Natural Families: Acquiring Manly Virtue

Gay men in the modern Western world are accustomed to accusations a homoerotic orientation is seen as effeminate, sissyish. This is a complete myth, as is easily shown by the many counterexamples from the butch, bear and leather-oriented sub-groups that co-exist with the more camp and drag groups. The words "gay male" cover an astonishing degree of diversity. Still, stereotypes persist. Sometimes, though, they are not what we would expect.

In classical Greece and in Tokugawa Japan, same sex lovers were especially associated with courage and with military prowess. Elsewhere, the important virtues of "courage, proficiency in hunting, and the ability to dominate women" were so closely identified with masculinity that they were routinely passed on to young boys in the most direct way possible - by direct transfer from older males to younger in pure male essence - in semen, by anal or oral sexual intercourse.

This is from David F Greenberg , "The Construction of Homosexuality":

“The homosexual practices are justified by the belief that a boy will not mature physically unless semen is implanted in his body by an adult. Valued male qualities, such as courage, proficiency in hunting, and the ability to dominate women, are transmitted in the same way. Repeated intercourse builds up a supply of the vital substance in the boy’s body.”

But, says Greenberg, intercourse with women is believed to be debilitating.  While this pattern of childhood homosexuality is found in a minority of Guinean societies, where it was recorded, it was obligatory for all.   From a remarkably early age (sometimes as young as seven, sometimes ten or twelve), boys learnt to accept the all-important semen from an older age group.  As they matured, these boys in turn would pass on their own semen to those younger than they.  Not until they were fully mature were they permitted intercourse with women – by which time, presumably they were strong enough to withstand the debilitating effects of the experience.

The semen was transmitted in different ways: sometimes by anal intercourse, sometimes orally – or even by insertion into special incisions in the skin. In these cases, the semen was obtained from the older men, following special ritual intercourse with women.

Natural Law, Natural Families

When I first put down some thoughts on sexual ethics here and at "The Open Tabernacle", it was quite specifically intended as simply a collection of principles that I have put together for myself, rather than any reasoned and coherent system of ethics.  Later, I referred rather off-handedly to the church, which developed its own teaching without any reference to   empirical data from external reality.

For this I was criticized by a reader, who pointed out reasonably enough that I too had presented no empirical data.  He went on to refer to the finding so Kinsey and biology as proof that “nature”, by hot wiring a direct connection between the genitals and the pleasure centres of the brain, predisposes and directs our sexual energies to reproduction.  As this is a variant of the “natural law”  basis for so much of traditional Catholic teaching on sex, I thought I would share with you some of the evidence, the “empirical data”, that directly contradicts the conclusion above.

As I explored the evidence though, I soon realised that there is so much of it, in such startlingly diverse abundance, that it would be impossible to cover the topic properly in just a single post.  Instead, I will tackle it in a series, looking at it from several different perspectives.  By way of preview, these are just some of the headings I propose to tackle first:

• The contradictions in the concept of “natural law” as used in Christian theology, and the factual errors about animal biology that underlie it.
• The abundant evidence for homosexuality in traditional African societies from the Stone Age onwards, which flatly contradicts the claims that it was foreign to Africa and introduced by the Western colonisers – or by the Arabs,
• The institution of compulsory homosexual practices for boys, as a means of acquiring many virtues.
• The widespread recognition of homosexual orientation in individuals as a spiritual gift
• The common practice of sustaining homosexual relationships in parallel with heterosexual marriages
• Examples from the animal world
• The Middle Eastern context of the biblical world
• China, Japan and Korea
• Pre-modern Europe

I do not have any rigid structuring principle for the order in which I shall tackle these, but will probably do so roughly inversely to their familiarity – starting with the least well known, so the first two should  be on African homosexuality,  and on same sex experience as part of acquiring virility.

Anybody have special preferences?

See also:

"Traditional" Family Values

Naphy, William: Born to be Gay

Greenberg, David F: The Construction of Homosexuality

Herdt, Gilbert H: Same Sex, Different Cultures

Murray, Stephen O: Homosexualities

"Traditional" Family Values?

This is fun!

From the great state of South Carolina, we were diverted some months ago by the fascinating tale of how one can now go "hiking the Appalachian trail" in Argentina.  Now, in quick succession, it appears that there are two more emerging stories of interest:  Mike Rogers reports that rumours about the sexual orientation of a certain Lieutenant - Governor, which have been doing the rounds long enough that even I, on this side of the Atlantic have heard them before, have been "confirmed" (but instead of evidence, Rogers simply points to his "100% track record" on previous outings). Also,  from FitsNews.com ("unfair; unbalanced". the site proudly proclaims), we have:

"S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford may be an amateur Romeo, but it looks like he’s got nothing on his appointment to the S.C. State Board of Education.

