Box Turtle Bulletin

Health Rubs

Did you know that masturbation can prevent prostate cancer? It appears so, according to this new study:

Frequent sexual intercourse and masturbation protects men against a common form of cancer, suggests the largest study of the issue to date yet.

The US study, which followed nearly 30,000 men over eight years, showed that those that ejaculated most frequently were significantly less likely to get prostate cancer. The results back the findings of a smaller Australian study revealed by New Scientist in July 2003 that asserted that masturbation was good for men.

In the US study, the group with the highest lifetime average of ejaculation – 21 times per month – were a third less likely to develop the cancer than the reference group, who ejaculated four to seven times a month.

I wonder if John Smid has heard about this? He’s the outgoing Executive Director of the Memphis-based Love In Action ex-gay residential program who gave an entire workshop on the evils of masturbation at the 2007 Exodus conference last summer. It was definitely the single most bizarre talk have I ever attended in my lifetime. Especially when he bragged, “My wife’s vagina is enough… God created her for my fit” to a room full of struggling celibate ex-gays.

The “good part” is at the 2:18 mark.

Smid also told his audience that he heard from a Brazilian physician that masturbating actually harmed the immune system. This is how Smid described that conversation:

He said, men actually, when they live in sexual self-control and restraint, actually those hormones and those secretions are reabsorbed into the body, which stimulates the immune system of the male. This is a physician. He said that’s something that’s not often taught because the physician world is built up of a lot of men that don’t want to teach things like that because they don’t want to let people know that they can’t, you know, it’s really kind of a secret. He said we really don’t let that out as physicians.

… And I thought okay, now, think about, who are probably the most unhealthy people? Sexually addicted people. Physically unhealthy. You know, because first of all we’re not taking care of ourselves, we don’t feel good about ourselves. But we’re also possibly eliminating a source of our own immune system boosters. I mean it was very interesting when he said that.

I think we’ve met the very definition of “junk science” here.

Meanwhile, back in the world where real science takes place, Dr. Michael Leitzmann at the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda found that spankin’ it about every other day ought to do the trick:

More than 12 ejaculations per month would start conferring the benefit – on average every second day or so,” he says.

However, whilst the findings are statistically significant, Leitzmann remains cautious. “I don’t believe at this point our research would warrant suggesting men should alter their sexual behaviour in order to modify their risk.”

But on the other hand, it couldn’t hurt.

A Noble Common Trait

What do the following all have in common?

Gerald Ford, 38th President of the United States

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States

Dick Cheney, 46th Vice President; Secretary of Defense, Bush Sr. Administration

Barry Goldwater (“Mr. Conservative”), 1964 Republican Presidential Candidate, Senator (R – AZ), Chairman of Committee on Armed Services

William Cohen, Senator (R – MA), Secretary of Defense, Clinton Administration

Colin Powell, Secretary of State, Bush Jr., Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff, Bush Sr.

John Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff, Clinton administration

Lawrence J. Korb, Assistance Secretary of Defense, Reagan administration

Alan K. Simpson, Senator (R – WY), Chairman of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, member of Iraq Study Group

All of the above public servants have an impressive knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the United States Military. All of them love their country and want policies that best serve the nation and its armed services.

And all of the about have at some point expressed at least a lack of convinction in the laws that keep gay men and women from serving openly. Many have been outspoken advocates for eliminating this antiquated discrimination.

Of course there are a great many more within Government and without who have varying levels of experience in or with the military who agree. And the general public is overwhelmingly in support of eliminating Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell. In fact, it’s hard to find anyone to stand up for the merits of the policy.

Its day has passed. So it’s up to us to remind Congress to do both the popular thing and the right thing and toss this moldering pile of bias in the trash bin of history.

