Equality Works fundraiser

Support Equality Works!

Support Equality Works!

Usually Friday nights for me are home nights. After all, that’s the night “Battlestar Galactica” is on!  Except that… “Battlestar Galactica” is over [sigh].  But [brightening up] at least I have the DVDs!

Okay, well, that’s the night “Dollhouse” is on!  Except that… “Dollhouse” had its season finale last week [sigh].  But [brightening up] — we got the happy news yesterday that Fox had renewed it for a second 13-episode season!  Yeaaaaay!

Still, what now am I to do with a Friday night?

Tiffany McClain of Equality Works

Tiffany McClain of Equality Works

Last night it was to go to a fundraiser for Equality Works, the coalition that’s working to end discrimination against lesbians, gays, bisexuals, & transfolk in Anchorage.  That includes making sure we’re heard when the Anchorage Assembly takes public testimony on June 9 on the ordinance introduced last Tuesday that will, if passed, ban employment, housing, public accomodations, & other forms of discrimination based on sexual orientation or veteran status.

Tiffany McClain, Brittany Goodnight, & Ryan Lawton, raising funds for Equality Works

Tiffany McClain, Brittany Goodnight, & Ryan Lawton, raising funds for Equality Works

I was a little worried as I drove there, because there were only 6 people, including me & two of the organizers, had RSVPed “yes” to the Facebook invitation for the fundraiser.  But I need not have worried: when I got there (as Linda Kellen Biegel has already blogged at Celtic Diva’s Blue Oasis), the street was already lined with cars, & the backyard barbecue/party was already in full swing.

My first impression — besides that there were sure a lot of people there! — was, Whoa! everyone is so young! Please, take no  offense at that; take it from the perspective of me, a 50-year-old whose strong years as an activist ended nearly two decades ago, when burnout & the private concerns of family life & personal goals led me to kinda fade out of the public LGBT activist scene.  Which explains why most of the people there (unless they happened to have caught Channel 11 News last Wednesday night) had no idea who I was.  Or if they did, like Equality Works’ Tiffany McClain, only by way of recent occasional emails.

Linda Kellen Biegel & Mel Green

Linda Kellen Biegel & Mel Green

The big exception to that was Linda Kellen Biegel.  Linda is well-known in Alaska & beyond as the prominent progressive political blogger Celtic Diva of Celtic Diva’s Blue Oasis.  But back in the day, the early 1990s, I knew her as Linda Kellen, a member of the local folk/rock band Sky is Blu, which amongst other things performed in at least a couple or so of the annual women’s show Celebration of Change, in which I also performed.  And if you don’t already know, let me tell you: Linda is one fine damn singer.

Linda Kellen Biegel (Celtic Diva) & Mel Green

Linda Kellen Biegel (Celtic Diva) & Mel Green

As Linda described this past Thursday in a post about her experiences during the 1992-93 equal rights ordinance battle,

I was in the folk/rock band “Sky Is Blu,” whose members were either LGBT or LGBT-friendly.  We ended up playing many gigs for LGBT events and for six years, I felt privileged to be involved in this wonderful, close-knit community.

It was in that context that I knew Linda.  But while I’ve been following her blog since last August, I hadn’t seen her in years.  I can’t say what a delight it was to hang out with her last night, catching up, but mainly talking about how important this ordinance is & what we could to ensure its success.

(Go & read Linda’s post about 1992-93 in full.  There you’ll find that, in the poisonous atmosphere created by the likes of the “Reverend” Jerry Prevo in their fight to prevent equal rights protections for LGBT folk, it’s not just the LGBT folk who take this hits, but also our nongay friends & allies.  But will that stop people like Linda from standing with us this time around?  Nope, didn’t think so.)

Tiffany McClain & Linda Kellen Biegel

Tiffany McClain & Linda Kellen Biegel

The other high points of the evening for me were meeting Tiffany McClain & some of the other people who are working hard behind the scenes at Equality Works.  It’s wonderful to see the vital, fresh energy being poured into this effort — & their willing, hard work made me feel a whole lot better at sticking with my own self-knowledge: I cannot, any more, do the kind of work that I was doing in the ’80s & early ’90s.  I’m a writer: what I can do best for this effort is to write.  Like I’m doing now.

We asked them what they’d like us to tell supporters of the ordinance about Equality Works & the June 9 Assembly meeting, at which the Assembly will take public testimony on the ordinance.  What they said:

Turn out! Even if you don’t plan to testify, we still want to see you there.  And we’d like to see you there in blue — blue dresses, blue shirts, blue sweatshirts — let’s have a sea of blue around the first floor of the Loussac Library that Tuesday evening.

And support Equality Works with your time & your money. There’s a donation form on their website which you can print out & send in with your donation.

Bent Alaska has more suggestions on how you can help to pass the ordinance.

Also from Bent Alaska,

Share your story
Are you an LGBT person who believes that you have been discriminated against by an employer, landlord, or business? Have you ever been told to stay closeted on the job? Are you a straight ally or family member who has felt the sting of public harassment or discrimination because of your friends or relatives, or because you were perceived as being “too masculine” or “too feminine”? There is no better time than at the public hearing on June 9 to share these stories with the people in a position to make a difference. If you can participate, please e-mail Tiffany McClain.

Although I hope you’ll keep reading my blog, Bent Alaska remains your best single online source for news about the ordinance, with periodic news roundups on the ordinance, as well as other news for the LGBT community in Anchorage & statewide. Thanks to E. Ross and Stacy, who work together to put out Bent Alaska & the Alaska GLBT News email list.

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Divorce, financially interdependent partner style

Rozz slicing apples for pie, Thanksgiving 2005 (Jesse in background)

Rozz slicing apples for pie, Thanksgiving 2005

Today is the final day of the University of Alaska system’s annual Open Enrollment period, when we have the opportunity to make changes to the various options in our benefits package. And so it came to formalize what Rozz, now Ptery, & I had come to agree to — that we’re not quite partners anymore. So, with the simple filling out of my Health Plan Enrollment Form removing Rozz (still his legal name) as my financially interdependent partner… well. There it is. Filled it out, walked in the rain to the University Lake Building where our HR office is nowadays, & made it official.*

Is this how heterosexual couples feel when they get copies of their final divorce papers? Surely at least those who still love each other but for whom circumstance or life paths have led them in different directions, as happened with us.

Rozz & met in January 1993, moved in with each other later that year, & became financially interdependent partners (FIPs) as soon as the university made the program available, sometime in the mid-1990s.  To become FIPs, we had to fill out a form checking off on a number of statements establishing our relationship to one another,  & also had to meet at least five criteria (for example, having a joint checking account) which established proof that we were financially interdependent.

What did this get us?  As stated in the University of Alaska’s explanation of  its FIP policy:

financially interdependent partners and their dependent children will be provided the same benefits as those provided to married spouses and their dependent children, except where expressly prohibited by law. All University of Alaska Policies and Regulations and benefit plan documents that affect employees, spouses and their families also apply to employees and their financially interdependent partner and dependent children.

Through the FIP program, then, Rozz had access to UA-provided health benefits, along with other benefits such as the employee tuition waiver, which enabled Rozz to take classes at UAA.  (I used the employee tuition waiver myself to finance my masters’ degree.)  Had we legally adopted Rozz’s nephew Jesse, he also would have come under my benefits.  (As it happens, it proved too legally complex to put through an adoption; & he fortunately had health insurance through other means.)

