The Revolution Will Be Dirty, Fabulous and Live on the Air

My activism has taken many forms, I’ve been a street fighter, a journalist, a speech maker, just about anything you can imagine. But I never thought I’d take my fight to the airwaves as I have over the last several months.

I’m the co-host of a weekly show called The Rainbow Asylum, along with Arizona activist Mike Shipley (aka Head Nurse Mikester). We started the show back in September after I was a guest on Mike’s weekly political talk show Outright Arizona. The both of us had such a blast on the air that I suggested we do our own show.

But it had to be something different, Outright AZ, the radio network Mike had his show on, was mainly political shows, all of them with a libertarian bent and a few focused on LGBT issues. Mike and I were both serious political junkies and insanely driven activists, we needed a break from the constant work we were both engaged in.

So that’s how it started, a weekly break from the insanity that consumes most serious political addicts (and hence the name “The Rainbow Asylum”). But we had to go further than that; Mike and I are both cultural radicals, often scorning mainstream gay culture. We had to attempt to reinvent it.

We went for it, Mike adopted the stage persona of Head Nurse Mikester and became a sharp tongued androgynous king bitch, liberally lashing celebrities, politicians and yes, even yours truly. I became the Soundmaster, spinning gems from the queercore underground, including mainstays like Sister George, the Tom Robinson Band, and Pansy Division, but also digging deeper and airing bands like Maris the Great & the Faggots of Death, Le Sexoflex, Hunx & His Punx, the Strong Boys, and Closet Burner.

Slowly, but surely we started to get somewhere with it, people dug our crass humor, the records we were playing, and our first weekly bit “Slut of the Week”, where we pick a celebrity that’s being particularly asinine and officially end their careers. Most of our targets have been musicians or actors, but we have taken a few political swipes, such as when we declared the entire US Congress as “Slut of the Week” over the government shutdown.

Our first break happened with our Halloween show, we had Maris the Great on as our guest and he was insane, discussing his habit of eating the brains of his lovers, the danger that mere mortals face in his presence and during our “Slut of the Week” bit, he ate the brains of our chosen loser. People tuned in to hear the King of the Gay Undead growl with two weird activists.

Shortly after Maris was on, we expanded our show to an hour and a half and added a new cast member, Sandra Furr. I knew Sandra back when I was in college and knew she would be perfect for the show. With her sharp drag persona, she started doing a bit called “Sandra Furr’s Concrete Carpet” where she would dig up a queer artist who was more pop than what I normally played and highlight one of their songs.

We were growing and quickly becoming the highest rated show on the network, we had our own on-air personalities and were getting a fairly regular cast of callers, who would dial in to make crass jokes, tell us they loved the show, or tell embarrassing stories about either me or Mikester.

But even though what we were doing was meant to be non-political, it was revolutionary in its own right. Mike and I both came out of the underground music scenes, we were used to digging for our own culture and identities and with the mainstreaming of American gay culture, a lot of that raw, dirty edge was rapidly disappearing in a haze of Top Forty pop radio and drag queen reality shows.

So we set out to tear it down and rebuild it in our own image and encourage our brothers and sisters to rediscover their own queer cultural roots and find what was going on that The Advocate wasn’t talking about.

And I think so far we’re succeeding…

Tune into the Rainbow Asylum, Sunday Nights at 10:00 PM EST (9:00 Central, 8:00 AZ) on the Outright Arizona Network at BlogTalkRadio: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/outrightaz

Find the Rainbow Asylum on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RainbowAsylum

The Real Acceptance Project: Making Efforts to Accept Everyone and Every Experience

Friday evening, I had the opportunity to attend a film screening of the latest documentary, titled “Families are Forever,” put out by the Family Acceptance Project (FAP). This initiative, through San Francisco State University, outreaches to families with LGBTQ youth who are religious or ethnic, in order to preserve the family unit and foster acceptance and love of families toward LGBTQ identified individuals. For anyone wanting more information on the project, this is their official website, a statement by The Cesar Chavez Institute through which the project was done, and the project’s research as published in this journal and this journal.

I acknowledge, but do not wish to focus on, the technical and research aspect of the project. Those so interested can read about the research as linked to above. The one thing I will comment on is use of the “LGB” acronym in this research, and thereby the exclusion of the T: transgender. The articles in both published journals each start out by using the acronym “LGBT.” But as the study and article proceeds, the acronym explicitly becomes “LGB.” In fact, people identifying as trans have, statistically speaking, some of the highest rates of homelessness: one-fifth of respondents identifying as trans in this survey had been homeless at one time. 

I came into the film screening with two questions about the project, which I asked in the Q&A session following the presentation:

1. What, in this research, defines a family?

2. Does this project address the needs of those who left their respective religious communities, and repairing relationships between the family and the individual?

The project’s director did answer these questions, albeit in a manner I found to be indirect and dismissive. However, addressing them could benefit the project in assisting more LGBTQ and religious identified youth, as doing so dismantles the project’s prioritization of marriage and active membership in the church. In reality, the structure of families and the experiences of LGBTQ and religious identified youth vary.

What defines a family is crucial in when we discuss “family,” as the term is recycled throughout the study and project. Is family defined as a group of people headed by heterosexually married biological parents? Are single and widowed parents included? What about families headed by other family members, like grandparents or aunts and uncles? And, is family defined as having blood relatives? The different structures of family affect one’s experience within it. While I was assured that the project studied “many different types of family,” the research did not clarify this question for me. Knowing what I know about the LDS church and its enforcement of normative family structures, the possibility of relying upon other forms of family than the normative and traditional ones seemed slim. However, the variance in family experience should be accounted for, as the different heads of a family constitute a LGBTQ identified youth’s experience. Moreover, should family be defined as blood relatives who put others in situations such as homelessness? While this does not address the needs of LGBTQ identified homeless, maybe there’s something wrong with how we, as a society, are defining family. A crucial difference between blood relatives, who may disagree with us, and family, people who love and accept is, should be made. After all,

A reality for some LGBTQ and religious identified individuals is that they end up leaving the church they were raised in, whether forced to or voluntary, and remain content to not be attending church. I see this situation an important one to include in the FAP. Many will question why no longer religiously-involved LGBTQ identified individuals even matter in movement such as this. If they are no longer attending Church, why should this affect them?  Despite the inactivity or religious relocation of these individuals, their families may remain faithful and religious, which can cause friction in a relationship. The fact of the matter is that religion can be more than just sitting in a chapel. Religion becomes a way of life for many individuals and families. From these beliefs sprout customs, a culture, a navigation of how to live one’s life. As seen in the documentary “Families are Forever,” the Montgomerys had a life envisioned for their son before he came out to them. The religious culture within families rings true for Mormons, and for many other religions. And these traditions remain in tact with families, independent of a LGBTQ identified individual’s activity within an organized body of religion. I, personally, am still asked to pray and participate in prayer at family gatherings and meals. I, daily, deal with how was I socialized and how the conditions it mandates on my activities now. Simply quitting attending church does not free oneself from religion’s effects. And should LGBTQ youth want to leave their church, I would hope this project addresses, embraces, respects, and works with that. And should they want to stay in their church, I would hope this project addresses, embraces, respects, and works with that. I don’t think there’s one way to live as a religious and LGBTQ identified individual  – we have many different experiences. And they should not be placed on a hierarchy, with one lived experience prioritized over another.

I applaud the work that FAP is doing, as the homelessness and rejection of LGBTQ youth is a pertinent issue in our society. However, I desire for the FAP to be accountable for the variance in experiences of the religious LGBTQ community, and to not prescribe one way of living to the entire body. This privileging of family structure and activity within religious spaces does more to promote assimilation into traditional family structures and religious spaces, overlooking other experiences. And maybe those other issues are what need to be accepted, by everyone. 

Embracing Difference and Critiquing Sex

In the wake of celebrating my birthday, moving out of my apartment in Santa Barbara and back home for the summer, I’d like to direct anyone reading this to two authors who have their stuff together this week for some thoughtful insight.

First, this article here, as messaged to me by a friend. I appreciate this article so much because it reiterates a point I so strongly believe in, and even focused on in my workshop last month: embrace difference. Embrace it in coalitional politics between different communities, religious and non-religious, because it can be so beneficial in our politics. Race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, religiosity, ability—the possibilities are endless.  Embrace it in the varying experiences of those religiously and LGBTQ identified. Whether active or inactive in their church, everyone’s voice and experience is crucial in queer religious movements. Embrace it in general, because it’s not always about our own way or own experience.

Second, an article here, on the New York Times website from a Feminist Studies professor at none other than...UCSB (shameless plug). As someone who is personally critical of many representations of gay sex scenes in mainstream media (are men’s bodies really supposed to look like that? Why is everyone white and adhere to their gender assigned at birth and its traditional representations?), it’s useful to be critical of the societal harms these images perpetuate and utilize the potential that representations of sex have as powerful societal statements. 

Bisexuality Rant

Here is a (condensed) list of reasons I was afraid to come out as a bisexual, or to label myself with the term bisexual:

1) I was afraid people would be like, "...but your'e in a committed relationship with a man...so why bother coming out? It's not like you're actually *gay*."

2) I was afraid my boyfriend would be like, "but your'e in a committed relationship with *me*...so why bother coming out? It's not like you're actually *gay*."


3) My parents. Which is a whole different can of worms that finals week will not bear going into right now.

4) I was afraid people would be like, "Are you sure you're just not actually *straight* and you're just rebelling against your parents?"

5) I was afraid people would be like, "Are you sure you're not actually gay and you just haven't experimented enough and the boyfriend is just a cover?"

So, turns out, these are fears a lot of bisexuals have, and experiences a LOT of bisexuals have had as well. Here are my experiences with my fears:

1) no one's ever said that to my face, but it does come across A LOT in the media (cf one very strange episode of Happy Endings, which I generally like as a show and was therefore disappointed in, and A LOT of other things) and in offhand comments by acquaintances/classmates who don't know that there is *gasp!* a bisexual in their midst.

2) My boyfriend did not say this, having always suspected something of the sort, and though he was perhaps a little perplexed about my need to label myself, we talked about it a lot and are (I think) both pretty comfortable with it.

Did I mention that my boyfriend rocks?

3) ....no comment. Yet.

4) Multiple people have said this to me, namely my LDS bishop and my parents.


5) No one said that to me, presumably because I've been into boys as much as I've been into girls for my entire life.

So what is it about bisexuals that freaks people out? Obviously people are freaked out by homosexuality and queerness and transgenders because they go against standard norms, but I've found that there tends to be a prejudice against bisexuals because they aren't one thing or another. They defy our human belief that things need to be in shades of black and white--you're either all gay, or you're all straight. Of course, the Kinsey scale itself pushes against this, and I'm not trying to say that this same issue isn't applicable to the LGBTQ community as a whole (and human life in general, really), but the way the media (and my classmates) tend to deal with the issue of bisexuals is to write them off as confused, because really they should just be all gay or all straight.

I still struggle with the issue of why I wanted to "come out" as bisexual when I could have just stayed hidden as a typical (...kind of) heterosexual in a monogamous heterosexual relationship. But I think it had to do with wanting to be true to myself, and wanting people to know that for me, a real expression of love wasn't necessarily dependent on gender. I told my parents not because I wanted to "rebel" against them, but because I wanted to show them the thing they were the most scared of in the world--ie, being kinda gay--and see if they could still love and accept me. It was kind of a plea for acceptance, and since I relied on them for my self-worth, I think I was also saying, "Tell me that I can be this way and still love myself, because if you love me, then I can love me too." Needless to say, that didn't turn out very well, and while I know that my parents still love me, they don't love me in a way that translates to me as "love," ie respecting my decisions and treating me like a capable, inherently good human being. But hopefully throughout this experience I can move closer to choosing how I want to define myself and how I want to see and love myself, and feel less like I need outside sources to define and evaluate me to determine my self-worth.

I'm not sure how I feel about Single Dad Laughing; I'm not crazy about him, but I do think he makes some apt points occasionally, including this list about what it means to be bisexual:

That doesn’t mean that I sleep around.

That doesn’t mean that I am confused.

That doesn’t mean that I am attracted to everyone.

That doesn’t mean that I am in transition.

That doesn’t mean that I am not faithful in my relationships.

That doesn’t mean that I will always want and miss the gender I am not with.

That doesn’t mean that I am denying my true self.

That doesn’t mean that I am into threesomes. Or orgies. Or swinging.

That doesn’t mean that I am always horny.

And, believe it or not, that doesn’t mean that I am attracted to you simply because you’re breathing and you have two legs with something in between them.

It simply means that I will fall in love with whomever I will fall in love with.

Here's the full post if you want to check it out. I thought it was interesting, though I don't know how he can live with someone who says that if she could change one thing about him, it would be his bisexuality. That seems...terrible. But it's his life, not mine.

Also, I wanted to note that it's okay not to label your sexuality, or to label it in a way different from the norm. Identifying as "queer" instead of going with the more traditional labels is often really helpful for people and really cool. Alternatively, if you choose not to label yourself, I think that can be as freeing as choosing a label for yourself instead of letting society choose one for you. This is just kind of the way it worked out for me.

(ironically, perhaps, I am now going to choose my "labels" for this post so people can search for it in the blog...I guess I can label it whatever I want to)

That's pretty much my unedited rant for the day. Now back to paper writing. Have a good week, everyone!

Also, here's a poem I found today on my friend's tumblr that served as a good reminder that if you haven't read any of ee cumming's erotic poetry, YOU REALLY SHOULD CONSIDER DOING SO.

i like my body when it is with your
body. It is so quite new a thing.
Muscles better and nerves more.
i like your body. i like what it does,
i like its hows. i like to feel the spine
of your body and its bones, and the trembling
-firm-smooth ness and which i will
again and again and again
kiss, i like kissing this and that of you,
i like, slowly stroking the, shocking fuzz
of your electric fur, and what-is-it comes
over parting flesh … And eyes big love-crumbs,

and possibly i like the thrill

of under me you so quite new.

True Equality Won't Come with Marriage

A peaceful spring break quickly turned into a hectic one. Surprisingly, the continuous plans I made to keep me busy weren’t the most hectic part of it all. Dinner and Jersey Boys, a Giants game, and catching up with friends were the least of my chaos. The most frenzy came from Facebook and this symbol:

and my having to explain my position.

This post is not about arguing for or against the issue of same-sex marriage. That’s not the point. I myself am weary about marriage as an institution, specifically because of the inequalities it perpetuates and small population marriage is even applicable to. I invite anyone to click here, here, and here, for more reading on this topic, as more educated people have been better able to articulate their thoughts on the matter.

And yes, I do realize that this issue reaching the Supreme Court is historical and could produce significant legislation, so that’s not what this post is about. 

What this post is about, however, is how the issue of same-sex marriage is being deployed as a solution to injustice towards the LGBTQ community, the solution to everyone’s problems. And as I struggled to formulate my opinion on the matter, Jack Halberstam, Director of The Center for Feminist Research at University of Southern California and queer theorist, came as my saving grace with the following quote:

"Get married by all means--gays, straights, whatevers--but don't confuse recognition with liberation or the cementing of social norms with social justice."

Amen.

If anyone needs any proof that other and more crippling problems persist, then I wish I could show you my Facebook News Feed, filled with posts from conservative LDS Facebook friends that directly and indirectly denounce not only same-sex marriage, but most importantly homosexuality and being attracted to members of the same-sex. Attraction. Within these spaces, many are not even at the point of grasping the acceptability of individuals interested in members of the same sex, and allowing these people to express their interest through romance and relationships. Even if same-sex couples are granted the right to marry, there are still many problems facing people in the LGBTQ community. The fact that people identifying in such a way can only be accepted in my church if they abstain from romantic relationships is one issue, as it’s unfair to deny anyone to feel and experience the Christlike emotion of love, and build a family, which is one of, if not the, most important teaching of the church.

I admire those allies in support of same-sex marriage, as, for some, it reflects a genuine interest in gay and lesbian politics. But I beg that these same people become allies to the LGBTQ community as a whole, and keep this vigor and passion in issues much more plaguing and vital to the larger community. There are causes and actions more worthwhile than changing a profile picture, and these movements call for personal involvement to work towards solutions towards these problems. Because when “faggot” continues to be yelled at me as I walk down the streets of my community at night, I must admit that same-sex marriage is only a pit stop on this journey, with stops of homophobia, acceptance in religious spaces, and LGBT youth and homelessness needing to be addressed. There are many more issues plaguing the community that are vital to the mere survival of some. Before marriage, survival and basic necessities must be met first.  

I don't give a shit.

Let me just start out by saying I don’t agree with a lot of things gay Mormon bloggers say or think. I think many of them are parroting things they’ve heard, agreed with, and so decided were right. I think that if they have spent time thinking about the concepts they write about, it is only in a spiral of self-confirming anecdotes, not a critical exploration and certainly not with any desire to see if “the other side” might have a point. The blogosphere in general feels to me like the whining of four year olds coupled with the writing level of teenagers. I am a dispirited, disappointed, unhappy camper. And bitter a little.

Now, today’s topic: the gay identity. I don't think this will be my only post on the subject. I’ve lost count of the various pissing contests over “gay” versus “same sex attracted” and whatever else, and I just want to say, I don’t give a shit. Personally I think “same sex attracted” is fine, but I don’t use it because it’s stupid long even if you abbreviate it. “Gay” wins on that front even though I don’t feel it’s entirely accurate for me because “homoromantic asexual-leaning” is even longer than “SSA,” and “queer,” though otherwise my favorite, still has a negative connotation. You know. From the days when it still meant “weird.”

When I was seventeen I went to an Evergreen conference in SLC, and for about a year after that the distinction between “gay” and “SSA” was a big deal for me. It helped me acknowledge my orientation and my religious disbelief more or less separately, since there was a space in Mormonism for “SSA” but not “gay,” and at the time I couldn’t have dealt with both. “I’m same sex attracted, Mom, not gay. I’m not going to live the lifestyle.”

“SSA” let my put the whole question of liking guys on hold while I dealt with the question of “Is Mormonism God’s thing?” It simultaneously let my parents get used to the idea of me being attracted to boys without pushing the possibility of a flesh-and-blood I’m-sinning-with-this-guy boyfriend in their faces. A year later when I’d more or less decided against Mormonism and started using “gay” around my mom, she was upset a little, but nothing like she would have been if I’d insisted on “gay” right away. You will probably never convince me that there is no place for “SSA” as a descriptor. I say that if the distinction is important to someone, let them have it.

This is another way of saying that I don’t fully identify with “the gay identity.” You do? That’s great. That’s excellent! I’m happy for you, but don’t assume everyone agrees just because they’re gay. Some of us use it only because it’s the closest approximation to truth, not because it’s truth itself.

Two old blog posts pushed my mind to this topic last week: This woman kept her religion and her gay identity. This woman did not. Their writing made me think.

***

I passed the Navy officer aptitude test. (Mentioned it here, remember.) My score was in the top quartile, so I’m cleared to continue my application. 

Related: This week I will think about a boy who, if I go into the Navy, I will have approximately zero chance with.

***

In case you want to laugh / cry.