Air Force DADT Training Timeline And Issues Still To Come

I was passed this document (PDF) from the Air Force talking about their implementation plan for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

There are a couple interesting things to pick out of here. First, that all training is to be completed by June 2011. To me, this represents that the top brass of the Air Force fully expect the repeal to be certified soon, as training is to begin in April 2011. So that's good news for those of us skeptical of when the repeal would be certified.

Second is section 2, labeled Policy. This is pretty much what I figured would happen, but I was hoping for something more. Essentially, this section confirms that the Air Force plans on ONLY implementing the letter of the repeal, meaning that they will no longer discriminate based on sexual orientation when considering recruiting, promotion and kicking people out. However, they will not put in to place any other policies to even the playing field for LGB soldiers.

The housing policy will not change. The pay scale policies will not change. The medical benefits policies will not change. Even naming a partner/spouse as your benefactor or next of kin will still not be allowed, as the Federal Government does not recognize this. Essentially, they are stating that because of DOMA, they cannot implement any other changes.

And this is where I call bull shit. While I am fully aware that the armed forces are simply limited in what they can and cannot provide because of federal policies, I'm going to point to the State Departments recent revelations that they can, indeed, provide same-sex partner benefits and can provide for housing of same-sex partners to foreign-service employees. They are regulated by federal policy as well, yet they have found a way to make it work.

I knew this would be a problem. I knew that this repeal would be just the beginning. And I know that there will be many more discussions, legislative efforts, and lawsuits to come to iron out these policies to make them fair for every soldier.

But this does still benefit quite a few soldiers and potential recruits. I think it will mostly aid young LGB people considering a one-time enlistment in military service, possibly so they can take advantage of GI benefits. These young people may not yet be in a place where they are concerned about long-term relationships or partner benefits, etc. But if they get stop-lossed because we're still tied up in senseless wars, this could become a problem.

For anyone considering longer service, there are still many hurdles to overcome. They'll get no support when it comes time to move because they've been re-assigned to another base. They're spouse will receive no support while the soldier is deployed. It doesn't even look like the soldier's partner will get base privileges. It's not like soldiers are on the top of the pay scale, so trying to find private insurance for their significant others is going to be prohibitive. In short, life for LGB soldier's trying to make a career out of service will still not be easy.

But progress is progress. As anyone familiar with the military knows, everything is a process and change does not come quickly or easily to the armed service branches.

Is The Emphasis Wrong?

Based on my read of the scientific literature, the conclusion I reach is that gay youth are rather ordinary adolescents and young adults. Yes, some are at-risk, but these clinically fragile youth exist in the same proportion and to the same degree among heterosexual youth.

Why this is important is that as a clinician, I’m worried about the “message” we’re giving to gay youth. I’m worried about suicide contagion (publicizing gay youth suicide may provoke similar behavior among vulnerable youth). I’m worried about our inability to understand their lives. And, I’m worried about adult tendencies to insert our life experiences onto those of youth. Just because we had a difficult gay adolescence does not mean that today’s gay youth experience the same pain.

Maybe we should listen to youth about their actual lives. If we did, we would learn that, for the most part, the “suffering suicidal script” is not an accurate one. In reality, the gay kids are all right.

This is a quote from a very interesting article on the reality-vs.-perception of how life is for gay youth today. It's something I've been thinking about lately, in one respect or another, and it is something I think we need to be aware of when discussing teen suicides. The mind of the person who is considering suicide as an option may be more prone to consider that option more seriously when they constantly see other kids publicized and sainted.

It's an interesting thought. The discussion should always be on bullying, anti-gay bias, and discrimination.

Concerning Maggie Gallagher's Bloody Hands

Dear Maggie,

Do you have blood on your hands? Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but since you brought it up... Yes. Yes, you do. And while you may have some interesting ideas that also deserve examining, that in no way absolves the pain you've inflicted on America.

You see, the vile that spills from your lungs and onto newspapers or into sound bites is exactly what we (LGBT-folk) mean when we refer to hate mongers. Your whole shtick is to blast gay people as evil. While I am often vulgar on this blog, the things you say about my people are far too vulgar to reprint here.

So you say these things and put together commercials that depict LGBT folk as some sort of menacing terror out to go all bed intruder on easily scare-able people. Those things are heard by young, queer teens. Those teens can internalize that hate. And the countless teen suicides over the years that are a result of this internalized hate is a direct result of the kind hate speech you and your ilk offer the world.

Does drug abuse play a role in teen suicide? Maybe… but what could possibly stress a gay teen out so much that they feel they need to escape reality for a few moments? I'm gonna go with being told that they don't deserve basic human civility, much less human rights. The same could be said for the other risky behaviors you mention. When you treat a group as if they are outsiders beneath your level of contempt, that fucks with those people's psyche.

So, in conclusion: Yes, Maggie, you do have blood on your hands. You can either chose to rectify that or pull a Pontius Pilate. While I have hope that you will someday understand the pain you've caused, I'm just not very optimistic that you're tainted world view will ever change.

Sincerely,

Me

To Wear A Pretty Pink Tutu

I lived in rural, pan handle Florida when I was in the later half of Middle School. We had moved from a very rural small town in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan the summer before my 7th grade year to Florida as part of one of my dad's transfers and I was generally happy to get back down to the South. Warmer weather, white sand beaches, actual summers, all of these things had me super excited about life in Florida.

The one thing I didn’t expect is that life in the South can be a bit… special sometimes. They live by their own rules and don't really give a damn what others think about it. And many of those rules don't seem to follow any sort of social trend whatsoever.

Earrings And Boy Bling

Somewhere in my 7th grade year I decided that I wanted to get my ear pierced. Just one in the left ear, as was the socially accepted thing for teenage males to do at the time. The day after I got my ear pierced, I strolled into all of my classes shyly showing off my new jewelry. Some of the other boys were jealous because their parents wouldn't let them get pierced, some were disinterested altogether, and others ribbed me a little. I was still the new kid then, after all.

The proverbial feces hit the fan as I walked into my band class that afternoon though. I had just recently been bumped up to the advanced band class and had just been accepted in to the all-county band for percussion. Mallet percussion, to be exact. When my (very, very southern) teacher noticed my earring though, he threw a hissy fit! He ranted and raved about how boys just don't wear earrings and that men and women are different and that it just wasn't right, by God! He did this in front of the entire class and proceeded to scream at me for several minutes before demanding I take out my earring. You would have thought I was wearing a pretty pink tutu with a "too many Christians, not enough lions" t-shirt and painted up like a member of the Insane Clown Posse. When I refused, he told me to sit in his office until after class and he would "deal with me then."

When he came to "deal with me," he again huffed and buffed about antiquated concepts of gender roles and masculinity. I am not one to back down, particularly when I know I am correct, so I fought right back and stood toe-to-toe with this man until he was so fed up he sent me to the principal's office. This was the very first time I had ever been to the principal's office mind you, not just at my new school.

My mother was called in to the school and I was asked by the school administration to remove my earring. I started to refuse, but before I could even get my protest out my mother had jumped in to defend my right to wear an earring if I so choose and if she approved. Other students had them, after all, so why would I be singled out? After a bit of a heated debate, and after the administration had discussed the topic with my band teacher (if I could have been a fly on the wall for that conversation…), it was decided that the best "compromise" would be for me to take out my earring before his class only. Any other time I could wear it, but not in his class.

Fight The Man, Tuxedo Girl!

Why do I bring this story up? Because that was just a minor infraction in that part of Florida's unwritten code of conduct, and it was very upsetting. My rights and my protections were violated based on some far outdated code of gender norms. So I can sympathize when I see stories about a young, Southern woman who wanted to wear a tux for her senior picture who was then completely omitted from her year book. Her school didn't print her picture, her name, her accomplishments… it was as if she just didn't go there.

She is now suing the school district with the help of the ACLU and I cannot support her more in deciding to do so. There is no reason for this type of discrimination. Gender conformity is a very strong and vile force in this country, and obviously in some parts more so than others, but it is one that can have lasting negative effects on someone. So I say good luck to her in her lawsuit and a big Screw You to decidedly vicious Southern preconceptions concerning how others should lead their lives.

Thoughts On Closing Arguments

Today is the day. Well, one of The Days at least. Today is the day that the Proposition 8 trial will hear closing argument. After today, there will be nothing left to do but wait for the judge to rule.

He's going to be ruling specifically on Proposition 8 and whether the law has any legal validity, but this one ruling could affect many other states, possibly even support a full on case in the US Supreme Court. If prop 8 is knocked down for being the vile, hate-filled, ignorance-driven drivel that it is, than the same tactics used in this case can be used in other states.

There isn't much else to say on marriage equality, to be honest. What has been said is more than sufficient to support my right to legally marry my fiancé, and those that oppose it have sufficiently shown themselves to have nothing but unfounded bias in their hearts. Does that make them bigots? Some of them yes, but most of them are just too lazy to examine the reality so they follow along with the loud-mouth bigots.

My fiancé and I leave for Vancouver in a week and in a week and a half we'll be married. Legally. As recognized by the government of Canada and several other nations that openly support marriage equality. But when we come home, we'll still be just another queer couple fighting for basic rights in the eyes of our government.

Recently a co-workers husband suffered a stroke. It was pretty bad from what we've gathered, but he survived. He's had to go through serious rehabilitation to retrain his brain to talk properly and walk correctly because those functions were damaged in the stroke. Luckily the federal government provides the Family Medical Leave Act which provides that employers must allow for time off for her so that she can be there to help in her husband's rehabilitation. It's a tough spot for her to be in, but FMLA helps.

If either of me or my husband to be were in the same boat we would not be afforded that right. The federal government does boy provide that protection to us because it will not recognize out marriage. My employer has voluntarily extended that right to me, although I must provides mountains of documentation whereas hetero couples simply provide a marriage certificate. But his employer does not provide that same benefit. If I were to fall sick or something tragic happen to me, we would have to chose between having an income and him being there to help me recover.

We are often asked what exactly we would gain from marriage equality. While there is some truth to gaining public acceptance and equal societal standing, the reality is that we would gain basic, human rights. The right to see my husband in the hospital without question. The right to make decisions on each others behalf if we can no longer make a decision for ourselves. The right to not lose our jobs because our family is working through a tragedy.

Sure, maybe this all seems melodramatic. Maybe you're thinking this post is just a little too serious for a Wednesday morning. But as I get closer to being married, I've started to really examine these questions. It's not just a word or a term anymore. It is a set of right, benefits, and protections from our goverent, as well as a final committment to my partner. And I can't for the life of me understand what is so terrible about that.

The Case Of The Missing Insurance

Here's a fun story. A woman who works for the federal government sued for the right to have her wife covered by her employer's health insurance program. Arguing that denying her partner insurance meant that she was not getting equal pay for equal work because the costs of buying private insurance for her gal was astronomically higher than what her heterosexual co-workers paid to have their spouses covered under the company insurance program, a federal judge ORDERED the federal government to cover the plaintiff's wife.

So, you know, a Federal Judge comes along and makes a ruling against the Obama Administration, who of course follows that ruling as is required by law, right? Well, no, not really. Instead, the Administration tells Blue Cross/Blue Shield to not process the claim and then makes this quaint claim that they are not allowed to cover the woman because of DOMA. BUT A FEDERAL JUDGE TOLD YOU THAT YOU CANNOT DENY THIS WOMAN BENEFITS!!

