This why I came to Oklahoma City and have been too busy to blog these past few days, and when here after a 12 year absence, I could see the results of the advocacy, lots of tissues were required. At times as I quietly observed the younger Gay Community and talked with those my age who passed it on to them.

I knew and worked with such great people in my past.

Quiet heroes.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(included in this blog are cartoons done during the advocacy  for inclusive language in the referenced policies that were based on excuses put forth to avoid doing the right thing)

The reasons for Pride come in various forms and at various times.

In 1997, a simple request to the administration of the Oklahoma City Public Schools for teacher professional development sessions on the existence and needs of GLBT students in their classrooms, similar to what was done for the Asian, Black, Latino, and other groups to which students belonged, was rejected because, regardless how important that might be, “local norms will not allow it”. That was code for supporting bigotry, as the local norms referred to were those supported by politicians, the local newspaper, and the all controlling Baptist Church.

Over the next several years meetings were held with administrators, after having been initially refused, that resulted in the formation of a committee to review the Oklahoma City Public School District’s policies on bullying, harassment, and nondiscrimination which some hoped would result in the addition of the words “sexual orientation” so that there would be no doubt that Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender students were included in those policies and their protection and school experience would not be controlled by the personal religious and political beliefs of individual teachers and administrators.

That committee was close to the inclusive language, but an intra-administrative tiff resulted in that committee’s meetings being postponed indefinitely which, as it was to turn out as predicted, was to be never.

The quest for those inclusive words was not abandoned, and for the next several years, 12 in total, that inclusion was sought to various degrees of acceptance by people going to school board meetings on a regular basis to present facts and figures to educate the school district of the importance of those words.

Finally in December 2009, as a result of persistence, and some drama along the way, the GLBT Community’s request and the importance of inclusion was recognized when the words “Sexual orientation and “gender identity” were finally added to the Oklahoma City Public Schools policies on bullying, harassment, an nondiscrimination.

The inclusion of “gender identity” put the school district at the forefront of student protection as very few school districts throughout the country had yet to include it.

As with all things, there is growth. And part of that process is to realize that the gates of hell did not open to consume the school district and the greater city in which it operated, and the imagined unending filings of law suits was a fantasy and excuse for immobility.

Quite surprisingly, I am sure, those who had originally opposed inclusion and may have reluctantly allowed it have been seeing the rest of the country catching up.

Proof of that positive growth came, when on this past June 12, 2017, the Oklahoma City Public Schools Board of Education passed a resolution vowing unwavering support for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer students and staff making it one of only five school districts in the country to do so.

Chairperson Paula Lewis has stated,

“The resolution is just a start for our district of recognizing that we are a diverse district and that we are proud of everybody in our district whether it be students or teachers.”

and

“I’d like to get an overarching policy that says we as a district recognize not just our nondiscrimination, but a true policy that says we recognize all these groups and they’re safe to work here and they are safe to go to school here.”

These are the very sentiments expressed from 1997 to 2009 by those advocating for inclusive language.

Carrie Jacobs another Board member explained her support of the resolution.

“It sends the message that the district is for all kids. It says that we see you and we are grateful that you are here. We value your contributions.”

This has become a good Pride Month for me.

And lest they are forgotten, there were a number of people, besides myself, who throughout those long years went to many board meetings, spoke out when it as needed, and helped in the advocacy in any way they could.

Recent events are easy to remember, and can appear to have come out of the blue, but the Community should thank these people:

Rob Abiera, Jim Nimmo, Bob Nichols, Mike (Skye) Camfield, Eddie Kromer, Paul Bashline, Rhonda Rudd and Jayshree, Karen Parsons, Jean Pennycuff, all the guys at Tramps, still here and gone, Nathaniel Batchelder and his Peace House, Rey Jones, a man who wanted justice for everyone, Jim Prock, Victor Gorin, Reverends Scott Jones and Jenalu Johnston, and Paula Schonauer. .

.

,.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

As a cartoonist, I draw a series of lines and segments of lines until there is a complete picture. As I draw, I might modify some lines and segments of lines until there is a complete image, however, it is only after I can see the complete picture that I can critique it. That is when I accept or reject the work, redo it if possible, modify what needs to be modified, or put it on the pile of things that seemed promising but did not in the end come out as planned.

I would never finish a picture if I critiqued each line as I drew it.

This approach was useful in Union work, as, while presenting a complete summary of an argument or a defense of the member, the other side would grasp at words and sentences to argue and find fault with which often meant they were not grasping the fine points as they were worried about vocabulary choices and parsing sentences in order to avoid having to offer factual counterpoints, or, worse, actually were unable to grasp the concept and were arguing their own little case in their heads while others in the room were dealing with the facts as laid out on the table.

This usually meant that at the level of the arbitration when both sides submit their summary statement, the other side was blindsided by the presentation of all facts unfiltered by interruption so they were hearing the complete defense for the first time.

My summation may have been long and involved, but they were inclusive with no facts or points omitted and too often heard for the first time at that point..

Although they might have been prepared to present all grammatical errors and sentence parsing, it was at the summation that it became clear either their approach kept them from grasping all the facts or they had had no intention to view the facts and decided accordingly to just confuse things.

I was trained in approaching member Grievances by a man named Joe Zarba who had little ways on controlling an arbitration with little subtle actions and was very adept at phrasing sentences in such a way that the other side would go off on the vocabulary and sentence parsing while the arbitrator had to choose between their performance and the presentation of facts.

I may draw a cartoon line by line and line segment by line segment, but I cannot assess the picture until it is completed and then I can look for the flaws to correct. 

If. however, I critigue every line or line segment as I draw them, the picture will never be complete.

In Grievance hearings no matter how far off the track they might go, I earned to make my shopping lists during these intervals returning to the main point as if they had said nothing when it was my turn.

When Joe Zarba held a document the other side considered important up to his artificial eye pretending to inspect it, the Grievant could relax as that was a sign the document, like most of the petty arguments and comebacks, was irrelevant and the case won. It was subtle, the other side did not know it, but it really was a good moment for the Grievant.

So, between my understanding of the importance of seeing the whole picture because it is part of drawing and my Union training, I will let you know when I would prefer discussing the issue not vocabulary.

One time when presenting some complicated information to a room full of White people, when they were not accepting the facts as presented but were arguing minutia, I said,”what you people need to understand is that if you back the wrong measure we lose the raise,” and the rest of the meeting was a criticism of my calling them “you people” with most of the lecture I received was about the racist overtone to my approach as I saw them as “you people”.

We had to have a second meeting to go over what the first meeting was supposed to cover.

So, in a discussion, regardless if it is important to argue the nuance of a word, I may cut you off to get back to the topic or simply accept you cannot grasp it.

Some treatment of a serious topic will take time and can be involved, but unless you wait for the complete telling, we are only dealing with lines and sentences and not pictures or paragraphs.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

When I began my blog some 12 years ago I had decided to do one a day, more if an idea hit me. I guess it’s like jogging which almost becomes an addiction if any of my running friends are any indication. 

I have come to a point now when I have to break my streak.

I will be traveling to Oklahoma to attend an event at the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmund.

Living in Massachusetts now, the art work and legal papers I had accumulated over my 18 years in that state, work and papers that have little if any meaning up here but were a part of GLBT history in Oklahoma, not just because of me, but many others still here and gone, that got the Oklahoma City Schools District to add “Sexual Orientation” and “Gender Identity” into school policies, I offered it all to the University of Central Oklahoma if for no other reason than to make me feel comfortable that, whether or not they are ever looked at, they are available to anyone who might find them useful.

Volunteering at a museum, I have seen things left from history that were minor things of little consequence until someone during research found their relevance and importance. I figured that somewhere in the distant future some students will come across the collection when moving boxes looking for what they need and may either look at for the first and only time since it was stored and shrug their shoulders in acceptance as they put the stuff back in its cubby-hole, or might give a student a topic for a paper about obscure historical events.

If nothing else, it could all be thrown out by the University, but at least it wasn’t thrown out by a total stranger cleaning out my apartment after my unfortunate and untimely demise.

I suppose the timing of the acceptance of materials was fortunate as a grad student majoring in Museum Studies preparing for a career in museum curation was assigned to be the curator of the “bequest”. I am assuming that she, like I had done, chose a practical action as opposed a thesis paper. I avoided my thesis by actually working in a Special Education setting to show my practical knowledge rather than my grasp of theory.

Things were quiet for a while as I assumed it was all in a cubby-hole in the basement of a campus building, but, then I received word that the student-curator was mounting an exhibit that was to include artwork and coverage of the events to which it was all related, generally “Gay Equality”, more specifically, GLBT Student protection in school district policy.

The Whaling Museum which is actually the Old Dartmouth Historic Society (Dartmouth being the first settlement in the area which now covers the South Coast of Massachusetts of which New Bedford would eventually become its own town then city) has a large collection of art by many artists long dead, and, rather than actually knowing what the artist’s idea was when approaching the painting, there is a lot of speculation filtered through the knowledge of the viewer.

There is a huge painting by a famous local artist that hangs in a hallway in front of which someone had once placed a chair so people could look at the picture and see what they could come up with for meaning. Judging from its size and detail there has to be more to the painting than is obvious, but the artist, long dead, has to leave its meaning up to the viewer right or wrong.

In my case, I am still around so the student-curator could contact me to clarify any questions.

The proof of the write-up she sent for my inspection contained information that although correct, was approached in terms of 2023 as opposed the realities of the years 1997-2009, so the facts became murky and it appeared that I had left town before the final wording was added with my work being the foundation for adding the words after I left.

The reality was I stayed, was wrongfully dismissed for my GLBT student advocacy, won my job back in a District Court and prevailed in the school administrators’ appeal in the Appellate Court, the language was added, and, after 3 semesters with the words in place, I left.

I did not want to become one of those people who, having been successful with one thing, is assumed to be an expert in all related topics, something I found with others in the past to be counter productive.

 One has to know when to exit the stage.

Had I been dead, the easy to correct errors would have been part of the official story as, it seems, no one is interested in reading the book that contains the actual story.

A second, common mistake in looking back is to view people and events from a modern standpoint and interpret them accordingly.

There is confusion with the actual events that took place at the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village that night in June 1969, because modern terms and understandings are being applied to an era fifty years in the past, so the sexual orientations and gender identites of participants are being viewed from now as opposed to then and people, in spite of good intentions, are being rewritten so they are no longer who they actually were and often erased as they have yet to serve a purpose and may never as being hidden over time creates oblivion.

Although “gender” and “sexuality” are important topics to today’s college and graduate school students, these were presented as what I was dealing with which to me was not only extremely generic, but had me not knowing what it was I had done. I requested that rather than the generic terms,  the story should refer specifically to adding the words “sexual orientation” and “gender Identity”, much more important than a general topic.

The demand for the school district to do the right thing was specific and at the time, adding the specific terms “Sexual Orientation” and “Gender Identity” was extremely important. To reduce them to generic topics reduces that importance.

In both cases, had I been dead, my story, as presented, would have told a faulty tale that would become the official story having me the person who had been run off before the task was completed and only a participant.

One time when visiting home in Boston at Christmas, in one of those mother/son conversations, my mother told me that although she and my father would love me to move back home as they were getting up there, they realized that if I did that it would look like I had been run off and, worse, even if it was clear I chose to leave, I would be abandoning the GLBT kids who would have to wait for another day to be protected by the School District. Their agreed upon “blessing” was that I go back and win, leave after all was complete, and, hopefully, they would both be around when I did.

The did not want to have been responsible for this abandoning of the students.

Unfortunately my mother died a year before the language was added, so I put a copy of the Daily Oklahoman, the local newspaper, with its article about the addition of the words on her headstone in lieu of flowers that Christmas.

So it was important that the order of victory and departure be correct as it involved more than just me and those in OKC who supported me.

Makes one wonder if VanGogh was really that poor or people assumed his “He Shed” in the backyard was his home and just never asked while he was alive.

Corrections have been made.

So I am heading to Oklahoma, and, as a USRail pass was less expensive than a round trip plane ticket, intend to visit places from my past on the West Coast, stopping as many times as my pass allows and staying for as long in each place as my bank account can handle.

A farewell tour of sorts.

Because of this, I imagine drawing a cartoon will be near impossible, what with the rocking of the train, and, since I will be revisiting old haunts and will have no control over my schedule, I will be slowing down my blogs until my return in the middle of May.

Needless to stay because of layovers at certain stations along the route, there might be a chance to at least attempt a cartoon, and I will attempt to be current.

Otherwise, hoping not to drive people away, I will republish posts related to the reason for my trip, and perhaps some travel commentary when possible.

Thank you, you who have been reading my blogs. 

Although I know where I will be, I have no idea what is to happen when I get there. Generic plans with only a one-day three hour commitment with all else up in the air.

I will be back on track after the trip and back to the pledge I made to myself and see how long the future trail goes unbroken.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

It seems every election-cycle, if Texas does not get its way or, when during a congressional session, bills its Republican party wants get voted down while those they do not want get passed, the Texas Tradition is to threaten secession from the Union like a toddler threatens running away from home.

It has come up again this year, 2023.

Apparently, however, while Texas whines that as part of the Union they should always get what they want regardless of the needs of other states, things like disaster relief the other states give to it, its delegation in DC will deny what is truly needed by most every other state.

When it comes to abortion, the general demand vehemently defended and promoted by states such as Texas is that deciding its legality and any limitations, if allowed, is a matter of states rights, so the federal government cannot and should not allow it nationally.

A one law fits all is just wrong.

Liberal, godless states should not have their sin visited upon the whole country, including states who strongly reject it.

A Texas judge, appointed by Trump, has banned an important medical abortion drug, Mifepristone, which, because of the level in the court system he is, the ruling is applied nation-wide.

This effectively denies all states the right to self determination on this issue.

The medication has been on the market for over twenty years and studies have shown it to be safe and effective. In spite of this, a suit was filed by an anti-abortion group alleging that the approval granted was rushed and the drug is not safe.

Again, facts are ignored to force religious views on the country.
So, a judge in a state that crows about states rights while constantly complaining about the country, threatening secession at the drop of a hat, a perceived slight perhaps, has made a decision that effects a huge chunk 1/2 of the population.

Nothing inconsistent there.

Just the uninterrupted MAGA approach to the rest of us.

.

.

.

.

.

.