Our benefits weren’t exactly at the same level as for our legally married heterosexual counterparts, however.  For one thing, unlike for married folks, the value of the benefits that Rozz received count as income for me — so I had to pay additional taxes on them.

Rozz eating pie, Thanksgiving 2005

Rozz eating pie, Thanksgiving 2005

Not quite the same as marriage, then.

But for all that, it was the closest thing we had to a legal recognition and honoring of our commitment & love for one another.

And so filling out my Health Plan Enrollment Form removing Rozz as my FIP is the closest representation we have of a “divorce.”*  (It also, to my great regret, means that Rozz-now-Ptery no longer has any health insurance at all.  C’mon, President Obama & Congress, we need universal health coverage now!)

I picked these particular photos for this blog post because my memories of Rozz making that apple pie on a beautiful snowy Thanksgiving Day in 2005 is one of memories that went through my head as I walked in the rain to University Lake Building at lunchtime today, feeling pretty rainy inside myself.  Thanksgiving 2005 was a beautiful snowy winter day, & I remember Jesse (who is partially seen behind Rozz in the upper right pik) spending some time outside with the neighbor shoveling driveways & throwing snow up in the air that the neighbor’s dog would jump up into.  Later, after the pies were done, we headed across town to have Thanksgiving dinner with Mark (my brother) & Linda & Lauren & Miles — finishing off with pumpkin, pecan, & Rozz’s apple pie.

It was a wonderful day.  I miss days like those, & all the other days & nights that we spent together as friends, lovers, & partners over the past 16 years.  I feel lucky to have spent so much of my life with you, my love.  Knowing I’ll have less income tax to pay next April 15 is only partial recompense for not being able to spend more years the same.

Postscript: By coincidence, just as I was finishing up this post, I got a call from Ptery, who just came into cellphone range again after a week & a half out of it.  I told him the news of our ex-FIPness & about the blog post I was writing, & the sadness I was feeling.  But also, how glad I am that he’s happy doing what he’s doing & following the life he’s chosen.  With or without marriage or FIP, whether or not we live together or are partners, the love is still there, strong as ever.  And that feels pretty good.

——-

* Found out later I need also to sign a “Termination of Financially Interdependent Partnership” form in front of an official UA HR representative, so I’ll trot back over to University Lake Building on Monday & do it.

Posted in Journal, Marriage equality | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Divorce, financially interdependent partner style

Listening to Eddie

Not Eddie Burke (... or is it?)

Not Eddie Burke (...or is it?)

Yesterday, in between finding myself in front of a TV camera at lunchtime & watching the results in the evening, I listened in on Eddie Burke’s talk radio show on KBYR 700-AM.  I’d heard Mr. Burke would be devoting his show to discussion of the equal rights ordinance that was introduced the night before in the Anchorage Assembly.

It was an interesting, weird, sometimes toxic, & sometimes informative experience.

For anyone who lives, as I do, well outside the sphere of conservative talk radio, the toxic aspects should be obvious.  KBYR is a Fox News affiliate, and includes on its daily schedule such prominent conservative pundits as Bill Bennett, Laura Ingraham, Dennis Prager, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rusty Humphries, and Michael Medved. The other local voice I saw in their line-up besides Eddie Burke is Glen Biegel. Except for Glenn Beck & Sean Hannity, I’m not familiar with these people — & even Beck & Hannity I know more from seeing their… shall we say antics… put on display on “The Daily Show” & “The Colbert Report,” not to mention Keith Olbermann’s show on MSNBC. (Have you done that waterboarding-for-charity event you volunteered for yet, Hannity?)

In what I heard yesterday, I found Mr. Burke to be rather like Hannity or other Fox News types (like Bill O’Reilly), albeit with some of his own color thrown in. Once, he boasted of having the nickname “the Hammer” — which, sorry, just put me in mind of a certain Dr. Horrible’s Singalong Blog.   But really, doesn’t the character of Eddie Burke bears some similarity to that of Captain Hammer? — a smug bully who views himself as a defender of right?  (Well, of the right, at least.)  Who but Eddie Burke would make a point several times during his show to brag proudly about the “homophobe t-shirt” he was wearing?

And what are we to make of his contention that, by virtue of the ordinance being introduced, “They drew first blood — the homosexuals drew first blood!” Huh?  What blood?

Just a silly rhetorical flourish, I’m sure.  Not real blood.  Not, say, the blood of Peter Dispirito.  Who, you ask, was he?  Well, yesterday I opened my copy of Identity Reports to page 50 to read the headline of the “Prima Facie” case describing how I was fired from the Book Cache in 1984.   Tonight, I’ll jump another 20 pages, to page 70, to read from the first of that study’s cases based on documentary sources (hence the d in the case number):

Male, age unavailable
d-1 — MURDER OF PETER DISPIRITO BY GARY LEE STARBARD August 10, 1974

At 4:30 AM on August 10, 1974, Delbert Smith of the Anchorage Police Department was awakened by his wife, who told him there was an injured man lying in the street.  Smith looked out and saw a nude man, later identified as Peter Dispirito, a longtime Anchorage resident and hairdresser and owner of Peter’s Salon, lying in a pool of blood.  Smith called the Anchorage Police Department, then went out and covered Dispirito with a blanket.  Dispirito had stab wounds in his chest and one arm.  He told Smith that “Gary did it.”

About 45 minutes later Dispirito died of his wounds at Providence Hospital. In a case marked by procedural problems — two warrantless searches, a problematic interrogation of Gary Lee Starbard — Starbard was able ultimately to plead down to a charge of manslaughter, which could have led to as many as 20 years’ imprisonment. At the sentencing hearing, the defense attorney made numerous references to Dispirito’s homosexuality, finally leading Judge Seaborn Buckalew to rebuke him that “the victim is the dead man” and that the defense attorney’s remarks could be interpreted to mean that Starbard had killed not a man, but a “queer.”  But despite this ever-so-vigorous defense of Dispirito’s humanness, in pronouncing sentence, Judge Buckalew referred to the murder as “an unfortunate accident — incident” — and gave Starbard just one year.

Who drew first blood?  Doesn’t look to me like it was the homosexual.  Looks, rather, as if it was a homosexual whose blood was drawn, rather violently in fact, by — guess what — a heterosexual. (Or at least that’s what all the heterosexuals involved in processing the case presumed Starbard to be.)  We can at least be satisfied that the later judges did better than Judge Buckalew in sentencing the convicted murderers in case d-12, “Murder of Oscar Jackson by William M. Justice aka William M. Rima, December 21, 1984″ (p. 76) and case d-14,”Murder of Raymond Barker by Charles Cole and Matthew Decker, April 3, 1985” (p. 78), both cases in which heterosexual perpetrators felt justified in killing homosexual men because they were homosexual.

Now, those cases involved the spilling of blood. What’s been presented in the Anchorage Assembly, and what’s before them now,  is a call simply for equal protection from discrimination — which, while involving lives, does not in fact involve the “drawing of blood.”

So much for cheap rhetorical flourishes.

Which isn’t to say Mr. Burke ceased from making them, or from trotting out many of the same ludicrous claims that we’ve come to expect from opponents of equal rights.  For instance, the argument that the ordinance would grant homosexuals “special rights” — that is, the “special” rights already adhering to Anchorage residents to not be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, age, sex, color, national origin, marital status, or physical disability.  By this argument, if you are a woman protected through Anchorage’s human rights code from being paid less than a man for performing the same work, that’s a “special right.” If you’re a black man protected from being fired from a job by a racist white boss, or a white man protected from being fired from a job by a racist black boss — that’s a “special right.”  If you live in a large apartment complex and faithfully attend Anchorage Baptist Temple each Sunday, and are protected from being evicted from your apartment by a Mormon or Catholic or atheist or [gasp!] homosexual landlord (they do exist) who disagrees with your beliefs or is even downright hostile to the church you belong to (imagine such a thing!) — that, too, is a “special right.”

