International Olympic Committee Disregards Olympic Charter to Support Russia’s Anti-Gay Laws

Following yesterday’s post about the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) decision to enforce Rule 50, I looked a little further into the Olympic Charter to see what it says.

Rule 50, which IOC officials said yesterday would be enforced should athletes choose to carry a rainbow flag or wear a rainbow pin, states that:

“No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.”

This is a rule they admittedly only enforce selectively and would do so in accordance with anti-gay Russian law. Strangely enough in my research I can’t find any time in history where this rule has applied to religious athletes demonstrating their religion in the Olympic sphere despite it happening frequently.

What I did find were the “Fundamental Principles of Olympism.” These 7 fundamentals one would think might trump the 61 rules and by-laws of said rules. Among those are numbers 4 and 6, shared below:

4. The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

6. Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.

It would seem that in the interest of covering for Russia’s “Gay Propaganda” law, the IOC has made the decision to utterly disregard 2 of the 7 Fundamental Principles of Olympism.

The Olympic Charter can be read in it’s entirety here.

So…who’s the bride?

It’s no secret that I’m getting married a month from today. The generally frazzled look, messy hair, hundreds of wedding planning Google docs open on my computer – there’s really no hiding it.

I’ve always heard that the three most stressful things in a person’s life are moving, depression and planning a wedding. I’ve dealt with the other two, but this is my first wedding. I can happily say that overall, it’s been a very happy event. A few minor disagreements here and there, but overall it’s been pretty smooth sailing. Except for one little thing.

We all know stories and maybe even have friends who’ve experienced direct discrimination when it comes to wedding planning. A good friend of ours just dealt with someone on Etsy who refused to make a guestbook for them because Jesus didn’t want her to or something. And then there’s the story of the Washington florist. A gay man went to her regularly, spending lots of money and developing a nice relationship with this florist – all of a sudden, when it came time for the man’s wedding – the woman could no longer take his money. Having zero to do with marriage equality of course, and everything to do with that state’s anti-discrimination laws, the woman is now being sued by the state for violating those laws.

Those are huge infractions and those business owners who choose to violate state laws banning discrimination against gay people should absolutely be held accountable for breaking those laws. But then there are the seemingly little things.

With nearly every vendor we’ve dealt with (with the exception of the caterer who is located in Provincetown and services more gay weddings than straight) has asked us “who’s the bride” at one point or another. It’s an understandable question as I realize that gay weddings are a relatively new phenomenon. But it’s nonetheless a constant reminder of the fact that we’re still not “normal.”

Luckily, we haven’t run into any outright bigotry with any of our wedding vendors – so we feel very fortunate. But every time I see a form, or am asked for the name of my soon-to-be wife, it’s another conversation I have to have. But instead of feeling that shame I spent much of my 20s trying to get rid of, I take it to the next step and ask to speak to a manager. Or I simply make a formal request for that company to change the form and educate their employees.

From the time I was a little kid – every movie I saw, every book I read, every TV show I watched – featured straight couples, causing me to think there was something wrong with me. If by asking a company to correct a form or change their phrasing to “what’s the name of the other party?” or “what is your fiancé’s name?”, I can help stop someone from recalling those unfortunate feelings of inadequacy, I’m happy to do it.

At the end of the day, we’re in a very exciting time – it means more work for us – more calling out of the things that make us feel less than, and most importantly, more patience and assumption of good intent.

The guy who works at Men’s Wearhouse who asks me the bride’s name isn’t intentionally trying to make me feel bad that I’m not straight. But if I take a moment to calmly tell him that there’s no bride, but I’m happy to tell him the other groom’s name, he may stumble and feel awkward for a moment – but I bet he’ll think twice next time he makes that assumption.

Look, it sometimes sucks to have to be the ones who forge new territory, but at the end of the day we have an awesome opportunity to make the next generation of LGBT people feel more comfortable through some really easy conversations. Speak out when someone says one of those things that makes you feel less than. Don’t be afraid to ask someone to change their form so that it’s inclusive of you and your family.

