact on he kids. I think the audience we need to reach are the adults who are letting this kind of talk go on around them; parents, teachers, coaches...We need to step up and say something to these kids to let them know that it's not OK. Am I wrong?

See what others have blogged about this:
Twitter Trending Topic #uknowhowiknowuregay Provides Unreliable Tips for Identifying Homosexuals, by Riese and Tinkerbell at Autostraddle
Homophobic Trends and Twitter Wars, by Firebolt at The Freezing Flames
Think before you speak, by Z at It's the Thought that Counts
That's So Gay, by Rebecca at The Thang Blog
'Think B4 You Speak' Gets Gamers Arguing, by Tracy V Wilson at How Stuff Works

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Ilene Chaiken gets the green light for 'The Real L Word'. Really? http://www.blogher.com/ilene-chaiken-gets-green-light-real-l-word-really 2009-09-11T06:19:24-05:00 2009-09-11T06:19:24-05:00 no_I_am_zoe When I read that Showtime gave Ilene Chaiken the green light for nine episodes of a reality show called "The Real L Word: Los Angeles," my first thought was "Ooo, what a bad idea." Not that I won't tune in to watch at least the pilot episode of that bad idea, mind you. And I'm sure I'll probably get totally sucked in to the show, ...but, a reality show? Really?

]]> When I read that Showtime gave Ilene Chaiken the green light for nine episodes of a reality show called "The Real L Word: Los Angeles," my first thought was "Ooo, what a bad idea." Not that I won't tune in to watch at least the pilot episode of that bad idea, mind you. And I'm sure I'll probably get totally sucked in to the show, ...but, a reality show? Really? Has anyone ever done a reality show (ala Real World, or Real Housewives) and not come out looking like an immature, unintelligent, shallow, narcissistic, egomaniac. I'm not saying that's how those people really are, I'm saying footage gets edited down to the few tastiest clips. I'm sure if a camera crew followed me around 24/7, they could portray me in many different ways depending on what suits their needs. It just seems like potential for bad representation of lesbians.

I understand that reality television is the program format du jour. I also know that lesbians are starving to see more girls-who-like-girls, on television. Or at least this one is. So it only makes sense that someone would end up going there; cast a few hot chicks with big personalities, a bit of fashion sense, and a little flare for the dramatic, and you've almost certainly got a hit. Unless we're talking about Gimme Sugar. Then, not so much (Or maybe I'm just too old, too coupled, and too much of a midwesterner for that show). Anyway. What I don't get, is why Ilene Chaiken is going there. She is quoted as saying,

Even though we concluded our sixth season of 'The L Word' on Showtime this past March, I believe we are not nearly finished telling our 'L Word' stories
- 'L Word' is now a reality, by Michael Schneider

Which, I suppose is true. But, these won't be her stories, her characters to narrate. These will be real people, with real lives, whose stories and voices belong to no one but them. They aren't puppets whose strings she can pull for her own gratification. She can't make them do things they would never do, just to tell the story she wants to tell. Just in case you couldn't tell, I am still irked about how The L Word ended, just so she could try to spin off her new show. Leaving us all hanging with no resolution to the murder mystery that she created. And then, to add insult to injury, she gave us the interrogation tapes.

So. Seriously? This is the person we want at the helm of a reality show about the lives of 6 LA lesbians? Think I'm the only one whose critical about this? Check out Dorothy Snarker's post at After Ellen. She says,

Also, is anyone else troubled by how readily Ilene blurs the boundaries between the fiction of TLW and the reality of actual lesbians? How can this be “telling our L Word stories” when it should be telling the stories of these six, as-yet-uncast real lesbians?

Unless, that is, the entire L Word cast is about to come out as lesbians and let us follow them around with cameras. Now that is something I might actually watch.
-Let's get real about 'The Real L Word', by Dorothy Snarker

Or Grace Chu's post at Grace the Spot

So, thank you Ilene, for the bailout. We look forward to reviewing your new reality show about the true story of six lesbians – a writer turned stripper, a hairdresser who can’t do her own hair, a Persian who identifies as a Latina, a tennis player with terminal cancer, a British heiress with a criminal record, and a dog named Sounder – who get thrown into a Los Angeles County jail cell for eight weeks. Bring it on.
-The Real L Word? Hurrah! The cult of complaining about Ilene Chaiken shall return!, by Grace Chu

Autostraddle has a comment contest, in which commenters have to finish one of two statements.

We couldn’t help ourselves. This is a perfect reason to obsess over our feelings related to L Word. SO! Here’s the deal: comment on this post by finishing the sentence “On The Real L Word, there better be some goddamn….” or “On The Real L Word, there will be no ….” etc.

E.g.,”On The Real L Word, Jenny will step away from the railing,” or, “On The Real L Word, Angelica better get a goddamn babysitter,” or “On The Real L Word, there better be some big ol’ butch dykes hauling lumber and building sweatlodges.”
-Showtime Greenlights L Word Reality Show “The Real L Word: Los Angeles” – and Ilene Chaiken’s in Charge: Daily Fix

I hope that I'm wrong in thinking this show is a bad idea. I hope I will be pleasantly surprised, and "The Real L Word" will be fantastic. That the women will be likable and their stories relatable.

Will you be tuning to watch The Real L Word?

More fun posts on The Real L Word:
"The Real L Word: Chicago" could be in our future, by Trish Bendix
"She Got Me Pregnant": Episode 82, by Dana Rudolph
LOL -The *Real* L-Word, at The LOL Word

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor. She also blogs about her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Venice the Series, and the Kiss Otalia Fans Have Been Waiting For http://www.blogher.com/venice-series-and-kiss-otalia-fans-have-been-waiting 2009-08-27T07:04:33-05:00 2009-08-27T07:04:33-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Does the mashup, Otalia make you say who-what? Or does it inspire you to check twitter, or your favorite forum for the latest buzz? Or maybe it makes you want to share your latest thoughts and predictions for how the Natalia-Olivia story line will end when Guiding Light airs its final episode on September 18th? Or, perhaps the mere mention of their name works you up into fits of thinking, "for the love of god, will we ever get to see them kiss?

]]> Does the mashup, Otalia make you say who-what? Or does it inspire you to check twitter, or your favorite forum for the latest buzz? Or maybe it makes you want to share your latest thoughts and predictions for how the Natalia-Olivia story line will end when Guiding Light airs its final episode on September 18th? Or, perhaps the mere mention of their name works you up into fits of thinking, "for the love of god, will we ever get to see them kiss? Delayed gratification is one thing, but this is just plain torture." OK, maybe that's just what I would be thinking, if I watched Guiding Light. Is it really that unreasonable to expect to see a couple, who is supposed to be in love, kissing.

Snapper of SuperHero LunchBox seems to share my opinion on the lack of kissing issue.

