Mildred Loving in Her Own Words

In honor of Mildred Loving who died on the 2nd of this month and California's reversal on banning same sex marriage, I'd like to post her statement on marriage equality in full. I think these words touch me in particular because I am queer & of color. Please enjoy!

Loving for All
By Mildred Loving
Prepared for delivery on June 12, 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia announcement

When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, D.C. in 1958, it wasn't to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love and we wanted to be married. We didn't get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn't allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.

When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn't that what marriage is?

Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the "crime" of marrying the wrong kind of person. Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed.

The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.

We left and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.

Though it turned out we had to fight, happily Richard and I didn't have to fight alone. Thanks to groups like the ACLU and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, and so many good people around the country willing to speak up, we took our case for the freedom to marry all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that, "The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal right is essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men," a "basic civil right."

My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God's plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation's fears and prejudices have given way, and today's young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.

Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.

I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all.

That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.

Let me Finger What Drives You

A few days ago My sweetie & I were walking down Burnside. A Street known for being quite busy for vehicles & pedestrains alike. As we started to cross the street a car (and it's driver) pulled all the way into the crosswalk making us go around the vehicle & into the dangerously busy street. Passing the car & lady driver I without much thought flipped her the bird. Personally I hate it when drivers do this especially on busy roads and my first reaction is to flip folks off. It beats what I used to do in my more agro days when I'd kick the cars or throw drinks on them.

But what does flipping the bird to these folks really accomplish? Does it really make me feel better? Does it change their behavior making them less reckless & more considerate? I doubt my hostility, however dramatic or mild makes anyone do anything the way I wish them to. And it's these kinds of exchanges that can be subtle & easy to miss as a chance for empowerment, kindness & understanding. No matter how in how wrong the other person is how can the experience be used as on e of those oh-so-fun growth opportunities?

I guess in the end it's all about how I'm feeling at the end of the moment. As with many things I feel utterly compelled to do, I find once the moment of obsession or iritation or amazement passes, so does the need to react to it. And often I find when I resist my first impulse, I was glad I didn't follow through with whatever appeared to satiate my desires at the time. In the end do I want to pretend that flipping off somene will make me get my due revenge? In the end do I want the other person to feel my anger, how ever fleeting, and pretend they'll be more conscientious because of it? These are the questions I need to ask myself if I truly wish to live in the tradition of non-violence.

Violence can be a subtle as flipping the bird to a momentary perceived "enemy." It's not acting out of peace & the belief in the inherent goodness or godliness that resides in us all. So now I must stretch my heart to fit that which my mind already knows. Because I like myself & who I am. I enjoy doing things that make the world a better place & allow me to be the instrument of love that I'm meant to be. My fear of oncoming traffic and reaction to that fear by giving drivers the finger doesn't solve much & doesn't allow for the truth of the situation. So I'll continue to watch for tho moments where I feel a need to react and remember in those moments who I really am.

Grief & Strength. Accepting the Loss of what January 2nd Could have Been

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. -Martin Luther King Jr.

For in the end, freedom is a personal and lonely battle; and one faces down fears of today so that those of tomorrow might be engaged. -Alice Walker

Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person. -Mother Teresa

Do exactly what you would do if you felt most secure. -Meister Eckhart

Let no man pull you low enough to hate him. -Martin Luther King Jr.

I'm not doing so great today. Started the day okay, feeling still numb but less in shock. Then I got to work and had co-workers asking me what happened with domestic partnerships and what we were going to do next. And the reason so many co-workers even know is because due to where I work we have something called a holiday "blackout" time where if a staff member needs a day off before January 8th, the person has to either call out or find another staff member to switch shifts. So I had to make a plea to other staff members to switch that day (January 2nd) for one of my regular days off. I really didn't want most of the workplace to even know my business, but I had to find someone to switch shifts so my sweetheart & I could get up early, get legally partnered, and then celebrate.

So the feeling with co-workers asking me about it was one of embarrassment in a way. Like my personal life was on political display for folks I don't really need involved. And the other feeling is grief & loss. Just plain sadness. Trying to stride on in my normal work day I had to get to the bathroom to break down in tears. I'm sweaty and can't eat. The whole thing is really upsetting.

