advertisement
advertisement
|
Friday, March 14, 2008
Quinn’s Domestic Violence Bill Makes More New Yorkers Safe
TO THE EDITORS:
Re: “Domestic Violence Bill Would Help N.Y.C Gay Couples” (New York Blade online, Thursday, March 6):
The New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project applauds the coverage of this very important bill. We are heartened that Speaker Christine Quinn, Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly have all worked to try to ensure greater protection for survivors of domestic violence.
The briefing that Speaker Quinn held on Thursday, March 6, was enlightening and helped to clarify several questions that arose when the bill was first made public. We look forward to further discussions with the Speaker and her staff regarding the bill.
On this front, we would also like to make a clarifying statement regarding whom the bill covers. In the story, it was stated that “The bill excludes those who haven’t lived together, who are not domestic partners and who are younger than 18.” The Domestic Violence Civil Protection Act will cover those who are not domestic partners if they have lived together or live together currently.
It cannot be overstated that Speaker Quinn’s willingness to go as far as possible through the city government to protect survivors of domestic violence is a sign of tremendous support to survivors and those who work in the anti-domestic violence field. Speaker Quinn’s amazing determination to make a strong statement in support of domestic violence survivors speaks volumes regarding her commitment to New Yorkers. I hope that other legislators will follow her lead in her efforts to end domestic violence and to keep New Yorkers safe.
KIM FOUNTAIN
Deputy Director, Regional and National Programs, New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project
Editor’s note: We updated our web story on March 7 not only to clarify the misleading information but also to include current information about Quinn’s bill. You can read the story here.
Column on Slain Teen was Trans-phobic
TO THE EDITORS:
Re: “Death by homophobia” (op-ed by Paul Varnell, March 7)
Paul Varnell claims that 15-year-old Lawrence King was gay and that he was misguided because he “dressed in a way that he knew created a hostile reaction.” (King was shot to death while at school.)
This is a clear example of gay denial and blaming the victim.
Blaming the victim for dressing in a provocative way sounds familiar—it’s used in rape trials. Because “King was reportedly living in a foster home for abused children," and therefore was likely not in any kind of counseling, the columnist asks, "What advice would you have given young King?"
Maybe, get some counseling? The writer further reveals his trans-phobia in this statement:
"Part of the problem is that King was apparently acting out his understanding of what it means to be gay. But I cannot think of any gay man I know who dresses in high-heeled boots, jewelry, painted fingernails and makeup. Where did King get the idea that that is the way to express being gay? You have to wonder if the gay community’s lionizing of drag queen entertainers promotes that perception.”
Varnell is so trans-phobic that he denies the obvious evidence that King was transgender by suggesting that the solution was to intervene and “teach” this youth the error of his ways in dressing. Are you vomiting yet?
Just because someone proclaims that they are gay, apparently makes it so, but the act of "dressing" in the "risky" manner of feminine attire and accouterments does not indicate that one may be transgender? Why does Varnell so easily condemn the behavior of dressing as a trans person as risky?
Gay-Straight Alliances are for more than just gays. I suppose you are next going to explain how transgender people had nothing to do with Stonewall, despite the fact that it was started by trans people in response to police harassment and quickly joined by gay organizations as allies.
Have you ever heard of the acronym “LGBT”? That "T" stands for transgender. Trans people commonly dress in the attire that matches their identity regardless of their birth gender. (Just trying to help out, here!)
I would think that The Washington Blade is owed a refund of whatever it paid to this trans-phobic writer.
LEIGH SMYTHE
Minneapolis
McCain Panders to Anti-gay Religious Right
TO THE EDITORS:
Re: “In defense of John McCain” (op-ed by Scott Tucker, March 07)
I have lost all respect for Sen. John McCain. He correctly called Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson "agents of intolerance" in 2000. I voted for McCain back then in the Republican primary in Florida. (I am a registered Democrat today. I switched parties because the Republican Party has become so old-fashioned, intolerant and anti-gay and because Bush is a disastrous president.)
Some months ago, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” when asked by Tim Russert if he still thought Falwell was an agent of intolerance, McCain replied "no." McCain has shown himself to be just another politician. I hope he doesn't win.
He also supported an anti-gay amendment in Arizona last year. Luckily, the people of Arizona voted down this anti-gay amendment. Shame on Sen. McCain for supporting this amendment! He was obviously pandering to the intolerant, anti-gay religious right.
On gay-related issues, McCain is very bad. He has pandered to the religious right to get their votes. He opposes the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. He is against gay inclusion in the federal hate crimes bill. He is against gays serving their country openly in the military.
McCain is wrong on every gay-related issue except the anti-gay federal marriage amendment, which he opposes because he feels this is a states-rights issue. I will not vote for John McCain.
PEDRO A. ROMANACH
Miami
|