Unless viewers take a stand and make our voices heard, we will never see anything resembling positive portrayals of same-sex relationships in the mass media. And make no mistake about this: if we do see an Otalia kiss, it won't be because fans sat back and accepted the ridiculously chaste relationship these two supposed-lovers share. If we see a kiss between these two characters, it will be because the pressure from viewers became too great to ignore. It will be because journalists and bloggers have been critical and pointed out how incredibly stupid and unrealistic it's been for CBS to expect us to believe that two adult women in love wouldn't even kiss one another. If we see a kiss, it will be because certain GL actors spoke out, and made TPTB aware of the Internet buzz about this issue. If we see a kiss it will not be thanks to people who sat back and didn't make any noise for fear of "ruining" things for everyone.
-Read Scrambling for Scraps

It would be interesting to know why this story line was propelled forward if it wasn't going to get equal treatment. It makes me wonder who the intended audience is for this story line.

Now I must admit, I am/was among the who-what crowd. I'm not sure how I remained so oblivious to one of daytime television's most beloved lesbian couples because, um hello, there is a weekly recap at AfterEllen.com. How do I read right past them every week? It's not that I didn't know that soaps were starting to write in lesbian characters. It's more that I had a hard time imagining that the characters would be believable as lesbians, and that the story lines would be more than just temporary plot twists that would eventually end with the women returning to heteroville. I don't mean that to come across as knocking soap operas. It's just a general skepticism I have about any television show using an LGBT character. It comes from years of poorly written, one dimensional, non-sexual gay characters, or lesbian characters who get to be gay for day during sweeps week.

While I have not watched the show, I do know that Otalia has a huge fan base. This particular story line really seems to have tapped into something that people, including the actresses, just don't want to let go of just yet. After Guiding Light was canceled, Crystal Chappell, who plays Olivia, tried to get the Otalia story line transplanted to Guiding Light's sister show, As the World Turns. She also suggested that it get spun into a web series. But Proctor & Gamble, who owns the show, was not interested in her suggestions. Chappell could have let it die in the hands of the Proctor & Gamble, but instead she did something pretty awesome; she decided to start a web series on her own.

The web series, Venice, is planned to air in November. The show can not use the characters Natalia and Olivia, but both Chappell and her Guiding Light co-star Jessica Leccia, have roles in the show. Chappell, who plays a lesbian named Gina, says that fans will have to wait as long as 30 seconds into the first episode to see the two kiss. Oh yeah, I'm pretty sure I just became of fan. My own perviness aside, it seems to me like a good idea to have a kiss between the two right off the bat. If the show starts off with a kiss, there isn't really enough time to develop those two actors as new characters. So for the Otalia fans, it's a payoff before they start to see them as different characters. Although, it might make it difficult to see them as new and different characters too. I don't know.
Raz, of Obscure Clarity has a definite opinion about the new show.

My thoughts on the webseries is this: I do not want a gaggle of crazed Otalia fans being able to influence the show's direction. Already the influence of the fan's opinions, mostly vocalised on Twitter, is evident through Chappell's announcement that fans will only have to wait 30 seconds before seeing Leccia and herself share a kiss. Thank you Chappell for giving us what Guiding Light hasn't (yet), but I hope that the show remains above trying to transplant Otalia to the web as Gina and Ani. As much as I love the characters, I do not want to see several chunks of well developed characterisation be moulded into the framework for the characterisation of the Venice characters. I will be tuning into the show, no doubt, but I am tuning in to see something different, something fresh and new, not Otalia 2.0.
-Read Crystal Chappell is Gina

Other than knowing Gina is a designer who lives in Venice Beach, and that she likes the ladies, I don't know too much more about the actual show. The rest of the cast includes; Elizabeth Keener (you might know her as Dawn Denbo), Hillary B Smith, Daniel Cosgrove, and Jordan Clarke. The show will be directed by Hope Royaltey, and written by Kim Turrini. As many a web series starts out, it's all a labor of love. Everyone is working for free right now. Much of the support and promotion for this project has come from twitter, facebook, and Chappell's personal web site. Ah, the power of social networking. Chappell is also investigative the ideas of a subscription fee, and or advertising in the show. Would I pay for the show? I suppose it would depend on the fee and how good the preview looked.

One last interesting link to share. Otalia: Yes It's Patriarchal. So What? [Television Tuesday], asserts that Otalia is a story of resistance. It's about challenging the forces of patriarchy and homophobia that push us to conform.

Are you an Otalia fan? A soap opera fan?  Will you watch the Venice? Would you pay to watch it? 

 

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Does your pocketbook have a conscience? http://www.blogher.com/does-your-pocketbook-have-conscience 2009-08-20T00:58:07-05:00 2009-08-20T01:00:33-05:00 no_I_am_zoe When you make large purchases, do you research the practices of the businesses you might be supporting with your hard earned dollars, and does it influence your decisions? What about medium sized purchases? What about small ones? Do you care about the politics or personal practices of your favorite authors? How about movies stars? Directors?

]]> When you make large purchases, do you research the practices of the businesses you might be supporting with your hard earned dollars, and does it influence your decisions? What about medium sized purchases? What about small ones? Do you care about the politics or personal practices of your favorite authors? How about movies stars? Directors? Musicians...

I believe informed consumers hold the power to influence change. Or to at least make sure that their money does not end up supporting causes or practices that they do not believe in. And if you don't think we hold power, just look at how quickly Tim Hortons pulled donations and  posted a press release after one of it's franchisees was listed as a co-sponsor of the National Organization for Marriage's (an anti-gay marriage group) First Annual Celebrate Marriage Day, in Rhode Island. I saw this story hit the internet August 9th, and by August 10th, after being flooded with calls and emails from customers stating they will no longer support Hortons if they choose to support organizations such as NOM, the donations were pulled and they posted a press release on their website.

While I believe we do hold power as consumers, and that it's important to be informed, I'll admit, I sometimes get lazy. Oh I always do my research when it comes to the big ticket items like cars or appliances. And I'm pretty good about researching the retailers we buy from. But I am not always so vigilant about doing my research when it comes to things like books, or movies, or video games. And I really should be, because I don't want to unintentionally donate to something like NOM, or support Prop 8, or anything like that.

Case in point. About a year and half, or maybe two years ago, everyone I knew was obsessed with the Stephenie Meyer's series, Twilight. Everyone around me was reading these books; my friends, my sister-in-law, my niece and my friend's spouses were listening to the books on tape. It was all around me. My best friend was particularly captivated by it, so I thought I'd give it a read and I bought the first two books. Though I've not been able to get through the 2nd book, I somehow own 3 of the books in the series. It wasn't until after I spent money on 3 of Ms. Meyer's books that I found out she is a Mormon. She is an observant Mormon, who doesn't watch rated R movies or drink alcohol or caffeine, and is committed to her faith. From that, I assume she tithes. Which means means 10% of everything she makes from her work goes to the Mormon church. A church which is very vocal about it's anti gay marriage position, and was instrumental in the fight to pass Prop 8. I'd like to note that Stephenie Meyer has not stated her opinion on gay marriage. But since she has not spoken out against her church's position, it is reasonable to assume that her beliefs do not differ.

