Have You Hugged an LGBT Person Today?

If not, do. We need it.

Don't get me wrong - somewhere deep inside me, in a place I can't access at this moment, I am thrilled that Obama was elected. I know his presidency will be infinitely better for everything I care about - ending the war with Iraq, health care, workers' rights, immigrant rights, and leaving our kids a liveable world. I've spent my adult life working on these issues and I am so glad that we can start undoing the damage caused by Bush/Cheney and co.

But right now all I can think about is Prop. 8. About the impact on our community, and the hatred that found license for expression. You see, those behind Yes on 8 made a calculated choice to focus not on marriage but on queer people in general. If they could convince enough people that we were less than equal, they could win. Hence the ads warning that we would teach homosexuality in the schools. Hence their spurious claim that Obama was in favor of Prop. 8. Hence the Yes on 8 leader, in perhaps the campaign's most Orwellian moment, comparing us to the rise of Hitler.

So now here we are, two days post-election, still reeling. Whether or not Prop. 8 is overturned in the courts, as it should be, for now the impact is tremendous. As a woman on a lesbian email list posted, while in the grocery store on November 5 she kept thinking, "you, in front of me, did you vote to take my rights away? You, in back of me, did you?" There's nothing like being the target of hate to sharpen one's focus. And there's nothing like feeling threatened to make a person self-centered.

I've never felt this targeted in my life. Which just goes to show that while my political beliefs have always put me outside the mainstream, by virtue of my race and class (not to mention that I can "pass" as straight out there in the world), I've never truly felt personally discriminated against on a mass scale. Now I do.

And it also makes me realize how much I didn't understand previously about discrimination. Take Prop. 187, the 1994 California ballot measure to restrict immigrant rights. My friends and I were upset about it, for sure. We hung up signs and phonebanked. But when it was over, we moved on. We weren't the target, so we didn't have to question whether the person in front of us at the grocery store had voted to take away our rights.

To stay sane, I try to remember those who voted No on 8. My friends and family; my neighbors who put a No on 8 sticker on their truck unbidden. My (straight) sister, a diehard Obama supporter, who called me in tears on November 5. The woman who, while I held up a No on 8 sign on a street corner in Oakland, screeched her car to a halt right in front of me. "I'm a Mormon," she said, rolling down her car window, "and I'm appalled at what the Mormon church is doing. I truly, truly hope this proposition will lose." The Latino man outside the polling station with his kids, who looked me straight in the eye and said "it's just wrong - discrimination is just wrong. Always." The young African-American guy, pants practically around his ankles, who brushed off our polite attempts to hand him literature with a smile and a "Come on, it's a no-brainer! No on 8!" Each of these people will stay in my heart for a long time.

And I remember those who, from around the country, sent money so that we would have a fighting chance against the Mormon Church. My sister's husband's parents sent money and just now forwarded this quote from Winston Churchill: "you can depend upon America to do the right thing, but sometimes only after she has exhausted all other alternatives."

The morning after the election, one of my first thoughts was "maybe they'll leave us alone now." Like a battered spouse who gives up more and more in the hopes of not being hurt anymore. Maybe they'll leave us alone now. But this thought was fleeting. For one thing, I know the right wing forces have been emboldened and they won't stop here. But more importantly, I know the tide is turning. Just 8 years ago, another measure to restrict same-sex marriage passed in our state with 61% of the vote (and was later overturned). Prop. 8 got 52% and it's still being contested. Close to 5 million Californians voted in favor of equal rights, and a good number of them are as devastated today as I am.

In my high school history class, I learned the theory that great movements don't happen when people are at their most downtrodden; they happen when collective expectations have been raised and hope dashed. I'd say this is the biggest test case yet for the LGBT movement, and I'd like to prove that theory right.

One smart thing I did yesterday - I went to the gym and played music really loud on my ipod. While I sweated on the elliptical trainer, this song came on:

"I put my faith in the people
But the people let me down..."

