To Boycott or Nyet

The current attempt to boycott Russian vodka and/or the 2014 winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia in response to that country’s stringent anti-gaypropaganda law signed by President Putin in June, calls into question the effectiveness of such actions.  There have been successes in the past, but the current proposed boycotts will not succeed.

In 1977, homophobe and singer Anita Bryant effectively led a well-publicized effort through a group she headed “Save Our Children” to repeal an anti-discrimination ordinance in Dade County, Florida that covered sexual orientation.  The vote was a lopsided 69-31 margin. That outraged the gay community, and in response, activists organized a boycott of Florida orange juice because Bryant was a spokesperson for the Florida Citrus Commission. 

According to Eric Marcus, in his 2002 book, Making Gay History: The Half-Century Fight for Lesbian and Gay Equal Rights, gay bars all over North America took screwdrivers off their drink menus and replaced them with the “Anita Bryant”, which was made with vodka and apple juice.  Sales and proceeds went to gay civil rights activists to help fund their fight against Bryant and her campaign.
The boycott didn’t kill off the orange juice industry, but its high-profiled effort brought awareness to the plight of lesbians and gays in Dade County.  Activist Harvey Milk pointed out, “The entire nation finally opened up and talked about Gay people.”   

It took twenty years, but Dade re-authored the anti-discrimination ordinance.  Opposition again tried to repeal it, but the voters of Dade County said “not this time” and backed it with 56 percent of the vote.

In this case, the boycott served as a vehicle to rally progressive groups and individuals to a cause, and it diminished Anita Bryant’s career.  And although the change in law occurred two decades later, the boycott was deemed a success.

Another example was the boycott of Coors beer that began in the 1970’s but ended successfully by the mid-90’s when the company changed their anti-gay policies.

Not all boycotts lead to victories.  Many are divisive and come off as reflexive counterpunches to a wide range of provocations.  They make one feel good but they’re not always successful and could even induce a backlash.

Such was the case in the Chick-fil-A debacle last year.  CEO Dan Cathy had made public statements opposing same-sex marriage and we later learned that the restaurant chain had donated large amounts of money to anti-gay organizations.  Activists urged a boycott of the restaurant as a result.

However, anti-gay Mike Huckabee organized a show of support for not only the positions Cathy had taken but also his right to express them.  On August 1, 2012, “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” resulted in record sales as over 600,000 RSVPed on Facebook to back the Huckabee event.  Not only was the company rewarded by exceeding the effects of the LGBT-led boycott, but it also emboldened the opposition to marriage equality.

Nonetheless, Chick-fil-A has since taken steps to re-examine its treatment of LGBT employees and its donations policies.

The proposed dual boycotts involving Russian vodka and the Winter Olympics seem to be knee-jerk reactions and short-sighted.  Dade County in Florida may have felt the impact of an all-out boycott of orange juice, but Russia will simply laugh off a similar protest, urged by author Dan Savage, against their vodka.  Stoli, the most mentioned brand, is not based in Russia though it uses ingredients from there.  A boycott of that company is pointless since they did not craft the law nor do they support it.

Russia’s economy is pumped up by their exports of oil, gas, palladium, nickel, iron, chemical products, autos, military equipment and timber.  The country has vast reserves of natural resources and they maintain a consistent trade surplus.  The exportation of vodka does not even create a blip.   Do you think that a handful of American gay bars’ refusing to sell vodka drinks will have any effect on the Russian economy?  Do you think Putin would buckle under such minimum pressure?

The proposed boycott of the Olympics in Sochi created more of a controversy.   Actor and playwright Harvey Fierstein called for a boycott in an op-ed in the New York Times.  But many disagree.  Olympic diving champion Greg Louganis who could not compete in 1980 because of the boycott called by President Jimmy Carter a year following the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan and tennis champion Martina Navratilova believe the athletes should be allowed to participate.

LGBT advocacy groups All Out and Athlete Ally concur.  And the LGBT Sports Commission said in a statement, “Rather than talk about boycotts, the LGBT Sports Coalition is focused on participation. Whether or not an athlete is a member of the LGBT community, everyone who qualifies for these Games deserves the opportunity to compete safely…We did not choose Russia to host these Winter Games. However, we can use it as an opportunity to showcase the damage of repressive governments like that of President Putin.”

Then there is the question of why Russia’s treatment of gays deserve boycotts while other oppressive nations do not.  Local activist Rev. Meredith Moise illustrates the discrepancy.  “A transgender young woman was brutally murdered in Jamaica, hacked to death,” she told me. “Jamaica [as well as Uganda and South Africa] has been hell for LGBT people for years.” 

The point is well taken.  Do we hear about any boycotts of Jamaican rum?  LGBT folks are literally executed in Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries.  Do we boycott their oil?

Rev. Moise adds, “This has led many LGBT people of color to speculate and conclude that if a crisis doesn't involve gay white males, it will never get the attention from gay inc. establishment it deserves. Is this really justice or just us?”

International and diplomatic pressure is the only path to change the situation in Russia and elsewhere.  That’s an Olympic-sized challenge but has a better chance of succeeding than boycotts.

 

 

'A Chorus Line' Makes the Cut at Olney

Photo by Stan Barouh

It may have been 1975 with the birth years of the dancers auditioning for a fictional Broadway musical ranging from 1942 to 1955, but the competition for such chosen roles by “gypsies,” as show dancers are described, is as fierce today as it was then.  Many talented performers, few openings are available. That hasn’t changed over the years.  The Olney Theatre Center, acclaimed for its lusty musicals, succeeds with its entertaining re-creation of the timeless hit musical A Chorus Line, which humanizes these seemingly anonymous dancers.

