Coming Out in the Open

In contemporary times, the gay community across the world has got a larger space for expression in society. However, this does not in any way, reflect upon the genuine attitude that a large section of the population harbor for homosexuals. In fact, in most of the less developed parts of the world, as well as more broad-minded societies, people face discrimination and social seclusion based upon their sexual orientation. Often, the fear of facing rejection and silent condemnation from their peers, family or the general populace at large, leads homosexuals to suppress their homoerotic impulses or else get involved in clandestine relationships that rely upon secrecy to be successful. Either way, living such a life is not healthy for there is a constant sense of inadequacy in this nature of existence. It is thus advised by psychologists as well as gay activists that homosexuals should not hesitate to come out of the closet and express their sexual preference without any qualms.

For homosexuals to be as unguarded about their sexual orientation as heterosexuals, they shall need the comfort of knowing that they will get part of, if not similar degree of acceptance as the latter. What gay people often do not realize is that keeping their homosexuality within wraps, they themselves are also conforming to the sexual stereotypes which they think society is burdening them with. If they are at peace with the reality of their sexual preference, the societal response should become a secondary concern. In fact, as more and more homosexuals have gone ahead and been candid about their orientation, the general public response has also undergone a change. As the active gay community becomes larger and stronger, they garner more respect and acceptance due to the very fact of being part of a more vast section of the population and not an extremely small minority.

While a large number of gay people keep their homosexuality a secret due to societal pressures and insecurities, more often than not, it is also because they are comfortable with their own reality. However, they must realize that the root cause of such discomfort also goes back to the general conditioning that one receives in regard with sexuality and preferences from their very birth. What they need t realize is that it is better to come out and face reality rather than live a lie. Studies and statistics support the fact that most homosexuals have found themselves to feel happier and more secure once they have come out of the closet and declared their orientation with no hint of embarrassment or regret.

It is important to realize that if a homosexual is fighting with their sexual impulses or keeping their orientation a secret, they are not at peace and are not probably living a very satisfactory life in that sense. It is often believed by the more vocal members of the gay community that they are better off risking undesirable societal reaction rather than living in a state of unhappiness, often even depression. The idea is that it is a fairer deal to risk unhappiness and be true to oneself, rather than be unhappy and live in denial or concealment.

Moreover, as the gay community has become more vocal and active in fighting for its rights (pro gay marriage), a large part of the formerly indifferent or disdainful population has broadened their outlook, being more aware about the reality of homosexuality and sexual preference. As the world community gets more aware about this issue, they simultaneously become more sensitized towards the idea of accepting them as one of their own.

It is therefore, a fair conclusion that homosexuals shall fare better if they are open about their sexual orientation. It shall not only help lighten their own mental burden but also contribute to the larger cause of gay activism that aims at changing the discriminatory attitude that society may harbor in regard with homosexuals. And in coming out of the closet, a gay person makes a decisive attempt to control their own life, which reflects personal growth and strength of character. For all the gay people in the world, go ahead and express yourselves, embrace your sexuality and let other’s notions of right and wrong affect your life.

gaymarriagesupport.com/coming-out-in-the-open – 2012

The Spirit & The Flesh: Sexual Diversity In American Indian Culture

American Historical Review 93 (February 1988):218-219

By skillfully integrating historical and anthropological literature with the results of his own unique cross-cultural fieldwork among contemporary berdaches, Williams provides an extraordinarily perceptive study of the berdache and the most comprehensive treatment of this controversial topic to date. One of the goals of this work is to “allow Indian people to speak for themselves” (p.7). The most effective use of quotations occurs in part 1, which explores the character of the berdache… Particularly valuable insights are conveyed by various traditionalists…. This is a provocative book that will undoubtedly rattle a number of cages. It will also prove to be an essential tool for scholars engaged in gender studies and an extremely useful source for ethnologists, historians and others interested in the human condition. There is a wealth of information in the book.

American Anthropologist 89 (December 1987): 978-979.

Walter Williams produced a detailed study of the sexual diversity among American Indians in six years, 1980-1986. “The Spirit and the Flesh” achieves an important place in anthropological literature regarding berdaches or transvestites and homosexual behavior among American Indians by means of finding and interviewing berdaches.

The recent general sexual revolution in the United States and the gay liberation movement contributed greatly to the production of Williams’s wide-ranging and fully documented book. It will surprise some, shock some, but almost everyone can learn something new from it.

Journal of the American Academy of Religion 57 (Autumn 1989): 607-615.

Walter Williams explores both the extensive literature and the berdache phenomena in considerable depth in a volume that is a decided contribution to the discussion and understanding of complex issues. It becomes essential reading for all of us who would engage in an ongoing study, as well as for those busy academicians who would hope for at least some knowledge of the subject. They will find Williams’ style eminently readable and at the same time well documented….

Williams would push us to move beyond a commonly cited definition to think of berdachism as representing a third, distinctive gender, a ‘mixing’ of the two biologically obvious genders…. Williams perfers ‘gender mixing’ as a more appropriate description of berdaches as an in-between gender…. Williams does a good job of surveying a great variety of ethnographic, anthropological and historical reports… Williams does put the ethnographic evidence into a new interpretive framework. This much alone insures that his work will be in the center of academic discussion about berdache traditions. It should be added that he has also done rather broad field work assessing the state of the issue in contemporary tribal situations….

The analysis of the shifts in contemporary Indian cultures, as we have noted, is one of Williams’ intended contributions…. He advances far beyond other interpreters, although there are certain problems. The strength of Williams’ interpretation of the contemporary context and also the problematic is in the reporting of his field work, namely his broad based conversations with a variety of modern berdaches / gay Indians from very differing tribal traditions. While his treatment is not and probably could not yet be thoroughly systemic, he attempts to move beyond treatment of berdaches as merely a historical phenomenon…. At the very least, evidence from Native America will emphasize that it is simply not the case that the despising of homosexual individuals is a human universal.

Ethnohistory 37 (Autumn 1990):449-451.

Already a classic, this prodigal, prizewinning ethnography about cross-cultural sexual variation remedies serious empirical deficiencies even as it contains important interpretive problems of its own. The many and overwhelming data it presents confirm not only the presence of sanctioned homosexuality but its diverse institutionalization in indigenous and contemporary Native American cultures. Focused largely on male homosexuality, this book draws on Williams’ fieldwork in North America, Central America, and Hawaii and on his exhaustive excavation of the ethnographic and historical literature….

Most of the evidence for the berdache’s social legitimacy is strikingly convincing… yet at times the book’s argument does not seem to register the contradictory evidence which, to its credit, it actually cites…. The narrative and theoretical voice is stronger in the second, historical section of the book, which uses a dialectical model of colonial domination to examine the transformation of the berdache tradition since European contact…. [It] illustrates very powerfully how domination, by contradictorily facing in as well as out, generates resistance: the recent gay liberation movement among whites, having drawn symbolic nurturance from the surviving berdache tradition, has in turn helped to energize that tradition as a symbol and catalyst of its own culture’s revitalization….

The last chapter surveys data that suggest a wide cross-cultural range of sexual diversity. The concluding paragraphs rightly chastise social constructionists like Foucault and Weeks for their ethnocentric ignorance of emics, which prevents them from fully comprehending variant models of sexuality and gender or imagining truly revolutionary ones. While the book’s own use of etics is a bit random (the first section’s grab-bag functionalism posits now reproductive survival, now social leveling, now biopsychological need, as the telos of social custom), its description and evocation of emic categories admirably begin the task for whose continuation it calls.

Journal of American History 77 (June 1990): 308.

For decades anthropologists and historians have mentioned or provided brief discussions of the role of the berdache within traditional native American cultures, but this volume by Walter L. Williams, a professor of ethnohistory in the Program for the Study of Women and Men in Society at the University of Southern California, provides the first in-depth, systematic examination of this institution and its relationship to both Native American and Euro-American cultures. Combining extensive research in travel accounts, personal narratives, and anthropological reports with his own field research, Williams argues that the institution was prevalent throughout most of the western tribes, and that berdaches played prominent social, economic, and spiritual roles within tribal societies….

This is a well-researched, well-written study. Williams admirably blends his fieldwork with more traditional historical research, and the volume will unquestionably remain the standard reference work on this subject for the forseeable future. Unfortunately, however, Williams’s arguments for the legitimacy of the berdaches and his condemnation of Euro-American attitudes toward gay and lesbian sexual behavior occasionally border upon advocacy. In addition, his chapter arguing for the prevalence of clandestine homosexual behavior among such socio-economic groups as pirates or cowboys detract from his primary thesis. These shortcomings aside, this volume should be welcomed by historians and anthropologists studying Native Americans. It should also be well received by historians of sexuality.

 

by Walter L. Williams. Boston: Beacon Press, 1986 and revised edition 1992.

transgender.org – 2011

Gay Travel In India

It is easy to get bored of spending vacations in Europe, Argentina and the more exotic locations around the world. This is when most travelers think of coming to Asia for their next yearly vacation. For any LGBT + traveler, however, Asia is far from the ideal location for travel, unless the focus is on sightseeing and not LGBT services. If you or one of your friends is planning to drop in to India for a short while, there are things that are necessary to know before making the trip, if the plan is not to make the trip a disaster.

India is almost a homophobic country. Though you will get a lot of eye candy in the form of her ancient heritage and monuments, it is not for you if you’re looking forward to a week of gay bars and partying. Homosexuality is illegal here, and PDA is an offence. If you’re caught doing PDA with your gay lover, you can easily expect a night or more in jail. Holding hands does not count, by the way, but you’ll be better off without it.

Once you are clear about your objective for visiting India, choosing where all to visit is crucial, since the country is so huge and full of travelers’ havens that going to every tourist location in one trip is not possible. The first place you might want to look at is what is popularly known as The Golden Triangle – Delhi, Agra and Jaipur. All three cities overflow with Mughal heritage and monuments, famously the Taj Mahal in Agra, the Red Fort in Delhi and loads of Mahals in Jaipur. What to expect here? – Huge castles and fortresses, a lot of heat, a lot of traditionally dressed women – basically, a lot of India. You can also extend your trip to other cities in Rajasthan, such as Udaipur, if you can stand the heat and love Mughal architecture. And for travelers especially looking forward to gay activity, there are several bars in New Delhi that have a gay night once a week.

Going south, there are cities like Mumbai, Kerala, Goa, Chennai, and a lot of hill stations like Kodaikanal and Ooty. While Mumbai has some spectacular monuments (and gay parties every now and then), like the Gateway of India, and museums, Chennai and nearby cities have some mind blowing temples. The architecture of these temples has been the primary attraction for tourists for years, all of whom can not get over the façade, the interior and just about everything about them. The immense scribbling on the façade by tourists is just proof that these temples are popular indeed!

Goa is full of exotic beaches, great nightlife and very cheap alcohol. Coming to Kerala and the hill stations of South India, here is natural beauty if there ever is anywhere. Kerala is not known as “God’s Own Country” for no reason, after all. The scenery is refreshing, serene and breathtaking. Full of lush trees and beautiful lagoons (or backwaters), Kerala is the place for you if you want to de-stress.

Northern India, too, has some scenic displays for the tourist. Leh, freezing cold, but fascinating, is a must visit for anyone looking for the perfect hill station. Then there is the disputed and terrorized territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Don’t call me crazy for this, but there isn’t much to fear while visiting the state, since the police patrol the area, and tourists visit it, all the time. If you are looking for a spiritual tour, you can probably visit the famous Badrinath and Kedarnath temples in the Himachal area and Vaishno Devi, one of the most popular Hindu temples anywhere, in J&K.

Keep in mind that asking for gay parties and bars is something of a risk in India. It is better that you look for these in online forums and discussions, get in touch with a few local guys who know the gay scene here, and then make your move. Staying in hotels is not an issue in India, since men often share a room to cut down travel expenses. Just know that advertising your sexuality will only work against you here. The rest said, enjoy India!

Article written by Shahrukh K. – 2009

Queer Gay Sports Eye for the Hopeless Homo

As I was watching “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” the Bravo reality series where five fabulous gay guys transform a straight, uncultured slob, I was struck by a moment where I identified more with the hetero than the homo.

It was a scene where Carson, the fashion maven, was going through the closet of Slob ‘O The Week, and came across his collection of replica NHL jerseys. Carson picked one up that said “Gretzky” across the back and remarked with puzzlement, “Gretzky? What country is that?”

C’mon, dude, I said to the TV. How can you not know who Wayne Gretzky is, maybe the greatest hockey player ever? At least you should know he’s married to B-movie actress Janet Jones; it was in all the tabloids. I’m certainly no fashion poster boy, but even I know about Prada and Tom Ford.

The Fab Five’s apparent lack of sports knowledge led me to an idea: teaching sports-impaired gay men the basics about the world of bats, balls and pucks. Call it “Queer Sports Eye for the Hopeless Homo.” This information can be very useful in those awkward social settings where you have to interact with your ultra-straight brother-in-law, or maybe break the ice with the dad of your new boyfriend. Or even, pray tell, if your significant other would rather watch “SportsCenter” than “Trading Spaces.” I consulted our Fab Five (no, not the Michigan basketball team from the 1990s) and we came up with these following helpful hints, tips and facts about the world of sports.

Culture

–Super Bowl Sunday is a rotten day to throw a surprise birthday party for your football-loving boyfriend. It’d be like him asking you to go bowling the night of the Oscars.

–Contrary to what you may think, “Fantasy Football” is not a shower scene between you and the Green Bay Packers starting offense. It’s a game where you “draft” your own team of NFL players to compete against similar teams of your friends. But don’t be like our friend who picked his entire 2002 team based on which players were the hottest. Talent and looks do not always go hand in hand. Just ask Warren Sapp.

–“The Big Dance” is not the Palm Springs White Party. It’s the nickname for the NCAA men’s college basketball championship, a three-week hoops extravaganza featuring hot, young, sweaty jocks slapping each other on the butt while wearing tank tops and shorts and drinking lots of water. Oh, sorry, it is the White Party.

–You need to get down with the nicknames. “Shaq” is Lakers center Shaquille O’Neal; “Kobe” is fellow Laker Kobe Bryant; “A-Rod” is Texas Rangers shortstop Alex Rodriguez. “Tight end” signifies a football player positioned to the outside of the offensive line eligible to catch passes, not the headline of that hot guy you saw on Gay .com.

–Gary Glitter’s addictive “Rock and Roll Part 2” (aka the Hey! Song) is the sports national anthem, heard in every arena across the land year-round. Here are the complete lyrics, sung for three minutes: “Hey!”
Even Texas A&M alums can memorize it.

Food

— While watching a game, angel hair pasta tossed in olive oil and roasted garlic is a no-no. Doritos with a side of melted cheese product and a box of Krispy Kremes is as gourmet as it gets. We had a friend’s boyfriend come to a football party last year bearing oranges (it gets worse–they were seedless mandarins called “cuties.”) “You do not bring citrus fruit to a football party,” the boyfriend was told by his partner in a tone that resembled John Madden channeling Martha Stewart.

–Beer is the beverage of choice and it should to be a good, old, red-blooded American mass-produced brew like Bud or Miller. If you go micro, avoid foo-foo names like “Sweet Lavender Ale,” and choose “Snarling Pit Bull Malt” instead.

Interior Design

–A satellite dish with Tivo that can pick up the NFL Sunday Ticket and ESPN Classic Sports is de rigueur.

–You need a couch that’s functional, great to lounge on and the right color to hide beer and grease stains. Brushed leather won’t do.

–The kitchen should be within good hearing distance of the TV so you can’t miss a play. Better yet, go for a TV in the kitchen. And the bedroom. One fanatic we know (an ex-NFL player) has TV speakers in his bathroom so as not to miss a thing (how weird to listen to the Steelers going for 2 when you’re doing the same.)

–Contrary to what one friend’s partner thinks, a football trophy is a proper coffee table addition. Talk about a conversation piece!

Fashion/Grooming

–Avoid inappropriate combinations. A Yankees hat with a Red Sox sweatshirt; a Florida State visor with a Florida T-shirt; anything with “Los Angeles Clippers” on it. Would you wear your dad’s leisure suit to happy hour at the Boom-Boom Room? We didn’t think so.