Again, most often, there’s no ill-intent, just a lack of education or experience. It’s up to us to make it easier for the next generation.

 

Hate Group NOM Attacks Newborn Son of Rep Jared Polis

Welcome to the world, Caspian Julius!

We are frequently unsurprised when hate groups such as Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) or others go after gays and lesbians who want to be married. In fact, it’s expected. But today, NOM outdid itself in its rhetoric around Congress’ first openly gay father.

In a post on their blog, NOM wrote:

“We have no clue whether it was a planned motherless family or whether he and his partner stepped in to give a motherless child a family–since he will not say.”

Last week, Rep. Jared Polis and his partner Marlon Reis, welcomed into the world Caspian Julius, weighing 8 lbs, 12 oz. The birth was greeted with statements of support and love from around the country and today, an attack from hate group NOM.

NOM followed-up it’s blog post with a tweet:

“Openly gay #CO Rep. @JaredPolis announces with pride that his child has no mother.”

According to their website, NOM “is a nonprofit organization with a mission to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.” They claim that they exist to protect marriage, yet their tweets and comments and blog posts focus solely on attacking lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people.

Clearly in their current attack on Congressman Polis, they are ignoring the fact that an extraordinarily large majority (some say as high as 75%) of children do not live with their biological parents. NOM’s own former president Maggie Gallagher, was herself a single parent for many years. And current president Brian Brown spends much of his time traveling the country to attack LGBT people, while his wife raises their children essentially on her own.

So please don’t be fooled. The National Organization for Marriage, exists only to attack LGBT people, they’re protecting nothing. If they were actually interested in protecting marriage, maybe they’d spend a little more time on their own.

Welcome to the world, Caspian Julius and Congratulations Congressman Polis!

NJ Bridal Shop Denies Lesbian Bride Over ‘Illegal’ Wedding

Alix Genter is getting married next July. She lives in New Jersey and is going to get a civil union there, followed by a wedding in New York City (where marriage equality is now a reality).

Alix spoke to the Philadelphia Daily News all about her impending nuptials as she completed her PhD in history.

Last Saturday, Alix’s whole family joined her as she tried on her wedding dress at a store called “Here Comes the Bride” in Somers’ Point, NJ. Her mom and dad, her aunt, her cousin and two friends were there to cheer her on during this incredible time in her life by watching her don the dress and veil she thought she may never get to wear.

She tried on several gowns and finally found the one she loved – which if you’ve ever watched “Say Yes to the Dress” you’d know how trying a chore this can be. She asked Donna, the store manager if the designer might make the gown with a more lightweight fabric for her wedding next summer, and Donna agreed to look into it. It seemed to be a very happy smiling endeavor for all involved.

So naturally, Alix was floored to receive a call from Donna a few days later saying she would not be getting that dress. On the customer information sheet, Alix had crossed out the word “groom,” written in “partner” and put down her fiancee’s name. That didn’t sit well with Donna, who called Alix and told her she would not work with her because she is gay. She told her “There’s right. There’s wrong. And this is wrong.”

Donna went on in the voicemail to say that what Alix was doing was “illegal” and that the store would “not participate in any illegal actions.” The author of the article, Ronnie Polaneczky, called Donna back and they had quite the conversation.

“When I called Donna yesterday to get her side of the story, she both confirmed your version of events and accused you of “stirring up drama.” She said that your writing the word “partner” was basically a provocation, evidence of a need “to show that she’s different.”

“They get that way,” she told me.

By “they,” she meant women who were fed up with men because “men can be difficult,” and so now they “experiment” with female relationships because they’re tired of having men boss them around.

“She told me about a friend whose wife left him for another woman. And about a young family member who was molested by a same-sex adult male. And about a gay man who once plunged a knife into a chair in the restaurant where she worked. And – she finally lost me here – something about the Navy SEALs.”