Professor What If came to a similar realization about the importance of knowing where your proceeds will go before you buy.

In terms of the fanpire's role, their obsession with all things Twilight has further lined the pocketbooks of a Church that is unashamed of its homophobia. Even those of us who are not members of the growing legions of fanpires, those of us who merely read the series and watched the movie and yet can still somehow sleep at night without dreaming of Edward, have contributed to Meyer's tithing, and, by extention, to the success of Prop 8. To be honest, I didn't consider this component of purchasing the books until a friend mentioned it to me, and I feel the fool for NOT realizing it.
-read What if we are a fanpire nation, allowing the passage of Prop 8 via our Twilight obsessions?


So now I have these three books, for which I harbor a bit of guilt and regret for buying. Especially since I purchased them during the Prop 8 campaign time. I never even finished them. They just sit on a bookshelf and nag at my conscience. I'm now trying to come up with a good way to counter act my indirect contribution to the Mormon Church. I'm thinking about selling them and donating the money to our local Pride Center. Or maybe I should just give them away, and then make a donation equal to the cost of the books, to the local Pride Center. I'm open to suggestions.

All of this "be informed before you buy" thought leads to today, which is the release day for the new Xbox 360 game, Shadow Complex. Shadow Complex is a sci-fi first person shooter game, set in a world based on Orson Scott Card's book Empire, and written by comic book writer Peter David. The game gets great reviews, it's a $15 download, and it really looks pretty awesome. I usually find these kinds of games nearly irresistible. But... here's the thing. It's based on the Orson Scott Card novel, Empire. And that, makes me say no to buying it.

Now in case you haven't read Orson Scott Cards writings on the subject of gay marriage, and homosexuality in general, OSC strongly opposes gay marriage, and frequently writes about it. He also supported Prop 8. In my opinion, giving money to him is the same as donating to support NOM, or any other anti-gay rights group. But where this case gets a little tricky, is that this game is not his work alone. In fact, most of it is not his work. This game is based in the world created by OSC's book, but the game's story was actually written by a very gay friendly man, Peter David. Not to mention all the programmers and artists and whatnot, who brought the game to the screen. Is it fair to punish all the others who worked on the game just to not support one man? That's a questions that everyone must answer for themselves.

Dawdle from Gaygamer writes,

I still don't have an answer for myself. I think if you're obviously too disgusted to enjoy the game, avoid it, and speak out. However, if you want to play the game, play it. Enjoy it, but offset the hate: if you buy Shadow Complex, donate $5, $10, $15 if you can spare it to a gay charity. Let them know why you're giving the money. Card won't get nearly that much per game. In message boards or user reviews, in blogs or tweets, if it comes up, let people know exactly what Card has said on the matter, and where, and damn him with his own language.
- read The Shadow Comlex Conundrum

So what about you? Would you buy the game anyway? Does it matter to you if your money would likely end up supporting a cause you don't believe in? Do you believe your purchasing power can influence change?

 

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Do You Love Your Partner 'As Is'? What If She Became He, Or He Became She? http://www.blogher.com/do-you-love-your-partner-what-if-she-became-he-or-he-bacame-she 2009-08-13T05:37:21-05:00 2009-08-13T12:38:15-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Betty Please and I have been together for 16 years, and are committed to our life together 'til death do us part. She's the thing in life I can't get enough of. She is the thing that makes it all make sense. And though she may not always be happy with herself, and with her body, I love her as she is. I love her because she is Betty Please. Or do I?

Many months ago, my "I love her as is" thinking was challenged when Jess, the spouse of a fellow blogger, decided to transition from female to male.

]]> Betty Please and I have been together for 16 years, and are committed to our life together 'til death do us part. She's the thing in life I can't get enough of. She is the thing that makes it all make sense. And though she may not always be happy with herself, and with her body, I love her as she is. I love her because she is Betty Please. Or do I?

Many months ago, my "I love her as is" thinking was challenged when Jess, the spouse of a fellow blogger, decided to transition from female to male. Though, I could see this decision coming for a long time, because I also read Jess's blog, the announcement really stopped me dead in tracks. While reading Tina's reaction, I couldn't help but wonder how I would feel and what I would do if I were in Tina's shoes. I mean after all, I love Betty Please because she is who she is, as is. But could I love Betty Please if she were a man? Some of Tina's initial thoughts were of conflict and grief. She writes,

Not even when I came out did I feel this conflicted inside.

Never have I felt that our wishes/wants were in such direct opposition to each other.

[..] I can't help feeling this sense of loss. I can't seem to stop wishing this all to be a phase and that she he is going through.

Why is it so easy for Beck and Pia to call her "him" and "he" all night? Why is it so difficult for me to say?

Why can't I just be supportive and ok with everything and just "sure, let's do this!"?

Why does everyone else seem to get it and be OK with it?

I'M her his wife for fuck's sake. I'm the one that's supposed to be all gung ho for supporting her his dreams and desires.

While Tina is committed to her relationship and is supportive of Jess's transition, she is still mourning the loss of her wife. Their story is so honest and compelling. It's also quite interesting to experience the transition from both perspectives; one partner eager and excited about the changes the future holds, while the other struggles with grief and loss, and what this all means while trying to be supportive.

I know that Tina's reactions are likely sometimes hurtful to Jess, but I think are probably quite normal and understandable. Digging deeper into the blogosphere, I found another couple who is blogging both sides of this experience; Grace DreamWeaver and her partner Cameron. Aside from fantastic posts, they often have wonderful exchanges between them, in the comments. Grace DreamWeaver had one passage I found particularly thought provoking. She writes,

Sometimes Cameron feels like she has opened Pandora's box. She fears how this journey might affect us, as do I on occassion. Nevertheless, I am not hostage to this journey. I walk this journey of exploration because I love her. Because I choose it. Because I want to. Because I have lived without her, and this is better. And while recognzing her as Transgendered changes everything, it also changes nothing.
-read the full post Trans Dream

It's the last bit, about her being transgendered changes everything and nothing, that is so true and so not true, all at the same time. Yes, I believe I understand what she is really trying to say; when it comes down to it, we will always be who we are at our core. But I think when a person transitions, even though they are still the same person, they change because the world around them interacts with them differently do to their new physical presentation. Society has different rules, expectations, and privileges (or not) for men than for women. Changes in hormones modify moods, and can infleunce personality changes. A transition can change the roles in a relationship, or add gender roles where they didn't exist before. It changes how society views the couple, their sexual identities? And what does it do to the sexuality of the non trans partner.

