A few weeks ago I met a guy at a party.  He was there with his partner, another guy - they've been involved about five years, but they live separately.  He told me that while they might live together someday, living separately was working out okay - he wasn't in any rush to live with the other person.  Earlier this year I met someone else who was also living apart from their longer term significant other.  It's gotten me wondering whether this is a trend. 

I realize that as people get older, they are more set in their ways, so it might be more difficult to get used to living with someone else.  I think about this with respect to myself.  After living with my ex for 20 years, I'm enjoying my current lifestyle.  I live with two of my three kids (one is 21, the other 18).  My other son, who is almost ten comes over pretty frequently, but he doesn't live here anywhere's near full time.  I like a clean house - dishes done, stuff put away - bed made (I don't care if the kids beds are made).  My ex had a different standard so this was always a point of conflict.  I'm not a perfectionist, I just prefer to have things in their places. 

Most of my lesbian friends have been in long term relationships and they live with their partners.  I wonder how many of them would relish the thought of moving in with someone new if their current relationships ended.  Probably most would take it slow, I believe.  But if they fell in love, they'd probably quickly move in with the other person.  That's what lesbians do.  I'm struggling with this idea.  Which one - falling in love or moving in with someone else?  Both!

I think about Susan Sontag and Annie Lebowitz who lived apart for their entire relationship.  I wonder why?  Did they just both need their own private space?  Why did they need whole private living accomodations as opposed to just having separate rooms that they could each retreat into - in a joint residence?

I long for the right living situation, but I'm just not sure what that is for me.  I suppose that eventually my kids will be gone and I'll be alone.  I don't think I'll like living all alone.  Perhaps this will spur me into meeting someone who I might live with someday.  In the meantime, I'm happy with things just as they are.  There are occasional nights that I'm a bit lonely, but not too many. 

There is someone that care about and miss alot, but she doesn't seem to miss me.  Maybe someday I'll move on, maybe not. 

Sometimes I think about living alongside a good friend or lover - maybe in two attached condos or apartments where we can have our separate space and a place together.  Does this sound too much like I don't want to make a commitment?  Maybe?  It's a confusing time in my life as middle age is for many.  I guess all I can do is wait and be patient - and see what happens.  Somehow I don't feel a need to force anything to happen.  I hope I don't regret this later - but I don't think I will.  

I'm watching Nightline, and they have a show on about adultery.  People either got on and justified their adultery or denounced it.  They also talked about how much the adultery of their partner hurt them.  Now they're about to talk about the reaction of their kids to the adultery of the other parent. 

I've been here - with my ex-partner and my kids - and it was tough on all of us.  If anyone had ever told me that I'd be here, alone, without the person I'd been with for all those years, I'd tell them they were crazy.  I loved someone else, but we never did anything about it.  I was committed to finding ways to make things better and keep our family together.  My ex was seduced by someone else and she fell for this person and left me for her almost overnight.  And, she left our kids too.

Tonight on Nightline, a teenager talked about how she was raised by her brother after one of her parents cheated on the other.  She questioned why anyone would support adultery.  The host speaks to one of the guests who's still married and lives with her husband, but she has a girlfrient who also lives with them!!!!  The woman does her best to justify why this is okay for her child - under age 10.  A boy, about 14 spoke about how it was better for parents who cheat to just separate and move on, rather than staying together and seeing others on the side, assuming it has no impact on their kids.  He say, the kids know and it isn't good for them.

If you want to see the show or participate in the dialog, go to abc.com.

For my own personal view, this is what I feel:

1.  Kids are #1 and they need to be protected, no matter what's going on for the parents.
2.  Longer term relationships can end, and without major angst, if both people take it slowly, overcommunicate, and start planning for the end of the relationship - with each person taking responsiblity for their part in the break up and for themselves financially afterwards.
3.  The on-going relationship between two parents (now ex's) has to prioritize the benefits to the children.  Sometimes there are kids of the parents and the ex's.  The needs of all kids need to be focused on.
4.  Long term relationships include long term in-laws, sister-in-laws, brother-in-laws, and many others.  For the good of the children, all relationships should be maintained, if possible.  It's hard enough on kids to deal with the family break up, without having to lose their extended families as well.

Why is this important to gays and lesbians?  Because there is a trend amongst gay women that when their relationships end, the biological mom acts as if the non-biological mom was nobody - not the other mom, not someone who loves the children, not someone they were in a long-term relationship with.  It's as if the relationship was all an act....the two never meant to be together.  And, in many states, when this claim is made, the nonbiological mother gets nothing in court - no custody, no joint custody, no visitation.  

This has to stop.  Lesbians who call themselves "Mom" need to pay attention to the best interests of their kids.   

According to a new report, LGBT people are still afraid to be out at work.  Over 50 % said they hide their identity to most people at work - and the 54% who said they were not open to anyone at work at all reported lying about their personal lives.  Issues of sexual orientation or gender identity are hard to avoid in casual, non-work specific dialog among coworkers, the report says.  But many gays are fearful of opening up, worried about a negative reactions by peer and supervisors.  The gays in the study said that when they hear an anti-gay slur or comment, 67% just let it pass while 9% brought the issue up with a supervisor and 5% went to human resources.  The study was a collaboration between the Human Rights Campaign's Human Rights Foundation and Lake Research Partners.

It's still difficult to be fully out for most people.  There's work, but also neighbors, fellow church goers, your kid's teachers, parents of your kids friends, etc.  It seems like everywhere you turn there's someone to come out to. 

I hired a new sales person this week.  I was introduced to her through a past work associate who knew I was a lesbian.  But, I have no idea whether the two of them (both straight) had any discussion about my sexuality.  Our business is certified by the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce as LGBT owned.  We are also certified as women-owned.  The new sales person was pursuing IBM as a customer - she'd called a local IBM facility and had been told she'd have to call corporate in NY if she was to do any business with the company.  So, she looked up the diversity group on-line and there were many names to call.  She shared the list with me and I saw that one of the diversity managers specialized in working with LGBT owned companies.  I took a deep breath, told her I was gay, explained to her about our LGBT certification, and suggested that the one with the LGBT specialty might be the best one to call.  With out seeming to blink an eye - of course this was over the phone - she agreed and said she would call him.  They had a very productive call and she phoned me and told me how well it went.  Now she's looking up the other LGBT friendly sites listed on the NGSCC website!