According to New Jersey’s State Judiciary website, it is illegal to refuse service to someone based on their sexual orientation in that state. We’d like to refer Alix (and anyone else who has experienced discrimination there) to visit http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/factsheets/fact_sexordis.pdf. Please read the passage below on places of public accomodation:

“Examples of places of public accommodation in which sexual orientation discrimination is not allowed include places generally open to the public where goods and services are provided. This includes restaurants, movie theaters, stores, camps, organizations, schools, professional offices (such as doctors and lawyers), and other facilities.”

Please check out the shop’s Yelp review page and feel free to let them know how you feel about discrimination. And make sure you read the original poignant article here.

 

The Boy Who Cried “DOMA is Hurting Our Families!”

Christina Santiago and her fiancee Alisha Brennon

Yesterday, a terrible story made it around the LGBT blogosphere like wildfire. It was the story of a lesbian activist who was among those killed in the tragic stage collapse in Indiana last weekend. While her story is tragic enough, and the fact that she was set to join her partner in a civil union next September makes it even more heartbreaking, another story was making it’s way around. Word was getting out that the Indiana coroner who was in car of Christina Santiago’s remains was refusing to release them to her lesbian partner.

The story claimed that the coroner’s office cited the so-called Defense of Marriage Act for it’s reasoning in not releasing Santiago’s body. This of course would make anyone’s blood boil. The very thought that simply because of someone’s sexual orientation, they would be denied their partner’s remains after a tragic accident like this is sickening. The problem is it wasn’t at all true.

Santiago’s partner, who was apparently in no way legally bound to Santiago in Indiana or any other state, was in critical care at the hospital so she clearly could not have shown up to the morgue seeking to collect her partner’s body. The coroner’s office was making arrangements with Santiago’s aunt (who was listed as next-of-kin) and a friend of the couple’s was also assisting with those arrangements.

Now the purpose of this post is not to place blame on who released erroneous facts or who said what to whom. I merely want to point out the fact that we don’t need to make up stories like this to illustrate just how damaging and hateful the Defense of Marriage Act is.

Hundreds of stories every year surface about partners being denied hospital visitations, about husbands being ripped apart because one spouse lives in a different country, about wives fighting for health benefits, pensions and social security.

Congressman Gerry Studds, Husband Dean Hara and their dog, Bonnie

Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) has an excellent printable book on their site which you can get to by linking the image below. The book features 20 stories of how DOMA harms American families. Many of these stories are heartbreaking and I’m sharing one here. This is the story of Dean Hara, the surviving husband of former Congressman Gerry Studds. We’ve discussed the Congressman here before as being the first openly-gay Congressman. But here’s his husband’s story and how he’s affected by DOMA today:

Dean met U.S. Representative Gerry E. Studds, the first openly gay member of Congress, through mutual friends in the early 1980s. They crossed paths in their Washington, DC neighborhood over the next 10 years, and began dating in January 1991. Less than nine months later Dean accepted when Gerry proposed a lifetime commitment and they exchanged rings.

Over the next five years Dean and Gerry as a couple attended congressional, public and political events in Washington and around the country. Dean wore the congressional spousal pin and in 1995 was given a congressional photo identification card as Gerry’s spouse.

Gerry decided not to run for re-election in 1996, and retired from public service after 24 years in Congress. He and Dean moved to Massachusetts with their new dog, Bonnie, and built a quiet life together with family and friends. They legally married in May 2004, one week after Massachusetts ended marriage discrimination.

On October 3, 2006 Gerry took Bonnie out for her morning walk. He collapsed from a blood clot in his lung and was rushed to the hospital. His health improved at first, but 10 days later his condition suddenly got worse, and he died in the early morning hours of October 14, 2006.

“Gerry and I spent 16 wonderful years together and I miss him,” says Dean. “I remember when he spoke on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives during the debate about DOMA as I watched from the visitor’s gallery in July 1996. Back then, we didn’t know that we would ever be able to legally marry. Now that Gerry is gone, I’m always reminded that DOMA denies fair and equal treatment.”

Dean, now 53, works as a financial advisor and continues to live in Boston with Bonnie. Since Gerry’s death Dean has sought to be treated the same as other surviving spouses of retired federal employees.

“Gerry was a public servant for 27 years, worked hard for our country, and paid as much into the system as anyone else,” he says. “But after he died, I was treated differently than other surviving spouses. Every federal employee counts on their surviving spouses having basic protections, but the federal government denies me those protections because of DOMA.”

Make sure you go download the book from GLAD and share it with everyone you know.

 

Would You Let Your Kids Play With Kids of Gay & Lesbian Parents?

photo by Jamie McGonnigal, EqualityPhotography.com

After posting a story regarding the census reports from the St. Louis area, finding that many gay and lesbian couples were raising children there, STLToday has posed the question: “Would you allow your kids to play with the kids of gay couples?”

As we’ve seen in recent stories like that of a Colorado Catholic School, or a Catholic School in Hingham, MA, children of LGBT parents are often discriminated against. So the questioned posed by the St. Louis publication is not that far a leap.

And while most readers of this blog are either LGBT themselves or allies to the LGBT community, it’s questions like this which shed light on the bigotry and hatred we face on a daily basis. You’ll find most of the comments already posted at STLToday find the very question to be offensive.

Brad Wolf commented:

“I will not allow my children to play with children of bigots because bigotry is actually a learned trait.”

Donna Savage wrote:

“why not let them play together. homosex— is not contagious.”

And Cynthia Prior added:

“I have seen first hand that many people are afraid to let there children spend the night or hang out at the home of my grandson. I’m not sure why I just know there has been an affect. Perhaps they are not sure of what there children might be exposed to or they don’t know how to explain the difference in the parents.”

While the context of Cynthia’s post was not described, and we’re not sure if her grandson is gay or if his parents are a same-sex couple, it’s clear that whether people find the question offensive or not, it’s a legitimate question that should be addressed. One commenter even mentioned that since comments could not be made anonymously, those who are homophobic are less likely to respond truthfully. Could this be true?

How interesting to see moments like this, or like the National Organization for Marriage trying to hide the names of their major donors for fear they might be seen as the bigots they are? Those who discriminate against LGBT people are afraid of receiving threats, as Anti-Gay Senator Chuck Grassley said in the recent Senate DOMA hearings. He claimed one of his potential witnesses was afraid to testify because she feared for her and her family’s safety. I know very few LGBT people who have not felt threatened at some point – and with good cause considering the violence and murder that has been a part of our everyday lives for generations.

So…would you let your kids play with kids of gay and lesbian parents? And if you’re offended by the question, ask yourself why.

Bus Driver Orders Gay Couple to the Back of the Bus

Ari Gold (photo by Jamie McGonnigal, EqualityPhotography.com)

Many activists in the LGBT movement frequently hope and pray for a “Rosa Parks Moment.” By that, they mean a pivotal occurrence where an LGBT person stands up for themselves in a way that ignites a flame that won’t go out until we have our full equality. While this wasn’t exactly the Rosa Parks Moment some hope for, the irony is not to be missed.

According to the Village Voice, this weekend, openly gay performer Ari Gold claims to have been sitting in the front seat of a Short Line bus holding another man’s hand.

The bus driver reportedly told Ari that if they wanted to continue sitting together, they’d need to move to the back of the bus. Channeling Rosa Parks, Ari refused. The driver pulled the bus over and phoned for a state trooper. Upon the trooper’s arrival, the driver said that the couple was making him uncomfortable and he wanted them off the bus. Naturally, the trooper told the driver that nothing they were doing was illegal and he needed to continue the trip.

Ari announced to the bus what had occurred and the bus seemed displeased with the driver’s blatant homophobia. Ari will be filing charges.

