Reading a collection of essays on indigenous rights kept reminding me about the similarities the movement for indigenous rights have with the movement for queer rights. In an essay by Kirk Endicott*, where he lists an amazing number of oppressive policies the federal and state government practices against the Orang Asli and indigenous groups of Borneo (i.e. low compensation for snatching land away, destructive Islamic missionary initiatives, and a Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli that is made up of Malays), the struggle of the Orang Asli and other indigenous peoples around the world, in their act of revolution against the hegemonizing nation-state, reminds me of an inspiring manifesto I had once read. Finding it today, again, I want to share a touching paragraph on the politics of reclamation and self-identification – one that, if sometimes seems more confrontational than conciliatory, restores faith in the self-worth of the community. In the indigenous communities that most of the time lack proper access to infrastructure and education, such a manifesto, I hope, renews some hope for coalition building (perhaps not at the expense of making invisible the diversity within the coalition) so that our Original Peoples are included in Najib’s farcical 1Malaysia.

A paragraph from the manifesto of Queer Nation.

“AN ARMY OF LOVERS CANNOT LOSE

Being queer is not about a right to privacy; it is about the freedom to be public, to just be who we are. It means everyday fighting oppression; homophobia, racism, misogyny, the bigotry of religious hypocrites and our own self-hatred. (We have been carefully taught to hate ourselves.) And now of course it means fighting a virus as well, and all those homo-haters who are using AIDS to wipe us off the face of the earth. Being queer means leading a different sort of life. It’s not about the mainstream, profit-margins, patriotism, patriarchy or being assimilated. It’s not about executive directors, privilege and elitism. It’s about being on the margins, defining ourselves; it’s about gender- fuck and secrets, what’s beneath the belt and deep inside the heart; it’s about the night. Being queer is “grass roots” because we know that everyone of us, every body, every cunt, every heart and ass and dick is a world of pleasure waiting to be explored. Everyone of us is a world of infinite possibility. We are an army because we have to be. We are an army because we are so powerful. (We have so much to fight for; we are the most precious of endangered species.) And we are an army of lovers because it is we who know what love is. Desire and lust, too. We invented them. We come out of the closet, face the rejection of society, face firing squads, just to love each other! Every time we fuck, we win. We must fight for ourselves (no one else is going to do it) and if in that process we bring greater freedom to the world at large then great. (We’ve given so much to that world: democracy, all the arts, the concepts of love, philosophy and the soul, to name just a few gifts from our ancient Greek Dykes, Fags.) Let’s make every space a Lesbian and Gay space. Every street a part of our sexual geography. A city of yearning and then total satisfaction. A city and a country where we can be safe and free and more. We must look at our lives and see what’s best in them, see what is queer and what is straight and let that straight chaff fall away! Remember there is so, so little time. And I want to be a lover of each and every one of you. Next year, we march naked.”

For the rest of the manifesto, please visit here.

*Kirk Endicott, with his wife, Karen Endicott, have published a book on the egalitarian social relationships, including gender!!, in the Batek community of Malaysia. He has also edited and written several works on indigenous rights and the Orang Asli and indigenous communities of Malaysia. His bio page can be read here.

This wonderful story on the social construction of gender is a MUST-READ for everyone.

A Fabulous Child’s Story

by Lois Gould

Once upon a time, a baby named X was born. This baby was named X so that nobody could tell whether it was a boy or a girl. Its parents could tell, of course, but they couldn’t tell anybody else. They couldn’t even tell Baby X at first.

You see, it was all part of a very important Secret Scientific Xperiment, known officially as Project Baby X. The smartest scientists had set up this Xperiment at a cost of Xactly 23 billion dollars and 72 cents, which might seem like a lot for just one baby, even a very important Xperimental baby. But when you remember the prices of things like strained carrots and stuffed bunnies, and popcorn for the movies and booster shots for camp, let alone 28 shiny quarters from the tooth fairy, you begin to see how it adds up.

Also, long before Baby X was born, all those scientists had to be paid to work out the details of the Xperiment, and to write the Official Instruction Manual for Baby X’s parents and, most important of all, to find the right set of parents to bring up Baby X. These parents had to be selected very carefully. Thousands of volunteers had to take thousands of tests and answer thousands of tricky questions. Almost everybody failed because, it turned out, almost everybody really wanted either a baby boy or a baby girl, and not Baby X at all. Also, almost everybody was afraid that a Baby X would be a lot more trouble than a boy or a girl. (They were probably right, the scientists admitted, but Baby X needed parents who wouldn’t mind the Xtra trouble.)

There were families with grandparents named Milton and Agatha, who didn’t see why the baby couldn’t be named Milton or Agatha instead of X, even if it was an X. There were families with aunts who insisted on knitting tiny dresses and uncles who insisted on sending tiny baseball mitts. Worst of all, these were families that already had other children who couldn’t be trusted to keep the secret. Certainly not if they knew the secret was worth 23 billion dollars and 72 cents – and all you had to do was take one little peek at Baby X in the bathtub to know if it was a boy or girl.

But, finally, the scientists found the Joneses, who really wanted to raise an X more than any other kind of baby – no matter how much trouble it would be. Ms. and Mr. Jones had to promise they would take equal turns caring for X, and feeding it, and singing it lullabies. And they had to promise never to hire any baby-sitters. The government scientists knew perfectly well that a baby-sitter would probably peek at X in the bathtub, too.

The day the Joneses brought their baby home, lots of friends and relatives came over to see it. None of them knew about the secret Xperiment, though. So the first thing they asked was what kind of a baby X was. When the Joneses smiled and said, “It’s an X,” nobody knew what to say. They couldn’t say, “Look at her cute little dimples!” And they couldn’t say, “Look at his husky little biceps!” And they couldn’t even say just plain “kitchycoo”. In fact, they all thought the Joneses were playing some kind of rude joke.

But of course, the Joneses were not joking. “It’s an X” was absolutely all they would say. And that made the friends and relatives very angry. The relatives all felt embarrassed about having an X in the family. “People will think there’s something wrong with it!” some of them whispered. “There is something wrong with it!” others whispered back.

“Nonsense!” the Joneses told them all cheerfully. “What could possibly be wrong with this perfectly adorable X?”

Nobody could answer that, except Baby X, who had just finished its bottle. Baby X’s answer was a loud, satisfied BURP!

Clearly, nothing at all was wrong. Nevertheless, none of the relatives felt comfortable about buying a present for a Baby X. The cousins who sent the baby a tiny football helmet would not come and visit anymore. And the neighbours who sent a pink-flowered romper suit pulled their shades down when the Joneses passed their house. The Official Instruction Manual had warned the new parents that this would happen, so they didn’t fret about it. Besides, they were too busy with Baby X and the hundreds of different Xercises for treating it properly.

