The Kid

Lets talk about books!

So anyone from the Pacific Northwest should know the name of Dan Savage. If you dont just...just got find a respectable newspaper and read him or something, because i dont even want to describe how deprived your life must be. If you're not from the Pacific Northwest and you still know Dan Savage, good job.

ANYWAYS, mini bio, Dan Savage is an author and newspaper editor who i know mainly from his column Savage Love, which answers readers questions about sex in a very frank and humorous way. Dan has always concerned his writing with politics, culture, and homosexuality (i dont know if there's a genre for what he writes...it's not satire, but it's not political analysis either). He's a pretty controversial character, even in the gay community, but i adore him (my friends and i also stalk him around seattle coffee shops. good times.)

Dan and his (now husband, then boyfriend) Terry adopted a son in the early 2000s, and Dan chose to write a book about the experience. It's called The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant.



It's a very small book, and an easy read, which is why i would recommend it to anyone who is interested in adoption, gay marriage, legal rights of gay couples, lesbians, children, homeless teens, or just good memoirs. just go read the book.

The book is dedicated to his husband, Terry, but the whole thing is written as if his child were one day to read it. It's very sweet, and it gets into a lot of the controversy behind gay couples adopting. He talks about the fear of homosexuals and pedophilia, gay marriage, adoption policies (even pertaining to straight couples) and a whole slew of other issues. the really interesting part of the book is that it is not a book meant to educate; it's just one guy, writing because he has a word count to fill for his editor, talking about what his personal experiences have been. It's a very personal book (so personal that, at times, i felt like i was unfairly invading his life and i wanted to put the book down) but that's its charm.
This puts a face and a voice to the issue of the 'gay family', which is something a lot of political argument is missing. Opponents of gay rights talk about 'those gay people' and all 'their habits'. It's been observed, though, that many people are opposed to gay rights as a sort of default; they arent gay, they dont know anyone gay, so it doesnt really apply to them. If 'those gays' dont get to marry, who cares? it doesnt apply to them!
It has been observed, though, that when ambivalent opponents to gay rights meet gay people and talk to them or, better yet, realize someone they've known all their life is gay, their opinions change pretty fast. it's no longer 'those gay people' as a generalization, it's individual voices and lives. This book is just one of those voices, and its greatest quality is the humanity it brings to these issues.


go read it.

cruel and unusual punishment?

In Helling v. McKinney, the Supreme Court ruled that a prisoner's exposure to second hand smoke could constitute cruel and unusual punishment. 

This got me wondering about the Turner vs. Safley case. (ruling: marriage is a fundamental right; it is an "expression of emotional support and public commitment."  This decision was unanimous.) [philly.com handout, Boies]

But then I started wondering about an alternate rationale for the marriage ruling. Could withholding marriage rights from prisoners be considered cruel and unusual punishment?

I was browsing online and found an amazing article about two men who are yet to be married on a plane! A plane! That is amazing! I was so fascinated by this story and how much courage they must have to 1. get married despite all the controversy surrounding gay marriages and 2. get married on a plane. When I was reading the article I was touched to read that when one was asked "“What do you love most about your partner?”, Mijatovic gushed, “That now after seven years I still have butterflies in my stomach when I look at him. And I love the fact that I always feel that I am in a team and that I can rely on him and trust him unconditionally.” This just proves that gay marriage should be allowed, and that despite the gender, what is going on is love and that the love should be what is most important in any relationship no matter what sexual orientation you are.
* sorry when I copied the quote the whole font changed and now I don't know how to change it back...

WATCH: PSA from NOH8 Campaign To Stop Anti-Gay Bullying

Bullied to Death

Around the start of October another child was bullied to death. He was just 13 years old and in eighth grade. Other students were said to be acting out gay sex acts during a physical education class. He was made fun of for being small, for his religion, and for being gay. His name was Asher Brown. Check it out here.

Why I'm Not Getting Married Until Gay Marriage is Legalized

Let me forward this by pointing out that the reason is not just the possibility of me marrying a woman.  I'm actually undecided in my personal sexuality, so there's a perfectly good chance of me falling in love with a young man who I could, quite legally, in any state of my choosing, enter into nuptials with.  There's also the chance, which I have known for quite a while, that the person I fall in love with will not believe in the institution of marriage, (though I do,) as let's face it, I hang out with hippies.  And the whole point might actually be moot, because I have no intention of getting married until I'm well into my 20s and I really really hope that by that time, gay marriage will be legal anyway.  But if it isn't, and I do end up in a serious relationship with a man, and he does believe in the institution of marriage, I'm still not going to marry him until gay marriage is legalized nationally.

I haven't actually mentioned this to many people yet, thus I wanted to blog about it publicly.  Honestly, the reasoning is pretty simple in my mind.  As stated, I hang out with hippies, I'm really really obviously left-leaning, and I have been raised to believe in equality in all its forms.  Actually, when I was very little, I didn't even get that there was something unusual about two men being together - my gay uncle gave my sister and I a children's picture book called "My Two Uncles," and I liked the book, but the fact is, I didn't need the book to inform me of how okay it was that he was romantically involved with another man... it was just kind of fact to me for as long as I can remember.  If anything, I have taken that ethos far further than I think my parents expected me to, and am currently planning on going into a career as a lawyer to put my ideals into action.  And another way of doing that, i.e. putting my ideals into action, for me is to refuse to get married to a man until gay marriage is legalized.  As long as the situation in the United States is such that, if I were to want to marry a woman, I would not be allowed to, there is absolutely no reason why I should be able to marry a man either.  In short, if you're forbidding their gay marriage, my straight marriage should be forbidden too.  Incidentally, according to my friend Christine (she and my sister are the only people I've mentioned it to since deciding, since it came up in conversation,) this tactic was followed on the TV show Queer as Folk, which is hardly surprising, and reminds me that I should watch it.

So, anyway, just wanted to say that, and figured this would be a good platform to.  Thoughts?  Am I insane?  Do you approve?  Do we have better things to talk about?  Well, yes to the last one, but...

ACLU & GLAD File Lawsuits Against DOMA

Suzanne & Geraldine Ardis are married and
raising three boys in Clinton, CT.

Interesting news on the civil rights front. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) arefiling lawsuits today challenging the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on behalf of same-sex married couples from New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut and New York.

The New York Times reports in ("Gay Couples To Sue U.S. Over Marriage Law"):

The two new lawsuits, which involve plaintiffs from New York, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire, expand the attack geographically and also encompass more of the 1,138 federal laws and regulations that the Defense of Marriage Act potentially affects — including the insurance costs amounting to several hundred dollars a month in the case of Ms. Pedersen and Ms. Meitzen, and a $350,0000 estate tax payment in the A.C.L.U. case.

The civil liberties union filed suit on behalf of Edith S. Windsor, whose spouse, Thea C. Spyer, died last year of aortic stenosis. The two women, New Yorkers who had been together for 44 years, married in Toronto in 2007. New York officially recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other states. Had the two been man and wife, there would have been no federal estate tax to pay.

“It’s just so unfair,” said Ms. Windsor, who is 81.

Taken together, said Mary Bonauto, the director of the Civil Rights Project for the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, the cases show same-sex couples “are falling through the safety net other people count on.”

Traditionally, Ms. Bonauto noted, the federal government has left the definition of marriage to the states. “The federal government has respected those determinations, except in the instance of gay and lesbian couples marrying,” she said. The result, she said, is a violation of constitutional guarantees of equal protection.

GLAD does not play around. Many people (including yours truly) expect them to win their other lawsuit challenging DOMA, Gill v. OPM,  which is currently before the 1st Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals with GLAD having already won at the district court level. That lawsuit was on behalf of same-sex couples who have been married in Massachusetts for at least 5 years.

Do you think DOMA will still be federal law five years from now?