An open letter for our congress critters

Dear US Senators and Representatives,

Well, now it looks like HR 4970 may be advancing to be voted on next week. This is the House version of VAWA that strips away the provisions for LGBTQ, Native, and immigrant survivors. Let me ask you just one request:

For the real VAWA, please stand up! I do not want this to be the version that passes for the sake of being "bipartisan." Don't gamble with people's safety and well being.

Please don't divide the issue. We're talking about women's lives here, and we have to care about all the women's lives.

Thanks,

Revel

I'm talking about lives here

As a crisis worker and a feminist and as a human being in general, I am really getting riled up over this whole "debate" over reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Well, actually, I am really quite happy for the bipartisan support it's received in the Senate. The Senate version is designed to help victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, and this one even includes provisions for helping LGBTQ survivors, Native women, and undocumented women. How's that for helping some vulnerable groups? I have worked with women who are undocumented, and many of them really fear that they will be deported if they report their abuse. The new VAWA will help them get a visa if their abuser is the primary immigrant. And the LGBTQ provision is also quite needed, as gays and lesbians and trans folks are unfortunately a high-risk group for violent crimes. I am glad that our Senators chose to include them to make this bill super-comprehensive.

In the House, though, is a whole different story and a much uglier one. My dentist is probably going to tell me my bruxism has gotten a million times worse, but how can it not, with all the teeth grinding I've been doing over this issue? The House, which is controlled by Republicans, is really not at all cooperative. They've been trying to block passage of VAWA, and now that they know they're not going to get away with it, they're drafting up a new version of it. One, specifically, that will strip away those provisions to help undocumented women, Native women, and LGBTQ survivors. I mean, what is this?? Preventing violence against women should mean protecting all the women, not just those you deem acceptable! To make matters even scarier, an undocumented survivor would be at risk for having her abuser know that she's applied for a temporary visa. Now how does that help her? That's only going to exacerbate the abuse! And the LGBTQ community is still targeted for hate crimes. Where does that leave a lesbian survivor or a transgender individual needing assistance?

I am really praying this House version of VAWA does not become the one that's up for a vote, as I really don't think it's right that certain individuals' rights and safety become a political football. This reminds me a lot of the passage of the Affordable Care Act. Though I was really happy that so many Americans would get healthcare, I was enraged that it had to codify the oh so odious Hyde Amendment to do so. It felt like a Pyrrhic victory almost, at least for women. Why should our rights to reproductive healthcare be considered acceptable to trade away? Why is it that we have to "wait our turn"? Now, with the House refusing to re-authorize VAWA with its new provisions, it really worries me that re-authorization may come on the backs of groups that are already vulnerable. Haven't survivors from these groups suffered enough? It's bad enough to be discriminated against, as well as being a survivor of abuse. But to be at further risk or with inadequate services available? I can't imagine what that feels like. I can't speak for those groups. I can only speak for me, but I am really hoping this is not the trade-off we must strike.

I'm tired of trading away people's rights in the name of bipartisanship. Like my comment on the Affordable Care Act, these are people's whole lives we are talking about. We can't play games with people's lives. Yes, it's easy to say no federal funds will pay for abortion services...when you're not the low-income woman facing an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. I'm sure it's also easy to be okay with stripping protections for these survivors as well...when you're not the rape or domestic violence victim with nowhere to go and facing huge discrimination. I really hope (and will be sending my letters and emails!) that the Senate does the right thing and sticks to their own version of the bill. We can't divide the issue and give protections only to those we like. If we truly believe in our country as "the land of the free and home of the brave," we need to understand that freedom has to mean freedom for everyone.

An open letter for Gary Trudeau

Dear Gary,

You. Are. Awesome.

And by that, I mean completely awesome.

I think it's way too bad that people are censoring your Doonesbury series about the new restrictions on reproductive freedom. As a woman living day in and day out in this culture, I find it to be totally ridiculous that I and my sisters are expected to just sit back and put up with all these scary restrictions on our own healthcare that will affect our lives...but a cartoon disagreeing with this (and drawn by a man, no less!) has to be censored so as not to hurt the feelings of the males who came up with these scary restrictions. Where is the logic in this? People like me have to sit back and have a transvaginal sonogram if we are seeking an abortion or be called sluts if we are sexually active, but the men (who will not be pregnant) who created these laws are offended by a comic strip about this? I have had enough of this!

But you know what, Gary? As my way of saying thanks for your art, I'm going to be a friend for you. I'm going to do my little part in making sure more people see what you intended, rather than the censored strips. So Revel readers, make sure you take a look: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/03/13/new-media-rule-107-censorship-has-opposite-desired-effect. Today for me, tomorrow for you, as Angel from Rent would say.

So thanks, Gary. This revel is grateful. And I hope you don't have any more inspiration for similar strips, as all the restrictions on reproductive freedoms are really scaring me.

Your friend,

Revel

Fired up!

Fired up ain't gonna take it no more
Tied up ain't gonna take it no more
You say cool down, we say step down
You're breaking my mother's heart

Fired up ain't gonna take it no more
Tied up ain't gonna take it no more
You say cool down, we say step down
You're breaking my mother's heart

Children need schools more than they need jails
That's where our society fails
First seven years creates the child's foundation
Mandatory for a healthy nation

How could we forget that the children come first
We left them alone and they died of thirst
Mothers and fathers confused and forlorn
When the children are missing there's something wrong

Can't just focus on kids with wealth
Can't pick and choose who gets the health care
Take an honest look at the great divide
Looks dangerously similar to genocide

Fired up ain't gonna take it no more
Tied up ain't gonna take it no more
You say cool down, we say step down
You're breaking my mother's heart

Shame shame!

Ain't gonna take it no more
Tied up ain't gonna take it no more
You say cool down, we say step down
You break another mother's heart

Performed by Holly Near. I love how she sang at the very first Take Back the Night on the back of a big truck.

What does it take?

I have time on my hands. Well, I would've spent the time doing other things, but considering that I am currently waiting to hear back about a repair I need, I figure I will fill that time. So I figure I will discuss something that's been eating at me for quite a while.

As a crisis worker, I hear a LOT of difficult and traumatic stories. I'm trained to do this, and frankly, I've come to see it as a privilege that people I haven't met are trusting me with their stories. That is not easy for them to do. Additionally, as a crisis worker, I try to work for social service and social change. While it's important to treat a problem, it's also important to consider why that problem even exists and what can be done about it.

Recently, I learned that a student at a local high school in a very affluent community was very brutally attacked and left for dead a couple of months ago. The story broke all over the papers, and I really felt awful for the young woman and what she's been through. I've spoken to many people from this community, and they've had a lot of questions for me about how they can talk to their kids and families about what happened. I'm glad there's some sort of a dialogue about this--frankly, I think our silence on these issues allows them to foster and go unreported. It just makes me angry that a very highly publicized and very horrific case is what spurred this community into awareness and action. I cannot and will not discuss specific client cases due to confidentiality, but I do know that this one case is one drop in a pretty enormous bucket of survivors in this particular town. Just because the town is so wealthy and well-off does not make it crime-free.

But that got me thinking...what does it take to move people to action? The realization that yes, this could happen to them, in their community? The realization that no matter how much you do to "reduce your risk," the only thing that will reduce your risk of rape is to never be around a rapist in the first place?? (Yes, I'm playing Alex the Advocate here. Can't turn that off!) Why is it that a particularly horrific and publicized event gets people talking and mobilized, yet the cases that happen daily warrant no attention?

I don't know the answers to these questions. Not now, with too much caffeine in my system and too little sleep. I guess I will close with a quote from the divine Cherie Moraga. Read it and think about it in the context of this entry. This is from her poem, "What Does It Take?" from her amazing book Loving in the War Years:
If they took you,
I would take to the streets
scream, BLOODY MURDER.

What does it take to move me?
your death
that I have ignored
in the deaths of other women?

Isn't the possibility
of your dying
enough?

I love that poem, but I think it's applicable for here. Why does this one story get everyone fired up, but not the thousands of others? And like Ms. Moraga mentioned, isn't the possibility that it could happen bad enough? I guess now that they are fired up, I hope this momentum lasts.

Don't Ask Don't Tell, don't come back!

Don't Ask Don't Tell is officially over!

All I will say on this most happy and historical day is that I hope that terrible law never, ever, ever comes back!

Although I am something of a pacifist and although I do wish that the DADT repeal also included a non-discrimination clause and protections for transgender men and women serving in the armed forces (I'm all about equality for everybody, not just a few), I am really happy to see this inhumane and discriminatory law gone and finally relegated to the dustbin of history. Nobody should ever have to hide who they are to serve our country.

It's your choice

Well, now I am done posting lyrics to one obscure song (listen to the cover of it though!) and one big classic (listen to the original!). I'm ready to talk about an issue that has really been on my mind all throughout 2011.

I've really come down to a simple conclusion on a lot of social issues. You can't call yourself a progressive and say that you support the empowerment of different groups unless you promote everyone's equal access to them. I'm talking to the progressive governor or member of Congress who decides to slash funding for social services for the poor and downtrodden (while they enjoy a hundred-dollar-a-plate fundraising dinner). I'm meaning the "pro-choice" president or congressperson who decides to vote for a law restricting abortion access in the name of "bipartisanship" (in particular if they're cisgender men and cannot get pregnant). I'm also criticizing the hetero politician who says that of course they're an ally for the LGBT community because they support civil unions rather than full-on marriage.

Now do any of these examples sound at all like allies or as if they believe in the positions they supposedly espouse? Not at all! And I'm not just talking about politicians either (though many of them have recently drawn my ire). I'm also talking to the lay folk who back down as soon as possible when they feel as though others don't share their belief.* It's just so ridiculous. If you support something, and if you call yourself a progressive/liberal/some other varient, you have to support equal access to it. Progressivism is about equality.

*A quick word. If it's not safe to do so, you don't have to be all vocal about your beliefs. I can understand if you're worried about your own personal safety and well-being. However, if the situation poses no danger or risk to you (like a conversation or something), the most progressive thing would be to say what you believe. Not cover it up or act like it's something only people like you should have.

It Won't Take Long

They said some men would be warriors,
and some men would be kings.
And some men would be owners of land
and other man-made things.
And false love as the eternal flame
would move some to think in rings.
And gold would be our power
and other foolish things.

But you who dream of liberty
must not yourselves be fooled.
Before you get to plead for freedom,
you have agreed to being ruled.
If the body stays a shackle,
then the mind remains a chain
That'll link you to a destiny
whereby all good souls are slain.

And it won't take long,
it won't take too long at all
It won't take long, and you may say
"What has that got to do with me?"
and I say "You mean to tell me that's all?"

Of three men in a desert wandering,
one is knowing and two are scared.
They say time is in the river,
but the river is not there.
Dry in spirit, dry in body
two will lend themselves to death
And in grief one weeps into his hands
and drinks his bitter tears

'Cause it don't take long,
it don't take too long at all
It don't take long, and you may say,
"I don't know what you're talking about,"
and I say "You mean to tell me that's all?"

And as I stand before you now,
I am hopeful in my rage
You know love has finally called for me,
I will not wilt upon its stage
But still smaller than my nightmare
do I print upon the page
Do we have to live inside its walls
to identify the cage?

'Cause it takes so long,
why does it take so long,
But it takes so long, and you may say,
"I don't really care what you're talking about,"
and I say, "Are you trying to say you don't belong?"

I am my mother's daughter,
but I have seen myself in you
It's this blessing that I follow now,
and so I must speak true
I dreamed of thousands dying,
it was you and you and you,
And while the city sleeps so quietly
there is something we must do

And it wont' take long,
it won't take too long at all,
It won't take long, and you may say,
"I don't know if I wanna know what you're getting at,"
and it makes me wanna say, "So long."

