You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'gay stuff' category.
It’s been months since I posted an installment of New Gay Heroes. I’ve had a couple of posts for the series in mind for quite some time, but just haven’t gotten around to actually writing and posting them. This weekend, though, I saw a little snippet on the Huffington Post that lit a fire under me to get going. So without further ado…
Portia de Rossi
It’s true that when we think of famous lesbians, the first blonde to come to mind might be her wife, but Portia de Rossi is surely a New Gay Hero in her own right.
She and wife Ellen do wonderful things for lesbian visibility by being out, being themselves and sharing their lives with the public. Whether they are beaming in the glow of their engagement on the red carpet…
Sharing their wedding photos in People magazine…
Playing the Newlywed Game and speaking candidly about their life and love on Ellen’s talk show…
Or talking about equal marriage rights on Oprah…
Ellen and Portia are, together, such a wonderful positive representation for lesbians and same-sex marriage.
But on her own, Portia has this habit of appearing on talk shows and effortlessly and eloquently speaking about marriage equality. Just last week, she quite calmly fielded the (at times bizarre) questions of the ladies at The View with poise:
The very same day she also stopped by Good Morning America, where she again spoke about her marriage to Ellen and equal rights (that starts at about three minutes in):
I just love the way Portia speaks about equal marriage rights with such grace and ease. She makes it sound just as simple as it should – if we don’t have marriage, we don’t have equal rights. Plain and simple. Portia always manages to explain that marriage is different from being “partnered” or “unioned” or whatever other nonsense opponents of our rights try to sell us – and she always does it without breaking a sweat.
Portia de Rossi is a New Gay Hero for sure.
This is the greatest:
Available in Vermont stores all month long!
Congratulations, Vermont – enjoy your equal rights with a side of yummy ice cream!
State Attorney General Martha Coakley has filed a suit that challenges the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act.
Here’s an excerpt from boston.com:
The suit filed by state Attorney General Martha Coakley says the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 violates the US Constitution by interfering with the state’s right to define the marital status of residents. The suit also says the law forces the state to discriminate against same-sex married couples – on certain health benefits and burial rights – or risk losing federal funding.
Massachusetts risks losing millions in dollars for MassHealth, the state’s Medicaid program for the poor, and for veterans’ cemeteries overseen by the state Department of Veterans Services, unless it obeys the Defense of Marriage Act. The federal government has told the state that it cannot provide federal funding for MassHealth benefits given to same-sex spouses. It also informed the state it will lose Veterans Affairs funding if it buries the same-sex spouse of a veteran in a cemetery, as the state does for heterosexual spouses of veterans.
The suit spefically challenges Section 3 of DOMA. GLAD had this to say:
Section 3 of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) represents an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into the traditional and historical power of the states to make determinations of marital status. By refusing to recognize any marriage of same-sex couples-and by denying these couples access to all federal rights, protections and responsibilities related to marriage-the federal government steps in and overrides these state-sanctioned marriages. The Commonwealth’s lawsuit seeks to uphold the traditional division of power between the federal and state governments as it has always been regarding marriage.
Way to kick ass, Massachusetts!
Rachel Maddow
Oh, Rachel. Rachel, Rachel, Rachel. What can I say? I have an enormous crush on Rachel Maddow. Now, I don’t want my giant crush to color my characterization of Rachel as a New Gay Hero, so let’s just get it out of the way at the start, and then move on, okay? Rachel Maddow is hot. She is only made hotter by how incredibly smart she is. And I am still in total disbelief that I get to tune into a super hot, self-proclaimed butch dyke talk about politics and current events on tv every night. Hot. Hot. Hot. Okay – Ahem! Now that that’s out of my system…
Rachel Maddow is a New Gay Hero for being herself on television. Sure, she takes off the glasses (they do cover a lot of her face – no television producer would let a tv host, male or female, butch or femme, wear them on-air), and puts on a suit and some make-up, but you’d never mistake her for a girly-girl, and her look is still undeniably lesbian-ish. And when she appears on talk shows, she’s 100% Rachel – glasses, sneakers, and her decidedly butch clothes.
In our culture, butch women are so often vilified, and Rachel is such a great shining example to combat all the negativity.
