Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde by Conor Ryan Message-ID: <1993Mar30.001636.21313@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:16:36 GMT Lines: 28 In response to my query about reposting Columbia Spectator columns ("Depeche Monde" by Conor Ryan) to soc.motss, I got about a dozen individual emails expressing interest, so I guess that's enough to warrant posting. Ryan is an out, first-year student at Columbia College; he's been doing the columns biweekly since last fall. There are seven at this point, which I'll post individually; I'll post subsequent ones as they appear in the Spec. The columns are clearly written for his fellow CU students, though I think they'll be of more general interest... Columbia, despite being in NYC, is not a very "out" place. A group of us have just started a campus Lesbigay Faculty/Staff organization, however, and also begun a series of monthly Lesbigay "Community" Meetings, which have had well over 100 attendees for the first two sessions. We've also started a campus Lesbigay bulletin board ("notesfile"), to keep the campus informed about queer stuff of all kinds, including activist information. We hope by these efforts to start making CU a more hospitable, queerer place to study, teach, conduct research and work. Anyone wanting to contact Conor should do so at his personal email address (ckr2@columbia.edu), since he's not yet a motsser. ========================================================================= Stephen Davis email: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu Director of Library Systems voice: (212) 854-4744 219M Butler Library fax: (212) 222-0331 Columbia University New York, NY 10027 **BOYCOTT COLORADO, SUPPORT LESBIGAY CIVIL RIGHTS!** ========================================================================== Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 1/2 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.002320.21800@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:23:20 GMT Lines: 168 COMING OUT - I by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 10/7/92. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] In case I ever forget how many challenges I will have to face in my life as a gay man, I only need open the newspaper. In Oregon, Ballot Measure 9 will be decided along with the Presidential race. Potentially one of the most anti-homosexual pieces of legislation ever to be presented, it could set gay rights back decades. According to the New York Times, if passed, Ballot Measure 9 "would amend the state constitution to classify homosexuality as 'abnormal, wrong, unnatural, or perverse'". This example typifies just the sort of raw hatred directed at homosexuals in this country and throughout the world that I just don't understand. It's not as if homosexuality is some new and bizarre phenomenon. In fact, homosexuality is as old as humanity. Julius Caesar, Shakespeare, Hans Christian Anderson, Elton John, these names span centuries. Yet it while most other minorities seem to have made the journey to at least partial acceptance, gay-bashing is a societally encouraged national pastime not unlike baseball. Don't misunderstand me, it's not as if attending a liberal university like Columbia forces me to read the newspaper to find hatred. Just two days ago, one of my floormates, one of the people with whom I live, called me a faggot. Ironically, I was walking down the stairs on my way to the L.B.G.C. dance when I passed him and a friend and he proffered his judgement. To say that it upset me really is an understatement. More than anything though, it just hurt. To have someone who to my knowledge I had rarely spoken with, let alone accosted, throw such a hate-laden word in my face shocked me. Some would say I should expect it. It's my fault for CHOOSING to be totally out. To some extent, I agree with that. When I came here, five weeks ago and decided to be out, I knew intellectually at least, that I would encounter some problems. Nothing prepares you for hate. I had a long talk with this same person much later that day. I never did really come to understand why he was so scared and disdainful of homosexuals. He said "it's just different", but it has to be more deeply rooted than that. Why the image of two men or two women frightens people so much will perhaps always be a mystery to me. On a very basic level, flesh is just flesh. What is so inherently evil in one man making love to another? How can there be anything wrong when two people who like each other share intimacy? Very generously, he informed me that while my floor disapproved, they tolerated it in respect to my rights as an individual. In the time I've been here I've heard more than a couple people bitterly proclaim "I hate P.C.". Easy to say when you're a straight, white male, safe from the bane of bias and discrimination. Wrongly or not, I feel that for the twenty-five thousand my parents pay to this institution, I deserve a relatively safe place to live and learn. This is no utopia, I realize, but in such a small community, intolerance is perhaps the most dangerous threat to the cohesiveness which enables us to excel. It's like I told my floormate who had the audacity to tell me that he and some of his friends really just did not approve of homosexuality, "You think YOU have a problem with it, try to imagine what my life is like." COMING OUT - II by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 10/16/92. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] My homosexuality is something that will be a major part of my life until I die. In truth, it's difficult to judge how it has affected me and how it will continue to affect my future. It's not simple enough to be deemed "good" or "bad", but rather, it just is. When dealing with others in the daily course of my life I try to be upbeat and positive and perennially upfront and honest because I have always felt that's the best way to help influence (straight) people's minds. Additionally, the fact is that if you're quiet and closeted, your voice never gets counted or heard. I like to think that it's harder for people to put down a group of people if they've actually met a real live member of the minority. It's easy to dismiss different peoples in the abstract, but my hope has always been that if they talk to me and see that homosexuality is really not that big a deal, and certainly not a threat, they might change their mind, or at least give it a second thought. As I said, I try to be positive and outgoing, but to keep the pain I feel and the anger I often have towards straight people and the world in general in check isn't always easy. There's a difficult side to being gay that I pretty much keep to myself. Just because I keep it buried though, in no way denies it's existence. Well, here goes. Lately, I've thought about suicide a good deal more than is probably recommended. It's rarely one thing or event that sparks this notion. In fact, it's a little bit of everything. I have so many worries. Will I be fired from my job because I have a picture of my lover on my desk? Will I be fag bashed by a gang of teenagers because I'm seen leaving a bar? Will I die of AIDS, like so many before me? I don't know the answer to any of these questions, but I do know they scare me. Most of the time I'm pretty together and at least mildly happy. But every once in a while, it all catches up and overwhelms me. I feel like being a homosexual is the toughest card I could have been dealt. It makes life so much more infinitely complicated. Things that straights take for granted, like feeling comfortable kissing or holding someone's hands on the street are acts of danger. I spent part of tonight in my friend's arms, outside in the rain, crying. I can't be strong and invulnerable to the pressures against me twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. I wish I could present my angst or depression, or whatever you want to call it, with easy to understand numbers or something quantitative, but it just doesn't work that way. I honestly don't know how other gays get through the day. In a sense though, they don't. Because of the way this world is, the harsh reality is that the suicide rate for gay and lesbian teenagers is three and four times higher than that of their straight counterparts. Don't misunderstand me, I would never want to be straight, I love lusting for and loving men and I couldn't imagine being any different. But for me every day is a test and it's terrifying to know my whole life is going to be that way. Part of it is feeling so alienated. Every time I see a guy I'm interested in, I have to wonder if he's even of my same orientation. It takes so much energy. Imagine waking up one day and being different from everyone you love and know. Imagine becoming one of those strange, bad people that you heard about or seen on the news, but had never actually met. All of the sudden you realize, "I'm one of them". It's life-changing, to say the least. I remember wondering who I was supposed to emulate and watch when in the blink of an eye I felt like part of a different world than my parents and friends. Every day I see a simple advertisement or a straight couple together I'm confronted with the reality of being different and reminded that I'm supposed to be straight. Sure, I could live in the closet and fit in. But that would be so false. I will never forget on the inside how little I have in common with most of this world. In fact, at straight functions like weddings I can't seem to think anything except that "I'm like no one in this room". One in four gays has a substance abuse problem. It's depressing that I find that awesome number so unsurprising. The fact is that most homosexuals have major self-esteem problems at some part of their lives, normally when they have first come out. For me, it was like I had been brainwashed for so many years that it was, and even today it's still hard to be comfortable with myself. One is taught that if you like men you're a woman, yet I'm not and I have no desire to be female. Where does that leave me? Most of the time I believe in myself and the way I am, but everyone so often I can't help but question what my place in this world is. Fortunately, I have my friends there to help me. I see those who would and do hate me as a battering ram. In my mind I can stand it up to a point, but eventually it just gets though, by virtue of repetition and numbers if nothing else. For how long can anyone go against the flow? Some days I'm confronting hate on a personal level, whether it's someone calling me a faggot or having one of my friends tell me that a guy was asking her if she was a "faghag?". Most of the time it's just listening