Out of breath at the AAS

I'm out of breath for two reasons.  First, I stayed up until 2 AM dancing at the big party at the annual American Astronomical Society (AAS) meeting.  Picture eight hundred sweaty, grinning, goofy scientists bouncing around in a variety of tempos on a packed dance floor.  It's so awkwardly goofy and charming there aren't words.  This may sound corny, but the AAS dance party gives me hope that we are building a better profession, where we want our scientists to make amazing discoveries -- and be happy.

But what really takes my breath away is how quickly the situation is changing regarding the inclusion and acceptance of lesbian, gay, and bi scientists in my profession.

When I attended my first AAS, I was a deep-in-denial undergrad, sublimating my confused passion into problem sets.  In my heart I knew I wasn't straight, but I hadn't realized I could be a lesbian.  I didn't know any gay people, except for one poetry professor (heart).  I knew it was possible, though really hard, to be a successful woman scientist, but I didn't think there were any gay scientists.  All this sounds so unbelievably quaint now, the foghorn of the Titanic may Blwwoooorn any minute.

After I came out in grad school, someone invited me to the AAS LGBT networking dinner.  We were to meet at the registration desk at an appointed hour.  Many of the crowd were regulars -- we just celebrated the 20th anniversary of this dinner!  But for a newcomer it seemed really closed and closety.  Were we ashamed?  Did we need to be afraid of being noticed?  I scanned the crowd.  "Um, are you guys going to, um, the dinner?"  Blank stares, wrong group.  Once I found the right group and walked to dinner, it was wonderful.  I met a scientist whose partner was also in academia.  Their institution recruited them as a two-body hire, and they had domestic partner benefits!  I was at a queer-unfriendly university at the time, so this story sounded like unicorns on roller-skates to me.

That networking dinner was a lifeline.  We bitched about some of the hurtful comments we'd gotten, we sympathized about the difficulty of living apart from partners because we couldn't find jobs together, or couldn't get visas.  We dished about which institutions were "tolerant", and which were hostile.  We bragged about what famous astronomers at our institutions were okay with us being gay.  We lamented that many of the activists for women in astronomy wanted us to go away, because lesbians weren't "real women" in science -- we were an unsympathetic distraction from their goal of enabling the straight woman scientist to raise a wholesome nuclear family.  We also laughed an awful lot, told jokes, mentored, listened, shared.  I don't remember talking much, but I remember inhaling it all.  Here were grad students, postdocs, planetarium and observatory staff, and actual faculty members who were gay and succeeding in science.

In math, an existence proof isn't a general solution, but one that demonstrates that the problem is solvable.  That LGBT networking dinner was my existence proof.  Yes, I could integrate the two intense, simultaneous metamorphoses of my life in graduate school: becoming a real astronomer, and falling deeply love with a woman -- into a whole person, the new me.  An AstroDyke.

This year, for the first time the AAS meeting included an LGBT reception.  It was announced in the conference program, and advertised by bulletin board and business cards.  The turnout was at least 80 at any one time, a happy buzzing crowd, enjoying and building community.  It was the Coming Out party for LGBT inclusion and diversity in astronomy.  Queer students, postdocs, and faculty members attended, as did department heads and the president of the AAS.  Even a few people whom I feel weren't very helpful in the past, were there proudly showing their support now.  Folks sipped wine (sponsored by a defense contractor, sigh), and talked about how to build a more inclusive profession.  Then the queers went off to a fabulous networking dinner, marveling at how times have changed.

The next morning I wandered around the poster hall, wondering if I'd dreamed it all.  Did most of the places where I'd applied to be a postdoc really not have domestic partner benefits?  Was it really true that my advisor, an otherwise great mentor, told me he couldn't help queer couples solve the two body problem, because they weren't married and who knew how long such relationships would last?  Is it really true that my first interaction with the director of my postdoctoral institution had to be asking for them to add DP benefits, so that my partner would have health insurance when she moved to be with me?  (They did, to their credit.)

At dinner following a recent colloquium I gave, a postdoc asked, politely, why we as a profession should worry about LGBT inclusion in astronomy, when the problems of women and minorities are much harder.   He was really surprised by my response, that in my own career, it's been much harder to be a gay person in science than a woman in science.  He had no idea.

That's changing.  At this year's dinner, one of the undergrads, when I asked what the AAS should be doing to promote LGBT inclusion, apologized -- he had nothing to add, because he had no negative experiences being gay and a science major.  "Good," I said. "I want that to be true your whole career."  We're not there yet, not nearly yet.  We're still a profession that favors straight white men.  It's still much harder to be black, or queer, or a parent.  