Rachel is not just a New Hay Hero for her looks, of course, she is truly a New Gay Hero for what she says. When Barack Obama won the election in November, there was a lot of buzz about what the liberals would have to talk about now – Rachel has given us that answer. She covers the Obama administration’s every move, applauding that which she thinks is worthy of praise, and examining in depth that which makes her uneasy. Very recently, Rachel has been all over Obama’s lack of action on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell:
And DOMA:
As an entertaining tv personality, a positive representation for butch (and all) lesbians, and a watchdog for LGBT rights issues, Rachel Maddow is surely a New Gay Hero.
When I saw the movie Milk, I cried all through the credits, and all the way back to the car. I cried for the loss of Harvey Milk and all that he could have accomplished, and also for my community’s lack of a leader, a leader with Harvey’s vision, drive, and ability to inspire. When we think of the face of gay rights today, who do we think of? I really don’t know the answer to that. There isn’t one person in particular who comes to mind. But in the months since I saw Milk, a few gay public figures have inspired me, in ways great and small. And so I have decided to start a little feature here on the blog called New Gay Heroes.
New Gay Heroes will feature members of the LGBT community in the public eye that inspire, educate, or entertain in a way that I think is beneficial to our community. New Gay Heroes are people that I am proud to see represent my community, and give me hope for our future.
So without further ado, my first New Gay Hero is:
Wanda Sykes
In November 2008, Wanda Sykes made her official coming out at a gay rights rally in Las Vegas. She was moved by the passing of Prop 8 to go public. In her speech at the rally, she said:
“We took a huge leap forward and then got dragged 12 feet back. I felt like I was being attacked, personally attacked — our community was attacked. Now, I gotta get in their face. I’m proud to be a woman. I’m proud to be a black woman, and I’m proud to be gay.
They pissed off the wrong group of people. They have galvanized a community. We are so together now and we all want the same thing and we shouldn’t have to settle for less. Instead of having gay marriage in California, no, we’re gonna have gay marriage across the country.”
Wanda isn’t a New Gay Hero just because of her empowering statements at that November rally, but also for her brilliant use of comedy as a way to share her life with the public – educating through laughter.
In May, Wanda was on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. NBC won’t let me embed the video, but you can watch here (once the page loads you can click “Select Chapter” to watch Wanda’s two segments – which are totally worth sitting through a couple of ads, I promise!). In her segments with Jay, Wanda talks about she and her wife Alex being new moms to twins. She shared some hilarious tidbits about the twins’ birth by c-section, such as, “If the doctor tells you ‘Don’t look there,’ don’t look there!“ And when Jay commented that he prefers to be there for the conception rather than delivery, she responded ”I wasn’t even there for that!,” after which they and the audience erupted into laughter.
Wanda had a couple of great bits about parenting, which demonstrated (without spelling it out) that life isn’t that different for two moms as opposed to a mom and a dad. On separation of baby duties, Wanda explained that since Alex is breastfeeding “She handles everything that goes in, and I handle everything that comes out.” And on the difficulty of caring for multiples, she said ”I told my wife, if you ever find me in bed with another woman, you know I’m just there for a nap! I’m just trying to get some shut-eye!”
As an activist and a comedian, Wanda Sykes is such a positive figure for us to have on our side. Seeing her on Jay Leno, talking about her wife and children just like any straight guest would, may not seem incredibly significant, but it is. Sharing our stories helps people to understand us, and making them laugh in the process just makes it that much easier for them to relate. And that’s what makes Wanda Sykes a New Gay Hero to me.
Today, New Hampshire became the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage. 5 of those 6 are here in New England! (But don’t hold your breath for RI)
I can’t yet find any detailed information on the bill, like what kind of “protection” for “religious organizations” is included, but I’ll keep my eyes and ears open…
Congratulations New Hampshire!
The California Supreme Court has decided to uphold Prop 8. Thankfully, the 18,000 same-sex couples already wed in California will remain that way, but no future same-sex marriages will be permitted.
This is a crushing blow.