We called ShortLine to find out if anything had been done about the situation and we were emailed this statement from George Grieve, President of Hudson Transit Lines:

I am the president of Hudson Transit Lines, Inc. which is the company known as Shortline. I wanted to assure you and your readers that we do not condone or endorse the actions taken by this one driver. His actions are not representative of the management of our Company. We will continue to investigate this incident until we are sure we have all the facts at which time we will take the appropriate disciplinary and remedial action. We apologize for the insensitive action of our driver and can assure you we will take the necessary steps to make sure this does not happen again.

Gay Couple Booted from Cambridge Deli After Brief Kiss

Having grown up in the Boston area and certainly come to terms with who I am as a young adult in Boston and Cambridge, the story of discrimination in a local market there, comes as a surprise.

Josh Fallon, Harvard senior

According to My Fox Boston, harvard senior Aaron Fallon was in the Market in the Square in Cambridge with his boyfriend when after sharing a small kiss, a clerk told him “We don’t want that kind of sh*t in here,” and kicked them out.

While Cambridge may feel like a safe area and Massachusetts is certainly legislatively a very LGBT-friendly place to live, there are always ignorant and homophobic people in any place. While the store owner apologized to Fallon, the feeling of being discriminated against for who you are is not an easy thing to shake. It’s something that hits you in a way that people who haven’t been discriminated against find hard to understand.

BREAKING: US District Judge Opens Door for DOMA Challenge

More and more challenges to the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) have been hitting the courts and getting shafted by Federal Judges.

Today, we have a new ruling out of California, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, US District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland ruled that state employees can sue the federal government over their same-sex partners’ exclusion from long-term health care benefits. The judge denied a request from Obama’s Department of Justice to dismiss the case, opening the floodgates for lawsuits from gay federal employees around the country.

Currently, federal employees can enroll in federally-approved long-term health care plans. Employees of the state can buy coverage at below-market rates, use untaxed income to pay premiums and deduct future benefits from their taxes. The California agency has refused to sign up same-sex spouses because the Defense of Marriage Act denies federal tax benefits to any state that covers them.

Judge Wilken claimed that DOMA is “robbing states of the power to allow same-sex civil marriages that will be recognized under federal law” and made it clear she would be challenging parts of the law.

While this story doesn’t specifically address our personal stories, we thought it important to share the fact that a major decision was made today, that is in line with the decision of Judge Vaughn Walker’s which overturned California’s Proposition 8. With more and more judicial challenges to the bigoted Defense of Marriage Act, it’s only a matter of time before we see it overturned in US Courts.

DOMA Separates Families

Every day before he left for work, Richard Dennis would kiss his partner on the forehead as he slept, knowing each kiss could be their last.

Let that sink in.

That line comes from an AOL news article about Richard and his partner Jair Izquierdo, who was just deported back to Peru after immigrating to the US legally five years ago.  Every day the couple lived in fear that that day might come despite their having obtained a civil union in New York state. When the day finally came they hauled Jair off in handcuffs like a criminal.

You see, there simply is no civil protection for bi-national same-sex couples. Even in the six states that currently recognize same-sex marriage, for them, the threat of deportation looms large.

Take the story of Joshua Vandiver and Henry Velandia, a married couple in New Jersey fighting to stay together.

These Americans face the most blatant and cruel aspects of a federal government that refuses to recognize their relationships and callously rips them apart, all in the name of “protecting family values”.  For Richard and Jair the Defense of Marriage Act is no abstract concept. Jair might never be coming back to America.  No legitimate path exists under current law to bring them back together on American soil and that tragedy is all due to DOMA.

For many, Marriage Equality is a social justice issue. Many couples desperately need protections under the law such as the right to Immigration Equality.

The next time you have a conversation with anyone, gay or straight, that doesn’t support Marriage Equality tell them these stories. Ask them if their family deserves to be torn apart because of who they are.