Ms. and Mr. Jones had to be Xtra careful about how they played with little X. They knew that if they kept bouncing it up in the air and saying how strong and active it was, they’d be treating it more like a boy than an X. But if all they did was cuddle it and kiss it and tell it how sweet and dainty it was, they’d be treating it more like a girl than an X.

On page 1654 of the Official Instruction Manual, the scientists prescribed: “plenty of bouncing and plenty of cuddling, both, X ought to be strong and sweet and active. Forget about dainty altogether”.

Meanwhile, the Joneses were worrying about other problems. Toys, for instance, and clothes. On his first shopping trip, Mr. Jones told the store clerk, “I need some clothes and toys for my new baby”. The clerk smiled and said, “Well now, is it a. boy or a girl”

“It’s an X”, Mr Jones said, smiling back. But the clerk got all red in the face and said huffily, “In that case, I’m afraid I can’t help you, sir”.

So Mr Jones wandered helplessly up and down the aisles trying to find out what X needed. But everything in the store was piled up in sections marked “Boys” or “Girls”.

There were “Boy’s’ Pyjamas” and “Girls’ Underwear” and “Boys’ Fire Engines” and “Girl’s Housekeeping Sets”. Mr. Jones went home without buying anything for X. That night he and Ms. Jones consulted page 2326 of the Official Instruction Manual. “Buy plenty of everything”, it said firmly.

So they bought plenty of sturdy blue pyjamas in the Boys’ Department and cheerful flowered underwear in the Girls’ Department. And they bought all kinds of toys. A boy doll that made pee-pee and cried, “Pa-pa”. And a girl doll that talked in three languages and said “I am the Pres-i-dent of Gen-er-al Mo-tors”. They also bought a story-book about a brave princess who rescued a handsome prince from his ivory tower, and another one about a sister and brother who grew up to be a baseball star and a ballet star, and you had to guess which was which.

The head scientists of Project Baby X checked all their purchases and told them to keep up the good work. They also reminded the Joneses to see page 4629 of the Manual, where it said: “Never make Baby X feel embarrassed or ashamed about what it wants to play with. And if X gets dirty climbing rocks, never say “Nice little Xes don’t get dirty climbing rocks.”

Likewise, it said: “If X falls down and cries, never say, “Brave little Xes don’t cry”. Because of course, nice little Xes do get dirty, and brave little Xes do cry. No matter how dirty X gets, or how hard it cries, don’t worry. It’s all part of the Xperiment.”

Whenever the Joneses pushed Baby X’s stroller in the park, smiling strangers would come over and coo: “Is that a boy or a girl?” The Joneses would smile back and say, “It’s an X”. The strangers would stop smiling then, and often snarl something nasty – as if the Joneses had snarled at them.

By the time X grew big enough to play with other children, the Jones’ troubles had grown bigger too. Once a little girl grabbed X’s shovel in the sandbox and zonked X on the head with it.

“Now, now, Tracy”, the little girl’s mother began to scold, “little girls mustn’t hit little -” and she turned to ask X, “Are you a little boy or a little girl, dear?”

Mr. Jones, who was sitting near the sandbox, held his breath and crossed his fingers.

X smiled politely at the lady, even though X’s head had never been zonked so hard in all its life. “I’m a little X”, X replied.

“You’re a what ?” the lady exclaimed angrily. “You’re a little B.R.A.T., you mean”.

“But little girls mustn’t hit little Xes, either!” said X, retrieving the shovel with another polite smile. “What good does hitting do, anyway?”

X’s father, who was still holding his breath, finally let it out, uncrossed his fingers and grinned back at X.

And at their next secret Project Baby X meeting, the scientists grinned too. Baby X was doing fine.

But then it was time for X to start school. The Joneses were really worried about this, because school was even more full of rules for boys and girls and there were no rules for Xes. The teachers would tell boys to form one line, and girls to form another line. There would be boys’ games and girls’ games and boys’ secrets and girls’ secrets. The school library would have a list of recommended books for girls and a different list of recommended books for boys. There would even be a bathroom marked BOYS and another marked GIRLS. Pretty soon boys and girls would hardly talk to each other. What would happen to poor little X!

The Joneses spent weeks consulting their Instruction Manual (there were 246 and 1/2 pages of advice under “First Day at School”), and attending urgent special conferences with the smart scientists of Project Baby X.

The scientists had to make sure that X’s mother had taught X how to throw and catch a ball properly and that X’s father had been sure to teach X what to serve at a doll’s tea party. X had to know how to shoot marbles and how to jump rope, and most of all, what to say when the other children asked whether X was a boy or a girl.

Finally, X was ready.

The Joneses helped X button on a nice new pair of red-and-white checked overalls, and sharpened six pencils for X’s nice new pencil box and marked X’s name clearly on all the books in its nice new book bag. X brushed its teeth and combed its hair, which just about covered its ears and remembered to put a napkin in its lunchbox.

The Joneses had asked X’s teacher if the class could line up alphabetically, instead of forming separate lines for boys and girls. And they had asked if X could use the principal’s bathroom, because it wasn’t marked anything except “BATHROOM”. X’s teacher promised to take care of all those problems. But nobody could help X with the biggest problem of all – other children.

Nobody in X’s class had ever known an X before. What would they think? How would X make friends?

You couldn’t tell what X was by studying its clothes – overalls don’t even button right-to-l eft, like girls’ clothes or left-to-right, like boys’ clothes. And you couldn’t guess whether X lad a girls’ short haircut or a boy’s long haircut. And it was very hard to tell by the games X liked to play. Either X played ball very well for a girl, or else X played house very well for a boy.

Some of the children tried to find out by asking (tricky questions, like “Who’s your favourite sports star?” That was easy. X had two favourite sport stars: a girl jockey named Robyn Smith and a boy archery champion lamed Robin Hood. Then they asked, what’s your favourite television programme?” And hat was even easier. X’s favourite television programme was “lassie” which stars a girl dog played by a boy dog.

Then X said that its favourite toy was a doll, everyone decided that X must be a girl. But hen X said that the doll was really a robot, and that X had computerised it, and that it was programmed to bake fudge brownies and then clean up the kitchen. After X told them that, the Other Children gave up guessing what X was. All they knew was they’d sure like to see X’s doll.

After school, X wanted to play with the other children.

“How about shooting some baskets in the gym?” X asked all the girls. But all they did was make faces and giggle behind X’s back. “How about weaving some baskets in the arts and crafts room?” X asked the boys. But they all made faces and giggled behind X’s back, too.

That night, Ms. and Mr. Jones asked X how things had gone at school. X told them sadly that the lessons were okay, but otherwise school was a terrible place for an X. It seemed as if Other Children would never want an X for a friend.

Once more, the Joneses reached for their Instruction Manual. Under “Other Children”, they found the following message: “What did you Xpect? Other Children have to obey all the silly boy-girl rules, because their parents taught them to. Lucky X – you don’t have to stick to the rules at all! All you have to do is be yourself. We’re not saying if it be easy.”

X liked being itself. But X cried a lot that night, partly because it felt afraid. So X’s father held X tight and cuddled it and couldn’t help crying a little too. And X’s mother cheered them both up by reading an Xciting story about an enchanted prince called Sleeping Handsome, who woke up when Princess Charming kissed him.

The next morning, they all felt much better and little X went back to school with a brave smile and a clean pair of red-and-white checked overalls.

There was a seven-letter-word spelling bee in class that day. And a seven-lap boys’ relay race in the gym. And a seven-layer-cake baking contest in the girls’ kitchen corner. X won the spelling bee. X also won the relay race. And X almost won the baking contest, except it forgot to light the oven. Which only proves that nobody’s perfect.

One of the Other Children noticed something else, too. He said: “Winning or losing doesn’t seem to count to X. X seems to have fun being good at boys’ skills and girls’ skills”.

“Come to think of if, said another of the Other Children, “maybe X is having twice as much fun as we are.”

So after school that day, the girl who beat X at the baking contests gave X a big slice of her prizewinning cake. And the boy X beat in the relay race asked X to race him home.

From then on, some really funny things began to happen. Susie, who sat next to X in class, suddenly refused to wear pink dresses to school any more. She insisted on wearing red-and-white checked overalls – just like X’s overalls, she told her parents, were much better for climbing monkey bars.

Then Jim, the class football nut, started wheeling his little sister’s doll carriage around the football field. He’d put on his entire football uniform, except for the helmet. Then he put the helmet in the carriage, lovingly tucked under an old set of shoulder pads. Then he started jogging around the field, pushing the carriage and singing “Rock a bye Baby” to his football helmet. He told his family that X did the same thing, so it must be okay. After all, X was now the team’s star quarter-back.

Susie’s parents were horrified by her behaviour, and Jim’s parents were worried sick about his. But the worst came when the twins, Joe and Peggy, decided to share everything with each other. Peggy used Joe’s hockey skates, and his microscope, and took half his newspaper route. Joe used Peggy’s needlepoint kit, Peggy started running the lawn mower and Joe started running the vacuum cleaner.

Their parents weren’t one bit pleased with Peggy’s wonderful biology experiments, or with Joe’s terrific needlepoint pillows. They didn’t care that Peggy mowed the lawn better, and that Joe vacuumed the carpet better. In fact they were furious.

It’s all that little X’s fault, they agreed. Just because X doesn’t know what it is, or what it’s supposed to be, it wants to get everybody else mixed up, too! Peggy and Joe were forbidden to play with X anymore. So was Susie, and then Jim, and then all the Other Children. But it was too late; the Other Children stayed mixed up and happy and free, and refused to go back to the way they’d been before X.

Finally, Joe and Peggy’s parents decided to call an emergency meeting of the school’s Parents’ Association, to discuss “The X Problem”. They sent a report to the principal stating that X was a “disruptive influence”.

They demanded immediate action. The Joneses, they said, should be forced to tell whether X was a boy or a girl. And then X should be forced to behave like whichever it was. If the Joneses refused to tell, the Parents’ Association said, then X must take an Xaminiation. The school Psychiatrist must Xamine it physically and mentally and issue a full report. If X’s test showed it was a boy, it would have to obey all the boys’ rules. If it proved to be a girl, X would have to obey all the girls’ rules, and if X turned out to be some kind of mixed up misfit, then X should be Xpelled from the school. Immediately!

The Principal was very upset. Disruptive influence? Mixed-up misfit? But X was an Xcellent student. All the teachers said it was a delight to have X in their classes. X was President of the student council. X had won First prize in the talent show and second prize in the art show and honourable mention in the science fair and six athletic events on field day, including the potato race.

Nevertheless, insisted the Parents’ Association, X is a Problem Child. X is the Biggest Problem Child we have ever seen!

So the Principal reluctantly notified X’s parents that numerous complaints about X’s behaviour had come to the school’s attention. And that after the Psychiatrist’s Xaminiation, the school would decide what to do about X.

The Joneses reported this at once to the scientists, who referred them to page 85759 of the I nstruction Manual. “Sooner or later,” it said, “X will have to be Xamined by a Psychiatrist. This may be the only way any of us will know for sure whether X is mixed up or whether everyone else is”.

The night before X was to be Xamined, the Joneses tried not to let X see how worried they were.

“What if” Mr. Jones would say. And Ms. Jones would reply, “No use worrying”.

Then a few minutes later, Ms. Jones would say, “What if” and Mr. Jones would reply, “No use worrying”.

X just smiled at them both, and hugged them hard and didn’t say much of anything. X was thinking, What if? And then X thought: No use worrying.

At Xactly 9 o’clock the next day, X reported to the school Psychiatrist’s office. The Principal, along with a committee from the Parents’ Association, X’s teacher, X’s classmates and Ms. and Mr. Jones waited in the hall outside. Nobody knew the details of the tests X was to be given, but everybody knew they’d be very hard, and that they’d reveal Xactly what everyone wanted to know about X, but was afraid to ask.

It was terribly quiet in the hall. Almost spooky! Once in a while, they would hear a strange noise inside the room. There were buzzes. And a beep or two, and several bells. An occasional light would flash under the door. The Joneses thought it was a white light, but the Principal thought it was blue. Two or three children swore it was either yellow or green. And the Parents’ Committee missed it completely.

Through it all, you could hear the Psychiatrist’s low voice, asking hundreds of questions, and X’s higher voice, answering hundreds of answers. The whole thing took so long that everyone knew it must be the most complete Xaminiation anyone had ever had to take. Poor X, the Joneses thought Serves X right, the Parents’ Committee thought! Wouldn’t like to be in X’s overalls right now, the children thought.

At last, the door opened. Everyone crowded around to hear the results. X didn’t look any different; in fact, X was smiling. But the Psychiatrist looked terrible. He looked as if he was crying!

“What happened?” everyone began shouting. Had X done something disgraceful? “I wouldn’t be a bit surprised!” muttered Peggy and Joe’s parents.

“Did X flunk the whole test?” cried Susie’s parents. “Or just the most important part?” yelled Jim’s parents. “Oh, dear”, sighed Mr Jones. “Oh, dear”, sighed Ms. Jones. “Sssh”, sssshed the Principal. “The Psychiatrist is trying to speak”.

Wiping his eyes and clearing his throat, the psychiatrist began in a hoarse whisper.

“In my opinion”, he whispered – you could tell he must be very upset – “in my opinion, young X here -”

“Yes? Yes” shouted a parent impatiently. “Sssssh!” sssshed the Principal.

