Archive for September, 2009

My Big Fat Gay Internship

Posted in Gay is Good with tags , , , , , , , , on September 30, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

(This was written in 2005 after completing my internship at the LGBT Community Center of Greater Cleveland.)

     I have been involved in Cleveland’s lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender (LGBT) community in various ways since 1994.  In 2002, I volunteered to work at the annual Cleveland Pride festival, which has been held annually since 1989.  I wasn’t sure what to expect that windy June day, but I knew I wanted to do more for the community than just be a girl who hangs out in gay bars.  My oldest friend, David, was on the Pride board of directors, and suggested that I help out.  I was set to sell pop and candy at a little tent, and the money I raised would all go to Pride.  I was doing my part, however small, but I knew that it was the start of something greater.

LGBT Center logo

     In the fall of that year, I went to a few Pride committee meetings, looking for some way to lend a hand.  It seemed like they did a lot of talking, but not enough action.  I was hoping there were events throughout the year where I could be involved, but all I heard was boring talk about the budget.

 

     Early spring arrived, and David called.  He said that Pride was looking for a new beer garden coordinator.  Brynna, who has been with Pride since the beginning, was trying to find someone with bartending experience to take on this role.  I went to bartending school, and had worked in a few bars.  I was excited to be offered this position.  Could this be the opportunity I was looking for?

 

     At the next Pride meeting, I formally accepted the duty of running the beer garden, which, I was soon to find out, is the largest source of income the Pride organization has except for regular donations.  I met with Brynna, and she showed me diagrams and figures and lists of past volunteers.  This was looking like an enormous task–I would have to come up with about fifty volunteers to make this thing run properly. 

 

     Now, this would only be the second time I was at a Pride festival.  The year before, I sat at a table under a small tent and sold pop and candy.  I didn’t even know where the beer garden was!  It was a little nerve-wracking to think about all the preparation I would need to do for this–but then, I have always thrived on stress.  Music to my ears came when Brynna told me that the beer garden belonged to me, and that I had absolute power.  Absolute power?  That’s all I needed to know.

 

     I was so into this job, I couldn’t believe how much fun I was having!  I was calling bars and meeting people around town–not to mention the fact that I am pretty popular, so my friends were right there with me.  Things were falling into place, and my list grew to over sixty beer garden helpers.  I studied past schedules, looked at money pick-ups, and made my final schedule within a couple days.  People were calling me the night before to offer their help. 

 

     I had never done anything on this scale before–I have been a manager at plenty of places, and was used to dealing with schedules and lateness and no-shows.  It turned out that my very intricate schedule was more skeletal than functional, but that worked out.  I had more than enough help, more than the rest of the festival, and the beer garden made more money that year than they had ever made.

 

     I have been known since 2003 as “The Beer Wench”.  I told everyone how much fun I had setting it all up, and watching everything fall into place.  Pride wants me to do this forever–and I plan to!  I am now in my second term as a board member of Cleveland Pride, and have had the opportunity to be a part of many great events over the last few years.

 

     Which brings me to my internship at the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Community Center of Greater Cleveland.  I first worked with the Center in the summer of 2003, where, on the heels of my great success as The Beer Wench, was again recruited to coordinate a bar staff for an LGBT event.  The Center has an annual Summer Garden Party, which is their biggest fundraiser of the year.  We were to have three small bars, and I was to staff them all.  No problem! I said.  Just let me know how many you need, and we’ll be there.

 

     Another rousing success, of course.  But I still wanted to do more than help gay people get drunk.

 

     I decided to come back to college after ten year of working at meaningless, low-paying jobs.  I am a very passionate person, and I knew I had more to offer than just making a great cappuccino, or bussing tables faster than you could seat them.  The Center was the first place I thought of when I was deciding where to do my internship.  I have known Sue Doerfer, executive director of the Center, since my first Pride in 2002.  I wrote her and explained my plans, and she was thrilled with my decision.  She put me in contact with Tim Marshall, the Center’s communications director.

 

     Tim sent me job descriptions for the two communications internships available.  Since I had almost no computer experience, I did not choose the marketing generalist internship.  The position I decided on was something new for the Center, and focused more on newsgathering, which was more interesting to me.  When we met in person, I told him what I wanted to do beyond the description, and he was more than willing to give me extra assignments to fulfill my hours requirements. 

 

 

     On Monday, 12 September, Sirius Satellite Radio’s LGBT channel, Q, did a live, two-day broadcast from the Center.  Local community leaders and artists were interviewed, and they took phone calls from listeners.  I was an observer at this event, and was interested to see the host and his producer working, on-air and behind-the-scenes. 

 

     This was a major media event for the Center, and for the Cleveland LGBT community as a whole.  When one thinks of Cleveland, one doesn’t normally associate it with being progressive or gay-friendly.  We were excited to be in the spotlight for this show, which was part of a Midwestern tour by the Q channel.  When Sue Doerfer was interviewed, she made it clear that our Center is one of the biggest in the country. 

 

     Established in 1975, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Community Center of Greater Cleveland (known, until November 2005, as the Lesbian/Gay Community Service Center), is the oldest and most prominent LGBT organization in Ohio, and one of the best in the United States.  In its thirty years, the Center has provided HIV testing and counseling, youth groups, addiction services, health seminars, book clubs, and other community services.  In addition, the Center also houses a great collection of LGBT historical archives, and sponsors events and guest speakers/performers from all over the country.  The Center is a leader among non-profits in fundraising.

 

     My main task concerned the website ( http://lgcsc.org/ ), which gets 10,000 hits a day.  With such a highly-regarded site, they are always improving and updating the information and features.  One thing Tim told me they’ve wanted to do was to create their own news page, where there would be an article summary, and then a link to the original source.  The site had a small section of news headlines, but they were from a newswire, and not written in-house.  Therefore, clicking on the headline leads you directly to a different website, and people often don’t return to the Center’s site.  Tim wanted to have a separate page on the Center’s site, where the story summary would provide the major points, and readers would be less likely to leave the site to read the full article.  Of course, we provide that link, but people who just want a quick update can find everything they need on one convenient page.

 

     Two days after the Sirius broadcast, I met with Tim to extensively discuss what my duties would be.  Aside from the newsgathering, he suggested that I become involved in gay/straight alliance (GSA) outreach, another program the Center had always wanted to do, but had neither the staff nor the time to create and maintain.  I was more than happy to accept this role, as I planned to become involved in the GSA at Lake Erie College, Spectrum. 

 

     The idea was to create a database of college GSAs from all over Northeast Ohio, and create a page for them on the Center’s site.  We would put contact information, meeting times, events, and profiles of their members on this page, and it would be a great way to get the Center’s name out to these groups.  As successful as the Center has been, there are still many younger people who don’t know about it, and this would be an excellent way to provide ourselves as a resource, and to offer our help in any other way.

 

     I dug right in on that first day of actual work.  I went online to seek out all the college GSA information I could.  Most of it was easy to find, as almost every college has a GSA these days.  Some schools even have a separate page for theirs! 

 

     Lake Erie, however, does not.  When I first decided to go back, I looked on the school site, wondering if there was such a thing in Painesville, Ohio.  I didn’t remember there being one during my first stint at LEC, but it was the mid-90s, and these things weren’t openly-discussed in those days. 

 

     When I finally read through all the descriptions of student groups, I came across Spectrum, and wrote to Hollie Chessman, director of student groups, to get more information.  She gave me the email address of the Spectrum president, Danielle House, whom I wrote to immediately.  It took about a week to hear back, and even longer to actually set up a Spectrum meeting, but, it finally happened, and there were only four of us there.

 

     I didn’t expect a very large group, as I realize we are in Lake County, and it’s pretty difficult to be openly LGBT around here–it’s pretty difficult to be openly different in any way, really.  But I knew it was my duty, as a Center representative, as well as an advocate in my every day life, to get this group to be more visible and active on campus, and, eventually, in the community at large.

 

     I was allowed to speak first, introducing myself, and explaining what I was doing at the Center.  Thankfully, the other Spectrum members knew what the Center was, and they had attended a poetry event there the previous school year.  I was very excited to have Spectrum become involved in this GSA outreach, especially since it is such a new group at LEC.  I told them that the Center was more than willing to help out with any events Spectrum would have throughout the year.  Everyone seemed interested in what the group could accomplish, and I offered to do everything I could do get things moving.

 

     But that was the only meeting we had.  I emailed Danielle many times over the next month, inviting her and the group to attend the National Coming Out Day rally the Center was holding on Public Square in Cleveland, and asking what we would do to promote Coming Out day on campus.  I never heard back.

 

     This looks really bad, I thought, to be in charge of GSA outreach, and my own school won’t get involved!  So I took it to Hollie Chessman again, and she directed me to Leslie Yetter, Spectrum’s faculty advisor.  She told me she had not heard from Danielle since the beginning of the semester, so she was going to make me the de facto president of Spectrum. 

 

     Leslie and I met and talked about ideas I had for events.  Again, I understand where we are, but we have to start somewhere.  I talked about the Center, and all the opportunities there are to get involved with other GSAs and form a GSA community.  She was happy to have me involved, but, as it was already late in the semester, there wasn’t much we could do. 

