GLBT law professor (Yale) speaks at Boston University Law Scholl on Same Sex Marriage legal history and progress

(C-SPAN taped 11-15-12)

I am glad C-SPAN taped a talk by Prof. Wm Esheridge (?) of Yale speaking at Boston University Law School on same sex marriage. His book is The Case for Same Sex Marriage, and his speech is going to be published in the (BU) Law Review. He gave a brief history.  It is, like most of the history of the movement to gain equal/civil. rights for homosexual Americans, not a single person or issue or method story.  Since the issue was first discussed in print in ONE Magazine in 1954, there have been many people and views on the issue and how to gain it, and even if it is a good idea to have it

He gives his own views and work on the subject/issue. I think it was 1971 when the Baker case happened in Minnesota. Then he mentions the case in Hawaii and how it was stopped.  He worked on a DC case.  He says that other issues affected this issue, such as Lawrence vs Texas, law changes in Europe, people knowing more lgbt people. He repeats—maybe in a sense it is practical for a non academic group but not a law school group—that Stonewall was a major event, the error that it was the first time we fought back. He says AIDS slowed the progress, but it seems to me that instead it got the movement more sympathy and got people supporting us who would not have done so otherwise.  He  says having same-sex marriage legal in Massachusetts was a great step forward as people saw it in the real world.

An aside, he says to think about the subject by using three TV shows as reference:  Modern Family gives us one view, Revenge another, and then Homeland—the one many rightwingers think of since it means the issue is a Trojan Horse—ruining marriage, as someone is trying to secretly ruin the nation.  (He says give Ellen some credit too.)

He thinks a slow method is best so doubts the court will go too far until a few years, when the public is ready, as in a sense it was for Loving vs Virginia, and he says that case affects same sex marriage as does the thinking (?) in Romer vs Evans.  I think he was thinking that Bowers set us back, and another bad case could do it again.

A questioner asked the obvious: do some in the community/movement think that pushing marriage is too much like being heterosexual and giving up status as an outsider and more free person?  He replied that is an issue, but AIDS should have shown that if we are in a more committed relationship that is more supportive of a safer status and supports the idea of family.

Don Slater and others said that the decision in Connecticut giving women the right to contraceptives removed the issue of sex and/or marriage being only for procreation.

There was also a question about separating the issue of the government concern in marriage and the religious part.  He did not then point out how the Mormons and Catholics defeated the Prop 8 and instead blamed the loss on lousy advertising.

From John Lauritsen...

In 1974 I wrote a monograph entitled Religious Roots of the Taboo on Homosexuality: A Materialist View. I printed it myself on an AB Dick offset press at Come! Unity Press, a quasi-anarchist collective that insisted that every publication printed there be free to anyone who could not afford the cover price.

All of us who used the press had to learn how to make plates, run the press, and bind our publications. Although never advertised or distributed commercially, Religious Roots sold several thousand copies. It was translated and published as a pamphlet in German.

I’ve now re-published Religious Roots as a newly typeset PDF pamphlet, with scans of the original covers, and have added images of 12th century Sicilian mosaics depicting the Destruction of Sodom. 

Destruction of Sodom

In re-reading the pamphlet, I was a little embarrassed by some of the rhetoric (“class struggle,” “bourgeoisie,” etc.) but decided not to change anything.  Religious Roots has historical importance in that it helped bridge the new Gay Liberation movement and the older Freethought and Atheist movements. 

On the basis of this pamphlet, I was asked in 1974 to write an article for the venerable British monthly, The Freethinker, which since then has published many of my writings.

Links to the Religious Roots PDF pamphlet are the first bulleted item on my Gay Liberation and Freethought pages.

Saving issues of the first national publication discussing homosexuality from and by and homosexuals

Written by Billy Glover on 11-17-2012:

What seems to not have been understood is that, except for a few nuts who would find something wrong today even with the good newspapers and magazines in the movement/community, from the first issue, ONE magazine was professional, something even closeted men and women could be proud of.  They didn’t have anything else.  Early Mattachine had been secret except for the front group formed to support Dale Jennings’ court case which he, in a sense, won due to a hung jury—probably the first time someone had said they were homosexual but did not publicly solicit sex with this man.  (He covered this in the first issues and was the first editor as well as a co-founder of Mattachine and ONE. Later he was famous for writing The Cowboys, the movie John Wayne was in.)

