Earlier this month I wrote that I hoped to post more in the coming weeks. That hasn’t happened just yet, partly because my concentration has been shattered by a woman who still hasn’t figured out that she could easily find someone who is smarter and funnier (but certainly not more attractive) than me to pay attention to, and partly because I think we already knew in our heart of hearts that Britney Spears is fine with gay marriage and that Angie Harmon is an idiot, in addition to being a terrible actress.
The story that finally lured me out of hiding is one you’ve probably already heard: Shirley Tan gets to stay in the U.S. for now, thanks to Sen. Dianne Feinstein. “For now” isn’t good enough, of course — Tan should be here permanently — but it’s better than nothing.
Today’s Boston Globe has an article about foreigners seeking asylum in the United States to escape homophobia, and it’s impossible to read Brazilian Genesio Oliveira’s story without getting angry. Laws in this country need to be changed so that gays and lesbians can sponsor their spouses for legal U.S. residency the same as heterosexuals. That this wasn’t done years ago (and probably won’t happen anytime soon) is shameful. And for asylum-seekers without American partners, the issue here is the same as in Canada — how do you prove you’re gay, and how do you prove your life is in danger if you’re sent back home? From the article:
Offering a haven for gays and lesbians is an emerging field of law in the United States and around the world, lawyers and advocates say, awakening foreigners to the option to live in the United States that was previously unknown. But the practice is raising concerns, as critics cite the potential for fraud and advocates worry that possible homophobia or lack of international experience might lead some judges and government officials to send foreigners back to dangerous lands.
In a 2003 case, an immigration judge in California denied asylum to a Mexican national, saying it wasn’t obvious the man was gay. The man appealed and won asylum last year.
There is fraud all over the place when it comes to immigration. People are still allowed to immigrate. According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesman Bill Wright, the government doesn’t keep statistics on how many gays and lesbians are granted asylum. So far, no one has suggested that there’s an epidemic of scheming heterosexuals masquerading as frightened gays and lesbians in search of U.S. residency.
So why do I have a sinking feeling that this is something Fox News numskulls will eventually blow way out of proportion, claiming that it somehow damages America? They need a new “War on Christmas”-esque stunt, and seeing as they love to scream about both homosexuality and immigration, this could prove as tantalizing as a loofah or falafel to Bill O’Reilly.
One thing to be relieved about: No one in the article was quoted as saying anything as stupid as Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary of the United Kingdom, who believes that gays are safe in Iran. (Never mind that by her own admission, gays don’t feel safe enough in Britain to report hate crimes to the police.) On the other hand, I’m sure we’ll hear plenty of the Jacqui Smith response as gay asylum becomes a bigger issue in the United States.
Remember that ludicrous Jacqui Smith business from earlier this week, when the Home Secretary of the United Kingdom was stupid enough to suggest that Iran is safe for homosexuals? All they have to do, she more or less advised, is spend their lives hiding in the closet. Then they won’t have to worry about being hanged or seeking asylum in the UK.
Well, Smith is again commenting on homophobia, only this time it’s the kind that happens on her own soil. A Stonewall-commissioned report released on Thursday found that one in five gay, lesbian and bisexual people in Britain have been a victim of some kind of hate crime or homophobic incident since 2005, and that 3/4ths of them declined to file police reports about it.
The results of this poll have been called shocking, but I was immediately reminded of another survey about gay Brits, and have to say that if you’re not willing to divulge your sexuality to a random census-taker, chances are you’re not going to walk into a police station and say you were just assaulted or verbally harassed for being gay. (You could argue that it isn’t a fair correlation to make, as the Stonewall report obviously used self-identified gays and lesbians as their sample group; additionally, respondents cited perceived police indifference as a reason for not filing reports. But I think that taken together, the results of the surveys indicate a sizable percentage of gay men and women in the UK don’t feel as comfortable standing up for themselves as they should.)
Curiously, given Smith’s own indifference towards gays in Iran, she responded to the report swiftly and decisively, stating:
“In the 21st century no one in Britain should ever feel under threat of verbal or physical violence just because of their sexual orientation.
“We’re determined that lesbian and gay people should have the confidence to report crimes to the police knowing that they will be taken seriously, the crime investigated and their privacy respected.
“Our key priorities are to increase reporting; increase offences brought to justice and to tackle repeat victimisation and hotspots.”
All sentiments that are very nice and proper, but how about extending that sense of justice to people who are in danger of being executed because of their sexuality?
And while I’m complaining…
This is admittedly shallow — inappropriate, some might say, given the seriousness of the subject matter we just dealt with — but why does it seem as though ESPN and NBC, in their coverage of Wimbledon, conspired to keep me from staring at Dinara Safina’s arms? She’s out of the tournament now, having been ousted by Israel’s Shahar Peer in a close three-setter earlier today, and what did NBC show instead? A Venus Williams match that’s result was old news.
I’m demanding better treatment next year. You hear that, you programming bastards? I’m like Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction: I will not be ignored. I don’t care if Americans played earlier in the day, I want live tennis. Live! If you do not meet my demands, I will not watch the rest of your network’s offerings. And if I’m already giving your shows the cold shoulder (sorry, NBC, but you know you suck), well … I don’t know. I’m sure I’ll come up with better threats over the coming months.
According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, women in the Army and Air Force are being kicked out in record numbers under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” From the Times:
While women make up 14 percent of Army personnel, 46 percent of those discharged under the policy last year were women. And while 20 percent of Air Force personnel are women, 49 percent of its discharges under the policy last year were women.
As Aubrey Sarvis, the executive director of the SLDN, notes, “Women make up 15 percent of the armed forces, so to find they represent nearly 50 percent of Army and Air Force discharges under ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is shocking.”
The Pentagon hasn’t offered an explanation for the increase in discharges of lesbian military personnel, but I have to wonder: could this be the start of the Tasha effect?
Rock Hudson: Never photographed at a gay pride parade.
How do you prove you’re gay? It’s a question that’s been troubling me since I heard about the case of Kulenthiran Amirthalingam, a gay man whose refugee claim was recently rejected by immigration muck-mucks in Canada when he couldn’t provide sufficient proof of his homosexuality. Amirthalingam was sent back to Malaysia, a country known for its hostility to members of the GLBT community; he has already spent time in prison there for being gay. From a Canada.com article about the deportation controversy:
Michael Battista, a Toronto lawyer who has expertise in dealing with gay and lesbian refugee claims, says the problem is there is no consistency of analysis. If claimants have pictures of themselves at a gay pride parade, proof of participating in online gay-chat rooms or witnesses who can testify they have had gay partners, then the adjudicator has some evidence.
How many of us have never been photographed at a gay pride parade? (You can’t see me right now—at least I hope you can’t, because I’m so not dressed for company—but I’m raising my hand.) How many of us don’t have proof of participating in gay chat rooms? (This is where I raise my hand again.)
For that matter, how many of us don’t have witnesses who can testify that we’ve had gay partners? (What about gay men and lesbians who’ve always been single or hidden their relationships from others?) Finally, how many of us are enormously, spectacularly, almost egregiously gay? (I started off raising both my hands. Now I’m bending my arms to form the letters Y-M-C-A as a disco ball that just magically descended from the sky shimmers beatifically overhead.)
Proving your gayness to Canadian immigration officials sounds even harder than proving your Jewishness to the rabbinate in Israel if you wanna get hitched. It got me thinking: If I weren’t a US citizen, if I lived in a country that meted out harsh punishments to those found “guilty” of being homosexuals, if I couldn’t furnish witnesses to testify that I’m a ‘mo (“Hello, Canadian Refugee Board. I’m here to tell you about the time Cranky Lesbian and I kept rewinding Morocco to see Marlene Dietrich kiss a woman”), and if I sought asylum in a country like Canada, how would I prove my gayness? It’s not like we’re tagged or chipped or an examination of our bodies would turn up the Mark of the Homo (which I imagine would resemble a miniature version of this).
Everything I came up with sounds like a lame joke. I’d probably point to my sneakers first. If that didn’t do the trick, I might hand over my iPod. The problem with relying on your MP3 player to establish your orientation to a bunch of strangers—or rather, my problem with relying on my MP3 player to establish my orientation to a bunch of strangers—is that its contents point more to me being a drag queen than a lesbian.
Mixed in with all the classic R&B and New Wave music, all the Beatles and Beach Boys and Ella Fitzgerald, you’ll find Barbra, Bette, Cher, Judy, Madonna, a little Cheryl Lynn, some Donna Summer, the original Broadway cast recording of Gypsy, the classic Charlene campfest “I’ve Never Been to Me,” Whitney Houston dance remixes, a curious cover that finds Liza Minelli turning “You’re So Vain” into “You’re Sho Vain,” and more Nellie McKay and Rufus Wainwright than you can shake a stick at—and that’s just off the top of my head.
What if the authorities still weren’t fully convinced of my gayness? I could recite the plot lines from various episodes of Ellen: The Post-Coming Out Years from memory. (Remember the time Ellen and Paige and Audrey went to that Lilith Fair-type event and Rena Sofer wanted to hook up with Ellen but Ellen only cared about Laurie and hilarity ensued? Doesn’t it warm the cockles of your heart just thinking about it? No? Yeah, me neither. That wasn’t one of the show’s finer episodes.)
I could name my favorite transgender character from a Pedro Almodovar movie. (That would be All About My Mother‘s Agrado, of course.) I could get online and show them a catalog of my book collection at LibraryThing, pointing out all the queer tomes I own and that my alias there is a tribute to my favorite Mink Stole character from a John Waters movie. If even that wasn’t enough to convince them of my all-time champion gayness, I could tell them the exact moment Betty and Rita start to earn that R-rating in Mulholland Drive. (That would be 1:40:16, which sounds like a Lynchian Bible verse.)
Other than that, what do I have? Coming out to my friends, coming out to my relatives, and accidentally coming out to all of the seventh grade when I wore that plaid shirt to school on picture day, those aren’t things I could prove if I was alone in a foreign country. The Canada.com article continued:
With no witnesses, photographs, love-letters or other documents indicating a gay lifestyle, refugees are often left showing up before the refugee board acting flamboyant or acting on other gay stereotypes.
How are witnesses and photographs and love letters proof of anything? Witnesses can lie. Photographs can be faked, their contents misrepresented. Love letters can be forged. Sure enough, journalist Tiffany Crawford writes that “witnesses and letters are dismissed as hearsay and claimants are accused of fabricating lies to stay in Canada.”
Maybe one of you, in your infinite wisdom, someone who stumbles across this in cyberspace, can explain to me how you determine whether a person is gay. I don’t want any smart-ass answers, any of that, “I don’t know, ask if they’ve dated Penelope Cruz” business. Me, I can’t figure it out.
