Prop 8 Trial Coverage: A Bad Case of PMS

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial. This will be Davina's last guest post on the trial. She has done a great job in covering the plaintiff's arguments and witness testimonies. Thank you, Davina!

I want to apologize for Friday’s last blog. To be honest, I had horrible PMS, protect-marriage syndrome. Protect Marriage Syndrome, or PMS, comes on when you have to sit for hours on end and listen to Yale and Cambridge educated experts testify that you are not insane, a child-molester, a degenerate, or an obsessive compulsive gender confused threat to civilization which I guess is supposed to make you feel good.

Only, then it is followed up with having to listen to another lawyer attempt to deconstruct that witness’s testimony to the most absurd, out of context, details, for hours and hours and hours with the purpose of denying your basic dignity, worth as a human being and your constitutional rights.

I had one hell of a case of bad PMS on Friday.

GAYS ON PARADE (STRIKE THAT) TRIAL!

In her testimony on January 15th, Helen Zia talked about being on trial at her work for being gay and how that depleted her, even caused her to burn her journal, which is like losing a limb to a writer.

All LGBT people are on trial under Prop 8. Even though marriage equality supporters have brought forward this constitutional challenge to denying our right to marry, like Zia, we are on trial. We are on trial as parents, as citizens, as worthy human beings. There is nothing right about this.

LGBT people are equal. We are as whole, perfect, and complete as our straight brothers and sisters. We too have hearts that beat and love. When we fall in love it is our hearts first that seek connection with our beloveds. It’s not about plumbing. Dr. Sylvia Rhue with the National Black Justice Coalition says, “When the hearts fit the parts fit.”

The attorney asked Helen Zia, “How do you feel about Lia?”

Zia replied, “ She’s my soul mate. I love her, she’s the person I want to spend the rest of my life, the most important person to me in the world.”

Most husbands and wives, be they straight or gay, know exactly what Zia is talking about. That’s why we choose to marry, because we want to do everything we can to protect, honor, and cherish our beloved.

Zia spoke of her and Lia, getting their domestic partnership licenses. “They issues dog licenses at the same counter,” she said and then discussed getting married in San Francisco in 2004 when it was legal for a little over a month. She spoke of the wedding reception she and Lia had planned with their families that would be attended by her mother, siblings, and some of her sibling’s children.

“My marriage was invalidated a week before our wedding reception.” The attorney asks her, “How did that make you feel?”

Anyone with a heart can guess how it made her feel.

Zia said she felt “devastated, sad, grieved, horrible, our marriage had made us so happy, brought us so much joy, and was suddenly invalidated.” But what struck an even deeper chord for Zia was that she and Lia felt that their relationship was invalidated “and as human beings we were invalidated.”

PARTNERS IN LIFE? DO YOU MEAN LIFE INSURANCE?

Zia, and many of the other 4,000 couples like my wife, Molly and I, who were married in 2004 and later judicially invalidated, struggled to get through that dark time until we were able to marry again in 2008.

“Getting married has presented numerous tangible and intangible benefits.” Zia said, “After marriage, my niece came up and said to Lia. “Auntie Lia, now you are really my auntie.”

Marriage has also made a difference to how they relate to people. “People wondered ‘who is this person who is hanging on to you extra close?’

‘This is my partner.’

‘Partner, partner in what business?’

We’d say, ‘we are partners in life.’ And get used to seeing this look on their face, ‘What does life mean? Do you mean life insurance?’”

Marriage also made a difference Lia’s parents and family. “It’s a matter of how our families relate to people,” Zia said. “We show up to every family event and they ask ‘who is that?’ ‘This is Helen’s friend.’ They never got partner, now with marriage, they are able to say ‘Helen is my daughter-in-law.’

For Helen’s mother too, marriage has given her a language to explain her relationship to Lia. “My mother would struggle to say this is Helen’s friend and now she would say ‘this is my daughter-in-law.’ That’s it. end of story. We are not partners in life or business. We are spouses. This is my wife.”

MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF TWO FAMILIES

“Marriage is not just about us.” Zia testified. “Our families related to each other differently. Marriage is the joining of two families. My family and Lia’s family relate to each other differently. My brother lived near my father-in-law for years. After we were married, Lia’s father stopped by my brother’s house and dropped things off. When he introduced his children he said ‘These are my daughters and this is my favorite daughter-in-law.’”

Zia spoke of how both she and her wife Lia, shared “the important events in life,” together, births and deaths of family members. “When Lia’s father died, that’s when family comes together.” She spoke of how having marriage secured her place in the family. She was a part of the memorial and listed in the obituary. “Marriage defines who family is, who is in the circle.”

While Zia spoke, the feeling tone in the overflow room was one of soft, gentleness. It was like being in a movie theatre where people are watching a romantic comedy. There were aahhs, warm laughter, and even a few tears as Zia recounted her relationship with Lia, what Lia means to her, and how having legal marriage has affected their life.

It was deeply touching. As the court house closed up that day, one woman spoke with me and said, “I never wanted to get married until I heard Helen Zia speak. I want to know what it’s like to feel what she described.”

In the words of John Lennon, “You may say I’m a dreamer, I’m not the only one. I hope someday you will join us and the world will live as one.”

Look for my new book Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail, April 2010.

For updates of the Prop 8 trial for January 24 and 25th, go to: Courage Campaign’s Prop 8 Trial Tracker. I'm hitting the proverbial showers.

Image: Helen Zia (left) and wife Lia (right).

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 9: Being Gay Is Bad For My Health, But Not For the Reasons You Think

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 9. Oh, and happy birthday, Davina!

I have not been to the gym since the Prop 8 trial started two weeks ago. I can’t even think of going to the gym in the morning when I have to race to San Francisco, go through the security obstacle course at the Federal building which includes taking off my shoes, jacket, turning my lap top on, going through a metal detector, surrendering my camera, bending over and coughing - okay it’s not that bad, but close.

Then I take the elevator to the 19th floor, slam my coffee, compliments of Billy the Rockstar, turn on my computer, connect to the network, bring up Twitter, Facebook, AOL, my website, and word and stake out my territory.

At lunch, I stuff my face with carbs, since the salad bar line is way too long, and then extra carbs to numb out the pain of the tortuous cross-examination. Girlfriend, I’m putting on the pounds!

TODAY STINKS-LITERALLY!

Being in the court room today feels like sitting in a college statistics class. It’s just hella boring, maybe because it’s my 40th birthday today and I came to the courtroom instead of getting a massage and doing something even mildly more fun than this today, like getting a root canal for example.

Maybe it’s because there is something way too human transpiring in this room today. The overflow room is filled with people and for whatever reason there are terrible odors!! Who the hell keeps farting? What’s with the severe body odor and the hacking coughs?

We gay people need some self-care. If you are sick, get into bed and drink plenty of liquids. Bathe-it does a body good. Wash your clothes. Leave the room if you need to pass gas.

Oh shoot, now I’m sneezing.

This may be my last blog for the day, especially since Yeson8 counsel is now talking about a lesbian who was married to a man and must have enjoyed having sex with him. I don’t think I can take listening to argument the Yeson8 counsel is trying to make.

Just because gay people may have had str8 sex, that doesn’t mean they are str8. It means that we were straight-curious or hadn’t come out yet.

The case will continue Monday and Tuesday and Judge Walker indicated today that the closing arguments will likely be scheduled in February. Marriage Equality USA plans to hold a vigil on the last day of closing arguments. There will also be a rally day of decision which will likely be within 90 days of closing arguments.

In the meantime, send thoughts of equality to Hawaii, Indiana, and New Hampshire where opponents of equality are trying to move us backwards.

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 5: 21 Bogus Reasons Why Gender Matters

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 5 - the cross examination of Professor Michael Lamb continued and then redirect (see first and second post of day 5).

During the Prop 8 campaign Ron Prentice reportedly distributed a booklet to churches that included an article entitled '21 Reasons Why Gender Matters': Examines Gender Disorientation Pathology And Social Policy, and made up his own psychological terminology “Gender Disorientation Pathology,” as any first year psychology graduate student with knowledge of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-TR) would know.

Dr. Lamb obviously had never heard of it either.

Dr. Lamb refuted the 21 reasons with peer-reviewed research and literature.

At least four of the reasons were just complete make believe.

15. “Healthy gender development prevents individuals from developing compulsive obsessive disorders leading to sexual addiction and other pathologies.” (The terminology is actually obsessive compulsive disorders - ask any psych grad student).

16. “Gender disorientation pathology is a symptom of family dysfunction, personality disorder, father absence, health malfunction or sexual abuse.”

17. “Gender disorientation pathology will lead to increased levels of drug abuse and partner violence.”

21. “Gender disorientation pathology encourages the sexual and psychological exploitation of children.”

Go here if you wish to read the pseudo-psychological 21 reasons.

YES ON 8 CAMPAIGN USED BOGUS MADE UP RESEARCH AND TERMINOLOGY

Apparently, in the booklet, Prentice makes statements that “12% of children of lesbian became active lesbians themselves.”

Dr. Lamb says this is inaccurate according to extensive research on children of same-sex parents.

GAYS NOT MORE LIKELY TO ABUSE THAN HETEROSEXUALS

Prentice states - "The sad truth is that homosexual abuse of children is higher than heterosexuals. It is the right of the child to know and have a relationship with bio parent. GENDER ORIENTATION PATHOLOGY increases the risk that children will suffer sexual exploitation. It is our duty to protect them.”

Lamb refutes all of the above and states that gays are no more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexuals and reiterates that there is no such concept or disorder called GENDER ORIENTATION PATHOLOGY. He asserts that there is three decades of research refuting this myth and that children are most likely to get hurt by school bullies who don’t respect or accept their LGBT parents.

POST-LUNCH CROSS EXAMINATION OF LAMB-SORRY THIS IS A BIT OUT OF ORDER

Defendant Council Thompson begins focusing on research that step-fathers are more likely to abuse their step-children then biological fathers. He’s not arguing for covenant-no divorce marriage (yet), but he seems hell-bent to say that all step-fathers and anyone non-biologically related to the child is a menace to that child, to wipe out all non-biological parents from capable child-rearing.

First, it is true some step-fathers molest their children. I ran a sexual abuse survivors program for ten years when I worked as a psychologist for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. There were many women who had been sexually abused by their biological parents too. Does that mean that WE should take children away from their biological fathers because of the chance, that being men, they might abuse their children?

