It would take most of our collective digits for my partner and me to tick off all of the times a random stranger has accosted us or yelled homophobic slurs at us from a distance. I started this blog because so many friends expressed surprise whenever I would recount such stories; they had all assumed that “things like that don’t happen any more” — at least not in the liberal Northeast.

Yet the recent spate of anti-gay hate crimes in New York City serves as a vivid reminder that for many, LGBT people are still the target of choice for random expressions of anger and hatred. There have now been seven reported anti-gay hate crimes in Manhattan in May alone, a reported 70 percent increase over this time last year. Anti-gay attacks are not as unusual as most straight people think, particularly in other boroughs of the city, but their sudden frequency and resurgence in Manhattan is something new.

By now, the most well-known is the May 17 murder of Mark Carson, a 32-year-old gay man fatally shot in the head merely for his sexuality. The alleged shooter, Elliot Morales, reportedly was out looking for trouble with two friends, and accosted Carson and a friend and told Carson he looked like a “gay wrestler.” After Morales berated them a bit more, Carson and his friend walked away, but Morales followed them and reengaged them until he asked Carson, “Do you want to die here?”, shot him in the cheek and fled the scene, according to published reports. (Reports on how to spell those names have been mixed, with some papers calling the victim “Marc” and the shooter “Elliott.”)

I attended (and live-tweeted) the May 20 rally and march in honor of Carson. It felt good to come out of my apartment and see that I wasn’t the only one outraged by his murder, but I also worry that marchers will think they’ve done their duty. As one speaker put it, ”Don’t leave here tonight and let this be the last thing that you do.” (Photos of the rally are in the slideshow above; for more, see the New York Times, Village Voice, and Huffington Post.)

To summarize, below is a timeline of the anti-gay attacks that have been reported in Manhattan this May:

• On May 5, a group of men beat up a gay couple, Nick Porto and Kevin Atkins, who were passing by Madison Square Garden. After yelling homophobic slurs, they knocked Porto and Atkins down, punching and kicking them. No arrests have yet been made.
• On May 7 (PDF), a man assaulted another man at Union Square while hurling anti-gay slurs. NYPD have a suspect in custody, according to the Anti-Violence Project (AVP).
• On May 8, men yelled homophobic slurs at a man leaving the gay bar Pieces (which is located just a block from where Mark Carson was shot).
• On May 10, five men approached two gay men standing outside of a club, yelled homophobic slurs at them and beat them savagely, chasing them several blocks. Port Authority Police at the 33rd Street Path Station arrested two of the alleged attackers, while one victim was hurt to so badly he required eye surgery.
• On May 17, Mark Carson was murdered.
• On May 20, three gay men were physically assaulted in two separate incidents.
  • Nightlife promoter Dan Contarino was beaten so badly he required chest surgery. Police have arrested a suspect, Gornell Roman.
  • In a separate incident, two men yelled anti-gay remarks at a gay couple and beat them up, causing another eye injury. Two men have been arrested and charged with assault as a hate crime, AVP reports (PDF): 32-year-old Fabian Ortiz and 23-year-old Pedro Jimenez.
    
• AVP has also said it is investigating a possible hate crime in the assault of a transgender woman in Queens.

In response to the attacks, AVP has announced a series of Community Safety Nights this June. Each Friday, volunteers will go into neighborhood affected by the violence to spread awareness, while AVP will also bring community members together to discuss prevention. The training will be Friday, May 24 at 6 p.m. at AVP, 240 West 35th Street, Suite 200; e-mail Tasha Amezcua to register.

Check back tomorrow for more on how Carson’s murder has impacted me directly and what it is that makes anti-LGBT hate crimes so insidious.

My first blog post since starting law school is live over at the N.Y.U. Review of Law & Social Change Blog.

Mike and I ventured into the city today for New York City Pride 2011, which was conveniently less than 48 hours since Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the just-passed marriage equality bill into law. We knew it would be a huge event, but I hadn’t quite realized it would draw the hundreds of thousands of people NPR has reported attending.

I generally have mixed feelings about pride events. On the one hand, there’s something very empowering about being among so many LGBTerrific folks and allies, but I also cringe at some of the overtly adult and stereotype-reinforcing behavior at what are often advertised as family friendly events.

