you down with GLB? yea, you know me....

There are those who think we queers are overly ambitious in our pursuit of gay civil rights. Calm down, I’ve heard. Blacks campaigned for civil rights for decades after centuries of enslavement… it’s a long process.

But why?

Sure, the African-American Civil Rights Movement and the enfranchisement of women took decades and decades of struggle (and arguably the effects of racial and sexist subordination are still felt today), but aren’t we a different society than we were in 1865 or 1920, or –hell- even 1973 (when the APA removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM)? Hasn’t the inclusion of women and blacks into Club Citizen taught us anything about marginalizing friends, colleagues and family members into categories of queer “untouchables”?

It’s 2007 and I have less agency than most of the people reading this blog. Fred Thompson suggests ammending the constitution to prevent court judges from legalizing same-sex marriage, but leaves that power open to each state legislature -a pretty moderate viewpoint for his party, and one that will certainly win him fringe votes should he gain the nomination. Hillary Clinton says she doesn't currently support same-sex marriage but wants to understand and work more for the cause.

With supporters like this in political power, with a more informed, mobilized and capable generation of gays than either women or blacks had available to them during their decades- and centuries-long struggle, with more ways of diseminating information and raising awareness than ever before, why should we be content to wait another 60 or 80 years for an ammendment guaranteeing our right to be equal citizens with our heterosexual friends and neighbors?

Why not now?

Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones…

By now, I am sure that most of you have heard about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s little visit to Columbia University. This past Monday, Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs invited President Ahmadinejad to speak at the World Leaders Forum. This was a gutsy move on Columbia’s part, and many were hesitant to even invite the President, yet what happened during the forum was a sight to see.

Usually when introducing a guest speaker, one does not usually resort to calling them names. Surprisingly, Columbia University President Lee Bollinger took this approach while introducing President Ahmadinejad, setting the maturity precedence for a truly amateurish forum. Sure, President Ahmadinejad has said some truly tactless, insensitive comments, and it had to be tempting for Bollinger to call Ahmadinejad out for his controversial comments on the holocaust, yet by saying what he did, Bollinger ultimately sunk down to Ahmadinejad’s maturity level:

“Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator, and so I ask you, why have womenmembers of the Bahá' í Faith, homosexuals and so many of our academic colleagues become targets of persecution in your country?"

Come on, Bollinger. Not calling your guest a petty and cruel dictator is something you should have learned in debutant training school. After Bollinger threw out his zinger at Ahmadinejad, the audience began to applaud. I couldn’t help but feel as though I was watching an episode of Maury where some disgruntled housewife called out her unfaithful husband –- and had the paternity test results to back it up. Maturity clearly was not anyone’s prerogative at the forum. On the other hand, though, the forum’s rampant immaturity did bring about something hilarious. In response to Bollinger’s incessant questions relating to Iran’s treatment of homosexuals, President Ahmadinejad’s acidic – if petty and cruel – tongue unleashed one of the finer quotes of 2007:

"In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who has told you that we have it."

In the wise words of Kathy Griffin, “Where my gays at?!” It would not surprise me that there aren’t many out homosexuals in Iran because the legal consequences they would face are somewhat daunting. As stipulated by Iranian law, sodomy is a crime and if two consenting adults are caught in the act, they could face death. Consenting adult lesbians caught in the act are subjected to 100 lashings. I suppose it’s no wonder why Ahmadinejad can’t find any homosexuals in Iran.

As ridiculous as Ahmadinejad may be at times, Bollinger’s juvenile tactics were somewhat uncalled for. But then again, Bollinger did get Ahmadinejad to claim that there aren’t any homosexuals in Iran.

Second-Class Citizen

I’m one of those… oh, what do you call them? bleeding-heart liberals? You know, a "we're descended from monkies, women have a right to choose, pull out of Iraq, homosexuality is not a choice, the humanities can safeguard our culture" kind of person. And it’s my firm belief that theatre –like an internet blog- is a powerful medium of political awareness and discourse –just look to ancient Greece for evidence on how public performance can be used as a means of civic engagement. In the 2,500 years since Aeschylus first produced his Oresteia, however, theatre has shifted to –and is seen almost solely as- a form of entertainment rather than education. Now is the time to change that perception.

But doing so is difficult: in today’s world of Bonos and Brangelinas, many actors are politically vocal, but few are politically aware. I need your help to change this. In the coming weeks, I want to learn more about the positions of presidential candidates on a subject that many actors care deeply about and has only been talked about within the past two decades on stage: homosexuality. I want the candidates’ –and all of your- opinions on don’t-ask-don’t tell, marriage versus civil unions, federal anti-discrimination laws, allocations for AIDS research and the development of the queer image. It’s my hope that this blog might create more civic discourse so that this actor –as well as anyone else who will share- might be a bit more informed when standing in the voting booth a year from now.