The editors asked famous homosexual authors to contribute but none would except Norman Mailer. So no author/writer/media person could later say they did not know there was, at last, a homosexual publication, telling people what was being said and done about homosexuality. And with no apology.

Jim Kepner had a hard job searching for news, since few places—except for printing names of those arrested—would mention or use the word “homosexual.”  As I have pointed out, a search of the Readers Guide to Periodical Index over the decades will show just how little news, articles, etc., there was in the 1950s and 1960s.  Slowly but surely the coverage grew, until today, you would need a whole book to list all the articles.

The most-read parts of ONE and later Tangents were the Tangents news section and the letters to the editor.  The letters were real.  It is still interesting to see/hear people from all over the nation were writing to ONE in those years, saying what they write to Ellen and celebrities today—saying, to new people each year, “You are an inspiration. I did not know anyone else was like me. You give me courage, etc.”  I wonder why editors today do not think readers would like to see the letters they get?

The movement / community has to know that there was a doubt that you could publish such a magazine promoting acceptance of homosexuality—and obviously they were right since ONE had to go to court to protect that right. That court case (when the Post Office stopped an issue, at the urging of a politician) is covered well in the book Courting Justice.

Some young writers and media types were able to test the waters by writing for ONE.  Joseph Hansen is an example. Some fiction was good.  The different views on homosexuality were educational.  There was no other place this discussion was taking place.  We did not censor.  We let the readers hear the opinion and decide for themselves.  I do not think there is an idea or view heard today that was not covered in ONE—such as the early discussion about marriage.

Harry Hay and Radical Fairies in Oregon Commune in the 1970s

Nice historical photo of Harry Hay with Radical Fairies at a commune in Oregon in the late 1970s.

Email exchange between Billy Glover, Paul Cain and Dr. Don Kilhefner on 11-2-2012 regarding Harry Hay
and John Burnside, whether they participated in nudism in their various communes.

Dear Billy and Paul:

 

Greetings.  I hope you are both well.

 

As far as I know, Harry and John

were not into nudism or it was very

marginal to their lives.  Harry talked

a liberationist line when it came to

sex and nudism in public but was

rather prudish in that regard in

private.

 

I lived at the La Cresta Court commune in Los

Angeles with Harry and John for over two

years (1979-82) and there was no nudism

there but also there was no anti-nudism

either--there was mutuality and reciprocity

and we respected each others boundaries

and proclivities.  From time to time a guest

might be nude but it was no big deal to us.

Harry, John, Michael Fleming and I tended

to be clothed even though scantily clothed

sometimes--it was our home.

 

From the very beginning of the Radical Fairies

(1979) to the last gathering I attended (1985)

in Southern California, clothing optional took

many forms including being nude with bells,

glitter, feathers and so forth being used

imaginatively.  But nudism as such was not

an ideology that was practiced.  It was more

liberation in whatever form we personally needed

to be liberated rather than nudism as such.  Nudism

always had a little 19th century and early 20th century

smell to it by 1969--once daring but by the late

20th century somewhat ho-hum to Gay Liberation Revolution.

Nudism was never was never on the agenda of Gay

Liberation in any significant way--Sexual Liberation,

however, was.

 

It is late for me and now I'm off to bed.

 

I'm moving nicely forward on a book tentatively

called You'll Never Be Alone Again: Gay Liberation,

Self-Identity and Community Creation in Los Angeles,

1969-79 in which some of this gets fuller treatment.

 

Thanks for thinking of me.

 

Pacem In Terris.

 

Donald Kilhefner, Ph.D.

Robin Tomlin’s Yearbook

Regarding the Huffington Post article of Oct. 4 reporting on the Robin Tomlin Yearbook bullying incident in Vancouver, 1970:

It still amazes me that, being from the ignorant south, such terrible things happened and still happen in educated north—and in Canada!

Changes at Rutgers after Clementi’s Suicide

Regarding in the NY Times:

Thanks for this this overly long discussion  of how Rutgers has changed since the suicide.  What comes to mind is the current problem with cost of college and (like chick-Fil-A issue) how perhaps young people should start picking college/university on not only how good they are academically but how comfortable students are—you can’t learn if you are in fear of your mind or body.  