“Young Ssssshhh here, I mean, young X” said the doctor, frowning, “is just about … “. “Just about WHAT? Let’s have it!” shouted another parent. “Just about the least mixed-up child I’ve ever Xamined” said the Psychiatrist. “Yah for X,” yelled one of the children. And then the others began yelling, too. Clapping and cheering and jumping up and down. “SSSSSHH!” Ssshed the Principal, but nobody did.

The Parents’ Committee was angry and bewildered. How COULD X have passed the whole Xamination? Didn’t X have an identity problem? Wasn’t X mixed up at ALL? Wasn’t X any kind of misfit? How could it NOT be, when it didn’t even KNOW what it was? And why was the Psychiatrist crying?

Actually, he had stopped crying and was smiling politely through his tears. “Don’t you see?” he said, “I’m crying because it’s wonderful! X has absolutely no identity problem! X isn’t one bit mixed up! As for being a misfit – ridiculous! X knows perfectly well what it is! Don’t you, X? the doctor winked. X winked back.

“But what IS X?” Shrieked Peggy and Joe’s parents. “We still want to know what it is!” “Ah, yes”, said the doctor winking again. “Well, don’t worry. You’ll all know one of these days. And you won’t need me to tell you.” “What? What does he mean?” some of the parents grumbled suspiciously.

Susie and Peggy and Joe all answered all at once. “He means that by the time X’s sex matters, it won’t be a secret anymore!”

With that, the doctor began to push through the crowd towards X’s parents. “How do you do?” he said, somewhat stiffly. And then he reached out to hug them both. “If I ever have an X of my own,” he whispered, “I sure hope you’ll lend me your instruction manual”.

Needless to say, the Joneses were very happy. The Project Baby X scientists were rather pleased too. So were Susie, Jim, Peggy, Joe, and all the Other Children. The Parents’ Association wasn’t, but they had promised to accept the Psychiatrist’s report and not make any more trouble. They even invited Ms. and Mr. Jones to become honorary members, which they did.

Later that day, X’s friends put on their red-and-white-checked overalls and went over to see X. They found X in the back yard, playing with a very tiny baby that none of them had even seen before. The baby was wearing very tiny red-and-white-checked overalls.

“How do you like our new baby?” X asked the Other Children proudly. “It’s got cute dimples,” said Jim. “It’s got husky biceps, too”, said Susie. “What kind of baby is it?” asked Joe and Peggy.

X frowned at them. “Can’t you tell?” Then X broke into a big, mischievous grin, “It’s a Y!”

Jakarta [3 June 2009]. On 9-13 August 2009, Bali will host the 9th International Congress on AIDS in Asia and the Pacific (ICAAP) – the biggest congress on HIV and AIDS in the region. Approximately 3,000 delegates from 51 Asian and 14 Pacific countries are expected to attend this congress. The theme of the
9th ICAAP is “Empowering People, Strengthening Networks” to support a vibrant community of empowered people, all across Asia and the Pacific, to mobilize a holistic and more effective response to the crossborder challenges of today’s HIV pandemic.
The Local Organizing Committee Chair, Prof. Dr. Zubairi Djoerban,Sp.PD-KHOM, who is also the Chair of the Indonesian AIDS Society (Masyarakat Peduli AIDS Indonesia), said “we recognize that ICAAP is the second largest AIDS forum in the world and are grateful for the confidence in Indonesia to host this
important meeting. We are inspired by the decision and will work hard to assure that the congress activities will advance regional efforts to respond effectively to the challenge of HIV and AIDS today and in the future.”

Mr. JVR Prasada Rao, Director, Regional Support Team, Asia and the Pacific, Joint United Nations
Program on AIDS (UNAIDS), added, “the 9th ICAAP promises to be an even better and bigger conference
than previous ICAAPs. There will be evidence-based discussion on whether Universal Access can be an
achievable goal by 2010 for many countries in Asia and the Pacific. Every facet of the epidemic and the
region’s responses are featured in the wide array of session and activities.”

The congress will take place at the Bali International Convention Centre (BICC) in Nusa Dua, and is
scheduled to be officially opened on 9 August by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Mr. Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono, in a ceremony at the Garuda Wisnu Kencana (GWK) Cultural Park.

ICAAP is a biennial gathering for the release and discussion of scientific, programmatic and policy
developments in the global response to HIV/AIDS and is convened by AIDS Society of Asia and the Pacific (ASAP).

In his message to the 9th ICAAP, Professor Myung-Hwan Cho, President of ASAP said that
“Indonesia has been given the opportunity to take bold and innovative steps n support of the regional
response to HIV and AIDS. Countries of Asia and other regions will be waiting to see Indonesia take the lead.”

According to the Independent Commission on AIDS in Asia (2008), AIDS remains the most likely cause of
death and loss of work days among people aged 15 to 44. The number of people living with HIV (PLHIV) in Asia in 2007 is an estimated 5 million, with a number of new infections (380,000) comparatively speaking equal to the number of people who died from AIDS-related illnesses (380,000). In Oceania an estimated 740,000 people were living with HIV in 2007 of which 13,000 were new infections.

Reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on HIV and AIDS requires all member countries to
halt and reverse the spread of the epidemic by 2015; this includes the Universal Access target of 2010 whereby all those who need treatment should also receive it, and the urgency to strengthen each country’s health system to ensure effective delivery of services and response.

Mr Rao continued, “what is really impressive is that the conference will showcase the immense progress
made by community groups, working together and in partnership with government and other partners, in
spearheading the response in many countries in the Asia Pacific region.”

Similar to previous ICAAPs, sessions will be divided into Plenary Sessions where distinguished
researchers, community leaders and policy specialists share the latest information and experiences; 24 symposia on topics such as addressing legal barriers and criminalization of at-risk populations, and a leadership session for delegates from the Pacific region; 64 oral sessions on topics related to prevention, care support and treatment of HIV and AIDS, understanding socio-cultural, economic and political determinants in the AIDS response, and on leadership.

Besides these, 32 skills-building workshops will also be held to help delegates improve various skills that
can apply to their daily work; Satellite Meetings and Exhibitions showcase the efforts of civil society and the private sector in the response to HIV and AIDS.
Distinguished guest speakers will include Michel Sidibe, UNAIDS Executive Director; Michel Kazatchkine, Director of the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM); Kyung-Wha Kang, UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights; Dr Nafiz Sadik, Special Envoy for AIDS in Asia and the Pacific; Myung Hwan Cho, President of AIDS Society of Asia and Pacific (ASAP) and representatives from Seven Sisters, Asia Pacific Network of People Living with HIV (APN+), Asia Pacific Network of Sex Workers (APNSW), CARAM Asia, Asian Harm Reduction Network (AHRN), APCASO, APN Rainbow.

