Gay NYT Shareholder: Let Me
Address Annual Meeting Via the Web

I own exactly one measly share in the New York Times Company because I wanted the privilege of attending the annual shareholders meeting and raising gays issues with the executives of the paper, which I did at the 2004 annual meeting. This year, I am unable to travel to New York City for the meeting, so I'm requesting the Times, with its vast technological capabilities, wires me into the meeting, without me leaving my apartment. Got my fingers crossed the Times will accommodate my request.

This message was sent today:

Arthur Sulzberger, Jr.
Chairman
The New York Times Company

Dear Mr. Sulzberger,

As a shareholder, I wish to thank you for inviting me to attend the annual stockholders' meeting on April 22 at the Times' new headquarters in Manhattan.

Unfortunately, due to financial and personal health concerns, I regret that I will not be able to be at the meeting.

However, even though I cannot physically be present, I still would very much like to be an active participant during the meeting.

In your letter to the shareholders in the annual report, you said the new Times building "includes the technology we need as a 21st century media organization."

I hope the technology in the building will allow me to observe the meeting live, as it is unfolding, through web-casting.

Also, I want to address the board of directors and the senior management of the company, either via web-cam or through tele-conferencing, regarding important gay and HIV/AIDS matters.

Just because I will be at home in San Francisco on April 22, that should in no way prevent me from listening in and watching the annual meeting, and directly speaking to the board and management team.

Frankly, I see no reason why the Times, and its new building, replete with the latest communications technologies, shouldn't be able to easily accommodate my request to interact with you and other Times executives during the meeting.

Please get back to me as soon as possible so we can work together to make sure my voice is heard on April 22.

Sincerely yours,
Michael Petrelis

HRW's Long-Awaited Gay Iran Report:
Not Available for Public Inspecton

Where is the Human Rights Watch report on Iranian gays promised in the summer of 2006, as gay advocates in dozens of world cities, including Tehran, were preparing for a global day of solidarity with gay Iranians and against the death penalty?

The director of HRW's gay section, Scott Long, like Iranians leaders, did nothing to assist in the worldwide actions, and, indeed, did much trashing of the events and the organizers. However, he did mention in an email in June 2006 that he was preparing a very important report, one that would probably settle the many questions surrounding gays in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In a message dated 6/24/2006 8:32:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, longs@hrw.org writes:

Dear Michael,

Thanks for your call and for the invitation. I’m sorry for not answering earlier but I was on the road.

I fully support the idea of commemorating the two victims. We would gladly sponsor an event which centered around the death penalty itself (obviously, one of the core human rights concerns in Iran) or its application to the offenses of minors. However, if the event is built on the presumption that the two youths were "gay," or were executed for it, we cannot sponsor it. There isn’t enough evidence for us to make either assertion. A great deal of speculation has for obvious reasons surrounded the case, but very few indubitable facts have been adduced, and none which clearly indicate that the two were executed for consensual homosexual acts, rather than (as the earliest accounts from Iran reported) for the violent rape of a 13-year-old. Amid such uncertainty I can’t see the possibility of pretending to a definitive statement.

We’re finishing a report on human rights abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity in Iran, which I hope will be ready for release by September. Entrapment and executions for homosexual conduct certainly take place, and torture is widespread. In relation to the effort to prevent Iranian asylum-seekers from being returned to such intolerable conditions—and from a pragmatic perspective—it however seems to me unfortunate that, with the focus so completely on Mashhad, the issue has come in the view of some governments to hinge on one murky and weak case, rather than on Iran’s overall record.

I'm sorry if I sound discouraging, but I do wish you the best of luck with the demonstration.
Best,

Scott

In late July 2006, Long published a column in Gay City News in which he prominently mentioned the report:

For eight months, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has researched a report on abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity in Iran, interviewing dozens in Iran and the diaspora, trying to separate fact from rhetoric and rumor . . .

Iran executes more people than almost any other country in the world. Consensual homosexual conduct carries the death penalty.

Yet if there is change, it will start inside Iran. Our report won’t be aimed at audiences in San Francisco or London. The readers that matter most are Iranian lesbians and gays, who are trying to assess their risks and options, and Iranian human rights workers campaigning for basic freedoms . . . In the process we hope to support lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Iranian asylum-seekers with reliable facts.

Reliability matters.

Indeed, I agree with Long on reliability. Now, almost two years after he first informed gay advocates of HRW's comprehensive report, one that would please the eyes of gay Iranians in Tehran, not those he doesn't like in SF and London, he not yet released the damn thing.

Maybe if he didn't spent so much time being the divisive global gatekeeper, and devoted more effort to finally finishing the review and edits on HRW's gay Iran summary, everyone could read and use it to improve respect of human rights protections of gays in the Islamic Republic.

Hey Human Rights Watch executives to whom Scott Long is accountable to, how about getting off your butts and giving the community the long-promised report?

Everyone should read a March 27, 2008, editorial in Gay City News that recounts some of the latest warfare waged by Long against gay advocates who don't kowtow to him:

As the head of the LGBT desk at the Human Rights Watch (HRW), Scott Long bears critical responsibilities for investigating human rights abuses and advocating greater freedoms for our community worldwide. That is estimable work, by any measure.

One occupational hazard, however, of taking on a highly specialized charge on matters of such delicacy involving repressive and dangerous regimes is undoubtedly a compounding sense of proprietorship, a fatigued feeling that others "shouldn't mess with my turf, they should stay out of my bailiwick."

On matters related to anti-gay repression in Iran, dating back almost three years, Long seems to have fallen into that trap, indeed to have fallen quite far.

And a favorite target of Long's churlishness has been Doug Ireland, the veteran human rights journalist who has done outstanding reporting on the lethal threats facing LGBT Iranians living under an Islamist theocratic regime.

Recent postings made by Long to an international human rights listserve - regarding the gay Iranian asylum case Ireland writes about on page one this week - demonstrate once again an unfortunate pattern of intellectual bullying to which he's too often resorted in recent years. Long's arguments are an amalgam of factual obfuscations, conflating of arguments made independently by a wide array of individuals, and references to privileged information to which only he is privy and that therefore cannot benefit from the healthy sunshine of public scrutiny.

Sadly, as Long's critics have charged, he sees himself as the international LGBT human rights gatekeeper, and a jealous one at that.

The most recent flap began when George Galloway, a member of the British Parliament from the leftist Respect Party, said on television that the young man whom Mehdi Kazemi, the 19-year-old gay Iranian asylum-seeker now awaiting UK justice, has identified as his boyfriend who was executed by Iranian authorities because he was gay, was in fact put to death for "committing sex crimes against young men."

Gay rights activists in the UK, most notably the tireless Peter Tatchell, immediately pounced on Galloway, pointing out that there is no evidence his charge about Kazemi's dead lover is true, and that not even Iranian authorities have made that claim.

(Tatchell alleged that one of Respect's key funders is a UK Islamist who holds radically anti-gay attitudes that include advocacy for putting gays to death. That assertion is a reminder that this entire controversy is tinged with questions about the geo-political and multicultural sensitivities entailed in any discussion about Iran, but that most decidedly is a matter for another day.)

In the wake of Tatchell's written rebuke of Galloway, Long felt compelled to step up, emphasizing that he "hold[s] no brief" for the Respect Party politician, but also theorizing that the MP may have fallen victim to "propaganda" that has "confuse[d]" "gayness" and "rape." In Long's telling, activists such as Tatchell and journalists, Ireland included, have improperly imputed a gay identity to men, including two who were teenagers, executed by Iran in recent years on charges of rape.

In a staggering allowance for Galloway's reckless charge, Long wrote, "Under the circumstances, with the facts clouded by irresponsible rhetoric, it's actually understandable he might get alleged consensual cases mixed up with rape cases."

Huh?

