"The Science of Sexuality"

Greta Christina has an interesting, if somewhat pointless, post on science and sexuality over at Alternet.

When I first came out into the gay community, one of the most common party lines going around was, "Gay parents aren't any more likely to have gay kids than straight parents." Some of the big political battles being fought at the time had to do with gay parenting, and the community was trying to reassure/ convince the straight world that it was "safe" for gay people to have and raise kids, that our kids wouldn't be any more likely to be gay than anyone else's. (Of course, many of us personally thought, "So what if our kids turn out gay? There's nothing wrong with being gay, so why does it matter?" But we knew the straight world didn't feel that way. Hence, the line.) --Read more

As I responded in the comments section on Alternet: I have a few ideas myself about what causes sexuality, but I don't know, and personally, I hope they never do find out for sure. Because the minute they do, the battles will begin afresh over what to do with that information.

If there is a significant genetic factor that can be detected in utero, should a woman carrying an unwanted "queer" fetus be allowed/encouraged to have an abortion?

If it turns out to be primarily a "choice," does that make anti-gay sentiment and activities more socially acceptable?

If it turns out to be primarily genetic, will the haters feel any more compassion for queers as a result?

The whole discussion begs the even more important Big Question: What difference does it make?

I can't see one that matters much. What does matter is that all Americans be treated exactly the same, both under the law and in the larger society as well, regardless of sexual orientation or anything else.

If knowing the "answer" to the causes of sexuality contributes anything toward that end, I don't begrudge the money and energy spent finding it. But personally, I doubt it, and believe that both could be better spent.

Whether I'm queer because I chose to be, or because of genes I carry, I expect to be treated the same as anyone else.

Anything else is un-American.

Larry King Promotes Day of Silence

Today is the National Day of Silence, a day when hundreds of thousands of students across America pledge to be silent for the day, representing the silence forced upon their lesbian, gay, or transgendered friends by the rampant homophobia and hectoring on the majority of school campuses. Below is a statement from Larry King:

(h/t HRC Back Story)

Why Conservatives Are Always Wrong

Jefferson Smith has posted a wonderful piece entitled "Why Conservatives Are Always Wrong" that should be required reading at least once a week for every human being on earth. Please read the whole thing and pass it on to everybody you can think of.

Suppose you had a friend you had known for many years, one who was very opinionated, who always seemed absolutely certain about everything, and yet who was always turning out to be wrong. He got you to buy stock in Enron and swore it would just keep on rising. He bet on the Yankees to sweep the Red Sox in ’04. He said mobile phones were just a fad . . .

read more

O'Reilly/Fox Homophobia

"Neutral Sexual Orientation Employment Policy"

I may be on to something here that the whole rest of the civilized world already knew, but I was mildly blown away when a quick skim of the proxy statement for a company I own a few shares of stock in turned up the following:

ITEM 9—STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING A
NEUTRAL SEXUAL ORIENTATION EMPLOYMENT POLICY
Resolution
Whereas, our company seeks to hire the most qualified person and has never had a policy discriminating against any person, or groups of persons, for any reason.

Whereas, it would be inappropriate and possibly illegal to ask a job applicant or employee about their sexual interests, inclinations and activities.

Whereas, it is similarly inappropriate and legally problematic for employees to discuss personal sexual matters while on the job.

Whereas, unlike the issues of race, age, gender and certain physical disabilities, it would be impossible to discern a person’s sexual orientation from their appearance.

Whereas, unless an employee chooses to talk about their sexual interests or activities while working, the issue of sexual orientation is, essentially, moot.

Whereas, according to the website of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender political organization, “an inclusive non-discrimination policy (one that refers to sexual orientation) is a key facet of the rationale for extending domestic partner benefits.” The HRC adds, “Establishing a benefits policy that includes your company’s gay and lesbian employees is a logical outgrowth of your company’s own non-discrimination policy. . . .”

Whereas, domestic partner benefit policies pay employee benefits based on the employee engaging in unmarried, homosexual relations. These relations have been condemned by the major traditions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam for a thousand years or more.

Whereas, the Armed Forces of the United States is one of the largest and most diverse organizations in the world. They protect the security of us all while adhering to a “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” regarding sexual interests.

Whereas, our company does not discriminate against tobacco users when they apply for a job even though they are not protected by any employment clause. It also does not pay tobacco users special benefits based on their engaging in this personally risky behavior.

Whereas, those who engage in homosexual sex are at a significantly higher risk for HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.

Whereas, marriage between heterosexuals has been protected and encouraged by a wide range of societies, cultures and faiths for ages.

Resolved: the shareholders request that Wells Fargo form a committee to explore ways to formulate an equal employment opportunity policy which complies with all federal, state and local regulations but does not make reference to any matters related to sexual interests, activities or orientation.

Supporting Statement
While the legal institution of marriage between a man and a woman should be protected, the
sexual interests, inclinations and activities of all employees should be a private matter, not a corporate
concern.

Position of the Board of Directors
The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST this proposal, which is identified as Item 9 on the proxy card, for the following reasons:

• The Company believes diversity is fundamental to its success; and
• Opposing discrimination in all forms is one of the ways the Company makes its commitment to diversity a reality.

The Company believes that welcoming all people and opposing discrimination in all its forms, including discrimination based on sexual orientation, represents a commitment to fairness that Americans support. This belief is how we conduct our business successfully. Diversity is part of the Company’s “Vision and Values,” which makes it clear that we want to “respect differences among team members, customers and communities—earning mutual trust by supporting our corporate values for diversity, taking advantage of different perspectives, supporting the diversity of our team members, customers and communities, and leveraging diversity as a competitive advantage.”

The Company seeks to recruit and retain outstanding team members who reflect the diversity of a highly competitive marketplace. We do not publicly support or endorse any particular creed or lifestyle. We simply strive to build a culture in which all people are accepted and individual differences are respected among our team members, and we intend to continue our commitment to support the diversity of all our team members and customers.

Accordingly, the Board of Directors recommends that you vote AGAINST this proposal.

The statements and arguments are familiar. We've been hearing them from Fallwell and Dobson and Robertson and Wildmon and Hagee and company for over 30 years in one form or another. They're tired, and they're untrue, and not even the dwindling number of followers those folks puts much store in them any more.

No, the surprise was that this item was included in a statement from the Wells Fargo corporation, a pioneer and stalwart supporter not only of workplace diversity but a proud corporate sponsor of any number of lesbian and gay sporting events and other activities.

The proxy statement doesn't say which shareholder(s) submitted the proposal (I'm sure it's in there somewhere, but I'm lazy.), but my guess is that somebody like Don Wildmon at the "American Family Association" or James Dobson from "Focus on the Family" has bought themselves a share of Wells Fargo stock.

Their efforts are laughable, and the resolution won't receive enough votes to justify the ink to print it or the time spent responding to it. It's both revelatory of the American culture and somehow bizarrely personally reassuring to me that these guys are still able to make a buck out of this issue in 2008.