Beyond Crisis Management
(An indictment against immediate gratification)

Starting the year 2006 with an average murder rate of greater than one per day in the city of brotherly love, there's little debate about whether or not something drastic is needed in Philadelphia to address this problem of raging murders.
So I can not be critical of Mayor Street for contemplating a request for assistance from the PA State Troopers and the PA National Guard in this effort. This is a response to the realization that past measures have not been effective in controlling the murder rate. Another way of putting this is that everything that has been tried in the past has failed. Unfortunately, sending in "the troops" is a measure that says you can get what you want through force or the threat of force. If this is the only response that were to receive serious effort and funding then we essentially disqualify ourselves as honest advocates of non-violence, anger management, conflict resolution, etc. It would be completely hypocritical, but, sadly typical for us to publicly and financially abandon precepts that we try to instill in the youth. Incidentally, because the vast majority of these murders that have constituted this crisis were unlikely a part of any organized affront, it's unclear how the presence of the guard or state troopers could be expected to impact the problem in a positive way. But, understandably, something has to be done

There must be a recognition across the board that the real problems are ignorance, ineffective communication, and a love for immediate gratification. The perpetrators of violent crimes have surrendered to the idea that they are incapable of achieving their goal(s) by other means and they do not have the patience to explore other options. Government officials routinely set poor examples when it comes to resolving conflict.Countries go to war primarily due to the ineptitude of their leaders. Unless a country or a person is acting in self defense, then violence is an admission of inadequacy. It says that the victims' power over the perpetrator is so great that the victims' existence detracts from the perpetrators' existence.
I do understand that something has to be done. But I suggest that while we are in crisis mode we take advantage of an opportunity to amass support for attacking the underlying causes of these manifestations of ineptitude and hopelessness. While the shadow of these tragedies looms overhead let's take advantage of the momentum that they have spawned. As potential victims of senseless crime, perhaps we should all focus our imaginations on a day when crime prevention is actually focused on preventing crime as opposed to dealing with suspects, perpetrators, and convicts. In order for that to happen we will have to address the ignorance that limits the arsenal of many people for dealing with conflicts. We will also need to address the affinity for immediate solutions to complex questions.

There are hotlines for people who are contemplating suicide, people relapsing into drug abuse or thinking about it, and for women who decide that they don't want there newborn infants. Is there a hotline for a person to call when they're hotter than the line and angry enough to be contemplating a violent resolution to a problem that is obviously resolvable by other means? If so, is there adequate funding given to this preventative tool, comparable to say the "safe streets" project, which incidentally, I'm in favor of? And, if there is, are people aware of its existence?

There are numerous measures that could be implemented that would address a culture of crime as opposed to apprehension of those who've already perpetrated offenses and smoke and mirrors "tough on crime" penalties. District attorney Lynn Abraham surprised me by acknowledging that law enforcement alone cannot resolve these issues. I applaud her for stating that on at least two occasions. But it's time for lawmakers to catch on to this and really run with it aggressively. If leaders are not proactive about addressing fundamental causal factors, then who's expected to step up? Cries for more police are cries of surrender!

Today I was propositioned by a person seeking DL men to interview for a book he's in the process of writing. I could have just said no, like the anti-drug slogan. But why just say no? Why waste the opportunity to add a reason? Well the door was openened and the following is my reply:

Thanks for opening up the opportunity for me to let you know that I absolutely do not fit the type you're looking for. Being DL is a selfdeprecatory, self-defeating phenomenon. It disgusts me to the core that people would limit where they go, who they associate with, and whose alliance they have in order to appease a segment of the population that hates their guts. The DL population promotes and supports people in power (politicians, preachers, etc), who, many times, might very well be getting theirs in privately, while publicly supporting policies that slowly detract from the ability of gays and lesbians right to live in peace. When I think of DL men, I visualize an undercover homosexual standing idly while he observes a fatal gay bashing. That's just what comes to my mind.

So the moral of the story is, don't come at me for an interview too early in the morning. Just kidding. Now I don't live in a vacuum. I know that there are numerous reasons that men choose to live on the low. But underlying each of these reasons is cowardice. This fact should at least be acknowledged. Instead being DL is insanely viewed as a badge of honor in some circles of the gay community. This is ironic since it is actually the epitome of acquiescence to shame. Unfortunately, the DL phenomenon, in my opinion, threatens to usher the gay community in a regressive march towards a time when homosexuals were treated much worse.

I'm also aware of the marketability of the topic these days. I can't blame a person for trying to make a buck. But capitalizing on a groups' mass neurosis or psychosis seems to me a bit sinister. It's true to say that the DL phenomenon is what it is, so writing about it or doing third rate flicks about it is merely telling the story. But it's not telling the entire story and it's doing nothing to mitigate the unfortunate status quo. Keeping who you are under wraps, makes it easier for those so inclined to continue making your life miserable. Your co worker might not be so frivolous with anti-gay rhetoric, or anecdotes, if he or she knew that the supervisor is gay. But the sup is on the low. And the straight supervisor might not be so tolerant of inappropriate anti-gay slurs if he knew that his son's gay or that his manager's gay. One may never know because for the time being it's "to the rear MARCHING" towards oppression and silence to the beat of a self perpetuating drum of defeat.