This is the second attack on a gay Georgetown student to occur off campus in the past week.  The first attack occurred last Tuesday, when “a female student walking near campus was assaulted by two men in their late 20s, who shouted antigay slurs and pushed her to the ground before striking her with her book bag.”

“Both cases were referred to D.C. police because the incidents occurred off campus…Neither victim has filed a report with police, but officers are working with gay groups on campus in hopes of encouraging them to do so,” The Washington Post reports.

A vigil was held on-campus the night following Sunday’s assault.

Campus officials have sent a letter out to campus members addressing both attacks.

Win or lose, there’s one truth this campaign has made abundantly clear. It’s an unpleasant truth, one that most of prefer not to dwell on. Yet it’s important to face:

Many people still find homosexuality weird, disgusting, or abhorrent, and they don’t want it around their children.

If you found that last sentence distasteful to read, let me assure you that it was not pleasant to write. But it’s what we need to reflect on if we’re ultimately going to win.

Confronting this truth is necessary for countering a pervasive myth in our community—namely that, when it comes to securing our rights, it doesn’t really matter what other people think of us.

This myth gets expressed in various ways: Morality is a private matter. What we do at home is no one else’s business. Our rights don’t depend on other people’s comfort-level.

Like most myths, it sounds plausible because it contains a measure of truth: the objective value of our relationships indeed does not depend on what other people think of us. But political battles don’t track objective value. They track public opinion.

And so our opponents run apparently effective ads stating that (for instance) if Maine keeps gay marriage, kids will be taught homosexuality in schools.

This claim is, strictly speaking, false: Maine curriculum is controlled locally, and whether or not Maine schoolchildren learn about homosexuality doesn’t directly hinge on whether the state embraces marriage equality. But the claim also contains a germ of truth: the greater the number of states with marriage equality, the more likely it is that, in the course of regular instruction, students will learn about the existence of gay people.

Such a result is very scary for some parents. As Matt Foreman writes at Bilerico:

“[T]he kid/schools attack ads are effective because they go right to the parental-protection gut of parents. They carry a double-whammy: first, that young people can be taught (read ‘recruited’) to be gay or lesbian, and second, that kids will come home asking questions about sex and sexuality. Whether we like it or not, most parents deep down would really rather their children not turn out to be gay and certainly don’t want to be talking about sex, period, let alone gay sex with their kids. This is deep, non-rational stuff.”

(It should go without saying, but age-appropriate discussion of gay people and relationships does not usually involve explicit discussion of gay sex. It SHOULD go without saying, but it can’t, because many opponents seem unable to make that simple distinction.)

There are several lessons to be gleaned here.

First, the closet is still powerful. While some of us treat “National Coming Out Day” as a quaint relic of bygone times, the reality is that many who claim to be our friends and neighbors are still viscerally uncomfortable with us at some level. I don’t care how popular Ellen is: a majority of her fellow Californians voted to deny her the right to marry.

What this means is that merely knowing that we exist is not enough. Our fellow citizens need to know us at a deeper level. It DOES matter what they think of us.

Second, and related, the case for marriage equality can’t be divorced from the case for moral equality—that is, the case for our relationships’ being positive and valuable (and holy, for those of a religious bent). Those of us who make the moral case are sometimes dismissed as “apologists.” We need more apologists (in this classic sense of the term).

Third, we need to keep exposing our opponents’ true intentions, which have become increasingly evident in this campaign season. As Jonathan Rauch explains at the Independent Gay Forum,

“Opponents of gay marriage in Maine do not just want to block gay marriage. They want to use the law to force all discussion of gay marriage out of the schools. In other words, they demand to turn the public schools into closets.”

This, despite the fact that nearby Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut have marriage equality. And despite the fact that some of these schoolchildren have gay relatives. Or are being raised by gay parents. Or are gay themselves.

In short, our opponents’ agenda is a truly radical one, which aims not merely to deny us marriage but to obliterate our very existence. We need to call them out on it.

I’d love to be pleasantly surprised next Wednesday morning, and discover that our opponents’ appeals to voters’ irrational fears were no match for our appeals to their better nature. It could happen. But whatever happens, we have much work left to do.

***********

John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.

Check school websites for rooms and times.

Patrick was walking to a friend’s house around midnight when he was followed by two women and a man who he says were yelling homophobic threats.

Patrick ignored the group until they got closer. When he asked them why they were shouting at him, according to Tulsa World:

They started “beating, biting and slashing at Patrick with a blade, leaving him with several cuts on his head and body.

“I’ve never felt scared or feared for my safety before,” he said. “You brush it off and walk on. That’s what you’re taught to do.

“This time, it didn’t work.”

Patrick described them as a woman in her early 40s and another woman and man, both in their late teens or early 20s.

Oklahoma’s hate-crimes law makes it a crime to “intimidate or harass another person because of the person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin or disability.”

Jenkins noted that the state law excludes sexual orientation from the qualifiers for a hate crime. As a result, police are investigating the case only as an assault and battery.

 

Read the story at Tulsa World.

Let’s say you are a little pork chop (if you are insulted by fat jokes move on, Boo. Move on). Let’s also assume as a bigun, you need a motorized cart to get to the potato chip aisle. If these things are true, it seems prudent your big booty should not be wearing a t-shirt with homophobic crap.

The above pic was taken from the bestest internets site People of WalMart. The photo of “too fat to walk Mr. Homophobe” was taken in Nebraska. As a rule I care little about sartorial choices, but the clothes of my large clan do bring pause. Lycra bike pants are terrible for those with ham hock thighs, and bigoted t-shirts should not be worn by those with too much blubber to defend themselves.

What unnerves me though is that this handicapped butterball, too lazy to even walk, got up one morning and thought it would be nice to wear an anti-gay shirt. Doesn’t he have family who can give him advice? We know he has no friends. Who would want to freely associate with such a little disgusting roly-poly?

I’m sure husky man is never online (his fingers are too chubby to type), but if you are out there, drop by and explain yourself sir. Ex-gay? Bitter over love lost? Sodomized by your best high-school friend—he was the star jock of the school—and loved it so much you freaked out? And what’s your favorite potato chip? I’m guessing Ruffles (which is a good choice).

Malaysia has just joined the Ukraine, Lebanon and the Bahamas in banning Bruno – the gay sexcapade/ insightful look at homophobia in America. I am a great defender of Bruno and understand that the film – made to shock American sense- was likely not going to receive a huge welcome from many international audiences.

That said, how crazy that Malaysia bans this movie, not because of the graphic nudity, not because of the language or sex scenes, but because it is based on gay life and contrary to the culture?

That just seems like a bad pr move to me.

Malaysia is a country where being gay is outlawed, but the reality is there are a number of gay pockets that live without the kind of persecution common in other predominantly Muslim countries. Couldn’t they refuse to inflame the issue more by using the graphic sex excuse and closing debate.

It is yet another example of how politicians are more than willing to engage in and inflame the debate about gay rights – using it as a galvanizing point for the more conservative and a polarizing force, both in Malaysia… and in the U.S.

The angry citizens stood on the steps to protest the Sept. 10 undercover police raid at the gay Atlanta Eagle Club. Eight people were arrested that night, including the owner, and charged with providing adult entertainment without a permit.

According to Towelroad, a total of 62 patrons were handcuffed, searched illegally, and forced onto the ground, where they stayed for close to two hours.

Towel Road also reported some of the complaints last week:

“One man said officers grabbed patrons who didn’t immediately lie down by the neck and forced them to the ground. The man said he was kicked in the ribs while lying down. ‘Then I heard laughing and giggling and saying this is more fun than raiding niggers with crack. They also told us to shut the fuck up unless we were spoken too [sic].’ The man said he heard one person told that if he spoke again he would be hit by a chair. He also reported that one officer ’said to everyone in general that all you all do is flash your asses and show your cocks.’”

Other witnesses reported that the police uttered anti-gay slurs to those they searched.

He’s made a name for himself so well that he is not just any blogger. He’s an all-around celebrity.

CNN recently reported on the relationship between Perez Hilton’s sexuality and nationality.

It is no secret that Perez Hilton is gay. But it may be a surprise to some that the controversial blogger is Latino.

The Latino community is often known for being devout Catholics and has had a reputation for being largely homophobic.  So it’s amazing to see a proud Cuban-American who is also a proud gay activist.

CNN reports:

“Hilton is a Latino pioneer. He is one of the first Latino public figures in the U.S. to be openly gay. While Latinos have broken ground on the U.S. Supreme Court, in Hollywood and in professional sports, gay Latinos in the nation’s public arena remain largely invisible.

“Hilton says deep-seated homophobia within the Latino community has forced many gay Latinos to go underground, but attitudes are shifting.”

Gay Latinos aren’t something the MSM usually reports on- although Perez might not be the most attractive candidate for Gay Latino of the Year, it’s great for gay Latinos to have a public face.  Kudos to CNN.

Selena Watkins is a 365gay.com editorial intern

“Dyke,” she muttered with obvious abhorrence for a stranger, an assistant state’s attorney who walked into the courtroom and took a seat at the prosecution’s table.