to the news or opening the newspaper. Hate is everywhere. A lot of my friends can dismiss such comments. "Who cares what a breeder thinks, anyway? They're just stupid and ignorant". For better or for worse, I'm too sensitive to dismiss so much so easily. I want to run up to Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson, Jesse Helms and everyone else and scream, "I'm only 18 years old, what could I possibly have done to make you hate me? Would they be able to tell me to my face how evil I am? I also wonder how the twenty years olds we saw at the Republican Convention holding signs that read "Family Rights Forever, Gay Rights Never" can look themselves in the mirror. I've thought a lot about having a child when I'm older. Sure, it wouldn't be "traditional", but then my very being is "non-mainstream". I feel I have so much to give to a child. At the very least, I'd be guaranteeing that one member of the next generation wouldn't grow up hating gays, blacks, or anyone who's different. I've since changed my mind. I can't in good conscience help bring anyone into a nasty world like this. The worst is when I hit bottom. When I really get depressed or overwhelmed I can't help but think that so many people in this world think homosexuality is evil and wrong, who am I to think otherwise? Maybe I am a freak, a deviant. That's the saddest part of it all. No one should have to question their very right to exist. No one. (Conor Ryan's email address is: ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 3 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.002707.22077@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:27:07 GMT Lines: 79 DEFENSE OF THE 'RAINBOW CURRICULUM' by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 1/21/93. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] In the Tuesday Edition of the Spectator Peter Freeman wrote an Editorial concerning the "Children of the Rainbow" curriculum currently being debated in the New York City School System. Freeman wrote that two pages of the 443 curriculum should be edited so that the controversial inclusion of three books discussing homosexuality are excised. He argued that first graders are simply too young to learn about such complicated matters as sexual orientation and that the school system should wait until fifth or sixth grade "if education on homosexual families has to be part of the curriculum". First of all, first graders and adolescents may be young, but they are far from ignorant. As we can all remember, much of what we learn in our youth does not come from inside the classroom. By avoiding the topic so obviously in the school system, we are sending the message that homosexuality is taboo, something not to be discussed in a formal environment. Obviously, kids see traces of homosexuality on television and in the movies (though quite rarely). Thus, they know it exists but are given the impression that it is something strange and off-limits about it. Often people tend to fear and hate what they don't understand. By doing nothing to educate students they are indirectly leading students to have different and uneducated opinions about it. Waiting until the fifth grade is simply too late. I know from personal experience as well as anecdotal evidence that by this age kids have learned that the meanest term to call someone is a fag. While we would all wish for a world where kids could stay innocent it's just not realistic. The fact that 13 year old girls are turning up pregnant is not a result of being taught to have sex by a health class. It is a result of ignoring a serious issue and thereby deciding for youths by denying them the knowledge of their options. Moreover, by that same logic often sued by zealots such as Mary Cummins (President of the Queens school Board), it should be proposed that books and stories with heterosexual relationships and marriage should also not be included in the curriculum because it could confuse potentially gay children. Besides, by the same logic, the notion of heterosexual relationships is much too complicated to inundate a child who hasn't reached puberty. But does anyone ever say that? No. But then, double standards are part of the problem. And as for Pat Buchanan's oft-quoted argument that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian values I have two answers. First of all, the Puritans (Pilgrims) who founded this country wanted not only freedom of religion, but more importantly, freedom from religion. It is a distortion to take the religious persuasion of this country's founders who themselves were victims of persecution and in turn use it to persecute others. Furthermore, while I personally don't believe in God, I also don't see the Ten Commandments written in the Constitution, so let's leave them out of rational discussion. The last time I checked this country was governed by legislation produced by human beings. It seems to me that when people discuss the idea of teaching homosexuality to youths there is always the implication that it will influence them. In other words, that just discussing the idea will "convert" them. Well I'm here to tell you that sexual orientation is about as innate a quality as you'll find. Thinking about it or discussing it is just that and nothing more. Furthermore, this whole fear rooted in the idea that it would be wrong for anyone to be homosexual is what causes so many problems. People really need to realize that whether they agree with it or not, gays and lesbians are here to stay. This is true across the country and the world, but few places have a larger gay and lesbian population than New York City. If people would just accept this fact, regardless of their personal beliefs, there would be much less friction. The debate over what to teach in public schools is difficult and arbitrary to say the least. However, as a society it is essential that we reach some sort of consensus with the good of society in mind. Clearly, we cannot accommodate every single viewpoint. However, regardless of what various personal views are, I expect most people think that others should be treated with a modicum of respect. Equally, most people, at least in the abstract, would oppose violence against their fellow man. No, the Rainbow Curriculum isn't trying to defile innocent children. Nor is it trying to subject one lifestyle or another on them. Basically, it just tries to teach children to be accepting of all people, regardless of how they may be different. If that is indeed a controversial issue, our society is truly in a sad state. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 4 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.003101.22391@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:31:01 GMT Lines: 104 COLUMBIA AND ITS GAY AND LESBIAN STUDENTS by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 1/28/93. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] All through high school I dreamed of going to Columbia University. As a result of high achievement in academics as well as extracurricular activities, I won early acceptance on Dec 16, 1991, one of the happiest days of my life. Now that I'm here, I often wonder why I chose this school in the first place. I came to Columbia with many expectations. Of course, chief among them was respect for Columbia's academic reputation. I also figured that naturally, because it's in New York City, it would be a great place for a gay student to grow and develop. Reality unfortunately, is a much different picture. It has been a major disappointment for me to see that the administration obviously cares so little about gay students. Not only do they not care, but do they even know that gays attend this University? There seems to be a serious lack of any recognition. For instance, why wasn't I invited to minority weekend? The University seems to feel that if there are indeed students who are gay, it is a very small part of their identity. We are all aware of Affirmative Action. I have always felt that anyone different from the straight white males who have dominated college campuses and society for so long adds a distinct perspective and a unique look at life to the atmosphere. Anyone who's not part of the establishment in this world has something different to say. Moreover, it's critical that college campuses have a diverse student body that at least partially reflects the way the real world is. Yet, at no time during my application process was the fact that Columbia has any gay students ever indicated. In fact, even during my stay here as a prospective in March of last year one thing stands out in my mind. The group I was in walked by a gay bar in the Village and what did our group leader, the representative of Columbia, have to say? "You don't want to know what goes on in there" with a knowing smile. I wonder how many students decided to matriculate or not to matriculate based on that little comment. This is just one example of what I have found to be a surprisingly unaccepting environment at this school Like many bloated institutions, the only argument that would ever influence the University is, of course, monetary. With that depressing thought in mind, I wonder if the University is aware that by ignoring gay students' needs it is putting off a very desirable donation group, demographically speaking. I know I speak for myself and many other gays when I question why I would want to support an school that basically ignores a central part of my identity. Last week I went to the Gay and Lesbian Studies Group meeting called "Queer at Columbia". In listening to what other University students said and what my own experience has been, I realize the University on its own will never change. Most people who are in any type of power are older, straight, white men who neither understand nor care about the problems of a group like gays. Even if they aren't straight, they are part of a generation of gays that does not seem to think about their own identity or the ramifications of their actions on others. Yes, we all applaud the University for moving to include sexual orientation in the University Statement of Non-Discrimination on December 1, 1978. However, to assume this wraps things up neatly is foolish. In fact, this inclusion offers one a false sense of the atmosphere. The University has managed to have created an environment of low-grade tolerance, but entirely missed the goals of awareness and even, gasp, acceptance. A stroke of a pen cannot change attitudes by itself. This is why it is imperative that education be implemented along with rules. Whether in dealing with my floormates, my RA or the general campus, there is without a question a wide gap in relations between Gays and