From: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Rod Williams)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Gay Bar
Date: 9 Oct 92 22:12:25 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Francisco
Originator: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com

The following, from The New York Times's "Law" page (10/9/92),
is a re-print of David Margolick's "At the Bar" column.

*Phobe*Alert*:  The column expresses a well-meaning, probably
straight lawyer's shock at the homophobia (and anti-semitism)
of some of his professional cohort.  It includes stupid,
hateful quotes from said cohort.  Proceed with this in mind...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Last month, the cover story of California Lawyer magazine
carried the headline "Gays at Law: Life in a Straight-Laced
Profession."  Copies of the publication, an independently
produced magazine that contains the offical monthly
newsletter of the California Bar Association, went out to all
133,500 lawyers in the nation's most lawyered state.

As remarkable as the subject matter was the packaging.  On
the cover was a portrait of a pair of gay lawyers from two of
San Francisco's most prominent law firms, Andrew Mead of
Heller, Ehrman, White & McAuliffe and Nancy Koch of Farella,
Braun & Martel.  Inside was a full-page photograph of Keith
Wetmore, managing partner of the San Francisco office of
another giant firm, Morrison & Foerster, who is also gay, plus
pictures of other gay and lesbian lawyers with their domestic
partners.

But arguably more noteworthy than the contents of the article,
written by Jane Goldman, California Lawyer's executive editor,
or the accompanying photographs, was the reaction they
generated.  Consider some of the responses.

A lawyer named G. Sharp, address unknown, called the cover
picture "utterly repulsive."  Donald Ingoglia of Sacramento
was equally ouyraged.  "Showing two smiling gays on the cover
illustrates how sick our society has become," he wrote.  "You
have my nonlawyer friends falling off their chairs."

James P. Carroll, also of Sacramento, described his chagrin
when his teenage grandson asked if he subscribed to a magazine
for homosexuals.  "It is a sad day when I must make apologies
for my professional organization's official publication," Mr.
Carroll wrote.  The next thing you know, he continued, the bar
would be sponsoring a float in the annual gay-lesbian freedom
parade.

Two other lawyers suggested caustically that the offending
article could become part of a series.  Kemp Richardson, from
Canyon County, said one sequel could be on child-molestor
lawyers.  Martin Rosenberg of Thousand Oaks offered another.
"Next year your enlightened publication may have an attorney
and his animal of choice on the cover tolerantly proclaiming
'Bestiality at Law,'" he wrote.

Not surprisingly, there was also an assortment of anonymous
letters, "Who cares about some sodomizing legal faggots?" went
one.  Another, more carefully considered, came from someone
identifying himself only as "a long-time bar member from
Berkeley," who said he had been moved to write after finding
his 9-year-old daughter perusing the magazine.  In the theater
of hatred, his latter is something of a two-fer.

"Nothing today is more striking in our culture than the sexual
mania of the Jews who edit, write and read current
publications," the lawyer wrote.  "'Our' (!) legal magazine
presents a good insight into the Jewish psyche -- greed for
money, inveterate vulgarity, complete disregard for non-
Oriental norms of decency and an insatiable itch for all the
uglier aspects of sex.  I believe that the progressive
deterioration of morality can be directly attributable to the
growing predominance of Jews in our national life."

In the article, Ms. Goldman, a 1990 graduate of Stanford Law
School, describes the new assertiveness and visibility of gay
lawyers in large, conservative law firms, which stemmed, she
maintained, from pride, strengthened feelings of community and
the conviction that concealment can be harmful in a profession
in which "being friendly is good business."

To be sure, several of the letters were complimentary.  But
what the nasty ones showed, she said, is that homophobia
remains as deep-seated in the bar as anywhere else.  To her,
more shocking than their substance was their virulence and
eloquence.  Part of that she attributed to the Republican
National Convention, where gay-bashing was even more of a
leitmotif than lawyer-bashing.

"I suspect that helped our correspondents frame their gripes,"
she said.  "Lord knows it legitimized homophobia."

Coming out several years ago did not harm Ms. Koch, who
graduated from the University of Chicago Law School in 1981;
she was promoted to partnership after telling superiors she
was gay and living with another woman lawyer at the firm.  Mr.
Mead, a 1983 Harvard Law School graduate, is "special counsel"
at Heller, Ehrman, essentially lifetime tenure without
partnership.  Because he carries the virus that causes AIDS,
he said, the distinction is "kind of a moot point."

Mr. Mead said he saw something hopeful even inthe hate mail,
particularly that anonymous letter from Berkeley.  "I'm glad
the guy's 9-year-old daughter read it," he said.  "Maybe she's
getting a view of life contrary to the venom that her father
or mother is feeding her."

--------------------------- end of article ------------------------
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)