72-year-old man attacked in Detroit, and some other stuff

From Detroit's WDIV:

The victim, Andrew Anthos, was riding a city bus back to his residence at Detroit's Windsor Tower apartments on Feb. 13 when another male passenger asked him if he was gay, Anthos's niece, Athena Fedenis said.

Anthos was followed by the man from the bus and beaten with a pipe in front of his apartment, Fedenis said.

"It just doesn't make any sense," Magealine Hloros, the victim's aunt said. "Why do people have to hurt each other?"

Anthos is barely able to speak above a whisper and is paralyzed from the neck down. He is currently at Detroit Receiving Hospital, his family said.

The police haven't arrested anyone yet, but they're searching the area and seeking people who have information.

Of course, the report didn't disclose the victim's sexuality. That would be highly unprofessional for a news service to post that sort of information without first getting the guy's consent, and at least waiting until a more appropriate time to ask for it.

But that doesn't stop me from wondering, and, more importantly, wondering why I'm wondering. Would his sexuality have some sort of effect on my ability to empathize with him? Is the distinction between actual and perceived sexual orientation, written into anti-discrimination and hate crimes legislation, one that actually gets translated into a differing ability to see someone as "like me", a perversion of the philosophy of making the political personal?

Hmmm... good questions! Maybe the answer lies in the drawing of such distinctions. I mean, isn't all sexual orientation perceived on some level? Like, how do I know I'm gay unless I'm basing that notion on the predominent content of sexual fantasies and differing emotions I feel with regard to the Same Sex and the Opposite Sex. I'm still perceiving those feelings, and when I tell someone else that I'm gay, they're perceiving (hearing) what I say, making that my perceived sexuality to them. For example, someone like Ted Haggard's (I CAN'T GET ENOUGH OF HIM, I KNOW) sexuality causes slippage in such a distinction: if my actual sexuality is gay because I tell people that I'm gay, then shouldn't his actual sexuality be straight because he tells people that he's straight?

I don't mean to be queering the planet, as queer theorists would put it, calling into question the idea of monolithic sexuality. I'm going in a different direction and wondering how we know what our sexualities are, how we know the sexuality of others, what it means to be GLBT, and by extension, how we subconsciously include and exclude people who don't wear their sexuality in the same way.

Without a doubt, what happened to this man was wrong. Michigan does not have hate crimes legislation that covers sexuality, but if it did, it would probably include a phrase about "actual and perceived sexual orientation". And it is definitely a GLBT issue if it went down like it was described in the press because of the assailant's invocation of the word "gay". But the revelation of parts and aspects of one's identity can humanize, and someone whose identity includes some modicum of GLBT would be easier for me to identify with. When someone's identity includes "perceived as gay", I wonder about how easy it would be to consider someone like that "like me" considering that everyone could potentially be "perceived as gay". Maybe that leads to the best conclusion - a comradery with all people because of such potential perception.

Or I could just be like a friend of mine and think that everyone's either gay or lying.

Gay marriage odds-n-ends

Lots of developments this week, probably because this is the beginning of the year and all the legislative bodies are decided what will be debated this year. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of these measures in our favor just fizzled out. The ones against us, though, have to be done before 2008, of course.

• A Michigan appeals court decided that the anti-marriage amendment passed this past year in that state denies any benefit to same-sex couples who work for the state or state universities.
• Two Democrats in Connecticut announced their intention to propose a bill to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.
• Two bills (an anti-marriage amendment and a DOMA) were defeated in committee in New Mexico. Shocker, it fell along that party line.
• An anti-marriage amendment passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in Indiana, once again along that party line.
• In New Hampshire, a Republican will introduce a bill for "Contractual Cohabitation" for both same and opposite sex partners.
• The Wyoming Senate passed a bill to prevent recognition of same-sex marriages performed out-of-state, because their own ban on same-sex marriage, the federal DOMA, and Massachusetts' own law preventing out-of-staters from marrying there aren't enough.
• Hawaiian Democrats introduced bills in the state House and Senate for civil unions.
• Christine Quinn, the New York City Council Speaker, introduced a bill to patch up the city's domestic partnership registry.