Illinois Civil Unions Not Looking Very Promising

In February we reported that Rep. Harris and Sen. Koehler had introduced legislation to bring about civil unions in Illinois. Chicagoist.com gives us an update

There are currently two bills in the General Assembly to recognize civil unions in Illinois, House Bill 1826 and Senate Bill 2436. State Rep. Greg Harris (D Chicago), sponsor of the house bill said that they are close to the 60 votes needed. The sponsor of the Senate bill, David Koehler (D Peoria), says he is waiting to see what happens in the House before going forward.

While I appreciate Rep. Harris’ enthusiasm and hope that his vote count is correct, another recent vote count suggests that this is probably just wishful thinking.

This week another bill that would impact gay couples was before the House

The measure involves pension benefits that surviving spouses can collect after a teacher dies. The change would have allowed gay teachers to give survivor benefits to their partners, just as married couples can.

Although this would have had no financial impact on the state (teachers pay for the policies) the house voted 67 to 43 against this bill.

Now I may be wrong, but to me it seems that there can only be one reason for denying gay teachers the ability to leave their survivor benefits to their partners; and that’s because they are gay. And I’m just not very hopeful that a legislative body that so dislikes gay people that they won’t let them arrange for their own survivor benefits will suddenly champion civil unions.

Meanwhile, anti-gays are moving ahead in their efforts to change their constitution to exclude gay couples entirely.

Protect Marriage Illinois has been circulating petitions to put an advisory referendum on the ballot in Illinois this fall. If they succeed, voters would be asked if the General Assembly should propose an amendment to the state constitution that reads “To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as marriage or similar union for any purpose.”

Kentucky Votes for LIMITED Information on Holocaust

The legislature in Kentucky has voted to assist in the education of students about the Holocaust and genocide.

The resolution would direct the Department of Education to make curriculum materials available for optional use in public schools by March 2009.

The material would be part of the Kentucky Program of Studies, which has state approval but is not required.

Oh, but not ALL victims of the Holocaust.

The Senate deleted a clause in the House version that cited other people the Nazis deemed “undesirable” because of their “race, nationality, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, religion, and political ideology.”

Whitaker said he received indications earlier in the session that the reference to sexual orientation was a “red flag” that could have endangered the bill.

It truly amazes me that some people refuse to provide accurate information about the Holocaust lest someone somewhere may know that gay people were also victims of Nazi mentality.

I’m truly flabergasted.

Welcome Out, Azariah Southworth

Azariah Southworth lives in Nashville and has been the host of the popular Christian youth show The Remix for the past year and a half. The Remix is in syndication, where it reaches more than 200,000 viewers weekly on one of three networks. Ths program has hosted such major Christian contemporary and rock acts such as Jars of Clay, Avalon, Superchick, Building 429 and Rachael Lampa.

Azariah Southworth announced today that he has come out of the closet:

“This has been a long time coming. I’m in a place where I’m at peace with my faith, friends, family and more importantly myself. I know this will end my career in Christian television, but I must now live my life openly and honestly with everyone. This is my reason for doing this,” Southworth says. …

I know I will be cut off from many within the Christian community, and if so, then they didn’t get the point of the life of Christ. I believe by me living my life honestly and authentically now, I am able to be a better person and a better Christian. We all know there are so many other gay people in the Christian industry; they’re just all scared. I was scared, but now I’m no longer afraid,” notes Southworth.

Welcome out, Azariah Southworth.

Hat tip: Scott H.

Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout

In tough economic times, a state needs every advantage it can get to lure jobs. Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern’s recent anti-gay tirades, in which she says that gays are a bigger threat than terrorism, is giving at least one Fortune 500 company second thoughts about locating part of its workforce to Oklahoma:

Tom Maloney, vice president of California-based Staubach Co., would neither confirm nor deny that the 1,000-employee, AAA-rated client company’s top executive is a lesbian who expressed concern over Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern’s recent anti-homosexual statements, as has been the topic circulating among local business leaders. …

“He told us straight up … ‘I cannot recommend to any of my clients that they should consider Oklahoma City because of that,'” [Roy] Williams [resident of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber] said. “When you have one of the nation’s premier relocation experts making those statements, you should pay attention to that and not dismiss it.

See also:
Sally Kern Is a Little Confused
Sally Kern’s Economic Fallout
Sally Kern’s Meeting with PFLAG on Tape
Exodus’ Local Ministry Aligns with Sally Kern
Certified Cameronite: Sally Kern
Kern Speaks to College Republicans
Sally Kern: Out of Context? The Complete Transcript
We Be Jammin’
Muslims and Gays United
OK State Rep. Sally Kern’s Son is “Straight and Not Gay”
Sally Kern Exaggerates Death Threats
A Letter to Sally Kern
LaBarbera Award: Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

Born What Way?

Social conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage often point to personality differences between men and women — the complementarity of the sexes, they call it — and consider these differences to be innate in men and women. Men are more aggressive and women are nurturing; it’s “in their genes.” But when we see evidence that the personalities of gay men and women have more in common with their heterosexual opposite-sex counterparts, then somehow the environment is blamed. Now a series of studies calls those assumptions into question.

Researcher Richard A. Lippa wrote an article for American Sexuality magazine in which he describes the studies he’s been performing over the past ten years. In these studies, he measured five human personality traits: extroversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism (negative emotionality) and openness to new experiences. To that, he added two more measures: instrumentality (independence, assertiveness, and leadership ability) and expressiveness (warmth, nurturance, and tenderness). And then he just asked two more questions point blank: Are you more interested in masculine things or feminine things? And do you consider yourself masculine or feminine?

Over the past decade, he asked all this of 2,724 heterosexual men, 799 gay men, 5,053 heterosexual women, and 697 lesbian women. This way he could make direct heterosexual male-female comparison, and compare those with differences between heterosexual men and gay men, and heterosexual women and lesbians. The results are shown in the table below. Personality Differences are given in terms of “effect sizes,” a common statistical measurement for experiments. In psychology, effect sizes 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 are considered to be “small,” “medium,” and “large,” respectively. A positive number simply means the first group is higher than the second; a negative number means the second group is higher than the first.

Dr. Lippa noted:

Gay men were somewhat higher than straight men on agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness, and expressiveness. Except for openness to experience, gay-straight male differences mirrored male-female differences—that is, traits that gay men scored higher on than straight men were also traits that women scored higher on than men, and vice versa. The really big gay-straight male difference was for M-F of interests. Gay men had much more feminine occupational and hobby preferences than heterosexual men did. To give you a sense of the magnitude of this difference, the effect size listed in Table 1 implies that 90% of gay men have interests that are more feminine than the average straight man’s. Interestingly, the gay-straight male difference in self-ascribed M-F was more modest, and I suspect this is due to the fact that many gay men (like many straight men) don’t like to openly rate themselves as being “feminine.”

What were the corresponding results for women? Lesbian women were somewhat higher on openness and instrumentality than straight women were, and they were somewhat lower on neuroticism. As was true for the corresponding results for men, lesbian-straight female differences mirrored male-female differences—that is, traits that lesbians scored higher on than straight women were also traits that men scored higher on than women, and vice versa. The really big lesbian-straight female differences were for M-F of interests and self-ascribed M-F. Lesbian women had much more masculine occupational and hobby preferences than heterosexual women did. The effect size for this difference implies that 93% of lesbian women had interests that were more masculine than the average straight woman’s. Furthermore, lesbians rated themselves to be considerably more masculine and less feminine than straight women did. Thus, lesbians seemed to openly acknowledge and embrace their masculinity more than gay men acknowledged and embraced their femininity.

Does this mean that gays and lesbians are “born that way”? Dr. Lippa thinks this may lend credence to that position, although this study doesn’t prove it one way or another. But this does raise an interesting point. If straight men are more open to new experiences and straight women are more expressive because “they’re born that way,” then why do social conservatives blame opposite-gender traits in gay men and women on bad parenting?

