Todd's book explains most of the history/even those who were actors might have lousy memories

Continuing Stephanie Donald’s discussion from Aug. 29:

ONE Archives is safe if the USC library is safe.  There is no problem there.  

If I am right and ONE Archives and HIC both have the material of the original ONE, inc. (and both parts built up their own collection of material after the separation)  then I would even say we both should be sending copies to other community libraries/archives.  But if the material in made available online, that ends the whole issue.  Neither archives makes money or gains power in that case.  (There is much ONE material online at I think Online California Archives—I forget the name.)

I know nothing of ONE Archives anymore. They wasted their effort trying to cause HIC legal trouble, obviously based on lies they were told.  John was wrong legally and morally, but if he put the material at ONE and did not keep it for himself, then that makes a difference to me.

Hawkins is head of ONE Archives, and if Brandon is right, they applied and got the use legally of the name ONE, Inc.  BUT that is as if I got your name if you let it go.  The point, with implications good and bad, is that no one at ONE Archives was there when ONE existed, or when the founders were around, as far as I know, so they have no personal knowledge of the legal decisions.  Like Dorr's poor attorney, Hillel Chodos, they only heard Dorr's version of the truth.

But in a sense they have our historical material—we both do, often duplicated, and if they and we do our job, and preserve and build on it and make it useful and used, then we all deserve support.  There can not be too many lgbt archive—-we do not compete, and if for some sad reason one dies, then others will have some of the lost material since they will have shared it..

A little bit of religion is better than a lot, especially to "A Christian Coming Out"

It might be bad “religion,” but my experience in life has been that the people who are most “Christian” are those with little “religion.” It might be said that was true of Jesus, and St Paul—one kicked the money changers out of the temple and fussed at the fanatics (Sadducees and pharisees?) and the other rejected the laws and codes some were trying to force on converts.

At this moment in time, if we accept that most churches now are NOT racial bigots—as was true when they supported slavery (quoting the Bible) and fought to keep racial segregation, the major issue THEY (churches/preachers) have on their agenda is preaching hatred of homosexuals.  Out of a long list of rules, this is the one issue they concentrate on, even if they claim they are only saying what Jesus said—considering that he said NOTHING on the issue.

So many, if not most, homosexual/glbt Americans have rejected All churches that are anti-gay, much less the ones that preach that we should be killed.

Many of us just ignored some teachings, as in fact do ALL “Christians,” especially the ones that claim the Bible is inerrant, worshipping the book more than the Man.

So how do we “read” a book describing the journey of one homosexual person from the dark times under the control of the sexual bigotry of her church/religion?

Some of us wonder why it took her so long.  That may be an issue, since she had allowed herself to be led into a heterosexual marriage, settled for less than the best, and brought forth children. Then she faces the old issues of do I do what is best for me, or sacrifice to do what is “best” for my partner and children?

She is proof that faking it does not work. And indirectly she thus harms others she loves. How many books have been written about such a situation? Who wants to read about such a “journey?”

An irony is that most homosexuals today do not share her problem, or even understand it. They wonder why, with all the literature, resources, “out” famous people, end of DADT, DOMA, etc., any person could NOT know that we are not sick, sinful or criminal?

She tells us the answer: If you are told you are bad, you try not to think about it, you are afraid, and do not seek information that might say otherwise.  Until, finally, you have to change or become a zombie.

The problem is that she still considers what members of the church and members of her family will think of her. She has to end a marriage that has not been fulfilling for her or her spouse.

She gives us pages of exchanges of emails with people, family, preachers, etc. She does finally understand the issues of religion and sexuality. For the most part, she gets support, even in a Southern Baptist setting.

But what I get from this is what I have always gotten from people who go to church, ask few questions and manage NOT to become fanatics. The sad fact is that it is mediocre Christians who are the most Christlike. It is the fanatics, there every time the door opens, debating every word of the text or that the preacher said, that cause more harm than pagans. That may be true of Muslims and of people of other religious groups.

People who have a life, who have a family to support, who enjoy living, do not spend all of their time, energy and money on a church. And they do NOT support a church or preacher that uses hatred for a racial or sexual group to raise money and gain power.

The author of the biography, A Christian Coming Out, was lucky, but made her own luck.  She finally found resources, PFLAG, etc,did the thinking and understood herself, then she was able to tell others what she felt and thought, and she found a partner.