I was covering a routine session to review felony cases at the local courthouse.

The assistant state’s attorney was on hand to update the judge on the status of her cases, as well as to negotiate pleas with defense attorneys.

It turns out the hisser behind me was in the courtroom hoping for a lenient plea on a felony drug charge.

Reporters, with notebook and recorder in hand, can listen to conversations in public settings without qualms about eavesdropping.

So I listened to the hisser and the chum who accompanied her to court.

“Dyke,” she snickered.

Her friend paused, seemingly uncomfortable with her mean-girl attitude, but offensive in his own way. “I give everyone the benefit of the doubt,” he replied.

He said he used to bother trying to guess who is, who isn’t, but “anymore you can’t tell.”

“You can tell with her,” the woman replied with a superior air.

The conversation turned to a new subject — her trials and tribulations in the court system.

I would learn, from her confessions and admissions to her friend, that the woman with the haughty attitude is a repeat felon.

She is a drug addict.

She is a bad mother in the midst of a custody dispute.

She is looking at up to six months in jail, and has been to jail before.

She is facing federal charges of lying to a law enforcement officer and interfering with an investigation.

My, my, she does have cause — if anyone did — to sneer and snicker and reign high-and-mighty over another woman with a short haircut and wearing a wrinkled shirt and baggy suit trousers.

The mean-girl in me — she visits occasionally — wanted to pass a note to the assistant state’s attorney: “Say, this woman who wants leniency is making fun of you.” “Hey, this woman behind me, in addition to being a repeat felon who just admitted she’s guilty of what you charged with, is a bigot.”

I did not do that, though I know the hisser’s name and case number.

Instead, I met up with her outside the courtroom to tell her how hateful she sounded and to warn her that I so wanted to tell the assistant state’s attorney with whom her freedom might rest exactly what I overheard.

She listened, red-faced and pouty, and then stepped on the elevator to head down into the heat and humidity of Florida in August.

And I spent the rest of the Wednesday considering this woman who thinks that by reason of her sexual orientation — or by reason of another’s sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation — that she is superior.

I wondered, as I read the news flash that Barack Obama had honored 16 individuals with the Presidential Medal of Honor, about the jeers, the sneers, the hisses that medal recipients Billie Jean King, the late Harvey Milk and the Rev. Joseph Lowery endured.

My mom says I worry too much about “what people think.”

While I don’t fret over whether someone thinks my hair is too short or my clothes are too baggy, I do concern myself with bigotry, with prejudice, with a woman who hisses hate at a stranger.

How does a person grow up to detest another because they love someone of the same sex, because they are black or white, Mexican or Irish, Catholic or protestant or Jewish?

The question is not easily answered with a dismissal that bigots are repeat felons with drug addictions and not to be recognized.

But the answer does escape me.

Robert Colle, now of Egg Harbor Township, settled his lawsuit for $415,000. Colle says he was harassed by the other officers because he is gay, and received further harassment when he threatened to expose an on-duty romantic tryst involving a superior.

According to the Press of Atlantic City, Colle also accused, “police officers refused to back him up on a call involving a disorderly woman,” who, according to the lawsuit, “bit his finger to the bone.”

The Municipal Excess Liability Joint Insurance Fund paid $400,000 to Colle, while workers’ compensation for psychiatric, psychological or other bodily injury paid for the remaining amount.

Six officers were originally named in the suit, though two were later dropped. The Press of Atlantic City said the city has not disclosed whether any of the remaining officers had been disciplined for the ordeal, though they all are still employed by the police department. Three of the officers have also received promotions since the law suit was filed.

Read the full Press of Atlantic City story here.

In a recently released report, Human Rights Watch said that many gays and lesbians face great discrimination in the eastern African nation and that the newly enacted law would only worsen the situation.

“Half the world’s countries that criminalize homosexual conduct do so because they cling to Victorian morality and colonial laws,” said Scott Long, director of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights program for Human Rights Watch. “Getting rid of these unjust remnants of the British empire is long overdue.”

According to the group’s report, the new law bans “sexual relations with persons of the same sex.” The report also says that many other African countries with similar laws have increased punishments for those that break the laws.

Prior to the passing of the law, Human Rights Watch said the country’s LGBT community was just beginning to form together to protest their discrimination and request equal treatment.

“The government needs to listen to these voices to understand the harm it is doing to Burundians with its state-sanctioned discrimination,” said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director for Human Rights Watch. “The government should rescind this law and instead work to promote equality and understanding.”