Final Story!!

Despite being stood up twice for interviews and being told by a certain Athens County government official that my story was a waste of time, I managed to crank out my final story which encompasses what I have covered the whole quarter on same-sex marriage. Enjoy!


In Athens, the word marriage is often taken for granted in the hearts of many students at Ohio University. While many single scholars are still trying to forge career paths for themselves, others are invested in spending an eternity with their spouses, basking in the joys of married life and reaping in the government ensured benefits of marriage. However, for some students in this bustling college town, these benefits are intangible, for now.
In Oct. 2009, just five months after OU enacted a policy allowing university employees’ domestic partners to be included in its benefits plan, Graduate Student Senate called for a similar policy for graduate students.
OU’s current benefits plan offers tuition waivers and stipends for spouses of graduate students, but does not apply to students’ domestic partners.
David Nichols, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Commissioner for Graduate Student Senate, was concerned about the current exclusive policy.
“Ohio University does have a strict non-discrimination policy based on sexual orientation,” he said. “We just want to ensure that the university is following the language it has adopted.”
The current plan states that a graduate student employee must present a marriage certificate to qualify his or her spouse for benefits. Because same-sex domestic partners cannot marry in Ohio, graduate students such as Nichols are questioning the policy’s equality.
“This is not just a gay issue. It is not just an LGBT issue. This affects anybody who does not fall into the confines of the traditional relationship with a marriage certificate,” Nichols said.
This fight for civil equality now joins a larger national trend of same-sex couples displeased with the amount of benefits they receive from the government.
In response to a June 2009 executive order signed by President Obama granting same-sex domestic partners some of the same benefits as married couples, government employees, such as Baltimore native Lisa Polyak, are less than thrilled with the outcome.
“I have to say, as a federal employee, I’m really disappointed,” Polyak said. “The benefits that the president is announcing are already available. This isn’t new. This isn’t different.”
Under Obama’s plan, same-sex partners of civil service employees can be added to the government’s long-term care program, employees can use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and children and same-sex partners of Foreign Service employees will be included in medical evaluations and housing allocations.
In most cases, such as Obama’s plan, civil unions and domestic partnership laws only offer a fraction of the 1,049 benefits the federal government provides for couples in a heterosexual marriage.
Thought of as lackluster by some, the plan makes other LGBT activists concerned of the government’s role in ensuring equality for all citizens.
“They just gloss over these issues like there isn’t a human face behind it,” said Chris Uihlein, a junior journalism major at OU and LGBT affiliate. “To treat these issues like that completely disregards the peoples’ humanity,” he said.
Mickey Hart, Director of Ohio University’s LGBT Center agrees.
“The federal government is running away from its responsibility when it is clear this really is a constitutional issue,” he said.
Obama’s plan is the most recent disappointment to come out of a long string of same-sex marriage defeats in the United States, the most recent being in Hawaii.
On Jan. 29, Hawaiian legislators postponed a vote on H.B. 444, a measure that would allow same-sex civil unions to occur in the state.
“It’s frustrating when we have hope that these initiatives are close to being passed and it’s suddenly ripped away from us,” Uihlein said.
Conversely, people like Rev. R. William Carroll, head pastor at The Church of the Good Shepherd in Athens, thinks these defeats are a sign of change to come.
“When I think of the amount of progress this movement has made since the Stonewall riots of 1969, these voting setbacks only show opposition groups like Christian conservatives as up in arms about an inevitable social change,” he said.
Since Stonewall, a series of riots in New York that sparked the beginning of the gay rights movement in the U.S., the amount of support for the LGBT community has grown.
According to an Aug. 2009 poll conducted by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life, 57 percent of Americans favor same-sex civil unions that would give gays many of the same rights as married couples and 39 percent support same-sex marriage, up 12 and six percent respectively from Aug. 2003.
However, some Athens residents seem skeptical about the rise in support for same-sex marriage.
“I don’t agree with this,” said Keith Sluss, a junior journalism major at Ohio University, when asked about the survey results. “I think people have gotten caught up in popular culture in recent years but I do not think much has changed since 2004.”
Referring to the 2004 election in Ohio where voters approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, unlike Sluss, some feel it was a mistake.
“I think what we did in that constitutional amendment was that we wrote discrimination into our state,” said Evan Young, spiritual coordination of United Campus Ministries in Athens.
Aside from Athens County, the only county in Ohio which rejected the amendment, Young thinks that many moderate and conservative voters are afraid of change.
“I think a lot of it has to do with fear,” he said. “People perceive this redefinition of a traditional position as a threat to their morals without connecting it with the law, logically.”
He further stated he was unconvinced by the argument conservative voters have made against gay marriage or civil unions.
“No one has really adequately demonstrated to me how affirming the sanctity of a same-sex marriage detracts in any way from a heterosexual relationship,” he said. “I think conservatives need to do a better job in communicating their arguments to the general public.”
In Nov. 2009, the Ohio House of Representatives witnessed a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act by Rep. Tyrone Yates, a democrat from Cincinnati, who introduced a proposal that would eliminate Section 11, Article 15 of the Constitution.
“I would support this challenge,” Uihlein said. “I doubt the legislature will act on it because it is an election year, but it is a step in the right direction.”
However, Hart seems unsure of the challenge, doubting law makers on both the state and federal levels will act on such a controversial issue during an election year.
“It seems like their number one job is to get re-elected,” Hart said. “These types of issues are not the centerpieces of a legislator’s campaign.”
Uihlein agrees with Hart, stating that the Obama administration has done very little to further gay rights and benefits for domestic partners.
“I don’t think Obama has done very much for this cause because everyone knows health care reform is his primary issue,” he said. “Issues such as this always get pushed to the side because they (lawmakers) don’t want to deal with the backlash.”
In concurrence with the current debate over partnership benefits for graduate employees, some think the university will not concern itself with equality issues at this time.
“Although I believe the plan is unintentionally discriminatory, I think OU would rather focus on facing budget cuts and fiscal responsibility,” Young said. “I know the university has gone above the standard for a public school, but they should still right a blatant wrong.”



Outline

I. Introduction
a.) Graduate Student Senate calls for same domestic partnership benefits as faculty and employees
b.) “Ohio University does have a strict non-discrimination policy based on sexual orientation…we want to ensure the university is following the language it has adopted.”

II. Government Discrimination
a.) Obama plan which is claimed to not give any new rights to same-sex couples
b.) Civil unions only offer a fraction of the benefits married couples receive

III. Gay Marriage as a “Wedge Issue”
a.) Long string of marriage defeats in places like Hawaii
b.) Growing support for same-sex marriage
c.) Battle for same-sex marriage in Ohio
d.) Obama administrations lackluster support for the issue at federal level
IV. Conclusion

Sources, Sources, Sources...

Hey everyone,

Here is a list of my sources from my past two features and a list of potential stories for my final story.

- Dan



Past Primary Source References
1.) Rev. R. William Carroll, Ph. D
Title: Head Pastor of The Church of the Good Shepherd Episcopalian Church
Phone: (740)-593-6877
Fax: (740)-593-5213
e-mail: chogs@frognet.net
2.) Devon Turchan
Title: LGBT Commissioner for Ohio University Student Senate
Phone: 440-567-1703
e-mail: dt194006@ohio.edu
3.) John Hanzel
Title: Ohio University Student
Phone: 847-346-4455
e-mail: jh141406@ohio.edu
4.) Brooke Barron
Title : LGBT activist & Ohio University Student
Phone: 513-827-2050
e-mail: bb302006@ohio.edu
5.) Keith Sluss
Title: Ohio University Student
Cell Phone: 330-685-5253
e-mail: ks269907@ohio.edu
6.) Mickey Hart, M. Ed.
Title: Director of Ohio University LGBT Center
Telephone: 740-593-0239
Fax: 740-593-0223
e-mail:hartm@ohio.edu

Future Sources:
1.) Evan Young
Title: Spiritual Director for United Campus Ministries: Center for Spiritual Growth and Social Justice
Phone: 740-593-7301
e-mail: ucmevan@frognet.net
Reasoning: I think Evan would be a good source to have because even outside of the spiritual realm, he would have good insight on the general topic because he is an LGBT activist and studies this cause as a goal help promote social equality.

2.) Jill A. Thompson
Title: Athens County Auditor
Phone: 740-594-3270
e-mail: jthompson@athenscountygovernment.com
Reasoning: I think Jill would be a good source to have because if I do a story on the benefits of legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions, she would know what tax audits married couples qualify to receive.

3.) David Nichols
Title: Ohio University Graduate Student/Graduate Student Senate Member
e-mail: dn264496@ohio.edu
Reasoning: I think David would be a good source because of his recent opposition to a benefits proposal which would allow heterosexual married couples the right to obtain free education if one or both works for Ohio University while the same benefit would not exist for same-sex domestic partners.

4.) Tim Miller
Title: Visiting Performance Artist
Reasoning: As a suggestion from Ashley Lutheran, I think Tim would be a good source because of his outspoken track record when it comes to marriage equality. He has also personally been discriminated against in this area when his performance art was denied a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts due to its homosexual content.