Always in my life I have overcome. Being a queer woman of color I have no choice or else I succumb to the evil of prejudice that wishes me dead. And I know that this ordeal will pass because things always do, but I just can't seem to shake the utter despair of being less than equal today. I'm just so sick of being a minority right now. I'm sick of folks who don't care & folks who don't have to care. I'm sick of one minority group hating another. I'm sick of folks within their own minority group not giving a shit. Many people care, I know this. My own mom reminded me that allies & good people are working hard for equality right this very moment. But when I go around the town today & see folks smiling & laughing & not even phased I just feel... a temporary hopelessness.

There is anger here too. I'm angry so many of my fellow queers choose to sit with their thumb up their arses then get in the streets & make it known to all we are equal. Yesterday I checked Portland's Indy media & other local web sources & there was nothing. No-thing. And yes there will be vigils but where's the passion. Where's the fire or hope even to demand we be treated, by the government who makes us pay the same taxes, equally.

And for the hate mongers who think that their god is better their everyone else's and can't understand what the point of having queers be equal is, I just want to ... I don't even know. Can it be explained that we are just people? Just regular ol' folks who just want the same protections that they already have. We don't wish to take away even one right from them. Don't they know we just want some peace and nothing special at all. Just the same ability to move through the world without having to watch our backs every 5 seconds.

To the allies who remain silent: please speak up! Speak the words we need to hear. That equality is important to you!
To my l/g/b/t/2s family: Don't be afraid to speak up & take action even if you immediate circle doesn't understand. You will connect with those who get it and your strength will shine so others can stand up too.
To our Queer leaders: Know we cannot just settle for less. That this is the time to fight. That doesn't mean violence or hateful actions but a new creativity that will get into the hearts of those who need to see, hear & feel what is the truth of our situations.
For myself: I'll not give up. I'll not sit & wait. I'll speak up even if my fellow queers don't like it. My place is in this world at this time & that cannot for naught. I won't be run over or run down by prejudice. I will rest when I need to & continue to take action for myself & others to be full citizens of not only Oregon or the United States, but also the world. Get ready people. You haven't seen nothing yet!
~F

Here's a little musical salve from the late Tupac. Peace!

The Bubble Hath Burst: Domestic Partnership on Hold in Oregon

Photo courtesy of unprofound and edited by me

The news came to me later than it did for others in the blogosphere. I didn't find out until my beloved called me at Noon today to share what our lesbian boss told her. That January 2nd we will not be able to get a legal partnership in Oregon.

Truthfully I'm so shocked I can hardly even speak or think. I knew there was a possibility that there could be a delay but I figured the possibility had the odds of like, getting struck by lightening. Fuk.

What happened was a conservative "christian" group called The Alliance Defense Fund filed a suit against the State of Oregon & Bill Bradbury (our Secretary of State) claiming that some signatures on referendum petitions against domestic partnerships were tossed out unfairly and that the people whose signatures were considered invalid should have been properly notified. In order for there to be a delay to the domestic partnerships going legal on January 2nd the plaintiffs needed to prove that signing a petition is the same as signing a voting ballot and that the law passing would incur irreparable harm and also that the ADF in the end would likely win their case.

Yesterday Judge Michael Mosman presided over the case (also called a preliminary injunction). It was what the Portland Mercury called "a secret weapon" that convinced Mosman to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) from DP laws going in effect on the 2nd. The weapon was a case in Idaho where it was ruled signing a petition was the same as voting. Therefore Mosman decided that signatures on a petition were fundamental right and by putting a hold on January 2nd's domestic partnership laws he was preventing irreparable harm.

In reaction to how this case has turned out so far there has been a lot of support by others within the Oregon and or Queer community around this disappointment.

Kendall Clawson, the executive director of the Q Center said "Unfortunately, our fight for domestic partnership may not be over, yet I truly believe that those that opposed this amendment have underestimated the strength of our community and the power of love and respect for others that drives us. As the sun comes up and we begin planning our next steps, I have decided that I will not give away another minute of sleep pondering the negative aspects of this situation. Conversely, I will work to acknowledge, appreciate and derive strength from all of the people that tirelessly work to bring us together as a community rather than tear us apart."

Crallspace wrote an open letter to the Alliance Defence Fund and asks "Why take the beacon that many look to for inspiration, hope and goodwill and shine its dark side? With all the problems that face our world today, homosexuals are your scapegoat; you have a heyday on folks that may have been the subject of the verse, "As you have done it to these the least of my brethren, you have done it unto Me." (Matt 25:40) As much as you think Christianity is persecuted and outlawed for obnoxious reasons, how do you think homosexuals feel about your work?"

Multnomah County Commissioner Jeff Cogen noted for us all that "Daily, we are reminded that the quest for equality continues and it is up to us to push forward principles of acceptance, fairness and justice. I hope this issue is resolved soon and we can get to the business of equality - for all."

Jack Bogdanski at Jack Bog's blog made a great point that "...once again, the electoral process in this country is showing itself to be badly, badly deficient. Not only can't we count votes securely and honestly -- we can't even agree on how to check the signatures on the petitions by which we decide what we'll be voting on. Nearly every election -- even every potential election -- turns out to be a lawsuit. It's a disgrace."

For more information on all this go here and here for information from Basic Rights Oregon.

There will be a vigil at the Q Center from 5:30pm to 7pm On January 2nd. The address is 69 SE Taylor Ave at SE Water Ave.

Though personally I'd like to see folks taking this to the streets I know many feel safer in a queer space among other queers & allies. I guess I just don't want it to seem like Oregon LGBTQ2S folks are rolling over and taking this. But I'll be at the vigil all the same, with my beloved.

Stay tuned to Just Out's Blog for updates on this heartbreaking situation.

I wish for all of us who planned on participating in legal domestic partnership on Wednesday a peaceful night & happy, hopeful, loving New Year!

Peace!

~F

They're No Friends of Mine. Why a Vote for Obama, Clinton or Edwards is a Vote for Inequality

Please note: It's about to get all opinionated up in this blog and for good reason. I'm known for "saying it like it is" and today is no exception.

If you support any of the current popular democratic candidates for president then you are against the founding principals of this country and against human rights for all U.S. American citizens. That's right! Am I being black and white on this? You bet! Why am I saying all this? Because of one extremely important reason:

Marriage Equality

This isn't about same sex marriage. This isn't about gays being able to get married. The truth is not everyone in a same sex relationship is gay. Not everyone who is gay falls in love with someone of the same sex either. Love happens regardless of sex or gender identification. As I always say the size and shape of one's genitals are never the main reason someone wants to marry or start a family with another. And not all gays want to get married per se either. But I don't know of one queer person who doesn't want 100% equal rights.

Sure these candidates show some support towards l/g/b/t/2s folks. Hillary Clinton believes the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is a matter of national security and wants to fix it. She supports equal benefit legislation and anti-hate crime legislation. She even has gay friends! She proved that when she addressed the HRC. Barack Obama opposes a constitution ban on "gay" marriage. Thinks homosexuals (god could his language be more annoying?) should have the same adoption rights and is concerned about AIDS worldwide. John Edwards would support a federal law protecting all people from job discrimination. He also believes in equal immigration rights. One interesting thing to note about Edwards is his willingness to discuss his internal conflict about marriage equality. I like his honesty & willingness to explore his heart about it. It should also be noted his wife Elizabeth Edwards disagrees with him and supports marriage rights for all.

Yet not one of these candidates support marriage equality. They all support civil unions. But here's the gipper, marriage and civil unions are not the same. And even though all the democratic candidates support federal benefits for same sex couples, access to survivor benefits and equal taxes for same sex couples, only Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel support full equality for all. Here's a great fact sheet about about where each democratic candidate stands on all these issues.

Here's the deal: our constitution guarantees equality for all. Not just a majority or minority. It doesn't say "everyone is equal but those who want to get married to someone of the same sex." No it says The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. And here's the 14th Amendment if you are unclear what Article Four, Section Two said: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now let's just for a moment go back in history and consider this example. Now I know some folks hate it when racial minority civil rights get compared to current l/g/b/t/2s rights but I think this example is appropriate. Lets just say that in 1964 when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed it also said "citizen racial minorities will have all equal privileges or immunities except in marriage where they shall have civil unions instead." Do you think for one minute that would be okay? Sure a few would say "well that's fair because they're still 2nd class citizens to me." But there would be quite a fight for full equality as civil unions would be considered not full rights and therefore unacceptable & unconstitutional. Even if the law was "racial minorities can marry each other but only have civil unions to Caucasians" that kind of law would still be considered less than separate but equal.

But wait some say. The bible says...... Well folks lets not forget separation of church and state. Umm no that phrase is not actually in the constitution but the 1st Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This means that everyone is free to believe what they want and carry out those beliefs within their own religion. It does not mean one's religion gets to determine federal and state law. It does not mean one's religion trumps any citizens basic rights. Also remember folks, the bible was used to justify slavery back in the day.

In conclusion we must acknowledge that if we wish to call ourselves true Americans we must also vote in the ways our constitution. We must support presidential candidates who honor the American value of equality and therefore honor not only the original constitution but also the 1st and 14th Amendments. These are our laws. They are not in anyway an out for one group to have more rights and privileges than another. Obama, Clinton and Edwards are not only not patriots because of their stance on marriage equality, they are also not worthy of our support when they don't support equality for all American citizens. It's as simple as that.

Peace!
~F

Free to Pee

I was reading the latest copy of JustOut, Portland's only queer rag. There was an article about bathroom safety for transgendered folks that I feel is important to think about. In the piece a person was asked to leave the women's restroom and when an attempt was made to use the men's in a different store this person was told s/he was in the wrong room. Though I have not personally experienced this kind of harassment I've had plenty of lovers who have. No they were not trans per se, but each woman who expressed her gender towards the masculine had a bathroom story to tell me. And there was always pain in those stories.

It's easy to take some things for granted. Just like a number of whites (not all mind you) don't understand their own set of privileges based on their skin tone, people who don't express their gender according to what general society considers correct (ie. you're born with a cock so don't wear skirts, you're born looking female but better not dislike wearings skirts) have to struggle with oppression in the forms of harassment, threats and even violence. And often the most commonly shared experience of this kind of prejudice is in the bathroom.

Junior high was a terribly awkward time for me & most folks. I remember my own prejudice then against those who didn't conform to "proper" gender expression. I was afraid the girl who never expressed herself in an feminine way would be unsafe to be around in the bathroom. In fact then I thought out loud to friends that I thought gays & lesbians should have separate bathrooms, because what if they hit on me in there. Gosh I'm glad I'm not 13 anymore! But these kind of juvenile attitudes persist in many adults in our communities. The assumptions that trans folks or genderqueer folks are a threat while we go to the bathroom is silly at best. Not a whole lot of folks get excited from hearing someone else pee. And those that do are often the last folks we'd ever think (like a senator or something).

Being kicked out of a bathroom at any time would be embarrassing at best. Then imagine having this happen when you've got to use the toilet. Everyone has the right to take a piss or a doo doo. Why should we say we're a free country when someone is perceived to be the wrong gender and forced to not be able to relieve themselves?

Now I don't know what the best ways of talking to someone who is perceived to be the wrong gender for a gender segregated bathroom about one's personal comfort level. I don't think someone needs to ignore their own comfort and instincts. But I know there are ways to make ourselves feel safe while not harassing or making a drama out of that which we don't yet understand. I'm going to explore ways allies can talk to others about this topic and also ways to support our transgender and genderqueer citizens to help protect their safety as well.

In the meantime here are two great links:
Peeing in Peace is a great resource for transgender folks and their allies. It was produced by the Transgender Law Center in California and has not only some wonderful advice and resources but also a history of bathroom activism and how to deal with harassment. This in in a pdf.

Also a wonderful resource for gender free restrooms is safe2pee.org. You can look up your location (the site lists all the states and some other countries besides USA) and see where the gender free restrooms are. Among some of the places in Portland are Powell's Books on Hawthorne, the downtown YWCA, the Doug Fir, and the Roxy. Check more PDX locations here.

Well hope you all are having a lovely fall weekend!
~F

Reparations Day is Tomorrow! Are You Ready?

I almost am. I've got the sign made, made work schedule arrangements, have allies set up, an interview set up & such. Only I have one small problem. I need a can or something good of some sort that I can collect change in. I'm thinking of using my coffee mug that says "Touch your own hair." Anyway short of that I'm ready, even, finally- mentally.

I'll be in NE Portland between 10am & 2pm near Lloyd Center. We'll see what happens as I try to be a part of opening up this important issue for all Americans and the world.

Please check out my post at the National Reparations blog. In the meantime tomorrow please look for folks in your own cities & support them in their performances. A smile may go a long way for those who are not as brazen as they may seem (like myself!).

Please visit the Reparations Day website and the Reparations Day blog for more on this Nation wide event!

from my August 8th post:

"As we all know slavery sucked. And the effects of such soul crushing devastation still haunt the United States today. Reparations is basically an apology from those who have benefited from such a hideous institution in the form of money. Who has benefited from slavery? All white people. Yes even you, your mama, daddy & so on."
Special thanks to Jack Stephens for noticing this blog and that quote at The Blog & The Bullet

Peace!
~F

The United States Constitution Article 4, Section 2

The very first sentence reads:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

I remember this when I think about marriage equality. I don't want special rights & privileges I want equality!

Peace!
~F

The above message was provided by a citizen of the United States of America

It's not the Oppression Olympics but I Still Wonder Why the Jena 6 got More Coverage than the New Jersey 7

Look I don't think gays suffer more that POC or that POC suffer more than white women or that women in general suffer more than trans folks or anything like that. But I do think when different minority classifications get combined the likelihood of something being written off faster is likely.

Take for example the Jena 6 case. Most of you have heard of it by now I hope, but if not here's a video link with a great explanation.

The whole thing is crap for the dudes! I mean talk about injustice! A guy gets his butt kicked some but not enough to really harm as he was able to get to a social function that very night. Yet the guys who gave him the can-o-whoop ass get 2nd degree attempted murder charges. Oh and of course it's a white dude that gets his ass whopped & Black dudes that get the erroneous charges. The whole thing is a mess & the young man judged guilty by an all white judge & jury may possibly be given a 22 year sentence. Ahh the smell of racism.

The whole thing sucks & I for one am utterly incensed by all the circumstances surrounding the Jena 6.

That being said I am a little surprised by the fact that the Jena six case is getting so much more press than the case of the New Jersey seven (or four depending on who you read). In fact the fact that some reports say four and some say seven is in itself a problem as no one seems to care to get the facts straight.

Here's an example: I googled the key words Jena 6. And get pages of links. I googled New Jersey 7. Nothing. New Jersey 4. Nothing. New Jersey four. Zip. New Jersey seven. One link to an NY post titled "Attack of the Killer Lesbians." WTF?

Are the circumstances different? Sure. One event happened in a small town and one happened in a big city. One case was all men and the other was women and a man. One case had a white person and several Black people. The other case had all Black folks. One case had (as far as we know) all heterosexuals. The other had homosexual/genderqueer people & a straight person. And to be fair the Jena case initially had stiffer charges against the accused.

Here are the similarities. Past prejudice fueled an attack. Past injustices due to privilege fueled anger. A lack of freedom in choice of location fueled resentment (the tree only belongs to the whites and the streets only belong to men). A legal system that favors the majority to minorities. A person with more privilege provoking the accused. Both cases had the person attacked suffer minor injuries yet the attackers were charged beyond the reality of the crimes. Both cases had prejudice based tensions of the recent past adding to already existing pain of living as less-than-equals. Both cases involved African Americans.

Oh and here's one more difference. In the New Jersey seven's case the accused were not only Black but queer women. Triple minorities that force us to think about the many layers of injustice that happen here in the U S of A.

I'm not saying for one second that the media attention the Jena 6 are getting is undeserved. On the contrary. I think an even bigger ruckus needs to be caused. In that same vein the New Jersey seven's lack of attention seems questionable. Why isn't there more about these women and their case. What are the reasons one case gets more support than another?

With the New Jersey seven I have to wonder if there is sexism here. Or homophobia. Or genderqueer phobia. Or all of the above. Maybe it is just too much for us to think about that many levels of injustice and oppression. Maybe we can get behind men but not people who we consider immoral due to their sexuality and gender expression. Whatever the reason I figure it is important to at least ask.

~F

Free The New Jersey Four Now! A Call for Action!

Reprinted with permission from Workers.org

Lesbians sentenced for self-defense

All-white jury convicts Black women

By Imani Henry New York
Published Jun 21, 2007 2:58 AM

On June 14, four African-American women—Venice Brown (19), Terrain Dandridge (20), Patreese Johnson (20) and Renata Hill (24)—received sentences ranging from three-and-a-half to 11 years in prison. None of them had previous criminal records. Two of them are parents of small children.

Their crime? Defending themselves from a physical attack by a man who held them down and choked them, ripped hair from their scalps, spat on them, and threatened to sexually assault them—all because they are lesbians.

The mere fact that any victim of a bigoted attack would be arrested, jailed and then convicted for self-defense is an outrage. But the length of prison time given further demonstrates the highly political nature of this case and just how racist, misogynistic, anti-gay, anti-youth and anti-worker the so-called U.S. justice system truly is.

The description of the events, reported below, is based on written statements by a community organization (FIERCE) that has made a call to action to defend the four women, verbal accounts from court observers and evidence from a surveillance camera.

The attack

On Aug. 16, 2006, seven young, African-American, lesbian-identified friends were walking in the West Village. The Village is a historic center for lesbian, gay, bi and trans (LGBT) communities, and is seen as a safe haven for working-class LGBT youth, especially youth of color.

As they passed the Independent Film Cinema, 29-year-old Dwayne Buckle, an African American vendor selling DVDs, sexually propositioned one of the women. They rebuffed his advances and kept walking.

“I’ll f— you straight, sweetheart!” Buckle shouted. A video camera from a nearby store shows the women walking away. He followed them, all the while hurling anti-lesbian slurs, grabbing his genitals and making explicitly obscene remarks. The women finally stopped and confronted him. A heated argument ensued. Buckle spat in the face of one of the women and threw his lit cigarette at them, escalating the verbal attack into a physical one.

Buckle is seen on the video grabbing and pulling out large patches of hair from one of the young women. When Buckle ended up on top of one of the women, choking her, Johnson pulled a small steak knife out of her purse. She aimed for his arm to stop him from killing her friend.

The video captures two men finally running over to help the women and beating Buckle. At some point he was stabbed in the abdomen. The women were already walking away across the street by the time the police arrived.

Buckle was hospitalized for five days after surgery for a lacerated liver and stomach. When asked at the hospital, he responded at least twice that men had attacked him.

There was no evidence that Johnson’s kitchen knife was the weapon that penetrated his abdomen, nor was there any blood visible on it. In fact, there was never any forensics testing done on her knife. On the night they were arrested, the police told the women that there would be a search by the New York Police Department for the two men—which to date has not happened.

After almost a year of trial, four of the seven were convicted in April. Johnson was sentenced to 11 years on June 14.

Even with Buckle’s admission and the video footage proving that he instigated this anti-gay attack, the women were relentlessly demonized in the press, had trumped-up felony charges levied against them, and were subsequently given long sentences in order to send a clear resounding message—that self-defense is a crime and no one should dare to fight back.

Political backdrop of the case

Why were these young women used as an example? At stake are the billions of dollars in tourism and real estate development involved in the continued gentrification of the West Village. This particular incident happened near the Washington Square area—home of New York University, one of most expensive private colleges in the country and one of the biggest employers and landlords in New York City. The New York Times reported that Justice Edward J. McLaughlin used his sentencing speech to comment on “how New York welcomes tourists.” (June 17)

The Village is also the home of the Stonewall Rebellion, the three-day street battle against the NYPD that, along with the Compton Cafeteria “Riots” in California, helped launch the modern-day LGBT liberation movement in 1969. The Manhattan LGBT Pride march, one of the biggest demonstrations of LGBT peoples in the world, ends near the Christopher Street Piers in the Village, which have been the historical “hangout” and home for working-class trans and LGBT youth in New York City for decades.

Because of growing gentrification in recent years, young people of color, homeless and transgender communities, LGBT and straight, have faced curfews and brutality by police sanctioned by the West Village community board and politicians. On Oct. 31, 2006, police officers from the NYPD’s 6th Precinct indiscriminately beat and arrested several people of color in sweeps on Christopher Street after the Halloween parade.

Since the 1980s there has been a steady increase in anti-LGBT violence in the area, with bashers going there with that purpose in mind.

For trans people and LGBT youth of color, who statistically experience higher amounts of bigoted violence, the impact of the gentrification has been severe. As their once-safe haven is encroached on by real estate developers, the new white and majority heterosexual residents of the West Village then call in the state to brutalize them.

