Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Montrose Voice, No. 82, May 21, 1982
File 023
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Montrose Voice, No. 82, May 21, 1982 - File 023. 1982-05-21. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. November 28, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/6055/show/6048.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(1982-05-21). Montrose Voice, No. 82, May 21, 1982 - File 023. Montrose Voice. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/6055/show/6048

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Montrose Voice, No. 82, May 21, 1982 - File 023, 1982-05-21, Montrose Voice, University of Houston Libraries, accessed November 28, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/6055/show/6048.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Montrose Voice, No. 82, May 21, 1982
Contributor
  • McClurg, Henry
Publisher Community Publishing Company
Date May 21, 1982
Language English
Subject
  • LGBTQ community
  • LGBTQ people
  • Gay liberation movement
Place
  • Houston, Texas
Genre
  • newspapers
Type
  • Text
Identifier OCLC: 22329406
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries Special Collections
  • LGBT Research Collection
  • Montrose Voice
Rights In Copyright
Note This item was digitized from materials loaned by the Gulf Coast Archive and Museum (GCAM).
Item Description
Title File 023
Transcript 22 Montrose voice/May 21,1982 Letters & Comments Van Ooteghem answers critics <w = 1982 by Gary J. Van Ooteghem Will Ray Hill and George Barnhart please step forward onto the carpet. Up to the line, please. Since your public statements have generated a circus of false, malicious gossip regarding my character, I ask you to step forward and be held accountable for your actions and remarks. First, I find it incomprehensible that you uttered any public accusations about testimony I made in a court of law, in a room distant from your own hearing, without first calling me to ask for my version. You reacted when you should have reasoned. Something not uncommon for the two of you, I might add. Because of not extending that simple courtesy, you have caused much to do about nothing. And of all that I am going to say on the matter, it is only this that I would expect an apology on. The rest of this matter concerns a difference of opinion between us, which you will have to accept, like it or not. I respect the rights of others to have differing views from me on a whole host of matters. Not agreeing on everything is just as important agreeing on everything. We need both. Consequently, you are entitled to your opinions and so am I. Second, and before I address the real issue at hand, let me try to dispel many of the untruths generated by your gang of two-plus: I am not anti-gay; never have been. I am not out to interfere with the right of the French Quarter to exist; frankly, I don't have an opinion one way or the other. I have made no disparaging or spiteful remarks concerning the lack of gay support regarding my candidacy for public office. I did say, however, that no organized gay support came forward, which is the truth. George Barnhart made the foregoing accusations and, as usual, was way off base again. Ray Hill, on the other hand, called me a prostitute because I stepped forward and gave testimony against what he calls "gay male porno flicks." Tell me Ray, how you define the word "prostitute." Is it because you started a FALSE rumor (or unwittingly repeated to others) that I was supposedly guilty of some campaign violation (there are several versions of this) and was about to be indicted by some grand jury? Further, that I testified for the prose cution in exchange for them droopping an indictment against me? It would appear the only way to vindicate myself would be to be indicted for something. What nonsense, Ray. You should know better than that. I have a hard time understanding why Ray Hill or George Barnhart decided to retaliate against my testimony with a PERSONAL attack on me except that it appears based either out of ignorance or stupidity. In Ray Hill's case, I suspect ignorance. Third, the issue: As always, there are two sides to an issue. To listen to both Hill and Barnhart, it was an anti-gay act to speak out against a film described by Hill as a "gay male porno flick." Further, they embrace the acts in this film as fitting the gay community's standards. It is here that I draw the line and disagree with the Gang of Two-plus. These may be their standards, but they are not the universally accepted standards ofthe remainder ofthe gay community. For example, the film in question portrays ... (fisting) as one of our gay "standards." I say it is not. Hill and Barnhart would have had me testify that it was. If I had perjured myself, presumably they would have been happy and content. Fisting is not the norm or standard of this community: whether they like it or not is not my concern. The issue before the court was whether or not this film represented gay lifestyles. I contend that fisting is not representative of gay lifestyles. Fisting, I believe, needs to be viewed under some other standard, but not gay. This was the only issue I addressed in court. Personally, I believe that fisting belongs under sexual aberration rather than under any gay classifications. Too often we raise the anti-gay defense on matters which are not. We are not exempt from all the rules of conduct which govern our society, even though we may like to think otherwise. I respect the rights of all persons to do as they wish with themselves and/or with other consenting adults. But I oppose, object and reject a few people placing their personal preferences up for all to view, especially under oath in a court of law, as a standard lifestyle of our gay community. It just isn't so. In the court case before us, fisting was that example. I felt it was time someone spoke out on the issue and I did so. I was, frankly, unconcerned whether or not it was a popular thing to do. It was a statement I felt important to make. I do not present my preferences as the standard for all of us, either, and I will not permit others to intimidate me into silence when I disagree with what they suggest our stantards are. I reserve my right to differ on the standards of our community. Hill and Barnhart do not set my standards; I do! I am no one's puppet. There are those in our community who have standards at a different level than those proposed by Hill and Barnhart. I am only one, but I believe there are many others, too. Fourth, an observation: I find it strange that not a single person came forward to seek out my position on the matter before they started their personal attacks on me. Fortunately, our local publications are permitting me an opportunity to respond to these false accusations. My response would have been made earlier, but I was out of town for 10 days. It was during my absense that the Gang of Two-plus cranked up the rumor mill against me. Convenient. Fifth, our image: It's about time we took a look at our community and the image we wish to present to the rest of society. Both of you, Ray and George, have stated publicly that to object to "porno flicks" is to be "anti-gay." I disagree. Come forward and make your case, gentlemen. I like a good fight, so let's get on with it. But no more hitting below the belt; that's for little people... or big people with little minds. Conclusion: Opinions are like assholes. Everybody iB entitled to one. A clarification From Ed Coleman GPW Committee member from MCCR 2Just a quick note to correct a flagrant error in the May 7, issue of The Voice concerning the May 2 meeting of Gay Pride Week Committee. In the article it was stated that Mr. Larry Bagneris proposed that the man and woman Grand Marshal for this year's parade be elected by the Chairs of the committees. Not so! In fact a motion was made by Mr. Scott Miller that the four Chairs of the Parade Committee select the Grand Marshals. This motion was seconded by me and a number of others. Right. It failed overwhelmingly, but don't give Larry the blame (or credit) for the proposal. By the way, thanks for an outstanding paper—never miss an issue. Political sayings and doings in Montrose By William Marberry When Governor Bill Clements was in Montrose to speak at Lanier Jr. High School, 2600 Woodhead, May 15 at the 13th Senatorial District Republican Convention he said "(Mark White) is a career politician who has had his snoot in the trough long enough." He shoulda stayed around In the same speech, Governor Clements said "the Democratic Party is in shambles," bogged down in all its "fussing, fighting and feuding." This remark was to praise Republican unity—and only hours before the same group became locked in a bitter, name-calling battle where the convention chairman was accused of trying to boost his ex-wife's slim chance of being elected to the State Executive Committee by depriving the Heights, Montrose and some minority districts of their delegates to the state convention. Know what the Governor's concluding remarks to the 13th District were about? "Credibility; that is what we Republicans want to stand for...." Judge Price-is-Right? Judicial candidate Charley Price gives a clever speech in those candidate forums where two minutes is it. "My name is easy to remember: if you are into country and western, then my name reminds you of Charley Pride; otherwise, think of the TV show The Price Is Right, and remember me." Yield not unto... Harris County Republican Party Chairman Russ Mather did not immediately yield the platform when informed that Gov. Clements had arrived at the 13th District Convention. Instead, the chairman kept the governor waiting, apparently Figuring his own speech of greater importance. Mather was urging the convention delegates to stay long enough into the afternoon to maintain a quorum so the resolutions before the convention could be approved, putting the convention on record against porno, homosexuality, etc. Typical of Mather's remarks were, "The pulpits are silent on moral issues, so it is up to the political arena," and "Separation of church and state usually means separation of God and country." Ultimately, the morality resolutions never even came before the convention because of hanky-panky in the Nominations Committee over delegate selection. Where to eat ? On June 15th, Gov. Clements will be dining with any friends willing to pay a thousand dollars a plate, sure to be a very elegant affair. While across the street— which was not by accident—is the Harris County Democratic Party's get-together, but at only $5 per head, with scrufty attire permitted. Or for those not especially hungry, there is an opportunity to skip both dinners and be just as political by joining the scheduled picket of Ronald Reagan's presence in Houston the same day. Wait 'til next time Democratic Party activist Jerry Mays said, comparing this year's sedate Democratic Conventions to the action in the Republican's seething 13th District, "I belong to the party that's supposed to fight. We didn't. It was rather boring." Another round? Ray Hill says that he and Gary Van Ooteghem may meet in an open forum debate soon. Hill says it will probably be the second or third Thursday in June and most likely with the refereeing being done by Interact/Houston. Fresh rumor: It has been rumored that Richard Cross, who failed to defeat State Rep. John Whitmire in a bid for the Demo's senatorial nomination, may be planning another political adventure before long. This time to tackle city councilman Jim Westmoreland. Fun-raising fundraising When Renee Rabb announced to the May 19Gay Political Caucus meeting that there was a Debra Danburg fundraiser scheduled at Arno's, Sunday May 23, Marion Coleman squealed from the back of the room "That's when the carnival is!" meaning the Muscular Dystrophy Carnival at 901 W. Alabama being given by Kindred Spirits, Briar Patch, the Barn, and the Drum, With a little discussion the women discovered that the same-Sunday functions had little overlap. The Carnival Against Muscular Dystropy is from 1:00 to 6:00 p.m. and the Debra Danburg fundraiser at Arno's—which is just around the corner from the Carnival—is from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. It's block-walking time again in Montrose The Gay Political Caucus is organizing block-walking assignments to boost voter particiapation in certain targeted run-off elections.
File Name uhlib_22329406_n082_022.jpg