Ooh.  Special rights.  Better get rid of ’em.  It’ll clearly make the world so much better.

What a load of hooey.  Expect to hear a lot more of it from the Mr. Burke, his hero Pastor Prevo, & their followers before all this is done & over.  Expect to hear repetitions of Mr. Burke’s joke that “soon we’ll be giving ‘special rights’ to NAMBLA” [i.e., pedophiles], or his assertion that homosexuality is an “addiction” like alcoholism, & other equally ludicrous assertions.

Okay, enough about the toxic.  I said that listening to the show was a sometimes informative experience — what’s up with that?

It had chiefly to do with the presence of Jeffrey Mittman of the ACLU as a guest on the show. Here’s where we got into the substance of what the ordinance as drafted has endeavored to do: to advance Anchorage’s commitment to equal protection under the law for all its citizens, in this case by adding sexual orientation and veteran’s status to the human rights code, while simultaneously protecting the right of religious organizations to discriminate within the bounds of their legitimate interests as religious organizations.  I found this portion of the discussion fascinating and useful. In one interesting exchange, a caller’s question led to the identification of a fuzzy aspect of the religious exception, which Mr. Mittman believed could encroach on the right to discriminate by religious organizations.  This had to do with who actually determined what was a bona fide religious purpose and what was not: e.g., under the religious exception contained in the ordinance, the Anchorage Baptist Temple would never be forced to hire a gay or lesbian Sunday School teacher, but what about the bus drivers who drive ABT’s buses on Sundays, or the buses of their Christian school?  Mr. Mittman felt that the Assembly may still need to adjust the ordinance’s language to protect ABT’s and other religious organizations’ rights in this area.  (For my part, I recognize the Sunday buses as a part of ABT’s ministry — though I sure never would’ve let my kid climb onto one of them.)

Homeless camp in Valley of the Moon woods

Homeless camp in Valley of the Moon woods. According to Jim Minnery, you're only discriminated against if you're homeless, which in Anchorage would mean living at Brother Francis Shelter or in a camp like this. Oh, yes, & you'd also have to be unable to get a job.

But equally instructive were the occasional exchanges between Mr. Mittman and Mr. Burke’s other guest, Jim Minnery  of the Alaska Family Council. Mr. Minnery set the bar of discrimination pretty high: in his opinion, gays can only claim they’re discriminated against if they’re homeless & completely unable to get any job at all.   A couple of times Mr. Minnery brought up objections to specific provisions of the ordinance relating to the religious exception; but then, when Mr. Mittman attempted to address the objections with possible solutions and asked if they would be satisfactory, Mr. Minnery made it clear that it didn’t really matter: no matter what was done to improve the problems he had identified, he still wouldn’t support the ordinance.  No matter what.

And that, to me, turned out to be the biggest lesson of the show: there’s only one side negotiating here.  The Assembly, charged by voters with the task of representing all citizens of the Municipality of Anchorage, has been working to craft an ordinance that will as far as possible respect and protect everyone’s rights — our right to not be unfairly discriminated against, conservative religious organization’s rights to discriminate within the bounds of their legitimate religious purposes and activities.   But the conservatives as represented by Mr. Minnery and Mr. Burke will have none of that: if they don’t have carte blanche to discriminate as much as they want wherever they want against whomever they want — or at least against homosexuals — then, according to them, their rights have been trampled on.  There is no middle ground.  No matter how the ordinance is changed to meet their more specific objections, in the end they’re in the “debate” only for their prejudice.

So no matter how civil the discussion might appear — and yes, even on Eddie Burke’s show there was some civil discussion — in the end (especially when coming upon a commercial or news break), Mr. Burke would cut Jeff Mittman off and go into a sort of mini-rant that showed that nothing, nothing, nothing that Mr. Mittman or anyone else said, no matter how rational or persuasive, had modified Eddie Burke’s thinking one bit.  It might as well have never been said.  His show is not to negotiate a way for all the members of a pluralistic society to live together even with their disagreements. For him, it’s all just an exercise in getting us to waste our time, and then to go on to enthusiastically trash us with the enthusiastic participation of his fans.

Don’t ever call into or go on a show like Eddie Burke’s expecting to win a debate or to change his or his follower’s minds.  It ain’t gonna happen. Go with the expectation, rather, that there might be a few people listening who might be more openminded than Eddie-bragging-about-wearing-his-homophobe-tshirt-Burke (was it a Captain Hammer t-shirt?), people who are perhaps willing to sit down at the table and negotiate for a way in which all of us, straight and gay alike, conservative and liberal alike, can live together peacefully.  That seems to have been how Jeff Mittman approached his appearances on Mr. Burke’s show, so that he was able to maintain a relaxed calm and good humor all the way through. (I missed all but the end of Jackie Buckley’s call into the show as a representative of Equality Works, but from what I heard, she did a great job of it too.  No surprise there — I’ve seen Jackie do it before.)

I got a lot out of it.  But the toxicity was such that I hope I don’t have to listen again real soon.

(With apologies to Joss Whedon, Nathan Fillion, & the rest of the writers, cast, characters, & crew of Dr. Horrible’s Singalong Blog.)

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Channel 11 interview, part 2 (the full story)

Talking with Corey Allen-Young of Channel 11 about discrimination in Anchorage

Talking with Corey Allen-Young of Channel 11 about discrimination in Anchorage

The primary reason Channel 11 wanted to interview me today was because they were interested in hearing from people who had experienced discrimination in Anchorage because of sexual orientation. I know that the folks at Equality Works have been collecting accounts of discrimination this year.

Back in 1987-1988, I worked with Jay Brause (coauthor) and Jacqueline Buckley (co-project coordinator) to put together the study Identity Reports: Sexual Orientation Bias in Alaska (Anchorage, AK: Identity, Inc., 1989). One section of the report, “Prima Facie: Documented Cases of Sexual Orientation Bias in Alaska,” gathered 84 accounts of discrimination & bias that had occurred in various parts of the state from 1974 to 1987. Some were based on documentary evidence — newspaper reports, court documents, letters, etc. — & others were based on taped interviews conducted mainly by Jackie, which I wrote up (along with the introductory methodology & analysis of the study).

It’s in part because of “Prima Facie” that I know the exact date when the incident of discrimination that Corey Allen-Young interviewed me about occurred: July 22, 1984. As my case appeared in the study (page 50 of Identity Reports), names & even the name of the bookstore I worked for were omitted. It was headlined:

Female, 25
* 31 – EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION (RETAIL BOOKSTORE) July 22, 1984

Identity Reports (1989) and One in 10 (1986)

Identity Reports (1989) and One in 10 (1986)

The 31 refers to my story’s case number within the body of the report. The  asterisk * refers to the fact that my case, evaluated by a former intake investigator with the Alaska Human Rights Commission, would in her opinion have been jurisdictional if the state human rights statute of the time, Alaska Statute 18.80, had been amended to extend protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  That is, had sexual orientation been a protected class like race, ethnicity, sex, religious affiliation, national origin, etc., I would have had grounds to file a complaint with the state human rights commission & seek redress. (Like maybe getting my job back.)

