Steve Charing OUTspoken

Equality Demands More Than Civil Unions

2012-02-05T22:25:00.003-05:00

Letter Published in the Feb. 5 Edition of the Baltimore Sun:

Jerry Rodkey's letter formulated arguments that are not tied to facts ("Maryland should pass civil unions and move on," Feb. 1). Once again, The Sun continues to allow letter writers to throw out nonsense disguised as facts when the editors should know better.

Canada, Australia, Sweden, Argentina, South Africa and other countries have survived quite well the advocacy of same-sex marriages as well as its implementation. No collapse in their societies have ever been documented. And Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage has existed in the U.S. longer than any other state, continues to have the lowest divorce rate in the country.

What is most egregious about Mr. Rodkey's letter is that he claims same-sex marriage demeans traditional marriage. I would like to know from him how many heterosexual couples divorced because they felt their marriages have been demeaned by the legalization of same-sex marriages.

To his credit, Mr. Rodkey is advocating civil protections for same-sex couples. However, a civil union and its "separate but unequal" characteristic remands a large group of people to second-class citizenship. The Civil Marriage Protection Act, just introduced, has sufficient protections for religious organizations and leaders so as not to coerce religious institutions into officiating such ceremonies. Allowing same-sex couples to attain equal status is the real reason for the opposition, and that's obvious.

This is an important issue for the thousands of gay and lesbian couples, their children and other family members, friends, co-workers, neighbors and other supporters in Maryland.

Steve Charing,

Clarksville

Youth Will Create the Change We Need

2012-02-04T16:20:00.004-05:00

Liam Adams, 21, a biology/pre-med student at Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP), was among 3,000 who descended upon Baltimore for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s 24^th Annual Creating Change conference late January. It appeared that at least 2,000 of them were Liam’s peers—under age 25.

As a member of the Pennsylvania Student Equality Coalition coordinating committee and an IUP Pride Alliance Program Coordinator, Liam is quite busy being involved with the LGBT rights movement. So when this year’s Creating Change conference was announced, he ventured south to Baltimore with a bunch of his coalition colleagues to see how he can further help create change for the better.

“I wanted to attend Creating Change because I love the different LGBT conferences that I have attended since I have come out,” Liam (pictured at rear row, right) told me. “These conferences gave me great opportunity to learn many things about the LGBT family and ways that I can help advocate for our future.”

A number of institutes, seminars and workshops among the total of over 260 were geared towards youth. “LGBTQ Youth Organizing: From the Intersections OUT!”, “Working it Out in Rural Schools Settings: LGBTQ Youth,” “Building a Youth-led Movement,” The Trevor Project Lifeguard Workshop,” “Balancing Act-ivism,” and “Beyond the GSA” were just some of those offered.

But it was a workshop on LGBT history that impressed Liam the most. His favorite was “Remembering Frank Kameny and Discovering LGBT History.” Liam explained, “Having grown up in a very heterosexual family I had never learned any LGBT history, and it is fascinating to see the many triumphs whether big or small that our [LGBTQ] family faced in the start of the movement.”

The consciousness about gay history—the journey from the pre-Stonewall era to the present day—is usually rare among LGBTQ youth, but not so at the Creating Change conference. There was indeed a degree of seriousness, an earnest desire from those youth attending to learn from veterans of the LGBT rights wars who are training these reinforcements, if you will, for future battles.

This focus does not come easy given the chaotic nature of growing up and trying to succeed in college. It’s even harder when one has to struggle to come out to family members and friends.

“I have been out for about two years now, but when I first came out I wasn't open to everyone,” Liam points out. “Coming from a very Catholic homophobic family, I was ashamed of myself, but I have since learned to embrace myself, and this has made a huge difference in my life.”

Having successfully risen to those challenges will help Liam and others with similar histories be better prepared and tougher for the fights ahead. I met students from Oregon, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and elsewhere—all were members of LGBTQ groups that made it to Baltimore to learn more about the movement, develop skills and to network with other like-minded peers. Their goals had much in common in that they seek full equality for all LGBTQ people no matter the state.

Today’s LGBTQ youth have been broadly criticized for not taking an interest in the battles of their predecessors in the LGBT movement. Many adults say, falsely, that LGBTQ kids today have all the support organizations at their disposal with a text message or a click of a mouse and benefiting from increased general acceptance in the U.S. While the support network may be strong, kids still have to deal with family resistance, which is arguably the number one hurdle.

It is true that there are many LGBTQ youth who are politically apathetic (as is the case with their older counterparts) and aren’t activists-in-training like Liam and the other Creating Change participants. The challenge is to convince them that being treated as a second-class citizen is unacceptable. Hopefully, the more activist-minded youth will make that case as they interact with one another.

As for the straight youth, they are far more accepting of LGBTQ peers than previous generations. They shrug their shoulders at the mere mention of same-sex marriage. They had no problem with the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” They see no reason why a person should be fired from their job just for being LGBT. They cannot understand why transgender people should be discriminated against.

Yet, as we know from the all-too-many suicides resulting from bullying in schools, the lack of federal job protections for LGBT individuals, and marriage equality in a country that was founded on equality, there remains a significant distance to go.

Nonetheless, the old-time attitudes are slowly evaporating. Seizing upon that phenomenon and opportunity, the new generation of kids—gay and straight—are arming themselves with the knowledge necessary to create the change we all need.

Politicians would be smart to take notice of these shifting attitudes. The youth have been swelling the voter ranks and affecting elections. The Obama campaign brought more young people into the political process than any time since the 1960’s. Can that be sustained? That is the question, and that is the hope.

Same-sex marriage opponent offers bigotry, misinformation

2012-02-02T15:25:00.004-05:00

Letter Published in the Feb. 2, 2012 edition of the Baltimore Sun:

The letter written by David M. Zwald contained a number of dubious assertions that merit a rebuke (“No shortage of reasons to oppose same-sex marriage,” Jan. 30). To begin with, his comment that passing a marriage equality measure would “usher in an era of depravity” is the type of homophobic rhetoric that the public should denounce and dismiss as pure bigotry and which explains the misinformation he freely dispensed.

“Do any dare to tell [our creator] that we are so wise to change his sacred institution,” he asks. To state there is one original law governing marriage is simply not true. Marriage has evolved since the Old Testament where men routinely had five or more wives and concubines existed. Marriage until recently was more about property ownership than anything else.

Mr. Zwald’s concern that legislators cannot fit this important issue during the three-month long General Assembly session is laughable. He may not think the issue is sufficiently important but thousands of Maryland couples, their families, friends, neighbors, co-workers and other supporters do.

He writes that since marriage equality has been defeated at the ballot box every time it has gone before the voters, it should likewise be put up for a vote. I disagree. In our democratic society, putting a minority’s rights up for a popular vote is a vile concept. As an example, I am fairly certain that if interracial marriage had been voted by the general electorate, it most likely would not exist today.

Finally Mr. Zvald states unequivocally but falsely, “Societies everywhere reject same-sex marriage. How are we so smart to overrule what people everywhere else know?” Here is what Mr. Zwald apparently does not know: a number of countries including Canada, Argentina, Spain, South Africa, Portugal, Sweden and others have implemented same-sex marriage. More are on the horizon. Their societies are strong and probably better for it.

In the U.S. there are six states plus D.C that allow loving, committed couples of the same gender to marry. Other states are close. Massachusetts, the first U.S. state to allow such marriages, has the lowest divorce rate in the country. That doesn’t sound like the institution has been threatened.

We need to pass the Civil Marriage Protection Act now. There are sufficient protections for religious organizations and leaders contained in the bill to alleviate the fears expressed by Mr. Zwald.

Steve Charing
Clarksville

Smokin' Music Rocks Toby's Baltimore

2012-01-31T10:47:00.006-05:00

The production of Smokey Joe’s Café at Toby’s Baltimore is not your typical musical. There is no story line to keep track of that binds the musical performances. There is no acting. There is no dialogue. And so unconventional is this musical that the performers don’t have character names. Rather than adhering to a chronological structure or any kind of plot (and some might find fault with that), Smokey Joe’s Café is a musical revue.

What is presented on Toby’s stage is a lightning bolt of energy that brought back to life over three dozen pop, rock and blues standards—some huge hits, some lesser known— mainly from the 1950’s by the prolific composing tandem of Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller. In producing their own songs, the duo took control of their material, as did the Beatles, for example. “We don't write songs,” Leiber famously said. “We write records.”

The album, Smokey Joe's Cafe: The Songs of Leiber and Stoller, won a Grammy in 1996 for Best Musical Show album. The show’s earlier performers garnered several Tony nominations. It had opened on Broadway in 1995 and closed nearly five years later after 2,036 performances. In 1996 the touring company paid a visit to the Morris A. Mechanic Theatre in Baltimore.

It is a sparkling display of fast-paced, high-tempo performances from the talented young ensemble. There are ten performers in this group, which is an increase over earlier iterations of the show. The nearly forty songs were performed with varying combinations of the cast. Overall, the ensemble offered scintillating, lively performances and was true to the Lieber and Stoller score.

They belted out such favorites as “Kansas City,” “Poison Ivy,” “Jailhouse Rock,” “Love Potion #9,” “Hound Dog,” and a host of others that will make you clap your hands and tap your feet. They crooned to such popular and melodic ballads as “Stand By Me,” “Don’t Be Cruel,” “There Goes My Baby,” “I (Who Have Nothing)” and “Spanish Harlem.”

Under the direction of Kevin McAllister and musical director Cedric Lyles, the strengths of the cast members were well utilized to maximize the performances. Each one had something to offer and their talents were well integrated to create a beautiful tapestry of song and dance.

From the soothing bass voice of Marquise White to the powerful soprano Kelli Blackwell, the numbers they performed were superb as exhibited in their duet in “You’re The Boss.” The other cast members’ vocals were also joyful.

If a performance required some comical body language, then the directors turned to Bryan Daniels, who was a crowd pleaser. His rendition of “Treat Me Nice” treated the audience nicely.

And if choreographers Ashleigh King and Anwar Thomas sought an energetic, versatile dancer to lead in several numbers, then they struck gold with Toby’s veteran Derek Tatum (“Hairspray,” “Chicago,” High School Musical”). His shirtless performance in the song “Don Juan” elicited some shrieks from some audience members who admired his taut physique. Tatum’s Elvis-like dance routine in “Jailhouse Rock” also stood out. In general, the choreography from the cast was as harmonious as the tunes.

The pace of the show was breathtaking. Nearly 40 songs were performed in just over two hours. No pauses, no gaps, no respite in between selections. The performers for the next number were onstage virtually as the previous song ended. As such, the changes to Janine Sunday’s appealing period costumes were executed rapidly and smoothly—a credit to the stage production staff and the performers.

The set was spartan, which did not add or subtract from the quality of the production. Nor did it create a mood harkening back to the 50’s. A blank screen hung behind the performers and reflected some images from time to time but served mainly as a partition between the ensemble and the excellent orchestra. However, nicely designed stairways were used on both sides of the stage in a number of selections. It was clear that the performances were central to the show’s value, not the scenery.

While the musical revue overall doesn’t tell a story, most of these Leiber and Stoller songs do individually. If you’re old enough to remember these tunes, you will truly appreciate this production and bring back those memories. But if not, you should simply relax and enjoy the remarkably talented cast and musicians and tap your feet, which is hard not to do.

Smokey Joe’s Café runs through March 18 at Toby’s Dinner Theatre, 5625 O’Donnell St. (in the Best Western Hotel), Baltimore, MD 21224.. For schedule and ticket information, call 410-649-1660 or visit tobysdinnertheatre.com.

Photo: Chris Christiansen

A Question of Motivation

2012-01-24T14:57:00.003-05:00

Just as the 2012 General Assembly was about to begin, Maryland Senate President Thomas V. “Mike” Miller said on the Marc Steiner radio show that “a coming together of Evangelicals, Catholics, African-Americans” will oppose the marriage equality measure. “If it goes to polls, the other side is more motivated, and I think they will get their voters out, and I think it goes down to defeat.”

Like him or not (I don’t), Mike Miller, who opposes same-sex marriage, is an astute politician. The conservative Democrat has served as Maryland Senate President for a quarter century—longer than any counterpart in the country. Miller has represented his district (Calvert and Prince George’s counties) as Senator since the Ford Administration after being elected to the House of Delegates during Nixon’s term.

Numerous politicos and journalists believe that Miller is the most powerful person in the state, even more so than the Governor. Heck, they named the Senate office building after him and he’s not even dead.

Miller knows Maryland, and he knows politics like no other. Is he on target, however, in predicting doom for the bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in Maryland? Is he correct declaring that the “other side is more motivated”?

He may have a case. A recent Gonzales poll taken this month indicates a 2-percentage point edge favoring same-sex taken among registered voters in Maryland—well within the margin of error and thus a statistical tie. But many folks rightly believe that on social issues, people tend to respond more progressively in these polls, which could have artificially upped the pro-equality numbers.

Moreover, the survey did not target likely voters. The same groups that Miller mentioned, including African-Americans who are expected to turn out in large numbers because of the presidential election, are not yet convinced that marriage equality is good for the state and families or does such a change comport with their religious beliefs. Older citizens, who more likely oppose same-sex marriage, tend to vote proportionately higher in their demographic than younger voters do—once again tilting the scale against marriage equality.

Based on this analysis alone, the marriage equality scenario in 2012 is not as rosy as some believe, thereby validating Miller’s assessment.

And there are other factors. Rather than waiting for marriage equality to be legalized in Maryland, many gay and lesbian couples tied the knot in Washington, D.C. or in the other states that allow it. Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler’s opinion in 2010 that said Maryland should recognize those valid marriages conducted in the other states influences couples to marry elsewhere. So the motivation may not be as strong as it once was.

Although the total increased by 50 percent, the estimated number of gay and lesbian couples—17,000 according to the 2010 census—is a fraction of the entire LGBT population in Maryland. (In Baltimore City and Montgomery County, there are approximately 2,900 such couples in each.)

But among those couples, not all are seeking marriage for a variety of reasons. And many of those who are unattached do not ever expect to be married. This also tamps down the motivation of the pro-equality side.

On the other hand, the opposition is indeed very motivated. Well-organized and well-funded groups like the National Organization for Marriage exist solely to deny gay and lesbian Americans the right to civil marriages. NOM has so much clout that Republican presidential candidates signed a pledge to support a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. Other groups representing Catholics as well as African-American mega-churches are also eager to thwart the bill or overturn it in a referendum.

This is not to suggest that the pro-equality coalition under the banner Marylanders for Marriage Equality is not motivated. There are a considerable number of dedicated individuals and organizations working hard to secure marriage equality in the state.

Delegate Luke Clippinger (D-46^th District) told me, “The coalition has field organizers in key districts. The coalition also has the benefit of polling, of media advisors, of people with state-wide political experience, and of a finance committee that has already raised a considerable amount of money. All of these things…are essential parts of a successful campaign and they are already in place.” But it is going to require a high level of volunteerism and financial contributions by LGBT individuals and allies to win the battles ahead.

As we have observed on the national political stage, motivation can be crucial. To that point, the Republican Party will likely be nominating a candidate who is flawed and not loved by their base but he is perceived to be best positioned to defeat Barack Obama.

“The opportunity to beat a polarizing incumbent is a powerful motivating force,” wrote Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com in the New York Times.

We need to get motivated here—even those who don’t see marriage in their future— to do what’s right and just, and ultimately to prove that Mike Miller’s assertions are nothing more than hot air.

2012: Not for the Faint of Heart

2012-01-12T12:22:00.003-05:00

The confetti from New Year’s Eve has long been swept up, and as we open our new 2012 calendars—the ones that charities routinely send us—we notice that each month contains a majestic photo of an exquisite landscape from around the U.S. It’s nice but the political landscape nationally and here in Maryland promises to be anything but serene and beautiful. Rather we should brace ourselves because calendar year 2012 is going to be ugly.

Bruising Presidential Campaign

We are less than ten months away from either re-electing Barack Obama or we will decide that his opponent should reside in the White House for the next four years. And that opponent, barring a miracle, will be Mitt Romney.

Based on the tried and true fundamentals; i.e. ability to raise money, organization and name recognition, needed to carry out such a campaign, it would be a major surprise if anyone but Mitt Romney emerges as Obama’s foe. Assuming no credible third party candidate surfaces leaving the stage to the two principals, this campaign will be tantamount to extreme cage fighting.

The Republican faithful will hold their noses and nominate the former Massachusetts governor. His strength: the myth that he fostered that he is the only candidate who is “electable” against Obama whom the GOP loathes.

Whether he possesses sufficient true conservative values or not, Romney is the darling of the so-called establishment. And as the Tea Party’s influence wanes, the establishment should win out. The ultimate motivation will be to defeat Obama, and Republican dogma may have to take a back seat. But in an effort to shore up his conservative bona fides, expect more anti-LGBT salvos from Romney especially his desire for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

Because of the Supreme Court’s ruling that opens the door to unlimited campaign contributions that can be made to Political Action Committees (PAC), both opponents will have the cash to slug it out big time. Contributors to these PACs can remain anonymous and they will be completely legal if the PACs do not coordinate with the official campaign. We witnessed the effects of PAC money when Romney’s PAC obliterated his one-time feared opponent, Newt Gingrich in Iowa.

For his part, Obama has the resources (including PACs) to counter Romney and the assaults from his PACs. Team Obama has already made it clear that they want this election to be a choice between two candidates and not a referendum of the past four years. In other words, they will surely run a negative campaign against the presumed nominee, Romney. And if history has taught us anything, the Republicans will stop at nothing to use smear and fear to win elections.

The back-and-forth will be strident and personal, so get used to the muck.

Do or Die in Annapolis

As scenic as Annapolis is as a city, the 430^th Legislative Session of the Maryland General Assembly that had just begun promises to be unsightly. While the state’s budget deficit will highlight the session, marriage equality and gender identity protections will be on the docket.

Marriage equality advocates were short by a couple of votes in the House of Delegates last year following passage in the Senate. A new organization—Marylanders for Marriage Equality—is going to lead the fight this time around. It is comprised of the ACLU of Maryland, Human Rights Campaign, Progressive Maryland, SEIU 1199, NAACP — Baltimore Chapter, National Black Justice Coalition, Family Equality Council, PFLAG, Jewish Community Relations Council, Maryland Faith for Equality, Maryland NOW, Catholics for Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

The coalition is building a statewide grassroots organization—which includes weekly phone banks, post card drops, and letter-writing campaigns—to ensure state legislators hear from their constituents.

In addition, they have produced videos consisting of elected officials and entertainers in an attempt to win over Marylanders to pressure lawmakers to pass the bill and to hold off a guaranteed referendum battle should the bill pass and be signed into law. And they have the support of Governor O’Malley who made passage a legislative priority and promised to be more visible during the debate.

Should the bill be petitioned to referendum, the ongoing battle will be discordant and emotional. Will Marylanders for Marriage Equality come up with enough resources to fend it off? That’s the multi-million dollar question.

It is almost do or die, however, for the coalition to come through this session. In no way would the issue of same-sex marriage be taken up next year in the legislature or in 2014 as lawmakers are loathe to run with a hot button issue such as this on a ballot. Should the law pass this year and the referendum to defeat it holds up, it would require a court action, such as what’s happening on California’s Prop 8 situation, to overturn the referendum results. And there would be a lot of finger-pointing as well.

The gender identity non-discrimination bill will also cause a stir in the legislature. It passed the House last session but because of maneuvering by Senate President Thomas V. “Mike” Miller, it failed to come up for a vote in the Senate. Last time, “public accommodations” were struck from the language to improve its chances of passage. This time it is expected to be included.

But if a “public accommodations” provision is stripped as was the case last year and more recently in Massachusetts, some in the local transgender community will oppose the bill—a controversy that will also contribute to the foul political climate. In 2011 transgender activists were up in arms over the stripped provision banning discrimination against transgender persons in the area of public accommodations and made that opposition clear to lawmakers.

Nonetheless, like marriage equality, the gender identity measure has some momentum behind it. The worldwide video of a beating of a trans-woman in a local McDonalds underscored the need for legal protections for transgender individuals. Moreover, a legislative victory in Howard County recently occurred, which joined Baltimore City and Montgomery County as jurisdictions that have comprehensive protections in place. An additional jurisdiction in Maryland is poised to enact similar protections. These should help gain a statewide law.

With the Dream Act and the Marriage bill expected to be on the 2012 ballot, it is questionable if opponents of gender identity protections will follow that route. Regardless, advocates, who are led by a new organization, Gender Rights Maryland, must be ready for the potential onslaught.

Whether it is the national presidential campaign or the expected battles in Maryland, the landscape will not be like those portrayed on calendars.

The 2011 OUTspoken OUTIES

2011-12-29T00:41:00.004-05:00

The Best, Worst, Biggest and Smallest of 2011

Happy New Year! It’s time to look back at the events and personalities of this past year in the areas of politics and culture and present an unapologetic, subjective, slanted list of winners (and losers) who are deserving of the OUTIES trophy. In no particular order, I welcome you to the OUTspoken OUTIES of 2011.

Most Understated Hero: Gay staffer Daniel Hernandez for aiding Rep. Gabrielle Giffords immediately following her being shot. His brave action was a significant reason the congresswoman is on the road to recovery today. And he still doesn’t see himself as a hero.

Best Step Towards Equality: New York State legalizing marriage for same-sex couples.

Sorry to See You Go: Frank Kameny for his tireless work to achieve LGBT rights over five decades. RIP Frank—we will someday be treated equally.

Honorable Mention: The announced 2012 retirement of Rep. Barney Frank. Flaws and all, he championed a federal Hate Crimes Bill, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, was a lead sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and a reliable outspoken ally in Congress. Barney’s departure will hurt GOP fundraising.

Good-Bye and Good Riddance: The end of the discriminatory, homophobic Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Two women sailors’ public kiss caps off the year in style.

Biggest Near Death Experience: Equality Maryland. Following the failure to achieve its goals in the 2011 General Assembly, the organization ran out of money, fired its executive director along with most of the staff, and overhauled the board. But the one-time leading statewide LGBT civil rights group is poised to make a comeback in 2012. It needs to.

Most Premature Victory Dance: Also goes to Equality Maryland for staging “celebration” events following the successful state Senate vote on marriage equality but prior to the travesty in the House of Delegates. Timing is everything. So is perception.

Most Unexpected Ally: State Sen. Allan H. Kittleman for bucking his Republican Party dogma and supporting marriage equality in Maryland. If you know him, this is not really a surprise. Thanks Senator.

Most Mercurial Delegate: Tiffany Alston of PG County angered marriage equality advocates with her antics last session. She was a co-sponsor of the bill and then changed her mind. Now, with an indictment hanging over her head and her anger concerning the governor’s redistricting plan, it will be interesting in 2012.

Biggest Topic of News: The transgender community—the failure to pass a gender identity non-discrimination bill in the 2011 General Assembly, the intense and often angry divisions among the community members, the McDonald’s beating video, the formation of a new organization and the success in securing a gender identity bill in Howard County—provided much to write and talk about.

Best New Organization: Gender Rights Maryland—it’s motivated, mobilized and already has a victory to tout.

Biggest Game Changer: Viral video of beating of trans-woman Chrissy Lee Polis at a Rosedale McDonald’s. It graphically pointed out how trans-folks are in need of protections, and hopefully the incident will open some minds.

Smallest Minds for Prez: Anti-gay Republican candidates Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Romney.

Best at Carrying a Lucky Horseshoe: President Barack Obama. Low approval ratings, failure so far to motivate his base, economy in the dumper, no influence in Congress despite recent tax success—certain precursors to defeat, right? But look at the field of potential opponents!

A Movement Needing Motion: Occupiers with their noble cause must do more than camp out. Using the political system to realize their goals, if they are ever clarified, would be far more effective. The window may be closing.

Worst Muddling of an Issue: Homophobic extremists trying to equate pedophilia to homosexuality during the Penn State sex scandal.

Most Altruistic Organization: Brother Help Thyself raises much needed money for non-profit LGBT orgs in a slow economy. Great work and they do it every year!

Best Sports Progress: NFL, NBA and MLB for including LGBT non-discrimination provisions in their new labor agreements. C’mon NHL. Get the puck with the program!

Best Celebrity Allies (tie): Lady Gaga has been magnificent and once again, Neil Patrick Harris.

Honorable Mention: All those who have participated in the “It Gets Better” campaign and have appeared in videos supporting same-sex marriage in New York and in Maryland. Thank you all.

Top Mindless Movie: Friends with Benefits—not exactly a blockbuster—but when you have a chiseled (and nude) Justin Timberlake and a likable gay character in the same movie, that’s all I need. If only one of the Twilight guys was gay.

Best Opening Number: Neil Patrick Harris’ “It’s Not Just For Gays Anymore” at the Tony’s was one for the ages. Sample lyric: “If you feel like someone that this world excludes, it's no longer only for dudes who like dudes. Attention every breeder, you're invited to the theatre.”

Worst Audience: Those attending GOP debates who find it in their hearts to boo an American gay soldier and urging a hypothetical uninsured coma patient to simply just go die.

Best TV Show for LGBT (tie): Glee and Modern Family

Most Disappointing TV Show: Desperate Housewives in its final run. Dark plot all season about a murder and cover-up while reducing the gay couple to a pair of buffoons. Where was Andrew?

Best Song: Lady Gaga’s “Born This Way”—Great message, good beat, easy to dance to.

Best Gay Bar: All of them for providing a space for LGBT folks to congregate, network and socialize among ourselves without having to depend on social media for interaction. Nothing tops gay happy meetings.

Best Drag Act: Shawnna Alexander owns this category.

Best LGBT-Friendly Restaurant: Brewer’s Art (again).

Best LGBT-Friendly Theatre in Baltimore: The Spotlighters. Dependably good productions that are well-acted and directed in the tight confines of the in-the-round stage.

Best Gay-Themed Musical: La Cage aux Folles at the Hippodrome was a winner in every aspect. It was the best of times.

Baseless fears stand in way of justice for transgendered

2011-12-22T12:20:00.002-05:00

Letter published in Dec. 22, 2011 edition of the Howard County Times:

Kudos to Lindsey McPherson for her excellent article on the passage of the gender-identity bill by the Howard County Council and what it may portend for a statewide measure.

One thing that should be added, however, is that the bill before the 2011 General Assembly did not include language relating to "public accommodations." This was a decision made by the bill's sponsor, Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk, and other proponents who believed the elimination of "public accommodations" from the bill would help pass it. The strategy did not work.

Public accommodations has been a sticking point among legislators who oppose such legislation. They fear — irrationally, I believe — that a transgender woman with "male parts" entering a women's restroom would put other women at risk for being attacked.

In Montgomery County, where a comprehensive gender-identity bill that included "public accommodations" has been in effect for three years, no incidents have been reported. This was stated during a public hearing before the Howard County Council on Nov. 21. Jonathan Shurberg, a Silver Spring attorney involved in the passage of the law, testified that there has not been a single reported case of such an attack.

Moreover, in a Dec. 6 decision by the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Georgia — a rather conservative court — regarding a discrimination case brought to the court by a transgender woman, the court decried bathroom fears "hypothesized or invented post hoc in response to litigation" are not genuine justifications.

It's time to put away those fears and stereotypes and end discrimination for all of Maryland's citizens.

Steve Charing

Clarksville

Why We Cannot Leave the Game

2011-12-12T23:41:00.003-05:00

In contemplating the future of the LGBT movement, Editor Dana LaRocca commented last issue: “I do not know what my New Year’s resolutions will be for Baltimore OUTloud. It will not be ‘all marriage, all the time.’ We will get that, and we will achieve gender identity rights. However, if newspapers like ours and organizations like Equality Maryland and the HRC are to have any legitimacy after those goals are achieved we will have to look at a larger picture or choose to leave the game.”

Yes, marriage equality and gender identity protections will come our way at some point. It is possible they can be accomplished as soon as 2012 or it can take a generation to achieve these worthy objectives. Who knows? But even if these goals are realized, there is plenty of unfinished business to justify the existence of LGBT organizations and periodicals.

For one thing, passing marriage equality in Maryland (and that’s assuming there’s a successful effort to thwart a voter referendum) is merely one step in a process. Unless DOMA is repealed or struck down by the Supreme Court, same-sex marriage will not reap the full benefits or portability of heterosexual marriage.

Gender identity anti-discrimination laws are a good thing, of course. Still, with such protections codified in Baltimore City, trans-folk are being harassed, physically attacked or murdered. Baltimore County does not have such protections on the books. But even if it did, do you think that would have prevented the impromptu rage-beating of Chrissy Lee Polis at a Rosedale McDonald’s? But laws are needed nonetheless.

There is plenty of hate still around. All you need to do is read the message boards on any news item that is related to our community. The anti-gay vitriol is intense and widespread coming from all over the U.S. and it is even seeping into the presidential race.

A candidate for the presidency of the U.S. from a major political party, Rick Perry, appears in a campaign video decrying the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ “There’s something wrong with this country when gays can serve openly in the military,” Perry says as he ambles through the rural woods. This is a popular sentiment among the candidates within the Republican Party and among the party faithful as well—at least with the “social conservatives” (read: bigots).

A gay soldier who put his ass on the line in Iraq is booed by audience members when he discloses his sexual orientation in a question at a Republican debate. The candidates, yappy otherwise, were mute. No one on the stage or even the moderators called out the booing (and disrespect).

As Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton so poignantly expressed during her recent U.N. speech in Geneva, “Many LGBT Americans have endured violence and harassment in their own lives, and for some, including many young people, bullying and exclusion are daily experiences. So we, like all nations, have more work to do to protect human rights at home.”

Indeed, if hatred, homophobia and transphobia were non-factors, it would be much easier to implement zero-tolerance anti-bullying measures in our nation’s schools. There is still considerable resistance, and it stems from this bigotry.

The anti-gay messages spewed by government leaders and other sources foster the hate and intolerance that is still pervasive in our country. It legitimizes discrimination, if not outright violence, when jerks hear these epithets.

And that doesn’t include all the religious zealotry that dominates the conversations. Cherry-picked verses in Scripture have always been used to justify discrimination and intolerance since the Bible was ever “published.” But similar verses are ignored when they become inconvenient. How about parents stoning their children to death when they are disrespectful? That doesn’t count, I suppose, but it’s in there.

This anti-gay, anti-trans rhetoric makes it possible for all kinds of discrimination. For example, Americans can be fired in 29 states on the basis of their sexual orientation and in 34 states on the basis of their gender identity.

“Progress comes from changes in laws,” Secretary Clinton continued in her speech. “In many places, including my own country, legal protections have preceded, not followed, broader recognition of rights. Laws have a teaching effect. Laws that discriminate validate other kinds of discrimination. Laws that require equal protections reinforce the moral imperative of equality. And practically speaking, it is often the case that laws must change before fears about change dissipate.”

But for laws to change there must be progress in educating the uneducated on these matters, especially lawmakers. It’s a long road but one we must continue to travel.

There will be a lot of work ahead of us beyond the attainment of marriage equality and gender identity protections in Maryland. Other key legislation, such as the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) must be enacted. The same goes for immigration equality. Firm anti-bullying measures in the nation’s schools must also be put in place.

To repeat Secretary Clinton’s call for action, “we…have more work to do to protect human rights at home.” As such, LGBT organizations and newspapers will continue to be rather busy at least until the needed laws are enacted and the rants on message boards and political ads are reduced to the irrelevancy they deserve.

To do so, we cannot leave the game.

Howard County Passes Gender Identity Bill

2011-12-09T15:59:00.003-05:00

On December 5, Howard County, by a 4-1 vote in the county council, joined Baltimore City and Montgomery County as the only jurisdictions in Maryland to provide anti-discrimination protections based on gender identity and expression. The bill prohibits discrimination in the areas of housing, law enforcement, public accommodations, financing, employment, and health and social services.

County Executive Ken Ulman is expected to sign the measure, and it will take effect 60 days from then. That stroke of a pen will mean that a third of the state’s population will be covered by these protections.

The four council members who voted for the bill were Democrats Mary Kay Sigaty, Jen Terrasa, Calvin Ball (Council Chair) and Courtney Watson. Greg Fox, a Republican from Western Howard County, voted against the measure saying that the federal and state governments should pass a single law that clarifies the definition of public accommodations. The county law, as written, is vague on the definition.

Nonetheless, the council members believed that non-discrimination based on gender identity needed to be codified. “The Council felt strongly that this legislation was important not only to making discrimination based on gender identity illegal in Howard County but also to raise awareness and help bring about protections in other jurisdictions as well,” Councilwoman Courtney Watson told Baltimore OUTloud. “The experiences of a transgender student in our local high school helped reinforce the need to protect the rights of transgender citizens.”

This past summer, representatives from the Columbia/Howard County chapter of PFLAG and Gender Rights Maryland (GRMD) suggested that the council amend the current law to add gender identity and expression to the 15 other protected classes in Howard County. After consultations with GRMD and others, a bill was crafted.

On November 21, nearly 70 people attended a public hearing on the bill that included the testimony of 20 supporters and only 4 opponents. A wide range of LGBT and other progressive organizations as well as parents, relatives and transgender individuals testified on behalf of the bill.

Delegate Liz Bobo, a Democrat from Columbia, provided written testimony to back the measure. “In the 1970’s, Howard County was one of the first in the country to included gays and lesbians in our Human Rights Law. Now it is appropriate for our county to again be in the forefront on this human rights issue,” she included in her statement.

The four opponents apparently did not make a significant impact. Following the hearing, the Democratic council members who had sponsored the bill told Baltimore OUTloud that nothing was offered by the opponents that would change their minds. In fact, the testimony given in support of the bill solidified their positions. “The data demonstrated that ending the discrimination is the right thing to do,” noted Council Chairman Calvin Ball.

It was clear following the hearing that the favorable vote taken on December 5 was a virtual certainty.

Del. Bobo has been an ardent supporter of rights for the LGBT community for four decades. “This bill is needed because when any group of human beings are at risk of discrimination, we are all at risk of discrimination,” she told OUTloud. “This bill regarding gender identity is in keeping with Howard County's distinction of being one of the first counties in our entire nation to include gays and lesbians in our human rights law back in the 70's. I am so grateful to my husband, Lloyd Knowles, for having the courage to sponsor that bill so many years ago.”

She added, “I will be a co-sponsor of the statewide bill regarding gender identity again in the upcoming legislative session and am optimistic that it will pass and become law in the State of Maryland.”

Satisfied with the results in Howard County and anticipating momentum for a statewide bill, Sharon Brackett, Board Chair for Gender Rights Maryland, said in a statement: “Now, after much hard work, we have expanded protections in Howard and done so with a broad coalition of support. As a resident of Howard County I could not be prouder of my Council for taking this issue on. This event will yield great momentum in expanding these same rights throughout the state in 2012.” Gender Rights Maryland is an organization dedicated to end discrimination based on gender identity statewide.

Maryland is expected to take up a similar measure during the 2012 General Assembly. A bill that excluded “public accommodations” fell short in the Senate at the end of the 2011 session but with its passage in the House, it advanced further than ever before. Governor O’Malley pledged support during the upcoming session.

Photo: Council members from left: Mary Kay Sigaty, Greg Fox, Jen Terrasa, Calvin Ball and Courtney Watson

Some Post-Turkey Day Musings

2011-11-29T11:01:00.007-05:00

I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving and survived the Black Friday insanity. As we reflect on our families, friends, ourselves and the world we live in, I want to share some thoughts as we thrust deeper into the holiday season.

The Color Purple. Baltimore Ravens fans have been donning purple in support of their team throughout the football season and especially so following the impressive victory over the San Francisco 49ers Thanksgiving night. Yet purple took on another meaning just a few days before.

Most of the 70 or so folks who attended the hearing before the Howard County Council in support of a bill that would end discrimination based on gender identity and expression in employment, housing and public accommodations were clad in purple to demonstrate unity. Twenty proponents of the bill offered solid and persuasive testimony—much of which came from transgender individuals who related personal experiences with discrimination.

When Council Chairman Calvin Ball, one of four sponsors of the bill, asked those at the hearing to rise if they supported passage of the bill, a sea of purple rose, which made a strong impression on friend and foe alike. It was gratifying to see that. The bill is a near certainty to pass on December 5^th making Howard County the third jurisdiction in Maryland to offer such protections. Now “purple power” needs to be applied in 2012 to get the job done statewide.

Friendly Diamonds. While we continue to revel in the success of the Ravens, Major League Baseball and the Major League Players’ Association has given us some good news as well. They added non-discrimination protections for gay players in the new 5-year bargaining agreement. This was a result of lawyers on both sides agreeing that such protections should be in place.

“In a majority of states in our country, it is still perfectly legal to fire someone just for being gay, and 13 of the 30 Major League teams are located in those states that allow anti-gay firings,” Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work told the Washington Blade. “No player should have to fear harassment or workplace retaliation if he were to publicly come out as gay.”

This development means that a player cannot be terminated or face harassment should he come out as gay. The fear of harassment from teammates has always been a major impediment for a gay baseball (or any professional sport) athlete to come out. It is just a matter of time when we will welcome the first openly gay baseball player, and the reaction will be more positive than negative.

Equality Maryland’s Renaissance. Many people believed that following the disappointing 2011 General Assembly and the ugly finger-pointing that ensued, it was the end of the line for Equality Maryland, the state’s erstwhile leading LGBT civil rights organization. A majority of paid staff had been let go, with the Executive Director either having resigned or was fired depending on who you talk to. And the Chairman of the Board resigned leaving a gaping hole in the hierarchy.

But under the leadership and determination of Lisa Polyak, Patrick Wojahn, Mark Yost, Jr. and other remaining Board members, the organization did not wither on the vine. It paid down debt, put in place a new and expanded Board, and hired a new Executive Director, Carrie Evans, who is determined to restore the confidence of the community.

Although Equality Maryland will not be the sole force to achieve marriage equality and transgender protections in the upcoming legislative session, it will be a key player. Its viability and stability are crucial to pass these key initiatives.

Unfriendly Newt. Another kind of renaissance has taken place in the presidential race. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has risen from the ashes of an earlier flame-out and has surged in the polls to become a serious contender for the Republican nomination. (Does President Obama really have that good fortune?)

In its quest to find an anti-Romney who conservatives rightly mistrust, several wannabes had emerged during the pre-primary season. Now it’s Newt’s turn to fill that void.

While all the GOP candidates are virulently anti-gay, Gingrich actually has a record of opposing rights for LGBT Americans. According to davidmixner.com, Gingrich has been an active and vocal supporter of placing an amendment banning marriage in the United States Constitution. He has called marriage equality an aberration! He supports the lawsuit by Congressional Republicans to defend DOMA. He is even opposed to domestic partnerships in private industry.

He is absolutely against adoption by same sex couples. He is against the passage of ENDA. He has personally called homosexuality a sin and should be treated as such.

Newt Gingrich would be a dangerous president if elected, especially for LGBT people. However, his reluctance until now, to lay the gloves on Mitt (The Switch) Romney will most likely allow the former Massachusetts governor to cruise to the GOP prize.

Toby's Delivers a Joyous 'White Christmas'

2011-11-23T14:22:00.007-05:00

Sometimes nostalgia can be a powerful escape because with troubled times like these, no one could be blamed for harking back to a simpler, genteel era. This escape can be found at Toby’s, the Dinner Theatre of Columbia, with its completely entertaining mounting of Irving Berlin’s White Christmas.

The musical stage production was based on the 1954 movie of the same title that starred Bing Crosby and Danny Kaye as well as Rosemary Clooney and Vera-Ellen. It began as a regional production in San Francisco in 2004 and moved on to several other venues in the U.S. and Canada. The show opened on Broadway in 2008 and closed in 2009. Later that year, a revival was produced and again was short-lived but it garnered two Tony Award nominations for Best Choreography and Best Orchestrations.

The oft-recognized music and straight-forward lyrics were composed by Irving Berlin. The book was penned by David Ives and Paul Blake. White Christmas has been both praised and criticized for its simplicity. But I like simple as long as there is talent, and this production has that.

Taking any musical to the tight stage of Toby’s and in the round no less, is a daunting challenge. But just like so many other musicals in Toby’s long and distinguished history, this production of White Christmas met that bar and then some.

A superb cast directed by David James and Larry Munsey (both played the male leads, Phil Davis and Bob Wallace, respectively) led the audience in a delightful trip down memory lane with so many references to the 1950’s you may think you were in a time machine. Younger members of the audience, including those young cast members, would probably not understand all those allusions and quips from days of yore, but the music and choreography seem timeless and upbeat. It didn’t hurt that the first number was that Christmastime standard “Happy Holiday” that had you humming from the get-go.

The show opens up, however, not in the 1950’s but 1944 where Bob and Phil, then two GI’s, were singing and dancing to cheer up the troops stuck in war-shattered Europe on Christmas Eve. It is here the title song “White Christmas” first appeared in the show.

The next scene takes place 10 years later at the Ed Sullivan Show where the fellas continued what appeared to be a successful song and dance act and reprised “Happy Holiday” and “Let Yourself Go.”

From there the guys—skirt-chasing Phil Davis and his buddy Bob Wallace—pursue Haynes sisters, another singing duo. Judy Haynes played by Julia Lancione and Phil hit it off early on despite Phil’s wandering eyes. Betty Haines (Janine Gulisano-Sunday) and Bob struggle to connect.

They travel to a Vermont lodge owned by the guys’ former Army commander who has fallen on bad luck, General Henry Waverly (Samn Huffer). The gals were on their way to perform in a Christmas show. We’ll leave it there as the familiar 1954-type theme boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back provides one of the key threads in the show’s plot.

Jane C. Boyle, as Martha the lodge’s outspoken manager, is sensational. Blustery, powerful, comedic, Boyle gives the show the right punch. Her rendition of “Let Me Sing and I’m Happy” really hit the mark.

Larry Munsey as Bob was likewise fabulous. He showed off his big, strong voice and great acting chops, which he carries out with flair. When he and the superb dancing chorus performed “Blue Skies” to close out the first act, the audience nearly leapt to its feet. Munsey is a venerable performer and director at Toby’s, and his role as Edna in Hairspray, as an example, was superb. He was also the Costume Designer, and the costumes were magnificent and numerous.

Another Toby’s veteran is David James. The two-time Helen Hayes winner played Phil beautifully with fine singing and dancing performances, and he adroitly threw in his well-timed, clever lines.

Both Janine Gulisano-Sunday and Julia Lancione as the Haynes sisters shined brightly and played off the male leads with precision. Vocally, one couldn’t ask for better.

The remaining actors did a creditable job, and there was excellent chemistry among the company. The dancing chorus or Ensemble hoofed it up skillfully with lots of energy and graceful movement to the tuneful songs. Credit Choreographer Paula Lynn for designing the playbook so effectively allowing the dancers to show off their talents on a tight stage.

Veteran Set Designer David Hopkins also deserves a pat on the back for his work. The cute train car used in the scene where the guys and the sisters were traveling to Vermont stood out.

And I would be remiss if I didn’t mention Music Director Pamela Witt as well as the accomplished three-piece orchestra for bringing to life Berlin’s magical score.

Popular standards, such as “Count Your Blessings Instead of Sheep,” “I Love a Piano” and “How Deep is the Ocean” were wonderful. The Finale had the entire Company singing “White Christmas.” Then as an encore number, they all performed “I’ve Got My Love to Keep Me Warm” as snowflakes drifted down from the ceiling.

This is a special show for a special time of year, and a good one for the entire family. And bring an appetite.

White Christmas runs through January 8 at Toby’s-Columbia. For more information, call (410) 995-1969 – Baltimore area or (410) 730-8311 – Columbia or visit www.tobysdinnertheatre.com

Photo: Kirstine Christiansen

'The Sound of Music' Hits the Right Notes at Olney

2011-11-21T13:24:00.011-05:00

Many musicals provide a plot simply to connect the songs. In The Sound of Music the plot is as integral as the performances to the entertainment value of the show. The inevitability that Austria will fall to Nazi Germany formed the backdrop for the musical, and the improbable love between two disparate individuals was the focus.

The Sound of Music is sure to lift the spirits of theatergoers during this holiday season. The mounting of this classic at the Olney Theatre Center was a beauty to behold—both visually and through its superb score penned by the legendary team of Rodgers and Hammerstein. The book was written by Howard Lindsay and Russel Crouse.

For Oscar Hammerstein II, The Sound of Music represented his final production as he died nine months after the show debuted on Broadway in November 1959 with Mary Martin and Theodore Bikel as the leads. It closed in 1963 after 1,443 performances.

Several revivals both on Broadway and London followed and, of course, the 1965 film based on the musical starring Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer, went on to become a spectacular box office success.

While the musical was based on true events, there were a number of changes made. As Director Mark Waldrop put it, “Biography is not drama, and Lindsay and Crouse took a number of liberties with the truth” to increase the emotional impact, humor and suspense.

The Sound of Music contains a bunch of well-known songs, such as, “My Favorite Things,” “Do-Re-Mi,” “Sixteen Going on Seventeen,” “So Long, Farewell,” “Climb Every Mountain,” “Edelweiss” as well as the title song.

The story is about a former postulant, Maria, performed brilliantly by Jessica Lauren Ball, who has been sent to be the governess of the seven children of Captain Georg von Trapp (George Dvorsky), a widower and former Austro-Hungarian Navy Captain.

He treats his children like military underlings but Maria teaches them to sing and a whole new world opens up to the kids and Maria.

The Captain had intended to marry Baroness Elsa Shraeder (Jena Sokolowski), a wealthy socialite. But differences in the way they see the imminent Anschluss—the annexation by Nazi Germany of Austria—and a growing affection for Maria doom the union.

After being shaken by the real prospect that she and the Captain are falling in love, she runs back to the abbey and listens to the Mother Abbess (Channez McQuay). She then returns to the von Trapps’ house to determine if there is indeed love between the Captain and her. They eventually marry.

Max Detwiler (Bobby Smith), a mutual friend of the Baroness and the Captain whom the kids refer to as Uncle Max is a pushy music promoter. He convinces the Captain that the kids should perform at the upcoming Salzburg Music Festival.

Meanwhile the Captain is under intense pressure to accept a commission in the Third Reich’s Navy, who as an Austrian, is loathe doing. Leaving him no choice, the Captain decides to escape from Austria and pulls it off following the children’s performance at the festival, which took place with a huge Nazi banner behind them.

Mark Waldrop skillfully directed a superbly talented and charismatic cast. All the parts and pieces moved in perfect harmony. The music, so well integrated in the show’s dramatic plot, was performed splendidly.

As Maria, Jessica Lauren Ball, who played Sandy in Olney’s production of Grease this past summer, was a standout who would triumph in this role anywhere. Ball brightened the stage with her shiny presence and her glorious singing voice. She delightfully conveyed her empathy and love for the children.

George Dvorsky, a Broadway veteran, was excellent as Captain von Trapp. He also had great stage presence, sang effectively and portrayed his character with verve.

The sisters all sang like bells—beautiful, on pitch, and resounding. The supporting actors were strong with notable performances from Bobby Smith (Uncle Max) and an acrobatic Danny Yoerges who played Rolf, the young love interest for the eldest von Trapp daughter, Liesl (Maggie Donavan). Yoerges had previously demonstrated his strong acting skills as the lead in Olney’s Farragut North.

And the children—all of them—simply tugged at the heartstrings. They were fantastic.

Scenic Designer James Fouchard should be saluted because the scenery was simply exquisite, and the set changes (13 different scenes in Act I alone) were executed flawlessly and seamlessly. Also, kudos to Costume Coordinators Jeanne Bland and Seth Gilbert and Musical Director Christopher Youstra.

This is a must-see family show. A nine year-old boy, seated in front of me and attending his first show, was celebrating his birthday with his grandmother. What a way to introduce him to quality theatre!

The Sound of Music runs through January 22 at Olney’s Mainstage Theatre, 2001 Olney-Sandy Spring Road, Olney, MD 20832. For more information, call 301-924-3400 or visit olneytheatre.org.

Photo: Sonie Matthew

Debating Debates

2011-11-13T15:54:00.004-05:00

So much has been made of Rick Perry’s flub during the Republican presidential debate on November 9 that most pundits have written off his candidacy, and the public seems to as well according to latest polling data. But is it really fair to judge Perry or anyone else based on performance during a debate?

Since John F. Kennedy was determined by the media and pundits to have won the first-ever televised debate against Richard M. Nixon in 1960 (mostly on appearance rather than substance), the value of televised debates not only for presidential candidates but also for gubernatorial and Congressional candidates has been considered critical in our political culture over the past half century.

For the respective campaigns, debates can be a risky venture. It could be like walking through a political minefield in the dark. A Perry-like moment could doom a candidacy. Yet debates offer a candidate who may or may not be cash-strapped an opportunity to get his or her message out on the cheap; it could save on expensive ad buys especially in large media markets.

It also provides an opportunity to land that zinger that political campaigns dream of whereby an opponent could be flattened with one well-constructed and well-timed sound bite. But these zingers, have had mixed results and do not necessarily predict an outcome of an election.

Yes, Ronald Reagan during the 1980 New Hampshire primary boosted his campaign with his well-received “I am paying for this microphone, Mr. Green,” line in a Nashua debate which basically pushed George H.W. Bush into also-ran status.

And Mr. Reagan bounced off from a stumbling debate performance in 1984 against Walter F. Mondale when he floored the current vice-president in the next round with “I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience.” He won both elections decisively.

But arguably the most devastating zinger was landed by vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen against his opponent Senator Dan Quayle in 1988. “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy” stung like a swarm of hornets. Nonetheless, the ticket of Dukakis-Bentsen only managed to win 10 states and the District of Columbia come November.

Since then, such zingers have been few and far between. Most candidates prepare for debates like it was an oral quiz and spew out information which may or may not be factual. The attempted zinger, when perceived as rehearsed, comes off phony.

Debates have been so integrated into elections that competing campaigns most often debate each other on format, positioning, time requirements, etc. because each side wants to present themselves in the most favorable light.

The current crop of Republican candidates poised to challenge Barack Obama will be engaging in such debates ad nauseum through the primary season. Everything is relative; a mediocre performance can be considered skillful when compared to the rest of the field.

Given the emphasis on televised debates, should debating skills be essential to governing? Is it that important for a president to be a proficient debater?

In a practical sense, a president rarely needs to demonstrate debating skills once elected. Being a knock-out debater is not a key quality in being the leader of the free world. Most “debates” occur internally with staff, out of the public view, on policy matters or strategy. In these situations it would be more important for staff to debate effectively than it would be for the president. The president is a listener and a facilitator during these sessions, not a debater.

When meeting with adversaries, whether it be foreign leaders, reluctant allies or congressional opponents, the president rarely engages in debates. Instead, negotiating skills are far more useful and productive.

Like it or not, we are in an era that televised debates are the key test for candidates. True, they allow candidates to distinguish themselves from their opponent(s) on issues in a short amount of time. And it affords an opportunity to measure how a candidate commands facts under pressure. In that sense, it has value.

But governing requires other skills, such as judgment, decision-making, leadership and communication. That’s what voters should be evaluating as well as a candidate’s positions on issues, not how he or she answers a question in 30 seconds.

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

Who Doesn't Want to be a Gay Icon?

2011-11-13T01:56:00.004-05:00

There are various ways to write a dissertation for a Masters in Liberal Arts at Johns Hopkins University. But Sarah Lynn Taylor chose to pen a musical, and drawing on her vocal gifts, proceeded to perform in I Want To Be A Gay Icon.

Taylor led the audience through a journey that was part autobiographical and part gay history with songs that had been associated with several gay icons over the years. Using narration and song she argues that being a gay icon takes more than being a star performer but one also needs to be an activist, which she unabashedly claims that she is.

In its second year, Iron Crow Theatre, a Baltimore company that has produced several unconventional shows and focuses on Queer/LGBT issues, produced Taylor’s I Want To Be A Gay Icon in cooperation with Johns Hopkins University.

The show was limited to three days (November 10-12) at the Baltimore Theatre Project and did not charge admission because purchasing the rights to the songs would have been prohibitive if it ran as a for-profit production. Instead, the audience was requested to donate funds to cover expenses.

Sarah Lynn Taylor is no stranger to Iron Crow having appeared in Durang’s Shorts and Hedwick and the Angry Inch. Director of Icon Joseph Ritsch is also a member of the Iron Crow company and has performed in Hedwick, For Whom The Southern Belle Tolls and will appear in 2012 production of The Soldier Dreams—next on tap for Iron Crow.

Taylor, a magna cum laude graduate of Towson University, has significant local theatre, TV and radio experience. Her ease in front of an audience was quite evident as she commanded the stage, which she shared with three fine back-up singers and accessories to lighter moments during the show—the Iconettes (Ines Nassara, Amanda Rife and Katie O’Solomon).

In addition, four excellent on-stage musicians—The Gay Icon Band (Sam Palmer, Paul Huesman, Corey Zook and musical director/guitarist Nick Jewett)—effectively complimented Taylor’s vocals.

The concept of integrating music, biography and history was an ambitious undertaking. Generally there was a good flow but at times it seemed random and out of sequence. Landmarks in gay history, such as the Stonewall uprising, the AIDS epidemic, the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental disorders by the American Psychiatric Association and Harvey Milk’s passion were highlighted, with the songs representing gay icons of the era added a nostalgic connection to the events.

During the Stonewall segment, instead of singing “Cabaret”—a song from the musical that had been playing on Broadway at the time—I thought Judy Garland’s “Get Happy,” which Taylor did sing a bit later, should have performed at that point since Garland had died a few days before the Stonewall events. To her credit, Taylor noted the Stonewall patrons were already mourning over Garland’s death that may have shortened the fuse when the police raided.

The music and its icons were adored by the gay and lesbian community, but how many of them were activists for the cause? From Taylor’s perspective, most. She singled out Judy Garland, Liza Minnelli, Bette Midler, Elizabeth Taylor, Cher, k.d. lang and Melissa Etheridge as those superstar entertainers beloved by the gay and lesbian community but also active in LGBT rights—to whom Taylor aspired.

Taylor noted that Madonna should be included among those icons but she couldn’t afford to acquire the licensing for her music, and she stated Lady Gaga, whom she greatly admires, didn’t receive her request.

Other gay icons who may not fit Taylor’s definition completely or because of a lack of time were not mentioned. Among them were Gloria Gaynor, Diana Ross, Barbra Streisand, Carol Channing, Cyndi Lauper, and Donna Summer before she went anti-gay Christian on us. And you can add comediennes Kate Clinton, Margaret Cho, Joan Rivers and Kathy Griffin to the list.

Unquestionably, Sarah Lynn Taylor’s musical performance was the show’s strength. Although her narrative about history, her upbringing, and family was passionate, earnest and very well-delivered, the audience was eagerly waiting for the next number. In an important segment Taylor became serious when she reminded the audience that HIV/AIDS was prevalent in Baltimore and urged people to get tested and engage in safe sex practices.

Taylor showcased her versatility in performing both ballads and high tempo songs with flair and emotion. “Constant Craving,” “Cabaret,” “If I Could Turn Back Time” and “I’m The Only One” were delivered especially well. Her rendition of “The Way We Were” was somewhat disappointing, and with “New York, New York,” Taylor took some liberties with the lyrics.

Overall, this was an enjoyable production and was well received by the audience. Sarah Lynn Taylor displayed outstanding vocal skills, energy and enthusiasm and a good sense of LGBT history which can never be understated.

Can Taylor be an actual gay icon? She has the potential, and at the very least, I’m sure she nailed her dissertation.

What a Difference a Year Makes!

2011-11-13T01:48:00.004-05:00

Last November 20, Baltimore was among the many cities that participated in the 12^th Annual International Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR). The proceedings took place mainly at the First Unitarian Church of Baltimore on Franklin and Charles Streets although there were several other related events around town.

This happened only a year ago, yet it seems like eons considering what has transpired since. In 2010, a few dozen trans-activists, supporters and city officials attended TDOR. There were a number of heartfelt speeches given, workshops on key topics, town hall-style meetings, enjoyable musical selections, and a bounty of food. It was followed by a moving candlelight vigil outside the church whereby there was a reading of the names and brief biographies of transgender persons or those perceived to be transgender who had died as a result of hate and prejudice.

Much of the discussion at TDOR centered on violence that target transgender individuals, homelessness, police harassment, discrimination, the effects of HIV/AIDS on the transgender community and other concerns. I recall the passion of Sandy Rawls, Kevin Clemons, Donna Plamondon, Jean-Michel Brevelle, Bill Palmer and others who dedicated themselves to this moving experience as well as the extraordinary concert given by Tona Brown later that evening.

TDOR 2010 was mostly a reflective, emotional experience and an opportunity to hold a conversation on important issues. There had been few victories to tout. Most notably in November 2002, Baltimore became the first jurisdiction in Maryland to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit practices based on gender identity or expression.

There is no statewide statute offering similar protections, and such attempts have been unsuccessful since 2007 and continued through the 2011 General Assembly in Annapolis. Nonetheless, a bill introduced during the 2011 session to protect Marylanders from discrimination in housing and employment based on gender identity advanced further than ever before.

The decision to exclude “public accommodations” in the bill was a tactical political decision, which was aimed at increasing the odds of passage. It fell short anyway, and the controversy surrounding the language of the bill, HB 235, sharply divided the transgender community and its supporters.

Upon completion of the 2011 session, the prevailing feeling was that efforts to ensure transgender rights in Maryland will have to be amped up. Following the near collapse of Equality Maryland, a new group, Gender Rights Maryland, was formed to push for new legislation in 2012.

On April 18, 2010, a seminal event—horrific to be sure—took place that probably changed the dynamics and altered the trajectory for achieving rights for transgender individuals. Chrissy Lee Polis, a 22 year-old trans-woman, was an unwitting hero in the cause. She was caught on video being pummeled for what seemed like an eternity by two young women—one a 14 year-old—in a Rosedale McDonalds.

As the shocking video went viral, emphasis was dramatically placed on the need for protections for transgender individuals and garnered the attention of elected officials. Governor Martin O’Malley promised to work with lawmakers to achieve those protections based on gender identity.

A community vigil and rally was quickly organized and took place a week later outside the McDonalds. It drew over a hundred activists from the LGBT community, allies and media. And the perpetrators of the assault were brought to justice with the adult, Teonna Monae Brown, sentenced to five years in prison.

With the wind at its back, the transgender community should finally see a much-deserved legislative victory in the form of a comprehensive bill in 2012. No one can predict the outcome, but I’m one who believes the governor will sign the measure into law, and it would withstand a possible petition to referendum.

Unlike the issue of same-sex marriage that will also take place next session, transgender rights do not bring to the debate much in the way of religious dogma. There are no organized groups, to my knowledge, that have been formed to fight the end of discrimination against a marginalized segment of society.

In Howard County, a sweeping bill has been recently introduced in the county council by four of the five council members. Therefore, it will be interesting to see what, if any, opposition forms and could be a gauge as to what to expect in Annapolis next year.

So as we approach the 13^th Annual Transgender Day of Remembrance, there is a renewed hope that wasn’t evident last year that important progress will be forthcoming. But we will not forget those victims that paved the way for this progress.

www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com.

La Cage: The Best of Times is Now

2011-11-02T15:15:00.006-04:00

It’s a pity that La Cage aux Folles is playing in Baltimore for only a week. The touring production of the multiple Tony® Award-winning musical currently mounted at the Hippodrome Theatre is a winner in every aspect, be it performing, staging, costumes, scenic design, music and direction.

La Cage aux Folles made Tony® Award history by being the first show ever to win the coveted prize three times for best production. La Cage aux Folles is already legendary in theatre yore; the superb composer Jerry Herman (Mame, Hello Dolly!), Harvey Fierstein (Torch Song Trilogy) who wrote the book and director Arthur Laurents collaborated in a fun-filled musical comedy based on the 1973 play La Cage aux Folles by Jean Poiret.

La Cage aux Folles opened on Broadway in 1983 and had spawned two hit revivals. Earlier two successful French films with the same title had been adapted from the play and a third one premiered in 1985. In 1996 the American film The Birdcage, based on the French movie, became a box office smash.

While the production for the tour’s version has been scaled down some and a few tweaks have taken place, the core plot is the same as the original. Georges, played by venerable performer and headliner George Hamilton, owns a glitzy, drag nightclub in Saint-Tropez, and his gay partner, Albin, played by Christopher Sieber, moonlights as a glamorous drag diva, Zaza.

Georges’ 24 year-old son Jean-Michel (Billy Harrigan Tigue) shocks both he and Albin by announcing that he is engaged to (gasp!) a woman—the daughter of the head of the conservative Tradition, Family and Morality Party whose goal is to close down the local drag clubs. Jean-Michel wants his fiancée’s parents to meet Georges as well as his birth mother. But the flamboyant Albin/Zaza must not be seen for at least that one night.

What ensues is a hilarious, outrageous romp, testing family bonds amidst the battle between conservative family values and genuine young love. One of the highlights was the frenetic “what are the boys doing on the plate?” sequence.

The campy, naughty drag performances by the nimble and fun-loving Les Cagelles ensemble and their interaction with the actual audience, especially in the first act, were top-notch.

Tony® Award-winning Director Terry Johnson, who helmed much of his work in London’s West End, was masterful in bringing the production to the high level it achieved.

George Hamilton, who had some Broadway musical background when he appeared in Chicago, is best known for his work in film and television (The Man Who Loved Cat Dancing, Love at First Bite, Doc Hollywood, Dynasty). While he does not possess strong vocal chops, his singing was serviceable. “Song on the Sand” was particularly performed well.

Drawing on a half-century of experience, the fit-as-a-fiddle, dashing Hamilton had the timing and instincts down pat. And while at times he appeared a little stiff in his movements and dialogue, he exuded a warm charm and played beautifully opposite Christopher Sieber. The chemistry between Hamilton’s Georges and Sieber’s Albin/Zaza is what makes the show work.

Tony® Award nominee Sieber’s performance was superb. No stranger to La Cage, he had played the role of Georges opposite Harvey Fierstein on Broadway. He also received plaudits for Spamalot, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Beauty and the Beast among others.

True, Sieber’s numbers were showier than others in the score, but he delivered big time. “A Little More Mascara” was performed very well. And he brought the house down with his scintillating rendition of the gay anthem “I Am What I Am.”

The supporting cast also contributed mightily to the show’s quality. Jeigh Madjus effectively played the over-the-top, flamboyant housemaid, Jacob. Billy Harrigan Tigue as Jean-Michel was excellent as were his duets with Hamilton (“With Anne on My Arm” and “Look Over There”).

Allison Blair McDowell played Anne, Jean-Michel’s somewhat conflicted fiancée. She did a creditable job defending her love for her fiancée while acknowledging her love for her family. Her father, the conservative morals politico M. Dindon, was played wonderfully by Bernard Burak Sheredy.

Gay Marshall was excellent portraying the mischievous restaurant owner Jacqueline where the unmasking of Albin’s true identity took place. The remainder of the cast performed admirably as well.

Tim Shortall’s scenic design made efficient use of the stage, and the sets transformed flawlessly. Matthew Wright’s costumes were colorful and imaginative. Jonathan Deans sound design was expertly executed and the performers were well mic’d.

And the musical production team of Todd Ellison, John Miller, Joey Chancey, Jason Carr and Lynne Page saw to it that Jerry Herman’s score was delivered perfectly by an outstanding orchestra and cast. As the finale pointed out, “The Best of Times” is now.

La Cage aux Folles runs through November 6 at the Hippodrome Theatre. Matinees are performed on both Saturday and Sunday. Tickets are available at the Box Office or through Ticketmaster. Visit the website for more information.

Photo by Paul Kolnick

Getting Their Ducks in a Row

2011-10-31T16:36:00.005-04:00

The recent autumn snow was a stark reminder that the 2012 General Assembly that begins in January is not far off. With it comes the hope of passing a marriage equality bill and a comprehensive gender identity non-discrimination measure. Both fell short in the 2011 session but had advanced further than any time before.

A new dimension has since been added to Maryland’s upcoming battle for marriage equality. The revised redistricting plan, drawn up by state leaders and signed by Governor O’Malley, if not overturned in court, puts the 6^th Congressional District in play for Democrats for the first time since Beverly Byron last held the post in 1993. This tilt was aided by adding Democratic-rich D.C. suburbs to the district that was once confined to Western Maryland.

The 10-term incumbent Republican Roscoe Bartlett, 85, will be facing a formidable challenge from, among others, the lead sponsor of the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, State Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola (D-Montgomery). Though he will be running in a district that still contains many conservatives, Sen. Garagiola will not shy away from his strong advocacy for marriage equality.

“If someone asks me a question out in Allegany County about same-sex marriage, I’m going to talk about it and explain my reasoning for it,” Sen. Garagiola told the Baltimore Sun. “Hopefully, those who are like-minded will be appreciative of it, and those who aren’t will at least understand my reasoning for it.”

Accordingly, marriage equality will be a hot button issue in 2012—not only in this congressional contest but it is also likely to find its way on the ballot should the bill be passed and signed into law during the upcoming session. A significant pushback is expected from a variety of religious and secular groups to thwart the legislation, and if that effort is unsuccessful, a petition to referendum is a virtual certainty. Marriage equality advocates must be ready to counterpunch in what could be the big election story of 2012 besides the presidential and congressional races.

Following the financial and leadership implosion by Equality Maryland—the heretofore principal LGBT rights organization in the state—a new group, Marylanders for Marriage Equality, was launched this past July to lead the effort to advance a marriage equality bill. MME is comprised of a coalition of progressive statewide and national organizations that should help raise money and muster volunteers to fight the battle.

The coalition includes the NAACP-Baltimore Chapter, SEIU, ACLU-Maryland, Progressive Maryland, Equality Maryland, Human Rights Campaign, National Black Justice Coalition, Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Family Equality Council, Catholics for Equality, Maryland Faith for Equality, PFLAG and Maryland NOW.

Equality Maryland, which is a key component of the coalition, has begun a turnaround. “From a structural standpoint, Equality Maryland is making steady, stepwise progress on the short-term strategic plan that we developed earlier this summer,” said Lisa Polyak, the acting chair of the Equality Maryland, Inc. Board of Directors. “We solidified our financial position by eliminating debt and improving our development efforts. We seated 16 new members to our Equality Maryland Foundation (C3) and Equality Maryland, Inc. (C4), and we are now in the process of screening suitable candidates for the job of Executive Director.”

She added that a significant Equality Maryland event will take place in Baltimore before the end of the year, which will be “headlined by more Maryland champions for LGBT equality.”

For its part, the umbrella organization, Marylanders of Marriage Equality, is also getting its ducks in a row. Similar to New York’s successful efforts in achieving marriage for same-sex couples, MME has so far garnered two local celebrities to advocate in videos for the cause: Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo and Baltimore native Oscar winner Mo’Nique.

"We are so grateful Baltimore native Mo'Nique is speaking out on behalf of all Maryland families," said Elbridge James of Progressive Maryland. "People from all walks of life, including gay and lesbian couples, want their children to live in a loving, stable, committed home and be protected under the law."

The video campaign is designed to raise the profile of the diverse support for civil marriage equality in advance of the 2012 legislative session. Governor O'Malley kicked off the effort last month.

MME is developing additional strategies to get the message across. “The coalition has been ramping up our grassroots efforts in recent weeks, including a Lobby Day in Annapolis, regular phone banks, which enable constituents to call their legislators, letter-writing campaigns, and using social media an as organizing tool,” said Sultan Shakir, the campaign manager for MME.”

The Lobby Day event, which occurred during the special session that produced the redistricting plan, was a targeted effort and did not include a public rally on this occasion. The coalition mobilized people of faith, parents and LGBT people to speak with their respective lawmakers about supporting civil marriage equality.

“The active participation of pro-equality supporters is vital to getting this bill over the finish line. We would encourage LGBT people to ask their moms and dads, friends and co-workers to get involved in this campaign,” said Shakir.

It’s going to require legions of volunteers and significant fundraising to realize success in the General Assembly and in the potential referendum battle. Marylanders for Marriage Equality’s coalition partners are positioning themselves to win on behalf of the LGBT community by getting their ducks in a row now.

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

Photo: Phone banking at the GLCCB

Courtesy of the GLCCB

Street Smarts

2011-10-19T23:46:00.004-04:00

It may have been game 4 of the World Series between the Orioles and Mets at Shea Stadium, but on Wednesday, October 15, 1969 in New York City there was a much more significant occurrence going on. It was Moratorium Day whereby anti-Vietnam War protesters took to the streets of New York and around the country in an effort to persuade our government to end the war. These historic events took place on 300 college campuses with marches, rallies and prayer vigils nationwide. In all, 2 million participated.

It was my first such demonstration, and I recall us singing the Youngbloods’ “Get Together” while we chanted and listened to speeches at the rally I attended. This was something I never thought I’d do, but the realization that the Vietnam War needed to stop motivated me. Having tasted the experience of a protest demonstration as a young man, I participated in several gay rights marches in Washington, D.C. in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Those memories were summoned back to me in a flash when I noticed how the Occupy Wall Street demonstration, which began somewhat quietly on September 17 in lower Manhattan, spread like wildfire across the country, from Boston to Anchorage, including Baltimore, to eventually become a worldwide phenomenon.

Indeed, on October 15—the 42^nd anniversary of the Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam—this newest entry in the protest movement officially went global with over 950 cities spanning 82 countries and hundreds of thousands of people involved. The intention was to be non-violent but, alas, there were reports that violence and destruction erupted in some locales.

This country has seen a plethora of marches and demonstrations for social, economic and political justice during the course of its history. In the modern era we had numerous (and at times bloody) civil rights marches, demonstrations, sit-ins and rallies. There was a clear objective: end discrimination, segregation and disenfranchisement based on race. Through the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, the goals were largely met.

We had seen demonstrations and sit-ins on college campuses particularly in the mid 1960’s to early 1970’s. Most of them were tied to the Vietnam War protests and the individual college’s policy of allowing the ROTC to recruit students on campus. These as well as the general anti-draft, anti-Vietnam War protests ended when the war ended. Again, there was a specific goal that had a clear remedy.

Gay rights marches also sought specific objectives that ranged from equality in the workplace to ending discrimination in the military. With the stroke of pens at the local, state and federal levels, while still incomplete, many goals have been achieved.

The Occupy movement is quite dissimilar from these other examples. Not only are the participants railing against government dysfunction and the inequities it spews, they are also fired up against corporate America and its associated behavior and influence. As such, there is a broad mix of grievances stemming from individuals representing myriad backgrounds and viewpoints.

While most of these gripes are economic-related, they have been boiled down by many Occupy participants and the media to these: corporate greed and income disparities (one percent of the population controlling most of the wealth).

Here’s where it gets complicated. Unlike those other aforementioned protests, there is no single outcome that will alleviate their concerns. Greed is a human trait, similar to hate, that cannot be legislated away. Income or wealth re-distribution likewise cannot be corrected simply; the rich will certainly not part with their money voluntarily.

What needs to be done, what would be smart, is for the Occupy movement in the U.S. to follow the model of the right wing’s protest counterpart, the Tea Party, and delve into electoral politics whereby these complaints could be effectively addressed by a government that’s sympathetic to its causes.

While I believe the Tea Party’s vast success will be short-lived, mainly because its ideology runs counter to mainstream thinking as well as its deliberate strangulation of government, the movement already had an oversized impact. They sought and backed like-minded candidates using the economic downturn, health care reform, an anti-Obama, anti-big government and anti-debt mindset as catalysts and succeeded spectacularly in taking over the House of Representatives in the 2010 elections.

Though the Occupy movement consists of a loose array of political allegiances and goals, the preponderance of the ideas are left-leaning and are opposed to the inequities promulgated by Republicans. The Occupy movement needs to harness its own good energy and do more than protest.

I realize many, if not most, of the Occupiers are turned off by both major parties. But these folks would be wise to develop a political strategy with support from other progressives and bring in national and local Democrat organizations that can help with logistical support, fundraising and targeting opponents.

To be fair, Democrats have had a role in creating some of the conditions that the Occupy participants are protesting. But overwhelmingly the fault lies with the Republicans for advancing tax breaks for the wealthy, opposing regulation of Wall Street and big banks, and allowing corporations to escape paying their fair share of taxes. The Tea Party-controlled GOP is also responsible, strictly for political purposes, for preventing President Obama from implementing a jobs bill to help get some of the unemployed back to work.

Protesting is fine but there must be a mechanism to realize goals. Politicization would be the key strategy to give the movement its best chance at righting the wrongs. As John F. Kennedy said, “Efforts and courage are not enough without purpose and direction.”

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

Spotlighters Serves Up 'Tea and Sympathy'

2011-10-12T14:05:00.010-04:00

Baltimore’s Audrey Herman Spotlighters Theatre kicked off its 50^th season with a well-staged mounting of the Robert Anderson classic Tea and Sympathy. Ms. Herman, the person for whom the theater is named, appeared as one of the play’s principal characters, Laura Reynolds, at the Spotlighters back in 1968.

Tea and Sympathy opened on Broadway at the Ethel Barrymore Theatre on September 30, 1953 and ran successfully for 712 performances under the direction of Elia Kazan. In 1956 it was made into a movie that was directed by Vincent Minelli.

Over a half century later, Director Fuzz Roark does a splendid job of capturing Anderson’s pioneering message through the performances of the excellent cast in the Spotlighters’ production.

Set in a 1953 New England boys’ boarding school, the play’s theme, applicable today, is school bullying, especially if a student is perceived to be gay with the key word being “perceived.” Hardly any gay student would dare to come out in such an environment, particularly during a point in time when homophobia was prevalent.

In Tea and Sympathy, the student is Tom Lee, played earnestly and passionately by Justin Johnson. Rumors about Tom’s sexuality are rampant because he is a sensitive person and eschews the macho-jock ethos that dominates the students and the male faculty members.

Instead, Tom wears his hair long, enjoys music and drama and was readying to play a female role in an upcoming school play. His detractors have judged him to be a “fairy” based on this stereotype as well as by his mannerisms and walk.

Fueling and perhaps validating the suspicion, Tom was spotted swimming naked at the dunes with another teacher, David Harris (Jose Teneza). Tom credibly and strongly denied any wrongdoing. “Nothing HAPPENED!” he implores. The gossip spreads wildly throughout the school, affecting Tom. The audience was left wondering why he was with Mr. Harris under those circumstances in the first place.

Isolated from his peers and faculty members, Tom’s only source of comfort is the wife of a teacher, Laura Reynolds, played expertly by Karia Ferry. Bucking the advice repeated by the fun-loving headmaster’s wife (Lisa Libowitz) that "you have to be an interested bystander...all you're supposed to do is every once in a while give the boys a little tea and sympathy," Laura immerses herself in Tom’s plight, which becomes the emotional center of the play.

Skeptical about the rumors, she rebukes her domineering and hyper-masculine husband Bill (Todd Krickler) who is firmly a passenger on the Tom-is-a-fairy bandwagon.

Laura had once married an 18 year-old who was killed in World War II in an attempt to demonstrate his courage and burnish his manliness. Accordingly, she feels the connection to the embattled Tom, who, himself, is just shy of turning 18.

At the same time, her current marriage to Bill is deteriorating, and she questions Bill’s own masculinity because of his over-the-top machismo that leads to his assuming the worst in Tom. Laura asks, “Did it ever occur to you that you persecute in Tom, the thing you fear in yourself?”

Tom does not receive comfort from his gruff father, Herbert Lee (Bob Ahrens). Hearing the rumors, too, and discovering the gown Tom was to wear in the play, the elder Lee orders Tom to abandon his plans to perform.

Tom is constantly being taunted and bullied by three fellow housemates. Shawn Naar, Kevin D. Baker and Dennis Binseel who plays Tom’s roommate Al, inject considerable energy into the play. Al, however, is conflicted between going along with his peers and his slightly more tolerant nature coupled with his loyalty to Tom. Binseel deftly conveys this welcome sensitivity and helps Tom develop a “manlier” walk as a way to mitigate the taunting.

Being sexually innocent, Tom withdraws and becomes confused as to what his sexual orientation really is. This leads to an escapade with a local girl that doesn’t go well, resulting in a potential expulsion from the school. At no time during the course of the play did Tom ever admit to being gay.

Laura continued to pull away from Bill and had decided to leave him. At the same time she takes even more of an interest in Tom. In an attempt to make Tom feel like a man, Laura discreetly offers herself at play’s end. As she prepares herself for the ultimate good deed she tells Tom, “Years from now—when you talk about this—and you will—be kind.”

Tea and Sympathy was one of the first American plays to address homosexuality and its resulting prejudice. The core message is the prejudice, not Tom’s actual sexual orientation, which remains unknown.

This production benefitted from wonderful acting performances with Karina Ferry, Justin Johnson and Dennis Binseel and Todd Krickler heading the list. The other cast members performed quite admirably as well.

As with other productions of Tea and Sympathy, a split set designed by Roark for this production is used: one depicting the Reynolds’ living room where students can come downstairs and cavort with the housemasters and the other set in the stage’s corner representing Tom’s bedroom symbolizing his isolation. The action alternates between the two.

Period furnishings in both Reynolds’ study and Tom’s dorm room were authentic, as was the mood music from 1950’s records featuring such artists as, Debbie Reynolds, Patti Page, Frankie Lyman and Peggy Lee.

All in all, this play is highly recommended for its skilled production and prevailing message, which has transcended over a half century.

Tea and Sympathy is being performed at the Spotlighters Theatre, 817 St. Paul St., Baltimore and runs through November 6. Tickets are $20 for Adults, $18 for Seniors and $16 for Students. They can be purchased online .

Photo: L-R: Tom (Justin Johnson, Al (Dennis Binseel), Ralph (Shawn Naar)

Credit: Ken Stanek

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

My Question Used on MSNBC's 'Last Word' with Lawrence O'Donnell

2011-10-07T00:02:00.003-04:00

My Tweet to Lawrence O'Donnell's Last Word on MSNBC, October 6. Question posed to Herman Cain who responded "...it was a matter of opinion."

Why Obama Can Sleep at Night

2011-10-05T11:20:00.003-04:00

As President Barack Obama left the podium on October 1 to a standing ovation at the 15^th annual Human Rights Campaign dinner where he was the keynote speaker, his reminders of his accomplishments on LGBT issues during his first term were still resonating among the crowd of 3,000. The repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ his call for the end of the Defense of Marriage Act, the passage of a comprehensive Hate Crimes bill, non discrimination in hospitals, lifting the HIV travel ban, and a continued focus on bullying head the list.

It was also a stark reminder that this progress for LGBT Americans may not continue after the 2012 elections. “I don’t have to tell you, there are those who don't want to just stand in our way but want to turn the clock back; who want to return to the days when gay people couldn’t serve their country openly,” the president warned.

Fresh off eight years of failures of the Bush administration, Obama burst onto the electoral scene with the mantra of “hope and change” as well as his opposition to the war in Iraq. He steamrolled over the favored and more experienced Hillary Clinton to win the nomination. And then Obama, as we know, handily defeated a one-time decent independent-minded Senator John McCain who, sadly, veered sharply to the right in the general election.

Obama—African-American, inexperienced and liberal—was seen by the electorate as the anti-Bush and one who can lead the country from the economic morass the previous administration left as a legacy.

But things did not work out well for the new president. He made health care reform the centerpiece of his legislative agenda early on and galvanized a relatively small, noisy bunch of folks who despised Obama from the outset to lead an unsuccessful nationwide crusade against the proposed reforms. This group, who never understood the rudiments of the complex legislation, simply opposed it and protested vehemently at town halls, on the airwaves and on the blogosphere.

The protests gave rise to the “Tea Party” movement that consisted mainly of far right, debt-obsessed, anti-government, white Republicans, who charge that Obama is a big-spending socialist, and they pledged to “take the country back.” With the unemployment rate excessively high and a slowing economy that did not respond effectively to the stimulus that Obama and Congress implemented, the Tea Party faction gained in numbers and strength and wound up shaking up Congress in the 2010 elections.

As the calendar turned to the 2012 election cycle, Obama is considered very vulnerable, especially with an unemployment rate hovering at 9 percent, and forecasters do not see an appreciable drop by next November. His poll numbers have been tanking steadily—even after the debt ceiling debacle, which was largely blamed on intransigent House Republicans beholden to Tea Party members.

Recent history points to incumbents who failed in a bid for a second term because of poor economic conditions. Jimmy Carter and Bush 41 are good examples. But with the relentless vitriol leveled at Obama from the 2008 campaign to the present fueled by 24-hour news cycles, unaccountable blogs and social media, the economy’s woes became magnified—and personal.

There are 13 months until the general election and it appears that there will be insufficient time to right the economy especially because it would not serve the GOP’s political interests to cooperate with the president on job plans and other measures to get people back to work.

So with these toxic conditions, poor poll numbers, and an erosion of the base, how can Obama sleep at night with these seemingly insurmountable odds? The answer: he can because he will have a Republican opponent to face off against.

Many, if not most, political pundits view the current GOP field as weak. Moreover, polls clearly show a much worse approval rating for Republicans than the president. As a result, Obama’s goal should be to make the 2012 election a choice and not a referendum—although he had amassed an impressive list of legislative and foreign policy accomplishments to tout.

Governor Rick Perry and Mitt Romney are the so-called front runners at this juncture. Romney is disliked by the Tea Party crowd largely because they doubt his conservative chops. Gaffe-prone Perry lacks the confidence of GOP establishment and Wall Street types.

A new Quinnipiac poll in Pennsylvania shows that just 43% approve of Obama’s job, while 51% say he doesn’t deserve a second term. However, in head-to-head match-ups, he leads Romney (45%-43%) and Perry (46%-40%). And a new Quinnipiac poll in Ohio finds similar numbers for Obama in the Buckeye State: just 42% approve of his job, and 51% say he doesn’t deserve re-election. In head-to-heads in Ohio, Obama leads Perry (44%-41%) and Romney (44%-42%).

The results in these important states show that while Obama has been beaten down and the economy stinks, his opponent is perceived as worse. This is critical because the “independent” vote will determine the election, and they reject extremes. Helping Obama’s cause are the outrageous reactions from Republican audience members during their debates including the horrific booing of a gay soldier in Iraq.

But what is even more essential is Obama’s ability to bring back and fire up his base. His speech at HRC is a good first step.

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

The Verdict is in on 'Witness For The Prosecution'

2011-10-03T23:31:00.003-04:00

As is the case in most of Agatha Christie’s works, Witness For The Prosecution, currently being staged at the Olney Theatre Center, is another deliciously fascinating whodunit. The three-act play has more twists and turns than a plumber’s snake.

British born Agatha Christie is the best-selling novelist of all time, according to the Guinness Book of World Records, and along with William Shakespeare, the best-selling author of any type. Christie penned The Witness For The Prosecution as a short story in 1925. It was published in the U.K. in 1933 and then appeared in the U.S. in 1948 as part of the collection The Witness for the Prosecution and Other Stories.

Based on the short story, Witness For The Prosecution premiered as a play in London in October 1953. Its success motivated the production to be brought to Broadway’s Henry Miller Theatre in December 1954 and closed in June 1956 after 645 performances.

It was created into a film in 1958 starring Tyrone Power and Marlene Dietrich and later adapted into a television film by Hallmark Hall of Fame.

Set in 1952 London, the play centers on Leonard Vole (played by Jeffries Thaiss), a married unemployed charmer who was arrested for the sensational murder of wealthy 62 year-old widow Emily French whom he had befriended. Vole made periodic visits to Mrs. French, helping her deal with her loneliness and with her tax matters—much to the chagrin of her live-in housekeeper Janet Mackenzie (Monica Lijewski).

Mackenzie had told police that Vole, a much younger man, was in the company of Mrs. French right before the murder. She was the person who discovered her body. Adding another reason to suspect Vole was the fact that Mrs. French named the virtually financially broke Vole in her will as the sole heir; therefore, he stood to gain the most from her demise.

Vole’s wife, Romaine (Andrea Cirie), an enigmatic German actress, first informed Vole’s defense team, Sir Wilfrid Robarts (Bob Ari) and Mr. Mayhew (James Slaughter) that she would provide the critical alibi, although these erudite attorneys received an odd and inexplicable vibe from her. But when the trial proceeded, Romaine reversed course and became a witness for the prosecution. She testified that Vole was not home during the time the victim was deemed to have been killed.

What then transpired was a wild ride through the dramatic intensity of trial testimony and cross-examination coupled with a fascinating guessing game regarding the guilt or innocence of Vole. That which appears as obvious isn’t—the true core of Agatha Christie’s genius. The climactic ending was a shocking twist upon a twist and will not be revealed here.

Veteran director John Going, a regular at Olney (The Mousetrap, Doubt, and I Am My Own Wife among the 30 he helmed) and a four-time Helen Hayes Award nominee, deftly guided the actors (and the audience) though the plot’s labyrinths. The British dialect throughout was clear, precise and well-timed and the actors’ movements on the stage were crisp and purposeful.

While I was hoping that the passionate Leonard Vole was innocent, Thaiss didn’t present Vole as a sympathetic character who may have been wrongly accused of the crime. Charming, maybe, but likeable, not so much.

Andrea Cirie seemed to relish the role of the cunning, duplicitous and mysterious Romaine. She is the catalyst that makes the plot work, and Cirie, who has significant Shakespeare background as well as TV appearances, played her character to the hilt.

The best of the best were Bob Ari (Frost/Nixon, Bells Are Ringing, Laughter On The 23^rd Floor on Broadway) as Sir Wilfrid Robarts, the trial counsel, and James Slaughter as Mr. Mayhew, his associate.

Ari, in particular, was a standout as the esteemed lawyer. The characters they portrayed were credible and fun in trying to discredit the mounting circumstantial evidence and the calculating Romaine. Although I wasn’t moved to get behind Vole in his quest to be exonerated, I easily felt connected to Robarts and to some extent, Mayhew.

The remainder of the cast performed admirably, and some added a dose of comic relief to break the tension. Most notable was Justice Wainwright played mischievously by Jim Scopeletis, a multiple Helen Hayes Award winner.

James Wolk, the Scenic Designer, warrants major kudos. The staging had two sets—Robarts’ chambers (office) and the courtroom. Both were excellent in their design, which authentically and meticulously reflected the décor from the period.

Olney’s presentation of Witness For The Prosecution benefitted from a great story, expert direction, solid acting performances, a superb set, good British costuming including trial wigs, and the other ingredients needed for an outstanding play.

Olney’s Main Stage audience delivered its verdict with a justifiable standing ovation at the conclusion.

Witness for the Prosecution is running at Olney Theater Center, 2001 Olney-Sandy Springs Rd., Olney, MD 20832 through October 23. For tickets and information call 301-924-3400 or visit www.olneytheatre.org.

Photo: Bob Ari as Sir Wilfrid Robarts, James Slaughter as Mr. Mayhaw and Jeffries Thaiss as Leonard Vole

Credit: Stan Barouh

Putting Homophobia Ahead of Patriotism

2011-09-23T14:53:00.006-04:00

It’s bad enough that presidential candidate Rick Santorum wants to reinstate ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ after the nearly two-decade long policy had been sent to the scrapheap on September 20. Being the homophobe that he is, Santorum had made even more outlandish comments against gays during his unheralded career.

But when asked about “circumventing” the repeal if elected president during the latest Republican presidential debate on September 22 by a gay U.S. soldier serving in Iraq, this is the garbage Santorum could muster:

“I would say any type of sexual activity has no place in t

he military. The fact they are making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to and removing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military’s job is to do one thing to defend our the military.”

Not only did he fail to acknowledge and thank the soldier for his service, but none of the other 8 morons at the podiums jumped in to do so. Nor did he or the other wannabes attempted to muffle the crowd noise, which was cheering during Santorum’s answer. No admonishment for disrespecting a soldier who is in harm’s way defending his country—something Santorum never did.

In the circus atmosphere that characterizes Republican primary debates (“Let him die,” applauding executions, etc.), hypocrisy wins out over their principles. Of those audience members who shouted “let him die” during last week’s debate in response to Ron Paul’s tortured explanation of how should a hypothetical 30 year-old without health insurance be dealt with if he was critically ill or those who cheered Rick Perry’s bragging that Texas leads all state in executions, one must question the sincerity of their “pro-life” principles.

And these same folks who normally applaud service members at the drop of a hat (as they should) but boo a soldier simply because of who he is, aren’t as patriotic as they claim to be. Homophobia over patriotism—that’s all it is.

Welcome Aboard!

2011-09-21T01:37:00.004-04:00

NAACP-Baltimore Joins MME coalition but there are concerns.

By Steve Charing

The email message from Marylanders for Marriage Equality (MME) that announced on September 9 the addition of the Baltimore branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to the coalition was welcome and positive. My gut reaction is that there is now a focus on MME’s steering committee to work directly with the African-American community to help pass a marriage equality bill in 2012.

“The NAACP’s long history of working for equality and fairness for all will be instrumental in harnessing the supportive voices in the African-American community and throughout Maryland,” said Sultan Shakir, Campaign Manager for MME in the statement.

Tessa Hill-Alston, president of the Baltimore branch was quoted as saying, “We believe gay and lesbian couples have the same values as everyone else. They want to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love and build a loving, stable family. So it is only right that committed gay and lesbian couples be given the opportunity to marry as everyone else. We look forward to working with the coalition and lawmakers to pass a marriage equality bill that protects religious freedoms.”

The NAACP joins Senator Rich Madaleno, Delegate Luke Clippinger, Equality Maryland, Progressive Maryland, 1199 SEIU, ACLU-MD, Human Rights Campaign, and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force as steering committee members for MME.

The news was received favorably by progressives all over. Blogger Michael Hulshof-Schmidt (TheSolipsisticMe) of the Daily Kos wrote: “Hill-Alston is the tonic for the hypocrisy and bigotry I witness from gays who are racist and misogynists, or blacks who are homophobic, or women who are anti-women and homophobic. I simply don’t understand how anyone that is or has been marginalized can’t feel an obligation to then stand up for others who are marginalized. I am hopeful and will look forward to other NAACP chapters stepping up to the plate and continuing to show great courage and leadership for civil rights for all.”

Yet religious African-Americans have resisted, if not rejected, the clarion calls by eminent civil rights leaders, such as Julian Bond, Rep. John Lewis, the late Coretta Scott King and many others as well as iconic institutions, such as the NAACP, who have argued for marriage equality. Those African-Americans who oppose such legislation use their religious convictions and/or their refusal to recognize marriage equality as a civil rights struggle as justification.

Even in a liberal city like Baltimore, mayoral candidates Frank M. Conaway and Otis Rolley and victorious District 12 Councilman Carl Stokes—all African-Americans—expressed opposition to same-sex marriage in a Gay Life survey. Other African-American candidates did so as well.

But it must be pointed out that while there is significant resistance to marriage equality among blacks, more recent polls indicate a modest increase in support. When the data surrounding the passage of Proposition 8 in California were ultimately analyzed, the initial finding of 70 percent support for the ballot initiative among African-Americans based on exit polling turned out to be overstated.

Further studies, however, indicate that in actuality 58 percent of California’s black population voted to prohibit same-sex marriage—a clear majority to be sure, but not an overwhelming one.

Many gays and lesbians were quick to blame blacks for the Prop. 8 debacle, but other factors, such as political ideology, religiosity and age played more of a role than race.

For marriage equality to pass the Maryland legislature in 2012 and to successfully defend it in a likely referendum, advocates will certainly need increased backing from African-Americans. With 30 percent of Maryland’s population being black—among the highest proportion of any state—the education process needs to be sweeping and intense. Clearly, the NAACP, with help from others, could provide such an effort.

That is why I enthusiastically welcomed the MME announcement. But upon visiting the Baltimore branch’s website , I was surprised by the fact that Tessa Hill-Alston’s name did not appear as president. She had been elected last November—fully 10 months ago—yet former president Marvin L. “Doc” Cheatham’s president’s message is still displayed. And when doing a search for Tessa Hill-Alston, “no results were found.”

Obviously the website is in need of updating. Perhaps there are insufficient resources to make the technical changes. But if an organization is to exude confidence and credibility, this should be a priority in the Internet age.

Moreover, I attempted to reach Ms. Hill-Alston to ascertain how the branch will reach out to the African-American community to help sell marriage equality. She did not return the phone message I left with the receptionist.

I also emailed Kevin Nix, the media spokesperson for MME who released the announcement, requesting him to share details of the role the Baltimore branch of the NAACP will play in the coalition’s effort. I also wanted to know if the other NAACP branches in the state, particularly Prince George’s County, will be called upon. At press time, I had not heard back.

My hope is that the reluctance to discuss specifics with the media and, by extension, the community is more of a strategic calculation (and not a good one since the General Assembly is a mere four months away) rather than an absence of information, which is more discomforting because of the closeness of the session. What we don’t want is “window dressing”—organizations who sit on a board and who can help check the proverbial boxes but otherwise have no active function.

The members of MME’s coalition, including the NAACP, could be vital to secure passage of the marriage equality bill and stave off a referendum attempt if utilized properly. The community needs to hear more about those plans but right now, nobody is talking.

www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com.

The Time to Plan for a Referendum Battle is NOW

2011-09-07T10:46:00.008-04:00

Following the victory on the marriage equality bill in the Senate during the 2011 Maryland General Assembly, I had asked a former official at Equality Maryland (not the executive director) if plans are afoot to combat a likely referendum should the marriage bill be signed into law. That person said that “we are focused on winning in the House, and we’ll worry about the referendum later.”

On the surface, that response seemed prudent. The legislative battle had yet to be won, and energy and resources must be dedicated to jumping that hurdle before you look further down the track. And with a potential ballot initiative taking place 19 months in the future, arguably there was time to mount a strong defense.

Unfortunately, the marriage bill fell short by only a few votes of victory in the House without an actual floor vote taken. On top of that, Equality Maryland, the principal group leading the legislative effort, essentially imploded in terms of organizational stability, finances, and to some extent, its reputation within the LGBT community.

Its board, which experienced multiple resignations following the session and had fired its executive director, is attempting to bounce back. But Equality Maryland will not be the vanguard for the marriage bill, as a new organization, Marylanders for Marriage Equality (MME), was launched in July.

Nor will Equality Maryland be the sole steward to secure protections on the basis of gender identity, as that effort is being headed by Gender Rights Maryland. That bill could also face a referendum attempt.

The fledgling MME is a coalition of organizations who will renew the fight in the legislature. It is comprised of Progressive Maryland, 1199 SEIU, ACLU, Human Rights Campaign (HRC), National Gay and Lesbian Task Force as well as Equality Maryland.

While it appears that Equality Maryland never got down to the nitty-gritty of mapping out a specific strategy to raise funds and plan for a possible referendum skirmish in 2012, there was hope that MME would. “The coalition is looking at the big picture to bring marriage equality to Maryland,” said Kevin Nix, who works for HRC and is the media spokesman for MME. “Our priority in the short term is passing a bill through the legislature.”

OK, apparently it’s back to Equality Maryland’s position earlier this year in that MME will not put the cart before the horse and instead focus on getting the bill through both chambers. Governor O’Malley promised to sign it and actively campaign for it as part of his legislative package.

If signed into law, one can rightly assume the opposition will garner the required number of signatures, regardless of the method, and the issue—“Should marriage only be between a man and a woman?”—will be offered to the voters. And with the next General Assembly ending in April 2012, there is precious little time to organize, raise funds, and execute a winning strategy to thwart the inevitable referendum come November.

Accordingly, the time to plan for such an eventuality is now—not after the bill is signed and the predictable celebrations fade away.

The main focus of the plan should be to bring in money—lots of it—and in a down economy to boot. Just to raise funds to counter the advertisements by opponents in the high-priced media markets of Baltimore and Washington will be daunting in itself. The need for printed materials, phone banking and other related expenses will cost a bundle as well.

There will be a plethora of well-funded, well-organized groups from within Maryland and throughout the U.S. who will be highly motivated to ensure that marriage equality does not see the light of day in Maryland. This opposition is formidable and will include but not limited to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the Catholic Archdiocese, Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, the Mormon Church and the mega-churches in predominantly African-American areas of Baltimore City and Prince George’s County.

To illustrate the challenge, NOM alone spent $1.8 million in support of Proposition 8 in 2008. The next year in Maine, NOM was the majority contributor to the anti-equality Stand for Marriage Maine with $1.6 million geared towards Question 1. Overall, in 2009, NOM’s total expenditures were roughly $7.5 million.

The task becomes even more exigent as a full-blown, all-out education campaign is required, especially among African-Americans and Catholics. With President Obama on the 2012 ticket, turnout among blacks is expected to be high. This is particularly significant in Maryland with its high proportion of African-Americans (nearly 30 percent). And according to the Public Religion Research Institute, 2 out of 3 African-American Protestants oppose marriage for same-sex couples.

Older citizens tend to be socially conservative, and as a group, they are more apt to vote. Moreover, the Dream Act referendum will also be on the ballot drawing out many voters to defeat that law who are also likely to oppose same-sex marriage.

If the opposition succeeds, the law is dead, and it could take decades before politicians decide to overrule the “will of the people.”

For Marylanders for Marriage Equality it’s understandable to focus on winning the immediate battle in the legislature. But it will be useless if we lose the war. To win the war we have to match our opponents dollar for dollar and then some.

Start the planning now!

www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com

A 'T Party' in Our Community?

2011-08-22T14:55:00.005-04:00

It’s hard to pinpoint the exact date in which the letter “T” for transgender was added to the GLB or LGB to form the now familiar LGBT. All indications are that it occurred during the 1990’s with no ceremony or official announcement that I can recall. It just showed up, and became a regular part of the acronym as activists seemed to accept it.

There wasn’t a major pushback from purists who wanted to keep the gay rights movement restricted on the basis of sexual orientation. Some did argue, however, that there should be separate movements as transgender individuals have different issues from those who are gay or lesbian. Or that this addition was another example of unnecessary political correctness.

While transgender folks and gays/lesbians are distinct (one is sexual identity while the other is sexual orientation), these arguments did not signal a demand to separate. And over the past two decades the groups kind of melded into a broader force to achieve equality. The umbrella was large enough to make our case for equality to the masses for all the letters represented in the LGBT acronym.

This unique coalition did not have its first flair-up nationally until 2007. That is when another attempt to secure passage of the perennial Employment Nondiscrimination Act or ENDA was brought up again in Congress. However, head counters, such as Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), who is gay, noted that passage of the law would not have a chance if “transgender” was included in the bill.

The House ultimately passed the non-inclusive ENDA but it died in the Senate. To no one’s surprise, then President George W. Bush had threatened to veto the measure had it passed both chambers.

The failure to enact an all-inclusive ENDA generated a lot of heat. Transgender individuals felt betrayed by their being thrown under the bus so that the LGB portion gets their protections. Many gays and lesbians believed that having to incorporate the ‘T’ part of the bill was a drag on their progress.

Following the defeat in 2007, an all-inclusive ENDA had been introduced in the House 2009 and 2011—both times by Barney Frank and in the Senate by Jeff Merkley (D-OR). The bills currently sit in committee.

Earlier this year in Maryland, an attempt to add gender identity and expression to the current statute that prohibits discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations and credit appeared to have traction. However, a decision was made by the legislation’s sponsor in the House of Delegates, Del. Joseline Pena-Melnyk that the bill be stripped of the “public accommodations” provision to help ensure passage.

This triggered a very heated, often ugly debate within Maryland’s transgender community. Some wanted to achieve at least job protections; others saw the bill as meaningless if “public accommodations” was absent. There were transgender folks who actually testified against the bill because of the elimination of this key provision.

Regardless, the bill made it out of committee and passed the House in its current form sans “public accommodations.” A similar measure was advanced to the floor of the Senate for the first time, but it was killed in a procedural vote. The marriage bill had suffered the same fate but died in the opposite chamber, also without an up and down vote.

There had been considerable finger-pointing and recriminations from the gay and lesbian component regarding the marriage bill’s failure as well as the transgender community’s anguish over the failure of the gender identity legislation. Those who sought the “public accommodations” language rejoiced at the failure.

Transgender activists continued their expressions of displeasure over the tactical decisions made and have taken steps to carry the fight next year on their own. The divisions within that community remain palpable and could jeopardize any chance of success in 2012 unless there is more unity with a singular effort to pass comprehensive non-discrimination legislation on the basis of gender identity and expression that includes “public accommodations.”

Unfortunately, the acrimony on the part of transgender activists resulting from the failed attempt in the 2011 General Assembly began to spread beyond the confines of the trans community, Equality Maryland and others to the LGB portion of the LGBT family. Some have opined on blogs and social media that if there hadn’t been so much attention to the marriage bill, there could have been more resources devoted to the gender identity measure.

They have also discounted the significance of marriage equality as opposed to housing and job and public accommodations protections for transgender individuals since, they feel, most gays and lesbians will not opt for marriage. And the memory of failing to include gender identity protections in the 2001 nondiscrimination law on the basis of sexual orientation is still raw.

Having this fissure in the LGBT community is not productive. I am certain that most transgender activists understand there is a tremendous amount of support among gays and lesbians in their quest for trans protections.

The upcoming effort may have received a boost as a result of the brutal beating of Chrissy Lee Polis, a trans-woman, in a Rosedale McDonald’s on April 18—a horrible incident that received worldwide notoriety thanks to a video of the attack that went viral. The rally emanating from the Chrissy Polis assault, which took place just days afterward, was well-attended despite short notice, and galvanized all letters of LGBT as well as allies.

And that turnout for support should not be ignored. To our transgender friends—please don’t fault gays and lesbians and the goal for marriage equality for the failure up to this point to achieve comprehensive protections. The legislature can handle more than one issue at a time as each chamber considered the separate bills.

I can’t speak for everyone, but essentially we are on your side. Most of us believe in the LGBT umbrella and your fight is our fight. The anger, understandable as it is, must be channeled towards the real opponents of transgender rights and not the LGB folks.

www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com.

For the President it Was Not a Happy Birthday

2011-08-10T23:48:00.002-04:00

Although turning 50 is not ordinarily a cheerful event as that landmark makes one AARP-eligible among other reminders that the sunset years are closing in, it is no cause for despair either. Except when President Barack Obama turned 50 on August 4, his melancholy was not tied to the aging process; his presidency has given him the grey hairs we did not see as a robust, youthful candidate merely three years ago.

The actual day was not marked by cake and candles as much as the 500-plus plunge in the Dow. The debacle in the stock market all but wiped out the gains of 2011 at a time when the investing class looked towards their IRAs and 401k’s as a safety net during this stubbornly faltering economy.

The downgrading of the U.S. credit rating by S&P seemed to have piled on with the help of another stock market free-fall the next week. Then there was the tragedy in Afghanistan where thirty U.S. servicemen lost their lives.

These news items plus the fallout from debt ceiling debate put a damper on the mood of Mr. Obama’s supporters. Birthday or not, the country was not celebrating.

The President didn’t help himself politically during the depressing debate and negotiations surrounding the debt ceiling legislation. He abandoned the necessary component that any compromise be “balanced,” and that would include closing tax loopholes for the wealthiest Americans as a revenue enhancer. The Tea Party members of the House were so intransigent on this element of a potential compromise—forcing Speaker John Boehner to follow that hard line lest he perceived as a weak leader—that Mr. Obama simply caved to avoid a devastating default on the government’s obligations.

Worse, he eliminated the 14^th Amendment from his arsenal during his negotiations whereby he could have invoked the provision that applies to protecting our credit to avoid default. What President Obama should have done was insist on “the grand bargain” with its sweeping cuts that included entitlement programs and tax increases under the threat of using the 14^th Amendment. But he didn’t and went along with a bill that satisfied Speaker Boehner by the tune of 98 percent.

The President went out on a limb to offer entitlement reform—anathema to the liberal wing—in exchange for tax reform. Neither was ultimately part of the final package as the Tea Party-led Republicans would clearly prefer to see us default and set off a chain of economic calamities than to mollify their own misguided economic dogma.

Moreover, the President blew a golden opportunity to go over the heads of Congress and take his message directly to the American people in a nationally televised prime time speech. He addressed the nation alright, but it was simply an explanation of the progression of the negotiations, not a rallying cry to the American people. Yes, he asked viewers to call Congress, which they did, but his speech fell flat and uninspiring—the complete opposite of Ronald Reagan’s addresses to the nation when things got dicey for him.

This lack of leadership and strength on the part of the President demoralized his supporters. In underestimating the influence of this noisy minority called the Tea Party Republicans and relinquishing key bargaining chips, he failed to adhere to the cardinal rule in politics: secure the base before running to the center.

It’s hard enough to win re-election in an environment that is projected to be unfavorable given the economy and joblessness. Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush can attest to that. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Mr. Obama to make the sale with his base to maintain the level of enthusiasm needed to win a national contest. This translates into contributions and volunteerism, which could make the difference in swing states.

And for us LGBT folks, keep in mind that President Obama has done more for our community than any other previous president. A record number of openly LGBT appointees, public recognition of gay pride month, a comprehensive hate crime law, repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), and the refusal to further defend DOMA—the Defense of Marriage Act—as it winds its way to the Supreme Court have been notable achievements.

With an inclusive Employment Discrimination Act and a Congressional repeal of DOMA (unlikely but who thought DADT would be repealed?) that could be on the horizon, it is in the interest of our community that Barack Obama be re-elected over one of the potential opponents who are basically homophobic. Should he lose, none of these items on the menu will see the light of day.

That brings me to the reason to be hopeful: the opposition. The folderol from the debt agreement seemed to have cast the largest shadow over Congress as the approval level for that branch of government as a result of a recent New York Times poll is the lowest in history. Although the President didn’t emerge as a victor—far from it—he did not incur the wrath of the public as Congress in general and the Republicans and the Tea Party did in particular.

Further, this episode, which will undoubtedly be repeated when the super committee of 12 from Congress is called on to make the tough choices in the Fall or see calamitous across-the-board cuts in spending, will probably result in the return of the centrist moderates to the President’s side, which is crucial towards his re-election bid.

'Grease' Serves Up Some Summer Loving at Olney

2011-08-03T14:44:00.005-04:00

By Steve Charing

For nearly 40 years the musical Grease has graced the stages of Broadway, summer stock, community theater, and high schools and middle schools all over the U.S., and it also spawned the highest grossing musical movie to this date. It remains Broadway’s 13^th longest running show ever, having debuted in 1972 (1971 in Chicago) and lasting until 1980—a total of 3,388 performances.

You know the show has been around a while when the original Danny was played by Barry Bostwick, and the original Sandy was performed by Carole Demas.

Grease, whose book, music and lyrics were penned by Jim Jacobs and Warren Casey, also had Broadway revivals in 1994 and 2007 and major tours both in the U.S. and internationally throughout the years.

The plot, probably familiar to most readers due to the show’s prolific run, has undergone some tweaking in terms of the score and dialogue during its course. Yet it continues to center on the relationships between lead characters Danny Zuko and the Sandra Dee-like Sandy Dumbrowski and among their respective peer cliques—the T-Birds and Pink Ladies—at the fictional Rydell High School in 1959.

Embedded in the plot are such social issues as teenage pregnancy and gang violence amidst the themes of love, friendship, teenage rebellion, sexual exploration during adolescence, and class consciousness. While those issues are legitimate in any period, Grease is all about the 50’s in terms of music, wardrobe, culture, dialogue, and gestures. Its popularity over these many years is a testament to the show’s ability to entertain audiences of all ages and in all eras.

The current mounting of Grease at the Olney Theatre Center does the show proud. Bobby Smith, whose body of work stems more from acting (eight Helen Hayes nominations for excellence in Washington theater) than directing (Forever Plaid at Olney last summer), piloted a tight, energetic, seemingly flawless production of Grease on Olney’s main stage.

From the vocals and dancing to the scenery (Robert Klingelhoefer), lighting (Charlie Morrison and Sonya Dowhaluk) and Seth Gilbert’s costume design, the staging of this show was Broadway caliber right from the get-go.

The brilliantly performed iconic ensemble number “Summer Nights” in the second scene set the tone and won the audience’s affection for the production that lasted throughout and culminated with a raucous standing ovation at show’s end. The songs are the show’s strength, as one would expect in a musical with the pedigree of Grease, under the musical direction of Aaron Broderick and choreography of Ilona Kessell.

“Greased Lightnin’” (featuring a crowd-pleasing transformation of a rusty unpainted convertible to a shiny hot rod during the song), the hilarious “Mooning,” “Born to Hand-Jive,” “Hopelessly Devoted to You,” “Beauty School Dropout” (that spotlighted a scintillating vocal performance by Vincent M. Kempski), and “You’re the One That I Want” were standouts along with the aforementioned “Summer Nights.”

The interplay among the actors was snappy, mischievous and well-timed, which more than adequately served as bridges between the anticipated and well-executed musical numbers.

Casting for this production was spot-on; the talented ensemble is young but experienced with several having performed on Olney’s stage in the past. David Bryant Johnson did justice to handsome, cocky Danny Zuko, possessing solid stage instincts and a fine singing voice. Jessica Lauren Ball as the wholesome Sandy demonstrated sweet vocal skills during her numbers.

Other outstanding cast members include Delores King Williams as the no-nonsense teacher Miss Lynch, Caroline Bowman as sarcastic Betty Rizzo, Dan Van Why as the mooning Roger, Allan Wiggins as Doody, and Patrick Cragin as the tough Kenickie. The remainder of the cast was also exemplary, following the strong direction of Bobby Smith.

Though the stage at Olney is not as roomy as you would ordinarily find in the larger venues, Robert Klingelhoefer did a superb job of economizing the space by designing a multi-use platform on the stage that resembles a large above-ground pool. The orchestra is seated on top and rear of the platform, and the actors come and go from a center entrance and duel staircases on the sides as well as from the wings. Scene and set changes proceeded smoothly.

All in all, the production stayed true to its roots and rock n’ roll core, and everybody associated with it deserves applause. It’s a worthwhile visit back to the 50’s even if you had enjoyed a summer night with Grease before.

Photo by Stan Barough

****

Grease is playing at the Olney Theater Center, 2001 Olney-Sandy Springs Rd., Olney, MD 20832 through August 28. For tickets and information call 301-924-3400 or visit www.olneytheatre.org.

Adding Grey to the Rainbow

2011-07-28T00:36:00.005-04:00

By Steve Charing

While I was celebrating a landmark birthday of sorts at the “Gay Mecca by the Sea”—Provincetown (P-Town), Massachusetts, I couldn’t help but notice a difference in the demographics of those visiting this iconic LGBT resort. Over the three-plus decades of vacationing at P-Town, the crowd has changed from a predominantly younger group to a more mature one.

This is not to say that Provincetown resembles Miami Beach; far from it. But if there was a pie chart depicting the various age groups through the years, the slice showing, let’s say, over 45 is getting thicker while the slice showing under 35 is narrowing.

One of the main reasons is that the cost of lodging, food and entertainment have been increasing steadily and have probably priced out the less affluent younger generation, both male and female, from partaking in this wonderful vacation spot. Why spend that much money on a scenic, historic, vibrant venue when the newest iPhone is about to go on sale?

Another factor is that the number of seniors in the LGBT population—a microcosm of the general population—is increasing faster than just about any other age group. This has been enhanced by the Baby Boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964. Currently, there are an estimated 3 million LGBT elders in the United States. By 2030, that number will nearly double.

It’s not that obvious in P-Town, but it is safe to say that in general older gay men and lesbians have been the subject of scorn and ridicule by many in the younger generation especially in this youth-obsessed culture. The pattern has existed for decades. Although it is true that many younger LGBT folks have marginalized the older generation, it’s not always the case. Plenty of young gays and lesbians find attraction to their elders and establish friendships.

In the excellent book Reeling in the Years: Gay Men’s Perspectives on Age and Ageism (Harrington Park Press), author Tim Bergling presents anecdotal nuggets from hundreds of gay men over and under 40 and their experiences with the opposite generation. Some of these stories cover the swath of emotions from fear and loathing to love and happiness.

The book also points out that while younger gays have cast the elders aside, many older ones show a decided lack of respect for the younger generation. It cuts both ways.

But the concerns of the older LGBT generation go beyond their acceptance by the younger one. The recent San Diego LGBT Senior Needs Assessment Survey polled some 500 LGBT seniors, ages 50 and up, on topics most important to them as they grow older. Social matters, support, and concerns of social isolation were the top issues among those surveyed. That was followed by health and quality of life issues, financial concerns, LGBT-affirmative housing and housing affordability, and health insurance/access to quality health care.

As identified in the San Diego survey, an important issue facing LGBT seniors is living alone. That's true for 50 percent of LGBT elders versus 33 percent of the general population, according to Dr. Judy Bradford of The Fenway Institute, a Boston-based researcher of LGBT health issues. She notes that LGBT seniors are more likely to be estranged from their families.

In addition, there is a paucity of LGBT retirement communities in the U.S. While the number is increasing each year, there are still too few to house the burgeoning older LGBT population.

Moreover, nursing homes are a problem for LGBT seniors. Few states recognize the marriages of same-sex couples, and the existing cultural discrimination results in couples being split up in such facilities.

Yet with all these clouds forming above the heads of LGBT seniors, there are solid support networks to help allow the sunshine to peer in. As we spotlighted last issue, the Prime Timers of Baltimore offers an outstanding array of social activities and interaction to help their members address some of these concerns, especially the major issue of social isolation.

For lesbians, there is the social group Older and Wiser Lesbians (OWLs) of the Greater Capitol area) whom we would like to similarly profile in the near future.

The mega-organization AARP is also recognizing the needs of the increased aging LGBT population. Last month, in conjunction with Pride, AARP launched a new online web portal to serve us older LGBT folks. The site features articles on news, personal finance, relationships, travel and other topics of concern to older LGBT Americans, and their family and friends, as well as a community forum.

In addition, it presents targeted news, trivia quizzes and information on healthcare, retirement planning, care giving, taxation, employment discrimination and more. Visitors can access AARP’s coverage of relevant topics, including an article from the latest issue of AARP The Magazine examining—three decades after the emergence of HIV/AIDS—–the new face of AIDS: people over 50. (Included was a profile of Lee Fischer, the President of the Prime Timers of Baltimore.)

The portal also features AARP’s 20-part multimedia package, The Stonewall Riots: 40 Years Later, A Milestone Anniversary.

The quirky new film Beginners, now playing at the Charles Theatre in Baltimore, is centered in part on a character played superbly by Christopher Plummer, who came out as gay at the age of 75 following the death of his wife. He had the support of his son (Ewan McGregor), his much younger boyfriend, and a host of gay friends and lived a full and happy life until his ultimate passing.

Most of those mature folks who enjoyed Provincetown this summer also had friends and partners to share the magical moments with. Many more, however, need that support system. Hopefully, they will reach out to those organizations that can help them secure the friendships and resources that are needed to allow them to live fulfilling lives. And it wouldn’t hurt to reach out to them as well.

Pulling Maryland Into the Gutter?!?

2011-07-27T09:50:00.004-04:00

Letter Published in July 29, 2011 Baltimore Sun

Al Eisner’s cynical letter should be labeled under the heading “Be careful what you wish for” ( “Md. Needs a referendum on same-sex marriage,” July 26). In chiding Gov. Martin O’Malley for making same-sex marriage a part of his 2012 legislative agenda and therefore, will, according to Eisner, “pull Maryland into the gutter,” he urges the state to do what many people consider to be is the un-American effort of putting minority’s rights up for a popular vote.

Marriage for same-sex couples has existed in Massachusetts for over seven years now. And with all fear mongering, doomsday scenarios, scare tactics and exaggerated hype, Massachusetts maintains the lowest divorce rate in the U.S.

People recognize that the sky did not fall since 2004, and the legalization of same-sex marriage has strengthened the institution, not dragging it into the gutter.

The trend continues to be favorable for marriage equality, thanks in part, to a realization that nobody’s marriage is threatened by the participation of others in the institution and to many of the enlightened and fair-minded younger generation who are still scratching their collective heads over this brand of discrimination.

Should a referendum take place next year, proponents of marriage equality will be ready to battle the anti-equality forces from inside and outside the state. And Al Eisner and his ilk will be surprised to discover that a majority of Maryland’s voters do not share his bigoted views, and the state will be poised to be the first to defeat a marriage equality referendum that would overturn the will of duly elected officials.

Steve Charing

The Boo-Hoo Red Sox

2011-07-16T15:48:00.001-04:00

For those who heard about the one-sided penalties meted out by Joe Garagiola, Jr. of Major League Baseball in the recent game involving the Baltimore Orioles and the Boston Red Sox, I feel your pain. It’s another example of the haves (winning seasons forever) against the have-nots (losing seasons seemingly forever).

I shrugged my shoulders and thought, “so what else is new.” The Orioles received the brunt of the punishment and the Red Sox players and manager almost got off completely unscathed. It’s a joke, and a bad one at that.

But when I encountered a Sox fan at the gym today, I couldn’t help being “outspoken” about the absurdity of the situation. That absurdity, however, was surpassed by his ridiculous defense of the penalties.

It all boils down to the fact, according to this guy, that Orioles pitcher Kevin Gregg was in the wrong by telling “Big Papi” David Ortiz to run out a pop-up. Wow! The guy said this with a straight face!

I said Ortiz should have simply ignored the comment and head back to the dugout. But no—the guy said Gregg had no right to tell him to run out a pop fly.

Are we talking about a 5 year-old? Ortiz is a multi-million dollar professional athlete, and a good one, not some school kid. But apparently Ortiz was uber-sensitive to the pitcher’s comments.

Walk away, turn the other cheek, don’t dignify Gregg’s taunt by reacting to it. Not Big Papi. He had to make a show in front of the home crowd and charge the mound swinging wildly but missing Gregg with any blows. What an example to kids!

Back in the day, baseball players were subject to ruthless bench jockeying throughout a game. It was no big deal. A player would charge the mound only if he was beaned and was conscious enough to react. Today’s modern agent-represented prima donnas charge the mound on the basis of a verbal taunt or an inside pitch. It’s incredible how the sport has evolved.

It makes one appreciate the courage, temperament and class of Jackie Robinson. All the times he received a lot worse taunts than Ortiz did—including the N-word on a consistent basis—Robinson had the ability to hold back the fire and take his anger out competitively on the field.

Not Ortiz—he cannot stand being called out for being a lazy runner and instead, charges the mound like a bull in the arena. He is an embarrassment to the game and baseball added to the embarrassment in the way they dealt with the incident.

Why Obama Should Come Out for Marriage Equality

2011-07-09T13:44:00.004-04:00

Here is the change you can believe in: President Barack Obama will most likely publicly support marriage for same-sex couples, and this declaration should take place prior to the 2012 election.

As you are undoubtedly aware, the President has wrestled with this issue for some time. His answers to specific questions have been tortured and calculated and to many marriage equality activists, unsatisfying. In fact, he has characterized his position even to this day as “evolving.”

“I think what you’re seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers, and that they’ve got to be treated like every other American,” Mr. Obama said at a recent news conference. “And I think that principle will win out.”

The President went on: “I think we’re moving in a direction of greater equality and — and I think that’s a good thing.”

This is surely a good sign that he’s moving in the right direction. Of course, he wasn’t as explicit during his election run in 2008 whereby political calculations were paramount. Then he declared his support for civil unions but told big-time pastor Rick Warren that marriage is between a man and a woman. Ugh!

But this coming election cycle, things will be different. Not only do I believe the President will declare his support, but such a decision will also benefit him in 2012. Here’s why:

Pro-gay record. It is no secret that President Obama has already compiled the most pro-gay record in the history of the U.S. He has appointed more LGBT people to his administration than all of the previous 43 presidents combined.

Obama spearheaded the final push to end the policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which was one of the top two on the LGBT activists’ wish list. He ensured the passage of a comprehensive hate crimes bill. And he ordered the Justice Department to cease defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as it is being litigated.

Therefore, supporting marriage equality would be the next logical step. He already congratulated New York on passing the marriage equality bill. You don’t applaud that kind of action unless you support it. Making a public pronouncement (a televised speech would be ideal) would not shock anyone. But it would make many Americans ecstatic.

Firm up the base. Backing marriage equality will help galvanize an already suspicious progressive wing of the Democratic Party. The overall enthusiasm level is likely to be less than it was in 2008 because after four years Obama is no longer the novelty he was when he launched his 2008 run.

Therefore, igniting a fire under the butts of the left wing will help to raise needed cash and attract enthusiastic volunteers. It doesn’t matter who the Republicans send out to challenge Obama; you must have a stoked, passionate army of supporters. He needs to do this so that the LGBT community returns to the Obama bandwagon in force.

Obama raised $750,000 from gay supporters at a recent fundraiser without a revelation of his evolved position. Imagine how the community will react when he does come out for marriage equality.

The center is the real target. While it is absolutely necessary to have the base in tow, to succeed again in such swing states as Ohio, Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Indiana, Colorado and New Mexico, President Obama must attract the center—the independents and moderates who aren’t exactly liberal but are kind of scared of conservatives and particularly the influence of the tea party denizens.

Many of these folks aren’t social conservatives or homophobes; they have a libertarian streak, and stating his support for same-sex marriage should not deter them to a significant extent. Keep in mind that socially conservative white people aren’t planning to vote for Obama anyway. So why appease that group?

Recent polls have shown that a small majority of Americans support marriage equality. It should be safe now to take that dip into the pool. Says Evan Wolfson, founder and president of the organization Freedom to Marry: “The President has very little to lose but a lot to gain politically. The center of political gravity in this country has shifted, and the President is lagging behind. He needs to be with us.”

2012 is not 2004. When it was Bush vs. Kerry in 2004, the Democrats allowed the GOP to hijack the narrative of the campaign and effectively exploit the Massachusetts ruling that legalized same-sex marriage. It did so by driving a wedge within the Democratic Party and bolstering turnout among evangelical voters by placing “gay marriage” on the ballots of 11 states.

It’s an entirely different environment now. The scare tactics used by the Republicans that predicted society’s collapse and the destruction of the institution of marriage won’t wash this time around. Massachusetts has allowed same-sex couples to marry since 2004, and with all that hype and fear mongering, it still has the lowest divorce rate of any state.

Moreover, the younger generation had been more motivated to vote in 2008, and this important demographic is replacing the more conservative elders who have passed on.

Setting a trap. Regardless of whom Obama’s opponent is it is clear that if he supports same-sex marriage, it will be used against him. And that’s the bait. Since the economy and jobs are projected to be the highest priorities on the voters’ minds, any attempt by the GOP to bring discrimination against gay people into the discussion will be seen as a needless and tired distraction and a dodge from the issues that matter most.

President Obama was for same-sex marriage before he was against it. In 1996, as a candidate for the State Senate in Illinois, Obama responded to a questionnaire from a gay newspaper. "I favor legalizing same-sex marriages," Obama wrote.

The time is right for Obama to return to his 1996 position, and it will help him win in 2012.

The Struggle for LGBT Equality: From Stonewall to the Present

2011-06-30T19:42:00.017-04:00

Address given to the Summer Academy of Baltimore City 9th Grade U.S. History Teachers-6/30/11

By Steve Charing

I am honored to be invited to participate in the Summer Academy for 9th Grade U.S. History teachers and its theme, "Justice for All: The Clarion Call for America's Minorities." And let me say this…thank you all for what You do! First, a few notes about me: I was born and raised in New York City and graduated from Queens College with a degree in Political Science.

I served 2 years in the Army and moved to the Baltimore area in 1977 where I continued my career with the Social Security Administration. I have been retired from the agency since 1999.

As a hobby, I have been writing for the gay press since 1980 and have served as editor of two Baltimore-based publications. The newspaper I continue to write for and was the managing editor until last month is Baltimore OUTloud.

I also served for 7 years as the media coordinator for the Howard County chapter of PFLAG—Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.

My partner Bob, who happens to be a Poly alum, and I have been in a committed relationship for 31 years, and we were legally married in Provincetown, Massachusetts in 2009. We have resided in Clarksville since 1994.

In looking back when I was in the 9th grade, I realize now how much easier it was for me then as there were 10 less presidents and 40 or so less countries in the world to consider. And, for certain, a subject like the struggle for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender equality was not on any syllabus.

But the fact that there is interest in this topic in 2011 proves how much of a journey we have traveled but yet, there is so much further to go.

Any discussion of achieving gay rights would normally begin with the Stonewall uprising that began on June 27, 1969. This was a seminal event, and is arguably the launching pad for the modern gay rights movement.

To understand the significance of Stonewall, one needs to visualize how the world existed prior to those historic nights in June.

Frequent gay bar raids occurred with police demanding ID’s under the threat of arrest.

Entrapment by the police was astonishingly commonplace especially in what are called “cruising areas.” So was blackmail.

Names of the arrested were published in the newspapers: Jobs lost. Tenants evicted from apartments. Families were torn apart.

Gays were beaten up by straights with alarming frequency. Thugs purposely sought out queers to beat up outside gay establishments. Same-sex dancing was prohibited, as was touching. Gay sex was criminal behavior.
You had Mafia-owned bars serving overpriced watered down drinks whose owners often worked in collusion with the police and cared not one bit about the gays and lesbians who were their customers as long as they can make money off of them.

Bar bouncers roughed up drunken gays.

There were no laws on the books to protect against discrimination in employment, housing or public accommodations.
Homosexuals were banished from the military following extensive witch-hunts.

There were no domestic partner benefits or any rights based on same-sex relationships at major corporations and few universities.

There were no openly gay elected officials, and anyone in the public eye remained in the closet. No officeholder supported an end to the harassment, much less advocated for equality. The thought of marriage between same-sex partners didn’t even exist.

A television show with a major gay character was unthinkable, as well as an openly gay actor. Any gay characters portrayed in movies were either depressed, suicidal, flamboyant or a victim of some sort. There were few, if any, gay-related periodicals.

Homosexuality was viewed as a psychological disorder; queers were considered sick and fair game by a hostile, homophobic society.
Most chose to remain in the closet.

Partners were introduced as “roommates.”

And because of family pressures, so many gays and lesbians were virtually forced to date or marry members of the opposite sex to deflect any suspicion of being gay.

There had been gay and lesbian rights groups that were covertly formed prior to Stonewall. They included The Mattachine Society, which began in 1950 in Los Angeles and Daughters of Bilitis, which was founded 5 years later in San Francisco.

But not until the Stonewall episode did a large number of other organizations form and develop.

The Stonewall Riots occurred in New York’s Greenwich Village on a sultry Friday night-early Saturday morning and lasted on and off for the better part of a week. It resulted from the second police raid of that week at the Stonewall Inn, New York’s largest gay club. The patrons, many of whom were transvestites and young homeless gay men and hustlers, resisted the police’s actions inside the club.

As patrons were being expelled from the bar, chaos developed in the streets immediately outside. The crowd swelled to hundreds, and many began hurling bottles, bricks and other objects as well as an uprooted parking meter towards the police vehicles and the bar itself. The embattled police, who never encountered such resistance to any previous raids, were forced to take refuge inside the Stonewall Inn until reinforcements showed up.
The riots received relatively little play in New York’s daily newspapers at the time, but historians viewed this as the pivotal point in the long and frustrating struggle for gay and lesbian rights.

By the courageous actions of these individuals—often maligned and shunned as fringe people by even the gay community—a statement was made that “enough is enough” and a movement was born.
The ensuing commemorative marches, parades and festivals that have been celebrated around the world since 1970 have emboldened the LGBT community to come out and stop being ashamed of who we are.

Yes, it is true that footage focusing on the more bizarre costumes that are typically on display at such celebrations have been used by religious extremists and political opponents to denigrate the gay community. They have been tools in the effort to keep us down, often succeeding.

But on balance the parades and related events have been beneficial. They are an affirmation of our self-identity. The gruesome conditions of pre-Stonewall gay America that I described earlier have virtually flipped around in the decades that followed.

While we have had to endure a phenomenal amount of setbacks politically during this period—including the politicizing of HIV/AIDS—we have come so far as a community, it defies imagination. We have evolved from merely seeking tolerance to later seeking acceptance, and now full equality will hopefully be within our grasp some day.

The complexity and scope of the gay rights movement at both the national and local levels cannot be appropriately captured by a simple chronological timeline as events and legal outcomes have spanned over decades. Instead, it is more instructive to highlight the progress and setbacks according to a few key landmarks and issues.

One of the early breakthroughs in the post-Stonewall era was the finding from the American Psychiatric Association in 1973 that confirmed the importance of new, better-designed research and removed homosexuality from the official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years later, the American Psychological Association passed a resolution supporting this removal.

Since then, both associations have urged all mental health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that some people still associate with homosexual orientation.
Moreover, they have attempted to debunk a variety of myths including that homosexuality is a choice and it can be cured through therapy.

These are crucial developments that have laid the foundation for society’s acceptance of gay people.
Not many other breakthroughs occurred during the 1970’s but interest in the plight of gay people was heightened by the anti-gay efforts of singer Anita Bryant’s successful attempt to overturn an anti-discrimination ordinance in Florida’s Dade County in 1977.

Through her group “Save our Children,” she instilled fear among voters and elected officials by insisting homosexuality is being taught to children.
The ensuing gay boycott of orange juice of which she was the spokesperson for the industry and the added support from a number of prominent Hollywood celebrities helped expose her as an extremist and galvanized the gay rights movement.

Thus, there was some degree of momentum heading in the 1980’s but a setback of unimaginable catastrophic proportions devastated the gay community.
This month we marked the 30th anniversary of the discovery of the virus that has come to be called HIV/AIDS. Gay and bisexual men by the tens of thousands were infected by the disease in the U.S., and thousands died from it. In the beginning of the scourge, the public saw it as a “gay disease” although the disease can be transmitted by intravenous drug users and tainted blood transfusions.
Politically, the AIDS epidemic was used to bash gays and their so-called lifestyle, by homophobes, religious and other social conservatives. Funding for dealing with the crisis was unconscionably insufficient.

President Reagan never publicly uttered the word “AIDS” and would have continued that silence had his friend Rock Hudson not succumbed to the disease in 1984.

On the positive side, the subsequent education campaign within the gay community resulted in the emphasis of safe sex and the closing down of establishments that fostered unsafe sex.

Nonetheless, while medical treatments have been developed to mitigate a once certain death sentence, there is no cure or preventable vaccine. Unfortunately, those in poverty or without health insurance have less access to these medications.

Troubling still is the fact the rate of infection from men having sex with men is back on the rise. Today’s younger generation is most vulnerable because:

1) They may not know anyone who actually died from HIV/AIDS and have not experienced the emotional trauma caused by such a loss;
2) They have a feeling of invulnerability because of their age; and
3) A false sense of security exists that medications would intervene.
Let’s go over some of the areas in which are key to the LGBT rights movement. I’ll begin with the military.

Throughout our history, the U.S. Military has banned gays and lesbians from serving in the Armed Forces. Thousands had been discharged mainly as a result of witch-hunts conducted by commanders and the snitching by fellow service members.

In 1993, newly elected President Bill Clinton attempted to fulfill a campaign promise to allow openly gay men and lesbians to serve in the military through an executive order. Having not accrued any political capital in the first few months of his presidency, Clinton was unable to withstand the vehement opposition from Senate Armed Forces Chairman Sam Nunn, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Colin Powell and many other military leaders and members of Congress.

As a result, he was forced to accept the compromise known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” This policy, which was enacted in 1994, was aimed at allowing gays and lesbians to serve but to do so without any open acknowledgement of their sexual orientation or to act on that orientation.

In the 16 years that transpired, over 13,000 service members were discharged, a significant number of whom held critical jobs for our national security, such as Arabic linguists.

Furthermore, a study conducted by GAO and later by an expert commission found that the policy has cost taxpayers $363 million during the first 10 years alone.

As you are probably aware, this past December Congress voted to end the current policy and the President signed it into law. The implementation has been delayed but it will take place by the end of the year.

An estimated 66,000 gays and lesbians are currently serving in the military.
Another area is the topic of hate crimes.

A tragic event occurred in October 1998 in Laramie, Wyoming when a gay college student, 21 year-old Matthew Shepard was kidnapped by two guys and beaten to death. This crime had garnered national and international attention to the dangers that gays are exposed to at the hands of those who are hateful.
During the next 11 years, Matthew’s mother, Judy Shepard, tirelessly lobbied around the country and in the corridors of Washington to secure legislation that would add extra penalties to those convicted of a crime based on hate.
Although such action failed in 2007 under a threat of a veto by President Bush, it finally succeeded two years later.

In October 2009, the aptly named Matthew Shepard Act was passed so that the Federal Hate Crimes statute was expanded to include crimes motivated by a victim's gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

President Obama signed the measure into law.

Maryland has a hate crime law on the books that covers sexual orientation and gender identity.

The decriminalization of gay sex marked another turning point.

This occurred on June 26, 2003 when the U.S. Supreme Court by a 6-3 decision, struck down the sodomy law in Texas in the case Lawrence v. Texas.

The court had previously addressed the same issue in 1986 in Bowers v. Hardwick, where it upheld a challenged Georgia statute, not finding a constitutional protection of sexual privacy.

But Lawrence explicitly overruled Bowers.

The majority held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Lawrence effectively invalidated similar laws throughout the United States that purport to criminalize sodomy between consenting same-sex adults acting in private. It also invalidated the application of sodomy laws to heterosexual sex.
At the time, the decision was considered by many as the most significant legal victory in the U.S. for gays and lesbians.

Later that year, another court decision was even more significant as we turn to the hot button issue of same-sex marriage.
On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled on the case Goodridge v. Department of Public Health that barring same–sex couples from marrying was unconstitutional.

Given 180 days to take whatever action was deemed appropriate, then Governor Mitt Romney ordered clerks to issue marriage licenses on May 17, 2004.

Accordingly, the controversial subject of gay marriage was one of the major issues during 2004 presidential election. Conservatives denounced the prospect of same-sex marriages as a threat to the sanctity of the institution and would destroy society.

Here’s a footnote: As to same-sex marriage being the downfall of the institution of marriage, Massachusetts, the state where marriage for same-sex couples has existed longer than any other, has the lowest divorce rate in the U.S.

Opposition to gay marriage was forming even before the ruling in Massachusetts. A decade earlier, opponents of gay marriage had started to rev up their rhetoric following the Hawaii State Supreme Court ruling in 1993 that found the state’s refusal to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples was discriminatory.

In 1998 the voters in Hawaii approved a constitutional amendment that would deny such marriages.
The opposition to gay marriage was led mainly by religious and cultural conservatives. They had successfully heightened the fears of the public and used the issue as a fundraising tool.
Much of what they put forth included distortions, exaggerations, the use of stereotypes, unsubstantiated statistics, and pure fiction to not only raise money but also to exert political influence.

In 2004 Republican political guru Karl Rove exploited the ruling in Massachusetts to drive a wedge among Democratic voters—particularly targeting African-Americans. And Republicans managed to place constitutional amendments on the ballots in 11 states that would prevent same-sex couples from marrying. They all succeeded.
Many believe that the scare tactics and ballot initiatives worked in the presidential election in that a higher than normal turnout among evangelical voters in the swing state of Ohio may have been the difference.

The marriage issue has taken two different paths. One is at the Federal level when in 1996 President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA, which primarily allows states to refuse to recognize the marriages of same-sex couples in other jurisdictions and bars any Federal benefits to same-sex couples.

Also, there was an effort to propose a constitutional amendment called the Federal Marriage Amendment which, if passed by both houses in Congress and ratified by 38 states, would define marriage as between one man and one woman. The measure failed in July 2006 in the House of Representatives.
Opposition was based mainly on the concept of federalism—that the Federal government should not intervene in the area of marriage licensing that has been traditionally a state responsibility.

The other path leads to state recognition. There are too many twists and turns in the road to marriage equality among the states and the courts to allow me to describe in the time allotted.
One of the more publicized contests, however, took place in California in 2008 where voters approved Proposition 8 that denied the right for same-sex couples to marry after the legislature had previously passed the measure.
This setback sent tremors among LGBT folks worldwide. Not only was California the most populous state but a high Democratic turnout in support of Barack Obama during the election was seen as a way to overcome largely Republican opposition and the measure would fail. It did not for a variety of reasons.

But needless to say, the signing of a marriage equality law in New York last week added to five other states and the District of Columbia who have legalized same-sex marriage. The other states are Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, and Iowa.

29 states have constitutional bans on same-sex marriage, while 12 others have laws against it.

Unless DOMA is repealed somehow, the same-sex marriages in the states that allow it are more symbolic than anything because it does not provide the 1,300 or so benefits, rights and responsibilities that are conferred upon heterosexual couples.
A fair question asked is what about civil unions if that would be more acceptable to the general public? Well, civil unions provide a separate but unequal class for gay and lesbian couples and their families that do not offer the same respect from society as marriage does. And such an arrangement is not portable from state-to-state.

Another area in which the struggle for equal rights has not fared well is employment protections, at least at the Federal level.

The Employment Nondiscrimination Act or ENDA is a proposed bill in the United States Congress that would prohibit discrimination against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by civilian, nonreligious employers with at least 15 employees.

A form of ENDA has been languishing in Congress since 1973, and ENDA itself has been introduced in every Congress except the 109th (2005-2007) since 1994 to no avail.

In 2007, the bill was pulled when it appeared that the inclusion of transgender individuals would fail to gain the needed votes in the House. This caused a rift within the LGBT community.

A transgender-inclusive bill was re-introduced in Congress 2009 and again 2011 where it remains to be acted on.

A total of 15 states, including D.C., have job discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and an additional 6 states, including Maryland, have protections based on sexual orientation only.
Locally, Baltimore City, Howard County, Montgomery County, Takoma Park and College Park have anti-discrimination ordinances in place.

In the private sector 337 large corporations employing over 8 million people have equal rights for their LGBT employees.

Culture. Without question the trend towards LGBT acceptance and ultimately equality has been aided by more positive portrayals of LGBT persons in film, books, television, music and other forms of entertainment.

From Billy Crystal’s role as Jodie Dallas in the late 70’s sitcom Soap, to the 8- year run of Will & Grace, to 20 years of MTV’s Real World with regular LGBT cast members, to straight actors playing gay roles and winning Oscars like Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, to the influence of Ellen DeGeneres and Elton John, more people saw LGBT folks in a different light and helped to mitigate the stereotypes that have existed.

And when TV producers trust openly gay actors Neil Patrick Harris and Jane Lynch to host huge awards shows, you know that we are on the right track.
Clearly, more and more celebrities and even a few sports figures have taken up LGBT causes whether it is marriage equality, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell or anti-bullying campaigns.
This is significant because of the influence these people have on society, especially the younger generation.
And with more people coming out, the chances for establishing allies increase. People who come out to their friends, neighbors, family members and co-workers put a face on LGBT. And those folks are less likely to want to see their LGBT counterparts harmed and discriminated against.

At this point I want to offer a brief summary of what’s been happening in Maryland.

In 1998, an ACLU lawsuit led to the Maryland courts striking down the state's sodomy law on equal protection grounds.
Under the leadership of Governor Parris Glendening, Maryland passed a comprehensive bill in 2001 to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations.
A similar bill to include protections based on gender identity has failed so far.
As for marriage equality, what advocates in Maryland are seeking is civil marriage, whereby religious institutions are exempt from being forced to marry couples if they do not want to.

Roughly 40 percent of couples in Maryland are married in city halls, town clerks offices and by justices of the peace. Those marriages are still valid even without a religious ceremony.

A lawsuit, Deane & Polyak v. Conaway was filed in July 2004, which charged that excluding same-sex couples from marriage violates the state constitution's guarantees of equality.

The oral arguments were heard August 2005 at a District Court in Baltimore.
In January 2006, Judge M. Brooke Murdock ruled in favor of the plaintiffs but immediately stayed the decision pending appeal by the state’s attorney general.

By a 4-3 decision, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled against the 19 plaintiffs in September 2007 thus upholding the 1973 law which states that marriage is between a man and a woman but signaled that the legislature can address the issue.

However, various attempts to gain marriage equality through the legislature have failed, most recently this past session.

In 2008, the General Assembly passed some forms of domestic partnership recognition that allowed, among other things, hospital visitation and medical decision-making rights to unmarried couples.

In February 2010, Maryland's Attorney General, Doug Gansler, issued an opinion that Maryland law could recognize valid same-sex marriages performed in other U.S. states.
In 2011 for the first time the Civil Marriage Protection Act passed the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee and then went on to pass in the Senate. However, after realizing there were a couple of votes short of passage in the House of Delegates, supporters of the bill voted it back to committee, thereby ending the effort in 2011.

Governor O’Malley had pledged to sign the bill if passed but has been criticized for not taking a public leadership role to try to get the needed votes.
Had the bill been signed into law, a referendum drive to overturn it was a certainty.

In the past General Assembly, a bill to add protections based on gender identity and expression similarly fell short.

Although the bill made its way out of the House, it failed to be voted on in the Senate.

The bill, as proposed, did not include Public Accommodations, which divided the transgender community.

The well-publicized beating of a trans-woman Chrissy Lee Polis at a Rosedale McDonald’s captured on video should fuel momentum to the gender identity bill next year.

Finally, Maryland law permits adoptions by single LGBT individuals and does not explicitly prohibit LGBT couples from adopting.
Status in Baltimore. After many years of contentious debate that received significant opposition from the Catholic archdiocese, a non-discrimination bill was passed by the City Council in 1988.

In November 2002, Baltimore became the first jurisdiction in Maryland to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, and credit practices based on gender identity or expression.
With much of the anti-discrimination work completed in Baltimore, the one area the LGBT community continues to have problems with is the police.

Many LGBT folks have mistrusted the police, not only in Baltimore but throughout the U.S.

True, you don’t see the bar raids, random ID searches and harassment that existed during the pre-Stonewall era, but friction remains.
This is based on a perceived and real lack of interest by police in investigating a crime against an LGBT victim or pursuing suspects.
The transgender community is particularly suspicious of the police because of the spate of attacks including homicides on trans-women, many of whom happen to be sex workers.

A liaison was established two years ago at the police department with the LGBT community to help bridge the two entities together.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention to this audience especially some of the issues facing LGBT youth.

While there are far more resources and support groups, including the establishment of Gay-Straight Alliances in the schools, to help today’s LGBT youth than there were, say, two decades ago, too many still experience a variety of problems.

Even today, with acceptance of gays and lesbians on the rise, a large number of families and peers continue to be resistant to a child’s coming out as gay or transgender.

In Baltimore, many rejecting families have thrown their LGBT children out of their homes.

This problem has been more prevalent among transgender teens.

Youth homelessness means these kids either live on the streets or couch surf just to survive.

And these circumstances often lead them to drugs, crime, illness and prostitution and their chances of being a victim of a crime are increased.

In addition, LGBT teens today are subject to bullying in the schools.
While Maryland has strong anti-bullying laws, their enforcement has been inconsistent.
A number of highly publicized suicides among teens who were gay or perceived to be gay have been traced to bullying—either in person or in cyberspace.
I recommend visiting GLSEN to learn more about the incidence of bullying in schools and what can be done about it.

In conclusion, we have traveled a long road to be where we are today, but we have so much further to go.

Folks like you taking an interest in matters affecting the LGBT community and understanding the history behind the LGBT rights movement will definitely help make it a better journey.

Thank you, and I welcome any further questions.

A Prideful Summer So Far

2011-06-29T01:48:00.006-04:00

As we start the summer season in earnest, there are some very positive developments in our quest for equality. I would like to comment on a few of them.

Start Spreading the News. The big item was the passage and signing into law of a marriage equality bill in the Empire State. The action taken by the New York State Senate (33 to 29) and the heroic leadership of Governor Andrew Cuomo, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the previous two governors, the strength of other courageous senators and assemblymen including Republicans, the hard work of LGBT organizations and the many people who supported the effort led to this significant victory.

The initial celebrations aptly occurred in front of the Stonewall Inn. The major party took place during the well-timed Pride Parade that Sunday.

The contrast between the leadership, courage and conviction of Governor Cuomo and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley is instructive. Where the resolute Cuomo personally and publicly lobbied for the passage of the bill, O’Malley held some “behind-the-scenes” conversations with lawmakers but then ruined it all by stating that the people should decide. The Washington Post Editorial Board commented: “As we learned in NY, legislation of this significance needs more than rhetorical hand-holding by the governor. It needs determined leadership.”

Happy Pride. Hats off to the GLCCB for a dazzling weekend of Pride celebrations in Baltimore. Thousands participated in the two-day celebration, and considering the GLCCB’s Executive Director, Craig Wiley, had resigned at the end of April, the extravaganza was run smoothly.

Kudos to GLCCB President Trevor Ankeny; Gary Wolnitzek, Director of Programming and Operations who functioned as the fourth Pride coordinator in as many years; Donald Young, Parade Coordinator; and the legions of volunteers for their outstanding work.
Personally, I enjoy the festival’s laid back atmosphere most, but who doesn’t love a fabulous parade? I want to thank the many visitors to the Baltimore OUTloud booth who offered encouragement and thanked us for our service to the community.

Rainbows Replacing Purple and Black. A sad consequence from the NFL lockout was the cancellation of Baltimore Ravens’ open practices that are normally held at McDaniel College in Westminster. However, the Carroll County city held its first Diversity Awareness Weekend on June 25-26 at the St. Paul's United Church of Christ, an open and affirming church. Open and Affirming is a movement within the United Church of Christ that welcomes people of all sexual orientations and gender identities There were exhibits, panel discussions, films, workshops and music at the event.

And of no small consequence Mayor Kevin Utz proclaimed Diversity Weekend in Westminster. That city and Carroll County in general lag behind the more progressive jurisdictions in the state when it comes to LGBT issues. However, Thom Ballantine, a deacon and events coordinator at St. Paul's, noted the county has become a lot more supportive of the LGBT community over the years.

“When I moved to Westminster in 1997, it was like I was the only gay man living in the whole county," Ballantine told the Carroll County Times. "Now there's a PFLAG chapter and a welcoming church, which shows the LGBT community that they don't have to remain in hiding anymore.”

Still Evolving. President Barack Obama spoke before a predominantly LGBT audience at a DNC fundraiser in New York just a few days prior to the historic marriage equality bill signing. After touting his Administration’s significant accomplishments on LGBT issues (repeal of DADT, signing a hate crimes bill, refusal to defend DOMA in the courts), he re-stated his position on marriage that it’s still “evolving.”

“I believe that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as every other couple in this country,” he told the audience. But he has not yet made that leap from marriage is only between a man and a woman to full marriage equality.

The President’s reluctance to declare support for marriage equality has irked many activists. They feel he is too cautious on an issue that is gaining public support and that they believe is a position he supports deep down.

In a recent editorial, the Baltimore Sun asserted that if the President declared his support for marriage equality, it would be beneficial to the movement in Maryland. He would have more sway than any other leader with religious African-Americans who largely oppose marriage for same-sex couples. The President could be a difference-maker in the 2012 General Assembly if he comes around given that our efforts failed this year by only a couple of votes in the House of Delegates.

A Good Night Out. The 7th annual Night out with the Nationals on June 21 was special on many levels. Nearly 3,400 LGBT folks attended the game between the Washington Nationals and Seattle Mariners, which was won by the home team 6-5 in a stunning come-from-behind walk-off victory.

Daniel Hernandez, the intern credited with helping to save Representative Gabrielle Giffords’ life in Tucson, and who was hailed as a hero by President Obama, threw out the ceremonial first pitch at Nationals Park. Openly gay John Berry, Director of the Office of Personnel Management and Amanda Simpson, the first openly transgender presidential appointee, were also on hand. The Gay Men’s Chorus performed the National Anthem prior to the game.

Plans are afoot to hold the first ever Night Out with the O’s this September. Stay tuned.

It Was Only a Joke. Finally, it was gratifying to see comedian Tracy Morgan publicly apologize for his tasteless jokes about gays and lesbians in a supposed comedy routine at Nashville’s Ryman Auditorium. Most serious was his irresponsible comment that he would stab his son to death if he turned out to be gay or had a “gay voice.”

But Morgan did profusely apologize. He partnered with the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. He met with homeless gay teens and a mother who lost her child to anti-gay violence. He swore up and down that he didn't have an anti-gay bone in his body.

This, in itself, is progress. Imagine such contriteness from the late anti-gay comic Sam Kinison?

Why Not Include a Rally at Pride?

2011-06-16T01:00:00.001-04:00

To some, the celebration of Pride month or weekend affords an opportunity to reflect on past successes within the LGBT community and look towards the future. To most, however, Pride has evolved into the big social event of the year drawing thousands of rainbow-minded folks to party, dance, drink, cruise, and yes, enjoy a colorful parade and a nice festival in the process.

The first Gay Pride parade and celebration in the U.S. took place in June 1970 in New York to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the Stonewall uprising that gave birth to the modern gay rights movement. The parade was a political statement back then: we demand our rights.

As the ensuing decades passed, Pride became less political and served other needs, mainly showcasing, entertaining and fundraising. Even the politically-oriented Washington Blade publishes Pride events in their Arts & Entertainment section.

While you don’t usually see elected officials or community leaders taking a microphone to rally the troops on behalf of a cause, there will be politicians aplenty trolling the crowd at the festival for donations and votes. That is a tradition at Pride celebrations, and there is nothing wrong with that.

In my view, this is the time to hold a rally. Those of us seeking equality need to get motivated to continue the journey after a disappointing spring. Why not allow community leaders to share the stage during the block party with drag performers and other entertainers to briefly address the masses on important LGBT issues? Or use the main stage at the festival?

Yes, Pride is a welcome respite from the sometimes depressing realities of the day. It is a party, and people should be allowed to enjoy a weekend of fabulous fun and festivities. I definitely want that as well.

But like no other day of the year, the LGBT community and allies in Baltimore come out in force at Pride, and the opportunity to reach thousands at one time that does not involve social media is enticing.

Not only would such a rally serve to galvanize the crowd to encourage volunteerism, but it would also present another opportunity to raise funds for cash-starved organizations. The fact that such a component is not included in the Pride schedule is a mistake and a lost opportunity.

There is no shortage of events, themes or causes to rally behind. For example:
On the positive side, over the past few months, we had experienced some wonderful successes that should make us proud. Not the least of which was President Obama’s signing into law the repeal of the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. Although there have been undue delays in implementing the change, official acceptance of openly gay and lesbian service members is a huge step on the road to equality.

We have seen entertainers, business leaders and professional athletes get behind the marriage equality effort in New York. This is particularly significant when it comes to pro athletes because so much of our culture in this country is wrapped around sports. The NBA’s strong repudiation of anti-gay slurs by some players is welcome and crucial towards reducing, if not eliminating, that form of bigotry.

We have seen a plethora of celebrities join the “It Gets Better” campaign.

We have seen in several polls how the country is moving closer to accepting the idea that loving members of the same gender can get married and enjoy the benefits and rights that are associated with marriage. The trends are even more favorable as the supportive younger generation is replacing the older conservative one.

We had seen a courageous fair-minded Republican leader of the Maryland Senate, Allan Kittleman, buck his party’s dogma and give up his leadership position to support marriage equality in the state.

We had seen a vote on marriage equality succeed in that very same Senate only to fall a couple of votes short of passage in the House of Delegates.
We also saw in Maryland a gender identity non-discrimination bill, albeit flawed, pass a legislative body (the House) for the first time but failed in the Senate.

And now we have a total of eight openly gay legislators—one of the highest totals in the nation.

On the negative side of the ledger, there was a brutal, persistent attack on a trans-woman, Chrissy Lee Polis at a Baltimore County McDonald’s. Out of this horrific incident, a new awareness of discrimination and violence towards our transgender brothers and sisters has been born. Hopefully, the imperative legislation next year will be fueled by this awareness.

Sadly, we are witnessing the possible disintegration of Equality Maryland as a viable force to achieve equality in the state. Its handling of personnel and the instability of the board coupled with a looming financial collapse has put the once renowned organization on the edge.

And on the 30th year anniversary that marked the discovery of the disease that has come to be called HIV/AIDS, reports indicated that the rate of infection among men having sex with men is once again on the rise. This is troubling, to be sure, and the concept of safe-sex needs to be driven home to our younger folks who feel they are invincible. Yes, there are treatments, which have mitigated a once-certain death sentence. But there is no cure or a preventative vaccine.

And if you need still another rallying point, you have NOM, the Catholic Church and politicians under the banner of “religion” who wish to deny us our rights as human beings.

All these points are worthy to rally around—individually or collectively. We won’t see such a rally as part of this year’s Pride. However, there is always next year, and it should be planned.

In the meantime, let’s enjoy ourselves and think of all the heroes that have brought us this far on the road to equality. Here’s to rainbows, balloons and triangles. Here’s to us all.

http://www.stevecharing.blogspot.com/.

Exit Spring

2011-05-31T14:18:00.007-04:00

By every measure, this spring has been one for the ages. You have the Arab Spring whereby several Middle East and North African countries challenged their authoritarian old guard governments in the quest for freedom.

You have the Tornado Spring in which there had been record devastation in the wake of countless climate change-induced tornadoes in the South and Midwest.

You have the Flood Spring where the mighty Mississippi wreaked havoc on neighboring towns.

You have the Osama bin Laden Spring when public enemy Number 1 was effectively put to death by our courageous SEALS 6 team.

You had the Donald Spring where the annoying egotism of Donald Trump somehow managed to dominate the political scene.

And you also have the Exit Spring. Clearly, the departure of Oprah heads the list followed not that closely by the Maria Shriver exit in the wake of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s dalliances and the sad cancellation of TV’s Brothers & Sisters. And as in the case of every spring, you have the Washington Capitals exiting the playoffs in an early round.

Perhaps not as monumental but of concern to our local LGBT community, was its share of exits this spring. While the surprise resignation of long time executive director of the GLCCB, Craig Wiley, was significant especially with Pride right around the corner, the messy, soap opera-like dismissal/resignation of Equality Maryland’s executive director Morgan Meneses-Sheets is still sending tremors among us.

And if that’s not enough, I, too, will be heading to the exit door after 26 months as Baltimore OUTloud’s managing editor. This resignation was as sudden as it was regrettable, but it was prompted by an unsolvable personal dispute with one of the publication’s owners. He shall remain nameless, and I will not discuss the details here.

I have turned the reins over to a very capable person, Dana LaRocca, whose column, “City Desk…A View from Mount Vernon,” has been a welcome and popular addition to our independent, award-winning newspaper. The paper’s co-publishers agreed to my recommendation, and she is the new managing editor.

Dana, who is a very good friend of mine, brings to this position years of experience in journalism. She is savvy, smart, and knows our community as well as anyone. But even more important, she cares deeply about our community and its issues, and that type of dedication is needed to be successful. Dana has been a tremendous booster for the paper and strongly believes that by being independent, it provides a critical voice for our readers.

I urge all of our writers, readers and advertisers to support Dana and the paper as it will continue to play an important role in presenting news and issues that affect our lives as LGBT folks. I have been working with Dana during this transition period, and I figure to write this column in the future.

My experience as editor has been challenging, fulfilling and enjoyable, and I owe it largely to everyone who has supported the paper and worked towards its success. I begin with the staff, and I am grateful for the support I received from the dedicated Mary Taylor (Sales Manager/Production), Anja Saine (webmaster), Bill Andriette (production director), Bill’s back-up Maria Nicolosi, talented Carol Baker (graphic artist, who also recently left to pursue further education in her field), Joe Velasquez who had succeeded Carol, and former distributors Jay Loane and Michael Serio.

Then there are the writers whose efforts are crucial to any successful publication. I cannot adequately express my appreciation for the loyalty and excellence of Gregg Shapiro, Chuck Duncan, and Deb Draisin whose contributions to our Lively Arts section made it one of the best there is.

Others also played important roles in providing excellent material for our readers (in no particular order): Dr. Eva Hersh (deserves special kudos), Dana LaRocca, David Placher, Jay Loane, Josh Aterovis, Jonathan Hernandez, Marty Hoegg, Wayne Curtis, Gerry Fisher, Rev. Meredith Moise, Woody Derricks, Mark Patro, Shawn Bradley, Sandy Rawls, Larry Walker, Colin Riley, Jessica Lemmo, Jesse Benson, Terrence Brower, Jeffrey Clagett, Nicole Bettis, Vann Mills, Bill Palmer, Jeffrey Clouser, Sam Kunz and the always dependable Rodney Burger.

These individuals are like family and made my job easier. Some have moved on to other priorities in their lives; others hopefully will remain with us.

A special nod goes to Bruce Garrett, whose outstanding political cartoons appeared in every single issue except one over a two-year period, giving our paper the uniqueness among LGBT publications of having our own in-house cartoonist. Bruce also did excellent work for the paper in the area of photography as did Skip Koritzer, Justin Nixon and most recently Jay W.

This has been a significant journey for me, and I don’t regret one minute of it. My work as editor and reporter for the paper has taken me to places and people I never imagined meeting, and I feel enriched by the experience.

Aside from the OUTloud family, I had been privileged to make innumerable contacts in and around the Baltimore area. As an example, I recently had the pleasure of meeting Maggie Beetz, the charming new editor of Gay Life whom I consider a colleague and friend rather than a competitor.

Organization leaders, elected officials, business people, other media representatives, publicists, etc. have added to and strengthened my journalism world and my life. I thank them for their work and their valuable contributions as sources and newsmakers.

In wrapping up this Exit Spring, I would be remiss if I didn’t thank Jim Becker, my dear friend of over three decades and co-publisher of Baltimore OUTloud, for the opportunity to serve the LGBT community in this capacity.

And above everything else, I thank my husband Bob Ford for his loyalty, patience and support. Investing this much time and effort into an endeavor such as this can truly test a relationship. But love, as they say, conquers all. Thank you, Bob, for the love, sacrifice and understanding throughout this period of our lives. I am once again all yours.

The Puck Starts Here

2011-05-17T23:09:00.009-04:00

Washington Capitals fans are in the all-too familiar position of witnessing our beloved team being eliminated from the Stanley Cup playoffs. But unexpected news during this playoff season has diverted our attention away from the disappointment with the Caps to the quest for marriage equality, particularly in New York State.

Sean Avery, a left wing (hockey position) in his fifth season with the New York Rangers has come out for marriage equality. Avery, a straight, fashion-conscious 31 year-old, has partnered with the Human Rights Campaign to appear in a video for its “New Yorkers for Marriage Equality” campaign. It can be viewed here .

"Sean Avery knows what it means to be a leader - on and off the ice,” said HRC Senior New York Strategist Brian Ellner. “As the first professional athlete in the state to publically support marriage equality, his voice is sure to resonate. Like a majority of New Yorkers, he believes in the freedom of all loving, committed couples to marry."

Sean Avery, however, is one of the most reviled players in the National Hockey League by his peers. He is known as an agitator on the ice whose primary mission is to get under the skin of the opponents. Avery has made some off-color comments that netted him a lengthy suspension, and he has twice led the league in penalty minutes. Fans of other teams despise him even more.

So when a bespectacled Avery, a Canadian, states in the 30-second video, “I treat everyone the way I expect to be treated, and that applies to marriage,” eyebrows were raised. Cynics could rightfully ask, “What does he have to lose? He’s hated anyway.” In the video Avery adds, "Committed couples should be able to marry the person they love. Join me in supporting marriage equality."

In a phone interview with the New York Times, Avery explained, "The places I've played and lived the longest have been in West Hollywood, Calif., when I played for the Los Angeles Kings, and when I moved to New York, I lived in Chelsea for the first four years. I certainly have been surrounded by the gay community. And living in New York and when you live in L.A., you certainly have a lot of gay friends."

Sure, it would be great if some iconic, transcendent figure in the world of professional sports could be a spokesperson for LGBT equality rather than one with a negative image. Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, Emmett Smith and Cal Ripken, Jr.—widely popular figures—would have more influence, to be sure, as they are heroes and role models. But we must take what we can get in this macho-obsessed, testosterone-laden industry, and Sean Avery should receive applause for this courageous step. [Note that Baltimore Ravens’ Brendan Ayanbadejo spoke out for marriage equality in the Huffington Post and is working with Equality Maryland to advance the cause.]

But in this case, it was the message (marriage equality) that resonated and not necessarily the messenger (Avery). When Todd Reynolds, vice-president of Uptown Hockey, a management group (agent), tweeted that he was “very sad to read Sean Avery's misguided support of same-gender ‘marriage’. Legal or not, it will always be wrong,” hockey fans rallied to Avery’s defense in droves.

Reynolds went on to clarify in subsequent tweets that his comments did not reflect hatred, bigotry or intolerance towards gays; he just believes in the sanctity of marriage. The controversy continued, nonetheless. Canadian sports reporter, Damian Goddard, was fired for his tweet-based support of Reynolds.

I’ve always believed that if a current gay male professional athlete were to come out, hockey would be the most likely sport. There is a higher percentage of Europeans and Canadians in the National Hockey League than any of the other three major pro sports leagues in the U.S. As such, there would probably be less gay hang-ups among players with those backgrounds.

Then you also have the cities where NHL games are played: New York, Montreal, Washington, Toronto, Vancouver, Boston, Atlanta, South Florida, LA, Chicago, etc.— hotbeds for LGBT folks. Public reaction and team management would likely be supportive.

I spoke with a former Washington Capitals player, who is Canadian, and asked him if the NHL would accept an openly gay player. He said that “the players would do the politically correct thing” at least in public. That’s promising.

When Brendan Burke, 21, a former hockey goalie and student manager of the Miami (Ohio) University ice hockey team and son of the NHL’s Toronto Maple Leafs general manager Brian Burke came out as gay in November 2009, there was also a flood of international support by news outlets and fans. Brendan advocated tolerance and spoke out against homophobia in professional sports.

His father, who was also the GM for the U.S. Olympic men’s hockey team in Vancouver, issued a statement: “I had a million good reasons to love and admire Brendan. This news didn’t alter any of them… There are gay men in professional hockey. We would be fools to think otherwise. And it’s sad that they feel the need to conceal this. I understand why they do so, however… Since he wishes to blaze this trail, I stand beside him with an axe! I simply could not be more proud of Brendan than I am, and I love him as much as I admire him.” Tragically, young Brendan Burke was killed in a car accident two months later.

Brendan and Brian Burke, Sean Avery, Brendan Ayanbadejo (and most recently Donte Stallworth of the Ravens), the NBA’s Grant Hill, Jared Dudley, and former NBA star Charles Barkley and others deserve a standing ‘O’ for what they have done for gay rights. And other allies like former U. of Maryland wrestler Hudson Taylor, whose organization Athlete Ally is challenging homophobia in sports, will help make gay athletes more likely to come out and advance equality in the process.

www.stevecharing.blogspot.com

Equality Maryland at the Crossroads

2011-05-04T23:33:00.007-04:00

April had not been a kind month for Equality Maryland, the state’s largest LGBT rights organization. The two signature legislative issues managed by Equality Maryland—marriage equality and gender identity protections—did not succeed in the 2011 General Assembly although the environment was ripe for passage for at least one.

Following each defeat (the bills were actually recommitted to committee instead of an up-and-down vote being taken in the second chamber) finger-pointing ran amok. Strategies and leadership were called into question, especially after the Civil Marriage Protection Act failed to advance in the House of Delegates although it sailed through the Senate.

Outside organizations (national partners, such as Human Rights Campaign, Gill Action and Freedom to Marry) were accused by many in the community of pushing the ultimate decision to recommit the bills, and Equality Maryland was blamed for allowing these organizations to maintain that degree of influence in what had been deemed by many as a local matter.

As to the gender identity bill, the trans-community was divided over the removal of “public accommodations” from the legislation to overcome a potential obstacle in the vote. The fury on both sides was intense and became personal. Many who were upset that the public accommodations component was stripped from the bill worked to defeat it. Although Delegate Joseline A. Pena-Melnyk, the sponsor of the bill, had made that strategic decision, Equality Maryland drew much of the ire as they backed the delegate.

The controversial firing of the organization’s executive director Morgan Meneses-Sheets also in April by the Equality Maryland Board did not help repair the public relations stain that had begun to envelop the organization. This was amplified by the resignation by Matt Thorn, the newly appointed Director of Development (fundraising), in protest.

The Board’s clumsy denial that Meneses-Sheets was actually fired was not productive as she had stated that it was not her decision to leave. There needed to be clarity and consistency in what had transpired, not contradiction.

And the appearance of a “gag order” to prevent Meneses-Sheets from talking to the media also fosters suspicion. When an organization reaches out to a community and asks for donations and volunteers, there should be transparency and accountability. Shunning the media or keeping things secretive only serves to erode confidence.

Many assumed that the firing of Menses-Sheets resulted from the failure to enact one or both of these critical bills. People even drew the sports analogy that when a team fails to deliver, the ownership usually axes the coach or manager. So it didn’t come as a major surprise that this action was taken.

However, according to a credible source familiar with Equality Maryland who spoke to Baltimore OUTloud on the condition of anonymity, the decision to terminate Meneses-Sheets was made as early as January. Even if these bills had passed, the Board was still going to dismiss Meneses-Sheets following the 90-day General Assembly.

There had been pressure placed on the Board by a number of lawmakers to remove her. It was a “communications” problem that, in part, led to the decision. Legislators believed she was too public by disclosing sensitive strategy while the Board was upset that she did not consult with them before she took a variety of actions or made statements.

This same source indicated that the role of the national partners during the last legislative session was troubling. “HRC and Gill Action seemed to play off each other. HRC saw this as a fundraising opportunity and each organization wanted to claim credit had there been a victory.”

Equality Maryland’s use of national partners has been questioned given that many believe that only local advocates would be more effective. The collaboration with these organizations gave the appearance that they were actually running the show. That perception further weakened Equality Maryland’s standing with some parts of the community.

Moreover, there is speculation that a new advocacy group will emerge to lead the marriage fight and a different organization will step forward to advance gender identity protections.

As April was mercifully coming to a close, Equality Maryland stood at the crossroads between becoming an effective state-based force in advancing LGBT rights or being perceived as irrelevant.

Only a week following the departure of Morgan Meneses-Sheets, the Board announced the selection of Lynne Bowman, a founder of Equality Ohio, to serve as the Interim Executive Director. She also served as the Director of Programs and Services for the Equality Federation, the national association of state-based LGBT organizations and possesses over two decades of experience in holding myriad leadership positions.

From all that can be gathered by reading posts on blogs, this is a very popular choice. I had the opportunity to speak with Lynne Bowman on the phone, and she impressed me as determined, and knowledgeable.

Her first order of business is to “stabilize” the organization from within and repair the public relations mishaps that beset the organization particularly over the course of the past month. Bowman’s guiding hand will be required to reassure a skeptical LGBT community.

This is crucial for the survival of Equality Maryland. Unless confidence is restored, much needed fundraising would not be accomplished and its impact on legislation would be reduced.

I still maintain that Equality Maryland has the infrastructure in place and the necessary contacts to overcome the disappointments of 2011. With Lynne Bowman at the helm, at least for the next four months, and if the LGBT community and allies get behind the organization, the ship can be righted. This is imperative because as of now, Equality Maryland is at the crossroads.

www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com

A Blueprint for Achieving Marriage Equality in 2012

2011-04-22T08:49:00.010-04:00

Winning a Referendum

We are a long way off from a referendum—both in terms of time and also in what needs to be accomplished before that eventuality. Of course, if the Civil Marriage Protection Act is not signed into law, there will be no referendum. There is no guarantee that it will be brought up again, and there is no guarantee we hold onto existing support or change the minds of a few.

And also keep in mind that at no time in our history has marriage equality been won at the ballot box, no matter how blue or progressive a state may be. We are, in terms of numbers, a small minority, nationally and in Maryland. Even with family members, co-workers, neighbors, friends and other allies supporting our cause, we are greatly outnumbered.

Moreover, the opposition who is invariably well-funded, well-organized, and well-motivated has a history of success in places like California and Maine. We are clearly the Davids among the Goliaths and our challenge will be daunting to say the least.

But we can overcome the odds.

The main thing is for our community to come together. Many gays and lesbians do not see the marriage issue as one where they feel they should donate money or help in any way. They are single and don’t think of themselves as ever going to be married or they are coupled and also don’t see nuptials in their future.

But none of that matters. When the opposition machine cranks up, the lies emanating from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and a bevy of religious organizations will be breathtaking. They will use money—lots of it—from outside of Maryland to smear us as a community.

Every stereotype, every exaggeration, every unverified claim, and every scare tactic will be thrown into the barrage of commercials, robocalls and mailings to sway otherwise fair-minded citizens of the state that we are immoral, filthy slime who will teach kids to be gay and ruin society.

Even if you don’t contemplate marriage, every one of these lies and attacks are directed to you as well. You have to consider: do you like being relegated to second-class citizenship status and stomped on? If so, then you probably won’t be interested in reading on.

But if you do have dignity, pride and a feeling of self-worth and would be personally offended by the absurd characterizations that will befall us, then you are in this with the thousands of Maryland gay and lesbian couples who would be denied marriage rights should a referendum to overturn the law establishing marriage equality is successful. For every insult hurled at us, you should and must take them personally and react accordingly.

We need everyone in the LGBT community to help combat the lies. It will take a lot of money, to be sure. We must enlist the fundraising expertise and infrastructure from national LGBT organizations. We must bolster Equality Maryland’s efforts to raise money and to help as volunteers.

It won’t be just a simple task of stuffing envelopes. There will be a great need for grass roots activism—the only way we can win this fight. Door knocking, phone banking, lit drops, town hall meetings will be required—just like a political campaign because that’s exactly what it is.

Equality Maryland deserves the right to lead the effort. They should not go at alone but they should be the lead. If other organizations and entities try to compete for the spotlight and trample all over each other, the effort will fail, just like in California.

Equality Maryland will, however, have a lot of work to do. And they need to start planning for a referendum battle NOW—not wait until the bill is signed into law. Fundraising strategies, town hall meetings in as many districts as possible, setting up an infrastructure for phone banking, designing fliers and mailers and other necessities must begin right away.

Equality Maryland is a small organization with a handful of staff and volunteers. It needs to beef up its donor base and attract even more volunteers.

The organization will have to seek national partners and build coalitions with progressive organizations like labor unions, particularly government unions who have money and people. They should also enlist the help of supportive elected officials to execute a grass roots effort district by district.

It would be great if the GLCCB steps up and partners with Equality Maryland to offer space for phone banking and provide other resources including mailing lists to attract contributions. The GLCCB should also allow Pride to be used as a means to energize the community and allow speakers to share with the stage with the entertainers, if only for a few minutes, to rally the masses.

The referendum, if one takes place, must be viewed as a war because if it fails there is no telling what the eventual outcome will be for marriage equality in Maryland. Therefore, it should be approached with the greatest degree of seriousness and be fought like it’s the last battle.

And we must all be soldiers in that battle whether you envision being married or not.

A Blueprint for Marriage Equality in 2012

2011-04-07T01:53:00.008-04:00

Winning Over the Legislature

By Steve Charing

Following the near-miss of achieving marriage equality in the 2011 Maryland General Assembly, many gays and lesbians were left heartbroken, angry and frustrated. It was a disappointment, to be sure, but there is no reason why we cannot succeed in 2012 if the entire LGBT community and allies get on board. We have the benefit of a year’s time to regroup, collect our thoughts and execute a winning game plan.

Keep in mind, however, that although House Speaker Michael Busch indicated he would bring up the Civil Marriage Protection Act in 2012, there is no guarantee that he will. Therefore, it is imperative that he be convinced there are sufficient votes for passage.

The following represents my ideas on how we can secure the necessary votes in the House of Delegates and hold on to the Senate’s support.

Keep it local

While national groups, such as the Human Rights Campaign and Gill Action were gracious to help Equality Maryland with the efforts in the legislature in 2011, I would prefer that their resources, reach and fundraising capabilities be applied to a referendum battle should one transpire. For our work in the legislature, it is best that Equality Maryland, with the support of the LGBT community and a professional lobbying firm, convince wavering and/or persuadable lawmakers to gain the necessary votes.

The national groups, many believe, played an influential role in the controversial decision this year to commit the marriage bill to committee, which left a bitter taste in the mouths of pro-marriage activists. This unfortunately eroded the confidence in Equality Maryland, and that damage needs to be repaired.

We must encourage Equality Maryland to lead the fight as they are in the best position to understand the idiosyncrasies of the individual legislators and their constituents. And as a community, we must stand behind the organization and offer support as needed.

Winning over non-supportive African-Americans

Maryland is a state with one of the highest percentage of African-Americans in the country. And during the 2012 election with President Obama will be on the ballot, a greater turnout of these voters is expected—a situation that is crucial during a referendum.

Clearly, the failure to move the marriage bill through the House this session was in part due to the opposition of several Democratic delegates who were influenced by church-going African-American constituents. This group has been traditionally opposed to marriage for same-sex couples. Securing the votes from those delegates would likely have been the difference between winning and losing.

Therefore, a major educational effort needs to be undertaken. Allies, such as the Maryland Black Family Alliance who have done great work on our behalf, would be helpful in that regard.

Equality Maryland should also solicit the assistance of supportive delegates and senators especially in predominantly African-American districts in Baltimore City and Prince George’s County. Perhaps town hall meetings held jointly by these elected officials and Equality Maryland could go a long way in allaying fears about marriage equality.

Of course, this could present a challenge in obtaining the assistance of these politicians, but you can be sure that homophobic delegates Emmett Burns and Don Dwyer will be working with NOM and other anti-gay organizations to ensure a defeat.

Also, our efforts to line up votes should focus on Democrats. Virtually all Republican lawmakers in this state are against marriage equality. Sen. Allan Kittleman is an exception as he is the only member of the GOP caucus capable of thinking for himself to support what he knows is right. Let’s not waste time and resources beating a dead elephant.

Words are important

There is no question in my mind that marriage for same-sex couples is a civil right. But many African-Americans don’t buy into that concept, and it may be hurting us.

Although leading civil rights icons, such as Rep. John Lewis, Julian Bond and the late Coretta Scott King have equated marriage equality as a civil right, it appears that a large number of African-Americans brush off that idea and listen more to their pastors.

I believe we should frame this struggle as one of “equal rights” where we won’t have to engage in a distracting side argument on the definition of “civil rights”. But we should not retreat on the word “marriage”. Naming it anything else opens up the separate but equal doctrine, which is unacceptable in this movement.

Ideas are important too

Equality Maryland and its board members should welcome strategic ideas from the broader community. Large open meetings would likely be unruly, difficult to manage and nonproductive. Instead, Equality Maryland should schedule smaller meetings in the months ahead with community leaders in business and media as well as other local advocacy organizations that have succeeded in advancing equality at the grass roots level. There should be a free exchange of ideas to determine the most effective way of reaching out to targeted constituency groups and to help formulate a broad strategy for raising large sums of needed money to succeed in a referendum battle.