Jason Collins, The First Openly Gay NBA Player

Last night, Jason Collins played eleven minutes for the Brooklyn Nets of the National Basketball Association in their game in Los Angeles, against the hometown Lakers. 

On the surface, this story is typical.   The NBA season is entering its late stages, and the Nets are trying to get into the playoffs. Teams in such a situation often sign veteran players like Collins, whom they value for their experience as well as their skills.

Most people who are not Nets’ fans would not have paid attention were it not for this:  In stepping onto the hardwood in Staples Center, Collins became the first openly gay player in any of the four most-watched men’s major sports leagues (the NBA, National Hockey League, Major League Baseball and the National Football League) in North America.  While I am happy to see him play again, and the way other players have expressed their support for him, his signing got me to thinking.

For one thing, he is a respected veteran player who didn’t “come out” until last year, after more than a decade in the NBA.  What if he were a college player who’d just become eligible for the league’s draft?  Would any team take him if its coach and general manager—not to mention players—knew about his sexual orientation?

For that matter, would he have played in college?  Would any college from which he would have a realistic chance of playing in the NBA have offered him a scholarship to play?

Also, he played for the Nets just after the turn of the century, when they were still based in New Jersey.  They made it to the NBA Championship twice (losing both times) with Collins establishing himself as a disciplined, hard-nosed player.   One of his teammates—and the team’s star—was Jason Kidd, the Nets’ current coach. 

What if he hadn’t had those prior connections to the Nets’ organization?  Would they have brought him back, his skills notwithstanding?  Would another team that could be enhanced by his skills and experience, but doesn’t have a history with him, consider signing him?

In other words, I have to wonder whether a player can “come out” before embarking on a career and still, well, hope to have a career in his sport.  I also have to wonder whether I’ll live to see a professional transgender athlete.

One thing that gives me some hope is that there are many “out” female athletes.  Some, such as Billie Jean King, came out after their playing careers ended, while Martina Navratilova’s sexuality was public knowledge during her career, which began near the end of King’s.  And the Women’s National Basketball Association has had a reputation, among homophobes as well as the enlightened, as a haven for lesbians.

I’ve noticed that straight women tend not to be as troubled by other women who are lesbians as some men are by their gay bretheren.  And, on more than one issue, I’ve noticed that where women go, men follow.  Perhaps the Nets’ brass are at the front of that procession.

Not Welcome In Arizona

What rights does--or doesn't--religion confer?

Nearly everyone (at least, everyone I know) thinks that no matter how you interpret Islam, it doesn't give you the right to hijack a plane and fly it into the side of a skyscraper.  And almost nobody in the Christian world thinks that the Inquision or the Crusades were positive developments.

Perhaps being refused service on the basis of your sexual orientation doesn't compare to such tragedies.  Still, I am guessing that almost any first-year law student or seminarian would tell you that if religion doesn't confer the right to commit murder, it also shouldn't allow discrimination.

Apparently, that's not how legislators in Arizona see it.  They've passed a bill that would allow businesses and other establishments to refuse service to LGBT people.  

So, for example, it would be perfectly legal for a baker to refuse to make a cake for a gay couple's wedding.  Or a photographer could decide he didn't want to record a same-sex ceremony.

The two examples I've cited have actually occurred in other states.  Now Governor Jan Brewer, on whose desk the bill sits, must decide whether she'll allow such things in her state. Given her record on civil rights issues, I'm not optimistic that she'll veto it.

What Is Professor Regenerus Telling Us?

Whenever I teach literature, I have to explain the concept of irony.

Now, I am the sort of teacher (and person) who prefers to teach and define through examples, so I am always looking new and interesting ones.

I think I may have stumbled upon something:  A sociologist whose work has been used to bolster claims that same-sex couples can't be good parents may just have given me, and other women, reason to become lesbians.

Two years ago, Mark Regenerus of the University of Texas-Austin published his study about adult children(up to 39 years old) of lesbian and gay parents.  According to his findings, such children have higher rates of problems with their own relationships.  However, as he has taken pains to point out, his work cannot provide any conclusive evidence that same-sex couples make worse parents than heterosexual ones.  For one thing, the parents (some of whom are now dead) of those adult children most likely did not self-identify as gay or lesbian, as few parents would have done so until recently. Essentially, he classified any parent who had an extramarital sexual experience with a person of his or her own gender as gay or lesbian. He himself admits that this is, at best, a flawed way of identifying gay or lesbian parents.