 

     I told her that I really want to know who is at LEC, how many LGBT students there are.  I know there are many, but most are not out.  I said I wanted to do a survey of the student body to find out who’s out there, and to get everyone’s take on LGBT issues on campus.  I created a survey, which Leslie said would be put on http://www.surveymonkey.com/, with a link to the site on LEC’s site.  At the start of the spring semester, I plan to analyze the findings, and start working on creating a more visible and active Spectrum.  I am afraid that, once I graduate in May 2006, that Spectrum will wither away, and that would be a great disservice to LEC’s LGBT students and faculty.

 

      Within a week, I had a complete list of GSA contact information.  I began to compose a letter to send out to all the contacts, explaining what the Center was trying to do.  I asked to be added to their mailing lists, and said I wanted to attend one of their meetings to meet with their groups and discuss the outreach program.  The thing that I emphasized most was, I wanted to hear their concerns, their ideas, what they need from the Center. 

 

     A couple schools wrote back right away.  Case Western Reserve University was the most excited about this program.  Sabina Hossain, co-president of Spectrum at CWRU, was looking to become more personally involved with the Center.  I contacted her right away, and she invited me to their next meeting. 

 

     In the meantime, I was working furiously on my newsblogs.  We use a blog site, www.blogger.com, to post my summaries.  I was apprehensive at first, given my limited computer skills, but Tim showed me how unbelievably easy it is to post stories and then link them to the main article.  He had printed out some examples of what he was looking for.  Before I posted anything, he asked me to look up some stories and send him samples of my work.  It had been a while since I did any writing of consequence–for all these years since I had been in school, if I wrote at all, it was fiction, poetry, very personal, journal-type stuff.  I hadn’t been a journalist for a long time!

 

     The first story I found was from http://www.365gay.com/, and it was about a battleship that was to be docked in San Francisco, which was going to hold a museum dedicated to the military service of gays, lesbians, women, and minorities.  I  hadn’t heard this story before, so I thought this would be a good choice.  I quickly decided that that would be the focus of this newsblog, stories that aren’t being reported in mainstream gay newspapers and magazines, things you wouldn’t find unless you really dug for them.

 

     I sent Tim my sample, and he said it was exactly the style he wanted.  His only suggestion was, for those early blogs, to tighten things up a bit, and not put quotes in unless they are extraordinary.  After a few weeks of entries, he printed out what I had done, and we met to discuss my progress.  Again, he was more than happy, and he only offered constructive criticism.  He also gave me a copy of The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual, the Center’s reference guide for all printed materials.  It has become a bible for me.  

    

     It was up to me to find websites to gather stories, and I was careful to not get all my information from the same few sources.  Luckily, there are many places to look.  I wanted to focus on stories happening in small towns, as well as around the world.  The majority of stories appear in non-LGBT publications, which lends credibility, I think.  If everything is told from a supposedly LGBT point of view, that it can be viewed as slanted, and I am supposed to be objective. 

 

     Granted, there are stories I don’t necessarily want to do, sometimes based on the headline of the original article.  For example, in September, there were many stories about the recently-passed hate crimes bill.  But since it was tied to a law that pertained to child molesters, most of the headlines focused on that, and not the part about including sexual orientation in the hate crimes statute. 

 

     This is where it often becomes hard to stay unbiased.  Of course, the bill is a good thing for all victims involved, but the fact that anti-LGBT activists often try to put gays and lesbians in the same category as child molesters makes me nervous as far as linking my summary to the larger piece.  When it pops up, the first words you notice are “child molester”.  I want to focus on LGBT issues, not ideas that anti-LGBT forces try to attach to the movement.

 

     Most headlines, however, were not sensationalist, and I had little trouble finding appropriate articles.  Sometimes what I came across was fairly amusing, so I threw things in just to lighten things up.  So much of the news is negative or disappointing, and once in a while, something funny or ridiculous happens that you just need to hear. 

 

     One such story was about a “heterosexuality officer” at a school in Australia.  Straight students who felt that LGBT students were getting special treatment decided to take matters in their own hands, and created a sort of “straight rights” group.  Another story was about a Christian anti-gay group who were yelling at people and telling them they were going to hell because of their sexuality.  I ended my summary with a simple, humorous quote from one of the condemned:  “But I’m Jewish.”

 

     An exciting part of reading these stories is finding out about LGBT rights organizations around the world, especially in places you would never think would have such groups.  I found a great article about a lesbian support group in Nepal, and lots of articles about groups in Northern Ireland.  It’s also refreshing to hear news about advances in LGBT right across the globe, like a mall in Bangkok that will offer a gay shopping area, the legalization of civil partnerships that will occur starting 21 December in the United Kingdom, and the Church of Sweden’s approval of civil unions. 

 

     Reading so much has made me more passionate about this cause, and more determined to fight for the rights of the LGBT community.  My interest is personal, as these things usually are.  I have had gay friends since I was 18, and they were the ones who really made me feel like I was something, like I was interesting and smart and funny and sexy.  Gay men made me feel like a woman!  I have a natural sense of justice, and I have made it my goal to see to it that my friends are treated equally and respectfully, and that all LGBT people can feel free to be out and proud of who they are–and who they love.

 

     11 October is National Coming Out Day, and I was asked by Sue Doerfer to “come out” as an ally at the Center-sponsored rally.  I was thrilled, but very nervous.  I am not much for public speaking, which sounds strange for me to say, since I am happy to talk about anything with anybody at any time.  But I get quite self-conscious in front of large crowds. 

 

     I took a speech class at Lakeland Community College many years ago, in an attempt to get over this stage fright.  What I excelled at was extemporaneous speaking.  We had to pick a topic and speak partially from a prepared speech, and partially off the cuff.  My opening statement was, “Homosexuality is not a disease; homophobia is.”  This was pretty bold for the early 1990s, but it was what I thought I’d be best at discussing.  For the first half, I read funny quotes about how gays and lesbians were perceived in the past, and I detailed societies where it was accepted and encouraged–samurais were known to take young male lovers, and women in the Victorian age were expected to form close friendships with each other as “practice” for eventual marriage.  The class sat, stunned at my openness and blatant promotion of homosexuality as normal and natural.  It was great!

 

     But where I really felt comfortable was when I talked freely about historical figures who were gay or lesbian, people the students sitting before me knew, but whose sexuality historians have long-glossed over or just plain fabricated.  I went on and on about how great gay people are, and my speech went well over the required ten minutes.  I was satisfied with my performance, and proud of myself for bringing this topic before a community college crowd in Lake County.  I knew I was destined to be an activist for this issue.

 

     I remembered this as I thought about what to say in my Coming Out Day speech.  I was told I should speak for about two minutes.  There was so much I wanted to do with these few moments in the spotlight, but I was terrified I would freeze up, or stumble over my words, or talk too fast no one would understand me.  I knew that talking off the top of my head would be the best way as far as getting over my nervousness.  But when I do that, I tend to go off on tangents–I say important things, but I often lose track of other good points I wanted to make.  I didn’t want to have a perfectly-crafted phrase just waiting to see the light of day, and then I forget because I’m going in another direction.  I thought that I should maybe write a skeletal speech, much like my first beer garden volunteer schedule–it’s useful, but not necessarily functional.  At an event like this, it’s better to just go with what you feel at the moment.

 

     Most of the people at the event were folks I knew already, from the Center and Pride, and others I just knew.  I asked my friend James to come also, to lend me moral support.  When the short program began, I realized that my moment was near, and I tried to not look at my speech too much.  I wanted to sound fresh and casual and breezy.  I was the third or fourth speaker.  There’s no turning back now! I thought.  These are your friends, don’t sweat it.

 

     My opening statement was, “Hi.  I’m Dana, and I’m an ally.”  I got a huge round of applause!  There were maybe 50 people watching, a lot of them passersby.  I was pretty stunned by their reaction.  I began talking about my first gay best friend, and how I helped him come out.  I said that, ever since then, I had made it my mission to promote quality and understanding however I could, and that I take every opportunity to talk about LGBT issues.  The best way to be an activist, I said, is to talk to people one on one, to advocate in your every day life.  I got more applause and cheers for that.  Most people don’t go to rallies or listen to speeches, so you need to talk to your coworkers, fellow students, friends and family members about your LGBT loved ones.  Unless everyone left that event and talked about their concerns, nothing was going to change.  I closed by saying that we all have to be open about who we are and who we love, gay, straight, allied, whatever your label is. 

 

     I did what I knew I would do–I started to read my speech, and then I went off and spoke from the heart.  My friend James was making funny faces at me, which made me laugh and put me at ease.  I was still a bit shaky, and I was beginning to get cottonmouth, but I survived.  And I got another grand round of applause when I left the stage.  If I had stayed up there for another thirty seconds, I would have been so comfortable and might have spoken for an hour!

 

     A great thing happened after my speech: other speakers began quoting me.  Whoa!  The main thing they said was my line about advocating in your every day life.  I was glad that people actually paid attention, and they honestly appreciated my words and my honesty. 