Let’s have colleges change their policies to make LGBT people welcome.  What a concept—free enterprise/capitolism??

LGBT persons in nursing homes

This is a generic issue.  

I have thought I’d have no problem in a nursing home at my age, no one would care about my sexuality—I of course have not been “active” for years anyway.  But I would stay in my house as long as possible because it is easier, and actually cheaper for me and the goernement/social security/medicare/medicaid, etc.  That is the blessing and question about Triangle Square in Hollywood and the one they are planning in Philadelphia.  Most retirement places now have regular apartments or rooms and then a section for later when you need assistance, etc.  But except for these two, they are expensive and of course these two are gay-friendly.

OTHER publications in other causes/how much good did they do? A note to Tracy Baim.

I am going to ask others, but thought I’d bring up my question—to myself—about how publications affected individuals in other civil rights efforts.

When I went to LSU in 1950, I had already been to the first efforts of the YM/YWCA and Methodist church to start getting young Southerners ready for racial desegregation and perhaps racial integration-summer camps in NC and Ohio—ironically Miami University of Ohio where Paul Ryan went.

So perhaps I was “ready” to find resources that fit my thoughts and interests. I found in the old LSU Library issues of the first black publication I had seen: Negro Digest. I read it and even did what it asked readers to do: write advertisers to thank them for placing their ads in this publication. What I wonder is: Do young LGBT people seek and find LGBT material today, perhaps now online?

It is also interesting that when that publications ended. I think it was replaced by Ebony—both are Johnson Pub magazines. I didn't find Ebony as interesting. I am sure for most black readers it was more entertaining and interesting—only later came Jet.  

It was good when ONE and The Ladder, etc., were joined later, in the 1960s and ’70s, by Drum, Advocate, and then the local newspapers. I never saw a black newspaper in those days even though I am sure they might have served the community better than the Digest and maybe even Ebony.

I see OutSmart Magazine from Houston and am amazed at its high quality and good articles. But I still think Houston needs an old-style newspaper.

What we will never know is how much good these publicatins did. Did they change many peoples ideas, lives? Where are the people today who read the Negro Digest? Are they better personally and as citizens? Were these publicatins necessary to get black and LGBT publications where we are today?

The New Normal

RE: Phil Dragotto’s query:

I”ve seen the N.Y. Times article and a video clip regarding The New Normal. Does anyone know what station it's on? Is it on basic cable or a premium channel, such as HBO?"

It is on NBC, so except for Utah, your local TV channel should have carried it last night—as it did the new “Friends” man’s show (Go On) and I think it said the show would be repeated tonight.

gay paper sold/journalists honored: RE Press Pass Q, September 2012

Once again, I am hopeful that the bigots are upset if they see and know the news that you have compiled this week. 

First, that major New York publications are doing so well, including Gay City News, that they have been rescued (bought).  By the way, which Cal State did Goodstein attend? She might want to know that Cal State Northridge is now the home of the Homosexual information Center archives (including the Blanche Baker Memorial Archive. To make it even more complicated, it is part of the Vern & Bonnie Bullough Collection on Sex and Gender—Vern taught there and worked closely with ONE/HIC.

And once again it seems that our cause/movement/community is being torn apart by a few people pushing their own agenda—getting their particular part awarded the Gay Housekeeping Seal of Approval. How silly. What is wrong with “Unity”?  And while it is troubling that black journalists still can't seem to work well with other civil rights movements, I would agree that any credential or title should NOT be gay or Asian, etc, but cover all journalists.

It is good to see honors going to people like Burroways and Luongo.

But once again, I find it hard to understand how any journalists or editors can possibly be asking how they can find resources.  Have they never heard of Gayellow pages?

Finally, how great to see the lasting power of our publications—in large cities like Denver and smaller areas like Topeka (Liberty Press).  And we remember pioneers who have left us such, as Fertig, who inspire the younger LGBT journalists.

Election year coverage in current Gay & Lesbian Review/Barney Frank—and Congratulations on your coming 100th issue

I like the picture of Barney Frank on the cover of the latest issue of The Gay & Lesbian Review.  I like what he says in his article—it is hard to understand how LGBT people can vote—not be—Republican this year.  And other articles cover issues that politics affects or are affected by politics and inform us of issues we may not have thought about.  Obviously AIDS is one example.  How we are affected by EEOC is another—especially, as the interview with Chai Feldblum points out, the Macy decision and Trans issues.

