"Out" Everythingians
157 gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered/questioning noders!
Updated 23 March 2011

256
United Kingdom (1987)
409
(bi) Aberdeen, UK (1981)
aeschylus
Raleigh/Chapel Hill, North Carolina (1984)
agentz_osX
Livingston, UK (1975)
ameriwire
(bi) College Park, Maryland
ammie
Oakland, CA (1978)
Anacreon
Tel Aviv, Israel (1976)
Angela
Weymouth, Massachusetts
anonamyst
·
Any
Dorchester, Massachusetts(1979)
Ariamaki
(bi) Mogadore, Ohio (1987)
arrowfall
Seattle, Washington (1973)
avalyn
(bi) Detroit, Michigan (1976)
Avis Rapax
Glasgow, UK (1985)
banjax
Manchester, UK (1970)
Beanie127
UK (1991)
bender
Seattle, Washington (1984)
Bill Dauterive
Ohio (1974)
boi_toi
(bi) Cary, North Carolina (1984)
bookw56
(bi) New Jersey
BurningTongues
Quartz Hill, California (1980)
CamTarn
Glasgow, UK (1984)
cerberus
Edinburgh, UK (1979)
C-Dawg
Santa Barbara, California (1960)
chaotic_poet
Chicago, Illinois (1983)
Chris-O
(bi) New York
cruxfau
(bi) Omaha, Nebraska (1991)
Danneeness
(1990)
DaveQat
Milwaukee, Wisconsin (1980)
dazey
Edinburgh, UK (1976)
deeahblita
(polyamorous pansexual) New York City (1976)
dichotomyboi
Bryan, Texas (1984)
Digital Goblin
Chichester, UK
Dimview
(unspecified) Copenhagen, Denmark (1959)
drummergrrl
(bi) Washington, DC
eien_meru
Ada, Ohio (1985)
eliserh
Cincinnati, Ohio (1979)
*emma*
(bi) Placerville, California (1962)
endotoxin
Albuquerque, New Mexico (1977)
eponymous
(bi) Minnesota (1968)
Error404
(bi) British Columbia, Canada (1983)
etoile
Washington, DC (1981)
Evil Catullus
Denver, Colorado (1976)
Excalibre
East Lansing, Michigan (1983)
fnordian
(bi/trans)
fuzzie
(bi/trans) Wiltshire, UK (1984)
fuzzy and blue
(1979)
Geekachu
Owensboro, Kentucky (1975)
gleeme
(pansexual) Chicago, Illinois
Grae
New York City (1978)
greth
(trans-bi) Middletown, Ohio (1987)
grundoon
(bi) Davis, California
Herewiss
·
hunt05
Olney, Illinois
ideath
Portland, Oregon (1976)
illuvator
San Francisco, California (1984)
I'm The Pumpkin King
Los Angeles, California (1980)
indigoe
(bi, poly) Fort Worth, Texas (1985)
Infinite Burn
New York (1981)
izubachi
Chicago, Illinois (1985)
Jarviz
Linköping, Sweden (1981)
jasonm
(bi) (only out on E2)
J-bdy
Chicago, Illinois (1985)
jeff.covey
·
Jethro
Evansville, Indiana (1965)
JDWActor
Kansas City, Missouri (1978)
John Ennion
(bi) Kansas City, Missouri (1984)
Johnsince77
New York City (1977)
katanil
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1986)
kidcharlemagne
Texas (1984)
Kinney
Manchester, UK (1975)
Kit
Moscow, Idaho (1984)
knarph
(bi, maybe) Baltimore, Maryland
labrys edge
Chattanooga, Tennessee (1983)
Lady_Day
Birmingham, UK (1983)
Lamed-Ah-Zohar
·
LaylaLeigh
(bi) Birkenhead, UK (1984)
liminal
(1975)

Luquid
Prince Edward Island, Canada (1981)
MacArthur Parker
Denver, Colorado (1980)
Magenta
(trans online) Las Cruces, New Mexico (1978)
melodrame
(bi) British Columbia, Canada
Meena
San Diego, California
MizerieRose
Boston, Massachusetts (1982)
Monalisa
Sydney, Australia (1975)
Montag
Glasgow, Scotland (1989)
moosemanmoo
Newport News, Virginia (1990)
morven
(bi) Anaheim, California (1973)
neil
Lexington, Kentucky (1981)
nmx
(bi) Massachusetts (1981)
NothingLasts4ever
(bi) Mainz, Germany (1972)
novalis
(bi) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1980)
oakling
(bi/trans) Oakland, California
ocelotbob
Albuquerque, New Mexico (1979)
Oolong
(bi) Edinburgh, Scotland (1978)
Oslo
Lincoln, Nebraska (1978)
panamaus
Santa Barbara, California (1968)
Phyre
Raleigh, North Carolina (1985)
purple_curtain
Birmingham, UK (1985)
qousqous
(bi) Portland, Oregon (1982)
QuMa
The Netherlands (1982)
rad
·
randir
Cambridge/Somerville, Massachusetts (1977)
Randofu
Maryland (1983)
Real World
Los Angeles, California (1982)
rgladwell
London, UK (1976)
Ryan Dallion
(bi) Vancouver, Canada (1982)
Saige
(trans) Seattle, Washington
saul s
Wisconsin (1985)
SB5
(bi) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1983)
scarf
Birmingham, UK (1986)
scunner
Leicester, UK (1989)
seaya
Baltimore, Maryland (1977)
seb
Seattle, Washington
Shanoyu
·
shaogo
(bi) West Hartford, CT (1956)
shifted
Lexington, Kentucky (1981)
Shoegazer
Little Rock, Arkansas (1985)
snakeboy
Los Angeles, California (1976)
Sofacoin
(asexual) Rhyl, UK (1986)
Sondheim
Brooklyn, New York (1977)
so save me
Birmingham, UK (1986)
Speck
(bi) Texas (1981)
Splunge
Boston, Massachusetts (1977)
stupot
Birmingham, UK (1975)
tandex
Columbus, Ohio (1968)
Tato
San Francisco, California
teleny
·
tentative
(bi) Australia (1992)
TheChronicler
Sacramento, California (1986)
TheLady
(bi) Dublin, Ireland
TheSoko
Holland, Michigan (1987)
Thumper
(bi) Walnut Creek, California (1971)
Tiefling
(bi) United Kingdom
tkeiser
New Jersey (1984)
Tlachtga
(bi) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1979)
Tlogmer
(bi) (only out on E2) Ann Arbor, Michigan (1982)
transform
Spokane, Washington (1980)
treker
·
TTkp
Centreville, VA (1984)
Ubiquity
(bi) Toronto, Canada (1974)
Wazzer
Newcastle, UK
Whiptail
·
Whiskeydaemon
(bi) Seattle, Washington
Wiccanpiper
Heyworth, Illinois (1957)
WickerNipple
(gender neutral) Brooklyn, New York (1977)
winged
Madison, Wisconsin (1976)
WolfDaddy
Houston, Texas (1965)
WoodenRobot
(bi) Wales, UK (1979)
woodie
Texas
wordnerd
Denver, Colorado (1979)
Wuukiee
(bi)
WWWWolf
Oulu, Finland (1979)
Xeger
Santa Barbara, California (1978)
Xydexx Squeakypony
·
XWiz
Norfolk, UK (1974)
Zxaos
Ontario, Canada (1985)

Blab to Wiccanpiper (below) if you have questions/corrections, or want on/off the list
(include your city of residence and year of birth, if you'd like)
You don't have to belong to the Outies usergroup to get your name up here, by the way.



About Outies

Outies is a social usergroup for noders who identify themselves as homosexual, bisexual, transgendered or just differently gendered. We also welcome those who are questioning their developing sexuality and feel they may identify with our group, but basically we\'re "Queers Only" here.

