split personality
had a conversation with a friend today about the duality of perfomers, how someone can be completely one way in character and completely different out of it. and how a lot of people just don't get this and want you to be one way or the other all the time.

this doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because everyone plays roles and changes their personality depending on the situation. you don't act the same way with your card buddies as you do with senior women. you don't act the same way at work as you do at a football game. everyone shifts their behavior as their perception of the situation around them shifts, too. the old cliche about just be yourself all the time is a load of crap. some parts of us only come out at certain times, or are hidden, by choice, to enhance the comfort of others and ourselves in those surroundings.

i don't consider this being phony or fake. i consider it acting appropriately. i do know some people that are the same all the time, regardless of where they are or who they're with. if that works for them, great. but most of us have a dual, or more, nature.

a question of semantics
Wow, did I ever open up a can of worms. In an online community I am part of, I posed the questions:
1. Would you be happy with "civil union" if it was in all ways, state and federal, equivalent to marriage?
2. Should marriage as used in a legal sense just be gotten rid of, and everyone gay or straight gets civil unions (with the word marriage reserved for something they may or may not choose to do in a religious setting?

What a mess. At no time did I take a stand, but boy did I take it in the shorts. For a lot of people, there was no room for negotiation, semantically or otherwise. And those that would have said OK to #1 were politely castigated.

Got lots of legalese responses which were really good. Got more that were from the heart. Got a headache after a while.

Keep on fighting the good fight, people.

turnabout is political play
Gee, John kerry restated his position on the gay marriage issue. Sort of.

He is still against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages, but he is still opposed to them. The turnabout is in what he would offer. Federal benefits of marriage to anyone married under what the states come up with.

Not a tremendous step, but something.

And proof of how politicians play to their audience. They'll say whatever they think it takes to get elected, and I'm sure half the time they are sweating bullets hoping that the voters forget what they promised or that they can manipulate the news away from whatever promise they are breaking. Look at Bush. Master of misdirection. Get the media frenzied over something, get the voters snapping at it, and sit back and screw a completely different group of people who aren't looking.

Getting harder though. The media eyes and ears are everywhere, and cable news and the internet can bring you every lie, cheat, steal, promise, and victory, with whatever spin they see fit.

it's not what you know...
Oh a good note, saw my pop princess Tuesday night. Britney Spears puts on an incredible show, although I wouldn't take kids to it.

On a more sour and frustrating note, I went to an event at San Diego State today that featured voter registration and a viewing of an original copy of the Declaration of Independence. Voter registration and info area was dead...the radio stations giving away promotional keychains and Seabiscuit t-shirts got more traffic. I talked to one of the workers, she said that not very many students were even asking questions, and that a lot who said they were registered hadn't voted. Their two main reasons? "It doesn't matter" and "I have too much to do.

This was echoed while I was in line to see the DOI. Two kids behind me were getting interviewed. neither of them voted this week. Both said they had too much to do. The reporter interviewing them asked what, and their half-hearted responses were "uh, school and, uh, stuff" and "well, you know, i'm busy". Arrggh! It doesn't take very long. I know that some people don't want to vote because they don't know which candidate to go for, who stands for what, etc. Information is available, internet, newspapers, voter pamphlets. If you have time to watch evening TV, you have time to educate yourself.

Can you imagine if every eligible college student voted? Maybe the politicians would actually listen to their needs.

It's such a vicious circle. Youth doesn't vote, so the politicians focus on issues for older voters, so young people feel left out and unimportant, so they don't vote, etc.

This year's election is expected to be close. Every vote matters. And in the event of a hijacked election, at least you'll know you tried.

alabama, alaska, arizona...
Well, Oregon at least. Nice to see more cities, if not states, deciding that equal protection really means equal protection.

I can't imagine that W will be able to get an amendment passed--doubt he can get the votes. With this momentum, I think the likelihood of 38 states agreeing to the amendment is low.

Unless, of course, W finds some way to change that. Wouldn't put it past him to try.

ahhh, sweet frivolous sunday
Made M-n-M pancakes for breakfast. Went shopping yesterday--got my spring wardrobe, which means clean, well fitting t-shirts that cover my tattoos...my boss does not like them. And made teddy bears at this place called Build-A-Bear. And, wonder of wonders, Godiva was giving out samples, so my buddy and I got these amazing white-chocolate-raspberry truffles. Yummy, not worth $35 PER POUND! Yikes!

Continued doing nothing of import by going out to dinner and an Academy Awards party with another friend (why did I capitalize that?). We won a limo ride, shot the sh*t with pretty much anyone that walked by our table. I love random cool happenings like that.

Sometimes you just need a day to have fun.

ahh, sweet monday
In search of Britney Spears tix for show tomorrow night. I want to go! Have missed her every other time she's been in San Diego. Just decided today that I felt up to it.

But since I'm cheap, I am having to be very creative in finding tickets.

Will tomorrow be the day? Will I get to see my pop princess live-in-the-flesh?

in heteroland
I was in one of the bastions of Heteromaleland, a huge classic car show (with, I must say, some of the most beautiful things I have ever seen on four wheels).

Got on the phone with a friend and we started talking about the most recent gay marriage developments, along with our opinions. I found myself immediately lowering my voice and looking warily around, suddenly concerned with what might happen if I was overheard.

I've been doing that more, because I wonder if there's going to be a backlash because of this, or if gays, as they become more open, will become more targeted. Remember what happened to some african-americans who were politically active during th e 60's-70's. Law enforcement was a problem (though since they are under such a microscope I doubt that they would do anything violent), but the public is more than willing to take matters into their own hands.

It's such a polarizing issue. But I hope that people will realize that this won't hurt them, and that the denial of rights and equality are affecting their family members, friends, co-workers, etc.

I keep telling myself that I'll write about something else. But this is such a major civil rights issue I can't leave it alone.

what a load of Bu**sh**
"Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society," he averred. "Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society." GW Bush (as quoted in The Baltimore Sun)

Huh? There are, Mr. President, other civilized countries with gay marriage (Canada, the Netherlands which, by the way, has a rather low heterosexual marriage rate, Belgium), and their societies have not fallen apart or been weakened. I'd even venture that their rates of violence, teen pregnancy, and educational achievement are on a par with or superior to the US. Tell me, please, how Massachusetts and San Francisco have suffered on account of gay marriages. And don't give me any speeches about protestors. There have been fewer arrests and less violence than result from anti-abortion activists or world trade protests. And the economy? Well, I'd venture that these places are reaping economic rewards as people flock there to marry, or to fight for someone elses right to.

Gay marriage is, without a doubt, far less dangerous than guns, environmental risks, and war, and yet you are willing to let our society be exposed to these. And no arrangement can guarantee the safety and welfare of children. Abuse and neglect know no borders.

Who, really, is weakening us? Who is undermining our stability? I think it's safe to say that it is not two people of any sort who chose to enter into the legal ties of marriage.

s'pose it's a start
Ok, I want Bush out of office, as do many others, so I guess I can understand that a candidate who openly supports gay marriage is hurting his electability. So I can understand why the frontrunners are doing the "no gay marriage but civil unions are ok" and "no constitutional amendment" song-and-dance. And Kerry is smart to claim it's a states' rights issue, since his state looks like it is going to extend equal rights to gays and lesbians. This allows him both consistency in his message and election-year wiggle room.

And we now have Bush on record as not supporting equal rights for all, and wanting to limit the rights of some. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Ma) put it well when he said the Bush will be remembered as the first President to try to write bias back into the Constitution.

At least the right is not still bellowing the "gays are asking for special rights" message. Or maybe it would be better if they did, and further showed the electorate how out of touch they are.

Of course, this is the same electorate that wants to keep rights from a certain group. Sadly, using some of the same arguments used to try to keep interracial marriages from happening. Decline of society, immoral, wrong, etc. Sorry, but I really don't see allowance of interracial marriages then, or gay marriages now, as descending us all into the crapper. I'd venture that network TV is far more distateful than people who decide to commit to each other.