Since Jonni P's husband became her wife, she is often asked if they are lesbians. Her answer, "I'm a straight lesbian."

There is no question that we now are Lesbians, at least in the context of "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck." We each love one another, we are both women, and we make love to one another, so we are "tada!" - Lesbian. Of course, the same things were true for us as man and wife for more than 35 years too. So, perhaps, I'm "Bisexual." Does that mean I'm not Lesbian any more?
-read post Who am I? at TransMarried: Transgender Couple, married and happy about it

And there in lies the problem, the fine line between perceived sexuality and actual sexuality. While the world would label them as lesbians, is that really how either of them would actually truly identify? And do they feel a connection with the community of their perceived sexuality. I would never tell anyone how identify. People should feel comfortable with the identity they choose.  Personally, the world perceiving my relationship as straight would never change that fact that my preference is for female bodied people.

Helen Boyd seems to echo my thoughts on sexuality, in her piece How I Found Out I Was Sexist. he writes,

People can't and don't just change their sexual orientation because they want or need to, and partners of transgender people are no exception. I can't magically become a lesbian, no matter how useful that would be. I am seen as one by most other people when I am holding my female spouse's hand.

If I were categorically heterosexual I wouldn't have managed this transition at all, which is one of many reasons I think of myself as simply queer.

I've read that there are many couples have no trouble working through a transition. In fact, it brings them closer together. I've read that other couples stay together, but no longer have a sexual relationship. And then of course, many couples do not survive a transition. Every couple has a different experince.  I don't know what I would do if these shoes were placed on my feet. I would like to believe that whether or not we stayed together as a couple, I would be supportive through the transition. I mean I would want my partner to be happy and fulfilled in life. At the same time, I know what I need to be happy and fulfilled in life.

What about you? Do you think your relationship would survive if you or your partner changed genders?  Would you feel it changed your identity.

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Are lesbians more satisfied with their body image than straight women? http://www.blogher.com/are-lesbians-more-satisfied-their-body-image-straight-women 2009-08-06T05:33:19-05:00 2009-08-06T12:48:22-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Shortly after I became a Contributing Editor here at BlogHer, I was asked to participate in a new initiative called Letter to My Body. Upon receiving the request, I totally panicked at the thought of writing a post having anything to do with body image, and immediately begged off the assignment. I'm not sure that I can fully explain my flight reaction other than to say, I sort of feel like I have no right to write about body image. I feel guilty that pretty much every woman in my life struggles with being happy with their body, while I do not.

]]> Shortly after I became a Contributing Editor here at BlogHer, I was asked to participate in a new initiative called Letter to My Body. Upon receiving the request, I totally panicked at the thought of writing a post having anything to do with body image, and immediately begged off the assignment. I'm not sure that I can fully explain my flight reaction other than to say, I sort of feel like I have no right to write about body image. I feel guilty that pretty much every woman in my life struggles with being happy with their body, while I do not. I see their pain and insecurity, and no matter how much anyone tries to tell them they are perfect and beautiful they way they are, there is just no undoing years and years of media bombardment and cultural programming.

Until now, I have successfully avoided writing about this topic. There have been little things here and there that have tempted me to hit the keyboard on this issue, but the final straw was the new Fox show More To Love. The commercials play like this new show is revolutionary, and the first step in changing the unrealistic cultural ideals of beauty. They talk about how the average female reality TV star is a size 2, while the average American woman is a size 12-16. How this show is going to represent the average American woman. Then I heard the show was called More To Love, and I lost all hope that it's anything but a gimmick show. It felt like exploitation. You know, kind of like how shows, with no lesbian characters like to suddenly feature a lesbian lip lock during sweeps week. And then never again.

Now I have not watched this show, because I despise the premise of this type of show, but from what I've read, it's The Bachelor with larger bodied people. In fact, it comes from The Bachelor's creator, and the original working title was The Fatchelor. So, I suppose the title for the show could actually have been more blatantly cruel than what it ended up. The other thing they do that just seems completely crass, is to list the women's weight anytime their name is on the screen (according to what I've read at The Curvy Life). Why do that? What is the purpose? Is that really adding anything positive and constructive to the show? Wouldn't it have been a better to just make this as a season of The Bachelor, call it The Bachelor, and use the same descriptors for the women as they have in past seasons of The Bachelor?

But don't just take my word for it. Read Lesley's, brilliant piece from Fatshionista. She says,

Applying this idea to More to Love, here we have a situation in which that body-horror is being candidly exploited for (fun and) profit. It's clear that the initial expectation is that people will tune in for the sideshow factor - the self-conscious, semi-ironic placing of fat women (and a fat man) into a scenario typically reserved for people meeting a generalized beauty standard. Emme, the show's host, acknowledges as much in a behind-the-scenes interview for the show, while stating that she hopes the show will also have positive effects on how fatness, and fat people, are perceived. Some viewers may come away from the experience with a more positive impression of these women specifically, or even fat people in general, but the broader cultural contribution of this show - ultimately, a piece of throwaway television that few people will remember in a couple years - to how we as a society think about and see fat people remains to be demonstrated.
-read full post,101: Thoughts on Intersectionality, Or, Why There's No Dark-Skinned Fat Black Women on More to Love

And here I thought I was cynical.

But More To Love was just the last straw to me finally writing about body image. Two recent studies which looked at sexuality, body image, and weight control were also key players.

One study, by Caroline Huxley at the University of West England found

The lesbian women in this study felt significantly less pressure on their body image than heterosexual or bisexual women, and they also internalised social ideals of attractiveness significantly less than heterosexual or bisexual women.

The women were also questioned on their levels of body satisfaction and restrained eating, but no differences between the lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual women were found on these measures.
-read full article, Lesbian Women Feel Less Pressure To Have A 'perfect' Body

The other study, lead by Anne-Maree Polimeni, Ph.D from Odyssey Institute of Studies, Richmond 3121 Victoria, Australia found

[note,I edited out the statistical findings to make this easier to read] Lesbians were less likely to be dissatisfied with their body image, to cut down on fats and sugars, and to engage in healthy weight control practices overall compared with exclusively heterosexual women.
-read article, Sexual Orientation and Weight, Body Image, and Weight Control Practices among Young Australian Women, published in Journal of Women's Health.

Both studies found that lesbians were less likely to be dissatisfied with their body image. Note that neither study said they had a higher rate of happiness with, or satisfaction with, but rather were less dissatisfied with their body image. Even still, I find that a little hard to believe that that isn't changing, and we're moving toward the same levels of dissatisfaction as all other women. Especially now that we're living in a post L Word era. I'm not saying that this means that lesbians should be critical of the their body image, but rather The L Word gave us modern lesbian icons who were thin and fashionable. And we ate it up. I don't think anyone can deny the impact that show has had on lesbian fashion and culture. I can't go anywhere where the girls are without running into an army of Shanes. We seem to be a lot more stylized and fashion conscious these days too.

There are the familiar arguments about representations of women in the media, the ones about unrealistic beauty standards being forced into the brains of young women - which absolutely hold true for The L Word, as well. While it is great for a young queer woman to see images of queer women out there, period, what kind of message is it sending to the girl who can't afford to buy designer clothing or who will never wear a size four without physically harming herself? Granted, a better argument could probably be made about the young dykes who can't afford Showtime to begin with, but I digress...
-read The L Word Effect at Velvet Park

The first study also concluded that lesbians don't internalize social ideals of attractiveness nearly as much as heterosexual and bi women. But it makes me wonder, were they only looking at heterosexual ideals of attractiveness in this study? Because I believe that we instead internalize the ideals of certain lesbian culture, as I described earlier with the L Word.

I know there are two studies that say so, but it seems hard for me to believe lesbians are less dissatisfied with their body image than bi and straight women. There may have been a time when I would have thought that could be true, but I think those days are over. What do you think, are we happier with our bodies than than straight and bi women? Are our body ideals being influenced by lesbian pop culture?

Other good posts about body image:

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

 

]]> I can't believe I almost talked myself out of going to BlogHer09 http://www.blogher.com/i-cant-believe-i-almost-talked-myself-out-going-blogher09 2009-07-30T06:57:35-05:00 2009-07-30T07:40:58-05:00 no_I_am_zoe I have spent the past few days, mostly unplugged, recovering from BlogHer09. It was an experience I can't yet, nor will I probably ever be able to, simmer down to a few words, or even into a few concise thoughts. It was a weekend of inspiration and introspection. I laughed, and I cried. At times I felt completely alone, and at others I was swapping stories with new friends. I left Chicago feeling overwhelmed and exhausted, but also with renewed desire to get back to blogging as I once did.

]]> I have spent the past few days, mostly unplugged, recovering from BlogHer09. It was an experience I can't yet, nor will I probably ever be able to, simmer down to a few words, or even into a few concise thoughts. It was a weekend of inspiration and introspection. I laughed, and I cried. At times I felt completely alone, and at others I was swapping stories with new friends. I left Chicago feeling overwhelmed and exhausted, but also with renewed desire to get back to blogging as I once did. And to think I almost didn't go.

I had spent months convincing the shy and insecure parts of me, which can be pretty resistant to persuasion, that BlogHer09 was something I needed to do. I had to do. When I registered, I still had not really fully talked myself into going. But I was running out of time, it was almost sold out. Fortunately, I snuck in just under the wire for registering. That's when the real anxiety started to set in. A few days before the conference I was hit by a wave of panic. I almost talked myself out of going. There were going to be so many people there, and I didn't know anyone. I'm not the type of person who can just go up to someone I don't know and talk to them. What was thinking signing up for this? And on purpose.

I didn't sleep a wink Thursday night, still I was completely wired Friday morning. I was so nervous about not knowing anyone and not fitting in, but I was also excited by the possibilities for the experience that was yet to be. Betty Please had to give me a push onto the escalator to get me off on my own, and headed to check in to check in. Once off the escalator I stopped for one final pep talk. I took a deep breath, and headed in.

It didn't take much observation to see that many people were in the same boat as me. As my table filled up, I sucked up my fear and put on a smile. I introduced myself and made small talk with those who I could. The same thing was going on at tables all around me. But the small talk didn't last long. It was interesting to watch one person after the other pull out their laptop or handheld, and become in engrossed in online activity. Email. Twitter. Facebook. I suppose some were even blogging. I chuckled as I thought it ironic that the conference theme was, "in real life."

In trying to distill this whole experience down to a single coherent post that isn't the size of a novel, one thing I keep coming back to is something I heard said as a joke, "BlogHer is like Soylent Green, it's people. BlogHer is people."(I wish I could remember who said so I could them credit, but I can't. So if it was your quote, thank you. Claim it if you want.) Now I don't mean this quote in a, "we eat our own" kind of a way, but in a "it's all about connecting with other people" kind of a way. For me, connecting with other bloggers was what made BlogHer09.

I'm pretty glad that the Queerblogger session was placed in the first set of sessions to choose from. I thought if I had a chance of fitting in anywhere, that would be where. Also, I had been looking for forward to meeting Recovering Straight Girl , and Deb on the Rocks. We had a small and diverse group of attendees, about 15 women. Since the group was small, everyone was able to participate in the conversation. And wow, these women are smart and well spoken. They made me want to shut up and just listen. I really got a lot out of our discussion, I just wish the session would have been bit longer. If you'd like to see some of the conversation, you can read the Official Live-Queerbloggers-LGBTQ bloggers. Unfortunately, our live blogger lost wifi connection in the middle of our session and lost the middle bit of the live blog, but you can get the gist of things. I wanted to give a shout out to Amy at Pretty Babies, our live blogger, not only because she was so worried about losing the middle bit when she lost the wifi connection, but because I was really touched by how she responded to us, our stories and experiences.

Other highlights of BlogHer, were the Queerosphere party, and having an LGBTQ birds of a feather table at lunch. Between the two, I met some pretty cool LGBT bloggers, some of whom were not in my bloglines. Some of the people I met include: Trish Bendix who writes and edits for AfterEllen, and who also writes The L-Blog for Chicago Now; Polly who writes Lesbian Dad, and sometimes contributes here at BlogHer; Stacey Jill Jacobs who writes stacyjilljacobs.com and who co-founded Queerly Wed; Kathrin who writes The Diversity Projekt; Liza who writes LizaWasHere; and Deborah who writes Peaches & Coconuts. I don't know what kind of spell Deborah put on Betty Please, but when we got home BP asked me for the URL for her blog. Just so we all understand the gravity of this, BP doesn't even read my blog. I had such a good time talking to everyone, and they've all inspired me be a more active blogger. Anyway, if I've left someone out, I'm sorry it's not intentional, it's just that everything is kind of a blur right now.

Of course, would be remiss if I did not mention that the Queerosphere party, which was fabulous by the way, was a little extra sweet for me, because I won the Sweet Cruise for two. The announcement was made during the party. I'm still kind of shock that I won. I don't think it's really set in yet.

Oh, and then I got to meet Ilene Chaiken. That was kind of surreal. I found it strange that I didn't have any trouble talking to her, unlike the times I've met Melissa Ferrick when I become a tongue tied idiot who can't string a sentence together. On a somewhat related note. As much of an L Word fan as I am, I would have liked it much better if Ilene would have focused on OurChart rather than on the L Word. There were some ways that creating/producing a tv show crossed over to the topics of the discussion that was being had, but I was more interested in hearing about social media.

Ooo, ooo, then there is the last conference session I attended. It was one that really hit me. The focus was storytelling. It really made me think about my blog; what it was like when I started it, what it's like now, and how I miss telling stories. It really put the desire back in me to tell stories. To get back to better writing. It put the blogging fire back in me. I just hope it stays lit.

