We received our current issue of the GLCC News this past week after what seems like a long hiatus.  Is it just me or has it been awhile?  Maybe its just me.  I really look forward to this connection with the Community Center.  The professional quality just keeps getting better and I really like that.

Anyway, the organization is making strides in updating their use of technology with a brand new email list and they have posted some of the articles from the newsletter online here.  Still, I feel compelled to share.

Here's what I find most interesting ...

Ben Cook, GLCC Youth Program Coordinator has a nicely done piece about the GLCC's work with youth.  This program is, in my humble opinion, the hallmark of the organization.  Well, maybe second only to the Phone Line.  I think Ben is a great guy and does really good work.  Plus, he actively mentions kids who identify as queer or questioning.  This article also features the "Most Ironic Line" in the whole newsletter.  Tucked on page 3 after a feature on Celebrate the Night with absolutely no mention of any of the controversy surrounding probably THE most controversial gay happening of the entire year, Ben writes:

Unlike most GLCC programs that have careful planning periods leading up to large, publicized events (e.g., OUTrageous Bingo, PrideFest), the Youth Program is a mostly behind-the-scenes weekly commitment by the GLCC to the young people of our community.

Is it just me?  Do you see it?

There's a mention of PUMP's "40 Under 40" which includes Ben!  Go, Ben! 

The GLCC is hiring for two paid positions:  Community Resource & Information Specialist and a Grant Writer. 

Someone named Scott Itano (???) writes a nice piece about finding a LGBT-Friendly Physician.  He gives a shout out to two local practices.  I'm not a fan of one of them, so I'm going to instead give a shout out to my PCP for being so groovy.  I went to her simply because she replaced my former doctor who had left for greener pastures in Sewickley.  She was great -- she asked me a ton of LGBT sensitive questions.  Plus, she already knew the main side effects of the meds prescribed to me by other doctors.  Wow.  So if you need a great PCP, drop me a line and I'll give you her name.  Awesome.  Still, Scott's article is quite useful and one of the most neatest things in the newsletter.

I can't tell you how refreshing it is to have a PCP who is gay friendly and medically reliable.  Awesome.

An old friend, Gary McKillop, focuses on the importance of donations and volunteers to the work of the Community Center.  It is interesting to me, but I'm a professional human servicey type.  I think these "asks" could be more powerful if they included anecdotes or somehow the "voice" of the people served.  I know I was always impressed by *something* if I spent more than 30 minutes in that building ... a phone call, a drop in visitor, a listing on the bulletin board, a volunteer's story.  You should do that -- go spend some time there and just soak up how important this resource is to the community.

There's write up of the GLCC's strategic planning direction.  I was disappointed that there is no mention of diversity, at least thus far.  I think that's a significant issue in terms of those who hold power and decision-making authority and those who are served (or not served) by those folks.  Still, I know that any mention of diversity raises hackles on certain necks ... so keep reading.  Or go read something else. 

There's a new GLBT Corporate Network which is working with local corporations.  Awesome news.  If you have a GLBT group at your workplace, you can hook up with them.  There's only a telephone number contact so email me and I'll send it to you.

If you read this blog, you should be a GLCC News subscriber.  Hopefully, they will be able to move toward an online published edition (with ads!  the ads are great!).  Maybe YOU could volunteer to help them do that.  Or volunteer on the Phone Line.  Or the Youth Group.  Make a donation.  Go for it! 

I am 36 years old and this morning, I had my first mammogram.  I am one and one half years late in doing this.  I needed to get a baseline at age 35 because of the history of cancer in my family.  I procrastinated because it didn't seem urgent to me and because of how much hype I heard about the discomfort. 

I was being stupid and potentially risking my life.  That is not okay.

From the Susan G. Komen Foundation:

Women who partner with women and lesbians do have a greater risk of breast cancer than other women, but it is not because of their sexual orientation.  Rather, it is because some risk factors for breast cancer and barriers for breast cancer detection - never having had children and not seeing a doctor on a regular basis -- occur more often in lesbians.

There's a link between regular reproductive health services and breast exams/mammograms.  Because we are less likely to have children, we may not get routine care and, hence, may miss early detection.

So this morning, I toddled off the AGH Cancer Center.  I must say it was a very comfortable office and the staff were excellent.  I waited less than 10 minutes before I was gowned and ready to go.  The technician took the time to explain everything to me and was very gentle walking me step by step through the process. 

It was not painful. The pressure during most of the exam was awkward, but the technician explained that they have to flatten our breasts as much as possible to view all the tissue.  The truly uncomfortable part was the side shot which involved some leaning and flattening and grasping of a handle.  But, truth to be told, it was just about as comfortable as my yearly vaginal exam.  It is absolutely more comfortable than dying of breast cancer.

I'm all clear.  So now I go back at age 40 and then once a year from that point forward.

Don't be like me and procrastinate.  I've made a point to bring it up with every woman I've encountered today.  Over 50% told me they haven't kept current on mammograms.

Don't be like us.  Call your gyne or your PCP and get going.  I want you to come back and read this blog often.  I plan to still be here at age 40 and tell you all about my next mammogram.  Will you be able to tell me about yours?

Local opinion seems to be that our own con-alternative paper, the Tribune Review, is pretty anti-gay.  The fact, however, is that most of their gay coverage has been consistent with mainstream thought on gays -- we aren't so bad after all, its not such a big deal, don't we have better things to worry about (usually the libertarian columnists), and an abhorence of violence against gays.  Its a benign quasi-tolerance that keeps us fimly in our second-class seats, but protects us (mostly) from being bashed by pipe wielding maniacs.  They may not want their sons to be gay, but it would be okay if their daughters have a quirky gay confidante. Who could ask for anything more than that?  (I'm being ironic here b/c a 72 year old harmless man was killed by a pipe wielding maniac in spite of the fuzzy Will and Gracism pervading pop culture).

Two Trib columnists have tackled gay stories of late.  In an interesting display of better late than never, Matt Sober weighs in on the Tim Hardaway furor.  Sober went to Penn State with John Amaechi, the former NBA player who recently came out.  Sober recalls Amaechi as a very bright guy who probably appreciates the tough conversations his coming out have inspired throughout the sports world.  Then Sober takes an interesting twist:

And the lesson here is that declaring you hate gay people is just as silly as, well, declaring you love gay people.

Either way, the implication is that it's possible to know an individual based on some larger group identification.

Gay. Black. Immigrant.

Pitt grad.

Saying you hate gay people is silly -- that's the teachable moment Sober draws from all this?  Huh.  Declaring you love gay people is silly?  Its unfortunate that Sober opted for a jab at Pitt fans in lieu of actually saying something meaningful about the pervasion of homophobia in the sports world.  Its great that he's a fan of John Amaechi, but he trips right over his blase attitude into the treacherous world of "let's pretend there are no difference and see everyone as the same." 

Columnist Tom Purcell uses gay sheep experimentation to underscore the collapse of civilization.  Not because of gay sheep, but because of America's obsession with gay sheep and Anna Nicole Smith.  Some researchers were exploring the sexuality of sheep.  Hue and cry ensued about the ethics of such research, bringing the attention of such entities as PETA and Martina Navritalova.  Purcell takes the obligatory "nutty advocacy group" shot at PETA, dismisses any possibility that genetic research on sexual orientation could possibly be used against gays and then wraps up his analysis with this overreaching comparison:

Evil dictators are stifling freedom and torturing millions. Ethnic hatred and genocide are killing millions. Pestilence and disease are killing millions more. But we're more attuned to things that don't matter, such as "American Idol."

And we're at war. Western civilization is in a battle of wills with fanatics who hope to restore 6th century values. They intend to get their hands on some frighteningly powerful bombs to make us bend to that will.

I'm sorry, Tom, but in a nation that has collectively handed over our welfare to a despotic idiot, I'm feeling pretty good when groups like PETA bring our attention to potential landmines.  Especially when I look at your previous columns which don't seem to focus on evil dictators, torture or genocide.  But they do feature a lot of italicized words and exclamation points.  Its practically the same thing.

