Av rating:
Total votes: 95
Total comments: 49


Jesse Liberty
Being Out at work
08 November 2006

About two years ago I decided that it was important not only to be out [1], but to be out at work, and to be out loud [2]. In my case, perhaps, it was imperative to be even louder than most, because as a happily married bisexual, the 'natural' assumption is that I’m straight unless I take affirmative action to assert my sexual identity.

Note:
The references, [x], can be viewed in full at the end of the article
.

At the time I made the decision to mix my politics with my business, I had lunch with a friend who is the owner of a successful placement agency for technology professionals. She told me in no-uncertain-terms that I was committing 'professional suicide'. This article will explain why I made the decision to move forward aggressively and how it worked out, and, most importantly, why I think others should make that decision as well, if they can.

Let me say at the outset that at the time I came out to my clients (and on my web site) it was probably easier for me than for many others, as I was a well-established author and consultant-programmer. While I was taking a significant risk (consulting is a fickle lover and the Internet bubble had burst by the time I began to mix business and politics) the cliff I leapt off was small compared to the one confronting a queer [3] programmer or author who is early in her career.

There are many good reasons to be out, and out-loud at work. The rest of this article will discuss the following four reasons that I view as the most compelling in my personal order of priority:

  1. Modeling for others, especially for younger queer workers and clients
  2. Political advocacy
  3. Undermining the demand for Covering
  4. Personal honesty

Modeling

Queer teens who hide their sexuality are four times as likely as straight teens to attempt suicide [4]. That difference disappears for queer teens who are out. The key fact is that queer teens who know out adults are far more likely to come out themselves. Modeling is critical in the process of coming out; first to oneself, then to one’s family, then to the world. Few come out who don’t know an adult who is out, safe and successful. My personal journey of coming out was greatly influenced by the Stonewall riots, the Gay Liberation movement and the politics of the 1960s [5] and 1970s. Today’s queer kids live in two worlds: one in which there are many more open (celebrity) role models, and yet one in which the societal hostility is in some ways even greater and more overt.

Happily married bisexuals have every incentive not to come out. In fact, it is hard to be out; you have to go out of your way since people assume you are straight if your spouse is of the opposite sex. Modeling bisexuality, and helping others understand that bisexuality continues even after making a life-partner decision, is critical in helping young bisexuals accept that their identity is not transitional nor indecisive, but as legitimate as gay or straight. Modeling should also help young bisexuals to defend their identity.

Bisexuals are discounted, even despised, by many in both the straight and the gay community, and once married, bisexuals tend to disappear. It is imperative for married bisexual adults to be out loud and that, I’m afraid, takes a bit of effort (choose your weapons: bumper stickers, buttons, web logs, articles, you name it.)

Political Advocacy

While racism and sexism are endemic and institutionalized in the United States, racial minorities and women have legal protections that are denied to Queer Americans. In 1967, the United States Supreme Court swept aside all state laws prohibiting interracial marriage, and held marriage to be such a fundamental right that it cannot be denied to incarcerated felons; but in 49 states it is denied to same-sex couples. Only Queer Americans are prohibited from serving in the US Armed Services, despite the fact that every US Government study has shown the policy to be counter productive. Our allies (including the Israelis) have integrated their armed services with no reduction in morale (as have the CIA, the NSA and the FBI).

In 36 states, it is perfectly legal to deny housing to a person because she is Queer, and in more than half of the states, there is no law or policy against harassment of, or discrimination against, Queer children in school. Queer families are torn asunder: parents are denied custody; children are taken forcibly from their parents and turned over to strangers. We have no marches on Selma, no Freedom Rides, and no Letters From Birmingham Jail, but we must make our voices heard every chance we get.

Undermining the Demand for Covering

The central thesis of Kenji Yoshino’s wonderful book Covering is that marginalized groups go through three stages of demands from the groups in power:

  1. Conversion
  2. Passing
  3. Covering

The demand to convert in our case can still be seen in such misguided and destructive efforts as the 'reparative' therapies offered by some extreme right-wing organizations.

The second stage, passing, was rampant in the United States for most of the 20th Century. Most Queer Americans felt compelled to 'pass' as straight in most aspects of their life, effectively hiding 'in the closet'. [6] The height of this compulsion was reached in the 1950s, during what most Americans remember as the Red Scare but which is also documented as a great purge of homosexuals from the federal government.[7]

The final demand is to cover, that is the demand not to flaunt ones minority status. 'You can be black, but please, no corn rows.' 'You can be Asian, but don’t get straight A’s and listen to that funny music.' 'You can be Queer, but don’t talk about your life-partner.' That is, 'Go ahead and be who you are, but don’t put it in my face.' This demand is pernicious: it is the demand that you conform to the majority tone, sound, dress, hair-style, actions, behavior and social decorum when in public, and by all means, no kissing. The inevitable result is the P-town bumper-sticker: 'I don’t mind straight people, as long as they act Queer in public.'

Personal Honesty

Finally, there is simple personal honesty. The demand to cover, to side step discussions of essential aspects of who you are, to ignore the very personal impact of legislation and court cases being discussed at the water cooler…all of this serves to undermine a vital aspect of your own personal integrity. When my readers or my customers buy my books or services, they get more than just a product or a number of hours of code; they get 20 years of experience that includes living in the real world and learning the real lessons of what it takes to deliver a product on time and on budget. Part of that is learning to touch people, to help them succeed in their efforts, and you cannot do that by being disingenuous, by being a cardboard cut-out, by being a façade.

Work is not the proper place to slug it out on every political issue that comes along, nor is it the venue to force your personal perspective on each issue. But I feel it is vital that I bring my entire personality and integrity to each encounter so as to establish the trust and human contact that is integral to what I can offer my business clients.