And I can't forget the CE's who I met. Some of the nicest, kindest, people ever. You made my day.

Geeze, I knew I couldn't stay focused writing this post. Well, the point of my long seemingly unfocused ramble is, I'm glad I didn't let my fear of meeting new people and being afraid of not fitting in, get in the way of meeting wonderful new people who have inspired me to push myself to be a better blogger.

How was your BlogHer experience?

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (life-GLBT). She also blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Matthew Shepard Act Passes House and Senate, But Will It Get Vetoed? http://www.blogher.com/matthew-shepard-act-passes-house-and-senate-will-it-get-vetoed 2009-07-22T03:28:04-05:00 2009-07-22T03:28:04-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Yesterday, more than 3 months after the House passed a similar bill, the United States Senate passed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Passage of this bill marks a small step forward in the fight for GLBT rights. I say small step forward, rather than a victory, for two reasons. One, the President still has to sign the act into law, and there is a possibility the bill will end up being vetoed instead of becoming law.

]]> Yesterday, more than 3 months after the House passed a similar bill, the United States Senate passed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Passage of this bill marks a small step forward in the fight for GLBT rights. I say small step forward, rather than a victory, for two reasons. One, the President still has to sign the act into law, and there is a possibility the bill will end up being vetoed instead of becoming law. And two, the Matthew Shepard Act was amended from it's original version, to include some less favorable policy. Unfortunately, the amendments were added not as a way to create better legislation, but in hopes of killing the bill.

Now before we move forward, on why the President may not sign the bill, which he has said he favors making law, let me first clarify something. The Senate didn't actually pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act yesterday. What the Senate actually passed was the Department of Defense authorization bill, to which the Matthew Shepard Act was attached as an amendment. Also attached, was the Thune amendment, concerning reciprocity between states allowing citizens with a permit to carry a concealed firearm. What Hate Crimes and concealed weapons have to do with defense spending, I don't know. But that's where the Acts ended up. And that may be what ends up killing the Hate Crimes act.

You see, it is not that the President doesn't believe hate crime laws are important, it's just that he more strongly believes that the US should not invest any more money in F-22 fighter planes. He has drawn a line in the sand, so to speak. He has stated, that if there is money in the DOD authorization bill for F-22s, he will veto the bill. Which means he also vetoes the Matthew Shepard Act. As it stands now, the Senate has stripped the estimated $1.75 billion in funding for the fighter jets from their version of the bill, but the House bill still contains $365 million in it's version. Even if the President decided he would spend the $365 million estimated by the House bill, there is still the issue of the Thune amendment. I don't know exactly how the President would vote on this issue, I could venture a guess, but if he doesn't favor it, it's another potential nail in the Hate Crimes Act's coffin.

And course, if it weren't bad enough that this piece of legislation is tied to another bill, which also has another bill tied to it, it has also been amended in a way seemingly for the purpose of creating a loss in support. The main offending amendment, was to add the death penalty as a possible punishment for some cases. The death penalty goes against the beliefs of almost all involved in working for equal rights, and human rights, who have worked to get this Act turned into law. In addition, it also goes against the spirit of the Matthew Shepard Foundation. At the sentencing hearings, the Shepards asked that the men who killed their son, not receive the death penalty, but rather be sentenced to life imprisonment. There are really great analysis of the death penalty amentdmet and why it's damaging at Dym Sum and Law Dork.

Even if the Matthew Shepard Act ends up getting vetoed this time round, I at least have some hope that it will eventually become law. It made it through once, I'm sure it could make it through again. And I was beyond happy to discover that both of my state's Senators voted for the act. How did your Senator vote? It does though, really irks me to think, that for so long, so many have been working to get gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability included as protected by the current hate crime laws, and now that it finally has a chance, it doesn't get to stand and be judged on it's own merit. It's fate rests on the politics of , well, politics. Is it so unreasonable to think that a bill should be passed on it's own and be tied to no other? Have no riders. I mean really, should making laws for our country really be like playing a game of "would you rather?"

What do you think? Will it pass? Should it pass as it is now with the new amendments.

What are other bloggers saying about this? Check out:
Pam's House Blend
Lez get real
Pink News
The New Civil Rights Movement
Wicked Gay Blog
Joe My God
The Bilerica Project

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (life-GLBT). She blogs about her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Does Facebook Makes Coming Out Easier? http://www.blogher.com/does-facebook-makes-coming-out-easier 2009-07-16T05:20:01-05:00 2009-07-16T05:20:01-05:00 no_I_am_zoe A few weeks ago, I had lunch with a friend who I had not seen since half my life ago. We had been room mates our freshman and sophomore years of college. We had known each other in high school, but we hadn't really become friends until we roomed together. We had gotten pretty close, pretty fast, and for a time we were practically inseparable. But by the end of our sophomore year, we had started to drift apart. By the beginning of our junior year, we had stopped talking altogether. Until a few months ago, I don't think we had had contact for almost 18 years.

]]> A few weeks ago, I had lunch with a friend who I had not seen since half my life ago. We had been room mates our freshman and sophomore years of college. We had known each other in high school, but we hadn't really become friends until we roomed together. We had gotten pretty close, pretty fast, and for a time we were practically inseparable. But by the end of our sophomore year, we had started to drift apart. By the beginning of our junior year, we had stopped talking altogether. Until a few months ago, I don't think we had had contact for almost 18 years. I was very excied when I found a Facebook friend request from her, sitting in my inbox. I immediately clicked to accept.

I was pretty happy about the thought of reconnecting. I had often wondered what ever became of her, and had I always hoped she was happy. So, upon accepting her friend request, I promptly checked out her page. I quickly noted two things. One, she has greyhounds. Which I thought was very cool, and interesting because I always thought of her as a cat person. And two, I deduced from her name and status, that she must have been married at one time, though now she's single. Then it struck me; she is going to find out I'm gay through my relationship status on Facebook. And I kind of have mixed feelings about that.

Now the nice thing about my Facebook status showing that I'm in a relationship with Betty Please is, that my gayness is out there just like any other bit of information about me. That information is not weighted. It doesn't dominate the page. It's just there if you want to know. I don't have to worry about coming out. I don't have to think about how to bring it up, or whether it's the right time. I don't have to gauge a reaction before I do it. I don't have to decided whether it's really that important for this person or that person to know. I don't have to have a conversation about it afterward. I don't have to see that reactions. I can be OUT on days when I wouldn't otherwise have the energy to be. It's a good way to be visible 24/7.

The one downside to this 24/7 visibility without all the mental energy required to come out time and time again, is that it's not very personal. And here's where my mixed feelings lie in regard to this old friend. On the one hand, I was bit relieved at thinking that I wasn't going to have to come out in person. But on the other hand, it felt like even though we had not spoken in for as long as it had been, I owed it to her to do it in person, to be available for whatever the reaction, and to help her understand. She must have felt the same, meaning that she wanted to talk in person, because it wasn't until she was in town and we met for lunch a few week ago, that she asked me for "my story."