 

     I wrote an article about the event for the Gay People’s Chronicle, which was a front page story in the next issue.

 

     I went CWRU’s Spectrum meeting on 17 October.  I was allowed to speak first, so I gave my spiel about the Center, and how we want to link all local GSAs.  This was a pretty sizable meeting, with at least a dozen people.  The main topic was the upcoming Charity Drag Ball.  Sabina Hossain and Kenny Long, the co-presidents, were explaining the areas that needed work, and when they asked who wanted to be in charge of the drinks, I quickly raised my hand.  They were more than happy to give me the job.  It was to be a juice bar, so I needed to come up with about twelve non-alcoholic drinks.  I was looking forward to bartending again, even though it was all juice and pop.

 

     Over the next few weeks, I worked on my menu, and sent out emails to everyone on my list to promote the event.  I had no idea how many people would be there.  They said that, the previous year (which was the first year), they had about 200 attendees.  It was a lot of straight people who were making fun of drag, but it was still a decent-sized ball.

 

     I told Sabina that she should take out an ad in the Charlie’s Calendar section of the Gay People’s Chronicle, and that she should also think about writing a short press release, and sending that out to the Chronicle, Scene, and the Free Times.             

 

     I also got Grid-n-Orbit, my favourite bar, to be one of the event sponsors.  Their logo appeared on ads and the program, and I brought flyers advertising the Grid’s college ID night.

 

     The evening of the Drag Ball, my friend and I arrived early to begin setting up the bar, but everything seemed so disorganized.  My supplies didn’t arrive until about twenty-five minutes before the show began, so I rushed to put everything together, and give a quick lesson to my bartenders.

 

     Despite the initial insanity, everything went off without a hitch.  The event raised almost $600 for UNICEF and GLSEN, and 350 people attended.

 

     I wrote another front page story for the Chronicle, and was happy to give Spectrum at Case the great publicity.  It was an awesome event, and something smaller GSAs, like Spectrum at LEC, should aspire to.

 

     My newsblog officially launched on 26 October.  Tim and I wanted to have a substantial number of stories before we unveiled it to the public.  He sent out notice to Center staff first, and then to the Center’s mailing list.  I did my own publicity, emailing the link to everyone on my list.  I got lots of praise from everyone, and was glad they could finally see what I had been working on for all that time.  Most importantly, I was proud to bring this news service to the masses.

 

     Towards the end of the same month, I started feeling more like a real reporter.  Some stories I had done were now being followed up, like the Million Man March and the Polish presidential elections.  Seeing things progress was fun, and I was eager to read more.

 

     I was also eager to do more than what I had been doing.  The GSA stuff was still not picking up.  Case was the only school I had really been involved with, though I heard from Cleveland State University, and was on the Cuyahoga Community College GSA’s mailing list.  The people I heard from from those groups seemed to be interested in being part of this outreach, but I still craved more work!  Tim had a thought.

 

     He had always wanted to put an interview page on the website, something like PDQ in the Plain Dealer.  I was so excited to hear about this; when I was a kid, I used to carry a tape recorder around with me and interview my family and friends.  Sometimes I would have them pretend to be celebrities, and sometimes I would be Barbara Walters.  Something about interviews has always fascinated me.

 

     Tim gave me a list of local celebrities and other interesting people who were doing cool things around Cleveland, and I was to come up with a list of questions.  As with the newsblog, Tim told me this project was my baby, and I could approach it any way I wanted to. 

 

     Some of the people on the list were friends of mine, so I wouldn’t have any trouble getting in touch with them.  I didn’t realize how difficult it would be, though, to come up with great questions.  How gay should this be?  Do I ask what their favourite colour is?  Do I ask who their favourite 15th century monologist is?  I wasn’t sure as to what the approach should be.  I was leaning towards funky and cool, but I wanted some deep thoughts as well. 

 

      Tim and I decided that some of the questions should be geared specifically toward the respondent, and the rest should be general questions that are for everyone.  Then I would use my magical editing skills and whittle it down to ten questions that we use on the site.  A picture and a short biography, and a plug for an upcoming project or event, would be included.

 

      I scoured the internet looking for interesting questionnaires to inspire me, but there really weren’t any that appealed to me.  What I kept in the back of my head as an almost last resort was the Proust questionnaire.  Vanity Fair does it in every issue, but I do love it.  I believe that the Proust questionnaire is the inspiration for many interviewers throughout the years, so I gave in and borrowed some questions.

 

     But I added some more modern questions as well, and made my questionnaire.  We aren’t officially launching this until probably January 2006, when the Center’s website is updated and changed a bit to reflect their new name and logo.  But I am really eager to get more interviews done.  So far, I have done two.  The first was with a local independent filmmaker.  The second was with Christine Hahn, art director for the Chronicle, and host of a music show on CWRU’s  radio station. 

 

     They were both intrigued by the Proust questions, and the director asked if I was trying to psychoanalyze him.  But their responses were great, and I edited the first one and submitted it to Tim.  He thought it was great.

   

     In mid-November, Mika Major and I held a GSA summit at the Center.  I had heard from three or four of the colleges on my list that they were planning to attend.  This was to primarily be a brainstorming session, so we could listen to what these groups needed, what they were concerned about.  There were lots of high school students, some of whom were looking to start a GSA at their school.  It was inspiring to see so many young people interested in the cause.

 

     It was a pretty casual affair, with pop and pizza, and everyone speaking their mind.  I expressed concerns about Spectrum at LEC, and how I am hoping to leave a legacy to future LGBT students and their supporters.  This seemed to be a common theme with the high school kids, that they wanted the groups to go on after they graduated.  We listed ideas about how to accomplish this, and how to make our GSAs more visible, so we can increase membership.

 

     Many of the things we came up with were ideas I have heard at Pride meetings, and it made me think of all the ways we can help each other out.  Cross-promotion, co-sponsorships, things like this can be of benefit to the GSAs, Pride, and the Center–and this, of course, leads to benefiting the community as a whole.

 

     I got some contact information from the high school student from Solon who is looking to start a group at his high school, and from Lorain County Community College, who have just a bit less trouble with membership than Spectrum at LEC.  I am going to continue my outreach for these groups, beyond my internship.  I feel like I have a lot of insight and energy to give to these groups.

 

     Wild Plum Productions is the Center’s arts organization.  They have regular gallery showings and performances, and use local artists to raise money for the Center.  I promoted the event by placing flyers all over the LEC campus, and delivering them to bars around Cleveland.  I also sent out an email flyer to people on my list. 

 

     And, of course, I was a volunteer bartender at the event.  Wild Plum shows are open to the public, and feature paintings, jewelry, one-act plays and other artistic ventures.  The events in November were held at the Asterisk Gallery in Tremont.  We had quite a good turnout, and people were eating, drinking, and being merry.  I would like to do more artsy things like this. 

 

     I am always amazed at the quality of the Center’s events.  This is a non-profit, but everyone works so hard, and so passionately–but maybe that’s why.  When you do something because you want to, and not because you are getting paid, I think there’s a much greater sense of joy and satisfaction.  I first felt like that when I sold pop and candy at Pride in 2002.  Every time I am involved in something as a volunteer, I enjoy myself more than I ever have at any paying job.  That is how I know that these are things I should be doing with my life.  If you would do it for free, if it makes you happy, then that is your destiny.

 

     I had wanted to volunteer at the Center before I became an intern, I just never had the time because I was always working.  These past few months have been a pleasure, and I am planning on staying on as a volunteer.  I want to continue the work I started, and I want to become even more a part of the community.

 

     The Center has many great programs that I could be a part of.  Their Speaker’s Bureau provides experts on LGBT issues, and I know that is something I would excel at.  I am still trying to get over my podium panic, but the more I give public speeches, however big or small, the better I will be, and the greater impact I can make.

 

     One thing I really want to do at the Center is a series of lectures or classes called LBGT History 101.  I have always loved history, and have, in the past few years, begun to read everything I can about LGBT history.  I have met very few in the community, other than activist-types, who know much, if anything, about their history.  My original idea came from the Q satellite broadcast back in September.  Kathy Harvey, a transgendered performer, was talking about The Sissy Show, her performance group.  I thought that a musical about LGBT history would be funny.  There’s really nothing like that out there.  It could be a short revue covering all the important events throughout history, and maybe feature music from icons like Judy Garland and Cher and Madonna.  I’m not musical, per se, but I would love to see this come to fruition.

 

     In the meantime, I would like to work on a program at the Center that teaches LGBT history.  The Center has lots of youth groups, and I think this would be highly beneficial to them.  Those who don’t know history are condemned to repeat it.

 

     I look forward to many years of working for the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Community Center of Greater Cleveland.  I am impressed at what they have achieved in these thirty years, and I am proud to be affiliated with them.  There has been so much progress on LGBT issues in recent times.  I want to ensure that equality and respect will be afforded to all human beings in the future, regardless of whom they happen to love.  As I said, I became interested in this cause because of gay friends who loved me unconditionally.  What is more important than love?  If I can make a life out of spreading love and acceptance, I will have had a life worth living. 

The Ethics of Outing

Posted in Gay is Good with tags , , , , , , , , on September 28, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

(This piece was part of the requirement for the BA in Communications from Lake Erie College and was written in 2006.)

Barney Frank, Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts, was asked by a Boston Globe reporter in 1987 if he were gay.  Frank said yes.  “I’ve said all along that if I was asked by a reporter and I didn’t respond, it would look like I had something to hide, and I don’t think I have anything to hide,” he has said.  “I don’t think my sex life is relevant to my job, but on the other hand, I don’t want to leave the impression that I’m embarrassed about my life” (queertheory.com).

  

Frank is the first member of the House of Representatives to willingly come out of the closet.  He says he was motivated by two factors, his unhappiness at being a closeted gay man, and his feeling that it would be helpful in the “fight against homophobia if I joined approximately 432 of my House colleagues in being honest about my sexual orientation” (Brune). 

     

In 1996, Arizona Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe received a call  from Josh Moss, a reporter at The Advocate, a national gay magazine.  Moss said he was working on a story about the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and wanted to know why a closeted gay man like Kolbe voted in favour of the bill.  Kolbe felt that Moss was threatening to out him in the magazine, and told him, “I’ll talk to you about my reasons for the vote, but it’s my decision when I come out.  This is not something…that is proper or appropriate for you to do.” (Marcus 377) 

  

Kolbe’s orientation was not much of a secret.  There had been rumours since his 1984 election to Congress, and he came out to a few friends following his divorce in the early 1990s.  And ultra-conservative California Representative Bob Dornan had threatened, even before the DOMA vote, to expose closeted House members.  In 1994, Dornan outed fellow member Steve Gunderson of Wisconsin, who was the only Republican to vote against DOMA in 1996.

 

There were stories popping up on the Internet about Kolbe’s vote for the bill, and how he should be called out as a gay man because he was seen as betraying the community.  Kolbe realized the threat was serious, and told his advisors what was being said.  They all asked if he were gay, and he acknowledged that he was, and their advice was to just let things settle down on their own.

 

Kolbe met with Moss to convince him that gays and lesbians should not be in the business of outing each other, that it was an issue of the right to privacy.  Moss tried explaining that the story would be done in a sensitive fashion, but Kolbe still felt that coming out should be a personal decision, that one needed to do it in one’s own time.

“I have to tell you we’re going to go ahead with the story,” Moss finally, uncomfortably, told him.  Kolbe’s impression was that the editors at The Advocate were pushing Moss to do the article no matter what.  Even so, upon hearing those words that the story was going to be published, Kolbe felt relieved:

 

          …it was the closest thing I’ve ever had to a religious experience…An

          unbelievable sense of peace and calm descended over me.  I could

          physically feel  fifty years just go “phew!” up off my shoulders.  And I

          said to myself, “It’s over.  It’s done.  I know what I have to do now.”

          I would have to deal with it, but I didn’t have to worry about hiding

          this thing anymore.  (Marcus 379) 

 

Kolbe decided that he did not want The Advocate to be the one to tell the world that he was gay.  He began by telling Arizona Senator John McCain, who told him it didn’t make any difference to him, that he’s a great friend and legislator.  Kolbe told other friends and family members, and everyone accepted it.  His brother, John, who worked at The Phoenix Gazette, said he wanted to write the story for his paper. 

 

The article was to come out in the Friday edition, but was leaked on Thursday.  By Friday morning, all the phone lines were ringing off the hook with people asking if his being gay would affect his work, why he chose to come out at this time, how it affected his vote on DOMA.  Congressional colleagues offered words of support throughout the day, and Kolbe held a press conference back home.  After exhausting every possible question and answer, Kolbe said, “That’s it, then.  Now I’m going back to being a congressman.”

 

Pop singer George Michael was outed in a much more undignified manner.  There had been speculation about his sexuality for many years, and he was always coy in his responses.  When he was arrested in 1998 in a public restroom in Beverly Hills for committing lewd acts with an undercover police officer, his lifestyle was no longer secret.  He considers his arrest his outing.  Michael had been dating a man for several years at the time, and, as he told Oprah Winfrey, “I think part of me was almost ready to deal with it, in whatever way it was going to happen” (George Michael). 

 

The LGBT community is divided over the ethics of outing.  Obviously, putting yourself in a compromising position as George Michael did is one way of outing yourself, however unwittingly.  But what if you are a politician voting for anti-gay legislation, such as Representative Jim Kolbe supporting the Defense of Marriage Act?  Does one’s sexuality preclude any obligation to the values and opinions of the voters who elected you?  When does one’s private life become a public issue?  The question of the ethics of outing really boils down to this:  Who’s decision should it be to come out, and what effect does this have on the LGBT community as a whole?

 

Christine Hahn, host of the indie radio show “stonecoldbikini” on WRUW  91.1, is a proponent of outing.  “The people who are in the closet are one hundred times more hurtful to LGBT people…than the right-wing whack-job born-agains.”  She says that those in the closet set the tone of intolerance.  “They are telling people that being queer is something to hide and be ashamed of.”

 

Hahn and others feel there is an obligation for everyone to be out of the closet,  but not everyone agrees.  “I don’t think there’s any obligation,” says Dave Ream, treasurer of Cleveland Pride.  “It may be mentally healthier for the individual [to be out], but it may cause them to lose their job, move, etc. “  Ream does admit that the LGBT influence on society and government would be stronger if more people were out.  “I don’t see any downside to the community when someone comes out.”

 

The consensus on outing public officials seems to be that it is acceptable to call them out, providing they have been openly homophobic, or have been held up as an example as what is “normal” and righteous.  Brian DeWitt, associate editor of The Gay People’s Chronicle, the largest LGBT newspaper in Ohio, agrees that certain public figures deserve to be outed. He does not include in this group those who did not choose to be in the public eye, like crime victims or lottery winners.  Those who willingly seek fame agree to give up a certain amount of their privacy.  “An anti-gay politician either has or is seeking the power to spend our taxes to advance their world view,” DeWitt explains.  “If they are anti-gay but gay themselves…this is newsworthy.  They are supporting laws and policies that would apply to everyone but them.”  He adds that, though entertainers and athletes have no authority over anyone, they are fair game to be outed if they use their fame to harm the LGBT community.

 

John Aravosis and Michael Rogers agree, and this is why they began a campaign in 2004 to out closeted members of Congress, as well as gays and lesbians who worked for anti-gay politicians.  “If you’re gay and you support making sexual orientation a political weapon, then your sexual orientation is fair game, and you will be outed to the rafters (Brune),” Aravosis has said. 

  

Their crusade drew much criticism from national LGBT advocacy groups.  The Human Rights Campaign opposes using sexuality as a political tool.  “It turns the community against itself and turns off the rest of America because it comes off as being mean-spirited and divisive,” stated Mark Shields, spokesperson for HRC.  (sfgate.com) 

 

But the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force agrees with those who feel that outing is appropriate for those who are gay or lesbian and consistently speak out and vote against the interest of the LGBT community.  Matthew Foreman, executive director of the NGLTF, declared, “You can’t be publicly attacking and hurting gay people and privately courting them.  I think that is the litmus test” (Marech)

 

The outing campaign of Aravosis and Rogers is seen as a witch hunt by some, especially when it comes to their targeting of gay and lesbian staffers and other advisors of homophobic Congress members.  Lynden Armstrong, co-chair of the Gay, Lesbian & Allies Senate Staff Caucus, sees more harm than good in going after low-level aides.  He began receiving calls from staffers who had worked in Washington, D.C. for years, asking if they should avoid going to gay bars or telling people they are gay.  Armstrong feels that forcing such people out of the closet before they are ready hurts the cause.  “It angers me whenever I hear of gay people doing that to other gay people,” he says.  “It’s accomplishing nothing while demonstrating insensitivity to a very personal process” (Brune).

  

But Rogers firmly believes in his cause. “The closet is our worst enemy.”  He points to politicians like Kolbe and Gunderson, saying that “they were dragged out, but now they’re some of our most vocal advocates” (Brune).

  

Those who advocate outing public figures often point to people like Roy Cohn, a New York lawyer who persecuted gays while leading a double life himself.  Pete Williams, former assistant secretary of the Department of Defense, was an outspoken supporter of the ban on gay and lesbians in the military.  He was outed in 1991. 

 

Some in the LGBT community see outing as a moral issue.  In his 1992 book Gay Ideas: Outing and Other Controversies, Richard D. Mohr clearly states his position:  “Outing is both a permissible and an expected consequence of living morally” (12).

Another argument has been made that one’s sexuality is a privacy issue, but who makes that argument when it comes to discussing the sex lives of heterosexual public figures?  Celebrities write tell-all books and go on talk shows to reveal every detail of their intimate adventures.  Why is there an issue of privacy when it comes to gays and lesbians?  This position points the finger as much at the LGBT community itself as to the media that chooses to conceal or reveal a closeted individual’s sexual orientation. 

Michelangelo Signorile, an outspoken gay writer and activist, wrote on the privacy issue in his 1993 book, Queer in America: Sex, Media, and the Closets of Power: “How can being gay be private when being straight isn’t?  Sex is private.  But by outing we do not discuss anyone’s sex life.  We only say they’re gay” (Outing).     

“It is sexual acts,” writes Mohr, “and derivatively talk of them, not sexual orientation, that are protected by privacy” (17). He attacks those who feel that privacy should be respected on this matter, unless there is a closeted  individual who is publicly criticizing the community.  Barney Frank’s quote about there being a right to privacy, but not to hypocrisy, effectively illustrates his point of view, and Mohr adds that the activists who promote the outing of some public figures and not others feel that “the closet case’s hypocrisy…waives any right to privacy” (22). 

The privacy issue is one of the most common themes in the outing debate.  Should a person’s right to privacy outweigh their perceived obligation the being an openly gay or lesbian citizen?  Or should the community come first, are the activists looking out for the common good when they kick down closet doors and yank out anyone and everyone they find hiding in the corner, as well as those who are comfortable being themselves and don’t feel they need to make a public declaration of their sexuality?

    

Coming out is a process, and it is hard enough to do it in private, let alone with the eyes of the world watching.  I do think it is important for everyone to be at peace with themselves, whatever their orientation, but I’m not sure it’s effective to force someone out before they are ready. 

The exception I make is in the case of public figures who are lying about who they are; that is dangerous.  I agree that those who choose fame should accept that they are going to give up some privacy, and there will be endless speculation and accusations about their personal lives.  But that goes with the territory.  If you are presenting yourself as a morally superior character, if you want the world to believe that you are a good Christian and have a “normal” heterosexual life, and are constantly condemning the LGBT community and anyone who supports it, but you are frequenting gay bars and hooking up with strangers–I think we have the right to know.  If my tax dollars are paying for you to have secret rendezvous with call boys, I think we have the right to know. 

If you are an athlete or entertainer, and you are making public statements against LGBT people, but have had a string of same-sex lovers, I think there is a moral obligation to expose you for the hypocrite that you are.

Only when all LGBT people feel they can be open about their lives will there be an end to the need for outing.  As the numbers of out individuals increases, the better it will be for future generations.  Certainly, some of those who have been forcibly outed are happier now, and have become extraordinary spokespeople for the community.  But the majority of those in the closet should be allowed to go through the process in their own way.  Some people think “the closet” is a synonym for “internalized homophobia”, and in some cases it may be.  But everyone has their reasons for staying there.   I encourage my closeted friends to come out, but I am sensitive to the reasons they give for not being ready.   Family and societal pressures are the usual reasons given, and I understand that.  The best way to help someone feel comfortable enough to come out is through unconditional love and support.  I agree with Keith Boykin’s idea:  “If we really want to change the way society thinks about homosexuality and bisexuality, the place to start is at home.” (KeithBoykin.com)

Are we comfortable with some people being comfortable in the closet?  Are we comfortable pushing people out, whether they are scared to be out, or whether they are harmful to the community?  Why do we think everyone should feel obligated to announce their sexuality to the general public?  Our only obligation in life is to ourselves.  When that idea reveals itself to us, there will be no need to out anyone.

 

 

 

 

Boykin, Keith.  “Who’s Gay and Who Cares?”  KeithBoykin.  1 January  2002, 11:28 AM.  2 March 2006  <http://www.keithboykin.com/arch/000625.html>.

Brune, Adrian.  “Wave of outings hits Congress.”  Washblade.  18 June 2004.  Washington Blade.  2 March 2006 <http://www.wash blade.com/print.cfm?content_id=3165>.

Crea, Joe.  “Prying open the closet door.”  Washblade.  6 August 2004.  Washington Blade.  23 February 2006 <http://www.washblade.com/2004/8-6/arts/prying.cfm>.

Dana, Rebecca, and Jose Antonio Vargas.  “Capitol Hill Insiders Irked By Campaign to ‘Out’ Them.”  Washingtonpost.  15 July 2004.  Washington Post.  23 February 2006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/.A50299-2004Jul14?language=printer

DeWitt, Brian.  “Re: outing questionnaire.”  E-mail to the author.  7 March 2006.

“Excerpt from GayGate.com.”  Queertheory.  23 February 2006 http://www..queertheory.com/histories/f/frank_barney.htm

“George Michael: The Oprah Winfrey Show.”  Angelfire.  23 February 2006 < http://www.angelfire.com/vamp/olja/George/GM.htm>.

Hahn, Christine.  “Re: The Ethics of Outing.”  E-mail to the author.  24 February 2006.

Marcus, Eric.  Making Gay History.  New York: HarperCollins, 2002.

Marech, Rona.  “Activists consider ethics, efficacy of outing.”  SFGate.  14 November 2004.  San Francisco Chronicle.  23 February 2006 http://www..sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/14/MNGF69RDSR1.DTL&type=pri…

Mohr, Richard D.  Gay Ideas: Outing and Other Controversies.  Boston: Beacon Press, 1992.

“Outing.”  Wikipedia.  23 February 2006.  Wikipedia.  23 February 2006< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Outing&printable=yes>.

Ream, Dave.  “Re: outing questionnaire.”  E-mail to the author.  4 March 2006.

Boudicca: The Original Queen Bitch

Posted in Don't fuck with me--I'm a history major! with tags , , , , , , , , , on September 24, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

Boudicca     Boudicca’s statue, erected in 1902, stands across from the House of Parliament in London.  The image of the Iceni warrior queen, flanked by her two daughters, is a daily reminder to Britons of the ancient struggle between right and wrong, between freedom and oppression, between good and evil.  There has been much speculation about Queen Boudicca, as little is known to be accurate, but one thing is for sure:  she is a heroine, a fierce female leader who would stop at nothing to free the Celts from the authority of the Roman Empire.

 

     Boudicca’s revolt against the Romans ended in the defeat of her forces, and, probably, her suicide.  Can losing the greatest battle of one’s life still qualify one as a hero?  Does a hero take their own life, under any circumstances?  These are questions that have been asked of many leaders, ancient and modern, and I believe the answer is an unequivocal yes.  A hero is simply an individual who stands up for what is right, and does not compromise their principles, even if it means sacrificing their own life.  Facing obvious defeat, in some cases, they still press on to prove they are true to the cause.  Realizing that the end has come, seeing the destruction or failure of their fight, committing suicide is seen as noble and appropriate.  Using these criteria, Queen Boudicca was definitely a heroine to the Celtic people, and an inspiration to many in the modern era.

    

     Julius Caesar invaded what is now Great Britain in BC 55, and again the following year.  Six Celtic tribes, including the Iceni, submitted to Roman power at that time.  Upon departing the island, Caesar left the tribes to themselves, so he could focus on suppressing a potential uprising in Gaul.  The tribes began formal trade and relations with Roman Gaul that would have successfully and peacefully Latinized them, and would have made future occupation by Rome easy.  Caesar never returned to the British Isles, and the Celts were free of Roman influence on their own land for almost a century (members.tripod.com).

 

     Emperor Claudius invaded Britain once again, in AD 43.  At the time, the Celtic peoples had no centralized government.  There were many tribes, each with their own leaders and laws, and they often went to war with each other.  The Iceni tribe, of which Boudicca was a member, was ruled by Antedios when Roman forces entered their territory.  There was no formal armed resistance to Roman forces, and Antedios was recognized by Rome as being the official Iceni leader.  He was made a “client-king” of the Empire, meaning that he would serve Rome, but would be permitted to continue as ruler of the Iceni.  Rome gave the client-kings military protection, funding, education, employment, as well as slavery, serfdom, and suzerainty (members.tripod.com). 

 

     The Iceni were a prosperous, civilized tribe who lived in Norfolk and Suffolk in eastern Britain.  Trade flourished, as they controlled profitable sea routes along the coast, including the gold route which began in Ireland.  Diodurus Siculus wrote of the Iceni in the first century:

 

          They accumulate large quantities of gold and make use of it

          for personal adornment, not only the women but also the men…

          They wear a striking kind of clothing–tunics dyed and stained

          in various colours, and trousers…Their armour includes man-

          sized shields, decorated in individual pattern (mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk).

 

Frank Delaney described the Iceni as “a peacock people”, and called them “economically successful, enterprising and proud” (mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk).  These statements provide a picture of a cultured, sophisticated people, not dirty barbarians who were eager to risk their desperate lives to go to war for no good reason save a love of fighting.

 

     Boudicca was born into aristocracy around AD 30, and her birth name has been disputed for centuries.  She may have been called Boudiga by her followers, after the Celtic goddess of victory, which led to the Latinized Boadicea Victoria.  Boudicca married King Prasutagus in AD 48, and had two daughters.  When the King died circa AD 60, he willed half of his estate to his teenaged daughters, and the other half to Rome, now controlled by the Emperor Nero.

 

     It was, however, illegal under Roman law to will personal wealth to anyone other than the Emperor.  Prasutagus felt his decision would appease the Romans and keep his own kingdom and family in good standing.  Instead, Roman Procurator Decianus Catus and his soldiers came to collect all of the late King’s inheritance, enslaving many Iceni citizens, forcing others from their land, destroying their homes.  When Queen Boudicca protested, she was publicly flogged and her daughters were raped. 

 

     Boudicca was a powerful female, something the Romans could not accept.  Roman women were not citizens, whereas Celtic women were the equals of men, and often fought alongside them during war.  By publicly punishing the Queen for her insolence, and sexually assaulting her daughters, Rome was clearly trying to make an example of her.  Women should be kept in their place, the Romans thought, but Boudicca and her Celtic followers disagreed about where that place should be, and would show the Romans a thing or two about the power of female dominance. 

    

     Omens of Roman defeat began to appear both in Rome and Britain.  The statue of Victory in Camulodunum (Colchester), a symbol of the Roman Empire, fell to the ground with no provocation, its back turned as if running from the enemy; human bodies began to wash upon the shores of the island, and the waters had become blood -red; in Rome, voices could be heard screaming in the Senate; the image of a colony in ruins appeared on the water.  The great battle for Celtic independence was about to commence, and Boudicca’s charisma and anger fueled the masses.

 

     Dio Cassius, from whom we get much of our history of Boudicca, though he was Roman and lived a century after Boudicca’s demise, illustrates the image of the Warrior Queen Boudicca preparing for battle:

 

          She was huge of frame, terrifying of aspect, and with a harsh

          voice.  A great mass of bright red hair fell to her knees: she wore

          a twisted torc, and a tunic of many colours, over which was a

          thick mantle, fastened by a brooch.  Now she grasped a spear,

          to strike fear into all who watched her (mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk).

 

 

Surely, the thought of being defeated at the hands of a woman would be enough to make the average Roman cringe. 

 

     The exact numbers are unknown, but Boudicca is believed to have amassed an army of tens of thousands, rounding up the Iceni as well as other tribes like the Trinovantes.  The site of the first siege was Camulodunum (Colchester), where there was a colony of retired Roman officers and their families.  The men were unprepared for battle against such a force as Boudicca’s army of rebels.  They were easily defeated after only a few days of battle, as were the IX Legion Hispana, dispatched from the north to aid the veterans.     

 

     70,000 lives were lost at this battle.  But Boudicca was not satisfied just to have slaughtered all of Camulodunum’s inhabitants; she burned it to the ground, and then moved on to Londinium (London).

 

     Roman Governor Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, who had been fighting in the north Welsh territory, heard about the rebellion, and the Boudiccan advance toward Londinium.  Londinium was a town of business, not an important military post, and he quickly realized that it could not be defended, nor was it worth being defended against, the forces of Boudicca.  Tacitus explains the scene in his Annals:

 

          [H]e resolved to quit the station, and, by giving up one post,

          secure the rest of the province.  Neither supplications, nor the

          tears of the inhabitants could induce him to change his plans…

          All who chose to follow his banners were taken under his pro-

          tection.  Of all who…thought proper to remain behind, not one

          escaped the rage of the Barbarians (athenapub.com).

 

     Boudicca’s army subjected the people of Londinium to atrocities that shocked even the Romans.  Women were not spared; in fact, they seemed to have been targeted by Boudicca’s revenge.  Noblewomen were hung, their breasts were sliced off and sewn to their mouths.  Then they were impaled on skewers that ran the length of their bodies.  These do not appear to be the acts of a hero, especially a heroine like Boudicca who has been held up as a symbol of feminism and female superiority.  But many feel that such acts of horror may have been sacrifices to the Celtic patron goddess Andrasta, goddess of warriors, victory, battles and ravens.  Andrasta is known as “the invincible one”, and “she who has not fallen”.  Boudicca is said to have released a hare onto the field of her last battle, the hare being the symbol of Andrasta. 

    

 

     Londinium was burned so severely by Boudicca’s forces that its remains melted into a layer of clay ten inches thick, which can be seen just fifteen feet below the streets of present-day London.

 

     The rebels were now headed toward Verulamium (St. Albans), a city smaller than the tiny Camulodunum, and populated by Britons sympathetic to Rome.  Most citizens of Veralamium, having received word of Boudicca’s designs on their hometown, evacuated.  Boudicca killed those who remained, and turned the city into ashes.

 

     In the meantime, Paulinus was strategizing.  He had given up Londinium and Verulamium to focus on putting together a superior Roman army that would, for once and for all, suppress this Queen and her mass of Barbarians.   Paulinus knew that the Celts far outnumbered his troops, but he also realized that he had organization and armour on his side.  He found a spot in the midlands, likely near Watling Street, where the terrain would protect his men.  The soldiers in the rear were near the woods, and the flanks were close to defiles, meaning the Roman forces could not be surprise-attacked from any side.  They were ready to meet Boudicca head on.

 

     The tactics of the Celts, on the other hand, were far less organized.  Boastful of their recent victories, they sought to scare the enemy through wild screaming and motions, blowing trumpets to distract the Romans, and painting their faces and bodies with blue designs.  “They formed no regular line of battle,” Tacitus, tells us, as their forces were groups of varying size and leadership, not really fighting as a unified force. 

 

     Strangely enough, the Celts, expecting victory over the Roman oppressors, invited their families to watch the battle, bringing their wagons right to the edge of the field to give everyone a good view of the slaughter that was about to occur.  Some scholars believe that this may have been a subtle tactic to prevent the Romans from advancing past the battlefield, as women, children, livestock and property would be killed if they were to push forth. 

 

     The Romans expertly planned their intial battle stance.  The legionnaires stood in the center, flanked by auxiliary forces.  The cavalry stood firm on either side of the auxiliaries.  The idea was to form a wedge and move on the Celts in a precise fashion.  As Boudicca’s warriors began to throw their javelins, the Romans remained still–for the moment.  The Romans wanted to let the tribes exhaust themselves first, and then attack them ferociously.  The weaponry of the Romans, short swords and heavy shields, also gave them an advantage over the Celts, who fought with long swords and small, round shields (Santosuosso 137).

 

     The presence of so many noncombatants on the side of the Britons, combined with their lack of organization and inferior weapons, made it easy for the Romans to trap the soldiers and slaughter them all.  Boudicca’s rebellion had, in this final battle, failed; only 400 Romans died, and an equal amount suffered injury, compared to 80,000 British casualties (Santosuosso 137).      

 

     The only choice Queen Boudicca saw for herself was suicide.  After witnessing the brutalities of war, and the defeat of her Celtic warriors, the noblest choice, the only logical choice for her, was suicide.  I look at this as a classic “captain going down with the ship” mentality.  If  you can not lead your people to victory in the face of oppression, what other choice is there?  She was not a coward who tried to live in anonymity, and she did not wish to be subject to the wrath of the Romans, or to her fellow Celts whom she felt she had let down.  She did all she could do, and when that failed, she took her life.

 

     A great famine overtook the land after the defeat at the hands of the Roman Empire, as the warrior Celts had not planted their crops before heading out to battle, planning instead to capture Roman grains after their victory.  In addition, the Romans build drainage systems to pull water away from the soil, so the few farmers who had fertile land could not grow food.  Sanctuaries were desecrated, family treasures were looted, and weapons were taken from the Britons.  These were obviously measures of revenge ordered by Paulinus, but they resulted in a loss of tax revenue due the Roman Empire, and he was soon replaced as governor by Petronius Turpilianius, who ruled with a looser, and more humane, grip on the Britons.

    

     The legend of Boudicca has survived nearly 2,000 years, despite her defeat and eventual suicide.  The idea of Queen Boudicca as a heroine cannot be denied.  She may have been a Druid priestess, as some claim, explaining how she was able to muster such a large following and be so thorough in her destruction of three cities.  But this again begs the question, Can a true hero be capable of such destructive and cruel behaviour?  Can Boudicca be held up as a symbol of female leadership when she was responsible for the deaths of so many Romans, as well as so many of her fellow Celts?  Why should we admire a woman who massacred innocent people and burned their cities to the ground?

 

     One thing we can do is to look at her in the context of the times and the oppression the Britons faced.  The Romans were raping, pillaging and killing Britons.  Boudicca’s daughters were the rightful heiresses to the King’s estate, but they were ravaged by the Romans, and the Queen was publicly brutalized.  The Iceni had been cooperative up till then, as they had a prosperous lifestyle, and no reason to be belligerent.  Boudicca did what she had to do to remove the undesireable element–the Roman Empire–from her land, to reestablish the quality of life they had enjoyed for many years.  To fight a brutal force like the Romans, one can’t use sugar and spice and everything nice.  Boudicca believed in fighting fire with fire, and eye for an eye, so she had to one-up the Roman atrocities to prove her point.  And though her people suffered great losses and were bested by the Roman army, the final result was the removal of the provacateur Paulinus, and a ten-year halt to Roman miltarism.  Sometimes great losses are necessary to achieve a minor victory.

 

     There are many examples of heroes who have suffered defeat, but that does not diminish their stature, that does not negate the inspiration and the leadership they provided.  Standing up for what’s right, and not bowing down to anyone to make your life easier, these are what makes a hero.  Queen Boudicca was a fierce leader, a remarkable woman, and a heroine for all people fighting to keep their land and their freedom.

 

     Many stories have been told about Queen Boudicca, and her legend lives on the poems, novels, songs, and films.  We can never know the truth about her life and death, but we can look to her as a source of inspiration.  Anyone who ever felt wronged or subjugated can use Boudicca as an example of tremendous inner strength and determination.  Sure, she ultimately lost the battle, but the important thing is that she did what was right.  Queen Boudicca is a heroine, plain and simple. 

 

 

                                 Source Material

 

 

“Andrasta.”  freeyourmindproductions.  2 April 2006 <http://www.freeyourmind

   productions.com/forum/print thread.php?t=52>.

 

“Description by Tacitus of the Rebellion of Boudicca (AD 60-61).”  athenapub.

   Athena Review, Vol.1, No. 1.  24 March 2006 <http://www.athenapub.com/

   tacitus1.htm>.

 

Goldsworthy, Adrian.  The Complete Roman Army.  London: Thames & Hudson,

   2003.

 

James, Simon.  The World of the Celts.   London: Thames & Hudson, 1993.

 

Parsons, Cecilia.  “Boudicca.”  wanadoo.  July 2004.  Wanadoo.  24 March 2006

  < http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/parsonal/boudicca.htm>.

 

Santosuosso, Antonio.  Storming the Heavens.  Boulder: Westview Press, 2001.

 

“The Iceni.”  Roman-Britain.  21 March 2006.  Roman-Britain.ORG.  24 March

   2006 < http://www.roman-britain.org/tribes/iceni.htm>.

 

Wilson, S.  “Boadicea.”  tripod.  24 March 2006 <http://members.tripod.com/

   ~ancient_history/boad.html>.

Stereotypes can be comforting

Posted in Freelancin' and Whatnot, Random Shit with tags , , , , , , , , on September 20, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

     Stereotypes can be comforting.  They reassure us that what we know about the world, good or bad,  is accurate.  Every culture has stereotypes formed about them, and they form their own about other cultures.  We often think that if we credit a certain group with some positive traits, that the stereotype can’t be so bad. We can says that Jews are good with money, blacks are great athletes, and Italians love to cook.  But it’s not always easy being trapped in other people’s ideas about how you live.

 

     Steven R. Schirripa, “Bobby Bacala” from The Sopranos, has written several hilarious books that celebrate Italian-American stereotypes.  A Goomba’s Guide to Life and The Goomba’s Book of Love are witty and lighthearted looks at growing up and living la vita italiano-americano.  And it’s fun to read about “Goomba Heroes” (Joe DiMaggio, Dean Martin, and, of course, Frank Sinatra), “The Things a Goomba Can’t Resist” (gambling, dressing sharp, gold jewelry), and “Mob Slang”. 

 

     I, for one, have always loved Italian-American culture, and have happily bought into the stereotypes of big Sunday dinners, mobsters in the family, and a pictures of the Pope around the house.  It’s fun to believe that all Italian-Americans live that way.  Why?  There are so many great movies that show us how they live, so many spot-on characterizations of  family life that look so fun and exotic and unlike how many Heinz 57-Americans live their lives.  Goodfellas has lots of great cooking scenes; my favourite is when they are in jail, and they’re getting all that great salami and prosciutto and wine and bread for their elaborate Italian meals, slicing the garlic with a razor blade so it’s thin enough to liquefy in the pan with just a little oil.  The wedding scene in The Godfather with music and lots of food and drinking, everything looking so perfect and Italian.  And, of course, Saturday Night Fever, which shows working-class goombas in Brooklyn who don’t do much but chase girls and go to the disco.

 

     My Big Fat Greek Wedding is a film that has some stereotypical elements to it.  I am Serbian, not Greek, but it’s so much fun to watch something like that which so closely portrays a culture very similar to mine.  I can point to it and say, “My family’s just like that!”  And though many Italian-Americans resent the way they have been portrayed on TV and in the movies–that they are all spaghetti-eating, gold chain-wearing, goomar-having Mafiosi–the majority of them embrace it.  The first time I went to Cleveland’s Little Italy, I saw so much Sopranos merchandise!  And every store seemed to have Sinatra playing, and sold 8x10s of Ol’ Blue Eyes.  It was fun for me, since I was shopping for an Italian-American guy I liked, and knew he would appreciate something stereotypical.

 

     Were You Always an Italian? is Maria Laurino’s memoir of growing up on the wrong side of the social tracks in Short Hills, New Jersey, in the 1970s.  In the chapter entitled “Scents”, she opens by saying:

I can still remember the day when my ethnicity no longer felt like the tag line of my narrative, reluctantly affixed  to my American self, but instead signified an inescapable me. (16)

 

In gym class, a pretty blonde girl asked if Maria had been shopping at Saks Fifth Avenue recently.  Maria said she had.  The blonde girl saw her there, and told her mother, “That’s the smelly Italian girl who stands in front of me in gym class.”  Maria did not know what to say, so she just stood there, in silence, as the girl continued to speak.  It was then that she realized what a stereotype was, and how hurtful it could be.  Instead of fighting back, however, young Maria decided she no longer wanted to be Italian.

 

     She longed to fit in, to be a normal American girl and eat normal American food–and to have a normal American name.  She asked her mother why she named her Maria instead of Mary.  “Why didn’t you change our last name to Laurin?” she wanted to know, thinking that getting rid of that “o” would make her less obviously Italian. 

 

I have come to hate the books and documentaries about the ‘Italian-American experience’, full of treacly discussions of food and family, describing ‘the beautiful song’ of our heritage, those snapshots of golden days forever gone.  (30)

 

Saying that Italian-Americans have a unique heritage, and that they learned about self-sacrifuce and respect for the family–Laurino finds it almost offensive to act as if no other ethnic groups love family life and their national histories.  She calls this the “myth of the italiano”.

 

     Laurino addresses the love-hate relationship some prominent Italian-Americans have with stereotypes.  When Rudolph Giuliani was inaugurated for the second time as Mayor of New York City, he screened The Godfather for his friends, calling the film his all-time favourite. 

 

     Mario Cuomo, as the first Italian-American New York governor, chose to distance himself from such images.  Cuomo and his wife were invited to the Godfather premiere by then-New York City Mayor John Lindsay, in an effort to get him to join the administration.  When Cuomo pointed out that Don Corleone was a murderer, a criminal, Lindsay replied simply with, “Oh, it’s only a movie, you’re too sensitive.”

 

     Cuomo was famous for using ethnic nostalgia and family stories in his speeches, and did it better than anyone.  But his version of personal narrative came from a place other than the established vision of Italian-American history.  He is a family man, not because he is of Italian descent, but because he was raised to be so. 

 

     The title of this book comes from Cuomo’s own lips.  He was sitting for an interview with Laurino, and casually asked the question, “Were you always an Italian?”  Laurino shook her head no.  “I know all about ethnic self-hate,” he admitted.  Cuomo grew up surrounded by Irish-Americans, and felt like an outsider.  Upon finishing law school, he was encouraged by his dean to change his name to try to get a job on Wall Street.  He loves telling the story, imagining out loud how people would react to him being introduced as an uber-WASP.  “Hi, I’m Mark Conrad,” he jokes.  “I play tennis.  I play golf.” 

 

     Young Maria was not always alone in her fear of being seen as a “smelly Italian”.  In the “Clothes” chapter, she writes about her aunt and mother dressing her at different periods of her life.  Her aunt, a flamboyant widow in her forties, dressed her until she was about ten years old.  Her mother, subtle and simple, took over from ten till about thirty. 

 

     Her mother was most afraid of looking gavone, the dialect word derived from the Italian cafone, which means an ignorant person.  In dialect, it is used to indicate a low-class person.  Gavone is gaudy and colorful, and what many Italian-Americans considered sexy.  But to be called gavone was not a compliment.  And Maria’s mother did not want her to be looked at as many outsiders viewed all Italian-Americans–outrageous, loud, and tacky.  She knew that, to fit in and be successful, to be American, one must leave behind the Italian stereotype of the gavone.  A confusing message from her mother, who tried to preserve their traditions, except the ones considered low-class.

    

     On the other side of the coin, there are those Italian-Americans who see themselves as the stereotypes, who proudly emulate Tony Manero in Saturday Night Fever or Jake LaMotta in Raging Bull.  Laurino poses the question:

After years of television and movie portrayals, does Hollywood imitate life or did the mobster and the cugine adopt the traits of their fictional counterparts, mimicking the language and characteristics that have been assigned to Italian-Americans responding to an offer that they cannot well refuse?  (140)

 

Saturday Night Fever was based on a magazine article called “Tribal Rights of the New Saturday Night”, written by Nik Cohn.  Years after the film had become a classic, the story was revealed to be completely fictional.  But the Tony Manero character struck a nerve with Americans, Italian or not.  Kind of a dim bulb, but a sweetheart deep down, his hirsute Italian chest holding safely the cross that hangs from the golden chain around his neck, brushing his hair for hours until he gets it just right, admiring the Al Pacino poster that looks over his shoulder as he admires himself in the mirror–this figure is, according to Laurino, “how people want to see Italian-Americans, and how many Italian-American young men wish to see themselves.”