But it's getting better.  The students at the AAS this year included a gentleman with a foot-long spiky pink mohawk, a young man in a kilt, tons of women, including ones with skirts and nebula-print tights.  I saw quite a bit of blue hair, and a few men leading their young children through the exhibit hall.  I was encouraged to meet African-American, Native American, and Latino students, though their numbers are still far too small.  We are slowly becoming the profession I want us to be.

We are still not an inclusive profession when it comes to LGBT issues.  There are still significant legal as well as policy barriers that trip up the careers of LGBT scientists, and we still sadly encounter unsupportive, even hostile workplace climates.  This stuff's gotta change.  Over the next year, WGLE, the AAS's Working Group for LGBT Equality, will make a roadmap for how astronomy departments can support LGBT inclusion and remove discriminatory practices in their workplace.  If you care about these issues, please join WGLE (1-2 emails per month).  Just send an email to wgle@aas.org.

Oh, and the last wonderful thing is that at the last two AAS meetings, I met a few other queer women to dance with.  G-rated stuff, mind you.  Just goofily grooving to the music, finding community, gaining strength to go back to our own institutions, be our fabulous selves, and succeed in science.

Seeking scientists for It Gets Better project

I'm a big fan of the It Gets Better project, which reassures queer kids who are getting bullied that life will get better.  That there's a whole gorgeous life waiting for them, if they just survive their teen years and resist suicide.

I've seen Apple Employees, White House staffers, all kinds of neat people make videos for It Gets Better.  Why not scientists?  Anybody interested?

Astronomers to recognize Frank Kameny's contribution

This week is the superbowl of astronomy:  American Astronomical Society (AAS) winter meeting.  Several thousand astronomers will be networking, sharing new results, and awarding prizes for standout contributions to our science.

At the meeting, the AAS will honor LGBTQ civil rights leader and former astronomer Dr. Frank Kameny with a certificate recognizing his contributions to society.  While the grass-roots effort to honor Dr. Kameny got started while he was alive, sadly he passed away before the award could be given.   Several queer astronomers will accept the certificate in memory of Dr. Kameny.

I wish Frank had lived to see the ceremony, or that astronomers had gotten their acts together to honor him earlier.  After Frank was fired in 1957 from US government astronomy job for being gay, he walked away from astronomy.  After all, he had no recourse -- homosexuality was considered a psychosis. Frank played a key role in changing all that, and those of us who live openly and honestly owe him big time.   But I wonder if he missed his former profession --  taking data on the mountaintop, analyzing it late at night in the lab, going to lectures, trying to figure out how the Universe works.  Anyone know if Frank talked about this?  Would he be satisfied to be be recognized by his former profession?

The kind folks at AAVSO will be bringing their signed copy of Frank's astronomy PhD thesis, as a sort of physical memory of Frank, to be there when his citation is read.  Not sure if that's cheesy or profound, but I like it.

Will astronomers recognize Frank Kameny's contributions?

Dr. Frank Kameny is the most famous former astronomer that astronomers don't know.  Within the gay rights' community, he was a pioneer:  co-founder of the Mattachine society (an early gay rights organization); a scientific conscience that challenged the American Psychiatric Association's classification of homosexuality as a disorder as grounded in prejudice rather than science; an agitator to remove the ban on gays from serving in the government or holding security clearances.  Moreover, Dr. Kameny was a moral force who led by example, showing that gay people didn't need to hide in the shadows, grateful not to be beaten up.  Rather, we could stand up and demand fair treatment and equality.  For most of the last 50 years, that was a radical notion.

Dr. Kameny was fired from government service in 1957 for being gay.  In 2009, the White House formally apologized for his firing.  While this was a big deal in the gay rights' community, it didn't get much noticed by astronomers.  I find that very curious.  After all, the 2010 Decadal Survey (our every-ten-year examination of our profession's priorities) notes that "not all highly capable students" who are "trained in astronomical research" "will take up long-term positions in astronomy" (what a wishy-washy statement on the job market!), and that therefore students should be "educated and exposed to issues of public policy."  So, students: go read about Frank.  Professors:  include him in your "exploring career paths" workshop.  (You have one, right?)  

Two new Facebook groups seek to recognize Frank's accomplishments.  You can buy him a drink to thank him for his activism (actually it helps pay his utilities, but who's counting?), or you can support the creation of a Frank Kameny prize by the American Astronomical Society. 

Judge rules Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional

Good news!  U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro ruled today in two companion lawsuits that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional!  (Read the decisions:  Gill v. OPM and Massachusetts v. HHS).

"The next step in the case is for the federal government to decide whether it will appeal Judge Tauro’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. That decision should come within the next 60 days."  - GLAD's website

Background:  seven same-sex married couples and three widowers from Massachusetts sued the federal government because their legal marriages are not recognized by the federal government under section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage (DOMA).  DOMA, a blanket rejection of any marriage between persons of the same sex, hurts gay families in many ways:  You can't sponsor your spouse for a green card, or collect social security survivor benefits when she dies, or file a joint tax return, or (if a federal employee) cover your spouse on your health insurance plan.

One of the two lawsuits is Gill v. OPM, argued by GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders).   (The lawsuit does not challenge the rest of DOMA, which says a state can choose not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in another state.)  (NY Times summary of the case from 3/2009.)  The other lawsuit is Commonwealth of Mass v. Dept. of HHS.

Judge Tauro's 39-page opinion in Gill v. OPM includes several choice bits of sarcasm:


Furthermore, this court seriously questions whether it may even consider preservation of the status quo to be an “interest” independent of some legitimate governmental objective that preservation of the status quo might help to achieve.  Staying the course is not an end in and of itself, but rather a means to an end."

"... federal agencies merely distribute federal marriage-based benefits to those couples that have already obtained state-sanctioned marriage licenses.  That task does not become more administratively complex simply because some of those couples are of the same sex.  Nor does it become more complex simply because some of the couples applying for marriage-based benefits were previously ineligible to marry.  Every heterosexual couple that obtains a marriage license was at some point ineligible to marry due to the varied age restrictions placed on marriage by each state.  Yet the federal administrative system finds itself adequately equipped to accommodate their changed status."

"In fact, as Plaintiffs suggest, DOMA seems to inject complexity into an otherwise straightforward administrative task by sundering the class of state-sanctioned marriages into two, those that are valid for federal purposes and those that are not. As such, this court finds the suggestion of potential administrative burden in distributing marriage-based benefits to be an utterly unpersuasive excuse for the classification created by DOMA."

"It strains credulity to suggest that Congress might have created such a sweeping status-based enactment, touching every single federal provision that includes the word marriage or spouse, simply in order to further the discrete goal of consistency in the distribution of federal marriage-based pecuniary benefits."

Google to pay employees' "Gay Tax"

Google announced they would begin paying the extra taxes employees pay when they sign up their same-sex partners for health insurance.

What "gay tax", you ask? Let me provide a little context. When an employee puts their married, opposite-sex spouse on their company health insurance plan, the government doesn't count that as taxable income.   But when an employee signs up their same-sex partner for the same health plan, regardless of marital status, the federal government counts the employer's share of the premiums as taxable income to the employee.  So, several thousand dollars of extra taxes.  In addition, there are other "gay taxes" -- here's a short summary.

Of course, this is a stop-gap solution.  The easiest comprehensive solution would be for Congress to change the law about taxability of insurance premiums for domestic partners.  And while they're at it, change the laws on Social Security, disability, and the thousand other federal benefits.  Or if that seems like too much effort, just repeal Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage. 

High Tech Gays v. DISCO

While reading closing arguments in the federal case regarding Prop. 8, I came across a discussion by the defendents' attorney of "the High Tech Gays case".  Say what?

Google... The full case name is "High Tech Gays v. Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office".  You heard me right: "High Tech Gays v. DISCO." The case went to US District Court in 1987, which ruled homosexuals should have the same security clearance process as others. It was overturned in 1990 by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in 1990, and thankfully made irrelevant in 1995 by Executive Order of President Clinton, who barred the Federal government from denying security clearances on the basis of sexual orientation.

(Of course this is serious shit -- the gay bans on federal employees, and then on security clearances, ruined many people's lives.)

That said, "High Tech Gays v. DISCO" is the best-named court case ever, overtaking my previous favorite, Loving v. Virginia.

The cost of discrimination

Tax day is a good time for a reminder about the "Gay Tax".  The NY Times estimated the life-time cost of discriminatory laws to a typical white-color gay couple:

We gave our couple an income of $140,000, which is about the average income in those three states for unmarried same-sex partners who are college-educated, 30 to 40 years old and raising children under the age of 18.  Here is what we came up with. In our worst case, the couple’s lifetime cost of being gay was $467,562. But the number fell to $41,196 in the best case for a couple with significantly better health insurance, plus lower taxes and other costs.

Obama orders hospital visitation rights for LGBT Americans

From CNN:  Obama ordered the Dept of Health & Human Services to establish a rule: if hospitals accept Medicare/Medicaid funding, they must let partners visit gay patients.

Obama requested that the regulation make clear that any hospital receiving Medicare and Medicaid funding, which includes the vast majority of U.S. hospitals, must allow patients to decide who can visit them and prohibit discrimination based on a variety of characteristics, including sexual orientation and gender identity.

To quote the vice-president, "This is a big fucking deal."  For years, LGBT people have petitioned hospitals, counties, and state governments to allow us to visit our sick partners in the hospital.  In the back of our heads, there's the worry that we might die like Lisa Pond, alone, with our lover barred from the room, without the chance to say goodbye.  Or that when our partners need us, we'll be barred from telling the doctor our partner's medical history and allergies.

Many gay people travel with our wills & durable power of attorney paperwork tucked into our suitcases, just in case.  Here's hoping that Obama's order works, and we can travel lighter.

Workplace Issues for LGBT Astronomers

I wanted to highlight a poster from the recent "Women in Astronomy 2009" workshop, held last October. Titled "Workplace Issues for LGBT Astronomers," it's a reminder to our colleagues that LGBT astronomers face extra challenges at work, due to unequal compensation at institutions (lack of health insurance and pensions for same-sex partners), and federal laws that permit discrimination. (Props to L. Kay for presenting the poster and advocating for its inclusion at the WIA meeting.)

Comments? Suggestions for a similar poster for the next winter AAS?


Several of the other posters are also worth a read.

Hate Crimes bill passes

Catching up on legislative action: two weeks ago Congress passed the "Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act". Last Wednesday President Obama signed it into law.

The law expands the 1969 federal hate-crime law to include a victim's real or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. This is big:

• No longer must the victim be engaged in a federally--protected activity like voting. Texas has no hate-crimes statute when James Byrd was lynched; a similar crime now would bring additional penalties.
• The law gives the feds power to prosecute hate crimes when local authorities won't. Also, it helps state and county agencies cover the costs of high-profile investigations and trials. (The trial of Matthew Shepard's killers financially drained a Wyoming county.)
• It requires the FBI to track statistics on hate crimes against transgender people. We don't actually know many transgender folk are attacked and murdered every year, because the feds haven't counted.
  

Fundamentalist Christians have fought hate crimes measures on the grounds that they stifle free speech. That's not true. It is absolutely, 100% legal to stand on the corner and tell the world how much you hate brown people and gay people.

Hate crimes should be punished more severely because such crimes target not only the direct victim, but an entire minority community. A brick through the window of a synagogue is worse than a brick through the window of a 7/11. A lynching is worse than a murder. Therefore, the people who perpetrate hate crimes should face tougher sentences.

You are not welcome here.

Visiting a purple state on business, I stopped by a pizza joint, ordered a slice, and sat down with the town's alternative weekly newspaper. I read about the GOP candidate, putting the goober in gubernatorial, and how he thinks that feminists and homosexuals are destroying America. He was asked if that meant he wouldn't appoint a gay judge, and responded "It would depend on his actions." So, if a gay lawyer spends hours fantasizing about smooth pectoral muscles, but never actually goes on a date, then he's a fine candidate for the bench. Right?

I got so mad, reading the alt-weekly, waiting for my pizza. How dare this governor-wannabe force his religion on the rest of us. Do I tell him how to live his life? Which god to believe in? How to pray to her?

Here I am, in one of the few states where astronomy jobs are currently being advertised, and here's the leading candidate for governor, telling me I am not welcome in his state, nor my family, nor our values.

I finished the pizza, walked down the street, past the opposition candidate's local storefront headquarters. I doubled back, walked in, and gave them $20.

If the media were smarter, they'd ignore Fred Phelps

You've probably heard of the "preacher" Fred Phelps from Topeka, who drags his family around the country protesting same-sex weddings, funerals of gay men, funerals of American soldiers, and anything else he thinks will get him on TV.

You probably know, educated readers that you are, that Fred Phelps represents no one beyond his immediate family. He's a nutball, pure and simple. He's also extremely savvy: most of his family are lawyers, and they try to provoke violence against them in order to manufacture a lawsuit.

You know a reporter is lazy when an article contains a line about"Protesters of gay rights stood outside", and the photo illustrating this point shows Phelps' distinctive signs (huge square fonts, the theme "God Hates ______", and liberal use of the word "fag"). They're easy to spot once you know what they look like. Clearly, a reporter isn't digging hard when the "local protesters" are out-of-town Phelpsers, screaming for attention.

Many folks are wise to Phelps, and greet his demonstrations with creative counter-protests. My favorite is getting people to pledge a small donation to HIV/AIDS charities for every minute he lingers.

Lauren Ober covered today's counter-protest in Vermont, as marriage equality becomes legal there today. (Linked from her pal Alison Bechdel's blog.) Below is my favorite photo from her coverage.

Activist Frank Kameny recognized at the White House

Activist (and astronomer) Frank Kameny was honored at a White House ceremony as part of Pride month.

The U.S. government officially apologized to Dr. Kameny, who was fired by the United States Civil Service Commission 52 years ago because of his sexual orientation.

"With the fervent passion of a true patriot, you did not resign yourself to your fate or quietly endure this wrong," said John Berry, director of the Office of Personnel Management. "With courage and strength, you fought back. And so today, I am writing to advise you that this policy, which was at odds with the bedrock principles underlying the merit-based civil service, has been repudiated by the United States Government, due in large part to your determination and life's work, and to the thousands of Americans whose advocacy your words have inspired."

Dr. Kameny was instrumental in getting homosexuality dropped from the manual of mental disorders used by American psychiatrists. He also fought a long battle with the US government over the denial of security clearances to gay people, a battle finally won under the Clinton administration.

He was also a professional astronomer, until he was thrown out of the Army Map Service. Here's his publication list on ADS. As a professional astronomer and a lesbian, I'm grateful to Dr. Kameny and the other pioneers for making it possible for folks like me to live openly.

Death of a Sailor

Just wrote my US Rep. to demand a full inquiry into the murder of sailor August Provost at Camp Pendleton, CA last week.

Seaman Provost was murdered while on guard duty. He was 29, gay, partnered, and 3 years into a college education as an engineer.

At present, the Navy does not consider this a hate crime. Several members of Congress are calling for a Congressional inquiry into his death, or are calling on the Pentagon to investigate the murder as a possible hate crime. Please ask your US Rep to join them.

DOMA

Sonic Booms

My wife and I climbed a tallish building before Atlantis landed Sunday. Didn't see it, but we clearly heard the double sonic booms (a few seconds after NASA TV reported them heard at Edwards.) Exactly what it's supposed to sound like. So, in a small way, we welcomed the Hubble repair astronauts home. As, apparently, did pickuptrucks.com (stumbled across the link from Cars.com.) Everyone does love Hubble.

Also in the news, Prop 8 decision was announced Tuesday. Exactly what we all guessed based on the oral argument: Prop 8 stands, but my wife and I stay married, and laws that discriminate on sexual orientation are still subject to "heightened judicial scrutiny".

Afterward, as always, there was a rally. Small group (where the hell are you, pissed-off straight and gay people?), including many parents with kids (I was given a lovely kid-made sign, which made up for in sincerity what it lacked in legibility). Not sure how much the rally accomplished, but the wife said it was cathartic. We wrote letters to the editor this morning, too, not that people read newspapers anymore.

CA Supreme Court to rule on Prop 8

The California Supreme Court will announce its ruling on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 on Tuesday at 10am PDT.

Prop 8: follow the money

Five months later, the pain of Prop 8 still feels fresh. But I'm a data geek, and the AP compiled a database of Prop 8 donors (in support and in opposition), so here goes a quick look.

First, churches. What donors with "Church" in their names gave? Of the 13 churches that donated the most money, only 1 opposed Prop 8. Only 3 progressive churches were able to cobble together 1K to oppose Prop 8. That's just sad.

But those aren't the biggest donors. Here are the biggest donors for Prop 8, against it, and combined.

Some famous names among the big donors:

• John Hormel (first openly-gay US Ambassador), against
  
• Michael Huffington (ex-husband of Arianna), against
  
• Brad Pitt, against
  
• Ellen and Betty Degeneres, against (this one's so cute)
• Templetons (as in the scary Templeton Foundation), for
  
• Nerds: Sergey Brin, Jerry Yang, Apple, George Lucas, against
  

Interesting omissions: California's US Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and Governor Schwarzenegger are not listed as having made contributions.

You can search by zip code, employer, or name. Leave those blank to search all, then sort by the column headers. What else is there?

Calling your representatives

After calling my state and US representatives' offices, and leaving a short message regarding issues I care about ("Yes, I SUPPORT the hate crimes bill"), I wonder, "Did I make any difference?"

Today I stumbled upon this startling example:

[Vermont state legislator] Robert South, a freshman Democrat from a conservative district, said he reversed his position after 228 of his constituents reached out and urged him to support the override, compared with 198 who urged him to oppose it.

From "Gay Rights Groups Celebrate Victories in Marriage Push", NYT, April 7 2009.