March, 1991

GAY PEOPLE'S CHRONICLE

Page 3

Letters

Clearer Visions

To the Editor:

We are concerned about the impression of Visions which was presented in the February issue of the Gay People's Chronicle. True, the flyer which you referred to was a surprise to the steering committee as well as to those who received it. The wording was the expression of a single person who was given the job of arousing interest and notifying people on the mailing list of the meeting on January 19.

As you stated in your article the group has not arrived at a formal statement of purpose and goals. The executive board, now that it has been formed, is to consider formulating such a statement at the next meeting.

Further, the vote to open the membership to heterosexuals was not passed. The

vote, as you reported, was 16 to 15 for

acceptance of the amendment to the by-

laws. However, the by-laws state that

amendments must have a two-thirds majority. Since the vote did not comply with that requirement it did not pass.

We are a new organization trying to bring together the disparate segments of the area's lesbian-gay community and are undergoing growing pains. We trust that our actions will be perceived as efforts to unite the community, not create further fragmentation. Any help that you can give in your publication would be greatly appreciated. Constructive criticism is hard to come by these days-especially in the lesbian-gay community.

For the executive board, Arthur L. Kaltenborn, Jr. Corresponding Secretary

We stand corrected. At the meeting, we were told the vote had passed the amendment. Ed.

Two variety shows

To the Editor:

I am writing to express my disappointment in not being able to attend the 1991 Women's Variety Show. Each year I am told that the Variety Show is a women-only event and each year I lament, (hey! that rhymes!). I truly do understand that some women need a safe women-only space but why the Variety Show? I feel a lot of sadness that society has pushed us so far apart when we have so many similarities.

I am sorry I won't get to go, I won't get to see some of my friends perform. I won't get to chat with many East Side lesbian women who I don't see except at these events. I won't see Patty M. or Marsha; I won't see the Raging Hormones with that wild woman on the drums.

I hope that maybe next year the powers that be in the Variety Show will consider two nights. One night, the first, of course, could be the traditional women-only show, then the next night could be open to the public, non-discriminatory and perhaps more money could be made.

I am one of those gay men who have a lot of lesbian friends and I want to be with them at the Women's Variety Show!

Please consider some alternatives around the entrance policy of this event so we can all enjoy what, I've heard, is the best show of the year.

Can't we do this together?

Zak Haley

Lorain gay radio needs backers

To the Editor:

WOBC 91.5 FM is a non-commercial radio station affiliated with Oberlin Col-

lege which serves all of Lorain County. Monday evenings at 7:30 we air This Way Out, the international lesbian and gay newsmagazine distributed by Pacifica Radio. We would like to inform the Chronicle's readers in Lorain County that this program can be heard on WOBC as well as on Cleveland radio.

More important is the future of this program on WOBC. Considering the size of our budget, it is an expensive program to run, and we are looking for interested groups or individuals to help defray the cost of carrying this program. Parties interested in ensuring that we can contonue to carry this progran should contact: David Seubert, Business Manager; WOBC-FM, Wilder Hall, Oberlin, OH 44074, or call 775-8107.

David Seubert

Center ignores color peoples of

To the Editor:

First and foremost, I would like to correct a statement that was made in a skit at the Women's Variety Show. Sistahparty is neither sponsored by the Center, nor is the Center the fiscal agent of Sistahparty. Though Leigh Robertson was asked to make the correction in her column, she chose not to for reasons that I still don't understand. When requested to make this correction at the open house that is to be given in her honor by the lesbian community, she felt it wouldn't serve a real purpose since there possibly wouldn't be a representative of Sistahparty there the open house is the same day as the organization's business meeting. As a member of Sistahparty, I clearly see why she should

hundred members-without the monies or

the personnel at the Center's disposal? I It's my ad, okay?

would like Center board president Bob Laycock to answer this question. My thinking is that the Center just didn't care enough to discover ways of tapping into this community.

In the December Center board meeting, a member of the board who is also a member of Sistahparty finally started serious fiscal agency contract negotiations with the Center. The issues brought up by some of the members, particularly Bob Laycock, are as follows:

They didn't know the leadership of Sistahparty.

What if there was a leadership shift? How can they trust that the monies wouldn't be misappropriated? How could the Center have some kind of control that would insure that no such misappropriation would incur?

Could they trust that Sistahparty wouldn't threaten the Center's 501 (c) (3) status?

Fiscal Agency relationships, as set in the usual contracts, make many of these issues just plain racist. I have personally spoken to Leigh Robertson, and she has given me her personal assurance that she would like to hire someone to conduct a workshop on racism with the Center's board, as soon as possibly this month. From talking with her I sense that she is completely open and wants to make positive strides to address these kinds of issues. But, Leigh, and in particular Bob Laycock, even if you are made aware of the many issues that nonewhite gay and lesbian communities face, including racism from the white gay and lesbian community, non of this awareness and newly developed skills means anything if you don't really care!

Valerie R. Griffith

do this, which leads me to the second issue Where to draw line?

I want to address.

Five years ago, at the possibly stilltender age of 23, I got involved with the Gay and AIDS hotline with the hope that I could do something substantial in the gay and lesbian community other than to patronize the bars and clubs. I eventually joined the board of what was the predecessor of the Center. I ended up dropping out because of the continual leadership change and the lack of genuine interest in reaching out to the non-white gay and lesbian communities.

In those five years the Center remains consistently indifferent and distrustful of the non-white gay and lesbian communities. This is most recently evident in its handling of the request by Sistahparty that the Center become the group's fiscal agent.

Sistahparty is an organization/community of lesbians of color that evolved because of the need to have an organization, in which they could grow together, empower each other and address the special needs and concerns that are issues in their lives because they are, in fact lesbians of color. Though some of the members have volunteered to assume positions of leadership, business is conducted with the philosophy of modified consenus.

In November of last year, the request that the Center become the fiscal agent of Sistahparty was first put on the agenda. One issue that was raised was why Sistahparty just couldn't become a program under the Center. If this had happened, the Center would have subtly taken credit for the existence of Sistahparty in form, if not in fact. The Center would also have directed the future of the group and had control over the agenda of the group.

In the past, the Center, or one of its many predecessors, has asserted that it has been hard traditionally to reach out to and provide programming for the AfricanAmerican and Hispanic gay and lesbian communities. If this was true, how is it that four lesbians of color, in less than three months, were able to recruit close to a

To the Editor:

In the January and February issues of the paper, two people wrote in to complain about wording in the personals. Their concern was that using words like butch, fem, straight-acting, no fats, fems, dopers, etc., could cause internal homophobia.

We have a couple of answers to those people:

First of all, the very fact that the personals are personal should protect firstamendment rights for those placing the ads. The Chronicle should not be responsible for preferences of letter writers. If it were, they could refuse to print letters which begin controversies like this.

The Chronicle already eliminates sexually explicit wording in these ads; however, if you look at many, you can tell which color and on which side the handkerchief will fall. A creative person will be able to submit an ad without butch, fem, etc., and get the meaning across.

If people are spending money for an ad to seek a companion, they should have the right to request the respondent to be the type of person they would be interested in. If the Chronicle were to go along with this complaint, where would it end? The use of GWM, GWF, GBM, or GBF would be construed as both sexism and racism. Older people might start to complain about

66

Last month I bit my lip, sat on my hands, and cursed to myself as I read Susan Schnur's "Slurs in the Personals" attack on lesbian bigotry. I authored an ad quoted' 'normal' non-dyke like me" that seemed to prick the short hairs on the back of necks of the politically-correct. In February another raised fist in the letters section called for an "inclusive attitude" in personal ads.

I can not help but respond in deference to those offended and in expiation of my own choice of words. The intent of my ad was to attract the kind of woman who interests me, and it worked. I am absolutely not alone in disassociating from the stereotype. I as a woman, an individual with creative preferences. I am part of the homosexual community who exists. I am not straight-acting. I'm not dyke-like. I am an individual.

If you are wounded by my choice of words, I apologize. If you are angered by my choices, perhaps you should rethink the meaning of bigotry. I admit my intolerance. I am discerning in my choices but with the knowledge that homosexuals come in every shape, size; have every "look;" have long hair, short; are married, aren't; are smart, take drugs, are butch, have big feet, wear glasses. . . whatever, there are choices to be made. I advertise for the kind of person who interests me, and, in writing my personal ad, I validate the existence of gay women who may not consider themselves to be "dykes."

However, just because I don't like apples doesn't make me a fruitophobe. Understand that I, too, continue my own personal struggle within the context of my "gayness," and that it is not my intention to be hurtful or to raise the ire of the community of my family.

Odd position

To the Editor:

Carol Radinsky

In your answer to Karen Schneiderman's letter about the personal advertisements in your newspaper, you stated that you could not limit freedom of speech in the ads. Therefore, you would not ban homophobic and hetersexist terms.

However, your classifieds specifically ban sexually explicit ads, and you say that you "reserve the right to edit to conform to our policy and style . . .”

Therefore, it seems that homophobia and heterosexism are okay as long as they are tastefully expressed.

This is an odd position for a queer paper to take.

Are we now to criticize Jesse Helms for improper use of the subjunctive mode? Condemn Anita Bryant for her diction?

I'd rather believe that you need the dough from the personal ads and might lose revenue if you were to adopt proper standards. Then at least we could all hope for improvements as the paper prospers. Alan Trethewey

age references. Before you know it, there Bomb-happy NOW

would be so many restrictions the Chronicle would have no personal advertising. Give them a break. They do a damn good job.

Gay and lesbian people have a tendency to be too thin-skinned. In our lifestyle we have health problems, homophobia and a variety of other worries such as war in the Persian Gulf, homeless people and no national health care program, just to name a few. Let's concentrate on big problems and let the nickle and dime stuff go.

Paul Zeitzew Hal Dalrymple

To the Editor:

It was one thing to see on the cover of NOW Cleveland an American flag with the words "I support the American troops." It was quite another to see a full-page editorial cartoon of a huge mushroom cloud over Iraq with the caption "ROCK IRAQ."

I hope advertisers in NOW Cleveland realize the hostility and barbarism projected by the editor, who saw nothing wrong with this. People this bomb-happy are no better than Saddam Hussein, and Continued on page 12