Damn right, I thought.

But the song continued.

"So I turned the other way
And I carry on, anyhow
That's why I'm telling you
I just want to celebrate, yeah, yeah
I just want to celebrate, yeah, yeah
Another day of living,
I just want to celebrate another day of life"

And then, as if to drill the message into my head:

"Well, I can't be bothered with sorrow
And I can't be bothered with hate, no, no
I'm using up my time by feeling fine, every day
That's why I'm telling you I just want to celebrate...."

It's my daughter's 4th birthday party this weekend. I'll be listening to that song a lot in the next few days.

Comments

[JohnFF]

You can't imagine how proud I was to see this article and to know how strong you are in your determination to be free.

Uncle John

[Michale32086]

CONT

Again, if I am missing the point of Prop 8 and there IS language that, even tacitly, gives approval to discrimination, then that's a whole new kettle of fish..

But, as I read it, Prop 8 (like Prop 22 before it) simply moves to define the relationsh­ip..

Let 'em define it all they want..

The REAL battle is not letting ANYONE discriminate, no matter WHAT the definition is..

Thanx for allowing me to participate in this very worthwhile discussion­...

Michale...­.

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Michale,

Thanks for writing. One thing I want to make clear is that we didn't pick this fight. And it might not necessarily have been the fight we would choose to pick. I, for one, was absolutely thrilled when AB 205 passed. But it left unanswered, as you say, the very important issue of private institutions being free to discriminate against same-ex couples. And on a psychic level as well as a practical level, it wasn't marriage. It was separate but equal and we know how well that worked.

continued in next comment...

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Part 2

I suppose one could say that by deciding to marry same-sex couples back in 2004, Gavin Newsom picked this fight -- but then the marriages he authorized were challenged it court, a battle that worked its way all the way up to the CA Sup Ct, which ruled that in fact there is no reason same-sex
couples can't marry. It could have ended there, hurrah hurrah. But it didn't. Instead the Right Wing made same-sex marriage in CA the last outpost of the culture wars, and in this instance they won. So the culture wars continue (I mean, they would have anyway, but it sure woulda been nice to beat 'em this time!). And my concern now is that they will try to roll back other rights. Why, if they think our relationships are abhorrent, would they stop at ending marriage? (Now, I know there are some people, perhaps many people, who want us to have full domestic partnership rights but just not marriage. But the Right Wing folks behind this all -- the ones with the endlessly deep pockets of the Mormon Church -- don't want us to have diddly.)

So that's why marriage, alone with full and equal rights in employment, housing, education, and in every other institution, is so important to me.

[Michale32086]

Hi Ms White...

I think it's really great when HuffPo commentators care enough about their commentaries to come back to their posts and address questions.­.

Anyways, here's where I am coming from.

From what I read, Prop 8 is simply one of labeling.. It amends the CA Constitution to define what a "marriage" is..

Now, while I understand the importance of this to some, it seems to me to be a waste of time. So the State Of California wants to define marriage.. Big deal. The gay community is free to call their relationships whatever they wish. California making the definition of a "marriage" doesn't have ANY effect on a same sex relationsh­ip...

I don't mean to sound insensitive or blase' about it. I am sure that, for some, it's important. But it just appears to be a minute issue compared to the bigger issue of rights...

From the back and forth, I have learned that, while AB 205 did guarantee all State rights to Domestic Partnerships, there are private institutions that are free to discriminate against Same Sex couples..

It seems to me that THAT is the fight ya'all must fight...

It's not important what California, Florida, Ohio or Timbuktu labels your relationsh­ip... It's important that companies and people are not allowed to discriminate against you BECAUSE of that relationsh­ip...

Wouldn't you agree???

CONT

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi all,

Thanks for posting. I'm on mom duty right now, which means that at any moment my daughter, who is right now "reading" a holiday Pottery Barn for Kids catalog she found in our mail (eek!) will interrupt me. But next time I have a breather I will respond! I really appreciate the feedback.

[Michale32086]

@czar_2004

}}}}}
It isn't a matter of catering to the gay community. It has more to do with equal rights
{{{{{

My apologies.­. "Catering" was a very poor choice of words, and I realized that as soon as I hit POST...

While researching and trying to find TEXT on Prop 8, I came across this google entry..

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California­."

And I have to say that such verbiage really REALLY sucks..

In THAT regard, I am firmly in your corner as I believe completely that a marriage should be between two people who love each other and simply want to spend the rest of their lives together..

That is the "liberal" side of me speaking.

However, the practical side still doesn't understand the correlation between Prop 8 and the loss of rights within the private sector..

However, seeing that you have been more than fair (and patient :D ) in our discussions, I have no reason (and, perhaps more importantly, no evidence) to dispute your claim that there IS a correlatio­n...

I appreciate you taking the time to enlighten me and I wish you and yours all the best in your struggle..­.

Michale...­..

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for writing everyone. I came back to these posts after there had already been about 20, and in all honesty this is all still so raw for me that I'm not quite sure where to begin. So I appreciate the efforts of ConstanceReader, czar_2004, Glenn1441 and anyone else I've missed to respond to Michale's questions. and Michale, thanks for writing -- better to seek out answers than silently wonder. More later.

[Michale32086]

@ConstanceReader

}}}}}
The Supreme Court struck down that doctrine in 1954 when they decided Brown vs. Board of Education. The majority wrote that "separate facilities­...are inherently not equal."
{{{{

And what "facility" is being utilized in a marriage??

Brown v BOE addresses the issue of facilities and locations such as schools, etc etc. The SCOTUS ruled that separate but equal FACILITIES are inherently unequal.

I doubt that the case could be made that a marriage/p­artnership constitutes a "facility", since there are MANY different types of marriage..­. All different, but all equal under the law... A domestic partnership is simply a different kind of marriage, but still equal under the law..

Sorry, but that argument simply will not float...

Michale...­..

[Michale32086]

"Early in 2003, Jackie Goldberg (D-Los Angeles) of the five-person Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus introduced bill AB-205 the "Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003." As passed and signed into law, it granted domestic partners "the same rights [that are] granted to and imposed upon [married] spouses" by the state of California­."

Michale...­..

[czar 2004]

Again, while Domestic Patrnerships allow most of the same rights as Marriage, those rights are only applicable fully to government institutions. They may or may not be recognized by private institutions.

[Michale32086]

My point is, "private" institutions are inherently private and, as such, can pretty much do what they want to do. A person's choice is simply not to do business with that particular institution if they don't like they way they operate...

OK, let me approach this a different way..

If Prop 8 had failed, would these "private" institutions be under more obligation to cater to the gay community??

Michale...­..

[Michale32086]

"Early in 2003, Jackie Goldberg (D-Los Angeles) of the five-person Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus introduced bill AB-205 the "Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003." As passed and signed into law, it granted domestic partners "the same rights [that are] granted to and imposed upon [married] spouses" by the state of California­."

There are approximately 400 Cal State Benefits with regards to married couples. All but one of those rights (State Income Tax Filing) are afforded to civil unions the same as they are afforded to male/female unions....

It seems to me that there really aren't any "rights" being taken away from same sex couples by the passage of Prop 8.

This being the case, I have to ask.. What exactly is the problem with Prop 8?? As I mentioned before, it SEEMS that the NO ON 8 want to force EVERYONE to consider same sex couples as a TRUE marriage (which, in MY opinion, it already is), even if there are some who have strong beliefs AGAINST same sex unions.

Is that what NO ON 8 is really all about???

Michale...­..

[czar 2004]

In response, the rights we have lost include the legal right to insurance benefits and other benefits granted to married couples. We lose the right to be recognized as the next of kin in medical and other decisions that effect us and our partner's lives. We lose the right to be considered a family member in hospital/medical situations. These are just a few of the rights we have lost.