In short, I bring all of me: my experience, my skill, my family, my identity, my culture, my life. My clients don’t have to know every detail, but those details influence and shape the outward manifestation, and trying to separate the parts would disintegrate the whole.

Consequences

There is no way to measure the cost of coming out at work. It is possible that for every job I lost to someone who was turned off by my politics, I may well have picked up a job for the very same reason. I’m not sure I can measure the impact, and I’m not sure I can let myself care too much.

I have asked a few clients, carefully, if my politics has affected their decision to hire (or not hire) Liberty Associates, Inc. It is always hard to measure the accuracy of their reports (both for them and for me) but from what I can tell it has cut both ways. The big fear is that if you are passionate about politics you may be difficult to work with. Of course, I never get to talk with those who take one look and never call, so the survey is skewed to begin with. Then again, there are those who hire me and it turns out they have Queer kids, and may or may not realize that my politics entered into their hiring decision.

There are many factors in a hiring decision, and many of them are not rational. Who knows how many jobs I get because of my books, how many I get (or lose) because of my age, or because I’m white, or because of other factors that have nothing to do with my skills. I assume adding politics to the mix diminishes rather than enhances my prospects (especially since I don’t market myself, but obtain my work through word-of-mouth) but I don’t think it is possible to know.

While I’ve worked to balance how much of my politics is thrust into my business, I have found that not having to think so much about it, and not having to worry very much about who discovers what, has been a very positive experience. I’ve been thanked by a few, somewhat frightened young men at various talks I’ve given (presumably for the buttons I’ve worn, or the triangles I’ve sneaked into various slides), and who knows, perhaps I’ve eased the path to coming out for a couple of people. I certainly believe that if we were all out at work a great deal of good would come of it.

Resources

If you are not yet out, or not out at work, but you’d like to be, the best starting place I know of is the Human Rights Campaign’s Coming Out project. They have pamphlets to download and links to guide you.

A quick 'Google' of 'Coming Out' also provides over 290 million hits, so finding resources should not be too difficult, although separating the wheat from the chaff can be very challenging.

Here’s a tip: don’t do anything that makes you too uncomfortable, and watch out for homophobic sites posing as 'helpful' advisors.

Coming out at work is not easy; but it should not be a nightmare either, especially if it is the final part of a process rather than a single leap into the unknown. In my experience, coming out at work is one of the final few steps in a long journey. The first step is coming out to yourself. Next is coming out to someone you truly trust (though, be prepared -- his or her reaction might be anything from wonderful to tragic).

Take your time, there are no prizes for being first off the blocks. Consider getting support from others who are on the same road. The key is to walk the path, not to rush to the end. There is no end.



[1] See my personal coming out story

[2] Coming Out Loud by Jesse Liberty

[3] I use the term Queer deliberately as an inclusive term to embrace, on equal footing: gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, transgender, intersexual, pomosexual, etc. That is, those of us who are marginalized and legally discriminated against on the basis of sexual preference or identity. (I personally find the term LGBT unwieldy, hard to pronounce, and insufficiently inclusive.)

[4] CEDC/Massachusetts Department of Education Youth Risk Behavior Survey 1999

[5] 'If you can remember the 1960s, you weren't really there.' -- Timothy Leary

[6] See Michelangelo Signorile’s seminal work Queer In America (University of Wisconsin Press, 2003) for a wonderful discussion of the destructive effect of the Closet on Queer Americans in the late 20th century.

[7] The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government by David Johnson. (University of Chicago Press, 2006).

 



This article has been viewed 10268 times.
Jesse Liberty

Author profile: Jesse Liberty

The president of Liberty Associates, Inc and a Microsoft MVP, Jesse Liberty is the author of the international best-selling Programming C#, Programming VB 2005, Programming ASP.NET and numerous other books, including the forthcoming Programming .NET 3. He has written dozens of articles for leading industry publications and has been a featured or keynote speaker at international industry events. Jesse’s biography is listed on Wikipedia and he maintains a political blog a technical blog , and a free private forum on which he provides support for all his writing.

Search for other articles by Jesse Liberty

Rate this article:   Avg rating: from a total of 95 votes.


Poor

OK

Good

Great

Must read
 
Have Your Say
Do you have an opinion on this article? Then add your comment below:
You must be logged in to post to this forum

Click here to log in.


Subject: out at work
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Thursday, November 09, 2006 at 4:47 PM
Message: You go, Jesse! Elizabeth

Subject: The politics of long words
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Friday, November 10, 2006 at 2:36 AM
Message: I find the strange use of the word 'politics' when referring to sexual orientation rather confusing. I also do not quite understand the validity of equating an antipathy to 'pornosexuality' (evidently "the erotic reality beyond the boundaries of gender, separatism, and existentialist notions of sexual orientation.") to racism. I suspect I'd be against 'pornosexuality' if only I could work out what on earth it was!

Subject: Does it matter?
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Friday, November 10, 2006 at 5:57 AM
Message: Surely the better way of handling being gay in the workplace is not shouting about it, or unravelling political issues at work, but doing it discreetly? Personally I get offended by people forcing this issue. You're gay. So what!

Subject: Great article ...
Posted by: RachelH (view profile)
Posted on: Friday, November 10, 2006 at 6:12 AM
Message: I want to thank Jessie for a terrific article. I thought it was a great read.

I'm afraid I don't agree with the author of the first post who advocates 'doing it discreetly.' Why would this be the case? Heterosexual professionals assert their sexuality in may ways in the office environment, through their conversations and opinions for example. Just because someone is suggesting that they openly admit a lifestyle choice does not insinuate that anyone who wants to let people know should dress up in spandex and make a huge deal of it infront of their colleagues.

Jessie, I salute you for being assertive and open about your choice.