A Community Forum will also take place before the congress on 7–8 August, where various communities
each have their own conference to identify and share common issues and experiences. Seven
communities will be represented including people living with HIV (PLHIV); Injecting Drug Users (IDU);
Interfaith; Men who have sex with Men (MSM) and Transgender; Sex Workers; Women, including
Lesbians; and Youth.

The Asia-Pacific Village will be a friendly, fun and colorful venue to celebrate the region’s diversity, with arts and music performances, small group discussions, informal education activities, and regional stalls selling handicrafts and snacks made by people living with and affected by HIV and AIDS.

The Asia-Pacific Village will be open to the general public. Prior to the official opening ceremony on 9 August, a high-level meeting of AIDS Ambassadors will be held, co-hosted by the First Lady and National AIDS Ambassador, Mrs. Ani Bambang Yudhoyono, and AIDS Ambassador of Australia, Murray Proctor. The AIDS Ambassador’s Meeting will address the role of AIDS Ambassadors in the region in mobilizing greater action and accountability for the response.

For more information, please contact:
Ika Nazaruddin
Pacto Convex
Ph 62-21 571-9973
Ika_nazar@cbn.net.id
Elis Widen
Congress Coordinator
Ph 62-21 571-9973
elis.widen@icaap9.org
Ristya Paramita
Public Information Officer
Ph. 62-21-39838845/46
ristya.paramita@icaap9.org

Hola!

A friend of mine very recently concluded that she isn’t only bi-curious, or experimental — she’s probably very, very lesbian. She’s in her mid-twenties, with a (generous) string of men in her past. She’s finally found time to fully address the fact that she finds women physically attractive.

While I happily welcome any of my friends into the non-heterosexuality realms, I think she may be jumping the gun here. So what now?  As a child from the Google-generation, I’m far more inclined to compile other people’s work to make my case.

Behold, excerpt of article entitled What Women Want (Maybe), by Andy Newman, printed in The New York Times:

Heterosexual women, Dr. Chivers and her colleagues found, were no more excited by athletic naked men doing yoga or tossing stones into the ocean than they were by the control footage: long pans of the snowcapped Himalayas. When straight women viewed a video of a naked woman doing calisthenics, on the other hand, their blood flow increased significantly.

What really matters to women, Dr. Chivers said, at least in the somewhat artificial setting of watching movies while intimately hooked up to a device called a photoplethysmograph, is not the gender of the actor, but the degree of sensuality. Even more than the naked exercisers, they were aroused by videos of masturbation, and more still by graphic videos of couples making love. Women with women, men with men, men with women: it did not seem to matter much to her female subjects, Dr. Chivers said.

“Women physically don’t seem to differentiate between genders in their sex responses, at least heterosexual women don’t,” she said. “For heterosexual women, gender didn’t matter. They responded to the level of activity.”

Dr. Chivers’s work adds to a growing body of scientific evidence that places female sexuality along a continuum between heterosexuality and homosexuality, rather than as an either-or phenomenon.

“She’s pinpointing what’s kind of obvious, and yet unexplored: that women are so fluid in their sexuality,” one of the directors of “Bi the Way,” Josephine Decker, said at an after-party for the screening at a Russian-themed gay bar in Midtown.

As with all generalisations, this may not apply to everyone. But my friend does appreciate the link I sent her. She also find it entertaining that I recommended her this book:

book cover from Amazon.com

The Straight Girl’s Guide to Sleeping With Chicks, by Jen Sincero.

“You can’t swing a dead cat at a bridal shower without hitting a straight chick who’s slept with another woman, who’s thought about it, or who’s ready to make the move as soon as someone breaks out the booze.”

Such are the incisive pearls of wisdom to be heard from straight chick and girl-on-girl dabbler Jen Sincero, author of The Straight Girl’s Guide to Sleeping with Chicks. A deliciously sexy how-to guide, it gives curious straight women the complete inside scoop on girl-on-girl action — from pickup lines and virgin jitters to threesomes, techniques, and toys. Drawing on personal experience and hundreds of interviews with straight girls who’ve slept with lesbians, straight girls who’ve slept with straight girls, lesbians who’ve slept with straight girls, and straight girls who’ve done both or neither, Sincero covers the A to Z of the experience…

Yes, there’s a book about it.

I know some of you are already thinking of ways to discreetly gift this to a certain straight girl out there, possibly through a mutual friend.

Of course, you will be hovering possessively around this straight girl in the period she reads this book, snarling at everyone who comes in her general direction. What this does to your social life, is your problem.

You can head to Amazon.com and read the rave reviews. Or even the introduction to her book, where I found myself nodding in agreement to the things she had to say about sleeping with girls. Props to the straight girl, Jen Sincero, it sounds like she made a good choice to write about sleeping with other women.

Jen and Emily, pic from SexWithEmily.com

To top it off, Jen Sincero was on the Sex With Emily podcast show recently. You can listen to it at straight girls guide to sleeping with chicks. They talk about orgasms a lot — the different kinds they feel, the evergreen topic of multiple orgasm myth-or-not, how to give one, etc.

Sex With Emily’s a pretty fun and sexy website.

I’m all for people continuously exploring their sexuality where they can or want to, be it identity, orientation, or behaviour. If anything, being the default (read: only) lesbian in some of my circles, I’m the one the straight girls talk to when they’re premeditating action with other women.

I usually take it as a sign that if they’re coming to a dubiously-impartial source, they just want some support. Why else would they come up to a lesbian and ask if it’s okay for women to sleep with each other?

[ I'm not one of those who disapprove of bisexuals, or bi-curiousness, experimentation, or anything that isn't a "pure" form of lesbianism -- I think that's ridiculous, and frankly, kinda irritating ]

Now they don’t even need to come to me anymore. There’s plenty of affirmative material out there telling them it’s okay to be attracted to other women, and to act upon these attractions, without identifying as lesbian.

Well, maybe more links next time. Right now, I have a moussaka to cook, and a hungry sister (of the biological variety) to feed. Laters, people.

Source: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/76475

Upon arriving on campus, I was the wide-eyed idealist looking for a revolution to spark. And that was what I didn’t find in my first few months at my university.

Activism was dead, someone told me. And he had the written proof. In Yale, the LGBTQ community are facing the same lethargy when it comes to rallies and protests. Organized rallies, no doubt, still find hundreds of supporters as we’ve seen with the nationwide Prop 8 rallies but any other political activism finds a mere handful of “radical queers” screaming chants and holding up signs. It was the same on my campus. “We are way pass that age,” someone wrote.

