Lee.org

Seen in Wicked Local News 7-1-2020 By Julia Taliesin

View the article for more info

On June 29, Somerville quietly became one of the first cities in the nation — if not the first — to recognize polyamorous domestic partnerships.

The historic move was a result of a few subtle language shifts. For example, instead of being defined as an “entity formed by two persons,” Somerville’s ordinance defines a domestic partnership as an “entity formed by people,” replaces “he and she” with “they,” replaces “both” with “all,” and contains other inclusive language.

On June 25, the City Council passed the ordinance recognizing domestic partnerships unanimously, and on June 29 Mayor Joe Curtatone signed it into municipal law. The city is in the process of changing the application to include space for more than two partners, but polyamorous partners will be able to file soon.

The making of

Ward 6 Councilor Lance Davis, who chairs the Legislative Matters committee that reviewed the ordinance, said this began by just wanting to draft an ordinance recognizing domestic partnerships. Somerville didn’t have one, and a constituent request moved the council to work with the city on an ordinance.

“During our initial conversations, a couple things jumped out,” said Davis. “The first draft required domestic partners to notify the city of any change of address, which struck me as not in line with what married folks have to do, and required that they reside together, which again struck me as something I’m not required to do as a married person, so we got rid of those provisions.”

Important definitions & distinction
Polygamy vs. polyamory

Polygamy — which is illegal in the United States — is specifically tied to marriage, and is also gendered. It is defined as the practice of having more than one husband or wife at the same time, and does not reference romance, intimacy, or consent.
Polyamory is usually defined as the practice of having multiple consensual intimate relationships, and is often described as consensual non-monogamy. Relationships can be sexual or romantic, and are not gender-specific. Polyamorous relationships are diverse and can look different depending on the family. Sometimes it means having a primary relationship and seeking casual intimacy, and sometimes it means involving a third or fourth (and so on) person in building a family structure.
Marriage vs. domestic partnership

Marriage is commonly defined as the legal union of a couple. In some states, it has been defined as between a man and a woman but the 2013 Supreme Court ruling legalized marriage between same-sex couples.
Domestic partnerships were initially created as a pathway to a legal union for couples of any gender. While the rights of domestic partners can vary across states, domestic partners can often enjoy some similar spousal benefits, such as survivorship, hospital visitation, shared property and finances, and power of attorney. However, many domestic partners cannot receive healthcare on a partner’s policy. Since domestic partnerships are not recognized by federal law, partners also face barrier filing joint tax returns or petitioning for a non-citizen spouse. For example, in Massachusetts, domestic partners are not legally considered family and so cannot their partner’s assets in the event of death, and must ensure a will that directs those assets.
(Sources: Psychology Today, Merriam Webster Dictionary, GLAD Legal Advocates & Defenders, Miller Law Group – Massachusetts Family Law Attorneys.)

Other changes came later. Davis said it’s not usually like him to let legislation sit once it’s been worked out, but something told him to give this one some time.

About an hour before the June 25 council meeting, he heard from fellow Councilor J.T. Scott.

“[He] reached out and said, ‘Why is this two?’ And I said, ‘I don’t have a good answer,’” said Davis. “I tripped over my words a bit, and played devil’s advocate, but I had no good reason. So, I pulled it out, went through quickly making whatever word changes necessary to make it not gendered or limited to two people.”

The ordinance passed unanimously.

“I’ve consistently felt that when society and government tries to define what is or is not a family, we’ve historically done a very poor job of doing so,” said Davis. “It hasn’t gone well, and it’s not a business that government should be in, so that guided my thinking on this.”

Leading the way

The changes are small, but powerful: If you put the Cambridge and Somerville ordinances side-by-side they appear nearly identical save for a few differences, namely that the Cambridge ordinance defines a domestic partnership as including only “two persons” and requires partners to live together.

It’s the first time that family law attorney Andy Izenson has seen a municipality do anything like this.

Izenson is the senior legal director, vice president, and secretary of the nonprofit Chosen Family Law Center in New York. The center also has an initiative, the Poly Families Project, which offers direct, affordable legal support to polyamorous families across the country.

“I think it’s pretty amazing — strategies like this are the best chance we have of moving towards a legal understanding of family that’s as comprehensive as it needs to be to serve all families,” said Izenson. “I’ve seen a few other small-scale or local entities that have taken steps towards recognizing that relationships between adults are not only between two adults, but this is the first time I have seen this strategy brought to fruition.”