Second, this case is about marriage. Couples who never or can’t have biological children can marry and no one is rushing to pass constitutional amendments to take away their marriage rights. Also, have you noticed, same-sex couples are already, legally raising children, but I’m not naïve, I know that they are hoping to use this kind of bogus logic to take away same-sex couples rights to parent and adopt. They just did in Arkansas last year.

GRANDPARENTS CAN BE IMPORTANT TO A CHILD’S PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT, CORRECT?

Thompson- So the grandparents’ financial contributions to children make a difference in their lives, correct? Clearly we note that the psychological well-being of parents affects their ability to parent and the quality of relationship with their children.

Holy Research Twisting Batman!

Thompson is now taking the fact that some straight parents of LGBT people reject their children and so are not involved in their grandchildren’s lives and that this hurts these kids—the implication that kids would be better off with straight parents because their parents don’t reject them.

Okay my friend’s Ashle and Kinna have two wonderful daughters and the grandparents are extremely involved in their grandbabies’ lives. My friend, Maurie, a straight mom of a lesbian daughter and proud grandmother of two, is extremely active in her grandchildren’s lives and is more than happy to show you the beautiful picture of her grandchildren as ring bearer and flower girl at their mothers’ long-awaited legal marriage before Prop 8 passed.

Should they be denied their constitutional rights because some straight parents/grandparents are stifled in the current ability to accept their LGBT children? Should straight people who have difficulties with their parents and have been disowned for various reasons or chosen themselves to cut off communication lose their right to a marriage license? Again I think the answers are obvious here. And similar arguments were used to keep interracial couples from marrying.

GAYS SUFFER FROM MINORITY DISTRESS

While the psychological research shows that LGBT people experience minority distress due to homophobia and discrimination, Thompson decides to take the implication to an illogical conclusion.

He is also making the point that because LGBT people suffer minority distress, which leads to anxiety and depression, and because depression and anxiety affects parenting, LGBT parents do not make good parents. Wow!

I wonder what he says about People of Color who also experience minority distress due to racism and discrimination. I’m sure somewhere in there these folks may be advocating for fewer babies of color, remember they are very concerned with population growth, and believe that gay marriage will lead to the population dying out.

When I debated Maggie Gallagher at Brown University in 2006, she spoke with concern about the reduction of children being born in Western Europe. I could be wrong, but it sure seemed like she was suggesting that not enough white babies were being born, cause as far as I can tell, there’s no overall global shortage of babies being born.

IS IT ALMOST OVER YET

Thompson-“Dr. Lamb likes to talk about these rich, deep studies, but you don’t have any knowledge if these studies had control groups with biological, married parents which is the core of our case.”

Judge Walker interceded and says to Counsel Thompson. “We’re trying a case - is there a way to shorten your questions.”

I agree. My brain and body are starting to check out. I tend to dissociate a bit when Thompson steps up for cross-examination. He is quite annoying and his disdain for educated people, reality, facts, and gay people make me feel like I’ve been watching FOX news for hours. I can only take this stuff in doses, that’s why I watch the Daily Show with John Stuart - at least there are funny jokes in between his reports of the assault on logic, truth, and human decency.

Did I mention that there was a huge group of Stanford Law Students here today?

REDIRET

Discussing Michael Rosenfeld study based on U.S. Census.

Lamb - It is the only study we have, a rare study, which compares all the children in the country in the environments that they are reared, couple thousand children raised by lesbians, with couples thousand children raised by gay male couples, compared to children raised by heterosexual couples.

Matthew D. McGill Plaintiffs’ Attorney - In your experience is a sample based on U.S. census adequate to be reliable?

Lamb-Yes.

McGill-Why does it make sense to maintain a control group of heterosexual couples raising children?

Lamb-Seems most appropriate control group.

McGill-Why?

Lamb-Because you have unmarried couples in all of those groups. Children adopted into two parent family and children in bio family.

The point is to answer Thompson’s early assertion that none of the research used only heterosexual married couple with biological children. If they had, it would not have been an accurate group to compare with gay parents who are not legally married and some children, their children, are biological, others are adopted, and some are from IVF and other forms of alternative insemination. The researchers chose to be in the real world, acknowledging the diversity and variation of families, rather than embracing only one family type.

And speaking of typing, my wife wants to know - Are you done yet?

Yes dear, for tonight.

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 5: Cross Examination of Professor Lamb - Let the Badgering Begin

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 5 - the cross examination of Professor Michael Lamb.

Attorney Thompson [for Prop 8 proponents] steps up to the plate and starts his rapid fire questioning [of Professor Lamb] again.

You are a member of the ACLU, correct?

You are a member of… asks 10 more questions about his membership.

You give money to PBS, so you are a committed liberal, correct?

Then he attacks him by saying he has no clinical experience as a psychologist, he is only a researcher?

You are not a clinical psych, never done therapy before, correct?

You have not interviewed a child for over 20 years, correct?

(DUH-That’s what graduate students and research assistants are for!)

If you look at the Homer Simpson’s of the world, they are much more likely to be men than women, correct?

Breast feeding is better for children and men can’t breast feed is that correct?

Women earn less money than men, correct?

There are differences between the earning power of gay men and lesbians, correct?