My old friend is very okay with me being gay, just a little surprised that I ended up gay. In her words, "yeah, you were outdoorsy, but that doesn't really mean anything. It's just...I mean. You slept with so many guys in college." I guess that confuses some people. Anyway, I'm glad she knew before we met in person. It gave her time to process and think about what she wanted to as, and I didn't have to be all in I've got to come out mode.  

I'm not alone in feeling kind of liberated, or maybe empowered by my Facebook status. Caryn Brooks posted How to Come Out on Facebook, at Time.com, in which she writes

I remember the apprehension I had prior to going to a high school reunion in the days before Facebook was popular. I didn't care who knew I was sapphically inclined. I just resented having to tell them. Fast forward to now. My long-lost buddy Jill from middle school (married to a guy and with two small children) recently found me on Facebook. She had responded to some posts on my page about the lesbian soap opera The L Word, so it was safe to assume that she had figured me out.

And I think she really hit on a big something when she said, "I didn't care who knew I was sapphically inclined. I just resented having to tell them." I do resent having to tell people. I hate that I have to come out over and over, again.

 

Jessica who writes at lunch at 11:30, thinks coming out on facebook is the best thing ever. She says,

fast-foward 10+ yrs later. enter facebook. there's no awkward moments! there's no vetting someone's political and/or religious or cultural beliefs. there's really no "coming out" anymore to old friends, at least online. it's like, hey, yr friendin' me? ok, sure. and bam. everything's right on there. the "engaged to" (and, in a mere 2+ weeks, "married to." omg. OMG WHAT?? omg nothing.) and then the couple-ly profile pics. then there's this blog i'm always shamelessly promoting in my status msgs, which basically spills out my entire life story. a giant social networking site like facebook makes things so easy. it's unbelievable.

I really think Facebook, and if you have a blog that's not anonymous, are good ways to come out, be out, and to increase GLBT visibility. What do you think?

 

other good reads;
Mama's Gettin' to be an Old Pro at Coming Out, by Dorothy's BFF at dorothyscloset.com
Reconnecting with and old friend, by broom at Monologues from the Glass Closet
Time Magazine Publishes Gay Facebook Guide for the Clueless, by Maria Mercedes at Zelda Lily
11 ways to come out as a Lesbian!, by Sally Neill at GayWallet.com

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (life-GLBT). She blogs about her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> Heterosexuality: Membership Has its Privileges http://www.blogher.com/heterosexuality-membership-has-its-privileges 2009-07-09T09:49:51-05:00 2009-07-09T09:49:51-05:00 no_I_am_zoe Heterosexual privilege is something that many, straight people never think about, but that almost, if not all GLBT people think about more often than they'd like. And why would straight people think about heterosexual privilege?

]]> Heterosexual privilege is something that many, straight people never think about, but that almost, if not all GLBT people think about more often than they'd like. And why would straight people think about heterosexual privilege? We live in a heteronormative society, and most of us were raised with the cultural beliefs of that society. If I were straight, heterosexual privilege would just be a part of my life. I probably wouldn't think about it until, or unless, it affected someone I was close to. Not because I wouldn't care about the struggles of GLBT people, but that if it weren't such a personal issue to me now, animal rights would be my more important issue. Everyone has their thing.

Now you're probably noticing that this post is about heterosexual privilege, and I haven't yet defined heterosexual privilege. Well, that's because to say it is privileges or benefits that straight people enjoy that GLBT people do not, just doesn't really mean much. It's much easier to understand what it is and what its impacts are, through examples. The examples below, were taken from an article that recently circulated in the GLBT blogosphere. It was written by a group of straight-identified Earlham College students.

On a daily basis as a straight person...

  • If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented.
  • When I talk about my heterosexuality (such as in a joke or talking about my relationships), I will not be accused of pushing my sexual orientation onto others.
  • I do not have to fear that if my family or friends find out about my sexual orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical or psychological consequences.
  • I did not grow up with games that attack my sexual orientation (IE fag tag or smear the queer).
  • I am not accused of being abused, warped or psychologically confused because of my sexual orientation.
  • I am never asked to speak for everyone who is heterosexual.
  • People don't ask why I made my choice of sexual orientation.
  • People don't ask why I made my choice to be public about my sexual orientation.
  • I don't have to defend my heterosexuality.
  • I can easily find a religious community that will not exclude me for being heterosexual.
  • I can count on finding a therapist or doctor willing and able to talk about my sexuality.
  • I am guaranteed to find sex education literature for couples with my sexual orientation.
  • I have no need to qualify my straight identity.
  • My masculinity/femininity is not challenged because of my sexual orientation.
  • I am not identified by my sexual orientation..
  • I can choose to not think politically about my sexual orientation.
  • My individual behavior does not reflect on people who identify as heterosexual.
  • I can kiss a person of the opposite gender on the heart or in the cafeteria without being watched and stared at.
  • Nobody calls me straight with maliciousness.
  • I am not asked to think about why I am straight.
  • I can be open about my sexual orientation without worrying about my job.

-I edited this list down from the original to give a sampling, the full list can be found, Unpacking the Knapsack II, Sexual Orientation.

For people who have not experienced life as GLB or T persons, I think the students did a pretty darn good job of putting themselves in our shoes and getting the ball rolling on exposing heterosexual privilege. Of course this list was just a starting point. Terence, of Queering the Church, had a few other good ones to add.

* Growing up straight means that I have abundant suitable role models on which to model my behaviour
* Growing up straight means that I have appropriate socialization to show me the rules of the dating game, and how to come on to someone that I want to attract.
* Growing up straight means that I will not be rejected by my family for my sexual orientation
* Growing up straight means that I am dramatically less likely to be driven by bullying to take my own life.
-read Heterosexual Privilege

J Clarance Flanders, who writes at The New Gay, also had a few to add. Including:

  • As a child it is assumed that I will grow up to be heterosexual (Homosexuals must "become" gay and "come out of the closet").
  • Whenever someone meets me in public they assume I am heterosexual.
  • My heterosexuality is not an aspect of my life, or a lifestyle, just a fact about myself.
  • I will not feel stupid if I assume someone is of my orientation, even if they are not.
  • I know when people of my orientation are rewarded it is not because of their sexual orientation.

