This Massacre Was a Hate Crime - UCSB, Isla Vista, Feminism and One Alumnus's Thoughts

An abandoned shoe in Isla Vista in 2008

Friday night there was a stabbing and shooting in my alma mater, UC Santa Barbara. I heard the news via facebook mere minutes after a young man drove through the center of Isla Vista in a black BMW shooting.

For those unfamiliar with the community, UC Santa Barbara (UCSB) is adjacent to an area call Isla Vista which has just shy of 2 square miles of unincorporated county land with no clear governance. In this small beachside community 23 thousand students live – most are UCSB students but there are also community college students from Santa Barbara and other youth also live in the area. As an area with almost entirely student residents and extremely high real-estate prices most houses have 6-8 residents. Isla Vista is known for it’s party life as students have much more freedom there than other universities where there are more individuals living in dorms.

The Beach

But returning to Friday night – as I sat watching facebook and more facts emerged it was clear this wasn’t just random carnage – yet the media has been slow to name this attack as what I see it as: a hate crime against all women.

In a disturbing video that was on You Tube and since taken down the killer, Elliot Rodger, states his intent clearly:

“If I can’t have you girls, I will destroy you. [laughs] You denied me a happy life and in turn I will deny all of you life, it’s only fair. I hate all of you.

—All you girls who rejected me, looked down upon me, you know, treated me like scum while you gave yourselves to other men. And all of you men for living a better life than me, all of you sexually active men. I hate you. I hate all of you. I can’t wait to give you exactly what you deserve, annihilation.”

This is not a standard crime. This clearly wasn’t just about one girl – it was about every member of the community. It was meant to instill fear in all. A hate crime is a usually violent, prejudice motivated crime and this fits the bill.

As the killer’s sexism was called out, online Men’s Rights Activists rushed to say #NotAllMen are like this. However this took the focus away from the fact that even if not all men are killers, all women have experienced sexism, gendered bias and violent attacks like this are common, and the hashtag #YesAllWomen began to trend.

Statements like:

#YesAllWomen bc every single woman I know has a story about a man feeling entitled to access to her body. Every. Single. One.

#YesAllWomen bc “Text me and let me know you got home safe” is standard, necessary and normal.

#YesAllWomen “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.” – Margaret Atwood

As a national and international media jumped into the coverage, as an alumni, I instead watched Facebook. I graduated from the Film & Media Studies program and the annual Reel Loud Film Festival meant I could expect many alumni friends were visiting for the weekend. And while there was a gut wrenching shock and fear to think of bullets flying through my community combined with the fear that perhaps I knew a victim – I can’t say I was totally surprised that it could happen there.

As a student at UCSB, my first week was colored with fear. Not of change or being in a new place, but of hate crimes. The first time I picked up the campus newspaper I discovered there had been a hate crime against gay male students. It wasn’t the last time I’d learn of instances of hate on campus.

My first protest at UCSB in the aftermath of hate crimes in 2008 against gay students

As a student organizer I spent a lot of time engaging with uncomfortable dialogs. Whether it was to address homophobia, racism, sexism, sexual assaults, environmental issues or more – UC Santa Barbara provided a space where students voices had many outlets. While many did not engage as much in politics preferring to enjoy the beaches, the party life, focus on academia or other pursuits… those worlds often meshed in odd ways.

Local law enforcement at the “Deltopia” street party in Isla Vista

Students embracing the local party life

Election Day showcases the engagement many students have even though the community is unincorporated

Student organizers working to address racism on campus

 

While the community was generally friendly and almost any individual was a beer away from being a casual friend, it also wasn’t uncommon that I’d hear slurs like “faggot” directed at gays or “slut” directed at women. When I walked home I’d often call friends to “talk me home” if I didn’t have a friend to walk with.

During the Take Back the Night Protest in which women marched to reclaim the night as safe – several male students yelled rape threats. The very act proved our actions we needed and as much as we craved safety it was by no means present already.

Take Back the Night Protest

Janelle Monae performing prior to the Take Back the Night Protest

 

In an article for the campus newspaper my senior year I wrote the following:

“The tragedy of the situation is that in I.V., we’ve accepted the norms that allow our streets to be unsafe and our fellow students to be targeted. Even during our celebrations within their designated safe space, we are never fully safe. Often times the problems of Isla Vista are brushed off as some excuse the hate speech as drunken antics and taunts not meant to offend or be taken seriously. However, the reality is the same slurs that are used by drunken folks in aggressive outbursts are occasionally heard in classrooms and on campus, and the oppression from ignoring the severity of the problem contributes to the lack of safe spaces for the queer community attending our school.

Whether spoken in ignorance or malice, hate speech hits a nerve. It makes for unsafe spaces, and verbal harassment leads to the same degradation that enables other types of harassment and assault. In Isla Vista, I often observe the contrasting dichotomy of the sun-soaked ideal paradise and the very real problems that constantly plague the queer community and other minorities. As tempting as it is to ignore reality and enjoy the beachside bubble, we have to address these problems.”

Although this was written specifically to address the hate crime against LGBT students – those words feel far too fitting an applicable for women today in Isla Vista. 

As an alumni I have so many fond memories, strong friendships, experiences that helped me learn and grow. The streets the shooter drove down I’ve walked, biked, and stumbled down many times. I’ve gone to parties at places where I’ve now seen twitter photos of body bags resting. It’s shocking to see the violence but the root cause isn’t shocking. There was always violence against women. There was objectification. There were very real problems regarding rape. The sense of entitlement to others bodies didn’t start in Santa Barbara and is by no means limited to there.

But as the national debate goes on and CNN loops the killer’s video my heart is heavy as I think of the place that was my home.

Last time I visited UCSB was to celebrate the graduation of some of the individuals I was lucky to mentor and share time with. In the Student Resource Building while I was there someone wrote on the wall of the women’s restroom a cry for help. And the community responded with words of encouragement, resources they could go to, reminders that the original writer was not alone. When I think of UCSB I think back to that space often, and two years after graduating the wall was even more crowded with messages of support. The community has never been perfect, but there is support for those in need and a community willing to work to improve itself. Let’s hope that helps the families of the slain and injured in healing.

The notes on the wall of the girls bathroom in the Student Resource Building

 

Further Reading:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-transcript-ucsb-shootings-video-20140524-story.html

http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2014/05/lets-call-isla-vista-killings-what-they-were-misogynist-extremism

http://www.news.ucsb.edu/node/014194/isla-vista-shootings

https://twitter.com/hashtag/YesAllWomen

http://dailynexus.com/2010-05-06/hate-speech-creates-unsafe-environment-iv/

http://time.com/114043/yesallwomen-hashtag-santa-barbara-shooting/

This is what marriage equality looks like

SF Pride Manning Controversy Continues After Community Forum

If you believe SF Pride, the community forum on May 31st was the final discussion regarding the Bradley Manning controversy and now that they've released a statement we can move on. Releasing a statement that said,

"Over the past several weeks, SF Pride has sought to respectfully listen to and consider the various opinions and perspectives on the matter of Pfc. Bradley Manning and related interests in extending representative support for Pfc. Manning.   The SF Pride Board of Directors recognizes the divergent opinions regarding the matter of Pfc. Manning, but none of the three main options we received from the community forum on May 31 garnered a consensus majority."

They went on to address the discrimination claim filed in San Francisco, and then wrapped up their statement saying, "Therefore, SF Pride will continue to produce this year’s Pride Celebration to ensure a safe and joyful time for all attendees as safety and security is our number #1 priority."
But if you believe that, you might have believed them when they said "the discussion of that matter is closed for this year" on Facebook last month.


However they'll have another protest on their hands tomorrow due to the method in which this release was made. After promising to release a statement within a week of the community meeting, activists prepared to hold a press conference at the end of the business day the Friday responding to the anticipated statement. Only to have SF Pride delay the announcement I quote above, until after the press conference ended. The activist's press conference ended at 6:15pm. The statement from SF Pride was issued at 6:28pm

As relayed from an email alert from Joey Cain, the past SF Pride Board President who nominated Manning, a group of Manning supporters under the slogan “Reinstate or Resign” will be organizing a protest and speak out outside Pride’s monthly membership meeting tomorrow, Tuesday June 11 at 6pm.