Now I would have eventually told her I was a lesbian.  I just hadn't planned to do it during her first week on the job.  But I'm really glad I did.  But, it was a risk.  It could have really turned her off.  I had two interns working for me during the summer - college sophomores.  We were going through the women owned and LGBT certification while there were working with me in my home office.  The women one was easy, but the morning the fellow doing the NGLCC interview for their certification came out, I had to tell the two interns I was a lesbian.  There was an awkward silence and we quickly recovered and got back to work, but it wasn't easy.  I don't regret telling them though.  This was probably a great experience for them to encounter in a work experience - maybe even one of the best aspects of their internships - dealing with the unexpected!

I encourage gays and lesbians to live their lives as openly as possible.  I've written other posts about this - ones about whether you can truly have a positive emotional experience in life if you're always having to hide aspects of yourself.  I've lived this life before, keeping my sexual identity, the information about my now ex-partner quiet, even twisting how my family was put together (our three kids).  It's no fun - it's painful to keep part of yourself closed off.  Try not to do this.  Be open and positive about yourself and those who love you and care about you will follow your lead! 

I've been reading this book called, "The Developing Mind - How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who we Are," by Daniel Siegel.  I have one other post where I discussed this book, so it's rare that I'm covering it again.  But, this book deserves double coverage!  The premise of the book is that our early relationships shape who we are.  This isn't exactly new.  What is new is how he addresses the physiology of the brain and how it remains "plastic through life."

According to Siegel, a very important part of our brains, the orbitofrontal cortex, is able to keep developing way past childhood.  This part of our brains is important as it regulates our flexibility and emotional balance which is clearly necessary for social relationships.  Eye contact, facial expression, tone of voice and body gestures are part of the communication between any two people.  Siegel points out that interpersonal relationships create attachment experiences all through out life.  He says that a person who has experienced neglect or abuse will have a deep brain impairment that may be difficult to improve.  But, Siegel says that even in these situations, the principles of attachment theory may made it possible for the person to adapt to their stresses in life.  He says that therapy, romance, or friendship can all facilitate new orbitofrontal development and improve a persons regulation of emotion.

So, there is good news and bad.  I wonder how many gays and lesbians were lucky enough to have a good enough parental attachment when they were growing up.  The signs that a child might be gay can appear very early in life, and a parent who is astute enough to catch on, may try to redirect their child to fit them into the heterosexual box.  Clearly, this nips what may have been a positive attachment in the bud.  The resulting loss of individuality combined with what will probably result in a more challenging and difficult to control teenager, is the bad news.  Other parents who are unaware that their child is showing early gay tendancies may be blown away by the discovery later in childhood or adult life and may reject their child or not be able to relate to them in the same way anymore.  This can be just as bad a loss as this child may have had a very close and comfortable relationship with their parent(s) and now they feel they have lost it and been completely abandoned.

The good news is that based on Siegel's observation this situation can be improved with therapy, romance, or a good frendship.  In a recent study, researchers collected data on 2,074 people for a new survey known as the California Quality of Life Survey. They found that 48% of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals reported receiving mental health treatment in the past year, compared with 22% of heterosexuals. Lesbians and bisexual women were most likely to receive treatment, and heterosexual men were least likely. 

Wow, all those LGBT people in therapy! 

It takes a certain type of therapist to be able to effectively work with lesbians and gays.  If you are seeking a therapist, think long and hard about what you are trying to achieve in your therapy and don't hesitate to ask the therapist all of your questions about their experiences treating others with different sexual orientations and about their own orientation and relationships.  There's another good book, one about psychoanalysis with lesbians called "Lesbians and Psychoanalysis - Revolutions in Theory and Practice," edited by Judith M. Glassgood and Suzanne Iasenza.  The book discussed lesbians need for mirroring - similar to what Siegel talks about regarding attachment of children to their parents.  The Lesbians and Psychoanalysis book says that most lesbians have missed a necessary amount of mirroring in their lives as they were different from their mothers - so their mothers couldn't really mirror them.  This makes sense to me. 

I wonder if straight therapists can really be effective mirroring their lesbian patients.  I mean, if the mirroring is an act (not real - more of a game or playacting), it's not really therapeutic, is it?  If it's real, I can see how it would facilitate new orbitofrontal development and improve a person's regulation of emotion as Siegel talks about.  Isn't the mirroring by a straight therapist the same limited mirroring that the lesbian's straight mother gave her?  Maybe that means that lesbians needing this type of close attachment to be recreated with their therapists should only be treated by lesbian therapists?

The New York Times had an article this morning about some new parenting studies published in July (by researchers from University of Rochester).  The first study, of 9th graders, found that both positive and negative conditional parenting were harmful.  The positive approach was sometimes succeessful in getting children to work harder academically, but at the cost of unhealthy feelings of “internal compulsion.” A negative conditional approach didn’t even work in the short run; it just increased the teenagers’ negative feelings about their parents.

So, if you can't parent negatively or positively conditionally, how can you parent?  I guess psychologist Carl Rogers was right, unconditional love is the only way to go.  According to Rogers, there are two types of personalities - those whose self-actualizing tendancies are functioning and those whose are not.  

Per Rogers, those people whose conscious is available to awareness (although not always aware) have probably received unconditional love and are generally:

1.  Open to experiences - not defensive. Can reflect and attain much emotional depth whether it involves pain or pleasure

2.  Lives fully in each and every moment - is not rigid.  Is flexible, adaptable, and spontaneous

3.  Is intuitive - relies on experience to judge what is right and wrong and feels free to choose among alternatives

4.  Has creativity - can produce new and effective ideas and things

On the other hand, Rogers says those who have received conditional regard have issues of self-worth and as a result they generally:

1.  Live defensively - are closed to experience
2.  Follow a preconceived plan often laid down by parents - but may feel angry and manipulated
3.  Are not intuitive
4.  Lack creativity - are conforming and common

Thinking about this reminded me of the parenting styles promoted by my good friend Dr. Richard Lerner of Tufts (read his book, The Good Teen, if you have teenagers).  He speaks about three types of parenting - Authoritarian (direct them, tell them what to do, require them to do what you say), Passive (let them do what ever they want - leave them alone to figure things out themselves), and Authoritative (guide them - don't direct them, teach them to use their own inituition while coaching them).

Per Dr. Lerner, neither the authoritarian or passive styles work.  Kids reject authority and act out and fight back.  Others feel unloved when parents use the passive approach.  Only the authoritative style works because when kids feel loved and accepted, their own ideas are validated, and they feel safely  backed up by parents who are still guiding and coaching them.   

My father was authoritarian and my mom was authoritative. Having experienced both styles, I do my best to be authoritative.  I know I fail sometimes, but I try.  

Thinking about relationships broadly, not just about parents and children, doesn't everyone long for unconditional acceptance?  And how many really get it?  Is it really possible to unconditionally love someone for years?  I mean, can you be a parent or a spouse and give your children or partner unconditional love forever, all the time.  Of course this is impossible.  But, think about how you can do it with respect to the different layers of love:

- day-to-day love and support (like checking in and seeing how the person really is or bringing them a cup of tea, hot chocolate, or a glass of wine to help them relax and replenish themselves.

- love and support regarding new initiatives or ideas (reading a book they recommend even though it's not the type you might usually pick or really listening when they tell you about a problem they're having at work, school or somewhere else)

- big picture love and support (telling others, right in front of them, how important they are to you, making plans for big anniversaries or birthdays, showing you're there to support them by going the extra mile)

- huge love and support situations (when the one you love is physically or mentally ill, dying, or somehow incapacitated and they need you to be a real caretaker)

In all these cases, it's possible to extend your unconditional love to those who are important in your life.  Make some real sacrifices. 

You don't have to give all of yourself, that wouldn't work anyway.  There may still be irritating things, like they leave dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, toys everywhere.  Or maybe they treat you like they expect you to do all these things - without giving you much gratitude.  Part of loving unconditionally is living with these irritations.  But, it's a balancing act - they need to own their own part of the relationship too.  So, you can't restrain yourself from telling them what your needs are. 

My book, Preference for Love," is my own story about how I learned how to love unconditionally.  The book is completed, but my learning continues! 

 

Timing is everything in life and luck and timing go together. 

For example, I met a new friend who could have been someone I'd fall for, but she was fresh from a new breakup and she was about to have a fairly significant surgical procedure.  We'd only known each other for a few months before she found out about the surgery.  She was already feeling down about her 20+ year break up.  Add to that that she was in a lot of pain and taking a tremendous amount of valium.  I couldn't deal with all of this. 

It was my first real relationship in many years (after the end of my own 20+ relationship) and I was really afraid to get involved too deeply with someone who was sick and felt too needy to me (although she claimed she didn't need anything).  So, I broke it off.  We've remained friends, but she's seeing someone else now.  I'm happy for her, but I feel confused whenever she tells me about this other person.  I mean, it could have been me, but I didn't want it to be, at least not in the situation we were in at the time.

There's another woman who I really loved, and I think she loved me, but she got overwhelmed with the situation - it was the first time she'd loved another woman - and she was spooked.  I've tried to stay in touch, but it's clear she doesn't want to even know me anymore.  And, maybe she never did, she just acted like it.  Maybe if I'd been more straight forward about my feelings for her earlier, she would have shown her true colors then and I wouldn't have gotten so invested in our relationship.  Perhaps she might have felt differently about loving me in another time or place.

My ex-partner left me abruptly for another woman, someone we'd only known for a few weeks.  We were in couples therapy, trying to make our relationship better, when this woman walked in and broke it all apart - including two families with five kids collectively.  If she'd shown up six months later when things were better between my ex and me, nothing might have come of it, but her timing couldn't have been better for her and worse for me and our kids.  Now they're together, but they're not happy, I can see the signs.  I've been there before with my ex. 

Aren't all of these stories that have happened to me the same as ones that straight people tell about?  Love, confusion, and loss; love, confusion, and loss; more love confusion, and loss.  Timing is everything in life and luck and timing go together.  So does love, confusion, and loss.  Doesn't matter is you're gay or straight.  Our hearts are the same.  So, why are there so many straight people out there who don't understand this?  It's back to that executive functioning thing I've written about before - back to their ability to sort through what's conscious and unconscious to them.  If they can't envision experiencing it, they can't imagine it, identify with it, and rather than try, they just reject it.  And, in the process many of them reject people they love - but they rationalize it using religion, family values, or they use some other form of justification for turning away loved ones.

I'm amazed about what I've read about our consciousness and unconsciousness.  Along this path of gay-marriage, civil unions, DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, gay adoption and foster parenting, let's try and enlighten people.  It's hard, but they'll be all the better for it.

According to the Human Rights Campaign, some 50,000 people responded to the organization’s request for examples of how the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) negatively affects them.  Today legislation was introduced to repeal DOMA, but it doesn't have the support of Barney Frank, Massachusetts openly gay Congressman (the other two openly gay Congressman support it).  As I've said in an earlier post, I believe that's because Frank has his eyes on the Anti-Discrimination bill and repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. 

I agree with Frank.  I mean, we can't have it all in one year, right?  And, won't it feel and taste better to see all these outdated laws and policies change over time - say during the next few years?  I think so.  There are efforts going on in many states to allow same-sex marriages and these will continue - sort of with a domino effect.  As we work hard to get our laws in sych with our culture, we will also be able to sit back and enjoy the fruits of our labor.  

Let's take an inventory of issues we need to change:
1.  Gay marriage and federal and state recognition of them
2.  Anti - descrimination, including in the military
3.  Hate crime punishment
4.  Adoption laws for gay parents
5.  Foster care laws for gay parents

These are the major ones.  I honesly believe we have to focus in on 2 and 3 at a federal level and the other three at a state level.  It may be a long road to hoe, going state by state.  Many people relish in the slam dunk of a federal law providing for gay marriage, and while it may get there sometime in the future, I'm happy with a state by state plan for now. 

  

I was talking with someone tonight about why people sometimes break away from family and friends they love (or used to).  It's as if the past relationship never existed, like there was no love there in the first place.  As I've gotten older I hear more and more about this - and I understand it less and less.  I think this happens even more often with lesbians and gay men.  Why?

My friend said that she thinks this often has to do with money.  Someone has money and the other one doesn't.  Or someone is concerned with their inheritance, while another sibling is stealing it all away.  Sometimes people just don't want to leave an inheritance, however small, to a child or sibling who hasn't been there for them.  Here are two good examples:

1.  A woman had two sons, but when one married, the other became estranged.  Twenty-five years later there's no relationship between them.  The older person never even knew her grandchildren - in fact she finds out they were told she died years before. 

2.  A woman with Parkinson's has one brother.  They grew up in Germany during WWII.  Fortunately, they survived and relocated, eventually, to the US.  Their mother died years later, just months after the woman's oldest daughter died (under age 35).  Imagine that in the midst of her grief about losing her daughter, the woman's mother also died.  During the greatest grief time, the  woman's brother took care of "things" in Germany (where the mother first lived and still had assets) and his sister allowed him to sign documents for her.  What she didn't realize was that he was stealing her inheritance.

3.  A large family was always there for each other, but as brothers and sister started dying off, they became more and more focused on what would happen to the family property - a larger house built by their father.  When there were only a few left, and the youngest sister who lived there and who'd nursed their parents during their older days considered making some home improvements - to make the property more livable and valuable.  But, the others got upset and alienating.  Even though they didn't live there and hadn't paid anything towards upkeep (but the sister had) in the past 25+ years, the brothers still wanted a say in the home improvements.

4.  A woman claimed she loved her parents more than they loved her.  This was extremely painful for her.  But, she was never able to love this way again, always moderating her love to make sure others always loved her more.  This way she could avoid the pain she experienced in her childhood.  Even when others loved her, she couldn't return their love out of fear that it wasn't real and wouldn't last or be reciprocated. Today, she claims to not have any relationship with her parents - she says she tries not to think about them.

Okay, why would all these people go through all of this?  How painful do they want their lives to be?  I guess more painful than I would put up with!

So, what's the impact to gays and lesbians?  I hope you'll learn that it's a two way street and those who can deal with both sides do the best - If you worry about not being accepted, and you're not, then you're prone to giving up.  Don't give up - push people to understand you and what you're all about.  If you worry about being gay, relax and go with the flow - you'll figure it our someday (just don't wait so long that you've given a lot of your life away).  

On the other hand, expect that some people, maybe even many - despite the current liberal climate - will not accept you.  But recognize that it's their own short comings, not yours.  Because you are feeling unwelcomed, even by family and friends that you thought loved you, this is all the more cause to step up to the equation.  Be open, stick with it, go along for the ride, and know that those who are worth caring about will still be there.  Who cares about the others?  

On Labor Day, September 7th, I wrote a post about discrimination at work - especially for gays and lesbians.  In it I referred to the anti-discrimination bill now being debated in Washington - which if passed, would make it illegal to discriminate against gays and transgender people.  Of course I cited the real need for this legislation, focusing on the emotional strain imposed upon people who can't be who they are at work.  See the post below.

Today, the NY Times has an editorial encouraging the passing of the bill.  The leading sentence to the article is, "It is a disgrace that in 29 states workers can be fired for being gay. Congress should make passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act a top priority."  Here's the link - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/opinion/13sun2.html.

The support by the Times is great.  But, I have a problem with their editorial - it doesn't mention the need to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  How can the government pass an anti-discrimination bill, requiring the rest of the country to accept LGBT workers, and then turn around and continue to discriminate against it's own workers?  This is absolutely crazy.  These two initiatives need to be taken together. 

I have friends in the military, and they seem accepting of gay lifestyles.  What's the big idea?  The top military brass keep making excuses - the need to study the impact, the need to develop policies, the need to review, evaluate, discuss and then do it all again.  It's all a delay tactic, I believe.  If companies sending guys out to live for weeks on oil rigs or firefighters sleeping in firehouses, or utility companies with thousands of guys working together for days to rebuild infrastructure after weather emergencies, can deal with it, why can't the army and navy?  

The Times reports that employers in the 29 states where it's still legal to discriminate against gays and the religious right fear that an anti-discrimination bill will lead to "a flood of lawsuits."  The Times counters saying that in states where similar laws have been passed, this hasn't been found to be true.  I wonder if the government is worried about lawsuits by military personnel.  Clearly if the current bill is passed and Don't Ask, Don't Tell isn't dealt with, there will be lawsuits claiming discrimination - and having this new bill in place makes the military discrimination a much more realistic claim.  

Gays have been feeling burned by Obama's promises to repeal Dont' Ask, Don't Tell and the lack of priority he has given this since being elected (not that he hasn't been busy with many other important things!).  Perhaps a Congressman like Barney Frank has strategized setting it up this way - perhaps even with the President.  Frank's a smart guy.  By being gay and being the lead sponsor of the current anti-discrimination bill, Frank has put himself in a position to be remembered as the one who forced the debate that will inevitably occur about why it should only legal to discriminate against gays in the military.  And if Franks's successful, he might end up with the legacy of leading the country towards making it illegal to discriminate in all areas of life, even in the military.  

This week is going to be a big one for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), and Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO) will introduce legislation to repeal the DOMA, a law which discriminates against lawfully married same-sex couples. 

This website give a very good analysis of where gays can get married -  http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/wheremarriage.htm.  Gays can marry anywhere in Canada.  In Europe it's allowed in Sweden, Norway, Spain, Belgium, and the Netherlands.  And it's okay in South Africa.  There are over 190 countries in the world - and seven offer full access to marriage while the rest offer none or limited options (it may be allowed state by state, region by region - or civil unions are allowed).

I hope that those of us who are gay will put all of this into perpective. Look at how much progress we are making - Just a few years ago, no countries allowed same-sex marriage.  Now at least seven do.  And more will sign on in the future.

Aren't we all best served by the advice, "Love who you love."  I mean, think of what it means to love who you love, vs. not loving who you love.  Love grabs you and pulls you in - on some level you can't resist it.  But, it can be spurned, for a number of reasons.  Most common among gays is that the other person doesn't want to accept that they are gay.  Or maybe they aren't really gay, and don't want a relationship with you, but they still care about you.   

The performer, Valentine Ryder from NY; sings an unbelievingly touching song at http://straighttalkonmarriage.blogspot.com/2009/09/video-love-who-you-love.html.  He sings a song about love that applies to all of us.  Ryder made this video/vocal recording of "Love Who You Love," written by Stephen Flaherty and Lynn Ahrens to purposely move us, and it does!  In it, Mr. Flaherty plays piano.

After you listen to the song, come back and read the rest of this. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The song says, "Your common sense tells you best not begin, but your fool heart cannot help plunging in.  And nothing and no one can stand in your way.  You just have to love who you love."  It goes on to say there's no fault in loving, no shame - everyone's heart does the same.  Just go on and love who you love.  He says choose the one you love and don't lose a moment's sleep about it.  He says, there's no fault in loving - no cause for shame.  Just learn how to say I love you to the one you love.

This is a very meaningful song to anyone who's struggling to love another person, especially gays and lesbians.  Love shouldn't be that difficult, but, sometimes it is.  Ideally, love should be good, make you feel terrific, and sustain you.  When you find love like this, take the poet, Mary Oliver's advice, and don't look back, row towards it as strong and as fast as you can towards it.  When the love you're in doesn't feel like this, look to Kay Ryan - "waiting is sustainable- a place with its own harvests."  Love will come your way.
    

I read to the seniors at our local assisted living facility every Tuesday.  Believe it or not, they've elected to read Randy Pausch's, "The Last Lecture."  Pausch was a professor at Carnegie Mellon (in computer science - a specialist in virtual reality).  His is a sad story, because later in life than most, in his mid to late 30's he meets the woman of his dreams, Jai. They have three beautiful children.  And then when the oldest is 5, Pausch learns he has terminal cancer - ten liver tumors.  

We are nearing the end of the book.  Fortunately, this isn't an autobiography where the subject dies at the end - or those that love him or her go on about how they dealt with death.  That would be too sad for our group.  This book actually concludes before Pausch dies - and the end is quite uplifting.  The finish is about Pausch's views about how to live your life.  It's a series of short paragraphs, sometimes only one or two, but each one speaks about Pausch's opinion on what worked for him as he lived his life.

As I read, the older people nod their head yes to almost everything Pausch suggests.  His views are so real and common sense.  Here are just a few of his ideas (there any many, so read the book):

1.  Dream big - he dreamt about putting people on the moon (this was during Armstrong's days when we really were doing this for the first time).
2.  Being earnest is better than being hip - He says earnestness comes from the core, while hip is trying to impress with the surface.  
3.  Don't complain, just work harder - he speaks of noncomplainers like a friend who's a quadriplegic.  He says any time we spend complaining is unlikely to help us achieve our goals. 
4.  Don't obsess over what people think - we'd all be 33% more effective in our lives if we never worried about what other's thought, he says.  
5.  Look for the best in everybody - if you wait long enough people will surprise you and impress you.  When you're frustrated with people, maybe you just haven't given them enough time.
6.  If at first you don't succeed....try, try again - he speaks of cliches.  Like, 'Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.'
 7.  Show gratitude - the lost art of thank you notes.

If you think about Pausch's list above, it's relevant to everyone's life.  But these are especially good messages for LGBT people to remember:

1.  Don't obsess over what people think - just be yourself.
2.  Be earnest, not hip - again, be who you are.  Be real, not cool.
3.  Look for the best in everyone - even those who are not accepting of different sexual orientation have good qualities.  If you find them, you might make a connection that will transform their views.
4.  Don't complain, work harder - If we want equality, we have to work smart and hard.  This may mean waiting for Prop 8 in CA for a few years.  We want equality now, but if we lose, we might be further delayed.  Focus positive effort on where we can be successful.
5.  Show gratitude - many non-gays are helping us/ supporting us.  Let them know how much we appreciate them.

I could say so much more about this book - but there isn't enough room.  

Watch Pausch's last lecture at  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSo.  Over 10 million have seen it before you.  He's great. 

Update - he died at age 47 on July 25, 2008.

I'm not one for sentimentality, but Obama made me cry tonight.  He made me feel like he really cared.  I watched his speech with a friend who's 90 years old.  She's totally with it, a past head of the Department of Motor Vehicles from Brooklyn, NY.  So, she's seen a lot and she's a hot ticket - not much gets past her.  She's totally with it. 

Why did I cry?  First of all, there was this black man in front of me, one that's my contemporary, and his ability to speak and move people is unbelievable.  I was a supporter of Hillary Clinton, and I still am, but I really like this man.  He made both of us watching feel like he was speaking directly to us.  We watched as he thought and pondered, and while he watched Democrats support his comments and Republicans sit down.  He tried to pull everyone in with his straightforwardness and honesty.  We were right with him!

I guess I cried the most when he spoke about Ted Kennedy.  While this felt a little sappy, it was great.  The truth is, Kennedy did some tremendous things, but even though I live in Massachusetts, I was never his biggest fan.  However, I know he was a supporter of gay rights, so I need to stand behind him.  Watching Kennedy's wife and three kids, listening to Obama's speech, make me feel like this new health care package needed to be passed because it was what Kennedy thought was best.  There's no doubt about that.

While Kennedy had some powerful influence, and he certainly deserved to be honored, I think that many people have had input into this new health care bill.  As Obama said, if people out there have ideas about how to improve it, let him know.  Some major heath care reform needs to be passed. 

After this maybe Obama  will zero in on gay marriage, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and the anti-discriminiation bill Barney Frank put forward in June.  Sometimes standing in line, waiting for attention, is difficult.  But it's sometimes necessary and unavoidable.  Often rewards come as a result.

Read Kay Ryan's poem Patience - she says that "waiting is sustainable - a place with its own harvests."  So we will wait until Obama is ready to zero in on us - and he will - eventually.  In the meantime, let's hope that health care reform is passed.  If Obama is unsuccessful with heath care, it'll be all the harder to get our goals passed. 

The AFL-CIO reported today that one in three workers under the age of 35 are living at home with their parents because they can't afford to live on their own.  The cause?  High college debt, low wages, lack of jobs, and high cost of health care.  What does this mean to LGBT young adults? 

Today, there are many resources for LGBT youth and their parents.  When I came out as gay, we were on our own, my parents and me.  I was attending Boston College, a Jesuit institution, and while all the Jesuit priests I knew were supportive and respectful, I was afraid about discovering I was a lesbian.  My parents were good - when I told them I was gay, they were better than I thought they'd be, being pretty conservative Republicans.  It took them a few years to come around to me and my now ex-partner, but we've ended up in a good place.  Especially my mom and me. 

I suggest LGBT youth and young adult and their parents see the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Community Center as a resource at: http://www.gaycenter.org/families.  This group deals with being a parent of LGBT kids and becoming an LGBT parent.  The website has a lot to offer, by way of parenting information, but it doesn't really say much about what it might be like to have your LGBT child come home to live with you at age 20 or 30, or 35.  This would be tough for any parent, gay or straight, so it's especially likely that non-gay parents might have some difficulty with having their LGBT sons and daughters all of a sudden living at home with them.

How about the kids though?  It's not easy for them either.  You grow up feeling different.  Eventually you recognize you love people of the same sex.  There's often no one in your family to talk with about this.  You're afraid to tell your parents.  If you do, most likely they are reserved at best; maybe they are outright non-supportive.  So, you break away and create a new life for yourself.  Hopefully you're smart enought to keep in touch with your parents. 

But then bam!  The economy tanks and you find yourself back living with your Mom and Dad.  It's good that they are still there to support you, but their support might come with strings.  Can you have your same sex girlfriend or boyfriend over?  Do you feel your parents are trying to set you up with members of the opposite sex?  Are they trying to make you straight - sure you were never gay in the first place?

Sound conflicted?  Parents and children who do honestly love each other do find themselves living with each other - again.  So, what does each party do in these circumstances?

The children need to do their best to live with the parent's rules.  If they do, there's more room for negotiation as time goes on.  Parents who truly love their kids want the best for them.  They may have views about living life that are different from the person who's under 25, or even 35 for that matter.  But, over time there will be a meeting of the minds within most families; they'll either be open and supportive or rejecting and alienating.

Parents of LGBT youth and young adults need to do their best to be open - open to the feelings of their child, sexual or otherwise - and open to meeting their children's friends and intimate partners, despite their same-sexness.  Ultimately, if parents want the best for their kids, then they want them to have close relationships with people they love; with people who love them.  Parents are a good role model here.  Even if their own primary relationship is over or not what they wanted, they still need to show their children that they appreciate a good, solid, open, and loving relationship - whether it's between two women or two men, or between a woman and a man. 

When parents are open, children are open.  When children are patient, parents open up eventually and usually in a postive way.  Let's hope that all parents and children will have the capacity to work through this challenging situation.  It's critical to loving each other.    

It's Labor Day and I'm thinking about how gays and lesbians are treated at work.  Most people know that there's no discrimination law regarding sexual orientation at the federal level, except Don't Ask, Don't Tell - which makes it legal to discriminate.  I'll get back to this shortly.

For a state by state view of where it's illegal to discriminate against sexual orientation, go to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force site.  Their map shows that thirteen states and the District of Columbia ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity expression.  Another eight states ban sexual orientation discrimination.  Minnesota was the first state to ban discrimination based on both sexual orientation and gender identity when it passed the Human Rights Act in 1993.  Less than half the states (21 plus DC) consider discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal in the workplace.  For the full Map - see: http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/issue_maps/non_discrimination_7_09color.pdf.

In addition there are six states that don't allow discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity against public (government) employees and three additional states that don't allow sexual orientation discrimination against public employees (these 3 haven't enacted any protections for gender identity discrimination).  

So in total, 30 states now have some sort of protection for gays and lesbians and 19 also have protection for gender identity.  

On June 19, 2009 U.S. Representative Barney Frank introduced HR 2981 - Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009.  It was referred to five committees - including Education and Labor, Administration, Oversight and Government Reform, Judiciary, and Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.  This is basically the first step in the legislative process.  Some form of this bill has been introduced in every Congress except one since 1994.  While passage has alluded advocates for all these years, many believe that with a democratic majority in Washington and the support of President Obama, the 2009 bill may pass.  The bill exempts small businesses, religious organizations, and the military. 

So this gets us back to Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  Despite President Obama saying again recently that he wants to repeal “Don’t ask, Don’t tell, sooner rather than later,”  there is no timeline yet to repeal or ease the enforcement of the policy banning gays from openingly serving in the military.  Don't Ask, Don't Tell has resulted in the discharge of more than 13,000 military employees since its enactment more than 16 years ago. And, another 4,000 service members have left the military voluntarily each year because of this policy. 

The impact of sexual orientation discrimination at work ranges from individual discomfort by the gay or lesbian, bisexual or trangender person who has to hide a part of themselves at work to homicide and suicide.  In between there's bullying and people being fired.  I often write on this blog about why people can't just be kind and accepting of each other and this is another example.  It's really depressing.

People need to accept each others differences.  And employers need to set an example and create a culture of respect. 

How about if the U.S. government takes a leadership role and respects all its workers by exchanging Don't Ask, Don't Tell for legislation that protects LGBT people at work.  Now if that was to happen, we could really celebrate Labor Day next year!

Tonight I was driving home from my nephew's birthday party and the song "I Hope you Dance," by Lee Ann Womack came on the radio.  I've heard it a number of times, but tonight it struck a cord with me.  Maybe it was because I was leaving my sister's after her son's nine-year-old birthday and I was thinking about my kids all night.  My nine-year-old couldn't come because this is his weekend to be with his biological mom, not me.  As I've written about in other postings, my time with him is pretty limited since I only see him when our visitation agreement allows me to.  After reading about all the other nonbiological mothers who've lost complete access to their kids by court order though, I'm lucky.  But, the time we have isn't enough for either of us.

Today, my daughter who's 17, was home by herself playing the drums (she wants to go to college for drumming - music overall) and a neighbor came over and asked her to stop.  She didn't know who the neighbor was, all she knew was that she was old, but this old person certainly knew how to burst her bubble - after that she was too self-conscious to play anymore.  I told her to shut her windows and keep playing, but she couldn't forget what the woman told her.  She's proud of how she sounds and the woman made her feel uncomfortable about playing.

My other son is 21.  He still lives at home with us, and he's more than past the time that he should be on his own.  But he doesn't know what he wants to do and he keeps running into problems with everything he tries.  I think he's so afraid of really trying and failing that he has almost stopped trying. 

This song reminded me about what I really want for my kids.  I want them to feel good about themselves.  If given a choice I want them to love with passion even though I know they might get hurt.  I want them to live a full life and not take anyone, anything, or any time for granted.  Life's too short to hold back.  Here are the words -- or if your interested, here's the link to a utube version of the song -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urhazPkYTfo.

I Hope You Dance

I hope you never lose your sense of wonder
You get your fill to eat
But always keep that hunger
May you never take one single breath for granted
God forbid love ever leave you empty handed
I hope you still feel small
When you stand by the ocean
Whenever one door closes, I hope one more opens
Promise me you'll give faith a fighting chance

And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance
I hope you dance
I hope you dance

I hope you never fear those mountains in the distance
Never settle for the path of least resistance
Living might mean taking chances
But they're worth taking
Lovin' might be a mistake
But it's worth making
Don't let some hell bent heart
Leave you bitter
When you come close to selling out
Reconsider
Give the heavens above
More than just a passing glance

And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance
I hope you dance
(Time is a real and constant motion always)
I hope you dance
(Rolling us along)
I hope you dance
(Tell me who)
I hope you dance
(Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
(Where those years have gone)

I hope you still feel small
When you stand by the ocean
Whenever one door closes, I hope one more opens
Promise me you'll give faith a fighting chance

And when you get the choice to sit it out or dance
Dance
I hope you dance
I hope you dance
(Time is a real and constant motion always)
I hope you dance
(Rolling us along)
I hope you dance
(Tell me who)
(Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
I hope you dance
(Where those years have gone)

(Tell me who)
I hope you dance
(Wants to look back on their youth and wonder)
(Where those years have gone)
 
I like how she sings that you "should never settle for the path of least resistance.  Life might mean taking choices.   But they're worth taking.  Lovin' might be a mistake.  But it's worth making."

She says give faith a fighting chance.  I don't know if she means this in a religious way or whether she's just reassuring the listener that in the end everything will turn out okay.  Either one is fine with me. 

In the video she has a little girl with her; the concept is that she's singing to her own child - telling her not to worry, it'll be okay.  And she's also hoping that the child keeps her sense of wonder through all the challenges she will inevitably face in her life.  She wants her to feel small when by the huge, massive ocean.  And she doesn't want the girl to worry that love will hurt her and make her bitter.  She wants her to accept love in full, without holding back.

Isn't all of this what we really want for our children -- Love, happiness, patience, and faith, mixed with a little bit of wonder and dance?  If so, why do so many parents push their LGBT kids away - reject them and eject them from their lives?  How can a parent act like their child doesn't exist because they're not what they wanted them to be?  Maybe these parents should listen to Lee Ann's song and remember what they wanted for their child when they were first born.  Perhaps they could think about all aspects of their child and zero in on how good their kid is despite any places they don't exactly see eye-to-eye.  Maybe if these parents fully embraced and accepted their child it would bring about transformation and more openness to love in both their lives.  

I was with my parents tonight - my mom is very supportive.  But, my dad is always giving me his opinions - too many opinions.  I don't want to be like this with my kids.  Sometimes I come on too strong with my 21 year old, when I worry he's not planning for his future.  Right now he's only capable of living in the present.  But after hearing this song again, I'm going to have more faith that he'll find his way, whatever it is, and I'm going to hope he enjoys himself and feels some wonder along the way.   I'm going to wish this for all my kids and for all kids.   

I have three kids, two boys 21 and 9, and a girl who's 17.  Actually, they have two moms and a stepmom.  My ex-partner is with someone else now.  But she has virtually no relationship with our oldest son, and a limited one with our daughter.  Our youngest claims he has three moms, and while this is nice, if it's what he believes, I know that only two of us were present at his birth - me and his birth mother - and I know that only two of us relate to him as a mother would. 

My oldest told us once that he was ridiculed for wearing cowboy boots to school, but never for having two moms.  He says no one ever mentioned it.  My daughter says that kids at the high school have assumed she's a lesbian, despite that she says she isn't, and has had her share of relationships with boys. 

Part of this may be that kids assume if your mom's gay, maybe you are.  Truth is that if your mom is gay, she's probably open to whatever sexual orientation her kids are.  And she believes you should have the opportunity to determine your choice of sexual orientation over time, on your own.  This is important with young kids - because I believe it's not fully possible, for most of us, to declare our sexual orientation and interests until we are a little older.  Deciding to be gay is a big thing - not something you just announce on a lark; but after sexual orientation out of the box - parents and kids need to be clear that they are supporting each other.

I'm tired and I need to head off to bed.  Love is at the center of all the people who believe in the potential of all children to ultimately choose what is best for them. 

I'm tired, so have a nice sleep.

I found myself needing to read a poem by Mary Oliver today. I read a fair amount of poetry, but I especially like Oliver and Kay Ryan (both lesbians).  I pull out this particular Oliver poem, from time to time, when I want to remind myself that pursuing and maintaining love isn't easy, but when you feel it you have a choice.  You can run away or run towards it.  Brave people run right into it without looking back - I've always been one of these.  Those with fear either tip toe towards it, afraid to commit, or run away as fast as they can.

West Wind #2

You are young. So you know everything. You leap
into the boat and begin rowing. But listen to me.
Without fanfare, without embarassment, without
any doubt, I talk directly to your soul. Listen to me.
Lift the oars from the water, let your arms rest, and
your heart, and heart's little intelligence, and listen to
me. There is life without love. It is not worth a bent
penny, or a scuffed shoe. It is not worth the body of a
dead dog unburied. When you hear, a mile
away and still out of sight, the churn of the water
as it begins to swirl and roil, fretting around the
sharp rocks - when you hear that unmistakable
pounding - when you feel the midst on your mouth
and sense ahead the embattlement, the long falls
plunging and steaming - then row, row for your life
toward it.

Life without love is not worth a scuffed shoe, not just any shoe, but one that's already used and tarnished.  It's not worth a bent penny - worthless money.  And it's not worth a dead dog, even one not yet buried for nine days (gross!). 

Perhaps this poem is telling gays and lesbians that they have to pursue what's in their hearts - they have no choice - unless they want to live life without love.  Even though you sense the battles ahead - not just normal lovers quarrels, but disputes with those close to you about your choice of sexual orientation or partner - Oliver says you need to row for your life towards your love.  Anticipating long falls - plunging deep into the unknown - the waterfall throws off a lot of mist (steam) and you may have trouble seeing your way.  But Oliver says row towards it - not just row tenuously - but row for your life!  Without worrying about the fall.  Your pursuit of love will keep your head above the water.

In the poem, Oliver speaks to the young, who think they know everything.  She pleads with them to listen to her.  But on some level isn't this experience the same for anyone in love?  I think she's talking to anyone in love - true love. She might just as well be speaking directly to gays and lesbians who come out later in life - they might be especially embarrassed to have not discovered this part of themselves earlier, or feel anxiety about feeling same-sex love at all - she says listen without embarrassment (not really to her, but to their hearts).  They may be doubting themselves - she says there's no fanfare - she's speaking to your soul.  She may be talking to middle aged people who all of a sudden find themselves after being lost in a long term relationship, whether gay or straight.  She might be talking to seniors who never thought they'd love again and now they find their heart is open and ripe - and they've met someone who's turned their lives upside down and inside out - new love after age 70 or even 80 or beyond.  Are you ever too old to fall in love?  I don't think so.   

Her point is that you have to look into your own soul and follow the direction it tells you.  The waters may be churning and swirling and there are sharp rocks everywhere, but if you feel the unmistakable pounding of your heart, row for your life towards it. 

Two great posts today and yesterday on  the "Beyond (Straight and Gay) Marriage" blog.  Both are about lesbian bological mom's ditching the non-biological parents of their children.  See http://beyondstraightandgaymarriage.blogspot.com/2009/09/will-new-york-finally-get-it-right-for.html if you want to read the detailed post in addition to my summary and opinion below. 

Case #1 - In NY, the New York Court of Appeals (the state's highest court) has agreed to hear the case of Debra H. v. Janice R. After the couple broke up, the biological mom claimed that she decided to have the child on her own and that her ex-partner never functioned as the child's parent. These two women gave their child the biological mom's last name and they used the nonbiological mom's last name as the child's middle name.  Both moms were listed as parents on the naming certificate issued by the couple's synagogue (and on other papers). The biological mom also signed a power of attorney appointing the other mom as the child's guardian until his 21st birthday. During the pregnancy, the couple got married in Vermont.  Under Vermont law this assumes parentage by the nonbiological partner.  The biological mom says she only did these things because she was pressured and wanted to avoid conflicts.  Good news is that the NY Appeals Court ordered that Sunday visits between the nonbiological mom and the child should continue while the case is pending.

Case # 2 - In Texas, two women planned to have a child together but when the child was 15 months old, they broke up.  For two years the child lived with the biological mother but visited with the nonbiological mother on weekends, holidays, etc. When the nonbiological mom accessed the child's education records without permission, the biological mother cut off all contact.  So the nonbiological mother sued.  In Texas, joint legal status is only given to a nonbiological parent when that parent is a man who is married to the birth mother.  So, in this case the nonbiological mother got nothing.
And, imagine what the child has lost.

I know I've written about this issue before, but how about these kids?  The child in Case #1 is now 5 1/2.  The one in Case #2 is about 3 1/2.  By this time aren't they attached to both their parents?  When the kids get older, how are these biological mothers going to explain to their children why they cut off contact with their other parent. 

I've been reading this great book called, The Developing Mind by Daniel J. Siegel.  The subtitle is, "How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape who we are."  Chapter 3 is called, "The Attachment System."  It talks about how the emotions of secure attachment are directly related to the parent's emotionally sensitive responses to a child's signals.  It talks about how parents can help children to reduce uncomfortable emotions like fear, anxiety, or sadness so children can be soothed and feel safe when they are upset.  The book references work on attachment in 1995 by Mary Main who summarized attachment principles as follows:

1.  Earliest attachments are usually formed by 7 months.
2.  Nearly all infants become attached.
3.  Attachments are only to a few people.
4.  These attachments are selective and seem to be as a result of the baby's social interactions with the attachment figures.
5.  The attachments lead to specific organizational changes in an baby's behavior and brain functions.

So, do these biological moms really think that at 15 months or older their babies are not attached to their nonbiological moms?  And how can the courts avoid focusing on attachment and well-being of the children when making custody and visitation decisions?

The Siegel book goes on to talk about classifications of patterns of infant behavior, especially when babies are in strange situations. 

1.  If the attachment figure(s) is secure, the baby is secure.
2.  When an attachment figure(s) dismisses attachment, the baby avoids emotion and doesn't cry upon separation from the parent and also ignores the parent when they are reunited.
3.  If the attachment figure(s) is preoccupied with their own past attachment relationships, the baby is resistent or ambivalent towards attachment. 
4.  When an attachment figure(s) is disorganized or shows lapses in reasoning during discussions of their own attachments, the baby will be disorganized and disoriented as well.

So, what causes one mother to abandon another when logic clearly tells them it's not in their baby's best interest?  Clearly the biological mother couldn't be coming from a place of secured attachment themselves.  Mothers who feel positive about their own mothering experience couldn't do this to their own child - or to the other mother.  Most likely the biological mother falls into category 2, 3, or 4 above.  And, if the nonbiological mother falls into the first category, the biological mother can feel very threatened - worried that baby will prefer the nonbiological mother and develop a more secure attachment to her.  I think this is the fundamental reason that lesbian biological mothers try to cut nonbiological mothers out of their kids lives. 

Now look at it from the child's perspective.  It's best for the child to have secure attachments - as many as possible.  They probably don't know that their biological mother cut the other mother out of their lives until a little later in life.  They probably think that the nonbiological mother abandoned them - the biological mother might even discreetly or directly tell them this twisted fact.  The biological mother can make significant efforts to build a secure attachment with their child, despite the absence of the nonbiological mother, and many of them may actually be successful.  But children grow up.  And people talk - friends and relatives may actually tell an older child or young adult what happened when they were younger - how they had another mother who was cut out of their lives.  A nonbiological mother might actually seek out an older child or young adult and take steps to forge a relationship with them. 

Biological mothers beware!  Something is wrong about this entire picture.  In MA, in my own case, the judge seemed to see it all - we settled our case which gave me visitation with my youngest son - the biological son of my ex-partner.  Let's hope that New York does the right thing!  And, let's also wish that biological lesbian mothers read the book, The Developing Mind, because if they do, they wouldn't be able to do anything that so clearly goes against the likelihood of their children developing secure attachments.

A few months ago, I met a woman who was, long ago, a psychoanalyst from New York.  She's now over 80 and she lives in an assisted living facility.  When she was in her 50's she worked with many women who she claims were lesbians who wanted to have husbands and children.  For a number of years, this was the main population she dealth with.  She said she helped them, but it doesn't seem that she was appreciated.  In fact she told me that someone said she'd need to wait until these women were in their late 40's or 50's until they could see the situation fully and then the'd calm down and relax about her.  

She said she'd written a book about her experience and done a lot of speaking engagements about the topic of gay people.  I know, from having already read about her before she told me anything, that in her day, she was seen as someone who could convert gays to being straight.  She told me that lesbians held protests about her - they broke into places she was speaking and called her names - like lesbian basher. 

She says her book was widely sold.  Perhaps it was, I don't know.  All I know is that I told her about the American Psychological Association recently voting that conversion therapy doesn't work - isn't santioned.  I also told her about Nancy Diamond's book, "Sexual Fluidity and Women."  She'd never heard about it and told me that her work should be a reference to this book.  She asked me if I'd like to read her book and of course I said yes.  It's history.  

I know at the time, gays were viewed as "out there."  She admitted that most of her patients admitted to having homosexual feelings, but their parents couldn't accept them.  Most people couldn't.  She said she did accept them.  But, I guess her view at the time, and theirs, was that they wanted to change their sexuality (or at least not act on their lesbian feelings).    

It's weird is that we've found each other.  Who would have known.  She went on a trip to Cape Cod this summer (I helped her pack).  She was really happy to go - I helped her get ready for the trip.  Today, after telling me about her book and her past, I told her about my life as a lesbian and about the break up of my long term lesbian partnership and our three kids, she suggested that maybe next year we could take a vacation together.  Something else that tells me we've been brought together for a reason.

It's funny how some people think they can change others.  On the otherhand, it's funny how some people cannot accept themselves.  I'm sure this woman and I will have a lot more to talk about.  Today I told her that while I think some people are born gay or lesbian, others fall in love with someone of the same sex, not necessarily identifying themselves as homosexual.  On the other hand, she told me about how concerned she is about people's focus on sexuality....that it's reached a point where women are cutting their breasts off.  It's going to be intense, but I think we're going to have a lot to talk about.  I've never seen her more engaged that she was today in all the months I've been visiting her.  Should be interesting.