Get Out, Stay Out- Ken Mehlman and "Forgiveness"

Much has been said this weekend about OUT magazine's "Out 100" list ...and here whereGawker's Brian Moylan makes a brilliant case for why OUT's decision is both jarringly ill placed and wrongheaded..and rightly effing so.


Having read the write up that accompanied the article on Melhman I nearly spit coffee. "As someone who came out later in life I can say It gets better" he says. Please, its better for him because he's wealthy, conservative and most importantly DOESNT live in a state that hurled anti-gay policy around like grenades to make sure he can't EVER get married in them. He lives comfortably in one of the few states where it is better...but refuses to own up to the fact that its significantly less so in other parts of the nation because of his role as RNC chair. It hasn't gotten better for gay couples in the 11 states where they adopted the RNC's gay (southern) strategy and enshrined their state constitutions in bigotry to make sure gay people couldn't share their lives in any meaningful way.


I find the drum and strang on Melhman irksome because there have been very few conversations about him post coming out that even attempt to directly speak to his culpability as head of the party that made and continues to make being rabidly anti-gay a tentpole. Instead he's being lionized by OUT and more than a few apologists because he's out of the closet well after the damage has been done on the national scale and it is no longer politically expedient for him personally. There is in fact nothing heroic about being overwhelmingly opportunistic...and yet, here we are attempting to make excuses for those that haven't admitted wrongdoing. There's something so snide and disappointing in this narrative it makes me genuinely question the collective memory (and sanity) of the group he's profited off of maligning.

Human Costs- Marital Equality and the Long Time Partner

A quick post before scurrying off to campus. This footage from the Campaign for Southern Equality is jarringly effective in its simplicity. Long term partners in NC very earnestly, very tactfully reminding us of the human costs to denying same sex marriage on the state level. (I recommend grabbing a box of tissues)

Trip Ups- North Carolina Politics and the Thinly Veiled Biases That Drive Anti-Gay Legislation

The Gist: NC Senator: "You're trying to trip me up":

'via Blog this'

Two things come to mind when watching the above...utterly infuriating clip: 1.) Signorile doesn't have to TRY very hard to "trip up" Senator Forrester at all, 2.) The misconceptions and loaded rhetoric behind his reasons- "gay as unhealthy lifestyle", "the preservation of marriage" arguments just don't hold up over the slightest scrutiny.

States of Misgiving (NC Marriage Ban Update)

N.C. considers putting amendment to ban same-sex marriage on ballot – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs:

'via Blog this'

Suffice it to say, things aren't looking so forward thinking in North Carolina surrounding this impending (probable) ban on even the mention of gay marriage in the State of NC. Longstanding evangelical hate group leader Tony Perkins showed up in full force to display their animus. Rallies are being put together for today and tomorrow to demonstrate just how regressive and pointless such a move would be, (primarily because its not legal in the state as is), but it looks as though the vote was rushed and not passed through the proper channels for a reason. More as this develops.

As for my feelings on the prospect, it doesn't exactly make for a very welcoming environment to spent a decade or two, does it? A state that is so concerned about a given couple's inability to marry that it legislates it three ways from sunday. All the while, how about that unemployment rate? Way to keep our eye on the proverbial ball, guys.

In more active news, please check out the Equality NC facebook page , and consider attending the Marriage Equality Rally on the 13th. (click the link for more information). Its going to be interesting around here over the next few days, and by interesting I mean potentially volatile. I can only hope the legislators see sense at the last minute.

EDITED TO ADD: Facebook co-founder and former NC resident Chris Hughes has written an open letter to the State assembly expressing strong aversion to the bill, citing that its bad for business and alienating to potential residents. Well worth the read.

And now for some subversive singer/songwriter action: Rufus Wainwright's "Going to a Town" showcases a little of how I'm feeling right now, and does so as eloquently as ever.

The Neighborhood (North Carolina and Gay Marriage Bans)

Once again I find myself torn on North Carolina politics. The tea party one upmanship, the arena of making a point by threatening to defund this institution or that... it seems that on the state level is where the fringe is doing the most damage; especially if Wisconsin, Maine and Florida (which is shaping up to be some of the most unethical legislation I've ever seen) are any indicators. North Carolina has apparently expressed interest in not being outdone in this regard now that it seems to be using its political currency to not only disallow but BAN outright same sex marriage in its state's constitution.