Another such issue is covered in the article on marriage in Spain.  I would never have thought that in the celebration of that victory there are unsolved problems such a the fact that two men cannot adopt a child: the laws require a mother’s name on the birth certificate.  I also am reminded of how we get results we didn't want, such as the sort of victory on marriage (years ago—how fast we forget!) in Hawaii didn’t bring victory. Rather, it almost brought us an Amendment to stop same sex marriage, sort of stopped by passage of the lousy DOMA Act.

It is funny but silly that it seems bigots fighting LGBT issues in France try to get the public against them by calling them American.  In the same vein, there are two separate philosophical issues covered in articles that still need to be understood. Most of us don’t see the problem, but apparently the distinctions are important.  One (again in France) is the distinction between informing someone of something and educating them.  Another is, again, the issue of gender being a social construct.  Such discussions will not be found in “timely” LGBT publications.

What maybe found in them would be  discussion of Marilyn Monroe being a lesbian.  Something that I am constantly seeing as an issue now, and in judging our founders and leaders, is that some did not want to put “sex” into the early public discussions.  But Hal Call and others did. It is relevant in politics of a sort, as Bayard Rustin’s life proved. He was of course not liked because he was homosexual—he operated in a black area so color in a sense was not the issue.  But it seems that JFK called him an “old black fairy.”  A side of Kennedy we don’t understand since he had living in the White house is homosexual friend.  But it was his actually having sex and getting arrested that hurt him—so that he almost didn’t have the chance to make the March on Washington a great success.

I can understand that some people are Republican. The primary concern I have in voting regards the Supreme court—who makes the next appointments will affect us for generations beyond just who is the president.  Another point, to get back to Barney, is his saying that the hard thing is to see moderate Republicans being kicked out of office by extremists rightwing Republicans.  There are lots of questions some of us would like to ask Mr. Frank.  But what only truly nutty LGBT people would raise is how he was in his work. Only jealous people seem to find reason to attack him.  And he was what we want—someone who happens to be homosexual and is judged by how he serves ALL of the voters/citizens.

And it is sure strange when you think of how Communism both helped started our movement and then had to be kicked out to let it grow and be successful, and harry Hay being hauled before the HUAC to testify, to read about a woman spying in/on the Communist arty in the late 1940s and being a closet Lesbian (Angela Calomiris).  You wonder where David Schine is today—and how closet cases like Roy Cohn could do what they did.  

But it just may be that what gets this issue discussed is the whole page ad inside the cover—“Historical Gay Book Collection For Sale.”  There are “issues” with LGBT archives in Houston, and part of the  problems is the MCC selling an archive placed with them for safe keeping. Most asked is the question of  who bought the material—there is no public knowledge of who bought it or how much was paid.   So the ad and person involved is  maybe inadvertently being connected to the problem.  

Finally, letters to the editor are still what I like in publications. This was the most-read section in ONE / Tangents, followed closely by the news.

Re: Two media coverages of same sex marriage...

I saw mention of this on C-SPAN's BookTV yesterday when they had two guest who wrote a book on marriage.  It was well done.  The people were Maggie Gallagher of NOM and John Corvino, a professor at Wayne State, Philosophy.  In fact the title of the book is Debating Same Sex Marriage.

Some thoughts on ONE/Tangents magazines and how it contains our movement history, to Tracy Baim

I admit that thinking about ONE Magazine, as someday you will experience with Windy City Times, etc, is a pleasant thing, remembering the good times, the people I worked with, etc.  I don’t really think of the disagreements, etc.  It seems, like a marriage—as I understand it—often the better times were when you were struggling, and when times got good you shared less with each other.

I should say that part of my contribution to ONE was having Melvin and my picture on the cover—I don’t seem to find a copy.  The first time was with our backs to the camera and the second time, a few months later, was with us walking toward the camera.  I don't remember when my name first appeared as a co-editor and then as the business manager.  I first wrote one issue of Tangents, and also a few book reviews—it seems twice the books were on religion.

I found one random copy of ONE, and it is the time I wrote the Tangents news section. It had two references to Chicago.  It is the July 1963 issue, with an orange sun (sort of like on the CBS Sunday show) on black background.  Don Slater’s editorial could be repeated today, about dealing with politicians.  He said our movement needed not a leader or to follow one person but to deal with platforms and issues.  I’ve said before that Don Slater and Dorr Legg were right when they said not to follow them, but the work of ONE, Inc.

The reference to Chicago was to a show called To (or On) The Cuff, 2-24-63 (Norman Ross?) I assume, which had Dorr legg and Father James Jones (who said homosexuality was a social issue not psychological) and Paul Goldman (who said he often tried to get a change of venue from bigoted judges).

In a sense, I didn’t think we got media notice, but that show got mention in Variety, Playboy and Esquire.  Also there was a discussion of the subject on Ben Hunter Show in Los Angeles-on “decency,” which displayed ONE Magazine alongside porno publications.

Also in Chicago there was mention of how the law change didn't seem to reach the people at North Loop News, who wanted cops to control our behavior.  And shades of the Los Angeles Times later, the Chicago Tribune had refused an ad for The Wolfenden Report because it contained the words homosexual and prostitute.

ONE was sold at Ralph Bushee, at 115 S. Wells St.

In legal things like Frank Kameny, there is mention of two lawsuits, one by a William Dew (against FAA maybe) and one by Bruce C. Scott against civil service maybe?

ONE covered everything in the movement and communicated with groups in the U S. and in Europe.  We had  articles on all issues.  We had those who wanted pen pals, those who were for and against marriage.  We had an article on Ann Bannon (1/61) which also covered bartenders.  We had an article on successful homosexuals, sort of like Windy City Times does.

We had various covers, some colorful, some just diagrams.  Tony Reyes was on one cover mowing the yard (4-61), and Jim Kepner was on 6-58 as a cop.  We featured (Miss) Destiny as a drag queen (9-64).   We had an artist draw member little John Fadner who had been fired from his job. The early issues had an article on Plato. We covered books of the time.  We even had cartoons (Gay Menagerie animals in serotypes).

We had fiction, which some liked and some didn’t.  We had poetry which most (including me) did not like.  Our authors included James Colton (Joseph Hansen), and Bob Waltrip.  We did articles on movies, and on Fire Island. We did an article on the problems between Mattachine in San Frncisco and New York.

I don't remember how my co-workers affected my life—nor do I remember any teacher.  But twice in my life someone said something that stuck.  First, as a teenager working at the local movie theater a woman manager (I still remember her name, Hazel Sapp Wingo) who said two things.  When someone accuses you of something, they are the ones guilty. Why would you want to say you would never want to do something if you had not thought of it?  The other was Dorr Legg, who in helping me get started as the person responsible for delivering the magazine locally and mailing it to the newsstands around the nation said, “When you take the magazine to the newsstands, if, as you pick up the returns before placing the new issue, someone tells you that you will have to come back for the money and you can “trust me”— DON’T.  Take the back issues and don't leave the new issue.  Anyone who says trust me is not to be trusted.

They don’t teach such things in school.  We learn them in life.  And only later do we realize how such things and people have affected us.  And I wonder if those people who read ONE and Tangents decades ago (and still are alive) compare it with what great media we have today.

Our most liked section, by the way, was letters, and then the news section, “Tangents.”

NY Times Article on Baden-Powell

NY Times article on Baden-Powell

We know for sure that our worst enemies are closet queens. But was it an issue in the early days? And how did the media cover the issue when in the old days of racial segregation when troops were sponsored by churches that were in fact FOUNDED to KEEP segregation and even slavery?

No evidence it mattered, but Don Slater connected with several people who had media coverage—including one on C-SPAN’s BookTV today

I was watching on BookTV today a repeat of an old interview with Gore Vidal.  Then on came a discussion of a book, and the author is Rev. Robert Sirico.  He even says in his speech that he had been involved with several movements including the gay rights movement.  He was discussing his book, Defining the Free Market, the moral case for free economy. He is founder of Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, and he met Don Slater during the decade after leaving the Catholic church as a young man in his 20s, and when he came back and became a Catholic Priest.  I don't remember what Don thought of his work.  But I’m sure our files have material about him.  My thought is that here is a person still affecting society that talked with Don—who knows what he thought then and now, but he at least knew Don’s thinking.

The same would apply to a psychologist, and I have no idea where she is today, but she appeared on talk shows, etc, and she and Don liked each other.  Her name is Irene Kassorla.  And who knows who read Don’s editorials when they appeared a few times in the Los Angeles Times and Herald Examiner.

Why Chick-Fil-A is a frustration to politicians who see the moral problem and legal issues

The coverage of the Chick-Fil-A anti-gay marriage controversy in Windy City Times and most media, lgbt and general and even on humor shows such as Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show, has been accurate and the discussion has been good; it is the  politicians who have suffered when they took a stand on the side of equality and justice.

What they could not say is what we need to say to those people who so self-righteously attacked them for saying such restaurants were not welcome (especially to those arrogant black preachers):  What if the politicians were saying that the chicken restaurant owned by the KKK was  not welcome?  Would the people concerned with freedom of speech line up to buy food from the KKK's cafe?

I like it...

That is what our young people need to hear, common sense about problems.  The obvious easy answers usually turn around and bite us or our friends too.

Tracy Baim’s article re: Chic Filet, Huffington Post

Note to Andrew Sullivan/Dish on how to view Romney and his words in and on England

While lots of people are laughing at the media coverage of what are considered bad words from Romney on England, etc, you should listen to your own warning to him when you say that, while the British can talk bad about themselves, the Olympics, etc, Romney or other outsiders should not, as it then makes the British people join together to reject his words.

That may happen in America if you make too much of Romney’s words being made a joke of in England.  Many Americans who don't even like Romney will support him from the attacks by foreigners.

More on the Boy Scouts...

Here is a valid example of how religious bigots harm homosexual/lgbt youth, from a PBS segment last night and this article from the L.A. Times:

The Boy Scouts of America, an organization once known mainly for welcoming boys to a world of adventure, self-sufficiency and good citizenship, now is more famous for the groups of people it bans: atheists, agnostics and homosexuals. 

It’s been a sad evolution and an unnecessary one. The Girl Scouts, as well as international Scouting organizations, have carried out their similar missions without resorting to intolerance. By refusing once again this week to admit gay people to its ranks, either as Scouts or leaders, the Boy Scouts may have satisfied some of the religious organizations that sponsor many of its troops, but it risks long-term irrelevance. Participation in its traditional Scouting programs has steadily declined over the last decade, by more than 15%, and is down more than 40% from the early 1970s. 

Of course, much of that has nothing to do with the organization’s policies that bar atheists and others who decline to take an oath to God, as well as gay people. The number of Girl Scouts has declined too, though not so precipitously. Both groups face more competition from other youth activities than in previous decades. But it’s also true that a sizable number of parents will have nothing to do with an organization they view as bigoted. 

Some may believe that by banning people who are openly gay, the organization is keeping out sexual predators. But repeated studies have shown how false this assertion is. Besides, if that were the reason, what would be the point of prohibiting a lesbian woman from being a den mother, as the Boy Scouts have done? 

The more likely reason is a pragmatic one: The Boy Scouts, unlike the Girl Scouts or international Scouting groups, derive considerable support from religious organizations that take a dim view of homosexuality, especially the Mormon and Roman Catholic churches. Less than 2% of the U.S. population is Mormon, but 15% of Scouts are. The Boy Scouts of America could lose hundreds of thousands of Scouts if it opened its doors to atheists and gay people. 

Yet as society grows more accepting of homosexuality, and less willing to overlook discrimination based on sexual orientation, the Boy Scouts will feel increased pressure to become a more tolerant organization. Support from corporations and municipalities might be harder to come by if it doesn’t don’t change its policies. The organization’s marketing logo reads “Prepared. For Life.” Unspoken but increasingly obvious are the added words “but only for some.”

The best part of working with Don Slater and others in the movement...

I have been trying to understand and deal with what is obvious—a generic issue—that young people don’t know the history of our nation or the movement go gain civil rights for homosexual (now GLBT) Americans.  I think that I don’t care for giving credit, but think that if they don’t know how much work had to be done then they might not know that they now have to do some more work, not just to keep what we have given them, but to keep it from being reversed.