But will other women, and men, still in the dark place, the church/religion of hate rather than love, find her story, learn from her journey?  It is there if they seek it. She is proof that you can change and have a better life, and not harm others in the process. And that is the best answer to the bigots who falsely say you can “change” and be other than your true sexual nature.

How ironic that it is those outside the church who are changing the world for the better, making individual's lives better, and it is “religious” people who lie, use their pulpits to preach hate and use their power for evil.

More on Walter L. Williams....

Regarding the Advocate's article Op-ed: How a Renowned Gay Writer Made the FBI's Most Wanted List: 

Here is a perfect example of Dorr Legg’s way of telling facts.  The article says—or says Walter claims—he is the founder of ONE National Archives. Now is there anyone in the movement who does  not know the truth?

We have spent time since 1965 telling the history of ONE Archives. Walter helped get the building for the archives. But “founder?”  ONE Archives is mainly IGLA, Jim Kepner’s material.  And while I guess Walter supported Dorr’s part of ONE, and Todd can tell more as he was not only a student of Walter’s, but was there at the start of founding the combined archives (which we later, for a short time, sadly, joined).

I never heard of the last book mentioned. And we did wonder why Walter suddenly stopped his emails.  But the few times I saw him, I had no idea of his interest in boys. Since he did not work with our part, I never got a chance to know him enough to think about him.  I did think he promised more than he delivered.

The record has to show that without our rejoining ONE/IGLA and Jim Schneider taking over, it could be that there would never have been the use of the building at 909 W. Adams, which is Walter’s accomplishment.  Or at least it would not have happened for years as USC had gotten so mad at John O’Brien they had cut off funding and any communication.  That of course, Dorr-like even though he  was not there, is not on record in any meeting minutes, etc., and the “board” later attacked Schneider when he asked to be repaid  the money he had personally spent in addition to the funding he got USC to restart.  For once, we do have pictures, of the building before and after and Gus on the platform fixing the building, etc.

Guest Blogger Stephanie Donald

Stephanie Donald writes:

Let me cast your minds back a year and a half when John O’Brien and I were mixing it up on your “Heavy Hitter’s List,” Billy. I never liked the man and never will.

O’Brien maneuvered himself into a position of being elected Director of One, Inc. by the Board of Directors through phony credentials backed up by an award winning scholar from the University of California by the name of Dr. Walter Williams. The Board could hardly be faulted, could they…or could they?

Williams had his eye on getting hold of ONE for a song and a dance and O’Brien was “sent in” for that express reason. Once the reign of O’Brien began, materials began disappearing and money evaporated from the accounts and while the expenses were highly questionable and O’Brien didn’t keep receipts (that alone should have earned him a one-way ticket to the Grey Bar Hotel) and by the time the Board realized they were broke and fired O’Brien, he had set a perfect stage for Dr. Williams to come in and purchase ONE, Inc.

Williams already owned something called the International LGBT Archives so he called the purchase of ONE a “merger” when in fact it was an acquisition. Williams has made sure than any and all subjective archive material research in his possession cost researchers through the nose even though he had no way of claiming copyright on the old ONE magazine or the Homophile Quarterly and John O’Brien, in the last few months of reign as Director of the old ONE, destroyed all duplicate collections of ONE and the Homophile Quarterly by dumping boxes and boxes into the dumpster behind ONE’s offices.

Now we find out years later that Williams and someone named Richard Arlington were using grant money to arrange sexual adventures with underage boys around the Asian and Eurasian areas of the world…and this is justified through the grants how…?

I didn’t know about this until I read this email but it was funny that I had a conversation with Todd White a little while ago involving Williams just a little while ago. I guess I’m the dumb one in all this because I’m sure he knew and assumed I already knew.

Considering the good intentions with which all the gay pioneers such as Dorr Legg, Jim Kepner, Don Slater and Billy Glover along with all those people who worked to start and maintain the original ONE, Inc., this gross capitalistic manipulation of such an important historical resource that makes me mad enough but when people like Williams and Richard Arlington (a longtime associate of Williams and who also got arrested in this international sexual predator case), who acted as a third party procurer of young boys for Williams and himself.

Considering John O’Brien’s connection to Williams and Arlington should make any rational adult wonder whether O’Brien himself had any involvement, but as a person with an advanced education, I have to say that I don’t convict people based on associations even if the rest of our once great nation seems so eager to charge ahead on those assumptions.