If there is indeed any evidence that the children of such relationships have more problems, it probably has to do with the instability found in those parents' relationships. Even if the kid doesn't exactly know his or her mother or father is really doing when he or she is "working overtime" or "going out with the guys (or girls)", he or she can pick up on the tension engendered by sneaking around and  keeping it a secret--or of the fact that the spouse knows that the person he or she married is on the "down low."  The kid notices that the parents are fighting or not talking to each other, even if he or she doesn't know the reason why.

Regenerus himself acknowledges the flaws in his study and says that it cannot be used to draw any conclusions about the inferiority of gay or lesbian parents.  Of course, his warning has not stopped organizations like Focus on the Family or the editors of The National Review from doing exactly that.

Now Professor Regenerus (What a name, huh?) has published a new study in which he concludes that the "normalization of gay men's sexual behavior" will embolden straight men to demand, of their girlfriends and wives, the right to  "open relationships" (i.e., one in which they are allowed to stray) and anal sex.

Hmm...So let's see...Gay men are still sexually promiscuous, just like we thought they were in the 1970's.  They're going to give straight men ideas.  Hmm...Where does that leave us?

Now, if I ever get involved with a man again, I just might allow an open relationship, as long as he asks me nicely and  is honest with me. (Perhaps it's naive to think such a thing is possible. Oh well.)  But I don't know about the anal sex part.  It's not that I feel revulsion to the practice or even that I associate it with gay men, necessarily.  Let's just say it's not my preference, so I'm not sure of how I'd feel if a man started to demand it of me.

I was willing to give Professor Regenerus the benefit of the doubt on his earlier study (or, more precisely, doubt the reading comprehension skills of some who saw it).  But his study of the effects of the "normalization of gay men's sexual behavior" has me scratching my pretty little head.  Perhaps he can explain further.

 

 

When You Can't See Liberty

Today's post hasn't much to do with gender or LGBT issues, perhaps.

But I thought I'd share two photos someone passed on to me.  They were taken today in lower Manhattan:

From here, you can't see the top of Liberty Tower, the building that replaced the twin towers of the World Trade Center.   

Here's another image that will give you an idea of how low the fog was today:

To Old Age (Or, More Precisely, Getting There)

"Well, gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense. [...] First, these men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners. These conditions do not make one's older years the happiest. Second, because sex is the center of their lives, they want it to be as pleasurable as possible, which means unprotected sex. Third, they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

Where did I find the above quote?  Well, all right, I found it on Wikipedia. (Shh...Don't tell anybody.) Actually, I remembered seeing it somewhere, but I couldn't recall where or when.

It came, not from the early days of the AIDS epidemic or any of the earlier Dark Ages. Rather, it's of recent vintage--twenty years old, to be exact.  It came from the 5 January 1994 Ron Paul Survival Report.

Now, I won't get into a discussion of Mr. Paul's fitness for public office, let alone the Presidency. But the quote that began this post reveals not only his, but a very common, perception about gay men--and, by extension, LBT people.

None other than Larry Kramer condemned the sexual habits of gay men during the '70's and '80's in language not much different from Ron Paul's.  The first gay men I knew (at least, the first who revealed their sexuality to me) were indeed more sexually active than anyone else I knew up to that time, or most people I've known since.  However, it was a time when many gay men--as well as lesbians--came "out of the closet."  And, like anyone who has been released from bondage, they wanted as much of the very thing they'd been denied.  Also, to be fair, almost no one had heard of what would come to be known as AIDS, let alone the ways it was transmitted.

Still, it's disturbing to read comments like the one from Ron Paul.  If anything has an impact on the life expectancy of LGBT people, it's homophobia.

At least, that's a conclusion of a new study.  When you think about it, it makes perfect sense: LGBT people in accepting communities live (on average, 12 years) longer than those in intolerant environment.  And, until recently, homophobia was everywhere.  In fact, people who abhorred racism and sexism held anti-LGBT attitudes, often unconsciously.  I was one such person.

Before the AIDS epidemic, one didn't see many older LGBT people. Of course, during the epidemic, many died young.  But those who survived are embarking upon old age, and many of us have a better chance of doing so than we might have in the old days. 

Still, even in the most tolerant of environments, we face the hazards of homophobia and the terrors of transphobia.  People are harassed, beaten and even murdered right here in New York for their actual or perceived sexuality or gender identity.  So, while more of us are becoming members of the AARP, there are still things that have just as much chance of claiming us.  And they can't be changed by medical science.  Rather, we have our best chance of living long, fulfilling lives as the human spirit grows and expands.

 

Great Advice

A letter to "Dear Abby" reminded me of how much work still needs to be done:

Dear Abby: My husband and I relocated to Florida a little over a year ago and were quickly welcomed into our new neighbors’ social whirl. Two couples in the neighborhood are gay. While they are nice enough, my husband and I did not include them when it was our turn to host because we do not approve of their lifestyle choices. Since then, we have been excluded from neighborhood gatherings, and someone even suggested that we are bigots!

Abby, we moved here from a conservative community where people were pretty much the same. If people were “different,” they apparently kept it to themselves. While I understand the phrase “when in Rome,” I don’t feel we should have to compromise our values just to win the approval of our neighbors. But really, who is the true bigot here? Would you like to weigh in? — Unhappy In Tampa

At least "Abby"'s response shows that she gets it:  

Dear Unhappy: I sure would. The first thing I’d like to say is that regardless of what you were told in your previous community, a person’s sexual orientation isn’t a “lifestyle choice.” Gay people don’t choose to be gay; they are born that way. They can’t change being gay any more than you can change being heterosexual.

I find it interesting that you are unwilling to reciprocate the hospitality of people who welcomed you and opened their homes to you, and yet complain because you are receiving similar treatment.

From where I sit, you may have chosen the wrong place to live because it appears you would be happier in a less integrated neighborhood surrounded by people who think the way you do. But if you interact only with people like yourselves, you will have missed a chance for growth, which is what you have been offered here. Please don’t blow it.

Perhaps the most important part of her response is in the second paragraph.  She seems to understand that "what goes around comes around" and, more important, that people like the letter-writer don't realize just how much they are living by their sense of entitlement.  They want to be accepted and included but want the right not to accept or include people whose "lifestyle choices" they don't approve. 

If someone refused that letter-writer employment for which she is qualified or housing she can afford because she is female or because of her race, religion or cultural background, I imagine she'd be furious.  I also suspect she wouldn't have stood for not being allowed to marry the man who became her husband.  she'd be furious.  Yet she probably believes that  in fighting for the same rights straight people take for granted, in marriage as well as other areas, LGBT people are looking for "special treatment."

"Abby" is right:  If people don't like people who are different from themselves, they should find ways to live and work only among those who look, think and act like them.  But they would miss out on so much.

I feel sorry for people like that.  After all, I feel sorry for anyone who would want to deprive him- or her-self of my company! ;-) 

 

I Bought It Anyway

Even though I have never, ever wanted what this ad promised, I bought the product. In fact, I bought it several times, for several bikes. 

Was He? Does It Matter?

Here in the US, today is “Presidents’ Day”.  In my childhood and adolescence, schools were closed on the 12^th of February to celebrate Abraham Lincoln’s (but not Charles Darwin’s) birthday and on the 22^nd for George Washington’s birth.  Some time when I was in college, I think, the two holidays were combined into a Monday observance.

I haven’t seen many attempts to psychoanalyze George Washington.  However, about a decade ago, it seemed fashionable (at least among actual and wannabe historians) to speculate on Lincoln’s sexual proclivities.  More than a few people who were trying to make names for themselves or simply to seem smart (to whom, I don’t want to know) claimed that Lincoln was gay.  They cited such evidence as the fact that he sometimes shared his bed with other men and that he seemed distant, even cold, toward his wife.

Now, I would not be upset if someone could prove once and for all that “Honest Abe” was indeed a homophile.  However, I also can’t say that the question of whether or not he was doesn’t occupy my mind.  For that matter, I don’t find myself thinking much at all about whether famous historical figures were straight, gay or whatever, unless it has some obvious bearing on their actions.

To be perfectly honest, I never could impute any sort of sexuality to Lincoln.  In every portrait I’ve seen of him—and the monument to him in Washington, DC—he simply seems too dour to experience any sort of passion or pleasure.  In fact, the time I saw his larger-than-life statue in the nation’s capital, all I could think was, “Shit, that guy was ugly!”  

About his sharing his bed:  It wasn’t uncommon in those days before central heating and such.  Even today, people of the same sex sometimes share a bed because they’re sharing the same space—for the same reasons people who aren’t romantically linked would share a space.  Also, if he was indeed cold or distant to his wife, I could easily understand it, having seen the portraits and read accounts of him.  His contemporaries noted that he often seemed sad and distant; he himself confessed to suffering bouts of depression. As someone who can honestly say she’s experienced her share of despair, I can attest to the difficulty of letting yourself get close to someone, or letting someone get close to you, when you’re trying to find your own self-worth.

The real point, though, is that trying to “prove” that some long-dead historical figure was gay or lesbian or straight makes the person trying to make the case—and the group into which the person is trying to fit said historical figure—seem less credible and overly concerned with the seemingly trivial.

If anything, I think it’s more important for LGBT people to figure out whether we can apply any of his methods or lessons to our own struggles. As to whether he would have supported same-sex marriage…well, he believed that people should be free and equal.  I’ll leave it at that.

How To Respect A Transgender Person

Today I'm not going to say much.  Instead, I'm going to share something I found on wiki How

Steps

1. 
   1
   Respect their gender identity. Think of them as the gender they refer to themselves as and refer to them with their chosen name and gender pronoun (regardless of their physical appearance) from now on. (Unless they are not out, or tell you otherwise. Ask to be sure if or when there are times it is not okay.)
   Ad
2. 
   2
   Watch your past tense. When talking of the past try not to use phrases like "when you were a previous gender" or "born a man/woman," because many transgender people feel they have always been the gender they have come out to you as, but had to hide it for whatever reasons- or at least be aware of when you do it. Ask the transgender person how they would like to be referred to in the past tense. One solution is to avoid referencing gender when talking about the past by using other frames of reference, for instance "Last year", "When you were a child", "When you were in high school", etc. If you must reference the gender transition when talking about the past, say "before you shared your true gender", or "Before you began transitioning" (if applicable).
3. 
   3
   Use language appropriate to the person's gender. Ask what pronouns the transgender person prefers to have used in reference to them and respect that choice. For example, someone who identifies as a woman may prefer feminine words and pronouns like she, her, actress, waitress, etc. A person who identifies as a man may prefer masculine terms like he, his, etc. Other transgender people have begun using gender neutral pronouns such as ze, zir, sie, hir, singular they, them, etc., but this is a personal preference. ^[1] Use the name they ask you to use.
   • Your friend Jack has just come out as a transgender person, and now wishes to be called Mary. From this point on, you do not say "This is my friend Jack, I've known him since grade school." Instead, you say, "This is my friend Mary, I've known her since grade school." Table any awkwardness you feel for another time when you and Mary can talk privately. Definitely, if you want to remain friends, you will need to respect Mary's wishes and address her as who she is today, not the person you used to know; despite the fact that the transgender person IS the person you used to know, you just know them better now.
4. 
   4
   Don't be afraid to ask questions.^[2] Some, but certainly not all transgender people will answer questions related their identity / gender. Don't expect the transgender person to be your sole educator, however. It is your responsibility to inform yourself. Also, if a trans person doesn't feel comfortable answering your question, don't try and "force it out of them." Lastly, questions about genitalia, surgeries, and former names should usually only be asked if you need to know in order to provide medical care, are engaging in a sexual relationship with the transgender person, or need the former name for legal documentation.
5. 
   5
   Respect the transgender person's need for privacy. Do not out them without express permission. Telling people you are transgender is a very difficult decision, not made lightly. "Outing" them without their permission is a betrayal of trust and could possibly cost you your relationship with them. It may also put them at risk, depending on the situation, of losing a lot - or even being harmed. They will tell those they want to, if or when they are ready. This advice is appropriate for those who are living full-time or those who have not transitioned yet. For those living full-time in their proper gender role, very many will not want anyone who did not know them from before they transitioned to know them as any other than their current, i.e. proper, gender.
6. 
   6
   Don't assume you know what the person's experience is. There are many different ways in which differences in gender identity are expressed. The idea of being "trapped in a man/woman's body", the belief that trans women are hyperfeminine/trans men are hypermasculine, and the belief that all trans people will seek hormones and surgery are all stereotypes that apply to some people and not to others. Be guided by what the person tells you about their own situation, and listen without preconceived notions. Do not impose theories you may have learned, or assume that the experience of other trans people you may know or have heard of is the same as that of the person in front of you. Don't assume that they are transitioning because of past trauma in their lives, or that they are changing genders as a way to escape from their bodies.
7. 
   7
   Begin to recognize the difference between gender identity and sexuality. Do not assume that their gender correlates with their sexuality - it doesn't. There are straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, questioning, and asexual transgender people. If the person comes out to you about their sexual orientation, use the terms they use.
8. 
   8
   Treat transgender persons the same. While they may appreciate your extra attention to them, they don't particularly appreciate you making a big deal of them. After you are well-informed, make sure you're not going overboard. Transgender people have essentially the same personalities as they did before coming out. Treat them as you would anybody else.
   • Be willing to listen. Many TG people live in small communities where sharing their experience is limited to their own kind. Often, being able to explain and educate people about their experience is helpful to both you and them.
   • Don't obfuscate. If you are finding something difficult, let them know. An honest, straight forward response is a lot easier for them to deal with than cutting them off.
   • Hang out with them. Make it "normal" - get used to them in the way they present and sooner or later you'll find that they aren't a strange person, they are "joe" or "josephine." You might just find you end up with a really good friend.
9. 
   9
   Those who have begun to express a gender different from the one assigned at birth are usually undergoing a major life changing event. Patience, understanding, and a willingness to discuss issues these changes will bring about will help them through a difficult and emotional time. It is best to ask open ended questions that allow the person to share as much as they feel comfortable sharing. Examples: "How are things going?"; "You looked stressed. Care to share?"; "You look really happy. Something good happen?"; "How can I help support you during these changes?"; "I am all ears if there are things that wish to discuss."
   Ad

Tips

• Asking about trans peoples' genitals and how they have sex is not appropriate, in the same way that asking cisgender (those whose bodies naturally match their gender preference) people how they have sex is not appropriate.
• Not all transgender people pursue genital reconstruction surgery (GRS). GRS is almost always more appropriate to use than "sex change operation." Don't assume that it's appropriate to ask about a person's plans for surgery, hormones, and so forth, any more than you would pry into someone else's medical affairs. Moreover, don't assume that there is only one "right," path to transition (e.g. that to "really be transgender" or to "finish your transition," you need to have GRS).
• Some trans people will be comfortable answering questions, and some will not. If a trans person is uncomfortable answering, or doesn't want to, then let it go. If you need to know, use the resources below.
• If you slip up early on and say "she" or "he" when you meant the other, don't apologize too much, just follow the mistake with the right term and continue what you were saying.
• Many believe that the word "transgender" is an adjective, and a descriptive word; not a noun or a verb. Others believe otherwise. Just as you wouldn't call an older person "an old" or say they are "olded", it is inappropriate to refer to a transgender person as "a transgender" without adding "person", "woman", "man", or any other appropriate noun. Some transgender people also consider this objectifying and dehumanizing.
• Unless you have a close and personal relationship, it may be rude to ask what their "real" name or birth name was -- they consider the name they have chosen to suit their gender (if they have done so) to be their real name, and they want you to think of them that way.
• It has been widely accepted in the educational community (and others which deal with people with various disabilities/differences) that one not refer to people with their difference first, (i.e., transgender person), but that one refer to the person before the difference (i.e., person who is transgender). It might be a bit more clunky to articulate, but in the mind of the listener it identifies the subject of the communication as a human first and as different from others last. A small but important differentiation, in my opinion.
• Some people believe that the only "cure" for being transgender is to correct the physical appearance (with surgery and/or hormones) to match the mental gender identity. These people believe there is a problem with the body, not the mind. Current medical evidence and authorities support the effectiveness of these treatments (See AMA, APA, APA, NASW and WPATH statements.) Some people believe that it is society's gender expectations and limitations for men and women are the core issue and need to reflect an acceptance of a wider variety of gender expression for males and females.
• Gender Dysphoria is the term used by medical and psychological professionals and is the term used in DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition, May 2013). DSM-4 used the term Gender Identity Disorder (GID) but was replaced due to the pathologizing nature of the concept that Transgender is a “disorder”, not a natural part of the variation of human development, although only a small percentage of the population has this variation.
• Websites like My True Gender, PlanetOut or 4chan have transgender groups, or other sections for transgender people; go to them to talk to people or learn more.

 

 

Warnings

• Never tell a transgender person that people will not understand or love them because of their transgender identity. It hurts very badly, and is not true. Many transgender people are understood, accepted and loved.
• Do not compare them to a non-transgender person by calling that person a "real" or "normal" girl/boy. What makes a man a "real" man or a woman a "real" woman is the way they identify themselves, not the way someone else experiences or classifies their body. A transgender man is no less a man than a cisgender man; a transgender woman is no less a woman than a cisgender woman.
• Avoid the use of transphobic slurs like "tranny" and "shemale." These terms are oppressive, objectifying, and dehumanizing.
• Even if you have objections to a person's transgender identity, you should always respect the person and never willfully embarrass them publicly. Embarrassing or humiliating the person does no good for anyone.This situation could also become unsafe for the transgender person.
• "Intersex" is a general term used for a variety of conditions in which a person is born with reproductive and/or sexual anatomy that doesn’t seem to fit the typical definitions of female or male, ^[3] While some intersex people are also transgender, the two are not the same and should not be conflated. ^[4]
• Be very careful when referring to someone's transgender identity as a "choice". Gender dysphoria is certainly not a choice by its very definition^[5]. Some transgender people describe their identity as a choice, and some do not. For some, the "choice" was to fix their body to match their mind. Find ways to respect a person's identity that don't hinge on whether or not they can "help it".

It Has Nothing To Do With The War. Really.

According to data obtained by the Associated Press, the number of officers forced out of the Army due to misconduct has more than tripled in the past three years.  In the meantime, the number of enlistees who left the Army under similar circumstances has nearly doubled.

Increases in both categories, though not quite as dramatic, were also reported in the Navy and Air Force.  

I am writing about this issue because some of those officers and enlisted personnel resigned, whether on their own accord or under duress, after being charged with sexual assualt.

General Ray Odierno, the Army's top officer, admitted that his branch of the Armed Forces sometimes "overlooked character issues" as it struggled to recruit as many men and women as it needed to fight twelve years of war on two different fronts.  Because of those difficulties, many soldiers and officers were repeatedly re-deployed, which may have pushed some whose stability and sanity were already questionable over the edge.

While General Odierno couched his criticisms in bureaucratic language, as people in positions like his are wont to do, he was at least more forthright than Army General Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  He insisted, "It is not the war that caused this". 

Oh, really?

So you mean to tell us that war doesn't hype up a military culture based on male domination enforced by violence?  Or that the promotions many female enlistees and officers have earned couldn't have stirred up the resentment of male recruits with borderline personalities?

I also can't help but to feel that in our invasion of Iraq, and our attempt to do the same in Afghanistan, our "enemies"--which is to say, anyone who is or seems as if he or she could be from those countries or any that surround them--have been demonized and even dehumanized in ways that our foes in previous wars never were.  Some of that had to do with the events of 11 September 2011, to be sure. But I think there's also some pure-and-simple bigotry at play:  Germans, Russians and even Japanese never seemed to evoke the visceral hatred too many of my compatriots express at the mere thought of someone who's Middle Eastern or Muslim.

And, of course, when you look closely at racism--or, for that matter, any other form of bigotry--the object of one's hatred is always seen as someone to be sexually subjugated. That is the reason why racism and other kinds of hatred are so intertwined with sexism, homophobia and transphobia.  It's also the reason why there are women--particularly in the ranks of officers--who have behaved just as badly as men:  They know that to survive in such an atmosphere of male domination and repression, the have to behave like such men. 

In brief, as long as there is war--especially if the same people are deployed over and over again to fight it--some of those people will turn on each other.  And, in an atmosphere of brutality and domination, sex will be one of the weapons.