They said it would make my life better. They said I would find my “purpose.” It was my 8^th grade school year. My pastor said I should read this book that would change my life. The name of the book was A Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren. It’s always interesting to reflect back to my pre-teen life and think about the different things I was involved in. Some of my childhood experiences were amazing and shaped who I am today, other experiences—like buying Rick Warren’s book—are just embarrassing. I was reading a book by one of the most divisive and homophobic/anti-gay men in America, at 13.

The author of the very same book, seven years later is now in the limelight being accused of supporting the Uganda Anti-Homosexual Legislation Bill. Proposed on the 13^th of October 2009 by Member of Parliament David Bahati, the Bill would criminalize key aspects of comprehensive HIV/AIDS prevention education and imprison health-care workers who refuse to report sexually active gay patients to the police. If enacted, it would also broaden the criminalization of homosexuality in Uganda, including introducing the death penalty for HIV positive people who have previous convictions, instituting extradition for those engaging in same-sex sexual relations outside Uganda, and penalizing individuals, companies, or media organizations who support LGBT rights.

Right when you think your out of oppression, there always seems to be something that tends to pull you right back into it. This is nothing less than a gay-genocide and I wish our government (democrats and especially republicans) would stop being so inactive when it comes to fighting for LGBT rights within our country and around the world. Personally, I’m still waiting on “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” to be overturned. I mean really, is this American or not, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that the home of the “some are free, and maybe brave” continues to marginalize and stay silent with the oppression of others. I do have to give some credit to the Obama administration; they put out this statement last month (2 months after the bill was introduced):

“We urge to ensure that sexual orientation or gender identity may under no circumstances be the basis for criminal penalties– in particular, execution, arrest or detention. If adopted a bill further criminalizing homosexuality would constitute a significant step backwards for the protection of human rights in Uganda.”

One of the major supporters of this bill in Uganda is minister Martin Ssempa, who has been to Rick Warren’s Church several times. Rick Warren tried to ignore the issue for a couple months until he recently put out a video and went on record condemning the Ugandans for their gay-genocide bill. Conservative pastors all across the country have gotten themselves into some trouble on this one. Even when Rick Warren desperately tried to clear his name by sending a video to Ugandan pastors criticizing the bill, he still feels the need to emphasize his belief that marriage should only be between one man and one woman. Teachings like this are exactly what fuel what David Bahati calls the 95% disapproval rate of homosexuality in Uganda.

More pastors around the country are almost forced to condemn the Ugandans legislation. But every time I read a story like this, I feel the pastor basically saying that “we have taught you to hate these gay people, but lets not go and kill them, lets just try to change them.” All in all I think conservative pastors have been at the backbone of religion in Uganda for quite sometime, and consciously or not, they have some ownership over the anti-homosexuality bill.

On the other side it is of course a bill directly proposed by a Ugandan politician.

“And if you’re a Ugandan politician, would you rather be talking about the rebel uprising and child soldiers, the fact that you’re stealing most of the aid money, the looming environmental disaster, or how you’re protecting the country from the gay? Add in a bit of rick warren and other Christian fundamentalist influence at the point of a bayonet and it’s pretty easy to see how this came about.”

In the mean time, here is my prayer…God help us, these conservatives are getting ridiculous!

 Sex makes me nervous! I get nervous both before and after sex. I am nervous because in my head I picture this spinning chart of numbers and statistics that makes me realize that sex is the ultimate Russian roulette. You pull the trigger you get a risk-free nut; you pull the trigger again and you get a parting gift.    

 After having sex, I hate the immediate realization that I am at risk for a slew of different diseases: Herpes, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, HPV and HIV are just a few of the “gifts that keep on giving,” especially for us black folk.  After that thought come the charts and statistics:

 In 2006, rates for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis were highest among non-Hispanic blacks for all age groups.

      Among adolescents aged 15--19 years, the highest rates of chlamydia occurred among non-Hispanic black females (8,858.1 cases per 100,000 population), compared with non-Hispanic black males (2,195.4 cases per 100,000 population)

      A similar pattern among adolescents aged 15--19 years was recorded for gonorrhea, with the highest rates occurring among non-Hispanic black females (2,829.6 cases per 100,000 population), compared with non-Hispanic black males (1,467.6 cases per 100,000 population)

 As a sexually active person, and a STI/STD-prevention worker, it is my job to stay informed and know all of these charts, graphs, and statistics.  Being informed comes with the price of being hyper-alert about sexual risks. I am a black, gay male which makes me a member of two high-risk groups in terms of HIV/AIDS transmission and prevalency rates.   Promiscuous or not, knowing the guy’s name or not, I realize each time that I have sex puts me at risk.  What are your thoughts about your risk?

In 2007, according to the CDC data, blacks accounted for 51percent of the 42,655 new HIV/AIDS diagnoses in 34 states with long term confidential name-based HIV reporting.  Blacks accounted for 48 percent of the 551, 932 persons living with HIV/AIDS in the 34 states. The modes of transmission for black men were: 1)sex with other men. 2) injection drug use, and 3) high-risk heterosexual contact.  The modes of transmission for women were:  1) high-risk heterosexual contact, and 2) injection drug use.

In June 2005, the CDC released a report on a five city study in which they found an HIV prevalence rate of 46 percent among black gay men.  Although some black gay men say the sample is not big enough to make that conclusion, I found it alarming given the sample size that such a high prevalence rate was found among the black men tested compared to the other groups’ rates.  Black gay leaders made speeches about the study and its implications.  Only a few gave the speech I wanted to hear, which is mobolizing black gay men to take our concerns to White House.  In 2005, I think many people were too busy twirlin at the local punk bars (cited in the study) to get the high-powered folks in Washington DC deeply concerned about black gay men’s health.  At the same time as the invisible black gay crisis, people recognized that black women were bearing the brunt of  the HIV/AIDS infection among women.

On December 1^st 2009, World AIDS Day, I found myself in a conversation with a group of Delta Sigma Thetas sorority members. We were talking about HIV/AIDS, when one woman raised a concern about dating and having sex with DL men. Although many liberals frown upon this conversation starter, I think it is a healthy initial step toward awareness.

 In the conversation, the young woman pressed how she just does not feel comfortable dating or having sex with folks who are closeted bisexuals. I shared with her that I too don’t feel comfortable dating or having sex with folks who are closeted bisexuals.  We explored her concern about the mythic DL—disease carrying—brotha out to infect her—the upright Christian—black woman.  I mean HIV/AIDS is often times a 100 percent preventable, particularly contracting it by sexual intercourse (USE a CONDOM).  What she and I understood was her fear was more about her boyfriend liking dick (read: penis) as much as she apparently does.

All jokes aside, how did you commemorate World AIDS Day?  Have you lost someone to AIDS complications? What are your concerns about sex; are you nervous like me? 

Homophobic Rapture

The homosexuality controversy in black faith communities has reached a feverish pitch, especially with Tonéx’s and Donnie McClurkin’s recent admissions. Probably most renowned for the rumors regarding their sexuality, these two black gospel singers have become the centerpiece to the debate of the role homosexuals should play in black faith communities.  Unfortunately both men’s livelihood as pastors of their respective church has led them to depend financially on a community that by and large forces/prefers silence on same-sex desires and human rights. Yet, both these men have carved a space in gospel music to openly acknowledge their desires. Tonéx by stating that his preference is for the same sex; Donnie by (abstaining and) persecuting other homosexuals as not being willing to be delivered from “the perversion of homosexuality.”

In September 2009, Tonéx spoke to Lexi, a female gospel recording artist and host for the Word Network about being molested. In his interview with gospel singer Lexi, he said in response to her question about being molested at minute 4:12:

Living Truthfully

“I just want to put this disclaimer out there. Cause many times you hear people blame their sexual experiences or explorations on molestations or rapes. And, I just wanna say yes I was indeed molested, true. I was exposed to things that obviously at that age you shouldn’t be exposed to which opens up a box of awareness. However, I am not blaming those situations on the choices I made later…” 

At one fell swoop, Tonéx discards the cloak of victimhood used by molested (ex-)gays to distance themselves from their actions. This is the critical turning point in the conversation that starts the firestorm with Donnie McClurkin. It is this difference that has Donnie swinging his meaty-paws at Tonéx and black youth in general.

On November 7 2009 in Memphis Tennessee, Donnie McClurkin spoke at the 102^nd Holy Convocation International Youth Department Worship Service (COGIC Church). In a tear-filled speech, he invoked what Ann Coulter calls the “infallible victim” cloak that allows someone to-

Yet holding On?

speak from the authority of being a victim. While cloaked, he offers to the audience at minute 8:24 that his 20 active years of having sex with men were formed (and sustained) by him being raped as an 8 year old child. After being ‘delivered’ from the ‘gay affliction,’ he has been up and down the gay circuit (read: gospel strip) professing the ills of the gay lifestyle even using President Obama’s platform .  This famous black ex-gay (read: re-closeted) pastor went after Tonéx for Tonéx’s recent confession of same-sex desires; he, McClurkin, said “we talk about the Tonéx situation…God did not call us to such perversion.”

 McClurkin reacted violently to “Tonéx situation,” because Tonéx unintentionally called Donnie’s “infallible victim” status into question. McClurkin calls Tonéx’s conversation regarding his sexuality “a perversion” and told everyone “[Tonéx’s conversation] is only turning [the youths'] hearts further away from God and making them believe that such conversation is real. When it is not real, it is not real.” If you are watching the clip, you see the standing ovation and shouts of the mindless black people screaming, shouting and crying. It is his next few lines that are chilling. He says, “today, I am overwhelmed in this holy convocation, because I see feminine men [and  boys].”  If you watch the clip, he scans the audience and his crocodile tears continue to fall to ground as he stirs a homophobic frenzy while he predatorily corners the LGBTQ youths in the sea of black faces.  The he says it, “We didn’t discern the seed. We didn’t up root it. We failed our boys. We failed our girls.  Listen to me every one of you young people in this room. You will be free if you want to be free.”

At this point, I have tears of impotent rage in my eyes. I imagine being in the sea of frenzied homophobes exhorting a re-closeted gay man, who is regurgitating back to them all the things he was force-fed to believe about himself and his desires. I imagine single-household mothers turning to their sons and daughters questioning their children. I see men in the choir looking at each other wondering who among them is of the (un-)discerned seed, which breeds homosexuality. I seethed because as much as I would love to despise this man of God; I shed tears for him. I shed tears for his brokenness and the inner turmoil that leads him to persecute in Christ’s name.

I cry because he says next in clip 2, “Nobody said Donnie you’re clapping wrong.  Donnie you’re walking wrong. Nobody told Donnie.” This so clearly articulates his self-disdain for his desires and himself. He sees himself as a malformed thing. A thing so twisted in its formation that it existed wrong and broken.   According to a blog-interview by Clay Cane, one of Donnie’s ex-lovers talks about Donnie McClurkin’s struggle with his sexual desire and gender roles.  Although I feel sympathy for Donnie’s plight, I still hold him accountable for putting young black LGBTQ youths’ lives in jeopardy. His speech calls for the policing of black youth by parents, pastors, and the larger faith community, and the uprooting (whatever that means) of the seed of homosexuality. I don’t know about you but I am deeply concerned, especially considering the data collected by the Black Youth Project Survey.  

  According to the findings of the Black Youth Project Survey, 55 percent or “the majority of black youth believe that homosexuality is always wrong.” An even larger majority, 58 percent to be exact, disagree with the statement that “the government should make it legal for same-sex couples to get married”; to add insult to financial injury, 66 percent of black youth, “believe that the government should actively promote marriage by offering special benefits to married couples, such as lowering their taxes or paying for childcare.” As a black gay youth, I am disgusted that the majority of my fellow black youths’ beliefs are so ingrained in homophobia.  It is these attitudes that create opportunities for bigoted beliefs to form into hate speech and inevitably hate crimes.

Admittedly, I think of Religion as a central factor in what creates such prevalence of intolerance among black youth and the black community, especially with recent events in the black Christian church.  I am curious to know what factors in your, the readers’, opinion cause these kinds of beliefs to be so prevalent among black youth.

House of Legacy Eternal

walkin the category of Ultimate Boy realness

Personally, I find sagging pants, du-rags, grills and accessories distasteful; however, I stand by people’s right to be self-expressive, particularly when it comes to ‘cross-dressing.’ In talking about Morehouse College dress code, I have to give props to Frank Leon Roberts for his post on the Root.  In Morehouse’s efforts to preserve its legacy, it created a dress code which hinders student self-expression.

The “Appropriate Attire Policy” is the product of Robert Franklin, President of Morehouse; it is his attempt to create the modern “Renaissance Man.”  In his words, “[he]…hopes to have the next generation of Morehouse graduates live up to the school’s legacy-

walkin the category of LEGENDARY legacy

(read: tradition) as seen in notable alumni such as Martin Luther King, Jr, Spike Lee, Samuel Jackson, Maynard Jackson and Saul Williams.”  The pattern is made clear when you look at these alumni together.  All of these men are presumed heterosexuals and successful; ironically, some of these men are respected due to their efforts to unmask bigotry when encased in tradition.  Yet, this facet of these men’s legacy, left to the Morehouse Administration to pass along to its students, seems all but forgotten. It seems that when the bigotry deals with ‘traditional masculinity’ and preferred styles of dress, it is understood as being corrective and beneficial for the Morehouse men, and thus goes unchallenged.   For example, Morehouse men don’t wear dresses, purses, grills, du-rags, sagging pants and heels; they wear pants, Oxford and polo shirts, and nice loafers.

Miss Ultimate Nerd Realness

This black male respectability sentiments were echoed by TJ Holmes, CNN anchor, and Dr. Steven Perry, Educator and Author. Whereas Holmes and Perry were careful in their language to never directly comment on the cross-dressing, they implicitly let us know that it is too far across the line of acceptable male behavior, especially at Morehouse. I was disheartened by the statements of the Vice President of Student Services, Dr. William Bynum. He said to national media, “[w]e are talking about five students who are living a gay lifestyle that is leading them to dress in a way we do not expect in Morehouse men.”

I don’t know about Dr. William Bynum’s knowledge of Morehouse men, but we who are in the Life know differently.  The running jokes among my gay friends are that you can always find a dateable guy (read: gurl) at Morehouse College, or you go to Morehouse to get the best college-grade Trade in town.

All jokes aside, I have a huge problem with Dr. Bynum’s comment. Not only does it allow professors, administrators and other students to police GBTQ students’ clothing and gender performance, but it gives credence to homophobic past actions (Aaron Price, the gay-wedding basher, and the experience of  Jason Harrell ).  When an Administration creates a rule to point-out “five students who are living a gay lifestyle that is leading them to dress in a way [the Morehouse Administration] do not expect” it is like declaring open season on transgender, transsexual and intersex students of Morehouse.

Admittedly, I am not a Morehouse man, and I never considered going to an HBCU. So the importance of maintaining legacy is something that fails to rise to a level where I can understand the dress policy as a necessary evil. I am deciding to close this out with youtube videos of black males taking a stance on the Morehouse Dress code.

XemVanAdams  response to Moorehouse house Dress Code.

A black male responding to XemVanAdams.

A black male talking about why he supports the dress code and he is specifically against guys wearing dresses because it is distracting.

Johnson, left, and Thomas exchanging kisses before a game during the 1989 NBA Finals (Andrew Bernstein/Getty Images)

Those of us who lament the current incarnation of the NBA despite Lebron James’ and Chris Paul’s (he’s soooo cute — no hetero) greatness do so because we remember the golden age of the league.  (Are you looking for Kobe love?  You won’t get that here.  Move along.)  Those of us born in the 80s were raised on the good and nutritiously entertaining similac of dope hip hop and an NBA that was absolutely faaaaaantastic.  Part of what made the mid-80s professional basketball such a renaissance was the rivalry between Magic Johnson and Larry Bird, a contentious pairing that began during the championship game of the 1979 NCAA men’s basketball tournament, where Magic’s Michigan State Spartans beat Bird and the Indiana State Sycamores.  Thirty years after the Bird or Magic debate began, the former adversaries, now friends, have co-written a book with the help of former Boston Globe sports columnist Jackie Macmullan.  Though the book won’t be on shelves until November 4, last week the sports world took a brief break from obsessing over football to report on some of the juicier content.

According to reports, in When the Game Was Ours Johnson makes two startling allegations about former Detroit Pistons point guard, Isiah Thomas who was, by all accounts, Johnson’s closest friend in the league, until an on the court fight eventually led to the two buddies becoming estranged.  The first allegation concerns Thomas being left off the roster of the 1992 Dream Team.  However, what’s most interesting--and what commentators have spent most of their time exploring--is Johnson’s claim that Thomas questioned and spread rumors about his sexuality after his HIV diagnosis was made public.

From the Sports Illustrated article about the story:

Magic’s most shocking accusation, however, is that Thomas was responsible for spreading rumors that Johnson was gay or bisexual after Johnson tested positive for HIV, forcing his retirement at age 32. “Isiah kept questioning people about it,” Magic says. “I couldn’t believe that. The one guy I thought I could count on had all these doubts. It was like he kicked me in the stomach.”

and

The book’s main source for this allegation is Magic’s longtime agent, Lon Rosen, who says Thomas told him in 1991, “I keep hearing Magic is gay.’

“C’mon, Isiah, you know Earvin better than anyone,” Rosen replies.”I know,” Thomas answers, “but I don’t know what he’s doing when he’s out there in L.A.”

On Wednesday, Thomas denied that conversation. “I don’t know Lon like that,” he said, adding that he reached out to Johnson at the time. “I remember calling Magic and saying [of the allegations that he was rumor-mongering], ‘You know that’s some bulls—.’ ”

Over the past month I have been writing on the good and bad of “The Ballroom Scene.” Now I want to take a moment to explain more about the rising underground dance, that is becoming one of the new “black arts.”  If homophobic, masculine idolizing, intolerant schools like Morehouse would be a little more open minded, maybe our black community could learn to accept things that are different. (Making a reference to Morehouse’s new anti-gay dress code)

Some are disgusted when they observe this new black art taking place. I would assert that people are still afraid of anything different. While, I cannot vogue and have many criticisms about the scene, I still know to respect both the Art and the people who choose to be in the ballroom scene.

It really is a very artistic and creative style of dance. It has impacted performers like Beyonce, Brittney Spears, Janet Jackson. Madonna even made a song about it, after she witnessed a vogue performance.

There are four different aspects to this erupting style of dance. When an individual contends that they vogue, it means they compose 5 different associations into a fluid and rhythmic style of movement.

1.Cat Walk

2. Dip

3. Hand Placements

4. Duck Walk

5. Spins

The Incorporation of these styles into a new type of dance is many times referred to as “vogue fem.” Below is a list of the different categories in the competition aspect of the Ballroom Scene.

• Butch Queen/Fem Queen Vogue Fem- Give a stunning performance using the 5 elements of vogue: hand placements, spins, catwalk, duckwalk, and dips
• BQ Realness- Judged on participants ability to personify Thug, Pretty Boy, School Boy, or Executive.
• BQ/FQ Realness With a Twist (Twister)- Judged on participant’s ability to personify masculine traits and then come back and vogue fem.
• BQ/FQ Runway- Judged on participants ability to catwalk, usually with a requested outfit or color
• Bizarre- Judged on participants creativity to design a costume based on what the category asks for
• Labels- Judged on how many of the current most popular labels a participant is wearing and their authenticity

• BQ/FQ Face- Showing off your clean, perfect, smooth face
• BQ/FQ Sex Siren- Giving sex appeal mostly in sexy underwear such as thongs, briefs, or bikinis
• Dipology- like Vogue Fem, but spins into dips only
• European Runway- Showing how many of Europe’s labels of the year you are wearing
• Butch queen up in pumps- Basically the same as Labels or Runway but you must wear heels usually 6 inches or more.
• FQ/BQ in Drag Female Figure Performance- Give a performance (usually lip synched) of a famous female figure
• Hands Performance- Give a vogueing performance using hands only
• Virgin Vogue Fem- The same as vogue fem but for participants that have been vogueing for less than 2 years
• Virgin Runway- The same as Runway but for participants that have been walking Runway or less than 2 years

“They make fun of you because your different, but you should make fun of them because they are all the same.”

Remember last year when all the white gay people were mad at black people because Prop 8 passed in California?  Well, it wasn’t a fluke.  We’re still their whipping boys (er, bois?).  Last week, my internet boyfriend AC (again, the only man I’d ever seriously consider marrying), sent me a link of the above video, where Current TV contributor, Bryan Safi learns us about the phrase “No Homo.”   Most of the commenters loved this piece and deemed it “genius.”  Me?  Not so much.

Now, I get it.  Yes, “No homo” is obnoxious, even for those of us who embrace and critique hip hop’s contradictions, its problems.  It’s also one of more ironic phrases in recent memory, articulating one’s anxiety over homosexuality while simultaneously acknowledging that what one has said and/or done is, well, “gay.”  Yes, rappers (still) employing the phrase need to be called out and on some level made fun of–as part of a larger critique, of course.  But I don’t appreciate Safi’s approach, his (ab)use of black masculinity which, for me, is not only yet another example of the tension between queer black folks and queer white folks, but also an indicator of the ways the latter group often refuses to acknowledge the underlying racism employed to further their cause(s).

First, Safi tells his audience that “hip hop has coined a brand new homophobic phrase” for those uncomfortable gay moments between straight male friends.  Indeed, many of the commenters admit to having never heard the term before. But for anyone not rocking out too hard to Black Eyed Peas and actually paying attention, this phrase is hardly novel nomenclature.  In fact, it’s the opposite.   It’s beyond stale; it’s older than “bling.”  So what Safi implicitly suggests by calling the phrase “brand new” and what his audience confesses by saying that they’d never heard the term before is that black music, though omnipresent, is tangential to their lives.  Had Safi bothered to research the topic deeply, he might have discovered the term’s history, and that it’s something that black people have been discussing for quite some time.  Instead, Safi assumes that because he heard it for the first time as he and his “best homies were beasting” on the dance floor that the slang was fresh, never considering that the adage that just because one sees/hears/thinks something for the first time doesn’t mean that it’s the first time that it’s been seen/heard/thought might be true.  Instead one is left with the impression that hip hop is literally background music on the fringe of Safi’s life unless and until he finds it worthy of assisting in an epiphany or articulating a point.

Second, Safi doesn’t bother noting anything different about the cadre of rappers who often employ the term.  Those he mentions, Cam’ron, Lil Wayne, and Kanye all assert masculinities that though homophobic aren’t as uncomplicatedly “hard” as their counterparts.   In fact, their utterance of “no homo” despite wearing pink, for example, obscures the fact that there is a history of black men who often decorate–long nails, hair, bright colors, referring to themselves as “pretty”–and describe themselves in terms deemed “feminine,” that prevailing notions of masculinity do not traditionally tolerate.   (Hence the subtly “white” term “metrosexual.”)  However, because the hip hop sphere is such a homosocial environment, the disclaimer seems necessary.  This isn’t a defense of the phrase or a dismissal of the trepidation these men obviously feel regarding their appearance and how that informs others’ assumption about their sexual orientation.  However, I do think it’s important to note how reductive this piece makes the term; that in order to employ the phrase the way he wants to, Kafi has to both simplify and evacuate the term of some of its history.

Third, Kafi’s appropriation of the appointed accoutrement of “urban blackness” is thoroughly played and not funny.  His recycling makes him look like a doofus, and I found it boringly unsophisticated–seriously.  The way in which the “tenets” of blackness got employed and caricatured: the slang, the clothing, the “fist bump” were thoroughly unnecessary.  “Genius” is a term used promiscuously.

Finally–and this is the larger, more important point–what I don’t appreciate about the piece, though I agree with its central point, is the way in which homophobia continues to be cast as a problem that black people have.  Clearly, black men have anxieties about sexuality, so much so that they’d create slang to distance themselves from homosexuality.  But what is “bromance” but a euphemistic, more acceptable (read: white) synonym for “no homo”?  Why is Safi not concerned with making fun of that nomenclature?  (I went to a very large Big Ten school.  I have witnessed white men doing very gay things only to blame the alcohol.)

The reluctance by Safi and others to recognize the implicit claims they make about race in their work, their refusal to understand the ways in which race and sexual orientation intersect do nothing but exacerbate the aforementioned tension between GLBTQ, etc. white folks and GLBTQ, etc. PoC.  That Safi doesn’t see that the gay best friend looks a lot like the best black friend, or that gayngels and magical Negroes have similar powers indicates an overall disinterest in the ways in which blackness is deployed in popular culture, unless it can be used as a prop, a scapegoat to make a point about the homophobia white men experience when all they want to do is two-step in the club.  Black people should only provide the music.  Who cares if “no homo” is easy to rhyme?

A week before I returned to University of Chicago for my second year of college, I encountered what I like to call “an incident.” My brother, on this particular day followed his normal pattern of entering the basement room of my mother’s house in a drunken state. His drinking problem is one thing, but his homophobia mixed with intoxication is not a good combination. My brother chose to make comments about my friend and I, as we passed him on the way to my room.

“Why are these fucking fags in my house!?! Maybe if I bash their heads in they will stop coming! I hate these gay ass niggas, its nasty, and they’re nasty!!” (My brothers actual words)

He went on for 30 minutes in a nearby room, yelling every homophobic obscenity his slurred vocabulary could muster.

This is unfortunately what I have to deal with in my interactions with some of my family members.

For many individuals in the ballroom scene, stories like this become the status quo. My friend (that was with me when my brother’s drunk tangent occurred) explained that similar situations happened in his family and he had a scar on his arm to show for it. This same friend is also in the ballroom scene.

I have observed how inside of the ballroom scene, people create their own families. This is most likely because many of the biological families that these individuals grew up with, rejected their lifestyle. But this “Family Life” that is created within the ballroom scene’s “House” system is fascinating.

People in the ballroom scene have what they call “gay mothers, gay fathers, gay brothers, gay sisters, gay aunts, gay uncles, gay grandparents.” Most of these individuals under every category are male or transgender. Some of these “gay families” live together and function as an actual family would. I have seen people in this scene as young as thirteen.

This system initially reminded me of what happened in history  with sects of the black church. Many individuals will have “church mothers”, and call each other “sister” and “brother.” Like “Houses” in the ballroom scene, a greater community of people connects them. They all have a meeting place and a goal. Some would call this comparison sacrilegious, but I believe it to be significant. The entities that are oppressed the most have a tendency of using that oppression to bring the members in those bodies even closer together. This interwoven characteristic of oppressed groups is a beautiful thing, even with the drama that can occur in both the church and the ballroom scene. Regardless of the gossiping church mothers or the gossiping “gay mothers” both of these connected bodies serve a noteworthy purpose for those groups who have been oppressed. In spite of ministers that become hypocrites and ballroom legends that normalize narcissistic attitudes, “Family Life” is what allows people to fight oppression with others who are similarly oppressed. In the good parts and the bad parts, this non-biological “Family Life” allows a person to be comfortable in his or her own skin. Sharing a burden of marginalization is always easier when you don’t have to do it alone.

The primary problem is that the concept of equal rights remains trapped in iconography of the 60s in the minds of many people and, therefore, is a project that takes on a “old” connotation with respect to the agenda, strategies, and tactics. However, the concept of equal rights or civil rights is defined as those rights that citizens in society enjoy that enable them to achieve their respective individual and group goals. Since Blacks enjoyed those rights unequally, the primary goal of the 60s struggle was to establish, through the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the principle of anti-discrimination and equality in the use of federal resources across the board.

This historical summary is just a part of the “pathway” to freedom” and doesn’t look as if it was focused on only one thing – political rights – but rather a wide range of rights. Even today there are those who would have you believe that there is a distinction between civil rights and human rights. Civil rights are human rights. The view of those who began the movement in the 30s was to stop lynching and the remnants of slavery; to attempt to close the gaps in pay between Blacks and Whites, and demand equal access to college and law school by bring lawsuits in court. Thus, the definition of equal rights changes with each age.

We are living today in the age of fads and quick changes in concept and culture for the sake of it. Pushed along by generational change and the technologies used to commercialize “newness” and deprecate “oldness.”

Civil rights are not old. They exist where there are gaps between Blacks and other disadvantaged groups and the dominate society. Such gaps exist where 48 percent of Blacks are incarcerated; where the Black/White wealth gap is now 14 to 1; where whites own homes at 70 percent and Blacks at 45 percent; where health gaps in major illnesses persists and Blacks disproportionately do not have health insurance; and where poverty reigns for 30-40 percent to such an extinct that it impacts on educational performance, crime and other aspects of life for many.

(While handcuffed, Juan Perez was kicked in the face by a police officer. However, the State Attorney’s Office in Sarasota, Florida did not file battery charges against the police officer.)

Institutional leaders such as the new Black race-neutral mayors in Newark and Washington and other cities are held as the preferred style of leader. They are viewed as acolytes of Barack Obama’s race neutral management of his campaign and style of governance when he took office. However the lack of civility recently seen across this country, and even in the hallowed halls of Congress in discussions on health care and immigration serve to remind us all that the struggle for equal rights continues. Are you free?

When we talk about interracial dating in the new millennium, we are facing a new reality in America. In the above clip at UNC Chapel Hill, we see how youth feel about interracial dating. Unsurprisingly we find that many are open to interracial dating, except for the two black women Litesha and Ally.  Additionally, Si-on lm, an interviewee, admits that her parents would be concerned especially if her chosen partner was black.  Yet the prevailing feelings (or at least the director’s closing statements) were that the “deciding factor” should be about love between two people regardless of race.

Interracial dating (read: inter-human dating) (when and if) you so choose is the preferred reality for me (and possibly for many other young people).  I mean why not explore your options. This is not to suggest that intra-racial dating is passé (because it is very much still the norm), but it is to say that we are in a new period in history. It is now more so than ever a time to live life, explore options, cultures, the world and to celebrate our hard-won freedoms. To that end, the data is starting to reflect this new awareness of our freedoms to be happy with whomever we want (within reason).

 According to the PEW Research Center’s 2006 report, 22 percent of Americans have a relative in a mixed-race marriage. Moreover, the Population Reference Bureau reports that more than one-half of Americans have “interdated.”  A 2002 Gallup poll finds that “86 percent of people ages 18 to 29 approved of marriages between blacks and whites, but just 30 percent of those ages 65 and older approved of such marriages. A 1997 gallup national survey of people 13 to 19 – found that nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of black, Hispanic or Asian teens who had ever dated someone and who attended schools with students of more than one race said they had dated someone who was white.” Basically, the numbers are suggesting that interracial dating is growing increasingly acceptable for younger groups of people.   

Why wouldn’t it be with all of the hit shows cashing in on this modern day example of love conquering all particularly racial biases? Michael Russnow, Professor and screenwriter, wrote in the Huffington Post about interracial coupling on TV. He provides an extensive (but partial) list of shows across several Network channels. He makes a very interesting point that the Network channels might be exaggerating the number of inter-human relationships out there. However, to prove his point he looks at Census data regarding interracial marriage and folks’ shackin’ as opposed to interracial relationships/dating overall.  He (and the Network channels) both by and large neglect to talk specifically about LGBTQ “inter-human dating.”

 On Cable channels, we see the same pattern emerging, but with more interesting inter-human ‘interaction’.  For instance in 2004, the L-Word (one of my favorite shows of my early coming out years) changed the game for me in terms of inter-human dating. Inter-human partnering never looked so hot. I remember wanting to be Bette Porter. I wanted to be sleek, commanding and in charge in the office (and in the bedroom). Her partnership with Tina Kennard was passionate and sensual in a way that allowed me to celebrate same-sex couples having sex. At the time, it allowed me to take ownership of what I was creating in my own space in terms of dating and attraction.

If you (or I) find an individual that is outside of our race that fulfills our requirements, why not be open to that possibility?           

Loving couple

What is the harm in being happy?   Still like Si-on lm and Ally the Korean and Black women at UNC, we do have to appreciate both self-held traditional values as well as ones imparted to us by our parents, but those values/traditions have to be brought into alignment with present realities.  Miscegenation is no longer illegal, and interracial marriage has been a constitutionally protected right since Loving vs. Virginia in 1967.