My sense of radicalism and political activism for the queer movement flickered out and died. I had to grapple with another identity – being gay and accepted. But that was when things began to change. Slowly, as more discussions took place within the Gender and Sexuality department and among transgender allies who are “tired of standing on the shoulders of gay and lesbian activists”, there began a call for more inclusion within the gay and lesbian community on campus. It is time that political activism included more people than just gay and lesbians. Discrimination is not over for the transgender community. And marriage isn’t everything. No doubt the ongoing work seeking marriage equality is one that is must be done, but at the same time, there are a growing number of individuals who feel that “Yes, we’ll fight for the equal right to marry. But we don’t necessarily like it.” A discourse begins to take shape. “Striving for equality shouldn’t be just an equality within a heteronormative model. Let’s move beyond there.”

Activism is reborn. Here comes Queer.

This is how I choose to identify — I am queer. It is a renewed sense of pride in the fact that we are different – in terms of how we view sexuality and gender – and that we are happy staying that way. Yes, we want equal and fair treatment. Yes, we want an end to discrimination. But no, we are not necessarily going to live within the heteronomartive model that has been set up. Some of us don’t want to get married. Some of us, who identify as males, and like other males, do not necessarily identify as gay. Some of us think that sexuality and gender are not two separate things. I am not heterosexual, but also, I am not a “man” – a stable, gendered, and performative body that is regulated through a political and social discourse.

We’ve change the group name on campus from LGBTSA to QSA – Queer Students and Allies to reflect the inclusiveness we wish to encourage in the discussions that go on. In some ways, activism is rekindled. People have fought to continue anonymous HIV testing, to ensure gender-neutral housing policies, and most importantly, to see that the university is committed to making as many of its social spaces and records gender-neutral. We are definitely seeing some spark of revolution return.

In the following video, historian and eloquent public speaker Tim McCarthy, tells us why we should not allow queer activism die. He is a wonderful speaker with great talent – his speech brings the listener on a turbulent journey through the comings-to-be of queer theory and politics in the United States and how milestone events such as the Stonewall riots have played a role in how we view the queer rights movement today. I won’t spoil the punch line/thesis of his speech, but he asks: What sort of queers are we when we forget who got us here today to be able to so casually dismiss our identities as part of other things?

The only reason why I can organize my identity politics around the axis of art, for example, owes a lot to the great work done by queer activists before me. Understanding that, knowing that, inspires me to organize my identity politics around the axis of being … queer, queer, queer!

The video is here.

These are confidential records of the lives of Yuki Choe and her friends, and is the most striking evidence of what the absolutely dirt crazy gay lifestyle is all about. Names of the people involved in this revelation are kept confidential as the blogger risks being sued!

Yuki woke up very tired from a long night’s sleep. It was a Monday, and she has to get to work. Therefore, she went for a lustful teeth brushing and a sexy bath routine, which is part of her gay lifestyle since she was a child. She quickly chose her full clothes to wear to her office, fearing she will be late. (But what the heck, being fashionably late is the foolish lifestyle of a lot of Malaysians). She later got into her car, and has to face another part of the stupid Malaysian lifestyle, people driving like oxi-morons across the highway all around her.

On the way to the office, she thought back about last night. She remembered herself screaming, “More! One more!” Oh, that sensation! Those eleven men were all incredible, all of them handsome hunks. They kept on shooting it in she just could not resist as she held her own body tight. Those men were down with another half more to go. She will cherish that night because it does not come often. Manchester United were nil-two down, and ended up beating Tottenham five-two. That was real sexy football for her. Man Utd! She loves the Barclay’s Premier League lifestyle!

She pumped it hard at work the whole day, because the challenging lifestyle of all salespeople is always cold calling, appointments and trying to close the deal. She drank a lot of tea that day, and have to indulge herself in the dirty washroom lifestyle. She also ate at the mamak, a mostly fattening lifestyle of a lot of Malaysians. After a long tongue-licking day at work, before she left the office her straight friend R called. “Where are you?”. “At the office-lar”, she replied (Note: using “lar” at end of sentences is a Chinese Malaysian oriented lifestyle). “Come over (a pub) for a drink”, he invited. She playfully said yes with much delight.

Now drinking beer is the lifestyle of many that are staying in Damansara Uptown. Being a playground for a lot of well off people, she never turns down a chance to drink when people spend her alcohol. Besides alcohol consumption, hugging GRO girls is the proud lifestyle of many married straight men there. One of them came up to her and asked, “How is your lifestyle?” She decided she would leave her lazy lifestyle of sitting on pub chairs. She then stood up and tried to perform her bloody unhealthy lifestyle of dancing while moving away, because he was harassing her. As that guy went away, R asked “Are you gay?” She said “How can I be gay when I do not even like sex?”

After a few drinks, she went home. She climbed up to her room and turned on her lamp-light. She decided enough was enough, and she wanted to do something crazy that night. So after a quick shower, all wet, she quickly rubbed the sweet lotion all over her body. There she was, naked, ready to indulge in her despicable lifestyle. “Hey, everybody does it”, she thought. So she jumped into bed and quickly slept, the most relaxing lifestyle of all human beings in the world. Worst of all, with much utter disgust, it was only 10pm!

Yes, the gay lifestyle is so horrible and menacing!

Cross-posted from Yuki’s Box Of Chocolates.

“We are born alone and we die alone, but there is no reason why any of us should live alone in this life… Too many of my gay friends have left this shores because of intolerance. Let’s make a change today.” – Neo Swee Lin (in the video below).

Picture taken from Queerty.com

From the Guardian.

SINGAPORE (AP) — The gay community in tightly controlled Singapore held its first-ever rally Saturday, taking advantage of looser laws on public gatherings to call for equality.

About 2,500 participants wore pink clothing, played music and sang songs at a park known as Speaker’s Corner, said organizer Pink Dot, which represents Singapore’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents.

“This is a great opportunity for us to make our pitch for the equal treatment of the LGBT community in Singapore,” said Roy Tan, a Pink Dot spokesman.

Singapore’s government has become more tolerant toward gays and lesbians in recent years, but sodomy is still illegal, Tan said.

Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng told the state-owned New Paper on Friday that gay people “have a place in our society” but warned they must “not assert themselves stridently as gay groups do in the West.”

The government eased a ban on public demonstrations last year, encouraging Singaporeans to air grievances at Speaker’s Corner as long as they don’t discuss race, language or religion. The government says public discussion of those subjects could enflame passions and create instability in the multiethnic city-state.

Last year, Singaporean investors met at the park after losing money on structured notes issued by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

From CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/08/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5001396.shtml

In spite of President Obama’s declared stance against the “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” policy that keeps openly gay individuals out of the military, the U.S. Army on Thursday told Lt. Dan Choi he is being dismissed for publicly revealing his homosexuality.

Choi is not the first servicemember to be dismissed because of his sexuality under the Obama administration, but his dismissal stands out because of his noted skills. Choi is an infantry platoon leader in the New York National Guard who is fluent in Arabic. He graduated West Point and recently returned from Iraq.

As founding member of Knights Out, an organization for openly gay, lesbisan, bisexual, and transgender West Point alumni and their supporters, Choi advocates allowing openly gay people to serve in the military. He announced his own sexuality on MSNBC on March 19.

On the campaign trail, Mr. Obama specifically criticized the dismissal of openly gay servicemen who have special language skills. He also told the Advocate, a gay newsmagazine, that the don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy is a “counterproductive strategy.”

“We’re spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need,” he said in an interview with the magazine. “That doesn’t make us more safe.”

Since the don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy was implemented during the Clinton administration, around 12,500 servicemembers have been dismissed because of their sexuality. 

What will Obama do?

The White House also recently came under fire from liberal bloggers who noted a change in the language addressing the issue on Whitehouse.gov. The site initially said Mr. Obama supported “repealing” don’t-ask-don’t-tell, but it later said the president supported “changing” the policy “in a sensible way.” After taking heat on the matter, the White House changed the wording on Whitehouse.gov once again to say the president “supports repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in a sensible way that strengthens our armed forces and our national security.”

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has also been noncomittal about repealing the policy. While touring war colleges in April, Gates said he did not yet have a position on whether gay troops should be open about their sexuality.

Mr. Obama has also come under pressure from gay advocates to appoint an openly gay person to the Supreme Court.

Posted by Stephanie Condon, May 8, 2009 11:33 AM.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Lt. Choi has recently appeared again on Rachel Maddow’s show. He has just received his letter of termination from the military. The interview also highlighted a personal letter written to Sandy Tsao, a woman in the military who had just come out as gay and has also been informed that she will be withdrawn from the military. You can watch the You Tube video below:

In the first 100 days of Obama’s presidency, there has been mounting pressure for Obama to speak up on what he intends to do when it comes to issues pertaining to gay rights, the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy and same sex marriage. Maine, Iowa, and Vermont have recently sanctioned same sex marriage in the past few months. And pressure is building for the Federal Government to pass same sex marriage in the United States. There is also increasing pressure for Obama to repeal the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy in the military, which states that somebody can be fired from the military on the basis of homosexual conduct, which includes coming out publicly.

The CNN video below provides a great summary of the current situation here in the US.

1. DADT: Sandy Tsao and Dan Choi explains.

2. Same sex marriage: Can you hear us, Obama?

Just when I thought our television had turned over a new leaf.

I should have known of course that there’ll always be certain boundaries drawn, especially around supposedly sensitive issues such as homosexuality. Still, when they showed Brothers and Sisters on our cable tv more than a year back, I found myself pleasantly surprised. Whoa. A regularly recurring main character who happens to be gay on our national tv? Hell, that’s progress if anything.

Maybe our idiotic censors can change.

Still when week after week they continued showing our gay protagonist Kevin Walker’s brief dalliances with his coterie of male admirers ( at least before he settled down with Scotty ), I found myself almost applauding the seemingly enlightened censorship board.

Scotty : Awww, Look, our proposal scene is coming on!
Kevin : Where? Bloody hell. Did they just erase it?

Of course – as usual – I spoke a lil too soon in praise of the scissor-happy censors. Since I guessed that tonight would be the infamous proposal scene that Kevin makes to his partner Scotty, I figured I might as well take a look. As a measure of support if nothing else. But just right at the end before the gay proposal, the episode came to an abrupt end with a clever segue nto a preview of the coming week’s delights.

Yup.  Our diligent censors had been busy at work. Helpful lil buggers. Obviously talk of gay marriage turned out to far too much for them. Two men committing to each other must have blown their little minds. Shouldn’t have expected much from folks who’d censor the word ‘gay’ from the Oscars.

So for all my fellow countrymen – at least those who aren’t as blindly bigoted as our homophobic censors – just take a look at what actually happened at the end of the episode.

Makes me wonder how they’re gonna play out the episode next week which centers on Kevin and Scotty’s marriage. Will the overeager scissor-happy censors slice and dice again? Tune in next week.

Reposted from Tufts Observer.

By Seth Stein

When does a man become straight or gay? Is it a choice or is it predetermined? If it is a choice, as certain groups claim, then the issue is further complicated: why would a person willingly join an oppressed minority? Perhaps the discussion should start on a more personal, albeit admittedly non-scientific, note.

I grew up in downtown Chicago. One of my best friends grew up about four blocks away from me. We come from similar socioeconomic strata; both of our parents are professionals. He has an older sister; I have an older half-brother and half-sister. We attended the same day camp as children and the same high school as adolescents. We both attend prestigious top-tier universities now. Yet he recently came out as a gay man and is very active in the LGBT community at his school, while I’m a heterosexual with a girlfriend. What “makes” him gay and me straight?

Before examining what in his life led him to be gay, it is important to understand what a gay man is. Homosexual behavior, as in same-sex sexual parings, is as old as the human species. The Greeks, the Romans, and Samurai all practiced pederasty; various other kinds of homosexual behavior have been the norm in societies across the globe. But a gay man—a man who has exclusively same-sex relations with romantic attachments—is a modern phenomenon. The Greek who has a boy lover that he trains to be a warrior, but also has his wife to maintain the home, is not a homosexual. A man who self-identifies as gay, has strong attraction for same-sex relations, and chooses not to adhere to the norms of straight society, certainly is a homosexual.

The Gay Community

To understand homosexual behavior, not identity, we can use the animal world as a guide. Homosexual behavior is commonplace among other primates. The most popular theory used to describe this behavior is called the “alliance formation hypothesis.” Simply put, homosexual behavior allows lower-ranking males to cement alliances with higher-ranked males or other lower-ranked males; this allows them access to resources they either would not have had before or would have had limited access too. The main resource, ironically enough, is access to females. Homosexual behavior, just like heterosexual behavior, is used to cement social bonds. In this light, the ancient Greeks and Romans aren’t outliers—they are the norm.

But where did the modern gay community come from? Around the 19th century there were fundamental changes taking place in Western Europe that would transform the face of the world—industrialization, nationalism, and the modern nation-state. It should not be surprising that the first homosexual community—who looked to men exclusively for romantic and sexual relations—emerged in the most advanced state of the time, Great Britain. Freed from traditional family arrangements and social constraints, as well as the ability to lead independent lives with relative autonomy and anonymity, they embraced their sexual desires towards members of the same sex.

The division of the world into gay and straight quickly followed the creation of the first gay communities. Up until the early 18th century, it was not uncommon for married Englishmen to engage in homosexual intercourse on occasion. However, the burgeoning field of biological science quickly ended the fluid sexuality that had been the norm in Western civilization from ancient times. Rapid advances in medicine spurred doctors to classify homosexuality as a deviant behavior and therefore an illness or defect. This was instrumental in further separating those who chose to engage in homosexual behavior and those who did not. People now began to self-identify as either gay or straight.