But sexual orientation was not a protected class under Alaska Statutes.  Nor was it under federal legislation, nor under municipal ordinance.  I was, as they say, S.O.L.

If you want, you can look up Identity Reports in the library & find my case on page 50, case #31.  I can vouch for the fact that there are a couple of copies of it in the Alaskana section on the second floor of the UAA/APU Consortium Library, because I pulled a copy of it (& of an earlier study I’d also worked on, One in 10: A profile of Alaska’s Lesbian & Gay Community, 1986) to show to Corey when he came to interview me.  (And to Channel 11 cameraman Scott Favorite.)  But the account as written there is kinda dry.  Like I said, doesn’t even include the name of the bookstore I was working at.

I gave a pretty complete account to Corey & Scott, names included.  But of course an interview which is only one part of a two-and-a-half-minute story on a nightly TV news program has to edit things down somewhat.  Here’s what KTVA’s written version of the story says (following closely what was said in the broadcast):

For Melissa being discriminated for her sexual orientation began here in 1984. “One day I just walked into work and my manager said we are going to have to fire you and I was like what why.” Melissa says she was fired over complaints that she was not helpful enough. Something that was surprising due to her previous good work ethic. But she says that all changed when her supervisors learned of her sexual orientation. “Anyone that works for a book store, or any other private business can get fired exactly the same way that I did, for no other reason than one of my co workers disliked me.”

All in all, it fit in well with what I felt was a pretty good, balanced story on Channel 11’s news broadcast tonight.  And Corey & Scott made it an interesting, enjoyable experience for me (even if I didn’t end up having time to eat my lunch!).

At my brothers house, December 1984, a few months after being fired from the Book Cache

At my brother's house, December 1984, a few months after being fired from the Book Cache

But here’s the full story:

In July 1984 I was a probationary employee at the Sears Mall store of the Book Cache, which many will remember as an Alaska-owned chain of bookstores that went defunct a few years later.  One of my coworkers was another young woman, perhaps 19 or 20, named Chris, who used to spend a lot of her breaks & lunches hanging out with a gay male friend of hers who worked down the mall at Sears.  Because of that friendship, I evaluated Chris as someone who could safely know that I was a lesbian — don’t remember exactly how the topic was brought up, but in any case she knew about me.  She had no problem with it, was friendly throughout.

Problem, though: Chris had a habit of taking overlong breaks, which often cut into my own.  This was especially a problem when my brother, who worked for the State of Alaska downtown, came to meet me for lunch: he had only so much time, & if Chris was late getting back, so much for me having lunch with my brother.  I talked with Chris about it two or three times, but despite any promises she didn’t change her behavior.  So finally I felt compelled to complain to my manager about it.

On July 22, 1984, after a couple of days off (& rough days they were, too, but that’s a story best told elsewhere), I came in to work & went to the workroom at the back of the store to take off my jacket.  I wasn’t even able to get both arms out before my manager approached me & said, “I’m sorry, but we’re going to have to fire you.”  I was dumbfounded.  “Why?” I asked.  She explained that two customers had complained to the personnel manager that I wasn’t “helpful enough.”

That didn’t make sense.  After all, the personnel manager worked in a downtown office: he wasn’t even onsite.  Whereas my manager was: surely if a customer had a complaint about me, they’d make it directly to her.  Nor had I received any complaints or cautions whatsoever about my job performance to date.  It occurred to me pretty quickly that at the very least, the action to fire me had not originated with my manager: her attitude was apologetic, as though she was perhaps against my being fired, & the explanation of the why seemed to foist responsibility onto the chief high muckety-mucks downtown, rather than her.

It also occurred to me to wonder if maybe I’d been fired for being a lesbian.  This was confirmed a couple of days later when I went in to the store to pick up my final paycheck.  I talked with one of my other (former) coworkers, whose name I don’t remember — in “Prima Facie” she goes by the initial M.  M was maybe two or three years younger than me, a rather innocent-seeming Mormon girl who seemed embarrassed by what she had to tell me.  She said that the day before I was fired, she had seen Chris at the back of the store talking with higher-ups from downtown, including the manager.  On the same day, Chris had announced to coworkers that I was gay.  On the day I was fired, Chris had gone about the store singing, “Mel got fired, Mel got fired.”

I’ve never seen Chris since, but my best guess is that she resented me for complaining to our manager about her habit of taking overlong breaks, & decided to get her revenge by playing on the prejudices of higher management.

And there was nothing I could do about it.  My employers didn’t care that I was a good and conscientious worker.  What was more important from their point of view, apparently, was that I was a member of a category of people against whom they were prejudiced, never mind that they had no clue I was a member of that category until Chris told  them.  Not only that, but they lacked the courage to tell the truth about why I was being fired to my face — though they must have known that, absent any legal protections from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, there was absolutely nothing I could do about it.

And you know, here it is, 25 years later, & we’ve got the very same situation in Anchorage today.  Which is why I told Corey on Channel 11 News:

Anyone that works for a book store, or any other private business can get fired exactly the same way that I did, for no other reason than one of my co workers disliked me.

Let your representatives on the assembly that you want equal rights in Anchorage. Ask them to pass the proposed equal rights ordinance. And support Equality Works in their efforts to end discrimination in Anchorage on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Channel 11 interview, part 1 (the video)

On Channel 11 News

On Channel 11 News

It was a surprise to me: around 10:30 or so this morning I got a call at work, on my direct line, from someone identifying himself as a reporter. I’m not entirely unused to getting calls from reporters — faculty in my department are often asked to comment on this or that issue in the news — but those calls usually come to our main office line, not to my direct extension.

Turns out it was Corey Allen-Young of KTVA Channel 11 News. With the introduction in the Anchorage Assembly last night of an ordinance which would prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, etc. on the basis of sexual orientation, Channel 11 was interested in talking with people who had actually experienced discrimination. Mr. Allen-Young had seen a comment I made on the blog of Assemblymember Patrick Flynn yesterday, in which I had made reference to having experienced discrimination for being a lesbian. Though I signed myself there as “Mel Green” rather than by my full name, with a little detective work Mr. Allen-Young had managed to track me down at my workplace a the university. Although my instance of discrimination had taken place quite awhile ago — in 1984, 25 years go — Mr. Allen-Young was still interested in talking with me.

So it is that I came to be on Channel 11 News tonight — the first time I’ve ever been interviewed for TV news. So pardon me if I go on about it a little (later) — it’s a new experience for me.

Here’s the interview, from KTVA’s website:

Tip o’ the nib to Katie, who found it online first.

More to say later.  Meanwhile, consider making a donation to Equality Works, which is working to end discrimination in Anchorage on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

The noise begins

Alaska Pride flag (design by Steve)

Alaska Pride flag (design by Steve)

The Anchorage Daily News has a story by Megan Holland on the proposed equal rights ordinance:

“Assembly to consider gay rights ordinance — Discrimination ban: Proposal would also cover veterans; Rev. Prevo plans fight”

No big surprise that Jerry Prevo of the Anchorage Baptist Temple plans to battle the ordinance — Prevo was also a vocal opponent in the earlier attempts to establish equal rights in Anchorage in the mid-1970s and in 1992-1993. I expect the ADN will have more complete coverage tomorrow. The story confirms what Patrick Flynn indicated in his blog earlier today on Sunday: that the Assembly would hold a public hearing on the proposed ordinance on June 9.