One singular sensation  (Photo: Stan Barouh)

Veteran Stephen Nachamie, in choreographing and directing, stays true to the original production that featured music by Marvin Hamlisch, lyrics by Edward Kleban, a book by James Kirkwood, Jr. and Nicholas Dante and originally choreographed by Michael Bennett.  In doing so, Nachamie helmed a tight production on a mostly bare stage that boasts a diverse array of talented dancers, singers and actors that performed some of the best-known songs on Broadway.

For full review, visit MD Theatre Guide.

Editorial cartoon shows unfair politician-bashing

Letter published in the Howard County Times

I must take exception with the editorial cartoon appearing in the Aug. 8 issue. It depicts a hog at the Howard County Fair asking, "Eww…what's that smell?" and a sheep standing adjacent to it responding, "They're judging politicians over in the show pavilion." Yucks all around. Clearly, the cartoon's point is aimed at jumping on the anti-politician bandwagon with an attempt at humor.

Without question the dysfunctional government in Washington, D.C., especially Congress, and the never- ending battles in Annapolis have soured a public with a good dose of cynicism as evidenced by recent polls. But it is unfair to paint all of our elected officials in such broad strokes to signify disdain, even from barnyard animals, for all politicians.

Before readers get riled up and say, "Geez, it's only a cartoon; lighten up," lest we forget, editorial cartoons have been a powerful visual device for newspapers to express an editor's (or board's) position on political matters since the mid-19th century though such cartoons have been in play for a longer period of time. Readers tend to view them and are influenced by them. That's why they are published.

Let's be fair. There are many elected officials in this county and elsewhere who work hard for the common good. Even those I disagree with (and there are plenty) deserve respect for their chosen path of public service, frequently at personal sacrifice, and who sincerely try to make things better for the citizenry.

Messages as portrayed in this cartoon could have an adverse impact on young people who are expected to be our leaders of the future. If the editorial board of the Howard County Times/Columbia Flier chooses to deride politicians, dedicated individuals may pursue a different route and leave those leadership positions to less-qualified folks. Moreover, the percentage of those voting is alarmingly low as it is. Don't make it worse by pouring fuel on the cynicism fire.

One of a newspaper's civic obligations is to encourage participation in the political process, not degrade it, however lighthearted the message is conveyed. If an individual elected official "stinks," by all means call him or her out. Some do, for sure, but definitely not all as the cartoon implies.

Steve Charing
Clarksville

hocoblogs@@@

'Les Misérables' at Toby’s est Magnifique



Photo by Kirstine Christiansen

If you bought a ticket simply to hear the magical tenor voice of Daniel Felton who plays Jean Valjean in the stellar production of Les Misérables currently at Toby’s, the Dinner Theatre of Columbia, it would be worth it just for that.  The same could be said for experiencing the performances of Lawrence B. Munsey as Javert or Theresa Cunningham as Madame Thenardier or the rest of the ensemble or even the scrumptious buffet.  But there is more, much more.

This version of Les Mis at Toby’s in-the-round configuration maintains the high level of brilliance expected from such a great work with its outstanding score and orchestration, magnificent individual performances, creative and efficient staging and spectacular costuming.  All these elements were overseen by co-directors Toby Orenstein and Steven Fleming who not only met the physical challenges of mounting such a complex, lavish production in this venue but exceeded it.

Les Misérables, a classic sung-through musical based on the novel by the French poet/playwright Victor Hugo, has been entertaining audiences throughout the world for decades.  The Broadway musical, whose score was written by Claude-Michel Schönberg, original French lyrics by Alain Boublil and Jean-Marc Natel, with an English-language libretto by Herbert Kretzmer, opened in March 1987 and ran until May 2003, closing after 6,680 performances. It is the fourth longest-running Broadway show in history.  Les Misérables was nominated for 12 Tony Awards and won eight, including Best Musical and Best Original Score.

The storyline with its adventure, drama, love, generosity, redemption and tragedy has many moving parts to it, but it essentially follows the life of a peasant Jean Valjean in early 19^th century France.  He had been imprisoned 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread to help his starving sister’s child.  Valjean broke parole and started his life over with the benefit of a helping hand from a kind Bishop.  He was relentlessly pursued by police inspector Javert whose sense of justice did not allow him to believe that a man could change for the better.

As a town mayor and factory owner eight years later, Valjean rescued a dying woman named Fantine from the police and promised her to care for her young daughter Cosette, whom he liberates from the abusive innkeepers-turned-street gang leaders, the Thénardiers.    

Years pass by and Valjean is still being dogged by Javert, and a student uprising begins in Paris.  One of the revolutionaries, Marius, falls in love with the grown Cosette who reciprocates, and they eventually marry.  Valjean, who rescued Marius from an injury sustained at the hands of the French military at the barricades, ultimately reveals his identity before he passes on. 

Much occurs in between as this is merely a general summary.  Since there is no dialogue, the entire plot is revealed through music, and the performances were characterized by top-notch vocals with clear enunciation of the lyrics to illuminate the story.  The six-piece orchestra led by Christopher Youstra provided the musical support to help allow the performers to excel. 

Most of the ensemble are Toby’s regulars and are accustomed to the contours of the theatre and the stage presence required of the actors.  They performed superbly led by Daniel Felton as Valjean.  Possessing a powerful voice that is pitch perfect combined with his ability to hold long notes, Mr. Felton is a standout.  “Who Am I” and “Bring Him Home” are two of the noteworthy numbers in which Mr. Fenton shines.

Toby’s mainstay Lawrence B. Munsey turned in one of his best performances yet as the intense Javert.  Not only does he burnish his vocal chops in “Stars” and “Soliloquy,” but his dynamic acting skills come into play as well.

Janine Sunday as the tragic figure Fantine also performed nicely, and her main song, “I Dreamed a Dream” was performed well.

Jeffrey S. Shankle as the student revolutionary Marius and the love interest of Cosette, though not quite as young as one would expect from the role, is excellent in both acting and vocals.  He is convincingly passionate and sings effectively in “Empty Chairs at Empty Tables” and in a duet with Mary Kate Brouillet as Eponine, the daughter of the Thénardiers (David James and Theresa Cunningham) in “A Little Fall of Rain.”

Helen Hayes award winner for her role as Sofia in The Color Purple at Toby’s, Ms. Cunningham, as Madame Thénardier, adroitly demonstrates her vocal prowess and funny facial expressions in her scenes.  The Thénardiers are a conniving couple who provide what little comedy the show offers. Mr. James, who leads my personal favorite number, “Master of the House,” was a bit understated for such a campy, energetic song.  He does it better, however, in “Beggars at the Feast.”

Another vocal standout is Ben Lurye as Enjolras, the leader of the student revolutionaries and Marius’ friend.  His rendition of “Red and Black” and “Do You Hear the People Sing” with other members of the ensemble is fantastic.

Other noteworthy mentions are young Jace Franco as the street urchin Gavroche, Katie Heibreder as Cosette, Andrew Horn as the Bishop of Digne and David Bosley-Reynolds as the Factory Foreman.  The remainder of the company, including the revolutionaries, are also strong.

Costume Designers David Gregory and Shannon M. Maddox set up the cast in magnificently accurate period attire.  Lighting Designer Lynn Joslin proficiently used lighting effects to augment the mostly dramatic scenes.

Scenic Designer David Hopkins utilizes large props and furnishings as well as the iconic barricades made of scaffolding to provide dimension to the solid production—no small feat considering the confines of the theatre.  Scene changes occur rapidly and seamlessly.

This production of Les Mis is tout simplement spectaculaire and worthy of the rollicking standing ovation it received at show’s end. 

Running time: Three hours with an intermission.

Les Misérables at Toby’s The Dinner Theatre of Columbia runs through November 10.  For tickets and information, call 410-730-8311 or visit online or Ticketmaster.

hocoblogs@@@

The Stench of Racism Fills the Air

Like so many else, I was outraged at the verdict that freed George Zimmerman in the murder of Trayvon Martin.  Though the verdict itself was a heartbreak for all of us who believed that an innocent, unarmed teenager was gunned down by a racial-profiling vigilante and was not punished, I was not surprised at the outcome given Florida’s gun laws and that a second degree murder or manslaughter case could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. 

I was also not surprised (but angry nonetheless) that the prosecution gave a less than robust performance in an effort to at least send Zimmerman up the river for manslaughter.  They failed to effectively poke holes in Zimmerman’s story that his using a handgun was in self-defense and that his life was truly in danger.  I’ll never believe it.

But what infuriated me most was the reaction to the verdict that brought out racists who hide behind the anonymity of a keyboard to spew their vitriol all over the blogosphere, social media and elsewhere.  You see, Zimmerman was perfectly justified, in their view, not because he “stood his ground” or that his life was somehow in danger at the hands of an unarmed 17 year-old.  They rejoiced at the acquittal because Trayvon deserved it. 
After all, he was a young black male, wearing a hoodie that fateful evening and seemed suspicious.  They say he was a drug addict because he had previously smoked marijuana; that burglar tools were once found on him along with possessing stolen women’s jewelry.  And that he was a thug.

Translation: Trayvon was black so he must have been guilty of something.  Blame the victim; it’s his fault for appearing “suspicious.” Why are the liberals anguishing over this incident when there is so much black-on-black crime, they reason.  It’s pathetic.

The racists also chomped at the bit to vilify their favorite targets:  Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama.  They’re the villains here, not the white-Hispanic George Zimmerman.  

Then there is Trayvon’s phone pal Rachel Jeantel, whom TIME columnist Joe Klein described as one who stoked “every white racist’s fantasy about the limitations of black people.”

Racism has reared its ugly head once again, and it doesn’t look like it’s going away soon while other forms of bigotry have changed course. 

We have witnessed homophobia lessening over time though it is still dangerously out there.  People have gradually evolved towards acceptance of LGBT folks even on same-sex marriage, the ultimate frontier.  

As an increasing number of LGBT people come out, they become the faces of gay rather than some abstract image. More people now than ever before, according to surveys, know at least one LGBT individual personally.  Family members, co-workers, neighbors, friends—all see LGBT folks in a different light and it’s usually positive. 

Racism is another matter.  You can’t come out as “black” to change ingrained perceptions.  

America has a long, sad history of racism.  With the election of our first African-American president, we all were duped into thinking our country had finally moved forward.  Wrong!  Instead, the opposite occurred.  We took a giant leap backward.

During the 2008 campaign we saw these racists climbing out from under their rocks.  It didn’t improve much in 2012.  “Socialist,” they yelled.  “Terrorist.”  They assumed that Mr. Obama would be taking their money and handing it over to black America.  The obdurate opposition to the Affordable Care Act is based on the same misinformation and prejudice-laden rage: white folks will have to cough over more of their hard earned money so that black people can get health care.

The nauseating endless quest to have the president prove he was born in the U.S. is yet another example.  The constant belittling him over everything—refusing to give him his due credit and blaming him for all of the world’s ills—is largely race-based.  The so-called “patriots” who supposedly love our country would rather it fall into an economic abyss than to make compromises as a component of governance. 

In short, the racists strive to defeat the president at every turn no matter the issue.  They want to ensure that the U.S. should never again make the mistake of electing a black president.  Of course, not all of the opponents of the president are racists but all the racists are opponents of the president.

The Supreme Court’s ruling that gutted a key part of the Voting Rights Act is more evidence of racism.  Immediately, several states moved to toughen their voting laws to make sure blacks and other minorities are disenfranchised. The House Republicans’ removal of the Food Stamps program from the Farm Bill is a further example because to them, only blacks receive the aid. 

Then the trial of George Zimmerman reinforced all the racists fears including the liberal media, the bleeding hearts who ignore crimes committed by African-Americans, you name it.  In the age of online anonymity, they surface and freely say what they truly believe.

Folks, we are moving backward, and the stench of racism is suffocating all of us.  Perhaps Washington Post columnist and MSNBC commentator Jonathan Capehart summed it up best in a tweet related to the aftermath of the verdict:  “Reading these letters is like walking through a sewer with no shoes.”

Racism is not going away.  It’s going to take a new generation of color-blind children to grow up and reverse the course.

Spotlighters Brings 'Fiddler' to Life

Ken Stanek Photography

Tevye, the central character in Fiddler on the Roof, must pull a milk cart by himself because his horse is lame.  In doing so, he slowly, pedantically drags it through Anatevka, a small village in Czarist Russia in 1905.  This struggle, this effort becomes a metaphor for Tevye, who seems to have the world’s weight on his shoulders, and in his world, he does.

At the brink of poverty, Tevye, a religious Jew who frequently refers to the “Good Book” and believes that God, for some reason, tries to give him a hard time.  He battles to feed, clothe and house his wife and five daughters.   His three oldest girls eschew deeply ingrained Jewish traditions to which he so desperately tries to cling.  

Instead, they prefer to pursue lives of their own fueled by changing social mores.  He must also match wits with his sharp-tongued wife of 25 years Golde.    And on top of that, Tevye and his family as well as the other Jews in Anatevka face constant anti-Semitism and intimidation from Russia’s Czar.

For full review, visit MD Theatre Guide.

'Rainbow' Themes on Display at FPCT

Steve Ferguson (L.) and Rasheed Green in Hoya Saxa Photo: Ken Stanek

The 32^nd annual Baltimore Playwrights Festival started off on the right foot with Rich Espey’s The Rainbow Plays currently running at the Fells Point Corner Theatre.  Mr. Espey, a Baltimore-area resident, is a three-time winner of the Carol Weinberg Award for best play at the Baltimore Playwrights Festival for Fifty-Fifty, Hope’s Arbor, and Following Sarah.

In The Rainbow Plays, under the strong direction of Lisa Davidson who is making her Baltimore directing debut, six distinct mini-plays, each about 10 minutes long representing the different themes contained in the rainbow or gay pride flag are presented.  A seventh play attempts to sum it all up with a humorous, clever, rap-dominated performance.  As in the case of that flag, The Rainbow Plays consist of a tapestry of discrete stories, with the only common thread woven throughout is that they are gay- or lesbian-related.

The rainbow flag, which originally had eight colors and now contains six, was designed by the artist Gilbert Baker in 1978 as a positive alternative to the pink triangle used by the Nazis to identify homosexuals.  Some theorize he was inspired by the death of Judy Garland of “Over the Rainbow” fame—an iconic gay anthem—which occurred just a few days before the Stonewall uprisings in June 1969.  Mr. Baker recently told a Chicago television station: “The rainbow came to mind almost instantly as an obvious expression of diversity and acceptance.”

For full review, visit MD Theatre Guide

One Giant Leap for Equality

The incredibly historic rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on marriage equality remind me of another improbable feat. As Neil Armstrong said upon setting foot on the lunar surface, “One small step for [a] man; one giant leap for mankind.”  Before the 1960’s nobody thought we could land a man on the moon but we did on July 20, 1969.  We are now approaching the 44^th anniversary of that astounding occasion.

The SCOTUS decisions similarly could not have been predicted just a few years ago given what the Court has wrought over the years including Bush v. Gore, Citizens United, and just the day before the marriage rulings were handed down, the lamentable decision on the Voting Rights Act.

I always thought that the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA would collapse under litigation based on the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.  And some lower courts saw it the same way.  Yet, SCOTUS with its conservative tilt and conservative Chief Justice, seemed like the time was not quite right to make bold progressive rulings in arguably the most significant civil rights issue in decades.

Bold they weren’t in the case of Proposition 8 in California. Rather than ruling that same-sex couples everywhere in the U.S. have the fundamental right to marry, the Court punted.  The case went back to the lower court because those who appealed that decision to strike down Prop 8 lacked the legal standing.   This meant that same-sex couples in California regained their right to marry. 

As for Section 3 of DOMA, SCOTUS decided by a vote of 5-4 that the federal government must recognize the lawful nuptials of same-sex couples, thus conferring over 1,100 rights, benefits and responsibilities.  That decision applies only to the 13 states (including California) and D.C. where such marriages are valid.

President Obama, arguing that DOMA was unconstitutional, refused to defend it in court and later filed a brief that attacked DOMA on the merits.  The administration is currently taking steps to broaden the benefits of the SCOTUS ruling by moving swiftly to revise regulations so that same-sex couples in states where marriage equality does not exist, can tie the knot in any of the other 14 jurisdictions and receive federal benefits and protections.  

Moreover, the entire DOMA could eventually be scuttled as Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) immediately re-introduced the Respect for Marriage Act in the upper chamber.  It would repeal DOMA and require the U.S. federal government to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages regardless of what state the couple lives in. The number of co-sponsors has increased sharply from 17 just two years ago to 40 presently.
An identical bill was introduced into the House by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, (D-NY) with the support of 160 co-sponsors, including at least two Republicans.  Alas, this measure will not advance soon as the tea party caucus continues to dominate the GOP-controlled House, and they are not ready to drop DOMA.

The Republicans can’t help themselves.  All that post-election talk about “expanding their tent” evaporated into thin air and not just in terms of their attitudes towards women and immigration reform.  They continue to maintain an anti-gay posture and seem to be stuck in that mire while the rest of the country is moving forward.  House Speaker Boehner and others denounced the SCOTUS decisions proving that the GOP is still enmeshed in and controlled by base politics. 

While the SCOTUS rulings do not have wide applications, what did come down justified the celebrations.  For one thing, the Court could have gone the other route and upheld Prop 8 and DOMA.  That would have been a significant setback for marriage equality advocates, and positive change would be perhaps a generation away.  But this Court, albeit narrowly, handed down decisions that should pave the way for favorable outcomes in the near future.

Emboldened by the SCOTUS rulings especially on DOMA and a surge in public support for marriage equality in recent years, advocates in several states are seeking to overturn existing bans to same-sex marriage via their legislatures or at the ballot box.  Furthermore, it is almost guaranteed that there will be a wave in lawsuits in the non-equality states based on violation of the equal protection clause and the precedent established in the SCOTUS majority opinion. 

Going into the last week of the Pride month of June, many folks were optimistic even hopeful about the Court’s rulings but cautious considering the make-up of the Court.  Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had written the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas exactly ten years before that ruling de-criminalized sodomy, was considered the “swing” vote.   But many viewed him as unpredictable based on his stated concern during the oral arguments phase last March about venturing into “unchartered waters.”

Nevertheless, as was the case with the Apollo mission, SCOTUS defied the odds and doubts and came through when few imagined it possible say, four years ago.  And because of the now favorable possibilities, this was indeed one giant leap for equality and the beginning of a new frontier.

Equality Wins!

Supreme Court strikes down DOMA, reverses Prop 8

On the 10^th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that struck down sodomy laws in Lawrence v Texas, June 26, 2013 turned out to be another seminal landmark in the history of LGBT rights.  By a 5-4 decision the Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA—the Defense of Marriage Act—on the grounds that it violated the equal protection clause in the U.S. Constitution.  

In the case, Windsor v the United States, DOMA was viewed by the majority of the Court, whose opinion was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, as unconstitutional “as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.”  Justice Scalia was among three justices authoring dissents.

“By creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State, DOMA forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy. “By this dynamic DOMA undermines both the public and private significance of state sanctioned same-sex marriages; for it tells those couples, and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition. This places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage.”

The result is that same-sex couples who were married in states where such nuptials are legal, including Maryland, will be able to enjoy over a thousand Federal rights, benefits and entitlements that are accorded heterosexual couples. They include such Federal benefits as the right to file joint tax returns, federal pension survivors’, Social Security survivors’ benefits and many more.   Government agencies will be required to revamp their regulations to include legally married same-sex couples. 

With the Court’s decision to allow a lower court’s ruling to stand, which struck down Proposition 8 in California based on the equal protection clause, there are now 13 states plus D.C. where same-sex couples can marry. This represents jurisdictions covering over 93 million Americans.

DOMA was signed into law in 1996 by President Bill Clinton in which the Federal government was barred from recognizing same-sex marriages even if they were legal in certain states.  At the time, no such marriages were legal.

The second landmark decision that struck down Proposition 8 was based on standing that upheld the U.S. District Court of California’s ruling, authored by Vaughn Walker.  “We have never before upheld the standing of a private party to defend the constitutionality of a state statute when state officials have chosen not to,” read the majority opinion in Hollingsworth v. Perry authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. “We decline to do so for the first time here.”

By taking this approach, the Supreme Court nullified Proposition 8 in California but provided no opinion on the rights of states to ban same-sex couples from being legally married.  Observers characterize the Court’s decision as “punting.”  During the oral arguments in March, Justice Kennedy cautioned that the Court was entering “unchartered waters,” which signaled a more likely narrow ruling as opposed to a sweeping broader one, unlike the DOMA ruling.

Hundreds of equality supporters as well as a lesser number of opponents gathered around the Supreme Court building in sweltering heat and humidity cheering the news amidst a sea of rainbow colored flags and signs.  People came from all over the U.S. with some spending the night before to witness history.

“Today the married lives of same-sex couples in Maryland were made whole,” Carrie Evans, executive director of Equality Maryland, told me.   “We can now access the more than 1,000 protections the federal government provides to married couples. And with the ruling in the Perry case, marriage equality returns to California bringing us to 13 states and the District of Columbia that have marriage equality. We will continue our quest in the remaining 37 states until all loving and committed couples in the U.S. have access to marriage equality.”

HRC president Chad Griffin issued a statement that said in part, “Today’s historic decisions put two giant cracks in the dark wall of discrimination that separates committed gay and lesbian couples from full equality.”

Governor Martin O’Malley, who pushed marriage equality in Maryland, weighed in calling the rulings “a powerful step forward for those who live in states like Maryland.”

The White House issued the following statement: “I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.  This was discrimination enshrined in law.  It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people.  The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it.  We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.

“This ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly, as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to persuade their nation to change for the better.” 

“This is a historical day for all gay and lesbians couples,” said Annapolis resident Kim Hinken. “My wife, Adri and I are overjoyed at the repeal of DOMA. Finally, the country recognizes our vows to each other as they do any couple. The legal protections that this ruling allows us will assure that we are seen as a legally married couple in the U.S.”

The Future of Baltimore Pride

Jay W Photos

It had been an uncharacteristically busy run-up to Pride this year for the GLCCB, the organization that has run the annual event since 1977.  The iconic 33 year-old building on W. Chase Street had been sold at the end of May.  Potential new venues are being evaluated. The board of directors removed the interim label from Matt Thorn’s title and appointed him executive director. 

Then the Center got caught in the firestorm of words among business owners and the Mount Vernon Belvedere Association as to the management of the block party and its related problems of the past.  All these taking place in the two weeks leading up to the big weekend.

GLCCB executive director Matt Thorn, who among other positions in our community is also the Pride Committee chairman.  Undaunted, he managed to pull off Pride, and with the help of a cadre of volunteers, did so quite well. 

It wasn’t always a smooth ride in the past.  Invisible to the parade watchers, partiers and festival attendees were behind-the-scenes miscues at various points throughout Pride’s history that included wasteful spending, mounting debt, poor decision-making, a lack of transparency in the planning process, and allegations of theft.  These blemishes are more likely the result of organizational and financial instability that has beset the Center during its long history..

Some of these blunders, which had been concealed from the public by GLCCB leadership over the years, did manage to leak out.  Therefore, it’s not surprising that individuals and groups have floated the idea of wresting Pride away from the Center and running it independently (as done in D.C. and Philly) and presumably more efficiently.  Aside from Pride’s management, many people feel that the current location does not allow for expansion. 

“I think it's all about growth and Pride is a stunted child both because of where it is and because of the natural limitations placed on it by virtue of its oversight,” said a member of the community who asked not to be identified.

Thorn is aware of such criticisms.  “Pride has been a staple event of the GLCCB for many years. While not all of those years have been perfectly managed or executed, Baltimore Pride has consistently been an event enjoyed by thousands each and every year,” he told me.  “According to the large majority, Baltimore Pride 2013 was one of the best run and best executed Prides in recent history, [as evidenced by] statements from attendees, the MVBA and local businesses including Club Hippo, Grand Central and City Cafe. There is always going to be bumps with planning any event especially one of this magnitude but the GLCCB and I are committed to improving the event year after year.”

Mindful of the negativity stemming from past Prides, Thorn adds, “There is little that can be done with previous actions of previous administrations; its history cannot be rewritten.  We can only learn from those actions and what has taken place utilizing them as learning experiences to move forward allowing Baltimore Pride to be better and better.”

It is quite possible, even likely, that a well-managed and run private entity could do an effective job in organizing, planning and running Pride.  But Pride is the principal fundraising effort for the GLCCB; an attempt to deny the Center of those important dollars is ruinous.   

There are steps the GLCCB should take to mitigate the criticism directed at itself, and by extension, Pride.  In no particular order:

Improve the Center’s brand within the community.  The leadership should adhere to the strategic plan and follow the recommendations laid out by the company who developed the plan.  Transparency and community involvement with decision-making is crucial.  People will not respect, support or contribute to an organization that they do not trust.

Be mission-centric.  The relevancy of the GLCCB takes a hit after each Pride within the community because the Center seems dormant until the next cycle.  There are a number of issues the GLCCB can wrap their hands around to the betterment of our community, and there should be a concerted, well-publicized effort to do so.

Consider Pride alternatives.  Either outsource some of the Pride operations to a private entity without damaging the Center’s financial position or task the Pride function to a separate body within the community.  Thorn’s direction of this year’s Pride was admirable, but the executive director needs to concentrate on improving the GLCCB’s relations with the community, developing other revenue streams, and fulfilling the promise that the Center once had.

Become more diverse.  This is not as easy as it sounds but the GLCCB should establish a task force dedicated to encouraging women, African-Americans, transgender and other sexual minorities to get involved and convince them that a strong GLCCB benefits all.

Rally the community around the new home.   When the GLCCB settles into a new space later this year, the leadership should set up a series of open house events and fundraisers to rally the community.  It’s always exciting when a move takes place, so the Center should capitalize on that buzz.

The GLCCB is at the crossroads.  It needs to vigorously demonstrate its willingness to move forward and if and when confidence is restored, so will its stewardship of Pride. 

Matt Thorn is looking ahead.  “Plans are already under way for Baltimore Pride 2014 including extending the event from June 12 through June 22 and adding a multitude of events to the festivities,” he said.  “I understand some of the frustrations that people have and I encourage them to join us on July 22^nd for our Baltimore Pride 2014 inaugural planning session.”

A good start.

Be Totally Proud but Not Totally Satisfied

Pride is such a great time of year—especially when there have been notable victories in our never ending struggle to achieve full equality.  Last year, we in Maryland celebrated the historic passage of marriage equality and we were in the midst of a referendum battle that created uncertainty but also a degree of activism on the part of the LGBT community that had not been seen in previous years. 

Every Pride, it seems, there is something different we can cheer about and reflect upon our improving fortunes, particularly in light of the struggles our predecessors had to endure at the time of Stonewall—the consensus onset of Gay Pride.

This time around we have myriad reasons to be proud.  Marriage equality was finally achieved in Maryland after many years of disappointments.  Having won last November at the ballot box makes the victory even more gratifying 

Starting New Year’s Day, marriage for same-sex couples became legal and hundreds of couples have since rejoiced.  At the Pride festival, there will be a mass wedding.  How sweet is that? Thousands more will be afforded the same standing as our heterosexual counterparts if we can get key portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA repealed. 

Two other states joined Maryland on Election Night while another beat back a hostile constitutional amendment.  Since then several others rapidly jumped on the bandwagon resulting in a total of 12 states plus DC that have legalized same-sex marriages and adding much momentum to the cause.  Plus a few foreign countries joined the party.  Moreover, some Republicans (gasp!) in Congress announced their support for marriage equality. 

On top of that, we eagerly anticipate a potentially historic Supreme Court ruling on Prop 8 in California and DOMA.  While most observers do not see sweeping, broad rulings from the Court on these cases, both decisions could (and should) be favorable.  We expect to find out by the end of Pride month.  What timing!

Then in the world of sports—a major component of our culture—we witnessed for the first time male athletes coming out in pro basketball and pro soccer while active as did a college basketball player.  There were athletes from various sports publicly declaring their acceptance of a gay teammate with a whopping 92 percent of players in the National Hockey League, according to a recent survey, asserting that a gay teammate would be welcome.  

These developments, one would think, should put an added spring in the steps of the parade marchers on Saturday and make the rainbows a little bit brighter throughout the weekend.  While we can bask in the glow of these victories and prospective ones to come, it goes without saying that there is so much, no, too much work to be done to be fully satisfied.

While basis protections for transgender individuals exist in Baltimore City and in Baltimore, Howard and Montgomery counties, there continues to be a barrier at the state level.  For the past few years, strong efforts to achieve non-discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations based on gender identity and expression remain elusive.

We also need to address the plight of those LGBT youth who have been discarded by non-accepting family members or as a consequence of poverty and become homeless.  There is a disproportionate amount of LGBT youth among the homeless in Baltimore and it is especially acute among trans youth.  As such, homelessness among our youth increases the chances for violence, poor health and crime—as perpetrators or victims.

And make no mistake, we can enjoy the benefits of marriage equality and other advances, but no matter the decisions by elected officials or votes at the ballot box, there are way too many people out there who do not like us.  It may not be visible or obvious to casual observers, but it is quite apparent when we learn about violence directed towards our community.

You can see evidence of this “anonymous” vitriol spewed on blogs and other Internet-based threads that discuss LGBT rights.  Hiding behind the security and obscurity of a keyboard, folks from all over the country lash into our community with alarming intensity and frequency.  Some of this is attributable to the culture they grew up in that breeds contempt for LGBT people; other causes are probably due to a backlash in the unprecedented rapidity of advances in LGBT rights.

As we have witnessed here, LGBT folks have been attacked, beaten or murdered simply because of who they are.  Law enforcement can do their job and they try, but we need to be vigilant and conscious of our surroundings.  There remains much hatred out there.

This continued disdain towards our community extends into bullying habits at schools.  While jurisdictions have adopted anti-bullying initiatives, the bullying against LGBT teens and pre-teens or those who are perceived to be LGBT, has not waned significantly.  Pressure needs to be applied to localities and school districts to help curtail these incidents.  Bullying contributes to low self-esteem and dropping out and worse, suicides among the kids.

There are also issues on the national stage that need to be legislated like job non-discrimination, immigration reform as it pertains to LGBT people, and HIV/AIDS funding.  Unfortunately the Republicans in the Congress have a stranglehold on any progressive legislation, and redistricting will keep them in place for an extended time.

So while I don’t want to cloudy up a sunny and bright Pride weekend especially in the aftermath of significant political victories, reality has a way of seeping into the mix.  We should all be proud of ourselves, our accomplishments, and the upward trends towards equality, but we should not rest on those laurels or be satisfied.  Understand that our work is far from finished.

An Abundance of 'Nunsense' at Toby's Baltimore

Most of us probably do not know what actually goes on behind the stark, sturdy walls of a traditional convent.  We believe that such an edifice would reflect austerity, include much prayer as well as “proper” behavior among the nuns.  Not so with the Order of the Little Sisters of Dundalk—yes, Dundalk, Md.—whose loopy, hilarious antics take us on an irreverent, non-stop ride,  while good-naturedly spoofing Catholicism and nuns themselves in Nunsense, now playing at Toby’s the Dinner Theatre of Baltimore. 

Dan Goggin superbly penned the book, music and lyrics for this farce and as such, Nunsense, which debuted in 1985, became the second longest running off-Broadway show in history behind the Fantasticks.

The production at Toby’s is mostly a madcap combination of vaudeville and slapstick with an ample supply of puns and outstanding music that keeps the audience howling in laughter.  Add to the mix an amazingly talented ensemble under the direction of Mark Minnick and you have one terrific show.

To read the full review, visit Maryland Theater Guide.

Mark Patro: A Man of Pride and Passion

The battle for marriage equality in Maryland was moving into high gear by July 3^rd of last year.  Polls indicated a tight contest on Question 6, creating much uncertainty and apprehension among the state’s thousands of same-sex couples and supporters who were hoping beyond hope that the bill that Governor O’Malley signed into law in March legalizing same-sex marriage would withstand a robust referendum attempt. 

While trying to combat the efforts from well-funded opponents seeking to overturn the law at the ballot box, most advocates knew it would be a struggle to prevail.  Every possible vote was needed to be harvested.  It would be particularly important to register college students, as they represent a large number of the state’s unregistered voters and, based on polling data, would more likely to be supportive.

Accordingly, on that July 3^rd evening, a group of 20 folks from Baltimore and beyond gathered at the GLCCB’s edifice on Chase Street to be trained and certified as voter registration volunteers.  The instruction was to have taken place inside the building but someone didn’t get that memo; the doors were locked.  Undaunted, activist Mark Patro who was to deliver the training, held the session on the sidewalk outside the GLCCB on this particularly sultry, sweat-producing evening.  Despite that speed bump, the voter registration drive was well underway.

Mark didn’t stop there.   He bolstered the Question 6 effort by organizing Light Brigade Maryland—whereby groups of people held battery-charged lit panels that spelled out messages promoting marriage equality.  They visited over two dozen road overpasses, bridges and other venues around the state, but mostly in the Baltimore metropolitan area, to gain the attention of motorists and pedestrians.  It turned out to be a key component of the superior and creative messaging the pro-equality forces crafted during the campaign that helped sway people to vote our way.

This is what Mark Patro does.  Always forward thinking, always strategic, always creative, Mark finds a cause that is clearly progressive and manages to inspire others to reach a specific goal.  He is not a fiery, rah-rah type; in fact, he is rather soft-spoken.  But Mark possesses a lot of energy and passion, and people love to follow his brand of activism, of which he’s had considerable experience.

“My initial involvement in activism was with the impeachment of Richard Nixon; at seventeen I carried a petition for his removal from door to door in the Reisterstown suburb where I spent my teen years,” says Mark, a Towson University graduate and native of Baltimore who was educated in the Baltimore City and Baltimore County public school systems.

Mark decided to come out as gay in the late 1970's and was seeking “community” at the GLCCB. In the early 1980’s he volunteered as a photographer and worked on layout—a manual paste-up process—for the Community Center’s Gay Paper prior to the advent of computer-based page design programs. 

Light Brigade, formed by Mark Patro, in action

Mark explains that “during this period of time I got a closer look at organizing on the grassroots level when others, who were more involved than I, attempted to get an LGB housing and employment protections act through the Baltimore City Council. By the time this passed I was no longer involved with the Community Center.”

He continued his advocacy through intense letter writing to advance LGBT civil rights.  This, along with the efforts of many others, culminated with the passage of statewide protections in 2001 for gays and lesbians.

Things changed dramatically for Mark in 2005.  “I attended my first PFLAG meeting in Howard County, which was a 45 minute drive from my Baltimore County home,” he says.  “For a brief time I drove 30 minutes in the other direction to Churchville where there was a second PFLAG meeting group. While attending both meetings, I decided there was too big a gap between Columbia and Churchville and decided to start the PFLAG chapter in Lutherville.”

He remains as the president of that PFLAG chapter, and the name was changed from PFLAG-Baltimore County to PFLAG-Baltimore to reflect a broader reach.  “The PFLAG work that I’ve done is very near and dear to my heart; and the direct advocacy work that I learned how to do while working with PFLAG has become my new passion. I see my future more full of this kind of work on a broader range of issues,” Mark says.

Mark stepped up that political advocacy when passage of equal rights for same-sex couples was emerging as a top priority.  During the Maryland legislative session of 2009 he testified in favor of the Inheritance Equality bill written by Senator Rich Madaleno.  This bill passed and became law later that year.

Being one of only a handful of LGBT advocates in his northeast Baltimore County legislative district, he volunteered to become district coordinator for Equality Maryland’s annual Lobby Day. With several other dedicated district voters he made this trip for each of the last five years of that seven-year process.  

“I grew comfortable with talking to my senator and delegates to a point where I thought my conversations were sometimes having a positive impact,” Mark points out. “When the law finally passed [in 2012] and the opposition took the signed law to referendum I worked to ensure we would hold on to the right to marry.”

While the battles for marriage equality were being waged in Annapolis, Mark also turned his sights on extending protections in employment, housing and public accommodations based on gender identity and expression.  And for him, it was very significant.

“My proudest moment as an LGBT advocate happened in January 2011,” Mark explains. “This is when the Baltimore County Council passed by a 5-2 vote and amended language to the Baltimore County Code to protect people in Baltimore County on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. I was happy to work with a well-organized coalition of groups including PFLAG, Gender Rights Maryland, Equality Maryland, the Esimorp Network, The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force and many clergy and citizen advocates. Councilman Tom Quirk led this effort and I, for one, will be eternally grateful.”

His work with PFLAG, the legislative conversations, and the referendum work resulted in an invitation in the fall of 2012 to join the Moving Maryland Forward Network (MMFN), and in January 2013, he was invited to join the board of the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministries (UULM).

“As a member of PFLAG, MMFN & UULM in 2013, I am proud to have worked side by side with folks like Sharon Brackett, Matt Thorn, June Horner, Lea Gilmore, Charlie Cooper, Vinny DeMarco, Lisa Ward and Betty Crowley.”

Mark’s work seems just to be starting.  As stated earlier, his advocacy work brought on a desire to broaden the scope of issues.  “We may have passed a very strong Fire Arm Safety Act in Maryland this year but there is still work to do,” Mark reflects. “The gender identity/expression protections bill still needs to pass on the state level. I feel strongly that we need to understand and implement strong regulations, if not an outright ban on fracking.

“The simple things in our life, which are even more basic than our civil rights, are now being threatened. Labeling genetically modified food should be considered such a right. People need to be able to make a choice about what they eat and feed their children.  Fracking threatens our water supply and our ability to grow food.”

Pride…passion…and limitless issues to confront.  That’s Mark Patro.