Speeches from Minnesota’s Historic Vote for the Freedom to Marry

It's Time, All Minnesotans Deserve the Freedom to Marry.By a vote of 75-59, the Minnesota House of Representatives passed the freedom to marry for same-sex couples yesterday afternoon, Thursday May 9, 2013. Prior to the vote, there were a number of moving speeches from Representatives. In case you didn’t have time to be glued to the news coverage yesterday, I thought I would post several of my favorite moments from yesterday.

 

You might remember Representative Steve Simon (DFL) for a different speech he made during the marriage amendment. In a previous speech, Simon asked a Republican controlled committee the question, “How many more gay people does God have to create before we ask ourselves whether or not God actually wants them around?”

Yesterday’s speech was equally compelling. Representative Simon told the house, “I think slowly, as a society, we are coming to the realization, some faster than others, that those in the GLBT community do not have some sort of condition to be pitied or prayed away. What they have is a god-given orientation which should be celebrated and welcomed.”

Equally moving was Representative Tim Faust’s speech explaining how he changed his mind about same sex marriage. He asks, “Do we as a society have the right to impose our religious beliefs on someone else?”

This bill moves on to the Senate on Monday. Take action to help it become a law. Find out what you can do on the Minnesotans United for All Families website.

Vote November 6th!

Vote No Twice

Vote No on both Constitutional Amendments November 6th!

 

 

Hey Friends. It’s time to vote!

Did you remember to research all your Constitutional Amendments, Judges, Soil and Water Supervisors, and School Board Members?

 

 

If you’re from Minnesota/Minneapolis and didn’t have time to read through the details of all the races, here’s the slate I’m voting. The best thing to do is research it all yourself, but in the absence of having that time, feel free to use my State General Election cheat sheet.

State General Election Cheat Sheet:

President and VP: Barack Obama and Joe Biden

U.S. Senator: Amy Klobuchar

U.S. Representative District 5: Keith Ellison

State Senator: Scott Dibble

State Representative District 61B: Paul Thissen (Not that many people will have this on their ballot but I wanted to remind those of you who do, not to vote for the Republican: Nate “Honey Badger” Atkins. Yes, it’s hilarious that he’s known as the Honey Badger, but actual elections are the one time we can’t vote for comedy.)

Constitutional Amendements:

Amendment 1 Recognition of Marriage solely between one man and one woman: NO (obviously. See Minnesotans United For All Families for more info)

Amendment 2 Photo Identification Required for Voting: NO (this one is seriously important. There are no real details on what this amendment entails, just that the next legislature gets to decide what ID is required and how it’s going to get paid for. Voter Fraud is not a problem in Minnesota. This is a waste of money and disenfranchises people who have a right to vote. As the ACLU puts it, “while showing a photo ID may seem like a common sense idea, the actual amendment is poorly written and would cause too many unintended consequences.” )

County Offices:

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor 1: Eleonore Wesserle

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor 3: Brian T. Peterson

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor 4: Richard B. Strong

Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor 5: Abstain. Danny Nadeau is a Republican and as far as I can tell he’s running unopposed. If anyone has a better idea please post in comments!

School Board Member At Large Special District 1: Carla Bates

Judges:

Chief Justice: Lorie Skjerven Glidea

Associate Justice 1: Dean Barkley

Associate Justice 4: David R. Stras

Judge 22: Elizabeth Cutter

Judge 44: Lois Conroy

The remaining Judges are running unopposed.

Ok folks, that’s all I have for recommendations. November 6th is a big day. Go participate in democracy!

 

 

On Queerness

Feminism is for Everybody

photo by anouk124

I recently re-read bell hooks’s Feminism is For Everybody, an incredibly accessible book about reclaiming and re-understanding a feminist consciousness. So much of that book has influenced my thinking on how to view pop culture through a critical lens, of
keeping a class and racial analysis core to feminism and the concept of global feminism.

On this read, however, I struck by a comment on sexual identity and practice and its relation (or lack thereof) to a political identity. hooks writes: “transgressive sexual practice did not make one politically progressive, ” (95) meaning that non-normative sexuality does not or should not assume one’s politics, While hooks does not employ the word “queer,” I applied this notion to the political and politicized language of Queerness. For some, queer is used as an umbrella term to encompass many sexual identities (“Queer” being more succinct and yet more all-encompassing than LGBTQQIAP). For me, queer is not just who I fuck, it’s how I fuck and why I fuck, and how I approach my relationships. It’s how I perform my gender identity as a cisgender woman. It’s how I view the intersections of history, the intersections of privilege and oppression, on my own body. It’s the lens through which I read the world. I gravitated to the identity queer at a point where I had already claimed a bisexual and later a gay identity, and sometimes those labels still apply to me. But queer seemed to speak more to me, qualifying my particular sexual habits and desires and the way that my body operates and matters (or doesn’t) in the world.

Perhaps as a result of growing older, or perhaps as a result of spending time with many people of diverse sexual and gender presentations and identities, but I meet more and more people who self-identify as queer. With some of these folks, those who do not
seem to have an analysis to accompany their identity, I wonder about their use of the word queer.

Sometimes queerness is read onto my body; but most often I claim that identity for myself. While I do not want to presume someone’s “true” identity, nor do I want to prescribe what queer is (what I love about it is it’s ever-flowingness, that connects to my ever-shifting sense of self), I would like to call for a more critical use of “queer”. Why did we each
choose this word, a former and current slur, to reappropriate and reimagine? I am interested in the “why” behind the “queer”. I am constantly interested in my “why,” and how it changes or remains fixed. I wonder if others of my large and beautiful queer ”family” think about this too. bell hooks reminds me that a queer sexual identity and a  queerpolitical identity cannot and should be assumed. So it is up to me to hold both of those aspects of my being accountable and aligned to stay true to my critical, queer, anti-racist and feminist beliefs.

how i spent my summer vacation, or reflections on the fourth and freedom ticklers

back in the unseasonable warmth of february (hello, record temperatures)
i decided that turning my fourth of july into a five-day weekend would
be a good use of p.t.o.  this proved to be true, as i was later
invited to a friend’s family cabin with ten other lovely people that
very weekend.  we journeyed to the woods of wisconsin to drink
beer, eat meat, shoot fireworks, and dance to drake.

an excellent time was had by all, but there was a group consensus
based on pit stops for food, beer, and gas that small town wisconsinites
were not feeling us. like, really not feeling us.  i personally
felt i was getting more side eye than mary-kate olsen and olivier
sarkozy (probably) do strolling through the city of lights.  it
could just be paranoia brought on by certain aspects of rural midwestern
culture, despite the fact that i’ve come to expect them, such as the
ubiquitous anti-choice billboards. the first one i noticed was a little
different than most, in that it shared half its space with an ad for
cremation services, as if to say “we are constantly thinking this whole
(what we think is the) life cycle ALL THE WAY THROUGH.”

while we are certainly a lively bunch, we are also far from
obnoxious, our politeness and hygiene both impeccable.
 nevertheless, it felt as if we were immediately recognized as
liberal, city dwelling outsiders and subsequently treated with an air of
disdain.  what i imagined them thinking was something along the
lines of, “we’re red. you’re blue. and purple doesn’t exist in this
country, so we hate you.”

full disclosure, i’m smack dab in the middle of franzen’s freedom, so
competing notions of freedom and the uglier memories of the bush jr.
administration have been occupying my mind a bit more than usual lately.
 but even if that hadn’t been the case, the following picture of
what i found in a gas station ladies room still would have sent me right
back there:

sweet liberty

the french freedom tickler.  now, as i’m sure most of you
remember, back in 2003 when the u.s. decided to invade iraq, our french
friends were strongly opposed and expressed this opposition loudly in
the united nations.  this led to some americans boycotting french
goods and, to really drive their point home, alter the name of perhaps
our most beloved fried food, french fries, to freedom fries.  as
far as i know, this phenomenon was relatively short lived, but the
evidence of its existence still lives on in google image search:

would you like some freedom with that?

i can only imagine that the maker of the french freedom tickler
thought that, unlike with fries, to completely replace “french” with
“freedom” might prove too confusing for people, and they would pass on
buying it.  so what they did instead, that clever person, was put
the word “french” up in the corner, ablaze in the fire held by the very
statue that the french themselves gave us in 1886. how does that liberté
feel now?

