What would Buddha do?

Whether we like it or not, admit it or not, religion (or some philosophical variant thereof) plays a role in political participation. At an extreme are social conservatives who have made it their mission to dictate our lives by infecting every branch of government with agents that would change and override our laws. Another extreme are those who would have nothing to do at all with politics.

At a dinner party during the week of the Democratic Convention, conversation predictably turned into commentary and debate. A heated discussion over Clinton and Obama ensued among those at the table, except for a guest who quietly chewed on his specially prepared vegetarian fare. The host, not hearing a peep from the man, asked him what he thought.

"I don't get involved in politics," he proclaimed, "it distresses me." A self-taught Buddhist, he was making a point about how he transcended it all. A bit familiar with Buddhism myself, I reminded him about a central tenet of the philosophy that we are all interconnected and hence have a responsibility to each other. Gautama himself, after reaching enlightenment, chose to live among his ignorant contemporaries that they might be enlightened. As such, while political engagement might disturb his precious peace, there is a moral imperative to act and get involved - policies affect our daily lives.

"I don't need people," he coolly replied. When I pointed out that he would not be relishing the organic mozzarella, tomato and basil sprinkled with extra virgin olive oil sandwich nor the spinach and pea soup before him were it not for the farmers, bakers, truckers, and shopkeepers, he confidently announced that "I will survive without people, I will find something to eat, I am sure of this."

At this point, the host interjected, wanting to save the self-contained and -sustained man from himself. She rightfully argued that there are many ways of being involved and tried to remember a quotation about how there has to be peaceful people in order to have true peace in the world. While I agreed with her, I countered that prayer or enlightenment ought to lead to action. Sure, Jesus retreated on occasion but he always returned to preach, heal, turn over the moneychangers' tables and get crucified. Boddhisatvas, enlightened beings or Buddhas, choose to stay or return to our world to help all beings. Prophets of the old testament worshipped Yahweh while being gadflies to kings. Muhammad preached compassion and mercy.

Unperturbed, the man reiterated that he doesn't care. "Republican or Democrat, it doesn't affect me." Easy to say for a government scientist who lives in Georgetown. Another guest then said, okay, but what about other people who are adversely affected by policies instituted by Republican and Democrats?

"I don't care ... if someone was dying next to me, it wouldn't affect me ... would I give my life for another person? Frankly, no. I don't care." Clearly.

Now that is extreme.

Image of Buddhist monks protesting (Myanmar).

What if Michael Phelps came out?

What if Michael Phelps came out? Came out as an American who believes in what is right, just and good? This occurred to me while watching his interview in a morning television show. What a potent spokesperson he would be for bringing back economic stability, shared prosperity, equal opportunity, basic human rights, pride and respect to our country. His story - a son of a single mother, a person who worked day in and day out for a dream, a young man who shares his success and inspires the next generation - would remind us of what is still possible if we were to come together for change.

And what if all gay women and men came out? What if the estimated 18 to 40 million lesbian, gay bisexual & transgender women and men stood up and told their families, friends, neighbors and coworkers that they are the same people they know and love but are now free and proud? How could our reality and human rights be denied any more? If enlisted women and men, military leaders, elected officials, farmers, athletes, Wall Streeters, celebrities, blue collar workers, community leaders, journalists, pastors, priests, rabbis and imams - if all who happen to be gay took the risk and demanded for what is right, then there would be profound change.

Now what if all parents, family members, friends and coworkers of gay people came out? Came out that they are proud of their sons and daughters, sisters and brothers, friends and colleagues? By casting out shame instilled by ignorance and fear, they too would be set free. If hundreds of millions of straight people told their elected officials, religious leaders and communities that they would no longer stand for the bigotry, hatred and injustice their loved ones suffer, there would be rightful change.

What if we all came out for what is right, just and good?

Image from Crossroads Dispatches.

Democratic Impressions

While some of us would like to think that we know presidential candidates personally, the reality is we don't. What we have are impressions about their person and character as well as ideas about what they stand for and could achieve. Among the only things we can claim as facts are basic biographic details, rehashed anecdotes, and perhaps even bills sponsored (but how many of us can honestly say we keep track of legislation?).

Impressions solidify through time as people see, hear and think more about a politician and her actions. Some Americans have the impression that McCain can get cantankerous but is nonetheless a patriot and a maverick. Others have the impression that Bill Clinton is slick but was able to set the economy right. There are those like myself who think that Hillary, while not warm and fuzzy, is a hard-working and experienced person.

What about Barack Obama? Undeniably he has made a very strong and positive impression on millions of Americans, but the novelty of this first impression has faded. And it has become apparent that we "know" him not. He seems like an intelligent man with values and aspirations most of us appreciate. But with a little than over two months to go, a whole lot of Democrats and Independents still ask who he is. Too many people, too many voters, do not have a solid enough impression of the man.

Let me make it clear: I passionately believe that it is time for change. It is time to put government back into Democratic stewardship. It is time to reclaim the values that bind us together. It is time to clean up the mess created by the present administration and set things right again.

But I am anxious. I am concerned that it might be too late to change impressions.

Photo: Newsday.com

Minority Coalition

At the end of Mautner Project’s gala last year, the mistress of ceremonies exhorted those present to go out hand in hand and change the world. She meant for lesbians, gays, African Americans, Asians, Latinos and other minorities to help each other gain their rightful place in society. It was a forum tailored to her message. That evening, Mautner Project, a national health organization catering to lesbians, bisexual and transgender women and their families, had honored the first openly gay congresswoman; one of the first Black female medical graduates; and a trans woman volunteer. The audience was mostly female, but there were a handful of gay men and straight allies.

Her appeal makes common sense. If minority groups worked together for what they all desire and deserve, namely equality, then things would change. After all, a third of Americans are of color and by mid-century, more than half (CNN, 2008). Estimates for the percentage of lesbian, gay, bisexual & transgender (LGBT) Americans range from 5 to 11 percent.

Sadly, the disparate groups rarely come together.

A friend gave an example (albeit an English one). Recently, a band of male clergy released an open letter to their leaders, lamenting movement towards the ordination of female bishops. Simply, they do not see women as their equal and refuse to fall under the authority of a she-bishop.

What leaves me indignant is not the institutional misogyny which is to be expected, but the hypocrisy and bigotry of some signatories, two I personally know. The young men with whom I am familiar are gay, as are other priests and bishops who signed the letter. Like other upstanding presbyters, they are not celibate just discrete. Rather than support women and in the process make the church more open to all including homosexuals like themselves, they choose to be complicit in maintaining inequity and injustice. In the United States, gay priests and bishops opt to stay within the comforts and privilege of their closets rather than challenge the status quo and labor against discrimination.

Within the LGBT community, conflict has always been an undercurrent. The trans woman honored at the gala had told me of the rift between some lesbians and transgendered individuals. Apparently, there are those born biologically correct who do not appreciate the appropriation of female identity by those who transition. Among transgendered people themselves, there is a divide among race and class. Studies by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in turn reveal the tension between White gays and gays of color, as well as among LGBT African Americans, Asians and Latinos.

Though the LGBT movement is part of the larger struggle for equality and freedom in the United States, some African Americans cringe whenever the LGBT fight is likened to their own. A Washington Blade article gives an example. Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson “considers some former leaders of the civil rights movement — including Congressman John Lewis of Atlanta and Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King Jr.’s widow — ‘a disgrace to blacks, whites and Jews who died [during that time]’” for drawing comparisons between Black people’s fight for social and economic justice and gay people’s fight for social and economic justice. Peterson is disgusted.

There is nothing new to all this and it is understandable why minorities rarely collaborate. They find little in common with the next group, have their own interests to promote and see others as competition or obstacles. Moreover, some are less disadvantaged than others. A few even delude themselves, believing that they are truly accepted by those in power or that they can somehow, miraculously, “make change from within” (it amazes me how lesbians and gays remain within institutions and parties that clearly do not welcome them). And there are those who are scared of change and progress, even when it is painfully apparent that they stand to benefit.

At the end of the day we all want the same thing – equality. But we need each other. Until each and every minority – lesbian, gay, transgendered, African American, Asian, Latino – is guaranteed equality, dignity and freedom, it makes all the sense to reach out and work together.

Image: Detail of float from San Jose Parade of Floats

Logophobia

Upon opening this site for the first time, my childhood chum exclaimed – whoa, text heavy! This is hardly surprising, coming from George who is a creative director and visual by nature. I suspect however that a host of others plugged into Web 2.0 and its requisite gadgets also find my blog more of a slog – like, where are the streaming videos? There simply are too many words! Where are the distractions?

In a recent issue of Atlantic magazine, Nicholas Carr examines what the Internet is doing to our brains. In “Is Google Making Us Stupid? “ he describes troubling symptoms:

Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.

Because of the way information pops, scrolls, flashes and links through pages of text, pics, videos and sound in the Internet, we are easily distracted. Let us try reading about the Russian-Georgian conflict on NY Times online.

Peace Plan Offers Russia a Rationale to Advance… TBILISI, Georgia … click … Georgia emerged from breakup of the Soviet Union divided by its own separatist conflicts and afflicted with corruption and poverty. It has transformed in recent years into one of the more democratic countries in the region thanks largely to reforms by the government of President Mikheil Saakashvili …didn’t he study and live in the US? Let’s google him … good ole Wikipedia … Mikheil Nik'olozis dze Saakashvili (Georgian: მიხეილ ნიკოლოზის ძე სააკაშვილი) (born December 21, 1967) … scroll … aha! … receiving a fellowship from the United States State Department … Columbia Law School ... 1994 and … classes … The George Washington University Law School … that’s a great inaugural pic ... where am I?

Thus am I not surprised if only one or two of those who stumbled on this post got this far.

While a hundred words or less can describe how one feels today, thinks about Edwards’ philandering during his wife’s cancer remission, a find on Ebay, and even a profound thought, it is not enough to truly examine, understand and analyze anything or anyone. Post Soviet geopolitics requires many more words. Tackling substantive matters requires the thick description of Geertz – going beyond simple description and digging deep into detail and context.

So for the faint of heart, all this text might not be for you. Then again, you’ve long moved on, haven’t you?

Image: Words are Sweet Sounds for Objects Unreal, Justin Simoni, 2004

Safe Spaces

A friend asked whether my partner and I had been to a certain bar/restaurant in DC – one of those venerable gay hang-outs. I answered that we have been, then generously added that I think the place to be too claustrophobic, too familiar (with anyone or anything that walks in), too campy (particularly the straight waiter who’s been there for decades), too lecherous … in other words, too old school gay. Our buddy, who is in his mid-forties gave me an indulgent smile and agreed, yes, the men can get rather friendly and frisky. And yes, it is very gay. However, he likes going there for the very same reasons I am repulsed. He offered as an explanation the fact that he had come out later in life, having been in the Air Force and a Texan police force. Moreover, he is high up in a government department that would not be happy to learn that he is cohabiting with another man.

This exchange made me realize that there is still need for places and spaces where homosexual and trans women and men can congregate, be fully themselves and feel safe. The 2000 U.S. census might have confirmed that there are gay folk in every county, but discrimination and intimidation remain rife.

In New York, I knew of highly competent women and men who kept their partners on the down low as they worked for the more powerful financial and law firms in Manhattan. In Washington, I have met individuals who feel constrained from expressing their orientation for fear of losing their jobs in the military, Homeland Security, Treasury and the like. An issue of Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal reports that since 1993, over 10,000 service members have been discharged from every branch of the Armed Forces.

In most churches, LGBT people have no place at the table. The Roman Catholic Church which has become the largest Christian denomination in the United States with over 75 million adherents, opposes the social acceptance of homosexuality, same-sex relationships and obviously, gay marriage (americancatholic.org). A majority of Evangelical, Protestant and Mormon congregations likewise shun openly gay persons and their families.

Among LGBT African Americans, alienation is especially painful as the Black Church is the heart of the Black community. Sadly, Black Protestants lag behind other Protestant groups in recognizing gay people. The Washington Post cites a study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life that show African American Protestants as far less likely than other Protestant groups to believe that gays should have equal rights.

Where can we go then? While I might find my friend’s favorite hang-out as “too gay,” it is a place where homosexual and trans women and men can be together. Like many other LGBT bars, clubs, restaurants and centers, it serves as a safe space for those seeking refuge and respite from the daily bigotry they endure.

I have been lucky. Since coming out, I have lived in New York City and now Washington, DC. I have worked in companies and nonprofits that do not discriminate against my kind. I have found churches in Manhattan and the District that embrace all people. Thus can I easily dismiss good ole Annie’s.

Image: At the Moulin Rouge, Two women waltzing, Toulouse-Lautrec, 1892

Responses to Rhythm Method

Al M., a retired doctor & politician emailed:

I enjoyed your blog. The basic flaw in the official Catholic line is: the primary purpose of marriage is procreation. What then is the motivation of older persons getting married, or handicapped individuals? I still think the main reason for getting married is a commitment to a loving relationship. Keep up your fine work.

Pat V., a married professional emailed:

As a person who is on the pill and who does not have any plans of procreating, I am quite shocked at how things haven’t changed back home. I didn’t know the statistics kasi. I guess it’s hard when people believe that the more kids you have, the more “grasya” you’ll get...