Kristin Maguire, an Upstate evangelical and one of South Carolina’s most respected social conservatives, has been one of the governor’s closest education policy advisors for years.  She’s also Sanford’s appointment to the S.C. Board of Education, which last year elected her its Chairwoman.

What else is she?

The prolific author of hardcore erotic fiction on the Internet, according to documents provided to the governor’s office earlier this summer and later obtained by FITS.

Maguire, a professed Christian who home-schools her four children, declined to comment for our story but did not deny that she had previously frequented websites that feature such X-rated material."

Ah, that grand tradition of  "defending traditional family values",  as espoused so fervently by Larry Craig, Congressmen Vitter & Foley, preacher Ted Haggert ...and all the others whose names I have forgotten and am too lazy right now to look up.  You know them better than I do.

In any case, pointing out the hypocrisy is too easy.  There are two other points behind this that deserve closer attention, because they are less frequently pointed out.

Outing the Church

First, I applaud Mike Rogers for his commendable work on outing the political hypocrites.  (For the record, I am a "fierce defender" of any individual's rigut to privacy.  While I strongly endorse the personal and community value of coming out wherever possible,  that final qualification is crucial:  sometimes it is just not possible).  BUT:  when some closeted queer goes on the attack aginst the community, all rights to sympathy are waived.  This is a position which I believe is fairly widely shared.  So when are the professional ecclesiastical  journalists, in the Vatican or around the world, going to start to follow suit?

It is widely reported that a large and growing proportion of priests, at all levels in the hierarchy, are gay.  Others are heterosexual, but non-celibate.  Professional Vatican watchers, it is said, know not only who many of these people are, but also their partners and preferred sexual practices.  As with politicians, I would prefer that they should have the courage to come out publicly, difficult as this would be, but where they choose not to, we must respect their privacy. But as with politicians, where they actively connive in the church's demonization of "homosexuals"  and other sexual minorities, they should lose that right to provacy.  There have been plenty of reports of gay bishops and cardinals emerging after their deaths, or after nasty blackmail scandals - so why not when they are alive?

It is also often said that tthe pope's balls are one of the three most useless things in the world.  So.........come on, you professional clerical journalists:  are your cojones any more useful than His Holiness's ?

"Traditional family":  a modern invention

Raymond and I had a wonderful day today enjoying  the English landscape, driving around Jane Austen's beloved Hampshire. I got to see Jane 's house where she spent the last ten years of her life, as well as the nearby Gilbert White's House.  Jane Austen is well known as the most popular English novelist, totally respectable and a model of gentility and propriety.  Gilbert White is less well known, but equally respectable.  He was a clergyman, renowned as a naturalist for his careful observations and detailed notes on natural history and gardening.  Guess what?  Neither of these models of English respectablity lived in "traditional" family structures.  During her years at Chawton, Jane and her similarly unmarried sister Clarissa lived with their widowed mother - and a friend, who lived with them, but occupied a bedroom a little apart.  Jane's brother Thomas had earlier left the family - because he had the good fortune to have been "adopted" by a wealthy childless couple, the Knights, who felt in need of an heir to take charge of their large estate.   The Rev White was unmarried - but does not appear to have lived alone in his large, rambling house and extensive garden.

Nor did many people at this time (late 18th and early 19th centuries), or earlier, live in "traditional"  family structures.  If you were rich enough, you might get to live with your family in a grand country house  - but also with the extensive staff required to run it.  Tradesmen and working professionals shared their homes with apprentices and servants. Conversely, if you were not rich enough, you probably left your family to live with your employer (if you had one), as an apprentice,  in domestic service, or as a farm labourer, or travelled the country as an itinerant tradesman.  And if a man was lucky enough to live with his woman and children, perhaps in a farm cottage - it was entirely possible that they were not married at all:  marriage was largely a legal matter of settling property, of little practical value or religious importance if there was no property to settle. (Marriage was not required, nor treated as a sacrament by the church, for many centuries),

Biblical Times.

After returning home, I began reading the introduction to Bernadette Brooten's "Love Between Women".  Just in theopening chapter, I came acros numerous references to same-sex marriages in the classical period - in Rome, in Sparta, in Canaan, in Egypt and elsewhere.  It is well known that family structures of the Hebrew Bible hardly conformed to the "traditional" family we keep hearing about, with all-powerful men holding absolute power over the women, children and slaves of the household, with multiple wives and concubines, arranged marriages and extended families living together.  In the Christian New Testament, I can't off the top of my head think of a single instance of a "traditional" family unit.  Certainly not Christ's own biological family, nor His later family of choice, nor the household of Martha, Mary and Lazarus, nor those of the apostles, who were urged to leave their families behind, nor the Roman centurion and his "paidion" (or male slave, commonly used for sexual purposes).

No, wait: there is one, if you ignore the palace staff.  The family of Herod, Herodias and Salome lived together as Daddy, Mummy and daughter.

So which of these do you suppose is referred to by "traditional family" values?

Gay Parents: Recommended.

My regular readers will now that gay adoption rights are a personal, touchy area for me.  As a father and grandfather myself, I am acutely conscious that what matters to a child is not the status or orientation of the parent, but the depth of love and the quality of the care.  My daughter Robynn has gone on record in stating , on the first occasion, that her experience when living with my partner and myself gave her a more stable emotional environment, and better examples in moral standards, than she saw given to her classmates from more "conventional" backgrounds.  Later, she made it clear in a post here at QTC, that we should listen to the voices and experiences of children themselves who have grown up in gay - headed households, before making judgements.  Giving her own verdict, she concluded: "Gay parents? I recommend them".

The issue of gay adoption tends to get less press than same sex marriage, but in many ways has greater importance for long term progress to gay equality and inclusion.  Here in the UK , gay adoption is fully accepted in law, but a Catholic adoption agency has just won an important court appeal, granting it exemption from  the statutory requirement of equal treatment for all candidate parents. This is a topic I am not yet ready to discuss properly, but will do at some stage.  In the US, the situation varies by state, but in only one state, Florida, is there an outright legal ban.  There is no sign of this ban being lifted by legislative process any time soon, but meanwhile there have been a string of favourable court decisions, with an important court ruling due any day now. In the meantime, here is another personal story of one child  who would clearly agree with Robynn, and recommend gay parents.  In his case, he voted with his feet, and actively left his one-mother-one-father version family for a gay single father - and in the process made a huge improvement in his life:

From Palm Beach Post:

Grade-A gay 'parent' saved a child from two-parent straight home

James was a bright boy with a dark future looming when he made a decision to change his destiny.

Irish Bishops' Humpty Dumpty Language

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master – that's all." Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. "They've a temper, some of them – particularly verbs, they're the proudest – adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs – however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That's what I say!"

Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass"

In Ireland, the Catholic bishops are concerned about the imminent passing of legislation to allow civil partnerships.  In voicing their opposition, they are using an argument used before in Washingto DC, and in Boulder Colorado, to restrict the religious freedom of gay and lesbian Catholics. This time, though, the application of the argument is so breathtaking it would do Humpty Dumpty proud:

In a statement, Why Marriage Matters, released by the bishops yesterday, they describe provisions in the Civil Partnership Bill as “an extraordinary and far-reaching attack on freedom of conscience and the free practices of religion – which are guaranteed to every citizen under the Constitution”.

Irish Times

Global Marriage Equality: Slovenia Advances

The global spread continues.  Slovenia has begun the legislative process towards full same sex marriage.  Will this be the first former Easter bloc country to get there? From Box Turtle Bulletin

Slovenia marriage bill passes first reading

Timothy Kincaid

March 4th, 2010

The government of Slovenia is proposing a revised Family Law bill which would legalize same-sex marriage and allow for gay adoptions. The bill was proposed on September 21, 2009 and has gone through a period of public debate. Yesterday, after heated debate – with much emphasis on the adoption provision – the Slovenian Parliament passed a first reading of the bill by a vote of 46 to 38. According to the NYU Law School, a bill undergoes three readings, the first of which is a debate over the reasons, principles, and goals of the law.

College Students For Marriage Equality

It will not surprise anyone that college students are more supportive of same sex marriage than other groups.  Still, the detail contained in one recent survey is fascinating.  

First consider just the scale of the support: 65% of all college students support full marriage. That's "support", and "marriage".  The remaining 35% are not by any means all against - they're split between those against marriage, but support civil unions; those who are undecided or just don't care; and the remainder who are specifically opposed.  That's looks like a pretty strong endorsement, to me.

But why are college students so much more supportive of marriage than the population at large?  Is it just that they are younger, and that each age cohort is more supportive than those before them?

Marriage Equality: In Europe, a Human Right?