So more gay-benign pablum from the Tribune-Review.

Today I join hundreds of other bloggers around the nation to share why I am pro-choice.  Please forgive if this does not flow as well as I would like - I'm not feeling 100% today.

Blog for Choice Day is a chance to raise the profile of reproductive rights issues in the blogosphere and the media, and to let everyone know that a woman's right to choose is nonnegotiable.

Why do I support a woman's right to choose?

I believe that our society has been structured on principals of men exerting ownership over women, but that is not necessarily how the law has been structured.  Thus I believe that much of dialogue around choice/life is about women being free to make their own choices, not about unborn children.  Choice is about power and control, something our
society does not easily impart to women.  Thankfully, not all men fall into this trap and, sadly, too many women do.

I also believe that most people who are pro-life REALLY are anti-choice if you look at the sum total of their political stances and personal actions to "protect life."  Displaying a bumper sticker is not the same thing as becoming a foster parent or donating to child abuse prevention organizations.  Waving a dead fetus is not the same thing as cradeling a
baby born addicted to cocaine or holding the hand of a 14 year pregnant girl facing her rapist in court. Confronting clients at women's health clinics is not the same thing as
teaching young men to value and respect women (and themselves) or
speaking up when they don't.

Perhaps I focus to much on what the other side does or fails to do.  The hypocrisy around respecting life saddens me and sickens me, especially given that I work every day with children that are not being cared and tended for as they should.  Children who need society to step up and provide their families with adequate resources to parent effectively and children who sometimes need someone to step in and parent them directly.

Choice is about power and control.  I am in control of my body and my reproductive decisions.  I will not willingly relinquish that power. 

In another stunning effort to spin negative publicity, City Councilwoman Darlene Harris claims that she did not order a smoke eater machine to de-stuffify her office.  Ms. Harris simply wanted some box fans and now she is outraged, outraged I tell you, that someone mistakenly spent $1200 on the smoke eater.

"I wanted a little square box" with a ventilation fan, she said. Gesturing at the 2-foot-by-4-foot Trion Eliminator Series SE 800E mounted in the ceiling above her desk, she said, "When I came in and saw that thing, I couldn't believe it."

Harris, along with Student Body President Doug Shields, was featured in a recent Post-Gazette article about illicit smoking in the City-County Building.  Both admitted that they smoke in spite of a smoke prohibition rule going back before our new county-wide ban.  Neither seemed the least bit penitent which doesn't bode well for them to follow the new law. 

To summarize thus far, Harris has completely missed the point that this is about SMOKING not a smoke eating machine.  Her umbrage is matched only by her ridiculousness.  Not only is she refusing to take responsibility for breaking the law, but she's now pointing fingers at her political enemies whoever they may be:

She said she has asked Public Works Director Guy Costa why the device was ordered and installed when she only wanted a ceiling fan.

"I'm still trying to find that out, and I don't know if I ever will," she said. "I'd like to know, is this politics, or what?"

Yes, Darlene, it is politics at its most sad when an elected city leader openly violates the law because she's too lazy/proud/arrogant to go outside like the rest of the city employees.  It is politics at its lowest when an elected city leader shifts responsibility for her own stupid choices onto the shoulders of said city employees.  Public Works gets enough guff without having to ante up for your mistakes.

It is politics at its most disgusting when an elected city leader assumes we are foolish enough to be distracted from her illegal activities by other issues.

Ms. Harris said she has occasionally smoked in the office on nights when she was working late. She said she's been working hard to get more plainclothes police in North Side neighborhoods, catalog abandoned houses, identify drug and prostitution hot spots and write legislation to govern absentee landlords.

Let me get this straight --- according to her logic, if we want a more lawful community, she's going to have to break a few laws.  If we want healthier communities for our families and children, she's going to have to compromise the health of her staffers and others who visit the building.  If we want absentee landlords to take responsibility for their property, she's going to need the freedom to place responsibility on others.

She should have left well enough alone after the last article.  Doug Shields came off like a giggling schoolboy with a big man-crush on Luke, but that's nothing to the political harridan that is Darlene Harris.