*Ahem* Excuse me a moment, just need to … recover here…

Anyway, John Berry, who is the head of the Office of Personnel Management, or the VP of HR of the Federal Government so-to-speak, was questioned about this decision of the Obama Administration at the Gay and Lesbian Leadership Institute (hosted by the Victory Fund). Oh, did I mention that Berry is also the highest ranking openly 'mo member of the Administration? Yeah, that's a bit relevant. Anyway, here's his adorable response:

She was looking at this, and both her and the Justice Department, and Matt's here from the Justice Department, concluded that basically neither I nor the president have the authority to do this. Which is why Congresswoman Baldwin's legislation is so essential. And why the administration is inaudible on behalf of it it and is helping work with her to get it done. Because it will give me the authority to do it and as soon as we get it, the president will signed it we'll do it.

Now the judge has ordered me to go ahead and do it. And the lawyers are, you know, finding out what what we can do or not and they're going to tell me what I can do. And if the Justice Department says we can pay it, I'd be happy to pay it. If I can't, I can't.

To sum up, he won't because he can't. But he can, because he was ordered to by a GD FEDERAL JUDGE! Which means someone above him is telling him he's not allowed to. Hmmm…. Wonder who would have the authority, or at least perceived authority, to block a federal judge's ruling? I'll give you one guess, and it's that guy that's made lots of promises to the gays and has done his best so far to not live up to as few of them as possible...

Secret Ballots And Voter Shame

I'm in a better mood today. Not because the pain and the hurt of bigot-driven vote isn't there, but because I've personally learned a few things over the past two days, although I really only want to focus on one right now.

I've realized that there is a major flaw in the secret ballot system: if someone who holds a hate-filled opinion is given the opportunity to express that opinion with ZERO chance of repercussion, they will do so. And that's exactly what secret ballots do.

The reason it's so powerful win a legislative body, such as Maine's or California's, passes a law such as marriage equality is because their vote is always and forever on record. It's also the same reason it's hard in most places to pass it congressionaly. But secret ballots during popular voting sessions allow the average Joe to express his bigotry with impunity.

Now I'm not saying the secret ballot program should go away completely. I feel that it is a very important process for elected officials and for tax initiatives. People need to know there will be no retribution in those elections. But once something has been defined as a Right, it should not be up for public debate. Sue for it all you want, but then it's all in the open.

Rights are inalienable. They should not be eligible for public discourse because there is nothing to debate. Both Maine's law and California's Supreme Court decision defined marriage as an inalianable right. Since when did this country start allowing secretive votes on those?

The sad truth is that even today, if you put to a public, secret vote on whether or not interacial couples should be allowed to marry, most states would prohibit it. Why? Because the bigots would be allowed to vote with impunity, denying rights to people then going back home without anyone knowing the wiser.

This is also why it is important to make public the names of donors and signers for political campaigns. If company A or person B knew their name would go on record as a hate mongerer, they would be much less likely to do so. Also, those ignorant enought to follow through would have to deal with the societal pressure of the bigotry.

Marriage Equality will go to the Supreme Court. And even though there are some obsurb terds on that bench (I'm looking at you Scalia), I think they will have the sense to make marriage the law of the land. Why? Because they understand law is separate from emotion and theocratic ideals, first of all, but more importantly because their votes are registered and they have to justify them. They can't secretly express their hatred and expect to skate by.

Our day is coming.

Atlanta Joins In Gay Bar Raiding Fun!

I know I said I'd stay away from political issues, but sometimes I just can't resist it, so here goes anyway:

In the wake of two raids in Texas gay bars, Atlanta's police force decided they should join in the fun as well. The recently raided the Atlanta Eagle, taking over 20 officers into the bar to manhandle the patrons. They force the bar goers on to the ground for TWO HOURS while they pretended to search for things, or pick on the homos on the ground, or watch "the game"… whatever they had to do to pass time during the two hours of their illegal raid on the bar.

Why did they raid said bar? Because they were told there might possibly be some sex going on in the bar somewhere. Did they find any sex going on in the bar? Nopers, but they stuck around for two hours just to make sure. Have the EVER raided a hetero strip club for all the sex that happens in those diseased cesspools? Nope, but that's just boys being boys, you know? Nothing wrong with that…

These raids Have. To. Stop. They are being perpetrated illegally and unethically by the powers that be because they feel like gay people are scum and should be erased from the world. And if they just rile them up enough, they'll go away! And why, pray tell, might these Southern US cultures have the notion that gays are evil, bad, and deserving of eradication? Because we have allowed Christian fundamentalists to take over the political atmosphere and frame gay people as the opposite of god.

I shouldn't be shocked really. This kind of raid was common in black bars and establishments 60 years ago, for many of the same reasons. The white folk in charge were afraid that the black community would organize, or even worse, establish roots in "their" community. Hell, raids on gay bars even happened in Northern states and cities perceived to be progressive. Stonewall, anyone?

I can only hope that justice is handed down against the Atlanta PD in this issue and fast. A strong message needs to be sent to these ass hats that they cannot continue to abuse their badges to further their bias. I also have to wonder about the moral compass of a police force that is able to muster 20 willing officers to administer such hate without any of them standing up or speaking out. Even now, none of the 20 officers offers remorse for their actions.

This is what out and out hate legislation leads to. When our politicians stand up in public and congratulate their constituents for passing laws that enshrine hatred into the system, or even speak out in support of those laws, the idea that it's ok to discriminate against gays is drilled into the masses collective mind. Saying that gays are second class citizens by denying them marriage rights and adoption rights gives people the mental OK to perpetuate physical and social discrimination against gay people. This is what those laws have accomplished, and I sincerely hope that the right wing is satisfied in understanding that every single bruise caused in these raids, every single human rights violation, is on their hands. This is their doing.

How Texas Is Trying To De-Gay: Hate And Discriminate

Oh, my dear Texas... the state where I have my first memories of living in America... What the fuck is wrong with you?! First, you give us G. W. Bush. Fuck you for that. Recently, you decided to raid a gay bar and beat the crap out of, and hospitalize, one of it's patrons. Why? Because they were drinking in public. At a bar… Fuck you for that. Oh, and now you want to kick out The Gays of your restaurants in El Paso because gay acts are supposedly illegal in your state? Well, fuck you VERY much.

Mayhaps you forget that it was Texas that lost the seminal case Lawrence V Texas, and in doing so made it no longer legal to discriminate against the gays for their "acts." Maybe even you forget that in El Paso, as in many, many, many cities, it's illegal to discriminate against people for their sexual orientation in businesses open to the public. Maybe. Or maybe your officers are all just ignorant twits that need to go back to school for a bit of re-education.

"Hi, um, 2009? Yeah, listen… we need a favor. It seems that you, and your brothers before you, kind of forgot to stop by Texas. Yeah, I know it was just an oversight, but seriously dude. Get over there!"

This kind of shit just baffles my mind. How can this continue to happen? I really, honestly don't care one tiny bit about the fact that it happened in Texas. Even more honestly, I could care one iota less that straight people might possibly be feeling uncomfortable with the LGBT folk's progression toward civil justice. I suppose it confuses some of them, so they resort to just about the only thing straight men do well: violence.

So Texas, here's to you being a state full of ignorant dumb fucking breeders. To all the LGBT folk in that state, I'm sorry. I'm more than happy to show you the ropes here in Chicago though! I won't be coming to visit there any time soon though, that's for sure.

Again With The Out Right Lies

I have to admit that I'm getting to the point where I'm tired of fighting these religiously motivated, anti-gay bigots. "Why are you always down on the religion stuff, Dickie? Seriously, lay off!" you might say. However, I'd beg you to find me an example of anti-gay sentiment that didn't stem from religion.

Bigoted religious organizations are spending all of their time right now simply creating lies and falsehoods to spread to their constituents. Clearly, I still don't understand why it's relevant to them, other than as a blatant attempt to grab some form of self-importance from the situation. Why else would a church go out of it's way to make statements like "Hate-crimes legislation will mean that we will all get arrested for saying gays are bad?" Truth is that the hate-crimes legislation proposed here in the states is specifically toward crimes. Last I heard, calling someone a fag wasn't a crime, but beating the living shit out of them because you think they are is should be.

Fact of the matter is that Religious Preference is already protected by hate-crime legislation, yet here I stand telling everyone that the religious leaders and followers of our nations biggest hate machines are bigots. Wanna know a secret? I'm not doing it from jail! I know, it's amazing! I mean, if we were to believe what this nut-jobs are saying, then I'd have to be arrested because I speak openly about the evils of the church on a regular and daily basis, right? Yet, here I am. Still blogging away without a hint of the po-po on me. Weird how that works, isn't it?

And I am STILL waiting on one person to give me a relevant reason for Equality to not be the law of our land. Just one real reason, that's backed by real science (I know that concept is hard for Fundamentalist Christians to understand, but those of us who live in Reality are fond of Science), and I'd at least understand why they are bothering to fight. They'd of course still be wrong, but I'd at least have a semblance of respect for their arguments.

But hey, it's much, much easier to build a case from out-right lies and fear-mongering, isn't it? Just ask W. He's the king of that. Shit, we're still mired in a war because of his out-right lies and fear-mongering. I should start saying things like "Christians want to castrate all men everywhere!" and site a few Bible verses that show castration as punishment and see what happens. I mean, it's not true, and the Bible verses are completely irrelevant, but I'm bored and feel like fucking with other people's lives, so I'll give it a shot and see how much power and money I can rack up…

Come on people, start thinking for your god damned selves!

We Have To Change The Mentality

It seems like everyday we are running into this problem: Some one, some where has decided that the word Gay, in and of itself, must immediately mean Adult. Microsoft has been guilty of it. Amazon has been guilty of it. And now school districts are being called out for it. This mentality is one of the biggest challenges we as a community have to overcome, and it's a mentality that has to change.

Underlying this problem is that homosexuality must be spoke of only in grown-up circles, which means that Heterosexual people feel there is something naughty, wrong or dirty about gay people. That, my friends, is the real problem. Every day we hear about Parents complaining that they don't want their children taught about homosexuality at school, or that they will teach their kids about the Gays. Any suggestion that someone else will educate their children about sexuality (read: give their kids unbiased information about human sexuality) sets of some sort of red flag in these people and they freak out. Why do they freak out? Because in their minds, gay people are evil, and evil is something a child should not be exposed to.

It's not sexuality as a whole they are opposed to. No one complains about Cinderella being on the bookshelves or performed on stage. No one gripes that kids read through several Shakespeare plays. Parents hardly bat an eye at their kids reading Tess of the d'Urdervilles in English class. But put a children's book that talks about two same-sex penguins raising a baby penguin together and the world starts to fall apart. It is clear that these heterosexist people would prefer their children learn about rape and sexual subversion, as long as it's between opposite sex people, than learn about a happy home life without mention of sex at all, simply because that home life deals with two guy penguins.

I ran into this issue at a previous job and raised a stink about it. While I was not able to view sites like 365Gay, my contemporaries were able to surf sites like ESPN. What does gay news and sports news have to due with each other? Nothing, but that's my point. Sports news is irrelevant. It's pure entertainment. Yet gay news is flagged as bad with an "adult" warning splash page and a stern message that IT monitors all web traffic. 365Gay is a news organization. There is nothing particularly "adult" about news, not any more than CNN (which was not blocked). The underlying assumption is that if a site is gay-specific, then it must either be evil or pornographic and good workers wouldn't waste their time with it on the job. However, if those workers would like to fall in line with the heteronormative behavior of sports water-cooler talk, that is ok. I was not happy. I let people know. It was changed. I don't work there anymore.

This is the mentality that holds us back, and a mentality that we sometimes feed into. Ever been on a date in a hetero neighborhood with a guy who refuses to hold your hand because there are kids around? How about being out with a group of your gay pals who decide to "tone it down" because of the family at the table over? What about trying to pretend to not be boyfriends at the bookstore because that mommy an isle over gave you a dirty look and shuffled her kid ahead of her when she saw you sneak a quick peck? That feeds into this ideal because we're validating it. By being submissive to this concept that gay is bad or should not be presented to children, we are agreeing with it.