For the last six years the political LGBT youth group FIERCE has been at the forefront of mobilizing young people “to counter the displacement and criminalization of LGBTSTQ [lesbian, gay, bi, two spirit, trans, and queer] youth of color and homeless youth at the Christopher Street Pier and in Manhattan’s West Village.” (www.fiercenyc.org) FIERCE has also been the lead organization supporting the Jersey Seven and their families.

The trial and the media

Deemed a so-called “hate crime” against a straight man, every possible racist, anti-woman, anti-LGBT and anti-youth tactic was used by the entire state apparatus and media. Everything from the fact that they lived outside of New York, in the working-class majority Black city of Newark, N.J., to their gender expressions and body structures were twisted and dehumanized in the public eye and to the jury.

According to court observers, McLaughlin stated throughout the trial that he had no sympathy for these women. The jury, although they were all women, were all white. All witnesses for the district attorney were white men, except for one Black male who had several felony charges.

Court observers report that the defense attorneys had to put enormous effort into simply convincing the jury that they were “average women” who had planned to just hang out together that night. Some jurists asked why they were in the Village if they were from New Jersey. The DA brought up whether they could afford to hang out there—raising the issue of who has the right to be there in the first place.

The Daily News reporting was relentless in its racist anti-lesbian misogyny, portraying Buckle as a “filmmaker” and “sound engineer” preyed upon by a “lesbian wolf pack” (April 19) and a “gang of angry lesbians.” (April 13)

Everyone has been socialized by cultural archetypes of what it means to be a “man” or “masculine” and “woman” or “feminine.” Gender identity/expression is the way each indivdual chooses or not to express gender in their everyday lives, including how they dress, walk, talk, etc. Transgender people and other gender non-conforming people face oppression based on their gender expression/identity.

The only pictures shown in the Daily News were of the more masculine-appearing women. One of the most despiciable headlines in the Daily News, “‘I’m a man!’ lesbian growled during fight,” (April 13) was targeted against Renata Hill, who was taunted by Buckle because of her masculinity.

Ironically, Johnson, who was singled out by the judge as the “ringleader,” is the more feminine of the four. According to the New York Times, in his sentencing remarks, “Justice McLaughlin scoffed at the assertion made by ... Johnson, that she carried a knife because she was just 4-foot-11 and 95 pounds, worked nights and lived in a dangerous neighborhood.” He quoted the nursery rhyme, “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me.” (June 15)

All of the seven women knew and went to school with Sakia Gunn, a 19-year-old butch lesbian who was stabbed to death in Newark, N.J., in May 2003. Paralleling the present case, Gunn was out with three of her friends when a man made sexual advances to one of the women. When she replied that she was a lesbian and not interested, he attacked them. Gunn fought back and was stabbed to death.

“You can’t help but wonder that if Sakia Gunn had a weapon, would she be in jail right now?” Bran Fenner, a founding member and co-executive director of FIERCE, told Workers World. “If we don’t have the right to self-defense, how are we supposed to survive?”

National call to action

While racist killer cops continue to go without indictment and anti-immigrant paramilitary groups like the Minutemen are on the rise in the U.S., The Jersey Four sit behind bars for simply defending themselves against a bigot who attacked them in the Village.

Capitalism at its very core is a racist, sexist, anti-LGBT system, sanctioning state violence through cops, courts and its so-called laws. The case of the Jersey Four gives more legal precedence for bigoted violence to go unchallenged. The ruling class saw this case as a political one; FIERCE and other groups believe the entire progressive movement should as well.

Fenner said, “We are organizing in the hope that this wakes up all oppressed people and sparks a huge, broad campaign to demand freedom for the Jersey Four.”

FIERCE is asking for assistance for these young women, including pro-bono legal support, media contacts and writers, pen pals, financial support, and diverse organizational support. For details, visit http://www.fiercenyc.org/.

Why Marriage Equality is Important to Me

I'm not going to sugarcoat this. I never wanted to get legally married. Not until now. Not until I found the love I had waited so very long for. And now I see the importance of marriage & why civil unions/domestic partnerships are not enough.

For many years I ran around saying "screw legal marriage, everyone should just do domestic partnerships." I believed it with all my heart & still very much feel it's a great way to go. It is not necessary to get legally married. Lawyers can draw up papers so that most things in a marriage can apply to a union. So why have I changed my mind for myself?

I suddenly understand what deep love means & how important it is to protect it to the fullest extent possible. Legal marriage makes this possible. To want your partner & family to have as many provisions as possible to keep the family sustained & healthy is an appropriate response to such strong feelings. Don't get me wrong, legal marriage in and of itself can't keep a family from harm, divorce or problems. But when love is right & life is tough, legal marriage can help. Take for instance, the two things our state (Oregon) with it's domestic partnership legislation doesn't cover: after death benefits & immigration.

• As noted in the Willamette Week article written by Byron Beck legal domestic partnerships would still leave a surviving partner unable to receive the deceased partners social security benefits. You could be together for longer than a married couple but still not receive the dead partners social security after death. I cannot even begin to fathom that my partner would not be able to get my social security benefits for one reason only: because she's female. If we have children & grandchildren I would want them along with my beloved to be able to receive all the monies that I worked my ass off for. It would be the way I would want it & legal marriage provides for that. Not having access to that is not only unfair but unjust & discriminatory.


• Immigration and love. Yes the two happen! If the bill Gov. Kulongoski signed goes through it still means that if a US citizen falls in love with someone from another country, even Canada, the partner wishing to immigrate here would not be able to. This means a mixed citizenship couple could be physically torn apart at any time because the non-citizen could be deported. Legal marriage protects against this & keeps the couple together.

Let's not forget that all the other benefits that legalized domestic partnership would afford a couple would not be carried on to any other state. Only legal marriage for all partners in all states would guarantee a couple all the benefits & provisions no matter where in the US they go.

The love I feel for my partner is so strong that I want her to be able to get all the help & comfort possible. Legal marriage provides help and shows to all that our commitment is so strong that we feel the privileges marriage affords are not to be taken lightly but are cherished & to be used to benefit the family to make us better so we can better for others. That the benefits of legalized marriage can be used to enhance our comfort so we can be better citizens of our country of the heart & the country we're supposedly equal to all, in. Is saving money by filing joint taxes, getting each others social security after death & being recognized as lifelong partners legally important? Hell yes! Relationships no matter how wonderful are work. The labor of love is important work that benefits the individual, couple & all around them A real & deep commitment to stay together no matter what is one of the most important things a person can do & it's extremely serious. If the law can provide a bit of ease for a couple with some tax breaks & post death financial support than so be it. Our country should support real love between two people and legal marriage makes that possible.

Same sex marriage does not interest me. Marriage equality does. To me this issue is not about the right for gays & lesbians to get married. It's about stopping discrimination based on gender or the sex of our partners. The size, shape & appearance of one's genitals is not the determining factor in commitment. It's that a union between two people who care deeply for another is worth the seriousness of lifelong togetherness. And I believe even most married straight couples would agree that they married their partners for love & not solely for what is in their pants.

Peace!
~F

Yay and MLK Jr. Day

Are you looking at my blog? Oh gosh yes you are! Notice anything different? I know it's cute eh? A big big thanks to Zee for creating the header. The Daschund looks just like my little Lily. With the lovely header I needed to figure out how to get it on this blog. Thanks to Google I found this. And yay!

Well I'm still quite tired despite getting 10 hours of sleep last night. I don't even know what else to say on that.

Today I walked in a Martin Luther King Jr. march. It was great! Sisters of the Road sponsored the march and you know they make some really great cookies. Today I felt so very grateful for Dr. King and his wife Coretta. If it had not been for them & the others who joined in the movement for equal freedom, I may not be here. My parents may not have ever got together. Perhaps I'd have to drink from a different fountain then some of my friends. Maybe I wouldn't be able to work and love as freely as I do. I thank God for Martin & Coretta. Things can still suck, but my goodness, because of Dr. King I can do something about it.

One thing we can never forget when it comes to prejudice: as King said "whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." This is the truth for those of us who are minorities. We are still suffering the affects of slavery, marriage inequality, and brutality. And I believe one day this wo'n be the case. All will be & feel free.

Happy MLK Jr. day to y'all. We shall overcome!