Meanwhile, the homophobes have already begun to climb out of the woodwork in comments on the ADN story. Example:

hhecuba wrote on 05/12/2009 09:20:45 PM:

Is the Anchorage Assembly pro sodomite? Will Anchorage be known as the new Sodom and Gomorra? Will the Anchorage Assembly support the Democrats new hate bill that supports and gives pedophiles and sodomites special privileges, and make it a hate crime for a preacher to give a sermon against homosexuality or normal people to live a their lives in a biblical way?

To which I replied:

Will people like hhecuba continue to ask questions that add nothing to a true civil discussion at all?

It took me some thought to frame my comment as a civil question, rather than to respond in kind. I hope that all of us who favor equal rights for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transfolk will take that kind of time — to take a deep breath & stay calm. Yes, the noise has begun. But a Finnish proverb I like to use as an email .sig comes readily to mind:

Hiljaa hyvä tulee.
(Good comes quietly.)

Which isn’t to say, say nothing. But say it with calm, quiet conviction, rather than spittle-flecked lips.

Foregoing The Daily Show tonight to see what KTUU Channel 2 News has to say in their 10 PM broadcast.

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Against discrimination in Anchorage

Pride

Flags at Pride, 2006

Anchorage Assemblymember Patrick Flynn posted on his blog this morning on Sunday that an ordinance to bar discrimination based upon sexual orientation or veteran’s status in the Municipality of Anchorage would be introduced at tonight’s Anchorage Assembly meeting.  Per Mr. Flynn’s blog:

This change, which is consistent with Anchorage’s long history of social justice, would prevent:

“discrimination in the sale or rental of real property, financing practices, employment practices, public accommodations, educational institutions, and practices of the municipality, based upon…sexual orientation or veteran’s status.”

This would simply add to the existing list of protected classes, including “race, religion, age, sex, color, national origin, marital status, or physical disability,” so I therefore consider it quite reasonable.

Furthermore, the definition of sexual orientation in the ordinance (see its full text on the Muni website), makes clear that the ban on discrimination extends to transgender/transsexual persons:

Sexual orientation means actual or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality or gender expression or identity. As used in this definition, ‘gender expression or identity’ means having or being perceived as having a self-image, appearance, or behavior different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth.

Be sure to visit Mr. Flynn’s blog to commend him for stepping forward on this, & answer the poll there too (in the right-hand column, scroll down to see it). And if you’re a resident of the Municipality of Anchorage, let your Assembly representative(s) know that you support this ordinance. Mr. Flynn indicates that a public hearing on the ordinance will take place on June 9, so please show up at the Assembly chambers at the Loussac Library, too. Consider also making a donation to Equality Works, which is working to end discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity in Anchorage.

The last time we went to battle on this was 1992–1993. I still curl up into a tiny ball inside when I think of that time — palpable hatred in the air, of which Wayne Anthony Ross’ referring to lesbians/gays as “degenerates” in a 1993 letter to the Anchorage Bar Association was merely one instance. It’s bound to get noisy this time, too. But have heart. We can win this. And will.

(On a lighter side: I also predict that a certain well-known Anchorage preacher will bring up paranoid fears about “basement rooms.”)

Posted in Alaska politics, Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Against discrimination in Anchorage

On the fat loss track again

Been awhile since I’ve posted on the Teverys (health) blog (or, now that I’ve imported all my blogs to my new website, the Terveys category).

This one’s a quickie, just to say that I’m back on the fat loss track again.

Between February 18, 2008 & last August whensoever, I lost about 40 lbs.  (If you want exact: 41, but you should know that weight fluctuates naturally a lot within a day.)  But I was also low-carbing during much of that time, so some of that would’ve been water weight, which got added back again when I started eating more carbs again (thus restoring my glycogen stores, thus also the water that always attaches to glycogen).  I’m estimating then that over the winter I gained back in the area of 5 lbs. of fat, the rest water weight, for a net weight loss since last year of about 30 lbs.

As always, a better measure of fat loss than weight is girth.  Last year I had to buy new trousers because the old ones were too loose.  I also tightened my belt to the last notch.  Over the winter, I had to loosen my belt again.

But as of a few days ago, having gone to a somewhat loose version of a PSMF (protein-sparing modified fast) diet — “loose” in that I’m not being anal about making sure that my protein sources are the absolute leanest possible — I’m now back to the last notch of my belt.  Next steps, shortly into the future: a new belt, & maybe even some new trousers again.

As of this morning, weighed in at 177.0. (February 18, 2008: I was at about 210.0).

Guess today’s one of my “free meals” days though — doing a retirement lunch for one of my faculty members at Don Jose’s.  So sorry, I’m gonna have me one of them wonderful three-enchilada plates.  And a margarita.  Yum.

Posted in Fat loss, Nutrition | Tagged | Comments Off on On the fat loss track again

Commenting on my blog

First, I hope you will!

Second, I’ve made it easier: the default for this software (WordPress) was to require registration in order to comment, but to heck with that: now you only need to supply a name (just using your first name or a nickname is fine) & an email address (the latter will not be published with your comment). So please, comment away!

Of course, you can still register to this site if you want, using the registration form. But don’t feel obligated.

Gravatar

Gravatar

By the way, if you comment very much around the web, you might want to consider getting a Globally Recognized Avatar, or Gravatar.  A gravatar is simply an 80×80 pixel-size image (a photo, an icon, whatever) that you use as an avatar across the web, which is generally tied to your email address.  Visit the Gravatar site for more info or to set one up. You’ll see my gravatar anytime I post a comment on one of my own posts.

Posted in Meta | 1 Comment

Same-sex marriage: A personal history

Mel & Rozz, 2006

Mel & Rozz, 2006

Good news from Maine Wednesday: its legislature passed, & its governor signed, a law making it legal for same-sex couples to marry.  This makes Maine the 5th state in the U.S., after Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, & Iowa, to grant the same civil rights & responsibilities of marriage granted to heterosexual couples, to lesbian & gay couples.  On the same day New Hampshire’s legislature passed a similar bill, which is awaiting its governor’s action.

Good news indeed; so why was it simultaneously making me feel a bit blue? Fact is, I always feel some ambivalence anymore when I heard news about same-sex marriage, regardless of whether it’s good or bad.  Maybe I always will.

(Which isn’t to say I won’t stand up for it.)

But why?  I was feeling enough of the blues on Wednesday, that I decided to write more about it.

More than a decade ago, my friends Jay Brause & Gene Dugan were amongst the first in the nation to challenge the unquestioned custom of refusing marriage licenses to gay or lesbian couples.  Exact details elude me — it was a long time ago — but lucky for me: online sources are kind.  Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (incidentally one of the best websites on religion out there) has a great summary of the events (& there’s some other sources below).  Basically, Jay & Gene applied for a marriage license in Alaska in 1994, were denied, & took it to court.  In February 1998, Judge Peter Michalski of Anchorage Superior Court issued a decision in their favor, ordering the State of Alaska to show a compelling reason why heterosexuals should be granted special rights to marry that were denied to gay men & lesbians.  The State of Alaska appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court, & meantime the Alaska Legislature acted to prevent same-sex marriage, placing on the November 1998 ballot a measure — Ballot Measure 2 — which would, if passed, amend the state constitution to define marriage as being “between a man and a women.”  Similar stuff was going on in Hawaii at the same time.