SF Pride needs to realize that declaring a controversy over doesn't actually end a controversy. They may be hoping that activists get busier as Pride Month continues, and that they tire of protesting this issue, however with the NSA leaks in the news the value of and consequences of being a whistle blower is being debated again and many Manning supporters have been energized by this debate. It should be interesting to see how this continues to unfold. But over a month into the controversy both sides seem to continue to not be heard by the other.

You Should Skip School If You Don't Want to Know About Harvey Milk

If you are a student in California, your teachers might use today to teach you a lesson some parents might not be comfortable with: Some people are gay. One of those gay people, named Harvey Milk, once spoke up about his homosexuality, and still managed to get elected to public office. Eventually he was shot by someone who didn't like this.
If your teacher is a bit more progressive you might hear about his work to include other minorities, unions, seniors and the disabled. There are a lot of great sources to learn about Harvey Milk including the Harvey Milk Foundation (who would have thought?), the films The Times of Harvey Milk or Milk, news footage in your local library etc... And since I trust you're a good policymic reader, I'm going to focus on 7 awesome quotes from Harvey Milk himself that will showcase just how relevant his ideas remain today, and why California celebrates him as an important local leader who inspired beyond our state.

 

1. On Equality

"All men are created equal. Now matter how hard they try, they can never erase those words. That is what America is about."

 

2. On Youth

"All young people, regardless of sexual orientation or identity, deserve a safe and supportive environment in which to achieve their full potential."

 

3. On Compromising

"It takes no compromising to give people their rights. It takes no money to respect the individual. It takes no survey to remove repressions."

 

4. On Hate Speech

"If I turned around every time somebody called me a faggot, I'd be walking backward - and I don't want to walk backward."

 

5. On Taxes

"Let me have my tax money go for my protection and not for my prosecution. Let my tax money go for the protection of me. Protect my home, protect my streets, protect my car, protect my life, protect my property.... Worry about becoming a human being and not about how you can prevent others from enjoying their lives because of your own inability to adjust to life."

 

6. On Politics

"Politics is theater. It doesn't matter if you win. You make a statement. You say, "I'm here, pay attention to me.""

 

7. Last Words...

"This is to be played only in the event of my death by assassination. I fully realize that a person who stands for what I stand for, an activist, a gay activist, becomes a target or the potential target for somebody who is insecure, terrified, afraid, or very disturbed themselves. Knowing that I could be assassinated at any moment, any time, I feel it's important that some people know my thoughts. And so the following are my thoughts, my wishes, and my desires, whatever, and I'd like to pass them on and have them played for the appropriate people."
...
"I have never considered myself a candidate. I have always considered myself part of a movement, part of a candidacy. I considered the movement the candidate. I think that there's a distinction between those who use the movement and those who are part of the movement. I think I was always part of the movement. I wish I had time to explain everything I did. Almost everything was done with an eye on the gay movement."
To listen to the full tape...

Divisiveness of SF Pride's Manning Decision is Nothing New for the LGBT Community

The LGBT rights movement is by no means a monolithic group, and the range of opinions was contextualized Wednesday night when famous activists Dan Nicoletta and Anne Kronenberg took the stage for an event discussing the impact of Harvey Milk at the Castro Theater hosted by Facing History and Ourselves.

During the Q&A the recent SF Pride controversy around Bradley Manning's nomination and subsequent removal from the grand marshal list was brought up, where Dan Nicoletta diplomatically supported SF Pride, the representation of Manning in the movement, as well as the process of debating and disagreeing with each other.

Replying to the question about what he thought about the controversy Nicoletta answered, "And you know I love Pride... and I've worked intimately with Pride... So the discourse is heartbreaking but I think Stuart Milk so eloquently always says that our differences are our strengths and we are going to have fights and we should fight... we'll figure it out, it's a complex issue and I think by giving that spokesperson for Bradley Manning a place to talk about those issues we're doing the right thing...
"Just like in Harvey Milk's Day... under the pressures from the rest of the world when Anita Bryant challenged us at the ballot box and John Briggs challenged us at the ballot box... there was a lot of scrambling to be something other than what we are. To have our arguments in public, I think that's a healthy thing and we will figure it out."

Dan Nicoletta's photography has done much to document Harvey Milk's life as a politician in San Francisco and both he and Anne Kronenberg, who got her start in politics working with Milk, spoke at length about how they think Milk would have lead today had it not been for his assassination.

Meanwhile in current San Francisco LGBT politics, Supervisor David Campus wrote a strong letter to SF Pride in which he said, "The decision to rescind this honor is unprecedented and the community has every right to be concerned about the consequences of this abrupt, top-down directive. Most importantly, however, is the obligation Pride has to be accountable, transparent and representative to the diverse LGBT community it serves. As an organization which receives City funding, Pride has a responsibility to operate with transparency and accountability, and to allow for timely appropriate discussions with the community as needed. The failure of Pride leadership to do so in this circumstance is contrary to this responsibility."

"Controversy is not a new phenomenon to Pride festivities, nor is it a valid reason for Pride not to fulfill its responsibilities to the broader LGBT community. The recent statement made by Pride that the discussion on this matter is “closed” is disturbing, and may serve to further divide the community and foster long-lasting resentments."

Tuesday this week activists also held a "mock Pride board meeting" with a row of empty chairs to represent the absence of SF Pride in the discussion.

Whether or not SF Pride takes the time to respond to the community outcry or Supervisor Campos, the vigorous debate is nothing new in LGBT politics, though it certainly seems to have become reinvigorated thanks to the Manning nomination.

Bradley Manning: SF Pride Still Doesn't Get Why People Are Upset

San Francisco Pride would really like you to forget the whole Bradley Manning issue. After Manning was nominated to be honored by former Grand Marshals of the city's yearly Pride Parade, the announcement was made public, some veterans and LGBT groups protested, SF Pride retracted the honor, faced community protests, changed its tactics, and was protested again — and yet the organization still hasn't absorbed why the community is upset and why it matters.

SF Pride has announced via email that it's postponing the May 14 meeting on Manning's invitation until a larger, suitable location is secured, with the rationale that “We want to allow people to have a chance to voice their opinions about the recent controversy, but also have a large event coming up, and do not want to let one issue, as important as it is to some, overshadow the concerns and interests of the hundreds of thousands who attend SF Pride.”

The email went on to say, “SF Pride's decision concerning the election process of Bradley Manning as Grand Marshal being consistent with SF Pride's long standing Grand Marshal election policy is firm. Thus, the discussion of that matter is closed for this year.”

With this attitude that the matter is closed, any such meeting on Manning serves no purpose. The activists who gathered to protest both on April 29 and May 7 were not hoping to just get an idea out there, they sought concrete actions from SF Pride in order to best reflect the will of participants.
SF Pride justified this decision saying, “A meeting in a larger venue after the 2013 Celebration and Parade will allow people from all sides of that issue and others to fully air and hear one another's viewpoints, without jeopardizing the production of this year's event and the safety and security of the attendees. We ask everyone in the community to come together in Pride this June, recognizing that we can embrace difference without violence and hate.”

This is a classic strawman argument. There is no safety or security risk in honoring or not honoring Bradley Manning. And to deny the community a chance to be heard prior to the event is not respecting viewpoints of a diverse community; it is silencing the chance for those viewpoints to be reflected in action. This lack of representation in action has been a complaint of many protesters, and in its newest tactic to avoid controversy, SF Pride is showing just the attitude the protesters have become tired of.

In my observation of the protesters, I saw no hate for Pride as an organization or movement. Rather, their protest sought to better represent the community and was based out of a desire for greater inclusivity within the community. Many had frustrations due to SF Pride not listening, however this press release shows that such a frustration is well grounded. SF Pride wants to first have its event, and then have a conversation when it can have no effect on the outcome.

Originally Posted Monday May 13, 2013 here.

Hey Look - I'm Writing Again! At Policy Mic...

In hindsight, I should have posted the last few articles I wrote here too… But oops. I didn’t. So I’m attaching them here. I will do this a series of posts this afternoon so they will be here, tagged and easier to find in the future.
Without further delay… here we go! – Starting with this post from exactly a week ago.

San Francisco Gay Pride 2013: SF Parade Honors Bradley Manning, Now Backtracking Any Way Possible

In a press release on the afternoon of May 7 prior to their monthly board meeting, the San Francisco Pride Board of Directors released a statement intended to clarify the reasons that Bradley Manning was named a community grand marshal before having that honor revoked.

In their release they argue that “the community grand marshal upon whom the Electoral College votes is defined as ‘a local hero (individual) not being a celebrity’ … Because Mr. Manning is not local, by definition under the Grand Marshal policy, he may not be nominated or elected by the Electoral College as its community grand marshal.”

This release comes on the heels of a protest on April 29 in which many community leaders protested SF Pride for their decision to revoke the honor they’d voted to bestow upon Bradley Manning.
Speakers at the April 29 protest included a wide range of military perspectives from Daniel Ellsberg, famous for releasing the Pentagon Papers, to John Caldera, an honorably discharged U.S. Navy corpsman and openly gay member of the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Commission. Also present was Rainey Reitman, who founded the Bradley Manning Support Network and spoke of the work of supporters, while Stephen Funk, a gay man who was court-martialed for his opposition to the Iraq war, called Manning a “freedom fighter.”

Almost all the speakers at the protest referenced SF Pride Board President Lisa William’s press release on April 27 which said, “Bradley Manning is facing the military justice system of this country. We all await the decision of that system. However, until that time, even the hint of support for actions which placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform — and countless others, military and civilian alike — will not be tolerated by the leadership of San Francisco Pride. It is, and would be, an insult to every one, gay and straight, who has ever served in the military of this country.”

Caldera responded at the rally that “SF Pride sponsors include Bank of America and Wells Fargo, who have foreclosed on hundreds of veteran families” and went on to call for Lisa William’s resignation over the issue.

One former grand marshal, Gary Virginia, demanded an explanation of the process through which grand marshals are selected, and said until the board did so it not only would fail to represent the community, but also taint the honor of former grand marshals if the process was found to be unrepresentative. He assured the crowd that as a co-founder of the Pride Brunch fundraiser, their event would honor Manning.

While SF Pride’s newest press release doesn’t address all of the protesters concerns, nor does it address a recent complaint filed against it at the San Francisco Human Rights Commission concerning Mr. Manning — it does backpedal on the former political reasons for removing Mr. Manning’s nomination by changing the reason for revoking the honor to a technical byline. Whether or not this new tactic from SF Pride will remove the controversy surrounding the issue remains to be seen.

NOTE: This story has continued to develop as SF Pride’s Board had their monthly meeting Monday night. SF Pride called in police to remove protesters and promised to hold public comment in the future at a larger venue, however, no date has been announced.

Another Day at Cinequest

So today I’ve seen three films. But only two new ones. I started the day seeing The Other Family (La Otra Familia) which I also saw last week. Refresher for those who didn’t see that post my comments on that:

“Charming, nuanced, not cheesy, enough of a bite to be real and enough sweetness to tug at the heart strings. Basic plot is the son of drug addict is taken away from his mom after she has been missing for several days, and ends up being taken care of by a gay couple. We also see a lesbian couple go through the process of family planning, a couple that’s trying to adopt, and what family means to each of these characters. It is set in Mexico and thus is in Spanish, but if you see it at Cinequest it will have subtitles and the performances need no translation to be brilliant. If you have a chance – go see it!”

On a second viewing I found it just as powerful. The visuals are well constructed but I was so engaged in the story I didn’t notice it as much the first time. It’s bittersweet and honest- not the sugar coated gay story. I hope it gets wider release eventually because I’d really love for my friends who weren’t at the festival to get a chance to see this one.

Following that I went to see a documentary, The Island President about President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives, as he explains why for the lowest-lying country in the world global warming could be the literal death of his nation. The documentary follows him as he goes to Copenhagen to try to convince the nations of the world to do more to reduce carbon emissions and in doing so protect his country. Bringing a deeply personal reality to the consequences of global warming through showing erosion across the islands and showcasing the culture of the Maldives this movie educates viewers on what the world could lose if we all fail to act. Extremely powerful. So powerful in fact that not only did it make me cry but when the film ended and the directors name flashed across the screen the audience was so stunned it took over a minute before a round of applause hit the theater. Not sparse applause of the sort that almost all films can get at a festival – but the sound of everyone in the theater clapping hard. Environmentalists should bring this to college campuses if they want to add a fact to the risks the planet faces. And anyone and everyone should see this film. Everything a documentary should be.

To finish off the night I went to see The King (Ko) an Indian political thriller. A photojournalist takes an action photography to a new level covering bank robberies, political underdogs, fires and more. Insert the expected betrayal, false allies, unrequited crush, romance interest, old friends, and of course song and dance that is required from an Indian film. Lots of fast cuts and action, cheesy hero dynamics, everything you think of specifically relating to Bollywood it has in its own way. A few modern touches like a political optimism worthy of Obama in 2008 and guys taking a feminist stand in college. It was a good film, but I was far too tired for such a long one… 165 minutes… At just shy of 3 hours long it is a typical Indian film, but a horrible choice for the last screening of the evening. Or if you do want to see it late night, get some coffee or chai beforehand.

Young Film Makers at Cinequest (And Prop 8 is live streamed as a play)

Today I saw three productions - two at Cinequest, and one online. The online one was AFER's production of 8 - a play which takes dialog directly from the court transcripts of the prop 8 trial before Judge Walker.

I always fear watching young film makers first works. On one hand the age means we have more in common and I'm more inclined to relate to the subject mater, on the other hand often times production values make it a painful endeavor to watch. Much like amateur theater productions - you're not going for the quality but rather to support budding artists.

I started the day with a film that felt like it was a college production, Cheap Fun. Cinequest's guide begins their description of it with, "Cheap Fun is a comedic wake-up call, playing off the monotony of a directionless life." However I found such a wake-up call was lacking. The directionless life made for a directionless narrative where the characters wandered through the night in search of amusement. With a large ensemble cast this proved problematic for me as no one character was interesting or compelling enough to hold my attention. It felt like I'd wandered into a party where I didn't know who amongst the crowd was the host - who should be deserving of attention and who was an extra? Also after seeing L!fe Happens last night, it was especially disappointing that the only female character was written in a flat way that felt like a cliche more than a character. By the end of the film there was a bit more action and one character who ended up streaking through town proved the most realistic and ironically the most fleshed out of the bunch (Sadly due to the size of the cast I can't remember the character's name). Overall the plot felt to me like an attempt at the Hangover for younger directionless students, but the lack of a solid storyline other than, "let's go anywhere" made it drag for me. There were some funny moments but it felt stretched out, and what could have been a solid short film ended up being a less impressive feature.

After that I watched the livestream of 8 (on twitter as #8LA) which was an extremely star studded affair. Judge Walker was played by Brad Pitt, David Boies was played by George Clooney, Theodore B. Olson was Martin Sheen and the opposition's lawyer Mr. Cooper was played by Kevin Bacon.

(To save time on listing the talent I'm posting a screenshot of the program... )



I knew the material would be powerful beforehand. Having watched the Prop 8 trial - excerpts from that really could be nothing but a tear jerker. Literally. Not ashamed to admit by the end I was crying. Dustin Lance Black added to the official transcripts by weaving in pieces featuring Jamie Lee Curtis and Christine Lahti portraying Kris Perry and Sandy Stier the lesbian couple who were two of the plaintiffs as they explain to their sons why they're missing soccer practice, and arguing about getting take out. Seeing Martin Sheen say the words of Mr. Olson definitely made me feel like life was becoming West Wing, a rational response being the appropriate way to react to injustice. (I must admit, the policy nerd in me WISHES life was like West Wing). Overall all of the actors were incredible at portraying the emotion of the trial and watching and hearing the words over again brought me back to the uncomfortable wooden seats in the court room. I feel like using Prop 8 as source material is a double edged sword, while it has powerful and honest compelling stories illustrating the impact both emotionally and politically, there is also a whirlwind of emotions attached to it, so to make something that resonates for people who weren't there and also for those who were requires a very honest production which everyone delivered on. I would love it if this was aired on TV in full as I feel it would do more to explain fight for same-sex marriage than almost anything (releasing the tapes of the trial would top it, but little else.)
Luckily for drama students everywhere - the script is available royalty free - so if you want a powerful production with strong characters, an easy to build set and a topical plot, you've got your play. I imagine what the Laramie Project was for me in high school, 8 will be for the next batch of young drama kids.