We have to fight this mentality, and the ONLY way to fight it is to be brazen and be brave. There is NOTHING wrong with you for being gay, and you relationship is not bad, evil, disgusting or any less appropriate than hetero relationships. THEY are the ones with the problem, but WE are the ones that have to make them recognize that reality. That not-so-subtle homophobia has gone unchecked for far to long.

A Sailor Walks Into A Debate...

I need you to check out this story. If that isn't a shining example of why the military's current anti-gay policies need to go, I don't know what is. People should not have to live like this, not when they are serving in defense of our country. The only thing that DADT improved (if you can even use that word) is that it is no longer a dishonorable discharge from the military, as it would have been for David.

The policy needs to end, and not in a quaint little "when the time feels right" time-frame that we've recently been blindsided with. The time will never "feel right" for bigots, same goes for marriage equality. It is the Government's job to force these changes and do what is right and correct. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the President to live up to his promises, and I think it's fair to call him out on his presumed failures when his people are making statements to the effect of "Yeah… we don't really care about DADT…. TY for you Vote though! LYLAS!"

Check out David's blog, then feel free to copy and paste my letter to Obama from yesterday and send it to the President. Or write your own. Modify it and send it to your Representative and Senator. This policy has to go, and it's going no where as long as we allow our Government to sit back and do nothing.

San Diego Firefighters Get Paid To Be Scared Punks

A lawsuit concerning San Diego Firefighters recently closed. The lawsuit awarded damages to the Firefighters for "mental anguish" caused to them when they were assigned to work the Gay Pride parade in that city. They felt that they were forced to undergo undo pressure and had to see things (gay things!) that were just sooooo traumatic that they could only be cured by money.
Hmmmm… I guess that means that gay men working in retail stores can sue the world when they are asked to assist a straight woman pick out her wedding dress. That's a lot of mental anguish there… it's just so crippling! Or I can sue my employer when they force me to watch a training video that features hetero couples in , or even worse, in their own homes! I can't take that, that's crossing a line, and I need reparations for this travesty against my homosexuality!

Are you kidding me?!? These Firefighters were informed that they needed to participate in a community event, one not unlike the dozens of others most likely held in San Diego every year, but yet they feel that because that particular event was gay centric that they have the right to be fuckinig offended?? Fuck that!

My tax dollars pay for those gay-hating, ignorant ass holes (well, ok, not mine, because I don't live in San Diego, but transpose this to Chicago…). If you ask me, these twits should be fired immediately for wasting our time and tax dollars with this inane court case. This isn't a private organization, this is the publicly funded Firefighter we're talking about here. The people that are suppose to protect us in case there's one of them fire thingies. Yeah, those guys. The point of civil servants showing at events like this is to build community ties, but when shit like this happens, it builds up walls faster than anything else.

Will the Fire Department now stop responding to calls in gay neighborhoods or from "known homosexuals" because that might possibly cause trauma to the Firefighter? Do we allow this shit to happen in other industries, like say Medicine?

This is pure ignorance, and I can't say I expect much more from the state that just proved that gays aren't welcome there. What kind of precedent will this set if allowed to stand? Will a ruling like this be applied across all things, or just to scared fucking punk-ass straight boys when it comes to those predatory queers they seem to be afraid of? If you're that afraid of gay people, I'm willing to guess it's because you're afraid of you own damn desires anyway. If this stands, you can guarantee that I will be going back to my college and suing for forcing me to sing with the choir at a hetero marriage. I was uncomfortable.

I've been un-fucking-comfortable my whole life because I'm constantly barraged by the hetero-normative world and told that I am a silly queen that doesn't deserve rights or justice. Welcome to the game, San Diego Firefighters. It sickens me that as the straight world start to get a taste of what us LGBTs have to go through, they get to make financial gain from it… fuck that.