The one matter I can say is that the ONE, Inc. files, transcripts, history and archives will die with the life sentence of Dr. Walter Lee Williams and Dr. Richard Arlington and John O’Brien will go down in LGBT history as the man who fired the shot that killed it.

As far as the claim of Williams being the founder of the “ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives”, that is not a false statement since the original name of ONE was ONE, Inc. Williams first portrayed his acquisition of ONE, Inc. as a “merger” when it was nothing more than a means to raise more money for his international travels and since he’s presently under a RICO writ of forfeiture, ONE becomes the property of the United States government and will likely be auctioned off. It does give us good reason to attempt to get a grant to reacquire ONE from the government auction but it will probably be purchased by some rich gay or lesbian asshole who wants to hold it hostage for big bucks like Williams did.

I’d love to hear John O’Brien’s defense of all this but I deleted his email some time back due to his “I was everywhere” yarns regarding LGBT history that were obviously 20 lbs. of bullshit in an 8 oz. can.

A Question About One Magazine

David Williams of the Williams-Nichols Collection at the University of Louisville asks:

From May to at least August 1965 there were two different versions of One Magazine.  One was edited by Don Slater and the other by Richard Conger. We have both versions of the magazine during that time. My question is, how long were the two different versions published? Did it end in August 1965, or were there different editions in  September, October, and perhaps November 1965?

Our reply:

Hello David!

Thank you so much for contacting us on this question.

When ONE, Inc. divided in the spring of 1965, Don Slater and company moved the entire operation to a new location. Even though Slater had emptied ONE’s office completely, Dorr Legg (as “Richard Conger”) was still able to continue to produce and distribute ONE Magazine (much, of course, to Slater’s dismay). Legg said that he had committed ONE’s mailing list to memory, but that's just silly. My best guess is that Legg anticipated some sort of brash act by Slater (Legg, it seems, was moving to kill ONE magazine entirely in order to grow his Institute) and had managed to have a copy of the list secured off site. (ONE’s mailing list was a highly coveted and much protected, so this is actually a very big deal, a confession Legg could never publicly make).

Soon after the division, a judge determined that Legg would keep the office and rights to the name ONE, Inc. Slater retained his materials but had to stop doing business as or representing himself as ONE. This was to be a tentative arrangement, but even after Legg continued his fruitless and expensive lawsuit against Slater for two more years, this is how things remained. 

You will find that the content of the two first dual issues is similar to identical. Some of the work was by Joe Hansen, who was devoted to Slater and would never have consented to have his work printed in Legg’s magazine, yet there it was. How Legg obtained that content remains a total mystery to me.

You can see the four covers of Slater’s magazine (clearly subtitled “The Homosexual Viewpoint” here.

I have started to post content, but work is proceeding slowly since I can only do this on a voluntary basis at the moment. As you can see, the magazine changed its name to Tangents in October, 1965. This, in a way, makes Tangents the “true” continuation of ONE magazine, with a great majority of ONE’s editorial and writing staff continuing on in this new venue. The July issue of ONE features a play on the male/female symbols that was designed by Joe Hansen's wife, Jane, and remains HIC’s logo to this day.

I have been talking to several people about bringing Tangents back as a biannual newsletter, I hope becoming quarterly in time. I will keep you posted on the progress there as this could be happening very soon.

I hope this helps to clarify. The details of this can be found in my book, Pre-Gay L.A.: A Social History of the Movement for Homosexual Rights, published by the University of Illinois Press, if you are interested in learning more about this history. 

Best wishes,

Todd

C. Todd White, Ph.D.

Chair

Homosexual Information Center

http://www.tangentgroup.org

<todd@tangentgroup.org>

Discussions in Box Turtle

Regarding today’s agenda on Box Turtle Bulletin: 

I wonder what articles, issues your readers find more interesting. I glanced at your website today and found the duplicity of Stoli the best example of exploitation—but if men are stupid enough to want to “compete” to be their spokesperson, that says more about their self image than Stoli’s  I have no idea of how to deal with the issue of Russia and the Olympics. I do think the Hitler reference is valid.

Once again, you discuss historical events in our movement, and I like it, and that applies to the discussion of the NACHO Conference in Chicago and Frank Kameny’s “Gay is Good” proposal. You say the vote for it was unanimous, but if I did vote for it, I did not like it then, or now, as it is a copy of “Black is Beautiful,” and I would think thinking people would find it silly. We know we are equal, and I doubt Kameny’s slogan convinced many bigots to change their thinking.

