Privilege

I've been pondering what people mean by "privilege" in the context of current affairs (civil rights, freedoms and responsibilities). And I've been pondering whether I fall into the category of "privileged," because self-examination is as important in personal growth as it is in the fight against testicular cancer.

My conclusion, so far, is that, it MUST be a privileged person who doesn't vote, and avoids educating themselves about politics, and doesn't fight with their vote for civil rights. It is an unavoidable conclusion that a privileged person must be a person who does not belong to an oppressed group of people. It must be a person who does not struggle financially everyday. It must be a person who isn’t black. It must be a person who isn’t gay. It must be a person who isn’t “of color” of any sort. It must be a person who is not female.It must be a person who never struggled with gender or sexual identity issues. It must not be children taken from their parents. It must be a person who’s civil rights are not in danger. It must not be a person who flees from violence and oppression from their own people and government. It must be a person who never experienced the fear of police brutality or profiling.

In short, people who don't vote, and avoid educating themselves about politics, and don't fight for civil rights, the people who tell us all to “play nice”, the people who are tired of Facebook posts like these, the people who think us being engaged in politics is “annoying” - they must be highly privileged. It is the only logical conclusion. They not only don’t want to fight, but have no need to fight, because their life, their safety, their livelihood, their freedom, their PRIVILEGE, is not at stake. They claim to not know about politics - but they lack motivation to educate themselves because they are not affected - they are *privileged.*

There is a short list of labels for people that fit this highly privileged group of folks - but I’ll let the reader do that math.

The rest of us, A.K.A. the minority groups, are fighting for our lives - literally. We fight for our safety. We fight for our relationships, our culture, our art. We fight for living wages and fair workplace environments. We fight for our right to unionize. We fight for our freedom, for some semblance of privilege. We fight for our dignity and respect.

There are many minority voices that are oppressed - and many reasons for that oppression - not wanting to be "out" at work for fear of losing a job or being harassed or bullied, the protection of people within our care, or perhaps fear of having our civil liberties ripped from us.

But THAT is exactly why we, the minority groups, have to be educated about politics, that is why we share strong opinions, that is why we are emphatic about elections and voting. I recognize that it is, ironically, a place of privilege that I live and work in a safe place where I can be myself. But there is all that distance traveled between work and home where I am, in fact, at risk of oppression - at the bakery, at the grocery store, at the bank, at a restaurant, in an alley or on the street. We can’t afford to be nice about it - because our oppressors aren’t nice. They are bigots and murderers and bullies, and xenophobes, and homophobes, and racists, and misogynists, and transphobic, and sexists, yes, they are politicians.

If we, the minority groups, don't vote, and don’t participate in politics, if we don't fight for civil rights, WE LOSE. If you don’t know what THEY are doing to us, WE LOSE. There are real lives at stake here - and very real civil liberties at stake.

There are many of you who say our tool, our secret weapon, is our VOTE. Although important, that is only partially true. Our real ace-in-the-hole is YOU - our friends, our family, our coworkers, our ALLIES. We are a minority, which means our votes can be oppressed by a sheer function of numbers. But our ALLIES can shore up those numbers, make our votes count. We need you.

Educate yourself. Read up on the candidates, ask your affected friends and families, ask an immigrant, ask a member of a minority group - ask how they are affected, ask how their loved ones are affected.

Please help us overcome our minority disadvantage - get out and vote this November. Vote at the local, state and federal levels to protect civil rights - vote for the candidates who will protect civil rights, who will protect minorities, who has compassion and empathy and human decency. VOTE, please, to protect that transgender child in your family tree. Vote to protect your GBF. Vote to protect the immigrant running from violence and oppression, just like many of our own ancestors.

Body Motivations - Part II

A while back I posted a casual entry called Body Motivations, which touched on the right of businesses to advertise to their target audience using male almost-nudes in their campaigns and in-store advertising. Of course, I used that premise as an excuse to post various advertisers ad campaigns as examples, a visually pleasurable tour, to say the least.

As I grow older and struggle with maintaining personal fitness, I find it necessary to inspire myself through any means available. A good dance song that makes me want to move (exercise), or a good visual stimulation such as a great male nude photo. Such pictures are not just for "gentleman's time," but are good for goal-setting and comparisons.