The message it sends its particularly calloused to not only its gay and lesbian taxpayers, but to the idea of civil liberties on the whole. While the reaction among editorials in papers in NC seems squarely opposed to the constitutional ban, it seems a surefire way to score points with its increasingly belaugered base. Obviously there's little in this feint aimed at job creation, but one would hope that ruse has lost any pretense of meaning at this late juncture. Instead those in the conservative majority seem interested in defaming as many liberal "sacred cows" as possible before the clock runs out.

As for implications, this ban if passed will strike a blow against the perception that North Carolina is any different than its southern counterparts- a feather that fit well in the state's cap as it pertained to Ashville, Raleigh and Charlotte at least. While local opinion on the ban and its possibility of success seem mixed...if this goes the way it may look, I'll be relocating well before I look into settling down and spending serious money in state.

Sen. Al Franken: Mythbuster.

Speaking of feeble defenses and mis-apropriated sociological research; Al Franken absolutely dessimates the testimony of Focus of the Family representative's ...rather creative (false) assumptions about the article he sites.

The Box Turtle Bulletin highlights that here.

I'm not sure whether to be dismayed or amused at the aftermath of the DOMA exchange above. Especially considering Right Wing Conservatives are still clinging to the belief that the study cited excluded same sex nuclear families and Sen. Franken was flat out wrong.

That is, until the researcher responsible for the study chimed in, claiming that the Senator was correct in reading that nuclear families in this (or any) case meant two parents related to children by adoption or birth, and same sex families were included in the study. Same economic, emotional and psychological benefits. Period. Granted, the Good As You Article above is an indicator cold hard scientific evidence of normalcy isn't useful when countering those with fingers in their ears.

Music by Hey Champ.

On the "Will of the People" (tm)

Boehner says no House vote on DOMA repeal | Washington Blade - America's Leading Gay News Source

Here's an interesting lesson in political jargon. When DADT, Proposition 8 and the recent votes to legalize gay marriage in NY state were major political issues, we'd hear quite consistently how we needed to "Let the people vote!!!". The reason for this is a sheer matter of numbers and social conservative pragmatism, as NOM and the likes assume (narrowly in the case of Proposition 8) that people will invariably vote to suppress the rights of their neighbors should they "disagree with some aspect of their lifestyle choice". They assume- marginally correctly- that (older, more religious) people will find the gays vile enough, and have no network connections to actual gay people and therefore will be more apt to enshrine glbt discrimination into policy (or at least vote in favor of it).

But there's some indication that this assumption can be made less safely now, as the above article makes an interesting distinction:

“A number of House Republicans have told me privately that they feel the same way,” Nadler said. “This, coupled with the fact that there is now a majority of Americans who support equality and with the recent polling data showing that a majority of Republican voters want GOP leadership to give up their position on this matter, means that it is only a matter of time before we act in a bipartisan manner and repeal DOMA. And, believe me, we will keep pushing to get it done until we have succeeded.”

Interestingly, the data from Proposition 8 even showed a gradual sea change on the attitudes of younger Americans towards same sex marriage. Glenn Beck, the afore-reviled Ken Mehlman and other staunch conservative figures have since noted that the vehement traction on the wedge issue is much less there. (With the likes of Mehlman this is of course too little, too late as he's one of the architects of DOMA in the first place.) During the elections that hammered through anti-gay marriage legislation on both the state and federal levels during the Dubya years, the anti-gay rhetoric was turned up to 11, and the "Will of the People" was done; At least according to the staunch conservative policy groups like NOM who make a very handsome living being professional homophobes. Look at the rhetoric being used here: Allowing people to vote on gay rights issues = the will of the people. Not allowing people to vote on DOMA = prudent officiating. Its artifice at its most transparent to suggest that NOM and the American Family Association are interested in the will of people who do not side with them on this issue. For groups like this, their tactics and ploys to perpetuate political inequality are good and noble...but only when they do them. Some of their press on gay rights issues shatters the misconception they push about "just being about preserving marriage" and "not being explicitly anti-gay". NOM's activity, tweets and talking points have long since gone beyond opposite sex marriage and ballooned into full blown completely transparent anti-gay rhetoric. If anyone ever bought the idea that they "merely disagreed over allowing gay people to call it marriage" we can dispense with that naivete now.

The consolation prize is that these issues are nominal in the grand scheme, and ultimately love will win over inequality. I'm confident of that much. The world can be a beautiful, inclusive place, "the kids are allright" and I for one am pleased to see the changes on the horizon for what they are.

Here's some Earworm for you, courtesy of Empire of the Sun- "Walking on a Dream" (Seriously, I'm trying not to adore this song) The original is lovely too.

New York States of Mind.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/06/ny-senate-approves-marriage.html

In "In Hope For the World Yet" News, it would be remiss of me as a Jr. level pseudo-social activist not to post an entry in honor of the recently official approval of gay marriage in New York state. Its a great boon for those of us who prefer we collectively work towards equality, and not seem as much the regressive nation we may in fact happen to be when compared to a our allies. The right to marry in NY seems long overdue in ways, as so much of the western world looks to Manhattan as second only to San Francisco as true north when it comes to gay communities and life in general.

It bares noting that this doesn't necessarily mean a sea change regarding the rest of the nations rigidity on the so called issue of same sex marriage. New York state as of last night has become one of only six states in the union who actively seeks (after much deliberation, apparently) to recognize the humanity and equality of all its legal taxpaying adult citizens. Compare that with the number of states where marrying one's cousin is permissible and on the books... and shutter at the sheer wrongness of it all.

Secondly, the victory for marital equality in New York state does not mean that there are not those who will seek to hamper and demonize gay people and this issue of civil rights. The dialog that has been generated around this issue in states where its on the docket is quite simply vitriolic in many cases. Much the way voting President Obama into office hasn't been the harbinger of the "post racial" society I'd heard so much about, the vote here in the right direction isn't going to stop idiots like Archbishiop Timothy Dean of NY from making the hackneyed slippery slope analogies we hear so often:

"That’s what’s going to happen here. You think it’s going to stop with this? You think now bigamists are going to want their rights to marry? You think somebody that wants to marry his sister is going to now say 'I have a right.' I mean it’s the same principle, isn’t it?"

I suppose we could waste valuable time dissecting just how impossibly stupid this line of logic is. If what the good Archbishop implies is correct, the ONLY thing keeping men from this urge to marry their sisters is... a law in place that prohibits this... the man does not much faith in general decency of his fellows it would seem. The ways this analogy fails is tremendous, as two loving (not related) human beings who already share a life or seek to, have no reason to live their lives as though a subjective religious lens. State officiated marriages are offered in a purely secular capacity and in order to assuage some concern of the religious among us, religions can still opt to be highly discriminatory towards those it does not wish to serve or acknowledge. Its just that they cannot entirely control the argument and act as arbiters of social norms for everyone.

I sometimes wonder if all the animus towards gay marriage from christian conservatives does not stem from this fact; the idea that a real or perceived loss of control about being able to be the preeminent decider of who and what unions are valid, and the ability to control the terms through which a couple weds- not to mention the monetary/economic aspects of the ceremonies associated. Perhaps its a more Marxian dynamic than some would be willing to admit in that the ability to control the lines where the in-group and the out-group are divided, and further to dictate the terms upon which a member of the group can change status is being eroded in this particular case...Though it is highly doubtful anyone who has ever wielded any sort of power will abdicate such without a fight.

Its a great, beautiful thing that has been wrestled from the hands of the rigid this day, on the week of NY Pride, no less. To love is a gift, and marriage...as far as traditions go, has aspects worthy of adhering to as its at least generally a social good. Encouraging more people to conform to standards that we as a society have long held are important, the pinnacle to which any relationship is to be measured against, seems perfectly understandable. Not allowing "conventional wisdom" to hinder people from taking care of their families and loved ones merely because someone else takes exception to whom you happen to love flies in the face of the freedoms that make America's vast potential for humanitarian good somewhat more muted.

_________________________

Now for something incrementally less exuberant. Matt Pond PA is one of my all time favorite bands, I've always been enamored of the way they meld rock and orchestral sensibilities to get some sweet, lovely layered melody. Midlake is one of my more favorite folksy discoveries of the last year, and "Head Home" is perhaps one of my favorite songs of theirs. (though it seems its hard to choose). Music to read by. Be excellent to each other and have a wonderful (pride) weekend.