Justice Department to Soon Ask Supreme Court to Uphold Marriage Equality

On Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder made a surprise announcement that he will be stepping down from his position in the Obama Administration. Only one day later, Holder made news by indicating that he will once again take action on the issue of marriage equality.  This evening, reporting by NBC News Justice Correspondent Pete Williams revealed that the Justice Department will soon ask the Supreme Court to uphold marriage equality, indicating that Holder believes the country is ready for it.
HRC.org

www.hrc.org/blog/entry/justice-department-to-soon-ask-supreme-court-to-uphold-marriage-equality?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss-feed

Chris Pratt Reveals the Origin Story Behind His Infamous First Headshot: VIDEO

Kyler Geoffroy

www.towleroad.com/2014/09/pratt.html

Meet the Mormons at Affirmation: LGBT Family & Friends
Affirmation was awarded the Allies Award by Equality Utah at the annual Allies Dinner in 2014. As members and friends of the gay and lesbian community, it is Affirmation’s intention to work…

Hot Sheet: September 26, 2014

Our top 10 entertainment and events highlights this week include Ben Whishaw in Lilting, new Kylie Minogue, and old Peter Berlin.

read more

Advocate.com Editors

www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/hot-sheet/2014/09/26/hot-sheet-september-26-2014

California Quietly Adopts Landmark Condom Law To Protect Sex Workers
Last week, without fanfare or media attention, California became the first state in the nation to adopt a law aiming to protect sex workers from being prosecuted as prostitutes merely because they’re carrying condoms. The police practice of targeting for arrest those in possession of multiple condoms undermines critical efforts to help this vulnerable population avoid sexually transmitted diseases, advocates for sex workers argue.

The advocates applauded California’s legislation as a step in the right direction, but they said the measure as written doesn’t go far enough.

“It’s great that the California Legislature has contemplated this issue and taken it seriously,” Sienna Baskin, managing director of the New York-based Sex Worker Project at the Urban Justice Center, told The Huffington Post. “That said, I do think a more comprehensive bill would be more effective.”

The California legislation, which Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed into law on Sept. 19, requires a court to state explicitly that the presence of condoms is relevant to the individual case before prosecutors can use them as evidence of prostitution. The original bill, authored by California Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco), would have banned the use of condoms entirely as evidence of prostitution, but it didn’t have the votes to pass.

“Right now, there’s no process, and condoms are admitted into court even when they aren’t actual evidence,” Wendy Hill, Ammiano’s senior legislative assistant, said to HuffPost. “There are very few cases [against sex workers] in which an actual condom is listed as a valid piece of evidence.”

A report released by Human Rights Watch in 2012 looked at prostitution cases in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington. It found that in all four cities, police officers frequently seized condoms from sex workers and used them as justification for arrest. “The practice makes sex workers and transgender women reluctant to carry condoms for fear of arrest, causes them to engage in sex without protection, and puts them at risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases,” stated the 112-page report, published in advance of that year’s International AIDS Conference.

Advocates for sex workers hope the additional legal requirement under California’s new law will act as a deterrent against specifically targeting those sex workers who carry condoms. “We believe that the process of having to seek a court’s permission on a repeated basis will ultimately prove too burdensome for many district attorneys to pursue,” Whitney Engeran-Cordova, senior director of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s public health division, said in a statement. “As a result, sex workers, prostitutes and others may now possess more than one condom without the current — and rational — fear of incriminating themselves.”

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s public health division supported Ammiano’s broader measure.

Last year, San Francisco banned the practice of confiscating condoms to use as evidence against sex workers outright. But according to Hill, incidents similar to those chronicled in the Human Rights Watch study are still commonplace in Los Angeles.

“There are cases where HIV health outreach workers would go out and distribute condoms, and then law enforcement will follow up right behind them as a means of ‘cleaning up the streets,'” Hill said. “[Police officers] would threaten [the sex workers], arrest them or just scare the crap out of them.”

According to the Human Rights Watch report, such police actions do nothing to “clean up the streets” and only lead to more unprotected sex. Hill argues that the only way to reduce prostitution is to “provide services and alternatives to the folks who are engaging in that kind of work.”

She noted that in California, prostitution is usually considered a misdemeanor, resulting in the offender spending a night or two, if any, in jail. “It ends up costing the public in tax money, and it ends up being harder for [the sex worker] to get a job,” Hill said. “And so the cycle repeats itself.”

Beyond the four cities featured in the Human Rights Watch report, Baskin said further research has found that the practice of police officers using condoms to intimidate sex workers is widespread not only across the United States but worldwide. “It’s an issue in many countries around the world,” she said. “There’s a real need for this kind of documentation.”

Although she believes the California law doesn’t go far enough, Baskin said she’s encouraged. “It takes one state to take the first step,” she said. “I’m excited to see a piece of legislation pass. There’s been a slow and steady building movement.”

Baskin’s organization, which provides legal and social services for sex workers, is currently rallying behind a bill pending in the New York state legislature that would bar the use of condoms as evidence in prostitution cases. New York City adopted a similar ban earlier this year.

“Sex workers should have full access to human rights just like all other individuals,” Baskin said. “The right to protect yourself and to protect your health is something we’ve spent a lot of resources ensuring everyone has. We shouldn’t take that right away from anyone.”

www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/26/condom-law-california_n_5890692.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices

Minimalist Social Network 'Ello' Grows As Drag Queens Rally Against Facebook: VIDEO

Charles Pulliam-Moore

www.towleroad.com/2014/09/ello.html

Renata Rodrigues Apoia a causa LGBT

WATCH: Why We Are Listening to the Rescues

Indie supergroup the Rescues said goodbye to Los Angeles’s Room 5 on Monday night with a rousing, heartfelt night of music.

read more

Sunnivie Brydum

www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/music/2014/09/26/watch-why-we-are-listening-rescues

The Gay Blood Ban That Keeps on Chugging. And Discriminating. And Killing.
A few days ago, that monthly e-mail announcing the upcoming campus blood drive popped up on my screen.

“Help saves lives,” it declared.

“Unless you’re gay,” it derided.

I then went to the Student Union to pick up some lunch and was immediately confronted by the poster announcing that same blood drive.

“Be proud,” it shouted.

“Unless you’re gay,” it snickered.

“Be a hero,” it proclaimed.

“Unless you’re gay,” it scoffed.

“Free Chipotle for donors,” it promised.

“Unless you’re gay, in which case, no beans and rice for you!” it laughed.

To be clear, I really and truly do see and hear these things when confronted with a blood drive announcement. Each and every month. And each and every month, it never fails to be humiliating, dehumanizing, embarrassing and a whole host of other alienating words. All due to the fact that I can’t make it past the screening questions to donate my universal donor, O-negative blood because I have had sex since 1977, the disqualifying year in the FDA’s ban commemorating the year of my birth (yes, at this point, I’ve personalized this ban more than a bit…).

Oh, and also, I become enraged. White hot angry. Partly at the ban, but also at the LGBT community’s almost complete inability and nigh total ineptitude to mobilize an effective fight against the ban. We coalesce beautifully around marriage equality. We gather passionately to fight school bullying. Heck, we even seem to be coming together around ENDA.

But around a blood ban that discriminates against gay men on a cellular level? Around an archaic, medically-unsound policy that both metaphorically and (no joke!) biologically argues that we are less than our heterosexual brothers and sisters? It’s almost like we have no clue what to do.

After 15 years of educating, organizing and ranting about blood drives, here’s the small amount of knowledge I have gained.

Petitions don’t work. Like, at all.

There’s a new petition out. Which is different than this petition. That failed. Which is different than this petition. That failed. Which is different from a ton more. Which all failed.

But, fine, let’s live in a universe where the requisite number of signatures is achieved (that assumption being huge given that even a post from social media megastar George Takei couldn’t push one of those petitions over the edge), then what? The White House comments? To say what? That this isn’t a priority for them? Seriously, these online petitions just have no capacity to create meaningful change.

Banning a Blood Drive Feels Horrible.

I’ve been heavily involved in the successful efforts to ban blood drives on two different college campuses. It is a dreadful experience. Make no mistake: I wholeheartedly stand by my actions. When you work for an organization that sports a non-discrimination statement protecting community members on the basis of sexual orientation, you simply cannot endorse the invitation of a group on campus that discriminates against community members on the basis of sexual orientation.

That said, it’s not like it is heartwarming to advocate for a ban. Even as the ultimate goal of a ban is to draw attention to discriminatory practices which, if ended, would open the blood supply up to as many donors as possible, no one working on banning blood drives raises a triumphant fist in the air as the blood-mobile sits outside the campus gates.

So Many People Don’t Know About the Ban. They Just Don’t.

My guarantee to you: I will share this piece on Facebook and someone will write, “Wait, what?!? I had no idea.” It will then take a tremendous amount of effort to set aside my frustration and just respond, “Yes, it’s real.” But that’s what we all have to keep doing: speaking, education, posting, ranting and advocating for change. Somewhere in all of that lies the hope that a critical mass of folks will be reached who will demand change.

True story: another professor walked into my office while I was typing this and asked about the topic of this piece. I told her the ban on gay men giving blood. She replied, “Oh, I had no idea!” Indeed.

Ultimately, this issue is about discrimination. This issue about saving lives (1.8 million lives, apparently!). This issue is about doing the right thing. And yet, we can’t seem to figure out how to arrive at that place where we discard this hateful, deadly ban.

If you have ideas on how to get there, post them below. In the meantime, at least tell someone else about the ban. Chances are, they don’t know.

www.huffingtonpost.com/ken-schneck-phd/the-gay-blood-ban-that-ke_b_5884250.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices