Study: Weightlifting helps breast cancer survivors
Breast cancer survivors have been getting bum advice. For decades, many doctors warned that lifting weights or even heavy groceries could cause painful arm swelling. New research shows that weight training actually helps prevent this problem.
“How many generations of women have been told to avoid lifting heavy objects?” Dr. Eric …
Tags: Breast Cancer, Breast Cancer Survivors, Bum, Cancer Breast, Decades, Doctors, Dr Eric, Groceries, Lifting Heavy Objects, Lifting Weights, Many Generations, Weight Training, WeightliftingA consensus: among consultants Wait until 2012 To Repeal Prop 8
he advice is piling up on one side for folks who want to see same sex marriage legalized in California: Wait until 2012 to ask voters to overturn Proposition 8.
We’ve told you about the three LGBT coalitions of color who suggested waiting, and the nation’s oldest LGBT Democratic club saying the same. Now some of California’s top political consultants are joining the chorus.
Now, now. We know that some gay marriage fans blame consultants for the ruinous anti-Prop 8 campaign. But Equality California marriage director Marc Solomon — who helped lead the successful drive for marriage in Massachusetts — asked seven to share their thoughts on the 2010 v. 2012 question. Plus, they asked what the LGBT community and their allies should do to prepare to go back to the ballot. Three were openly LGBT (including two who are married) and one is a Republican.
The consensus: Wait until 2012.
Sue Burnside, co-chair of the National Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund Campaign Board, is “convinced that we should refrain from rushing in 2010, and instead to build on grassroots passion and strategically prepare for a ‘Yes on Marriage Equality’ referendum in 2012.” Ditto for Mark Armour and Rick Claussen suggests “a multi-year campaign that culminates in an election when the time is right.”
“If you do UNSUCCESSFULLY undertake this issue at the ballot in 2010, this will further erode public support on the issue and make it harder for future efforts to succeed,” Claussen said.
Even though Democratic consultant Richie Ross — who has won a bazillion races in California going back a few decades — doesn’t offer a definitive suggestion, he presents a raw numbers breakdown that suggests that by 2012 there will be more young voters on the rolls (likely to vote for gay marriage) and more older voters (likely to oppose) dying off.
Dave Fleischer, who has worked on many gay-related ballot measures over the years, worries about money. Each side on the Prop 8 battle raised at least $40 million. “The most conventional path to victory employed by a wide variety of campaign strategists — bury your opposition by dramatically outspending them, effectively drowning out their message — isn’t an option when the opposition is as well-funded as ours is in California.” He worries that the 66 weeks until Nov 2010 “is a very brief time to raise $40-50 million.”
Plus, he worries if “our strategy, in a lower turnout year, (can) insure that those who voted withus in 2008 return to the polls in greater numbers than those who voted against us? We can certainly try. But we have to acknowledge that this would be very difficult. Key blocs of our supporters, such as younger voters, often turn out to vote in reduced numbers in off-years.”
Former Los Angeles Times pollster Jill Darling said “Did the 2008 campaign move voters? Are the post-elections efforts having any effect? Nothing measurable, as of May.”
See The consensus: Wait until 2012.
San Francisco Chronicle
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/consensus-amo…
US May Lift Entry Ban on HIV Patients
For more than two decades, anybody who is HIV positive has been prevented from entering the United States. But with President Barack Obama’s support, the ban will likely expire soon, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) taking public comments until August 17. The department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will then make the final decision. “We’re trying to end the stigma and the discriminatory practice for a disease that doesn’t warrant exclusion for coming into this country,” said the director of the CDC’s division of global migration and quarantine, Dr. Martin Cetron. “We have to appreciate this is not a threat we face from abroad.” He acknowledged that “HIV is clearly a public health disease of significance,” but added that simply letting somebody with HIV into the country does not “immediately pose a risk to the public.”
The proposal could allow an average of about 5,000 HIV-infected people into the United States each year. And according to a CDC estimate published in the federal register, the lifetime medical costs of those admitted in just the first year would total almost $100 million. The United States is one of about 15 countries that prevent entry of HIV-positive patients, though it is possible to obtain a waiver under certain conditions. See US May Lift Entry Ban on HIV Patients
The New American
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/us-may-lift-e…
How long has Seattle supported gay rights?
Seattle: 1st in gay rights
Seattle has been at the vanguard of gay rights for at least three decades. Remember Anita Bryant? While she was getting cities across the county to repeal gay rights ordinances in the 1970s, Seattle voters held the line — the first city in America to vote in favor of gay rights. The City of Seattle adopted a fair employment ordinance in 1973 which specifically prohibited discrimination against gay people in the workplace, followed by a fair housing ordinance in 1975. But in 1978, Initiative 13 attempted to repeal the ordinances. It went down in defeat, and Seattle voters successful stopped the national movement to turn back the clock of gay rights. Since then, the cities of Tacoma, Spokane, and others followed suit; Seattle has elected openly gay city council members for decades and is considered to have one of the largest gay populations in the nation.
– Leonard Garfield
Sunday’s gay pride parade marks the event’s 32nd year. See photos from the event here.
Learn more about Seattle’s Museum of History and Industry at seattlehistory.org.
See How long has Seattle supported gay rights?
Seattle Post Intelligencer
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/how-long-has-…
Gay rights mean different things to different generations of community
Before there were domestic-partnership registries and commitment ceremonies, before same-sex marriages and civil unions — before the gay-rights movement, even — John McCluskey and Rudy Henry met, fell in love and harbored the notion that they could spend their lives making one another happy.
And for 50 years, the Tacoma men went about doing just that, all the while longing for social acceptance.
Even in gay-friendly San Francisco where they first lived together, they found it necessary to hide their relationship from prospective landlords, and on job applications they would sometimes lie about their marital status to avoid raising suspicion.
Decades later in 2006, at a coffee-shop concert on Seattle’s Capitol Hill, Amy Balliett and Jessica Trejo met and they, too, eventually fell in love.
In their 20s, the two had come out as lesbians at a time when young people could find support in groups on high school and college campuses, when they had gay role models in politics and on television, and when their parents probably knew people who were openly gay. By the time the two married in California last October, legal bonds between gays and lesbians were possible in several states.
Balliett and Trejo, Henry and McCluskey are like generational bookends to this modern gay-rights movement, launched 40 years ago this week after a group of activists at a small Manhattan bar called the Stonewall Inn stood up in violent protest to ongoing police harassment.
While older gays and younger ones share much the same agenda of equality, their needs within the movement are also divergent.
Young people, who have at times referred to their own post-gay movement, seek the protections of marriage equality as they form relationships and start families, while gays of their grandparents’ generation are more concerned about issues of aging — like survivor benefits and long-term care.
See Gay rights mean different things to different generations of community
Seattle Times -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/gay-rights-me…
Gay seniors embrace a newfound openness
Marvin Levin was speaking to his psychiatrist in November 2003. The conversation halted briefly as Levin looked away, collecting a thought that had waited decades to surface.
“You know what?” he said, looking up at his doctor. “I’m gay.”
At age 61, married more than 30 years, this was an unlikely admission.
“It was the first time I’d ever put words to that,” Levin said. “It was like an epiphany. And then I looked back on my life and said, ‘You dummy, of course you are.’ ” Levin, now 67, grew up in Chicago, part of a conventional Jewish family. He found himself interested in the gay lifestyle — still highly taboo at the time — but resolved that he was “straight but curious.”
Conforming to the social mores of the time, he married in his mid-20s. “I can’t really say I was madly in love. This was a woman I knew and we had the same sets of values and beliefs. It seemed a good fit.”
Together they had two sons, were active in their synagogue, entertained regularly and worked through the ups and downs of marriage.
“I was Mr. Straight,” Levin said. “There were certain things in life that you do, and I would just go ahead and do them. I was fascinated by this other world. The gay world had this attraction. But I just never did anything with it. It was just there.”
In the 1970s, Levin began suffering from depression. He went into counseling and got on medication but could never identify the source of his unhappiness. Until that day in 2003, in his psychiatrist’s chair.
“My wife at first was shocked,” he said. “But she was also glad I’d finally figured out why at times I was non-functional. She’s a wonderful woman and was very supportive of me through all of this.”
See Gay seniors embrace a newfound openness
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/gay-seniors-e…
LA Times Editorial: A court battle California doesn’t need
The Supreme Court’s ruling last week in the case of a grandiosely unethical West Virginia justice opened a new field of constitutional review — the high court may now consider when an elected state court jurist has been so tainted by politics that due process requires him to recuse himself from a case.
In West Virginia, a coal executive spent more than $3 million to unseat a sitting state Supreme Court justice; it was money well spent, as the justice was defeated by voters and replaced by Brent Benjamin. Benjamin then did what was expected of him and cast a deciding vote in overturning a $50-million jury award against the executive’s coal company.
Indeed, California has wrestled with this problem before — and quite possibly could again.
California’s system for selecting Supreme Court justices is much better than West Virginia’s. Candidates for the court here are nominated by the governor, confirmed by a state commission and then placed on the bench. They must periodically stand for retention, but they are not, as they are in West Virginia, subject to direct challenge by rival candidates. A retention election can cost a justice his or her seat, but it does not let voters kick out one justice and install their own replacement.
California’s rules have helped balance the judiciary’s independence with the public’s fair insistence on accountability, but even this state’s reasonable retention process has been subject to tilt. Most notable was the 1986 retention election that removed Chief Justice Rose Bird and two associate justices, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin. Much reflection has gone into that race in the decades since, and opinions differ on its merits. Two truths, however, stand the test of deep inquiry: The forces arrayed against Bird were not motivated solely by her opposition to the death penalty — that was cover for a second complaint, which was her defense of consumer rights against corporate power — and Reynoso and Grodin were victims of a special-interest crusade against a vulnerable chief.
Would that we could relegate that episode to California’s history. In fact, the state rumbles with discontent over its high court and chief, and those stirrings contain alarming echoes of the battle of 1986.
At issue are the court’s rulings on same-sex marriage and Proposition 8, and its chief justice, Ronald M. George. In May 2008, the court overturned the state’s ban on gay marriage, striking a victory for civil rights in the grandest tradition of constitutional protection of minorities. A few months later, after voters approved Proposition 8 and amended the state Constitution to ban the same institution that the court had upheld, George and his colleagues upheld the amendment. Both times, George wrote for the majority. He thus angered opponents of gay marriage in 2008 and supporters of it in 2009.
By California’s rules, George faces a retention election in 2010, and some predict that he could face challenges from either side — or even both — in this polarizing debate.
That would be a shame for the state’s judiciary, an unfortunate attack on judicial independence and an unfair castigation of one of this state’s most principled and admirable public officials. In the gay-marriage cases, George’s votes demonstrated conscience, professionalismand restraint. He voted to uphold same-sex unions out of the strong conviction — which this page shares — that the Constitution does not allow society to deny the protection of marriage to gay couples any more than it once denied it to those united across race. The ruling was right on the law, and will certainly be validated over the long march of history.
Months later, voters tacked in the other direction, narrowly rejecting gay marriage and amending the Constitution to allow California to recognize only the unions of heterosexual couples. That was challenged, naturally, and the lawsuit offered the court the opportunity to extend its earlier ruling, though on shaky constitutional grounds — advocates for same-sex marriage argued that Proposition 8 was such an affront to the rights of Californians that it revised the Constitution rather than merely amending it. Scholars split on the merits of that argument, and although the strong consensus of legal opinion rejectedit, an opportunistic justice might have seized the chance to solidify his legacy.
Instead, George subordinated his politics — as evidenced by his writing — to the weight of constitutional opinion. He voted to uphold the proposition, even though it undid his own work. Permitted latitude within the strictures of the Constitution in the first case, George was able to vote his conscience; bound by the Constitution in the second case, he yielded.
Such is the lot of a principled judicial officer, but those concerned only with results already have signaled their unhappiness with George. The moneyed interests that supported Proposition 8 last fall are considering whether to finance a campaign against George next year. Supporters of gay marriage, who championed his heroism in 2008, were bitterly disappointed when the court upheld the hateful initiative.
This is not West Virginia. Corporate interests are not knocking off justices who disagree with them and seating more accommodating replacements. But intimidation has no place in our judicial life any more than it does in Appalachia. The 1986 campaign against Bird and her colleagues now stands for many as a reminder that well-intentioned systems of accountability may be hijacked by special interests, a lesson learned too often and at great cost in California. It was misguided in its first iteration; it would be regrettable in its second.
See A court battle California doesn’t need
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/la-times-edit…
Two Anti-Gay Marriage Dems Cut Deal With Republicans to shift NY Senate to GOP control
ALBANY, N.Y. — Republicans and two dissident Democrats took control of New York’s Senate on Monday after the two New York City renegades voted with the GOP to throw the fledgling Democratic majority out of power.
The decision by senators Pedro Espada Jr. of the Bronx and Hiram Monserrate of Queens to join the coalition gave Republicans a 32-30 voting edge on hastily introduced measures that changed the leadership structure. Neither Espada nor Monserrate changed party affiliation.
Democrats held the Senate for barely five months after being out of power for four decades.
Shortly after the coup, Republicans named Espada temporary president of the Senate and Republican Dean Skelos of Nassau County vice president and majority leader. Skelos was majority leader in 2008.
Those are the most powerful positions in the chamber. With them, the bipartisan coalition can direct legislation and reassign committee and leadership posts.
Democrats tried to leave the chamber, even turning off the lights briefly, and are expected to challenge Monday’s action in court.
The coup throws into doubt the movement to legalize same-sex marriage, one of the major policy issues still pending for the last two weeks of the regular session. Although passed in the Democrat-led Assembly, it is stalled in the Senate. Several Republicans and Sen. Ruben Diaz, a Bronx Democrat oppose the measure.
See Two Anti-Gay Marriage Dems Cut Deal With Republicans
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/two-anti-gay-…
Revisiting 1969 and the Start of Gay Liberation
On Friday afternoon, officials from the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce rang the closing bell at the New York Stock Exchange to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall uprising and also to honor Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month.
The embrace of the gay rights movement by Wall Street — the title of the stock exchange event was “From Stonewall to Federal Hall” — was a striking example of how much things have changed for lesbians and gay men in four decades. The change is brought into relief in a monthlong exhibition, “1969: The Year of Gay Liberation,” that opened June 1 at the New York Public Library.
Using the Stonewall uprising, which began in the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, as a starting point, the exhibition focuses on the pivotal months that followed, charting the emergence of a new strain of militant activism — exemplified by groups like the Gay Liberation Front, Radicalesbians and the Street Transvestites Action Revolutionaries — that expressed a new vision of gay freedom.
The activist vision of that era, the exhibition suggests, was more far-reaching than the so-called homophile movement, which had used a more cautious approach, and also more critical of societal institutions like the family than the contemporary gay rights movement, which has been dominated in recent years by the debate over same-sex marriage.
Jason Baumann, who curated the exhibition and also coordinates the extensive collection of gay materials in the library’s Manuscripts and Archives Division, contrasted the new exhibition with “Becoming Visible: The Legacy of Stonewall,” the library’s landmark show in 1994 on the history of gay and lesbian life in New York.
Photo: Photo: Diana Davies. Gay Liberation Front marches on Times Square, 1969.
See Revisiting 1969 and the Start of Gay Liberation
New York Times -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/revisiting-19…
How far New Hampshire has come
A photograph of state Rep. Jim Splaine of Portsmouth standing next to N.H. governor John Lynch Wednesday as he signed into law legislation legalizing gay marriage reminds me of an incident from the 1981 legislative session that serves as a dramatic example of just how much New Hampshire has evolved over the nearly three decades since then.The state has changed in so many ways I didn’t think would ever happen, largely because of my initiation into the “Live Free Or Die” view of life. My first months in the Granite State during the winter of 1979 were punctuated with periods of disbelief. Why would voters reject offers of federal grants to improve their communities? On general principal, that’s why. The phrase I heard over and over again seated on the sidelines of a million March town meetings was “We don’t want to become New York.”I didn’t take it personally. I don’t think anyone in Epping at the time knew I grew up on the shores of Lake Ontario. Still, there were moments when I felt like a stranger in a strange land. See How far New Hampshire has come
Foster’s Daily Democrat
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/how-far-new-h…