Jay Brause, Gene Dugan, Fred Hillman, & Les ? at Alaska Gay & Lesbian Resource Center, 1982

Jay Brause, Gene Dugan, Fred Hillman, & Les Baird at Alaska Gay & Lesbian Resource Center, 1982

Enter the personal history part of the story.

Personal #1 is that I’d known Jay & Gene since first arriving in Alaska in August 1982, in fact shared a house with them & our “landlady” Sami & her three kids, until Sami remarried & we moved to our own separate households.  They were (& are, despite distance) my  my very good friends, & they were also — especially Jay — guys I worked very closely with on the activist front of working for equal rights for lesbians/gays in Alaska. At the time of our meeting, Jay was executive director of the Alaska Gay & Lesbian Resource Center (now known as Identity, Inc.), & he coaxed me (without too much difficulty) to join its board of directors as secretary.  We later worked together, along with a whole lotta other people, on two important studies of Alaska’s lesbian/gay population, One in 10: A Profile of Alaska’s Lesbian & Gay Community (Anchorage, AK: Identity, Inc., 1986) & Green & Brause, Identity Reports: Sexual Orientation Bias in Alaska (Anchorage, AK: Identity, Inc., 1989). Meanwhile, Gene was doing the work that led to the creation of the theatre company Out North, beginning with his bringing to Alaska the play “My Blue Heaven” about two lesbian homesteaders. They worked together for years at Out North, Gene as artistic director & Jay as managing director, until their departure from Alaska in 2006.

Mel & JJ on backpacking trip to Williwaw Lakes, Chugach State Park, 1997

Mel & JJ on backpacking trip to Williwaw Lakes, Chugach State Park, 1997

By the time the marriage stuff rolled around in 1994, we didn’t see quite so much of each other.  This was thanks in part to my general burnout on matters political, organizational, & activist-oriented; in part to my pursuit of an MFA degree at University of Alaska Anchorage; & in part due to Personal #2, which was the relationship I’d formed in 1993 with my partner, Rozz.

The establishment, after many long years of living alone & single, of a relationship & family life became even more a factor after December 1996, which was when Rozz’s nephew JJ (as he was then known) came to live with us: age 9, his life to that date one of abuse, neglect, & a succession of foster & group homes.  He came to us violent, striking out at us preemptively before we could hurt him, as he was sure we would do — after all, everyone else in his life had.

It was a rough time.  I’m talking rough.  This was a boy who had been at the very least witness to sexual abuse of one of his siblings, if not a victim of it himself; & had most definitely been victim of physical & emotional abuse & neglect.  And for many long months in his fear of more of the same, he took it out on us.  I had never lived with abuse before — an abuse that I reckon was not him abusing me, but was his father reaching through him — as JJ used to say, “[My father] is in my head.”  It messed me up so badly, it took months to for me a wordworker to fnd words for it:

Cycle

the man in the head of the boy
the father of memory
the father who could pitch
his sons into the wall
the man who used their sister
for his “needs”
who sold them back for
four hundred dollars
in an Oklahoma City
KFC

the man in the head of the boy
the man in the boy’s fist
in his kicking feet his butting head
his spit on my face his biting teeth
in the bruise yellow and purple and green
on my arm the blood beneath my skin

the hurt that cannot speak

[August 4–November 14, 1997; rev. 11/18/97]

But now jump ahead to 1998.  Judge Michalski has made his ruling in Jay’s & Gene’s case.  The Legislature in reaction has done its thing.  Ballot Measure 2 is on the ballot for November: a measure that will, if passed, enshrine in the very basis of our society, our state constitution, the belief of the body politic that the close intimate relationship & commitment of two women with each other, or two men with each other, isn’t worth a bloody damn thing.

I was barely aware of any of this.  Because in spite of everything — in spite of completing my MFA, in spite of us having successfully gotten through the difficult first year of JJ’s life with us, of JJ giving up his violence & learning to trust us — in spite of all that, Rozz’s & my relationship came apart.

Jesse & his dog Sweetheart, resting up during a backpacking trip up Powerline Pass, June 2004

Jesse & his dog Sweetheart, resting up during a backpacking trip up Powerline Pass, June 2004

I won’t go into all the details of that here.  I’m doing it & have done it elsewhere, much of it in private where it will stay. Suffice it to say that we came back together again a year later, we talked it all out, we came to understand that our breakup or breach came about due to the incredible pressures that came with taking on a very hurt child, we forgave each other, we continued to raise the boy, & the boy, now a young man at 21, is — oh damn, just a very very fine young man, who even as I write is well on his way to an independent life doing just what he wants to do.  (Meantime, I’m taking care of his dog Sweetheart.)

At the time I didn’t know things would turn out that way.  At the time I only knew I felt a deep sense of betrayal because it all came so unexpectedly.  One day we met a new friend — I’ll just call her D — & a month later, Rozz was gone, & JJ with her, & I was just a 160-pounds-or-so mass of confusion, grief, anger, & dumbfoundedness.  (A month or so later: I was a 140-pounds-or-so mass of the same, having lost my appetite on what I dubbed at the time the Official Grief & Dumbfoundedness Weight Loss Program. I’ve got better ways of taking off the excess nowadays, thanks.)

And so my life through most of 1998 from the late spring on was one of trying to make sense of it all, & put my life back together after it had been tossed into the air & scattered like a game of 52-card-pickup.  I felt that all the meanings of my life, of my life together with Rozz, had been summarily & unilaterally flushed down the toilet.  I was scraped down to bedrock, & didn’t have the emotional reserves to give much attention to the Ballot Measure 2 & the battle for marriage equality.

And yet it did come up.  Because, you see, the pain I was feeling was pretty damn illustrative of the whole point. Do you feel that kind of anguish for the loss of a relationship when it means (as our enemies would like to have it) absolutely nothing?  Of course not.

And you know what? The people in my life — not just the lesbians & gay men, not just my family members & friends, but my coworkers too — they knew it. They treated me accordingly.  Just after I voted against Ballot Measure 2 that November, I wrote to some friends:

I’ve gotta say, though, that what indicates to me changes toward the good for lesbians & gays…which will be present regardless of the votes outcome…are present every day in my life, and have especially been present for me this last nasty year, as all my coworkers, family, friends have treated me with the same love & respect & concern in my hard times as they would have treated any nongay person going through the same nasty shit. Just as a matter of course.

Just as a matter of course. No aren’t we so very special for being so knee-jerk-liberal compassionate to this poor sad second-class citizen.  Just simple care & compassion because they knew that I was worth something, & that my relationship was every bit as valuable to me, as their own relationships were to them.

Tell me, Jesus: who has followed your way more closely: my coworkers, who treated me with compassion during a devastating period of my life, or the Alaska Family Coalition, financed mainly by out-of-state interests that worked so hard to make discrimination against people like me part of Alaska’s foundational document — & telling lies in the process?

From an Alaskans for Civil Rights/No on 2  press release dated October 31, 1998:

False and misleading information fills the Alaska Family Coalition display ad published in today’s Anchorage Daily News. The ad claims that the decision of an Alaskan judge found Alaska’s marriage law unconstitutional and would “replace…Alaska’s existing marriage law” and that the NO on 2 campaign’s claims to the contrary are “completely false.”

In fact, it is currently illegal for same-sex couples to be married in Alaska and this will not be changed by the defeat of Ballot Measure 2….

… “Yes on 2” fliers also claim if the measure is defeated, young children will be introduced to homosexual doctrine at an early age and schools will be required to teach that homosexual relationships are “normal” and equal to traditional marriage….