If you\'d like to join, you should know that the message traffic in this usergroup can sometimes be very high (as in edev-level). However, at other times there is no traffic for days. We\'re either flooding each other\'s message inboxes, or half-forgetting that we\'re even in the group. Note that as of March 2004, this usergroup is no longer moderated! Lots of off-topic prattle and inane ranting may and does occur. If the idea of logging on to find 150+ group messages within 24 hours really bothers you, Outies might not be your cup of tea.

If you do decide to join, we also add your name to the list of "Out" Everythingians (above). You don\'t have to be "out" in real life, just online. If you are "out" in real life, that\'s great! But we won\'t treat you any differently if you\'re not.

To join or leave this usergroup, message Wiccanpiper.


Venerable members of this group:

Evil Catullus, panamaus$, ideath, fuzzy and blue, Oslo, Xeger, ocelotbob, Error404, boi_toi, tandex, eponymous, CamTarn, nmx, kidcharlemagne, Ubiquity, Excalibur, Splunge, MizerieRose, Sofacoin, Giosue, MacArthur Parker, Grae, Tlogmer, aeschylus, Tlachtga, oakling, XWiz, TheSoko, 256, Avis Rapax, J-bdy, Zxaos, eliserh, bookw56, scarf, Kit, wordnerd, katanil, dichotomyboi, Tato, eien_meru, TTkp, greth, WoodenRobot, tkeiser, indigoe, Tiefling, banjax, Ariamaki, chaotic_poet, moosemanmoo, Danneeness, shaogo, scunner, Beanie127, Whiskeydaemon, cruxfau, Oolong@+, tentative, Wiccanpiper, Hopeless.Dreamer., Chord, Dom Coyote, Estelore
This group of 64 members is led by Evil Catullus

SO YOU'VE BEEN MISPERCEIVED AS A HOMOSEXUAL

or, "Am I a fauxmosexual?"

What is a red-blooded heterosexual male to do? Herewith The Management presents a guide to help men in such straits (*snort*) better present their true natures:

To convince your homosexual friends that you are not playing for the same team as they:

To convince your heterosexual friends of your good standing:

Or, to easily satisfy both sides of the fence when challenged, politely smile and say, "I apologize, but I don't believe my choice of partner is any of your business... if, in fact, it were any of your business, why, YOU'D ALREADY KNOW."

The reaction to Barack Obama's speech from conservative pundits was puzzling to me at first, but then I realized it was supreme (and almost assuredly unintended) praise for his rhetorical skill: he made them think that his values were their values, that Obama was "conservative"!

Andrew Sullivan, the conflicted gay Republican blogger, said: "Obama struck many conservative notes: of self-reliance, of opportunity, of hard work, of an immigrant's dream, of the same standards for all of us."

Choking back our laughter at the notion that conservatives support immigrants, let's see if we can figure out how Obama fooled Sullivan.

When conservatives like Andrew Sullivan invoke "the same standards for all of us", they mean keeping things the way they are now. That's why we call them "conservatives". They oppose programs intended to change things, such as "affirmative action". They think, despite all evidence to the contrary, that we have equal opportunity now. When you tell them you want to give blacks the "same" opportunities that whites now have, what they hear is that you want to take what whites now have. Conservatives always think in terms of a zero-sum game. You can see this especially when they talk about money. In the conservative mind, there's only so much wealth to go around, new wealth cannot be created, and expansion and growth never happen: cutting taxes is "giving back" to people "their" money, taxing capital gains is "double taxation".

When progressives invoke "standards", they are not talking about the way things are now. To progressives, the way things are now is bad. Of course, it goes over better in politics if you don't stress so much how bad things are now: people get defensive and their little egos are so easily bruised, if you even hint at the fact that it's their fault. It works better, and resonates better with the American self-image, to accentuate the positive: how much better things could be. Listen to they way Barack Obama says it:

No, people don't expect government to solve all their problems. But (emphasis supplied) they sense, deep in their bones, that with just a change in priorities, we can make sure that every child in America has a decent shot at life, and that the doors of opportunity remain open to all. They know we can do better. And they want that choice.

Obama creates word pictures that different listeners will "see" differently. He talks about a young man he met named "Shamus", who is going off to Iraq with the Marines, about whom Obama says: "this young man was all any of us might hope for in a child." Is "Shamus" white or black? He's from East Moline so I'm guessing white, but maybe he meant East St. Louis, in which case "Shamus" would be black? Barack Obama invites us to imagine him however we want, to think he could be anyone's child. It's the same with all the people he conjures up:

If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother.
Barack Obama's mother was white. When he sees an old white couple, he says, he could be looking at his grandparents. Barack Obama doesn't automatically categorize people into "us" and "them" (like I know I do) and somehow his color-blindness carries forward into his words and this speech.

He also manages to invoke God in a way that I'm not sure anyone has since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Oh sure, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton can talk about their "faith", but coming from them it just sounds like they're saying, "I go to church just like you." When Barack Obama invokes God, he makes it sound like God is a liberal:

In the end, that is God's greatest gift to us, the bedrock of this nation; the belief in things not seen; the belief that there are better days ahead.
Yes: "things not seen" is an echo of something from the Bible. It's not exact: "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". Hebrews 11:1. But the inexact reference, "belief in things not seen", can evoke many Biblical images, like Moses' belief in a promised land he never actually got to, the Prophets' belief in a new Jerusalem after the old one had been sacked and the people carried into captivity, Jesus' belief in a Kingdom of Heaven which is all around you, if you have eyes to see and ears to hear.

It's about time that this God, the God of Moses, the God of the Prophets, and the God of Jesus, re-appeared in American political speech once again. I'm getting pretty sick of the God who hates gays and medical research.

What conservatives obviously don't realize is that "things not seen" also evokes a certain book of essays by James Baldwin. The Evidence of Things Not Seen was published in 1986 and was the last work by Baldwin, the expatriate black writer who also gave us the civil rights masterpiece, The Fire Next Time in 1963, and many other works. The essays take as their starting point a series of murders of black children in Atlanta in the 1980s, but rapidly go from there to race relations, and the self-image of persons of color, at that time.

Another example: Yes, the phrase, "my brother's keeper" evokes the story of Cain and Abel. It's also the title of the memoirs of Amitai Etzioni, university professor, former Carter administration advisor and founder of the communitarian social movement. This is no accident. The speech asserts communitarian principles of shared responsibility—our shared responsibility for the child who can't read or the senior citizen who can't afford drugs—rather than the traditional "liberal" values of individual rights.

I would suggest to you that for those with ears to hear, the speech is full of stuff like that, which remains hidden to the mainstream and the semi-educated pundits of the right wing.

It's like Kerry's campaign theme: "Let America be America Again". Langston Hughes' poem is socialism, pure and simple, but this seems to go right over the heads of pundits. TIME Magazine columnist, Mitch Frank, guessed it was an attempt to co-opt a Ronald Reagan theme: "Maybe it’s Massachusetts-speak for, 'Are you better off today than you were four years ago?'" Uh, no, Mitch, it's not. Not even close, bucko.

I'm especially fond of the closing, asserting that the people will "rise up" in November, elect Kerry and Edwards, and:

... this country will reclaim its promise, and out of this long political darkness a brighter day will come.

..because it reminds me of this:

Green Acres, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Hooterville
Junction will no longer be so damned relevant, and
women will not care if Dick finally gets down with
Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people
will be in the street looking for a brighter day.
The revolution will not be televised.

Gil Scott-Heron "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"

If I'm hearing him right (and I think I am) there's really some audacity in Obama's "audacity of hope". If the wingnuts could figure out what Barack Obama is really saying, they would realize he's not Ronald Reagan reincarnated as a black man but an outrageously progressive skinny kid with a funny name.

Considering the policies of countries surrounding South Africa, with heads of state such as Robert Mugabe comparing homosexuals to pigs and dogs and active efforts at condemnation, rejection, and criminalization on the part of most African countries, it is surprising and heartening to find that South Africa has some of the most protections for full equality of homosexuals and heterosexuals of any nation on Earth.

It was certainly not always so. Two seperate efforts of the apartheid era government of South Africa were made to criminalize homosexuals and transvestites were made, one in 1968 and a second in 1985. Both were defeated by an upsurge of protest from homosexuals across South Africa, however beyond these brief times of unity there were no significant mass political movements and institutionalized discriminatory policies remained.

A first, and somewhat disappointing attempt was made in the formation of the Gay Association of South Africa in 1982. This group mostly served a social instead of political function. They refused to take part in apartheid opposition, made up of mostly white males, and by 1987 the movement dwindled under expulsion and condemnation from the International Lesbian and Gay Association.

Resurging resistance toward government hostility began after the failed 1985 effort to criminalize homosexuals, but this time things were done correctly. Several activist organizations sprang up, incorporating members both black and white. They melded gay rights issues with antiapartheid struggles, allying with the United Democratic Front and African National Congress, making significant contributions of time and resources to help dismantle apartheid.

When the ANC came to power in 1990, they listened to the organizations' concerns about the drawing-up of the new constitution. After struggling so long to dismantle a ghastly blight on South Africa, it would've been unfortunate not to make a clean sweep and throw off the last ideals of discrimination and government-mandated hostility. The interim constitution was the first in the world to specifically include a prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Although there are still efforts being made by conservative forces to prevent legal recognition of homosexual civil unions, the picture in South Africa is still one of the most optimistic for full equality of gays, lesbians, and tranvestites in the world.


Information sourced from an article in Foreign Policy. Kovac L. Amy. "Africa's Rainbow Nation." Journal of Southern African Studies, vol. 28, no. 2, London, 2002.

The film Who Framed Roger Rabbit? was very loosely based on a 1981 novel entitled Who Censored Roger Rabbit?, written by sci-fi author Gary Wolf.

The Novel

Who Censored Roger Rabbit? basically was born out of a mixture of Wolf's fascination with noir novels and 1940's era comic strips; he wanted to somehow merge the two worlds together. Thus, he created the concept of having comic strip characters exist in real life.

The book has a few similarities to the film: Eddie Valiant, Roger and Jessica Rabbit, and Baby Herman are all in the book, along with a few of their basic character traits (Eddie attempts to battle alcoholism, and Jessica is just as buxom as in the movie version). Also, the general premise of a murder of a bigwig in the world of the 'toons is retained. However, this is where the similarities stop.

The plot of the book actually revolves around the "murder" (see below) of Roger Rabbit, as well as one of the heads of a major art syndicate (vaguely like Marvin Acme from the film). Valiant is charged with the investigation of the murder of Roger Rabbit, who happens to be in the middle of a divorce from Jessica Rabbit at the time. The plot eventually rolls along to discover that a "judge" advocating censorship is behind most of the actions, i.e. the Judge Doom character.

Another major difference is the 'toons themselves. In the film, the 'toons act, move, and talk like real people, vocalizing their thoughts and emotions directly. In the book, however, the 'toons simply make word balloons that say in a text form what they're thinking or feeling. This concept rolls over into what the 'toons do for a living; in the film, they make movies, while in the book, they are merely photographed, and the photographs when lined up make a comic strip.

Issues Dealt With In The Novel

The movie very gently deals with much of the same issues dealt with in the novel, but the novel really digs into many of them.

Censorship: Rather than actually being murdered, 'toons are instead censored, which for them is much the same as murder. The "dip" used in the movie is what is used for censorship. The book obviously takes a huge anti-censorship stance as can be gathered from the direct comparison of censorship and murder.

Racism: The 'toons are treated as second class people throughout the book, but the humanoid toons are treated with much more compassion than the non-humanoid toons, called "barnyard" 'toons. This leads to a clear caste system in which characters lower in the caste system are treated poorly simply because of their external appearance. This also leads to much of the trouble between Jessica and Roger, as Jessica (due to her "humanoid" toon status and buxom appearance) is seen as nearly human (a major plot point of the book is an affair that Jessica supposedly has with a human), while Roger is clearly in the "barnyard" class.

Alcoholism: The thread of Eddie's alcoholism runs deep throughout the book, pushing a large number of the questionable decisions that Eddie makes in the early stages in the book, as opposed to just a scene or two in the film. The causes for his alcoholism are also addressed, and they run much deeper than just the death of his brother.

Pornography: Pornography is a rather substantial issue in the book, mostly in terms of how it relates to censorship. One of the primary characters is a producer of pornographic comic books who alternates between being massively sleazy and semi-heroic as a protector of freedom of expression, in much the same way as Larry Flynt.

From The Novel To The Film

The book was picked up by Disney for film release in late 1981; Disney went on to announce that the film was in "production" in late 1982. However, due to the difficulties of adapting a somewhat edgy book into the family film that Disney wanted, the film kept getting pushed back. Finally, in 1985, the decision was made to basically scrap the whole book, leaving only the faintest structure, and then to pull pieces from the book together in a family-friendly framework.

The result was a very good family film with just a touch of dealing with other issues, but without the topical nature of the source book.

The book is available from Ballantine Books; although it is not actively printed, it is still relatively easy to find. Much harder to find is the sequel, Who P-p-plugged Roger Rabbit?, in which a formula is found that allows 'toons to become humans and vice-versa.

It was 1990. Christ, what a year. My good friend Phil died of a rare bone cancer in December of '89. From Russell Crowe look-alike to emaciated man in constant pain in 16 months. And then, three months after being Phil's pallbearer, it was my only brother.

My brother called from San Francisco in January, a month and a half after I carried Phil's casket into church. I need your help, he said, I'm getting bad. Got a call a few days later from a mutual friend, Debbie. Fly out right now. I did. Rented a car. Drove to Twin Peaks, noticed the Pacific fog drifting so slowly over the hilltops. It would have been a beautiful milieu under any other set of circumstances.

When you walk up to a dying person's house, you always take a deep breath and turn the knob before you go in. His friends Daniel and Bob were there. It was Bob's place. My brother couldn't manage his own apartment any more. They gave a warm greeting and smiled, and I felt better knowing he was with good guys.

He was in bed, propped up, with fresh brightly printed bed linens with tan and blue stripes. My beautiful blonde brother, a high school wrestler and weightlifter was down to less than a hundred pounds. The beautiful San Francisco sunlight streamed through the window, falling on his bed. He got up slowly, so slowly. His legs were shockingly skinny. All of those hours in the gym doing squats and leg presses, all of those bicep curls, all of those stomach crunches, for naught. He led us to the back porch, where he lovingly watered and fertilized his plants. We sat on the warm back porch, he drinking water, wearing his bulky sweater. He wanted to know how his nieces were doing. They are young and full of sweetness and love. They are everything we love in girls. Although he would want more than anything to see them again, it is not a pleasure he would permit himself. He wouldn't want their last memories of him to be like this.

He had a fine doctor, a young doctor who understood the psychological trendlines of dying AIDS patients. My brother didn't need false cheerful optimism, he wanted facts. He wanted the honest clinical truth about how he was going to die. He wanted to know his doctor's challenges in keeping him alive. "AIDS is a fascinating disease. Dr. Mark explained it to me, and it is so fascinating. It would be a lot more interesting if I didn't have it, of course." He volunteered for experimental drug regimens. It was too late for him, but his experience may have helped others. The cocktails he was given were brutal; in many ways they were worse than the disease. But he didn't give up. In a certain Christian sense, it was a redemptive thing for him. He must suffer so that others may have better lives. He understood this, and willed his body to accept his decision. It was not easy.

He did not fear death, but he was angry that he had to die so young. So many ideas. So many unaccomplished goals. We wanted to grow old and compare notes when we were old. We were twin halves of one august event, growing up close in age and outlook. After high school graduation, like an iceberg that was split in two, we split apart and began leading separate lives, I going off to college first, choosing engineering and the hard sciences, and he following later, equally conversant in the arts and the sciences, but choosing a different course, one with plants and arts and beauty. We always assumed that in our dotage we would re-merge and learn from the other.

He feared separation of a different sort when we were younger. In our younger adolescent days, I inveighed against fags, queers, sexual perverts, and homosexuals. I quoted Scripture. He remained silent. Whatever natural love he felt for his older brother must have been gradually eroded by my mean-spirited diatribes. God forgive me, for I know not what I say. He died by degrees, perhaps, back then, when we were still living together. He learned that he had to hide what he was. But somehow in his great capacity for love, he still cared about me enough to worry how I felt about him as a gay man. We spent a weekend renting a cabin together up in Big Bear Lake when he told me. He was living with a man. On the drive up I asked if he was gay, dreading the answer, but knowing it too. He said yes. We drove on in silence. Do you have HIV? He said yes.

And here is the great cosmic joke: I, ostensibly the Christian, learn the meaning of "long-suffering" from my gay brother. I, the hetero, learn that within my own family, my other-half brother is gay. Same mother, same father, same house, same neighborhood, nothing different. He's gay, I'm not. It wasn't his choice. Choice had nothing to do with it. No one would choose to grow up with that kind of abuse. But I had a choice. Could he still count on his brother's closeness? Would his brother walk away?

When you are confronted with this question, a heart of love speaks more powerfully than a thousand Bibles. You cannot deny your own flesh, your own blood. Your brother will always be your brother. He didn't want to be gay, but there it is. It was time for me to grow up and say fuck it, here we are, you've been dealt a shitty hand, let's stick together. I will never leave you or forsake you.

So here it was, a few years later, when his T cell count was alarmingly low, and cryptosporidiosis was claiming him one meal at a time. Eat. Vomit. Eat. Vomit. The parasites never let him digest his food enough to permit proper digestion. They were not treatable by any drug.

He wanted control over his death, no matter how painful, no matter what the cost. He did not want to go to a hospital or a nursing home. He did not want to give up his beloved San Francisco to come live with us on the East Coast.

He and his doctor worked out a plan. Like Socrates, he was going to die by his own hand. I was but a bit player in the drama. Three or four large syringes of potassium chloride, injected into his arm, would stop his heart. Brain death would occur a few minutes later. That afternoon, we made him a meal he loved: baked chicken, mashed potatoes, gravy. He ate it, enjoyed it, and threw it up. Our mother was there with us. At four in the morning I was to set the quiet alarm, and wake up and see his wishes through. He made me promise that if he couldn't finish, I would finish for him. He stared into my eyes. I wanted to deny the reality of the situation, but he wouldn't let that happen. He needed to see steel in his brother's eyes, as there was in his own. There was no steel in my eyes, there were only tears. Of course I will help you.

All night long I dreamt strange dreams. What my brother must have dreamed can only be imagined.

At three a.m. a strange sound woke me fast. It was coming from my brother's bedroom. His small night-table alarm clock was quietly but insistently beeping. My brother wasn't turning it off. My heart pounded as I tiptoed to his room, not wishing to wake my worn-out mother. As in some horror movie I walked down the small hallway to the half-open door, and remembered seeing my arm opening the door, even though I knew only unhappiness lay there. In the moonlight, his body lay sprawled across the bed, his ribcage showing through his pellucid skin. He had been sitting at the side of the bed and injected himself. He fell back when his heart stopped. Two syringes emptied. He had started an hour early. I was his insurance policy, but none was needed.


Years later, I wonder and marvel at his courage. His final act was a triumph over death. Oh death, where is thy sting? Oh grave, where is thy victory? I'll tell you, that was his victory.


Sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt, Werner Robert Seelig, 1957-1990