–It is OK to go shirtless to a sporting event. But you first must be willing to paint “Hi mom! Go Huskers!” on your chest. Please do us a favor, though–before you bare all, at least have seen the inside of a gym in the past year.

–Tattoos are cool but must be appropriate. We have a good friend who’s a huge Minnesota Vikings fan, and he has a tat of the fierce Viking mascot on his behind. In the old days (before he found Mr. Right), he would go up to a prospective trick and if the guy knew anything about football, would say the Pickup Line That Never Failed: “Would you like to go somewhere private and see my royal Viking ass?” Try that with a tat of Madonna.

–Yes, many athletes wear jockstraps during competition, hence their name. And yes, people notice. Denver Broncos wide receiver Ed McCaffrey (all 6-5, 215 pounds of him) and his wife were once interviewed. The questioner noted that Ed wears undersized shoulder pads and mentioned he must also wear a jock strap. The wife said the jock “is a very large one. That’s why the shoulder pads look so small.” And this was on ESPN, not the Spice Channel.

By J. Buzinski Out Sports – 2003

The Gay, Lesbian, and Feminist Backlash

The modern era of the gay & lesbian rights movement is usually marked as starting on a hot July evening at the Stonewall Inn in New York City’s Greenwich Village. The New York police, as many city police departments across the United States did, made period raids on sexual minority bars to harass and arrest the patrons. On this particular night, transgendered woman, Sylvia Rivera, resisted arrest, touching off a riot that continued for three nights running.

In the next year, three transgendered people, Sylvia Rivera, Marsha P. Johnson, and Angela Keyes Douglas would play pivotal roles in organizing the emergent Gay Liberation Front and the Gay Activists Alliance. The goal of the Gay Liberation Front was complete acceptance of sexual diversity and expression. But by 1971 the gay men’s community had returned to the assimilationist strategy as the lesbians, in 1973, turned to separatism and radical feminism. There seemed to be no room for transgendered people in either camp.

In 1971, the GAA wrote and introduced a bill to the New York City Council that was the first omnibus anti-discrimination bill to protect homosexual people. However, inspite of early and avid support of the GAA by transgendered people the bill completely ignored transgendered people. Silvia Rivera, disgusted by the batrayal, said to the leaders of the GAA, “It’s not us that they are afraid of — its you! Get rid of us. Sell us out. Make us expendable. Then you’re at the front lines. Don’t you understand that?” This marked the first serious batrayal, but certainly not the last.

Disillusioned by the GAA’s betrayal of transgendered people, Angela Douglas formed the Transsexual Activist Organization along the same lines as the GAA, with some of the loftier ideals of the GLF. She began publishing MoonShadow, a quirky newsletter for and about transgendered people and the struggle for legal rights.

In early 1970’s, Beth Elliott was active in a number of organizations including the Alice B. Toklas Gay Democratic Club, which she co-founded, the Board of Directors of the California Committee for Sexual Law Reform working to repeal California’s anti-sodomy laws, and the Daughters of Bilitus. The Daughters of Bilitus had been a pioneering lesbian organization during the 1950s and ‘60s, but was losing membership in the ‘70s as the lesbian community turned to more radical organizing. In ‘73 Ms. Elliott was asked to stand for election as the Vice-President of the San Francisco chapter of the Daughters of Bilitus. Late in her term of office her transgender status became a point of contention at the West Coast Lesbian Conference, where she was outed and vilified for being a MTF transsexual. The complaint was that Beth Elliott had insinuated herself into a position of power over women as a patriarchal man, a propagandist ploy that was to become common when attacking other transgendered people . At the conference she was forced to stop her music concert due to the catcalls from the audience by women that knew nothing more about her than that she was transsexual. She was required to sit through a popular vote of the attendees to determine whether they would let her finish her set. In the weeks and months to follow she was further vilified and even betrayed by women who had once called her friend. The treatment she received led her to become “stealth” for many years after.

In July of 1973, during a “Gay is Good” rally, Sylvia Rivera was followed on the stage by lesbian separatist Jean O’Leary. She denounced transgender people as men who, by “impersonating women”, were exploiting women for profit. It was the beginning of a series of such high profile transphobic attacts from the lesbian community.

In 1977, at the height of the Right Wing / Anita Bryant anti-gay rights backlash, the lesbian feminist separatist movement was busy attacking an even smaller community that only wanted to work within the lesbian community, lesbian identified transsexual women. Central to the conflict in ‘77 was transsexual recording engineer, Sandy Stone, working at Olivia Records.

Sandy Stone was a recording engineer for A&M Records before her transition. Olivia Records needed a recording engineer with skills and experience to help their fledgling all women’s recording studio. They found it in Sandy Stone. She recorded a number of their early albums, training other women on proper recording and mixing technique. When word got around that Olivia had a transsexual in the company, lesbian separatists threatened a boycott of Olivia products and concerts. Olivia Records was on the edge of profitability. A boycott would destroy them. Olivia supported Stone at first but eventually crumpled beneath the separatists demands, asking for Sandy’s resignation.

Angela Douglas became upset at the vitriolic, absurd, and transphobic comments broadcast on listener sponsored station KPFA in Berkeley, California and letters published in the feminist journal Sister. She wrote a very tongue-in-cheek satirical letter to the editor of Sister, the night before the 1977 San Francisco Gay Pride Parade.

The next day, at the Parade, a “gender bending” MTF individual handed out fliers that was written in protest of the Parade Committee’s policy of exclusion of “Drag Queens, Transvestites, and Transsexuals” . The policy was formulated in the hope of heading off the media which tended to focus on the flamboyant, instead of the very serious issues of Gay & Lesbian community pride and efforts to fight homophobia in society. However, transphobia had operated in the Parade Committee to equate transgendered people with “flamboyant” social unacceptability and political liability.

After the parade, Angela Douglas wrote a short essay with photos for the Berkeley Barb, in which she decried the efforts to exclude transgendered people. She asked if there shouldn’t be a counter parade by transgendered people, to be held on Halloween, a day that one is supposed to be flamboyant!

Two years later Janice Raymond in The Transsexual Empire, wrote of the events of 1977, casting Ms. Stone as an agent of the “Patriarchy” and “divisive”. The letter that Angela Douglas wrote as satire was quoted out of context, as an example of transsexual hatred of women, by Raymond. Her quoting out of context a letter written by Douglas was tantamount to intellectual dishonesty, with scholarly repercussions.

Janice Raymond was a professor at the University of Massachusetts. She is infamous for having written her doctoral thesis attacking transsexuality, denying its medical reality, and for viciously attacking individual transsexuals, notably Sandy Stone and Angela Keyes Douglas in her book, based on her dissertation. The book uses insensitive and transphobic language throughout, while vilifying feminine MTF transsexuals as tools of patriarchy for upholding stereotypes of women, and vilifying androgynous lesbian identified MTF transsexuals for being tools of patriarchy, fifth columnists infiltrating womens’ space and “raping womens’ bodies”, a typical ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ trap. She dismisses FTM transsexuals as deluded and misguided lesbians, afraid of the label “homosexual”. Her thesis rests entirely on arguments that sex/gender identity are fixed within the genitals at birth, an essentialist theory that excludes the possibility of transsexuals being a form of intersex, a topic which Raymond never addresses.

The book, while it did not create the transphobic attitude in the lesbian community, did tap into and ‘validated’, at least for the transphobes themselves, the discrimination they practiced. Thus, what began in the ‘70s, occasional attacks on individual transsexual women, became institutionalized discrimination against all transsexuals in the ‘80s.

The Transsexual Empire, was not the most damaging writing that Raymond penned. Far worse was a United States federal government commissioned study in the early 1980’s on the topic of federal aid for transsexual people seeking rehabilitation and health services. This paper, not well publicized, effectively eliminated federal and some states aid for indigent and imprisoned transsexuals. It had a further impact on private health insurance which followed the federal government’s lead in disallowing services to transsexual patients for any treatment remotely related to being transsexual, including breast cancer or genital cancer, as that was deemed to be a consequence of treatment for transsexuality.

Ms. Raymond is closely associated with another noted transphobic writer, Mary Daly, who described transsexuals as “Frankenstien’s Monsters” in her book GynEcology.

Transgender participation continued to be controversial in the Gay & Lesbian Community. Transsexuals taking leadership positions in the community were especially subject to attack.

Ms. Carol Katz was on the Christopher Street West Gay Pride Parade and Festival Committee, serving as Security Coordinator from ‘79 through ‘81. However her position on the board was a controversial one as many gays and especially lesbians objected to the presence of a transsexual. She recruited a number of transgendered people, both FTM and FTM to work as volunteer parade monitors and festival security each year . Her background in law enforcement facilitated greater cooperation between the Committee and local law enforcement organizations, LAPD and the LA County Sheriff’s Department.

In 1980 Ms. Katz was asked to serve as Security Co-ordinator for the “Women Take Back The Night March” in Hollywood. She agreed to help. However… lesbian feminist separatists threatened to boycott the march. Carol offered to step down in the interests of the larger community, with some private bitterness. The Committee accepted her resignation. But at the very last minute, due to overwhelming details in doing the job without her… and perhaps a realization that it was wrong to push her out of her participation… the committee asked her to take back the job the very day of the march. The controversy over Ms. Katz’es leadership role lead to the effective banning of broad transgender community participation in event planning and execution, though transgendered people did march that night .

It should be noted that the memory of the gay & lesbian community is short, as demonstrated by the efforts of the transgender community in Los Angeles to win inclusion in the Parade and Festival in 1995; Transman, Jacob Hale faced a Festival committee that believed transgendered people had never been participants before. The work of the transgendered community in ‘79-’81 had been completely forgotten, erased by the silence of the 1980’s.

In 1991 Nancy Burkholter was ejected from the Michigan Wymyns’ Music Festival at 1:00am by security staff suspicious that she was transsexual. She had done nothing to warrant eviction. She was forced to find transportation back to town to fly home, a holiday trip ruined by transphobia.

Unknown to the transsexuals who had been quietly attending the festival for years was an unpublished policy of the festival organizers that transsexuals were not welcome “on the land”. The policy was written out in the material for the next year that only “Wymyn Born Wymyn” may attend. The language was clearly designed to exclude transsexuals while avoiding debates regarding whether MTF transsexuals were “Wymyn”.

The next year, in 1992 TransActivist Anne Ogborn began organizing a protest to be held at the Festival, unable to go herself, she enlisted Davina Anne Gabrielle to attend. Davina and non-transsexual woman, Janis Hollingsworth handed-out buttons to women reading “I might be transsexual” at a table to enlist festival attendees in a dialog over the transsexual inclusion. Davina was ejected from “the land” in accordance with the written policy.

In 1993, the transgender community pitched CampTrans outside the main entrance. Jessica Xavier, Leslie Feinberg, among others attended to protest the Festivals’ “Wymyn Born Wymyn Only” policy. “Woman Born Transsexual” read a new button worn by CampTrans inmates. At the camp, workshops and concerts were presented as an alternative to the Festival. A number of women came out of the festival to participate in discussions. Notable was the participation of younger lesbians, especially members of The Lesbian Avengers. TransActivist volunteers stood outside the gate taking a poll of the festival attendees attitudes toward transsexual inclusion at the festival. The poll revealed division on the issue, but the majority of the women attending indicated that they would welcome transsexual women.

Participation in CampTrans energized the transgender community to become active once again, after the community’s silent withdrawal from the larger gay & lesbian community the previous decade.

National and local transgender activist worked for months to gain inclusion in the 1993 March On Washington. Transgender volunteers aiding in organizing the March, notably Jessica Xavier, worked with March organizers for months trying to gain inclusion in the name of the March. There was a ‘divide and conquer’ politicking by transphobic gays & lesbians that pitted bisexuals against transgenders. They told the bisexual community members who were also working toward official inclusion that it was either transgender or bisexual, but not both. To their credit the bisexual members did not buy into the ploy. However, the issue of inclusion was still couched in such terms by the foes of transgender inclusion. When the issue was put to a vote by the organizing committee the bisexuals won inclusion easily. The vote for inclusion of transgender was divided. There were actual cheers from the gay and lesbian community when the committee announced their decision to exclude transgender which deeply dismayed the transgender community volunteers.

A new pattern emerged in the mid 1990’s. The generation that had grown up since Stonewall welcomed transgender people without reservation, perhaps even with a tinge of adulation for their contribution to the struggle for Queer Rights. The older generation, those who had struggled just after stonewall, those who had read The Transsexual Empire when it was new, had not changed their minds significantly. Those that had been accepting during the 1970s remained so, those that had been sitting on the fence now came down on transgender inclusion. But those who had adamantly opposed trans-inclusion in the ‘70s still fought against it in the ‘90s. In 1994 The Transsexual Empire was reprinted and used as a textbook in feminist classes once again.

In 1994 CampTrans was pitched again with Riki Anne Wilchins taking a leading role. The turn out was smaller than expected. It was not due to a feeling of failure, but rather a feeling that the issue of transgender inclusion in “wymyn only space” was being by-passed by larger and more important issues.

Also occurring in 1994 was the Gay Games. When transgendered people wished to participate they discovered similar transphobic attitudes that the International Olympic Committee held . The Games organizers refused to allow transgendered people to participate except under very restrictive rules, namely that had to prove that they had had surgery or at least lived two years full time, with hormones, in their gender of identity. Bi-gendered individuals were completely excluded. This reliance on rules that on the surface seem to come direct from the HBIGDA Standards of Care, offended the transgendered community.

Transsexual Menace of New York organized to protest the restrictive and discriminatory rules. In street protests the group held up a banner that read, “Gay Games to transgendered: DROP DEAD!!” The uproar and embarrassment forced the organizers to drop the rules and allow unrestricted participation.

Some gay columnists were calling the events the “transgender Stonewall”, comparing 1994’s protests to ‘the gay riots of 1969’, totally ignoring the historic irony that Stonewall itself was started and fought by transgendered people. This lack of historic recognition sparked another protest in New York, demanding inclusion in planned events to mark 25 years since Stonewall.

In 1994 the issue of discrimination against sexual minorities became the biggest issue. The gay & lesbian community was working towards passing a bill in Congress, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA);. Transgender activists worked with the gay & lesbian community and the bill’s sponsors in Congress on inclusive language for the bill, only to discover that the language was removed before the bill was introduced. When the issue was researched by Phyllis Frye, she discovered that the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) had objected to the language. Once again transphobia in the gay community had resurfaced as betrayal.

The betrayal of the HRC was echoed at the local level. In 1995, transactivists in Oregon worked with gay & lesbian activist with the Right To Privacy Political Action Committee (RTP) for a state version of ENDA. Once again language was changed at the last minute, behind the back of the transgender community. Later, RTP board members denied this fact when charged by transactivists. However, transsexual law student and legislative intern, JoAnna McNamara was in the meetings that were held with RTP and the bill’s sponcors. RTP representitives did not know that Ms. McNamara was transsexual, who later provided information to the local gay press regarding the betrayal.

The transgender community lobbied the HRC and other organizations to amend the language to include transgender and gender variant gay & lesbian protection. Each year saw organizations that had previously supported the bill, drop its support. Each year of the second half of the ‘90s saw organizations officially add transgender to their mission statement. Each year saw what started as inclusive lip service become real support.

In 1998. the Gay Games was held in the Nederlands. Ironically, while transsexual pop singing star Dana International performed at the opening festivities, the transgender community protested the re-instatement of the same restrictive rules that had excluded some transgendered people in New York four years earlier. However, European officials of the Games were unmoved.

In 1999, five years after the disagreement between the HRC and the transgender community over inclusion in ENDA surfaced the controversy continued, one of the bill’s Congressional sponsors, openly gay Representative, Barney Frank, played the “Bathroom Card”, saying that employers will not accept transgender people as employees since they won’t be able to convince their other employees to tolerate transgender people in the restrooms. This was quickly denounced by transgender activists as truly expressing transphobia, though Frank had earlier voiced his concern regarding violence and discrimination against transgender people in the wake of the death of Tyra Hunter, pointing out the irony as the “Shower Card” was used against the gay & lesbian community in its fight to gain the right to serve in the armed forces earlier in the decade .