The tendency for both the homosexual and the heterosexual worlds to practice exclusively same-or opposite-sex relations caused gay men to develop an alternative community to the predominantly heterosexual world. Before the community came out of the closet in the 1960s, it was maintained by secretive bars and meeting places. There were clearly established ways of suggesting to possible partners that a man was gay. This is where the stereotype of the effeminate gay man originates; gay men would commonly act more effeminate to signal to other men that they were gay.

As studies of human sexuality in the United States were almost nonexistent before the 1960’s, little was known about this underground community. Alfred Kinsey, in his famous report on human sexuality, opened the doors to this world and may have laid the basis for the gay civil rights movement. He challenged the common misconception that one is either gay or straight, positing that human sexuality exists on a continuum, and, throughout their lives, people can and will engage in both homosexual and heterosexual behavior. That being said, Kinsey did allow that most men engaged in predominantly opposite-or same-sex relations, not a combination of the two.

This caused a sea of changes in the homosexual world. Kinsey allowed that homosexual behavior was not deviant but in fact perfectly normal. As the community came out of the closet in the 1960’s, fundamental cultural changes took place that allowed gay men to express themselves in new ways. Being gay changed from being a dark secret to being alternative; gay scientists and activists sought to end the discrimination they experienced from mainstream society.

At this point the gay community shifted from an underground, largely self-contained community into a political unit. As black Americans demanded that they not be discriminated against on the basis of their genetic skin color, so gay men demanded that they not be discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation. Scientists sought to find the “cause” for homosexuality–if orientation was indeed genetic or biological, then it was senseless to discriminate on that basis. However, more conservative scientists and religious groups sought to prove that homosexuality was a choice and therefore not protected by civil rights legislation. And thus inquiry into the biological basis of homosexuality took on politically charged tones that skewed our understanding of homosexuality for decades.

Nature vs. Nurture

Fortunately, our understanding of homosexuality and human sexuality in general has advanced by leaps and bounds; homosexuality is no longer listed in the DSM-IV as a mental illness. The most extensive twin study on sexual orientation ever undertaken was recently published in Sweden. Comparing twins, the study demonstrated that human homosexuality has a genetic factor, an environmental factor, and a social factor. All of these factors play together to increase or decrease the probability that an individual will be a homosexual. The results of the study suggest that environmental factors account for about 60% of sexual orientation, while genes account for another 40% (refer to the sidebar for an analysis of this study).

The genetic basis of homosexuality is a puzzle to biologists—why would a trait that causes a person not to have offspring be preserved in the human species? This puzzle, however, is misleading; although homosexuals currently leave around 1/5th the offspring of their heterosexual counterparts, historically we have no evidence of how many offspring homosexuals could have produced as they were most likely not exclusively homosexual. The genes that contribute to male homosexuality have been postulated to be located on X chromosome and therefore passed down the mother’s line. In a tip of the hat to the elegance of evolution, one theory suggests these genes seem to make women more fertile while also contributing to male homosexuality. As such, the dearth of offspring produced by gay males is offset by greater numbers of offspring produced by women carrying the gene.

As previously stated, genetic factors are not the only determinant of homosexuality, and modern science shows they may have an even smaller effect than we think. Current theory is exploring unique environmental factors, i.e. the state of the fetus in the mother’s womb. The biggest determinant for homosexuality seems to be birth order; the successive sons after the first of a woman are the most likely to be gay. Why this is the case is still not clear, but it may have something to do with hormone levels in the womb. Testosterone plays a major role in sexual development in fetuses, and it is theorized that the first son, who produces testosterone in the mother’s womb, causes the mother’s body to become sensitized to the molecule. The mother will start producing testosterone antibodies that could change the hormone balance of her successive sons, which may increase the likelihood that he is a homosexual.

Regardless of the cause of homosexuality, there are some biological differences between a gay and straight person’s brain. Recent studies, which are considered controversial by some, show that gay men’s brains more closely resemble the brains of straight women. In other words, gay men have stronger vocalization skills and lower visuospatial intelligence than straight men. These differences are not drastic or universal, but they do shed light on a biological component of male homosexuality.

It is apparent that homosexuality has a biological basis, but few of the factors that contribute to homosexuality seem to predetermine it; in other words many different factors work together to make homosexuality more likely. Social factors are important as well. The process of “coming out” is actually a very ordered and regular socialization process, in which an individual chooses to self-identify as a gay man and pursue their sexual desires toward the same sex. This is part of the polarization of male sexuality—men who come out to be gay identify as strongly with exclusive homosexuality as your average straight man identifies with exclusive heterosexuality.

What is clear is that homosexuality certainly has its biological, social, and cultural elements. A fascinating confluence of these factors is the “gay ghetto.” Being a Chicagoan, this concept is hardly foreign to me. Northalsted, commonly known as “Boy’s Town” is an accepted part of the Chicago landscape, geographically positioned near other primarily young and progressive neighborhoods. In Boy’s Town shops fly the rainbow flag, men at bars expect other men to be gay and gay political organizations are organized from the community. Because of its tight-knit community spirit, Boy’s Town was one of the few urban neighborhoods to grow and gentrify throughout the entirety of the last four decades, even during the height of urban decline and white flight. As urban renewal became the order of the day in the last decade or so, Boy’s Town has been an essential mover in revitalizing Chicago’s north side.

Conclusion

What do all these facts mean when we look at them together? Gay men are actually different from straight men, both biologically and socially. So is that what makes my friend different from me?

The short answer is no. My friend and I are actually the same in every way that matters. He wants to find someone who he can love and who can love him back. He wants to be with someone he is attracted to who can offer new things in his life. He wants to be happy and satisfied. At the same time, his sexual orientation is not important at all in other large areas of his life—what he studies, what he likes to do, and who he chooses as his friends. I do not consider it too high a compliment to describe him as one of my most cherished friends—a role he filled even before he came out of the closet.

But why then is this the kind of person we are allowed to demonize in such horrible ways? Our cultural bias against homosexuals is so strong that the groups opposed to marriage in California didn’t even try to cover their motives. Instead they explicitly said they were anti-gay rights.

Fortunately times are changing much faster than the conservative forces in society can contain them. Americans our age are much more likely than even our parents, who were hippies, to be accepting of gay and lesbian individuals. Even young evangelicals are sick of beating the sodomy drum and would much rather focus on traditional progressive causes like poverty alleviation. I honestly believe that by the time I am my parents’ age my friend will be able to get married legally.

Even though things are changing quickly, that is not a license for inaction. While I enjoy the full range of rights and opportunities any society can provide, my friend does not. He is a second-class citizen. Gay rights is the civil rights issue of our generation. Liberty by gradations is not liberty, it is hierarchy. True liberty is all or nothing, and, until all people in the United States enjoy and practice their full rights, we will not be a free people—just mostly free.

Continue Reading