Thursday, July 9, 2009

SFU HIV/AIDS Research

From SFU 2009 Alumni report:

November 27, 2008
No

Simon Fraser University health sciences professor Robert Hogg, who is internationally known for his understanding of infectious diseases, will head Canada’s first nation-wide HIV/AIDS antiretroviral research network. The Canadian Observational Cohort (CANOC) will study the effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy for HIV/AIDS treatment.

Hogg predicts that the network’s research will significantly improve treatments for the 58,000 people living with HIV in Canada. Hogg, the director of the Drug Treatment Program at the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, notes that new infections are occurring everyday, particularly among First Nations people.

Read full article:

Toronto funds Pride Week

Article posted in Yahoo Canada News:

By Jennifer Ditchburn, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA - A gay member of the Conservative caucus is applauding junior cabinet minister Diane Ablonczy's financial support for Toronto's Pride Week, a decision that put Ablonczy in the hot seat with some social conservatives.

And Senator Nancy Ruth says the MP who publicly criticized Ablonczy is one of only a handful who grumbled about the $400,000 tourism grant at a June caucus meeting.

Read full article

Monday, June 29, 2009

Obama and Stonewall

Fulltext of Obama's June 29 equality speech:

President Obama: Hello, everybody. Hello, hello, hello. [Applause] Hey! Good to see you. [Applause] I'm waiting for FLOTUS here. FLOTUS always politics more than POTUS.

Mrs. Obama: No, you move too slow. [Laughter]

President Obama: It is great to see everybody here today, and they're just -- I've got a lot of friends in the room, but there are some people I want to especially acknowledge. First of all, somebody who helped ensure that we are in the White House, Steve Hildebrand. Please give Steve a big round of applause. [Applause] Where's Steve? He's around here somewhere. [Applause]

The new chair of the Export-Import Bank, Fred Hochberg. [Applause] Where's Fred? There's Fred. Good to see you, Fred. Our director of the Institute of Education Sciences at DOE, John Easton. Where's John? [Applause] A couple of special friends -- Bishop Gene Robinson. Where's Gene? [Applause] Hey, Gene. Ambassador Michael Guest is here. [Applause] Ambassador Jim Hormel is here. [Applause] Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown is here. [Applause]

All of you are here. [Laughter and applause] Welcome to your White House. [Applause] So --

Audience member: [Inaudible] [Laughter]

President Obama: Somebody asked from the Lincoln Bedroom here. [Laughter] You knew I was from Chicago too. [Laughter]

It's good to see so many friends and familiar faces, and I deeply appreciate the support I've received from so many of you. Michelle appreciates it and I want you to know that you have our support as well. [Applause] And you have my thanks for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard and care about their communities -- and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. [Applause]

Now, this struggle, I don't need to tell you, is incredibly difficult, although I think it's important to consider the extraordinary progress that we have made. There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop. And though we've made progress, there are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; and who would deny you the rights that most Americans take for granted. And I know this is painful and I know it can be heartbreaking.

And yet all of you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make but also by the power of the example that you set in your own lives -- as parents and friends, as PTA members and leaders in the community. And that's important, and I'm glad that so many LGBT families could join us today. [Applause] For we know that progress depends not only on changing laws but also changing hearts. And that real, transformative change never begins in Washington.

[Cell phone "quacks"]

Whose duck is back there? [Laughter]

Mrs. Obama: It's a duck.

President Obama: There's a duck quacking in there somewhere. [Laughter] Where do you guys get these ringtones, by the way? [Laughter] I'm just curious. [Laughter]

Indeed, that's the story of the movement for fairness and equality -- not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who've been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; who've been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them. It's the story of progress sought by those who started off with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion and courage and sometimes defiance wherever and whenever they could.

That's the story of a civil rights pioneer who's here today, Frank Kameny, who was fired -- [Applause] Frank was fired from his job as an astronomer for the federal government simply because he was gay. And in 1965, he led a protest outside the White House, which was at the time both an act of conscience but also an act of extraordinary courage. And so we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership. [Applause]

It's the story of the Stonewall protests, which took place 40 years ago this week, when a group of citizens -- with few options, and fewer supporters -- decided they'd had enough and refused to accept a policy of wanton discrimination. And two men who were at those protests are here today. Imagine the journey that they've traveled.