For purposes of clarification, this case was not about whether or not the California Supreme Court wants to let same-sex couples get married – this case was about the legality of Proposition 8:
-
The supporters of equal rights who brought the case to the CSC argued that the Proposition should be overturned because taking the right to marry away from same-sex couples would require a revision of the state’s constitution, and revisions cannot be made by a popular vote (the process is more complicated).
-
Supporters of Proposition 8 argued that banning same-sex marriage was an amendment to, rather than revision of, the state’s constitution, and therefore was possible through a popular vote.
This means that the Supreme Court ruled today that Proposition 8 was an amendment to the state’s constitution rather than a revision, and threfore stands. While this doesn’t change the fact that same-sex marriage is now illegal in California, it does shed some light on exactly what the Court decided today, and I think that is important to know.
Visit DayofDecision.com for details on protests taking place around the country today if you feel compelled to speak out and stand with others to express your disappointment in this decision. I hope all of us attending will remember that while we are justified in being angry and have a right to speak out, peaceful protests will be most beneficial to our cause.
So we know that a marriage equality bill passed the New Hampshire Legislature earlier this month, and that the Governor said he would not sign the bill into law as it was. Here’s what 365gay.com has to say about where we are now:
The original marriage bill passed the legislature earlier this month, but Lynch said he would veto it unless it offered better protections to churches that oppose same-sex marriage.
The revisions approved earlier Wednesday in the Senate by a 14-10 vote would have made it clear that churches, church organizations and staff are protected from lawsuits if they refuse to permit same-sex marriages.
But when it went to the House in the afternoon, it was defeated by only two votes – 188-186.
The House then voted 207-168 to ask the Senate to negotiate a compromise with the governor instead of killing the bill.
[My emphasis]
This leaves us waiting (for who knows how long) for a compromise. My question is, what will the revised bill really mean?
I was always under the impression that no matter what the law, churches and religious organizations had the right to deny anyone they wished from having their weddings within their doors. But then Vermont, Maine, and now New Hampshire started talking about putting protection for religious organizations in their marriage equality bills, which I thought was strange. I thought it was a given that churches could continue to discriminate at will, but that maybe these provisions were being included to appease the religious right and make it clear that marriage equality was not a threat to religious organizations that don’t condone it.
Then I got this comment on my blog from Brenda:
Just wanted to let you and your readers know that the changes are not just for performing ceremonies. The religious organizations automatically have that provision. What the changes say are that social religious organizations, such as the Knights of Columbus, don’t have to rent their halls to same sex couples for their ceremonies or receptions. It also adds an amendment that allows religious organizations such as hospitals (St. Mary’s) and Catholic Charities to discriminate against same sex couples. This means that if you are a same sex, legally married couple, these places can deny your spouse benefits if you work there, spousal privilege if you get hospitalized there and can deny you service if you need it. This is not right. Just thought you would like to know what we are settling for.
I tried to do some research, but am coming up empty-handed! The Human Rights Campaign doesn’t even mention this. MassEquality has nothing. What is the deal?
Going back to the 365gay.com article I quoted above, they use the language ”permit same-sex marriages” – they don’t say “recognize same-sex marriage.” I know it’s semantics, but in this case, the difference between religious organizations having the right to refuse to “permit” vs. “recognize” same-sex marriages is a big one! It is the difference between my wife and I not being allowed to get married in a church (no complaints from me – there are plenty of religious organizations that do accept gays, if you are so inclined), and my wife not being allowed to come to my side if I were to be in an accident and rushed to a hospital that’s run by a religious organization that hates gays. That is a HUGE difference.
So, okay, who has links? Who has the answers? What the fuck is going on?
Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire says that he will sign the same-sex marriage bill if it is changed to give religious organizations the power to decide to whether or not to perform ceremonies for same-sex weddings.
In my opinion, it seems very likely that this change will be made, since both Vermont and Maine’s marriage equality bills had similar provisions.
We are so close to 5 out 6 here in New England!!
The New York State Assembly has passed a same-sex marriage bill.
The bill passed 89-52, with 5 Republicans among those who voted for it.
Next, the State Senate will need to vote on the bill. There is no word yet on when the Senate vote might happen, but it is believed that there might not yet be enough support for it to pass. We’ll stay tuned!
