Schwarzenegger taps Latina lesbian for finance director post

Considering the current status of the California state budget, I'm not sure whether I would even congratulate anyone who might want to become the state's finance director. And yet, earlier in the week, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that he had appointed 34 year old Ana Matosantos to the previously vacated position.

The Sacramento Bee and other major English language papers note that Matosantos, who was born in Puerto Rico, would become the youngest person and the first Latina to ever fill the post (her appointment is still pending approval from the California State Senate).

Interestingly, none of the major English-language newspapers make note that Matosantos is also an openly lesbian woman. That information actually came from the Spanish-language newspaper La Opinión who interviewed her for an article that ran on Tuesday. An translated excerpt:

Montesanos speaks openly and with no need to hide her personal life. She confesses that she is single, a lesbian and has a partner. "Once you have confessed to your parents, it doesn't matter what others might think." she says certain of herself [...] Additionally, I feel happy because my nomination reflects the diversity lived in the state, and California siempre pa' adelante [using a Puerto Rican colloquialism in Spanish].

[NOTE: That contradiction about being single and having a partner comes directly from the Spanish-language text].

After Senate approval of her appointment, Matosanos will have to present Schwarzenegger's state budget in January. In a statement, the Governor gave Matosanos full support by saying "In the coming year, our state will have to make incredibly challenging and tough budget decisions, and Ana has the knowledge and expertise necessary to guide my administration through that decision-making process."

With the pending appointment, Matosanos would become one of the highest ranking gay Latinos appointed to political office in the United States.

New York's largest Spanish language newspaper backs marriage rights for same-sex couples

I might be wrong but this might be a first. Today New York's El Diario La Prensa - the Spanish-language newspaper with the second largest circulation numbers in the United States - published a strong editorial backing same-sex marriage rights for same-sex couples. This in the wake of weekend nationwide demonstrations against Proposition 8 in California and recent anti-gay statements by the reliably homophobic Reverend Ruben Diaz, Sr. (also a NYS Senator).

From the editorial:

A Stand for same-sex marriage
El Diario La Prensa, Nov. 17, 2008

Latinos have fought too hard and long for equal rights. This is why we must rally around a sector of our community that remains even more discriminated against--gays and lesbians.

Across the country this weekend, people protested against measures banning same-sex marriage. One of these bans came as a harder blow in California, where thousands of couples had married since that state’s Supreme Court had legalized same-sex marriage in the spring.

After that legal decision, Governor David Paterson announced that New York state agencies would recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.

But there are loud voices, among them State Senator Ruben Diaz, who threaten to thwart any legislation that would allow same-sex marriage in New York.

Rev. Diaz and others are supposedly not for denying rights to gays and lesbians but believe that marriage should be between a man and woman. Yet, it’s this very discriminatory position that serves to exclude lesbian and gay couples from accessing rights, benefits and treatment that heterosexuals take for granted.

This use of religious beliefs to block basic civil rights undermines the separation of church and state in this nation. The basis of that separation lies in the experience of early American colonists who had fled religious persecution elsewhere to pursue tolerance and freedom in the “new” world.

Latinos, as well as other groups, should have an honest conversation about homophobia. Discrimination, whether within or outside of our communities, on the basis of color, immigration status, gender or sexuality is just not acceptable.

Across the nation, a gay rights agenda must be representative of LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) Latinos and the deeper inequities they confront. The gap between the struggle for LGBT rights and the struggles for economic and racial justice needs to be closed.

Back in October of 2005 I highlighted their strong editorial against efforts by the Vatican to purge gay priests from their rolls but this is the first time I remember the paper standing unequivocally for same-sex marriage rights.

I say: Thank you! La Opinion, which is based in Los Angeles and has the largest circulation numbers among Spanish-language news dailies in the US, did it first. It is very welcome nevertheless.

Update: Here is the Reverend's unhinged response to the EDLP editorial -

• In Total Disagreement with El Diario La Prensa (Ruben Diaz, Sr., Room 8, Nov. 30, 2008)

Previously:

• La Prensa backs marriage for same-sex couples in California (Oct. 10, 2008)
• Anti-gay NYC rally by Hispanic religious leaders is a flop (Sept. 8, 2008)
• El Diario La Prensa and Latino gay pride (June 24, 2007)
• Newspaper watch: Hoy New York and same-sex marriage (Sept. 19, 2005)

La Opinion backs marriage rights for same-sex couples in California

[NOTE: Above, the latest ad for those seeking to safeguard marriage rights for same-sex couples in California. For more info and to support NO on Prop. 8 efforts head directly here]

In an editorial published today in Los Angeles' La Opinion ("An unnecessary proposal"), the paper asks Latino voters to vote 'NO' on California's Proposition 8 and against efforts to undo a state top court decision legalizing same-sex marriage (It counts quite a bit: La Opinion is the Spanish-language paper with the largest circulation in the United States).

While not surprising (the paper also supported the same-sex weddings that took place in San Francisco under Gavin Newsom's watch back in 2004), the editorial comes at a key time when foes of same-sex couples seem to have the upper hand and Latino and African-American voters are being mentioned as a reason why the ban could pass (not sure I am convinced by the arguments).

I am taking the liberty to reprint the English version of the editorial in its entirety.

Proposition 8 seeks to amend the California Constitution to expressly guarantee that marriage must be between a man and a woman.

We believe this is an unnecessary initiative that would impose a constitutional restriction on rights now held by a group of Californians whose mutual commitment before the law and society poses no danger whatsoever.

The idea behind this initiative and the title its proponents wanted to give it was the "California Marriage Protection Act".The state attorney general changed the title to the more accurate "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry."

That right was declared in May by the California Supreme Court, ruling that such a ban is discriminatory. To arrive at that decision, the judges based their opinion on a 1948 legal precedent that determined that it was illegal to prohibit marriage of couples of different races.

It is subjective to claim that the voluntary marriage between two adults is a threat to an institution which, ironically, these people are fighting to join.

The true threats to marriage are lack of communication, infidelity, domestic abuse, and economic pressures.

The driving force behind the measure comes from Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon, Baptist, Orthodox Jewish, and Adventist congregations, with money, sermons, prayers, fasting, and very respectable and respected opinions.

But that does not mean it is acceptable to impose these beliefs on all of society, and much less, change the State Constitution.

We recommend voting NO on Proposition 8.

Related:

• Los Angeles Times: Gay marriage foes ramp up outreach to Latinos
  
• Orange County Register: Latino adults: Marriage desirable, but too 'risky'
• Rex Wockner: Polls flip, gays now losing marriage in Calif.
• Gloria Nieto: No on Prop 8

La Opinión endorses Obama

Los Angeles' La Opinión, the largest Spanish language paper in the country, has endorsed Barack Obama in Tuesday's primary. From today's editorial:

We need a leader today that can inspire and unite America again around its greatest possibilities. Barack Obama is the right leader for the time. We know that he is not as well known among our community and while he has the support of Maria Elena Durazo, Senator Gil Cedillo and others he comes to the Latino community with less name recognition. Nevertheless, it is Obama who deserves our support.

They also endorse McCain on the Republican side.

The news stories that stuck with me in 2007

As a regular newshound there are always a few stories that stick with you at year's end. This year its seems they are mostly about immigration.

This was the year that immigration became a political bugaboo (replacing, in some ways, same sex marriage as a wedge issue). Two of the stories that spring to mind are related to migrant labor and the harshness of life in the streets for some of the undocumented immigrants that come to the United States seeking work.

In late November The New York Times profiled a Colombian-born man from Queens, Jorge Muñoz, and his daily efforts to provide warm home-made food to the day laborers that congregate in the streets of Woodside, just a few blocks away from my own apartment, as they try to get picked up in the early mornings to do the menial and rural work that most people won't do.

It might be argued that Mr. Muñoz makes it easier for undocumented immigrants to remain in the country by providing them food but just try to sleep in the streets of New York on a winter night and sustain yourself on one meal a day and then talk to me about "easy."

You might be surprised by some of my views on immigration (I, for one, do believe that each country has the right to regulate immigration and was also against NYS Governor Eliot Spitzer's push to grant driving licences to undocumented immigrants) but - as an immigrant myself - I also understand the sacrifices that these men make to make a living in this country and loathe the way that anti-immigrant zealots try to deny their humanity.

It is for this reason that I found Adam Bellick's story for the Times ("The Chicken and Rice Man") so inspiring as well as this video documenting Mr. Muñoz's work.

Another story that caught my eye this year - not as inspiring and much more disturbing - appeared in September in the largest Spanish language newspaper in Los Angeles, La Opinion ("Prostituyen a Jornaleros"). Reporter Claudia Núñez takes a look at migrant workers who allege that they have been targeted by some gay men for sex in exchange for money or outright threats. Núñez avoids - for the most part - the lurid trappings of reporting such a story and catches a couple of American men as they pick up on a younger undocumented immigrant for sex. She admits that some of the dynamics at work involves immigrants who are more than willing to make a quick buck in exchange for sex with men but also captures the vulnerability of some of these men and the shame that forces them to keep instances of sexual abuse under wraps for fear of being deported or being tagged as gay by others. New American Media translated the story and named it as one of the two Best Hispanic Media Stories of 2007.

On Christmas Day, the Chicago Tribune also ran the first mainstream news story that I have ever seen on participation by LGBT advocates in last summer's immigration rights rallies ("Gay Immigrants Fight to Join Movement"). Unfortunately they also play up the fact that one older man hurled insults at gay marchers questioning their presence.

My experiences during immigration rights rallies in New York have been different and show that most participants more than welcome LGBT contingents and seem to recognize not only that there are transgender folk marching but also the symbolism of the rainbow flag.

I am sure there has been a homophobic presence at the various rallies but I can say without a doubt that I have never seen any homophobic sentiments expressed at the rallies I have been in.

Speaking about immigrants, the Spanish-language edition of the Miami Herald (appropriately named El Nuevo Herald) ran an incredibly moving story in February about Carlos Mielgo, a 45 year old Cuban-born man struggling with cancer and the unwavering support from his partner of 14 years, 52 year-old Joe Vásquez. The Spanish language version of the story is still accessible ("Cuando el amor se jura con palabra de hombre"). Can't find the English-language version except for a mention in Steve Rothaus' blog here.

What makes it a personal story for the Miami Herald is that Carlos is a former employee of the newspaper.

Perhaps the most moving story I read this year has nothing to do with immigration. Instead, it has to do with a man wrongly convicted for raping and killing a high school classmate and freed earlier this year after 16 years in prison.

In the November New York Times story ("Vindicated by DNA, but a lost man on the outside"), Fernanda Santos takes a look at the life of Jeffrey Deskovic after being freed through efforts from The Innocence Project. Mr. Deskovic has a MySpace page should you care to contact him after reading the article.

PJ on Bill Richardson's "maricon" moment and sexual orientation comments

My good friend Pedro Julio Serrano, who works at the fabu National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, is President of Puerto Rico Para Tod@s and blogs here submitted an OpEd piece to the Los Angeles-based Spanish language newspaper La Opinion on presidential candidate Bill Richardson's "maricon" comment on Don Imus as well as Richardson's most recent declarations that he considers sexual orientation to be a choice during the gay gay gay presidential debate (one of the perks of having been in Colombia was not blogging about the debate since it seems just about every other gay blogger in the United States did already).

The OpEd ran in La Opinion, in Spanish, on Wednesday. Graciously, PJ has provided us his own handy translation and since we want to hear other gay Latino views on the issue, we are more than happy to take the liberty of reposting it here for your perusal:

La Opinión
Los Angeles, California
Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Actions speak louder than words
By Pedro Julio Serrano

When I heard Gov. Bill Richardson utter the word maricón, I almost couldn’t believe it.

As a Latino gay man, I have seen time and time again how this and other hurtful words are used to degrade our identities, our gay identity as well as our Latino identity. As a Latino man, Gov. Richardson should have known better. Now as a presidential candidate, he has to do something about it.

While Richardson has had a great record of supporting rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, the use of the word maricón has profound connotations in our Latino culture. It is used to demean gay people and brings a lot of hurt, not only to gays who are subject to homophobia, but to the people that use the word without remorse. Because harsh words have been used against our Latino identity, we should know better and not use language that is inflammatory, hurtful and hateful. When a person of his stature uses this language, it sends a wrong signal of approval to using these demeaning words.

Gov. Richardson’s record shows that he is not a homophobic man; on the contrary, he has supported LGBT rights during his public career and led efforts in New Mexico to amend its laws to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. He supports civil unions for gay and lesbian couples; he supports the repeal of the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ military policy; he supports adoption by lesbian and gay couples; he opposes the discriminatory federal amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage. He has spoken for LGBT rights in front of non-gay audiences, something presidential candidates almost never do.

But the fact is that he took the homophobic bait put forth by Don Imus on his radio show and joined him in repeating it. We all make mistakes, and given Gov. Richardson’s record, I’m sure we all would have accepted a sincere apology. Unfortunately, instead of simply saying he was sorry, he offered the lame excuse, “In the Spanish I grew up speaking, the term (maricón) means simply ‘gay,’ not positive or negative…” Come on! Maricón is derogatory no matter what kind of Spanish someone grows up with, and the fact that he’s been a friend to our community makes this kind of dodge even more problematic.

To make things worse, during a forum focused on gay issues in Los Angeles recently, Richardson stumbled while being questioned if homosexuality was a choice. He said “yes, it is a choice.” And when the panelist gave him a chance to redeem himself, he just couldn’t get it straight. Speaking to the media, he continued to back pedal and equivocate about his response for days. It is important to have a great record of supporting our issues; but Richardson must speak out clearly, in front of all audiences, in favor of our humanity.

He has a golden opportunity in his hands, not only to debunk the myth that Latinos are more homophobic than anyone else, but to show that his support of LGBT rights in the past can transported to the platform of a presidential campaign. For instance, he could now start a conversation about homophobia and how hate hurts us all. Especially, when Congress is considering hate crimes legislation and Pres. Bush has threatened to veto it. Richardson could use this moment to show his remorse on his own words and show real leadership on this critical issue at the same time.

We have seen how the White House has been used by two kinds of presidents, one like Bush who might not use inflammatory words like maricón, but have forced gay people onto a second-class citizenship. And one like Clinton who said we were part of his dream but failed to deliver on the promise of equality.

In a time when we have lacked politicians with the moral leadership to stand up against intolerance, discrimination and division in this country, we need leaders who will not stand against hatred and will lift us to a new place — a place where we all count. And we need presidential candidates who will speak to all minorities — those of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, and yes, sexual orientation and gender identity — and tell us that we are part of their mission, treat us with dignity and respect, but most importantly, will act on their promises.

Gov. Richardson has the opportunity to show he really cares, give a loud and clear apology and to use the bully pulpit of the campaign trail to speak openly and clearly in support of equality for LGBT people. He must let us know that in the future, like in his past, he will deliver on the promises of equality for LGBT people.

It’s the only way to do it because in our Latino culture and in this country, actions speak louder than words.

Pedro Julio Serrano is Communications Coordinator for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Previously:

• Bill Richardson goes all Isaiah Washington on us! guess on which show! (July 10, 2007)

Mexico City says yes to civil unions for same-sex couples

Last week I found myself speaking to a reporter from the Los Angeles newspaper La Opinion on the issue of LGBT rights in Latin America. He tried his best to get me to say that the situation for gays throughout Latin America was worse than that for gay Latinos in the United States.

While I did say that the LGBT advocacy movement throughout Latin America was younger and faced incredible challenges as well as organized opposition from conservative religious and political leaders, I reminded the reporter that the United States had seen the vicious murder of Matthew Sheppard and others and that, under this administration, the United States seemed to have fallen behind some Latin American countries on protecting the rights of the LGBT community.

I mentioned the civil union bill that was signed into law in the Argentine cities of Buenos Aires and Rio Negro in 2002, LGBT rights advances in Brazil, and the fact that civil union bills were being debated in Uruguay and Colombia, among other countries in the region.

"Yes," the reporter said, "but what about Mexico!"

I said that, yes, Mexico had a history of homophobia that was strongly linked to its machismo culture but that, as in most other Latin American countries, there was a vibrant and active LGBT community gaining visibility in its urban centers.

I have a feeling he still found this hard to believe.

So, without further ado, it is a great pleasure share a Reuters article from today that says simply "Gay unions legalized for first time in Mexico."

What about Mexico indeed!

Newspaper watch: Hoy New York and same-sex marriage

Yesterday, the New York City edition of Hoy (one of the two largest Spanish- language newspapers in the city) published an opinion column by Mexican writer Carlos Ruvalcaba titled "Minority Rights: Puritan Double Morality."

In the article, Mr. Ruvalcaba argues that for a city as cosmopolitan as New York, marriages between same-sex couples should be legalized but that, despite a favorable New York State Supreme Court ruling by Judge Doris Ling-Cohan, same-sex marriage advocates continue to meet insurmountable obstacles.

He says that those who want to keep gays from getting married are "the same who oppose abortion but that give licence to Bush so that the armed forces kill and continue killing children, women and innocent elderly people in Iraq and Afghanistan."

It is not the first time that the newspaper publishes an opinion piece that argues for the right of same-sex couples to marry but, in recent months, the newspaper seemed to back away from the issue after the presidential elections.

Editorially they have also shown some temerity: When Mayor Mike Bloomberg decided to challenge Judge Ling-Cohen's ruling in the courts, an Hoy editorial congratulated the Mayor for his pragmatism in dealing with a difficult issue... but then stayed away from editorializing on the issue itself.

To date the editorial board at Hoy has not gone on the record as to whether they endorse the right to marry for same-sex couples (to be fair, their competitor - El Diario La Prensa - also has stayed mum). [in contrast, Los Angeles La Opinion, the third of the major Spanish language newspapers in the nation, has editorialized on the issue twice and given same-sex marriage a ringing endorsement].

Unfortunately, as great as it is to see Hoy accepting positive editorials on this issue once again, in his arguments the author makes several mistakes:

1. The author argues that there should be a constitutional amendment allowing same-sex couples to marry. Ah, no. The United States constitution supposedly guarantees equality for all and those seeking an amendment are doing so to LIMIT the right to only a specific number of couples. The issue here is NOT adding amendments to the United States constitution, it's to make sure that the country does what it says it does: Guarantee equal rights for all.

2. The author argues that Mike Bloomberg or, should he become mayor, Fernando Ferrer, should legalize same-sex marriage in the same way that Gavin Newsom did in San Francisco. Ah, no! Gavin Newsom did not - and does not have the power to - legalize same-sex marriages and nor does the Mayor of New York City. They can interpret existing law and allow public offices to release marriage certificates if the law says that it's legal, but sometimes even interpretation can be faulty as even Gavin Newsom found out when all the same-sex marriages that took place in San Francisco were invalidated.

3. Mayor Bloomberg and Ferrer on same-sex marriages: While mentioning Judge Ling-Cohen's court ruling, the author seems to totally disregard that it was Mayor Bloomberg who decided to use the power of the Mayor's Office to challenge that same ruling while Fernando Ferrer has long been on the record for unequivocally supporting the right of same-sex couples to marry. While in one of the debates Ferrer went as far as saying that, should same-sex marriages be legalized in New York, he would officialize at same-sex weddings as a public official, Bloomberg is not about to say the same thing.

As flawed as the opinion column is, at least it is an endorsement of the issue. Now, if only the editorial board could right the wrongs in the column and editorialize on behalf of the right for same-sex couples to marry as their Los Angeles counterpart has done!