Same-sex marriage opponents and ex-gay advocates have a pretty fundamental contradiction in their logic. Somehow I doubt we’ll see them addressing this anytime soon.

Hat tip: BTB reader Steve M.

California Supreme Court to Rule In Favor of Same-Sex Marraige?

That’s the rumor anyway:

Sources wishing to remain anonymous in the California Court System indicate that the court, which has until June 2, 2008 to issue it’s marriage ruling, is considering issuing it on Friday, May 23, 2008, with the decision being written by Chief Justice Ronald George. The Court is readying itself for a backlash that may follow the rumored and bold decision. There is talk that the Court will not simply strike down Proposition 22, but will move the State of California toward full marriage, if not even granting full marriage rights for gays and lesbians outright.

I wonder, did this rumor embolden Gov. Schwarzenegger to fire the first shot?

John Shore Gets It

In a posting on his blog on CrossWalk, John Shore did not speak out for inclusive theology. But he did something that I think is often missing from the Christian debate about homosexuality; he acknowledged that the conservative viewpoint demands far more of gay Christians than most heterosexuals would ever be willing to give.

I’m not saying that it’s manifestly absurd and even cruel to suggest that everyone within a broad swath of our population spend their lives in emotional and physical isolation. I believe in the tenets of Christianity as ferociously as any Christian in the world. All I’m saying is that, as far as I can tell, we Christians (insofar as we ever speak with one voice) are saying that it is morally incumbent upon homosexuals to spend their lives in emotional and physical isolation. I hear a lot of Christians asserting that gays and lesbians should stop acting like gays and lesbians. But I never hear anyone saying the unavoidable follow-up to that — saying what that really means — which is that gay and lesbian men and women should spend their lives never experiencing what people most commonly mean when they use the word “love.”

Thank you, Mr. Shore.

Wherever one finds oneself on the theological spectrum, it is important that one recognizes and acknowledges exactly what they are demanding of others. This is a conversation in which it is well worth engaging.

The Pope’s Anti-Marriage Record

In conjunction with the visit of Pope Benedict XVI, anti-gay marriage activist Maggie Gallagher has compiled a listing of the Pope’s rants in opposition to any efforts to provide civil protections to same-sex families.

A new analysis entitled “Pope Benedict XVI on Marriage: A Compendium” [pdf] and published by the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy on the eve of Benedict’s historic U.S. visit, finds that in less than three years of his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI has spoken publicly about marriage on 111 occasions, connecting marriage to such overarching themes as human rights, world peace, and the conversation between faith and reason.

Sadly, rather than revealing an obsession that places opposition to gay equality as more important than scandals within the church, Gallagher sees this as validation of her quest for civil discrimination.

The short pontificate of Benedict XVI is thus already a standing rebuke to those voices of our time who attempt to make us embarrassed about our concern for, and battles over, marriage, family and sexual issues – to those who see in the contemporary marriage debate merely a distraction from more important issues.

But Gallagher is a bright woman. And even she can recognize that Benedict is a bit extreme.

Marriage essential to world peace? This may strike American ears as an oddity.

Ummm, yeah. Ya think?

Pope Draws Distinction Between Homosexuality and Pedophilia

The New York Times reports this morning on comments Pope Benedict XVI made with reporters during his flight to the United States. He talked about the clergy sexual abuse scandal that has affected more than 5,000 victims and cost the church more than $2 billion. He described the scandals as a “great suffering for the church” and for him personally, saying “We are deeply ashamed and we will do what is possible that this cannot happen in the future.”

During the discussion, the pontiff indicated that he recognized the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia:

Apparently drawing a distinction between priests with homosexual tendencies and those inclined to molest children, the Pontiff said “I would not speak at this moment about homosexuality, but pedophilia which is another thing. And we would absolutely exclude pedophiles from the sacred ministry.”

This would be welcome news, but the rest of the church appears not to have gotten the memo. In response to the clergy sexual abuse scandal, the Congregation for Catholic Education in 2005 issued instructions barring gay men entering holy orders unless they had “overcome” for at least three years. This led to a virtual witch hunt within many seminaries, while priests faced increasing stigmatization within their dioceses. Meanwhile, abuse victim advocates accuse the pope of protecting nineteen bishops who they say have been “credibly accused of abusing children.”

You can learn more about the fals link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse in our report, “Testing the Premise: Are Gays a Threat To Our Children?”

Gay Groups Ask for Leniency in Lawrence King Murder

A coalition of 27 LGBT activist organizations is urging the Ventura County, California District Attorney to charge 14-year old Brandon McInerney, Lawrence King’s murderer, as a juvenile. McInerney shot King, 15, point blank in the head on February 12th at E.O. Green Junior High School in Oxnard, California. With hate crime enhancements, McInerney faces up to 27 years in prison if he is charged as an adult. But citing an overall “climate of intolerance and fear about sexual orientation and expression,” the coalition feels that prosecuting McInerney as an adult would “compound this tragedy with another wrong.”

The press release, which is not yet available online, reads:

A coalition of 27 groups fighting for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights today is urging Ventura County prosecutors to try 14-year-old Brandon McInerney in juvenile court, and not as an adult. McInerney has been charged as an adult in the February 12 murder of his E.O. Green Middle School classmate, 15-year-old Lawrence King. Students say McInerney targeted King because the victim was openly gay and because he wore women’s jewellery and makeup.

LGBT civil rights organizations, including Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and the Transgender Law Center, have delivered a short statement to Ventura County District Attorney Gregory D. Totten, calling on him to try McInerney as a juvenile.

“We are saddened and outraged by the murder of junior high school student Lawrence King,” the statement reads. “At the same time, we call on prosecutors not to compound this tragedy with another wrong “we call on them to treat the suspect as a juvenile, not as an adult.

“The facts in this matter seem clear: one boy killed another in a climate of intolerance and fear about sexual orientation and gender expression. The alleged perpetrator, who turned 14 years old less than three weeks before the shooting, should be held accountable for his actions. But we support the principles underlying our juvenile justice system that treat children differently than adults and provide greater hope and opportunity for rehabilitation. In addition, public safety is not served by treating children as adults. According to research released by the Centers for Disease Control in 2006, children transferred to adult court are more likely to re-offend than those committing similar offenses who remain in the juvenile justice system. California law does not require District Attorneys to prosecute 14 year-olds as adults, even in circumstances such as these, and we oppose them doing so. We are issuing this joint statement because we believe so strongly in principles of justice that protect all our young people and know that, even in the face of strong emotions, we should not abandon them. We refuse to let our sense of outrage blind us to the fact that the suspect is only 14 years old.

“Prosecuting the alleged perpetrator as an adult will not bring Lawrence King back nor will it make schools safer for LGBT youth. We must respond to this tragedy by strengthening our resolve to change the climate in schools, eliminate bigotry based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and hold schools responsible for protecting students against discrimination and physical harm.”

The list of signatories include: American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California; American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Counties; American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California; Ally Action (CA); Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere (COLAGE; national); Community United Against Violence (San Francisco); Different Avenues (DC); Equality California; Gay Straight Alliance Network (CA); Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD); Human Rights Campaign; LAGAI – Queer Insurrection; Lambda Legal; LifeWorks Mentoring (Los Angeles); Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center; National Black Justice Coalition; National Center for Lesbian Rights; National Center for Transgender Equality; National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) National; Safe Schools Coalition; San Francisco LGBT Community Center; Sylvia Rivera Law Project (New York); TGI Justice Project (CA); Transgender Law Center; The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center (NY); TransYouth Family Allies, Inc.

New Mexico Man Accepts Plea in Hate Crime Attack

Jerry Paul, 40, of Shiprock, New Mexico, pleaded pleaded no contest to false imprisonment, a fourth-degree felony, and misdemeanor aggravated battery. Paul, the second of three men accused of attacking Matthew Shetima in Farmington last September, faces more than two years in prison:

While walking through an alley near the Journey Inn on Glade Lane, Shetima said he was called over to talk to several men who began hitting him, calling him “faggot.”

When he fell, the men kicked him saying, “You want to die faggot?” arrest documents state. The victim was then allegedly pulled into the men’s hotel room, where they continued to punch and kick him before he could escape.

Also arrested were Scott Thompson, 22, Craig Yazzie, 37. Yazzie pleaded to the same charges in March. Prosecutors believe Thompson was the ringleader in the fight. His trial for kidnapping and aggravated battery charges begin on May 2. If he’s found guilty, Thompson faces up to 14 years in prison with the hate crime enhancement.

Welcome to Tucson, Jason Cianciotto

From this morning’s Arizona Daily Star:

Jason Cianciotto has been named the new executive director of Tucson’s gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community center. Cianciotto is a former member of the youth group and a grant writer.

… He most recently served as research director for The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s Policy Institute in New York City. He also was the Task Force’s primary spokesman at press conferences.

Tucson is pretty small as cities go. When including the suburbs — and every scorpion and rattlesnak — our population just barely made it to over a million recently. But Tucson’s Wingspan LGBT community center rivals community centers in cities four times its size. (Phoenix still doesn’t have one. Heh, heh!)

Wingspan celebrates its twentieth anniversary this year, but its roots go back to the late 1970’s following the murder of Richard Heakin. The community’s horror over that hate crime transformed Tucson, making it one of the first cities in the country to pass anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation. Anti-violence programs remain a core part of Wingspan’s work, but it has branched out to include youth groups, community outreach, health and wellness programs, senior programs, and transgender support and advocacy.

I’ve had the pleasure of meeting Jason a few times. I’m sure he’ll do a wonderful job with Wingspan.

More Facts about Elane Photography

UPDATE: Decision and Final Order [pdf]

The Decision and Final Order of the Human Rights Commission lays out the facts leading to the determination.

Vanessa Willock sent to Elane Photography the following e-mail on September 21, 2006, a year in advance of her ceremony.

We are researching potential photographers for our commitment ceremony on September 15, 2007 in Taos, NM.

This is a same-gender ceremony. If you are open to helping us celebrate our day we’d like to receive pricing information.

Thanks

Elaine Huguenin responded

Hello Vanessa,
As a company, we photograph traditional weddings, engagements, seniors, and several other things such as political photographs and singer’s portfolios.
-Elaine-

Willock wrote again

Hi Elaine,
Thanks for your response below of September 21, 2006. I’m a bit confused, however, by the wording of your response. Are you saying that your company does not offer your photography services to same-sex couples?
Thanks,
Vanessa

Huguenin in conclusion

Hello Vanessa,
Sorry if our last response was a confusing one. Yes, you are correct in saying we do not photograph same-sex weddings, but again, thanks for checking out our site!
Have a great day.
-Elaine

In November 2006 Willock’s partner, Misty Collinsworth, contacted Huguenin and – without mentioning the sex of the partners – inquired about services. Huguenin responded enthusiastically and sought to follow up.

On December 20, 2006, Willock filed a charge of discrimination against Elane Photography.

The decision included two questions: did discrimination occur based on sexual orientation, and was Elane Photography a public accommodation. The commission found the answer to both questions to be in the affirmative.

Elane’s attorneys argued that Ms. Huguenin’s religious convictions provided exclusion to the New Mexico Human Rights Act. The commission found that questions of the constitutionality of the NMHRA was “not before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission for determination in this proceeding and, accordingly, are not addressed here.