One of the women in the group smashed a glass in CeCe’s face, cutting and injuring her. As a matter of fact, the glass sliced all the way through her cheek, lacerating a salivary gland. A fight ensued. One of the attackers, a 47-year-old male, died. CeCe was arrested and charged, and self-defense was not considered. By some counts, CeCe was denied proper medical care and was kept in solitary confinement for a month. The woman who initiated the incident and smashed the glass in CeCe’s face was charged nearly a year later; as far as I am aware there is no acknowledgment of a hate crime, despite the guy who was killed having a prior criminal history and swastika tattoo on his chest.

Also, the woman was charged after CeCe pled guilty to manslaughter.

CeCe was sentenced on June 4, 2012 to 41 months in prison. Whether or not she was given due process and justice, she is to spend 3 years and five months in prison. Some of you may be thinking, ‘she plead guilty, now she has to face the consequences.’ What might be the problem with this line of thinking?

CeCe McDonald is a male-to-female transgender woman, and while she identifies as a woman, she will be housed in a facility with male inmates.

The obvious issue popping into the minds of most people invested in CeCe’s case and hopeful for her wellbeing is the issue of physical and sexual violence by the other inmates in the facility. It is a concern an has been reported to the Transgender Law Center from previous inmates that this is a very real fear and concern for both male-to-female transgender inmates and also female-to-male transgender inmates. Rape and sexual violence in prisons are heavy concerns, especially for trans* inmates. There may be coerced sex by another inmate or inmates, or also prison staff. Coercion is rape. There may be gang rapes and violence. And there another main form of sexual violation on trans* inmates according to reports to TLC is unnecessary strip searches and forced nudity:

a frequent substitute for, or precursor to, sexual violence or coercion is the use of strip searches or forced nudity by deputies, guards, officers, or medical personnel. Because of the severe reduction in privacy that occurs in jails and prisons, transgender people have very little control over who sees their bodies. Bodies that often times do not conform to the identity they know to be true or at least society’s expectations about that identity. Therefore, strip searches and public nudity can be especially humiliating to transgender prisoners.

Transgender men in particular report being subjected to unnecessary strip searches. Two men who have been held in San Francisco County jail have told me about frequent strip searches conducted by deputies and medical personnel for no reason other than to seemingly satisfy curiosity. These searches were not related to visits or interactions in which these guys could have been passed contraband. Instead, they seemed to come randomly from many quarters and occasionally involve two or more people doing the search.

Back in Sacramento County Jail, one of the two women described above and two of her fellow transgender prisoners related stories of being forced to walk topless through a gauntlet of male cells in order to get new clothes each week. Along the way, the women were subjected to taunts and catcalls. The very act of walking the line made them objects of both harassment and ridicule.

There are also a whole host of other concerns that include:

- Lack of competent medical care

- Access to programs, jobs, and recreational activities

- Ability to dress properly

- Respecting one’s gender identity and referring to them by the proper name and/or pronoun

- Segregation from the rest of the prison population. This is a huge deal because it has already happened in CeCe’s case. She was kept in solitary confinement for nearly a month by most accounts. Prison staff may determine to place trans* inmates in confinement as a way to, possibly, keep them safe or keep the incidences from occurring. This makes less likely and nearly impossible for the inmate to receive jobs or proper treatment programs.

Also, according to TLC:

The stated purpose of administrative segregation is that people being confined within it are a proven danger to themselves, staff, or other inmates. By using this classification for transgender prisoners, the message is being sent that a person’s gender identity itself is threatening to the institution and that person must be locked away in a prison within the prison.

The Transgender, Gender Variant and Intersex (TGI) Justice Project has a prison survival guide for trans* and intersex inmates. According to the survival guide, written by transgender women, “prison politics outweigh prison policy.” Sadly, this comes after the explanation that if you are any race other than Black and housed with the general population, you will be removed or leave the yard because the gang violence geared toward you, as the transgender inmate, will be so harsh.

And sadly, I don’t think that this post adequately describes the horror that trans* inmates have faced, nor the injustice that CeCe and others are facing and will continue to face. According to an article that includes a survey of trans* people of color by Advocate.com:

38% of African-American respondents experienced police harassment, 15% reported being physically assaulted by the police, and 7% reported being sexually assaulted by the police; 38% of African American MTF (male-to-female) respondents reported being sexually assaulted by either another inmate or a staff member in jail/prison; 41% of African-American respondents reported being imprisoned because of their race and gender identity alone; a whopping 47% reported having been in jail or prison for any reason.

According to this article, transgender people are 10-15 times more likely to be incarcerated at some point in their life, and have to face the horrifying circumstances outlined above. Additionally, prior to their incarceration, they often feel unable to rely on the police for protection because the police are often perpetrators of crimes against them. Over 50% of trans* people, notwithstanding incarceration, have been victim to some sort of violence; self-report surveys vary but a significant number of these attacks are sexual violence. 43% of trans* rape victims (both FTM and MTF) who participated in self-report surveys believed their perpetrators homophobia to be the motivation for the assault while 35% suggested transphobia to be the motivation.

[imagebrowser id=3]I applaud President Obama for concluding recently that PREA will apply to all Federal confinement facilities. President Obama has included language that acknowledges the concerns that I have for CeCe and all LGBTQQI people that may be incarcerated at some point. I do have wonders for the general public though; and the main one would be exactly how effective the Prison Rape Elimination Act would be henceforth. A few of the guidelines that detention centers must follow in order to be in compliance with the new guidelines under PREA is that they must:

• Staff should be trained on effective and professional communication with our communities.

• Housing assignments should take into consideration individual vulnerabilities but do not, in most circumstances, place [LGTBQQI] in inferior wings or pods.

• An analysis is required of whether an abuser was motivated by bias against [LGBTQQI], if abuse does occur.

• Transgender detainees cannot be searched solely to determine their genitalia, and determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis about whether [LGBTQQI] should be held in a men’s or women’s facility and cannot be based solely on genital status.

President Obama and company have included many great provisions for trans* inmates, including that they must be given the opportunity to shower separately from other inmates. And while one would hope that these provisions would provide some safety for transgender men and women prisoners, I wonder how effectively it is enforced and how much protection they are really being provided. CeCe will still be housed in a prison of men.

Also, if prison staff are part of the problem, how effective will PREA be? And if trans* people are afraid (with very good reason) to come forward and make staff aware of their rights and request their protections, what can be done? And if, by the counts of transwomen who wrote a prison survival guide for transwomen, prison politics outweigh prison policies, what good is PREA exactly?

What will happen to the CeCes of our community?

The post CeCe McDonald: Self-Defense and Still Defending appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

I was met with the typical response from some commenters that sexual ambiguity is a deal breaker and how can one be sure they shared similar values if the other person is ‘like that’. People are hilarious sometimes, especially when I think of the amount of people who are married to what has recently been identified to me as a ‘beard’.

“Beard is a slang term describing a person who is used, knowingly or unknowingly, as a date, romantic partner (Boyfriend or Girlfriend), or spouse either to conceal infidelity or to conceal one’s sexual orientation.”

Now I don’t mean to be mean or anything, but I do find it peculiar that I am personally aware of waaaay more marriages where one partner is perceived as ‘‘questionable’, than I know of married couples where one spouse openly identified as homosexual, though married to a heterosexual.

I’m not saying that couples have to openly affirm their sexual orientation to society, but its not like people aren’t confused when these relationships are vigorously presented as simply a case of ‘boy meets girl’ when the boy in question has never, ever, ever been interested in girl until he decided to marry —->her.

Dating and marrying a thirty year old virgin doesn’t make a man special. Though some would love to think their un-tampered with unicorn’s lack of interest in mating with men before them, just meant they were waiting for ‘the one’ and he thinks she’s that “one”.

I’m not talking about the sexually conservative, or strict religious followers, I’m just talking about what I consider average peculiar behavior.

Arranged marriages and marriages of convenience are nothing new, but since we’re out here promoting marriage as a willing union and not as a business deal what is to be said about those using marriage as a front to hide their sexual orientation?

Everyone asks questions regarding the sexual orientation of one partner or the other; teachers and other family associates inquire as to the gender identity of the parent and at some point in time everyone begins to wonder what the REAL deal is.

While I have no problem with any couple (gay, straight or mixed) that marries for the sake of wanting to be together to take on life as a team what I do have a problem with are people who feel that it’s okay to front for the sake of saving face.

One partner marries someone whom they know could never love them the way they want but they are still willing to take a fraud of a relationship in order to feel special. One partner may sit idly by while the other partner continues to maintain their REAL romantic relationship with a same sex partner who they call their ‘best friend’. Yes, the bills are paid, the family piles into the car to attend church on Sundays and the portraits do look amazing but is this how you saw your marriage?

Surely this satisfies the requirement for some people’s definition of marriage but pardon me if I want more. Using a person as a front is selfish and cruel; allowing yourself to be used as a front shows desperation. Unfortunately, your willingness to be a tool won’t barter you the love you seek.

I’m not a witch doctor hunting down the mythical DL brothers because that facet of life is merely a half truth at best. But just as much as a man or woman has to be willing to lie and deceive others regarding his/her sexuality he/she must also have a partner who is willing to eat those lies and lick the bowl clean. If the wedding ring is more important than being able to look yourself and your spouse in the eye then the marriage isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

You may say these unions are no one business but their own…I disagree.

I do know White couples, Asian couples and some Middle Eastern couples who are married to a homosexual partner in spite of the variation of sexual orientation. They have chosen to live their lives this way for their own reasons, but what I do see is that they care about each other and their relationship is authentic, as it should be.

With the shortage of Black male dating prospects out here I’m sure there are plenty of women who would be willing to look the other way and forgive past transgressions for a man who was willing to ‘get saved’ and change his body language, social circle and friends in order to give a respectable “go” of the marriage.

But how many of them would marry a plain old bi/gay male who was willing to do the same thing but for change his orientation and sexual identity……not many I bet.

When little potential future homosexual children seek examples of who they will be when they grow up it saddens me to know the amount of people out there who are willing to lie and let lie rather than those willing to accept their authentic selves and each other.

With no space to exist some will feel forced to fit into roles that require them to wear a mask and there will be those heterosexual people right there ready for them when they do.

The post Gay People DO Get Married: The Curious Case of the Beard – When “the Gays” Marry Straight People appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Uh uh, never mind the economy, or the fact that gay people are unemployed and unable to afford stuff like glitter or whatever else “the gays,” happen to purchase; no, never mind that. Instead, what’s important and on everybody’s mind is that Obama wants to make it legal for gays to marry. Keep in mind that this was just his personal opinion and no legislation has been advanced to suggest this becoming a reality. Nope, all that matters is that gays are gonna be married with the full blessings of Obama; and, straight people (whether married or single) will now have to deal with the hassle of not being able to get out of their driveways because they’re being blocked in by the gay married couple giving each other head in a parked car. Yep, forget the whole equal protection under the law thingy in the U.S. Constitution; shit, that’s an old-ass piece of paper anyway.

I mean, who wants to have gay people tossing salads within 500 feet of a school, right? So yeah, as absurd as it sounds, that’s what marriage equality means in the minds of many. That plus the idea that straight people will now have to contend with the obvious embarassment of being placed in a ompromising position, by a gay person getting down on one knee and offering them a marriage proposal in public. Yeah, straight people often get married for the wrong reasons, who wants to add a straight person being hitched to a gay person and having to act gay to  the list.

Yes, this is what people fear; and, it’s the reason there’s so much talk . And you better believe, as far as the politics of fear goes, as much as most try to deny it, this will have an impact on this years general elections. How significant an impact? I’m not sure. However, I am sure that these fears will be exploited by the many ignoramuses  among us over the next several months. Hell, you see how they’re already trying to play divide and conquer by using the black vote, right? Yep, they’re using the black church to divide the black electorate by making same-sex marriage the latest wedge issue. Smart move especially when you think about how black preachers are bent on not pissing off white Jesus in hopes that he would allow blacks and whites to drink from the same fountain if Negroes are allowed in heaven. Yes, it’s that deep for some of the members of the black clergy and the Sunday Communion Kool Aid drinkers they lead. So much so that I’ve heard that some of them are definitely going to sit this election cycle out. I’ve heard from good source that in one particular Obama For America campaign office, people are talking about walking out on the campaign.

It’s good to know that common sense still lives in the church…

The post Wait, is Barack Obama Gay? Uhm, is He Still Black?!! appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

The language on the ballot that NC citizens voted either ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ on May 8th, or earlier, stated:

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

It is important to note that prior to May 8, 2012, thirty states have included “same-sex marriage” bans in their constitutions. Legal scholars note that there are three types of language that these marriage bans maintain, and the rarest (and most broad) are language types such that Ohio used. North Carolina has now adopted such similar language, even though the consequences were proven in Ohio and the people of Ohio worked hard (and are still working) toward better legislation.

I am of the opinion that the amendment was framed this way before and during the vote in order to appeal to the emotions of the religious voters of the South. In fact, the people who thought it was about marriage and gays came out and expressed how much bigotry and privilege they maintained, quietly or not. However, the idea of marriage is less the focus in the language of the newly passed amendment, and the phrase the only domestic legal union is. Why? Because the courts have to interpret exactly what that means. Additionally, the newly passed “marriage amendment” is nearly identical to a tragedy that passed in Ohio, that opened the floodgates to consequences for more than just persons of the same sex/gender seeking marriage. In fact, in both Ohio and North Carolina, same sex marriage is already outlawed without the amendments.

Beyond further marginalizing the LGBTQ community, the marriage amendment has the potential to affect domestic violence victims. In Ohio, defense attorneys argued that unwed heterosexual couples did not meet the criteria for a “union”, however the court may decide to define it, and as such does not qualify for certain charges. Defense attorneys were also successful in overturning domestic violence convictions on this basis, and the courts were unclear on whether or not certain protections could be afforded to victims in the form of restraining orders. Also, the courts ruled inconsistently on these matters across the state, and so victims in different regions were not afforded the same protections. Eventually, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional ban did not affect domestic violence laws; however, it took three years for the circumstances to reach the court and for a decision to be made. During those three years, damage was done.

Even more unfortunate is the language in North Carolina’s newly passed amendment is more vague, and potentially more dangerous, than that belonging to Ohio. While there are some extremely progressive parts of North Carolina, there are also very small, rural communities that may have different understandings of the phrase “legal domestic union” and, much like Ohio, provide unequal protection of the law. This matters. THIS MATTERS. This matters because people in rural communities may not have access to many of the resources in the larger cities, and it Amendment One is an issue of classism in addition to anti-gay, religious bigotry.

Along those same lines, Amendment One has a great potential affect legislation where children of unwed parents are concerned. Custody and visitation laws may be affected with parties who have never had a “legal domestic union” as the courts see fit to interpret. Additionally, insurance benefits provided by either parent therein have the potential to be affected. This is incredibly important because, as of 2010, 72% of Black mothers were unwed. Does this mean that in every instance, the father is absent? Absolutely not. In one way or another, either through the courts or voluntarily, I would suggest that it has been my experience that many fathers are around in some form. I do not have a statistic and I will not speculate on a statistic; I am saying this to say that the passing of this amendment and a courts subsequent decision could limit this involvement, ergo harming children and Black families. Amendment One is harmful because, in addition to the anti-gay, religious bigotry and classism, it has the potential to be racially discriminatory and harmful. It harms single-parent families which, by extension, harms the Black community greatly.