heterosexuals on this campus. Proof of this can be found in a survey taken two years ago titled "Dimensions of Incivility". The survey was designed to calculate which groups of students were most often to referred to by "insensitive, ignorant or disparaging statements." On a scale of one to seven with seven indicating often being singled out, gays ranked first with a mean score of 4.8 and Lesbians came in third with a mean score of 4.3. Clearly there is much work to be done. Furthermore, you can count the number of Gay and Lesbian studies classes for the entire University (approx 18,000 people) on one hand. Is anything even close to 10% of the school's resources or energy devoted to to population of Lesbians and Gays? As a first year student I went through orientation just like every other member of the Class of '96. The Sensitivity Workshops that garnered so much publicity in the New York Times was a paltry half-hearted effort at increasing awareness. Columbia needs to realize that gays are a unique minority in that as teenagers they often arrive for college unsure about their sexuality. Thus, not only is there a need for students to be educated about homosexuality, but some education or even a glimmer of recognition by the University might help a number of students develop a long way. My suggestions are as follows. Sensitivity workshops conducted by gay students should be mandatory for all first-years. No question. Secondly, in one of the endless orientation assemblies perhaps an openly gay member of the faculty (who could have the title of Lesbian and Gay coordinator) could talk to the students and offer his or her help. Both of these actions would demonstrate to those just joining the Columbia community that homosexuality is not only "tolerated", but accepted by the administration. A public affirmation would signal that it is ok to be gay and admit it, and at the same time it is not excusable to harass or otherwise discriminate based on sexual orientation. This is not to say the Administration is the only perpetrator of the wrong attitudes. From what I've seen many of the Professors could also attend a workshop on gay awareness. If this happened, gasp!, they might even stop addressing all their students as if they're straight. These are few suggestions, but I'm not holding my breath. It would certainly take a major show of solidarity in the Columbia Gay Community to force the Administration's hand. Until or if that ever happens, New Haven looks better and better every day. Now _that_ is a terrifying thought. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 5 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.003405.22594@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:34:05 GMT Lines: 71 THE CASE FOR CONDOMS by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 2/11/93. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] Tonight, at 7:30 p.m. in John Jay Lounge the Columbia/Barnard Campus Crusade for Christ is sponsoring a lecture called "The Scientific Case Against Condoms". Appearing, is David Thom an "AIDS/HIV researcher and speaker on university campuses for the past eight years", according to their promotional poster. The Campus Crusade for Christ has a right to exist just like any other organization. Whatever the "Crusaders" may do amongst themselves is their own business. When they start spreading misinformation to promote their own agenda though, they have overstepped their boundaries. The same poster proclaims the lecture "for anyone who places their trust in condoms to prevent HIV infection" and says that the lecture will address the "scientific case against condoms and alternatives to condomania." Condomania? I'm not even sure that's a word. More importantly though, what exactly does that mean? The CCFC seems to be implying that too many people erroneously look at condoms as the answer to stop HIV infection. Presumably, their "alternative" suggestion would be abstinence. It is true that if all humans abstained from sexual intercourse, the spread of HIV would be reduced. But the question, is that either plausible or in fact, even necessary? According to Laura Pinsky, co-author of "The Essential AIDS Fact Book" and Co-director of Columbia Gay Health Advocacy Project [GHAP], which promotes AIDS education and handles HIV antibody test counseling, "The problem with focusing on abstinence is that it doesn't seem to be what most university students practice." Leslie Kantor, of SIECUS, the Sex Information Counsel of the United States, points out that the Campus Crusade for Christ is one of a number of far right groups that are part of a national movement to promote extremely conservative values. "Part of what they promote is fear-based sex education", said Kantor, former Coordinator of Sexuality Programs for Columbia University's Health Services. "One of their major tactics is to distort medical information. They both totally fabricate information and misrepresent condom findings in laboratory studies", she went on to say. Both Kantor and Pinsky are concerned that giving people the idea that condoms are ineffective will lead to more unsafe sex. Said Kantor, "They get people into a mindset where they think 'if condoms don't work, than well, I might as well not use them at all'. Pinksy concurred, "[GHAP's] concern about talks which increase guilt is that we feel that high levels of guilt are associated with greater difficulty in thinking about sex carefully and practising safer sex." In regard to the properties of condoms, a fact sheet complied by the Center for Population Control (CPO) stated, "Standard tests assure that latex condoms do not allow for the passage of water, HIV or sperm." Former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop once proclaimed, "The greatest problem with condoms is that many people do not know how to use them". According to Kantor, the theoretical condom failure rate is 1%. It is human error that causes this number to rise to approximately 13%. Says the CPO, "When latex condoms do fail, it is likely due to human error which is preventable when users are educated, skilled, and motivated to use condoms properly." Titled "Condom Efficacy and Use Among Adolescents," the CPO fact sheet also conveys, "Laboratory tests indicate that latex condoms used with a contraceptive spermicide during vaginal intercourse have a projected effectiveness rate of 97.5 percent in preventing pregnancies, 99.90 percent in preventing transmission of STD's and even slightly higher for HIV." There, now you have the facts. So please, don't let one very biased presentation endanger your well-being. One last thing Leslie Kantor had to say, "While a condom doesn't confer 100% protection, your protection is 10,000 times higher as compared to unsafe sex." Decide for yourself. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 6 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.003722.22776@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:37:22 GMT Lines: 84 COME OUT COME OUT WHEREVER YOU ARE! by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 2/25/93. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] I'm mad. The state of this world is disturbing. Every story of gay-bashing, every parent who kicks out their gay child and each and every tally of AIDS related deaths just makes me angrier and angrier. I'm all too aware that humans seem to have trouble caring about any tragedy or injustice that doesn't personally affect them. Perhaps for this reason most straights just don't seem to care about the killing, both direct and indirect of gays. However, if as generally reported, about 10% of the population is gay or Lesbian, one would have to live on a desert island not to know at least "one of them". Too many straights are able to blind themselves too easily from the existence and effects of gays. This is one topic covered in Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen's book: "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90's". One of the more interesting points concerns a phenomenon the authors label "The Big Lie". "The Big Lie" is a group of misconceptions that heterosexuals have about gays which help to perpetuate discrimination and enforce oppression. According to "The Big Lie," "Gays are hardly worth thinking about; few in number; easy to spot; homosexual because of sin, insanity, or seduction; kinky, loathsome sex addicts; unproductive and untrustworthy members of society; suicidally unhappy". It hardly requires saying that these are absurd exaggerations and misconceptions. At least heterosexual homophobes are a recognizable enemy that can be openly fought. Closet cases are "Uncle Toms" whose internal homophobia stand in the way of progress for all gays. Too many gays live in shamed secrecy when their presence could help fortify the movement and personally influence heterosexuals. Not only are closet cases not setting the right examples, but because of their situation they are even more likely than straights to laugh at a gay joke or avoid teaching a Gay Studies class, for example. Mind you, I'm not talking about an 18 year old who has some feelings towards the same sex, but just isn't sure. I'm talking about people who are out to themselves, but who hide their lives consciously to avoid "causing problems". How many heteros know that Barry Diller, former Chairman of Fox Network, and the man who helped bring "The Simpsons" on the air, is gay? How many people know that the man behind Geffen Records, which showcases artists like Guns n Roses, Nirvana and Siouxsie and the Banshees, is gay? Both Barry Diller and David Geffen could do so much more with the positions they occupy and the power they possess. It's unfortunate that people, as successful as they are feel so little responsibility to help others. I want to send a message to anyone gay who is reading this. If you're in the closet, you're a coward. You're selfish and you're only concerned with your own comfort level. Of course, I wish this were a perfect world where we could all just live our own lives. However, as long as gay teens continue to kill themselves and long as people are fired and beaten for their very sexual orientation, we all have a responsibility to try and change this world for the better. Furthermore, if you think that everything is fine, wake up. As "After the Ball" declares in the opening line, "the Gay Revolution has failed". Look at the facts. A full twenty-four states in this country still have sodomy laws on the books. While Colorado's Amendment 2 is currently in stasis, the fact remains that more than half of the state obviously feels that the rights of homosexuals are not worth protecting. Finally, the backlash over the military reminds us what America really thinks about gays when put to the test. Did Rosa Parks simply stay in her place and hope that things would change? Did Mahatma Gandhi lie back and let others fight his fight? The answer to both those questions is a resounding no. Nothing will ever change until we force it to happen. The larger picture is no different than the situation at Columbia University. If you expect anyone else to fight for our rights get used to waiting. The clearest route to change is to make the fact that the "10%" so often cited, live everywhere. We are your neighbors, your teachers, and even your pastors. Only when every Gay is open and proud will things ever change. If we all came out then our families, our friends and our government could not but help rethink their thoughtless and ignorant ways. Hiding your sexuality or acting as if being gay is something wrong allows homohaters a victory and does nothing to break the circle of hate we in which we are entrenched. Until one generation takes a risk and is willing to make sacrifices, things will never improve. I can't speak for all gays, or even for anyone but myself. I'm gay and I do exist. I will never hide who I am out of shame or fear or any other reason. Moreover, I'm going to be around for a lot of decades in people's faces. So, for those of you who don't like it, either get used to it or go away, cause I'm sticking around. And I'm not the only one. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 7 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.003955.23055@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:39:55 GMT Lines: 66 CLUB KIDS by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on March 11, 1993. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] Glamor and glitter, fashion and fame! No, I'm not talking about that super cartoon singer, Jem!, but New York's own Club Kids. I'm sick of politics and I'm tired of substance. I say we let the Club Kids control the FBI, the CIA and the fashion police. Imagine a country where one had to look fierce just to walk down the street. Just think, even the subway stations would be guarded by discerning drag queens equipped with velvet ropes. By governmental dictate, all supermarkets would mount disco balls and strobe lights. The IRS would deem compacts and platform shoes tax write-offs. In case I've lost you or if you've become used to relying on the "The Federalist" for club info, I'll lay it on the table. First you've got these clubs: Limelight, Club USA, Webster Hall, Save the Robots, and maybe The Grand or Nell's (but certainly not Danceteria, as some might think). Now what makes a club work? The atmosphere, the music and location, right? Not! Sure, those details are important, but they're just the dressing, for a club to be hip and cool, it's got to have Club Kids! Club Kids are young, gay, dressed to the hilt and of course, drug- positive. With wardrobes and make-up kits to put any high society social butterfly to shame, they attract attention like a magnet. You won't find "to club kid" in Webster's Collegiate, so what do they actually do? Sometimes they talk, occasionally they dance (it is a club after all), but mostly they just pose and prance and laugh. Their job is to be who they are. They are paid to dress up, look fabulous and simply be. They're promoters, but mostly they promote themselves and, in turn, the clubs at which they put an appearance. If you're picturing Christy Turlington or Linda Evanglista, think again. Try more Kristen McMenamy. The Club Kids mock glamor and the high fashion world more than they worship it. To be a Club Kid, you have to have an unusual look and you simply must have lots o'attitude--that's Attitude, as RuPaul might say. They're really not so different from sports figures; most people have a personal favorite. Some like Desi Monster or Astro Erle better than Walt Paper or Paris. In fact there are even "Klub Kid" trading cards. Collect them all! In many ways, a Club Kid's life is wish-fulfillment to the nth degree. Imagine this: at the age of eighteen someone is willing to pay you to go the greatest clubs and have fun and be the center of attention. Drinks and mild-altering substances are perks. You get to wear whatever you want and look however you wish, as long as it's fat (cool). Indulge every wish! Wear a dress, or platforms, or a dominatrix outfit. Go grunge, go scary, just go unusual. As much respect as I have for Columbia's diverse catalog of courses, nowhere do I see anything resembling a basic how-to Club Kid course. I know, I know, there are cut-backs and Columbia simply cannot offer every course, but I'd be willing to give up Logic and Rhetoric without much of a fight. And as for things like econometrics--gone just as fast as you can snap your finger. I can only hope that newly-elected University President George Rupp will have something to say about this gaping hole. Even if Columbia isn't willing to accommodate such an important need, surely there are other educational institutions just dying to fill this niche. After all, McDonald's has a Hamburger University, so at the very least, Sally Struthers should offer a Club Kid correspondence course. Admittedly, the financially-motivated might be wondering if Club Kidding doesn't pay as well as say, Wall Street, but who has more fun? Dress Code? I don't think so. You can have corporate America, cause I'm on my way to career services to see about Club Kid interviews. I wonder if I could transfer to Brown and construct my own major?. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu) Newsgroups: soc.motss Path: clarkson!rpi!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet From: daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) Subject: Depeche Monde - 8 Message-ID: <1993Mar30.004311.23296@news.columbia.edu> Sender: usenet@news.columbia.edu (The Network News) Nntp-Posting-Host: davis.cul.columbia.edu Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1993 00:43:11 GMT Lines: 78 LOSING A BATTLE, LEARNING A LESSON by Conor Ryan [The following article was printed in The Columbia University Spectator on 3/25/93. It is copyrighted material owned by the Spectator. It may not be reprinted or sold for profit.] It was Wednesday, March 17, 1993. Approximately 220 gay and Lesbian protesters were arrested for having a sit-in on Fifth Avenue before the 232nd St. Patrick's Day Parade. The charges ranged from contempt of court, parading without a permit, resisting arrest to disorderly conduct. On that day last week I watched as friends, acquaintances and strangers alike were arrested and taken to jail. It was traumatic witnessing fellow Lesbians and gays being taken away in plastic handcuffs and stuffed aboard commandeered city buses. The legal debate over whether the Ancient Order of Hibernians (the parade's sponsor) has the right to exclude the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization (ILGO) from the parade has already taken place. It's useless to continue this debate any further (at least until next year). After much debate, less than twenty-four hours before the start of the parade the court granted an injunction preventing the ILGO from marching. Although the police were on the right side of the law as they crated off protesters, one couldn't help but feel that gays and Lesbians don't even have the the right to protest blatant hate-spreading and bigotry. Irrelevant of the law, the police and the courts certainly weren't on the inclusive, pro-humanity side. I felt that if there was no clear course of action, the city would be better off erring on the side against discrimination rather than supporting homophobes. The appearance and symbolism of the parade are what were really important. Regardless of the city's intentions or the legal semantics, to the cheering bigots on the sidewalks it must have seen as if they, the police and the city were all on the same side: trying to stop the "horrible homosexuals" from threatening a public tradition many hold dear. The message that gays are to be fought was clearly sent to everyone watching the parade. That type of signal has far-reaching effects--it's not difficult to picture what impression the many children watching the demonstration formed. I couldn't help crying as I watched the police haul protester after protester away. For me at least, the peaceful demonstration wasn't about marching in the parade. While I am Irish and I support ILGO's attempts to be recognized, I could not care less about some jingoistic, patriotic pat-on-the-back march. The demonstration was about taking every opportunity to fight. Homophobia is so difficult to fight because there is rarely a tangible enemy or a public forum. Public confrontations like this give people a chance to at least engage in some sort of struggle. All in all, the protest left me drained and depressed at the state of affairs for a number of reasons. First of all, I couldn't help thinking to myself, "This is how little we have." It wasn't that gays and Lesbians couldn't march in the parade for legal reasons, it was that even today Cardinal O'Connor and the church are still condemning "the lifestyle" of gays and encouraging homophobia. The demonstration also forced me to confront my level of commitment and to think about aspects of resistance to which I had never really given much thought. I was afraid of being arrested and wasn't sure of what the outcome would be. As a result, I took the easy way out and went to the sidelines to cheer. As soon as I had left the circle of enclosing police, I regretted it. I felt like a traitor and a hypocrite. I suppose we all have to decide how we want to go about advancing the causes that we care about. Moreover, I realized that civil disobedience is just one of the flashier ways of resistance. Writing letters, calling, organizing panels are all just as important. The lobbyist who helps pass the Lesbian and gay civil rights bill currently facing the New York State Senate is just as important, if not more so, than the demonstrator in the street. As I said, St. Patrick's Day of 1993 wasn't one of the happiest in gay and Lesbian history. I keep telling myself though, to wait until the March on Washington (MOW) April 26. Close to a million gays, Lesbians, bisexuals, and friends are going to take over the nation's capital for a day. My hope is that the MOW is going to bring my community together in a way that's never been done. With a lot of fighting and a lot of luck, a national civil rights bill to protect the rights of gays and Lesbians will not be far off. In summary, it's true: gays and Lesbians lost the battle of St. Patrick's Day, but the war is far from over. (Conor Ryan's email address is ckr2@columbia.edu)