Subject: Re: Rachael's comment
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Friday, November 10, 2006 at 7:01 AM
Message: I'm not sure we should encourage either Heterosexual or Homosexual professionals to assert their sexuality in the office environment. It sounds to me as if they're not being given enough work to do.

Most of us are too busy with work to even notice the sexual orientation of our colleagues, and if they do happen to go on about it, then it is time to be 'on with the earphones'.

Subject: Not poRNo- poMo-
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Saturday, November 11, 2006 at 8:32 AM
Message: There is nothing in the article about pornosexuality, it is POMOsexuality - POst MOdern Sexuality - the idea of moving beyond sexual identity.

As for the posts that say that you shouldn't be talking about your identity at work; nice try, but every time you talk about your husband (if you are a woman) or your wife (if you are a man) you are talking about your sexuality, it is just that no one notices because yours is the "accepted" variety - not the persecuted type.

Your comments fit in nicely with the idea of Covering: okay be gay who cares, just don't talk about it. Except it isn't okay when gay people can't get married, and are denied their civil rights, so while you are offended by people demanding that you recognize they are gay, I am offended by your closing your eyes to the fact that your tax dollars are being used to deny your fellow (gay) workers their civil rights and you don't feel the need to do anything about it.


Subject: Who cares!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Sunday, November 12, 2006 at 12:20 AM
Message: You are so conceited! Who cares if you're gay, straight, asexual, or anything else? It's work. Do a good job. I don't know, and don't care, what anyone at work does at home. Keep the talk work-related, and everyone can focus on what's important... work!

Leave it to a guy who lists himself on Wikipedia and then puts it in his bio -- as if it's an accomplishment -- to try to get attention at work by forcing his sexuality into the forefront.

Subject: pomosexuality
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Sunday, November 12, 2006 at 3:41 AM
Message: Jesse has contributed his thoughts. One can, of course, disagree with him  but one should not, I reckon, insult him as being conceited,

On my screen pomosexuality reads like pornosexuality. As I'm against post-mordernism, that's probably got me labelled as a bigot. Pornosexuality sounds rather more exciting.

Most of us are merely interested in how to accomodate different cultures, races, religions, orientations, disabilities and so on in the workplace with the maximum harmony and productivity. It isn't always easy, and the more discussion we have the better. So thank you, Jesse for your thoughts. Its go me thinking, though not necessarily agreeing.

Subject: re: Who cares!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 8:44 AM
Message: > Keep the talk work-related, and everyone can focus on what's important... work!

I agree, Jesse listing a Wikipedia listing as an accomplishment is amusing, but not half as amusing as your naivety. The concept that the environment where you spend most of your working hours can some how be kept socially separate from the "home" life is a fallacy. Where would you draw the line? Ban talking about your kids? Ban discussions on football? Certainly no beers with the guys from the office. Humans are social creatures, and I'm afraid things just work that way.

Subject: re: Who cares!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 8:46 AM
Message: > I don't know, and don't care, what anyone at work does at home.

I think you Do know, and DO care. You sound kinda scared....

Subject: Quick responses
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 10:13 AM
Message: Actually, I didn't add my Wikipedia listing as an "accomplishment," I simply referred folks there for my bio. (FWIW, I was invited to post my bio on Wikipedia, and it was "beefed up" by others, who were interested in my writing and my political activities.)

I'm happy this thread has generated interest, and not suprised it has sparked some emotion, but I do think we should try to keep to the issues, rather than engage in ad hominum attacks.

A central issue, as I see it is this: should queer people talk about the politics of their sexuality at work. There are a few elements to that, as I try to describe in my article, and I hope I've raised a few interesting questions worth considering, such as, "why is it different for a lesbian to talk about her partner than for a woman to talk about her husband?," and, for me more pressing, "is it more imperative to talk about the political inequality of queer people than it is to talk about other political issues?"

The "you're gay, so what?" argument would work perfectly if the government's attitude was "so what?," if society's attitude was "so what?," but we know that is not true. Queer people in America continue to be marginalized and legally discriminated against, isn't there room to talk about that? If we eliminate talk about the most important things at work, are we left only with sports and the weather?

Let me clarify, though, as this seems to be getting lost: when I (and most Queer activists) talk about Queer Rights, we are *not* talking about sexuality, we are talking about sexual identity, and about political equality. No one is suggesting lurid discussions; that is all in the mind of the listener. We are talking about politics and law, prejuidice and how we treat one another.

Among all the talk at lunch and at the coffe counter (or do you really keep head-down focused on work all day??) isn't there room to discuss the simple fact that some of your co-workers are not allowed to marry the person they love, not allowed to serve the country they honor, not allowed to adopt their children, not allowed protection against discrimination? Is that really inappropriate discussion at work?

-jesse

Subject: Wrong to generalise
Posted by: Phil Factor (view profile)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 2:02 PM
Message: I think maybe there are lots of different work cultures around.
I can't remember ever hearing a discussion of the politics of sexual identity over lunch or coffee at work.
From my own experience it has, several times, come as a total surprise when a colleague I'd worked with over the year appeared at the christmas party with a same-sex partner, but not a surprise that subsequently affected the working relationship in the least. In most IT departments I've been in, the fact that we had to work together for long hours, under considerable stress, meant that there was a general agreement that certain subjects were taboo. Babies, Sex, and relationships were always high on the list wherever I've worked. These things may hold a fascination for oneself, but not for the group as a whole, especially if there are bereaved, divorced, singles, gays, lesbians or PoMosexuals present. We talk about other things: beer, politics, technology, machinery, fishing, music, telly, literature, poetry, sports, cooking and history. That way we can all chip in.

Subject: This can't work
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 4:19 PM
Message: I can only talk from a UK perspective but surely the worse thing to do is to shout about how you're different you are from your work colleagues? A sex-filled happy marriage and relationships with men? That's why you're different and that's why people don't like to talk about this subject. It's awkward and raises huge emotions.