Ignorance = Cash Payouts

I'm not 100% sure on how I missed this story, because it sounds like it's right up my alley, but I sure as hell did. This gentleman, Raed Jaffar, boarded a JetBlue plane back in 2007 wearing a shirt that read "We Will Not Be Silent" in both Arabic and English. He was then taken off the plane because some passengers and crew were all afeared of the Arabic man wearing a shirt that has any pro-ethnic message.

Obviously, as is American custom, Jaffar sued both the TSA and JetBlue for discrimination, and the ACLU jumped in to help out. Today he was awarded $240,000 in a settlement from both groups. The only thing unfortunate about it was that the settlement wasn't higher.

My mind can't even begin to comprehend why anyone could ever think that it would be OK to kick Jaffar off the plane simply for wearing a shirt! Seriously?! Oh, that's right, he's one of them there brown-skinned peoples, they all want to kill whitey, right? Stupid, ignorant fucks.

WE CANNOT ACCEPT DISCRIMINATION AND INTOLERANCE ON ANY LEVEL!!! It's not OK. The man was equated to a terrorist because he was wearing a shirt with an obvious political message, which is odd because the shirt has nothing to do with terrorism. Had I been wearing the same shirt, a pale-ass white boy, would the same conclusion have been drawn? Nopers. Some douche bag skin-head could probably get away with wearing rebel flags and swastikas on a plane, obvious signs of hate and intolerance, but heaven-fucking-forbid an Arabic man wearing something with Arabic writing on it!

This is so beyond sickening. If the TSA and JetBlue were allowed to get away with this behavior, just imagine what else might happen! No more rainbow flags, because there might be heteros around that think we're all militant gays. No more churches because they lead young queers to kill themselves. No more minority PACs because someone might think they are planning on hurting the old, white people on Capital Hill.

Good god damn, this is ignorant. We need to get over it, people! For example, I HATE Christian Churches (if that isn't obvious, you haven't read enough of my blog). However, I will always support the rights of someone to practice their Christianity. The amount of psychological damage that has been inflicted upon the LGBT set due to constant berating of ignorant, Crazy-Ass Evangelicals is immeasurable, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to exist. They shouldn't be allowed to shape policy, but they can believe what they choose.

Thank you to whomever forced this settlement, it was truly well-deserved. I would contend that financial reparations are due to Jaffar from the "frightened" passengers as well, but ultimately, it was the airlines fault for not standing up the bully fucks that were all sorts of scared by a man not-ashamed and proud of his heritage.

GLBT People Eat Babies, God Strikes Back!

I can't forget to remember that we evil gays are in fact the cause of all things evil. Man, I didn't realize how much power we have!

First, we caused Katrina. Then we caused the wild fires. Now, us gays causing the Wall Street Financial crisis? Shit, I better be invited to the next Queer Disaster Intiaticve Conclave (Q-DIC for short), because these crisis are nothing!

Anti-Blood Drive Campaign In Portland Is Poignant

This is an interesting guerrilla ad campaign waged in Portland over the past weekend. It's crude, vulgar, and to the point. And I wholeheartedly agree with it.

I have long held strong contention with the Red Cross and their blood drive policy. Excluding people of a certain sexual orientation simply because they are a certain sexual orientation is discrimination, pure and simple, based solely in paranoia and fear. It's disgusting, and quite frankly, makes my blood boil every time I think about it.

The building my company houses itself in hosts a blood drive every few months, and when they do, my company blasts out an email letting everyone know that the blood drive is coming and encourages us to donate. Every time I raise a stink about how inflammatory and discriminatory it is to even support such an organization, but I'm told that they are a charitable organization, so it isn't a big deal. I beg to differ.

Simply because I choose to do good work with one hand doesn't mean that the evil I do with the other is forgivable. What's more, their policies are keeping people like myself, a person with Type O Negative blood which is constantly in high demand, from donating much needed blood, thereby condemning someone else. Who's the evil bastard in that equation?

I do realize that for the most part these bans have more to do with the Federal Policies regulating blood donation, but just like everything else in the Government, if the Red Cross would fight for the abolishment of this regulation, they could get the policy changed.

Source