Connect with us

Homophobia At Home In Connecticut

Published

on

National debates on whether gays should indeed have civil rights—and if so, which ones—continue to inspire threads of passionate comments at a wide variety of online media sources from The New York Times to my local Patch.com blog. While I’m usually bored, amused or numb (or some combination of the three) when reading the more homophobic comments by the national community, similarly prejudiced comments from folks in the local community have, in rare moments, left me stunned and staring at my computer screen. The other day, I was embarrassed to realize I had fat tears racing away from my eyes.

Sometimes I comment, other times I don’t. Today, I’d like to share the response that won’t fit into a comment box. I fully support freedom of speech but please remember that while you’re at home typing away on your computer, you might as well be standing in a large circle of locals at the farmers’ market or town hall or outside your favorite café or restaurant while talking about “these people.” You’re talking about me, my wife, and my family.

We’re your neighbors. We’re standing here, right next to you, and you’re looking in our eyes as you talk about “those homosexuals.”

That’s exactly how close it feels as I read another “unscientific poll” posted at Patch.com by local journalist Susan Schoenberger essentially asking my neighbors what rights they think we should or shouldn’t have. Out of professional respect, I wrote a private letter to Schoenberger back in May and asked her to consider another perspective regarding a poll asking for comments about Obama’s evolving views on same-sex marriage. She didn’t respond. Perhaps she didn’t receive my message? I sent another but still no response.

Patch_s Poll_ Should the Boy Scouts Allow Local Units to Decide Whether to Admit Gays? - Granby-East Granby, CT Patch

Obviously, Schoenberger’s never experienced what it’s like to see a poll in a public forum asking the community whether her marriage to her husband should be recognized by the federal government or whether her husband should be allowed to be a scout leader or her son a scout because of their sexual orientations.

Patch’s Poll_ Should Gay People Be Afforded the Same Federal Rights in Marriage? - Granby-East Granby, CT Patch

And local journalist Ronald DeRosa has surely never had his personal life be the subject of polls such as his equally disturbing posts titled “Should Gay People Be Afforded the Same Federal Rights in Marriage?“ and “Do You Care About a Private Group’s Stance on Issues Such as Gay Rights?“ and “Should Schools Police Kids’ T-Shirt Slogans?“ illustrated by a photo of an anti-gay t-shirt worn by a Connecticut teen.

Regardless of whatever DeRosa and Schoenberger’s best intentions or personal politics may be, this sort of “community journalism” creates a very different discussion and environment than this morning’s poll regarding the U.S. Postal Service cutting Saturday deliveries.

My marriage and family is the topic that’s been proposed once again for discussion—clothed this time in the Boy Scouts of America issue. Might this have something to do with the advertisers who pay salaries and Patch.com editors’ eagerness to please AOL?

I simply ask local journalists and community members to consider the fact that gay people are probably standing in your circle outside the coffee shop. Like you, our hands are in our pockets on a cold day. And we hear, unfortunately, all you have to say about us.

Each and every comment that acknowledges our right to civil rights is profoundly appreciated. But the homophobic comments from neighbors—even if they’re in the minority, even if there’s just a couple—can be unsettling at best and heartbreaking at worst.

Surprised I was surprised, I began tweeting a series of quotes as I read comments from several polls:

Overheard in CT: I guess the homosexuals and pedophiles need somewhere to go. […] Why can’t they just form their own clubs?

Overheard in CT: most gay men do not believe in…”sexually faithful” relationships, so their arguments for “gay marriage” are specious at best

Overheard in CT: gay choice is based in a deep need to compensate for a severe lack of essential nurture…or a severe destruction of psyche

Overheard in CT: I find it amazing that homosexual behavior, which used to bring a chorus of “Ewwwws” 50 years ago, because we knew…(cont)

Overheard (cont)“…we knew it was unnatural and aberrent, now must be thought of with the same warm fuzzies as for heterosexual couples.”

Overheard in CT: We think we are enlightened, but actually our minds are being slowly boiled in the ever warming caldron of the PC-ers,

Overheard in CT: If the homosexuals come in, I would expect many parents to pull their sons out. I know I would do so.

Overheard in CT: Why not have Gay Boy Scouts of America and Lesbian Girl Scouts of America…

Overheard (cont): If they have any doubt they should be supported in being heterosexual…

Overheard in CT: The policy just says you can’t be “open” about the gay thing.

Overheard in CT: Attacks are expected when a study challenges the strident advocates of same-sex parenting.

Overheard in CT: Bravo, BSA and Chick Fil-A

Overheard in CT: I don’t give to the united way because they support gay parades and such.

Overheard in CT: I’ll be taking my scout to chick fil a …for a sandwich. That’s after I send a big check to the local scouts.

Overheard in CT: “Try joining the NAACP or any womans group if you want to know real discrimination”

Overheard in CT: “Its a real simple concept, start your own gay troop instead of forcing your beliefs on others who do not agree with you.”

Overheard in Ct: Boy scouting has has largely enjoyed the blessing of God for all its years. Let’s just not mess with success.

Overheard in CT: It’s a shame these people keep getting away with wreaking havoc on so many great institutions.

Reading these quotes now, I again feel numb. But there are moments when it feels like we’re living some sort of contemporary, virtual version of Shirley Jackson’s short story, “The Lottery” (set in another small town I lived in). Meanwhile, we’re also paying taxes that benefit our community, voting on issues that affect our community, sending our child to the local school, in line behind you as you order a sandwich, holding the door for you as you enter the post office, and reading the same papers and local blog.

“We” are part of “you.” So, as you exercise your freedom of speech, please consider addressing us and these very personal issues with the same respect you’d hopefully employ if speaking to our faces—the same respect you’d want if your sexuality and family and civil rights were being openly debated in most every public forum, everywhere you look.

And this issue is not “moot until May” as one commenter said. My wife and I will be living this issue every day for the rest of our lives.

Chivas picChivas Sandage’s first book of poems, Hidden Drive (Antrim House, 2012), places Ada with Eve in Eden and explores same-sex marriage and divorce. Her essays and poems on gay marriage have appeared in Ms. Magazine,The Naugatuck River Review, Upstreet, Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate (Prometheus Books, ‘04) and are forthcoming in Knockout Magazine. Her work has also appeared in Artful Dodge, Drunken Boat, Evergreen Review, Hampshire Life Magazine, The Hartford Courant, Manthology: Poems on the Male Experience (Univ. of Iowa Press, 2006) and Morning Song: Poems for New Parents (St. Martin’s Press, 2011). Sandage holds an MFA from Vermont College of Fine Arts and a BA from Bennington College. She lives in Connecticut with her wife and daughter and blogs at csandage.com.

Image, top, courtesy ACLU

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

Noem Defends Shooting Her 14-Month Old Puppy to Death, Brags She Has Media ‘Gasping’

Published

on

Republican Governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota, a top potential Trump vice presidential running mate pick, revealed in a forthcoming book she “hated” her 14-month old puppy and shot it to death. Massive online outrage ensued, including accusations of “animal cruelty” and “cold-blooded murder,” but the pro-life former member of Congress is defending her actions and bragging she had the media “gasping.”

“Cricket was a wirehair pointer, about 14 months old,” Noem writes in her soon-to-be released book, according to The Guardian which reports “the dog, a female, had an ‘aggressive personality’ and needed to be trained to be used for hunting pheasant.”

“By taking Cricket on a pheasant hunt with older dogs, Noem says, she hoped to calm the young dog down and begin to teach her how to behave. Unfortunately, Cricket ruined the hunt, going ‘out of her mind with excitement, chasing all those birds and having the time of her life’.”

“Then, on the way home after the hunt, as Noem stopped to talk to a local family, Cricket escaped Noem’s truck and attacked the family’s chickens, ‘grabb[ing] one chicken at a time, crunching it to death with one bite, then dropping it to attack another’.”

READ MORE: President Hands Howard Stern Live Interview After NY Times Melts Down Over Biden Brush-Off

“Cricket the untrainable dog, Noem writes, behaved like ‘a trained assassin’.”

Except Cricket wasn’t trained. Online several people with experience training dogs have said Noem did everything wrong.

“I hated that dog,” Noem wrote, calling the young girl pup “untrainable,” “dangerous to anyone she came in contact with,” and “less than worthless … as a hunting dog.”

“At that moment,” Noem wrote, “I realized I had to put her down.”

“It was not a pleasant job,” she added, “but it had to be done. And after it was over, I realized another unpleasant job needed to be done.”

The Guardian reports Noem went on that day to slaughter a goat that “smelled ‘disgusting, musky, rancid’ and ‘loved to chase’ Noem’s children, knocking them down and ruining their clothes.”

She dragged both animals separately into a gravel pit and shot them one at a time. The puppy died after one shell, but the goat took two.

On social media Noem expressed no regret, no sadness, no empathy for the animals others say did not need to die, and certainly did not need to die so cruelly.

READ MORE: ‘Assassination of Political Rivals as an Official Act’: AOC Warns Take Trump ‘Seriously’

But she did use the opportunity to promote her book.

Attorney and legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold says Governor Noem’s actions might have violated state law.

“You slaughtered a 14-month-old puppy because it wasn’t good at the ‘job’ you chose for it?” he asked. “SD § 40-1-2.3. ‘No person owning or responsible for the care of an animal may neglect, abandon, or mistreat the animal.'”

The Democratic National Committee released a statement saying, “Kristi Noem’s extreme record goes beyond bizarre rants about killing her pets – she also previously said a 10-year-old rape victim should be forced to carry out her pregnancy, does not support exceptions for rape or incest, and has threatened to throw pharmacists in jail for providing medication abortions.”

Former Trump White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin, now a co-host on “The View” wrote, “There are countless organizations that re-home dogs from owners who are incapable of properly training and caring for them.”

The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson blasted the South Dakota governor.

“Kristi Noem is trash,” he began. “Decades with hunting- and bird-dogs, and the number I’ve killed because they were chicken-sharp or had too much prey drive is ZERO. Puppies need slow exposure to birds, and bird-scent.”

“She killed a puppy because she was lazy at training bird dogs, not because it was a bad dog,” he added. “Not every dog is for the field, but 99.9% of them are trainable or re-homeable. We have one now who was never going in the field, but I didn’t kill her. She’s sleeping on the couch. You down old dogs, hurt dogs, and sick dogs humanely, not by shooting them and tossing them in a gravel pit. Unsporting and deliberately cruel…but she wrote this to prove the cruelty is the point.”

Melissa Jo Peltier, a writer and producer of the “Dog Whisperer with Cesar Millan” series, also heaped strong criticism on Noem.

“After 10+ years working with Cesar Millan & other highly specialized trainers, I believe NO dog should be put down just because they can’t or won’t do what we decide WE want them to,” Peltier said in a lengthy statement. “Dogs MUST be who they are. Sadly, that’s often who WE teach them to be. And our species is a hot mess. I would have happily taken Kristi Noem’s puppy & rehomed it. What she did is animal cruelty & cold blooded murder in my book.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

OPINION

President Hands Howard Stern Live Interview After NY Times Melts Down Over Biden Brush-Off

Published

on

President Joe Biden gave an nearly-unannounced, last-minute, live exclusive interview Friday morning to Howard Stern, the SiriusXM radio host who for decades, from the mid-1990s to about 2015, was a top Trump friend, fan, and aficionado. But the impetus behind the President’s move appears to be a rare and unsigned statement from the The New York Times Company, defending the “paper of record” after months of anger from the public over what some say is its biased negative coverage of the Biden presidency and, especially, a Thursday report by Politico claiming Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger is furious the President has refused to give the “Grey Lady” an in-person  interview.

“The Times’ desire for a sit-down interview with Biden by the newspaper’s White House team is no secret around the West Wing or within the D.C. bureau,” Politico reported. “Getting the president on the record with the paper of record is a top priority for publisher A.G. Sulzberger. So much so that last May, when Vice President Kamala Harris arrived at the newspaper’s midtown headquarters for an off-the-record meeting with around 40 Times journalists, Sulzberger devoted several minutes to asking her why Biden was still refusing to grant the paper — or any major newspaper — an interview.”

“In Sulzberger’s view,” Politico explained, “only an interview with a paper like the Times can verify that the 81-year-old Biden is still fit to hold the presidency.”

But it was this statement that made Politico’s scoop go viral.

READ MORE: Justices’ Views on Trump Immunity Stun Experts: ‘Watching the Constitution Be Rewritten’

“’All these Biden people think that the problem is Peter Baker or whatever reporter they’re mad at that day,’ one Times journalist said. ‘It’s A.G. He’s the one who is pissed [that] Biden hasn’t done any interviews and quietly encourages all the tough reporting on his age.'”

Popular Information founder Judd Legum in March documented The New York Times’ (and other top papers’) obsession with Biden’s age after the Hur Report.

Thursday evening the Times put out a “scorching” statement, as Politico later reported, not on the newspaper’s website but on the company’s corporate website, not addressing the Politico piece directly but calling it “troubling” that President Biden “has so actively and effectively avoided questions from independent journalists during his term.”

Media watchers and critics pushed back on the Times’ statement.

READ MORE: ‘To Do God Knows What’: Local Elections Official Reads Lara Trump the Riot Act

“NYT issues an unprecedented statement slamming Biden for ‘actively and effectively avoid[ing] questions from independent journalists during his term’ and claiming it’s their ‘independence’ that Biden dislikes, when it’s actually that they’re dying to trip him up,” wrote media critic Dan Froomkin, editor of Press Watch.

Froomkin also pointed to a 2017 report from Poynter, a top journalism site published by The Poynter Institute, that pointed out the poor job the Times did of interviewing then-President Trump.

Others, including former Biden Deputy Secretary of State Brian McKeon, debunked the Times’ claim President Biden hasn’t given interviews to independent journalists by pointing to Biden’s interviews with CBS News’ “60 Minutes” and a 20-minute sit-down interview with veteran journalist John Harwood for ProPublica.

Former Chicago Sun-Times editor Mark Jacob, now a media critic who publishes Stop the Presses, offered a more colorful take of Biden’s decision to go on Howard Stern.

The Times itself just last month reported on a “wide-ranging interview” President Biden gave to The New Yorker.

Watch the video and read the social media posts above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

 

 

Continue Reading

News

CNN Smacks Down Trump Rant Courthouse So ‘Heavily Guarded’ MAGA Cannot Attend His Trial

Published

on

Donald Trump’s Friday morning claim Manhattan’s Criminal Courts Building is “heavily guarded” so his supporters cannot attend his trial was torched by a top CNN anchor. The ex-president, facing 34 felony charges in New York, had been urging his followers to show up and protest on the courthouse steps, but few have.

“I’m at the heavily guarded Courthouse. Security is that of Fort Knox, all so that MAGA will not be able to attend this trial, presided over by a highly conflicted pawn of the Democrat Party. It is a sight to behold! Getting ready to do my Courthouse presser. Two minutes!” Trump wrote Friday morning on his Truth Social account.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins supplied a different view.

“Again, the courthouse is open the public. The park outside, where a handful of his supporters have gathered on trials days, is easily accessible,” she wrote minutes after his post.

READ MORE: ‘Assassination of Political Rivals as an Official Act’: AOC Warns Take Trump ‘Seriously’

Trump has tried to rile up his followers to come out and make a strong showing.

On Monday Trump urged his supporters to “rally behind MAGA” and “go out and peacefully protest” at courthouses across the country, while complaining that “people who truly LOVE our Country, and want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, are not allowed to ‘Peacefully Protest,’ and are rudely and systematically shut down and ushered off to far away ‘holding areas,’ essentially denying them their Constitutional Rights.”

On Wednesday Trump claimed, “The Courthouse area in Lower Manhattan is in a COMPLETE LOCKDOWN mode, not for reasons of safety, but because they don’t want any of the thousands of MAGA supporters to be present. If they did the same thing at Columbia, and other locations, there would be no problem with the protesters!”

After detailing several of his false claims about security measures prohibiting his followers from being able to show their support and protest, CNN published a fact-check on Wednesday:

“Trump’s claims are all false. The police have not turned away ‘thousands of people’ from the courthouse during his trial; only a handful of Trump supporters have shown up to demonstrate near the building,” CNN reported.

“And while there are various security measures in place in the area, including some street closures enforced by police officers and barricades, it’s not true that ‘for blocks you can’t get near this courthouse.’ In reality, the designated protest zone for the trial is at a park directly across the street from the courthouse – and, in addition, people are permitted to drive right up to the front of the courthouse and walk into the building, which remains open to the public. If people show up early enough in the morning, they can even get into the trial courtroom itself or the overflow room that shows near-live video of the proceedings.”

READ MORE: Justices’ Views on Trump Immunity Stun Experts: ‘Watching the Constitution Be Rewritten’

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.