Strollerderby : lesbian

California School District Approves So-Called Gay Curriculum

Brett Singer — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:30:00 GMT

This was a tricky story to put into a headline. See, it's not a "gay curriculum" per se. That's what the opponents of the program, officially called LGBT Lesson #9, are calling it. A better headline is this one from KCBS news -- Alameda Approves Elementary Curriculum on Tolerance. The "controversial lesson plan aimed at discouraging bullying and teasing based on gay and lesbian stereotypes" was approved by the Alameda school board by a vote of 3-2.

Yes, 3-2. And it's only in Alameda, California. When I first saw the story on Fox News a few days ago (before the vote had occurred), I initially thought that this was state-wide. Because based on the tone of the reporting, one would think that something HUGE was going on.

Watch this fair and balanced (not) report from Fox News:

(If the embed doesn't work, please click here.)

Listen to the way Steve Ducey says "transgendered people" as if he were saying "horrible, evil nazis who would like nothing more than to eat your family dog."

The question the Fox report raises is whether or not it is "age appropriate" to teach K-5 kids about what they refer to as the "gay lifestyle." Also, "Opponents [of the curriculum] say that this is an effort to advance the gay, lesbian and transgendered agenda," according to Fox. Next: those opponents want to recall the board members who voted for it. Then Steve Ducey wraps things up for us by saying "OK. Same sex penguins. Only in California." (Well, also in New York, at the Central Park Zoo. But hey, East Coast, West Coast, we're all heathens in the eyes of the Duce.)

So what is everyone so upset about? One item is the book "And Tango Makes Three," described by FoxNews.com as a book that is "about two gay penguins who raise a baby peguin, is the basis for grade school teachings on gay and lesbian lifestyles."

Right. Because that's what the point of the book is. To showcase the gay lifestyle. Because being gay is just a lifestyle choice, right? A choice made by irresponsible Sodomites who hate America and all of the values on which we stand.

The purpose of the lesson plan is to promote tolerance. And judging by the reaction, some tolerance is needed.

Another take on this is provided by KGO-TV, an ABC News affiliate in San Francisco. That report says that parents are upset that they will be unable to "opt-out" of the lessons if they feel that they go against their religious beliefs. They also say that "race and religion...can also lead to bullying," but those things are not discussed.

Here's the thing. I don't know the full extent of the curriculum being proposed. But tolerance for gay people is not taught the way tolerance for people of different races are taught. Wen I was in school, we learned about racial tolerance. I very clearly recall a film strip (remember film strips?) in which Bill Cosby said, "There's a Black man sitting in your loafers," and pointing out the racism in old movies ("When they got scared -- these dudes turned white!"). We read "Native Son." What we didn't do was discuss anything about gay people.

Fast-forward thirty a few years. My son is in school. He learns about racial tolerance. He has told me more than once that anyone who believes that one race of people is better than another race of people is "insane." He learns about the holidays of religions that he wouldn't otherwise be familiar with. But as far as I know, he hasn't read "And Tango Makes Three." Why not? Maybe because gay stuff still makes people uncomfortable. (The Onion had a headline that reflected this brilliantly. I can't find it but basically it said that the popularity of "Queer Eye For The Straight Guy" could attributed to the fact that gay people are so cute without all that gay sex. The Onion said it better than that.)

I admit that this is based on my own experience, but I think there's something to it. Is this particular curriculum the answer? I don't know. Will reading "And Tango Makes 3" in second grade cause the sky to be consumed in hellfire? Nope. Gay parents are out there (no pun intended). Why shouldn't kids know that?

What do you think? Is K-5 too young to learn about gay people? Or should it be treated as another path down the road to tolerance?

Source: Mercury News

Image: Amazon

Mom Arrested for Having 555 Pound Son

13 Year Old Alfie Definitely Not A Dad

SNL Mother's Day Skits

Don't Call Her a Tomboy

JeanneSager — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:36:00 GMT

Ask anyone of our generation what a tomboy is, and as forward-thinking as we might be, you'll get a gender-bending answer. Ask our kids, and you might just get a funny look.

It seems the word tomboy is disappearing, or at least the negative connotation that came with it when we were kids.

Years ago a girl who preferred her t-shirts to tutus and her knees skinned and dirty would bring out all the old biddies in the neighborhood to cluck and shake their fingers. The "l-word" was whispered by parents late at night, and I don't mean love.

It wasn't PC or, for that matter, very fair. Neither is the dictionary definition: "an energetic, sometimes boisterous girl whose behavior and pursuits, esp. in games and sports, are considered more typical of boys than of girls."

But according to an in-depth look at the tomboy label in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, girls who don't want to act all "girly," are getting a little more respect these days. Basically, girls are just that - girls. And if they're girls who like to skateboard, girls who climb trees (as long as their parents don't catch them) and girls who prefer getting muddy, it's OK - they don't need an extra title. They're still, well, girls.

Marketers might not have it figured out yet - I'm still waiting for mud and bugs Barbie - but the girls have. Maybe that's because so have we. I never would have thought to call my daughter a tomboy; even though I most definitely was (and I'm not ashamed of that). Part of it is because she loves her pink clothes, her tutus and her sparkle clippies, and nothing I've done has changed her tastes. Sigh. But when she tears across the backyard to tackle her friend Chase, I just see two kids playing. It took my godmother, who is in her late fifties, early sixties, to even alert me to the fact that my daughter isn't as "girly" as some. "She's a tomboy," she told me the other day, watching my daughter and Chase outside on the swingset. "She's unique."

The former didn't bother me, but the latter I appreciated more. Yes, that's right, she's unique. She's different. She doesn't have to do everything one way because she's a girl. She just does . . . whatever.

Explains Kristen Tillotson in the Star-Tribune:

The consensus: Girls feel more pressure to look good than boys -- but not necessarily all pink and lacy. They still have more responsibilities around the house, such as helping with cooking and cleaning, than their brothers do. They also have a lot of chutzpah and ambition.

I doubt the pressure to look good will ever go away. Whether you want to look good for a guy, a girl or even just to feel more comfortable in your own skin, a portion of that is intrinsic in feminity - in part because our bodies change so drastically during adolescence. The difference between responsibilities in the household between the genders is still up to parents; although I'd wager that even that is changing. But if it's the sister who prefers cutting the lawn to helping to cook dinner, at least she might never hear she's doing the man's job when there's woman's work to be done.

Image: SagerScenes

Michigan Court Must Hear Lesbian Custody Dispute

JeanneSager — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:31:00 GMT

The residents of Michigan passed a gay marriage ban in 2004, but that doesn't mean the courts can't weigh in on a lesbian couple's custody dispute.

A court ruled last week that the legal adoption of three children by two gay Michigan residents - while they were living in Illinois - must not only be recognized by the Michigan courts but addressed as the now estranged couple attempts to navigate a custody arrangement.

Diane Giancaspro and Lisa Congleton have three children between them, adopted in 1998, 1999 and 2002, while the couple was living in Illinois, a state that recognizes both parents in a homosexual relationship and allows for joint adoption. The women broke up in 2007 - after moving to Michigan.

But when Giancaspro sued for custody under Michigan law, her former partner called for the case's dismissal. Congleton was attempting to use the state's refusal to recognize domestic partnerships in her favor, stating that neither parent has rights in the state of Michigan. As depressing as it is that a lesbian had to make use of the laws that are set up AGAINST her to retain a connection with her children, it worked. The judge in the case said she recognized the "validity" of the adoption but couldn't enfore either woman's parental rights.

Giancaspro, with the help of the ACLU, took the case to an appeals court. Last week, a two to one decision from the court mandated the issue be put back before a Michigan court, ruling that the U.S. Constitution protects the adoption and therefore allows for a custody dispute to be mediated in a family court setting.

The decision has, of course, prompted suggestions by family values advocates that it's time for a gay adoption ban in Michigan (really guys? as if the gay marriage ban didn't prove you can't pull your heads from your you-know-whats?). But it's a victory for gay parents, who are finally getting access to a right afforded every other parent in the state - the right to their day in court.

I still can't help but come back to Congleton's argument, however. I understand she was grasping at the same straws any parent would to keep their children, but there's something deeply saddening about a mother forced to embrace the very laws that denied her rights that should be granted her as a member of the human race in order to be there for her kids.

Would you compromise your values in this kind of situation?

Image: Wikipedia

Lesbian Lawmaker Denied Chance to Work for Kids

JeanneSager — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 16:32:00 GMT

A Missouri lawmaker has been told she was kept off of a House committee on children and families because other members found her "offensive."

What's offensive? That she's a lesbian?

Democratic Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford was nominated by her party last month to serve on the Special Standing Committee on Children and Families in the Missouri House. But the Republican house speaker, Ron Richard, ignored the party's request and chose another Democrat.

But Rep. Mike Corcoran, who got the nod, says he expressed an interest in the seat only after being told Oxford was out of the running. He thought she made a good pick. Which leads Oxford back to her big question.

Is the head of the Republicans in the Missouri house saying a lesbian can't help on a committee that serves children and families? Ironic, considering one of only two openly gay lawmakers in the house, Oxford HAS served on committees relating to kids and families since she was elected in 2004. Before that, she served as executive director of ROWEL, a St. Louis organization that advocates for the poor with a focus on changes to the welfare system. One of its biggest claims to fame in Missouri? ROWEL advocated for increases in cash grants for Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

The House minority leader - who put forth Oxford's name for the appointment - is also confused; Richard accepted other party suggestions - and he hasn't given her a clear answer either.

It all sounds fishy to me, especially when you look at the list of bills sponsored by Oxford in her time in the House - everything from establishing lower class sizes in St. Louis city and county schools to expanding the amount of kosher foods available under the state's Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program.

Sounds like this is a lady who knows kids and families. Funny thing a lot of homophobic house speakers haven't realized - lesbians are parts of families too. And once upon a time, they were kids. Which makes them just as qualified for a post on a committee that deals with kids and families as anyone else - especially when they have a long history of advocating for . . . kids and families.

Image: Jeanette Mott Oxford's Blogspot

Protect Children: Prohibit Divorce

Lutheran High School Can Expel Lesbians—And Does

Miriam Axel-Lute — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:00:00 GMT

A California appeals court has upheld the right of a private Lutheran high school to expel students based on sexual orientation. Creepy as that sounds, I don't think the court is actually wrong. As long as they don't take one single of penny of my taxpayer money, religious organizations have the freedom to be petty, mean, and discriminatory in their own special ways all day long.

(For clarification: This is a school run by the "Wisconsin Synod" Lutherans, not Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which is more tolerant.)

The school itself, on the other hand, which ended up in court because it did in fact expel two female students for having a relationship with each other, is wrong in so many ways.

I really can't say the main point much better than Shaun Martin over at California Appellate Report, who writes: "I know that if I taught at a private high school . . . I'd definitely spend my valuable time looking up the myspace pages of all the female students in my class to see if any of them said that they were bisexual or in love with another female student. Yes, and if I were the principal of said high school, and a teacher discovered that two female students had in fact so identified themselves, I'd definitely call them into my office and interrogate them about whether they had a consensual lesbian relationship. . ."

Not to mention the crazy power this gives mean, rumor-mongering teens.

And would the snooping stop with teenagers? If religious schools think they have license to control not only what happens in school, but the private lives of their communities, are parents of young kids in religious elementary schools going to find their kids expelled when it becomes clear that they aren't using birth control (not enough kids! need more tuition!) or don't attend church enough? I know in some dioceses unmarried Catholic school teachers have actually had problems with priestly peeping Toms trying to see whether they are having overnight guests.

According to the AP, the school's lawyer says the school's goal is to "educate based on Christian principles." I realize the world is full of examples to the contrary, but it's always been my understanding that the core Christian principles are supposed to be forgiveness and redemption. Oh well.

I guess the girls who were expelled will have a good chance to practice forgiveness, but I'm guessing there are more and more parents out there who are going to just opt out of schools like this in the first place.

Photo by Made Underground.

More by this author:

They Say: Shunning Gay Kids Bad for Their Health

JeanneSager — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:36:00 GMT

Gee, who would have ever thought being told they're just not good enough could be bad for kids?

Apparently researchers at the César E. Chávez Institute at San Francisco State University. They actually took money and did a full-fledged study to figure out gay kids are at higher risk for a number of health problems if they're shunned by their families. Ya think?

What ever happened to funding studies that do things like - oh I don't know - find a cure for children's cancer?

The study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics showed a link between the family rejection of lesbian, gay and bisexual kids and a higher risk of a serious health problems, such as depression, illegal drug use, risk for HIV infection, and suicide attempts. Compared to kids who came from families who were accepting of their sexuality, those who experienced rejection were more than eight times more likely to have attempted suicide, almost six times more likely to be depressed, three times more likely to use illegal drugs and three times more likely to have unprotected sex.

I'm not excusing the parents here - they need to get a grip. But let's say they struck sexuality from the criteria and looked simply at kids who were rejected by their families versus those we were accepted. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a child who's mom or dad tells them they're worthless who hasn't contemplated suicide or wouldn't qualify for a dose of Prozac.

It's encouraging that researchers are willing to look at sexuality in children - lending further credence to the fact that people are born gay (or straight), and evidence of sexuality in kids is natural. But sometimes, they just go too far to categorize kids and families. Gay kids need love. So do straight kids. If parents can't provide it, their kids are in trouble, period.

Image/Source: RedOrbit

They Say: Schools Near Fast Food Makes Fat Kids

Principal Censors Pro-Gay School Paper

Dad Uses Alternative Meds, Girl Ends up Braindamaged

Jamie Foxx: Just a Normal Dad?

They Say -- Kids Who Skip Breakfast and Hate Mom Have Sex Sooner

Court Bans Divorced Mom's Partner from Sleeping Over

JeanneSager — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:01:00 GMT

Proving once again that what's good for the gander isn't necessarily going to be allowed by homophobic family court judges for the goose, a divorced mom from Tennessee has been informed she can't allow her lesbian partner to sleep over on the same nights as her kids.

Her ex-husband, meanwhile, has remarried and his wife sleeps over - well, lives - with him every night.

Angel Chandler and Joseph Barker have been divorced for ten years, and shared custody of their two kids (now thirteen and fifteen) that whole time. They've both entered new relationships too, Barker remarrying five years ago while Chandler has maintained a monogamous relationship with a woman since 1999. But when they went to court late last year to modify the custody arrangements, the State of Tennessee sent both parents and both kids for psychological work-ups.

The evaluation determined Chandler's partner was a positive influence on her two kids. The court ignored it. A "paramour" restriction was added to the custody arrangements earlier this year, restricting Chandler's partner from being in their home on the nights when the kids were with Mom. Because after nine years, suddenly a set of teenagers are going to be shocked to find out Mom's a lesbian?

The women are now living in a duplex, side by side, so they can abide by court rules and still be together - sort of. The ACLU has stepped into the fray, filing a brief this week that urges the court to remove the paramour restriction, calling it unconstitutional for interfering with Chandler's abilities to raise her children as she sees fit.

If the court really wants to do what's best for the kids, how about allowing two sets of parents to get on with their lives in loving relationships and letting those kids see examples on both sides of happy, committed, successful couples?

Image: Amazon

Source: ACLU

Teen Has Cancer and Lives in a Car

Man Says Drinking Breastmilk Cured His Cancer

Principal Censors Pro-Gay School Paper

Parents Upset: Transgender Kids Use Different School Bathrooms

Mommy and Mama Now Legal in New York

More Parents Leaving Kids Alone to Save on Daycare

Gym Teacher Likes Girls A Little Too Much

JeanneSager — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:29:00 GMT

Another teacher, another sex scandal. Same unfortunate news, different day. But to make it interesting, Indiana gym teacher Brooke Biggs is accused of seducing a 16-year-old female student.

That I won't have to listen to some nasty radio DJ talking about the hot teacher and the lucky teenage boy is about the only silver lining to this story. Because I don't believe in the double standard for female teachers. Sorry, not even for a hot lesbian teacher.

That Brooke Biggs shares her name with a porn star doesn't make me laugh either (well, not much). The 27-year-old was in a South Bend, Ind. court late last week to answer two felony charges of child seduction. Biggs teaches seventh and eighth grade physical education and coaches at the local high school where the 16-year-old girl is a student. The investigation that led to Biggs' arrest was prompted by the girl's parents who first forbade the teen from having any contact with the teacher then found she was sneaking out anyway. Court documents allege Biggs' bought the girl a cell phone to replace one her parents had taken away, and the two allegedly exchanged hundreds of sexually explicit text messages.

Seems teenage girls do a little more than talk on the phone these days.

Image: WSBT

School Board Member Uses Gay Slur, Says Student Said it First

Teenager Arrested For Kiddie Porn - The Pictures Were of Herself

Don't Pay Child Support? Bid the Gun Rack Bye Bye

Dirty Diaper Thief on the Loose in Upstate New York

Should Computer Technicians be Mandated Reporters for Child Porn?

Mob Mol Who Smuggled Sperm Says Prison System Hates Her Child for Being Born

Five-Year-Old Catches STD From Dad's Towel?

Love the Sinner

Shannon LC Cate — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 14:45:00 GMT

News of Sarah Palin's "gay friend" is not much of a surprise when you take the ten percent rule of thumb into consideration. (That is, roughly 10% of the population is something other than strictly opposite-sex oriented.) What's too bad is, unlike some pie-in-sky folks claim, just knowing or even "dearly loving" (as Palin claims to love her friend) a gay person doesn't make someone see that person as fully human or fully deserving of basic human rights. After all, we dearly love our pets, too. But evengelical Christians don't believe animals will be "saved" (most of them don't, anyway).

I grew up in an evangelical (though not politically conservative) family and church myself, and am somewhat versed in the theology that says all peple are sinners, all people are human and stand before God as individuals. There's no ranking of better or worse sins and it's not the place of any given sinner (everybody) to stand in particular judgement over the sin of another--or even what does or doesn't qualify as sin in the first place.

It's all well and good to "love the sinner and hate the sin" which has become the popular anti-gay rallying cry among evangelicals. It's just that you're not really saying much in a tradition that believes the world and its creatures is so very steeped in sin in the first place. Why single out homosexuality (for those who believe it is a sin in the first place, which is a debate for another time)?

I once received a card from a certain biolgical family member that read, roughly, "Congratulations on finishing your PhD! I am so proud of your wonderful accomplishment! I must tell you I am disappointed in the choices you have made about your lifestyle and hope you will leave your partner and return to God. Love, [name withheld to prevent familial embarassment]"

In short, "Congrats on the PhD, hell-bound homo!" Hallmark needs a section for that.

Knowing and/or loving a queer doesn't make a person "tolerant." I don't want to be tolerated anyway. I want to be celebrated and included and treated like a 100% fully human being.

Image: Will and Testament

Happiness for Her Kids: Even Lynne Cheney Wants it Now

JeanneSager — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:33:00 GMT

While the world’s been watching a hockey mom who’s seen Russia attempt a move cross country, the current resident of Number One Observatory Circle has been making some big moves of her own.

Lynne Cheney earned some fans in the GLBT community this week for sort of, almost, but not exactly putting her seal of approval on gay marriage. Congratulations Mrs. Cheney, you’ve taken the next step in what it means to be a mommy.

The vice president’s wife was on CBS’ Early Show to promote her new book, We the People: The Story of Our Constitution, not talk about her openly lesbian daughter Mary. But when CBS co-anchor Harry Smith pressed for her take on Star Trek actor George Takei’s marriage in California to his long-time partner, Brad Altman, Mrs. Cheney quoted one of her husband’s speeches embraced by gays and lesbians back in the 2000 campaign.

“Freedom in this country ought to mean freedom for everyone,” she said, paraphrasing Dick Cheney’s comments during the 2000 vice presidential debates (the exact context of the statements is available here). You know, the comments he conveniently forgot when it came time to stand by his boss and support the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

But I digress. This is about his wife, the mother of his children, after all. “I would wish my daughter to have happiness and freedom to make her own choices,” Mrs. Cheney told Smith.

Even skirting the words “yes, I support gay marriage,” she’s come a long way from the mom who made a political attack against John Kerry during the 2004 campaign for discussing Mary’s sexuality. She pulled the mom card when she called out Kerry to lend credence to her claim that he was “tawdry.” Now she’s pulling the mom card to turn her back on the Republican line.

If she were a politician, I’d call her out for being a flip-flopper. But she’s not a politician. She’s a politician’s wife, and she’s a mom. And I’m just too darn hokey to believe that moms don’t always want their kids to be happy. Call me Pollyanna, but come on. If they’ve got blue hair, a bull ring through the nose plus a lesbian girlfriend, they’re still yours.

So congratulations, Mrs. Cheney. You picked your daughter over the devil perched on your shoulder. Score one for motherhood.

And Now - The Gay Brain

Brett Singer — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:10:00 GMT

First it was the gay gene (and it wasn't Bugle Boy! Apologies to Bill Maher whom I stole that joke from.) Now the powers that be have decided that there is a gay brain. Scientists studied the sizes of the left and right brains of 90 people, and found that, "Gay men and heterosexual women had halves of a similar size, while the right side was bigger in lesbian women and heterosexual men." So gay men have brain halves like straight women, and gay women have brain halves like straight men. Got that? This will be on the test.

This isn't the first attempt to "prove" that gayness is born, not made. There was the gay gene (see above), and then the theory that what happens in the womb could affect male sexuality. According to the BBC, "this is the first time…that scientists have used brain scanners" to attempt to determine the cognitive differences between gay people and us breeders.

In theory, this is a good discovery, since it helps put to rest the idea espoused by certain lunatics that homosexuality can be "cured." But it could help the loonies' cause too, couldn't it? Imagine if someone proposes a test be given to children at birth, or in utero. Then what? I know that sounds extreme but some people are, well, extreme (like this lady – don't click this link unless you want to get angry.) There's a part of me that wonders if sexual orientation is something we need to find a reason for.

image: The Situationist, and then messed with by me. * = Homosexualis Gaygaygayus is a term I just made up, obviously.

Rich guy pretends to be gynecologist to see women naked (he ain't no fruit!)

Political Nanny: Women, Dear Sweet Angry Women!

Clay Aiken ain't no fruit

Best of FameCrawler: Week of May 30th

No Baby Daddy Needed

Adrienne Martini — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:00:00 GMT

Quick, ladies! While the men are distracted by the big game, take a gander at this breakthough in reproductive technology. If science has its way, pretty soon, men won't be needed to make babies.

Turns out, it is completely conceivable that sperm cells could be made out of a woman's bone marrow. This discovery may pave the way for lesbians who want to have biological offspring without adopting or tracking down a donor. Gay men should be able to get in on the marrow action as well. Plus, this could lead to a breakthough in infertility research.

It's still too early to chuck out the penis with the bathwater. Our science fiction future -- the one where women keep men as pets -- isn't here yet. But it is something to keep in mind, just in case.

Image credit: www.blogs.timeunion.com

Kids Raised By Lesbians Doing Just Fine, Thanks

Alisyn — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:37:00 GMT

A new Dutch study shows that the children of lesbian couples are just as happy and healthy as kids raised by heterosexual couples. The findings mirror what large numbers of American studies have also shown: "Children do well in loving families, regardless of whether there are two moms or a mom and a dad involved."

Even more interesting is that - perhaps not so surprisingly - lesbian biological mothers show significantly more satisfaction with their partners as co-parents than do heterosexual mothers. The partners of lesbian biological mothers, according to the study's findings, "are more committed as parents than are heterosexual fathers - that is, they display a higher level of satisfaction with their partner as co-parent and spend more time on child care and less on employment." Together, two moms heading up one family make more time to spend with their kids, and their kids are happier for it. If that's not the best argument to add another wife to the family, I don't know what is.

Bottome line: all you need is love.

White House Slammed for "Sinful" Lesbian Photo

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 20:01:00 GMT

Now here's a way to drive up support for the administration: Post hot lesbian parent photos on the main White House web site. Finally, they're doing something right. Unless, of course, you talk to Stephen Bennett -- founder of the Stephen Bennett Ministry of Ignorance and Stupity or something like that.

Bennett is bent out of shape because a photo showing the devil and his wife, Lynn Cheney, holding their new grandson included a caption explaining that the boy's parents are Cheney's daughter and her partner.

And because there's really nothing important going on in the world today, Bennett took time out of his insanely busy schedule to say, "I say shame on the White House, shame on the president and shame on the vice president for allowing such a caption to be 'officially' added onto the White House website and such a beautiful photo of two happy grandparents and their new grandchild."

Huh? Did you miss the controversy? What's the crime here, you ask? Why is Bennett so fumed? The caption listed Mary Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, as "parents." And because lesbians obviously can't parent in any way, Bennett goes on to give a ninth-grade biology lesson on birds and bees and then throws his hands in the air and orders a "massage" from Ted Haggard. Tool.

Ellen Degeneres and Portia de Rossi: Maybe Baby

Karen Murphy — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:47:00 GMT

I'm still astounded that if a celebrity reports simply thinking about doing something, it's news. But how can I resist this one? I love how Ellen Degeneres transcended all the ugliness from being practically drummed out of television to being one of the most-liked figures in daytime TV. How can you not like a story like that? So people have either forgotten she's a lesbian or "forgiven" her for it, or even better, don't care about the label. Yay! I'd love to see more of this.

And now Ellen is planning/hoping/talking about having a baby with her totally hot partner Portia De Rossi. Sure, a move like that might bring the labels back for some people, but it also could bring the couple a lot of happiness. And I hope it does.

Parent Blogosphere Focus: Meet the GLBT Parents (Part 1)

thezeroboss — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 15:34:00 GMT

Here at Strollerderby, we strive to highlight the great writing done by parenting bloggers far and wide. As a bisexual dad myself, I have a special interest in calling out my peeps in the GLBT community, who face the burden of parenting in a culture that is often hostile to their family's very existence. In the following series of posts, I'll point out some of the best blogs written by gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered parents that you may or may not be reading. Many of these blogs are about parenting, but some aren't; the key factor is that they discuss some facet of the world from a GLBT parent's perspective.

By way of Pirate Papa I found Guy Dads, two gay fathers who are raising six kids. (I would say "HOLY SHIT!" with as many exclamation points as my text editor allows, but having six kids total myself, I'm in no position to talk.) Check out this post from author Another Gay Dad about the War on Christmas, and how he feels about "coming out" to others during the Christian high holidays as a convert to Reformed Judaism.

One blog that everybody insisted I must read is The Other Mother, written by Robin Reagler, which subtitles itself "letters from the outposts of lesbian parenting". Robin and her partner have two girls who are the definition of "adorable". Here's Robin talking about how glad she and her partner are to know that their child didn't inherit Kelsey Grammar's hair line. For a mile-high view of what Other Mother and her family are all about, check out her review of 2006, culled by copying the first paragraph from the beginning of each month of her archives.

Finally (for now), The Hygiene Chronicles is a must read. The author Steve lives in the Washington D.C. area with his partner of 15 years and their 4 year old son. How good is Steve? He has me thinking that I should moisturize my face. Plus, his top 10 albums from 1985 to 1989 show he has, if not impeccable, then at least excusable taste in music.

Needless to say, I haven't even sucked the tip of the iceberg with this roundup. Stay tuned for more!

Lesbian Custody Battle Wages On

Patti — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 13:00:00 GMT

The family court division in Rutland, Vermont is enforcing the child support order it imposed upon Janet Jenkins, who is currently locked in a bitter custody battle with the biological mother of her child, Lisa Miller. Jenkins and Miller conceived their child, which Miller carried, via IVF during their year-long civil union. They dissolved the union after Miller renounced her homosexuality and moved to Virginia with their child. Jenkins has been duking it out with her ex ever since.

Virginia currently refuses to recognize Vermont's jurisdiction over this matter, and Lisa Miller has enlisted the support of the religious right in her fight to gain full custody of four-year-old Isabella, retaining as her legal representation Liberty Counsel, who also represent the Exodus "gay rehabilitation" organization.

As we all know, if Janet Jenkins were a man, Virginia would probably be recognizing the hell out of Vermont's jurisdiction. And if this were a messy heterosexual breakup, we'd be calling what Lisa Miller is doing "kidnapping".