Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Kagan: 1/3 of the Highest Court

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan

  
This picture just make my heart sing. I can't wait until the day where the United States Supreme Court actually has a majority of women on it!

Kye Allums: Openly Transgender NCAA Div. 1 Basketball Player

Kye Allums, is getting a lot of mainstream press coverage about his transition from female to male while continuing to play on the George Washington University female NCAA Division 1 Basketball team.

Official statements from GWU and Allums follow:

Statement from Robert Chernak, Senior Vice Provost and Senior Vice President for Student Academic and Support Services:

“Student-athlete Kye Allums has decided to live as a male student and be referred to as a male. The George Washington University supports Kye and his right to make this decision. Kye has informed the university that he will not begin any medical or drug protocols while a student-athlete. The University consulted the NCAA regarding his competitive status. Kye will continue to be a member of the women’s basketball team. Kye has informed his teammates, and the university, with Kye’s consent, has informed athletics staff and others, as appropriate.”

Statement from junior Kye Allums, male member of George Washington’s women’s basketball team:

“GW has been supportive during this transition. This means a lot. I didn’t choose to be born in this body and feel the way I do. I decided to transition, that is change my name and pronouns because it bothered me to hide who I am, and I am trying to help myself and others to be who they are. I told my teammates first, and they, including my coaches, have supported me. My teammates have embraced me as the big brother of the team. They have been my family, and I love them all.”

Thoughts about this modern example of gender expression and sports? For example, do you think that Kye should be unable to play on the men's team when he completes his transition from female to male? If that should happen then, then why not now?

Cross-posted from #CSP19: LGBT Rights in the Era of Obama and Google.

Homophobia Lost? In UK, Straight Guys Kiss Each Other

Sociologist Eric Anderson is reporting that in Britain straight males are starting to engage in same-sex kisses with their peers.

Based on in-depth interviews of 145 British university and high-school students, Anderson and his colleagues discovered that 89 percent had kissed a male heterosexual friend on the lips at some point. A total of 37 percent had engaged in "sustained" kissing with another man, Anderson said. The men all identified as straight, and they didn't see the kisses as sexual.

"These men have lost their homophobia," Anderson said. "They're no longer afraid to be thought gay by their behaviors, and they enjoy intimacy with their friends, just the same as women."

[...]

The United Kingdom is less homophobic as a whole than the United States, Anderson said, but Americans should expect acceptance of men kissing on our shores soon enough. Research on American college soccer players suggests that 20 percent of those men have kissed another man, which is a harbinger of the trend, Anderson said.

It's not yet known how the trend of men kissing extends to non-University segments of the British population. Anderson plans to extend the research to minority men and low-income men who aren't in college.

Growing acceptance of same-sex kissing doesn't mean that homophobia is gone, just that masculine ideals are changing, Anderson said. His theory, put forth in his book, "Inclusive Masculinity: The Changing Nature of Masculinities" (Routledge, 2009), is that in times of homophobia, men police their behavior to avoid being seen as gay. When homophobia fades, men can relax and explore behaviors that don't jive with the traditional masculine ideal.

"Decrease in homophobia has positive effects for heterosexual men as well," Anderson said.

Thoughts? Does anyone think that such "enlightened" views about how heterosexual masculinity can be constructed will ever cross the pond and reach the United States?

Cross-posted from #CSP19: LGBT Rights in the Era of Obama and Google

Scalia Claims Sex and Sexual Orientation Bias Not Banned By Constitution

Adm Golub / The Chronicle

Antonin Scalia, the 74-year-old Associate Justice of the Supreme Court gave a speech at University of California Hastings on the 24th anniversary of his unanimous approval by the United States Senate on Friday.
Scalia, the notoriously homophobic head of the conservative wing of the Court told the audience that he is convinced that the United States Constitution's 14th Amendment's declaration of "equal protection of the laws" does not apply to women or gays and lesbians.

"If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, you have legislatures," Scalia said during a 90-minute question-and-answer session with a professor at UC Hastings College of the Law. He said the same was true of discrimination against gays and lesbians.

[...]

The court has ruled since the early 1970s that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws applies to sex discrimination, requiring a strong justification for any law that treated the genders differently. That interpretation, Scalia declared Friday, was not intended by the authors of the amendment that was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War.

"Nobody thought it was directed against sex discrimination," he said. Although gender bias "shouldn't exist," he said, the idea that it is constitutionally forbidden is "a modern invention."

The court has not applied the same exacting standard to discrimination based on sexual orientation, an issue it could reach in several cases now in lower courts, including the dispute over California's ban on same-sex marriage.

But when the justices overturned laws against gay sex in 2003 as a violation of personal autonomy and due process, Scalia dissented vehemently. He compared the anti-sodomy laws to statutes against incest and bestiality and said many Americans view bans on homosexual conduct as protections for themselves and their families against "a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive."

It's interesting that Scalia will say in public that "gender bias 'shouldn't exist'" but he is on record in a published opinion of the Court declaring the homosexual "lifestyle" to be "immoral and destructive."

Perhaps he should recuse himself from future cases involving sex discrimination or sexual orientation discrimination before the Court?

Kagan Confirmed To SCOTUS; It's Now 1/3 Female

By a vote of 63 to 37, the United States Senate confirmed President Barack Obama's second Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, 50, to the country's highest court. That body will have three women serving simultaneously, the most ever when Kagan joins Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 77, and Sonia Sotomayor, 56, as the 112th Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

Governator Nominates API Woman To Head CA Sup Ct

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has nominated 50-year-old Tani Cantil-Sakauye to replace California Chief Justice Ron George who announced he was retiring recently. Cantil-Sakauye's nomination would mean that the state's highest court would now have a female majority: Carol Corrigan, Kathryn Werdegar, Joyce Kennard and Tani Cantil-Sakauye.

The Los Angeles Times reported her reaction to the nomination:

"I have had the distinct pleasure of being a municipal court judge, a superior court judge and an appellate court justice," she said. "As a jurist, woman and a Filipina, I am extremely grateful for the trust Gov. Schwarzenegger has placed in me. I hope to show young people what they can achieve if they follow their dreams and reach for their full potential."

Cantil-Sakauye is a Republican of Filipino descent and has served as a Court of Appeals judge since 2005. She's married to a Police Lieutenant and has two daughters.

Celebrity Friday: Caster Semenya

Caster Semenya is back in the news because the International Association of Athletics Federations has finally resolved her case and decided that the gender non-conforming (and rumored intersexed) athletic track star can compete in women's events in the future.

Celebrity Friday: Sandra Diaz-Twine

Sandra Diaz-Twine, 34, made history on Sunday night by becoming the first person to win a second $1 million dollar check by repeating as a winner of CBS's reality television show Survivor. It is the only reality show that I watch (still!) and I was glad to see Sandra win over rvials Parvati Shallow and the odious Russell Hantz.

This was one of the best Survivor seasons ever, with former players returning, most notably the excessively pulchritudinous (i.e. hella phyne!) James Clement and "Survivor superman" Colby Donaldson who got to the final 5, but shockingly disappointed in the physical challenges.

The next season will be all new players again, so I will check out the first episode to see if there are any hotties, but really the game gets going when individual immunity (final 10-12 weeks) so that's probably when I'll check in. I do find it interesting that the game has had an almost even number of male and female winners. I think that shows that being able to "outwit, outplay, outlast" is not the domain of one gender.

Logan Utah Adopts LGBT Rights Ordinance!

The city of Logan, Utah (where Utah State University is located) became the second city in the Mormon-dominated, religiously conservative state to enact an ordinance banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in employment and housing on Tuesday night.

According to the Salt lake Tribune:

In one motion, the Logan City Council on Tuesday night mandated that employers and landlords cannot discriminate against gays, lesbians or transgendered people in the city limits.

Modeled after anti-discrimination laws recently adopted in Salt Lake City, Logan's housing and employment ordinances passed with four votes and one abstention, by Councilman Dean Quayle. A crowd, which filled the City Council Chambers halls and an overflow room, was mostly subdued throughout a one-hour public hearing. Following the tally though, the crowd erupted in applause and rewarded the council with a standing ovation.

In the days leading up to Tuesday's meeting, Council Chairman Jay Monson said he received more than 250 calls and e-mails "for" and only 10 "against" the ordinances, all from Logan residents and business owners.

[...]

"The [LDS] church supports nondiscrimination ordinances, period. Certainly, I was told that this applies to Logan as much as any other place in the world," Monson said Tuesday before calling for the vote. "They do and I do and I agree that this is not the answer for everything ... But it is a step in the right direction and it is long overdue in my thinking

However, as I have blogged about before, there are plenty of examples of ignorance in this monochromatic state about the nature of civil rights:

Logan resident James Gibson, a business owner and landlord, disagreed saying the City Council is overstepping its bounds.

"I don't feel that it is the place of the government to step in and say who I can and can't hire," Gibson said, adding that, if anything, it should be a state matter. "If anybody feels like they've been discriminated against on behalf of any landlord or business owner, that becomes a civil matter. "

Joshua Frazier added, "The problem is a lack of compassion, not a lack of laws. You cannot legislate compassion and attempting to do so only creates resentment."

Frazier said the ordinances are unconstitutional because employment and property rentals feature a private contract.

"It's wrong for governments to interfere with contracts between individuals," Frazier said. "I see this as the government forcing moral decisions on private individuals. I do not want the government determining and defining what is moral and what is not."

Of course, he is saying that as a white, Mormon man who is currently protected under federal, state and local ordinances which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, gender and religion.
How would he feel if it were legal to say "No Mormons Need Apply!" in his rental property or place of employment?

It's simply stunning to me how some people can not see past their own privilege.

International Day Against Homophobia: May 17

Tomorrow, May 17 is the International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO). This year's theme is confronting homophobia in the sports world.

Obama Nominates Elena Kagan To SCOTUS

Kagan is only 50-years-old and would become the 4th woman ever on the nation's highest court, with 3 serving simultaneously for the first time.

I think she's a lesbian, and so do other people. Whether this will prevent her from being on the Court is anyone's guess. Regardless of whether she is a lesbian or not, having another single woman (Sonia Sotomayor was briefly married and now is a permanent divorcee) on the nation's highest court will do wonders for gender equity in this country.

ACTION: Vote for Rock For Equality Video!

The above video is one of 15 finalists in the YouTube's Nonprofit DoGooder Video Awards. The winning video will be featured on the homepage of YouTube.com. The video, called "What Kind Of Planet Are We On?," merges science fiction with a story about the heartbreak of the surviving spouse of a same-sex couple (even legally married ones) being denied access to federal social security benefits thanks to the Defense of Marriage Act, just because of the gender of the recipients.

VOTE NOW!

Celebrity Friday: Nancy Pelosi

Today, Friday March 26th is the 70th birthday of Speaker of the U.S. House Nancy Pelosi. On Sunday night, she presided over the final passage of the most sweeping social justice legislation in over 40 years, Obama's national health care reform bill. Let's hope she has a good celebration of her 70th birthday!

Pssst, Nancy! We still expect ENDA and DPBO to pass before November. Don't let us down.

AD-43: Shock! Nayiri Wins Stonewall Dems Nod

Nahabedian	Gatto

In a shock to most political insiders, Nayiri Nahabedian, Glendale School board members and AD-43 candidate, won the endorsement of the Stonewall Democratic Club, one of the oldest and most prominent LGBT democratic clubs in the country, despite the fact that her main opponent Mike Gatto, has been a longtime paid member of the club for well over a decade and a strong LGBT ally.

MadProfessah is a Stonewall Democratic Club board member (technically, elected Steering Committee member) of Stonewall, and although I have participated in other endorsement panel hearings, I was not on the committee that recommended an endorsement for Gatto by a vote of 4-3. However, at the meeting of the membership on Monday March 22nd, the vote was 23-10 to endorse Nahabedian, which observers chalked up to an impassioned speech by former Assemblyperson Jackie Goldberg, who is openly lesbian and best well-known for the primary author of AB 205, California's Comprehensive Domestic Partnership Act. Stonewall does not allow candidates to speak at a club meeting in which their race is being considered by the membership, but allows 3 people to speak in favor and in opposition to motions on the floor.

Gatto has been endorsed by yours truly, but more importantly he has been endorsed by the California Democratic Party. This surprising result at the Stonewall Democratic Club is the second time that Nahabedian has mobilized (some would say "packed") a Democratic club meeting to overturn the recommendation of a club's endorsement committee for Gatto. DPSFV (Democratic Party of San Fernando Valley) had recommended Gatto but the endorsement was changed to open endorsement by a vote of the membership.

The special primary election will be help on April 13th to see who will replace Paul Krekorian and then on June 8th the Democratic primary will be held for who gets the nomination for the November election to represent the 43rd Assembly district in January 2011.

VA GOV Issues Legally Meaningless Gay Nondiscrimination Directive

There is mass confusion in Virginia (and the traditional media and the blogosphere) about the status of LGBT citizens' civil rights to employment, public accommodations, housing and education thanks to the recent actions by its recently elected Governor and Attorney General.

Thanksfully, legal eagle Chris Geidner can clear it all up for us, in an article entitled "No, Virginia, There Is No Nondiscrimination Policy":

On Wednesday, March 10, Gov. McDonnell issued an ''Executive Directive'' regarding the ''Standard of Conduct'' for state supervisors and employees ''Concerning Employment Discrimination.''

In it, he suggests a pronouncement on the state's position on sexual orientation nondiscrimination. The set-up looks like an attempt to create some space between Cuccinelli's move as attorney general and his own administration. But it does no such thing. To the extent it mentions sexual orientation, it is simply a basic restatement of federal constitutional law. It fails to mention gender identity or expression at all. 

[...]

The law, by the governor's own words, is the same on March 11 as it was on March 9. There is no protection provided by the Commonwealth of Virginia or Gov. McDonnell to LGBT people other than the slight protection already provided to them by the U.S. Constitution. And McDonnell has taken no action to ask the legislature to do more.

[...]

In the days since Cuccinelli's letter, people across Virginia have been asking McDonnell to tell them the truth about his commitment to nondiscrimination. On Wednesday, like the Sun's editor, McDonnell gave a saccharine response aimed more at providing pleasant words than it did providing a real answer. McDonnell's directive, unfortunately, purports to give comfort to LGBT people in the state about something that is not really there.

We're not falling for your ****, Bob McDonnell, no matter how square your jaw is!

BOOK REVIEW: Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex

Finally buckled down and read Jeffrey Eugenides' Pulitzer Prize-winning Middlesex awhile back as part of gay male book club. It was quite interesting to read this fictionalization of a child of Greek immigrant parents who experiences firsthand knowledge that sex is not always a binary selection between male and female.

I had heard many things about Middlesex because it had won the Pulitzer Prize and was about topics that I am interested in: immigrant life, sex, gender and sexuality.

The book is about the life of Cal Stefanides, who is born as an intersexed individual due to the unwitting coupling of two generations of his immediate relatives.

The part of the book which deals with the travails of Cal's grandparents travels from a little town in Greece to the big city of Detroit, MI are one of the highlights of the book for me. Eugenides portrays a lightly fictionalized account of various important historical events in Detroit in particular and the United States in general during the 1950s, 60s and 70s.

Cal doesn't make an appearance in the book until almost the halfway point, and then "he" appears as Calliope. Because of an inattentive, near-senile family physician and indeterminate genitalia, Cal is raised as a girl for the first 16 years of his life, and we (the reader) are given a first-person account of what it is like for a heterosexual person to grow up in a body whose body and surroundings represent a gender different from the gender in their mind.

I know that some people had problems with the heteronormative world-view of a novel which is asking the reader to be mentally flexible about sex and gender. However, I am sympathetic to Eugenides not necessarily wanting to complicate the issues he was portraying by including sexual orientation into the mix. However, I do agree with his critics' point that at the very least the author could have been more nuanced in his approach to sexual orientation.

It's definitely true, that for me, the book does not end well and really starts going down hill when the main character of Calliope is introduced. However, as an intoxicating melange of historical fiction and teenage coming-of-age tale, Middlesex is not a book you will soon forget.

Title: Middlesex.
Author: Jeffrey Eugenides.
Paperback: 544 pages.
Publisher: Picador.
Date: June 5, 2007.

OVERALL GRADE: A- (3.67/4.0).
PLOT: A-.
IMAGERY: A-.
IMPACT: B+.
WRITING: A.

SASOD Files Lawsuit Against Guyana Cross-Dressing Law

Official flag of Guyana

Guyana's Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination (SASOD) has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of that country's archaic law against "cross-dressing."

In a series of crackdowns last year between February 6 and 7, the Guyana police arrested a number of male-to-female transgender persons (MtF Trans) and charged them for ‘cross-dressing’ under the archaic Colonial section 153(1)(xlvii) statute. Unrepresented and completely unaware of their rights, the defendants were detained in police custody over the week-end and then hustled through the legal system. When they appeared before Chief Magistrate Melissa Robertson on February 9, 2009, they were further ridiculed and told that they are men not women, before being fined by the learned Chief Magistrate. Seon Clarke, also known as Falatama, one of the persons arrested, said: “It was one of the most humiliating experiences of my life. I felt like I was less than human.” The motion also pleads that the Chief Magistrate was improperly influenced by irrelevant considerations, discriminated against the MtF Trans on the basis of religion, and violated a fundamental norm of Guyana as a secular state. Vigorous and wide-ranging calls within and out of Guyana for the repeal of these discriminatory laws which facilitate such injustices have been ignored by the government.

Since then, SASOD has forged partnerships with human rights interests in the local and regional arenas who have been working collectively and consistently on a voluntary basis over the past year to assist this marginalized group to obtain access to justice for the atrocities endured at the instance of the law enforcement authorities. The 2009 ‘cross-dressing’ crackdowns and prosecutions provided clear illustrations of how discriminatory laws are facilitating grave human rights’ abuses, in spite of the existence of an entrenched regime of human rights protection in the Guyana constitution. Leading the research initiatives to support strategic-impact, human-rights litigation in the region, Tracy Robinson of the University of the West Indies Rights Advocacy Project (U-RAP) based at the Cave Hill campus’ law faculty in Barbados described the arrests and prosecutions as “an unfortunate embodiment of the patriarchal use of coercive state power for no clear or rational purpose,” highlighting the need for law reform to ensure social justice and gender equity in Guyana and across the region.

SASOD has mobilized support from local and regional human rights attorneys to provide representation in what amounts to a ground-breaking constitutional case. According to Dr. Arif Bulkan, also of U-RAP and one of Guyanese attorneys involved in the litigation, “unless the wide-ranging constitutional reforms conducted in 2001 and 2003 are to be dismissed as pure window-dressing, then the emphasis placed on non-discrimination during that process should guide the High Court to interpret the expanded equality rights generously in order to protect one of our society’s most marginalised groups.”

Veronica Cenac, a St. Lucian attorney who serves as the human rights focal point on the Caribbean Vulnerable Communities Coalition board of governors, lauded SASOD for spearheading the case. “For way too long, we have allowed abuses against the most affected populations to go unchallenged,” she said, quoting the closing words of the UN Secretary-General’s message: “Lack of social justice anywhere is an affront to us all.”

At last year's Global Arc of Justice conference at UCLA Law School I met some Caribbean LGBT activists and heard first-hand from them about some of the indignities suffered by members of the LGBT community living in the British Caribbean countries (like Barbados, Grenada, Trinidad, Jamaica, Guyana etc) as well as their plans for redress.

I am glad to see the resistance to institutionalized homophobia in these jurisdictions is starting to reach a heightened level of activity (and even mainstream press coverage!) I will endeavor to keep track of the progress of this lawsuit and other efforts to combat homophobia and transphobia in the Caribbean.

Annual Update on Sexual Orientation Law Fri Feb 19 at UCLA

Friday February 19th at UCLA Law School, the Williams Institute will hold its 9th Annual Update on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy. Entitled "Sexuality and Gender Law: Assessing the Field, Envisioning the Future," the day-long event will feature appearances by some of the most prominent LGBT legal minds in the country, such as (just to name a few that I am looking forward to meeting and seeing again) NYU Law Professor Kenji Yohsino, University of Chicago Law Professor Mary Anne Case, Columbia Law Professor (and former Vice-Dean) Katherine Franke, American University Law Professor Nancy Polikoff, Obama appointee to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chai Feldblum, Georgetown Law Professor (and blogger!) Nan Hunter, and Yale Law Professor Bill Eskridge.

There'll be a whole lotta "mad professahs" in the house!

Here's the schedule at a glance (see full schedule here):

Friday, February 19

9:00-10:20am – The Difference a Field Makes: The Impact of Sexuality and Gender Law Scholarship on the Law and Legal Scholarship

10:40-12:00pm – Theories Behind Multidimensional Advocacy

1:00-2:30pm – The Impact Sexuality and Gender Law and Policy Scholarship on LGBT Rights

3:00-4:30pm – Intersectionality

5:00-6:30pm – Final Round, 6th Annual Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Moot Court Competition

6:30-8:30pm – Annual Gala Reception and Awards Ceremony: Honoring Richard Taylor and Announcing Williams Institute National Moot Court Winners
*Click here for tickets.

Saturday, February 20

9:00-10:15am – Sexuality in a Global Culture

10:30-11:45pm – The Many Meanings of Gender

12:00-1:00pm – Next Steps: The Future of Sexuality and Gender Law and Scholarship

Just a few weeks ago I was a guest judge in the early rounds of the 6th Annual National Moot Court Competition on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law. It is a very interesting case which pits religious freedom under the first amendment against equal protection interests based on gender identity in a hypothetical in which national health care has become law but includes a rider which allows a "conscience clause" allowing doctor's to not treat transgender people.

Exemption Protecting Religious Freedoms of Medical Personnel:
No physician, nurse, or other medical personnel shall be required under this or
any other law of the United States to provide hormone therapy, surgery, or any
other medical care to transgender patients that is related to their transgender
status, gender identity, or gender expression if the provision of such care violates
the sincerely held religious beliefs of the physician, nurse, or other medical
personnel requested to provide such service. This provision shall not apply in
situations in which the transgender person’s medical condition is life threatening.

This year's Moot Court problem allows students to go into the details of the Lemon test in Supreme Court jurisprudence for improper governmental establishment of religion as well as the parameters of equal protection analysis involving suspect classes and the evolving nature of rational basis review.

The finals will be judged this year by two sitting members of State Supreme Courts: Justice Carol A. Beier (Kansas Supreme Court) and Justice Joette Katz (Connecticut Supreme Court) and is always a highlight of the entire day.

MAP Report on LGBT Right Progress 2000-2009

There's an interesting report out this week called "A Decade of Progress on LGBT Rights" written by one of the smartest (and least well-known) LGBT organizations, the Movement Advancement Project, (with funding from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr Fund) which puts where the LGBT community is now in a useful historical context.

* Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation: The number of states outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation increased 83 percent, from 12 to 22, between 2000 and 2009. The percentage of the U.S. population living in states banning discrimination based on sexual orientation soared from 24.5 percent to 44.1 percent, an 80 percent increase. In other words, today 134 million Americans are now living in states where discrimination based on sexual orientation has been outlawed, an increase of 65 million over the decade. (When local nondiscrimination laws passed by cities without statewide protections are included, the figure is over 50 percent of the U.S. population.) Fortune 500 companies that protect workers based on sexual orientation grew from 51 percent to 88 percent.

* Discrimination Based on Gender Identity: There was an even more remarkable increase in states outlawing discrimination based on gender identity and expression, which rose from just 1 state in the year 2000 to 14 states representing nearly 30 percent of the population in 2009. The percentage of Fortune 500 companies that protect workers based on gender identity jumped even more, from just 0.6 percent to 35 percent.

* Relationship Recognition: Similarly exceptional gains were made in the area of family recognition. In 2000, no state extended the freedom to marry to same-sex couples; one state gave broad recognition to same-sex relationships and one offered limited recognition. Now in 2009, five states extend marriage to same-sex couples (with New Jersey and the District of Columbia pending at press time), six offer broad recognition, and seven offer more limited recognition. Overall, the number of Americans living in a state that offers some protections to same-sex couples nearly tripled, from 12.7 percent to 37.2 percent.

* Protection from Violence: The 2009 Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act is the first federal law to specifically protect LGBT people.

* LGBT Elected Officials: The number of openly LGBT elected officials in America rose 73 percent between 2000 and 2009, from 257 to 445.

* Public Opinion: The percentage of the public supporting the right of openly gay and lesbian people to serve in the military grew from 62 percent to 75 percent. Support for marriage equality has grown from 35 percent in 2000 to 39 percent today; there has been an even larger increase in support for relationship recognition that involves many of the rights of marriage, from 45 to 57 percent.

* Safer Schools: In 2000, only one state had a safe school law that specifically cited sexual orientation *and* gender identity/expression for protection; by 2009 that rose to 13 states. The number of Gay-Straight Alliance Clubs in high schools grew from 700 to 4,700, a nearly six-fold increase.

The report also includes data on areas with mixed or negative results.

· Marriage Opposition: In 2000, 5 states had blocked marriage equality through a statewide vote; today, 31 have done so, including 29 states amending their constitutions to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages.

· Homophobia in schools: The percentage of LGBT students reporting hearing homophobic remarks in school has remained above 99 percent and LGBT students who report experiencing harassment in school edged up (up from 83.2 percent to 86.2 percent.)

· HIV/AIDS: New HIV infections among adolescent and adult men who have sex with men grew 10 percent, from 28,000 to 30,800, as did the percentage of new HIV infections overall that occurred among men who have sex with men, which rose from 51 percent to 53 percent.

· Military Service Ban: In spite of overwhelming public support for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the U.S. military continued to discharge hundreds of gay and lesbian service members, with the cumulative number of discharges under the 1993 policy nearly doubling during the past decade. The only "positive" note was that the number of annual discharges decreased from 1,241 in 2000 to 619 in 2008 (the most recent year for which data are available), apparently because of the urgent need for soldiers to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002.

I hope that some of the people who have been screaming obscenities at our friends in power take a sobering look at how far we have come, and think about where we want to be in 2019.

"Two Spirits" Movie About LGBT Native Americans

One of my students alerted me to the trailer for the very interesting film about Native American "two-spirited" people, which is the word used to describe people who have both masculine and feminine traits. Generally, we think of such people as part of the LGBT community. The film is called Two Spirits and the trailer is below:


UPDATE FRI 12/18/2009 09:11AM
I heard yesterday that there will be a special screening of Two Spirits on Thursday March 18th at 7pm at the Japanese American National Museum in downtown LA by the Red Circle Project, a Native American HIV/AIDS agency run out of AIDS Project Los Angeles. I plan on attending and seeing this interesting documentary!