The Creative Process: Somewhere between a dead end and a complete enigma

When I sat down to write this story, I was in complete panic because I was rushed to create what I wanted to be a journalistic masterpiece; something that lived up to my expectations as a writer. As I was anxiously sitting at a computer station on the fifth floor of Alden, relentlessly chugging Mountain Dew and combing through a fat stack of notes and research articles, I realized that I just had to calm down and write the best I could to meet the deadline. However, I knew I was reverting back to one of my main flaws as a novice journalist, the idea that I thought my work would be good enough to let me slide through to the next week without attempting to achieve excellence. I remember telling myself that night, "I don't need to edit much because it looks fine to me," something I am and have always regretted with school assignments.
Aside from my brushes with procrastination, my process is one where I am either stuck for days trying to figure out a spin or lead for a story, followed by hours of painfully piecing together the body, or one in which I can "hammer out" the story in a few hours and spend a brief amount of time editing before I feel satisfied with my work. It is a weird phenomenon which I cannot clearly explain. It is like working on a multitude of different puzzles where in some, the pieces fall together and in others, I have to jam the pieces into their corresponding spots in order to create the illusion of a coherent story. The process is like a (excuse my french) a complete "mind fuck" where sometimes I am chain smoking cigarettes and pulling out my hair to get a story or in other times, the story just flows from my mind to my fingertips and produces a well structured story on the computer monitor. It is just terrible.
But in this particular instance, I decided to calm myself down by putting on my iPod and listen to my favorite album, Hail to the Thief by Radiohead. I know it sounds cliche but I truly think Radiohead is the band of my generation just like the Beatles were for my parents back in the 1960's. Somewhere between "There, There" and "Sail to the Moon", the stars aligned and I thought I had a story. I first formulated my lead by painting the dream of a wedding in Hawaii and juxtaposing that imagery with the reality of a same-sex marriage law being stalled in the Hawaii State Legislature. I then started to write the body relating the story to sentiments about same-sex marriage in Ohio courtesy of the three interviews I conducted with three members of OU's student and faculty body. The process went a lot smoother than I had originally thought, but I still was not happy with the final outcome. So I spent an additional two hours editing the feature so it had a coherent vibe and a distinctive character, but I just felt lost considering I have almost no experience with feature writing. I struggled trying to adapt style tips from other articles and trying to adopt a fairly decent structure in conveying the primary sources' opinions. I felt lost. Plain and simple.
I had written an outline where I wanted to place quotes and touch on sub-topics, but by the end of my slaughter-fueled editing process, the outline seemed pointless to post on the blog because it was so skewed and inverted. I first loved the thought of portraying the story in a linear fashion but then I thought it was too dull and tried to go for a more modular approach. Let's just say I felt like a schizophrenic patient for arguing with myself over the structure for at least 45 minutes, which was a very surprising side effect for even Mountain Dew's high levels of sugar based compounds. But in the end, I had to feel complacent because there was a deadline and I knew better than not to miss it.
I guess all in all, I try to have a process by writing an outline and organizing my notes accordingly, but I don't think the puzzle pieces aligned with me on this assignment. I have learned I feel less anxious when I clear my mind and listen to some chill music, but for me it really all depends on the cards I am dealt out. Like Black Jack or any other card game lining the casinos of Las Vegas , sometimes journalists are dealt out amazing hands full of great primary sources which link directly to other research and sometimes they are dealt mediocre hands, which they have to work with in order to create a decent story by their deadline. I'm not saying that all journalists are pre-destined to have good and bad hands, but that not every time one initiates their writing process, it will be an easy, enjoyable experience.

- Dan

First Feature Story!

Hey everyone,

I just wrote my first feature on same-sex marriage chronicling the recent defeat of a same-sex civil unions bill in Hawaii and how it effects the promise for same-sex marriage in Ohio. Enjoy!

Hawaii is a place most couples dream about having their wedding. The sandy shores, tropical climate, and rich culture of areas like Maui and Oahu lay scene for a number of weddings annually. However, for some couples, that dream will remain intangible.
On January 29, Hawaii legislators declined to vote on a bill that would have allowed same-sex civil unions, a dream bigger than a beach wedding for members of the gay community.
With this latest blow to the marriage equality movement, some citizens of Athens wonder whether same-sex marriage will ever become legal in Ohio.
Brooke Barron, a junior journalism major at Ohio University and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender activist, seemed disheartened by the recent setback in Hawaii, bringing up a painful memory regarding the approval of Ohio’s Defense of Marriage Act in 2004, which constitutionally limits marriage to a union between a man and woman.
As she started to speak about these issues, one could notice the frustration and subtle anguish boiling inside.
“It is unfortunate that this issue needs to be voted on,” she said while fiddling with her pink scarf. “I frankly don’t see the difference between this and slavery because they [federal and state governments] are not letting people live their lives.”
As she sadly glanced down the first floor hall of the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism building, Barron started to open up about the hardships same-sex couples have to endure without the benefits of their heterosexual counterparts.
“The situation really does suck,” she muttered toward the empty hallway. “Ohio is my home. I have friends and family here and I feel it is unfair for me to pick up and move to a state like Vermont, just so I can marry my girlfriend.”
Although Athens County struck down the same sex marriage ban in 2004, not everyone in this lively college town feels the same way as Brooke and the LGBT community.
Keith Sluss, also a junior journalism major, has a different perspective on the idea of same-sex marriage in Ohio.
As he swung back and forth on a trite red porch swing, clenching a cup of coffee, he became guarded and steadfast about his opposition to marriage equality.
“I think that people do not want same-sex marriage,” he said bluntly. “I’m not trying to say that gay people should not have rights, but I believe the word marriage should be used to describe a union between a man and woman.”
Sluss further elaborated on the issue, alternating between exchanges and sips of dark roast ambrosia. “I think it is a good idea [to not use the term marriage] because it has been a tradition between a man and a woman for centuries. They should come up with a new name and benefits for gays, but it is not marriage.”
In the wake of Hawaii’s decision to indefinitely postpone its vote on H.B. 444, many residents of Athens find the principle of side-stepping controversial issues as a strategy for legislators to remain in office.
Mickey Hart, Director of Ohio University’s LGBT Center, feels strongly that election years are not the times where legislators want to gamble their careers on social issues such as gay marriage.
“It seems like their number one job is to get re-elected,” he laughed. “These issues are not the centerpieces of a legislator’s campaign.
Sitting in his clean, colorful office, it was hard not to anticipate an elaborate response to what he described as “sloppy politics” embedded in the state by state system of ratification. After he shot back a few quick e-mail replies to students and faculty members, he began to talk about the problems with this issue.
“The problem with same-sex marriage is that it’s a state issue when it should be a federal issue. The federal government is running away from its responsibility when it is clear this is really a constitutional issue.”
As he tried to research more about the Hawaii case on his iMac, he seemed pretty confident about the failure of state-by state referendums.
“Leaving same-sex marriage up to the states only drains money and what we see is little victories and big defeats. In all referendums, the majority has never voted to expand the rights of minorities.”
However, in November 2009, the Ohio House of Representatives witnessed a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act by Rep. Tyrone Yates, D-Cincinnati, who introduced a resolution which would eliminate Section 11, Article 15 of the Constitution.
Barron cracked a quick smile as she was sending a friend a quick text message. “I would support this challenge,” she said. “It is kind of ironic because I am otherwise a Republican but there is no awareness about the inequalities gay people face. The law does not stop same-sex couples from co-habitation and engaging in family life so it would only benefit more people in the long run.”
However, Sluss and Hart both seem skeptical of the challenge, expressing opinions of doubt whether the initiative will affect change in Ohio.
“I don’t agree with this,” said Sluss while he sat engaged in the conversation. “I think people have gotten caught up in popular culture in recent years but I do not think much has changed since 2004.”
Although Hart did express his admiration for Yates’ courage in contesting the same-sex marriage ban, he consents with Sluss about his skepticism for Yates’ resolution. “I believe this state will be one of the last states who will legalize same-sex marriage by either following other states’ support or by having the issue legalized at the national level. It is simply easier to go with the status quo than to side with change.”

Hey everyone out in the blogosphere! I am Dan Gilson and I'm currently a journalism major in Ohio University's E.W. Scripps School of Journalism. I am creating a blog dedicated to exploring the issues and controversy surrounding same-sex marriage for a class titled Journalism 331: Reporting on Contemporary Issues. I feel this topic is important in the realm of reporting because it is one of the most debated contemporary issues within the United States. With seven countries already legalizing the practice and over two-dozen countries offering similar marriage benefits to same-sex couples, the issue has gained global awareness and national media attention.

Since this topic is extremely broad, I have thought of some story ideas to work with throughout the course of this quarter. One idea would be to explore the effect of recent anti-LGBT legislation (Amendment 1, 2004) passed in the state of Ohio on the LGBT community here in Athens. To execute this idea, I plan to interview students and prominent members in the LGBT community as well as research legislation relating to same-sex marriage. Another idea I want to explore during the quarter would be the relation between the LGBT community and religion, researching whether religious institutions would be willing to marry same-sex couples if the practice is ever legalized through interviewing both LGBT members and local religious institutions. Finally, a third idea I was thinking about exploring would be the economic benefits marriage would provide same-sex couples. To explore this idea, I would interview members of the LGBT community as well as research legislation pertaining to current opposite-sex marriage benefits.