_______________ MY SON, THE CROSS-DRESSER BY LISEN STROMBERG (05/27/98)
	Having just read an article about a 3-and-a-half-year-old boy who is in touch with his feminine side -- so much that he cross-dresses -- made me reflect on my childhood. I too was in touch with my feminine side. I never crossed-dressed (except when I did "Rocky Horror" in high school), but I did have more "girl-like" traits than the average boy. I enjoyed playing baseball, but not enough to want to be on a team. I enjoyed playing G.I. Joe, but not enough to want any of my own G.I. Joe toys. But I really enjoyed watching old movies, particularly musicals. Singing those great songs of yesteryear while helping my mom cook in the kitchen. I was always "one of the girls." In junior high and high school, I was sometimes the only boy in a group of teenage girls hanging out at the mall, or at the park. This never changed. Two weeks ago, I was the only man at a bachelorette party. I was there as the "chauffeur," but I was clearly welcome to join the party any time I wanted. (Respectfully, I kept my distance ... most of the time -- but I did go to the bridal shower!) Being "one of the girls," I learned about hair, nails and makeup (instead of football, wrestling and hockey), which was fine with me but (as I didn't learn until after entering adulthood) practically KILLED my parents. When I was a teenager, my ever-so-supportive mother would corner me every Tuesday night to watch the TV show "Brothers" (under the guise of "quality time"). It is a TV show about three brothers, hence the name of the show. The oldest is the "blue collar" one, the middle is the "businessman" restaurant owner and the youngest is the "baby brother" who gets life advice from his older siblings (a mirror of my then-current family setup). The youngest brother also happens to be gay. Every week after the show, my mom would give me the "If any of you boys were gay, I would still love you just the same" speech. This went straight over my head. I told her, "I know you would, Mom," figuring she just needed reassurance that she was a good parent. (The fact that I spent an hour every morning fixing my hair in the mirror while humming the soundtrack to "My Fair Lady" never entered my mind.) Because my mother was EXTREMELY jealous whenever my older brothers brought girlfriends home, I never brought home mine. (I did bring female "buddies" over, but that was different.) It never occurred to me that my parents had NO IDEA that I was dating. Now that I am older, and married (I've been with my wife for almost 9 years now), my adolescence is kind of a family joke. My mom says I was just more "evolved" that the typical boy. I still spend an hour fixing my hair in the morning (it's waist length), and I still love to cook, and I still love musicals, but now I know a lot of other men who like the same thing. In my spare time I work on The Great American Screenplay, and have done hair and makeup for my community theater, and hope someday to direct independent films. I am also a househusband. I take care of my home as well as any housewife. (I do work part-time outside of the house, building custom PCs and setting up small LANs.) I think my life turned out as good as it did because my parents didn't make a big deal out of my behavior and didn't try to make me "act like a boy." They allowed me to discover who I was as a person, and for that I am eternally grateful. I have a feeling that the little boy in that article may just turn out to be the next Ralph Lauren. -- T.D. Shadow I enjoyed reading Lisen Stromberg's article about her cross-dressing 3-and-a-half-year-old son. It sounds as if she has a fabulous son, and he is lucky to have parents who are not attempting to limit or suppress him. I think that it is important that he know that his family loves and supports him in the event that he does encounter difficulties as he grows older. Children who are subjected to discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion or gender usually have family members who are similarly situated and can provide support. By contrast, gay, lesbian and gender-bending kids often perceive and/or find that their family rejects them, and have nowhere to turn when confronted with prejudice. It is heartening to read of parents and schoolteachers who allow a child to still be a child, rather than a prisoner to arbitrary gender roles. I agree with the writer's gay friend that much of the negative reaction is tied to homophobia, specifically fear that her son is or will be gay, and related bigotry. It is acceptable for children to pick on feminine boys, but not masculine girls. This is especially true for boys, who are encouraged to be aggressive and even violent, in the name of gender roles. With love and support, the 3-and-a-half-year-old cross-dresser will make a fine addition to the gay team, the straight team or even a new team. Last year I saw the film "Ma Vie en Rose" with my two boyfriends. It is a wonderful film about a cross-dressing boy who identifies more as a girl, and the ensuing difficulties he and his family face. It was a beautiful film about the joys and difficulties of being a child, similar to "My Life as a Dog" and "The Little Princess." At the end of the film, I was shocked and upset to learn that the film was rated "R," rather than the "G" rating or, at most, "PG," which it should have received. It is clear that the film was restricted based on the gender issues alone. While the subject matter may have discouraged people from seeing the film, the rating added an additional barrier, which may discourage and prevent adults, teens and children from seeing the film. I would also recommend "Funny Boy," by Shyam Selvadurai, another wonderful story about a gender-bending boy, and "The Last Time I Wore a Dress," by Daphne Scholinski and Jane Meredith Adams, a compelling memoir about a young woman who was forced into mental institutions in an attempt to force her to follow traditional gender roles. -- William O'Callaghan San Francisco What wonderful serendipity, to run across Lisen Stromberg's article the morning after seeing "Ma Vie en Rose," a French/Belgian film about a family trying to understand and deal with a 7-year-old son who liked to cross-dress and wanted to grow up to be a girl so he could marry the boy next door. It's a beautiful film, but written as art, not life. The screen parents are eventually broken down by community pressures, turning on their son as the source of their troubles, before regaining their capacity for unconditional love. Lisen Stromberg's article could have been a prequel (although the boy in the film had no interest in sports). I wish the Strombergs the strength to continue to nourish whatever gifts nature has bestowed upon their son and recommend to them (and anyone else who enjoyed the article) "Ma Vie en Rose." -- Robert G. Milne Victoria, British Columbia Concerning Lisen Stromberg's assertion that 3-and-a-half is "a little early to be defining one's sexual preferences," I would remind her that many homo- and bisexual persons feel that they're "different" as early as 9, and always by puberty. Sexual orientation may be genetically influenced, anyway: Is a zygote early enough? Besides, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. Stromberg should be happy she has a healthy, creative kid. A lot of people are not blessed in that way -- and how is her son going to feel when he figures out his mom doesn't necessarily welcome his little quirks? All kids are different -- why do we feel the need to rein them into an exact gender or social expectation? Love your kids, love who they are. Let them play with Barbies and trucks -- balance couldn't possibly harm them! -- Laura Maschal
_______________ THE "CONSERVATIVE RALPH NADER" BY JOSHUA MICAH MARSHALL (05/26/98)
	I read and listen to both liberal and conservative publications and news shows in order to educate myself on both sides of the fence. Your publication is the most misinformed I have come across. It would be nice if you would try and get your facts straight, not just your "cover Clinton's ass" slant on them. The article by Joshua Micah about Larry Klayman was another misinformation piece. You left out any details of why a lawsuit was filed, and had I been in a similar position as Mr. Klayman, I would have done the same. Shame on you. Are you really so blind that you can't see that the "most ethical administration" has sold encryption codes and encryption hardware to the Communist Chinese (who, by the way, have made no bones about how much they hate the U.S.A.)? -- Wendy Ritchie Joshua Micah Marshall poses a number of very good questions regarding editorial responsibility in his insightful piece on Larry Klayman. Now I would like the editors of Salon to be asked the same tough questions regarding the psychotic ravings of Camille Paglia. A delusional spite-monger is a delusional spite-monger regardless of whether his or her twisted belief system and concomitant vitriol is directed at President Clinton or, as in the case of Paglia, anything within flailing distance of her stubby arms. I do not raise this issue to defend the so called New Age -- but aren't those desperate, crystal-clutching seekers of the Wisdom of the Mall too easy of a target -- like shooting dolphin-safe tuna in a hot tub? The same cultural lowering of critical thinking that created the New Age movement has also given rise to the likes of Paglia. It is my belief that Salon has outgrown her. -- Phil Rockstroh I see yet another far-right apologist has tried the old "where there's smoke, there's fire" bit in regard to the constant and vicious right-wing attacks on Clinton: hinting not-so-subtly that there must be some basis in fact if these charges are "sticking," as he says. Of course, that was the whole point of the article: Even the most ridiculous charges have "legs" simply because, as Anthony Lewis said in the New York Times back in December 1997, the right-wingers making them "have the power of money to spread their lies" -- and the media "credibility" that can only come with having your own "experts" (in the guise of "objective" commentators) expensively spread all over the media. If Mr. William A. Ryan is truly concerned about objective reporting -- as opposed to trying to cast doubts on both Clinton's and Salon's integrity -- I strongly suggest he read the back issues of Nieman Reports, the world's oldest and finest journalism peer-review magazine. He'll find plenty of evidence to support Salon's claims concerning the virtual conspiracy against Bill Clinton -- and the incredibly bad job done by the mainstream media in covering it. -- Tamara Baker SALON | June 1, 1998