Homosexuality and Pedophilia (And Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla)

It figures on the very day I post about Homosexuality and Pedophilia, A friend of mine alerts me to a news article about Mark Foley.

There are so many issues here, I don’t know where to start.

In the past 24 hours, there have been many news articles written about the Republican Congressman (Florida) Mark Foley. Many of those articles called Mark Foley a pedophile. He is not. But, I suppose to answer that question, one must look at the definition of Pedophilia.

Pedophilia has been defined by Law Enforcement as well as the Medical and Psychological field as a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. There is no cut off age for pedophilia interest, as puberty can hit different children at different ages. Having an attraction to young, post-pubescent children is what is called Ephebophilia. Pederasty is an ephebophiliac attraction to young males, while attraction to postpubscent females is referred to as the “Lolita Syndrome” - a reference to the 1962 Stanley Kubrick film Lolita based on the novel by Vladimir Nabokov.

Legally, psychologically, and mentally, there are more differences between pedophilia and ephebophilia than there are similarities. However, there are many people and groups out there trying to blur the lines between the two, usually stating something along the lines of “sexual attraction to children is sexual attraction to children and it is bad, no matter what you call it.”

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with either pedophilia or ephebophilia. So, then why is it that we are more outraged when Congressman Mark Foley sends inappropriate text messages to a sixteen year old boy than we were when Mary Kay Laterno gets pregnant by her teenage lover and student? What about Sandra “Beth” Geisel? In fact, there have been quite a few female teachers getting caught in inappropriate relationships with their male students since Laterno. In fact, it almost seems like the world loves Laterno - we can’t stop talking about her, and did you see that movie they did on Lifetime? Or, did you see the episode of Law and Order: SVU that was ripped out of the Laterno Headlines?

So, why does Laterno get celebrity status while Mark Foley gets labeled a dangerous pedophile?

Another issue that was raised in several of the articles I read about Mark Foley was on the Republican response to learning about Foley’s indiscretions. The

One of my biggest questions is this: What if Mark Foley was a Democrat and not a Republican? Would they have sat on their asses for awhile doing nothing until the story finally went public, or would they have been there starting another round of the war they raise with the Democrats? And dare I mention anything like “Family Values”?

Homosexuality and Pedophilia (and Child Predators)

One topic I am actually surprised I haven’t focused on (on this blog) yet is that of child predators. When NBC’s Dateline started doing it’s To Catch A Predator series, I started watching. Part of me was afraid that homosexuals were about to get a bad rap. I knew that all that was needed would be for one gay person to appear on the show and change the focus of everything. Before long, homosexuality and pedophilia would be, once again, linked. So far, thank Goodness, that hasn’t happened.

In fact, Dateline: To Catch A Predator has almost had the opposite effect. Through this show, we have seen how just about any kind of person can be a child predator. Those featured on the show have included military men, the average Joe next door, and even church leaders and other highly religious people.

One of the myths that have stuck around (even long after it has been debunked) is how homosexuals are pedophiles or child predators. Sure, such things do happen occasionally - however it is far from the norm. In fact, by far the greatest number of pedophiles are heterosexuals - or, at least people living in heterosexual relationships or at least reflecting the heterosexual lifestyle.

And yet, someone always manages to twist the facts to suit their own wants and needs. One recent example of this is from a group calling themselves Americans For Truth. They recently wrote an article about a recent episode of the Oprah Show that focused on pedophilia and child predators. The article starts out by saying:

One of the questions I have regarding any linkage between homosexuality and pedophilia is why such a disproportionate number of child molestation victims are boys—if (openly) homosexual men comprise such a small percentage of society? We doubt that Oprah Winfrey, who is very pro-”gay,” will pursue the answer to that question, but at least she is exposing the notorious group NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association), which once marched in homosexual “pride” parades in the early days of American “gay liberation.”

While Oprah may not pursue the answer to that question - let me address it now. There is no link between homosexuality and pedophilia. None. What-so-ever.

The writer of this highly prejudicial and misleading article fails to take a number of facts into consideration. For example, most of the convicted pedophiles and child predators are heterosexuals. Most are married, living the heterosexual lifestyle. Sure, occasionally one identifies himself as homosexual, but this is far from the norm.

Another way in which this article tries to mislead you is by throwing up the notorious group NAMBLA, and pointing out one aspect of gay history that we’re not very proud about. Because the article cannot say (and be truthful) that NAMBLA is a group of gay men (because supposedly most of its members are blatantly straight) they point out that in the early days of the gay rights movements, they were allowed to march in the Gay Pride Parades. What the article doesn’t say is that the gay community, in general, can’t stand NAMBLA or what they represent either. We’re just as repulsed by them as Americans For Truth is.

(And, since when does marching in a gay pride parade mean you’re a homosexual? Tell that to the countless politicians who march every year in local gay pride parades. Tell that to the members of PFLAG, a wonderful organizations for the Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays. Tell that to … ok, you get the idea.)

The Americans For Truth article contains very little truth, and whatever truth it does contain is both prejudicial and misleading, like the Nambla statement. Even the headline isn’t true. “Oprah Exposes NAMBLA:Homosexual Pedophiles Online”… Oprah did no such thing. In fact, Oprah never even focused on homosexual pedophiles at all. The article also names Todd Calvin, NAMBLA member and convicted pedophile. It is presented in a way that makes you think the guy is gay - even though, on Oprah, we heard from his ex-wife, and the only suggestion of homosexuality is the fact that he was convicted of molesting a young boy.

I also think it is highly suspect in the way they single groups, such as NAMBLA, while ignoring other groups entirely. Why was there no mention in this article about all those Catholic Priests who molested young boys? (And why were those Catholic Priests not labeled homosexual and kicked from the Church, but rather often promoted or moved to different areas?) While it’s true that most “pedophilia groups” are not organized the way NAMBLA was, that doesn’t mean they do not exist. Many such groups do exist, nameless, recruiting through friends of friends - getting together to share ideas about how to seduce the innocent and not get caught.

The Oprah Show did expose a lot of topics that need a lot of focus and attention. Or, maybe what we need is another slight paradigm shift? The Internet has been, and is still, used for illegal purposes - and that does include child porn, that does include groups of pedophiles, and countless other illegal activities. I am not blaming the Internet, far from it. But, when we get onto the Internet, we need to be aware that such things do happen around here. More importantly, law enforcement needs to be aware of it.  (And, more and more every day, they are.)

Remembering The Black Dahlia (Part Two)

Here’s an article I wrote on the Black Dahlia several years ago. With the upcoming movie release, I thought I might as well share it with you:

The Black Dahlia

The murder of Elizabeth Short (also known as the Black Dahlia) remains to this day as one of California’s more extraordinary unsolved mysteries. And it seems to have been made of the stuff legends are made of - a brutal crime … the victim as a small-town girl gone off to Hollywood to make it in the movies … a list of suspects that seemed more like the Titanic’s passenger list than anything else …

Over the past half decade, countless articles, books, movies, and television shows have presented information on the Black Dahlia. And it seems like the more you know, the more questions you have. And yet the questions remain - Who killed the Black Dahlia and why?

The Victim

Elisabeth Short was born on July 29th, 1924 in Hyde Park, Massachusetts, but a short while after she was born her family moved to the town of Medford - a few miles outside Boston.

By all accounts, Beth Short (known as Betty to friends and family) had always been a pretty girl. Her biggest concern was her health. She was plagued with a rather nasty case of athsma. One one occasion, she had to have an operation to remove some fluid from her lungs. Yet, even through all of that she still remained a friendly, feisty, and caring woman and everyone she met seemed to like her.

Her other major concern dealt with a certain birth defect. Her vaginal area was slightly deformed, causing normal penetration to be impossible. She also did not have a normal period. Several doctors stated when she was young that she would eventually outgrow this - however, she never did.

When she was a girl, her mother, Phoebe, would often take her and her younger sister to the movies. Beth loved this, and had often dreamt of being an actress. This was, perhaps, her biggest goal in life. Years later she would move to the Hollywood area, and try to make that dream a reality.

She would move in with her father, Cleo, for a short while when she was nineteen. He had moved there when Beth was a small girl after faking his suicide when his miniature golf course business went under. Years later, he contacted his wife and wanted to be a part of the family again. Phoebe refused. Beth’s relationship with her father was fairly rocky, and he eventually asked her to leave because he found her lazy, boy crazy, and untidy.

After having a rather rough time in Hollywood, she moved temporarily back to Medford, and then headed south to Miami Beach where she met Major Matt Gordon, a pilot. (She seemed to have romantic fantasies about servicemen.) During their engagement, however, he was sent to India. Before he could return home, he was killed in a plane crash. Beth Short had already decided the next thing in store for her was marriage, so after a short while, she called upon a former beau - another serviceman. But that relationship was doomed to failure as well.

Some of the servicemen who knew her started calling her The Black Dahlia. One of the popular films at the time was called The Blue Dahlia (with Veronica Lake and Alan Ladd) and the name stuck because she dressed in black lacy dresses and had black frilly hair. Beth liked the nickname and started portraying this sultry personality.

The Murder Of The Black Dahlia

On January 15th, 1947 a young lady and her daughter were taking a stroll near a vacant lot when the two spotted what the woman first thought was a broken mannequin. But it wasn’t a mannequin - it was the nude body of a young woman, the lifeless body of the Black Dahlia.

She had been posed naked, on her back with her arms stretched above her head bent at the elbows, severed at the waist. Her lower half was angled upward at the hips, her legs spread-eagle. It was believed that she was severed after death, but some evidence suggests it was possible she was severed while still alive. Her bodyparts were placed in a line. The liver was exposed. Her face and breasts were slashed. Marks on her wrists and ankles suggested she’d been tied up, perhaps in an upside-down position Evidence also suggests that feces was placed in her mouth while being tortured.. An incision was also made crudely from her pubic region up to the navel.

After an autopsy was performed, a few more curious details would enter the picture. Some evidence suggested that she was frozen for a period of time, perhaps to aid preservation. Other evidence suggested that the body had been put down, at some point, face-down in dew covered grass and then turned over. The body had also been dead for at least ten hours before it was placed in that lot. Her hair and body had been extensively and painstakingly washed and cleaned. No evidence of semen was found, although that could have been because she had been washed so well. The official cause of death was listed as being caused by a concussion to the head, and to the wounds on her face and breasts.

The police tried everything they could think of to crack this high profile case. They spent countless hours trying to recreate the last few days of her life. They talked with friends, and even went as far as rounding up nearly every known (or suspected) sexual deviants or perverts and questioned them.

During their investigation, they located Robert Manly. He was a hardware salesman and known the Dahlia for only a short time. A week before her death, the two had checked into a motel, gone out to various nightclubs, and then headed back to the motel. Manly reports he slept in the bed while Beth Short slept in a chair. She had complained of not feeling well. The next morning, he had an appointment, but when he came back, she was now dressed, and apparently feeling a little better. She said she wanted to meet her sister so when Manly had to leave that evening, he left Elisabeth Short alone in the room waiting for her sister. This would be the last time anybody saw her alive. She disappeared for the next six days before turning up severed in the vacant lot. Manly became the first suspect the police had. However, after several long interrogations he was eventually released.

The police were flooded with calls from people who knew the Black Dahlia. It took major manpower to handle the volume of calls and to follow up on the tremendous amount of information. Meanwhile, Phoebe Short arrives in California to claim her daughter’s body. It seems her ex-husband wanted nothing to do with the whole fiasco. Later, Phoebe would bury her daughter in The Mountain View Cemetery in Oakland.

And then the local papers received a package containing a few of Elizabeth Short’s personal belongings such as an address book with pages torn out, her social security card, birth certificate, business cards, photographs of her with various servicemen, claim checks for suitcases she had left at the bus station - accompanied by a note made from newspaper clippings which said, “Here are Dahlia’s Belongings” and “Letter to Follow.” The police tried to lift fingerprints off all of this, but none were able to be found. Each and every name in the address book was tracked down and interviewed, but not much came of it.

The Investigation

The investigation went nowhere fast. Every lead seemed to turn into a dead end. And yet, everyone seemed to know something about the Dahlia’s death, or had some connection that nobody else had. For example…

Two detectives sat in a local restaurant discussing the case. When they returned to the station, they got a call from a man who said he had seen the killer. As it turns out, he was the waiter at the restaurant and the two officers were to whom the man referred.

An astrologer said that if they buried the Dahlia with an egg in her hand, her killer would be caught.

Several landlords reported that their problem tenants were most likely the killer. Many women reported their ex-boyfriends or ex-husbands.

One serviceman was reported to military police by another serviceman with whom he had fought about money. The man who was reported had blood on his clothing and had some newspaper clippings of the Dahlia. The man confessed, saying that he could have done this since he often got violent toward women when he was drunk. The police saw through his confession eventually and he was sent to a psychiatrist.

In fact, as many as fifty different people confessed to the crime - but there were none the police took seriously.

Suspects

A crime reporter for the Herald Express named Aggie Underwood wanted the police to investigate a connection between the death of the Black Dahlia and the murder of a socialite named Georgette Bauerdorf. Bauerdorf. had known the Dahlia and had died in what Underwood considered similar circumstances - she had been strangled and raped before being drowned in a bathtub with a towel thrust into her mouth to keep her from crying out. The police never followed this lead, citing various reasons.

Janice Knowlton wrote a book titled Daddy Was The Black Dahlia Killer in which she tells of the affair Elizabeth Short had with her father George and pinning the murder on him. According to officials, George Knowlton was never considered a suspect.

Another popular book - Severed: The True Story Of The Black Dahlia Murder by John Gillmore, which contained a totally different view (and sources of information). While it is recommended that you read both books, it is also recommended that you make your own judgements on the information they contain.

Not much to go on. I know. Perhaps this - above anything else - explains why the case remains open andd unsolved, even after over fifty years.

The Killer

From the evidence presented, we can make certain educated guesses at what the killer was like, or certain other bits of information about him. I must strongly note here that since the killer is still unknown - all we are able to do is make these educated guesses. Even though the information presented in this section is logical - there is still a chance that it may not be correct.

Beth Short was a high risk victim. We can guess this since she was emotionally vulnerable, had a somewhat needy personality, led a lifestyle of club hopping, was often homeless, and had a dependant personality. Any killer who was looking for women who he could dominate and manipulate would have been easily attracted to her from the get go.

The nature of the crime suggests that this was a lust murder - although certain aspects of the crime tells us that it dosn’t fit the normal bill. Most lust murderers are, for the most part, disorganized types. However, since the killer went to such legnths to was the body (we can assume to get rid of physical evidence) and the manner in which she was severed, and these are definate signs of an organized offender, an interesting discussion on his personality traits can be made.

Since the body was killed elsewhere and then left in a vaccant lot, we can assume a few more details. The killer would have to have a car. Considering the year is 1947 and that most Americans did not own cars at this point in history, we can either conclude that he was criminally sophisticated enough to be able to steal one without it ever showing up as evidence, or that he was wealthy enough to be able to afford one.

The area where the killer dumped the body was not a busy intersection, however it was populated and nobody ever reported seeing anything amiss. We can assume here that since nobody saw anything out of order, that the killer either blended into his surroundings so that nobody would remember seeing him, or that he went completely unseen however unlikely that is bound to be.

In order to have tied the Dahlia up and torture her the way he did, he must have had his own home (or other such place to - cough snort - work) and he probably lived alone. It would be difficult (but not totally impossible) to pull this sort of thing off had he lived in an appartment, or if he lived with another person. But, then again, considering that the person he lived with might have gone away (as in out of town), and since he cleaned up The Dahlia very well, we can also assume he thoroughly cleaned the area where he kept and killed her, so that no traces were left when the others returned. However unlikely this scenario might be, I must also admit it could be possible.

Since the body was placed out in the open for people to find, we can also surmize that his intention for doing this was to shock or offend the entire community, and make a statement. He also appearantly was not too woried about leaving behind evidence of his identity, thus relating again to the fact that he cleaned the body.

Later, he would communicate with the police. This would suggest that he wanted credability, he wanted to outfox or outsmart the investigators, and that while he was fairly bright, he wasn’t too smart.

The crime also showed definate signs of sadism. He manipulated and degraded his victim to such a drastic level that we can guess his anger wasn’t against her, personally, but against her as a woman, suggesting his anger was toward all women. Or, at least all woman who the Dahlia reminded him of.

Does This Feel Like Discrimination To You?

They’re building a new shopping center in Oak Park, Illinois (near the intersection of Lake and Harlem.) So far, the process has gone on without any major complications. Some of the folks in nearby stores and office spaces have commented on the noise, but that’s nothing beyond what’s expected when you’re piling large metal beams into the earth…

Lately, they’ve been trying to get retailers interested in renting space in the new building. That, too, has been pretty much what anyone would expect … until now, that is.

The Village of Oak Park is trying to “expand the market of people who are going to come downtown” says Village President David Pope in a Chicago Sun-Times article. It kinda sounds like they’re trying to diversify the Chicago suburb that was named last year as one of the nation’s “sexiest” suburbs.

However, when Lane Bryant - a store that caters to plus sized women - applied to rent space in the new shopping center, the Village of Oak Park denied their request saying Lane Bryant didn’t fit the “kind and quality” of the shops they were trying to attract.

And just what “kind and quality” of customer is that?

Lane Bryant is screaming “Discrimination” by filing a lawsuit against the Village of Oak Park, asking to be allowed to open their store at that location (1116 Lake Street) and to award the developer 2.4 million for its losses on the deal.

Law And Disorder: The Murder of Kevin Hale…

There are many different stories, excuses, and theories about what happened on July 30, 2005 - it's hard to know exactly what happened. The official version of the events make no sense and has more holes than Swiss cheese. There are only a few facts that everyone seems to agree on.

What we do know is this: 36 year old Kevin Hale met two men in Durango, Colorado's Buckley Park. He did not leave the park alive. The two men were 21 year old Adam Hernandez and 24 year old Jason "Todd" Fiske.

Hernandez claimed he bore a grudge against Hale because he (Hale) had made a sexual advance earlier that evening. According to the police, Hernandez and Hale had long history of ill will. Fiske's confession claims that he broke up a fight between Hale and Hernandez by grabbing Hale in a choke-hold, but released him as soon as he went limp.

The Coroner eventually released his report saying that Hale's death was caused by cerebral anoxia - a lack of oxygen to the brain caused by compression of his neck. In other words, he was strangled.

If Jessica Fletcher or Perry Mason were investigating this crime, the show would be over. If this were an episode of Law and Order, this would be the point in the show where the police hand the case over to the District Attourney's Office. We know who did it. We know (kinda) how it happened. But, unfortunately this story is just beginning.

One of the first Law & Order twists involves the use of medical and psychological treatment records. Under normal circumstances, anyone's psychiatric and medical records (just like anything you tell your lawyer or priest) are considered off limits. But not in this case. Because the coroner used those records to help him determine the cause of death, the defense felt they should be entitled to that information as well. Those documents were delivered to the judge who ultimately determined that any information they contained had no bearing and no impact on the case at hand.

Part of the dramatic element would come from those who knew the people involved, or from the residents of Durango. "This sort of thing doesn't happen here," several of the townsfolk are quoted saying in the Colorado newspapers, often making a parallel to the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

The families of both parties have gone on the record through the local newspapers saying that they couldn't believe that Hernandez or Fiske could have done such a thing. Tamara Hernandez told the Rocky Mountain News that the idea her son could be involved in a hate crime was tearing apart her family, and saying that her son always told her not to "be a hater".

Yet those who knew Hale paint a slightly different picture. Larry DeVinny, Hale's uncle, strongly believes the crime was hate-related, saying that Hale had been "very openly gay" and had "endured a great deal of anti-gay harassment". DeVinny also related how Hale had expressed a lot of concern over one person in particular: Todd Fiske. Hale's mother also went on the record saying that Kevin had even approached the police eight months before his murder, complaining about Fiske (who he worked with at the time.)

The Colorado Anti-Violence Project and the Western Equality Organization released a statement about these events reminding us that when it comes to perpetrators of anti-gay hate violence, they will often claim that the victim had made a sexual advance at them, thus prompting the violent attack. It is "the oldest one in the book," they say. They also remind us that this is nothing more than an excuse for bad behavior, preying on the empathy of straight men who might panic were they hit on by a gay guy.

Both Fiske and Hernandez have also stated that drugs and alcohol played a part in that evening's events, which Hernandez's mother claims was "out of character" for him.

Hernandez pleaded guilty to manslaughter and theft charges in April and was sentenced to eight years in prison. He also broke down, pleading with the judge because he felt he "couldn't make it in prison", and apologizing for what he had done. The judge recommended him for a prison "boot camp" program, which could enable them to reevaluate his sentence in two years.

Fiske, on the other hand, pleaded not guilty, and waived his right to a speedy trial. A status hearing will be set for July 25th, 2006. Hale's uncle, Larry DeVinny is pleased that there will be a trial (even though a plea bargain is still on the table and the investigation is still ongoing) because he wants the truth of what happened that night to come out. He is certain by the end, everyone will know this was hate crime.

SOURCES

• The Rocky Mountain News
• The Denver Post
• CBS News (Denver)
• Colorado Anti-Violence Program

What Is Destroying The Sanctity of Marriage?

How many times have we heard that legalizing gay marriages would destroy the sanctity of marriage? There are those out there who speak those words over and over, like it was some mantra. I have yet been offered an explanation about why this would be. I can't even come up with a single way that allowing gay marriage would have any impact at all on heterosexuals.

So I pose this question: If anything is destroying the Sanctity of Marriage - what would that be?

The first thing that comes to my mind is divorce. What better way to destroy marriage values than to promote divorce?

According to the Center for Divorce Reform, half of all marriages will end in divorce if the current trends continue. Whatever the current statistic is varies from report to report, so it may be impossible to determine exactly what the current divorce rate is.

The Barna Group (who'se main goal is to partner with Christian ministries and individuals to be a catalyst in moral and spiritual transformation in the United States) has released some interesting information as well. One of their findings is that one third of adults "Calls it Quits" - and that number is the same for both Christians and non-Christians.

It's also interesting to point out that CNN also reported on Nov 12, 1999 that the Divorce Rates are highest in the "Bible Belt" states. They also published that Nevada had the absolute highest divorce rate, but Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama and Oklahoma rounded out the rest of the top five. To explain this, several ideas were raised, such as that younger people are getting married in these states, household incomes are lower, or that certain factors common in Protestantism may also contribute.

Nevada being the divorce capitol (or so it seems) may be so for a couple of reasons. First, because it's so easy to get married there - and fun! Where else can you be married by an Elvis impersonator or by a Roswell-looking alien guy? But, in Nevada, its also easier to get a divorce. Stay for a short time to get your local residency, file a few papers and pay a small fee - and BAM! You're not married anymore.

When someone like Britney Spears gets married in Vegas to some high school chum just because they think it'd be fun to get married - only to turn around the next day and file for divorce - how is that not mocking the sanctity of marriage? Why did I not see a single person complaining that Britney was contributing to the decline of marriage values?

But its hard not to notice that today's society also has a much more relaxed attitude toward divorce than in earlier times. A couple has grown apart … a couple wants to spend more energy on career and less on family … it's no big deal - couples get divorced all the time! How many times have we laughed when Ivanna Trump said (about divorce) "Don't get mad. Get EVERYTHING!"

So then what are the biggest reasons people are getting divorced? After doing a few Google searches, I have found a lot of conflicting data. But, that isn't to say that there aren't certain trends. (One report may say that adultery is the leading cause of divorce while the next says the leading cause is irresponsible attitudes on the part of either spouse. I even found one page that says adultery doesn't cause divorce. Other top factors (depending on who you listen to) may include physical or emotional abuse, addictive personalities (alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc.), family stress, career concerns, or medical concerns (mental health, physical well-being, terminal illnesses, etc.)

I am starting to understand that this is a moot point, anyway. Can I blame my job for my divorce if my career is more important to me than my spouse? Can I blame my nagging mother in-law or my screaming kids if my family life is just too stressful? If my spouse gets some terminal illness or starts having a mental breakdown, it's not my fault we filed for divorce? Yeah, I know traditional marriage vows include the phrase "in sickness and in health" but I thought that just meant the common cold … Right? Or, it says "for better or worse" but it didn't say I had to deal with in-laws, his gambling problems, or how he leaves the toilet seat up or farts in bed … right?

(When it comes to things like abuse, however, I do think divorce is par for the course. Abuse escalates … and is more of an issue of personal safety.)

In my opinion, the leading cause of divorce (and the main factor of what is destroying the sanctity of marriage) is our ability to blame something other than ourselves for our mistakes, and our inability to take full responsibility for our behaviors, thoughts, and actions.

No. That can't be it. So, who else can we blame? Oh, yeah - I know! Those damn homosexuals who want the same legal benefits that we married people got.

25 Years Is A Really Long Time

Monday, June 5th, 2006 - marked the 25th anniversary of the start of the AIDS epidemic.

Looking back over the past twenty-five years - in some ways, it seems like we've come a long way; in other ways, it seems like we're still standing at the same point.

Twenty-Five years ago, nobody knew anything about what was happening, but they knew it was going to be something big, something major. It started with a report from the Centers For Disease Control (CDC) about five gay men with Pneumocystis Pneumonia. Pneumocystis itself wasn't new, but an outbreak of people who shouldn't be getting it sure was.

Because it was thought, at first, that this was a disease plaguing only the gay community, at first, they called it GRID (Gay Related Immune Deficiency). In 1982, the CDC began to realize that half the reported cases were from heterosexual, not homosexual men - they changed its name to AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome.)

Throughout the first several years, nobody knew very much about this or why it was happening. They realized it was a sexually transmitted disease, but nobody had any idea what kind of virus it was or how to fight it.

Between 1985 and 86, researchers began working with a drug called Azidothymidine - which had initially been intended as a cancer drug, but failed the initial tests. When they started using the drug on HIV, it showed a lot of promise. On March 20, 1987, the FDA (Food & Drug Administration) approved the use of Azidothymidine (or AZT) for use against HIV, AIDS, and ARC (AIDS-Related Complex - a term we no longer use today but used to mean pre-AIDS illnesses.) In 1990, it was approved as a preventative treatment.

AZT, tho, was not the miracle drug that everyone hoped it would be, but it was a start. The side effects were terrible and the drug turned toxic at the levels it was prescribed at - yet it was still better than the alternative.

So - how far have we come since those days? A long way. We now know a lot more about HIV and how the Virus operates. We know how it enters the system, and what it does once it gets there. We've been able to map how it takes over the immune system.

In 1995, a new class of medications came out called Protease Inhibitors. This was really teh first breakthrough since the AIDS epidemic began. By as early as 1997, an AIDS Diagnosis was no longer a life sentence.

Today, 2006, we have even more types of drugs for use on HIV and AIDS. We are still using AZT (although at a much lesser amount, and in combination with other medications) and Protease Inhibitors, but now we also have Reverse transcriptase inhibitors, Fusion inhibitors, Integrase inhibitors, plus several new drug classes on the not-so-distant horizon too.

We have also learned how to deal with many of the AIDS-related conditions - such as Pneumocystis Pneumonia, Kaposi sarcoma, Tuberculosis, Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) colitis, just to name a few.

That doesn't mean that today there are no health worries with HIV or AIDS - only that we know more about how to prevent and treat these illnesses. We know more about how to fight the virus itself.

This also isn't to say that we still don't have a long way to go. We still have no cure. There are still quite a few unanswered (and unanswerable) questions.

While looking back at all the progress we've made, it saddens me to think that in other ways, we're no better off than we were twenty-five years ago.

Throughout the early years, we often heard about how HIV and AIDS was some form of punishment from God… God doesn't tolerate homosexuality. If you use drugs, Jesus isn't going to allow you to go to Heaven. You're only going to get this if you're immoral or do ungodly things.

It surprises me that even today, this attitude is still present. God doesn't punish anyone for having sex by giving them AIDS - just like He doesn't punish immoral New Orleans' people by throwing them a hurricane or two. And yet, this is what we hear when Fred Phelps and the Westburough Baptist Assholes (pardon my French) show up at the funeral for a (most likely heterosexual) soldier killed in the line of duty in Iraq.

Being open and honest about ones HIV status often leads to isolation. The HIV and AIDS stigma is just as bad now as it ever has been.

If you have HIV or AIDS, most people are still going to think you're either some perverted gay guy or some strung out drug addict. Many will even think its your own fault for getting this disease because if you didn't stick that needle in your arm or have sex with whomever it was that gave it to you - and if its your own damn fault, why should they care?

Even the gay community often turns its back on the HIV/AIDS Epidemic.

Granted, there are cities like New York City that offers so many options for HIV related housing, HIV related social services, HIV support groups, that it's hard to know where to start … and yet there are other cities that offer almost nothing. And the current political climate is only making this issue worse.

Barebacking (having sex without a condom or any form of protection) is big in the gay community right now. You can get barebacking videos at the local adult shops, lots of places have (private) bearbacking parties - it seems like you can see it everywhere. Do these people know this is exactly how you get HIV in the first place? Or is it just that they don't care?

You'd think we'd have learned to live with HIV by now - whether we have the disease or not. And that - that is why we still have a long way to go.