In my quest for inspiration, I have run across some more examples of photos that inspire, and I just thought I'd share:

Yes, that's Mark Wahlberg - one of the few that managed to survive teen-idol status and graduate into someone who is still very handsome and respected in the Arts/Entertainment community. And he still inspires, even today:

There is no shortage of Underwear makers who utilize the male form to advertise their product (for which I am grateful):

In particular, I am grateful for Andrew Christian, who is NOT afraid to cater to the gay male as their target audience.

Sorry, that picture was uploaded in error, as it it obviously has very little to do with body motivation.  THIS is the picture I meant to post: 

There's just something about anatomically correct underwear, football, and men that's just, well, um, inspiring. And I say, three cheers for Andrew Christian, because they have inspired millions, in print media, as well as in streaming/internet content!

Of course, the general public, at least in America, shuns male nude models in advertising, especially in public. There are many excuses, but the bottom line seems to be that either puritanical ideas of "religion" or "the-children-might-see" mentality tends to discourage the use of male nudes in advertising. However, it does seem perfectly okay to display women in various forms of undress in everyday advertising!  (Don't worry, women are NOT the subject of THIS blog entry...)

In other parts of the world, it would appear that people are far less uptight about showing body. The Leopold Museum, housed in the Museumsquartier in Vienna, Austria, home to one of the largest collections of modern Austrian art, featuring artists such as Egon Schiele, Gustav Klimt, Oskar Kokoschka and Richard Gerstl, had an exhibition (if you'll pardon the pun) of "Naked Men" by Ilse Haider in 2012. The posters they used to advertise the show caused controversy, causing a requirement of a "red stripe" to conceal the man bits.

Sometimes it really does seem that America is awfully uptight, especially when we can see naked Hindus in public events:

Or bike rides that would NEVER happen in America...

Except I'm wrong. THIS happened in Chicago:

But from the looks of that photo, most of those guys NEEDED body motivation. So, here's some body motivation to my fellow cyclists:

And, of course, if you need motivation to be fashionably dressed, this may be motivation enough:

I've never been into sports, and especially not wrestling, but Chris Weidman makes me want to wrestle something: 

Gov. Nikki Haley Issues Budget Vetoes

The Governor's veto #18 cuts all operating funds - $417,750 - for the S.C. Arts Commission, eliminating their ability to function/administer any programs and services, including grants. She also vetoed the $25,000 in one-time funds for a plan a Cultural Districts Designation Program in her veto #56. More details to come but now is the time to urge your House and Senate members to vote to OVERRIDE VETO # 18 AND #56. The House is scheduled to take action Wednesday at 1PM and the Senate at 11AM on Thursday. Please act now!

Gov. Nikki Haley issues budget vetoes 

In other news of things I care about: The US Supreme Court decisions about California's Prop 8 and the so-called 'Defense of Marriage Act' (aka DOMA) will come on Wednesday, June 26 at 10am. 

Where can we learn about the decision? 

Minute by minute updates are posted live Wednesday morning on SCOTUS Blog. You can log-on to watch for free. Also, if you have Facebook, sign-up to join this ONLINE Event page. 

What can we do once we have a decision? 

Many credit the beginning of our modern LGBT movement to the Stonewall Riots on June 28, 1969 which started at one of New York's LGBT bars. 

In that spirit we will gather Wednesday from 5-6pm at PT's 1109 (1109 Assembly Street, Columbia) to organize a march through the streets of Columbia. 

- At 6pm, we will march up Gervais Street past the State House which continues to deny our equality. 

- We will turn down Main Street where the first SC Pride March was held in 1990 and pass the county courthouse at 1701 Main Street where many loving same-sex couples have been denied marriage licenses in the past. 

- We will end our march out front of Columbia's City Hall, one of the places in our state which has granted equality to our state's residents and visitors through inclusive Human Rights Ordinances. 

- From there we invite you to return to PT's 1109 with us so that we can spend time together as a community, processing the court's decisions and brainstorming ways to move forward for South Carolina. PTs 1109 will be offering Happy Hour specials till 8pm.

The results of the court's ruling will signify if this will be a celebration march or a march to call for more equality. We will have posters and supplies for you to make your own signs if you'd like. We will adjust the message of our signs based on how the court rules so come early to get ready. If it rains, bring your umbrellas!

Things you can do on Wednesday:

• Wear RED to symbolize love and commitment of marriage equality

• Tell all your friends about the march and ask them to join you in support of equality

• Post this information to Facebook and Twitter so everyone will know about the march

• Remember no matter the outcome, we will march peacefully and respectfully

• If you belong to an organization or business, bring your signs and banners so that the public will know you support equality 

• Change your Social Media profile image to reflect LGBT equality in South Carolina.

If you don't live in Columbia but are organizing an event in your town, post those events this page to share with other residents of South Carolina.

United we will stand no matter the decision and we will move forward to advance other issues of LGBT equality till Equal Means Everyone. 

If you haven't already, be sure to sign-up for South Carolina Equality action alerts to stay updated on the cases. http://goo.gl/PYmPW

Identity

Do you know any transgendered people?
(I'm listening to your answer, but I don't think you are listening to the question.)
Do you KNOW any transgendered people?
(What's the difference, you ask, between my two questions?)
Let me phrase it this way: Do you openly and genuinely associate on a personal basis with a Transgendered person?
(I do.)
I have more-than-one family member who is transgendered.
(I'm trying to protect their anonymity by being vague about their identity.)
I have several acquaintances who are transgendered.
In all cases, my associations with these people increased my awareness and compassion for the issues they experienced and are still experiencing.

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook, and since he posted it publicly, I shall quote him fairly and in its entirety (the link he refers to is immediately following):

"I'm all for equal rights for everyone, but this perplexes me. Not being insensitive, but I find it hard to believe that a six-year old has the sophistication of thought to culturally identify as transgendered. Would it not be kinder in the long run to tell the child "No, you're a boy. You have these body parts, and that means you use the boy's bathroom" than to foist this level of publicity and attention (some of it sure to be negative) on a first-grader?
This calls several levels of ethical consideration into debate...when does allowing your child to "be who he/she is" actually cause more damage than forcing the child to conform to societal norms? Children are not allowed to drink, drive cars, enter into contracts, engage in sexual behavior, or any number of other things that adults do because they (children) do not possess the knowledge or emotional maturity to make informed decisions. 
This particular case also begs the question of whether the other children in the school are being treated fairly. Does exposing them to the concept of transgenderism at such an early age force them to process issues which they are not yet culturally or psychologically prepared to fully comprehend?
Ultimately, I hope that Coy grows up to be a happy, well-adjusted adult, living whatever lifestyle he/she chooses. I also hope becoming an iconic figure as a first-grader doesn't lead to pressures that make that more difficult." 

Transgender Girl Wins Right to Use Bathroom at Public School

My friend's post surprised me, because he in fact IS probably one of the most open-minded straight people I know, and I truly enjoy his company, friendship, and insights. I also know he won't mind me tackling the issue on my blog, with due respect to him, of course. But his post reveals a conformist tendency that we all fall victim to from time to time. The "don't rock the boat" idea that manifests in the fear that the child might be harmed by the very act of defending that child's rights and identity.

I responded to his post on Facebook with a quick answer, one that I didn't spend a lot of time on, just my gut reaction to his post.

"obviously the child *IS* sophisticated enough to express it, and therefore does deserve to have attention paid to the issue. No one should have their identity forced upon them AT ANY AGE. Three cheers to the child's parents who were actually listening to their child! (If she can think it or feel it, it's real enough to be an issue)"

Too often we think, as evidenced by my friend's post, that children are not aware of their identity. That they need development and maturity to know who they are. That they are too young to understand. But identity starts forming at birth. It begins with family and environment. It succumbs to society and marketing within days, beginning with how the parents view their child (as a boy, as a girl, as a race, as a culture), because, you see, the parents decide how to dress the child, how the child will told to believe, who they will associate with, what toys they will play with, etc. So the parents decisions are shaping the identity of the child - without input from the child.

So the child emerges into self-awareness with much of his or her identity predetermined by how their parents perceived them - and now has to overcome any dissonant components, sometimes with great difficulty. A parent doesn't have anything to go on, at first, EXCEPT genitalia. So being a "boy," or being a "girl," can ONLY begin with what genitalia the child has initially. And upon this the parents start forming the child.

Identity is everything to a person. Dig deep into your own psyche and try to tell me that isn't true. When I think of WHO I am, my first thought is that I am a man - but I am not a penis (nor the color blue or a tonka truck or a cigar or a mustache). I am gay - but I am not sex (or top or bottom). I am emotional - but I am not any specific emotion. I am a member of a family, a member of a community, a member of a minority group, a citizen of a city, a citizen of a state, a citizen of a country. I could go on and on about all the things I am - but the point is, my identity is not tied to the visible, but instead, to the invisible. I am feelings, I am thoughts, I am self-aware...  etc. etc. etc.

And yet, so often, I hear gay people say things like, "I knew I was different (at a young age), I just wasn't sure what it was." My transgendered friends say that they "knew" when they were very young (this child's age), but didn't have definitions or specifics of what it is that they "knew." The theme keeps emerging in coming-out-story after coming-out-story after coming-out-story. Not just gay people, but bisexual people and transgendered people, too. I would like to offer the notion that the reason why they "don't know what it was" is because parents, and society, don't give them all the information, thinking that we have to shield them from such things.

I like this article because it means the parents were listening. They were listening when the first ludicrous idea that their boy might identify as a girl manifested in whatever way. They were listening again when the idea persisted. And maybe it took lots of listening, but the parents decided to listen, to give their child audience, to entertain the idea that they child might have a better understanding of her identity than the parents did. And the parents provided information so that the child could know what that something was. They didn't prolong or put-off a conversation with this child - and possibly saved this child years of emotional agony, years of identity-crisis!

I'm not a parent. I'm not transgendered. I can't pretend to fully understand either. I don't think there's any specific age at which it is a perfect time to discuss identity issues, but I would say there are cues and signs at every age. Cues as to whether there is an issue, signs that the issue needs discussion.

But I know that I sure would have liked parents who listened, not just to what I was saying, but to what I wasn't saying, when I was young. I, too, "knew" when I was very young, but had no outlet to explore it - no one to talk to, no one who was listening.

The result? I spent years pretending to be what I thought everyone else wanted me to be - instead of who I was. My environment as a child presented me with what my parents, their social circle and my school considered "normal," but I knew I was different. With lack of information, it became this guilt, this sense of not-belonging, this sense of being different, this sense of being strange, this sense of being weird... and I was just gay - not dealing with the super-complicated transgender identity-crisis that this young child appears to be confronted with.

Simple Machines.

How can there still be people in my life who claim they love me and care about me and YET still qualify their "love" by saying crap like "I don't agree with your lifestyle," or call being gay a "choice?" WTF?
The truth is, any argument or retort I might have to offer these people tends to be a waste because their minds don't ever want to be changed, they're almighty in their assertion that they are right, and I, therefore, must be wrong. 

I suppose I'm just as guilty of that logic. 

Point me, if you will, or if you can, to any credible evidence that proves I ever had any choice in being gay. 
And don't quote me any lemming bible - that is NOT evidence. 
Because all evidence I have is to the contrary.
I know many folks who live a falsehood, by hiding their true selves in an unsatisfactory marriage or lonely bachelorhood - wishing, of course, to avoid the "consequences" of being "out." They forget that they are involving innocents in their deceptions - spouses, children, family and friends.
Had I made that "choice," I'm sure I would have committed suicide many years ago, or at the very least, have been victim to severe depression or other mental disorder.
My "lifestyle" is NOT about sex, or lust, or debauchery.
It's about identity, and about having the capacity to love a PERSON, and gender has little to do with it.
And don't tell me "don't knock it until you try it," because not only have I tried it (relationships with women), but I challenge you to find a vehemently straight person who felt the need to "try it" with a same-gendered partner before they "knew" they were straight. They KNOW they're straight, same as I know I'm gay.
And I refuse to live a lie, especially not to satiate religious, societal or moral expectations of a misled and misinformed group of people or individual.
So, I am forced to move beyond such arguments with people who might never be convinced by logic. Instead, I'm forced to examine the importance of my relationships with such people: Just how important is "family?" My assertion is that "family" is defined by people who actually ACT LIKE IT, and most times has absolutely NOTHING to do with blood ties. And in that sense, family is very important to me. 
My assertion is that love of a person is unconditional, but the degree in which I need that person involved in my life is directly related to my comfort level with that person. Obviously, if they're willing to try, so am I, and in doing so, I might gently change their minds through example - through them seeing that my relationship has richness, fulfillment, quality - and genuine love. They may be able to see that whatever prejudice or preconceived notion they may have about a gay person is changed by their willingness to care, to be involved, to be open-minded.
With such open-minded or open-hearted people, it is easy to see a clear path for association, for friendship, for quality relations.
But just how (and why) do I need a person in my life who is closed in mind and heart? Shall I just dismiss them, count them out, edit them out of my life? Should they be deleted (in modern terms) from my Facebook, my twitter, my newsfeed? Should I recognize that they are unchangeable, immovable, hopeless - in terms of their capacity for unconditional love?
One thing I know for sure: I'm NOT editing my life for their personal comfort - NOR should they. Certainly they are entitled to their opinion, and I defend their right to do so, just as surely as I defend my own right. But i don't have to compromise my integrity, my happiness or my identity.
But I have to ask, if that is their mindset - if their hearts are truly closed, why do they insist on calling me "family?" Are they relying too heavily on a deep-rooted "traditional" definition of the word?
If "family" is so important to them, why does it seem to come with conditions (I love you but I don't agree with your lifestyle...), with prerequisites (we don't talk about, or just simply ignore, the "gay" thing)?
I'm left with the only logical conclusion - and that is simply that they're leaving a door open for dialogue, whether it be locked, barred, bolted, welded or otherwise - the door is still there, and I should not give up hope. If the door wasn't there, why do they bother? Why not just simply be completely uninvolved? Why include me in their life at all?
So with that in consideration, I have to study intent. Perhaps the phrasing, the word choice, is a an accidental offense, one that comes from a lack of familiarity or association with real-live-gay-people. Perhaps they simply do not know they are being offensive.
So, I'll just continue to be myself. They can continue to be themselves. Perhaps by continued association, we will both learn the intent of the other, and it won't be so bad as it was in my head. There are keys to locks, pry bars for bolts,  the inclined plane was  invented for exactly this purpose. The gentle wedge shall prevail. 
And if it doesn't, time will solve it, eventually - TIME - the simplest machine of them all.

Body Motivations

<--Abercrombie & Fitch

I saw a news piece in 2008 on the local news about a man who managed to come very close to obtaining all the necessary signatures to have an Abercrombie & Fitch store in the local mall remove a picture inside the store. He even had started a web site, http://www.movethepicture.com/ to facilitate his efforts.

One of the things that makes America great is our right to speak out, make free speech, protest or support things in our America. We have a voice, and it can be heard even louder in numbers. This man has his right to his opinion, and I respect that.

However, personally, I think we should see how many people want to sign a petition to save the picture. It serves no harm, and is not pornographic. I've seen worse at the public beach (or better, as the case may be). The photo is inspiring to people who wish to be physically fit.

The objectors website is no longer - and A&F continue to strategically place photos such as these in conspicuous view from the leaseline.  Thank you A&F for providing Body Motivation to men everywhere!

Its no secret that men worry about their "image." The less secure ones worry that if pictures like these are all over their refrigerator, some of their guy friends might think they're gay. So finding body motivational images can be a good thing for them, because they can still view motivational photos without worry.

<--American Eagle Outfitters (one of my most favorite clothing stores ever - their clothing is actually of good quality, not just fashionable.)

Of course, us gays, we have no such hangup - we put pictures of fit men on our refrigerators, on the walls of our bathrooms, on our Trapper Keepers...

 <--Hollisters

So here's hoping these images help those who seek body motivation...  however it may come!

Additional Body Motivation - an openly gay male country music star, Steve Grand: