by the light of the moon...

I first discovered Mr. Yoshino, a professor at Yale Law School, when I read about his book: "Covering: The New Assault on our Civil Rights."

The concept of "covering" - hiding the attributes of oneself that put the self at risk of personal harm based on rasicm, homophobia, etc. - has been a very useful tool to me as I negotiate this world as an queer activist. When do I feel safe to act "female", or to speak of my bisexuality? Where must I pretend to be a member of a dominant group in order to keep myself safe? What can I do in situations when I have power - as a white person, as a member of the US middle class, as someone for whom English is their first language, etc. - to create spaces where covering is not necessary?

Throughout this process, I have realized that for me, the spaces where I don't have to cover my activism are the most precious of all.

(I realized as I drafted this blog entry that I haven't actually read Mr. Yoshino's book, so I'm picking it up today. I assume I'll be recommending it to y'all highly in the next couple of weeks.)

--------------

I was reminded of Mr. Yoshino because of his new Op-Ed today in the New York Times. In an analysis of the current rulings against gay marriage, he describes a dangerous legal technique with which I was not familiar: "restrict(ing) rights with a flourish of fond regards."

In other words, the LGBT community doesn't get marriage rights because we are too good to need such guidance.

Lovely. Thanks for the compliments, but gee, I think I'd rather have my rights. Funny that.

It's a good article, and it's also enlightening to learn of the convoluted arguments people use to prop up tired oppressions. He points out that similar arguments were used to deny women's rights, and also that the law that was upheld is based on provisions from 1909. Not exactly an era known for celebrating the moral superiority of the queer community.

As Mr. Yoshino concludes: "The “reckless procreation” argument sounds nicer — and may even be nicer — than the plainly derogatory “role model” argument...but equality would be nicer still."