Some LGBT people first entered into civil rights through the black movement

I always like to hear what others are thinking on issues that may affect our community. I am not sure what I would do, for instance, if I could make the decision on what to do about the Russian laws, the Olympics, etc.

In regard to the “issue” in Bay Windows, if I even understand it, there can be misunderstanding between male and female homosexuals and black and white homosexuals. It is time to stop allowing bigots, even those who are not anti-gay, to make a distinction among civil rights groups/fights.

I  got involved in a small way over the issue of racial segregation in Lousiana in the late 1940s as a teenager—long before I was aware of civil rights issues for homosexuals. Many of us had not even heard the terms or thought of us as a community.

This is example of how no issue is simple.  I, like most LGBT people, consider religion as our greatest enemy—Christian, much less Islam, etc. But, it was religious groups that formed my view of why discrimination is wrong.  The YMCA had student organizations in high schools (H-Y) clubs, and students, boys, who went to their summer camp worked and lived in an interracial place for the first time.

Then, starting in 1950, LSU dealt with the issue when it started integration under court order. To help students start dealing with the end of racial segregation, the YM/YWCA and, in my case, the Methodist Church/Wesley Foundation, started hosting meetings between students of LSU and Southern. We did small things such as writing letters to businesses urging them to not discriminate. This is the same time when the first bus boycott took place, in Baton Rouge.

Most of us now know of the problem black homosexuals faced, Bayard Rustin being a great example.  But many of us who had to choose, decided to work in the effort to gain civil/equal rights for homosexual Americans.  We supported womens’ rights, black Americans’ rights, etc. Our main movement co-founder, Harry Hay, found time to work for the rights of American Indians/Native Americans/tribal rights.

With millions of us working for the cause, there is now no problem with specializing: lesbian issues, religious issues, legal issues, health issues, which we could not do when there were only two or three groups in our movement. What we can never afford is for one LGBT group to fight the work of another, or to undercut one effort, such as marriage equality, fearing that it gets more publicity and support than another issue, such as equal employment, etc.  And there is no excuse for us to fight over gender issues.

A "marriage/relationship" issue I had not known

The article in the current issue of Windy City Times about how others view relationships of trans/lesbian/hetero couples is a “problem of terms and judgements” and confusion I had not heard. We spend so much time fussing about which term to use for homosexual people, much less bi and trans, that this is a silly issue, but one that is hurtful when some of the people in our own community/movement seem to find it objectionable that, for instance, a former lesbian couple stays “gay” when one partner becomes trans and in a sense it is a hetero couple.

And it seems so wasteful to spend time arguing over who is welcome at a “gay” event, such as who is really a woman, as at  women’s music festival. To be successful it probably is necessary for events to be public, but it does seem fair for some groups, even based on gender, to hold private events.

I hear some restaurants are trying a policy of not allowing families with children to be guests after a certain time, as kids usually get cranky and disturb other guests, etc. Diversity does not mean that everyone is welcome at some events or places, and  if someone doesn't like such a rule, then they are free to start their own event, or cafe, etc. There seems to have been a time when a few gay bars were so entertaining that heterosexuals started coming. While at first that was good, sooner or later some anti-gay heteros seem to have started coming and ironically, objected to the bar being “so gay.” Wasn't there a similar problem with hetero women coming as a group to gay bars having semi-nude male contests?  This disturbed the gay men and made the “scene” uncomfortable.

This is not the same issue as some bars, even gay bars, not welcoming some racial group or only welcoming members of a racial group—a bar for Asians may be unwelcoming to non-Asians who come for wrong reasons.  There have been jokes in movies of some unpleasant person going to a Chinese restaurant and wanting non-chinese food.

Transgender Archives Conference

Dallas Denny writes:

There’s a conference on transgender archives next year in Victoria, British Columbia—the first ever. I'll be speaking there. I hope one thing that will come out of it will be some sort of alliance or group so the various libraries and archives can communicate with one another and share duplicate copies. There are more gay/lesbian/bisexual archives than trans conferences. I hope something similar will happen. 

I’m trying to visit the trans archives as I can. Last year I visited the LGBT community center in New York. I hope to make trips to Houston, San Francisco, and Los Angeles in the next few years, as I can afford it.

That is great good news—and glad you are speaking and visiting our community archives.  I think some rich LGBT people should set up a fund to fund someone to get groups connected—such as archives, centers.  I hope the meeting gts coverage and our media gives us the results.