All posts by GayFriendschat.com

First Person: #WhyILeft What I First Thought Was a Consensual Leather Relationship

First Person: #WhyILeft What I First Thought Was a Consensual Leather Relationship

Vancouver_Pride_Parade_-_Flag_(3816236455)

#WhyIStayed and #WhyILeft have gone viral on Twitter since the Ray Rice domestic violence revelations. Our friend David M posted his story of surviving domestic abuse on Facebook earlier today and has given Towleroad permission to share it.

I was helped by several wonderful people when I was a homeless boy, discarded by my LDS family. There was Jim, the leatherman who introduced me properly to the leather scene, the man from whom I earned my first leathers. And there was Miss Gladys, the Black trans sex worker who took me in and gave me a home for a time, who was to me like a mother, and who made the best fried chicken I have ever had.

Then there was Paul. He gave me a place to live, too. But it came at a price. He beat me, raped me, abused me emotionally and financially, and lent me out to his friends. All under the guise of a BDSM relationship, which I wanted desperately. He taught me I had to start out living as his slave if I wanted to be in the scene. I was young and stupid and I believed him. I thought it was normal. And I was afraid of being back on the street, where I was already being raped and abused, anyway. That’s #WhyIStayed, far too long. But one day I found the courage to leave.

We were watching tv downstairs by the pool. I locked him into the room, went upstairs and threw my clothes into a bag, and walked out the door. I had no money, no friends, nowhere to go. But I walked out. I walked 50 miles to Tampa where I knew there was a leather bar and other leathermen. That weekend, I went to the local bar, and I started telling people my story. I met Jim, who I mentioned earlier. Jim was an old school (some would say Old Guard) leatherman. He gave me a place to live, and this time there were no strings attached. I would have slept with him; I was used to sleeping with men for food or shelter. But for the  year I lived with him, he never touched me. He taught me how to have a healthy, consensual leather relationship. He taught me the difference between BDSM and abuse. But back to the story…

A few months after I had left, I was at the bar, this was the 2606 in Tampa which some of you may know. Jim was not with me, so I was alone when Paul walked in and tried to get me to leave with him. After being afraid of him for so long, I wasn’t afraid any longer. I yelled at him; I told him I was going nowhere with him.

The music kept playing, of course, but all around me men went quiet and turned toward us. The pool games stopped. The tension in the room was palpable. Paul grabbed me by the arm and began to pull me toward the door. And suddenly, something magical happened. The leathermen in that bar closed ranks in front of us. And all around us. Tampa had a small leather community, just the one bar, so I already knew these men, and they knew my story. They knew who Paul was and why he was there. As ethical leathermen, they stepped up to protect me.

Paul didn’t really understand what was going on, but for the first time I saw fear on *his* face. I experienced a sudden realization of how small and pitiful he really was. I pulled my arm from his grip. I was shaking not with fear but with anger; I leaned in close to him and I told him that these were my friends, that this was my bar, and that he was not welcome here. He should leave, and never come back. He never did.

To this day I still ask myself #WhyILeft. But I really don’t know. Why was it that one day I suddenly had the courage that I had never had before? I don’t know. I’m just glad I did. I wish I had done it much sooner.

David M. is now married to his longtime partner. He teaches and mentors young men entering the leather scene. He says the most important thing he teaches them is how to tell the difference between healthy BDSM and abuse. He recommends consulting the site Kink Abuse for more information on the topic.

From time to time Towleroad runs first person stories spotted on social media we think will be of interest to the broader community. Hat tip to Jim Landé for spotting this one. If you come across a particularly timely, moving, amazing or otherwise worthy post, please let us know through our contact form or drop us an email at tips at towleroad dot com.

Previously in this series:
How Three Restaurant Workers Restored a Gay Man’s Faith in Humanity [tlrd]

[image kyle pierce – wikimedia commons]


Michael Goff

www.towleroad.com/2014/09/my-story-tampas-ethical-leathermen-made-me-feel-protected-and-are-ultimately-whyileft-2.html

Nev From 'Catfish' Was Kicked Out Of Sarah Lawrence For Punching A Girl

Nev From 'Catfish' Was Kicked Out Of Sarah Lawrence For Punching A Girl
In his new book, In Real Life: Love, Lies & Identity in the Digital Age, Nev Schulman — the boyish host of the MTV show Catfish — writes about the time he was “tossed out” of Sarah Lawrence College for punching a girl in the face. In the passage, Schulman explains away his behavior by saying he “hadn’t been aware of” the fact that the person he punched was a woman, because she was “short, stocky, crew-cut-styled.”

www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/11/nev-catfish-punched-a-girl_n_5806536.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices

NY Radio Hosts Kimberly and Beck, Who Were Fired for Transphobic Remarks, Back on the Air: VIDEO

NY Radio Hosts Kimberly and Beck, Who Were Fired for Transphobic Remarks, Back on the Air: VIDEO

Kimberly_beck

Kimberly and Beck, the Rochester, NY radio hosts who were fired from 98.9 ‘Breakfast Buzz’ show after unleashing a tirade of disturbing and offensive remarks about transgender people in a ‘discussion’ of the city’s new trans health benefits, have been hired by Clear Channel station Radio 95.1.

The radio duo apologized after being let go over the offensive segment (which you can listen to HERE), saying, in part:

We are very sorry for the hurt and pain we have caused anyone, especially those in the Transgender community and their friends and families. What we said and the manner in which we handled ourselves was wrong; we take full responsibility and we deeply apologize to any and all that we offended.

Our attempt was to discuss a controversial healthcare issue; however our lack of sensitivity and understanding of the Transgender people and their plight created 12 minutes of radio we that wish we could take back…

…It is our hope that this situation can be a time of learning and understanding about the Transgender community and not a time for additional anger and insensitivity. This is a community of individuals who struggle painfully to be themselves and find the support and comfort they deserve. We believe that this can be a chance for all of us to stop the ignorance and find our humanity.”

In an announcement released today about their new show, Kimberly says:

“We took some time to reflect and kind of figure out what went sideways and we made the statement that we were sorry and made amends to the transgender community and we’re just glad to be back.”

Kimberly and Beck say they’re doing the same kind of show they have been doing for 13 years and don’t deny they might say something else that gets them in trouble.

Says Kimberly:

“Oh we’ll probably say stupid things. I mean, there’s no doubt. We’re all human…There are things that you say that in a minute you wish you could take back. It’s the nature of the business. We never intend to hurt anyone.”

Adds Beck:

“It’s live radio. In the area where we live, once in a while we overstep our boundaries.”

Kimberly and Beck do not specify the amends they made to the trans community or how their understanding of transgender people has changed in the time since the controversy. Perhaps they will do so on their show.

Watch the duo’s announcement today, AFTER THE JUMP

 


Andy Towle

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

Conservatives Can't Be Pro-Marriage and Oppose Gay Marriage

Conservatives Can't Be Pro-Marriage and Oppose Gay Marriage
More bad news for marriage and families this week. A new study was released showing that 33 percent of children are now being raised by either a single parent or unmarried parents, compared to 1960 when the figure was less than 10 percent.

“The decline of marriage is wreaking havoc on our country,” a spokesman from the non-profit group, “Family First,” told Fox News.

As a Christian conservative, I entirely agree, and we must do everything possible to promote marriage and reverse the trend. But it’s time to call out the hypocrisy of the right: It doesn’t make sense to be pro-marriage and pro-family while opposing gay marriage and gay families. The positions are entirely inconsistent.

In fact, I’ll go a step further. Any ideology fixated on preserving marriage and the nuclear family should be proactively encouraging as many couples to marry as possible, including gay couples.

The problem is, every major conservative pro-marriage organization in America continues to oppose gay marriage.

Focus on the Family, for example, evidently does not appear to see the contradiction.

“Family is the fundamental building block of all human civilizations, and marriage is the foundation of the family. The institution of marriage is unquestionably good for individuals and society, and the health of our culture is intimately linked to the health and well-being of marriage,” the organization says on its website.

In the same post, the group continues, “Battered by high rates of divorce and cohabitation, unwed child-bearing and the push for so-called same-sex ‘marriage’ and civil unions, marriage is in a state of crisis.”

This group does not even attempt to explain how gay marriage tangibly undermines traditional marriage arrangements, and no conservative I’ve asked has been able to give me a satisfactory answer.

Why would traditional marriages be devalued or under threat if homosexuals gets married? If anything, the advance of gay marriages only serves to bolster society’s value for the institution.

The group also details a long list of benefits marriage provides from living longer to better outcomes for children. But in a swipe at gay marriage, the organization asserts, “Research and common sense tell us that girls and boys need role models of both genders.”

Sounds convincing. The problem is that it’s wrong. Not only has research shown that there are no statistical differences in well-being between children of heterosexual couples and those of homosexual couples, but the most recent study shows that homosexuals raise children with better health and well-being outcomes than all other types of parents.

Specifically, a study released this summer found that the children of same-sex parents rate roughly six percent higher than the general population on a number of measures of general health, well-being, and family cohesion. On other measures, including temperament and mood, behavior, mental health, and self-esteem, the children scored the same as children from the general population, in keeping with other studies.

The National Organization for Marriage lists 77 “non-religious” reasons why marriage should be defined solely between a man and a woman. A number of the reasons focus on making sure children are not separated from their biological parents. The group adds, “Every child is entitled to know and be known by both parents.”

It’s true that children have the best measurable outcomes when they are raised by their biological, married parents, but taking these points together, does this group oppose adoption too? Should fostering be banned? What about making sure that children are not raised by step-parents? I wonder if they would propose outlawing remarriage. What’s to be done about single parents?

In its parting shot, the list says, “Same sex marriage amounts to a hostile takeover of civil society by the state.”

No, my darlings. That’s called liberalism.

There is some good news: The sheer number of these anti-gay marriage vigilantes is shrinking, including the Christian ones. I find that encouraging because their hypocrisy gives all Christians and conservatives a bad name.

Numerous mainline Protestant churches are reconsidering their official positions on the issue and making changes to their policies and doctrines.

In my own denomination, Presbyterian USA, one of the top ten largest churches in America, the governing body of the church voted in June by large margins to recognize same-sex marriage as Christian in the church’s constitution. If ratified by a majority of individual presbyteries, the definition of Christian marriage will change from “a man and a woman” to “two people, traditionally a man and a woman.”

Evangelicals — previously known for their strong opposition on the issue — are also changing their minds. In the past decade, evangelical support for gay marriage has more than doubled, according to a poll by the Public Religion Institute.

Nevertheless, these changes do not cover up the fact that leading conservative organizations and top GOP lawmakers who have a disproportionate influence on the public discourse continue to straddle conflicting messages about marriage and family. Just four Republican senators, for example, are on record supporting same-sex marriage.

To my Christian friends who may not be convinced, here is a thought from a Methodist pastor, Adam Hamilton:

“It is possible to be a faithful Christian who loves God and loves the scriptures and at the same time to believe that the handful of verses on same-sex intimacy are like the hundreds of passages accepting and regulating slavery or other practices we today believe do not express the heart and character of God.”

Quite apart from the social benefits of all types of marriage, Jesus called us to love one another. It simply doesn’t make sense to stand in the way of any person who wants to formalize their love within the sacred institution of marriage.

www.huffingtonpost.com/melanie-batley/conservatives-cant-be-pro_b_5805900.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices