A (very) small segment of the population is born with both genitalia, true hermaphrodites. There is strong current medical opinion that it should be left to the child to figure out and assume their preferred gender role and sexual identity as they mature. See the website: http://www.isna.org.

a). Allowing for this, once a hermaphrodite reaches adulthood, should society be the decision makers for which gender that hermaphrodite assumes? If that hermaphrodite felt they were more male than female, should it matter to us? How about the reverse? They are still the same person, following their nature, they just happen to have both sex organs.

b). Now, let’s assume the surgery is never performed, that the hermaphrodite decides not to risk the dangers of surgery or simply hasn’t figured out their preference, meaning both sexes are intact. Should society impose it’s will and force the person to pick a gender? Or failing that, should the decision of who is appropriate for him/her to love and marry be up to society? Or would it be better that he/she make those decisions without restriction or without having to weigh positive and negative legal consequences? If he/she met someone (male or female) and fell in love, should society have any say in whom they can marry because they happen to have organs of both sexes? How much basic freedom and liberty should be curtailed for these people to “fit” into society? Should the will of the majority impact such a small minority? Or should that person have the freedom to be with whomever they fall in love with, male or female? If so, why would it NOT be called marriage? We have two loving, caring individuals in a committed, intimate and legally binding relationship. Is it relevant on any level that one partner can partly fit into either gender? On the other hand, Is it ONLY having the genitalia of both sexes that would permit a hermaphrodite to MARRY the person of their choosing?

c). This brings into focus the true nature of relationships. Gay marriage, intersex marriage, straight marriage….it’s all about two people sharing love and life together. We are after a loving, caring, intimate partnership sanctioned under civil law, so why should the law look at this differently because of the gender(s) involved? Whether religion and tradition see it differently, it’s not the government’s job to impose either component upon anyone, but it is government’s job to treat everyone equally. If honoring freedom and liberty means that a hermaphrodite can have a “choice” to follow their nature and have equal treatment under the law in following their nature, why should the gay community not be treated equally as well? Or IS it only a question of genitalia, in which case a hermaphrodite will always be half wrong AND half right in the Pro8ers eyes. And as such, who decides which gender hermaphrodites can or can’t marry?

So, what event happened that ultimately brought equality to Blacks? It wasn’t Martin Luther King’s laudable march to Selma and his peaceful protests — which usually ended in him being set upon by police dogs and put in jail. No, it was the aftermath of the assassination of Martin Luther King, and the weeks of rioting nationwide that ensued, which scared the holy sh*t out of the White supremacists in all branches of government and in all walks of life. They finally realized that this dog bites back and that you kick it at your own peril.

The billions of dollars in property damage nationwide, coupled with a tsunami of sudden fear and insecurity felt by White people, forced the White majority to respect the rights of the 13% of Americans who were Black and who were also fed up at being treated like dirt; forced to conform to second class citizenship, and even murdered — kind of like the GLBT community today. So, in that instance, peaceful protests did not work, but fear of retaliation from the oppressed did work.

I hear time and time again from the nervous Nancys and appeasers in our community about how we should all be on the “down low” or else we will face the fearsome “backlash” –such as the sweeping anti-marriage inequality amendments of the last fifteen years throughout the United States.

But ask yourself this: If there would have been violent riots, by the GLBT community, in the first state to have passed such a vile amendment, how eager would the rest of the states have been to pass them? If there would have been massive civil unrest on an enormous scale, thousands of times larger than the Stonewall Riots across the nation, how could they ignore us then?

Just look how everybody, worldwide, knows about our little uprising at the Stonewall tavern in New York in the late 60s. They even have a civil rights group called “Stonewall” in England — and it wasn’t even their riot. So why is Stonewall remembered and not one damn “peaceful” protest celebrated or even recalled in our movement?

Why? Because Stonewall was transitional and transformational. And not because it was peaceful, but because it was a violent rejection of the presumed privilege of a heterocentric society and its defenders. We finally stood up to the bullies. And bullies usually only pick on people which they are confident will not fight back. What a shock Stonewall must have been to them

Bullies, like bigots, are cowards and will often back down if you push back. Be pro-active. Organize sit-ins and join national boycotts (it worked against Coors beer — remember?). Target the states who have added anti-gay amendments to the their so-called “Bill of Rights” i.e. State Constitutions. Encourage others to not vacation in those states or to purchase products made in those states. Make it clear what you are doing and also make it very clear that you will work actively against any politician (including the current president) who is not working on what we also elected them for — our civil rights.

To be certain, sure remember and celebrate the fortieth anniversary of Stonewall this year, but let’s make our own Stonewalls today as well.

Also, really ask yourself this: What the f*ck have we done since then? Isn’t it far past time that we do something historical again?

© “Bud” E. Lewis Evans, 2009

http://rainfish2000.blogspot.com

When I was growing up in the Deep South in the 1950s, a “Bible Teacher” paid by the local (protestant) Ministerial Association taught “Bible” IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Jews and Catholics were persecuted UNMERCIFULLY for asking to be excused. Catholic graduates got their diplomas in the office … they weren’t allowed at graduation ceremonies because they couldn’t attend the PROTESTANT baccalaureate service.

Don’t like gay marriage?

DON’T HAVE ONE!

Don’t like abortion?

DON’T HAVE ONE!

Don’t like gay people?

THEN LEAVE ME AND MY FAMILY THE HELL ALONE!

The Founders KNEW the history of ancient Athens and the “tyranny of the majority” … that’s why they inserted the Bill of Rights into the Constitution before the ink was dry.

You know that you are not making an ounce of sense, right? Are you friends with Lydia?

James

Yeah, I chose to be gay, on August XX, 19XX, THE DAY I WAS BORN.

*I* know: let’s have a referendum — Irish people are forbidden by law from marrying non-Irish people.

Makes about as much sense as your ASSertions, dude.

And if being gay is a lifestyle “choice”, then ipso facto so must being heterosexual. Which, in effect, means that YOU could ‘change’ because you ‘choose’ to be betterosexual.

Sheer and utter nonsense. But what else can we expect from a radical rightwingnutjob.