Subject: Please don't distort
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Monday, November 13, 2006 at 7:50 PM
Message: You may want to read my messages more carefully. Not once did i talk about sex. I certainly didn't say that I currently have relationships with men; I'm happily monogomous, (did you stop being heterosexual when you got married? I didn't stop being bisexual, but there is a difference between sexual orientation and behavior, as I trust you know.)

It is odd to me that heterosexuals so often think that Queer advocates are talking about sex when we are talking about civil rights. What is it about the subject that makes you think about the dirty bits, and not about housing laws, marriage, and equal protection.

Of course "it can work;" we talk about politics all the time (did you never mention the elections at work? What a boring place it must have been!) These subjects are only taboo because they make you uncomfortable.

AND you have the luxury of not talking about them because you are quite comfortably protected with the laws on your side.

It is as if you said to blacks 20 years ago, "really, must you go on about civil rights, we're having such a good time here at work, can't you just stay in your place and talk about sports and drink beer like a good boy?"

I apologize for making you uncomfortable, but try this; let it slip that you are actually bisexual and see how things go for you for a while.

Or watch your child fall in love but not be allowed to marry, be fired from his job, be kicked out of the army, be denied housing, be ridiculed at school by the kids first, then by his teachers.

But remember, don't bring it up at work, because your co-workers don't want to talk about that, isn't appropriate, and the unwritten rule is we talk about sports at work, never about disturbing subjects like gay-rights.

Finally, I have to respond to Phil, who lumps gays and lesbians in with the bereaved and singles: that is folks who can't talk about their spouses. ('that way we all have something to chip in') It seems to me that if you're talking about your spouse, Queer men and women can "chip in" just as much as straight men and women, if the atmosphere allows it, and certainly more than I can chip in about sports, fishing or cooking. I think these assumptions about what subjects should be "taboo" should be questioned; and the fact that you've never heard these subjects discussed may be an indication of what is "normal" or they may be an indication of a problem in our industry or society.

-j


Subject: More of this
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 6:19 AM
Message: Agree or disagree with Jessie's opinion, this is the kind of discussion we all should be having more of. Here, on line, and also at work in my opinion. We can not shut ourselves off from the important questions of the world and imagine that we do not have a responsibility.

Subject: Are you kidding me??
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 12:43 PM
Message: Jesse, I'm familiar with your work and I have one of your books - all great, in my opinion.

However, the workplace is no place to run your crusade for gay awarenes. I assure you, regardless of what is said to your face, your coworkers don't want to hear about it. They want you to come to work and do your job, which is I'm sure what you want out of them as well.

I am a proud conservative Republican and I enjoy sharing my political opinions with friends and family. However, I check my politics at the door. There are too many other distractions to bring in that kind of baggage. Further, I recognize that politics is a hotbutton issue for many people, and discussing one's opinion on same can set off a firestorm for those who disagree with that opinion.

The issues you bring up are not dissimilar from politics, at least in their danger and controversy. You owe it to your employer and your coworkers to keep your personal life just that.

Though I can't imagine anything other than the heterosexual perspective, I support your right to live your life as you see fit. That being said, I don't care to hear about your lifestyle any more than I want to hear about the party crowd and their beer-chugging parties. Everything has its place, and the workplace is a highly inappropriate venue to come 'out'.

Furthermore, I don't care to read about your sexuality on this site. Last time I checked, wasn't this site about SQL Server and .NET? Is there no one to monitor the content to make sure this type of thing is filtered before being published?

Subject: Ok, but only if you are straight.
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 3:43 PM
Message: A couple quick points. You write...

" I can't imagine anything other than the heterosexual perspective"

and then you write,

"I don't care to read about your sexuality on this site."

Hmmm. Yours is fine, mine is not. Inneresting.

You then go on to talk about my article as discussing my "lifestyle" comparing it to the "party crowd."

It is very sad to me that I talk about your friends and neighbors and co-workers who do not enjoy the same civil rights and liberties as you do, and you hear me talking about lifestyle and sex.

This happeens all the time; look at the thread; I'm talking about freedom, and many of the responses are about bodily functions.

I can only assume it is the "ick" factor. We say "please don't break apart our families" and what is heard is "please let us do icky things to each other." We say "please let us serve our country in the military" and what is heard is "please let us corrupt soldiers." We say "please protect our children from being abused at school" and what is heard is "please let us recruit your children into perversity."

In this article I said "please, take a moment to see the whole person, and realize that being at work can't insulate you from the fact that your co-workers are being marginalized and treated in ugly ways by your government" and the response is "that kind of talk has no place here."

I refer you to Pastor Martin Niemöller.

Subject: How about in the UK/Europe?
Posted by: Neil Davidson (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 4:19 PM
Message: Jesse,

A very interesting article. Do you have any experience in different attitudes in the USA vs Europe / UK?

Subject: I applaud you!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 6:36 PM
Message: Jesse,
We're about the same age -- you are about 5 years younger than me. I am transgendered and have been in my chosen and most comfortable gender, female, for almost 20 years now. It was a long struggle with many deep emotional scars suffered along the way. You cannot imagine, or perhaps you can, how toxic and damaging the mono-sexual, rigidly gender-binary the environment was (and still is to some extent though it has become much better in the last 10 or so years) to my pysche and development as a productive human being. What was SINGULARLY lacking for my sanity and well-being was the existence of the type of queer role models of which you speak and of which you, yourself are an example. Had there been more individuals modeling the fact that YES there are different ways of being sexual and gendered than this warped and toxic society holds up, I may have been able to help, produce and contribute much more to the well-being of our society. I might have been spared much pain and tortuous years in the wilderness. Keep up the good work.

Subject: UK vs US
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 at 6:39 PM
Message: My experience (very limited) is that most of the English speaking countries other than the US tend to be far lower key, as evidenced by laws, public discourse, etc.

I suspect much of the extended Commonwealth is rather bemused by the American reaction to all this, but that isn't to say that homophobia dies easily anywhere (except perhaps in Holland <smile>).

-j

Subject: What are we afraid of?
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 1:38 PM
Message: I have read a lot of messages on this site, never saw any that so many people were so angry about. What is the problem. Why is it we can talk about anything but this?

Seems to me Liberty is talking about rights, not about private matters, but must be very scary or very touch subject. Maybe we need to talk about it more, not less.

One (straight) man's idea.


Subject: Enjoyed the discussion
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 at 8:01 PM
Message: This is a topic that often generates more heat than light, but I do think some good points were raised here. I enjoyed the discussion and look forward to many more.

My marching orders are to write fortnightly on any topic of interest that touches on technology (however obliquely) and I will attempt to be reasonable, if provocative (in the best sense of the word -- that is provoking discussion, not provoking anger). I look forward to many interesting discussions and hope that you find them valuable.

Thanks to you all, and especially thank you to Tony and Claire for their welcome and courage and generally incredible support.

Stay tuned, new columns to arrive soon, and perhaps an article or two as well.

-jesse

Subject: A developer with a life!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 4:44 AM
Message: A very interesting article. I thought developers had to be very boring and just think about IT! ;-)
It's a great topic to spice up a techie newsletter. I think you're right the UK and probably the rest of western Europe are more open-minded on this issue than the US.
As an Englishman, any one being "in my face" about anything is an issue, but I see no reason for stuff like this not to be common knowledge in the work place, and no reason why it shouldn't be discussed openly.
Being bi, straight, gay, male, female, christian, muslim, atheist, black, white, asian, arab should not make any difference in the work place - or anywhere. I know it does sometimes. But it shouldn't!
And knowing about these different walks of life makes the workplace a more interesting place to be. The poster who said you should just talk about work must be the type of developer I mentioned earlier.

Just as an amusing aside, did you know we have a slang term (although it's as much a term of endearment) for a man showing "less than manly tendencies", which is to call someone a "Big Jessie" - best said with a Billy Connolly accent.

I just noticed your name on 2 books I have, so keep up the good work.

Subject: It shouldn't matter
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 4:58 AM
Message: As far as I'm concerned, a persons sexuality doesn't matter.

However I appreciate that in our society (UK), it can still have an adverse effect, which is a great shame.

Maybe someday we'll all be able to live and let live

Subject: I feel sad for you...
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 7:40 AM
Message: I proudly admit that I am a heterosexual male. But that is not WHO I AM. My life is not defined by my sexuality. If all you can say for your life is that you are attracted to members of the same sex (a losing proposition at best because it will never propogate the species), then I am truly sad for you.

Your life is worth so much more and who you are as an individual is even more important than how you choose to perform in the bedroom.

If that's all that is to your life, then I would suggest seriously taking stock of what you have become and what exactly you wish to be!

Even animals do not define themselves by whom they try to mate with. You're not even doing that, you're saying that everything you are, everything you do is merely a function of your sexual desires.

That's the tragedy in all this, that you have no more self worth than a base desire. You said that you felt better about yourself after you came "out".

It sounds to me like you are still searching for your own self worth. Telling yourself that your happy and trying to push it in everyone elses face is nothing more than a desparate attempt to validate your existence.

You are so much more than that.

Subject: what this is about?
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 7:50 AM
Message: Really, I appreciate your attitude towards your orientation and human rights in general, but I really don't see any connection between these matters and professional work. For me those things are orthogonal, like food habits and work, hobbies and work, religion and work, my friends and my work etc. I don't come to work announcing that I am heterosexual and atheist, I just don't see any reason and relation.

Subject: You're mixed up...
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 9:57 AM
Message: ...and I fail to understand how bringing up your aberrant sexual behavior on an IT professional's web site does anything to enhance it's reputability or value. I'll be unsubscribing immediately.

Subject: Heterosexual and atheist
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 11:23 AM
Message: In reply to anonymous, a few posts ago:

How would you feel if it were illegal to be an atheist? Or if people accused you of being aberrant? If you had to pretend to be a God-loving Christian to get work? What would you do in those circumstances? Might you not be tempted to be 'loud' about your atheism, or at least be glad that some people were?

Subject: All discrimination is bad
Posted by: RobertDavis (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Message: It's easy for heterosexual people to say that a gay person shouldn't be open about their sexuality, but I guarantee that if 99% of those people went to work in an environment where they were the only heterosexual, they would be "out loud" about their own sexuality.

In fact, if you even ask a straight person if he or she is gay, you'll see how quickly they become willing to express their sexual preferences!!!

I think people that have themselves experienced discrimination are a lot more understanding on these issues. I also agree that America is a lot less tolerant than Europe.

I do think that some people express their sexuality too openly, and I suspect that heterosexual people are guilty of this more than homosexual people. I am more likely to hear a straight coworker talking about how sexual escapades than a gay coworker.

-- Robert (heterosexual, married, white American male)

Subject: Replies to a couple bits...
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 12:02 PM
Message: To the anonymous poster who feels sad for me, you seem to have read a different article than I wrote. Where did I write that I fully define myself by my sexuality? That would be sad indeed, but of course it isn't true.

Like most folks, I define myself in many ways, and have many roles in life; but like many members of a despised minority, membership in that role is made significant because of the laws and restrictions imposed by the majority.

I don't remember talking about "mating" or physical attraction; I do remember talking about laws, discrimination, marginalization, and political identity.

As for the other participant who is cancelling because this site dared run an article about "aberrant behavior" I can only apologize to the other readers and to the editors that my article cost the community a member. That said, I do think that the reader might wonder who is more offended, he by stumbling across my article, or the 10% or so of his co-workers who he considers aberrant and unworthy of his resepct.

