My Christmas (A Fictional Exploration)

I want to celebrate Christmas. It has been too long that I have done so.

It is not for lack of trying. There have been too many long pauses and silent moments between phone calls, E-mails and text messages. Family disconnected from me. There are too many reasons to spell out as to why. There are too many fingers worth pointing.

Nothing is OK at home, either. My so-called partner left. Again, there are too many reasons to parse out. My so-called friends already took sides on social media. I know why – I am the auslander. I was not born here. This is not my home.

Perhaps this Christmas is my getaway. Going way from what? Leaving behind an ex with a list of crimes against my own humanity. Leaving behind a clique who decided to close the wagon circle in front of me. Leaving behind a three-quarter empty apartment that was supposed to be full of life and vibrancy.

What do I really have left? What about my so-called job? It never fulfilled me to the point of wanting to do more with the company, my superiors, my co-workers and anyone else involved in what I do. Maybe I should leave that behind – albeit temporarily. 

History

-->

This is for what I get for being too young to remember any of the Civil Rights Movement.

Today, my attention at work was focused on my iPhone. I was following Twitter and the debates that transpired in the Senate chamber of the Minnesota legislature. Hours of debate ensued – sometimes affirming, sometimes contentious. But, I had to experience it from my cube at my day job.

It was no different than the previous Thursday, when the House chamber took up HF1054 – the bill to change the language of the Defense of Marriage Act in Minnesota towards an inclusive writ for all couples to marry in the eyes of the state. After a series of amendments and some debate, the House passed the bill 75-59.

Thursday turned into Monday. I felt the world was at edge. There were plenty of assurances that it would pass, but there were plenty of skeptics. The pundits considered the Senate safe for passage, compared to the House. I was just as nervous as anyone.

My Long-Winded, One-Sided Conversation About Minnesota's Marriage Amendment

-->

Four years ago, the voters in my home state of California decided to end a new tradition as sanctioned by the state’s courts – same-gender marriage.

This new tradition was created by the then-Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco Gavin Newsom when he defied state law and opened up the marriage rolls. A court case later, and the state was given the license to extend the same legal and taxation rights to same-gender couples. Then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger simply slowed it to happen.

A majority of Californians voted to overturn this decree. The case is still in the courts – again. Yet, several thousand couples are still legally married. That is my home state in a nutshell.

For the past eight years or so, I have been a legal resident of another state – Minnesota. It has been home to me, just like California. Whenever I roam from my home in Robbinsdale to work in Minneapolis and across the state, there are many reminders of home. My own neighborhood reminds me of the place where I grew up – Reseda, in the San Fernando Valley. I can pick out places in the Twin Cities that are part-Los Angeles, part-San Francisco, part-Orange County…etc. The farmlands are real, though I could be driving through the San Joaquin Valley as I was going through Hutchinson or Austin. There is beauty in California equal to the Brainerd Lakes just north of Los Angeles between Bakersfield and Tehachapi.

Waxing poetic between my native state and my current home would go on for paragraphs, but there is one common agenda item that needs to be discussed here.

In a month’s time, voters in Minnesota will be asked to codify the state Constitution once and for all to define the legal and tax code status of marriage as between two distinct genders. What this means is, if enacted, that a same-gender couple could never be able to ask the state or ay municipal government to recognize their coupling on equal legal and taxation basis.

Never before has this state used the Constitution to distinguish cultural definitions. I do not think there ever had been laws distinguishing the roles of gender, race and ethnicity in this state before. Frankly, it goes against what this state had been known for: Welcoming others through a notion of “live and let live.”

Over a year ago, that “live and let live” mentality was shed aside inside the State Capitol. The legislative majority in both the state Senate and House thought it was best to put forth a motion to create this ballot measure than to tackle more pressing issues. On July 1, the state of Minnesota stopped operating on a general basis because the budget was shoved aside for a late night debate and vote to put this amendment on the ballot. Consider the “sacrifice” the legislature made by imposing moral authority than fiscal responsibility.

With a month to go before Election Day, we are asked by one of the campaigns to have conversations with each other about this proposed amendment to the state Constitution. Frankly, I am not good with one-on-one conversations with people who have made up their minds about this issue. I get nervous talking about issues like this to people I do now know. No, seriously…

Why do we need to have conversations about this ballot measure? First, it is best to remind you that that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are a distinct cultural grouping within American society. Because its opponents are arguing to restrict rights against this cultural group means it recognizes that fact. This is a piece of information one might need in an argument.

Secondly, I am reminded how fair minded Minnesotans can be. I am also reminded that there are plenty of non-Minnesota natives residing here. Sounds like California, to me.

I am scared, however. I am scared that if it passes, there will be retribution against us. I fear that all of the progress we made on both the state and national level will be reversed. I have seen nations go through turmoil because of cultural divisions only to see even the most innocent of citizens shunned away – or worse.

I am also angry. Every time I see a “Yes” yard sign or a billboard, I feel as I am witnessing a new form of Apartheid – starting here in this state. I may have been a toddler or too young to have witnessed the Civil Rights Movement in this country, but I have seen other movements take root. I have witnessed and studied how power can turn nations into virtual living hells. The so-called Tea Party movement is still a minority that is after a set of groups equaling a majority of citizens of this country. Sounds familiar? Think South Africa after World War II or the military governments in Latin America in the late 1900s.

However, I am hopeful. When I witness the work of Minnesotans United For All Families, I see an amazing coalition of diverse people coming together for this cause. I am amazed how many of my heterosexual counterparts are wearing “No” t-shirts, posting “No” yard signs, sporting “No” stickers and buttons.

Yet, I ask our allies one question: Will you be there after the election? Will you be there as we continue to keep our eyes on the prize? Will you help us have the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act pass through Congress – and so forth?

Will you be there alongside me, when I talk about automobiles knowing full well that I am an out gay man?

This is only one voice in the wind here. My voice is not as strong in this arena. This voice has seen too much division in the country I am a citizen of. It took me most of my life to find a place where my voice is welcomed, despite knowing it may not be welcomed universally in other arenas.

If this prompts a conversation, please be peaceful. Please arrive at the table armed with an open mind and a kind heart – and nothing else. We can have that conversation and maybe we can walk away either understanding the issue or agreeing to disagree.

My bottom line is simple: A “no” vote will erase these fears. It may not forgive the state legislature for letting the state slide into last year’s shutdown by virtue of putting this proposed amendment on this ballot. It will provide food to this soul knowing he can continue the work I do as a re-employed contributor to the tax base of Minnesota.

Look, I will admit being selfish here. Let me extend my thoughts here to include the many same-gender couples I know – friends, acquaintances, foes and rivals alike – who will be severely affected by the ratification of this amendment. They will not see the tax benefits from an equal marital status. They might not have any spousal benefits ranging from post-death impacts to healthcare considerations.

After seeing my home state go through this in the courts and at the ballot box, it is my hope that this amendment will be defeated in November. I do not want to see this state go through a form of Apartheid and having to fight it out in the courts.

With that said – just vote “no.”

My Simple Message for a Contentious Year

This will be a difficult year...

The reason why I said this is because we are at a crossroads as a nation. One side has been perpetuating a shoestring method of survival where only those who have money are doing what they can to spend it. Then, there are those who are less fortunate who are trying to survive. However, they are the ones that believe in a nation of equals where all citizens enjoy the same rights - even while there are still gaps that need to be closed.

Then, there's the other side. The side that would rather have a caste system based on cultural identity. The side who's angry that the nature of faith has been challenged because a different kind of coupling - one that is considered unnatural by religious texts - want to same legal recognition as their status quo counterparts. That side wants to put a stop to civil recognition of same-gender couples under the writ of marriage.

Last spring, as the state of Minnesota was about to lose its budgetary balance, the state's legislature voted to put on this year's Presidential ballot a measure that would amend the state constitution to permanently disallow the definition of marriage to be accorded to same-gender couples. In my mind's eye, the weight of measure goes beyond the legal status of same-gender couples. It is an invitation to reverse the progress my culture and community made since rioting on the streets of the West Village in New York City back in 1969.

It is heartbreaking to know that people would support such a change to the state constitution - people I consider friends, colleagues, acquaintances, former co-workers, etc. I understand that it is part of their lives and beliefs to see me and my people to be unequal as American citizens and residents of this state.

This goes against the grain of my upbringing.

A Disappointed Former Baseball Writer's Last Shout

How can I get mad at Major League Baseball?

It’s like a friend or a lover that decided to gossip about you en route to stabbing you in the back. While you tell said person to cease and desist, they continue doing it. Somehow it got back to you that the behavior has not stopped. In the end, there was no choice but to end the relationship.

The only difference with my relationship with Major League Baseball was that the [insert word here] was out in the open. Everyone knew what the Commissioner’s Office, the ball clubs, several managers and a good number of the players were doing. You followed their Tweets, blogs, Facebook updates and their coverage in the media. 

A Poem - Perhaps the Reason Why I'm Still Single

Originally Written in Early 2005

There will be no “good-night” tonight

No “I love you,” or salutations

Such as “honey” or “sweetie” or “darling”

There will no longer be a need

Or a want…or, a desire

To share a common space

Clothed or naked, tonight

Tomorrow or…evermore!

There will no longer be a trust

Or, an understanding…or, a care

As to how things were, or will ever be

There will never be a time, a place

Or, a meal shared together

A movie, a ballgame

Even time with our friends

Either yours or mine

There will be no more lies

No more excuses or aversions

To my issues as you play out yours!

There will be no more tolerance

To your so-called love for me

You say you love me

I did, and then you blew it!

Now leave me alone!

What Are You "Occupying?"

In all actuality, I am a part of the 99% the “Occupy” movement has been talking about.

I am working – temporarily. I am also doing side projects and guiding my business and writing endeavors towards new plateaus. In all, I’m doing what I can to pay rent and my immediate bills.

Beyond that, it’s a bloody mess. I prefer not to discuss my business here. I’ve learned that’s dangerous water in social media. This is why I’ve been silent about things, such as employment and other worries.

What I need to address here is a concern over the reaction to the “Occupy” movement. When you get a cross-section of people coming together towards a single cause, there has to be an understanding that you are there for a single reason agreed upon everyone in the movement. If there is partial agreement, the movement cannot move at a pace preferably by everyone involved.

The partial agreement issue is the open chasm where divergent issues can also be lumped into the argument. From what I’ve seen via video and photos, side agendas were present along with the primary cause. This is discerning if the cry is to “tax the rich,” “make Wall Street accountable,” “make the Government accountable”…and so forth.

What happens when side agendas get thrown in the mix is the presence of a scapegoat. This is where I need to express my concern. Once you have the Left and the Right meet, there will be a great argument over each side’s peripheral agendas. Issues ranging from the environment, universal civil rights, immigration…among others…could be thrown on the table weakening the main reasons behind the “Occupy” movement. Once this happens, then the movement will begin to become irrelevant and lose focus on what’s important.

Then, the scapegoat is unleashed. I could name the potential suspects, but that would further dilute the movement. Yet, we need someone to blame. Who? Which collective entity? What if the scapegoat was part of your movement? You might as well amputate your own appendage that this point and give up on the cause.

My only caveat to this movement is simple: Please stay on your message. Leave your other pressing agendas at home. If you want job creation, make sure it’s jobs for everyone – not just for your bloc. If it means credit forgiveness, then it should be for every American in debt – not just you and those who only share your philosophy.

In a democracy, the people in power are obligated to listen to the voices of many – not just a few.  This is how it is supposed to work in this country for the past two centuries and so forth. I can only hope for something good will come from these “occupations.”