Connect with us

Remembering “The Homosexuals”



Editor’s note: This guest post by Scott Wooledge was originally published at Daily Kos and is published here with his permission. Scott Wooledge writes at the Daily Kos under the handle Clarknt67.

44 years ago this week, March 7, 1967, CBS News aired a Special Report hosted by Mike Wallace titled simply, “The Homosexuals.

Wallace begins quoting a 1967 CBS-commissioned opinion poll that showed “most Americans are repelled by the mere notion of homosexuality” and “two out of three look upon homosexuals with disgust, discomfort or fear. One out of ten says hatred.” He goes on to say:

The majority of Americans favor legal punishment even for homosexual acts performed in private between consenting adults. The homosexual, bitterly aware of his rejection, responds by going underground, they frequent their own clubs, bars and coffee houses where they can act out in the fashion that they want to.

Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out calls this “the single most destructive hour of antigay propaganda in our nation’s history.”

It is definitely painful but important look into a bygone era, but one that is not so very far in our past (I was, myself, merely 21 days away from coming into this world).

Dave White took a fresh look at this documentary in an article for The Advocate last year. Describing his review process, he says:

I took notes. And when I was done my pad of paper was a laundry list of every horrible thing you’ve ever heard about the gays: smothering mothers, mental illness, animalistic sexual gratification, society’s repulsion, promiscuity, recruitment, etc.

Some quotes, some from Wallace, some from clergy and other “experts” on the subject:

“They frequent their own bars … where they can act out…”

“The average homosexual isn’t capable of love.”

“Homosexuality is, in fact, a mental illness.”

“The church has a great deal of sympathy for those who are handicapped in this way.”

“[Being a homosexual] automatically rules out that [the man in question] will remain happy.”

But what I find interesting is not so much the archaic, offensive language but the insight into how the law played into a culture of oppression. Wallace reminds us in 1967, Illinois was the only state that did not outlaw homosexual acts. (Most sodomy laws would live on until the Supreme Court struck them down in 6-3 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas in 2003.)

We’re now living in a time when finally the paradigm is shifting. But 1967, it was unquestioned that it was the appropriate place of government to manage, control, and contain the homosexuals and protect good society from them. In the clip below you will hear a police chief explain the importance of maintaining the “moral aptness here in the community” (which, at that time, would mean endless sting arrests, bar raids, in some places, even home invasions.) The government, top to bottom, was an enthusiastic participant and propagator of LGBT oppression.

But it seems, gratefully, that ship is turning around. But also it seems too that movement may have confused some people. I see people pointing to landmarks, like the passage of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in 1993 or Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, as somehow a marker of the beginning of the LGBT struggle for equality.

In fact, those moments in time only serve to illustrate that the LGBT community’s call for equality became too strident, too effective, too threatening and hence, legislative roadblocks had to be constructed to slow or stop it.

Below, I’ve share a six minute clip I found particularly heartbreaking and disturbing. The intro starts off, with seeming benevolent condescension, then takes a turn:

Most homosexuals do not consider themselves ill, and they are able to live with their condition fairly comfortably.

On the other hand, there are those whose compulsive behavior becomes a problem for the police. This is such an example.

Wallace then accompanies the police on a ride along where a 19-year old serviceman is picked up for trolling for sex in a public park bathroom. He is heard, but not shown, pleading and begging to deaf ears that his life will be over. And he’s probably right.

What might have become of this young man after his arrest? Well, his name and picture would probably have been run in the local paper. He was a servicemember, so it was likely the police contacted his CO and he was dishonorably discharged.

But he was only 19, he might still be saved. His parents might have committed him to an asylum, for reparative therapy, that might have included electroshock, chemical or actual castration, and yes, even lobotomies.

But why would someone risk such consequences? There were no other options, of course. It was another time, there was no Craigslist, Grindr, or Facebook.

But much more significantly, municipalities across the country gave not a second thought to violating LGBT Americans’ First Amendment right to free association. Gay bars were illegal in much of the country. Even hosting a gathering of “known homosexuals” in the privacy of your home was often an arrestable offense. We see the circuitous nature of the oppression, where gay people are granted no space to exist in private, and are declared a public menace, which becomes a convenient excuse to hunt them down in private… And round and round we go.

In the clip, the police chief brags of the 3,000 arrests he’s made, and warns the problem is growing:

I’m concerned with the moral aptness here in the community and I’m opposed as a matter of principle to making anything which is improper or immoral conspicuous and by this conspicuousness making it easy for a person to engage in this kind of activity.

I can’t help thinking how similar these concerns of “conspicuousness” are like many current objections to marriage equality, which conservatives fear it will “make it easier for people to engage in this kind of activity.” We must keep them “less conspicuous” for the children! Or objections to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” confirmed it was best for everyone if gay people were kept as inconspicuous as possible (for the sake of “troop morale.”)

The police chief adds in a rueful tone:

The law is itself is much that, really, there isn’t a great deal we can do about those things that occur in private places.

A morality police’s lament: they can’t just knock down the doors of our bedrooms and put an end to our depravity once and for all. Thankfully, the Supreme Court definitively closed the door on that option in 2003.

To clarify, gay establishments existed, but they were most often clandestine operations. To even enter one was to risk arrest. Forbidding them opened the door to exploitation. They usually operated only by the grace of pay-offs to both police and the Mafia. Gays were subjected to an endless vicious cycle of exploitation from the law and the lawless alike. This pressure-cooker of corruption was, in part, what fed the critical mass that culminated in the famous Stonewall Riots of 1969.

By the 1980s the worst of this police harassment was a thing of the past. Although not entirely, the raids continue to this day, under dubious pretext from Texas to Atlanta to New York City. And the arrival of the AIDS crisis served as a bitter reminder we were still a disposable population, unworthy of attention or care.

After the special aired, Jack Nichols of the of the nascent LGBT rights organization, the Mattachine Society (founded in 1955) shared this anecdote of his encounter with Wallace:

[A]fter we finished and the camera was turned off, Mike Wallace sat down with me and talked for about half an hour. He said, “You know, you answered all of my questions capably, but I have a feeling that you don’t really believe that homosexuality is as acceptable as you make it sound.” I asked him why he would say that. “Because,” he said, “in your heart I think you know it’s wrong.” It was infuriating. I told him I thought being gay was just fine, but that in his heart he thought it was wrong.

From Wikipedia, (a very interesting read):

For his part, anchor Mike Wallace came to regret his participation in the episode. “I should have known better,” he said in 1992.

Speaking in 1996, Wallace stated, “That is — God help us — what our understanding was of the homosexual lifestyle a mere twenty-five years ago because nobody was out of the closet and because that’s what we heard from doctors — that’s what Socarides told us, it was a matter of shame.”

The Socarides he references would be Charles Socarides, a prominent Columbia University psychiatrist. He is featured in the documentary and was very active at the time, fighting the movement to remove homosexuality from the DSM as a mental illness. He also penned a book Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far (a collection of anti-gay nonsense pseudo-science, still popular with anti-gay hate groups like Family Research Council). Sort of an East coast, elite Anita Bryant.

Today’s youth may associate the name Socarides with his son, Richard, who currently serves as President of Equality Matters and has served as LGBT liaison to the Clinton Administration, and has long been an outspoken voice for the LGBT equality movement.

Clearly we’ve come a long way, apparently you can now endure a sting operation like the serviceman’s and not only avoid jail and commitment but keep your Senate seat.

And LGBT images in the media aren’t this awful, by any means. But they still need a lot of work, 44 years later. It was less than a year ago, CNN’s Kyra Phillips wanted to address the issue of “Can homosexuality be cured?” “NO!” is already a long-held consensus opinion of the following leading professional organizations:

  • The American Psychiatric Association
  • The American Psychological Association
  • The American Psychoanalytical Association
  • The American Academy Of Pediatrics
  • The National Association of Social Workers

And these organizations would object to the question frame of “cure.” They think it’s definitely not an illness, and there’s no sound evidence orientation can be changed.

But apparently, those scientists and respected professionals don’t know what they’re talking about. No, Ms. Phillips of CNN—the one network committed to “Moving Truth Forward”—looked far and wide, until she found a discredited former-psychologist under a rock who would come on the air and tell her what she wanted to hear: “Yes.” That man was Richard Cohen. If his name is familiar you may remember his meltdown on the Rachel Maddow Show (when he had the misfortune of encountering a real journalist).

Among the endorsers of Richard Cohen’s book, Coming out Straight?, Dr. Laura C. Schlessinger and Charles Socarides, who wrote before his death in 2005:

“This book is a testament to a heroic and successful struggle to regain one’s heterosexual destiny. It gives hope to many.”

–Charles W. Socarides, M.D., Author,

Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far

How far we’ve come. How far we still have to go to marginalizing the voices of hate and ignorance that are featured in our media as credible sources.

The full hour video may be viewed via this link.

FYI: Wallace makes not a single reference to lesbians in the special. A very telling non-commentary comment on attitudes toward women’s sexuality, indeed.

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.


‘Recycling Stale and Debunked Burisma Conspiracy Theories’: Raskin Refutes Comer’s Claims as ‘Effort to Smear Biden’



It is an internal FBI document used to record an informant’s unverified statement, and House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer wants it.

On Monday after weeks of threats and intimidation, Chairman Comer announced he will seek to obtain a contempt of Congress conviction against FBI Director Chris Wray, who refused to hand over to the committee the document, known as an FD-1023, which allegedly contains allegations of unlawful activity by then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Ranking Member Raskin late Monday afternoon released a statement slamming Comer.

READ MORE: Comer Struggles to Defend Need for Internal FBI Document on Biden as He Seeks Contempt of Congress for Director Wray

“As the FBI explained at length during today’s briefing, and in previous conversations leading up to today’s accommodation, releasing this form publicly could place the Confidential Human Source in grave danger and undermine the integrity of FBI programs and investigations going forward,” Reskin said in a statement. “Yet, rather than acknowledge these legitimate law enforcement concerns, Chairman Comer has declared his intent to hold Director Wray in contempt of Congress to further promote debunked Republican conspiracy theories.”

“We now know what I had long suspected: that Chairman Comer’s subpoena is about recycling stale and debunked Burisma conspiracy theories long peddled by Rudy Giuliani and a Russian agent, sanctioned by former President Trump’s own Treasury Department, as part of the effort to smear President Biden and help Mr. Trump’s reelection campaign,” Raskin revealed.

Announcing,”here are the facts,” Raskin wrote, “the FD-1023 form, which we reviewed first-hand today, records what a Confidential Human Source told the FBI about conversations he had with individuals in Ukraine. The source, who has been described as highly credible by the FBI, told the FBI he could not provide any opinion on the underlying veracity of the information provided by these Ukrainian individuals.”

“Chairman Comer’s actions prove that his interest in issuing this subpoena was never about seeking the truth, but was always about weaponizing the powers of this Committee to hold Director Wray in contempt as part of MAGA Republicans’ efforts to discredit and ultimately ‘dismantle’ the FBI.”

READ MORE: ‘Indictment Anytime’: Experts Explain Significance of Trump’s Attorneys Meeting With DOJ – Warn Plea Deal Possible

Indeed, then-President Donald Trump urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an infamous July, 2019 telephone call, to “do us a favor though.”

“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it,” Trump said, according to a declassified transcript released by the White House.

On Sunday Rep. Raskin told CNN Comer “admitted” this is an attempt to help Donald Trump. “It’s all about the 2024 campaign.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

Continue Reading


Comer Struggles to Defend Need for Internal FBI Document on Biden as He Seeks Contempt of Congress for Director Wray



House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer (R-KY) Monday afternoon announced he will seek to obtain a contempt of Congress referral and conviction against FBI Director Chris Wray.

For months conservatives have been talking about a document supposedly damaging to President Joe Biden that the Federal Bureau of Investigation only recently verified exists. It is not classified, but it has also not been proven accurate. It was deemed so spurious even then-Attorney General Bill Barr questioned its credibility.

Chairman Comer has demanded Director Wray not only show him the document – which the Bureau did Monday – but hand it over to the Oversight Committee.

After the FBI, according to Comer, refused to hand over the document, Comer announced, “we will now initiate contempt of Congress hearings.”

On Monday, Comer said the FBI is using the document as part of an ongoing investigation.

READ MORE: Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them

Comer announced he will seek contempt of Congress charges against Wray even after the Federal Bureau of Investigation briefed him Monday on the document, allegedly from an unverified whistleblower, claiming then-Vice President Joe Biden engaged in an unethical or unlawful act.

Some reports say the document alleges Biden accepted a bribe in exchange for enacting a policy decision, although there has been no evidence to support that claim.

When asked by a reporter why he is pursuing a contempt of Congress charge against Wray, since he has now seen the document and been briefed on it, Comer struggled to defend his actions.