Returning to the film festival for another film made by young film makers I was a little apprehensive. With heightened emotion from an amazing cast and oscar winning writer - surely nothing could compare? Even worse, I'd met the actors behind the film earlier in the festival and enjoyed their company, so if I didn't like it I'd almost certainly be asked what I thought. Luckily such fears proved unfounded. Percival's Big Night was fun, quirky and engaging with a unique visual style that felt like the fly on the wall was on steriods with a steadicam, buzzing through the action while never being noticed and yet presenting the closest possible portrait of two roommates and two friends who come to buy drugs from them. Like Cheap Fun, Percival's Big Night was about the young and directionless as they seek better - but it was refreshingly honest as it exposed the peacocking of the men as they at last minute shower and change shirts while concocting excuses to be alone with their crushes as well as the seemly snide remarks flying between the girls despite their deep loyalty for each other as they look out for each others interests. The four characters had obvious chemistry on screen and the rhythm of the banter, camera movements, and story felt very comfortable. There were no cheap laughs or moments when I felt the action was directed towards the camera rather than the story which always seems to be one of my issues with student films, so I was pleasantly surprised. I was glad to hear during the Q&A portion following the film that they have left room for development and I look forward to seeing their web based extras. The characters were both fleshed out enough to feel complete, and yet layered enough to leave room for more, and I would happily watch future films of the same characters. Unfortunately unlike some of the other films I've seen this festival, my parents weren't with me as I would be very curious if my enjoyment was increased from a general audience perspective due to being similarly young and in that early establishing phase of life post graduation that the characters were in. However most of the folks I got a chance to speak to after the film were similarly young and in the early stages of their careers, so I can't speak with certainty on how it reads to other age groups. What I can say though is the film was well crafted and fun and I look forward to seeing future work from this cast and crew.



Beginning with this:




Percival's Big Night's Riku (Angelica Reeve) Explains How to Survive Assholes from Percival's Big Night on Vimeo.

Prop 8 Ruling

I could try to write something now but I feel like today's ruling said so much that it speaks for itself...Page 38 was the best part in my view:

"We are excited to see someone ask, “Will you marry me?”, whether on bended knee in a restaurant or in text splashed across a stadium Jumbotron. Certainly it would not have the same effect to see “Will you enter into a registered domestic partnership with me?”. Groucho Marx’s one-liner, “Marriage is a wonderful institution…but who wants to live in an institution?” would lack its punch if the word ‘marriage’ were replaced with the alternative phrase. So too with Shakespeare’s “A young man married is a man that’s marr’d,” Lincoln’s “Marriage is neither heaven nor hell, it is simply purgatory,” and Sinatra’s “A man doesn’t know what happiness is until he’s married. By then it’s too late.” We see tropes like “marrying for love” versus “marrying for money” played out again and again in our films and literature because of the recognized importance and permanence of the marriage relationship. Had Marilyn Monroe’s film been called How to Register a Domestic Partnership with a Millionaire, it would not have conveyed the same meaning as did her famous movie, even though the underlying drama for same-sex couples is no different. The name ‘marriage’ signifies the unique recognition that society gives to harmonious, loyal, enduring, and intimate relationships."

Meanwhile within the introduction section (page 5) it summarized the case rather well as it said :

"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples. The Constitution simply does not allow for 'laws of this sort.'"