Because grief will come in measures,
only grief alone will know
And you'll see it on your family,
on your own face it will grow
And they'll try to keep you hungry,
then they'll tell you to eat snow
You know pride can be a moving thing
if we learn the strength of "NO!"

And it won't take long,
it won't take too long at all,
It won't take long, and you may say,
"I don't think this has anything to do with me,"
"But did you ever think you could be wrong?"

At noon on one day coming,
human strength will fill the streets
Of every city on our planet,
hear the sound of angry feet
With business freezed up in the harbour,
the kings will pull upon their hair
And the banks will shudder to a halt,
and the artists will be there

'Cause it won't take long,
it won't take too long at all,
It won't take long, and you may say,
"I don't think I can be a part of that,"
and it makes me want to say,
"Don't you want to see yourself that strong?"

Division between the peoples
will disappear that honoured day
And though oceans lie between us,
lifted candles light the way
Half will join their hands by moonlight,
the rest under a rising sun
As underneath the sun and moon,
a ritual'd wailing has begun.

And it won't take long,
it won't take too long at all,
It won't take long, and you may say,
"I don't know how to be a part of what you're talking about,"
and it makes me want to say, "Come on! Come on!"

And beware you sagging diplomats,
for you will not hear one gun
And though our homes be torn
and ransacked we will not be undone
For as we let ourselves be bought,
we're gonna let ourselves be free
And if you think we stand alone,
look again and you will see:

We are children in the rafters,
We are babies in the park,
We are lovers at the movies,
We are candles in the dark,
We are changes in the weather,
We are snowflakes in July,
We are women grown together,
We are men who easily cry,
We are words not quickly spoken,
We're the deeper side of try,
We are dreamers in the making,
We are not afraid of "Why?

Performed by Ferron
Improved incredibly by the Indigo Girls

I love this poetical, powerful, nine minute song. It never fails to get me really inspired and pumped up, and on days when I'm feeling unsure, it gets me back to my kickass self. Consider it an acoustical form of audio caffeine. And my coloring of the words is intentional. Right now I'm kind of in need of some audio caffeine.

I need to move forward. In the end, that's really all I can do. And though we certainly don't have to live inside its walls to identify the cage, that doesn't mean we can't break the damn cage and move on.

Happy Pride Month!

Well, this is surely a wonderful piece of news...

On the 42nd anniversary of the Stonewall Riots* that got the whole gay liberation movement started off, marriage equality is finally the law in New York! (Which is the same place the riots occurred and got the ball rolling.)

This is the biggest state where this has happened, and I'm super-excited for my sisters and brothers in the Big Apple. Let's hope ALL the other states follow soon, or better yet, that DOMA is finally repealed so we all can enjoy equal marriage rights!!

In memoriam

Although the shocking news about Tyler Clementi's suicide broke last week, I've been feeling an overwhelming sense of anger and emotional draining over it. I did not know Mr. Clementi personally, nor did I know the other LGBT students who have taken their lives as a result of bullying. But as an ally and as a person who believes in the dignity of everybody, I feel compelled to write about it.

I can't get over how people seem to think that bullying and harrassment is somehow OK, as long as it's directed at certain individuals and groups. I just don't understand who decides which people somehow aren't deserving of basic human dignity, and I don't understand how that sort of nonsense just is perpetuated. What is it that marks one group an easy target and another off limits? What is it that gives people the feeling that they can do something this cruel?

Part of me feels it has to do with the de-humanizing of certain groups. If you mark certain people as somehow less than or not even human, it makes it a lot easier to perpetuate cruel acts against them. If you see your own group as the default or the "norm," it makes anyone else come across as different and less than. In my previous post, "Same Old Song and Dance," I described a heartless "fake prom" that was put on to discriminate against the LGBT and disabled students at a high school in Mississippi. Clearly, the cowardly and mean-spirited folks who hosted it saw this group as less than the rest of the student body and wanted them out.

What we need to do is NORMALIZE EQUALITY. We have come a long way, certainly, but we cannot stop. We need to make things like bullying a thing of the past by recognizing that EVERYONE is valuable and EVERYONE deserves respect. It doesn't matter what your political party or holy book or parents may say. We are all people and we all deserve respect.