Long's war on activists and journalists began over a dispute about the infamous hanging of two teenagers, Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni, in Mashad, Iran in July 2005. Initial press reports seemed to suggest that the youths were arrested after they had consensual sex with a third youth, younger than themselves. A government-controlled newspaper soon after reported that the youths instead were convicted of raping the third boy.

HRW condemned the execution of teenagers, but has steadfastly refused to credit accounts of the youths having engaged in consensual gay sex. Ireland, meanwhile, relying on multiple sources - the US-based editor of a magazine for gay Muslims, who spoke to three gay people in Mashad, and the editors of an underground gay publication in Iran, who had their own sources - reported that the Iranian regime's charges of rape were trumped up.

Long has never acknowledged a point made by Iranians, Ireland, other journalists, and activists - that the standard of proof for rape is less onerous than for homosexual conduct. He has also never come clean about the embarrassment he must have felt over the answer HRW's Iran specialist gave Ireland when queried about the group's own source about what happened - the regime-controlled newspaper.

Instead, with a piousness that is scant mask for arrogance, Long has repeatedly tisk-tisked Ireland, charging that his reporting has been "deeply irresponsible."

In response to an amazing series of first-person interviews with gay Iranians, both in-country and in exile, about which Ireland has reported in Gay City News since the Mashad incident, Long has been combative, dismissive, hostile, but not always consistent.

In a lengthy memo widely circulated via email in 2006, Long charged that Ireland had seized "uncritically" on stories such as the Mashad executions and "painted a picture of an 'intensifying reign of terror' or 'pogrom,'" which he said is "unfounded." At times, Long conflated what Ireland actually reported with rumors circulated by one or another of the vast universe of people with access to the Internet.

Yet, he also conceded he has "great respect" for Ireland's work as a journalist - and somewhat curiously credited Ireland with uncovering stories of "Iranian survivors of torture and abuse which are authentic and compelling."

Despite those kind - and well-deserved - words of praise, Long continues to snipe at Ireland, even as he glibly forgives the Galloways of the world. Last December, Ireland broke an astounding story detailing the execution of 21-year-old Makwan Moloudzadeh, who had been convicted of the rape, at age 13, of boys his own age. Because the six plaintiffs all recanted their accusations during the trial last year - Moloudzadeh insisted his own confession to one charge of anal sex was coerced and false - Iran's chief justice placed a stay on the execution, but in a rushed and apparently rump exercise of barbarity the young man's jailers hanged him anyway, in secret.

Ireland's sources for the story were the young man's attorney and the only Iranian journalist to have covered the case extensively - and whose own newspaper would not print her story. Ireland provided a vehicle for this brave journalist to tell that story to the world.

Long now complains that this is another case of improperly imputing gay identity in a case where evidence of it does not exist. Had Long read Ireland's story, however, he would know that Ireland was very clear that it is not known whether any sex ever took place. Long was merely reflexively regurgitating his own habitual rhetoric.

In a cryptic statement to the human rights listserve, Long said that he also had conversations with Moloudzadeh's attorney and his family and "the accounts that they gave us differed substantially and materially from what Doug put into print."

Never mind that Long offered no more information on those conversations (so how can we really judge his critique?) - he also failed to note that in Ireland's telephone conversations with the Iranian lawyer and journalist, the translator was Hossein Alizadeh, the Iranian-raised communications director for the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. Long has no inhibitions about branding Ireland "deeply irresponsible." Is he now prepared to make the same charge against IGLHRC?

Clearly, much of what HRW does in its work must by necessity remain behind the scenes. But if it is to have the confidence of the LGBT community worldwide, it must balance that need with the responsibility to demonstrate a reasonable level of transparency and collegiality and the backbone to stand up to cowards like Galloway.

Long's pretense of infallibility - unknown in modern times outside the Vatican and the police states he battles - are ill-suited to the sophisticated and nuanced leadership required in his post. He should either get off his high horse or abdicate his papacy, now gone terribly awry.

1985 Life Magazine 'AIDS Victim' is Still Alive

During the truly dark early years of the AIDS epidemic in America, the now-defunct Life magazine ran a controversial cover in July 1985, after years of ignoring homosexuals contracting the disease, that focused on the other "victims" of AIDS -- heterosexuals. On the cover were some of those people living with AIDS, and I believe the center image, of a man and woman holding a child, is the Burk family, and Lauren Burk is the woman.

Back in June 2005, when I couldn't locate the text of the article online, I found hard copy at the public library, typed it up and shared in on my blog. Click here to read it.

Today I received an anonymous comment on that old blog entry, from Lauren's sister, sharing some very good news:

I am Lauren Burk's sister, and I am happy to announce, she is still alive. Dwight was my Godson, and not one day passes that I don't see him, hooked up to IVs, feeding tubes and crying uncontrollably. AIDS is a dreadful disease. I agree, the homosexuals were the true victims. We were able to get doantions and support, while the homosexual victims only got shunned. Thank you for keeping my sister's story alive. God Bless!!!

Of course, I was beyond happy to read this comment, quickly posted on that old entry, then wrote a thank you note, which I hope Lauren's sister, and Lauren herself, read.

Lauren's story is one of longtime AIDS survival and must be shared with a wide audience, because she is a shining light of how some people with AIDS managed to beat the odds in 1985.

Lauren, if you read this, please know that I extend much love and best wishes for continued good health and lots of living!

Obama Visits Getty Mansion on
SF Billionaire's Row

The cranky and very opinionated man behind ZombieTime chooses to remain anonymous, which is fine by me because puts out great photos and videos. His conversational style of writing engages me. Oh, let me make a full disclosure here: he filmed me and Hank Wilson zapping UN head Ban Ki-Moon last summer, which was a top-ranked video on ZombieTime. Yeah, I like the guy, and some of his skeptical perspectives.

After a few weeks of not reading up on his latest activities about town, I checked out his site today and read about Obama's apparently hugely successful fundraising gigs here this week, including a stop at the Getty mansion:

On April 6, 2008, Barack Obama visited the San Francisco region, zipping from event to event all day long, from one end of the Bay Area to the other.

What? you might ask. How did I miss that? If only I had known, I would have gone to see him.

Well, there's a reason you didn't know about it. Obama didn't want you to know about it. Because the events he was attending weren't for people like you.

They were for people with lots and lots of money, who use that money to gain access and influence with politicians -- especially politicians who might become president . . .

And not only were the non-affluent excluded from these events, even the media was disallowed . . . I wasn't about to let that stop me. When I hear the words "No media allowed," that's when I reach for my camera.

And I set my sights on the grand prize: The fundraiser at the home of Ann and Gordon Getty, on what has come to be called "Billionaires Row," reputed to be the wealthiest block in the world . . .

Wait just a minute there. If you do the math, on just this one day in the Bay Area, Obama went to four events, three of which had $2,300 minimum donations per ticket, and the other $1,000 minimum per ticket. Each of the events, from the various descriptions, held as many as 400 people (the Getty mansion has a ballroom that reportedly seats at least 300). 400 x $2,300 = $920,000 per event, times three events = $2.76 million, plus the other event, which undoubtedly puts him over $3 million in contributions for this one day alone. And who knows how many other similar days he schedules in other parts of the country . . .

It was not easy finding out exactly where and when to go. The precise time of the fundraiser was never revealed, and the Gettys own many properties in the area. But another local columnist dropped a clue as to where it was happening: "The hottest ticket in San Francisco this weekend may well be the $2,300-a-head reception for Democratic hopeful Barack Obama at the Pacific Heights mansion of billionaire couple Ann and Gordon Getty." Ah, that Getty home -- it could only be the legendary one in the heart of Billionaires Row.

I scoped out the address and took a guess at the time -- late afternoon -- only to find I had arrived over an hour early. I sauntered up to one of the attendants and asked, "Doesn't the fundraiser start at four o'clock...?" "Five," he corrected me. "That's right -- five, " I said, and walked away.

The mansion, seen here in wedding-cake colors, may not look overly impressive at street level, but it sits on the crest of a ridge overlooking the bay; the estate actually cascades down the hillside behind, out of sight from the front façade.

Thanks for getting to the gig, ZombieTime, at least from the outside, and capturing fabulous photos. Read the full report and look at more photos here.

Olympic Torch Runner #12 = HIV Poz Gay Man

If you'll be watching the Olympic torch relay through the streets of San Francisco later today, be on the lookout for runner number 12, because that will be my friend John Caldera. He told me this morning that the relay organizers assigned him that number yesterday and he wants to show the world a gay man living with AIDS is participating in the torch relay. Here's his essay about his participation in today's Olympic event:

Why I will carry the Olympic torch

By John Caldera

As the eyes of the world turn to San Francisco during the Olympic torch relay on Wednesday, April 9, 2008, as an official Torchbearer and longtime peace activist, I am writing to solicit peace within San Francisco, the only City in North America where the Olympic torch will stop on its way to the XXIX Summer Olympic Games.

There are those who would speak out against the atrocities of human rights violations in Tibet. These protesters have every right to speak out against anything they wish, however, the moment any protester resorts to violence, the violence would belittle and demean any peaceful message they would intend to convey. It’s very sad how easy it is to spew hate when you wrap yourself around with a blanket of ardor and zeal versus how much harder it is to seek common ground and learn to accept people who are different from ourselves.

We live in a very troubled world, a world post 9-11, and a world where currently many countries are at war. If we expect the human race to survive on our planet, we need to all learn to get along better.

The history of the human race is filled with atrocities man has done against his fellow man. It is a world where it is far easier to destroy something than it is to create, craft and bring honor to something. I believe the Olympic Torch relay and the Olympic Games themselves represent the best of what the best of us can accomplish through commitment and effort.

Athletes have trained for most of their lives to compete against other Athletes from across the globe regardless of color, creed or class on an equal playing field, not on a field of battle.

Some say the opposite of love is hate, but I believe the opposite of love is indifference. Indifference to the plight of others is a terrible thing. What’s going on in Tibet is terrible, what’s going on in Darfur is terrible, but there are a lot of terrible things happening in our own back yard. Hate crimes still happen and gang violence is on the rise and with it, the homicide rate rises as well. Still, I also believe the companion to love is hope. I have hope for a brighter future for mankind and pray for peace and good will to all men and women as well as for our very precious environment, atmosphere and earth.

I view the coming of the Olympic Torch to San Francisco as an honor for our City, wouldn’t it be convivial if we were honorable hosts and showed the rest of the world that San Francisco truly is a world-class City that can rise above the dissension to promote peace and understanding through the Olympic Torch relay and on the field of competition that is the Olympic Games.

As someone who is openly Gay, HIV+, Latino and a US Navy Veteran, I have learned to respect the many subsets of our society. At times, I agree to disagree with those who have conflicting ideas or ideals than mine and at times, through respect and discourse, mutual understanding is possible but in the end I always remember the immortal words of the great humanitarian, John Lennon: “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”

I look at the opportunity to carry the Olympic Torch as an honor of a lifetime and I dedicate my run to each and every human being with HIV/AIDS because I know the torch you bear and I as I run I will remember each and everyone who was taken from us by the AIDS virus.

Gays Demand China Free AIDS Advocate
at Olympic Torch Protest

A press conference was supposed to be held today at 11 AM at United Nations Plaza by Tibetans living in the US, to demand China end its occupation of their country. I went to it expecting 2 or 3 dozen Tibetans and their supporters would be standing behind a microphone tree, explaining what they hope to accomplish as the Olympic torch passes through town.

What I found when I got there was a full-fledged rally, held in front of a large elevated stage near the north end of the plaza, and perhaps five-hundred protesters waving flags, chanting slogans and handing out flyers.

I hooked up with five other gay men who were there to call for the release of Chinese AIDS advocate Hu Jia, sentenced to three years in jail last week for pro-democracy advocacy, and to add our voices to the "Free Tibet" chorus.

Here are two photos of us posing for the cameras:



I'm proud a handful of us gays were present today, and will be attending other pro-Tibet events today and tomorrow, as the Olympic torch wends its way through San Francisco. And big thanks to the other gays who showed up today in support of our Tibetan friends and incarcerated AIDS advocate Hu Jia.

State Dept Reporters: Rice Running For Veep?

The subject? Condi and the Veep slot in November for the GOP. The place? The daily press briefing on Monday at the State Department in Washington. The fix for political addicts? Questions posed about Rice speaking to Norquist's salon, editorial writers for the Washington Times, a flattering profile in Fitness Magazine. State Department correspondents see a pattern of engagement on Rice's part not necessarily visible to the average news consumer.

Transcript excerpted from the April 7 press briefing:

QUESTION: For all the political junkies, we talked about this this morning. But Secretary Rice and the vice presidency: You said she’s not interested; no, she’s going back to California.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: So what are we to make if we were analyzing this? What are we to make of -- in the past week, we’ve seen a meeting with Grover Norquist’s group.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: We’ve seen expansive comments on race and education in America to The Washington Times editorial board.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: And we’ve seen an up-close and personal spread in Fitness Magazine.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: Secretary Rice lifting weights and looking very human --

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: -- or super-human. (Laughter.) So --

QUESTION: Libby.

QUESTION: I just – I’m just wondering, you know, this --

MR. MCCORMACK: With a C on her chest? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: This – I think this has led some to believe that she is actively kind of campaigning for the vice presidency. So why shouldn’t we look at this as unusual from a Secretary of State?

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, I think if you look back at her tenure in terms of her activities, you will find all of these activities perfectly normal and consistent with the way she has done her job over the past three years or so. So like I said this morning, if – if she is actively seeking the vice presidency, then she is the last one to know about it. She plans on going back west of the Mississippi to Stanford once she’s completed her work as Secretary of State.

QUESTION: Why not a Shermanesque denial?

MR. MCCORMACK: I think – you know, I think in her view, and certainly in my view, she’s given that many times over whenever she’s been asked this question. She was asked it most recently by Mr. Kralev’s institution, The Washington Times, and I think she gave a pretty definitive answer. She said, you know, not – not interested, time for new blood. She’s looking forward to going back to Stanford when she’s completed her work as Secretary of State.

QUESTION: All I’m saying is the simplest way to stamp out these reports would be to issue an airtight --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, next – tell you what --

QUESTION: -- definitive --

MR. MCCORMACK: Tell you what, next time – next time – next time you have a chance to ask her a question, you ask her that question, I’m sure she’ll give you a no. I’ll tell you no right now, but you can get it from her when you see her next.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Do you think she’d consider running for California Governor?

MR. MCCORMACK: (Laughter.) I think what she is considering is focusing on her work as Secretary of State because -- you may have missed it -- but there’s actually quite a bit to do. There is quite a bit left to do here as Secretary of State.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, there are a few things left on the burners right now, so she’s focused on that. And she’s – once her job as – her work as Secretary of State is done, then she looks forward to going back out to California to resume her activities at Stanford. Keep in mind, she is actually on leave from Stanford. She is still a tenured professor at Stanford University.

If you're interested in the transcript of Rice's meeting with the Washington Times editorial board, click here. She repeatedly states she's not going to talk politics, and then proceeds to do exactly that.

A sneak-peek of her comments:

SECRETARY RICE: Well, you know, it's -- America doesn't have an easy time dealing with race. I sit in my office and the portrait immediately over my shoulder is Thomas Jefferson, because he was my first predecessor. He was the first Secretary of State. And sometimes I think to myself, what would he think -- (laughter) -- a black woman Secretary of State as his predecessor 65 times removed -- successor, 65 times removed? What would he think that the last two successors have been black Americans? And so, obviously, when this country was founded, the words that were enshrined in all of our great documents and that have been such an inspiration to people around the world, for the likes of Vaclav Havel, associate themselves with those documents. They didn't have meaning for an overwhelming element of our founding population. And black Americans were a founding population. Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together; Europeans by choice, and Africans in chains.