Much time in ONE’s offices was spent, obviously, on practical things: putting together the next issue of the magazine, having committee meetings, doing the monthly lectures, preparing for the yearly business meeting, doing the banking, answering letters, etc.  BUT while we were doing these tasks, we also could talk and discuss things.  I don’t remember covering this issue, but it seems to me it will help us philosophically and emotionally to understand that, even though young people will not know or care what we have done, what the founders of the nation and this movement have done each succeeding generation, they have a right to enjoy the results. They can use the phone without knowing who injented it or how.

But there seems to me to be a valid reason for preserving the history of the nation and the movement. It is good to not worry about having the right to freedom of speech, press, etc. But if young people assume the rights came about with no work, and will always be there, they are mistaken.  That is why education is necessary.  I see TIME magazine is advertising you can get copies of the covers of their magazines, starting with the very first issue.  I’m not sure the covers of ONE magazine will tell people much—we didn’t have pictures of the current celebrities or events.  But a glance at the index, starting with the very first issue, will tell historians that we covered every issue of homosexuality that is being discussed today.  Since Lawrence vs. Texas, and the ending of DADT, perhaps some think we have nothing more to worry about.  But a glance at the local newspapers, while they still exist, will show that there are constant attacks on the same issues—some Republicans want to return DADT, and many law enforcement agents still try to arrest people for sex.

As Obama has said, and the Republicans have distorted, we are where we are because previous generations built roads, fought and died in wars, and gave us the Internet. As we enjoy the TV tonight, we are foolish if we don’t appreciate how good things are and want to work to keep them that way and make them even better for the next generations.

Harry Hay mention in yesterday's L. A. TIMES

Thanks, Jeanne Barney, for finding this article about Woody Guthrie in yesterday’s newspaper....       

LaChapelle details his discovery of these tracks on two 78 rpm discs residing in obscurity in the Southern California Library for Social Studies and Research in South Central L.A. They’d been donated long ago to the library along with other old records by longtime L.A./Hollywood political activist Harry Hay, who met Guthrie through their mutual friend, actor Will Geer.

Wow, that is interesting.  The hope is that people will want to use such archives—especially people writing and studying such a subject/person, etc.  Thanks for this.  I am not sure I know what archive this is.

Maria Cole dies (GLAAD should honor her as she was a celebrity who supported us in the late 1960s)

As Natalie Cole announces she is coming to a casino in Shreveport on September 1, we learn than her mother has died.  

I wonder if she knows that not only her dad, Nat King Cole, supported black civil rights efforts but that her mother, Maria, supported LGBT civil rights efforts in the late 1960s. She invited Don Slater, ONE and HIC co-founder, to co-host a week of discussions on homosexuality on her talk show on KHJ-TV.  (She had a co-host whose name I can’t remember).

Where are they now?

To Karen Ocamb:

I am aiming this thought at you since you are there in what I consider ground zero of the movement. I see Lesbian Connection and find it does coverage that I don’t see in men's publications.  I had also just seen the Program for a ONE event in 1997, and it lists many names of people who helped put on the event.  I wonder where they are today—it could be that I just don't hear from them as I am not in L. A.  But one name was, I think, in both publications:  Karen Quinn.  In the LC (Elsie) there is a note of a donation in her memory, by Sally in Lansing—so it could be a different Quinn.  In the Program it says the Annual Ball was produced by Karin Quinn.  I see the Karen/Karin, but it did make me wonder.  

And where are the others who worked on the Ball?  Gail Conrad, Carol Carpenter, Carlos Brown, Robert Chambers, Kathryn Korniloff?  How are some others doing?  Lily Tomlin, Bruce Vilanch, Mimi Gonzales, Paris Poirier, Karen Kiss—we may neglect earlier celebrities for the latest newcomer.

And are the ONE people listed still active?  Robert Arthaud, Flo Fleischman (do we honor them still?) Karen Quimby, Ernie Potvin (same question), Pat Allen, Jesse Jacobs, Sylvia Rhue, Mischa Schutt?  And I don't hear from some of the Advisory Board, what are Brenda and Wanda Henson doing, are they still in MS?  Sadly many are gone-morris, Frank, Vern Bullough, but at least Mark Segal, Robin Tyler, Urvashi Vaid et al. are still going, as is Troy Perry.