I was considering going out to celebrate - but I'm tired. Not just from sleep deprivation - but the mental exhaustion that arises with every time this case interrupts life. Every time a verdict regarding this has been on the horizon - whether from the voters on November 4th 2008, or before hearing the oral hearing on March 5th 2009, or when we anxiously waited for the first Day of Decision of that ruling, prepared to Meet in the Middle, set our scopes on national equality with the National Equality March in DC, when we fought the repetition of this case in Question 1 in Maine, as it went to Judge Walker, After his ruling when it was first made unconstitutional August 4th 2010, When it went back to court before Judge Ware to decide if the decision should be vacated after the proponents discovered Judge Walker had a long time same-sex partner, then to the California Superior court to advise the 9th circuit on if the state could be represented by the proponents if the state would not appeal, then to the 9th circuit which leads us to today...

On the eve of every one of these moments my insomnia gets worse and I spend an anxiety induced night with no sleep, groggy eyes when I finally get out of bed to shower and get on with the events of the day. (Whether that means driving to SF, working at voter reg or otherwise being active in the cause) Today was no different. I'm tired of these nights. The flashbacks of stresses and new stresses. The media narrative that makes me want to pull my hair out or slap an announcer for trying to be neutral and in doing so dehumanizing the people behind it. As such - I don't greet today's victory with a cheer, I greet it with a sigh. One more step on this fight...

Prop 8 Update... to come tomorrow

Tomorrow's Prop 8 ruling will likely cover three parts to the case...
1) If former U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker should have recused himself from hearing the case because he is gay and had a long-time partner with whom he was not married (and therefore might have an interest in marrying someday)


2) If the proponents of Proposition 8 have the right to appeal Walker's decision striking down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional when the state of California won't

3) If Walker did not need to recuse himself and the proponents DO have the right to appeal, whether Walker was correct that Proposition 8 violates Californians' due process and equal protection rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution....

... So tired of this nonsense. More news to come - 10:30 am tomorrow. Most likely on twitter...

Seriously? "I'm the One Getting Bludgeoned..."

After LGBT activist David Kato was beaten to death, for Evangelical leaders who've supported legislation in Uganda that would kill or imprison gays, this is by far the least appropriate thing one could say:

“I spoke to help people,” he said, “and I’m getting bludgeoned from one end to the other.”

(Blog Source and Newspaper as well... )

Especially after Tuscon the question of blame after violence seems to come up more in media narratives than the idea that words have consequences.  Once again a right-wing cry for direct action against a group has lead to targeted violence and in the immediate aftermath the response is claiming to be the victim. In 2008 when US right-wing leaders and Evangelicals started pushing anti-gay legislation this was an obvious risk. When publications posted pictures outing gay men with the caption of "Hang Them" this was an obvious risk. I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that it lead to an activist being brutally murdered...  It is tragic but expected. But for those who called for these action, the claim that they make calling themselves victims is unacceptable.

David Kato was considered the founding father of the gay rights movement in Uganda and his leadership is needed now more than ever. But leadership is also necessary here in the states given the amount of US leadership in escalating the targeted homophobia. Our LGBTQ citizens are certainly discriminated against, but we do have relative safety compared to those the right-wing has made all the more vulnerable, and as a movement we must consider not just the localized actions to secure our neighborhoods and states, but ensuring the safety of all those facing the same oppression. As Americans mourned the loss of one 9 year old in Arizona, the trial for the murder of another 9 year old in Arizona who also died in a political shooting is largely ignored. (Source) Except this time it was targeted by race. While I'm a fan of the idea of working together on issues that affect all Americans, we can't ignore the targeted attacks on minorities, those who call for them, or pretend such attacks are isolated incidents. Or that when internationally the same conclusions are reached after our right-wing activists work in collaboration with their governments, that it isn't tied to our own politics domestically. Whether it's Congresswoman Giffords or David Kato or 9 year old Brisenia Flores or any other of the many people who's suffered in hate crimes - the media narrative of shock must be abandoned. Only minimal research is needed to see warning signs in public speeches, published articles, active web forums spewing hate, and the accessibility of weapons to those who are being preached to or otherwise incited. I'm sad for the loss of David Kato, but I'm not surprised. And anyone who claims to be either has not been paying attention or is in denial, and both are unacceptable in our media.

San Francisco Pride