Also, it should be noted that in few counties in North Carolina, unwed heterosexual couples are allowed domestic civil unions; this provides that partners can be on one another’s insurance benefits in addition to other benefits. These include assisting with medical decisions, adoptions, will and trusts, and other financial decisions. However, since marriage between one man and one woman is now the only domestic legal union, many people will be at a disadvantage.

We do not know what will happen. I think that is important to say; however, we do know the things that have the potential to happen. Also, the fact that marriage between one man and one woman is the only form of marriage acceptable in the state of North Carolina (and the other states who have amendments) is illustrative of the fact that the governments are using emotional push-buttons in order to further underlying agendas. Moreover, Constitutional Amendments aren’t like trying on new shoes and deciding that we do not like the fit. It takes time, energy, and resources to ‘undo’ this; there is no easy fix. Once this gets out of hand and negatively affects the citizens of North Carolina, the legislature cannot simply pass a statute to remedy it; a new amendment has to be passed and this will be extremely difficult.

Again, as someone from North Carolina who has been on the ground working for just about a year against the passing of this very scary amendment, I’m torn between sadness, disgust, and rage. While not entirely surprised that the amendment passed, I did think that it would be closer; only seven of North Carolina’s 100 counties voted successfully against it. A few weeks before the election, I got a 21-year-old brother registered to vote because he specifically wanted to vote against the amendment. The day of actual vote, I got into many arguments with many religious Black people who felt as though voting for Amendment One was a testament to their religious convictions. Though I attempted to explain, I was devastated at how unchanged their minds were; and they were mostly in their twenties!

I challenged all of my Facebook friends to give me a reason to vote FOR Amendment One that had nothing to do with religion and I got no responses. However, I went to high school with a guy who is apparently becoming a minister, and very much disagreed with my stance on the amendment. He, as a minister, has a child out of wedlock and maybe might just be a Black Republican (I’m not quite sure of the latter). And so, to appeal to his religious nature, I introduced him to Loving v. Virginia, where a married Black woman and white man were sentenced to a year in prison (suspended for 25 years of probation) for their interracial marriage in 1959 because the court found that:

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.

Our government and constitutions should not be used as a sword, and it should not be used to prevent people from equal protection, rights, or benefits under the law. Our constitution is meant to give freedoms and not take them away. While in a way they’ve already begun, they are definitely coming for women and people of color next. Keep your religious opinions away from my constitution.

The post Amendment One: Wasn’t North Carolina The “Good” Carolina? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

You might even be so desperate for help that you reach out to a local radio show host like one father did recently for this exact same issue.

In response to an email from a listener concerning his daughter’s interest in girls, DJ Dominic Deiter declared over the air that the father could cure his daughter budding lesbianism by, “You should get one of your friends to screw your daughter straight.”

Once a person includes the words ‘father’, ‘daughter’,  ’your friends’ and ‘rape’ in the same sentence it becomes difficult to make things get worse than what they already are. However, the impact of the statement from this asshole gets even more insulting when you realize this is a broadcast from the ‘Rover’s Morning Glory’ radio program airing on WWMS 100.7 FM radio station.

This station is owned by Clear Channel Communications, also the home of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the rest of those red throat-ed eels. Bain Capital, the company that Mitt Romney began and is still involved with, is the majority owner of Clear Channel so as you can see, the gangs all here and doing what they do which is talk hateful and ignorant shit to the masses unfortunate enough to listen to it.

Of course this didn’t go over well with the folks over at GLAAD who had the following to say.

GLAAD’s Director of News & Field Media Aaron McQuade says “It was appalling and dangerous for this show to tell a father that he should have one of his friends rape his daughter. That’s essentially how Dieter responded to this listener, and this is no laughing matter in a world where people are too often the victims of violence and sexual assault based on their actual or perceived sexual orientation. And Dieter gave this vile advice to everyone who was listening, including educators, parents and children – sending the message that it’s okay to physically or sexually abuse people who are perceived to be gay.”

I’m not sure what it is that’s got my head so fucked up these days. As I sit down to write about certain topics I’m forced to reflect on myself and what it is that I’m trying to say to you people.

Sometimes the journey through what “is” and “is not” okay and what “is” and “is not” fucked up is still blurry in my world. Like when I hear about the sexual assault of a person who identifies as gay or is suspected of being gay, I can barely muster the interest to bat an eyelash because its part of what happens when you ‘choose’ to be gay. Being both gay and a woman makes the chance that a woman will be the victim of sexual assault that much more likely.

Dominic Dieter: Radio DJ, Potential Rapist, & Definitely Misogynist

Sexual assault is more prevalent for some people in society than for others and focusing on how wrong rape is immediately makes one also realize how common sexual assault is. The further you go down on the societal totem pole the more likely you are to be a victim of sexual assault.

The chances increase as you add various factors to the situation such as economics, race and especially sexual orientation, because the ladder makes a question of what one does up for public debate. Being gay or perceived as gay is something that is viewed as wrong by closed minded ignorant people of all nationalities, races and gender.

LGBT people insult everyone else with their presence so not only is the act of raping a gay person a sexual assault, it is also a hate crime because the initial motivation for the sexual assault is to exhibit power over another person because of their gender orientation or perception thereof.

Rape is about power.

The rape of a gay person is about power and erasure. It is a double theft of a person’s right to self determination and privacy.

The value of the victim decreases as the biases increase and I’m sure there were plenty of insecure men and quivering homophobics who agreed that indeed, a gay woman (or any woman for that matter) should have ‘the gay fucked out of her’ because there’s nothing more threatening to the world then a woman who isn’t susceptible or receptive to the almighty penis.

The post Female Sexual Assault + Hate Crime = How Men Turn Lesbians Straight? appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

This was the ultimate Twitter nightmare. It can be argued that a clear understanding of how twitter works, and what it’s reach is might have helped avert this situation. Even if he himself was unaware those around him – or there should have been some around him with an understanding of social media networks, Twitter especially since he frequents it so much.

How is it in the African American community who has such a high rate of users on twitter and other social networks, that it appears many are unaware of how this level of engagement TRULY works? There are some that know, but silence appears to be golden. Not so golden for Mr. Martin and others who have fallen prey to errant tweets. No one in this dimension can lay claim to the intent behind words on a screen. Technology is good but it is not yet that good to determine whether or not the text you see on a “screen” is authentic and any  more realistic than the device you use to connect in the first place.

The backlash was somewhat expected and even more so when one contemplates the fact that there are many of his co-workers and fellow journalists that are part of the LGBT community – at best this spells hostile work environment. The backlash TO the backlash was to be expected as well there has already been a Facebook page/group started in support of Roland Martin (Bruhs for Roland Martin)

Understandably, there has been a measure of what would be deemed an angry response from members of the African American community who feel that Mr. Martin was scapegoated, and or unfairly treated in this case.  One wonders if any  of those folks realize the kinds of contracts one has to sign in order to work for any organization of that size and magnitude and especially be in the public eye. Contracts often contain morality clauses or clauses that stipulate that if one’s behavior is not perceived to be in line with corporate policy – it is grounds for termination or breach of contract.

One also wonders if those screaming about the unfairness of Mr. Martin’s suspension have ever considered the creation of a news organization or media outlet LIKE a CNN and that would be minority owned and provide an alternative for individuals such as Mr. Martin so that situations like this would be non-issues.

With very little competition organizations can craft and execute whatever strategies they wish with very little impunity.  Having choices allows for more opportunities for fairness to exist. Having few choices means someone or some group gets to dictate to everyone else.

In the end, regardless of the “side” you may wish to take – reality says there are no sides because we are all humans in the end warts and all. Bad jokes or statements aside we still all bleed and we all feel. Not knowing Mr. Martin personally, the human side of me can and does feel compassion for what appears to be a situation that got quickly and totally out of hand. For all those celebrating this turn of events be careful what you Tweet or say online. The job/life you save may be your own.

The post Roland Martin’s Social Media Nightmare appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

What I did witness, however, were Roland Martin’s tweets (complete with exchanges from a few of my very sharp followers) that were, in short, homophobic, heterosexist, and disgusting. Now, I wasn’t entirely surprised at Roland, given how he defended Tracey Morgan’s remarks that he would stab his son is he turned out gay, writing it off as mere comedy. Roland tweeted advocating violence toward men who engage in behavior that is not hetero-normative, quickly distinguishing the difference between a “real” bruh and all others.

I’d like to say, though, that this is not that uncommon a stance within the Black communities. Roland’s homophobia is dangerous and damaging particularly to the Black community; and I am in support of GLAAD’s position that language matters and that there should be no space on CNN for a pundit who puts the LGBTQQI community in fear of being assaulted for expressing themselves (or, in many instances, minding their business and not physically expressing themselves at all!).

In the past, I’ve discussed how oppressed people often become oppressors, even while still being oppressed. Roland Martin’s tweets are a perfect example of that. I am a firm believer of calling people on their shit when they are wrong. What I am not a firm believer of, however, is fighting bigotry with bigotry. For Roland’s hate-filled words, he was called a N-word, an ape, made fun of due to his weight (during which, I interjected because fat-shaming is wrong), and even told by a psuedo-celeb for effect that he hopes he is “assraped”. I get it — we’re hurt, outraged, and upset. I do not by any means support any of what Roland Martin said; I absolutely agree with my LGBTQQIA family that he has a history of inappropriate and quite disgusting homophobia. I feel very strongly, though, that you cannot fight ignorance with ignorance. That, instead of encouraging more bigotry and even more violence (yes, Perez, I am talking to you), we must combat that shit with intelligence. Otherwise, we’re just as small-minded as the promoters of bigotry.

I stand with GLAAD, and yet I think that this may be putting a band-aid on a larger problem. We absolutely have to address LGBTQQIA rights on a larger scale, and within the home. We absolutely must do so within the Black community. If you think that we have, I’d encourage you to check the comment section under the video of the young man who was recently attacked – by multiple with a tire, by multiple men – in Atlanta for being (presumably) gay*. It’s sad and beyond offensive; hate speech, especially that provoking violence, infringes on basic civil and human rights owned by any individual.

*If anyone in the Atlanta area knows who the parties in the linked video are, please contact law enforcement.

The post Real Men Wear Ascots: Roland Martin, Homophobia, & Fighting Bigotry appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

I will never forget the first time my mother called me a faggot. It was Thanksgiving 2004. We had just gotten home from visiting my grandfather in the hospital. My mother and I had gotten into a fight, something that had become quite common since she was diagnosed with several serious mental illnesses in years prior. Driving home I had switched the radio station, which I assume triggered some distant memory as we began to dance a radio tango. She switched the station and I would switch it back.

Mother: “You better start showing me some damn respect. I’m your mother.”

Me: “I’ll show you some respect when you start acting like a mother.”

She went on to slap me across the face as the car was in motion causing my face to hit the driver’s side window. I swerved into oncoming lanes of traffic. Luckily, no cars were coming.

Finally, we made it home and the verbal aggressions continued. My mother looked me dead in the face with her cold, hollow eyes I thought I had become desensitized to. She venomously spewed the words, “Why don’t you suck a dick you faggot?” Suddenly, the tears streamed down my face masking whatever rage was boiling inside of me. How could my own mother say something like that to me?

This was the turbulent memory a climactic scene in Dee Rees’ Pariah brought me back to during a pre-screening of the highly anticipated film a few weeks ago. As 17-year old Alike, played by Adepero Oduye, navigates the blossoming of her sexuality, she also begins defining various parts of her identity in spite of what her mother, Audrey, wishes. Similar to my mother, Audrey, played by Kim Wayans, battles her own issues of love. Their shared issues include insecurity, living their lives based upon very rigid definitions of what it means to be a woman and mother, and perhaps even forgetting to take medication(s). Audrey’s rigid definitions meant she needed to submit to her husband for the sake of imagery, maintain a respectable (read: feminine) appearance and uphold her self against impossibly perfect standards.

Wayans’ performance is riveting, given many of us are familiar with her more comedic roles. Though some will find it hard to sympathetize with her character, Audrey is offered more humanity than I have seen tackled in other films. So often an individual possessing Audrey’s homophobic, narrow beliefs is viewed unsympathetically. We do not want to hear the stories that inform their views or why they are the way they are, despite our disagreement. We simply don’t care to listen. Pariah forces us to bear witness to some of homophobia’s catalysts, if only subliminally.

Throughout the film, I was captivated by Alike’s relationship to her mother. In one scene, I watched as Alike said exactly what she needed to say to her mother in order to begin releasing the demons her mother attempted to plant within Alike. I love you.

As tears flow down Audrey’s face (and my own), audiences capture a glimpse of the inner turmoil Audrey’s rigidity leaves with her. She is miserable. She has spent the majority of her life placing faith in ideas that have only served to isolate her. Audrey would rather remain faithful to those beliefs than begin the process of re-evaluating her relationship to those beliefs and her family.

Living in a culture that teaches us our parents are the people who will teach us about our identity, Alike and I know better. For some of us, our parents exit our lives for various reasons. It becomes our friends and lovers who help shape how we identify and express ourselves in the world. Perhaps our parents re-enter. Perhaps they don’t. As Alike’s relationship with her mother deteriorates, she spends a great deal of time talking with her best friend, Laura, played by Pernell Walker, about being sexual with other women, fantasizing and what it means to be an “AG”—a term some women of color use to identify aggressive lesbians.

Eventually Alike meets Bina, played by Aasha Davis, and their exchange provides insight and plenty of social commentary on what identity means, including a conversation on being gay gay, I do not believe it is their relationship Rees wants us focused on. It is not the obvious intimacy between Alike and Bina or Alike’s relation to Audrey that makes Pariah a love story.

The most fascinating relationship in this film is the one Alike has with her self. Beginning the film, Alike is timid about who she is and curious about what she likes. However, through her experiences with other women, like Laura, Bina and Audrey, we see Alike blossom until she can verbally confirm her parents’ suspicions and come out to her mother and father. It gets messy and scars are left, seen and unseen. Like so many of us, Alike takes her negative experiences and transforms them into a pathway for self-discovery.

Rees takes us on this journey, Alike’s expedition towards self-love and acceptance. In the film’s final scenes, Alike recites a poem written in her journal. The voice over plays as we watch Alike step into the many new beginnings of her life. She reads:

Heartbreak opens onto the sunrise.

For even breaking is opening and I am broken.

I am open.

See the love shine in through my cracks.

See the light shine out through me.

My spirit takes journey.

My spirit takes flight, and I am not running, I am choosing.

I am broken.

I am broken open.

Breaking is freeing.

Broken is freedom.

I am not broken.

I am free.

Alike’s freedom begins when she unleashes the pain her mother inflicts upon her and lovingly releases the hold her pain had. Releasing our pain is a choice. The choice is the difference between being held captive and freedom. But this wound takes time to heal.

As I left the theatre, I wondered if Alike’s path to forgiveness would be as tumultuous and expansive as my own. After all, cinema is constricted; in real time, these processes occur in phases. Forgiving her mother on-screen took less than thirty minutes; forgiving my mother in real life took several years. In relating to the story, I wondered if Alike would eventually face similar difficulties. Was the process of forgiveness over for Alike? Would she relapse? How many attempts would she make to reconcile her relationship with her mother before she deemed it hopeless? Was it hopeless? Would she eradicate the internalized homophobia from her mind? One thing was certain: Alike had the power to look in the mirror and see her beauty, inside and out.

Once You Go Black, discussing the politics of examining Black-queer-intellectual life, Robert Reid-Pharr states, “The real action of both politics and culture always takes place at the surface and in the present. Though our efforts at memorialization and recovery may prove to be incredibly important therapeutic strategies, they nonetheless would be hard-pressed to stop a war.” His sentiment expresses the significance of healing and how recovery is a part of freedom. Rees’ film is not only powerful for its narrative but also given its timing. In a moment where the spotlight has been thrust on queer youth, the political nature of Pariah lies in its ability to shine light in places the mainstream frequently overlooks.

While the film acknowledges the forging of chosen community, it also confronts homophobia in family life and how this impacts adolescence. It covers the displacement of LGBT youth who were kicked out after coming out. Yet, as we racialize and gender these numbers, they only increase. Rees’ decision to place themes of homelessness and sex work was strategic as these issues increasingly affect Black queer youth. The Center for American Progress highlights that homeless gay youth have strong racial divides. Black gay youth make up approximately forty-four percent of homeless youth, while Black transgender youth are a staggering sixty-two percent. 

As a white gay man, I was able to watch and listen to Alike’s story and tackle parallels between our journeys and mothers. But I constantly had to remind myself of the distinctions separating our narratives, the obvious being I am not Black nor am I lesbian. These distinctions left me walking out of the theatre with hypothetical questions. After leaving her family behind, would Alike find community in the imaginary safety of some mythically inclusive gay metropolis or be outcast as a Black lesbian? Would she be told the money of “her kind” was not wanted in a mediocre queer establishment, as was the case in a Chicago gay nightclub in 2010?

I worry how this film will be celebrated within various queer circles, if at all. My hope is that we do not participate in the too-common practice of de-racializing films, as Pariah is clearly Black. One can count the number of white actors in this film on one hand. Then there is the obvious fact this film centers on one Black family and the complexities of their lives together. In my opinion, Pariah was intended to be a conversation film for Black communities, conversations that need to be had from within and do not need to include white folks.

I hope Pariah will not be placed within the larger queer canon of painting Black families as more homophobic than the rest of society, as we see happening in the age of Obama. Oddly enough, the people making these claims rarely offer sources or stress the pervasive reach of anti-Black racism. Some of the film’s themes are certainly universal, as other reviews have highlighted. However, I think it is imperative we continue to address this film for exactly what it is: Black lesbian cinema. As is the case with many “universally-themed” films, certain elements of the feature become less salient as they garner popularity.

One of the most beautifully bittersweet things about Pariah is that Rees does not seem too concerned with these questions. She gives this film the life it was intended to have: one version of Black lesbianism. However, the questions and challenges that surface from Alike’s inspirational narrative offer each of us an opportunity to self-reflect, as individuals working towards a collective end.

Alike’s story is told with nuance and integrity in a way many films lack today. Rees’ work does not mimic reality, it captures it. Pariah reminds us that regardless of what we have been told in life or how we have been made to feel, we are beautiful and deserving. We can, and must, heal. We are worthy of love from others but, most importantly, from ourselves.

Pariah is in select theatres January 21, 2012.

2011 Trailer

The post Pariah: Not Just A Black Gay Love Story, It’s Real Life appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

Largely, a vast majority of rape education and prevention techniques (and I certainly have my issues with that) is directly specifically at women, who are 90% of victims. Now, before I go further, I want to make sure that we are clear in exactly what we are discussing (and where I am gathering my statistics). For the sake of clarity, ‘rape’ is defined, and has traditionally been defined, as penal-vaginal forced intercourse, where ‘sexual assault’ has been defined as other forms of sexual violations, including anal, oral, and sodomy with objects. Sexual assault is important to consider because it provides for the inclusion of same-sex forced sex, which is not necessarily indicative of sexual violations within the LGBTQQI community. Instead, it also captures sexual assaults that involve hazing where the perpetrators and victims may identify as heterosexual. While rape does occur in homosexual relationships, people in the LGBT community are more often raped by people who identify as heterosexual especially as a form of “corrective” rape, which is more commonly perpetrated on women who are attracted to women. (If you need to take a minute to think about that, you may do so now. Don’t make me explain to you that rape is not about sex or sexuality, but rather power and control.)

If any of you have been paying attention to the news, the FBI expanded the definition of rape to include forcible oral or anal sexual contact, earlier this month. This is wonderful because it erases the duality in how we perceive forced and involuntary sexual contact, and it provides that the LGBT community is better captured and included as well. However, as I understand it, this new definition thus far is simply for statistics sake and will not change any legal conditions once these crimes have been reported. For the sake of this post, and in focusing on Men Can Stop Rape‘s new ad campaign, let’s continue to address the previous definition of rape on women, and consider involuntary sexual contact specifically on college campuses.

Men Can Stop Rape is an advocacy group based in Washington DC who challenges issues of masculinity, boundaries, and healthy circumstances that include rape prevention and advocacy, toward men. While I take issue with the idea of, and false dichotomy that is, ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’, their mission is poignant and clear: men are likely to commit sexual offenses and men are likely to listen to other men, so men have the ability to aid in the prevention of these ultimate violations. From their website:

We at Men Can Stop Rape believe that stereotypical masculinity (or any other term you might choose: traditional masculinity, hypermasculinity, hegemonic masculinity, dominant masculinity) is still too much the air that we breathe. It’s something we often take in automatically, unaware. As one of the significant sources of violence against women across the globe, as well as other forms of violence, and as an unconscious source of conflict for many men, stereotypical masculinity causes great harm when it goes unrecognized. We all benefit from consciously developing healthier, non-violent masculinities.

Recently, the organization has created a bystander intervention campaign called the “Where Do You Stand” campaign, intended to get men involved when they notice particular situations going awry. I won’t insult your intelligence by inferring whether or not you know what the ‘bystander effect‘ is (but there’s a link to a wonderful essay, just in case); however, at one point it was estimated that the bystander effect was present during at least 30% of sexual offenses. 30% of the time, a person could have intervened and may have prevented a rape or sexual assault from occurring, or could have called the police once an act was initiated, and did not. As a matter of fact, of you google “bystander effect and rape”, you will find countless results with several different recent news stories. For that reason alone, this campaign is remarkable.
The ad is intended for college campuses and includes the following posters with the materials:

[imagebrowser id=1]

It really gets tiring as a relatively young, single woman that you should only go out in groups, using the buddy system, holding hands, using code words, watching drinks, and never trusting anyone. I’m suspicious by nature, but I reject the notion that we should leave our houses be afraid of what may be lurking outside in the bushes, especially due to the fact that 40% of rapes and sexual assaults occur in the victim’s home and 2/3 of completed rapes are by a person that the victim knows. I do, however, believe that advocacy and balanced education on all fronts is how we defeat any ailment in our society. Silly enough, those men’s rights groups who think women who want an end to rape are just whiny, bitchy feminists who “want to be men…but want to keep their pussy pass” are hardly worth addressing on this blog. They clearly don’t understand the dynamics of rape or sexual assault, and are comfortable in their own probably-pale bigoted right-wing skin. By all means, live your lives. (I did come across that comment on a men’s rights website, ergo the quotations, and I hope someone Google-bombs the shit out of the website.)

The post Men Can Stop Rape: New Ad Campaign Targeting Men Launched appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.

This via TPM:

A proposed bill in Tennessee would create a loophole in the state’s anti-bullying laws to protect those expressing religious, philosophical or political beliefs, which one proponent says would ensure that people can still express their “views on homosexuality.”

The proposed bill would amend the state’s current anti-bullying laws to specify that the anti-bully policy should “not be construed or interpreted to infringe upon the First Amendment rights of students and shall not prohibit their expression of religious, philosophical, or political views” as long as there’s no physical threat or threat to another student’s property.

David Fowler, a former Republican state Senator and current Christian activist, is pushing for the legislature to take up the bill in the new year after it stalled before the end of the last session. According to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Fowler sent out a newsletter for his group the Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT) in December that said he wants “to make sure [the law] protects the religious liberty and free speech rights of students who want to express their views on homosexuality.”

“The purpose is to stop bullying, not create special classes of people who are more important than others,” Fowler told the Times Free Press.

Gay rights activists in the state say the new bill would create a “license to bully” gay teens, and point to the suicide of a teenager named Jacob Rogers, who had reportedly been repeatedly bullied for being gay.

Gay Tennessee Couple Assaulted At Church

“This kind of legislation can send a message that it’s OK to hate and we’ll even give you religious sanction for it. You can say what you want. As long as you say it’s for religious reasons, you’ve got backup,” Chris Sanders, of the Tennessee Equality Project, told WSMV4.

FACT said on its radio show of Rogers’ death: “It is wrong to bully people because of their sexual practices. But it’s wrong to bully people period. The larger lesson here is that these tragedies are often the rotten fruit of the all-about-me individualistic culture that comes when we deny the existence of God and his image in us. When life and people become cheap, tragedy is the result.”

Tennessee’s legislature previously considered a “don’t say gay” bill — which prevented teachers from discussing gays and lesbians with students in grades K-8 — but it also stalled in the last session.

A spokesman for state Sen. Jim Tracy (R), who sponsored the bill in the last session, said Tracy is “reviewing the legislation” and will probably “narrow” the “very broad” language.

In November, Michigan’s Republican-led state Senate approved a bill with similar language that carved out a “moral convictions” loophole for bullies, but they backed off and compromised in the resultant controversy.

I don’t know what side of this issue you support. However, I must say that it’s really nice of our state legislators to keep the religious-minded anti-gay folks in mind with this loophole. I mean, the Bible gives you licence to be a bigoted religious zealot when it comes to the issue of homosexuality. But it’s great to know that your religious belief or exercise cannot be infringed upon just as long as you quote Bible verses while kicking their ass. Yep, this from the people who are against Muslims and Sharia Law. Uh-huh, bullying homosexuals is only bad if you fail to quote Bible verses.

The post Tennessee Bill Would Give Anti-Bullying Laws A ‘Religious And Political Beliefs’ Loophole To Bully appeared first on THE INTERSECTION | MADNESS & REALITY.