Izenson noted states recognizing third-parent adoptions as action that is close to offering broader rights to families, but pointed out that most gains in “marriage equality” have all been carefully defined as between two people.

“There’s a reflexive flinch away from families including more than two partners,” they said.

Izenson called out mainstream media, certain sects of Christianity, and the bottom-line of capitalism for maintaining this cultural flinch. For example, health insurance companies are incentivized to limit the definition of family so they do not have to cover more people.

Regardless, Izenson is hopeful that this move indicates even a small change in the way we think about the legal rights of families.

“There are two kinds of legal advocacy: the bottom-up kind and the top-down kind,” they said. “Top-down meaning law that comes from the Supreme Court…which, in terms of day-to-day life is more reflective of culture change than leading the way. This type of bottom-up work — local people making policy regarding their neighbors — that’s the sort of thing that’s not only reflective of a culture shift, but a shift towards acceptance and support of a broader variety of families.”

It is so terrific viewing family photos and videos in Google Daydream, a VR headset that works on my Pixel 2 phone.

Just today I found out that Daydream was discontinued :-(. I love knowing that the technology exists and that it will resurface… somewhere. But… waaah!

Our cape gooseberry plant has been so prolific this year!

I’ve got to thank Donna in Berkeley for giving us the first plant 2 years ago. It survived just long enough to give us some gooseberries to plant. The second plant has done very well in our front yard!

The artichokes I’m growing in our front yard are astounding!

I got a Chargie device for my phone. I’m sorry but I can’t recommend it.

The promise is “Chargie is an app+hardware phone charge limiting solution that makes your battery last for much longer than if you had charged it regularly to 100% all night, every night.” It limits charging by unplugging the USB cord when your phone is charged enough.

Here’s the review I emailed to the developer and posted on Google Play. I’m sad that after a month, there’s been no response.  

Two Stars out of Five: I got my Chargie April 2, 2020 for my Pixel 2. This review is on Jun 3. It’s a good idea, the app is well written and the device works (with a few tiny glitches) but I’m concerned that it won’t save my battery. Now instead of staying at 100% in the overnight, my battery goes between 80 and 85% charge several times per night. If it’s the act of discharging that is bad for a battery, then Chargie won’t solve the battery-wear problem. :-( I want it to work but I uninstalled it. Maybe it would help if it automatically turned on Battery Saving mode while on the Chargie device.

San Francisco DA to prohibit officers with history of misconduct from being hired (story)

A friend on Facebook writes “Wait, they’re just making this a rule now???”

Unfortunately yes. It appears that the contracts that police unions sign with cities often have many loopholes that explicitly let officers get away with misconduct.

Start here https://www.joincampaignzero.org
then here https://www.joincampaignzero.org/contracts
which takes you here https://www.checkthepolice.org
Their publicly viewable database has ~500 examples of police contracts that explicitly let police get away with a tremendous amount of poor behavior. I hope this situation improves.

(yeah, I’m like 3 weeks behind on posting this. If the world was normal, that wouldn’t be a huge lag. But the world has gone haywire, sorry.)

I came across this super fun Chain Clock on Thingiverse today.

Wow, I dreamed of making exactly this very thing a few years ago! I even went and built one in the Phun 2d physics simulator (that is now Algodoo) What a blast that was! I highly recommend playing with that toy as well!

I wanted to make mine out of bike chain and cut steel but… well, there’s never enough time! It really gives me a smile that such a thing exists in the world!

Update 8-12-22 Damn, someone built it real good! Via

A friend, call her “Dee”, recommended I watch the 2019 documentary Asbury Park: Riot, Redemption, Rock n Roll. Dee wanted me to see the film to see how the riots and looting affected that city. Race riots largely destroyed Asbury Park in the summer of 1970 and the effects are still vividly seen in the city today. Dee stressed to me that those rioters, and by corollary, the people being held for protesting, rioting and looting during the George Floyd riots in Minneapolis needed to be locked away immediately and for a long time.

Dee wrote:

if your entire life savings was burned, destroyed, looted by rioters, would you want them bailed out and back on the streets??? I would want them to rot. Generous of heart has its place, for sure. But not for these common criminals destroying people’s lives. Watch Asbury Park- riot, redemption, rock and roll. In that documentary you will see after the riots in Asbury Park, it was NEVER built up,again. Ruined forever.

So I watched the documentary. It was powerful, scary, beautiful, ugly, real. Here are a few essential quotes I heard about the riots:

Mabin Womble, described as an Asbury Park Community Activist had been interviewed through the whole movie. At 44:40, when the interview turned to the start of the riot, he got quiet and nervous, wringing his hands and said, “We were angry, we were angry. I’ll try to rationalize it. I can’t rationalize it… once it started… we did what we had to do.”

51:30 [showing footage of destroyed businesses on the main street, narration] “Whatever happens now, Asbury Park will never again be the same. For this small but tragically typical ghetto, the rioting has meant a venting of long simmering anger, a desperate expression of frustration. The people of Asbury Park’s west side don’t feel much like talking now. They too are shocked and worried about the chances for a really better tomorrow. – Jeff Camen, NBC News.”

52:15 “Southside” Johnny Lyon, Vocalist for the Asbury Jukes said, “They were living in terrible conditions so they burnt it down. And it was really mind boggling that it happened in our little corner of the world. We had seen it in Detroit and Newark and like that but in Asbury Park it seemed so strange but it was understandable.”

52:39 Billy Ryan, guitarist said, “It was just a phenomenon. It was sort of a tired of being sick and tired kind of thing. And they exhibited their anger and their frustration in a violent way.”

53:15 Bruce Springsteen said, “It was a sad moment in the city’s history but it probably needed to happen. It needed to happen.”

Here are those snippets. Sorry for the potato quality. There is much much more but I include these snippets to show the sincerity of the words spoken on this topic. I highly recommend you watch the film!

50 years later, the west side of Asbury Park remains in a poor state of affairs. Asbury Park Choice shows stark statistics like on the west side, the median household income is below the poverty line for a family of 4.

With all the groundwork laid in the above, it seems essential to our continued existence as a country that we figure out, as individuals and as a country to keep this from happening again. How do we learn from the 1970 race riots in Asbury Park and keep it from becoming the 2020 race riots of Minneapolis? Well, as the last 3 weeks have already shown, we failed at that. Why?

It seems clear to me as to why the problems repeat. The situation hasn’t changed. The political attitudes remain the same. The poverty remains the same. The culture remains the same. The police enforcement remains the same.

But oh, it is so complicated… and so simple.

Asbury Park started literally as a buffer city in the 1880’s, protecting the city of Ocean Grove to the south from, as the movie narrates “… from the sins and excesses…” of the city just to the north. Over time, the west side became a city where blacks and Italians lived to service the east side’s resorts, then the resorts faded, leading to a low-income neighborhood. That’s just part of the starting point for the riots. The Asbury Park riots happened in 1970. For more context, the city of Newark NJ, not too far away destroyed itself in 1967. I lived near Newark as a child and I knew that the city was still mostly broken in the late 1980’s. Do you see the parallels?  

OMG, call me a terrible writer but I simply don’t have time in my life to rewrite this article with what I just discovered. In researching the 1967 riots in Newark NJ, I came across this Wikipedia article, Long, hot summer of 1967:

Please read this segment and consider the parallels to today. Yes, it’s a Wikipedia article, and one shouldn’t rely on it. Then ask yourself, how is it incorrect? How is history not repeating itself?

History

A history of institutionalized unemployment, abusive policing, and poor housing was already present in certain areas of the United States. Riots began to flare up across the country but especially during the summer months. While rioting happened across the country the  Summer of Love  was occurring in hippie communities, and Americans witnessed troop movements in the Vietnam War and in American riots on the nightly news. At the end of July, President Lyndon B. Johnson set up the  Kerner Commission  to investigate the riots, in 1968 they would release a report blaming pervasive societal inequalities in American ghettos for the riots. By September 1967, 83 were dead, thousands injured, tens of millions of dollars in property had been destroyed and entire neighborhoods were burned.^[7]

Reactions

It is in the context of having been through “long, hot, summer” that in December, 1967, Miami police chief Walter E. Headley uttered the now-famous phrase “When the looting starts, the shooting starts” after which  Frank Rizzo,  Richard Daley  and  George Wallace  also spoke out in favor of a  hardline approach towards looters  and rioters.^[8]

A poll of Minnesotans asked respondents to gauge the perceived relationship between the riots and the Civil Rights Movement. When asked if there were a connection between the movement and riots, 49% said there was, 38% disagreed. A full 65% thought the riots were planned, rather than just uncontrolled skirmishes. In another poll of Minnesotans, respondents were asked if the cause of the riots was racial discrimination or lawless hoodlums, 32% said racial discrimination while 49% said hoodlums. In a March 1968 Harris poll reported in the Washington Post, 37% of Americans agreed with the Kerner Commission’s report that the 1967 race riots were brought on mainly by inequalities; 49% disagreed. A majority of whites (53%) rejected the idea, with just 35% agreeing. In contrast, 58% of blacks supported it, and only 17% disagreed.^[9]

Wikipedia: Long, Hot Summer of 1967

Felt sick Monday, maybe it was being tired from Saturday beach trip but quarantined in the bedroom in case it was COVID-19. Got tested Tuesday, felt better Tuesday evening, test came back negative Wednesday. I was very glad to be feeling silly that I was self-quarantining! I got to tell Megan I was in the “Best jail ever!” Megan felt the same a little under the weather Wednesday: how are viruses so strong?! We have been quarantining for 3 months!! I was never closer than 10′ from anyone outside my bubble in the last 2 weeks! My google timeline is soooo boring!

My CRVO eye problem came back starting Saturday. By my scheduled doctor’s appointment on Thursday, vision in my right eye wasn’t so great. Turns out, getting a needle in the eye is exhausting. I was out Thursday and much of Friday.

Is Donald Trump racist?

Racist: a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one’s own racial group is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

Dictionary.com

On June 12th Trump was interviewed on Fox News by Harris Faulkner. He was asked to explain why he Tweeted on May 29th “when the looting starts the shooting starts”.

Faulkner, “Why those words?”

Trump, “So, that’s an expression I’ve heard over the years.”

Faulkner, “Do you know where it comes from?”

Trump, “I think Philadelphia, the mayor of Philadelphia.”

Faulker, “No, it comes from 1967, I was about 18 month old… it was from the chief of police in Miami, he was cracking down and he meant what he said. And he said, ‘I don’t even care if it makes it look like brutality, I’m going to crack down. When the looting starts, the shooting starts.’ That frightened a lot of people when you tweeted that.”

Trump, “It also comes from a very tough mayor who might have been police commissioner at the time, but I think mayor of Philadelphia named Frank Rizzo and he had an expression like that. But I’ve heard it many times. I think it’s been used many times. It means two things — very different things. One is, if there’s looting, there’s probably going to be shooting, and that’s not as a threat, that’s really just a fact, because that’s what happens. And the other is, if there’s looting, there’s going to be shooting. They’re very different meanings.”

Summing It Up

In the 2 weeks between writing “when the looting starts…” and that interview, Trump had plenty of time to google the phrase or find out what public perception was. Hell, the moment I read that phrase, I knew in my gut, before looking it up, that it was charged, dangerous language. But Trump didn’t acknowledge any of that. He didn’t acknowledge the not-so-hidden meaning behind those words. By not distancing himself from the original context, he was choosing to support it and the full weight of its racist, police-brutality promoting context. Please understand this: it doesn’t matter if he said the phrase initially without understanding it’s historical context. What matters is that, after learning about the historical context, he did not correct the record, and that was intentional.

In case you’re missing my point, here’s another example. What if Trump had repeated a famous, inspiring quote like, “Do not compare yourself to others. If you do so, you are insulting yourself”. That may be fine advice. If, however 10 million people pointed out that it was a famous quote by Hitler (it is), the president might do well to distance himself from it. Maybe if he got asked about it in an interview, he’d say something conciliatory but face-saving. Maybe something like, “I didn’t remember where I heard it before. I thought it was an inspiring thing to say but realizing it’s origin, I wouldn’t use that quote again.”

Now instead, consider if an interviewer asked him about the phrase, saying, “You know, you saying that quote made a lot of people uneasy. I’m a Jew and that is a famous quote by Hitler,” What if Trump responded with, “Well, I also heard Frank Rizzo say it once and it worked for him.”? You’d think… well, what would you think?