 

     But the theme of Fever is about escaping the depressing, working-class life Tony and his family and friends feel trapped in.  When Tony is dancing, he feels like he’s really doing something, and he knows he can get out of Brooklyn.  He is intrigued by the life that Stephanie, a secretary, has made for herself.  She has gotten out of the Brooklyn mentality, and is going to move to Manhattan.  The movie ends with Tony’s dark subway ride from Brooklyn taking him to a bright new future.

 

     Laurino’s epiphany came from her trip to Rome in 1981.  She began the odyssey with the idea that “Italy meant fried dough and little ladies dressed in black”.  But after that first day, after she allowed herself to open up to be overwhelmed by Rome’s beauty and culture, she felt right at home.  She began to travel the Eternal City once a year, emerging herself in all things Italian: café life, open-air museums, outdoor markets, watching stylish Italians just walking around and being Italian.  She wanted to finally learn the language, she wanted the identity she had been running from since that day in the gym so many years ago when she was called “that smelly Italian girl”. 

 

     “Finally,” she writes, “I had awoken to the beauty of my homeland…How could I have been embarrassed about my heritage if these were my roots?”  But Rome was not where her roots lay.  Her family was from southern Italy, the Mezzogiorno, and life there was far different than in the north.  After traveling to Milan as a new mother, and not feeling as young and glamorous as she had on trips past, she realized that she did not need to have exotic roots.  “One’s origins are not romantic,” she says.  “Like the act of birth, they’re merely the seeds of the life we’re given–messy, tumultuous, mundane.” 

 

     Laurino visited her ancestral homeland in Conza, and realized the depth of her connection to the past, to this land she had been afraid, and unwilling, to visit for so many years.  “We may think that we are modern creatures, but who isn’t linked in some way to tribal rituals, ancient customs?”  No matter how American she had become, nothing could erase her roots. 

 

     “I am part of a past.”  Simple.  Eloquent.  Heartfelt.  Maria Laurino concludes her story with these words that all children of immigrants come to realize at some point in their lives.  There is always a struggle between holding onto the past and venturing into the future.  It doesn’t have to be that way.  Things evolve, some ideas and traditions may fade, but the essence of who we are is always rooted in the past.

 

     It’s hard enough to make your way through the world when the larger culture has certain fixed ideas about who you are supposed to be.  But when those negative images are turned inward, or when those stereotypes are embraced and perpetuated by members of the subculture, it makes it even more difficult to find a real identity, as a person, and as a group.  I am certainly guilty of being infatuated with Italian-American stereotypes.  I love The Godfather (its theme is the ring tone on my cell phone) and Goodfellas, and my favourite TV show is Growing Up Gotti.  And I must admit my disappointment when I meet Italian-Americans who don’t listen to Dean Martin and know their mother’s secret ingredient for Sunday gravy. 

 

     I loved Were You Always an Italian? because it is an honest account of a woman’s struggle with identity.  Even if you don’t come from an ethnic family, there are still underlying themes everyone can relate to.  In the end, Maria Laurino discovers her appreciation for the Italian-American heritage she had tried to escape.  Despite the images people have of what it means to be Italian in America, she figured out for herself what it was all about.  When one looks inward, and looks to the past, one can find all the answers. 

 

     Now it’s time to watch My Cousin Vinny.

 

 

(Winner of the 2006 Italian American Cultural Foundation Essay Contest.  Originally published in Voices in Italian Americana, Volume 17 Number 2 2006   http://qcpages.qc.cuny.edu/calandra/bordighera/books/voices/index.htm)

Do not force others to adopt your views

Posted in All the News That's Fit to Blog, Namaste, bitches! with tags , , , , , , , , on September 16, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

Thich Nhat Hanh Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education.  However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrowness.

…It is the spirit of free inquiry.  I think Westerners can accept this, because you understand it.  If you can find a way to organize it globally, it will be a happy event for the world.

The Wisdom of Thich Nhat Hanh

 

Thinking about all the mudslinging, protests, and general negativity involved in political and social discourse in this country, this quote shows the faith that Thich Nhat Hanh has in us to work through our differences in a more compassionate, rational fashion.  It doesn’t seem possible to have a meaningful discussion with people who yell at the president in the middle of an address to a joint session of Congress, citizens who scream words like socialist and Nazi to those who believe in health care for everyone, or religious zealots who shout homophobic slurs at funerals of those who die of AIDS.  Those who engage in such behaviour are not interested in getting others to understand their ideas, they just want to be the loudest and get the most attention.  They are not interested in dialogue.  They are not interested in democracy.  They use scare tactics, they use controversy, and they don’t care who they hurt.  The thing is, those who behave like that are really hurting their cause–and themselves. 

Teaching our children to be compassionate, free-thinking, decent people should be an easy enough concept for everyone to wrap their heads around.  But so many people raise their kids to be mini-me, clones of everything they think and do, instead of being proud that they are just good people who have the ability to reason and make independent decisions that might be the opposite of what their parents think.  You certainly instill your views in your children, but more importantly what I think is essential is to make sure that they can think for themselves.  I certainly hope my kids don’t grow up to believe in everything I stand against (homophobia, racism, misogyny, Republicanism, etc.), but I want them to think reasonably about society’s issues, I want them to research and come to their opinions in an intelligent fashion.  I hope that everyone does these things instead of forming their political and life’s philosophies from Sarah Palin’s Facebook page, Glenn Beck’s crappy TV show, or Heidi Montag’s endorsements (extra points for you if you have no idea who Heidi Montag is!). 

Only through compassionate dialogue can we really make any change.  We have to resolve to be happy and peaceful in our own minds before we can conduct ourselves with compassion and respect for others and their views.  In recent weeks, I have had many debates with friends and strangers over various political and social issues, and sometimes the discussion got ugly, though not with those I actually knew.  I don’t want to have knock-down, drag-out fights with anyone, really, but especially not with those whom I call friends.  But at least the friends I have argued with know what they are talking about, their arguments have been based on fact and not simple passion.  I have tried to explain why I think the way I do to those whom I do not know personally, but they usually resorted to name-calling when confronted with the facts.  Not knowing these people all I have to go on is what they said and the way they said it.  I can come across as a know-it-all, condescending, and holier-than-thou, and I am aware of that.  Sometimes people do not use the rights words when they present their argument, they do not have any facts to back them up, and they just seem angry at the world more than anything.  It’s difficult to reason with people like that sometimes, and I can’t usually contain myself when correcting their bad grammar and spelling and their lack of evidence.  I never call anyone names, I never assume anything about them.  I try to be reasonable with them, but I don’t usually get that in return.  I am not trying to get them to change their opinion, necessarily, but I am really trying to understand their argument.  Unless I understand someone’s argument I cannot say whether I agree or not.  Not everyone is very articulate, but that does not mean they cannot get their point across in an effective manner.    

I’m not sure about the education part of this quote, unless he is referring to schools that indoctrinate children into believing in a particular political or religious view.  Education can mean many things, but if he’s referring to formal education then I agree.  But you have to educate your children, you have to educate others around you about issues about which you care deeply that they may have no idea about.  But we must be careful about how we present our views sometimes, because what we may see as sharing a simple opinion may be seen by others as forcing our ideas on them.  Compassionate dialogue is a wonderful concept.  I am extremely passionate about my views and try to get others to understand, but that is different from trying to get everyone to think like me (though I’m not always sure that that would be such a bad thing!).  The fanaticism and narrowness which are in such abundant supply in 2009 America are startling, but in a democracy are things we must work through as individuals committed to compassionate dialogue that is based on respect for others and the good of all. 

I’ve been Spangled!

Posted in About DanapronouncedDonna, Cleveburg Rocks!, Freelancin' and Whatnot, Random Shit with tags , , , , , , , , on September 10, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

Emerald GoddessI’m excited to have been asked by Spangle Magazine to contribute to their My Town section.  The photos I took represent what Cleveland is to me, so there’s lots of food and pictures of the city and lake.  Be sure to check it out:  http://www.spanglemagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=331:my-town-dana-aritonovich&catid=42:frontpage-jumps&Itemid=87

Meaningless knowledge

Posted in All the News That's Fit to Blog, Namaste, bitches! with tags , , , , , , , , on September 4, 2009 by danapronounceddonna

For as long as a fool displays meaningless knowledge, it will fall back on his head to destroy what goodness he has.

Buddha, speaking in the Bamboo Grove, from the Dhammapada

 

This quote reminds me of all the blathering idiots who are yellin’ and screamin’  and callin’ President Obama a socialist/communist/Nazi/Muslim/immigrant.  They have no evidence of their claims yet they shout loudly enough so that their voices are heard over those who speak reasonably.  It is an exciting time to be an American, but also one of the most ridiculous times in our nation’s history.

 

Ugh.  Well, God bless America!  At least these assholes have the right to say the stupid shit they say.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 202 other followers