I found this while browsing the Post-Gazette website.  Since the writer LA Johnson does A LOT of homosexual themed stories, I am presuming that the Post-Gazette was being clumsy by using "spouses" instead of "partners"    I could be wrong but hey -- let's give it a shot anyway .... all you homo spouses who fit this bill, give 'em a call.

Seeking Your Help: Spouses and friends

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Do you and your spouse have mostly couples as friends or do you and your spouse have separate, individual friends? Has it changed over time? What works well for you? What are some of the pitfalls? If you're interested in discussing this topic for a future story, contact L.A. Johnson at Ljohnson@post-gazette.com or 412-263-3903. Be sure to leave your name and day-time phone number.

Frankly, this issue is so utterly complicated that I often avoid posting about it.  The American Episcopal church seems to be falling apart over the ordination of gays and women.  And there's all this gray in the middle sort of language that is meant to appease, but only succeeds in angering everyone.  I'm confused.  Read what the PG and the AP have to say about it. 

The Episcopal Church elected a female bishop as their head honcho.  The larger Anglican Communion is not pleased.  The conservative wing of the Episcopal Church was already angry about both female ordination and the ordination of an openly gay bishop.  The Episcopal Church expressed formal regret that the ordination caused turmoil, but not over the decision to ordain this man. 

So now the conservatives in the Episcopal Church led by Pittsburgh's very own Bishop Duncan want to break away and form their own diocese who does not answer to the duly elected female head bishop.  They want a floating non-geographic diocese led by someone specially appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Meanwhile progressive Episcopalians here in Pittsburgh are not sure how they fit into this whole schema.

I mean no disrespect because obviously this is a very painful issue for the entire Anglican Communion and the American Episcopal Church in particular.  Especially for Episcopalians here in Pittsburgh. 

But is it just me or does it seem pretty apparent that there is no real way to keep the church in union?  How does a diocese that refuses to ordain woman reconcile itself with a female bishop? If the Episcopal/Anglican strain of homophobia is so rampant that Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria would openly support legislation making homosexuals illegal (not just homosexuality), how do you expect them to accept a gay bishop? 

It just seems that this band-aid is being pulled off very slowly and hurting a lot of people who grow ever more divided over these issues.  Kind of like the looming divorce which sometimes is much better for everyone, especially the kids.

Just my non-Episcopal observation ...

Aside from the myriad of letters disputing the PG's review of An Inconvenient Truth and those from the stalwart "Great Americans" defending the Cheesesteak Bigot, a few homosexual themed letters appear ...

First, Martha Perego of Oakland wants to give us homos our very own second class status word or term to describe our unions.  Her rational? No one objects to the usage of fraternity or sorority.  No one?  Huh.  Cause I do.  Of course, I'm more concerned about the elitism, snobbery, hazing, alcohol poisoning, date raping, exclusivity ...oh and that "frat boy" mentality that pervades adult life like stink on a dog. 

Bless her two-tiered little heart, she's willing to permit us the same social and financial benefits.  I'm not sure Martha has been reading up on all the latest homo-hitchin' up news b/c what she's describing is called a civil union.  And our good friends over at the AFA of PA are onto that approach. 

Next up is Bob Poropatich of Stanton Heights writing in response to the Post-Gazette's critique of the Pride Theate Festival.  (This is the prancing queens part of the post).  Bob takes affront at the PG's implication that the festival is too straight and minus the prancing queens.  He compares the lack of drag queens and lisping homos to Fiddler on the Roof:

To match her ignorance one could say that if you go to see "Fiddler on the Roof," you won't see any jewelers, lawyers or Park Avenue doctors either.

This is what the Post-Gazette actually said:

But for a festival that purportedly spotlights GLBT themes, the plays are pretty, well, straight. You'd think there might be a few theatrical conventions challenged, but there aren't, and bisexual and transsexual/gender characters are conspicuously absent.

I didn't attend the festival so I cannot comment.  But the lack of bisexual and transgendered characters is a common motif in most mainstream gay events, organizations, issues, causes, etc.  And the further we strive to demonstrate how normal we are (not necessarily a bad thing) the more likely we are to turn our backs on those who don't fit in quite so easily.  The Post-Gazette may have picked up on that. 

The trick, Bob, is that we get caught up in normalizing our community to a heterosexual ideal.  Perhaps we should focus our time, talent and art on how HUMAN we are regardless of where we fall in the alphabet soup acronyms.