Newspaper Page Text
CONSCIOUSNESS
Have you ever heard or
read a statement from a gay
spokesperson that some how
fobbed you the wrong way? Like
it really didn't represent either
the way you felt or even
represented your lifestyle and
yet was conveyed to the straight
world as the'gospel’ of the gay
community.
\ About six months ago, I read
a statement from one such
spokesperson, from the Miami
News. "I don’t think acceptance'
of homosexuals will ever be
greater than what you have now
between blacks and whites,” he
was quoted to have said. My
immediate reaction was, perhaps ■
he had been misquoted as is so
often the case when the media
deals with the gay issue. It then
dawned on me that even if this
was a misquote, although
unlikely, the same kind of
negativity permeating this
statement is the same type of
negative stuff I’ ve hear a over
from leaders in the movement.
I felt anger that once again I
had been ripped-off, as a human
being, as a gay and as a
movement person as well. How
dare he, establish my limits (or
the movements.) of
my own consciousness, or the
degree of my potential with
his hopeless negative trip.
My anger subsided into
compassion. For I realized that
this brother was a product of his
conditioning (as we all are), but
he had triggered something
within myselfthat would forever
change my life and for that I was
grateful. I realized that the
consciousness of the movement
at that point in time was
concentrating on:
1. changing the political system
as it affects gays, V
2. apologise to the straights for
our actions, in order to ~
3. maximize our acceptance by
the straight society as equals.
As a 20 yr. activist myself in
civil rights, the anti-war
movement, National organizer
for the New Party/People’s
Party (Spock, Vidal, Gregory),
and now involved in the feminist
and humanist movements, I feel
that we must now take an entire
new approach to our own
LIBERATION, which is
straightUBERATION as well.
Our approach must be' to invert
the negative into the positive.
Starting with the premise of
being equal to the straights and
therefore wanting their
acceptance, is 1 believe, a false
direction to maintain. Why
should I want to be equal to a
society that is competitive,
devisive, manipulative, fearful
and violent and that is presently
bent on its own destruction?
Why do I want to adopt any of
these negative exploitations of
my own potential any longer?
I belive that the gay
community, has, as a result of
the repression we have been
faced with, actually developed
many positive, human and loving
traits of our own that go way
beyond the din of the straight
consciousness, including: 'liking
oneself’; the ‘coming-out
process’; ‘reduced role-playing’;
‘total love-making and physical
contact’; multiple experiences
and access to it; multiple
relationships and a host of other
positive models.
The point is we are already
doing all of the above but we are
not consciously aware that we
are doing it, and therefore we
have accepted the straight’s
, _image :; Q|:4>urselves and who they
^P-dha.ve repeated
■ negativity.
Let’s face it, we have all been
taught (straights and gays) from
the moment we were born the
don’t syndrome. DON’T relate
to people of the same sex;
DON’T relate to people of the
opposite sex,, unless it is for
reproductive purposes; DON’T
TOUCH PEOPLE
ALTOGETHER ESPECIALLY
YOURSELF. (Touching is okay
for pets not for people.) DON’T
get together with people too old
or people too young, or with
different ; religions, races,
incomes, lifestyles andon and on
ad nausea. In otherwords, don’t
get involved on any kind.of level
that doesn't coincide with the
social script of a long-term,
everlasting, monogomous,
fidelity oriented relationship
with someone who can reproduce
the species.
That is a heavy dose for
anyone to swallow and yet we’ve
all come from that adopted
collision course of anxiety.
Those who followed these
‘dogmatic don’ts’, effectively
cut-off 98% of the population
from their lives by the time they
were ready to even have a
relationship. If that weren’t
enough, the system (parents,
peers, t.v., books, plays,
government, religions, etc.)
conditioned additional demands
and modes of interaction, such as
jealousy, posessiveness and
ownership that were smothering
the balance of the 2% of the
population we were willing to get
it on with.
And so we control (or try to at
least), compete and manipulate
each other, only to reach the
conclusion that it all somehow
doesn’t feel good and only on
rare occasions does it work for
the positive. And this is the
group who is judging the gays?
Judging is a waste of energy
when we have all come from the
same conclusion.
Then what is our answer?
Obviously the best therapist is
the person who is de-
conditioning from ' all the
negativity, and not the person
who has-wall to wall diplomas
and is still mouthing the same
old devisive rhetoric.
Politically, we must
advance to a new stage that goes
totally beyond reforming the
system to accomadate gays. If
we are adopting the same tactics
and using the same motives and
anger as demonstrated by the
straights we remain as
dehumanized as ever. It is like
replacing white capitalism with
black capitalism, when the
whole question of competition is
changing the consciousness that
will determine human survival.
Replacing a straight with a gay is
not the issue any longer, if we ar
still using thesamemethods, we
are trying to replace.
De-conditioning is a vast
pandora’s box and yet at the
same time more freedom than
we’ve ever known. The first step
towards consciousness is
realizing that there is a - problem
and that is the hardest step to
take. But once it is taken there is
no turning back, as if anyone
would want to. Gays have
actually taken the first step
already. We have decided to
love someone else who thinks,
looks and feels the way we do.
We are already responding to
our needs to identify with
ourselves, by extending out to
someone of the same sex.
I will elaborate.later in, in my
opinion, on the positive
liberation steps we have already
taken and can take, which have
.The Questroontinned from ■ /< i
was directed to present another
paper. This he refused to do,
and challenged the professor to
justify his own conclusions.