Click here to read about Rice's "No Excuses" workouts in Fitness Magazine.

SF HIV Dental Clinic Closing,
New Bar Heralds Gay Revival

The odd things about this announcement from the University of the Pacific Dental School is that the closure is the first I'm hearing that the advanced general dentistry clinic was in jeopardy of shuttering. In the past few years as local hospitals, clinics and direct care nonprofit agencies have faced budgetary constraints and potential closure, they've all told the affected patient communities that bad news loomed in the near future. Public meetings to rally patients and politicians were held, and an effort was made to save whatever clinic or services were threatened. Not so for the dental school and this clinic, where I'm a patient, as are hundreds of other people with AIDS.

I think the university owes all patients of the clinic a full explanation about the fiscal troubles they/we are facing, and why no one is organizing to save the clinic.

From the university's site:

When is the AGD Clinic closing?

The AGD Clinic will stop treating complex cases and will no longer have general dentistry residents in San Francisco after June 30, 2008.

Why is the clinic closing?

Increasing cost in clinic operations and decreased reimbursement rates from government programs have created an unsustainable operation for the school. [...]

Can I be a patient of the Main (student) Clinic?

If you were once a patient of the Main Clinic and transferred to the AGD Clinic, the reason for your transfer was due to the complexity of your dental, medical, or psychological care. You are no longer eligible to be a patient of the Main Clinic as the dental students will not be able to manage/maintain your complex care needs. Please call your local dental society for referrals. [...]

I am a Ryan White AIDS CARE Act patient. Can I be seen in the CARE Clinic?

The CARE Clinic is staffed by only one dentist who is here part time. There are currently no openings for new patients in the CARE Clinic, and the CARE Clinic does not maintain a waiting list. Please call the Native American Health Center at (415) 621-8056 or the San Francisco AIDS Foundation. [...]

In other news from San Francisco today, the SF Chronicle covers the opening weekend of a new leather bar South of Market, and how it heralds a new era, one that revives the S/M leather bar scene.

Forty years ago there were no live-work lofts South of Market, no restaurants dotting Folsom Street, and the Whole Foods Market at Harrison and Fourth streets was home to the Toolbox, one of San Francisco's first leather bars.

Warehouses and printing businesses flourished then, as now, in this industrial area of San Francisco, and at 5 p.m., workers packed up to go back to their neighborhoods. That's when the leather scene took over, dominating the SoMa neighborhood after dark with more than a dozen bars and bathhouses on Folsom Street attracting leather-clad gay men who embraced the sexual subculture.

"There were a few families living in houses, but there were no restaurants, no yuppies, none of the bridge-and-tunnel crowd," said Mister Marcus, 76, a leather scene columnist for the Bay Area Reporter since 1971. "All the businesses closed at 5 and no one was down there, so you could park and walk, all the bars were so close." [...]

On Friday, David Morgan threw open the doors to Chaps II, the most recent indication that leather is making a comeback in SoMa. [...]

You'll recall I blogged recently on Chaps II getting ready to open, but I didn't see a link between that and news from South Dakota, of all places. There aren't many occasions when the gay scene in this SF, San Francisco, anything in common with the other SF, Sioux Falls. But both SF's, in the past month, have witnessed the opening of new gay bars.

Doesn't seem to me that the gay bar culture is really dying out, and is indeed enjoying a small trendy surge.

Read the entire Chronicle story here.

Clinton Questioned About
Iran's Gay Executions

The only country I am aware of where the government in the past few years has executed homosexuals is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Have I missed the stories about Egypt, Iraq and other countries putting gays to death?

The Wikipedia entry for LGBT rights in Egypt says nothing about executions. The Iraqi LGBT entry, of course, notes the warring militias have killed gays and transgenders. I don't deny that gays in both countries face tremendous fears of abuse and in Iraq, murder by death squads, but the interviewers from the Philadelphia Gay News who spoke with Sen. Hillary Clinton should have been more precise in their question.

On the other hand, if the countries mentioned by PGN have executed gays lately, please send links to stories about the deaths and I'll link to them.

From the PGN interview with Hillary Clinton on April 4:

PGN: What changes would you make toward governments that execute gay people, such as Iran, Egypt and Iraq and numerous other countries in the Middle East and Africa? Will you offer political asylum?

HC: I would be very strongly outspoken about this and it would be part of American foreign policy. There are a number of gross human-rights abuses that countries engage in with whom we have relations and we have to be really vigilant and outspoken in our total repudiation of those kinds of actions and do everything we can, including using our leverage on matters such as aid, to change the behavior so we can try to prevent such atrocities from happening.

Yes, that is a damn good answer, on the surface. However, I wish to point out that in her seven years in the US Senate, Clinton has not vocally objected to Iran's horrendous violations of the human rights of gays. She has not condemned the Iranian government's executions of gays, and I would be the first to applaud if she did open her mouth about the killings.

And Clinton sidesteps the question of offering political asylum to gays fleeing oppressive regimes. I would have liked for her to spell out her plans, either as senator, or, if elected to the White House, as president, regarding asylum for gay exiles and refugees.

Unfortunately, PGN did not pose a follow up question to her on this matter. I must also note that one of the PGN interviewers, Mark Segal, the publisher, failed to note his $1,000 donation to Clinton last year.

All these concerns aside, I still am quite pleased PGN raised international gay issues when they spoke with Clinton.

(Hat tip: Chris Crain.)

[Update: April 7]

A reader sent a message that in January 2002 Saudi Arabia executed three homosexuals by beheading them. Click here to read the Amnesty International report on the executions.

And my friend writer Patricia Nell Warren also sent info and links on the killings of gays.

Hi Michael,

You asked for links on executions and death squads. Death squads killing gays is a big problem in some Latin and Muslim countries:

Brazil

Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru

Mexico

Guatemala (a country where death squads also kill hundreds of women every year)

Iraq

Iraq

Patricia

Gay HIV+ Latino Vet is
Olympics Torch-bear-er

My friend John Caldera and I have seen each other recently, at the YMCA where we exercise, or at City Hall, where he volunteers in Sup. Ross Mirkarimi's office, and he hasn't said a thing to me about applying to be a torchbearer for the Olympic Torch when it passes through town.

I can't think of a better politically-motivated bear to use this sports-related opportunity to promote visibility of all the different parts of his identity, including having a well-developed muscle bear body and laid back attitude!

So today I found out he's been selected to carry the torch for a portion of it's route, according to a story posted on the Bay Area Reporter web site on Thursday, and I congratulate John for this honor:

At least one of the 80 people who will carry the Olympic torch during its stop in San Francisco next week will be a gay, HIV-positive Navy veteran.

John Caldera, 43, who serves on the city's Veterans Affairs Commission, revealed this week he has been tapped to carry the Olympic flame when it comes to town Wednesday, April 9 as it makes its round-the-world trip ahead of the 2008 Summer Games, which take place August 8-24 in Beijing, China. [...]

Caldera told the Bay Area Reporter Thursday, April 3 that he was unaware if any other torchbearers will be members of the LGBT community. [...]

Caldera said while he supports the protesters' right to speak out against Chinese policy, he saw no reason not to participate in the relay.

"This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. No one in my family has been a torchbearer," said Caldera. "Those who want to protest should be able to protest. I just hope I don't get hit with tomatoes." [...]

Naturally, I'm pleased the Chinese officials choose San Francisco as one city for the torch to pass through on the way to Beijing, all because it affords human rights advocates of many causes related to China to protest government policies.

Not only will the protesters lining the torch route send a loud message to Beijing, and the athletes participating in the games, but the choice of torchbearers in San Francisco, including John, will also a small signal for the Chinese government to respect its gays citizens and persons living with HIV.


(Photo descriptions: Top photo of John is from a bear charity fund-raising event at the Lone Star. Bottom photo of John was taken at last year's Lazy Bear event at the Russian River.)