|
I'll be presenting from Bi Perspectives on Kinsey at CBD Boston this year! BRC Marks Celebrate Bisexuality Day (CBD) for 11th Year On Thursday, September 24, 7-10 pm, at Club Cafe, 209 Columbus Ave., the Bisexual Resource Center of Boston (BRC) and the New England bi community will be celebrating bisexuality and honoring books about bisexuals. This is the 11th year that BRC will observe Celebrate Bisexuality Day (CBD). The listening party will include hors d'oeuvres, music, great bi community, bi-positive products, plus entertaining readings from the new second edition of Getting Bi: Voices of Bisexuals Around the World and Ron Suresha's anthology, a Lambda Literary Award finalist, Bisexual Perspectives on the Life and Work of Alfred C. Kinsey. 
Fenway Health's Boundless program co-sponsors again. Info: http://www.biresource.net Map: http://www.clubcafe.com/map/
|
|
Bi Summit Audio Highlights Broadcast Online
Highlights from the National Summit on Putting the "B" in LGBT in April at the NYC LGBT Center were broadcast Mon June 15 by the Out FM program on WBAI. You can listen to excerpts from the "Exploding the Myths About Bisexuality" panel with Ron Suresha, Dennis Slade, and Ignacio Rivera by clicking here: http://archive.wbai.org/files/xml/outfm.xml then click on June 15th. The bisexual segment starts about halfway through the broadcast. More segments will be broadcast on following Mondays 11am.
More pix and info here at: http://biwriters.livejournal.com/81598.html. Thanks to Brad Taylor of Out FM and Barbara Fortune who took the photos.
|
|
Ron at Lammies, Bi Lines reading, NYC Lambda Literary Awards Roc and I had a grand time at the Lambda Literary Awards on Thursday in NYC. We rode in on Amtrak and stayed for a long weekend at the Lammies host hotel, the W Tuscany. Just minutes before the ceremony, I was informed that a grant I’d applied for researching male triads went to someone else. So that was a disappointment going in. At the cocktail hour before the event, while hanging out with Felice Picano and his sister, one of the judges in the Anthology category whom I happened to meet totally brightened my evening, telling me that she loved and had nominated Bi Perspectives on Kinsey as a finalist (presumably she was the only one of the four judges in that category who did so) and that she was keeping it for her personal library, rather than selling or donating as she planned to do for most of the other books. We were supposedly assigned seats somewhere in the Proshansky Auditorium at CUNY, but wandered around looking for the chair signs until almost the start of the ceremony until Charles Flowers pointed to two seats and we sat down. And the Lammy went to . . . not my book. It went to Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage, written by Jenny Block (whom I finally met at the Bi Lines reading). Oh well, third time wasn’t the charm in my case this time around, but let me just add my response to another finalist who asked me as we chatted after the ceremony, What do we do now after not winning the Lammy? “Go home and write a better book than the last one.”
National Bi Media Summit In advance of the National Bi Media Summit held at the LGBT Center on Saturday, for which I served as a panelist, TimeOutNY asked several folks to debunk some bi myths. My response seems at this point somewhat off-topic as per the headline/myth they ended up using. Oh well.
Still, my parts on the panels on Bi Myths and Bi Community went quite well, and I got very positive feedback on my comments.  
TimeOutNY RJS bi myth quote Bi Lines 
My “intriguing” reading on Bisexual Perspectives on Kinsey at the Bi Lines performance on Saturday evening was kindly mentioned by the handsome & charming Father Tony of Bilerico blog.
|
|
Is Michael Musto for Real? What is this nonsense about Michael Musto saying he doesn't believe in bisexuals, based on his frustrated attempts at relationships with married men on Manhunt or Craig's List or wherever he meets these closet cases? I know the Village Voice columnist, Michael Musto, or at least I thought I knew the dude. But how could it possibly be Michael Musto saying those horrible, ignorant, misleading things about bi men? OK, I've seen Michael Musto on TV and read his column in the Voice, so I think I should know Michael Musto. But it couldn't really be the same Michael Musto I met at the Lammies two years ago. The kinda cute clean-shaven short Jewish guy to whom I introduced myself that evening? I thought I met the real Michael Musto there, but apparently it was someone else who looked and talked a whole lot like him. Either that, or I made zero impression on the guy. Because the guy I chatted with was wearing a badge saying "Michael Musto," and he asked about my work, and I told him I was the editor of two books named as finalists for the first ever Lambda Literary Award given for Bisexual Literature. I know I was there, for sure — I still have my name badge from the event. Because how could the smart, charming person I chatted with that memorable evening write such a thoughtless and hurtful diatribe against married bi men under Michael Musto's imprimateur? I can only surmise that Michael Musto is not real. He's a fake. This so-called Michael Musto has somehow replaced the real Michael Musto, and whoever is impersonating Michael Musto is doing an amazing job. Perhaps the real Michael Musto was kidnapped by the Russian mafia, and replaced by an undercover operative who's a ringer, pretending to be a brilliant journalist. Otherwise, I just can't believe that the real Michael Musto would know absolutely nothing about the existence of actual bisexual men, being a supporter of the Lambda Literary Foundation, which for the third year in a row now is presenting an award for excellence in the area of bisexual literature. Or maybe more likely, aliens abducted the real Michael Musto, cloned him, and took the original back to their planet for further "research" (and he went willingly, anticipating one if not many of those thrilling anal probes he's heard so much about), leaving the duplicate in the real Michael Musto's place. Let's set aside the conspiracy theories and the point that he offers no explanation for the existence of bi women and consider this serious matter for a moment. Because you would think that the real Michael Musto would have the common sense to do some sort of actual research about the topic before he declared the complete nonexistence of bisexuals and bisexuality, based on his assertion to have never personally met a real bisexual man. Wasn't that Michael Musto I met, who was at the awards ceremony in May 2007 in NYC? Because if the real Michael Musto had actually been there, he surely would have seen Mike Szymanski (who is a real bisexual man) and Nicole Kristal (a real bi woman) accept the Lammy for their delightful book, The Bisexual's Guide to the Universe. I guess he could have gone out for a smoke or a drink or something and have missed that part of the awards ceremony, but what about the two years since then? Was Michael Musto living in a complete intellectual vacuum that whole time? I find it impossible to believe that, given his exposure to bisexuality as part of the accepted fabric of queer literature, the genuine Michael Musto would question the existence of bisexuality. I can't possibly accept that Michael Musto would be so shallow and stupid, and so that inevitably leads me to this conclusion: Michael Musto, or whoever wrote that column and signed it Michael Musto, can't be real. And if Michael Musto isn't real, he cannot said to exist. Michael Musto must be, therefore, a nonbeing. Not only that, anyone named Michael Musto probably never is or ever has been for "real."
I feel sad for Michael Musto. He seemed like someone whom I could believe.
Or then again, maybe not so much. Blogged on my site here.
|
|
Kinsey Sexagennial Release Party!
Sunday, December 21, 2008 2:00pm - 3:30pm Golden Street GalleryNew London, CT 06320 8604440659 goldenst@goldenstreetgallery.com
Join us for a literary reception to celebrate the Kinsey Sexagennial - the 60th anniversary of the publication of the Kinsey Report! Presenting a special double issue of the J ournal of Bisexuality:
Kinsey Zero through Sixty: Bisexual Perspectives on KinseyRon Jackson Suresha, guest editor In honor of Alfred C. Kinsey's monumental scientific publishing achievement, the Journal of Bisexuality is presenting a double issue focusing on Alfred C. Kinsey's work, life, and legacy, and his effect on and relationship with bisexuality and all aspects of bisexual culture. Kinsey Zero through Sixty: Bisexual Perspectives on Kinsey is scheduled for December 15, 2008 publication by Taylor & Francis Journals. Contributors to this stellar collection of outstanding writing include the last surviving member of Kinsey's original research team, Dr Paul H. Gebhard, as well as leading names in the fields of sex research, GLBTIQA activism, and bisexual writing. This double issue of Journal of Bisexuality (8:3-4), Jonathan Alexander, editor, is being published with the independent sponsorship of the American Institute of Bisexuality, a nonprofit organization unaffiliated with The Kinsey Institute or Indiana University. Complete book details at: http://suresha.com/writing/books/kinsey/index.phpComplete event details at: http://suresha.com/events/events.php
|
|
This shows you that Bailey's credibility is so abyssmal that the gay rag won't even run his research ads.
+-+-+
Chicago Free Press Editorial: No Bailey Ads.
http://www.chicagofreepress.com/news/editorial/index.html
An excerpt:
"Since we cannot in good conscience steer our readers to a study that Bailey is part of, we´re canceling the ad. And in the future, before accepting any ads for research studies, our ad staff will ask who is involved. If Bailey is, we won´t accept the ads.
There are other researchers involved in this study. They may have good motives, but we question their association with Bailey. We appreciate good science. We don´t appreciate being used to further the dubious agenda of someone who believes he should not be held accountable to our community."
For more information about the Bailey controversy, see Lynn Conway's in-depth site and BRC's Bailey page.
http://www.biresource.org/index.php?p=484Current Mood: scrinchy and yes pinchy Current Music: Neil Young "Living with war" |
|
CBSNews.com
March 13, 2006
Producer Shari Finkelstein Discusses 'The Science Of Sexual Orientation'
Yesterday, "60 Minutes" ran a story on "The Science Of Sexual Orientation." Because of its religious, political and social significance, the topic seemed destined to invite controversy, and indeed, some blogs have already criticized the piece. (Many others, it should be pointed out, have lauded it.) I spoke to producer Shari Finkelstein about the early criticism, her goals for the piece, and the concerns those involved had in putting it together.
"We felt we couldn't shy away from a hot button issue because people might become upset," said Finkelstein. She said she was concerned about criticism from two groups – the religious right and the gay and lesbian community. Many people in the former group believe sexuality is a choice, and thus would likely not respond well to the contention voiced by scientists in the piece that sexuality is inborn, if not necessarily entirely genetic. She feared some in the gay and lesbian community, meanwhile, might be offended by the portion of the piece that discussed how "the science was showing a lot of stereotypes [about people's voices and movement] could be proved scientifically," though she felt on the whole that gays and lesbians would respond positively to the piece.
The key for Finkelstein – as it was for Scott Pelley in a piece on global warming – was to stick to science. "We decided we would just look into what the science was showing and report on that, and let people react to what was out there however they will," she said. That meant not including in the piece people more associated with the cultural debate, such as those who argue that homosexuality is a choice, a position most scientists reject. "We just did not want to get into that controversy, because it was not about the science," said Finkelstein.
The piece, some pointed out, did not explore one question that it seemed to raise: If sexuality can be affected by hormones, is it possible to alter a child's sexuality in the womb? And if so, what are the social ramifications? (One blogger raised this question here.)
"Frankly, there are so many issues associated with this subject and we had so much trouble fitting even what we did into the piece," Finkelstein said when I asked why the issue had not been addressed. She pointed out that the issue has actually been around for a while, as the search for a "gay gene" raised questions about the potential for altering someone's sexuality long before scientists began looking at hormones.
Another of the early criticisms of the story is that it was "confusing gender non-conformity with homosexuality," as one blogger put it. In the story, a nine year old boy named Adam, who is interested in dolls and paints his nails, is held up as an example of childhood gender nonconformity, unlike his twin brother, who has a G.I. Joe collection. Adam also says he thinks of himself like a girl. Critics said the story erroneously portrayed Adam as likely to turn out gay because of his gender non-conformity. Wrote the blogger quoted above:
Ask any gay man, do you want to be a woman. You will get a definite no. It sounds like Adam is going to end up being a transgender. Transgenders, not gay. It's a completely different type of mindset, personality, everything. Apparently 60 Minutes has never heard of this, though I know they have.
"We thought we were very careful not to label his sexuality in any way, because he's nine years old," says Finkelstein. "He doesn't have a sexual orientation. But we did report what is accurate, which is there have been longitudinal studies that have followed boys like him, and the best study in that field said the vast majority of those boys grew up to be gay men." She added it was possible that because being transgender is more accepted today than it used to be, a study that began today might show that more children with gender non-conformity would turn out to be transgender.
Finkelstein was in Puerto Rico when I spoke to her, so she has not had a chance to look at much of the response to her story. She has kindly agreed to make herself available to discuss any criticisms that emerge in the coming days. In the meantime, I spoke to "60 Minutes" spokesman Kevin Tedesco about the response he's seen so far.
"It's been the normal amount of feedback…There wasn't really a blip," he said, adding that the feedback has been across the board, as opposed to a deluge of emails from one side. "Perhaps homosexuality is not as controversial as some people think, and the origin of it is not as controversial as some people think."
+-+-+
March 14, 2006 Next Post | Previous Post
More Reaction To The '60 Minutes' Sexuality Story
Yesterday, I wrote about some of the early reaction to the "60 Minutes" story on "the science of sexual orientation." Here's an update on what people are saying about the story, as well as more response from producer Shari Finkelstein.
A writer at the gay-oriented blog called "Good As You" calls the piece "fantastic" and "fascinating" before getting into the criticism he or she expects:
Of course there will be those who think it unfair that the show did not present the "pro-family" side's position that homosexuality is a choice, and we'd almost guarantee that the 'mo foes will try and debunk CBS's journalistic ethics within the next few hours/days. We'll call them on their bull when that time comes; for now, let's just relish the fact that there are rational folks in this world who seem supportive of the notion that if it's a choice, then your humble scribe's zygote had very strong opinions about boobs.
I haven't seen much in the way the sort of criticism the blogger expects, actually, though there is some to be found in the debate taking place in the comments section of Wayne Besen's blog. Most of the commenters seemed to like the story, but not all of them. "The one thing that you can say in favour of that program is that it is so obviously one-sided and unfair in not giving supporters of the family theories any time to make their case that it isn't likely to convince anyone who hasn't made up their mind already," writes one commenter.
Some of the criticism has centered on Northwestern University professor J. Michael Bailey, who was featured in the piece. Conservative blog Newsbusters goes after "60 Minutes" for including Bailey in the story. "…what [correspondent Lesley] Stahl conveniently left out of her piece and failed to tell the viewing public, is that her “expert” J. Michael Bailey has been exposed and charged for “research misconduct” concerning the research he is best known for on transexuality. Turns out Bailey received many complaints from the transsexual women he interviewed for his book The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism, saying that they didn’t know he was using them as research subjects and that he distorted versions of their case histories that appeared in his book." Northwestern opened a formal investigation into Baliey's conduct in 2004, and he eventually resigned from his Chairmanship of the Department of Psychology, though he remains a professor at the university.
I asked Finkelstein to respond. "We were aware of the controversy surrounding Michael Bailey's book, and we looked into all the allegations before we decided to interview him for the story," she said. "We didn't feel there was anything that disqualified him from being interviewed. And in fact, his work is highly regarded by all of the researches in the field who we spoke with, and we felt that he was a very worthy person to discuss these issues."
A number of the emails that have come into "60 Minutes" about the piece have touched on an issue that was discussed yesterday – namely, the charge that the piece mistakenly equates gender non-conformity and homosexuality. Finkelstein again addressed the issue. "We are aware that most gay men were not boys who wanted to be girls, but according to the research, most boys who consistently and pervasively identify as girls grow up to be gay men," she told me.
Finally, if you ever needed proof that it's almost impossible to anticipate the criticism any given piece will elicit, I give you this complaint from the comments section of yesterday's post on this story. It posits that the "60 Minutes" piece was "just an excuse to promote gays like Rosie O'Donnell." The commenter goes on: "She has been campaigning to replace Bob Barker on the Price Is Right. She would make a terrible host. Although I sometimes watch the Price Is Right, I would stop watching it all together if O'Donnell replaces Barker. She is not as fun loving as he is."
Price is Right producers: Consider yourself warned.
|
|
This is why books like BI MEN and BI GUYS exist.
http://tinyurl.com/nwclw
From: "my_boston_buddy" <my_boston_buddy@...>
Date: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:31 am
Subject: Re: 60 Minutes my_boston_buddy
Sorry to say, two of the "experts" that Lesley Stahl interviewed, Michael Bailey and his protegé Gerulf Rieger, are known wackos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey
As part of their "research", they've advanced the idea of homosexual eugenics, i.e. the ability to identify and abort a fetus that's likely to become homosexual post-puberty. "Parental Selection of Childrens Sexual Orientation"
http://tinyurl.com/jd3ps (55kb Adobe Acrobat .pdf file)
They also claim scientific proof that bisexuality does not exist.
"Straight, Gay or Lying?" http://tinyurl.com/dkozy
(NY Times, free registration required)
It's disturbing -- make that unethical -- that 60 Minutes would legitimize these guys without mentioning the many, many controversies that surround them.
--- In boston-bears@yahoogroups.com, "bearman03887" <bearman03887@...wrote:>
FYI: My name is Robin Sanders, and I work at CBS News. I wanted to let you know about a story that "60 Minutes" will be airing this Sunday focusing on the question of what determines whether a person is gay or straight. It's a fascinating piece, and we're trying to get the word out beforehand to as many people as possible who might have a particular interest in this subject. To that end, we were wondering if you might consider sending out an email to your listserve and/or posting something on your website. The story will be broadcast on CBS stations on at 7:00 ET/PT on Sunday, March 12. Further details will be posted on our website,
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml
which you're welcome to link to from your own site. Below, you'll find a short write-up about the piece.
"GAY OR STRAIGHT?" There are few issues as hotly contested -- and as poorly understood - - as the question of what makes a person gay or straight. It's a political question, a social question, a religious question. But it's also a science question, and one that might someday have an actual, provable answer. The handful of scientists who work in this under-funded and politically charged field will tell you that the answer is a long way off. But their efforts are already yielding tantalizing clues. Lesley Stahl looks at the research being conducted in the field of sexual orientation on this week's "60 MINUTES," Sunday, March 12 at 7PM ET/PT on CBS.Current Mood: sperky Current Music: AAR - Franken |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
wolfbear's journal