Finally, we return to the connection any of this has to work. I can only offer this (if the article itself was unconvincing). Nealry 1/3 of your waking hours are spent working. You probably spend nearly as much time with your co-workers as you do with your family. If the state is denying them fundamental rights, perhaps you want to be talking with them about why that is.

Studies show that people who think they do not know anyone queer are far more likely to vote for restricted rights than those who do know people who are out, and so being out at work helps end this kind of discrimination.

Further, my experience is that heterosexuality is implicitly talked about every day at work. "How's the wife?" "My girlfriend recommended..." "I just broke up with my boyfriend and..." It is just so much part of the background of life it isn't noticed.

One final note. The point of writing opinion pieces is not to engage everyone in a nodding agreement over a beer. It is to stir up some discussion, challenge assumptions and generate an opportunity to look beyond the most narrow definition of our shared profession.

As recompensense, here is the joke of the week....

Heisenberg is pulled over for speeding. The police officer says to him, "Do you have any idea how fast you were going??" "No," says Heisenberg, "but I can tell you exactly where I was."



Subject: Poofs
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 2:41 PM
Message: Poofs should stay in the closet, their is no need to spread sexual perversion

Subject: It doen't matter
Posted by: Jim Swarr (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 2:57 PM
Message: It doesn't really matter to me what a co-workers sexual orientation is, but it is among a whole littany of things I don't want to discuss at work. Want to waste a few minutes talking about the home team - sure. Want to ask me about my opinion on abortion - please ask someone else.

I understand the need for personal honesty, but I can't think of a single reason that my sexual preferences have anything to do with how I execute my work day. Nor can I think of a single reason to be loud about it.

Yes, when I am at work I bring ALL my personal experiences with me - that doen't mean that I share that explicitly with all those within earshot of my desk.

While I have friends at work that are privy to my personal life and all that goes with it, there are many others that frankly don't care and don't want to hear all the gory details of my personal life. Most of the time they have a technical problem and want it solved and I don't think they care if was solved by the bi or the straight guy.

I see no reason to cover, however - being frank about your sexuality when appropriate is fine with me. However solving a programming problem and then annoucing - "and by the way I'm bi!", somehow just doesn't sit right with me.

Frankly, I dislike it when a co-worker is loud about anything not related to the task at hand. First and foremost, it's non-productive. Your sexuality is certainly not going to cause me to rate your work output one way or another - it is not connected or even remotely related. It's just code (However, I have seen my fair share of queer code, but it's turns out that it wasn't required to be written by gay programmers just bad ones.)

I can't think of a single time that I EVER said - "What we need to solve this problem is a <Insert Sexual Preference Here> programmer!"

Sorry, mixing politics and business is just not a good idea.





Subject: out at work
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 4:36 PM
Message: I think that a persons sexuality shouldn't need to be discussed at work, sexuality is a private thing no matter which way you choose to swing.

people who choose to be gay seem to need to tell the whole world about their sexuality.
Personally I find it offensive, and don't like other people's homosexuality being forced upon people as a discussion topic.

If people are in opposition to homosexuality, they are labeled homophobes, because it is Politically incorrect to offend someone with differing opinions. well Homosexuality offends me, but I don't force my opinion on anyone.

Sexuality and Homosexuality should stay away from work.
I'm sure people wouldn't want to hear about my sex life. I sure don't want to hear about other's

Subject: GET A LIFE
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 6:15 PM
Message: Why are you trying to push this at work

GET A LIFE


Subject: ARMY
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 6:16 PM
Message: GO and try and join the ARMY

ha they would fire ya toooooooo


Subject: GO home Jesse
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 6:17 PM
Message: WE dont want to hear or read about this on Simple talk.

we are professionals that dont care about your messed up life.

Subject: oh?
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 6:26 PM
Message: >> I think that a persons sexuality shouldn't need to be discussed at work, sexuality is a private thing <<

Agreed. But when a person is denied fundamental cviil rights based on such a personal thing then it is no longer personal; it is public and politicial. Close your eyes because you can (your rights are intact) but you can't ignore that others are denied rights you enjoy.

>>people who choose to be gay <<

No one chooses to be gay

>>...seem to need to tell the whole world about their sexuality. <<<

It would make me laugh. People who are gay spent hundreds of years cowering in corners terrified that anyone would find out. Today, most gay people are still afraid that certain people (their bosses, familiy, children) will discover their secret. When we finally do stand up and say "please stop treating us like second class citizens" we are told to shut up and go away. Yet, straight people announce their sexual preference every day by placing pictures of their family on their desk, by talking casually about their boy/girl friends, by comments they don't even notice.

>>Personally I find it offensive, and don't like other people's homosexuality being forced upon people as a discussion topic.<<

There are many things I find offensive, but in a free and open society I must accept that some people are going to talk about the guns they own, the narrow view points they hold, their petty racist attitudes, their xenophobia. There isn't much I can or shoudl do about it except try to engage them in discussion.

As for forcing the topic on you, two comments: you are always free to stop reading a given article, (what a concept) and perhaps you should consider the price paid by those who do not enjoy the freedoms that you take for granted: the right to fair housing, job security, the right to marry, the right to have your children free from harassment.

>>If people are in opposition to homosexuality, they are labeled homophobes, <<

Yes, that is the working definition of homophobia; while literally it means homosexuality-avoiding (like aquaphobic means water-avoiding) homoophobia means homosexuality-antagonistic.

>> Sexuality and Homosexuality should stay away from work. <<

Should heterosexuality stay away from work? Should workers be discouraged from discussing their families? their spouses? their loved ones? Or only gay couples?

>>I'm sure people wouldn't want to hear about my sex life. I sure don't want to hear about other's <<

Where in this thread do you see anyone talking about their sex life? What is it about this subect that brings to mind sexual acts? We're talking about equality, not creating the beast with two backs.

>> It doesn't really matter to me what a co-workers sexual orientation is, but it is among a whole littany of things I don't want to discuss at work. Want to waste a few minutes talking about the home team - sure. Want to ask me about my opinion on abortion - please ask someone else. <<

No problem. No one will force you to talk about anything you don't want to. Who could? But consider the opportunity missed to engage your co-workers in a solid meaningful discussion of values about a difficult subject that gets to the core of what some consider a very important and pressing issue. How often do you have the opportunity to connect with people like that?


>>I understand the need for personal honesty, but I can't think of a single reason that my sexual preferences have anything to do with how I execute my work day. <<

Of course not; this isn't about being a better worker, it is about being a better citizen.

>>Nor can I think of a single reason to be loud about it. <<

Ahh. see article. There are many good reasons to be loud about it; not least that it leads to meaningful discussions and good dialog.

>>that doen't mean that I share that explicitly with all those within earshot of my desk.... hear all the gory details of my personal life. <<

Again (and again) no one is talking about pornographic discussion of sexuality; we're talking about open political discourse on the role and rights of a marganilized segment of our population.

>>Poofs should stay in the closet, their is no need to spread sexual perversion <<

Well, you have to admire someone that up front about their bigotry.

Subject: Thanks.
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 9:29 PM
Message: Jesse,
I don't agree with your perspective, but I do appreciate your openness and honesty on this issue. Mud slinging from right or left on this issue only leaves us (duhh) muddy, but no smarter. I want to engage in intelligent dialogue on this issue and to evaluate my reasons (faith based) for believing that sexual orientation other than heterosexual is wrong.
David.
- http://www.gamesecretary.com/blog.aspx

Subject: It doesn't matter!
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 at 3:06 AM
Message: I read the first paragraph or two to confirm my suspicion, and yes, it's all about issues entirely irrelevant to the workplace. The curious thing I derive from glancing through the comments is that it seems that it's not allowed for us not to care.

I'm sure you're not interested in my sexuality, and I'm not interested in anyone else's, or someone else's preference in hair tonic or potted plants, subjects which are about equally important in my life.

This whole article was a total waste of time and energy! And so was this comment, I suppose ...

Subject: re: Oh?
Posted by: Jim Swarr (view profile)
Posted on: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 at 6:26 AM
Message: >>that doen't mean that I share that explicitly with all those within earshot of my desk.... hear all the gory details of my personal life. <<

>>>Again (and again) no one is talking about pornographic discussion of sexuality; we're talking about open political discourse on the role and rights of a marganilized segment of our population.<<<

Well, neither was I. The "gory details of my personal life" was not meant to mean that I would discuss anything pornographic. The details of my life are more than just my sex life, as it is for everyone else.

I couldn't agree with you more about the unfair treatment that gay couples receive in the eyes of the law. However, homosexuals are not the only marginilized segment of the population and there are lots of other injustices in the world. Whilst we are discussing all this stuff, just when will we get that pesky work done. The workplace is political enough as it is.

Besides, I don't think that one needs to discuss the "big" issues, sometimes it is enough to discuss how it personally impacts you. While one may believe that allowing gay couples to marry is immoral, on a personal level they also could understand how not giving health insurance to a significant other is unfair and a hardship.

I also agree with your statement that sexual preference is not a choice. No one chooses to be gay anymore than anyone chooses to be heterosexual. It just is what it is.



Subject: Starting discussion
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Thursday, November 30, 2006 at 8:55 AM
Message: I'm pleased to note that this discussion is being picked up by folks who strongly disagree but are open to finding a path towards common ground, as illustrated in <a href="http://gamesecretary.com/community/blogs/david_mackey/archive/2006/11/28/Bisexuality-and-Jesse-Liberty_2E00_.aspx" target="new">this</a> blog entry.


Subject: More than just queer
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Sunday, December 03, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Message: My plan is to write opinion pieces on a number of topics for this site: on programmer superstitions, on how ethics affect us as programmers, on any number of topics that tangentially affect us as programmers. I also hope to write on technical subjects (initially on .NET 2, but quickly on .Net 3).

As you can see, it is also my hope and plan to keep my blog up to date with ideas, recommendations, observations and so forth.

It will be interesting to see whether the storm over my first article (and the impressions formed, if any) affect the reactions to subsequent articles.

I hope you'll give each of my crack-pot ideas a fair chance. Some of them you'll agree with, some not, but with luck you'll take them in the spirit of one programmer to another, not as the rantings of some "egotistical poof" (as I was so gently referred to in a post here.

On harsh feedback: I have a pretty thick skin; so I'm all for strong push back, though I think personal attacks are unnecessary, and name calling is just unpleasant (though it doesn't bother me all that much). I'm Jewish as well, so if you're going for it, you can throw in some slurs there as well.

That said, I do hope you'll give the management here a break. They took the risk of running an opinion column that is not strictly on topic, that is going to be controversial, that is written by someone known to be somewhat argumentative. You might want to give them credit, instead of grief, and keep in mind that my opinions are strictly my own, and in no way reflect the opinions of anyone managing this site (they are adults who may speak for themselves).

I make no apologies for my column. I hope you'll wait until I have half a dozen columns posted before coming to conclusions, but you are always free to set the bozo bit and stop reading them. That is the wonderful thing about freedom; no on makes you read anything.

One final note; I get about 200 emails a day on my technical writing, and there are two I keep on my wall that I've had for years. They arrived the same day. The first said, in part, "You saved my life. I never understood pointers until you explained it...." The second said, in part, "I don't know what it is you do for a living, but it isn't programming or writing, because you are clearly not competent at either."

-jesse
http://www.LibertyAssociates.com


Subject: oops
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Sunday, December 03, 2006 at 11:47 AM
Message: Sorry, the "More than just queer" posting was by me. Wrong machine; wasn't signed in. Ahhh, technology. -jesse

Subject: Turn about fair play?
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Monday, December 04, 2006 at 12:38 PM
Message: You want the right to openly devulge your sexual orientation. How about my right to state that such is sin and that there is a high cost for you to pay in the end?

It seems, more and more, that folks like you are gaining the right to express yourselves while folks like me are losing the same right. Will you support my right to speak against your choices, in a kind and loving way, in what I believe to be in the best interest of your soul? You don't have to accept it, you don't have to change. But will you allow me the right to speak?

Am I homophobic because I hold an opposing view? Why is it that folks have the right to speak against the Iraq War (something they think is morally wrong) and folks like me are homophobic if we express our belief that homosexuality, bi-sexuality, etc. is morally wrong? In a truly free society we should both be allowed to speak and hold our views. Yet there is an major campaign to silence those who hold my views.

Your choices are yours to make. Are mine?

Subject: Of course you have the right
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Monday, December 04, 2006 at 4:47 PM
Message: Of course you have the right to say that you think homosexuality, or bisexuality is morally wrong. You have the right to believe it, you have the right to express it, you even have the right to campaign for folks who would take action to limit government support for policies you believe act againtst your moral beliefs. OF COURSE. Yes. Absolutely.

Now we get into the trickier area of whether I think you are homophobic. What a loaded term. By definition, it means opposed to or averse to homosexuality. Perhaps by that definition you are homophobic; but I'm certain that is not what you object to; you object to the implication of "bigotry" and rightly so.

Those of us who are in favor of full legal and social equality will get no where calling concerned folks like you nasty names. It doesn't help, and it just makes for an unpleasant conversation.

What we need is more polite conversation in which we look for common ground; shared assumptions, and our very first shared assumption is that you have EVERY BIT as much right to your opinions, ideas and beliefs and the right to express them as any one else.

I know it feels like the pendulum has swung away from your beliefs; I believe you, but I have to tell you that from this side it feels just the opposite (funny how that can be).

After six years of a president, Congress, judiciary and most of the states willing to break up loving homes and deny adopted children the right to married parents, it is hard for me to see that this country is too gay friendly.

But to return to your question; yes, shout it out; your opionion is not only valid, it is valued; how else will we talk? How else will we exchange ideas? We all spend entirely too much time talking to ourselves and shouting at each other.

-j

Subject: How about work being about work?
Posted by: Anonymous (not signed in)
Posted on: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 11:07 AM
Message: Look, if you want to get it on with men, women, trees, dolphins, or whatever else, that's your business. I happen to think that it's morally wrong for you to be with anyone but a woman, and in any circumstance other than monogamous marriage, but that's my view; you're entitled to your own, wrong though I think it may be (grin).

But that's not really the point. The point is this: how about you keep your bedroom in the bedroom? How about work being about work, rather than about you fulfilling your personal dreams of sexual pan/glos/eu/u-topia? Call me old fashioned, but the very last thing I think we need in the workplace is somebody "modeling" for young whatever-sexuals.

Subject: Can you get your mind out of the bedroom?
Posted by: JesseLiberty (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 1:58 PM
Message: I'm not sure how to say it more clearly...This is not about the bedroom. This is not about sex.(clear enough?)

This is a workplace issue when in 36 states you can be fired just for being queer. Not for being black, not for being Jewish, not for being a woman, but safely, legally and without recourse for being queer, even if your work record is perfect. Do you discuss job discrimination at work?

This is an education issue when in more than half the states there is no law prohibiting the harassment of queer students. Do you discuss education at work, around the water cooler?

This is a civil rights issue when the Supreme Court of the United States says that marriage is such a fundamental right that it can not be denied to incarcerated felons, but it is denied to same-sex couples in 49 states. Ever talk about civil rights during breaks? Coretta Scott King and Congressman John Lews (who spoke at the march on Washington) said this was the biggest civil rights issue of our day.

This is a health issue when 60 million people are infected with HIV in an epidemic that could have been prevented but was purposefully ignored by the Reagan administration because it was seen at the time to affect only homosexuals and drug addicts. Ever talk about health issues while at work? The World Health Organization said in its report last year that had anti-homosexual sentiment not been at play, HIV/AIDS could have been stopped before it became epidemic.

This is a national security issue when we're firing desperately needed Arabic speaking translators under Don't Ask Don't Tell. Ever discuss national security at work? The RAND corporation says that the policy is a risk to national security.

I'm discussing social policy, equity and treating one another decently; I'm not quite sure why you're talking about sex.

(And what is being modeled, one hopes, is pride, and the courage to stand up for what is right in the face of being called a poof, a conceited degenerate and aberrant.)

-j

Subject: Anonymous comments disabled
Posted by: AnnaL (view profile)
Posted on: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 at 4:04 AM
Message: Unfortunately due to relentless spamming, we've had to disable anonymous comments on this article.

If you wish to contribute to the debate on this article you will need to sign in.

Subject: Coming out and Billable Time
Posted by: codenet (view profile)
Posted on: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Message: Jesse,

coming out is fine in every imaginable way. But, I have to ask you, how does it help you convert bits into billable time? In theory, any political :) orientation should be billable, in one way or another.

I just don't see the business environment as the best place (because it does not care about it) for "coming out".

 

















Level Playing Field
 The Federal Government in the States accepts tenders for their IT projects from a wide-range of... Read more...

Women in IT: Change at Every Level
 In the past, straight-forward sexism was a real problem in the IT industry – women in IT were... Read more...

Second Life: A Virtual World of Real Money
 As more and more people invest in alter egos to live a pseudo life online in Linden Labs' latest...