For the next several weeks
Father George was suspended
from all Class activity (for
“disobedience”) and undrwent
intensive questioning as to why
he was “ in spired to put such filth
on paper. ’ ’ During th is period of
time Fther George seriously was
consideringwithdrawingfrom the
seminary and discussed this
privately with one of his fellow-
seminarians. In order
to have such discussions it
became necessary for the two
seminarians to remove
themselves from the rather
public and also confining
seminary area. They resorted to
afternoon walks on the seminary
grounds. Another
“disobedience!” It was not
permitted to form “particular
friendships” and it Was not
permitted for two individuals to
be alone. Another rule of the
seminary required that there
always be an odd number, such
as three, five, seven, when
seminarians indulged
themselves in activities outside
the group recreation.
His seminarian-friend, soon
to be ordained to the rank of
deacon- was disciplined for this
violation of the rule, though
initially nothing was said to
Father George. His friend kept
from him the disciplinary
measures taken as result of his
having offered a receptive ear to
the problems and frustrations
Father George was
experiencing. when for
the third time it was detected
that a “particular friendship”
was developing, the friend was
suddenly dismissed from the
seminary, and the following day
Father George was again
subjected to intense questioning,
and charged with having a
homosexual relation with a
fellow seminarian. He
attempted in all sincerity to
explain why they had
“developed a friendship” that
his friend was advising him not
to withdraw from the seminary.
This explanation was not
accepted. He was charged with
having selected his particular
“Augustine theme” because in
this way he could express to his
‘ * lover’ ’ how he felt. One certain
section was read to him over and
over and described as
all been a result of our
oppression.
Our individual and
community energies no longer
have to be focused on the
negative. The secret is simply
‘inverting’ the negatives into the
positives.
We must ‘invert’ the straight
concepts of who they want us to
believe we are and who we really
are. That awareness will also
allow the straights to focus on
who they really are as well,
which I see as melding into the
human family, with all of us
loving without labeling.
Iwelcome any comments on
this to: Bob Kunst
P.O.Box 1976
Miami Beach, FL. 33139
(305) 445-6757
representing his mbrsqlaal
feelings for the now departed
seminarian. The fact that the
words were written long before
the seminarian departed, long
before there had been any
disciplinary action because of a
‘‘developing particular
friendship” and therefore had no
connection, was totally ignored.
In March 1946 almost a year
of challenge and frustration
reached its climaz. The
Reverend George Hyde stood
alone in the midst of several
hundred seminarians and
priests, and in the seminary
church was asked to accuse
himself of his faults. The
occasion was the frequent
“Chapter of Faults” a strange
practice in Roman Catholic
religious communities where
each individual must publicly
accuse himself of violations of
the community rule and other
infractions which have not been
spoken of in a formal confession.
Tne system directs that if an
individual will not accuse
himself, then a fellow-
seminarian” as an afct of
charity” must stop foward and
accuse him if he knows of any
infraction committed. Since the
conflict generated by the Moral
Theology class was generally
known throughout the seminary,
it was not surprising that no less
han a dozen over-zealous and
questioningly pious fellow-
seminarians began to openly
accuse Father George of the
most minor violations of the rule,
of ill-temper, of harboring
heretical thoughts, ad infinitum.
One person climaxed the session
by vocally charging that he had
personally witnessed an
“abnormal expression of
particular friendship between
Father George” and the
departed seminarian. He
charged that he had seen them
“fondle” one another. (The
<. 4^' *
nkpmfc&ss enibrace’dufihg iftftch'
Father George thanked the
seminarian for his concern for
his own well-being.)
- With this announcement the
superior demanded that Father
George “purify and save” his
soul by opening his heart to “all
of us who care for you.” Father
George refused this invitation,
neither denying nor admitting
die charges. >
Standing alone in the midst
of the seminary church he
challenged ipainline Christianity
with these words:
.. .The church la Hke a
miraculous vase...which by the
Birth, the Death, the
Resurrection of. Christ is
perpetually filled to overflowing
with sweet-smelling water from
which all men and women are
entitled to nourish themselves.
But no! As far as homosexuals
are concerned,the waters have
.dried up, the vase is
empty...there is no
nourishment....you havo taken
the vase from Ms reach and in
effect have told him to be content
with the aroma only.- no!
homosexuals no longer can be
content with the scent from mi
empty vase....”
With this bold statement,
George Hyde not only
challenged die discriminating
theology of the Roman Catholic
and other churches, but defied
and challenged their doctrinal
authority as well.
“...the Church is the House of
the Lord...n a huge dwelling
with no closets, for that Is the
way He Constructed it. But you
fallible men have remodeled this
House, and in every comer, in
every nook, you have bulk
closets in which you seek to
conftae out of right and out of
reach all homosexual men and
Continued on page 9
Gome to. the GaLa/tet
m. J.’s ...
for everything
LIVE SHOWS / DRINKS / EATS / DISCO DANCING
HAPPY HOUR ALL NIGHT LONG
CHICKEN BASKETS & POOR BOYS
BREAKFAST
Sunday
COCKTAIL HOUR PRICES ALL NIGHT
BRUNCH SERVED
WEST PEACHTREE ;>t 13th STREET
OPEN NIGHTL V AT 9 00 PM
1139 West Peachtree
1494) 972-3290