I have shown before how marriage equality has been spreading relentlessly across Europe, but in some cases (as in the UK), this takes the form of strong civil unions rather than full marriage.  There are also a few countries, notable staunchly Catholic Italy and Poland, which are holding out. This could change.

(Dark blue - full marriage; light blue - civil unions; yellow  - legislation in preparation; red - prohibited.)

The European Union has been drawing ever more closely together politically, and in the field of human rights. As some British conservatives have found to their costs, there have been numerous cases where European human rights directives have forced changes in British law.  Now, an Austrian couple have taken their fight for the right to marry to the European Court of human Rights.  On the face of it, the prospects are good.  The court has a good record on LGBT rights, and the parameters are clear: human rights are defined to guarantee both the right to marry, and freedom from discrimination on the grounds of orientation.

"Their European case argues that in refusing them a marriage license, Austria violated articles of the European Convention on Human Rights that guarantee the rights to marry, protect one’s property and not be discriminated against based on sexual orientation."

Gay Marriage, in Church: Denmark Next?

Last year, Sweden approved full marriage equality, including church weddings if desired, for gay and lesbian couples. Up to now, this has been the only country where it has been possible for same sex couples to have a full religious wedding in a major denomination, and have it recognized by the state. (The other countries which recognize gay marriage, do so only for civil marriages.) However, support for full religious marriage has been building steadily, among voters and in some of the churches themselves. It now seems likely that Denmark will soon follow Sweden's example. This is not surprising - they have similar religious traditions, and similar social outlooks. Denmark was the first country in the world to approve civil unions, but has been slow to convert to full marriage. However, 1997 the bishops approved church "blessings" of civil unions, as long as the words "husband" and "wife" were omitted, so there's not a long way to go.

Now the government is considering a proposal to go he whole way, and allow full religious weddings. With almost two thirds of voters expressing support for the measure, and six out of ten bishops also ready to agree, it looks like an open goal just waiting for the final push.

Small Victory in Pennsylvania.

Not exactly a step forward here, but a backward move averted.  In an unusual move, Democratic members of a Pennsylvania Senate committee held firm against a proposal to write a marriage ban into the state constitution - and three out of nine Repugs broke ranks to kill the proposal.  There have been increasing signs for months that  this is no longer the vote getter for the GOP that it once was, and this confirms that some moderate GOP politicos are starting to find anti-gay bigotry is becoming politically toxic instead.

For all Maggie Gallagher's triumphalism last November over the "victories" in Maine, and later NY and NJ, it is worth remembering that these were essentially "as you were", stalling decisions. The cause of full marriage equality has yet to win at the ballot box, although Washington came close with its "everything but the name" alternative, and there have been the well known victories in the courts and the state legislatures.  For the opposition, it is now some substantial time since her NAM (National organisation Against Marriage) had any success in pushing back existing marriage or civil union rights, anywhere.

This does not yet leave Pennyslvania in the clear: the bill could conceivably still be revived, and if not there remains on the statute book a ban in law, if not in the state constitution.  Still, stalemate is better than a clear  backward step, and local activists will be pleased at the evidence that GOP opposition is no longer monolithic. Perhaps it is now time to develop a strategy, even along term strategy, to change the existing law.

From On Top Magazine:

3 Republicans Cross Aisle To Defeat PA Gay Marriage Ban

Three Republican senators crossed the aisle Tuesday to help defeat a Pennsylvania resolution that sought to define marriage as a heterosexual union in the state constitution.

The 8-to-6 vote in favor of tabling the measure in the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee leaves the joint resolution on limited life support.

Senator John H. Eichelberger, Jr. first announced he would sponsor the resolution in May of last year but postponed its introduction until January due to the economy, the conservative lawmaker said.

Eichelberger's resolution would insert the following language into the state constitution: “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid and recognized as a marriage in this Commonwealth.”

But three Republican and five Democratic lawmakers disagreed. Joining all the committee's Democrats in killing the resolution were Republicans Pat Browne, Jane Earll and Mary Jo White.

(Read More)

Boulder parents: 'They told us in church to love everyone'

In their continuing series on the Boulder school which accepted then turned away the children of lesbian parents, NCR now has the second in a series of four interviews with other parents. In the previous interview, the parents highlighted how the decision in this case contradicted the practice of the school in dealing with other children whose parents were not living in full compliance with Church teaching. In today's interview, the couple interviewed talk about the contradiction between this rejection, and the church's own teaching, and its boasts about diversity. They also point out that the school's reputation in the community will likley suffer, as will its enrolment - and that ironically, a decision which was supposedly taken to avoid having to teach the children about same sex relationships, has instead led to a situation where the children now talk of it constantly.

Here are some extracts. Read the full interview at NCR online:

Mexico's First (Gay) Weddings

Irish Bishops' Humpty Dumpty Language

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master – that's all."
Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again.
"They've a temper, some of them – particularly verbs, they're the proudest – adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs – however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That's what I say!"

Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass"

In Ireland, the Catholic bishops are concerned about the imminent passing of legislation to allow civil partnerships. In voicing their opposition, they are using an argument used before in Washingto DC, and in Boulder Colorado, to restrict the religious freedom of gay and lesbian Catholics. This time, though, the application of the argument is so breathtaking it would do Humpty Dumpty proud:

In a statement, Why Marriage Matters, released by the bishops yesterday, they describe provisions in the Civil Partnership Bill as “an extraordinary and far-reaching attack on freedom of conscience and the free practices of religion – which are guaranteed to every citizen under the Constitution”.

Irish Times

Gay Marriage, in Church: Denmark Next?

Last year, Sweden approved full marriage equality, including church weddings if desired, for gay and lesbian couples. Up to now, this has been the only country where it has been possible for same sex couples to have a full religious wedding in a major denomination, and have it recognized by the state. (The other countries which recognize gay marriage, do so only for civil marriages.) However, support for full religious marriage has been building steadily, among voters and in some of the churches themselves. It now seems likely that Denmark will soon follow Sweden's example. This is not surprising - they have similar religious traditions, and similar social outlooks. Denmark was the first country in the world to approve civil unions, but has been slow to convert to full marriage. However, 1997 the bishops approved church "blessings" of civil unions, as long as the words "husband" and "wife" were omitted, so there's not a long way to go.

Now the government is considering a proposal to go the whole way, and allow full religious weddings. With almost two thirds of voters expressing support for the measure, and six out of ten bishops also ready to agree, it looks like an open goal just waiting for the final push.

Marriage Equality: In Europe, a Human Right?

I have shown before how marriage equality has been spreading relentlessly across Europe, but in some cases (as in the UK), this takes the form of strong civil unions rather than full marriage. There are also a few countries, notable staunchly Catholic Italy and Poland, which are holding out. This could change.

(Dark blue - full marriage; light blue - civil unions; yellow - legislation in preparation; red - prohibited.)
The European Union has been drawing ever more closely together politically, and in the field of human rights. As some British conservatives have found to their costs, there have been numerous cases where European human rights directives have forced changes in British law. Now, an Austrian couple have taken their fight for the right to marry to the European Court of human Rights. On the face of it, the prospects are good. The court has a good record on LGBT rights, and the parameters are clear: human rights are defined to guarantee both the right to marry, and freedom from discrimination on the grounds of orientation.

"Their European case argues that in refusing them a marriage license, Austria violated articles of the European Convention on Human Rights that guarantee the rights to marry, protect one’s property and not be discriminated against based on sexual orientation."

UK: Civil Marriage, Civil Partnership Converging?

Here in the UK, full recognition of gay marriage just came another step closer. This development yesterday took me totally by surprise:

From Ekklesia:

Parliament votes to recognise religious same-sex partnerships

In a dramatic development, the House of Lords has voted to allow the use of religious premises and religious language in same-sex partnerships.

Sitting yesterday evening (2 March), peers voted in favour of the proposal by 95 votes to 21, despite opposition from the government and several Church of England bishops.

The current law on same-sex civil partnerships prohibits religious elements. Campaigners point out that this means that whereas a mixed-sex couple can choose between a civil or religious wedding, a same-sex couple are denied this choice.

The proposal, which takes the form of an amendment to the Equality Bill, was put forward by Waheed Alli, who is a gay Muslim and Labour peer. The government have agreed to work with Alli to redraft the amendment, ensuring that the principle is incorporated into the Bill.

(Read More)

Here is some context:

• Under current UK law, one of the few important differences between civil partnerships and full civil marriage is that the former are prohibited from using religious premises or language. If this legislation takes effect, as now seems likely, the main remaining distinction will be just the name.
• When the Civil Partnership legislation first took effect, it was widely accepted as near marriage, with very little expressed discontent. In the years since, there have been growing calls for its extension to full marriage. With a general election due within months, mainstream political parties have been jostling to be seen as the most gay-friendly. The Conservatives, now leading in the polls, were once the most strongly opposed to gay rights, but now even some of their spokesmen are promising to introduce full recognition for same sex marriage
• Three different religious groups have asked for the right to perform religious same sex unions or marriages.
• The vote in the House of Lords is important symbolically, but has less direct impact. Legislation will get nowhere without the active support of the more important lower house, the House of Commons. Still, this puts pressure on government to act, and it seems they have agreed to accept and incorporate the principle into the final legislation

From the Independent:

The lifting of the ban, which still needs to be approved by the House of Commons, will now give religious venues the option of conducting civil partnerships – but it will not compel them to do so, as some traditionalists had feared.

