bialogue ([info]bialogue) wrote in [info]postqueer,
@ 2008-07-06 11:35:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current location:San Francisco LGBT Center
Current mood: pensive
Current music:"We Are Family" by the Spice GIrls

Words Matter
This thoughtful essay on the current politics of inclusion/exclusion in the American LGBT Community and when and if "the ends justify the means" is X-Posted with permission from the author Lindasusan, a Bi-identified LGBT person from San Francisco CA.

She and her Bi-identified partner Emily have been personally effected by the fight for marriage equality in California because as she reports they were among the many same sex couples who took advantage of the "Prauge Spring" in February of 2004 and got married only to have their marriage invalidated in August of that year. They are now among the countless Bi-identified LGBT people who are working alongside the rest of Our Community and Our Allies to Stop Prop 8 which would again invalidate same-sex marriage in California.


“Words matter. Names matter.”

These sentences set the stage for a powerful and eloquent statement by Deputy City Attorney Therese Stewart as she argued before the California Supreme Court for the right of all people to marry the person they choose.

I couldn’t agree more. Words shape our thoughts and give form to reality. They are the vehicles through which we engage in the profound and magical act of communication.

Words do matter. Which is why, as a bisexual woman, I find the current celebrations on behalf of “gay and lesbian couples” profoundly painful. Each time I hear that phrase, I feel physically stabbed.

Vow To Vote NO on the Marriage Ban - California 2008 Equality for AllMy partner and I are both bi. As a same-sex couple, we’re subject to the same injustice and legal complexity and potential violence as any lesbian or gay couple. Our excitement in 2004 was just as palpable as we stood in line for our marriage license at San Francisco City Hall, and our relationship was just as diminished by the state’s subsequent annulments. We are just as threatened by Prop 8, the ballot measure this November that would define marriage as between one man and one woman.

The language of California law had left us out of the right to marry until the victory on May 15th. But the language of LGBTQI organizations and the media has robbed us of this moment’s joy. I can’t get my heart to stop hurting.

What’s shocking is that this non-inclusive language isn’t entirely random. Because some focus group data found that “gay and lesbian” was more palatable to undecided moderates than “same-sex,” there has been a strategic decision by key lesbian and gay leaders to use it through November. The goal is to win the fight against the ballot measure and secure marriage equality once and for all in California.

We could argue about whether the ends justify the means. We could argue about why the language is being used so broadly rather than just with the straight voters we’re trying to persuade. What’s not open for discussion is why no bisexual leaders were in on the conversation. No one asked us whether we were willing to make this sacrifice. We didn’t even get the courtesy of an acknowledgment that this strategy would take a toll on us. No one prepared us to have our hearts broken over and over for months.

Words matter. Not just some of them, and not just some of the time. Just as marriage is not the same as domestic partnership, bringing the entire queer community along is not the same as throwing some of us under the bus.

Names matter. I have chosen to name myself “bisexual” as a political stand for all people whose attractions span beyond one gender. Even as I acknowledge the word’s limitations, I also understand its rich history and its role in determining our real allies.

During last year’s fight over the non-inclusive ENDA, the queer community came together in extraordinary fashion and true solidarity with transgender and gender-nonconforming people. Organizations and individuals across the spectrum expressed justifiable outrage that some of us were being left by the side of the road, with only vague promises of getting picked up at an undetermined later date.

During this season of celebration, where is the outrage on bisexuals’ behalf? My gay and lesbian colleagues didn’t even notice that fundraising emails from nonprofits fighting the ballot measure kept talking about “gay and lesbian” couples. Why didn’t they get angry for me? If people I consider good friends and allies don’t even have my back, who will?

At the time of the ENDA fight, I suspected that if bisexuals were the ones left to wait at the side of the road, we would never have received the same outpouring of support. Sadly, I couldn’t even imagine it. Even more sadly, it turns out I was right. Rigoberta Menchu Tum once said that any erasing of differences is an act of violence. And because words matter, I’ll name this pervasive “G&L scandal” for what it is—violence.

Shocked to hear that word applied here? Think I’m overreaching? Climb inside my heart these days. You’ll feel just how deeply words matter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

POSTSCRIPT:
Last night (July 3rd 2008) was the first in a series of town hall meetings for the Equality for All campaign (the coalition fighting Prop 8 in California). My partner Emily and I, along with bisexual activist Lani Ka'ahumanu, put together a handout ("Words Still Matter: How the Marriage Equality Movement is Leaving Bisexuals Out" pdf flyer), press packets, and a silent protest we called "unVEILing injustice"

Having Our Cake and Eating It Too: Bisexual Exist from the 'unVEILing injustice' protest of 3 July 2008 SF California USAEmily, I, and several other bisexuals and allies walked into the standing-room-only crowd at the San Francisco LGBT Center wearing white veils to symbolize how bisexuals have been rendered invisible in the marriage equality movement. We even brought a cake, which read, "Having our cake and eating it, too -- Bisexuals exist!"

I'm delighted to report that the very first words from Kate Kendell (Executive Director of NCLR) -- before anything at all about Prop 8 or the campaign -- was an extended and heartfelt apology to bisexuals for leaving us out, and a sincere promise to use inclusive language in all communications going forward (as well as an invitation to contact them if they slip again).

The proof will be in the pudding, of course, but I couldn't have been happier with the outcome at this stage. I'm confident that marriage equality efforts in California will begin to include all of us.

Special thanks to Kate not only for working so hard to win legal protections for LGBT people, but for stepping up to the difficult task of saying publicly, "I'm so sorry. We'll do better."

To donate to the campaign to defeat Prop 8, go to www.equalityforall.com.



AddThis Social Bookmark Button





(Post a new comment)


[info]nodesignation
2008-07-06 06:28 pm UTC (link)
Wonderful article. I've been frustrated by the same language used by my state queer organization for years. They train us to say "gay and lesbian" in phone banks, canvasing, at speaking engagements, and with friends. All because of that focus group study. And because we want to be "in the habit" so that our friends are using the "right" language and don't slip up and say lesbian, gay, bi, and trans when talking to their conservative relatives. Grrr. I've been pushing and seeing some change with them though.

But I am a bit frustrated by the article's assertion that bi folk would get less community support than trans people. You can't compare the fake-ENDA to the G&L Scandal for a couple of reasons. First off, words do matter, but you have a case where bisexuals are getting rights but being left off the press release, and another case where trans (and gender variant people of all sexual orientations) are being denied rights and then left out of press releases as a reflection of the facts.

Secondly, the G&L Scandal is not the GLT scandal -- Trans people were left out of that as well. Trans people's relationship recognition rights are always at risk. If someone can "prove" that you're not the gender you say you are, then you lose your rights. That's true whether you can access "opposite-sex" marriage or "same-sex" civil unions. Only marriage that removes the sex requirement can really include trans people, and that's why California's Court decision is a big win for trans couples as well. But apparently no one, not even the unVEILing injustice activists seems to have noticed that "gays and lesbians" doesn't include trans people in this celebration as well.

Would I insist on inclusion here? I really don't know. I'm so used to being excluded from press releases that the pain is dulled, and I can easily consider the strategic questions around mentioning or not mentioning how trans people benefit from same-sex couples' access to marriage. But either way, comparing the community response to trans people being removed from legal rights protections to an instance of bi and trans people both being given rights but excluded from the press release, and then concluding that the pain bisexuals face is worse, is just insulting. And I say that as someone who is bi (okay really pansexual, but you know what I mean) and trans.

Now if California started denying marriage to folks who identify as bisexual -- then we'd have an accurate comparison. And I'd be aghast (and rioting in the streets) if the LGBT community didn't rally against it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-06 09:44 pm UTC (link)
But I am a bit frustrated by the article's assertion that bi folk would get less community support than trans people.

Seriously.

why do ppl always have to compare shit?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-06 11:04 pm UTC (link)
well I think it is because it is a good way to try to explain things to people from widely differing backgrounds, you try your best to use an analogy that will make it easier to understand

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-06 11:21 pm UTC (link)
how about just saying "i don't like it when gay and lesbian people treat bi people like they're not part of the queer community/like traitors/like 'just experimenting' predators/whatever?"

because the way it's written above just minimizes transphobia

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-06 11:32 pm UTC (link)
some people have said that others thought it was appropriate

these people (like most everyone involved in BiNet and other Bi political groups) were heavily involved in fighting against a non-inclusive ENDA so having just spent SO much time explaining that it might have just seemed a good analogy

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-06 11:38 pm UTC (link)
some people involved in bi political groups?

who cares? are they trans? even if they are, do you think that makes it any less problematic?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-06 11:59 pm UTC (link)
some people involved in bi political groups? who cares? are they trans? even if they are

ummm . . huh? I'd tend to think that a transperson is entitled to their own opinions no matter how they identified and if they are political or not

one of the founders of Celebrate Bisexuality Day was bi-identified transwoman, are you saying that make her opinions as a woman, as a transperson, or as a bi-identified LGBT activist somehow suspect and less valid?

I think I'm unclear about what you are saying here

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 12:08 am UTC (link)
I'd tend to think that a transperson is entitled to their own opinions no matter how they identified and if they are political or not

well that's good because for a second there i thought you were trying to dismiss my perspective by suggesting that "some people have said that others thought it was appropriate" and therefore i was wrong and the suggestions of "others" that you heard second-hand were right when i, as a trans woman myself, said that it's fucked up to minimize transphobia in the way that the author of the article you posted did

one of the founders of Celebrate Bisexuality Day was bi-identified transwoman, are you saying that make her opinions as a woman, as a transperson, or as a bi-identified LGBT activist somehow suspect and less valid?

um what?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 12:26 am UTC (link)
oh dear this is two "umms?" in a row one from each of us LOL

BUT I'm pretty sure we are not disagreeing with each other

to put it another way:

You are NOT saying that because a transperson is ALSO an bi-activist she is somehow out of touch with the vast majority of the transgender community and therefore her opinions are called into question.

correct?

and I am not saying that someone else has a right to tell YOU how to feel

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 12:47 am UTC (link)
I'm not saying that "because a trans person is also a bi activist that she is somehow out of touch with the vast majority of the transgender community and therefore her opinions are called into question;" i'm not sure how you got that idea.

What i would like to suggest is that her perspective--if, in fact, she read over and approved the remarks in the article written by Lindasusan above--does not represent that of all trans people, and i think that her opinion is incorrect.

But even more than that, i think that it's kind of fucked that a cis person is taking her words and using them to invalidate another trans woman's suggestion that the remarks i've commented on are problematic.

I'm curious--did this person actually say that there's nothing wrong with the implied complaint of a bi cis person that "the queer community totally came together for the trannies for that whole employment non-discrimination bullshit [riiiiight], so where are they in support of bi people during the oppressive oppression of bi people through emails talking about 'gay and lesbian couples?'"

Or are they just a bi activist and therefore it's assumed that they wouldn't have any problem with it?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 12:55 am UTC (link)
darn if I know I don't live in cali, but i am trying to find out for you

as a mater of fact i've already gone back to the larger bi organizations and quoted extensively from what you and others have said about how you find it problematic to see theses comparison between the problems of transgender persons within the greater LGBT community and bi-identified persons within that same community

but they don't end to answer immediately, especially not for such lowly creatures such as I

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 01:04 am UTC (link)
look it's alright, it really isn't the point so much whether she did or not, the point is more that when i told you what i found problematic it was dismissed using the possibility of another unnamed transperson having maybe said something agreeing with the article according to another unnamed person who told you about it

trans people and queer cis people do have some of the same problems; the comparison problem was in suggesting that emails saying "gay and lesbian couples" instead of "GLB couples" or whatever is comparable to trans people not having protection from employment discrimination

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 01:06 am UTC (link)
oops, i meant "unnamed trans person,*" not "unnamed transperson"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 01:12 am UTC (link)
LOL! having lovely visions of armed transpersons storming into the USA capitol and demanding Barney Frank cease and desist in his attempts to discriminate

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 01:14 am UTC (link)
lol

while that's a funny image, the correction was adding a space between "trans" and "person," not removing an "r" from "unnamed" :p

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 01:23 am UTC (link)
oh well, I AM slightly dyslexic and am reading and typing quickly . . but still . . storming into HRC would also be lovely

somewhere I have a T-Shirt given to me ages ago during the time of Queen Nation in NYC that says "Gay Right and a Good Left Hook" with a picture of an upraised fist

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]trousersofdoom
2008-07-06 11:43 pm UTC (link)
I'm a bisexual cisgendered woman.


I think the comparison is stupid and extremely minimizing.

And it has that effect regardless of what other bi people think since CISGENDERED PEOPLE DON'T GET TO DECIDE WHAT OFFENDS/OPPRESSES TRANSPPL OMGWTF

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-06 11:01 pm UTC (link)
hi, I see you've x-posted this directly to Lindasusan's blog, so I too am waiting anxiously to see her reply

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]shemale
2008-07-06 10:01 pm UTC (link)
"Which is why, as a bisexual woman, I find the current celebrations on behalf of “gay and lesbian couples” profoundly painful. Each time I hear that phrase, I feel physically stabbed."

well that's a little melodramatic.

i and both of my girlfriends are bi, but i don't think i'd say we're in a "bi relationship" so much as we are a lesbian couple (or, more accurately, a lesbian triad), and hearing "gay and lesbian couple" doesn't make me feel stabbed--it's kind of an accurate description of the type of relationship we have (altho the numbers are off a little but w/e).

with respect to the marriage thing (and srsly there are So. Many. more important things than that), as a bi person, you're only discriminated against when you're in a "gay or lesbian" (i.e. same-sex) couple. nobody's going to stop an opposite-sex wedding between two bi people and say "WAIT! THESE MOTHERFUCKERS ARE BISEXUAL!" and have the whole thing called off or whatever.

words do mean things--"gay and lesbian couple" doesn't mean the same thing as "gay and lesbian people," and when the latter phrase, unlike the former, is used in reference to the entire queer community, it's very--as you've said--noninclusive.

During last year’s fight over the non-inclusive ENDA, the queer community came together in extraordinary fashion and true solidarity with transgender and gender-nonconforming people. Organizations and individuals across the spectrum expressed justifiable outrage that some of us were being left by the side of the road, with only vague promises of getting picked up at an undetermined later date.

During this season of celebration, where is the outrage on bisexuals’ behalf?


lol fuck you.
are you serious? do you remember how many times the phrase "why don't we just make it 'GLB'" was tossed around during that time? of course you don't, you're not trans and it wasn't directed at you.

like i understand that bi people are marginalized within the queer community and everything but srsly stop being such a fucking drama queen.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-06 11:23 pm UTC (link)
(jsyk i realize you didn't actually write that but you did crosspost it here fully endorsing it; this comment was posted in rseponse to the original blog entry as well)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 12:05 am UTC (link)
(jsyk i realize you didn't actually write that but you did crosspost it here fully endorsing it; this comment was posted in rseponse to the original blog entry as well)

just FYI and not making ANY implications about this article one way or another we are a bisexual political action groups and as such we try to present a wide range of voices from the bisexual community even if individual members of bialogue may not agree with everything said

so if YOU ever have something you'd like to put out there of a political nature please let us know

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 12:13 am UTC (link)
so you're multiple people using one LJ account or..?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 12:33 am UTC (link)
so you're multiple people using one LJ account or..?

we are:

Bialogue = Bisexual + Dialogue

Bialogue is an activist/political group based in NYC working on issues of local, national & international interest.

Main page: http://www.bialogue.org/
Blog: http://bialogue.livejournal.com/

but only one person (me cynthia) has been on this page today -

others have been talking on other pages and have been offering advice - but today as they say any error or omissions made so far are all mine I'm afraid

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]shemale
2008-07-07 12:55 am UTC (link)
re: any error made so far is all mine I'm afraid--
really i just wish that you hadn't tried to defend something that's problematic w.r.t. trans people just because it's a bi-pride article

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 01:09 am UTC (link)
well as much as possible i'm more trying to explain what they THOUGHT they were saying, because sometimes we know some background material that may not be apparent in the post, yadda, yadda, yadda . . . but the thought is very kind and I appreciate it

you know many times this also happens when the LGBT Community tries to use the experience of other minorities in America as an analogy to THEIR experience,
many people do not think that is an appropriate or valid comparison

so I as person from a mixed non-USA family am about to go consult with a USA-born person of african decent who has been over on another community arguing over what seems to be a reference to canadian catholic theology that somehow is being bandied about by someone, who while they use polite words clearly just doesn't like bisexual people

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mingerspice
2008-07-11 03:25 am UTC (link)
words do mean things--"gay and lesbian couple" doesn't mean the same thing as "gay and lesbian people," and when the latter phrase, unlike the former, is used in reference to the entire queer community, it's very--as you've said--noninclusive.

On the one hand, I agree with this in that I think that "gay couple" could mean "a couple with two men" as opposed to "a couple with two gay men." It's open to interpretation, though, and I can also see why bi folks feel left out when the term "gay and lesbian couples" is used to refer to all same-sex couples. Often when we say "[adjective] couple" we mean "a couple with two [adjective] people" (See "Asian couple," "Grammargeek couple," cf. "Odd couple").

I still found comparing this language slip-up to Congress and HRC's endorsement of exclusion of trans and gender non-normative people from ENDA to be totally inappropriate.

And this:
At the time of the ENDA fight, I suspected that if bisexuals were the ones left to wait at the side of the road, we would never have received the same outpouring of support. Sadly, I couldn’t even imagine it. Even more sadly, it turns out I was right.
is flat out privileged and offensive.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mingerspice
2008-07-11 04:03 am UTC (link)
oh the second thing is from the OP, not from you. Sorry! That was some bad quoting.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mingerspice
2008-07-11 04:03 am UTC (link)
bad quoting on my part!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]lux_apollo
2008-07-06 11:08 pm UTC (link)
Wow. What melodrama. There is a difference between defining a relationship as gay/lesbian and being left out because you are bi/pan. The comparisons to trans peoples pain are ridiculous and laughable. Read what the above commenters have said much more eloquently and then get a life.

(Reply to this)


[info]thefayth
2008-07-07 12:48 am UTC (link)
From my spoken word slam, "What Went Wrong In The 1st Place -
I do believe there are progressions in humanity and that enlightenment was not just one period of historical time. Intolerance however has always equaled invisibility and a fight to be seen. All canon must be re-created, facts and fables. In my opinion our country of America is the best machine for this, constantly re-drawing ley lines of legend, myth and memory to produce popularizing therefore polarized mass life forms: Barak Obama, American Idol, George Bush, iTunes. And inside the fight must continue, how many people like the gays according to "popular stats" ? See our machine keeps track of that, correlating Brokeback Mountain jokes with an increase in scores, and sad slight upticks in Bill O'Reilly and downticks in Al Gore. We all have to keep fighting at the same time, Each Other Them Us, not a destructive force but with a firm, challenging cunning that is ready to refresh memories. Like never before, we must know that there are people right behind, never spoken and still not ready to emerge.

THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE: "Bisexuals who married same sex partners in California, Massachusetts, New York, or Belgium, the Netherlands or Canada have a distinct perspective on marriage equality. It's not who you love that's important, but how you love and that you love, and are loved in return. All the ways we make families and intimate connection are important and all are equally valuable and worthy of societal support. - Dr. Loraine Hutchins

DO YOU BELIEVE THIS?
As with gays and lesbian marriages, bi-sexuals would base their claim on the fact that they are people with a minority sexual orientation who wish to "live out their love(s)" and gain the social recognition of their relationships that they have been denied historically. Like gay and lesbian liaisons, the argument could be that failure to recognized bi-sexual relationships is due to stereotypical treatment causing historical disadvantaged. If it is good for gays and lesbians to be able to marry in accordance with their sexual orientation and procreation no longer provides an adequate argument for restricting marriage to heterosexuals, as courts in Canada have recently ruled, then this must also be so for bi-sexuals. A move to accept bi-sexual marriage, however, means that marriage cannot be limited to merely two people for what is bi-sexuality but the sexual love for both sexes? - http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/marriage/mf0063.html

So in summation, bisexuals have a couple different fronts on which to do war, (clears throat) I mean educate.
1) As the AMA suggests there are people who are physically incapable of changing their orientations to straight. Bisexuals are included in this number. This is a really important point, Bisexuals are not the highway from straight to gay.
2) Bisexuality is not the "sex orientation", it is not defined as liking to fuck a lot. When "Gays and Lesbian" ask bisexuals to be in a straight or gay marriage it doesn't do shit to shatter the stereotypes.
2) Bisexuals have the right to be included in the same sex rights battle, and using the words "Gays and Lesbians" is non-inclusive.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]myid
2008-07-07 01:47 pm UTC (link)
Awesome slam--I also agree with the Hutchins quote. But it looked as though that Catholic web site writer was confusing "bisexual marriage" with "group marriage," which he calls it in the article. I don't get all the hyphenating of "bi-sexual" either.

As to the question of whether we're excluding polyamorous couples...Well, they're definitely not getting the same kind of media attention or acceptance and recognition. But I also don't know many polyamorous people who say they would care, at least, not yet.

Would women's lib have been more complete if NOW had defended lesbians' rights all the way through? I don't know, but it definitely helped get GLBT rights to the forefront in the end.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bialogue
2008-07-07 11:47 pm UTC (link)
"Would women's lib have been more complete if NOW had defended lesbians' rights all the way through?"

Just one gal's opinion but "Yes", because time and energy were spent on infighting that should not have been. It's like the US Armed Forces conducted a "Gay Purge" right around 9/11 and got rid of LOTS of "suspect" Arab-language translators. Way to go fellows, that was SUCH a bright idea.

Same goes for the LGBT movement. For goodness sakes, concentrate on the REAL enemies instead of constantly issuing gay and lesbian purity tests.

It is similar to the way a Israeli friend put it when reading about the constant nit-picking of various Rabbi's to have the congregations of OTHER competing Rabbi's declared to be non-Jewish and therefore not eligible for certain rights. She said "if the NAZIS would have wanted to gas you, that's good enough for me!"

Well, lets all go ask the Grand Poobahs of the Queer world to declare that if the Gay-Bashers are screaming "Die Faggot and Burn in Hell Lezzie" then your good enough to be part of the LGBT Community. Then we can all stop the sniping about "trannies" and "fence-sitters" and go out and defeat Prop 8, DOMA and all that stuff.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]myid
2008-07-08 01:13 am UTC (link)
Drawing on the comparisons you list, I might add that all minorities have a responsibility to defend each other. I thought that was the original definition of "feminism" anyway--the belief in equal rights. Feminist activists didn't think that would be a hit with the right, who they were trying to convince, so they narrowed their focus.

I have to wonder if that approach even worked. Did they really convince anybody, with Title VII being an accident of luck and bigotry itself? Would they have been more successful if they had just argued for equal rights? Maybe trying to humor the anti-feminists was the wrong move, partly because it was illogical and they knew it. It sounds idealistic to think that everyone could have been liberated all at the same time thirty years ago. It's all speculation.

You know, I've been thinking a lot about those NYABN luncheons. Got any events coming up?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…