-read the full post Heterosexual Privilege in America

When the Earlham College student's list was posted over at Pam's House Blend, it generated some interesting discussion ranging from slignot's reaction

[...]This tendency to cultivate an idea that the only people who can truly understand the injustice are those to whom it actually happens is troubling and largely self-defeating. While I applaud the efforts to educate people of the privileges they enjoy merely by being straight, I find the implication that even "allies" to the cause prefer to remain in ignorance of these benefits insulting, dangerous and risks damaging the integrity of the movement as a whole. There is no cause that resonates more powerfully with me than the struggle for LGBT rights, despite the fact that I am a heterosexual. To imply that I don't have the empathetic capacity to understand the gross injustices visited upon my friends and family simply for who they are is beyond insulting. I may enjoy hetero-privilege, but don't imagine for a second that I am unaware of it, or that I take it for granted.

to Joneke's reaction which is at the other end of the spectrum.

It's been my experience that straight people who oppose gay marriage for non-religious reasons tend to not realize the real-life consequences that our current system of second-class citizenship has on LGBT folks lives. I think a discussions of this list by the broader public could do a lot to shift perception on the Gay Rights Movement. It's easy to deny rights to LGBT folks when you don't have to think about the hardship you're imposing on them (i.e. not being able to make legal decisions for your wife/husband because you're not married in the eyes of the law).

I didn't come around to supporting gay marriage until I realized my own straight privilege, and I'd like to think that some of my fellow straight folks could be persuaded as well. Hopefully that's not wishful thinking on my part.

While I do worry that lists like this may offend some of our allies by making them think that we think that NO straight people think about this, even though the original list was written by straight-identified people, I rather like to think that there are more Jonekes out there who had just never thought about it and need to see how straight privilege impacts GLBT people's lives. I'd like to think that maybe when lists like this circulate around the internet, at least a few minds will start to see things differently.

If I were to add to the list, I would say: as a straight person...

  • I could marry the person who I love. Not only could I, but it would be expected and supported by friends, family and coworkers.
  • I could, and would probably be expected to start a family, and my spouse wouldn't have to adopt our children in order to have legal parental rights.
  • My spouse and I could adopt children together with out being discriminated against based on our sexual orientation.
  • I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not a hospital would allow my spouse to visit me, or make decisions on my behalf, even when presented with papers granting power of attorney and or health care proxy.
  • I wouldn't have to worry that I have enough extra life insurance for my spouse so they could afford to pay the inheritance tax to stay in our home after I die. There would be no inheritance tax if we could marry.
  • I could take leave from my job should I need to care for my spouse.
  • I could serve in the military and not have to hide my sexuality

I could go on and on, I'm sure. But I'd rather hear what you would add. And, do you think this list will help change anyone's mind? Or does it actually hurt our cause, by insulting our allies?

Related reads:
Privilege is privilege, plain and simple, by Vanessa Leigh
Enjoying heterosexual privilege, by Gay in Public
"Performative Ambiguity" and heterosexual privilege: On being a straight man teaching Queer History., by Hugo Schwyzer
and just for fun, Heterosexual Questionaire, by Martin Rochlin

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She also blog about her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]> What Happened to the to Promise to Repeal DADT and DOMA http://www.blogher.com/what-happened-promise-repeal-dadt-and-doma 2009-06-25T05:02:32-05:00 2009-06-26T14:04:52-05:00 no_I_am_zoe There was a brief period of time after I graduated from college, when I considered joining the military. Growing up, I had always had this kind of romantic notion about serving in the Navy. My grandma had always spoken fondly of her days as a Wave, and my dad had lamented the Navy career he never had, thanks to asthma. They planted the military seed in the back of my mind.

]]> There was a brief period of time after I graduated from college, when I considered joining the military. Growing up, I had always had this kind of romantic notion about serving in the Navy. My grandma had always spoken fondly of her days as a Wave, and my dad had lamented the Navy career he never had, thanks to asthma. They planted the military seed in the back of my mind. After graduation I had no real career plan, so when I started getting recruiting letters on a regular basis, promising adventure, a career with a decent salary, and a rather large signing bonus, I gave the military a brief thought. A very brief thought.

Aside from the thought that joining the military would mean that I'd have to leave Betty Please behind to go away for training, and then who knows where I'd be stationed, and for how long, was a much more unbearable thought; my life with Betty Please would have to be a complete and total secret. Forever. And though I was still partially in the closet at the time, I knew there was no way in hell I could live my life, our life, under the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. It's not healthy to live in such secrecy, hiding so much of who you are. I wasn't willing to do it.

But there are those who are willing to serve in secrecy. Who are willing to hide who they are, and who they love. Those who are willing to play the pronoun game, and to dodge conversation. Those who are willing to go to great lengths to make sure their secret never sees the light of day because if it does, they're out. Game over. Do you know how hard it would be to never slip up? And not just at work, but out in civilian life too. You could never be relaxed out on a date because you never know who you might bump into. And what do you do if you do end up in a serious relationship and you want to live together? All it takes is one person to find out and report you, and your career could be over.

Don't Ask Don't Tell was supposed to be a temporary policy, until there was a better policy, that would allow gay men and women to serve in the military as long as they were not openly gay. What we've ended up with is a failed policy that's been around, unchanged for the last 15 years. Since DADT was implimented, more than 13, 000 service members have be discharged. These service members, many of whom have served in combat, lose their pensions, GI bills, access to the VA, and any other benefits they would have received had they not been discharged under DADT.

When President Obama ran for office, one of his campaign promises was to repeal DADT. Yet, since he's been in office 250 GLBT service members have been discharged under the DADT policy. Now I understand that the country is in a giant economic mess, and involved in a fair amount of military action right now, but he has taken no action. And when a case involving DADT was denied a hearing by the United States Supreme Court, the President took no action. During his campaign days, he said that repealing DADT was going to take leadership, so where it that leadership? It's my understanding that by executive order he could put a hold on the enforcement of DADT until Congress reviewed the policy. Is he really too busy to do that?

President Obama's inaction on this issue, as well as a recent statement out of the Obama Justice Department about DOMA (watch Rachel Maddow's Fierce Advocate segement for more info), have caused quite a stir in the GLBT world. As a way to passify the recent outrage over what many of us concider back pedaling on campaign promises, Obama signed a declaration, granting some benifits to same-sex partners of non-military federal employees. I'm not sure exactly what these benifits really amount to since health insurance wasn't included in there, but whatever. It strikes me as odd that it would seem ok to grant benifits to same-sex partners of one group of federal employees, but another group of federal employees will lose their jobs if they come out as gay. Another thought, if the Employment Non-Descrimination Act (ENDA) passes before DADT is repealed, will the ENDA apply to the military and effectively repeal DADT?

Check out what other bloggers have to say on this:
Deanna's Ramblings
Pam's House Blend
DOMA- Declare Obama Missing in Action, by Melanie Nathan

Obama Extends Benefits To Same Sex Partners Of Federal Employees

What do you think? Do we expect too much too fast? Or were the promises to repeal DADT and DOMA empty promises to get the gay vote?

Zoe is a BlogHer Contributing Editor (Life-GLBT). She blogs her life most ordinary at gaymo.

]]>