I even wonder about the advertisers.  How are the Women of Ojai?  And how are the writers doing?  Patricia Nell Warren, Robin Podolsky, Aleida Rodriguez, Terry Wolverton, Steve Johnson, et al.  I know how Stuart Timmons is doing as he was covered in the Harry Hay celebration.  And John Woo? And the Schutrum-Pitco Foundation?  

Back to LC—they give listings for new resources, such as a Coastal Hearts (.com) in the Santa Barbara/Ventura area.  And there is an effort by OLOC to honor lesbians who were involved in the civil rights movement in the 1950s, in connection with the pan by the National Black Justice Coalition to mark the hundred years of Bayard Rustin.  But the deadline is June 30.

Just some thoughts.  I know, having just seen a repeat of the PBS show on the internet that we all now have short attention spans and may not have time for history.

Gay Pride in the Military

Regarding Patriot Post article on Obama and gay pride in the military:

Ron Tate writes:

As we discuss this issue about gays in the military, I couldn’t help but notice this article posted by a former high school classmate’s Facebook page regarding celebrating gays in the military.  It is a long read but gives insight into how still so many view gays in the military. 
They will not let this issue die a dignified death.  My classmate served as an officer in the U.S. Air Force and grew up in Arkansas.
Need I say more?

Obviously there is only one answer needed for this man and the others—they said the same in 1948 when truman integrated the military.  And I notice the use of a “medical term” about homosexuality.  It is not valid, it wasn’t when it was used, and is not now.  But I did not know Obama told the military they had to “celebrate” Pride month.  I don’t celebrate it—so am opposed to that, or any other special group or cause.

Exteremists come in all flavors-but the "leftists" is worse than the right

As I logged onto the computer, the opening age of Yahoo links to a story (I did not bother to read it) that a former law professor Obama says he is not liberal enough, so should not be reelected.
 
I think the right-wingers are right-we need to get rid of most of the college professors, (protected by tenure which I once thought was a good thing) as they live in a false world.  
 
While I am concerned that young LGBT people will not know the past of the community/movement, and understand that there is still work to b done, I am now concerned that too many of us who worked “in the early and exciting days when what we have today was only a hope and dream” will forget the facts.  

College professors, preachers, psychologists, psychiatrists, lawyers and most institutions were our enemy.  The government was our enemy.  While we can be happy that the courts have given us freedom from the sodomy laws (Lawrence v Texas) and the psychiatrists and psychiatrists have admitted that they had bee wrong and we are NOT sick, mentally troubled, etc., don’t forget that, as Mattachine co-founder Harry Hay pointed out, these same “friends” under pressure may change their minds tomorrow. That is why most of those at ONE and the HIC did not spend most of our time being friends with politicians. The politicians that we would have been cozy with are gone.
 
Ours is a nation of laws, and the danger that remains (we are no longer criminals or sick) is religion. And what is so hard to understand is that the extremist Christians who want to control laws about our sexuality, etc., don’t understand that if we let them make the laws today based on their personal religious beliefs, tomorrow it will be the Muslims and we will have Sharia law. This is why LGBT people are more aware of the dangers of relying only on even laws to get our equal/civil rights.  We must continually educate ourselves and the general population. 
 
And, no matter how much money the fanatic Republicans can come up with, it is those who VOTE who will decide.  And so we too should want honest counting of the votes.
 
BUT a note to that law professor: Whom do you want to make the next Supreme Court appointments??

OutSmart’s June 2012 Pride issue, coverage of the people honored in the parade, etc. (19th Pride Issue)

You rightly can be proud of the Pride issue.  I am trying to write from memory (I’m at a library computer) but the main thought is Brandon Wolf’s articles on the honored people.  What I find interesting is how they got into the movement/community (including the non-gay ones) and that most ended up in Houston but came from such places as Wisconsin, Oregon  and Canada.  Even the ones from Texas came from small towns but moved to the big city.

I do wonder, since it is mentioned, what happened to the publication Texas Triangle and its publishers and writers?  I think you covered one a few years ago, but forget.  And I wonder, considering your last two governors, how  we understand how Ann Richards was there and dear Molly Ivins got by for so long.

Has anyone wondered, as I do, how, as far as I know, Houston has your great publication and no newspaper, and Dallas has the good Dallas Voice, but no magazine?  Some of us are inbetween in the Ark-La-Tex area east of dallas and north of Houston, so wish we got more of your good community works.