Archive | November, 2006

Lesbo family love needed for call-in radio show Monday

ALL POINTS BULLETIN!

Dr. Nanette Gartrell, the principal investigator on the National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study, about which I wrote in late October, is going to be interviewed about her study alongside a FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL guest on a call-in radio show on GreenStone Radio between 9:20 and 10:00am, PST, this Monday, November 20.

It’s streamed online, and the call-in number is toll-free. Details below. The obvious and pressing need is to counter what’s likely to be a well-orchestrated wall o’ hate coming in on the phone lines from the FRC folks.

Please spread the word.

Here’s the note Dr. Gartrell sent around; it was forwarded to the membership of the SF Bay Area’s LGBT family organization, Our Family Coalition:

Hi everyone,

I’ve agreed to speak about my lesbian family study on the All Female Radio network (started recently by Jane Fonda and Gloria Steinem) this Monday between 9:20 and 10AM Pacific Time. Here’s the link to listen online.

They are also having a Family Research Council right- winger as well. Many right-wingers will be calling in during the segment, and I’ve been encouraged to get folks on our side to call in as well. If you have time, please call in and express your progressive comments during the show.

1877-4ROSHOW – 1877-4767469

Thank you!!!

Comments { 1 }

Kid. I could watch it for hours.

Comments { 0 }

That boy in the blue sweater is a girl

Out at breakfast the other day with the lil’ monkey, the beloved, and Pops. After an enjoyable meal during which we all agreed with each other about the kidling’s charming precociousness (surprise, surprise!), Pops smiles conspiratorily, gestures with a tip of his head to a neighboring table, leans into me and says, “That boy in the blue sweater is a girl.”

I had noticed her as soon as we’d been seated, as one does when one such as oneself espies the only other mannish woman in a room. Except of course when one is in a dyke bar, in which case one notices the other kinda gals, trying graciously to ignore the mannish women as they constitute the competition. Or at least this is what one used to do, those dozen years ago when one was a swinging single, before one hauled the marlin to end all marlins up onto the deck of life. Said marlin now being the mother of one’s children.

But one digresses.

Regarding the “boy” in the blue sweater, I says back to Pops, “Yep. Just like yours truly.” I smile the broad smile of one who is confident about the positive reception of a long- and hard-fought point. Thank the goddess, by now, nearly twenty years after coming out to him, we have it all figured out. He loves me for who I am; gets it; the works. More or less.

“There’s all kind of genders under the sun, Pops,” sez I.

“Oh?” he said, either feigning confusion to flush me out, or actually expressing it genuinely. We’ve had this chat before. Many times, in fact, and it really helped hone my chops for teaching Women’s Studies 1001 back at “the U,” let me tell you. But nowadays he’s a bit like the lead character Leonard from the movie Memento: short term memory loss up the wazoo. Though I hasten to note that he hasn’t resorted to tatooing vital factoids on his person. Yet. He does, however, keep a list of friends’ and family members’ phone numbers on a tattered little spiral-bound notebook, which he pulls out of his breast pocket from time to time, pencilling over the numbers slowly, deliberately. As if in the penciling he will emboss the numbers and people they represent deep into his long-term memory, for good. Bless his soul.

But so I look at him, and say, “Youbetcha! There are as many shades of gender as there are varieties of apple. Observe.” And I whip out my napkin with a flourish, uncap my pen, and commence to producing the following visual aid:

IMG_5048
Napkinned diagram, let’s call it Fig. A, “The Wacky World O’ Gender, As Depicted Graphically.”

“Hyper-manly mens on the left end of the spectrum,” I explain to him as I sketch, “hecka girly-girls on the right end. Like the Kinsey Scale, people are spread across the whole shebang, more mens being masculine and more womens being feminine, thanks to hormones, but nobody has a lock on either.” His eyes get that far away look, and I imagine he’s contemplating East German women’s dominance at the Olympics during the 1970s.

“If you read fancy gender theorists,” I go on, knowing anything is possible with my dad, “you’d come to consider that masculinity and femininity are best understood as apart from the body, and female masculinity, modern examples of which we see at yon table and here before you, has a long and storied history.”*

Silence from Pops, but maybe because he keeps his hearing aid down low to minimize the reverb. Also, maybe I lost him.

“I, Daddy-O, am right about here,” I say, locating myself as a bit on the manly side of the median point, denoted by MOI in Fig. A.

He nods slowly. After all, he’s known his dolly (moi) ever since his dolly was a cross-dressing tyke, long before she was a swank-dressing dyke. I have him back, and am emboldened to continue.

I then cross-hatch in the range of possibility for males. “And you, I reckon, are riiiiiiiight abouuuuuuuut here.” Punto, down goes the pen just on the girly side of the median. TOI, in Fig. A.

Quiet moment during which he ponders it all.

“Yep, that’s about right,” sez he. He once told a story about how, when he was a young boy, his father explained to him what a “sissy” was. After the lecture was done, my dad thought to himself: “Uh-oh.” Said nothing to his swarthy, strapping, South Dakota farm boy, son of a circuit-riding minister, Coast Survey ship captain dad. Bless his soul.

As we leave the restaurant I catch the gal’s eye, and give her a small smile and a quick single nod, which she returns. Hail fellow, well met. I have to hope my dad found his solidarities along his way. From the tales he’s told, he did. To my enormous gratitude he also found my mother, who loved us both, in spite of our masculinities. Or lack thereof, as the case may be.

* Judith Halberstam’s work Female Masculinity brought this topic book-length treatment; informative review of it here in Jolique; interview with her about it here in Genders. Strap yourself in, though: the interview is jam-packed with 25-cent vocabulary words comprehensible only to advanced, upper division students of genderology. The interviewer’s first question is enough to send the cynic into an anti-intellectual tizzy-fit. Persevere if you dare.

Extra credit reading: George Saunders’ sparklingly brilliant gem of comic satire “My Amendment.”

Comments { 6 }

Dancing, addendum

In which the geriatric, long-suffering family dog serves as maypole.
(See previous post for accompanying text.)



Comments { 0 }

Look how I’m dancing!

I’m dancing really easily!
I’m like a merry-go-around!
I’m like a carosel!
I’m like both!

I’m going faster and faster!
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee!
I’m like a monkey!

I’m like a dromedary!

I can remember this song* and spin around in circles at the same time!
I’m going crazy!

*One of the gems on Woody’s 20 Grow Big Songs, which are holding up to repetition in the hundreds, and counting.

Comments { 0 }

Girls will be girls

Girls will be girls

Here’s a coloring book/zine that goes nicely with the spirit of the above image: Girls Will Be Boys Will Be Girls. Should be in every self-respecting lesbian dad’s kiddie book collection. Heck, everybody’s kiddie book collection, man.

More gender liberatory coloring books from the artists here, at girlsnotchicks.com. E.g.:

Comments { 0 }

Post-election addendum

Not surprisingly, Berkeley and San Francisco vote to urge Bush’s impeachment!

San Francisco was one of two Bay Area cities in which voters could call for Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to be impeached. Neither San Francisco voters nor their counterparts in Berkeley passed up the chance — San Francisco’s Prop. J won, 59 percent to 41 percent, while in Berkeley, Measure H easily won with nearly 70 percent of the vote.

Also not a surprise: gay marriage banned in 7 of 8 states, as expected (AZ the exception)*. But both Human Rights Campaign and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force folks read the AZ victory, and the narrowing margin on the losses, as a plus. NGLTF’s press release says:

Anti-marriage amendments were on the ballot in eight states and were approved in seven of the eight, but by significantly lower margins than in past years. In 2004, there were 11 anti-marriage amendments on the November ballot, and in only two of them did opposition top 40 percent: Oregon (43 percent) and Michigan (41 percent). Early this morning, five out of the eight states topped 40 percent, including Arizona, Colorado, South Dakota, Virginia and Wisconsin.

“It’s clear that fear-mongering around same-sex marriage by the GOP and the extreme Christian right is fizzling out,” said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. “It doesn’t have the juice it had just two years ago — people are getting sick of it.”

Amen to that. And way to see the glass as a quarter full, rather than three-quarters empty. Forty years from now all this hooey will be source of retroactive shame, as anti-misegenation laws are now. Same story: the closer they became to being struck down, a flurry of legislation swept around to ensure they stayed put; at the time of the historic 1967 Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia, popular sentiment was even more anti-misegenation than the current anti-gay marriage sentiment. [An interesting comparison of states' laws on both issues is collected here by a Canadian college student/Libertarianish political cartoonist/listmaker.] I might not live to see the last anti-gay marriage statute struck down, but my kids will – that is, global climatalogical calamities notwithstanding. Which is the point: we all have bigger fish to fry. Lest the fish themselves start boiling.

* [Later note: AZ insiders don't read the vote as a sign that a majority love gay people, so much as that a majority don't want to vote away benefits from oldster domestic partners. Says one writer, the next such gay marriage ban proposition will be better worded, and will win. See this piece in Slate for more... Another DailyKos diarist sees it as a series of factors some of which may, some of which may not be replicable.]

Comments { 1 }

Goddess bless America

IMG_4868_2

The teeth gnashing, knuckle nibbling, and coffee stirrer shredding begins as we watch what happens when majority rules a nation in which we – here, “we” being LGBT parents – are now and ever will be in the numeric minority. At a time in which the legal and social security of our families has been construed as a wedge issue, the better to distract from Actual Matters of Significance (poverty? health care? peak oil? global warming? war without end?). We work our hineys off, and then at the end of the proverbial day know that our allies – and in another generation, our kids – will make the critical difference. Meanwhile, teeth gnashing and knuckle nibbling.

Today, voters in South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, Coloraado, Idaho, and Wisconsin will be considering whether or not to ban marriage between same sex partners. [Human Rights Campaign has an election watch page here.] In my home state, we already got socked in the solar plexus on that one back in 2000.

This election, Californians consider keeping or dumping “the governator,” and folks in my neck of the woods will consider keeping or dumping our representative in Congress, the heroic Barbara Lee of “Barbara Lee Speaks for Me” fame. As ever, we will also consider various statewide propositions, which once seemed to represent an exciting innovation in populist legislative change, and have become another playing field for those with big bucks to run hyper-financed ad campaigns.

On the municipal front, residents of my fair berg also contemplated Measure H, which reads:

Shall the City of Berkeley petition the United States House of Representatives to initiate proceedings for the impeachment and removal from office of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney and call upon the California State Legislature to submit a Resolution in support of impeachment to the United States House of Representatives?

The San Francisco Chronicle did a bit on the measure here.

This morning, before going off to vote, I was chatting with the day care gal in my typically abysmal Spanish. (I once said something like, “If I knew what I was actually saying I’d be really pregnant.”) She had been watching analysis of the election earlier on Univision, and was updating me on Bush’s approval ratings. I said to her – or think I said – “Usually, democracy is an ideal, and in actuality it works very differently. Days like today, we allow ourselves a little hope.”

Comments { 0 }