A PERSONAL HISTORY�
First of all, for those who either don�t pick up on these things that swiftly, or who maybe aren�t familiar with the old saying, the title of this section comes from an old saying that so-and-so is �queer as a three dollar bill.� I suspect the phrase was originally intended to mean that someone was unusual, or different, but just as the term �queer� has morphed over the years, so has the saying, until it has come to mean what it does today� someone who is gay.
As an aside, I very much prefer the term �gay� to �homosexual,� simply because it allows me to avoid using the root word �sex.� Not that I am embarrassed by, or ashamed of the word� I�m not. It�s just that, for me, being gay encompasses far, far more than just �sex.� It�s about a self-identity, about how I relate with other people and how they relate back to me, the ways that I view the world, and so much more. Being a gay man in today�s society has at least a residual effect on almost everything I do, in some regard, but at the same time, it most certainly does not fully describe who I am. I am much more than simply a gay person� I love to write, I am intensely interested in music, politics, history, social justice issues and more. I love to tell jokes and make my friends laugh, I love a great book... in short, being gay is only one aspect of my personality. Certainly, it has an effect on many things that I do, but it does not define, nor describe me. I prefer to be seen as a person, who happens to be gay, rather than simply �a gay person.�
That being said, being gay IS what this section is all about, so.... I guess I have realized that I was gay since I first hit puberty, although I refused to admit it, even to myself, for several years. Growing up in a small town on the Prairies, I saw how gays were viewed, I heard all the comments and the jokes� in my self-denial, I am ashamed to admit that I even took part in it, and told my share of bigoted jokes. And with regular church attendance being pretty well mandatory until I hit my teens, I was well-acquainted with the traditional religious views of gay people as well. To say I was �in the closet� is a mild understatement.
At the same time, as hard as I tried, I could not change the way I really felt, deep down inside. I could struggle with it, and deny it, even to myself, but I could not change it. Without going into a long and tedious (and highly personal) story, this internal struggle resulted in several years of torment, self-hatred, depression, alcoholism and more. It wasn�t until I enrolled in university as an adult that I first began to come to terms with myself. In university, I had my first ongoing regular contact with openly gay men and women who were proud of who they were. Several of these people became good friends of mine, and I had many long discussions with a number of them. Over the course of my time at university, I gradually came to accept who I was, and to self-identify as a gay man. I was still not �out of the closet� to any degree, however, partly due to the wide-spread homophobia in the small city where I attended university, and partly due to my own continued insecurities.
However, to a very small group of intimate friends, I finally �came out� and admitted the truth, and it felt so good to finally be able to not only admit it to myself, but to say it out loud to another person. �Yes, I�m gay.� My straight friends can only imagine what a weight that lifted from my shoulders, but I know my gay friends will be able to relate to what I am saying.... At this point, I�d like to offer a heartfelt thank you to several friends who� with no exaggeration� probably saved me from insanity or suicide at this point, specifically, Ruth, Gordie, William, Roger, Neil, Sheila and Dwayne, and Jon. Some of these people were gay, and some weren�t, but they were all accepting and gave me someone I could talk to openly, and they will always remain among my dearest friends.
Over the years since then, I have slowly grown more self-confident and open in my identity as a gay person. I�ve had a number of relationships, a couple of them relatively long-term, and I�ve even fallen in love a couple of times. But I was still always hyper-cautious about who I told, and I was definitely not �out of the closet� completely. Indeed, my friend Mac recently pointed out to me that I have spent most of my life either fully or partially �closeted,� and commented that this must have had a serious impact on me. He wrote:
It just seems like this situation would be spirit oppressing at
best, and spirit crushing in the long run. It seems to me from
what I know of your history so far, that you've spent the
majority of your life being closeted to one degree or another;
which doesn't seem to jive with your attitude, and certainly
not with your intellect.
(Ahhh, Mac, you�re so wise!) Yes, he is fully and completely correct. I had to admit to myself that even when I WAS in a relationship, it was usually with other individuals who were still �in the closet� to a some degree themselves. And, as Mac points out, that�s not healthy.
The last few years, I have been a lot more open than I was in the past. There are a number of friends in the valley here who know that I am gay, but the circle has still remained fairly small. The thing that was the final straw for me occurred just recently, just before Christmas of 2003. I heard that the people who had murdered Aaron Webster in Vancouver had only been charged with manslaughter, and that the first one sentenced had only received a three-year sentence. (Please follow the links from this page to �Remembering Matthew, Aaron and more...� and go to the page concerning Aaron for more details on this case.) To say I was outraged is an understatement. It was at that point that I decided that I was going to be an open, �out� and proud person, and I don�t give a damn what people think. I am loooong past the point where I am sick of the �double life,� and all that it entails. If being open about my life causes me to lose friends, then they�re not the type of friends I need (or want) anyway.
None of this changes who I am, or what I stand for, at any fundamental level. It�s just that I am sick and tired of hiding such a major part of my life from the world at large. When I look back at my life so far, I have some regrets, but the biggest one is that it�s taken me so long to get to this point. My life would almost certainly have been harder in many ways if I had been �out� for all those years, there�s no denying that. But in many other ways, it would have been soooo much easier. But I recognized many years ago that there is no profit in dwelling on all the �would�a, should�a, could�a� scenarios...
As far as I�m concerned, the best thing I can do at this point is just to live my life as I always have, with one exception� I will no longer hide or deny a major part of who I am. No, I�m NOT about to become some kind of preachy, in-your-face type of gay activist, but I�m not about to hide the fact that I am gay. That decision alone has made me a happier person, and that should be all that concerns anyone else.
************************************************************************
THE WIDER VIEW�
Being gay has become a lot more acceptable to the general public across North America over the last few years. Sure, ever since the late �60s things have been slowly improving, but the pace of change has accelerated dramatically over the past five years. A lot of it is due to the decisions by several celebrities and well-known people to be open about their sexual orientation. People like Ellen Degeneres, and Rosie O�Donnell have got people talking, and of course, television shows such as �Will and Grace,� and �Queer Eye for the Straight Guy� have thrust the whole issue front and centre. All of this makes me glad, don�t get me wrong. But...
Yeah, �but...� Television shows like �Will and Grace� and �Queer Eye� also make me cringe, because to a large degree, all they do is perpetuate the same old stereotypical views of gays. You know the ones: gay men have this �built in� sense of fashion, flair and good taste; gay men are flighty, and mainly concerned with superficial issues such as clothes, clubs and cruising, and on, and on... There have been a few slightly more realistic depictions of gay men on television, however, although these were usually not main characters in the story line. For example, �NYPD Blue� featured a gay man who worked at the precinct. In the show, he is a decent, quiet man� although notably, he is not a cop, and is largely confined to clerical work. On the now-defunct show, �Spin City,� the mayor�s aide, Carter, is a capable (but funny) city administrator who just happens to be gay. There have also been other cases. But to a large extent, the �big� shows at the forefront of the supposed �gay wave� of the past two years have been ones like �W&G� and �Queer Eye� that play to, and reinforce old stereotypes. That is unfortunate.
Although I don�t watch a lot of television, I�d like to see a hit program like �Third Watch� or �Law and Order� feature a tough cop or courageous firefighter (male or female) who just happens to be gay. No big deal, but they are, and it�s dealt with fairly and honestly, just like the lives of the other characters. Even better would be a program such as �JAG� showing a regular character in the office who is gay and having to deal with the US-ain military�s moronic �don�t ask, don�t tell� policy that attempts to legitimize the institutionalization of �The Closet.� THAT would be courageous and compelling television, but I�m not holding my breathe.
Of course, there ARE great programs that feature a more realistic portrayal of gay men and women, but they�re not usually �hit� shows. One such example is the wonderful PBS program called �In the Life,� which tells stories of gay people and couples from around the United States who come from all walks of life� architects to artists, cops to corporate executives, and judo instructors to jurists. All of them are successful, admirable people who are openly and proudly gay or lesbian. It is a terrific show for highlighting positive and inspiring gays and lesbians, and I highly recommend it, particularly for younger gays and lesbians seeking some positive reinforcement. But I look forward to the day when a gay character on a sitcom or a drama causes no more comment than one who is heterosexual� it�s just part of what makes up that character, such as the fact that they are black, or Jewish, or Catholic, or even (gasp!) a white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant. That will be a good day....
But it�s not all about perceptions and television. At present there is a tremendous struggle underway across the North American continent over the issue of same-gender marriages. If you�ve been living in a cave, I�ll quickly note for you that recent Canadian court decisions in Ontario and British Columbia have found that the prohibition of same gender marriages is unconstitutional. The BC court went further, pointing out that �separate but equal� measures such as so-called �domestic partnerships� or �civil unions� would also be inadequate, and would contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Chreti�n government decided to stop fighting, and not to appeal the case, and instead referred the question to the Supreme Court, asking them if proposed legislation to recognize gay marriages at the federal level was acceptable, and would not infringe on the rights of religious institutions.
Since the original cases, same gender marriages have been performed numerous times in both BC and Ontario for people from around the world. But now, the Martin government is looking at expanding the question before the Supreme Court, which will have the effect of delaying any decision until after the next general election, allowing the government to duck the issue and lay any �blame� at the feet of the courts.
To say that this tactic disgusts me is an understatement. It is hard to believe that this is the same party that gave us Pierre Trudeau, the former prime minister who came to national prominence as justice minister when he shepherded a bill through parliament that loosened restrictions on divorce and decriminalized homosexuality. At the time, he also famously declared that �the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.� I find it incredible that we have reached the 21st century, yet the �Liberal� party is still so skittish over the opinions of the dinosaur crowd. The fundamentalist, anti-gay crowd is aging and shrinking more every year. The ignorant views expressed by Conservatives such as Elsie Wayne and Larry Spence have been repudiated by all parties, but the attitude behind them seems to continue to cow Paul Martin�s Liberals.* I am disappointed, and disheartened by this move by Paul Martin and Irwin Cotler, his justice minister, and I have contacted them to tell them so.** Gay rights are recognized under the constitution of this country, and cannot be �granted� to us, any more than rights can be �granted� to First Nations people. All Paul Martin�s Liberals can do is perpetuate an injustice and continue to deny those rights to us, or to do the right thing and allow the court to proceed, and then pass the legislation following the next election.
I have to stop here temporarily. (Time to go to work.) In the meantime, I will add the text of the letter I sent to Justice Minister Cotler for you to read. Later, I will get around to the situation south of the border.... Peace, y�all!
* For details on Wayne and Martins remarks, see the section, �Fundies and Fascists� linked to this page through the �In Memory of� link.
** If you would like to express your opinion, you may contact the prime minister and the justice minister through the following e-mail addresses:
The Honourable Irwin Cotler
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
[email protected]
or
The Right Honorable Paul Martin
Prime Minister of Canada
[email protected]
***********************
The Honourable Irwin Cotler
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8
sent by e-mail care of: [email protected]
Mr. Justice Minister Cotler�
I am writing to you concerning your recent decision to seek input from the Canadian public regarding the matter of so-called �same sex marriage.�
First, I must say that I am dismayed and disappointed by the decision to delay the resolution of this matter any further. Two lower court decisions have already stated that to deny marriage to couples of the same gender is discriminatory and contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Further, the British Columbia court stated that any attempt to circumvent this ruling by providing a �separate but equal� classification, such as �civil unions� or �domestic partnerships� would be inadequate, and would also contravene the Charter.
I fail to see how this is unclear in any way. It is straightforward and to the point. If the new federal cabinet feels that this decision was in error, it should drop the pretenses, withdraw the questions currently before the Supreme Court, and prepare to argue its case later this year. I guarantee that there will be men and women across this country, both gay and straight, who will applaud the inevitable decision to legalize the marriage of same-gender couples. And while this may cause an uproar among the �dinosaur� crowd, such as Ralph Klein and Elsie Wayne, why should you care? You�re supposed to be Liberals!
It becomes readily apparent to even the most casual observer, however, that your government is attempting to �have its cake and eat it too,� by being seen to be progressive in �granting� us the right to marry, while at the same time shrugging your shoulders to the anti-gay marriage crowd and saying �the courts forced us to do it.�
To make the point plainly� you and your government cannot �grant� us any rights at all, any more than you can �grant� rights to First Nations people. They are our rights as defined by the constitution of this country, and all you can do is to continue to deny us our rights. It was wrong to do so in the past, and continues to be so. A recent newspaper article described you in this manner: �Justice Minister Irwin Cotler built an international reputation as a human rights lawyer during a decades-long academic career before he was first elected in 1999.� [Globe & Mail, Jan. 3, 2004] Well, as a human rights lawyer, I shouldn�t have to make these points, you should already understand them.
Same-gender marriage in no way denigrates or debases anyone else�s marriage, nor does it force any faith-based institution to perform a marriage ceremony against its will. You don�t need to be a human rights lawyer to figure that out� common sense will tell you as much. This delaying tactic of Mr. Martin�s seems to be nothing more than pandering to the ongoing religious-based intolerance and bigotry of a shrinking group of Canadians.
And for what? So that you can avoid facing the issue in a general election, because the �dinosaur crowd� might� I reiterate MIGHT� cause you to lose a handful of seats? I counter to you, sir, that if your government was to act like Liberals, do what you know is right, and enact legislation to legalize these marriages across the country, you might actually gain some seats by attracting votes from the vast majority of fair-minded and accepting Canadians.
Let�s face it� unless Mr. Martin is caught in some ghastly scandal between now and spring-time, your party is not going to come close to losing the next election, so why are you worrying? Is Mr. Martin�s mania to �out-do� Mssr. Chreti�n so overpowering that it will lead your government to back away from correcting a historic wrong? Does your government have to be dragged, kicking and struggling into the 21st century? It is beginning to appear so.
With his frequent attacks on Mr. Layton recently, Mr. Martin is apparently very concerned that he may be portrayed as operating from the right wing of the Liberal Party. I warn you, Mr. Cotler, that your government�s recent decision to back away from a swift resolution to this issue is not doing much to dispel this perception. Even appointing Mr. Brison to an important Cabinet post does little to overcome this view, as he is only a recent convert from the Tories. Mr. Brison will be viewed as �gay window dressing� and far more acceptable to the Prime Minister because of his right-of-centre views. That is, unless your government follows its high-flown talk of �inclusiveness� with action. Mr. Martin has good reason to be concerned that he will lose left-of-centre support to Mr. Layton and the NDP, particularly if his government continues to follow this course of non-action.
In closing, I urge you to revisit your recent decision, and to take the action you know is right, fair, and in keeping with the progressive traditions of the Liberal Party of Canada. I ask you to allow the question before the Supreme Court to proceed without interruption, and in doing so to demonstrate to all Canadians that your party will not be dictated to by the narrow-minded and intolerant members of our society.
Respectfully,
Nathanial Thorne
copy also e-mailed to:
The Right Honorable Paul Martin
Prime Minister of Canada
and
Jack Layton
Leader
New Democratic Party of Canada