“So why do you need to document at hand? You just got a chance to view it, so why do you need it? Why move forward with contempt when the FBI says they’re cooperating in good faith?” the reporter asked.

“Well,” Comer replied, “if, let’s just look at what what I’ve read in a lot of the media accounts. and and with statements that Ian Sam’s has made from the White House, that, ‘There’s no merit to this. this is crazy. This is a conspiracy theory.’ And you’re just supposed to take my word or, or the FBI’s word, I’m supposed to take the FBI’s word that they’re investigating this, or that, uh, you, you’re gonna write that the source is unverified wherever, remember, the main reason they’re not wanting to make this public is because they’re concerned about the source.”

Comer also told reporters, “All I know is there’s an ongoing investigation. They’ve confirmed there’s an ongoing investigation, using, this information. I assume that ongoing investigation is in Delaware. I don’t know that.But I assume that.”

Meanwhile, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin was asked about Comer’s remarks that the document is part of an ongoing investigation.

Shocked and stunned, with his jaw literally hanging open, Raskin looked around as reporters told him what the chairman said, and he replied, “then I must have missed that because I had not heard that this is part of any ongoing investigation.

Comer, according to the clip below, also described the source of the allegation as “highly credible,” but Raskin appeared to correct Comer, saying the highly credible source “reported a conversation with someone else.”

Raskin has previously described the document as a “tip,” containing “unsubstantiated, second-hand claims.”

READ MORE: ‘Untrue and Hateful’: Nikki Haley Slammed for ‘Damnable Lie’ of Blaming Teen Girls Contemplating Suicide on Trans Kids

The unverified document, called an FD-1023 form, “has origins in a tranche of documents that Rudy Giuliani provided to the Justice Department in 2020, people briefed on the matter said,” CNN has reported.

“According to Comer,” CNN added last week, the FD-1023 form, “dated June 30, 2020, says [a] foreign national allegedly paid $5 million to receive a desired policy outcome, based on unclassified and legally protected whistleblower disclosures.”

“The allegations of wrongdoing by the then-vice president,” CNN added, many originating from sources in Ukraine, were dubious enough that Attorney General William Barr in early 2020 directed that they be reviewed by a US attorney in Pittsburgh, in part because Barr was concerned that Giuliani’s document tranche could taint the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation overseen by the Delaware US attorney.”

Watch the video clips above or at this link.


Continue Reading


‘Untrue and Hateful’: Nikki Haley Slammed for ‘Damnable Lie’ of Blaming Teen Girls Contemplating Suicide on Trans Kids



GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley is under fire for what some are calling “outrageous and fact-free,” and “unserious, untrue, and hateful” statements during her CNN town hall Sunday night, where at least one of her more attention-getting remarks is drawing anger and upset.

Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper to define the term “woke” as conservatives see it, Haley, according to Mediaite, replied: “There’s a lot of things,” which seemed to define her responses to several of the questions she was asked.

“You want to start with biological boys playing in girl sports,” said the former Trump Ambassador to the United Nations, referring to transgender girls. “That’s one thing. The fact we have gender pronoun classes in the military now.”

NCRM could find no reference to “gender pronoun classes in the military” via a Google search, although at least one right-wing website has posted what allegedly is a U.S. Military training video on pronouns.

“All these things that are pushing what a small minority want on the majority of Americans, it’s too much,” Haley continued.

READ MORE: ‘Indictment Anytime’: Experts Explain Significance of Trump’s Attorneys Meeting With DOJ – Warn Plea Deal Possible

That complaint could easily be applied to right-wing bans on abortion, school library books, and refusal to allow background checks on all gun purchases, to name a few.

“The idea that we have biological boys playing in girls’ sports, it is the women’s issue of our time,” Haley, a former South Carolina governor insisted, choosing that over equal pay for women, access to health care including abortion services, the economy, or gun violence.

But it was the next portion of her remarks that have many especially outraged.

“My daughter ran track in high school. I don’t even know how I would have that conversation with her. How are we supposed to get our girls used to the fact that biological boys are in their locker room? And then we wonder why a third of our teenage girls seriously contemplated suicide last year.”

Georgetown University professor of policy Don Moynihan blasted Haley.

“This really is grotesque scaremongering. Research I’ve done suggests that such stigmatizing political rhetoric has mental health effects,” Moynihan writes, pointing to this piece. “Of course, Haley does not mention that trans teens have the highest suicide rates.”