Another lie. Apparently to the Alaska Family Coalition, family values & let’s tell another lie are tantamount to synonyms.

And was it really the Alaska Family Coalition, or was it rather the Coalition of a Few Conservative Alaska Figureheads Funded Mainly by Interests from Out-of-State who Might Have a Sister Living in North Pole or a Nephew Who Served in the Air Force in Alaska for a Couple of Years but Probably Not Even That? The press release goes on to say:

Alaskan Public Offices Commission (APOC) reports filed by both campaigns on October 27 reveal that the Alaska Family Coalition has raised more than $637,000 while the Alaskans for Civil Rights/NO on 2! campaign has received just under $190,000 in donations.

Dan Carter, treasurer of Alaskans for Civil Rights/No on 2, explains further in a letter to Alaska newspapers dated October 30, 1998:

But the amount raised is only part of the story. Who and where it comes from is the real news in this report. While Alaskans for Civil Rights has received $35 from Outside gay/lesbian organizations ($25 from the Philadelphia Task Force and $10 from Pride, Inc. from Macon, GA), the proponents of this unnecessary measure were receiving almost $560,000 from Outside groups trying to rewrite Alaska’s constitution. When you look at how much money each side has raised from INDIVIDUAL ALASKANS, the financial reports are even more revealing. For every dollar raised by the NO on 2 campaign, 89 cents has come from individual Alaskans. On the other hand, for each dollar raised by the so-called Alaska Family Coalition, less than 9 cents has come from individuals living in Alaska. That’s the real issue in this campaign. Why should Outsiders determine if Alaska’s constitution should be amended? What is their agenda?

But that’s just some of the info that arrived in my email inbox.  More personally, as the debate leading up raged on in the media, some of it inevitably showed up on the radio that I listened to at work every day. Probably KSKA, then, Anchorage public radio. There was a call-in program about Ballot Measure 2, & some self-defined Christian brought up an argument about “family orientation.” I couldn’t hold back. As I later described to friends in an email:

I called up and talked about how this boy, JJ (I didn’t name him), had been the product of one of these much-vaunted heterosexual unions, had been severely sexually, emotionally, physically abused and neglected by his heterosexual father and his heterosexual mother…and the only reason he had a chance now was because we, two lesbians, had brought him into our family.

And you know, even with all that has happened since, it’s still true.

So to damnation to all you self-righteous “family values” advocates whose dictionary definition of family is so far from reality.

Jesses graduation, West High, May 2006

Jesse's graduation, West High, May 2006

And you know, even with all that has happened in the ten & a half years since, up until this very day, it’s still true: though I have no legal relationship, & never have had a legal relationship, with the boy once know as JJ who is now the young man Jesse — I am more a mother to him than his heterosexual biological mother is or has ever been, excepting only that she gave birth to him & he carries her (as well as his abusive father’s) genes.  (Though I credit her with caring more for him than his father, & staying in touch with him in ways he’s okay with, whereas his father he outright hates.) And furthermore, it was Rozz & me, two lesbians, whose bond of love & commitment despite its lack of sanction by our fellow citizens made it possible for Jesse to have a life of possibility & love, rather than life that would likely be no more than a repetition of the same cycle of abuse that had brought him to us in the first place.

So much for the superiority of opposite-sex marriage.

Which isn’t to say that opposite-sex marriage is inferior either. I am the child of heterosexual parents, whose love for & commitment to each other & to their family has been just as powerful a foundation for my life, as mine & Rozz’s has been for Jesse’s.  Marriage equality — get it?  Some relationships suck, some are marvelous.  Sexual orientation does not on its own make for one or the other.  It takes the individuals involved, their love, their committment, their elbow grease.

Be that as it may, on November 3, 1998, Ballot Measure passed by a 2 to 1 vote. With the vote half-counted, the Anchorage Daily News reported the following day:

The campaigns working for and against passage of the amendment steered around the thorny question of whether homosexuality is right or wrong.

But some voters saw the question as a referendum on homosexuality itself.

And in an email to friends, I commented:

And the majority rules, so therefore homosexuality is wrong? Of course not. Because us lesbians & gay men, dykes & faggots, queers, lezzies, homos — whatever else we may not know about ourselves, we do know this: Who We Are, from the inside, in regards to our sexuality. The meanings of our lives, from the center of our lives. Not defined, not prescribed or proscribed or whatever by the homophobic jerks or the plain dumb ignoramuses.

But it wasn’t just me or other lesbians & gay men who remained integrally human, regardless of the votes of ignorance or hatred. It was also many, so many, of our nongay families, friends, & coworkers:

Today I still go into work and find Bob, Jan, Nancy, Cassie, Sharon, Krista, Larry, Lisa — people, all of them heterosexual, who know me and who are not influenced in their feelings about me by this so-called “referendum on homosexuality.” They are still the people who watched my love for Rozz blossom & grow, saw the bite marks on my arm when JJ was terrorizing us, saw the results of her betrayal of me, all my pain. I have not changed as a result of this vote, nor have they.

So much for definitions applied externally. So much for the right winger denotation of “homosexuality.”

But you see now, I think, the reason for my ambivalence about same-sex marriage made clear. So much of my response to the events of 1998 arose out of the dilemmas of my own personal situation.  Not matter how much I might philosophize about the difference between enacted law & real reality, a part of me was deeply upset & angry that Ballot Measure 2 passed.  But another part of me was cynical about it all.  How could I help but be cynical, when D, the new girlfriend of Rozz who just scant weeks before had to my knowledge been my lifelong partner, somehow set herself up as some sort of spokesperson for marriage equality, & even finagled Rozz into appearing with her on Herb Shainlin’s radio show to tell Anchorage all about it?  I was self-preserving enough to avoid their radio appearance (I stuck with my normal radio station KSKA instead) — but yeah, of course it disturbed me.  Of course it affected my feelings.

But see, that’s the thing, all over again.  The demand for marriage equality isn’t a demand for people to believe that our (lesbian/gay) relationships are perfect, to require they be free of mistakes, breakups, divorces.  Marriage equality, get it?  The demand is simply to recognize in law the reality that already is fact in the substance of our beings: our relationships count to us, as much as yours do to you.  Yet in our relationships we will struggle just as much as our nongay neighbors with communication, commitment, love, all the stuff that makes up marriage.  When our rights are honored, no doubt we’ll be a good match for heterosexuals in our divorce rates, too. (Though I’d like to hope for better.)

But the law as it stands in Alaska &, at this writing, 43 other states, puts extra obstacles in our way at the outset: discouraging our commitments, treating our care for one another with contempt, destabilizing our families & our ability to take care of our children, making life harder.

How amazing, then, that so many of our relationships last out the years — as indeed with Jay & Gene, who met in 1978 at the Alaska Gay Community Center (as it was then called)  & are still together 31 years later.

The happy family, 2006: Mel, Rozz, Jesse (playing w/ Photobooth)

The happy family, 2006: Mel, Rozz, Jesse (playing w/ Photobooth)

Fast forward again, then, to 2009, the present day. A lot of water under the bridge, both in the continuing fight for marriage & other forms of social equality, & in my personal life.  As already stated, Rozz & I returned to one another (only a year after our separation), talked a lot, worked it out, reestablished our relationship, & saw Jesse through the rest of his childhood, into his early adulthood.  What’s that, you say?  Family values?  Yes.

But as I’ve alluded to elsewhere, our relationship is changing once again, & we can no longer be called partners.  The stresses & pressures now are quite a bit different.  That’s for another post, or many, who knows: the upshot is that my partner Rozz, who I always understood to be a woman & a lesbian, decided last year to finally honor an understanding long in the making: not a she, but a he: an FTM, female-to-male transsexual, a transman.  Which has just a tiny bearing on me, since I’m still… well… a lesbian.  And more on that in later posts, perhaps.  But even more a difficulty for me: that Rozz — or rather, Ptery (pronounced like Terry) — has chosen, at least for now, to live his life off the grid, from the land, out of a backpack & tent, & not in Alaska.

So now Maine, now New Hampshire.  Before that, Vermont, Iowa.  A few months ago, California won, & lost again with Prop. 8. Before that, Massachusetts.  And I look at it all, & I’m of two minds: the one, rejoicing for those like me whose relationships are finally being honored in law as they are in our hearts.  And the other, in sorrow for my own loss.

Mel at Anchorage protest of Californias Prop 8, 15 Nov 2008

Mel at Anchorage protest of California's Prop 8, 15 Nov 2008

But marriage equality, get it?  My loss is special, special to me; but no more special — nor any less — than is the loss experienced by anyone who suffers a breakup or divorce.  It is a private sorrow (though I speak of it publicly), that proceeds out of private lives, private choices.  It is not directly the fault of public institutions like marriage, even if those institutions exclude me. (Though that exclusion might well have been a factor contributing to our difficulties.)

And so despite the ambivalence born of my private sorrow, I will celebrate every advance that leads to the public recognition & honoring of any relationship between two (or even more!) consenting adults.

Go Maine!  Go New Hampshire!

* * *

Marriage is a public institution that grants certain rights & privileges, & also responsibilities, to people who have chosen to bond with one another in private relationships. Jay’s & Gene’s case in Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics was based in part on Alaska’s constitutional right to privacy.   And so in his judgment in February 1998, Judge Michalski wrote:

The relevant question is not whether same-sex marriage is so rooted in our traditions that it is a fundamental right, but whether the freedom to choose one’s own life partner is so rooted in our traditions.

Judge Michalski ruled that the Alaska Constitution, as it then stood, upheld our private freedom to choose our own life partners, whether we chose partners of the same or of opposite sex.

Ballot Measure 2 maintained that right for some people, but stripped it away for others.

We claim it still.  Nor are we alone.  From the Anchorage Daily News story on Ballot Measure 2’s passage published November 4, 1998:

Julie Stephens, a married mother of two, said she mulled the question over a lot and discussed it with her husband. In the end, she decided to vote against the amendment.

“People should be allowed to marry who they want to marry,” she said. “Times change.”

And sometimes they don’t.

That little flourish from ADN, more than anything, really riled me up.  And sometimes they don’t?!!!  I commented in email to friends:

And yet, in spite of the vote, they have. The ballot box does not measure the hearts of the people I work with, or my family, or my friends, or the families & friends & acquaintances of innumerable lesbians & gay men, who as the result of us coming out, as the result of their willingness to grapple in their own souls with the meaning of Difference, found themselves capable of still caring about us, of loving us *for* our Difference, even, not just in spite of it.

The changes that have happened have still happened. Regardless of the vote. The meanings are deep underneath, in our lives.

And that’s why ultimately we will achieve our goal of marriage equality, as well as other equal rights under the law.  Not just because of our own efforts, but because of the good hearts of our nongay friends and families, who recognize just as Julie Stephens did that it is indeed our right, everyone’s right, to choose their own life partners.  Who recognize that even with our differences, we are fundamentally the same in our humanity, no matter the propaganda that seeks to dehumanize us as degenerates or (in Wayne Anthony Ross’ 2009 update of his 1993 terminology) lima beans.

Remember that in the next weeks & months & years.  Yeah, we’ve still got a long way to go.  But how far we’ve come. Have heart.

* * *

I know you didn’t ask for it, but thanks all the same to Jay Brause & Gene Dugan for your efforts to establish marriage equality under the law not only for yourselves, but for all gay men & lesbians in Alaska &, ultimately, the U.S.  And also to all those in Alaska & elsewhere who have fought for those rights, & have voted for them.

I know you didn’t ask for it, but thanks all the same to my colleagues & coworkers, past & present, at the Justice Center at University of Alaska Anchorage, who did me & continue to do me the great service of treating me, simply, as a human being, as a friend, as a colleague.  Hey, folks: that’s what it’s all about.  May anyone who reads this blog take a lesson from you.

 

Mel & Ptery, Spokane, Apr 2009 (my brother Dave in the background)

Mel & Ptery, Spokane, Apr 2009 (my brother Dave in the background)

And Rozz who is now Ptery, you’ll read this at some point, I’m sure.  Sorrow blah blah — we’ve come through so many times together, good & bad, easy & hard, & we are family & love & deep deep friendship to one another regardless of cis/trans, or whether we live in the same place, or however our relationship is shaped.  Thanks for coming to Spokane to see my dad with me, & thanks for being an ever-presence in my life.  I love you.

* * *

Further reading on Brause & Dugan v. Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics and Ballot Measure 2:

Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics, No. 3AN-95-6562 CI, 1998 WL 88743 (Alaska Superior Court, Feb. 27, 1998).

The original ruling by Anchorage Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski; ruled that Alaska’s marriage laws violated the state constitutional right to privacy and the fundamental right to marry, and constituted sex discrimination. Also available through the Freedom to Marry website, which also provides a list as of 1998 (I think) of Alaska statutes pertaining to married people in Alaska — i.e., the specific ways in which same-sex couples, not permitted to marry, are discriminated against by the Alaska Constitution as amended by passage of Ballot Measure 2.

Ruskin, Liz. (4 Nov 1998). “Gay marriage ban approved.” Anchorage Daily News.

ADN’s day-after report on passage of the Ballot Measure 2. Rachel D’Oro and Lisa Demer also contributed to the story.  I will attempt to forgive the rhetorical flourishes that pissed me off at the time.

Alaska Constitution, Article I, Section 25 (1998) — “Marriage.”

Ballot Measure 2 passed by a vote of 152,965 in favor, 71,631 against in the election of November 3, 1998. States that: “To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage may exist only between one man and one woman.”

Clarkson, Kevin G.; Coolidge, David Orgon; & Duncan, William C. (Dec 1999). “The Alaska Marriage Amendment: The People’s Choice on the Last Frontier.” 16 Alaska Law Review 213.

Law review article examining the history & constitutionality of the marriage amendment.  Authors were all supporters of the amendment.

Molsberry, Ken. (26 Apr 2009). “1997-1998: Brause & Dugan v. Alaska.” The Freedom to Marry: Rites & Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2009. [Note 9 May 2011: individual article no longer available online.]

Puts Brause v. Bureau of Vital Statistics in the context of the overall history of the fight for marriage equality.

Molsberry, Ken. (26 Apr 2009). “1998-1999: Constitutional amendments.” The Freedom to Marry: Rites & Rights. Retrieved 7 May 2009. [Note 9 May 2011: individual article no longer available online.]

Covers the passage of constitutional amendments in both Alaska & Hawaii, the first states to enshrine discrimination against gay & lesbian couples into their state constitutions.

Robinson, B.A. (10 Sep 2007). “Same-sex marriage in Alaska.” Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. Retrieved 7 May 2009.

A basic summary of the events leading to the passage of Ballot Measure 2 and its immediate (legal) aftermath.

Posted in Alaska politics, Itse, LGBTQ history, Marriage equality | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments