Hate Crimes, Violence, and Jodie Foster

The LGBT-inclusive Hate Crimes Bill, aka the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, is dead. House Democrats removed it from the Defense Reauthorization bill to which it was attached. According to the Washington Blade, “gay-supportive Democrats who oppose the war would join more than 150 Republicans who oppose the hate crimes bill to defeat the combined bill.” Others, such as Lane Hudson, see the move as House Democrats selling out gays again.

Was it such a good idea, we might ask, to attach the hate crimes legislation to the defense bill? Senators Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), author of the hate crimes legislation passed in the Senate, and Carl Levin (D-MI), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee say they are “deeply disappointed” the House would not even vote on the bill with the hate crimes act included, but “The inclusion of the hate crimes provision in the Defense bill was appropriate. Our military stands for America’s ideals and fights for America’s ideals. At a time when our ideals are under attack by terrorists in other lands, it is more important than ever to demonstrate that we practice what we preach, and that we are doing all we can to root out the bigotry and prejudice in our own country that leads to similar violence here at home.” Sure, there’s political spin there, but I think they have a point. Not that I’m a fan of the war in Iraq, by any means, but “practice what we preach” is a good rule to follow.

I was going to write a separate post about the other news storming across the LGBT world today: Jodie Foster’s sorta-kinda-maybe coming out, but decided that perhaps there was a connection. Bear with me a moment.

Foster was honored at the 16th annual Women in Entertainment Breakfast, in her acceptance speech, thanked “my beautiful Cydney who sticks with me through all the rotten and the bliss,” i.e., Cydney Bernard, the woman rumored to be her partner. Speculation on whether Jodie thus came out ran all over the Web. For my part, I think it’s more telling that Foster’s two sons both have “Bernard” as their middle names, news that broke last July. Given that, then yes, I think “my beautiful Cydney” is acknowledgment of a romantic relationship. Without it, well, it could be a reference to a close friend or agent. Usually, however, people don’t give both their children the names of a “close friend.” Maybe one, but not both. Still, Foster has never said “I’m a lesbian,” and without knowing how she identifies herself, I’m not going to label her.

This brings us to why Foster has stayed so private about all aspects of her personal life (a decision I respect, much as I’d love to claim her as another lesbian mom). It’s not hard to guess that Foster’s reclusiveness stems from John Hinkley, Jr.’s 1981 attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in order to impress her, and the media storm that followed. No, that wasn’t a hate crime. Given Hinkley’s deranged state, it’s arguable whether it was even a crime of passion. It was a violent crime, however, and must have played no small part in her decision to remain silent about her personal life.

Here we are then, in the week when she cracks the door open a bit, perhaps reaching a certain distance from those violent and intrusive incidents of long ago. At the same time, the House slams another door closed on the LGBT community, meaning that other violent acts may not receive the justice they deserve. No, there’s no causal connection between the two events, and the violence has different motivations. But violence, closets, fear, secrecy, and intolerance are bouncing around my head tonight, in various combinations, and I can’t quite disconnect them all.

If Foster has made peace with who she is, I applaud her. If we were all that comfortable with ourselves, there would be no need for hate crimes laws, made to stop those whose fears and insecurities cause them to lash out at others.

In this season of peace, then, here’s wishing the new year brings us more of it, for ourselves, our country, and our world.