Haley baselessly suggesting teens are contemplating suicide because of transgender girls participating in girls’ sports has no bearing in fact.

“Clinical psychologist here,” writes Heather O’Beirne Kelly, PhD. “Nikki Haley’s suggestion that trans youth are responsible for girls’ elevated suicide risks is disgusting. Let’s also be clear that the suicide rate for trans youth is sky high — they need support, not blame from a politician seeking the presidency.”

And just how many transgender girls playing girls sports in the U.S. are we talking about?

“While we don’t know the exact number of trans women competing in NCAA sports, I would be very surprised if there were more than 100 of them in the women’s category,” researcher and medical physicist Joanna Harper told Newsweek in April.

READ MORE: ‘No Longer the Lord’s Chicken’: ‘Christian Woman’ Says She’s ‘Grieving’ Over ‘Woke’ Chick-fil-A Hiring a Diversity Officer

“One hundred transgender athletes would comprise an incredibly small number of the U.S. population,” Newsweek added, “and the number dwindles even further when it comes to middle school and high school athletes.”

NYU Professor Scott Galloway also criticized Haley.

“There is no data, or study (anywhere) linking teen depression to presence of trans kids,” he writes. “This mocks a serious issue, and reinforces a GOP theme of demonizing our most vulnerable. The opposite of leadership.”

Boston Globe opinion writer Renée Graham went even further: “There isn’t a shred of evidence connecting suicidal ideation in teenage girls to being in close proximity to trans girls. None. An ugly, damnable lie and exactly what one should expect from Haley.”

But Haley wasn’t done attacking transgender Americans.

“We should be growing strong girls, confident girls. Then you go and you talk about building a strong military. How are you going to build a morale and strong military when you’re doing gender pronoun classes?”

Her remarks on CNN were just part of her regular stump speech – Haley has said the exact same thing several times before.

And while she appeared to struggle for terms to define “wokeness,” back in March she had little trouble, telling attendees of the right wing conference, “wokeness is a virus more dangerous than any pandemic – hands down.”

Haley apparently does not see transgender service members as part of the U.S. Military — or part of its need to build “morale.”

“Our veterans deserve to be proud of their service,” Haley tweeted in May. “As president, we’ll ban gender pronoun classes in our military. No more ‘diversity and inclusion’ training.”

Chasten Buttigieg also blasted Haley.

“Nikki Haley suggesting that 1/3 of American teenage girls are contemplating suicide because of the existence of trans people is an unserious, untrue, and hateful thing to say. But hate is the point, isn’t it?” he asked. He also lauded CNN’s Tapper who appeared to mildly served up some important facts to Haley.

Author, essayist, and former naval aviator Brynn Tannehill responded, saying: “Nikki Haley’s claim last night that transgender people are the reason why teen girls contemplate suicide is beyond specious, it’s actively contradicted by the actual statistics. It’s also dangerous pro-extermination propaganda.”

READ MORE: Extremist Group Targets Florida High School’s Yearbook Over Inclusion of LGBTQ Students Section

“Idaho leads the nation in teen suicides. It has been one of the leaders in banning trans youth from everything from sports, health care, bathrooms, government IDs, and inclusion in sex ed. It was the first to ban trans athletes,” she adds, linking to this Reuters article from 2020.

“The six states with the lowest teen suicide rates are all either blue or purple. Five of the six (CA, NJ, NY, MA, and MD) all have explicit protections for trans people codified into law. So it’s not the existence of trans kids in school,” Tannehill adds.

“Haley is also making the claim that Dylan Mulvaney being on TikTok is enough to cause teen girls to want to kill themselves,” Tannehill continues, noting her “videos are basically floof (hair, makeup, comedy, video diary). Mulvaney’s stuff is light entertainment. No one has to watch it, and she’s not telling people to go out and be a jerk to anyone.”

Haley has been using Mulvaney as a “punch line” for months, including last month, when her “joke” reportedly bombed.

“But simply by being visible, she (and any other visible trans person) is somehow responsible for the deaths of hundreds or thousands of cisgender girls,” Tannehill adds, saying Haley’s “implication is clear: tolerating transgender people causes the deaths of lots of cisgender kids.”

Journalist Emma Vigeland notes the GOP presidential candidate is “saying that trans kids’ very existence is so confusing that it’s causing cis suicide.”

“Barbaric,” Vigeland concludes.

Watch the videos above or at this link.



Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.