Six months...a revel's reflection

I haven't written in ever so long, mostly because I've been unbelievably busy and partly because I am not entirely sure how I could condense everything I've been feeling into a blog-ready, condensed entry. I've been at my job for six months.

Doesn't seem that long, does it?

I feel like I've grown a lot in that time. I'm still marvelling over the fact that I'm there. For those of you who don't know, I'm working at the rape crisis center where I interned a few years ago. I figured that when I entered the "Real World" it'd most likely be at a non-profit, preferably a women's organization like a crisis center but not necessarily this crisis center. I've learned so much in this short period of time: how to write grants and proposals, how to analyze budgets and audits, how to improve my public speaking skills (I was good at public speaking before, but I think I've really improved), and what it means to represent my cause. All that and more. I feel like I'm really making a difference in the lives of women and children.

Being at the flagship agency in the state also really has made me aware of everything that goes into being among the best. I remember that I studied the history of crisis intervention back during my senior year, and I had made the case that advocates needed to get back their grassroots approach to their work. I still agree with that, but I see the current state of crisis intervention as the next phase in that grassroots movement. No matter how much a center can be sophisticated and polished, the fact is that we still need to advocate for victims of violence. And the kinds of things that we do help bring advocacy and the horrifying subject of violence against women and children into the public consciousness. As much as some of our popular fundraisers may seem like a far cry from the grassroots days of yore, they represent the next stage on our journey because they show that anyone can advocate for a victim, in the largest or smallest of ways.

Being at such a big and multifaceted agency also has made me wonder how the small centers do everything they do and still stay strong. I remember during my days at Rape Crisis/RACES (they go by RACES now but are still as fantastic as ever), all the employees did direct service as well as all the administrative and fundraising tasks. I remember when I'd go there after hours, many of the staff members would be there until 7 or 8 PM. I know that there are agencies that are even smaller and more pared-down, and I really have gained a greater respect for the way that they can do all of that hard work and still stay on top of their game.

Well, I'm sorry I kept you all waiting to hear about my updates, but I think this sums it up well. Happy 2010, everybody!

The Unkindest Cut

Okay, if my advocacy posts are boring you, then please skip this one. However, if they don't, keep reading and take note (please).

You might remember the previous post a few months ago, "La Vie En Teal," in which I discussed budget cuts affecting many of the social service programs in Illinois. Well, last summer, Governor Blagojevich was considering a bill cutting funding for the social services, which would have affected things like counseling centers, speech therapy, nursing homes, halfway houses, drug rehabilitation services, hospitals, and many other health and human services. Things like the domestic violence shelters and crisis centers were also on this metaphorical chopping block, as these cuts could send several of them out of business. Thankfully, the cuts didn't go through, and most of these programs stayed in existence.

Well, flash-forward to a year later, and Governor Quinn has been presented with a budget from the state Senate. This bill is lovingly termed the "Doomsday budget" by my friends at ICASA, and its official name is Senate Bill/SB 1197. The Governor cannot make tax/spending decisions but has the power to veto them. This budget includes some heavy cuts for these same social services--at LEAST 50%. If you don't think 50% is a lot, consider that will be closing many of the free clinics and services in lower-income areas. A small crisis center like RCS in Champaign would have to close its doors permanently. A free clinic or government-sponsored program (like therapy for a returning Iraq War veteran) would be gone as well. And for a person living in a lower-income area, they might not even get the medical treatment they need if they happen to get sick. Although programs like advocacy are my own personal link to this problem, I am also worried about all the other social services. Cutting them will only cost the state more than it will save.

I know the budget problem is a pretty deep-rooted one, and I'm not an economist or anything. But I do think that there has to be a better way for the state to save money than to cut programs it so desperately needs. Many of my conservative readers (yes, this flaming-liberal revel has conservative readers; you know who you are!) might lambast me for saying this, but even raising taxes just a little would be more helpful. IL is a big state, so even a small tax raise would help. Or cutting back on programs that aren't needed.

But for you readers, if you haven't already done so, please call Governor Quinn's office at 217-782-0244 and tell him to veto Senate Bill 1197. You will most likely reach a voicemail, so if you don't like talking on the phones, you don't have to have some long involved conversation (I already called; it's pretty quick and painless). Or send a message by clicking here: http://www.illinois.gov/GOV/contactthegovernor.cfm. We think the decision will be made on July 1, but I am really hoping that the cuts don't go through. Right now, it feels like that fabled sword of Damocles, dangling over our heads and completely nerve-wracking.

This isn't just for me. It's for everyone who has ever or will ever need those services. If you want to know more, contact me, and I will give you any and all information you need to know about it.

The bad moon arose

Well, this revel is not revelling now.

One of the prevention educators just emailed me on this, and I know she's usually informed and all up in arms on things like this. They upheld Proposition 8 in California! WHY?? This is not at all how it was supposed to go! That damn thing was supposed to go the way of the Briggs initiative and other ordinances designed to curtail human rights and NOT get passed by a landslide. Sooo many people opposed it too! If all those demonstrations against it were any indicator of the mass opposition to it, keeping the thing in place would only be opposing the majority will of the people. But what happens? They uphold the damn Prop 8 (in a dispiriting vote of 6 to 1), but say that the marriages performed before it was passed are valid. That is such cold comfort, even for a hetero ally. Cold comfort is no comfort at all. This isn't about special interests, it's about basic human rights (see my post, "Holy matrimony!"). And we have seen a breach in that, thanks to that awful Prop 8!

Welder

I am the welder
I understand the capacity of heat
To change the shapes of things.
I am suited to work
Within the realm of sparks
Out of control.

I am the welder.
I am taking the power
Into my OWN hands.

--Cherrie Moraga, from This Bridge Called My Back

I tried to find some graduation-style feminist wisdom, and this was something that really hit home for me. May we, no matter what path we choose, be the welder in our own lives, ready to take our lives and events into our own hands and shape our destinies.

The Maine Event!

YES! Go Maine, go!!!

Five states to recognize marriage equality, forty-five more to go. And Washington DC too!

Holy matrimony! Let's keep up the good work!

Holy matrimony!

Well, you've read my marriage-equality posts, so I'm sure you have a gist of what this one is about. I'm really happy about Washington DC recognizing all marriages, including the same-sex ones, performed elsewhere. I know it's not quite full marriage equality, but hopefully the remaining 45 states will go the route of Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa.

What bothers me is the way several conservative groups and individuals (Ms. Prejean, I'm lookin' right atcha) have been saying that legalizing gay marriage will infringe on their own religious freedom. Or by saying that they are being "forced" to watch as all these things contrary to their own beliefs are unfolding. Some even say that they should be able to refuse service to a same-sex couple because they personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Only.

Well, from the way they talk, you'd think someone was forcing them to follow a state-sanctioned religion or having the state meddling around with their church's affairs. That is, after all, what "freedom of religion" protects against. Or that they're being "forced" to marry someone of their own gender. Sheesh. But no, it's just the heightened visibility and rights of the gay community that bothers them. And honestly, I think their reactions are completely wrong.

What they're basically saying, instead, is that their "right" to discriminate against someone because of his/her orientation is being eroded. If marriage rights are granted for both hetero and same-sex couples, it's making the same-sex couple just as visible as the hetero one. And I can see that that clearly scares some folks. As Harvey Milk said way back in the 1970s, "a homosexual with power...that's scary stuff."

And frankly, I don't think that they have much cause to complain. NO ONE should discriminate, let alone have the right to discriminate, against who they can and cannot serve. The reason why we have anti-discrimination laws in this great country is to make sure that everyone is treated with dignity, that all men and women are treated equal. Should every church have to perform same-sex weddings? No, because that is a matter left up to them (remember the separation of church and state?). But should someone have the right to refuse service to a same-sex couple simply because the couple contains two men or two women? A big fat NO. That's not a right. If you are basically asking for permission to discriminate against people you don't like or whose very existence bothers you, then you don't have that right. Sorry.

