An article from The Advocate of 9/20/00, at the end of this posting, points up an attitude we're up against as gay or bisexual men. Note the comment about the dissenting juror in the second trial.

Some people in the general public can be our more immediate enemy than any established group (church, political organization, etc.) because their hatred for us has been ingrained since childhood. Rodgers & Hammerstein wrote a song in the musical "South Pacific" in which they suggested that children "have to be taught to hate and fear -- (they) have to be carefully taught."

The worst things you can call a man in our society are "faggot" and "cocksucker." When a straight or a closeted gay/bisexual is accused in this way, it requires that he defend himself with the best excuse he can come up with, as did the Scottish boxer who refuted the rumors of his being gay by protesting that he was "only a mama's boy who loved his mother's cooking." I consider that a dumb-ass excuse, but people buy into "mama's boy" with a lot more grace than a "Yes, you got it right" kind of answer.

"Filthy" is the connotation these words convey, and that is what we are in the estimation of many -- unclean lepers who deserve a violent death, from biblical stoning to emasculation with a razor blade in the back seat of a beat-up Chevy. That's what we are up against.

My only consolation for this sort of socially acceptable, savage attitude is in remembering that this is the way people thought about (and some still do) African-Americans and Jews for almost the entirety of my lifetime.

If the dissenting juror in the second trial (see below) had spoken of an African-American or a Jew as he did about the gay murder victim, a fellow juror would likely have taken it upon her/himself to break the code of secrecy applied to such deliberations and report the comment to the authorities.

There must come a time in our culture when verbal viciousness inspired by hatred or dislike for another's sexual orientation raises enough anger in those who hear it to cause them to respond in a manner that shames the speaker.

A prime example of this is one of the closing scenes in "In and Out," the film comedy based on an Oscar-winning actor's "outing," during his acceptance speech, of his gay drama coach in high school. In the film, as the teacher thus exposed is shunned by school authorities while the senior class graduates, a straight student in the graduating class -- angered by the officials' bigotry -- stands and shouts, "I am gay!" In rapid succession others join him in spontaneous protest until the whole class, plus many teachers, parents and siblings are on their feet proclaiming that they, too, are gay.

I don't consider this an unattainable goal in so-called real life. As my straight, re-born Christian cousin said to me with a pat on the shoulder as a means of making me feel comfortable, "Gay is OK!" He and others of his ilk have come a long way, primarily because of discovering that someone whom they admire -- a friend or family member or politician or other public figure -- is gay and living a "normal and moral" life.

We read that, in private, even the family of Mary Cheney, gay daughter of Dick and Lynne Cheney, and her lesbian partner of several years are accepted as an integral part of the family unit. Mary's lover is said to be "like a second daughter." How the Cheneys handle this in public is another matter, but that they have seemingly reconciled themselves to it in private life, should be counted as a giant leap forward toward social acceptance.

This is not to say that all of our enemies will come around. The adamant of hatred will imprison some elements of society forever, but I do believe that social intolerance of that hatred is on the horizon and will push it into a corner and lock it in.

May the worst epithet you can apply to a person become "disgusting homophobe."
===================

(From The Advocate)

Headline:
Ex-football player gets 20 years for vicious gay murder

Text:
A former high school football player was sentenced to 20 years in jail for killing a gay friend with whom he had had sex, the Tucson Arizona Daily Star reports.

Richard Bell had already served seven years for the killing of Candido Sanavria but was given a new trial after claiming that his defense attorney had been ineffective. Bell was found guilty of second-degree murder last month.

“You butchered the victim,” superior court judge Richard Nichols said at sentencing. Bell stabbed Sanavria two dozen times with a knife, until the knife bent. He then strangled Sanavria with a telephone cord and retrieved another knife to stab Sanavria through the heart.

At his trial Bell argued that he was protecting himself from a sexual advance. At the sentencing Bell apologized to Sanavria’s family. “I never wanted to be the one responsible for breaking your hearts,” he said. “I’m sorry I didn’t know how to handle the situation better.”

However, Sanavria’s sister, Marysol Galvez, said that Sanavria, who was nicknamed Cuquito, would never attempt to rape Bell, as he contended. “You knew Cuquito was gay,” she said. “Everyone in the neighborhood knew it. You killed him because you didn’t want anyone to know that you had sex with a gay man.’’

In the first trial, Bell had been convicted of first-degree murder. A juror at the second trial wrote to Sanavria’s mother to say that ten members of the jury had wanted to convict Bell of first-degree murder, but one juror was adamantly opposed. “He basically felt that this gay guy got what he deserved,” juror Russell Martin said. “He said that if anyone tried to do that to him, he’d do the same thing.”