“tickle her fancy with the real thing,” the tickler proclaims,
because everything real exists on american soil.  and just in case
you weren’t sure you were buying what you think you were buying adjacent
to the coin-operated condom dispenser, they put “adult novelty” at the
bottom.  for those of you who don’t know, this phrase is a rather
abhorrent one, because (in the united states) by selling products in
this particular category, you are entitled to all sorts of legal
loopholes that let you sell (cheap) toys that people insert into their
most private of parts containing b.p.a. and other shitty chemicals and
can also be totally porous and unsterilizable, allowing bacteria and
s.t.i.s to be fruitful and multiply (and, if you share them, shared!).
LET FREEDOM RING!

this trip to the ladies room made me sad at first, thinking that
perhaps the only “novelty” to speak of in this town was a sad,
heteronormative freedom tickler. then i remembered it’s the 21st century
and started to recall other things that made me think i shouldn’t fret
so.  like how there are a great number of sex toy stores that are
decent and don’t sell shitty toys and, most importantly, sell shit
online.  i thought back to my own days working in such an
establishment, and how i would smile a little when i would see that some
finely-crafted leather cuffs or high-quality dildo were being sent to
someone in bumfuck (pun intended) america. even target now sells a number of vibrators and (generally vibrating) cock rings in stores and online.

while this may or may not seem like a huge deal to you, i’m sure that
the people of alabama certainly appreciate it, seeing as how in
2009, the alabama supreme court upheld their ban on the sale of sex toys in
a 7-2 decision. so, you know, feel free to sell and stockpile weapons,
but pack up your leather harnesses and butt plugs and get the fuck out
of here.  this is what freedom sounds like in alabama:

public morality can still serve as a legitimate rational basis
for regulating commercial activity, which is not a private activity,”
associate justice michael f. bolin wrote in the majority opinion.

there is nothing `private’ or `consensual’ about the advertising and sale of a dildo,’” the majority opinion said.

after reflecting on ideas of sexual freedom in this country, i took a
moment to be grateful to live in a time and place where i can choose to
have sex only for recreation and not for procreation and can buy a
variety of birth control methods and sex toys, not to mention get an
abortion should that birth control fail.  this doesn’t mean that i
don’t hope for much, much better for the people of america when it comes
to having a nuanced and fully informed grasp of human sexuality, but i
do want to appreciate the battles that were fought to get us to where we
are now.

now, for the proof that i really was in wisconsin, the leinie lounger:

if my hair had been as long as it was a few weeks ago, i might have even tried a freedom braid:

Support Replacements Limited and General Mills

I got a recent email from Minnesotans United for All Families talking about the broad coalition
they have formed to defeat the marriage amendment. This coalition
includes everyone from General Mills to the Minneapolis School Board and
all kinds of businesses, churches, and non-profits. The other side may
have their allies, but it’s clear that many are fighting to prevent
discrimination from being written into Minnesota’s constitution.

Reading that email made me think about a New York Times article
I saw about the North Carolina vote to ban gay marriage and about the
sole Fortune 500 company that fought against the ban. The New York Times
reported that Replacements Limited,
which sells new and used dinnerware online, “lobbied legislators,
contributed money to causes supporting gay marriage, rented a billboard
along the interstate near its headquarters, and sold T-shirts at its
showroom.”

Replacements Limited faced backlash and loss of business, receiving
angry letters and emails from people canceling their business with the
company.  I think what strikes me about this is the commitment to
stand for what you think is right regardless of the financial
consequences. Bob Page, the company owner told the New York Times, “I’m
always concerned I will hurt our business. I know we have lost business.
But I don’t have a board or shareholders I have to answer to. My life
is not about money.”

The vote is over in North Carolina
and the voters chose to amend the constitution to ban gay marriage. But
Replacements Limited took a stand against the amendment when other
large businesses deemed it too risky. I wanted to write this blog
because I think about the stand Replacements Limited took and I want
them to succeed because of it. I want there to be an evident reward for
standing up and doing the right thing instead of the easy thing, staying
silent.

I don’t know if any of you are in the market for some used or new dinnerware, but if you are, buy from Replacements Limited.
They chose to fight the good fight regardless of it being popular or
profitable and I want them to see just how many people are with them on
the right side of the issue.

On that same note, support General Mills. Marriage Amendment supporters have been organizing a boycott of their products and it’s important to let General Mills know that the stand they took is no small thing.

Pride Report

Hi All. I hope you had a happy Pride. I had a good weekend. I spent Friday at a dance and burlesque party (Grown & Sexy Pride)
organized by my favorite queer party planners, Shannon Blowtorch,
Nadine DuBois, and Sweetpea. The party was at First Avenue instead of
Hell’s Kitchen, which gave people plenty of room to move around. I have
to say I missed Hell’s Kitchen a little bit. I’m not sure why I like
being packed into a bar like a sardine but I (mostly) enjoy it. All of
my Minnesotan counterparts were much more comfortable at First Avenue,
where they didn’t have to touch and they had a better view of the
burlesque. (It was nice to have a better view of the burlesque) If you
click on the Grown & Sexy link you can see a few photos of the action.

Sunday I saw the parade. No matter how many years go by, I still love
going to the parade. I remember when I was a gay teenager and didn’t
know a single gay adult. Other than Ellen, who explicitly came out, I
thought pretty much everyone was straight. Even people like Elton John
were straight as far as I knew (seriously). Back then it was pretty
mind-blowing to see so many gay people in one place. Even though I have
plenty of GBLTQ people in my life these days it still feels really
life-affirming to see all the people who come out to celebrate.

After looking at a slideshow of Pride Parades Around the World
on the Daily Beast and wishing it included more places in the world, I
thought I’d put up a few pictures from the Minneapolis Pride Parade. It
felt like a good turn out year for the parade. Minnesotans United for
All Families was out in force telling people to Vote No, and things felt
a little more political in general this year. I think people are
energized to kick this amendment’s ass.

It was pretty awesome to see the huge turn out of volunteers from Minnesotans United.

Sisters of Perpetual indulgence catch a ride in a Pedi-Cab

These Zebra Bikes represent at all kinds of events around the Twin Cities and I’m always happy to see them.

Go Flamingos!

Target seemed to be back in people’s good graces this year after their fundraising efforts for GLBTQ families.

Last
but not least, a guy walking by himself wearing boots and some
underwear. One complaint about Minnesota Pride is that it is almost
obsessed with being family friendly, so Man-In-Underwear, cheers to you
for being almost naked! I hope you didn’t get a sunburn.

Is Obama our first gay president? Nope, we’ve already had a couple queer men in the Oval Office (and at least one in the Cabinet)

Newsweek cover - Obama as first gay president

The Newsweek cover image

This week’s edition of Newsweek, with is it’s poorly photoshopped cover declaring Barack Obama our first gay president, has caused quite a stir.
The reference is itself sensationalistic and dumb, playing on the
notion of Bill Clinton being our first black president. Too bad, too,
since the discussion about Newsweek’s cover distracts from the
interesting article by Andrew Sullivan inside the magazine.

Okay, so Newsweek didn’t mean for us to take it literally. But it didn’t take long for outlets like Daily Kos and Salon to point out that not only is Obama not gay, our first gay president was most likely James Buchanan. And his presumed lover? Our first gay vice president, Rufus King. And Obama is not (even nominally) our second gay president as that title most likely belongs to Abe Lincoln. As long as we’re on a gay civics lesson, which Federalist was queer? Alexander Hamilton,
our first bisexual cabinet member. To find out more about these queer
18th and 19th century politicians, follow the links below:

Read more about our first gay president and our first gay vice president, James Buchanan and Rufus King.

Read more about our second gay/queer president, Abraham Lincoln.

Read more about our first queer cabinet member, Alexander Hamilton.

There have always been queer people and their will always be queer
people. That some of our presidents or early statesmen enjoyed the
affections of other men should really come as no surprise.

The first queer Cabinet member? Alexander Hamilton.

The Alexander Hamilton & John Laurens Statue in Lafayette Park, Philadelphia

Hamilton & Laurens together again

Today I happened to see the new issue of Gay and Lesbian Review, in which historian Michael Aubrecht presents the evidence
that Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury and
notorious playboy, was most likely bisexual. Letters between Hamilton
and the soldier and statesman John Laurens suggest the two men may have
had an intimate relationship. In the excerpt below, Hamilton reassures
Laurens that despite his upcoming wedding to his fiancée, Elizabeth
Schuyler, his love for Laurens remains:

In spite of Schylers black eyes, I have still a part for the public and another for you; so your impatience to have me married is misplaced; a strange cure by the way, as if after matrimony I was to be less devoted than I am now. Let me tell you, that I intend to restore the empire of Hymen and that Cupid is to be his prime Minister. I wish you were at liberty to transgress the bounds of Pennsylvania. I would invite you after the fall to Albany to be witness to the final consummation. My Mistress is a good girl, and already loves you because I have told her you are a clever fellow and my friend; but mind, she loves you a l’americaine not a la françoise [sic].
Adieu, be happy, and let friendship between us be more
than a name.
A Hamilton
The General & all the lads send you their love.

Historian Bob Arnebeck interprets the letter from Hamilton: “In
the extant letters, this is the last of Hamilton’s homoerotic bravado
with Laurens. But it is quite enough to allow us to label Hamilton as a
man with a wide appetite for pleasures that comfortably included
homosexuality. Marriage would be no cure for his love for Laurens.” A
statue of the two men stand in Lafayette Park in Philadelphia, a
testament to their friendship.

 

Return to the main article.

Read about our first gay president and first gay vice president, James Buchanan and Rufus King.

Read about our second gay/queer president, Abraham Lincoln.

The second gay/queer president? Abraham Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln & Joshua Speed

Young love? Abraham Lincoln & Joshua Speed

Some historians believe that Buchanan wasn’t our only queer
president. And which president do they debate about? None other than Abraham Lincoln. While sharing beds was common in Lincoln’s time, Keith Stern, author of Queers in History, takes exception with the suggestion that Lincoln and shopkeeper Joshua Speed sharing a bed for four years was typical:

Some historians note that it was common
for men to share beds in those days, there was a shortage of beds. 
But they fail to recognize that many of those men were also lovers.

It’s true, there was a shortage of beds,
and as men traveled around they might arrive at a roadside inn where
there was lack of space, so they might be forced to share a room or even
a bed with one or two other men.  There were many jokes about what
went on in those shared beds too.

But it was unusual for two adult men to happily sleep together at home for so long the way that Abe and Josh did….

Nearly four years later, on January 1,
1841, Abe learned that Josh was leaving him and going back to his native
Kentucky.  Abe was devastated and suffered symptoms of what today
we would call a nervous breakdown, an episode known to historians as
Lincoln’s “fatal first.”… By the way, there is not a shred of evidence
to support the contention of some historians that Lincoln also broke off
an engagement with Mary Todd or suffered any of the other myriad
setbacks that some have postulated to explain what upset him on that
fateful day, other than the well-documented impending separation from
Speed….

As Abe grew older he continued to have
intimate relationships with men…. Even as president, Lincoln formed a
close attachment to a soldier, Captain David V. Derickson, who was the
commander of his guards.  In 1862 and 1863, they shared a bed in
the White House and a getaway cottage at the outskirts of town. 
Believe me, there were plenty of extra beds in the White House.

Lincoln’s same-sex relationships did not
go unnoticed by contemporaries and early biographers. Virginia Woodbury
Fox, a well-connected Washingtonian, wrote in an 1862 diary entry:

“Tish says, ‘there is a Bucktail
Soldier here devoted to the President, drives with him, and when Mrs L.
is not home, sleeps with him.’ What stuff!”

Even thirty-three years later, Thomas
Chamberlain, one of Lincoln’s bodyguards, remembered the relationship of
the two men when he wrote a history of the regiment:

“Captain Derickson, in particular,
advanced so far in the President’s confidence and esteem that, in Mrs.
Lincoln’s absence, he frequently spent the night at his cottage,
sleeping in the same bed with him, and — it is said — making use of His
Excellency’s night-shirt!”

Scandalous stuff.  Some historians
like to say these observers were not implying a sexual relationship,
only that the two men were good friends, and it was perhaps slightly
improper for a common soldier to become so close to the President. 
But the fact that people of the time invariably noted the men slept
together only when Mrs. Lincoln was not around, indicates to me that
they had an inkling what was going on — they were aware that the
relationship was somehow hidden from and perhaps a substitute for
Lincoln’s terrible marriage to Mary Todd….

We will likely never know for sure if
Abraham Lincoln had sexual relations with those men.  But it seems
clear he had a passionate desire for intimacy with men to an extent that
attracted notice among the people who knew him.

(For more information on what other historians think, the Wikipedia article on Lincoln’s sexuality summarizes the arguments of both historians who suggest Lincoln was queer and historians who find this idea preposterous.)

 

Return to the main article.

Read about our first gay president and our first gay vice president, James Buchanan and Rufus King.

Read about our first queer Cabinet member, Alexander Hamilton.