It Keeps Getting Worse

I won't post a link to the video, and I won't even mention the young man's name, but you know who I'm talking about: the teenager who, months after having posted his own video as part of the It Gets Better campaign, recently killed himself. His suicide, it is believed, was the end result of his having been bullied for being gay. This death, as heartbreaking as it is, points to the very reasons I've never cared for the It Gets Better campaign, and think it's a pointless feel-good exercise which makes it possible for people to spend ten minutes in front of a video camera, and then pat themselves on the back for all they've done in the name of gay rights.

The biggest problem I have with the campaign is that, well...its premise is a lie. For many homosexuals it never gets better. Living in a small town can suck, but living in a big city is no solution. Advising gay teens in Kansas to move to SF or NYC is ridiculous and illustrates an ignorance about what such a move would mean, financially, for most people. For most people in America, such a move would be impossible. And, even if they could make such a move, the truth is that hate crimes targeting homosexuals happen in SF and NYC, too. I've witnessed some really ugly homophobia in SF, and I've met people here who have been the victims of extreme anti-gay violence.

The fact is, for a lot of people, it just doesn't get better. A campaign that consists of people talking about how holding on and waiting until the future, because "it gets better" doesn't do a damned thing to address why it sucks to be young and gay, in the first place. It sucks because other people can be shitty. Not just other young people, but adults: teachers, clergy, neighbors, the parents of the kids who do all the bullying. Even the parents of the the young person who is gay. And, guess what? They don't care about any dumb campaign. They're not watching. They don't care that the gay kid from Glee has had his three minutes of talking about how it gets better. They can't stand that little fag any more than they can stand the little fag in their homeroom class, the little fag who lives next door, the little fag who is their own son.

The It Gets Better campaign is the Just Say No of the 21st century. Remember that? A bunch of anti-drug people talking about how saying no to drugs was AWESOME! You know who paid attention? People who were anti-drug. Do you believe, for even a minute, that some heroin addict not only watched as Nancy Reagan and Mr. T talked about how a drug-free life would be neat-o, but ran out to rehab to clean up his act? No? Me neither. Because it didn't happen. And, guess what? That asshole who gets in his pickup truck on friday nights, cruising around town, looking for fags to bash? Not only is he not having an epiphany about how awful it is to terrorize someone on account of who he or she is and how he or she loves...he's not getting on Youtube to find out what Judith Light or Liza Minelli has to say. Like Honey Badger, that asshole with his pickup truck really doesn't give a shit.

This poor kid, who ended his life...he made his own It Gets Better video. Like everyone who's made such a video, he meant well. In it, he talked about how terrifically awesome his friends were when he decided to come out as gay (he'd previously identified as bi.) At the risk of seeming crass and insensitive, this needs to be said: They were his friends. They were SUPPOSED to be terrifically awesome. That's a friend's job. It wasn't ever going to be his friends who were going to make life hell for him. His sad, hopeful It Gets Better video is a cautionary tale, and here are the Cliff's Notes: If you're a young gay person, don't go thinking things will get better just because someone says so in a video. Moving to SF or NYC is not a panacea. Your getting older won't make people suddenly treat you with common decency. The world is often a cold, hard place. Toughen up. Get some emotional armor. Learn to fight. Sharpen your mind and learn to cut others down with wit and logic. Read about the drag queens of Stonewall. Find quality people, and surround yourself with them. Remember what George Herman said: Living well is the best revenge. It won't just get better. You have to make it better, in your own small way, within your own, small life.

© 2012 Lana M. Nieves

Limited Licensing: I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the Creative Commons Attribution license, granting distribution of my copyrighted work without making changes, with mandatory attribution to Lana M. Nieves and for non-commercial purposes only. - Lana M. Nieves 

Idiocracy: It's Real, and It's Right Here in America

I read an article, a short while back, about how lots of people are using Groupon and other such online coupon/discount sites...and about how a lot of the small businesses offering discounts are really disenchanted with the way it's turned out for them. For some reason, small business owners are finding that they're actually losing out, instead of increasing revenue. How can that be?

I think I have a pretty good idea.

A family-owned picture frame store with three locations in the Bay Area offered the following deal: buy a voucher worth $40 for just $20. The fine print said the voucher did not cover anything but frames, did not cover sales tax, and that there were no cash refunds or store credits. Each voucher could only be used during one store visit. Fair enough. I pounced on this. $40 worth of picture frames for $20 plus tax? Hell, yeah. I bought two vouchers because I knew I'd need picture frames in my new apartment, and nice frames are expensive.

Yesterday I went to the frame shop with one voucher, and gave the other voucher to the friend I was shopping with. All they sell at this shop are frames and frame hardware. The initial tip-off that this was going to be an exercise in ineptitude came when the sales girl announced, pretty early on, that she didn't know anything about frames or frame hardware. Take that in. She's a sales girl at a store that sells nothing but frames and frame hardware, and she KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT FRAMES OR FRAME HARDWARE. What's more, she doesn't seem to feel badly about this, or see a problem with announcing it. My friend and I are were picking out frames for original art work, not for photos, so we had very specific needs in terms of frame type, depth and such.

Without any help from her, my friend and I picked out our frames. When it came down to picking out the hardware to secure our paintings to their respective frames, she repeated that she had no idea what any of it was for, how it was used, or how to choose the right hardware for specific types of frames. She called in another guy who knew a little bit about frames and frame hardware, but not much more than my 14 yr old nephew knows. 

I picked a $30 frame. I also had a package of framing hardware that cost about $2. As per the fine print on the voucher and the terms of service I'd agreed to on Groupon, I expected to have the cost of the frame covered by the voucher, and to pay cash for the hardware and any sales tax. The sales girl stared at my voucher for a full minute, but somehow managed to NOT READ IT, because she said, "Your total isn't $40. I don't know if I can let you use this for less than $40 worth of merchandise."

I replied, "Are you joking? Of course you can. I just don't get any change back."

She said, "I don't know about that. I'll have to ask the manager."

I said, "But that's ridiculous. It's better for you if I spend the voucher on less than $40 worth of merchandise, since you don't give cash or credit back."

She didn't understand the concept and repeated, "I don't know about that. I'll have to talk to the manager."

"Well, you can't FORCE me to choose a $40 item."

"I don't know about that. I'll have to ask the manager."

She asked her manager, whose answer was, no...they would not honor the voucher is I had less than $40 worth of merchandise. I explained that I only NEEDED the $30 frame, and that I understood and was fine with the fact that I would not get change or a credit back. Impossible, I was told.....I HAD to have $40 worth of merchandise.

Ridiculous. Unbelievable. My friend passed me a cheap, little frame that I don't really NEED, just to make up the difference. The idiot sales girl then proceeded to include the big frame, the small frame, the hardware and tax in the $40 voucher. She triumphantly announced that I'd gone over the $40 voucher and owed them $1.10. 

Again, take that in. She considered it a victory that I had to pay $1.10 in cash. She, and her manager, think they did a great thing for their shop by forcing me to pay $21.10 ($1.10 in cash, and a voucher I paid $20 for) for $40 worth of goods. They don't understand that they should have let me pay $20 for a $30 frame, and pay for the hardware and sales tax in cash. At the end of the day, not only did they force me to pay less for more stuff, but they paid Groupon a service fee for the privilege. I got $40 worth of goods and they got $21.10, minus Groupon fees. Unless their regular mark-up is 50% (and it isn't - it's actually a very reasonably-priced shop) this transaction COST THEM MONEY.

Small businesses may be pissed off at Groupon, but they need to look to their own ineptness before laying the blame on this whole online coupon thing not working in their favor. 

For one thing, how the hell can a small business afford to offer several thousand 50%-off vouchers? Sears can do that. Target can do that. A small, family-owned, niche business cannot reasonably expect to do that and still turn a profit - especially not when they're paying a service such as Groupon to administer their discounts. I might walk in to Target with a 50% off coupon good for clothing, buy some PJs, and then end up spending another $75 in cash on groceries, toiletries, cleaning supplies, or whatever. But this is a frame shop. They sell only frames. I highly doubt people walk in, use their $40 voucher and then decide, "OMG...I need $600 worth of frames and I need it NOW!"

For another thing, how the hell does a business offer a deal without being well-versed in their own terms of service? I ended up paying only a small portion of the sales tax on this purchase, because the stupid sales girl included the tax in the voucher. A voucher is NOT MONEY. This store is going to have a hell of a lot of fun when it comes time to balance their books and reconcile their accounts for the IRS, because they're essentially NOT CHARGING SALES TAX FOR PEOPLE WHO USE VOUCHERS. The IRS will want that money, and guess who'll have to cough it up? The stupid frame store owner. 

America is in a financial crisis. It makes a lot of sense to point to federal and state policies, corruption in government, and politicians from both major parties who don't give a damn about the average working man. On the other hand, business owners - especially small business owners - need to step up their game. Complaining to the Wall Street Journal that they feel duped by Groupon won't do. I'm guessing a lot of these business owners who are disenchanted figured they could offer and get paid up front for big discounts, and that most consumers would never actually use their Groupon vouchers. That's more than just dumb - its damned greedy. I don't hope the store where I had this experience fails, but I won't be shocked if it does. And, if it does, it can't blamed on a poor economy or TPTB in Washington DC or Sacramento. It'll be because the owner is both stupid and greedy - a dangerous combination.

Blog for Access - July 26th, Anniversary of the ADA

When my mother passed away, my father, sister and I went about the business of going through her stuff. Some of it we wanted for ourselves, or to pass down to the grandkids. Some of her things, though, were carted off to places such as The Lighthouse for the Blind, or Hospice or other charities. Things like electronic screen readers, books on CD, talking timepieces, a power wheelchair, and all sorts of Assistive Technology.

Ma was lucky: she had really great insurance that covered the costs most of this equipment. Or rather, she was lucky AND smart: when she retired, she devoted a chunk of her retirement savings to pay for insurance for life. Most people don't have this option. I thank God my mother did. It made it possible for her to be as comfortable as possible when her multiple disabilities caused her pain, took away her eyesight, and compromised her mobility. The fact that she had excellent coverage also meant she was able to live in her own home, right until the end. Without ramps, rails, and a bunch of other devices that made her home easy to maneuver, there's no way my mother could have stayed at home. 

When we talk about access in regards to disabilities, we most often talk about physical access. The ramps and rails were great. The screen readers and talking machines were great. But those items can only be useful if they're accessible. And, by this I mean that they're great for people who can afford them or whose insurance helps them defray the costs, but more of a pipe dream for people who can't. This is a whole other type of access that people with disabilities have to deal with every day: the AT exists, and it can make the world more accessible, but some of it is exorbitantly expensive. It's only useful to people if they can actually get their hands on it.

The very tools that have been designed to provide greater access are not financially accessible to most Americans.

I remember talking to the social worker at the dialysis center where my mother had treatment four times a week. He told me that my mother wasn't like other patients he dealt with. She had great insurance, he explained, and great insurance gave her options. Most of the people he saw had little or no insurance, or relied on Medicaid or Medicare. I was shocked to find out that several of the regular dialysis patients were homeless, and living out of a tent city set up by the town council. The federal government guaranteed them access to dialysis treatment, but little else. Even if they were able to find affordable housing, the chances of being able to modify that housing to make it accessible was next to nil. For these people, there are few, if any, choices about independent, community-based living.

So, when Ma passed away, we packed up most of her AT, and donated it to different charities where other people with disabilities could make use of it. Some it was practical stuff: items to help people get dressed or read or tell time or get around. Other things were just for living life: tactile and large print board games and playing cards, a giant remote control, a wide selection of books on tape and CD. It felt good to pass those things along - to provide access to a few people. But it's not the answer. We need to work, as a country, to make not just emergency healthcare something that every person can access, but to make accessible the basic things people with disabilities need in order to truly have options they can explore.

Bad Science

"It's a choice!" you'll hear. Homosexuality is a choice, a lifestyle entered into by conscious decision. This what those who oppose same-sex marriage and full civil rights for gays and lesbians say. Homosexuals aren't and shouldn't be a protected class, they say, because homosexuality is not a genetically determined trait such as race or gender.

In their zeal to deny others of their rights, and to hold on to as much power, themselves, as they possibly can, the far right points to science. Many of the same people who poo-poo science when it comes to evolution vs. creation theory suddenly look to science as the be-all and end-all that they hinge their anti-homosexual agenda on. The problem is, the science they're pointing to isn't science, at all. It's pseudo-science. It has nothing to do with scientific investigation, controlled study, or hard evidence. It's quackery that amounts to taking select bits and pieces of scientific theory, mixing that in with large doses of religion and personal ethos, and calling it SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE.

The Myths

"The only natural sexual inclination involves males being attracted to females, and females being attracted to males."

Homosexuality and bisexuality occur all the time in the natural world. Animals such as chimpanzees, whales, dolphins, penguins, walruses, bison and some species of reptiles, to name a few examples of the close to 1500 species where homosexuality has been observed by scientists. Last I checked, bison and walruses weren't being induced or pressured into a gay lifestyle. Animals act on instinct. Outside forces play no part in bisexual and homosexual activity in the animal world, the natural world.

"Sexual activity is strictly a function driven by the urge to reproduce and preserve the species, therefore homosexuality must logically be a choice." 

One of the driving factors of human sexuality is almost certainly reproduction, but it isn't the only one. If it were, human beings would only feel the urge for sex when and if their bodies were capable of successful procreation. If it were, no one would ever masturbate or feel the need to masturbate. If it were, men with low sperm counts would have zero sex drive. If it were, no pregnant woman would ever have sexual urges - why would she? If it were, people who didn't want to have kids would have no sex drive. The truth is, human sexuality is a complex phenomenon that has several driving factors and which serves many purposes. Procreation is just one of them.

"Homosexuality is a learned behavior, and people become homosexual because of images of homosexuality they're exposed to in the media. Since it can be learned, it can be unlearned."

A child raised in a traditional household, by a mother and a father, can identify as homosexual, without even knowing what homosexuality entails and without exposure to homosexuality in the media or in real life. It happens all the time. In fact, that's the background story of most homosexuals I know. Homosexuality occurs in all cultures, including those without mass media and those where any images of homosexuality are strictly forbidden. Homosexuality predates the Internet. It predates Tom of Finland and Sarah Waters. It predates the printing press and mass literacy.

"Homosexuality is curable."


In order for something to be curable, it has to be an illness, a disease. Homosexuality is not a disease or a disorder. This is not just my opinion as a lesbian. Every major mental health organization in the country, including the American Psychological Association, has stated that homosexuality is not an illness or disease. So has the World Health Organization. Real science says homosexuality is not a disease. If it's not a disease, there can't be a cure. If it's not a disease - and it isn't - only a fool would look for a cure.

"Homosexuality isn't even learned - it's a conscious choice. People who engage in homosexual sex just need to choose to be heterosexual by engaging in heterosexual sex."

Sexuality is about a lot more than the mere sex act. A celibate heterosexual is still a heterosexual, and the same holds true for a homosexual. A person can and may choose how to behave and what to do, but no human being can choose his or her sexuality. Who would choose homosexuality in a country where homosexuals are denied their civil rights, face discrimination at every pass, are mocked in the media, and are often shunned by their families? If it were a choice, why would anyone living in a country such as Iran or Yemen, where homosexuality is punishable by death, choose to be homosexual? 

There are lots of homosexuals who live what we think of as heterosexual lives. I'm talking about men with wives and children who, when they feel safe that no one is watching, engage in sex with other men. They can't help it. Because, at their core, they're gay. They just aren't brave enough to embrace this reality, so they settle for gay sex on the DL and a straight life for their public personas. As recent history has shown, it's not uncommon for some of the very people who use bad science and spew bullshit theories about the curability of homosexuality to be nothing more than cowardly, self-loathing homosexuals. Hey, I'm not making this up. The Hall of Shame includes:

George Rekers
Pastor Eddie Long
Troy King
Richard Curtis
Ted Haggard
Glenn Murphy Jr.
David Dreier
Bruce Barclay
Roy Ashburn
Jim West

The Truth

The truth is, people who use bad science to defend the denial of basic civil rights to homosexuals are scared to death that their tenuous grasp on power is weakening. This is not new. It happened in regards to blacks, Native Americans, Jews, women, people with disabilities, etc. In 2011, we know better than to believe that Africans are genetically inferior to Europeans. We know that Native Americans aren't "savages." We know Jews do, indeed, bleed when we prick them. We know that it would be outrageous to deny women the vote. We acknowledge that people with disabilities have as much right to live in the world, and have access to public spaces, as the rest of us. In 2011, it high time bad science be kicked to the curb and homosexuals be granted our civil rights.

One Year

One year ago I got on a plane and headed across the continent to Florida to say goodbye to my mother. I did not make it in time to say goodbye. I was somewhere over America when she passed over. I didn't expect that. I expected her to hold on long enough for me to have one last chance to hold her hand. The way it happened, though, was the way she wanted it to happen. She waited until she was alone, except for my father, and she just...left. In terms of the many ways people die, she had a good death. Quiet. Peaceful. On her own terms. No unfinished business. My sister later told me that, near the end, she'd told our mother that, while I was on my way, she knew I'd understand if she couldn't wait. It was the right thing for my sister to do. This wasn't about me. And I don't believe it would have been any easier on me if I had been there. We had no unfinished business, my mother and I. We said all that needed to be said to one another. We didn't have the tension or rivalry some mothers and daughters have. We had genuine friendship and respect between us. Being together at the last moment wasn't worth as much to either of us as having been there for one another throughout my life.

One year. In most ways today is like any other day. But we tend to mark anniversaries in this culture. One year. One year without my mother. One year without the daily check-in by telephone. One year of not being able to pick up the phone and ask how to cook a certain dish, or who starred in some obscure 50s movie, or laugh over a funny story. One year of the phone not ringing, of no happy visits or sunny days pushing her wheelchair along the Sponge Docks. One year alone.

Nothing will ever be harder. This I believe. Friends who have had this experience - the ones who are brave enough to be honest - tell me it never gets easier and it never stops hurting. They say it just becomes something I'll get used to. The way this stupid hand injury I have has never healed, and never stopped hurting - I've just gotten used to it. And they're right - I am getting used to it. And I hate getting used to it, because it's like giving in to the obvious, the inevitable, the truth.

The Moment

I am five years old, sitting on the floor in front of my grandmother's couch. My mother and grandmother sit on the couch. I lean back on my mother's legs. We are all engrossed in what we see on the television in front of us: on the night before Philip Brent is to ship off to fight in Vietnam, he and Tara Martin have snuck into a church.

They are young.
They are in love.
In the darkness of an empty church, they privately exchange vows.
There is no priest.
This is their secret.
We are the only witnesses.

This is the moment that sets the scene for years of heartbreak, drama, tragedy and action in Pine Valley. It is the moment that will impact so many characters in the years to come. It is the moment that, years later, when Philip returns from Vietnam and finds Tara married to Chuck Tyler, he will bring us back to. It is the moment I first feel the power of the genre known as soap opera and fall in love with a particular kind of storytelling - storytelling that is about people and their histories, their secrets, their demons. Storytelling that is about people at their best and people at their worst, and all the shades of gray in between.

On hearing about the cancellation of All My Children and One Life To Live, I knew I'd have to write about what will truly be the end of an era for me, but I didn't know where to start. While exchanging emails with a group of friends who love soaps every bit as much as I do, and reminiscing about our favorite moments, it hit me like gangbusters: Philip and Tara. The church. Their secret. It is the first real story line I remember.

In my real life, I'd hear my parents talk about Vietnam. Howard K. Smith and Harry Reasoner talked about it on the news every night. It was part of the background noise as we ate dinner. But it was just a word to me. I had no idea what this Vietnam everyone spoke about really was, except that it was bad, and everyone had an opinion about it. My grandfather and father disagreed about it. A lot. And here, in the middle of the day, were Philip and Tara - two young, attractive characters who seemed like real people to me - talking about a war. About what it means for a young man to go off to war without any certainty that he'll come home, again. It is not an exaggeration to say that I figured out what Vietnam was - not through my parents or the news reports we watched every day - but  by watching Philip and Tara's drama unfold. It was a war! People had strong feelings about it, in part, because young men were going away for years and years, even though they didn't want to. Some of them never got back home. Some of them left home without ever having lived. Some of them left families behind, and people they loved.

For every crazy, stupid story line this genre has tackled - demonic possession, human cloning, time travel, a gorilla escaping from Central Park Zoo - there are so many human stories that really have made a difference in the way a lot of people live their lives. When Guiding Light aired frank and open story lines about domestic violence and breast cancer viewers paid attention - DV hotlines rang off the hook and women started booking appointments for mammograms in record numbers. Another World talked openly about abortion for the first time on television. As The World Turns revealed that a popular character was gay. Guiding Light tackled spousal rape for the first time on television. The Young and the Restless bravely introduced a story line about venereal disease in the mid 70s. Ryan's Hope broke tradition by featuring a Jewish character in the previously all Christian/ mostly Protestant daytime arena. And All My Children incorporated the Vietnam War - in real time, no less - with the Philip and Tara story line. And maybe this story line helped people talk about the war, or see it in a different light. I know it explained a lot about the war to me, as young as I was. But more. It made me notice story-telling. It made me pay attention to why characters did and said what they did and said. It made me notice that nothing exists in a vacuum, and that every action is followed by a reaction - even though I didn't have that language - and that these things are important to keep in mind if you want to tell a story that people will believe and want to listen to. Mostly, it made me want to make up and tell those stories, myself.

It is no small thing for me to think of All My Children being pulled off the air. Even though Tara and Philip are long gone, Agnes Nixon is no longer at the helm, and I haven't been a regular viewer for some time, that show is a little piece of home for me. It represents time shared with people who were important to me (my mother and grandmother), and a very specific moment in time when a big part of the person I am today was born.

It's no accident that people refer to their favorite soaps as their "stories," because that's what the genre has always been about - stories. Agnes Nixon wrote a story about Philip and Tara. Richard Hatch and Karen Lynn Gorney brought that story to life. That story made me fall in love with stories.

Birthday

Today's my birthday. I'm keeping it very low key. Keeping to myself all day. No cake. No celebratory toast. No presents. It's always seemed to me that my birthday wasn't just my day, but a day I shared with my mother. Really, one's birthday is the day that brings home the mother/child relationship, isn't it? Without her, there would have been no birthdays, at all, for me. And, yes, I know fathers count, too. But father's don't give their unborn babies a home to live in for nine months. And fathers don't go through unspeakable pain as they push us into the world. I'm here because of my mother. Because she loved me. Because she wanted me.

My mother loved all three of her children. My older sister was born when my mother had been married just over a year, and hadn't quite turned 20. 18 year olds do not plan pregnancies. In those days, a married 18 expected to become a mother, but she didn't plan on it. In those days, it was more about letting the chips fall where they may. My parents were happy to have their first baby. Thrilled, in fact.

My younger sister came as a big surprise. My mother had always said she'd have no more children after age 30. When she was 29 she found herself pregnant. She was surprised. My dad was surprised. Everyone was surprised. That baby just made the threshold and she made everyone happy. I was old enough when my sister was born to remember all of this: how surprising the pregnancy was, how fun it was to have a new baby when no one really expected any more babies to come our way.

I was in the middle. I asked my mother, one day, about the circumstances of my birth. I'd been planned, she told me. The only one she'd actually planned. She and my father wanted more than one child, and wanted their first child to have at least one sibling. They'd planned for me and wanted me and I had not been a surprise.  It meant a lot to me to hear this. It means something still.

The fact that I was planned may have something to do with the fact that my mother and I shared an incredibly tight bond, right until the very end. It might also have something to do with the fact that I was the one my mother chose to give her mother's wedding ring to, and then her own wedding ring. I'm the middle child. I'm unmarried. I'm a lesbian. I have no children. I will never have children. And my mother wanted her wedding ring, and her mother's wedding ring, to end up with me. She was very much alive and of sound mind when she gave them to me. She wanted no mistake to be made. I cannot describe how much this gesture meant to me - still means to me. I treasure those rings. They lived on the fingers of the two most important people in my life. The women who gave me life, nurtured me, gave me my first taste of coffee, passed on their sense of humor and love of story-telling to me. My idols. My best friends.

And so, today is my birthday. But how can I possibly have a birthday when my mother isn't here to share it with me? It shouldn't be my day. It's our day. The day she gave me the greatest gift anyone has ever given me. The day of our first parting...of the first time this baby left the only home she'd ever known.

Thanks, Ma. For life. For everything. My birthday will never be as sweet as it used to be.

Choice is not all black and white

Imagine your life-long dream of having a baby is about to come true: You're 5 months pregnant. You and your partner are thrilled. You've read all the books about prenatal care. You've never missed an appointment with the OB/Gyn. You've been eating all the right foods, exercizing, getting enough rest. You've got a positive attitude. Your whole family is excited. The baby gifts have started pouring in. Everything is exactly the way it should be. And then your doctor calls you in to tell you that something disturbing has come through on your most recent ultrasound. Your son (it's already been determined that you're carrying a boy) is not developing as he should be. Maybe his brain is only partially developed. Maybe there are other organs that just haven't developed, at all. Something has gone wrong. Instead of the son you've always dreamed of, you're carrying a fetus that is not viable. He's no less your baby than he was yesterday, but now you know that he will never be alive in this world. What do you do?

In 2010, a judge in Brazil refused to grant a woman the right to terminate a pregnancy, even though the fetus she was carryind had no brain. The judge believed it was a black-or-white issue: human beings either value life, or they don't. Is anything ever this cut and dry? When we state things and pass judgment based on things either being ALL RIGHT or ALL WRONG, what gets lost is the human element. How can there be any human compassion when one is measuring in terms that really have no practical value within the human experience?

A close friend of mine - C - is a Registered Nurse and Midwife. Most people hear "midwife" and think of childbirth. For the most part, this is a safe assumption. My friend, though, deals a lot more with fairly late-stage terminations than with catching babies as they enter into the world. When a pregnant woman faces a situation such as the one described above - a tragedy, no matter how you look at it - my friend is someone they can call on not just for her medical expertise, but for her compassion.

Women have to make choices regarding reproduction all the time - not just when they decide whether or not to use birth control. A woman in the situation described above has some pretty big choices to make. And she has rights. She might choose to carry to term a fetus that is not viable. This is her right. She might, however, choose to terminate the pregnancy as soon as she learns the truth about her baby - that he is no longer alive, or that he will die almost instantly after being born. This, too, is her right. When a woman makes this choice - the choice to terminate a planned pregnancy that has gone terribly wrong - it is my friend who is often called to duty.

C went into Midwifery because she loved the idea of women helping other women through the birthing process. Over time, though, she realized that her experience as a career nurse and her personal feelings about choice made her the perfect person to perform these difficult terminations. She's good at what she does not just because she has the clinical skills to perform the procedure, but because she knows that it's no easy thing for a woman dealing with trauma to make the decision to terminate. Also, she recognizes that, when a woman in this position DOES make the decision to terminate a pregnancy....she's giving up a baby she's planned for and learned to love. A woman in this position has the right to make choices about her own body, and she also has the right to grieve the loss she's experiencing. C knows that the business of deciding to terminate is rarely a black-or-white issue, and that the emotions that accompany it cover the entire spectrum. She is both an excellent clinician, and a compassionate support person.

It's important that we defend every woman's right to reproductive choice. It's also important that we remember few women make these choices lightly, and that the choice can be difficult to make.

2010: The Year

Needs no explanation.

Best On Screen Chemistry
Dexter

Last season's bathtub carnage left me wondering how the hell they could possibly keep this show interesting. How could they match such an incredible season? The answer to that question turns out to be Julia Stiles.

I'm not a huge Julia Stiles fan (although I highly recommend The Business of Strangers,) but hot damn if she didn't add a whole new dimension to Dexter. Stiles and Michael C. Hall share ridiculous chemistry, and it was disturbingly heartwarming to think of Dexter having a life-partner in crime.

Close second:

Mad Men

Who the fuck gives a damn about Don Draper, his ego, his secrets, or his predictable decision to marry the pretty girl? It's all about Joan and Roger. Three cheers for writers and actors who have created two characters well over 30 who are hot as hell, smart, interesting, and make me root for adultery. 

Best New Thing on TV
Boardwalk Empire

It's big, it's beautiful, it's Scorsese, it's Buscemi, it's filmed in Brooklyn. Love. That is all that really needs to be said. Which brings me to....

Newest Ridiculously Sexy Woman on Weekly Television

Gretchen Mol

She was so damned good as Bettie Page, and now she's on tv on a regular basis as Boardwalk Empire's Gillian. She's the perfect mixture of sweet propriety, and gutter-mouth street smarts. Mol's prohibition-era Gillian is like Joan Holloway's spiritual grandmother.  My marriage ended in 2010 - I'm announcing here and now that my next wife will be Gretchen Mol.

Writer of the Year

Patti Smith

If you read just one book in 2010, I hope it was Patti Smith's Just Kids. Simple. Beautiful. Unlike any other love story you've ever read. It is perfect. 

Over-hype of the Year

Mary Ann in Autumn 

Sorry - I know people love Maupin. I love Maupin. I love the entire Tales of the City franchise and especially love Mary Ann Singleton, and sooo looked forward to this book. It's not that it's a bad book, but it's just not a good one. Truth be told, even for a long-time soap fan who's used to suspending disbelief, Mary Ann in Autumn was hard to swallow. It's winning awards and getting accolades because Armistead Maupin is a much-loved man - smart, funny, good-natured, and talented. This book does not show off his talent. Much like San Francisco, itself, you'll expect so much more, and find yourself settling for so much less. I wish I'd skipped it. 

Best movie You Probably Didn't See

Howl

See it. James Franco is so much more than a pretty face. He channels Ginsberg. Howl is a thing of beauty.

Biggest Loser

Barack Obama

Because he stands by marriage as the domain of heterosexual couples. Because he did all he could to keep DADT in place. Because he sold everyone who had faith in a national  health plan down the river. Because he gave the uber-rich more tax breaks. Because we are still at war. Because he has failed, miserably, by throwing away a great opportunity, and caused it to slip through his fingers. 

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Get me Fucking Started...

So DADT has been repealed. Praise be! it makes me want to give Dan Choi a great, big hug and a weekend at Disney. Seriously - everyone knows there are gays in the military. There always have been. A soldier is a soldier. Not something I'd choose to dedicate my life to, but thank God someone does. Who the hell cares how they identify? Gay people serve in armies all over the world, and morale among the troops seems just fine, thank you very much. The long and the short of it is -it's about fucking time.


Here's the thing, though: no one can afford to become complacent about LGBT rights. DADT was repealed. Few of us will be directly impacted by this. The fact is, this country is still a mess when it comes to gay rights, and this is exactly the kind of move government makes to appease the uppity. How long before queers are told to sit down and shut up about other forms of discrimination with, "You got DADT overturned...what the hell else do you want?" Even money says TPTB figure this bit of doing-the-right-thing comes with a proviso: we'll fix that little military thing, but they have to shut up about that same-sex marriage nonsense. 

Here is what you need to know about the decision re DADT:


You have a son who has always wanted to serve in the military. Your son is gay. Now that DADT is a thing of the past, you son can Be All That He Can Be. He can join the army, as himself. Private Gaylord Assboy reporting for duty, Sir! That's it. That's all the overturning of DADT means. 


Your gay son cannot marry the man he loves. If he has a life partner, the US Army does not recognize this. If your son marries a nice, young woman he met while stationed in Germany, this woman could apply for a Greencard and, eventually, U.S. citizenship as the wife of an American. And, if your son were suddenly stationed in Fort Middle-of-Nowhere, the US Army would almost certainly relocate his wife. They would be eligible for military housing. Your daughter-in-law would get an official I.D. card so that she could shop at the PX and the Commissary. If, heaven forbid, your son died in the line of duty, your daughter-in-law would be eligible for widow's benefits. 


But your son is queer. 


Thanks to the recent decision about DADT, your son is now good enough to die for his country as a proud and out gay man. He's not good enough, however, to be granted the same rights as those granted the soldier who stands next to him - the soldier who is heterosexual. There is no Greencard for your son's life partner. No military relocation. No military housing. No PX or Commissary. No survivor's benefits. There is nothing for your son's life partner. Because he's gay. He might as well not even exist.


Your gay son can be a war hero, but he can't be a husband.


This business with DADT is a victory, but it's a small one and, while I'm sure President Obama will be willing to take credit for it in 3....2...1...the fact is, DADT was overturned in spite of him, not because of him. So, before you go back to your comfortable chair and say, "I knew Obama would come through for me in the end," remind yourself that we still have a president who believes marriage is a sacred union between MEN AND WOMEN. The long and short of it is he is against full equality and recognition on a federal level. And, without full equality and recognition under the law, on a federal level, the fight for gay rights will go nowhere. They will toss us a bone, now and then, to keep us quiet, but we will be treading water. 


The American Civil War ended in 1865. Jim Crow laws, enacted locally, meant that, for millions of black Americans, the end of slavery did little to bring equality. Change only really started to happen when discrimination was addressed on a federal level, by the Supreme Court. This didn't start until the 20th century, and black people living in America are still far from having equal opportunities in this country.


Ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell is nice....now tell me what else you have for me?