It's the story of an epidemic that decimated a community -- and the gay men and women who came to support one another and save one another; and who continue to fight this scourge; and who demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion and support in a time of need -- that we all share the capacity to love.

So this story, this struggle, continues today -- for even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot -- and will not -- put aside issues of basic equality. [Applause] We seek an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love.

And I know that many in this room don't believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that. It's not for me to tell you to be patient, any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African-Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half century ago.

But I say this: We have made progress and we will make more. And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I've made, but by the promises that my administration keeps. And by the time you receive -- [Applause] We've been in office six months now. I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration. [Applause]

Now, while there is much more work to do, we can point to important changes we've already put in place since coming into office. I've signed a memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as current law allows. And these are benefits that will make a real difference for federal employees and foreign service officers, who are so often treated as if their families don't exist. And I'd like to note that one of the key voices in helping us develop this policy is John Berry, our director of the Office of Personnel Management, who is here today. And I want to thank John Berry. [Applause]

I've called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination -- [applause] -- to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country. Now, I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides. And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I've made that clear.

I'm also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including health care, to LGBT couples and their children. [Applause] My administration is also working hard to pass an employee nondiscrimination bill and hate-crimes bill, and we're making progress on both fronts. [Applause] Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son Logan, are here today. I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May -- [applause] -- and I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son Matthew. [Applause]

In addition, my administration is committed to rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status. [Applause] The Office of Management and Budget just concluded a review of a proposal to repeal this entry ban, which is a first and very big step towards ending this policy. And we all know that HIV/AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia. And that's why this past Saturday, on National HIV Testing Day, I was proud once again to encourage all Americans to know their status and get tested the way Michelle and I know our status and got tested. [Applause]

And finally, I want to say a word about "don't ask, don't tell." As I said before -- I'll say it again -- I believe "don't ask, don't tell" doesn't contribute to our national security. [Applause] In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security. [Applause]

Now, my administration is already working with the Pentagon and members of the House and the Senate on how we'll go about ending this policy, which will require an act of Congress.

Someday, I'm confident, we'll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst, but as commander in chief, in a time of war, I do have a responsibility to see that this change is administered in a practical way and a way that takes over the long term. That's why I've asked the secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for how to thoroughly implement a repeal.

I know that every day that passes without a resolution is a deep disappointment to those men and women who continue to be discharged under this policy -- patriots who often possess critical language skills and years of training and who've served this country well. But what I hope is that these cases underscore the urgency of reversing this policy not just because it's the right thing to do, but because it is essential for our national security.

Now, even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change but, as I said before, on the hearts we open. For if we're honest with ourselves, we'll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don't yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters -- not yet.

That's why I've spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences -- in front of African-American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes. And that's what I'll continue to do so. That's how we'll shift attitudes. That's how we'll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.

Now, 40 years ago, in the heart of New York City at a place called the Stonewall Inn, a group of citizens, including a few who are here today, as I said, defied an unjust policy and awakened a nascent movement.

It was the middle of the night. The police stormed the bar, which was known for being one of the few spots where it was safe to be gay in New York. Now, raids like this were entirely ordinary. Because it was considered obscene and illegal to be gay, no establishments for gays and lesbians could get licenses to operate. The nature of these businesses, combined with the vulnerability of the gay community itself, meant places like Stonewall, and the patrons inside, were often the victims of corruption and blackmail.

Now, ordinarily, the raid would come and the customers would disperse. But on this night, something was different. There are many accounts of what happened, and much has been lost to history, but what we do know is this: People didn't leave. They stood their ground. And over the course of several nights they declared that they had seen enough injustice in their time. This was an outpouring against not just what they experienced that night, but what they had experienced their whole lives. And as with so many movements, it was also something more: It was at this defining moment that these folks who had been marginalized rose up to challenge not just how the world saw them, but also how they saw themselves.

As we've seen so many times in history, once that spirit takes hold there is little that can stand in its way. [Applause] And the riots at Stonewall gave way to protests, and protests gave way to a movement, and the movement gave way to a transformation that continues to this day. It continues when a partner fights for her right to sit at the hospital bedside of a woman she loves. It continues when a teenager is called a name for being different and says, "So what if I am?" It continues in your work and in your activism, in your fight to freely live your lives to the fullest.

In one year after the protests, a few hundred gays and lesbians and their supporters gathered at the Stonewall Inn to lead a historic march for equality. But when they reached Central Park, the few hundred that began the march had swelled to 5,000. Something had changed, and it would never change back.

The truth is, when these folks protested at Stonewall 40 years ago no one could have imagined that you -- or, for that matter, I -- [laughter] -- would be standing here today. [Applause] So we are all witnesses to monumental changes in this country. That should give us hope, but we cannot rest. We must continue to do our part to make progress -- step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind. And I want you to know that in this task I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you.

Thanks very much, everybody. God bless you. [Applause] Thank you. It's a little stuffed in here. We're going to open -- we opened up that door. We're going to walk this way, and then we're going to come around and we'll see some of you over there, all right? [Laughter] But out there. [Laughter]

But thank you very much, all, for being here. Enjoy the White House. Thank you. [Applause].

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Prop 8 Upheld

*** Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight ***

---

From the Advocate:

After nearly three months of waiting for a decision, California's supreme court justices voted Tuesday to uphold Proposition 8, the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

The court ruled that the decision to eradicate the ban would go against the will of the people if overturned.

Despite the ruling, the 18,000 gay and lesbian couples that wed after the supreme court's original decision in May 2008 will be allowed to stay married. Six of the seven supreme court justices voted to uphold Prop 8.

Protests directly following the November 4, 2008 election called for a hearing to repeal Proposition 8. The California supreme court agreed to hear arguments later that month. Hundreds of friend-of-the-court briefs followed by various organizations followed, both for and against the state's most expensive ballot initiative in history.

Day of Decision rallies have been planned for the evening of the ruling in all 50 states. For more information about the protests, visit DayofDecision.com for locations and action plans.

Sunday, May 24, 2009

13 love stories

From The Advocate's 13 Love Stories to Counter Prop 8:



Saturday, May 16, 2009

From the Advocate
Uruguay May Repeal Gay Military Ban
Andrew Harmon

While the Obama administration grapples with its stated intent to repeal the U.S. military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, Uruguay has moved one step ahead.

The Uruguay defense ministry confirmed on Wednesday that minister of national defense Jose Bayardi (pictured) has signed a decree lifting a ban on gays serving in the nation’s armed forces. President Tabaré Vázquez has yet to sign the decree.

The ban, which barred people with “open sexual deviations” from attending military academies and said gays were not suited to the armed forces, has been in place since a military coup in 1973, according to the Associated Press.

In 2007, Vázquez signed a congressional bill granting civil unions to same-sex couples who have been living together for at least five years, making Uruguay the first Latin American country to legalize civil unions for gays and lesbians.

Gay marriage remains illegal throughout most of South America, though some countries, such as Ecuador, have moved to adopt similar protections for same-sex couples.
In January, Colombia’s constitutional court ruled that same-sex couples must

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Thanks

A list of things I'm currently thankful for:

1. My family and everyone, of every species, whom I love and who love me. I have blessings literally coming out of my ass. I'm so lucky.

1. Having a job that I love, and for which I'm very well-compensated.

2. Living in Canada, where 90% my medical costs are federally absorbed by a healthcare system that, while by no means perfect, still operates semi-adequately and saves lives. I'm hoping that, by 2011, the cost of gender-reassignment surgery will be covered as a category of non-discrimination, and that this definition of being 'categorized' will be protected by Alberta's Human Rights charter.

3. The fact that I can write, which I would do anyways, and actually get positive public feedback on my writing, is amazing. It's like having people say cool things about you for eating a sandwich, petting your cat, or doing some other enjoyable thing that you'd be doing regardless. Imagine watching a Pedro Almodóvar movie, really enjoying it, with plans to watch another one--probably Mujeres al borde de un attaque de nervios, because it features gaspacho as a plot element--and suddenly, out of nowhere, a cheque drops into your hand. That's what it feels like to get paid for writing. It makes you feel privileged and vaguely nervous all the time, because you're afraid of being a failure, or afraid that you might want to be a failure.

4. The coffee and dessert I had today with Juan-Sebastián.

Friday, May 8, 2009

Star Trek

I saw the new Abrams-directed Star Trek today. My thoughts, as a queer trekker (no spoilers):

Captain James Tiberius Kirk: Pine is more than adequate. One-dimensional at times, but always fun and fairly natural to watch. I believed his confidence, and there was a sort of Crighton-y quality to him that endeared me. A colleague of mine said: "I want to lick him." I think that statement pretty much stands for most of the audience.

Spock: Uneven, but ultimately I think Quinto pulls off the role. His character had some unexpected developments, but none of them were unwelcome. I really liked the young-Spock as well. He had a Harry-Potter look that could spawn Teen-Kirk and Spock spin-off films.

Romulans: I didn't remember them ever looking quite that way. Bana is pleasant throughout as a lunatic, and it's oddly reminiscent of watching Dennis Hopper in Waterworld. I'm not entirely sure what their ship was supposed to look like, but it did not, in any significant way, resemble my two cast-iron and plastic models of a Romulan Bird of Prey starship (both assembled by me, in a pretty rare feat of dexterity).

Vulcans in general: meh. I didn't not like them. I got the sense that they were deeply-repressed Marxists who just really loved classical rhetoric.

Total lack of visible LGBT characters: meh. Not unexpected. At least there wasn't an atmosphere to discourage any potential queer characters (or character developments). Kirk/Spock slash is, I see, alive and well in Abrams' film, which is great.

Doctor McCoy: a bit scripted, but still, not unenjoyable to watch.

Sulu: thought the casting was weird at first, but I can see that they're trying to butch up his character. I am praying for a George Takei cameo. I thought it was fairly significant to watch him as an out actor in Heroes. I really didn't expect them to squeeze in a Sulu-oriented action scene, but man, did they ever.

Uhura: her character took some really interesting turns. I just got really excited whenever she mentioned morphology and xenolignuistics.

Starfleet trivia: very nice. I think I squealed or may have just murmured "oooooohh," along with the upper-echelon geeks in the audience. Did you own ST:TNG on VHS? Raise your hand.

Scotty: Pegg is sort of neutrally funny, and he has some good lines. One scene with him involving water was a bit much, but I still got really scared while watching it.

The Enterprise: very nice, NCC-1701 promptly displayed. Everything seemed to be in the right place, and I liked all the interior shots.

First Ten Minutes: worth price of admission. I was riveted, and the critic in me just kind of subsided and let the whole narrative play out. It was really orchestral, and I'm glad that Abrams found a way to be contemporary and affective without just making Lost/In Space.

One Plot Point Involving scary Jell-O: I don't think this would work, ever, even granted the existence of a warp drive, which is sort of connected to the Jell-O but not completely, without giving away anything.

One Scene Involving a Cave: just really unnecessary, but I didn't hate watching it, at least.

I think the beauty of Abrams' film is its serial potential, as well as its strong casting and dedication to the original series. I really want to see a big-screen re-enactment of Kirk fighting the Saurian gladiator, and Spock mind-melding with the Horta.

Complete Lack of Andorians: disappointing.

Transporter visuals: I think they kind of phoned the CGI in here, but at least it's clean and not too distracting.

Turbolift: meh, could be better, but I guess we can't expect DS9.

Musical Score: manipulative, but still really good.

All in all, it was satisfying. There were some conventions, but also some innovations, and interesting twists, and nothing out-right pissed me off. The scenes that were meant to be fantastic really were fantastic. I'm seeing it again tomorrow in very good company.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Skating Too Gay?

From ABC World News and PlanetOut:

Last Friday, ABC World News aired a story that has been brewing for about three months and now it seems poised to explode.

In February, Skate Canada, Canada's Figure Skating Governing Body, announced a new Public Relations campaign to make skating in Canada look "tough."

Skate Canada wasn't helped when two-time Olympic Silver Medalist, Elvis Stojko, went on a self-appointed mini press tour, speaking on behalf of what Skate Canada was looking for. Stojko told the Toronto Sun "If you're very lyrical and you're really feminine and soft, well, that's not men's skating. That is not men's skating, ok? Men's skating is power, strength, masculinity, focus, clarity of movement, interpretation of music."

---

If you're very lyrical? First off, Stojko, let's have a reality check. Figure skating has been pretty kind to you as a career, and you've been surrounded by LGBT folks and queer-allies within that sport for the last 15 years or so. If you can't man up and actually say something positive about your queer friends, colleagues, and co-workers within the sport, then at the very least don't slag them by contemptuously linking 'effeminacy' with 'softness,' and masculinity with 'grace.'

Basically, Skate Canada seems to be suggesting that there are two types of figure-skaters, the gay ones and the straight ones, and they need to pay more attention to the straight ones in order to butch up the sport. So, historical skating luminaries such as Brian Orser, Rudy Galindo (who quotes from Rocky Horror on his website), Brian Boitano (WWBBD?)...I guess they're soft, but not graceful, not manly. I seem to remember Boitano, Galindo, and Orser all doing triple-jumps, flips, death-spiral spins, but hey, those are just the gay spins, ignore them. Concentrate on Stojko's precious quad jump, which apparently takes so much raw heterosexual strength that only he can pull it off.

I distinctly remember watching Stojko skate in the late-1990s, with my mom (of course), to the soundtrack for the movie "Dragonheart." He was wearing leather wrist cuffs that looked suspiciously like gauntlets, a tunic, and a necklace simulated to look like a dragon's tooth. It was probably the gayest ensemble I'd ever seen him in, but he was still out there, puffing away, making mechanical arm-gestures and trying to communicate the indomitable spirit of his masculinity to the crowd. He pumped his arms like Messier scoring from the hash-marks.

Toller Cranston is graceful; Emile Sandhu is graceful; Sergei Grinkov was graceful when he skated romantic duets with Gordeeva, and still graceful when he skated alone, without pumping his arms like he'd just scored in OT. Figure skating may not be a 'gay sport' per se, but it's a sport where norms of masculinity and femininity become crucially blurred, transformed, and even renovated. I know that the many gay and straight figure-skaters I watched as a kid taught me a lot about both masculinity and femininity, movement and grace, music and silence.

Stojko may not have considered the fact that he was borrowing, even modeling his own style of masculinity from other queer skaters, or female skaters. He should thank them for the lessons on strength and grace rather than selling them out to the press in a cheap attempt to ingratiate himself with Skate Canada.



Orser, 1988 Tour of Champions

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Transgender rally in Alberta

From the Edmonton Journal:

People from Alberta's transgender community were holding a rally outside a provincial government health budget debate meeting Monday night to pressure the government to reinstate funding for gender reassignment surgery.

The government's move to cut the funding in April's budget will save the province $700,000 annually, but force transgender people to pay for sex-change operations that can range from $18,000 to $80,000.

"I think we have high hopes the government will be pressured to change," said Jan Buterman, one of the organizers. "It's important to be a witness when government is making decisions of importance like this. We have no access to these medically approved procedures because of this decision."

Jordenne Prescott, another member of the transgender community, said it's difficult not to be cynical.

"I want to be hopeful, I want to have rose-coloured glasses on," she said. "This is a big issue and hopefully we can sway their opinion, but the cynical side of me thinks they're going to go ahead, with it to be fought over human rights complaints. If the government wants to spend that money to fight those, I suppose they can, but they'll lose."

Ontario had to reinstate its funding -- 10 years after it delisted the services -- after the Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled the move was discriminatory.

People from Alberta's transgender community filed their official complaint in April.

Friday, May 1, 2009

Lafleur

From CTV Montreal:

Hockey legend Guy Lafleur was convicted Thursday morning on a charge of giving contradictory evidence at his son's bail hearing.

"It's considered a very serious crime by the court system, and there's a maximum [sentence] of 14 years in jail" said CTV Montreal's Stephane Giroux, reporting live from the Montreal courthouse after the verdict.

---

Essentially, Lafleur has been convicted of perjuring himself during his son's bail hearing, giving false testimony in order to make it seem as if his son hadn't violated a court-ordered curfew. Lafleur, in fact, was the one who violated the curfew by actually driving his son to a hotel so that he could "have some intimacy" with his 16-year old girlfriend.

Lafleur defends the hotel-visit by saying: "I thought that, at 22, he had a right to some intimacy."

OK. I am a queer guy who loves hockey. I cannot play hockey. My friend Marty can attest to this. But I am a fan, and even if I don't yell the loudest during minor-hockey games, I'm still pretty fiercely loyal to my team. I once screamed: "Jesus fucking Christ what the fuck, how can you not call that fucking hit, you are the worst, most fucking corrupt ref ever you fucking sack of shit," during a roller-hockey game. At least I think that's what I said. The rage was really speaking through me. Someone was messing with my team.

I love the Canucks. Even when they are inconsistent, I love them, as I love my hometown of Vancouver. I may complain about watching a game, but I still keep track of the score and will mumble things about referee motives or dubious saves, while seeming to be reading or checking my email. My mom and I have yelled out "garbage goal!" to the TV, and my stepdad will fire off an invective of "come ons" and "aww fuckin rights" and "you have to be fucking kidding mes" to as well.

Yet, to me, hockey always represented everything I wasn't: coordinated, strong, and straight. Never mind that my vision is so bad, I can practically walk into a sign-post without realizing that it's there. I have all the dexterity of a Toronto pigeon, along with the same erratic movements. I once tripped over my floor-hockey stick in gym class while trying to return a pass, then passed the puck to the other team, then, literally, almost started crying while the game was still in progress--not because I'd tripped over my stick or lost the puck, but because I suddenly realized that I'd lost my copy of V.C. Andrews' Flowers in the Attic.

So I'm presenting this argument as a lover and hater of hockey, who grew up with the culture, who can't help sentimentalizing it because it's in my blood.

I feel like there's so much going in with this case--nationally, sexually, ontologically--that we could debate it forever. What type of parental model is Lafleur enacting by both 1) defending his son's right to sex, 2) physically driving his son to a hotel in order to ensure that these rights are upheld, and 3) lying and risking jail-time in order to protect his son? There's an incredible shadiness and potential for violence inherent within this scenario, whatever it was that Lafleur was trying to literally create at this hotel. Given Lafleur's power as a cultural icon, regardless of whether this 16-year-old girl wanted "intimacy" with Lafleur's son, was there any way out of this for her?

Lafleur offers such a weird claim-to-rights in favor of his son: "He had the right to some intimacy." Screw driving your kid to soccer practice, why not facilitate possibly nonconsensual sex for him? It opens up a pretty contentious field of ethical questions involving parenthood and sexuality.

It made me think: what if I was the parent? What if my kid was incredibly unhappy because s/he couldn't see whomever s/he was dating? Let's up the ante, personally and politically. What if my kid was queer, and s/he wanted to see the object of hir affection? My kid is despondent. I start thinking about youth empowerment and sexuality and the fundamental need for intimacy...then I think, no way, I'd be perjuring myself in court if I did this, it's completely illegal. But then...what about intimacy? What about my kid's happiness? What can I do in order to keep my kid safe, happy, and within my orbit as a parent? What can I do?

Was Lafleur acting as a "good parent" by trying to protect his kid? Is this what a hockey dad is supposed to do? There's a whole Canadian ethos devoted to hockey moms and hockey dads and their endless service for their kids in junior hockey. How does this fit within the parameters of "doing anything" to protect your kids, even accepting jail-time? This whole event also raises the spectral presence of Sheldon Kennedy, who revealed a history of sexual abuse within Canadian minor hockey in 1999. Lafleur's legal punishment and public analysis have to resound within the deep structure's of hockey history, penetrating and despoiling hockey's most culturally powerful icons: the stanley cup, the hart trophy, the art ross trophy, and the habs. The epigraph on the habs website is "l'histoire se joue ici." Where history is played. Lafleur's public fall serves as an unwelcome deconstruction of hockey history and culture.



Lafleur's 1979 goal against Boston

Maddow and Shepard



Rachel Maddow and Judy Shepard discuss the Matt Shepard Act.

In my hometown of Vancouver, on March 14 2009, 62-year-old Richard Dowrey was attacked outside of the Fountainhead pub on Davie St. He is now making a slow recovery, and just recently came out of his coma.



Shawn Woodward, 35, of Vancouver, has been charged with aggravated assault against Dowrey. He apparently told bystanders, after beating Dowrey: "He's a faggot. He deserved it." The Vancouver West End's queer community, along with neighborhood activists and allies, marched on Apr 6 in order to press for increased security and protection against hate crimes.

Hopefully, this bill helps all around.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Matt Shepard Act Passes!

From People's Weekly World News

The US House of Representatives passed the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, Wednesday, April 29th with a bipartisan majority.

Supporters of the bill say it would provide local law enforcement agencies with additional resources to investigate hate crimes motivated by race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability.

In addition, it would provide federal agencies with a means to participate in local hate crimes cases when local agencies can't or refuse to investigate serious bias-motivated crimes adequately. Funds would also be made available to local agencies for training purposes.

Two key provisions of the law would be to expand federally protected categories to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, pointed out that federal hate crimes statistics show that one in six hate crimes are committed against an LGBT person, and that number is on the rise.

"The nation cannot wait any longer to protect all of its citizens," said Solmonese. "We should all be able to walk the streets without fear."

Read the rest of the article here

Howard Stern on Queer Marriage

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Subject is Gay Male

Scott McKeen's article in the Edmonton Journal (Apr 24 2009) strikes a fascinating and complex balance between curiosity, perplexity, and responsibility. He interviews Mateo, who does not specifically identify as transgender, but who is currently on testosterone:

"Mateo works at my favourite coffee shop. He is sleight of stature and effeminate in nature. At first, I was a bit freaked out by his androgyny. But my classifying brain did its thing -- 'subject is gay male' -- and stopped worrying about it."

There's a really interesting collapse of binaries going on here. McKeen, at least, is willing to admit his honest feelings here, which seems more self-reflexively critical than just saying "I'm super-tolerant, I'm gender-blind." He doesn't know, really, how Mateo prefers to be read. And he doesn't know if he even
could read Mateo the way s/he might want to be read. He's not even sure that it's a horizon of possibility for him. Visually, he reads Mateo within his own, experiential index of what it means to be a gay male--effeminate, slight--and provides Mateo with subjecthood. To McKeen, it's not an especially limiting subjecthood. It's just the only one available, and seems to fit, visually, with what he's noticed about other people, maybe other queer people; but maybe also, included with that memory, is a patchwork of 1950s American cinema, D.H. Lawrence, Proust, Tennessee Williams, Musical Theater, and Felicity Huffman playing Bree in TransAmerica.

"He is not gay. Not biologically male. Not female, for that matter. At the moment, he is betwixt and between -- not this or that."

McKeen places Mateo's gender interiority alongside the context of "that," of a thatness, an abstraction that also substitutes as an exclamation: "What's that? What is that? What
is that?" Because the only thing to do, the only possible thing to do, in order to snuff out that fear of the anticategorical is to provide an identity. Just slap it together. Quick. Like drywall.

But there's also, in McKeen's writing, the willingness to expand vocabularies. The conscious flux of she and he. As if a personal grammar is being redacted, or even rewritten. There is more description in the piece than actual speech by Mateo. But McKeen does give Mateo a print forum in order to speak a claim to rights:

"Some people think their tax dollars are being spent on freaks who want to mutilate their bodies...[W]e aren't perverts, or whatever they see us as. We just want to be treated humanely. We just want to be treated as citizens."

This crystallizes the current governmental debate in Alberta around gender reassignment surgery. There are reasonable, ethical modifications to the body, civil modifications, civil piercings, and metaidoiplasties and skin inversions are not covered. They are not to be covered by Alberta Health and Wellness, because their coverage would actually result in a kind of epistemological crisis for the province. They would, to borrow a phrase from Butler, "become radically undone."

In
Light in a Dark Room, Jay Prosser describes some of the possible realities of GRS:

"It is almost impossible to develop a penis one can piss through without its developing disabling fistulas or complications. It is impossible to develop a penis with which one can have penetrative sex....[A]nd still one must choose between these ‘options,’ between either pissing or having sex—as if life could be decided between urinary or sexual function....[T]he end result will anyway leave severe scarring, the loss of flesh in the donor body part sometimes so shockingly large as to leave that part dysfunctioning. Literally, to have a penis one must give an arm and a leg" (172: University of Minnesota Press, 2005).

In order to improve the safety and increase the availability of gender reassignment surgery, granting institutions need to invest funding within the process. In Canada, NSERC and SSHRC in particular need to offer more funding, not only for trans studies, but for research into innovative, safe, non-invasive technologies for personal gender expression.

As a queer person who doesn't identify as trans, I feel very uneasy making these arguments. I know that there is an intense divide between LGBQ Studies and Trans Studies. But queer academics, cisexual scholars, and straight allies need to 1) acknowledge their theoretical debts to Trans Studies, 2) stop crafting queer theory engineered for gay white men, and 3) try to join conversations on trans rights whenever and wherever possible.

Coverage on the GRS debate is still appearing in the Edmonton Journal, but the articles definitely dropped off after Apr 24. I've submitted a short piece. I hope others will do the same. Because, sooner or later, you're the one who's getting 'delisted.'







Friday, April 24, 2009

Rent Performed at Orange County High School

From The Advocate:

A student production of Rent at Corona del Mar High School in Newport Beach, Calif., will open tonight, despite having originally been canceled by the school's principal because of objections to the play's gay content. Students wore rainbow buttons to support the musical, which were confiscated by school officials. However, after reading the script, principal Fal Asrani gave permission to go ahead with the production.

But the drama didn't end there.

Members of Fred Phelps's Westboro Baptist Church have planned to protest the school as classes let out Friday, and they will do the same at tonight's sold-out performance. The Newport Beach Police Department will also be there.

Orange County Equality Coalition will counter-protest Westboro Baptist Church, and a number of groups and community members also plan to attend in support of the students and school.

The groups are planning to gather at the high school at 2:30 p.m., and again in the evening. For more information go to the OCEC website.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Banco Provincia commercial

This phenomenal ad just appeared from Banco Provincia in Argentina:



It is pretty astonishing, not just for the emotional impact, but for the powerful and ineluctable ways in which gender, sexuality, and capital become affixed within the rhetoric of the commercial. There's the notion that Banco Provincia, in addition to simply acknowledging its transgender clients and employees, is actually exposing a kind of investment within the transgender community. "Tenés una vida, tenés un banco. You have a life, you have a bank." Life and bank are barely divided by a comma, which is like an articulated border. And the Argentinian "tenes," from "vos," is very specific, denoting a grammatical and national community: Argentinian transgendered people. (I didn't notice this at first, but my boyfriend pointed it out.)

Even if this is capitalistic mimesis in order to wring dollars from all sorts of overlapping liberal and queer communities, one has to admit, it's elegant. What Latin American queer histories, ontologies, and horizons of slanted subjecthood does this message of inclusion actually emerge from? What struggles does it resurrect and mediatize for Argentina in particular as a country?

There has to be a way to link this, even problematically, with the legal debate over funding transgender surgery in Alberta. And why shouldn't Latin American media influence provincial Canadian law, given the audiovisual currents that link both continents together already?

Ultimately, the battle over GRS in Alberta has the possibility--the strong possibility--of becoming a legal challenge at the level of the Supreme Court of Canada. And that could mean the national funding of transgender surgeries across the country. Even if Alberta activates its notwithstanding clause, declaring the nationwide ordinance to be ultra vires to existing provincial legislation, it can only stall the bill for a maximum of five years. Which means that, in 10 years or less, Canada could offer funding for transgender surgery, including pre- and post-operative social programming and counseling services, as a federal health benefit. This would be a first step in redefining the parameters of sexual and gendered citizenship within Canada, alongside the work already being done by trans and gender-variant activists around the world.

I hope.

Trans Rights WA State

From The Advocate

"Washington governor Chris Gregoire signed a bill on Wednesday to add protections for transgender people to the state's hate-crimes law.

Currently, it is a felony in Washington to threaten, damage the property of, or physically injure someone because of ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, disability, or sexual orientation. The new measure adds "gender expression or identity" to the definition of sexual orientation."

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Andrade sentenced

From The Advocate

Allen Andrade was found guilty on Wednesday of first-degree murder for beating 18-year-old transgender woman Angie Zapata to death.

Prosecutors billed Andrade, 32, as a homophobe who aimed to kill Zapata after they met on a gay-related dating site. While Andrade's attorneys argued that the murder was a pure reaction to finding out that Zapata was transgender, evidence shows that she was up-front with Andrade about living as a woman.

"Someone living like that needs to be held accountable," he allegedly said to his girlfriend at the time.

Zapata and Andrade spent nearly three days together before the murder. The two also exchanged nearly 700 text messages in the days leading up to her death.

NY Trans Rights Bill

From The Advocate:

The New York State Assembly passed a bill on Tuesday to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and expression in employment, housing, public accommodations, access to credit, and other key areas. The Gender Expression Non-discrimination Act also would add gender identity and expression as protected categories in the state's human rights law.

GENDA passed the Democrat-controlled assembly by a wide margin for the second session in a row. This year, debate on the measure took 15 minutes, according to Gay City News.

The bill faces less certain prospects in the senate, where Democrats hold a slim 32-30 majority. Last year, when the chamber was controlled by Republicans, the bill died without being taken up.