Let's look at it in another way. Suppose a Christian photographer thinks that every relationship should be a "good, Christian marriage." Well, if that photographer is hired to take pictures at a Jewish wedding, s/he would be taking pictures of a couple whose relationship certainly isn't a "Christian marriage." Should s/he have the right to say no after taking the assignment? Should s/he be able to walk out if all those yarmulkes and stars of David freak him/her out? Of course not. If you have a job, the most logical (and dare I say it? moral) thing would be to DO that job, no matter who your clients are. And no one is being "forced" to see their "morals" eroding away. If they don't agree with same-sex marriage, well, then they don't have to go to Maine/Iowa/Vermont/Connecticut/Massachusetts and marry someone of their gender. No one is making them do that. They are welcome to believe what they want about whomever they want, but it crosses the line when they try to take that right away from someone else.

Ain't nothin' but a she thing

Wouldn't you know it, I'm getting really excited about my conference on Thursday. I've been working my booty off this whole week with that paper (don't try condensing 20 years of history into 5 minutes at home, kids!), planning the last hurrah of my Feminist Majority, reading two novels and studying for an exam on them, and figuring out my postgrad plans.

I am so doing something on Friday or Saturday to let loose and celebrate! Yes, I know I have an exam and some papers due that coming week, but knowing my mad time management skillz, I can get those done. Maybe use up one of those nice gift cards I got at ROAR and then attend Rock for a Refuge? Who's coming with me?

Number Four! Yes!

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, and now....Vermont!

Let's hear it for marriage equality! Four down, forty-six to go--which state is next? Hopefully ALL of them! This is going pretty quickly. I remember how on National Coming Out Day last year (October of 2008), they announced that Connecticut recognized same-sex marriages. Then within this month, two more states joined on. Let's keep this progress going!

And 2009 is the fortieth anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, like I said before. Isn't it fitting to see quite a bit of progress since that time?

I am the history geek!

Okay, this is probably the first time you've heard me call myself a geek, but I just received dramatic proof that I am indeed one! No, I can totally dress fine and I do have some social skills.

BUT...for one of my classes, I have to go into the archives (same place I found that amusing article about The Lavender Menace, see my post about the unaccompanied women). I wish they were a little closer to campus, but once I'm in there, you cannot stop me! The archivist lady brought out the boxes of material, and I was voraciously digging into into them! I'm serious! She dumped this giant box of articles about student protests (did you know there was an archive for protests alone?? How cool is that?), and I'm all like, "WOOHOO! LET'S GET THIS PARTAY STARTED!" And I just couldn't extricate myself from them!! Guaranteed, not all of the articles were all that positive (history is not always happy), but I was sooooo into reading about the student groups and coffee houses and protests of yore. Not to mention thinking about modern groups that probably grew out of them! AAAAAHHH....I so want to go back tomorrow and Wednesday! I've got an appointment to look through the archives of the YWCA tomorrow, and I'm more than stoked about it. This is way more addicting than the time I went into the microfilm room back during soph year. With microfilms, you see the image on the screen. In the archives, you get to TOUCH the materials. You get to feel what old feels like! You get to have your hands on something that has seen activists before you and see how they did it (yes, I am more tactile of a learner).

WHO would have thought it? I am the history geek! Hear me roar!

Let's hear it for Iowa!

Well, this is certainly exciting! Same-sex marriage is legal in Iowa now, and that makes it the third state now to allow it (technically, it's the fourth one, but CA passed that dumb Proposition 8 in November, so I am not including CA).

I know that there are now three states down, forty-seven more to go, but if you think about it, there might be many more that might follow the example of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa. Massachusetts legalized it in 2004, Connecticut in 2008, and Iowa in 2009. So that just might mean that we can expect to see more people talking about it and more states legalizing it. And how fitting, too, that it's in 2009, since 2009 marks the fortieth anniversary of the Stonewall Riots.

Let's hear it for marriage equality! Which state will be next?