Lord Alli denied the suggestion that religious communities would be forced to accept gay marriages.

“Religious freedom cannot begin and end with what one religion wants,” he said. “This amendment does not place an obligation on any religious organisation to host civil partnerships in their buildings. But there are many gay and lesbian couples who want to share their civil partnership with the congregations that they worship with. And there are a number of religious organisations that want to allow gay and lesbian couples to do exactly that.”

As elsewhere, full marriage equality is coming, it's just a matter of timing. Here, that timing may be quite soon.

Related articles

• Gay Marriage, UK: The Legal Challenge Begins (rooting-for-gay-marriage.blogspot.com)
• UK Queer Christians Support Marriage Equality Campaign. (queeringthechurch.wordpress.com)
• Straight Couple Denied Civil Partnership (gayrights.change.org)
• Yet more evidence that the State should get out of the marriage business (khanya.wordpress.com)
• 10 Modern Marriage & Civil Partnership Vows (socyberty.com)

Equality Struggle: Lessons From Latin America

Coming as I do from South Africa where I was born and lived for over half a century, I am acutely aware of the White South African tendency to think, speak and write from within a White mental framework, even as they live and work in an overwhelmingly Black country. South Africa though is in some key respects a remarkable microcosm of the world as a whole, and this is one of them: when we in the blogosphere write, many of us do so with a clear mental bias to the USA and Europe, paying scant attention to the remarkable advances elsewhere, notably in Latin America.

Pride Parade, Brazil

How do we explain this paradox of rapid political gains in a region where open intolerance and clear homophobia remain entrenched? What can we learn? Writing in Americas Quarterly (and reprinted at Huffpost, where I came acr0ss it) Javier Corrales has some thoughts on the political processes, which I will get to. First, I want to reflect on the significance to us in the Churches, that he is referring here to Latin America, the home of liberation theology.

Liberation theology, which was born in the slums of Latin America, had major impact on progressive thinking in the years before and immediately after Vatican II, until it met fierce resistance from the JPII/B16 partnership. The core ideas though, remain influential: that the Gospels are firmly on the side of the suffering and oppressed, and that by listening to their experiences, expressed in their own voices, the church can hear the Holy Spirit speaking to us for our times. Although the ideas emerged in the political context of Latin America, these ideas have also spread to other regions and spheres. They were hugely influential in South Africa, where the exponents were prominent in the long struggle for freedom, and also in Asia. It was also a formative influence on feminist theology, which in turn fed into gay and lesbian theology, and then queer theology. It is no coincidence that Marcella Althaus-Reid, one of the foremost exponents of queer theology (which she called "Indecent Theology"), came from South America. Her books exude the flavour and language of life in those Latin slums - and read like real life, far removed from the dry, distant theology that emerges from the Vatican ivory towers.

So, we as queer Christians have many lessons we can learn from the liberation theology of South America. Here is an edited summary of what Cabral has to say about the secular, political lessons:

From America Quarterly:

When most straight people are forced to think about gay people, they usually think of one thing first, sex. A political scientist might focus instead on a different question: how do gays perform in politics? Judged from their political achievements this past decade, the answer is, at least for Latin American gays: they're pretty good.

The political achievements of LGBT groups in Latin America in the 2000s are remarkable. Examples include: decriminalization of homosexuality (now complete in all Spanish-speaking countries and Brazil); laws against sexual-orientation discrimination (Brazil 2000, Mexico 2003, Peru in 2004); extending the same rights and obligations to same-sex couples as heterosexual couples (e.g., Buenos Aires 2002, Colombia in 2009); granting access to health benefits, inheritance, parenting and pension rights to all couples who have cohabited for at least five years (Uruguay); and constitutional bans against discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual identity or HIV status (Ecuador 2008). In the last two years alone the speed of change picked up, with most countries witnessing a significant legal change in the direction of more gay-friendliness, including the now famous Mexico City law recognizing gay marriage and adoption rights. [Please see index of chronology attached.]

Appropriately, he points to some specific lessons we can draw on methods to employ (emphasis is mine):

1. Embrace, not hate, globalization. Whereas the traditional left in Latin America has never quite come to terms with globalization, always responding to it with various forms of negativity ranging from suspicion to extreme repulsion--LGBT movements have adopted a more relaxed response: leverage globalization. LGBT groups systematically use resources provided by globalization and markets to enhance their bargaining leverage.

2. Party hard. A major mistake made by Latin American leftist social movements in the late 1990s was to disdain all things partisan. This generated a lot of unnecessary bad blood between parties and social movements that resulted in too much misallocated energy that helped neither group. LGBTs don't seem to display this hostility toward parties.

3. March hard. Like good old leftists, LGBT groups understand the power of a massive protest, especially in the streets. But their approach to taking the streets is not to go on strike, interrupt traffic during rush hour, shut down schools and hospitals, or vandalize private property, but rather, throw an annual gay pride march.

4. Wage wars peacefully. LGBT groups are engaged in an epic battle against homophobia. Like good old feminists, they are in a life-long struggle on behalf of gender and sexuality rights, and like good old human rights groups, they want equal treatment for all. But LGBT groups avoid two excesses associated with die-hard feminist and human-rights groups. They avoid launching wars against men in general, a problem that besets many feminist claims, and they avoid adopting too punitive an agenda.

5. Think anti-establishment; act intra-establishment. Like good old radicals, LGBT groups are motivated by anti-establishment, even utopian goals. To hope for a world free of homophobia has got to be one of the most idealistic goals of our times, and yet, all LGBT groups are committed to nothing less. LGBT political groups are thus as radical as they come. But their approach to changing the status quo is not exactly all that radical. Rather than destroy the status quo, they seek to work the status quo.

6. In battling conservatives, be fiercely conservative. The most significant development of LGBT politics in the Americas in the 2000s was the eruption of the marriage issue. This was never the top preference of LGBT groups, neither in the United States, where this issue began, nor in Latin America, where this issue has since become quite central in some of the larger countries. In terms of things for which to fight, LBGT across the Americas in the early 2000s would have preferred different battles, such as workplace discrimination. But LGBT groups immediately discovered the political advantage of embracing the marriage issue. It gave them a conservative argument to use against their conservative foes.

7. Draw business lessons. LGBT groups are succeeding in politics also because they are drawing lessons from the business world. From the ad industry, to give one example, LGBT groups have drawn the lesson that nothing sells like the creation of status symbols. Thus, LGBT groups have created the notion that being pro gay is a symbol of being modern, cosmopolitan, and hip.

8. Pop! Pop Culture is the new Populism. Like good political strategists, LGBT movements understand the advantages of appealing to all sectors of the population, and specifically, to both the privileged and the underprivileged. The old left in Latin America tries to create this cross-sectoral political alliance by promising too much from the state, a strategy that often flops and disappoints. LGBT groups have developed a less error-prone approach. They use pop culture as the new populism.

9. This revolution will be YouTubized. LGBTs not only do well as shapers of pop culture, but also as users of the latest medium to transmit pop culture: YouTube. Anytime there is an LGTB-related video out there, LGBT groups share it with hurricane force. Thus, a video about a hate crime in San Juan, or a video of a gay wedding in Argentina, or a video of a homophobic declaration by a bishop in Mexico is instantly watched and deconstructed in the LGBT cyber world.

10. The next gay revolution: Liberté, egalité, (p)maternité. The next LGBT revolution will not only be YouTubized, but it will also involve another remix of traditional and non-traditional icons of the Western world. LGBT groups know that their ideological forté is to focus on old-fashioned principles of the Enlightment--liberty and equality. Much of their success stems from their refusal to privilege one principle over the other, as the hard left and hard right often do, but rather, to always portray the fight for LGBT rights as a struggle for freedom and equality simultaneously. LGBT in the Americas are now launching their next struggle--the fight for p/maternal rights. Once again, they will use iconic emblems (liberty and equality) to transform a traditional aspiration of humans (the desire to raise a family) into a new democratic right: the right of LGBT people to adopt children.

In sum, what we have here is more than just amateurish politics. Like few other leftist social movements, LGBT groups have developed ingenious responses to some of the most pressing issues of our time: unrestrainable globalization (exploit it), strained political parties (respect them), unevenly-performing democratic institutions (fix them and work with the fixed ones), rising religiosity (talk the language), political cynicism (mobilize the young), attention deficit disorder for the written word (YouTubize everything), machismo and homophobia (rebrand the concept of gayness), increasing corporatization of citylife (buycotts). Most members of LGBT groups started out feeling ostracized, but they responded by working the system and building alliances with the system's untouchables. Because they are ideologically on the left and yet their responses to these challenges depart from traditional leftist responses, LGBT groups could very well be considered the first post-left leftists of the twenty-first century.

The strategies of LGBT groups, as with all innovations, are neither infallible nor immune to criticism. There is an inherent contradiction, for instance, in a movement that fights for equality by simultaneously relying on status categories of hipness and cosmopolitanism, to mention just one problem. It is not entirely clear either that all these strategies are especially impactful or appropriate for low-income communities. No doubt, philosophers have ample material here for debate in the years to come.

But there is no question that LGBT groups are emerging as the superstars of politics. Their approaches are succeeding in unexpected ways, especially considering the odds against them. LGBT groups will not win all their battles, but they have already revolutionized the way we ought to think about effective contestation in twenty-first-century democracies. As in so many other domains, LGBT folks in politics have proven to be, yet again, epochal trend-setters.

Read the full article at: Americas Quarterly.

APPENDIX : LGBT Victories in Latin America 2008-2009:

• - February 2008 - Venezuela. The Constitutional Branch of the Supreme Court issues a ruling that, on the one hand, recognizes that discrimination against sexual orientation is unconstitutional, but on the other hand, states that there does not exist constitutional protection for same-sex partnerships; only the legislature can confer such protections.
• - March, 2008 - Nicaragua. A reform of the Penal Code legalizes same-sex relations and ends an anti-sodomy law.
• - March 2008 - Brazil. Police estimate that more 3 million people participated in the 12th annual Gay Pride March; both the Sao Paulo government and Petrobras sponsor the march.
• - June 2008 - Brazil. President Lula launches the "First National Conference of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites and Trasnsexuals in Brasilia.
• - June 2008 - Cuba. New president, Raúl Castro, authorizes offering free sex-change operations for qualifying citizens, a policy change advocated by Cuba's National Center for Sex Education (presided over by President Raúl Castro's daughter, Mariela Castro).
• - August 2008 - Panama. Government repeals a 1949 law criminalizing gay sex.
• - September 2008 - Ecuador. Voters approve the country's 20th constitution. Article 11 bans discrimination on the basis of "gender identity," "sexual orientation," and "HIV status" (but still defines marriage as the "union between man and woman," Art. 68).
• - December 2009 - United Nations. The United Nations General Assembly affirms that international human rights protections include sexual orientation and gender identity. The statement is read to the Assembly by Argentina; 12 of the 66 countries that signed on were Latin American.
• - January 2009 - Mexico. In a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court rules in favor of a man-to-woman transsexual requesting the reissuing of a new birth certificate that would not reveal the change in her sexual identity.
• - January 2009 - Colombia. The Constitutional Court upholds a lower court opinion that same-sex couples must be accorded the same benefits as heterosexual couples in common-law marriages. This ruling grants same-sex couples equal pension, survivor, immigration and property rights.
• - February 2009 - Bolivia. New constitution bans discrimination on the basis of "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" (but only recognizes "marriage" and "free unions" as occurring "between a woman and a man").
• - February 2009 - Chile. The Unified Movement for Sexual Minorities (MUMS) organizes the first-ever mass wedding for sexual minorities in front of the Metropolitan Cathedral.
• - September 2009 - Uruguay. With a 17-6 vote the legislature approved a bill that ends restricting adoptions to married couples, what many interpreted as paving the way for adoptions by same-sex couples. Earlier, Archbishop Nicolás Cotugno of Montevideo condemned the bill as going "against human nature itself, and consequently, ... against the fundamental rights of the human being as a person."
• - November 2009 - Argentina. A Buenos Aires judge ruled that it was unconstitutional for civil law to stipulate that a marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. A marriage licence was then granted to Alex Freyre and José María Di Bello. This became the most controversial marriage in modern Argentine history, with debates on TV, marches, and hostile posters on billboards across the city. The archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Bergoglio, publicly criticized the city's mayor, Mauricio Macri, for not appealing the judge's decision to grant the marriage licence.
• - December 2009 - Mexico. In a 39-to-20 vote with five abstentions, Mexico City's Legislative Assembly approved marriage rights for same-sex couples. In a separate vote, the Assembly also approved adoption rights by a vote of 31 to 24 with nine abstentions.

Source: Corrales, Javier and Mario Pecheny, eds. 2010. The Politics of Sexuality in Latin America: a Reader on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights. University of Pittsburgh Press.