One of the march’s grand marshals, activist and sex columnist extraordinaire Dan Savage, has expressed similar sentiments on his blog, so I felt a little less guilty about my presence. (And it was a very festive mood, so it was hard to feel too bad, but don’t let them hear you calling the festivities a parade!) Dan rode with his husband and co-founder of the It Gets Better Project, Terry Miller.

We also saw the likes of marriage equality supporters Gov. Cuomo and openly gay City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Since they were marching, they probably managed to avoid hearing “Born This Way,” which nearly every musical group, band and float was playing.

Our friend Jon Cruz, who took this lovely picture of the aforementioned politicians, wore a get-up that included rainbow-colored wings, and he was quite the attraction for photographers. If you see a man in glasses, a pink cowboy hat and rainbow wings in any photos, leave a comment below!

A video Mike took of the Flaggots, a talented group with a crass-yet-empowering name. Note the music.

The New York State Senate just voted 33-29 to pass marriage equality. There had been hope we could win by a single vote, so it was amazing to hear moving speeches from former anti-marriage Republican Senators Saland (who represents my old haunt, Poughkeepsie), Grisanti and Kruger.

This vote was by no means a done deal. When the GOP swept the election after a Democrat-controlled Senate defeated marriage two years ago, it was widely thought we had no shot at it this year. Gov. Cuomo did an impressive job of getting equality the attention it deserves, and I thank him personally for giving us equal rights in his state. This vote means even more to the people it affects than I expect the senators realize.

Read more about the bill’s passage from the New York Times, and read what I said in real time on my Twitter feed, @gayinpublic.

Correction: Oh gosh, was it really already two years ago, not just one? Spooky.

The other indicator I needed to update was meeting up with my friend K for lunch. She told me I was slacking, or more specifically, “You need to update already!”

And so I present to you, below, the first piece I ever wrote in what would become the tradition of Gay in Public.

7/08/06

It’s so strange to me that it’s almost funny; holding hands in public can be an act of defiance without your even realizing it. While I hold grandiose notions of reestablishing social norms, all I really want to do when I’m walking down the street is to touch the man I love. I understand how public displays of affection might make people uncomfortable, but I honestly and truly do not see what makes our’s so threatening or even interesting. Reactions to us fall so neatly into very distinct categories— admirers, detractors, gaze-avoiders, and deer caught in headlights. People are lucky I have a sense of humor and that I’m not one of those people who backs into the guy tailgating him.

I have no great philosophical point to put forward. I just wanted to reflect on how bizarre it is to be thought weird for doing something that feels more natural than I imagined anything ever could. While I’m an expert at finding flaws in myself, I’ve never been one to abuse other people, but it seems to me that some people turn the irrational judgment I use on myself on their peers, even complete strangers. Why is that? I suppose one’s hatred of oneself might drive a need to find something else to hate more. I can’t believe that people could learn hatred from their upbringing and simply never question it, but then, they say that people will always surprise you. I guess that’s what I hate—complacent ignorance, unexamined beliefs.

Since then, we’ve seen couples meet and get married; we’ve even been at some of those weddings. We’ve endured two summers apart—one when I worked in Minnesota, and another when he traveled the country—and a year separated (physically) by an ocean while I taught in France.

Even when we’ve been “near” each other, we’ve still been in different states, which many people would consider “long-distance,” but I’d like to think we’ve weathered it all rather well. After all, we did put together a helpful guide for our dear friends, one of the aforementioned couples who went through a similar Franco-American trial, and who are also coming through unscathed. In fact, they got married!

I worked all day and can’t come to see you yet, Mike, but let me squeeze at least this under the wire: Happy anniversary.

I read “Hero” pretty soon after finishing my year teaching English in France and returning to the U.S. I had a little bit of time off, which I soon learned I hated, and Moore’s book was one of the things that pulled me out of my funk and really got me engaged in the world again. It’s the story of Thom, a d-list superhero with no codename and less-than-ideal powers, who’s also gay and the son of someone who’s essentially a stand-in for Superman. It was just the kind of book I could have used as a teenager.

Moore was also a writer and producer of some note, and his website was home to a disturbing but influential list of all the gay comic book characters who have been killed off, a trend he said spurred him to write his own novel. It went on to win a Lambda Award.

“I have always been enthralled with comic books and superheroes, and I’ve always believed there should be a gay superhero. Not as a joke, not as a supporting character, not as a victim, not as a token, but as a real front-and-center hero. I’ve always been surprised by how few gay heroes there are in comic books, and I decided I would write the definitive coming-of-age story of the world’s first gay teen superhero,” he said what has become an oft-quoted inverview on his website.

I’ve long been awaiting the TV version of “Hero,” which is apparently still in development, and the sequel to the novel he said he was writing, which I doubt will ever see the light of day. At the very least, I hope his work—and the impetus behind it—can gain more exposure, perhaps moving the world a little closer to the one he tried to create through it.

On Glee, we watched as Blaine (Darren Criss) inexpertly serenaded a would-be boyfriend at the latter’s workplace, a Gap store. Too bad the older guy and his boss didn’t appreciate the very public advances, leaving him without a job. And through it all, Kurt (Chris Colfer) is heartbroken because he thinks Blaine is going to serenade him, and when he finally tells him, Blaine admits he doesn’t have any clue what he’s doing.

This passes for realistic on Glee.

There are a few great things going on there. First, it’s exactly the kind of thing you’d expect in any other teen drama, without any added drama about coming out, how incredibly hard! it is to be gay, or any other extraneous plot. Sure, it’s a ridiculous storyline—how quickly do you think they’d get kicked out of a real store?—but it’s actually very believable by Glee’s standards. (Let’s recall that no one seemed to think anything of having a high school Glee club do the music at a wedding, and people were only mildly indignant at the prospect of shooting a girl out of a clearly deadly cannon.)

More importantly, I think, it showed us a more relatable side of Blaine. Up until now I’ve been pretty open in my criticism of what’s seemed a perfect character. Last week, he admitted he’s clueless about relationships and is afraid of messing things up with the Kurt, the one person who seems most likely to actually become his boyfriend. (The producers can tease us all they want, but it’s pretty obvious they’ll end up dating.)

Later in the week, I found myself nearly dying from laughing at the Valentine’s Day episode of Community. In the second plot line, Britta (Gillian Jacobs), the outspoken, leftist nonconformist thinks very highly of herself because she has a friend who’s a lesbian. She lords her superior acceptance of lesbians over her younger, less worldly friend Annie, who discovers that Britta’s friend is actually a straight woman who thinks Britta’s the lesbian and also thinks she’s the bee’s knees because of her willingness to be friends with someone who’s so unjustly treated.

Their determination to prove themselves as the least homophobic people at the school culminates with them actually kissing at the school dance.

Click through to see the kiss: Community – Ep 215: A Lesbian Kiss – Video – NBC.com.

I come from an educational background where people could occasionally be equally headstrong in their desire to be the most accepting, least homophobic, etc. and it was impressive to see those actions so perfectly lampooned. There certainly are people who want to prove how cool they are by having a gay friend, and it’s a very weird experience to be the object of their hetero-counternormative affections. (And for the record, I’ve certainly been accused of being as politically righteous as “Britta the Needlessly Defiant.”)

On a more personal note, today marks the third anniversary of this blog. While my first post came Feb. 24, 2008, it was inspired by the first Valentine’s Day meal Mike and I shared, this one at a restaurant in Princeton. At one point during the meal I found myself thinking that no one was treating us too weirdly, then how strange a thought that was to have, and then how bizarre it was to me that no one else had to think that way. This flighty thought association led here and ultimately to the firestorm of comments regarding my thoughts on Chick-Fil-A, by far my most-viewed post ever.

Thanks for sticking around, folks! Happy Valentine’s Day!

Iowa’s Supreme Court surprised the rest of the country when, citing a history of leadership in civil rights, it ruled in 2009 that same-sex couples there had the right to wed. Anti-gay activists ran a successful campaign to dismiss three of those assenting justices, marking the first time since voting was instituted in ’60s that Supreme Court justices were not reelected.

On Tuesday, those same political forces pushed a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage through the Iowa House with a 62-37 vote, according to the Iowa Independent, with three Democrats joining all of their Republican colleagues to pass the measure. It would still need to pass in the state Senate, which looks unlikely, and then pass through both bodies again in two years before it could even go to a general vote.

Those who voted “yes” used arguments like this one from Rep. Rich Anderson (R-Clarinda), as quoted in the Independent:

“If we remove the gender requirement for marriage, there is no rational basis to define the number,” he said. “So we open up the possibility of the constitutional recognition of polygamous relationships. That’s a slippery slope. And I don’t know where the logic is to draw the line. We wouldn’t recognize incestuous relationships between two consenting adult brothers and sisters. That raises up within us disgust, and we can’t accept that. We draw lines. We define marriage.”

Enter Zach Wahls, a 19-year-old college student whose parents are lesbians. Before the House voted, he explained why it would be harmful and how the claims that gay couples can’t raise healthy children are wrong. His words may have fallen on deaf ears in the Iowa House Republicans, but he gave a truly inspiring speech that has rightfully received national attention.

Update: Zach Wahls and his family speak about the aftershocks of his testimony.

It was with a bit of a surprise yesterday morning that I opened the New York Times to see the article “A Chicken Chain’s Corporate Ethos Is Questioned by Gay Rights Advocates.” It seems the NYT has finally noticed LGBT folks’ growing frustration with a company that claims to be “family friendly” while at the same time working to deny many families basic rights. Talk about political déjà vu!

It’s never been a secret that Chick-fil-A is a right-wing Christian organization. They’re closed on Sundays, which founder S. Truett Cathy has reportedly said is “our way of honoring God,” and the chain frequently gives out religious toys with its kids meals. Early this month, the story broke that a local eatery was sponsoring anti-gay marriage conferences, this time in my home state of Pennsylvania. For those with strong stomaches, there’s a video on the website for The Art of Marriage, the organization behind the conferences. In the classic style of these kinds of religious promos, it’s overproduced, features unnecessary sports metaphors (ooh, a spat is just like football!), and waits a couple minutes to wallop you with its true intent.

The ensuing brouhaha led to this ridiculous statement from Chick-fil-A corporate on their Facebook page (as preserved on Wikipedia):

First and foremost, thanks for your patience as we made sure we gathered the facts in regards to recent postings. We have determined that one of our independent Restaurant Operators in Pennsylvania was asked to provide sandwiches to two Art of Marriage video seminars. As our fans, you know we do our best to serve our local communities, and one of the ways we do that is by providing food to schools, colleges, civic groups, businesses, places of worship, not-for-profit groups, etc. At his discretion, the local Operator agreed to simply provide a limited amount of food. Our Chick-fil-A Operators and their employees try very hard every day to go the extra mile in serving ALL of our customers with honor, dignity and respect.

Like many right-wing politicians, Chick-fil-A wants us to know that they’re concerned with our “honor” (read: wallets), but that they’re still going to fight tooth and nail to make sure we don’t have equal rights. I wonder, would they expect anyone to swallow this if they provided food for a group that rallied against a religious or ethnic minority? It seems people are finally starting to realize what’s going on, and I’m hoping it hits the chain in the “honor” too. You can’t have it both ways: either you’re for everyone’s rights and you don’t try to oppress anyone, or you put some people above others. You can’t have your greasy chicken and eat it too.

Since the article was published, the company has responded with another statement from President Dan Cathy, which netizens have already picked apart. Here’s the section I found most significant:

Chick-fil-A’s Corporate Purpose is “To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us, and to have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.”  As a result, we will not champion any political agendas on marriage and family. This decision has been made, and we understand the importance of it.  At the same time, we will continue to offer resources to strengthen marriages and families. To do anything different would be inconsistent with our purpose and belief in Biblical principles.

On its face, his pledge sounds progressive, but that caveat at the end is telling. What would actually change if they continue to offer those “resources” at the exclusion of LGBT families? Political acts aren’t confined to campaign donations.

Being a vegetarian, it may be easier for me to resist Chick-fil-A’s processed meat sandwiches. But I will admit that their waffle fries are delicious, so don’t think I’m sidestepping this sacrifice completely. I haven’t shopped at Target since it has shown it will say one thing (that it supports LGBT people) and do another (fund anti-gay candidates, even after promising not to). And don’t get me started on Wal-Mart, where I never go. I’m not a rich man, and I feel the pinch of pricier stores and the pain of no waffle fries, but I’m not willing to put any dollars—however few of them—directly against my self-interest or what I believe is right.