[Michale32086]

Thank you for your response. It's truly appreciated.

It's my understanding that Civil Unions in California allow for all of the things that you mentioned.

Have I been mis-informed??

Thank you again..

Michale...­..

[ConstanceReader]

You have been misinformed because, as the Supreme Court pointed out in Brown vs. Board of Education, separate is NOT equal.

[Michale32086]

It seems that California Bill AB 205 that was passed in 2003 and signed into law by Davis gives civil unions all the rights that you claim are not available.­.

http://www.tgcrossroads.org/news/archive.asp?aid=605

Michale...­..

[czar 2004]

1st in response to the "Civil Union" question, CA does not have Civil Unions, only Domestic Patrnership. With Domestic Partnership, while government entities grant those rights, private entities do not have to recognize them. For 1 example, a company is NOT required to offer Insurance benefits to Domestic Partners, it is there choice.

[sixsyllables]

I hug an LGBT person almost every day, my granddaughter.

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Hurray!

[Glenn1441]

Ms. White.

Gay man here. NYC. 42-years old. The object of hate more than a few times in my life to date. Nearly killed in Greenwich Village, in fact.

Doesn't matter to me when a member of the LGBT community awakens to the hatred that has always been focused upon us -- upon each of us. I'm with you, and the contents of your post, every sentence of the way...

However, is it enough to post and commiserate on Huffington? You and I do not share equal access to this forum, and so it is my hope that as a blogger, you re-enter your posts to participate directly with respondents.

My question to you: What now?

Never has it been more clear that we are not equal under the law. Taxation without representation, state level or not -- well, I can't get that phrase out of my mind. I am bitterly disappointed in the Democratic Party, who takes millions and millions of our money, yet seems to throw us, collectively, under the bus each election cycle.

What do we do? What next?

Yes. I am really asking you to respond.

[Michale32086]

}}}}
Never has it been more clear that we are not equal under the law.
{{{{

Could you cite some examples of this??

Because, as near as I can tell, the only "unequalness" under the law that I see is the unequalness that the gay community has insisted upon...

Michale...­..

[Glenn1441]

Let us imagine:

You and your bisexual wife cannot marry via Justice of the Peace. You are not granted a marriage certificate. Instead, your union is a civil union.

Purely heterosexual couples may marry and receive a marriage certificate. Again, you cannot and do not.

Thus, you may drink at 'this' fountain. But you cannot drink at 'that' fountain.

Principles, and thus laws, must apply to all citizens. End of story.

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

To Glenn1441: First of all, thanks for letting me know the perspective you come from re hatred and discrimination. Yes, the past few weeks have truly been a lesson to me. I didn't realize how much I didn't understand. I am vowing to myself that I will look differently at discrimination towards any other group. I will make it matter to me. Of course, I can't experience it directly -- I still don't know what it's like to walk around as a person of color, for instance -- but I can truly be more sympathetic.

Another point I want to make in that regard. While I can "pass," my partner -- my WIFE -- cannot. She is a butch woman who is quite identifiable; and when I'm with her, so am I, but when I'm alone or with our daughter, I could be any other straight mom at the grocery store. I have always been proud of her for walking through the world looking "different"; and I think she's always been proud of me for being out even when I don't have to be. The past few weeks have been so hard on her, harder than at any time in the 20 years since she came out!

And she's not the only one. Last night I went to a community forum with other queer parents to talk about "what's next." Which was your main question to me. In the next comment (because I've just written too long!) I'll give a

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

(Okay so I wrote too long a comment. This is part 2 of 3. I'm not sure which part will post first....)

What's next?

Legally: 3 lawsuits have been filed. If I had more time I would look up the details of each (and I will write more about this later), but I wanted to get this post out to you. Suffice it to say that it ain't over til it's over.

Politically: We have made great progress, despite how awful it feels right now. At least 2 million more people in CA supported same-sex marriage in 2008 than did so in 2000, when Prop. 22 was on the CA ballot. That's huge progress in a pretty short time span. Even though, as a 40 year old, I really don't want to wait til I'm 50 or 60 to have this settled once and for all. But I've had a few older folks tell me that they didn't think they'd see a black person elected in their lifetime. Our lives are long (hopefully); and over and over this week I've read Dr. King's quote: the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice.

[Isobel White - Huffpost Blogger]

Here is part 3 of 3

Personally: My next goal is to be able to celebrate Obama. To watch his acceptance speech, which I missed on Tuesday because of (ultimately fruitless) attempts to console myself about Prop. 8 by having dinner out with friends. To remember everything else I care about in this world. Heck, a month ago I was fantasizing that Obama would create a new WPA -- I want to go back to fantasizing about that! And on a personal/political level, I now feel more deeply committed to LGBT rights than ever before. Because of my status as a parent, I am particularly eager to ensure that the schools my daughter attends not only tolerate diversity, not only agree to talk about it, but actually celebrate it. If you read my 1st post you'll know how lucky I am that my daughter's teacher read King and King to her class on the occasion of our marriage; yes, the very book that was decried by the Yes on 8 forces. This is something I was almost afraid to say during the campaign -- the Yes on 8 forces had us scared shitless -- but I actually actively want my daughter to go to a school where King and King (and other such books) are read. This, to me, is the way to create a safe and welcoming environment for all our children.

Lastly, I am happy to talk more. These are just my early thoughts, 2 days out.

[Glenn1441]

Ms. White... Thank you so very much for taking the time to respond to my comments/questions. I admire bloggers and blog contributors at Huff who take the time to read responses, and to comment when appropriate. We have a responsibility to one another, for the time we share, and I am encouraged by your sense of responsibility to me, and to all who've spent time with you here since this post went live.

I feel better now :>)

[Michale32086]

First off, full disclosure­..

I am fully supportive of ANY person's right to marry... Had I been in CA, I would have voted against Prop 8...

But I do have one question. Honest and sincere...

What "rights" have you lost?

Michale...­...

[Pearlswan]

There are 258 or more rights afforded to married couples, which most people don't even know exist. Look them up for yourself. Do the work to educate yourself, lazy one. Why are you commenting about something you evidently know little about? What's next for us all? A well-deserved break to contemplate the effort and the loss and the hate. I, for one, am sick and tired of explaining to people why the right to marriage is important. It is impossible to have a reasonable discussion with closed minds. Open your mind. Why do straight people get married if there are no rights or benefits afforded to them under the marital contract? Why does marriage exist in the first place if there are no benefits or rights? Surely there is some advantage to it that everyone is aware of or they would not have fought so hard to "protect" it. So, do us all a favor and drop the smartass hatred and take an intelligent look at why anyone, gay or straight, would want to get married. Then, maybe you will get it. We will never quit until we are equal under the law.

[Michale32086]

WOW...

If you are representative of the NO ON 8 community, no wonder the measure passed..

If that's an example of how a person who is sincerely curious about things is treated, it's no wonder..

For the record, I have been married to the same beautiful woman for 27 years who also happens to be bi-sexual.­. So, I don't know WHERE you come up with this "hatred" that you seem to want to assign to me..

Let me ask you something. Are you free to call your civil union a "marriage"?? Of course you are. And, with the passage of AB 205 in California and signed into law by Governor Davis, it seems that civil unions have all the same rights (AND RESPONSIBI­LITIES.. Don't forget about that) as a male/female marriage..­.

So, it seems to me, especially taking into account your belligerent attitude, that it's not that you don't have the RIGHT to call your union a marriage. You do..

It APPEARS that you want to force everyone ELSE to call your union a marriage, regardless of THEIR beliefs on the issue..

I stand ready to admit I am wrong, if you can show me how civil unions differ from a traditional marriage in the RIGHTS department.

Hopefully, you can do it with less attitude and more informatio­n..

Michale...­...