Well, there's no mistaking it. I'm back in the US, getting my anti-depressant medication adjusted, and my head back in the world.
The actual trip was a breeze, and the dog arrived in Chicago no worse for the wear. The trip down from Chicago to Champaign was a stark reminder of how incredibly flat Illinois is. No sea, either.
I've done nothing much since I got back except sleep. I got the things I absolutely had to do taken care of while I was still buzzing from the energy of the trip (I had made the mistake of not completely finishing my packing before I enjoyed a couple of "good-bye" get-togethers with friends.), and then I collapsed and have pretty much stayed that way.
If you've never enjoyed the experience of full-blown clinical depression, I hope you never do. I see the shrink on Thursday, and with a little luck will begin feeling better again not too long thereafter.
Besides the flatness, another thing that has blown me away is that nobody seems to realize the Democratic primary's been over since last month. As far as my Spanish friends know, it was over a long time before that. But not many of them are paying much attention. The general attitude is that Bush has really screwed up America, and that he's out of there come next January when Mr. Obama will begin the long, hard job of trying to put things back together again. It is unimaginable to them that anything else could happen. They see little difference between Bush and McCain. They think Hillary would be an improvement, but they see her as being too enmeshed with the system and the ways of thinking that got us into the mess we're in.
I think they're pretty astute in appraising the candidates, but I'm afraid they don't realize how little a role this kind of logic plays in American elections. We'll see.
"The Science of Sexuality"
Greta Christina has an interesting, if somewhat pointless, post on science and sexuality over at Alternet.
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.
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 moreAs 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.
read more
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