In 1999, at the close of the 20th Century, the gay & lesbian community was still divided over transgender inclusion. Camp Trans was once again pitched in front of the gate of the Michigan Wimmins’ Music Festival. This time post operative male to female transsexuals were allowed ‘on the land’, but pre-operative MTF women and post-operative FTM men were not. The issue had now come down to possession of a penis. Although they were now allowed on the land, vocal transphobic lesbian separatists menaced transsexual women, while members of The Lesbian Avengers supported them.

At the end of the 20th Century, the Transgender Question in the gay and lesbian community was still unsettled, and unsettling for the majority.

transhistory.org/history/TH_Backlash.html – 2003

A Gay Track Coach Tells His Story

In the spring of 1993, Eric “Gumby” Anderson was scared.

He was a closeted gay man behind the “Orange Curtain” – the term commonly used to refer to the politically ultra-conservative Orange County in California. He didn’t know a single other gay man. And, he was also in the homophobic world of high school sports-track in particular, where no coach had ever come out in America.

Later that year, that changed.

Gumby-a childhood nickname that everyone knows him by-became the first openly gay high school track coach in America when he told the administration and members of his team at Huntington Beach High School that he was gay.

“I just couldn’t lie and hide anymore to anybody,” he says.

Today, he is anything but hiding. Still living in Orange County, he has a jumbo-sized rainbow flag flying from the front of his house. He has a rainbow flag on his car. He even has a rainbow flag on the screen door to his back patio. The license plate on his Avalon is “GAYRNNR.” And, he’s had a very high-profile part of the campaign to end discrimination against gays at the high school level for years.

“The only thing I’ve ever really kicked myself in the ass for was not coming out sooner,” he says.

His closeted past long behind him, Gumby has chronicled his long struggle to bridge the gap between sports and being gay.

In his new book, “Trailblazing: The True Story of America’s First Openly Gay Track Coach,” he tells an intense tale of the first four years of coaching as an openly gay man.

He brings the reader time and time again into the principal’s office to face unfounded allegations of sexual harassment and illegal recruiting. He gives us the vivid details of the brutal beating of one of the runners on his “Fag Team.” He also shows the incredible powers of winning, overcoming tremendous adversity, and sportsmanship.

oach Gumby, now 32, knows the role of coach well. A PhD candidate at University of California Irvine, Gumby has spent years researching the psychology of sports. He has published two books on the subject of distance running, delving into the subject at every level from motivation and enthusiasm to nutrition and injuries.

It should be no surprise that one of the areas he has spent the most time researching is homosexuality in sports. He has written various articles and academic pieces on the subject including his Master’s thesis, “Gays In Sport: Is It As Bad As They Say?”

“Trailblazing” stands out from the rest of his works. This isn’t a training program or an analysis of statistics or facts. It’s a very personal story that the author hopes will have a very different effect than his non-narrative works.

Gumby began writing the book as a research project-a possible chronicle of two Olympic runners, from high school until, hopefully, Olympic gold. After four years, he realized he didn’t have two Olympic-caliber runners on his hand; but he did have a gripping story of a team and a coach dealing with what it is to be gay in sports.

“I realized that what was going on in [my runners’] lives had to do with what was going on in my life, as I was coming out of the closet as an openly gay coach,” he says.

It is very hard to find an openly gay coach at any level, as most choose to stay in the closet. In fact, Gumby is one of only two known openly gay high school coaches, the other being Dan Woog of Connecticut, the author of “Jocks,” a book about gay athletes.

When you hear Gumby’s story, it’s easy to understand why so many coaches fear what could happen to them if they are outed.

Within days of coming out, Gumby came under fire from the school administration. On a daily basis he got notes in his mailbox to “please see the principal.” He was asked about his reasons for coming out and accused of making sexual advances on his runners, illegally recruiting other runners, holding illegal practices, or any of a number of other missteps. Often these were “anonymous.” They were always unfounded.

As if that were not enough, while Gumby was being attacked by the administration, his team was being attacked by their classmates. Labeled “The Fag Team” both in their school and by other cross-country teams around the county, the Huntington Beach runners were assaulted verbally on a daily basis. Their cars were keyed. They were forced to change in the bathroom rather than the locker room. Sometimes they were even physically attacked.

“I’m not the hero,” says Gumby. “The heroes are the kids who chose to fight this fight.”

The situation totally consumed Gumby.

“With all the crap that was going on,” Gumby says, “I was running around putting out little fires, and trying to prevent big ones from happening non-stop, so I had absolutely no social life. Zero.”

Of course, that was the particular situation he had to deal with. In much of Orange County, being openly gay carries risks. And, to make matters worse, he was coaching boys, which helped feed into the hateful stereotypes. Being the first and feeling isolated meant added pressure.

“24 hours a day I lived, breathed, ate Huntington Beach High coach. I had something to prove to the world about gay coaches or gay athletes. There was a period when I had to win. It was the proof. So, that attitude and love just didn’t seem to go hand-in-hand.”

And win he did, bringing national attention to a perennial loser in Orange County, winning the County Championship in back-to-back seasons, sending various runners to Division I colleges and sending a team to the California State Meet for the first time in school history.

uickly, track began to be less and less a part of Gumby’s life and started to become his life.

“I wasn’t just going out there coaching, and the kids racing on the weekends,” he says “There was so much more involved; so much more going on.”

All of this also led to a non-existent love-life for Gumby in those days. “Love and track don’t seem to mix,” he says in his book after a short section on his first boyfriend.

Despite all of the meetings with the principal, hearing “fag” every day, and having to constantly take a larger role in the lives of his runners, for Gumby, coming out was an important part of his coaching.

“I didn’t come out until I was 25, and one of the reasons I didn’t come out is because I didn’t know anybody [who was gay]. I knew I had gay runners out there, there’s no question about it, and I knew that me being out would give them a breath of hope-that they’d think, `Yeah, there are other people out there, I’m not the only one.’ ”

Certainly not. Since coming out, Gumby has had seven of his own runners come out to him.

“I really am a lousy recruiter,” he says. “They ought to take my toaster back, because, for all the athletes that I’ve had, I certainly didn’t get many out of the closet.”

“Lousy recruiter” or not, Coach Gumby could never have been called just an “ordinary” coach.

“The average perception of a coach is somebody who goes out there, blows a whistle, tells athletes what to do, and goes home. That’s not the kind of coach I am. Coach and friend go hand and hand.”

Which is a big part of why his runners continue to stay in close touch with him, and continue to call him “Coach” long after they’ve graduated.

At a recent book signing at his house, most of the major characters of “Trailblazing,” including UCLA National Indoors 800 Champ Jess Strutzel, were there to offer their support and “hang at Coach’s place.”

Gumby’s new “in-laws” were also there, a sign that he has even managed to make the bridge between love and track. He has had a boyfriend, Grant-Tyler Peterson (right), 20, for two years. Grant-Tyler is a senior at UCLA and just starred in the school’s production of “Fahrenheit 451.”

Though he presently doesn’t have to balance his personal life with coaching runners on the track, Gumby continues to coach gay teen athletes in life. Many of them are scared and confused, wondering how they can be an athlete and be gay at the same time.

Gumby say the environment has changed a lot for the better in the seven years since he’s come out. His doctoral thesis is on the 42 openly gay high school and college athletes he has found. He hopes a more accepting society translates into more athletes feeling comfortable being open about their sexuality.

Many young gay athletes find him through his Website, coachgumby.com, which features his e-publication for gay teens, The Gumby Gazet. They contact him looking for advice and someone to confide in. They come from all over the country from all different sports. The word on the Web is, if you’re a gay teen athlete, you’ve got to track down Coach Gumby.

“I saw my book in Barnes & Noble on the shelf and I thought, ‘Some 16-year-old kid is going to pick this book up and is going to get a lot of inspiration out of it.’ And so, what this all means is that this is going to help somebody, this is going to help a lot of people. At least, that’s my goal.”

That 16-year-old couldn’t find a better coach. While he’s anxious to get back to coaching runners, right now Gumby’s just focused on changing the world.

By C. Zeigler, Jr. Out sports – 2000

Male on Male Sexual Violence

Male Survivors of Incest or other Sexual Assault

It is estimated that 5-10% of reported cases of rape or sexual assault each year involve male victims (Scarce, 1997) . Some rape crisis centers see nearly equal numbers of girls and boys up to age 12. Researchers report one out of six boys will have been assaulted by age 16. Experts believe the number of cases are under-reported because survivors are less likely to report than are female survivors. Any male can be assaulted. Survivors are gay, straight, and bisexual. Most reported perpetuators are male. Several reports stated that the majority of rapes of males are perpetrated by heterosexual males (Isely & Gehrenbeck-Shim 1997, Scarce 1997).

The identification of sexual assaults committed against males is a recent phenomenon. Previous to the feminist efforts of the last 30 years, resulting in much more comprehensive laws and growing public awareness, rape was the only “sex crime” recognized by law. Only males could be charged with rape and females were the only victims recognized by law. Rape meant vaginal intercourse. Now, the term sexual assault includes many more of the behaviors by which people could be hurt. Many, but not all, states use the phrase sexual assault. Many states are beginning to recognize the sexual assault of males as a problem.

Boys tend not to be taught to empathize. We haven’t taught boys that they deserve the right to feel safe in their bodies, that the autonomy of their body is sacred, that “no” equals “no” for everyone and that when stated it should be respected. Without teaching little boys to expect these rights for themselves, how can we expect young men to respect these rights for men (or women)? Little boys are not taught how to say”no” to abusive clergy, scout-masters, coaches, uncles, fathers, baby-sitters, and other potential male perpetrators.

Males are only beginning to recognize how many of them have experienced sexual assault. For reasons similar that female survivors, male survivors deny their victimization. Their reasons include 1) a lack of information to define their experience as sexual assault; 2) a sense that they will be disbelieved by people; 3) a fear of reprisal by the perpetuator(s); 4) an unwillingness to think of themselves as survivors of sexual assault and fearing all the potential changes in themselves that might inevitably ensue; and 5) a resentment that the behavior of the perpetuator(s) had or has the power to cause the survivor to expend time, energy, emotional and financial resources-and therefore essentially take control of their life-for an unknown length of time.

Sex or Sexual Assault?

Sexual assault is commonly defined as forced intercourse or sexual contact that occurs without consent as a result of actual or threatened force (Crooks & Baur 1998). Only recently, however, have many states amended their criminal codes to include adult males (meaning sixteen years of age and older) in their definition of rape (Isely & Gehrenbeck-Shim). All sexual assault is an expression of power, hate, and control. To many heterosexuals, an assaultive male is, crudely put, manifesting “homosexual” behavior. The majority of rapes of males are perpetrated by Caucasian, heterosexual men who often commit their crime with one or more cohorts (Scarce 1997) This demonstrates, again how straight culture confuses sex with sexual assault.

Any male who has been assaulted by another male has a disincentive to report the incident because many people assume that any male assaulted by another male is automatically gay. If the survivor is gay and the perpetrator is gay then reporting the sexual assault may involve “coming out” to authorities, which can be unsafe. Living in a homophobic culture which equates the rape of males to homosexual sexual behavior; a male survivor, who is gay or presumed to be gay, may assume that he will be disbelieved and harassed by the police rather than supported.

Some sexual assaults of gay males are committed by perpetrators who self-identify as heterosexual. The motivations of these men to assault gay males is similar to their motivation to assault females-to dominate and express hatred. Some sexual assaults of gay males are committed by other gay males. Estimates of numbers of assaults are impossible to come by with the prevalence of homophobia in the United States. Consent is what separates sex from sexual assault. Consent is not adequately taught to straight, bisexual or gay teens.

Sexual assaults are not sex. When a male sexually assaults another male: 1)neither male becomes a homosexual as a result of the assault; 2) it is not the manifestation of latent homosexual behavior. There are homosexual men who commit assault but the assaults they commit are not homosexual sex acts. When a man punches another man we do not call it “homosexual battery.” “If you hit someone over the head with a frying pan, you wouldn’t call it cooking.” says Mike Lew, author of Victims No Longer: Men Recovering From Incest & Other Sexual Child Abuse.

Males Who Sexually Assault Other Males

Most of the perpetuators of sexual assault committed on male are other males. As stated before, the majority of perpetrators are heterosexual and Caucasian (Scarce 1997). The boy or young man who is a survivor can be confused, angry, blaming himself, hurt, desperate to understand. The hysteria and misinformation rampant about homosexuality makes understanding their assault very difficult for male survivors.

How Sexual Assault Affects You and Others

Some male survivors’ confusion about their sexual orientation, can hinder their recovery. While some males assaulted as boys by older males come to realize that while they don’t want to replicate the abusive component of their experience, they do want to explore consensual interactions with males. Gaining clarity about one’s sexuality is much more difficult for sexual assault survivors.

 

When you are dealing with survivors who you know, they may “frustrate or anger” you by not wanting to report their assault, call it assault, change behavior that you find problematic or even destructive, or other things. You may be irritated with the survivors’ rate of recovery or unwillingness to do things that you objectively know would be positive for them. Since the root of eating disorders, depression, and addictions is often incest and others sexual assault, our attention can be misdirected by manifestations of these “symptoms.”

When you are dealing with perpetrators who you know, they too may “frustrate or anger” you by not wanting to call their behavior assault, change behavior that you find problematic, etc. Their resistance may be maddening. Their alleged act may well contribute to the polarization of their circle of friends. The presumption of innocent until proven guilty can be sorely tested. Additionally, you may know or like them as people, and experience difficulty believing they could “do” this.

You don’t have to arbitrate, heal or solve this problem alone. Survivors need support not rescue. You will be helping yourself if you first look at your resistance or denial. Know your own biases and prejudices. And if you can’t/won’t listen at that particular time because you are busy/stressed, or this brings up discomfort from personal experience; you so not have to at the moment.

How to be a supportive listener for a friend/lover/relative who is a survivor of incest or other sexual assault

Most survivors never tell anyone that they have been assaulted. If someone tells you about their abuse, consider it an honor. You may not feel lucky but you are. Welcome to a very confusing, murky world.

  • Believe them-they are telling the truth. Tell them you’re sorry and it wasn’t their fault.
  • Really listen, don’t jump to solutions. Ask what help they would like.
  • Do not distract yourself with heroic fantasies to beat up the perpetrator.
  • Offer to make an appointment with them to see a counselor, clergy, police, etc.
  • Do not say that you know/understand how they feel. You don’t, even if you’re a survivor yourself. Your experience was not identical to his/hers.
  • Suggest counseling in addition to talking to you. Professional counselors are very useful.
  • There is no limit to how long the healing process takes. Saying things like, “You’ve got to forget about this.” won’t help and may harm recovery.
  • Be aware of school/local support resources and share those.
  • Sometimes you can’t “do” what seems to you very much, but the “little” that you do may be sufficient for survivors now. Don’t assume for them what they need.
  • Give them time and space. If you’re talking more than they are, you’re probably not helping.
  • Do not give advice, even if asked for it. Survivors of sexual assault have had their power profoundly taken from them. Making decisions overprotects them and may send a message that you think they’re incompetent. Help them problem-solve by offering all possible options. Offer to support whatever decision they make, then do it.
  • Get support for yourself too-the more you care, the more you are affected. Look inward; pay attention to your own feelings, your needs are valid too.
  • Don’t burden the survivor with your “stuff.” Males learn to expect others to “take care of” our emotional needs and want them to explain to us what we are thinking/feeling about their trauma. It isn’t wrong for us to have emotional needs. It is wrong for us to add to the survivor’s burden.
  • Respect their need for absolute confidentiality. Not making their secret public may be the only safe thing for them to do as they see it. If you get support for yourself as an affected “significant other,” do not tell the details of the abuse to anyone. If a person who you confide in presses you to identify the survivor, do not tell them. If you help make the details of the assault public, you will do the survivor harm.
  • Check-in with a person before leaping into an intense follow-up discussion. Don’t assume that the level of disclosure that you shared previously is acceptable currently or later when you talk to that person. If you want to talk further, recognize that this might not be a good time for him/her to talk.
  • Sometimes a friend/lover/relative will share that they were assaulted by someone. Some survivors never bring it up again. Some refuse to talk further about it. Some even avoid you. This doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with you. You might be the only person they have confided in and every time they see you they recall their abuse. Don’t punish them for your feeling of being used if that is how you feel. Similarly, you may choose approach them at a private time and ask them if they want to talk further. If they don’t, that’s fine. If they do,that’s also fine as long as you both feel comfortable and safe.
  • When a survivor tells you tell you that they have been abused, you may feel uncomfortable for a variety of reasons. You have the right to state that what they are telling you is too difficult for you to hear. You may help them find someone else who can be there for them.
  • If anything you hear or feel resonates for you as you hear their story, it does not prove that you are a survivor. If you are a survivor and you are feeling old feelings again, there are (hopefully)caring resources available in you community.
  • Some people will seek out a stranger to tell their story to. They may feel safer telling their story to someone they won’t see again, feeling safer with anonymity this person provides. We all deserve the right to feel safe. ( Protective Behaviors, Inc).
  • Remember the value you place on a friend who took the time to really listen to you.
Possible Reactions of Male and Female Incest or other Sexual Assault Survivors

Note: I include this sections to illustrate the multitude of sometimes contradictory effects that sexual assault survivors experience. This list was created from several lists that compiled responses of many survivors, both male and female. Not all survivors necessarily experience all or even most of these.

  • Nightmares
  • Swallowing and gagging sensitivity (suffocation feelings)
  • Alienation from the body-poor body management. Manipulating body size to avoid sexual attention.
  • Fear that everyone is a potential attacker
  • Eating disorders, drug or alcohol abuse; other addictions; compulsive behaviors
  • Self-destructiveness; skin carving; self-abuse
  • Suicidal thoughts, attempts, obsessions; Depression (sometimes paralyzing); seemingly baseless crying
  • Inability to express anger; fear of actual or imagined rage; constant anger
  • Intense hostility toward entire gender or ethnic group of the perpetuator
  • Depersonalization; going into shock, shutdown in crisis
  • A stressful situation is always a crisis; psychic numbing
  • Physical pain or numbness associated with a particular memory, emotion (for example anger), or situation (for example sex)
  • Rigid control of one’s thought process; humorlessness or extreme solemnity
  • Nervousness about being watched or surprised; feeling watched
  • Trust issues; inability to trust; trusting indiscriminately
  • High risk behaviors; inability to take risks
  • Boundary issues; control power, territorial issues; fear of losing control
  • Obsessive/compulsive behaviors
  • Guilt, shame; low self-esteem, feeling worthless, high appreciation of small favors by others
  • No sense of own power or right to set limits or say no
  • Pattern of relationships with much older persons (beginning in adolescence)
  • Blocking out part of childhood (especially ages 1-12), or specific person or place
  • Feeling of carrying an awful secret; urge to tell, fear of its being revealed
  • Certainty that no one will listen; feeling “marked” (“The Scarlet Letter”)
  • Feeling crazy; feeling different; feeling oneself to be unreal and everybody else to be real, or vice versa; creating fantasy worlds, relationships, or identities
  • Denial; no awareness at all; repression of memories; pretending
  • Sexual issues: sex feels “dirty”; aversion to being touched (especially in gynecological exam); strong aversion to or need for) particular sex acts; feeling betrayed by one’s body; trouble integrating sexuality and emotionality; compulsively “seductive” or compulsively asexual; must be sexual aggressor, or cannot be; impersonal, “promiscuous” sex with strangers concurrent with inability to have sex in an intimate relationship; sexual acting acting out to meet anger or revenge needs; sexualizing of meaningful relationships. Note: Homosexuality is not an after effect.
  • Limited tolerance for happiness; reluctance to trust happiness

youthresource.com/library/ygm5.htm – 2000

What Are Young Gay Men’s HIV Prevention Needs?

Are young gay men at risk?

Unfortunately, yes. Accumulating research shows alarmingly high HIV prevalence rates among young gay men and high rates of sexual risk-taking, suggesting that young gay men in their 20’s are forging a “second wave” of the AIDS epidemic. During the 1980s, the median age at HIV infection was older than 30 years. It dropped to 25 years during the period from 1987 to 1991. From 1987 to 1991, one in every four newly infected individuals in the US was age 22 or under.

A recent study of 425 gay men aged 18-29 in San Francisco, CA found that 18% were already infected with HIV, with a seroincidence rate of 2.6% per year: among the 27-29 year olds, 29% were HIV+. Another study which sampled young gay men aged 17-22 from public venues such as bars, street corners, dance clubs and parks found 9% of the men to be HIV positive. Young African-American men were found to have especially high HIV seroprevalence (21%). A study of gay men aged 18-24 in New York City found 9% HIV positive.

What places young gay men at risk?

In contrast to studies with older gay men which demonstrate dramatic reductions in HIV risk-taking behaviors, a variety of studies show that young gay men are engaging in high rates of unsafe sex. In a survey of gay men aged 18-25 in three medium-sized West Coast communities, 43% of the sample reported having engaged in unprotected anal intercourse during the previous 6 months.(7) A study of gay and bisexual adolescent males in Minnesota found that 63% were at “extreme risk” due to unprotected anal intercourse or intravenous drug use. A San Francisco telephone survey showed that 44% of gay men under the age of 30 had engaged in unprotected anal intercourse during the previous year, compared to 18% of the men over age 30.

What contributes to risk taking?

A complex array of factors – at individual, interpersonal and community levels – contributes to the high sexual risk-taking of young gay men. Since the bulk of AIDS cases among gay men is among men aged 30-40, many young gay men perceive AIDS as a disease of older men and feel it is safe to have unprotected sex with other young men. Most young men know how HIV is transmitted and men who engage in unprotected sex do label their behavior as putting themselves at risk for AIDS. Nonetheless, with their feelings of invulnerability typical of youth, young men may feel the negative consequences “won’t happen to me”.

Young men are often in an exploratory phase with regard to sexuality which may entail high numbers of partners and a willingness to try a variety of activities. Due to inexperience, young men may be less competent in negotiating low-risk sex and less knowledgeable about making safe sex activities enjoyable. Coming out as gay can also be a period of great emotional turbulence, resulting in low self-esteem and depression which may reduce their feelings of self-efficacy and motivation for safe sex.

Further, protecting one’s health is not necessarily a young gay man’s top concern. Interpersonal motivations may be more pressing – wanting to fit in, to find companionship and intimacy. However, interpersonal issues can also contribute to unsafe sex. For young gay men, unsafe sex is most likely to occur with a boyfriend – someone whose affection is very important to them.(7)

The social structure and norms of the young gay subculture may not be entirely conducive to safer sex. In many communities, gay bars and public cruising settings provide the main opportunities for young gay men to meet and socialize. Yet each is highly sex-charged and the bar scene’s emphasis on alcohol sets the stage for engaging in sex while high – consistently found to contribute to unsafe sex.

What works for young gay men?

Despite enormous need, only a handful of programs specifically targeting young gay men have been designed and evaluated. Individualized risk-reduction counseling followed by peer education and referrals to drug, counseling and health services were reported to be an effective strategy for decreasing unprotected anal intercourse among gay male adolescents in Minneapolis, MN. In New York City, an intensive, multi-session small group intervention was offered to gay youth aged 14-19 seeking services at a community-based agency for gay youth; the more sessions youth attended, the more dramatic the changes in risk behavior.

Community-level programs can reach large numbers of young men. One successful program promoted a norm for safer sex among young gay men through a variety of social, outreach and small group activities designed and run by young men themselves. Rates of unprotected anal intercourse dropped from 40% to 31% after the intervention. The program found that young men engaging in unsafe sex who were unlikely to attend workshops were more likely to be reached through outreach activities – such as dances, movie nights, picnics, gay rap groups, and volleyball games.(13) STOP AIDS’s Q Action, in San Francisco, CA, is a community organizing model that promotes HIVprvention by putting the power for designing and implementing interventions directly into the hands of young gay men.

Youth-oriented media can also be used creatively to reach large numbers of young gay men. In Australia, ads promoting HIV prevention peer support groups appeared in popular youth magazines across the country. Over 1,300 young men responded. Follow-up questionnaires showed that 73% had not told a family member about being gay, and 48% had told no one. Direct mail was also found to be highly successful for sending AIDS and sexuality information to gay adolescents in rural, isolated, or culturally difficult environments who would otherwise not access support.(14)

What needs to be done?

Since there are multiple factors that contribute to HIV risk-taking among young gay men, multi-level prevention programs are necessary – programs that impact variables at individual, interpersonal and social system levels. Funding, designing, implementing and evaluating HIV prevention programs for young gay men must be a high priority to halt the AIDS epidemic.

The myth that the gay community has been saturated with AIDS prevention services is in serious need of debunking. New young men will come out each year who have not been exposed to prevention campaigns of previous years, thus HIV prevention for young gay men must be ongoing and dynamic.

Engaging, creative programs are needed that address HIV prevention within the contexts of young gay men’s lives, incorporating issues of self-esteem, coming out, substance use and interpersonal and social needs. Community-level and peer outreach programs are especially promising, and services for young gay men of color are particularly needed. Since previous sexual history is a strong predictor of current risk-taking behavior, intervention at an early point in a young man’s sexual initiation will be maximally effective.

Societal homophobia may impede implementing effective prevention programs for gay youth and may discourage young gay men from accessing prevention services.Political concerns must not interfere with HIV prevention services for young gay men. A comprehensive HIV prevention strategy uses multiple elements to protect as many of those at risk of HIV infection as possible. Targeting young gay men with AIDS prevention messages and services is not “condoning” or “promoting” homosexuality, it is acting responsibly in the face of a grave public health threat. Unless action is taken quickly, we will lose a new generation of gay men.

 

caps.ucsf.edu/YGMtext.html – 2000

Making Colleges and Universities Safe for Gay & Lesbian Students

The following is a summary from Making Colleges and Universities Safe for Gay and Lesbian Students: Report and Recommendations of the Massachusetts Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, Warren J. Blumenfeld, Principal Author. (For a free copy of the report, write to: The Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, Room 111, State House, Boston, MA 02133)

I. Policies
  1. Enact nondiscrimination policies on the basis of sexual orientation in >matters of hiring, tenure, promotion, admissions, and financial aid.
  2. Have policies and procedures for dealing with homophobic violence and harassment.
  3. Have a written, inclusive, and affirming definition of “couples” that is nondiscriminatory towards same-sex couples in a way that is appropriate for each institution.
  4. Ensure equal access and equality of all benefits and privileges granted to all employees and students.
  5. Have policies of active outreach in hiring openly GLBT and/or GLBT- sensitive faculty, staff, and administrators in all segments of the campus community.
  6. Actively recruit openly GLBT prospective students. All of the above policies should be written, clear, consistent, accessible, and well-publicized throughout the campus.
II. Training and Development
  1. Homophobia and other “diversity” workshops should be implemented for the entire campus community to sensitize and educate staff, faculty, and administrators.
III. Services
  1. Colleges and universities provide official recognition, support, and funding of campus GLBT student organizations.
  2. Physically safe, secure, and appropriate space with a welcoming, emotionally safe atmosphere should be available to GLBT organizations for meetings, social events, coffee houses, lectures, fora, workshops, and other events.
  3. Legal and fundraising support services should be available to GLBT students.
  4. Campus housing should include GLBT living options.
  5. University leadership should make strong, clear, public statements on a regular basis that state the college’s commitment to ending discrimination, conviction that violence and harassment are entirely unacceptable, and appreciation of the value of diversity on campus, including diversity of sexual identity.
  6. Colleges and universities hire openly GLBT or GLBT-sensitive therapists/counselors, faculty, staff, and administrators.
  7. Peer counselors and/or campus crisis hotline volunteers be adequately trained in sensitivity to sexuality, sexual orientation/identity, and “coming out” issues.
  8. Effective AIDS education, imperative for all people of all sexual orientations, must be available and widespread.
  9. Social activities through residence halls, Offices of Student Activities, and other organizations must be not only inclusive of all sexual orientations and identities, without pressures toward heterosexuality, but actively welcoming of GLBT people as well as same-sex couples.
  10. College and university presidents have a standing advisory committee, panel, or board, appointed or elected in consultation with GLBT students, staff, and faculty members.
  11. Student opinion should be assessed regularly, by the above mentioned panel or in some other manner, in order to gauge the effectiveness of implemented changes.
  12. Campus publications should take care to provide adequate and fair coverage of GLBT events and issues, both on and off campus.
  13. Colleges and universities should aid students in alumni outreach.
  14. Internship opportunities may also be cultivated among local GLBT- owned businesses and GLBT activist and community service organizations.
  15. The diversity within the GLBT community should be recognized and affirmed.
  16. The location and availability of resources of value to GLBT people should be published in materials distributed to all students, faculty, staff, and alumni.
  17. Personnel at the Career Planning/Placement Center, like personnel in every college area, should be sensitive to GLBT issues and be aware of employment opportunities in GLBT owned or GLBT friendly businesses and community service organizations.
  18. While needs differ greatly at each of the hundreds of institutions of higher education, it seems clear that for many, if not most, the most critically important and invaluable resource is a GLBT campus resource center with a paid administrator, staff, and resources.
  19. In institutions where financial resources do not allow for centers and/or administrative support for any “minorities,” there should at least be an ombudsperson or other clearly recognized, identified, and publicized as an official liaison to the campus GLBT community.
IV. Curriculum / Educational Materials / Academic Affairs
  1. Issues relating to GLBT people should be formally and permanently integrated into existing courses across the curriculum.
  2. Speakers on GLBT topics, and particularly those who present scholarly research on GLBT topics, should be brought to campus regularly.
  3. Courses dealing specifically with GLBT issues in the humanities, natural sciences, education, social sciences, and other disciplines should be established.
  4. A visiting scholar position in GLBT studies should be created and supported on a continuing basis.
  5. College and university libraries should increase their holdings of GLBT books, periodicals, and computer networking systems.
  6. Campus facilities should be available for regional GLBT studies conferences, with administrative support provided.
  7. Fellowship opportunities should be created and funded for teaching and research of GLBT topics.
  8. Scholarship and research into GLBT history, culture, and theory should be encouraged and supported in faculty and students.
  9. All multicultural education should be inclusive of the issues, history, culture, and experiences of GLBT people in the United States and worldwide. Multicultural awareness (social diversity) courses should be mandatory for all students at some point during the undergraduate years.
  10. An archive and history of GLBT organizations on campus should be created.
V. Employee Concerns
  1. Policies regarding equal benefits and nondiscrimination should be made clear in recruiting brochures, informational materials, campus publications, and orientation sessions.
  2. The university should aid, support, and fund the creation of GLBT faculty and staff discussion, support, and networking groups.
  3. Trade unions and professional organizations should have inclusive policies and supportive services available to their members.
  4. There should be equality in all benefits, including, for example: bereavement leave, insurance coverage, library privileges, access to gym and other recreational facilities, listings in directories if spouses are customarily listed, housing for GLBT couples where the qualifications are analogous to the qualifying basis for heterosexuals, “couple” rates must be made available to GLBT couples, access to any and all other privileges and benefits by GLBT partners if access is available to heterosexual spouses.
  5. There should be ongoing sensitivity training and staff development on GLBT issues for all employees.
  6. Colleges and universities should cover the expenses of employees attending conferences on GLBT issues.
VI. Community / Off-Campus Concerns
  1. Community GLBT groups should be invited to attend campus events as participants, guests, and event leaders and facilitators.
  2. Information regarding social, religious, and other community resources should be made easily accessible to all students, staff, faculty, and administrators.
  3. Counselors, administrators, and faculty should be available to parents or other community members to alleviate any concern that may arise out of the implementation of any of the above recommendations, as well as any concerns arising during their child’s coming out process, if that is the case.
  4. Representatives of GLBT student groups from different schools should meet regularly to keep each other appraised of upcoming events, plan events together, and strengthen the GLBT community.
  5. Publications, fundraising materials, and all other publications distributed to parents and alumni should include relevant and appropriate stories, essays, and news regarding GLBT issues, organizations, and events.
  6. Corporations, public agencies, and government, religious, and community agencies and institutions that do not have official written policies against discrimination based on sexual orientation should be strongly discouraged or prohibited from on-campus employment or enlistment recruiting.

youthresource.com/library/blumen.htm – 2000