Lesbians earn less than heterosexuals, correct?

Lee Badger, (actually her name is Badgett, but badgering is what you are doing and perhaps you were thinking of another small mammal), she says contrary to popular stereotype after controlling for race, age, male couples’ income is 4% higher than heterosexuals income, and female couples is 7% lower than married couples.

WOMEN SPEND MONEY DIFFERENTLY THAN MEN WITH REGARD TO CHILDREN

Women spend money differently than men with regard to children, correct?

Gender is associated with certain occupations correct?

Gender is assoc with educational opportunities, correct?

Men are more likely to perpetrate sexual abuse than women, correct? So step-fathers are more likely to sexually and physically abuse children than mothers correct?

Men who are married are less likely to drink heavily and gamble, correct?

Just to be clear, Dr. Lamb is qualifying all of his responses with intelligent arguments that I can't capture as quickly and Thompson's statements.

[Note from UTF: Courage Campaign's Prop 8 Trial Tracker has Lamb's responses.]

WHO ARE THE PEOPLE IN THE OVERFLOW ROOM?

“I didn’t know any of what Lamb discussed. Frankly, I don’t care about all those studies. I’m just a parent. I know what kind of job I do, I know a number of gay parents and I know what kind of parents they are. When they say gays are child molesters-- that hurts my heart.” - Billy, gay parent, father of two children.

Niko and Lorna, a multi-racial lesbian couple from San Francisco stood in line to enter the court room. The committed couple said they were there because they want to get a domestic partnership in San Francisco and found out that as a same-sex couple they had to pay $23 more than heterosexual couples applying for a domestic partnership certificate.

“Why should we have to pay more for a domestic partnership registration than straight couples?” The couple said that they were told by SF clerks that the $23 went to pay for an LGBT education fund. “Why can’t straight people pay the extra $23 for the LGBT educational fund?” I told them this was the first I ever heard of this.

Court on lunch break!

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 5: Children Raised By Gay and Lesbian Parents Are Just As Well-Adjusted As Children Raised By Heterosexual Parents

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, day 5.

Michael Lamb, PhD discussed [today in trial] the impact of same-sex marriage on children. Lamb is the author of The Role of the Father in Child Development and co-author of Child Care and Its Impact on Young Children (2-5) published by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, USA (2004).

Lamb is a Professor at University of Cambridge, England. For seventeen years, he was the head of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Since the 1970s, for nearly 40 years, Lamb has conducted research about children’s social and emotional development. He is achieved prestigious awards for his lifetime contributions to psychology.

He has two primary areas of study:

1. Investigation of sex crimes involving children and interviewing children who are young victims.

2. Factors that affect children’s adjustment, those aspects of children’s development that allow them to function effectively in their environment and to interact effectively with society.

He stated that over the past 40 years there are over 100 peer reviewed professional articles on children being raised by gay and lesbian parents.

He has two opinions on same-sex marriage with regard to LGBT people raising children. He stated:

1. Children raised by gays and lesbians are just as well-adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.

2. The emotional and social adjustment of children raised by gay and lesbian parents would be promoted if their parents could get married.

Lamb says that the consensus over 40 years of research indicate that there are three broad factors that impact the healthy adjustment of a child.

1. The quality of relationship with parent or parent figures.

2. The quality of relationship between the two parents or significant adults.

3. The environment the child is raised in has adequate economic and social resources.

Lamb states that “a good parent is someone who is committed to, loves the child, is engaged with the child, focuses attention on that child, can read the child’s signals, has an understanding of what the child needs, provides the child with stimulation, and provides appropriate guidance for and limits on that child.”

WHAT MAKES AN EFFECTIVE PARENT IS THE SAME REGARDLESS IF THE PARENT IS A MOTHER OR A FATHER

Attorneys introduced a quote from President Obama that stated “Statistics show that children who grow up without a father are 5xs more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, 9xs more likely to drop out of schools, 20xs more likely to end up in prison.”

Lamb says that “actually the factors that better explain this is not that there is no father, it is that these children grow up in households with more conflict between parents, have fewer economic resources…”

According to Lamb, “our research on masculine and feminine parents has made clear that that initial prediction (a child needs a mother and a father as parents) is incorrect. We’ve come to a new conclusion. What makes a good parent is the same for either a male or a female, a child does not specifically need a mother or a father.”

The attorney asks Lamb to read a policy statement from the American Psychological Association in support of marriage equality for same-sex couples and their families. He then reads the names of the following organizations who have also submitted policy statements affirming same-sex marriage.

American Psychological Association

American Academy of Child Psychology

American Pediatric

Psychiatric Association

Psychoanalytic Association

Child Welfare League of America

Social Workers

North American Council on Adoptable Children

MORE ON RON PRENTICE’S 21 REASONS GENDER MATTERS IN NEXT BLOG, STAY TUNED

THE COST OF MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION

Yesterday, Edmund Egan, PhD. San Francisco’s Chief Economist, spoke about the cost of discrimination to the City & County of San Francisco. Egan discussed all the lost revenue in marriage licenses and weddings since Prop 8 passed and stopped happy couples from saying “I do.”

Just a little tease, my new book, Love Warriors: The Rise of the Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail explores in greater detail the cost of marriage discrimination across the nation. Children raised by G&L parents are NOT more likely to develop a gender identity disorder.

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 3: You All Have Brockeback Mountain, and It Even Got Awards - Gay Discrimination Is Over

Guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com reports on the Prop 8 trial, the morning of day 3.

YOU ALL HAVE BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN AND IT EVEN GOT AWARDS--- GAY DISCRIMINATION IS OVER

Thompson, the smug attorney for the Proponents of Prop 8, is taking the position that gays are not being discriminated against any more and so that cannot be the reason that Prop 8 passed.

He makes a point and then asks Professor Chauncey if that is correct.

He’s mentioning Will & Grace, the movie Philadelphia and Brokeback Mountain as evidence that LGBT people are not being discriminated again.

NANCY PELOSI IS A GAY RIGHTS CHAMPION, RIGHT?

Did I miss something? Nancy Pelosi is our fierce advocate?

Thompson says she is.

Thompson-“Homosexuals couldn’t get hearings in the 1950s, but today you have Barney Frank and he’s a powerful ally of gays and lesbians, correct?”

Thompson, “You have AIDS funding, isn’t that important to gays and lesbians, correct?”

Thompson, “Thousands of employers have non-discrimination policies, correct?”

PRESIDENTIAL POLICY ON GAYS AND LESBIANS

Thompson- “President Clinton appointed 116 gays to employment, correct?”

Thompson- “He issued presidential orders, barring discrimination in employment, correct?”

Again, I was a federal employee, all the advances Clinton made for LGBT people in the government were immediately revoked or ignored during Bush’s 8 years. It was shocking to see how quickly we went backwards.

In 1999 and 2000, I held “lunch and learns” on gay issues during gay pride month. The first June Bush was in office, I was no longer welcome to hold such gatherings. And I believe it was Judy Shepard who had been invited to speak at Department of Justice (DOJ)-Pride in Washington, DC, an LGBT employment group made up of Department of Justice employees, was not allowed to speak in the DOJ board room. DOJ Pride, which had also held “lunch and learns” for gay issues in June, was told that they could no longer meet on DOJ property.

If my memory serves me, a Democratic Senator invited Judy Shepard and DOJ Pride to come use his conference room. That was June 2001, the first year Bush was in office. Believe me, it only got worse until Obama took office eight years later.

ALL MEN AND WOMEN ARE SINNERS, CORRECT?

Christian organizations against gay rights are in the minority, correct?

Thompson trying to show that significant shift in acceptance toward gay people as evidence by the fact that numerous churches support gay rights and read off a list of denominations that support gay people. He also submitted two videos for evidence to show that even the churches are supporting gay people.

One video is of the signing of the DC marriage equality resolution being signed in a church and the other was an interview of Rick Warren on Fox when he said that he believed that people should show “respect” for “all people regardless of their lifestyle, but I don’t believe in redefining marriage as it’s been the past 5000 years.”

Prop 8 Trial Coverage Day 2: Homosexuality - This Is Your Life

Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com covers day 2 of Prop 8 trial testimony of Professor George Chauncey, Historian

RUSHING TO LUNCH

At 12:30 PM we broke for lunch and raced to the Cafeteria on the 2nd floor of the fed building. I inhaled some sushi because I couldn’t wait for something to cook. I was famished. Can you believe they have a sushi bar at the fed building?

I had lunch with Terry Stewart’s wife and daughter, my wife, and plaintiff for the California Marriage Case John Lewis. [Note from UTF: Terry Stewart is representing the city of San Francisco fighting against Prop 8. She was argued against Prop 8 before the CA Supreme Court back in May.]

I asked John Lewis to tell me what he thought of the case. He said he was struck by the bravery of the plaintiff couples and said “over the past decade the success of the marriage equality movement can be attributed to LGBTI couples, their family and friends, who have spoken the truth of their lives in every possible setting, with co-workers, at rallies, too media, and even going door to door.”

Lewis said “This takes tremendous courage and belief in one’s dignity to be treated equally under the law and to stand up for your own life and offer that for the betterment of others now and in the future. The plaintiffs offered live testimony of their lives in a court case where they are subjecting themselves to hostile cross examination on the most important part of their lives.”

Well said John!

IN THE COURTROOM

Thanks to the wonderful generosity of blogger Michael Petrelis who shared his media pass with me, I had the chance to sit in the court room for the afternoon testimony by Yale Professor George Chauncey. Stuart Milk, Harvey Milk’s gay nephew, was there. Hoping to do an interview with him tomorrow.

Chauncey is a historian who wrote Why Marriage: The history shaping the debate over gay equality (2004). He is an internationally sought after speaker whose received numerous awards.

Unfortunately, this is when my computer decided to die.

Chauncey began talking about the widespread discrimination gays and lesbians faced in the public and private arenas, focusing specifically on public accommodation, employment, censorship, stereotyping, and then just plain old discrimination.

HOMOSEXUALITY THIS IS YOUR LIFE

Chauncey’s testimony was like “homosexuality this is your life!” Remember when you could be arrested for association and sodomy? Remember when we called you a degenerate and made up laws to throw you in jail for simply being in a bar?

Oh, this one’s great - remember when vagrancy laws were used to ensnare you in California and getting arrested meant the police would, according to Chauncey:

1. Call your family to “verify your identity” and out you.
2. Call your landlord to confirm that you lived there and out you.
3. Call your employer to verify your employment and out you.

And remember after prohibition when everyone else could drink, laws were passed to keep you out of the bars. Laws that actually prohibited gays and lesbians being served drinks or the bar would lose its liquor license, so you had to hang out at the bars that were operated by organized crime syndicates. Boy, homosexuality, you’ve come a long way baby, except, because of this, people still affiliate you with and compare you to criminals.

IF YOU’RE GAY STAY AWAY

I was shocked to learn today that there were actually signs posted outside of bars that said “If you’re gay, stay away” and “it’s against the law to serve homosexuals.” Hmm, what does that remind me of? And if these offensive signs weren’t enough, cops regularly raided bars looking for homosexuals or people that they thought looked like ‘em.

According to Chauncey, and you older gays probably remember this (I was in the womb during Stonewall, literally), plain-clothed policemen would go into bars and look for “stereotypical cross-gender behavior…women with short hair, masculine clothing, swaggering around the bar in ways that women shouldn’t walk..men with colorful clothes, long hair, and greeting each other in a feminine way.”

Chauncey even said that one person he interviewed said that one way to tell was if “two men talking about the opera, something no real man would do.”

Chauncey went on to talk about the legacy of police raiding bars and arresting gay people and referenced the Black Cat Bar, raid in San Francisco which lost it’s license in 1949. There was a court ruling that you couldn’t discriminate. But Chauncey said the police continued to crack down on bars with gays.

As we know they continued in 1969 with the Stonewall Inn in NY and even last year in Fort Worth, Texas. This legacy, while less frequent Chauncey says, still continues.

A DESPISED CLASS OF PEOPLE, OUTLAWS IN THE EYES OF THE LAW

2:07 PM

Terry Stewart asked Chauncey-How did this effect gay people?

GC- They were a despised class of people, outlaws in the eyes of the law. They needed to take great care and keep secret that they were gay. It more broadly associated gay life with criminality. Seedy, underbelly of society, associated with organized crime.

GC-WWI military decided to exclude homosexuals and to begin screening procedures to keep gay people out. Not surprisingly, they didn’t ferret people out. Most gays, like their peers, wanted to serve their country and were accustomed to passing as straight. Small town gays were very concerned about keeping that hidden.

PROFOUND CONSEQUENCES—GAYS AND THE MILITARY

Chauncey stated that the military had various procedures in place to keep homosexuals out and that when discovered they were discharged. Sound familiar?

The consequences for those who were discovered to be gay either before or during military service were profound.

Chauncey, “It was humiliating. They were denied benefits under the GI bill - even soldiers who served in combat and were kicked out because they were discovered to be gay. They were prohibited from benefits for housing, education, employment, etc. People wanted to see your discharge papers and find out what you were fired for before they hired you which did not help them.”

Chauncey “The War was an important moment of bringing people together.” He mentioned WWII. “Think of the classic WWII movie -The Jew from Brooklyn, the Irish guy from Jersey, the Italian from San Francisco.” Gay men were not able to be a part of this and then were seen as suspect because they were not a part of protecting the country.

The following fact is submitted for evidence--“Over the first 10 years of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell it cost the Defense Department 95 million dollars.”

HOMOSEXUALS, SEX PERVERTS, AND COMMUNISTS

Chauncey went on to talk about what happened after WWII. Things got worse for gays.

He says that in 1950, Joseph Macarthur wanted the names of communists and sex perverts. This led to the formation of top congressional committees on the employment of homosexuals and other sex perverts in government.

A document entitled something like On the Employment of Homosexuals, Sex Perverts and Communists is submitted as evidence.

Chauncey said that approximately “1,700 people had been prohibited from getting federal jobs” and noted that the State Department “dismissed more suspected homosexuals than communists.”

He said that President Eisenhower also created a policy that homosexuals could not work for the government, be in the military, or work for private companies who had contracts with the government, and that they had to fire their gay employees.

In 1975, Carter rescinded that policy, so that most government agencies no longer were required to fire gays and were able to hire them. But it was not until the 1990s that President Clinton ended that policy in intelligence agencies and prohibited discrimination federal employment for gay employees.

I was hired by the Department of Justice as a psychologist in June 1996 and during my background investigation I came out. The investigator documented that I had revealed I was a homosexual and proceeded to ask me if people knew of my homosexuality. I affirmed that I was open about my sexual orientation and found out later that they contacted my employer, my landlord, and many of my friends to confirm that I was a “known homosexual” and therefore could not be blackmailed.

WAITER, HAIRDRESSER, CLERICAL WORKER

Chauncey talked about employment discrimination that still exists in at least 20 states.

Terry Stewart asked if discrimination in employment affected “access to jobs in the private sector.”

Chauncey- "Gay people faced discrimination from a range of employers varied from occupation to occupation, company to company, most people had to hide their homosexuality for fear of losing their job.”

Stewart-Did it limit their job choices or channel them into specific occupations?

Chauncey-A good number of gay people pursued the profession they wanted, hid their identities, but there were also a good number of people who did not want to risk that and were funneled into low status job where being gay wouldn’t matter.

He mentions waiter, hairdresser, clerical worker.

WE HAD A GAY OLD TIME THIS WEEKEND

Stewart-What were the effects on gay people generally?

Chauncey-gay life was pushed under ground. They had to hide it. Increased the stakes for people. It meant that they were secretive, special codes, gay liberation in the 1970, in 1940s and 1960s, they used the word “gay” as a code word.

CENSORSHIP

Stewart-Can you explain gay people having been subject to censorship?

Chauncey-In the movies, Legion of Decency, led by Catholics, they led the charge to edit films with gay content. Pressured Hollywood.

1934 or 1944 enforced the Hays Code.

You had to pay a fine [if code was broken]. Prohibited interracial relationships, lesbian and gay characters, discussion of homosexuality.

A generation of Hollywood films could not include gay characters or explore gay lives.

Hollywood screenwriters had to submit scripts. Very strictly managed.

TV networks were even more constrained than Hollywood.

1980s, as recently as 1989, a pop TV series called 30 something had a scene with two men in bed with sheets. It was so shocking that various religious organizations threatened boycotts and it was not shown at all, putting a chilling effect on the inclusion of gay characters.

Gay people didn’t know there were other gay people like themselves. Older gays didn’t see themselves represented and were reminded that they were a despised group.

Kept people hiding themselves and it kept straight people from knowing gay people and allowed stereotypes to emerge.

See Day 3 coverage.

Prop 8 Trial Coverage: Opening Remarks From Ted Olson and Giggling at Opponents' Statements

UPDATE: See Davina's full summary of the first day of trial.

Due to my inability to blog and Davina Kotulski's amazing access to the Prop 8 trial, Davina has kindly granted permission to crosspost her reporting on Unite the Fight. Davina has started a new blog at DavinaKotulski.com where her posts can also be found. Check it out. She has provided the following bio for UTF readers:

Davina Kotulski, Ph.D., is a psychologist, motivational life coach, author of "Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage" and "Love Warriors: The Rise of The Marriage Equality Movement and Why It Will Prevail" that will be released in April 2010, and the former Executive Director of Marriage Equality USA.

She has deep roots in the freedom to marry movement that began with organizing “Marriage License Counter” protests. On February 12, 2004, Kotulski and her wife, were the 17th couple married in San Francisco. Kotulski organized the "Marriage Equality Express," an educational bus tour across the United States that culminated in the first national marriage equality rally in Washington, DC on October 11, 2004. She has appeared on CNN, Newsweek, Time and USA Today and in three documentaries: "Freedom to Marry" “Pursuit of Equality,” and “I Will, I Do, We Did”. Davina has published several articles on marriage equality in Bond Magazine, Flawles Magazine, Bay Area Reporter, Outword Magazine, and in an anthology entitled I Do, I Don’t: Queers on Marriage.

Davina received the “Saints Alive Award” from the Metropolitan Community Church and she was “sainted” Saint Activista Davina by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence in August 2004.

Marriage Equality Advocates Begin Prop 8 Trial With Early Morning Vigil

My hands are still numb from standing in the cold this morning outside the federal building in San Francisco. Marriage Equality USA sponsored a vigil for marriage equality, hope, and justice. There were over 200 participants holding candles to light the early morning rally attended by numerous clergy from many different denominations, including a former Catholic nun and non-PFLAG Mom, Helen Laird. Helen stood with her son and Tim and spoke of why she believed that all of her children had the right to marry. She said her son Tim was legally married prior to Prop 8, but that the family is waiting to celebrate until marriage equality is again the law of the land in California.

Ksuzanne and her wife, both African-American activists for marriage equality, spoke of the importance of being representatives for the Black Gay community and spoke of how being able to legally marry granted them the right to hospital visitation, a right Ksuzanne unfortunately had to exercise post-Prop 8 when her wife was hospitalized for a life-threatening condition.

Frank and Joe Alfano-Capley spoke of finally being recognized as a legally married couple by the Elevators Union so that Joe can finally get health insurance. While the crowd cheered this wonderful breakthrough, Frank and Joe said it saddened them that the union will not recognize domestic partners and thus another couple with a small child who were unable to marry during the small window when it was legal are still being denied health and other employment related benefits only provided married couples.

Overall the mood of the vigil was positive. Molly McKay, my wonderful wife, spoke of how last year’s garbage has turned to rich compost, an unusual, but accurate metaphor of the outpouring of support for marriage and renewed hope that comes with this new challenge to marriage discrimination. Rev. Roland Stringfellow offered a beautiful evocation for equality and love. There were inspiring performances by Veronica Klaus who sang “I can see clearly now the rain is gone,” and “Here comes the sun.” Melanie Demore, performed “Somewhere over the rainbow” and the civil rights song “Ain’t gonna let nobody turn me around.”

So, now I wait patiently for the trial to start any minute now. Word is that the cameras will not be allowed into the courtroom until after Wednesday. No youtube today.

90 Minutes into the Prop 8 Proceedings

The Prop 8 trial started with introductions from all the attorneys and discussion of the stay of live feed of the trial to other federal court houses and streaming for youtube. A stay has been issued until Wednesday at 4:00 PM. The only place to watch the proceedings is an overflow room in the Federal Building in San Francisco.

Judge Walker reported that he received 138,542 requests for TV coverage of the trial and only 32 requests opposing televised coverage.

Ted Olson, the attorney challenging Prop 8, spoke for the first hour.

He stated “This case is about marriage and equality. Plaintiffs are being denied the right to marry and under the law.”

“The right to marriage is one the most vital personal rights."

“A basic civil right.”

“A constitution right to privacy, association, intimacy and choice…a spiritual and public commitment.”

“Marriage is the most important relationship in life and of fundamental importance of all individuals.”

“Marriage is central to psychological, emotional, and physical health. Marriage is the building block of family, neighborhood, and community in our society.”

“Gays and lesbians have been classified as degenerates, targeted by police, fired from government jobs, arrested for private sexual conduct, and stripped of their rights by popular vote.”

"Domestic partners say that gay people are different, separate and unworthy."

“The roots of discrimination run deep... Prop 8 singles out gays alone…even convicted murders and child abusers in California enjoy the freedom to marry."

Olson said that opponents of Proposition 8 will argue these three points:

1. Marriage is vitally important in American Society.
2. Denying same-sex Prop 8 causes grievous harm against gay and lesbian individuals and adds another chapter of discrimination and suffering
3. Prop 8 perpetrates immeasurable harm for no good reason

The Giggling Has Begun

As soon as the Yes on 8 attorney [Charles Cooper] took the floor and began speaking out against marriage equality for same-sex couples, the giggles in the media overflow room started.

“Marriage is for a child whose mom and dad had a sexual union. Marriage is to take men and women’s procreation and to “channel it into an enduring union.”

Walker asked, "How does same-sex marriage diminish procreation for heterosexual couples?"

“Well, will this institution remain a pro-child institution or will it be a private relationship that provides couples with personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love?”

I prefer the latter. Marriage should be about personal fulfillment, companionship, and expressions of love what a wonderful environment for adults who them choose to bring children into this world into these kinds of self-actualized, loving families.

They lie. They say gay marriage will lower the marriage rate and increase the divorce rate. I remind that Massachusetts which has had same-sex marriage for 6 years reportedly has the lowest divorce rate.

Time for Obama to come out in support of marriage equality.

Prop 8 supporters used a quote of President Obama’s support of civil unions and statement against gay marriage to justify Prop 8.

Judge Walker commented that President Obama also said that if his parents wouldn’t be able to marry under anti-miscegenation laws.

Equality California is calling on people to contact Obama and ask him to come out against Prop 8. (Go here to sign petition)

“Marriage is the sexual embodiment of the man and the woman who form the union. The sexual embodiment forms the institution. Only naturally procreated contact will bring forward life. It’s best when the child is brought into the world that the parents are together," said Cooper.

Earlier in the proceedings, Ted Olson stated that “The quality of a parent is not measured by gender it is measured by the content of the heart.”

Gay marriage leads to group marriage?

Yes, the Yes on 8 attorney proposed that if same-sex marriage was legal, bisexuals will want to “have the right to express their love and achieve personal fulfillment by the state.”

Prop 8 Trial Coverage: I’m a 45 y.o. Woman and I Don’t Have a Word to Describe My Relationship

By guest blogger Davina Kotulski of DavinaKotulski.com.

Boies calls Kristen Perry to the stand. Describe your sexual orientation.

Perry-"I am a lesbian." Boies-"What does that mean?"

"I've only ever fallen in love with women. The happiest I've ever felt is with Sandy because I'm in love with her."

Boies-"Do you think you'll change."

Perry-"I'm 45 years old. I don't think so. I never let myself want (marriage) until now because everyone tells you you're never going to have it."

We went to City Hall and brought all of the boys and my mom and we got married at City Hall. The feelings I had were new to me. I have not let myself want to feel them, floating above the ceremony oh that’s me getting married. I couldn’t believe it. After, we had another ceremony with other people. We planned an afternoon with our friends and family in Berkeley… 100 guests in August 2004.

A few weeks after our August ceremony the California State Supreme Court ruled that our marriages were invalidated.

When you’re gay you think you don’t deserve things. So, I kind of expected it. The City of SF sent us a letter telling us that our marriage was not valid. That’s when we knew we were not married in SF anymore.

Boies-“What did that evoke?”

Perry-“I’m not good enough to be married.”

Boies-“What did you feel when the California Court ruled in 2008?”

Perry-“I was elated. But we couldn’t bring ourselves to do it again right then. We hadn’t really recovered from what happened in 2004. We decided not to go forward at that time.”

They discuss Yes on Prop 8 Ad

Perry- “The ad was to create a set of fear in me and that if I want to fix a bad thing I should vote Yes on 8.”

I'm a 45 y.o. woman and I don't have the word to describe my relationship. It appears to be really important to people and I'd like to use the word too. It symbolizes the most important adult decision you make in your life. You choose that relationship.

They get to support our family in a way that makes sense to them. Because right now we are outside the tradition.

Boies “I’m sure you heard the argument that -Allowing you to get married will damage the institution of marriage.”

“There is something so humiliating about everyone knowing that you want to make that decision (to marry) and knowing that you can’t. I still have to find a way to feel okay and not let every discriminatory behavior toward me personally.”

Nicely done Kristen!!!

Image: Kristen Perry, named plaintiff in Prop 8 case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger