According to the New York Times, the District of Columbia has the lowest pay gap between male and female workers in the country, compared to the 50 states. From NYT: "in the District of Columbia, the median weekly wage of full-time women workers is 96.5 percent of that for their male counterparts, far and away the most parity in the country." The U.S. average is 80.2 percent; Louisiana women are trailing the rest of the country, making only 65 percent of men's wages. Some other local stats: Virginia women make 80.4 percent of what Virginia men do; Maryland women make 87.3 percent. Of course, in this contest, we're a tiny urban area competing with states filled with urban, suburban, and rural areas—so this is likely more a triumph for cities than it is for the District.

Photo via George Eastman House

*D.C.'s AIDS rate is higher than that of any U.S. state. Our AIDS rate is approximately 10 times that of the U.S. in general.

* D.C.'s AIDS rate is higher than these major cities: Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Detroit, and Chicago.

* From 2004 to 2008, 3,312 new AIDS cases were diagnosed in D.C. African-Americans accounted for 86 percent of those cases.

* New AIDS cases are decreasing: From 2004 to 2007, newly-diagnosed AIDS cases decreased from 164 to 137 cases. From 2007 to 2008, they decreased from 137 to 107 cases.

* In 2008, 4.7 percent of African-Americans in D.C. were HIV-positive. "The burden of disease among blacks/African Americans in DC is especially high," the CDC reports. "In 2008, blacks/African Americans represented 55% of DC's population, but accounted for 78% of those living with HIV infection and 86% of newly diagnosed AIDS cases."

* The risk to African-American women is extreme: Of new AIDS cases diagnosed in D.C., 94 percent of women diagnosed were African-American, compared to 82 percent of men.

* HIV testing is increasing: From 2005 to 2007, surveys showed that the percentage of D.C. citizens who had been tested for HIV in the past year rose from 15 percent to 19 percent. But the surveying method has a serious flaw: It only includes adults with landlines, not those who only have cell phones.

* More people in D.C. are testing positive for HIV: From 2004 to 2008, the "number of persons testing positive" for HIV in D.C. increased by 353 percent, from 246 in 2004 to 1,115 in 2008.

* Free HIV tests are significantly more available: From 2004 to 2008, "publicly funded HIV tests" increased by 335 percent. Free tests increased by 415 percent for African-Americans.

* How the D.C. Department of Health's anti-HIV initiatives may be working: "Although the causes of the improvement in these indicators are unknown and cannot be linked to any specific intervention, they suggest improvements in the delivery of HIV testing and linkage to care services in DC," the CDC reports. These efforts include "enhanced collaborations, working with D.C. residents as spokespersons for local marketing campaigns and creating toolkits for health-care providers to expand HIV testing and linkage to care."

* Where to go from here: The CDC recommends that "ongoing and increased HIV testing and efforts to ensure linkage to care are warranted." I'd say so.

It's 11 a.m. on Tuesday, and anti-abortion activist Reverend Pat Mahoney has arrived at Washington, D.C.'s downtown Planned Parenthood health center with the intention of getting arrested. But first, he has to warm up the crowd.

"For the first time in the history of Washington, D.C., they have banned and prohibited prayer on a public sidewalk,” Mahoney announces to the crowd of television cameras, microphones, and note-pads jockeying for position around him. "Men and women who have prayed here for years have been threatened with arrest. . . We're going to pray here today! And if it means going to jail, then we're going to file a federal civil rights lawsuit against D.C. in order to keep praying!"

Commander Hilton Burton, of the D.C. police's Special Operations Division, has been dispatched to handle Mahoney's public display—and if necessary, arrest him. Mahoney agrees to give Burton ten minutes to confer with his supervisors before the Reverend attempts to perform the stunt that will likely get him handcuffed. Mahoney is happy to claim some extra time to play to his audience.

"As I just informed the Commander, this is just as much a disgrace as the 'White-Only' signs put up during the civil rights movement," Mahoney announces. As he stalls for the cops, additional press file in to jot down his statements and assemble more video recording equipment. Local anti-abortion activists file in with cameras of their own. Several more police officers report to the scene. A reporter fits a microphone into the pocket of  Mahoney's brown jacket. He grins. "If you speak to me,” he informs the crowd, “Just remember, I’m miked!”

The spectacle was two months in the making. It started with a fence. On April 2, the Planned Parenthood Association of D.C. was granted a fence permit to build a "42'' wrought iron steel fence" in front of its clinic at 1108 16th Street NW. Once Mahoney got wind of the construction, he sensed an opportunity to make himself heard.

Mahoney, who heads up the Christian Defense Coalition, doesn't take issue with the fence itself. He's more concerned with what lies beyond the gates: A 40-foot-long grassy entranceway with a paved center walkway that women must traverse in order to receive Planned Parenthood's reproductive health services, which include abortions. For years, anti-abortion activists have come to the turf to pray, confront patients, and attempt to convince pregnant women not to abort. The fence, equipped with signs reading “Private Property. No Trespassing. Violators Will be Prosecuted,” threatens to keep the activists at a distance. And D.C. police officers threaten to arrest anyone who dares protest inside the gates.

Mahoney contends that the space is public property, and he's had James Henderson, an attorney with the American Center for Law and Justice, investigate the issue with the Office of Tax and Revenue,  the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, and the District Department of Transportation in order to prove it. Planned Parenthood reps maintain that the property is theirs to police. “ At the 16^th Street health center, where Planned Parenthood also provides abortion care, our patients are typically met with and often harassed by people opposed to legal abortion," Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington CEO Laura Meyers said in a statement. "The fence serves to protect the health center and our patients from violations of DC trespassing laws while still allowing those who are opposed to legal abortion to exercise their First Amendment rights and express their views along the sidewalk." (The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs did not return calls for comment).

So, why not just pray on the sidewalk outside the fence? "It’s better access,"explains  Erik Whittington of Rock for Life, an anti-abortion initiative targeted at teens. Whittington says he's prayed outside the clinic “at least once a year" since 1995. “I’ve been up there next to the door, I've been up on the grass leading prayer circles," he reminisces. "For women who are coming here to have an abortion, they're walking up on that public property for about 15 seconds. . . Forty feet is a long way.”

Now, D.C.'s anti-abortion activists are forced to set up shop on the main 16th Street sidewalk, where it's difficult to even identify women seeking clinic services until they're already out of earshot. "You don’t really have enough time to talk to them that way," says Dick Retta, an anti-abortion activist who is familiar with the disputed terrain. "Outside the fence, you've only got maybe three to four seconds."

The fence may have been a bust for local sidewalk counselors. But as Mahoney knows, having your speech rights curbed in even a tiny section of the District can get a lot of people to pay attention to what you have to say.

Capital City Public Charter School students Keonie Smith, 17, and Clara Lincoln, 14, created the above video to show the support of gay rights among their peers at the Columbia Heights school. Prepare to clutch your pearls, wingnuts: The video was made as part of a school geometry project meant to apply logical proofs to real-life issues. Lincoln on the effort: "We want people on the fence or who oppose this issue to see that youth really do care about gay rights. And for those who support the issue, we want them to know that a multicultural group of students back them up."

When same-sex marriage was legalized in D.C. this March, Mike Newman offered himself up to officiate local gay marriages free-of-charge. Since them, Newman has wedded 44 of the District's same-sex couples—and one opposite-sex pair. Here's a taste of the ceremonies he's seen:

* "Most of them I’d describe as sort of guerrilla-style," Newman says of the typical same-sex wedding he's been called to officiate.  "We'll find a public space and do a ceremony that lasts only a minute or two . . . most of the the time it's just the couple says," he says. Newman, 43, says his officiant style is likely to attract more casual couples: "I'm obviously not a wedding professional, and I made it known I'm up for doing this wherever, whenever," he says.

* Also turning to Newman: Couples who don't want to get hassled by mainstream officiants of unknown tolerance level. "A lot of people I’ve spoken to are used to seeing a lot of discrimination. If they just make a blind phone call to an officiant and it comes out that it's a gay wedding, it can turn out to be a big deal," says Newman. "I'm vocal about wanting to perform these weddings, so they know right away it's not a problem."

* Since March, Newman has performed same-sex weddings in front of the Capitol, outside the U.S. Botanic Garden, in various local restaurants, on the roof of the Newseum, and in his own Capitol Hill living room. "A lot of people just drop by my house," says Newman."We've done half-a-dozen or so in my home, either in the living room or in the backyard," he says.

* Since March, Newman has also lent his services to a couple of heterosexuals. "I’ve performed one opposite-sex marriage in the past few months," says Newman. "It was a couple who said they were waiting to get married until their friends could get married, so it was a part of the same trend."

* On the first day same-sex marriage was legal in D.C., Newman performed eight weddings. Now the demand has tricked down to about one wedding a week. As demand has gone down, Newman's rate has increased. "I have recently started charging for the weddings," says Newman. As of a few weeks ago, the current going rate for his services is about $50 a pop. He's also recently taken on an apprentice—Newman recently endorsed his wife to become an officiant, as well.

Photo via Mike Newman

Last year, a friend of mine moved from D.C. to Philadelphia. After a year in Philly, she noticed something odd: "I don't get street harassed. At all. Ever." She writes:

So I've been in Philly close to a year now, and I've noticed something here that I wanted to talk to you about: I don't get street harassed. At all.  Ever.  I know it does happen here, I've heard stories from lady friends, from dudes with girlfriends, on the news.  However, I've walked around a lot of different neighborhoods in shorts, skirts, and tank tops here and no one has ever said anything to me.  Like, I've walked down the sidewalk towards a group of men, braced myself for a comment, and then not even gotten a "hello."  It is awesome.

I'm sure it has a lot to do with the fact that a) Philly is super affordable and I spend most of my time in relatively safe, middle-class areas and b) I drive a lot more often than I walk or take public transit.  But still, in DC you get comments in all neighborhoods, and even when driving I would get guys pulling up next to me in their cars and saying shit.  Not here.

Anyway, so I think this might be why you get so much resistance when you write about street harassment.  Outside of DC it's uncommon for men on the street to proposition you or touch you.  I can see now how someone wouldn't understand how a "compliment" can be threatening—it just doesn't happen in most other cities.  Have you heard this from anyone else outside DC?  Any idea why?

So: Has anybody else lived in an area that's seemingly devoid of street harassment? Um . . . any vacancies?

Photo via the Library of Congress

The District expects to register six-to-twelve inches of snowfall today. Winds are clocking at up to 40 miles an hour. The government is closed. Classes are canceled. Road conditions are hazardous. You want to pass the time by fucking. But is it safe?

A tipster for We Love D.C. reports that at least one District Safeway's condom selection was so decimated from the blizzard supply rush that only Magnums were left on the shelf (plenty of lube, though). Snogasm, indeed. Will D.C.'s near-record snowfall present a heightened risk for unintended pregnancies and STD transmission among antsy residents?

So far, at least, the condom rush has yet to extend to the District's most pervasive condom provider, CVS Pharmacy. Perhaps the chain's signature security click-boxes are fortified enough to prevent a quick clearing of the shelves: I called several CVS locations to check on their availability, and many claimed to be stocked with the full cornucopia of reproductive health products. The Dupont Circle CVS (6 Dupont Circle NW) boasts a full condom stock and will be open 24 hours throughout the storm; a clerk at the Adams Morgan CVS (1750 Columbia Rd. NW) promises the store will stay open until 10 p.m. As for AdMo's prophylactic stock: "Yes, we have a lot, honey," she insists.

The larger condom concern, of course, lies in the Southeast quadrant, home to the District's highest HIV/AIDS rate and the lowest concentration of pharmacies. One Southeast CVS (661 Pennsylvania Ave. SE) is currently operating and stocked with condoms—but the clerk who answered the phone said she couldn't promise the store would keep its doors open throughout the storm. One Anacostia CVS location (2646 Naylor Road SE) also plans to close early, at a time TBD. That store's condom stock isn't as healthy—"we have a few," says an employee—but the store doesn't anticipate having to turn anyone away from protection. "They're not running out," she says. "Nobody's buying them at the moment." CVS's second store across the river (3240 Pennsylvania Ave. SE) wasn't answering the phone when I called; a nearby Safeway pharmacy (2845 Alabama Ave. SE) also wasn't talking.

If your local pharmacy is closed or running low on condoms, the D.C. Department of Health points condom-seekers to the long list of community partners who distribute free condoms to District residents. While the D.C. government is closed today, some of D.C.'s condom partners may still be shilling rubbers gratis. But make sure to call ahead. "They're not government run, so they're probably opening and closing on their own accord right now," says a DOH rep. The list includes 37 locations in NW, 29 in SE, 14 in NE, and four in SW. The DOH also directs frisky residents can also text "DCWRAP" (followed by their zip code) to 365247 for a list of the nearest participating locations. The DCWRAP text line may be closed today, as well: I texted twice. I got nothin'.

But what of the residents who aren't able to brave the wind, sleet, and snow to reach one of these rubber providers? Call up DC Snacks, one of the Department of Health's condom distribution partners, who will deliver free condoms to your door—along with your order of Cheetos, cigarettes, or Chipwiches, of course.

Snack delivery entrepreneur Matt Mandell says that DC Snacks was open for business until about 10 p.m. last night. He hopes to resume delivery service again this evening, provided that the snow slows enough to ensure safe conditions for his delivery fleet. Since most DC Snacks snacks are delivered on bicycle, tonight's service depends on whether the main city arteries get plowed. "Our people on bikes can usually ride until we hit about six inches of snow, and then it's hard to get traction. That's when we pretty much closed," says Mandell. Mandell doesn't like to be closed. "We'll do our best. In some areas, we'll have to walk the bike. Some areas we can do it by motorized transportation . . . if it's close enough, we'll try to walk it there," he says. "I'm almost positive we're going to be open tonight."

If DC Snacks is operational this evening, be sure to take advantage of the extras. "There are always people who request that we throw a bunch of condoms in the bag," says Mandell. "We will definitely do that."

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

Today's Economist graph ran the numbers on the prevalence of same-sex households across the United States. According to the data, collected by the Williams Institute, Washington, D.C. has the highest concentration of gay households—14 out of 1,000. If that number sounds small to you, keep in mind that the data excludes single gay men and women. This study is only concerned with American households run by gay couples.

D.C. far outstrips the national average. In America, only 4.7 per 1,000 households are run by gay couples who identify each other as either "spouse" or "partner." D.C.'s number are nearly double the second-highest jurisdiction, Maine, which boasts a rate of 8.3 per 1,000. Compare those numbers to the roster of states that can't even muster up three gay households per 1,000: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia.

I'm sure that plenty of fundies (do fundies read the Economist?) will look at this graph and say, "I knew it. All the gays are concentrated in those godless coastal areas, but at least they're staying away from good 'ol Alabama." But what the graph actually indicates is how many closeted gays are living lives of quiet desperation (or having hot, anonymous sex) right in the conservatives' backyards. As one commenter writes:

Unfortunately this graph can easily mislead. A distribution map of gay couples is really showing where gay relationships are more socially (and legally) acceptable, not where 'gayness' itself resides. A social conservative in Idaho may see this graph and comfort himself that he and his state are "safe" and that there is no need to acknowledge, much less accommodate homosexuality. The tragic story of Senator Craig demonstrates how mistaken this can be.

The Economist notes that the very action of legalizing same-sex marriages or civil unions tends to encourage coupling up. "Those states where gay marriage is legal or where same-sex partnerships are recognised have a higher proportion of same-sex couples than the national average of 4.7," says the magazine. If a state recognizes same-sex coupledom, it either inspires an influx of out-of-state gays, or encourages locals to come out as couples. Which means that if D.C.'s gay marriage legislation is passed, our fair city may stand to get even gayer. Take that, haters.

(You can read the full Williams Institute study here [PDF]).

The authors of the D.C. gay marriage bill are sensitive folks. While they’re eager to grant gays and lesbians the right to get hitched in the District, they don’t want to upset conservative churches in town. So they threw an exemption into the pending gay-marriage bill [PDF]: No church will be obligated to wed same-sexers. It’s a ceremonial loophole that’s not nearly wide enough for the D.C. arm of the Catholic Church. “The language of the bill only protects us on the day of,” says Susan Gibbs, communications director for the Archdiocese of Washington. “But for us, that day is the launching point for the rest of your life. It’s not a day-long event. It’s a life-long journey.”

Translation: The Archdiocese wants to discriminate against gays and lesbians for much longer than just 24 hours. And that’s their problem with the legislation—same-sex spouses must be treated equally over the course of that life-long journey, for purposes of hiring practices, employment benefits, and adoption.

Yet for that one glorious day, when those bells chime, discrimination rules! The legislation says any “religious society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious society” may deny same-sex couples any “services, accommodations, facilities, or goods for a purpose related to the solemnization or celebration of a same-sex marriage.”

So just what sort of “services, accommodations, facilities, or goods” can be safely withheld here? The following is your guide to Legal Same-Sex Wedding Day Discrimination.

• PIANISTS. The “facility” exemption prevents a church opposing same-sex marriage from providing its religious sanctuary for the wedding. But what goods and services are we talking about? The goods and services provision prevents a crafty same-sex couple from walking into a house of God and demanding everything but the church hall for the purpose of their ceremony: From the in-house organist playing “Here Comes the Bride” to the Bibles used to recite Colossians 3:18: “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”

Russell J. Weismann, Georgetown University’s director of music and liturgy, serves as the organist for all weddings performed on campus. The Yale-, Duquesne-, and Carnegie Mellon–educated pianist doesn’t play for just anyone: Besides not being gay, couples who march down the aisle to Weismann’s tune must also be Georgetown students, alumni, faculty, or staff. The religious exemption, then, ensures that Weismann’s services won’t need to be legally extended to a couple of Catholic, Georgetown-educated gays who are either serious Weismann fans, or are just trying to make a point.

Councilmember Phil Mendelson, who chairs the committee that finalized the bill’s language, says that goods and services are included in the religious exemption in order to prepare for just such unlikely scenarios. “If a same-sex couple went to a Catholic church, the bill says the church does not have to perform their wedding,” says Mendelson. “But what if the same-sex couple says, ‘We won’t hold our wedding in your sanctuary, but we want to use your Bibles and candles’? If ‘goods and services’ were omitted from the language, the church could be sued over the Bibles and the candles.” And the pianist.

• SOUL FOOD. Saint’s Paradise, a divine cafeteria-style restaurant located at 601A M St. NW, is the perfect spot for a rehearsal dinner in the heart of overpriced, overcrowded downtown D.C.: It’s got family-sized tables, free cornbread, and a very pleasant view of the baptism fountain of the United House of Prayer for All People. The church, true to its name, doles out its extra-sweet candied yams to churchgoers and the general public alike.

That “all people” invitation doesn’t extend to weddings. Pastor Herbert Whitner clarifies the church’s position on gay marriage: “We don’t agree with that,” Whitner says. Same-sex celebrations aren’t exactly welcome on United House of Prayer property.

Rehearsal dinners, however, aren’t strictly a day-of event—they’re more of a night-before kind of thing. Mendelson says the cafeteria’s physical proximity to the church—the restaurant is at 601A, the house of God is at 601—allows the United House of Prayer to deny all wedding-related celebrations, regardless of their timestamp. “I think they could turn away the rehearsal dinner,” Mendelson says. “That’s because it is in the church. It’s a part of the church facility. And since the rehearsal dinner is part of the celebration of marriage, they would be able to say no.”

• “SOMETHING OLD.” The Salvation Army’s sole District shop, located in Northeast’s H Street corridor, wouldn’t be high on the list of any couple’s wedding destinations. Its aisles are a bit cluttered for a procession, seating is limited, and the place smells kind of weird.

What some engaged couples may not know: Beyond its work recycling consumers’ castaways, the Salvation Army is a real functioning Christian church with a penchant for military jargon. Their ministers—“officers” in the Army’s ranks—can be ordained to perform marriages for both Salvationist and non-Salvationist couples. Salvationist marriages are less than traditional. Ranking Salvationist officers are allowed to marry only other officers. Cake is allowed, so long as the couple says grace before the meal, but alcohol is forbidden. Some Salvationists choose to marry in full Army regalia, but the traditional white wedding dress is acceptable, as well. And since the Salvationist moral code is all about giving back, it’s not unlikely that one of these Salvationist ceremonies will lead to one slightly worn, dirt-cheap white dress gracing the racks at 1375 H St. NE.

Since a wedding dress is a good that’s used in the celebration of a same-sex marriage, and the Salvation Army’s religious beliefs clarify that “sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage,” would the Army’s thrift store be forced to sell a wedding dress for a gay wedding?

Mendelson says that a religious-owned thrift shop is too removed from the actual church, and a wedding dress purchase too removed from the ceremony, for the exemption to apply to wedding-related retail: “The bill is intended to establish equality for same-sex marriage. If we have exemptions in the sale of wedding dresses, in the baking of wedding cakes, in catering, in photography, then we have a separate and not equal situation.”

Besides, how would the Salvation Army know that the wedding dress is to be used for a same-sex ceremony? “For wedding dresses to be covered, we’d have to allow the checker at the store to say, ‘I’m offended that you’re homosexual so therefore I will not sell you the wedding dress,’” says Mendelson. “A wedding dress could be a part of a Halloween costume. You can’t just stop anyone who is a part of a same-sex couple and say, ‘No, you can’t buy that.’”

Since the Salvation Army hasn’t adopted “don’t ask, don’t tell” as a part of its military shtick, it’s possible that the organization’s thrift shops will not hold their peace in the face of a same-sex marriage dress-fitting. This situation—the Salvation Army making policy out of denying white dresses to same-sex couples—is about as likely as a couple of gay men suing Georgetown over its pianist. Then again, in 2001, the Salvation Army privately called upon the Bush administration to help the organization discriminate against gays and lesbians in hiring. Who’s to say the Army won’t take this opportunity to deny an affordable wedding dress to a lesbian?

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

Good news: Yesterday, a revised draft of the marriage bill was released that will retain domestic partnerships (for now, at least). Bad news: the revised bill also allows churches to refuse to make their facilities available for those same-sex couples who actually are into that whole "marriage" business.

The Washington Blade reports on the DP "tweaks":

During the committee’s two days of hearings, Catania said he was open to removing language he placed in the bill that called for ending the city’s registration of new domestic partnerships after January 2010. Catania noted that he put the provision in the bill because most states that have legalized same-sex marriage have ended existing domestic partnership or civil unions programs on grounds that most same-sex couples prefer marriage.

But a number of witnesses, including officials with the Gay & Lesbian Activists Alliance and lesbian rights attorney and American University law professor Nancy Polikoff, urged the Council to remove the “sunset” clause for domestic partnerships from the marriage bill. These witnesses suggested that the Council take up the domestic partnerships issue at a later date and through separate legislation.

Right now, we're focused on securing marriage equality, and that's an extremely important step. But hopefully, by the time the council gets around to considering domestic partnerships, we'll be able to look beyond marriage and consider our other options on their own merits. Even when same-sex marriages are recognized, we will still need to address how some marriage rights discriminate against those couples and singles who opt out of the institution. Right now, it may be true that "most same-sex couples prefer marriage," but I believe that may begin to change as the institution evolves and more options are made socially acceptable. A lot of people just don't want to get married, period, and they shouldn't have to do so to get their rights.

On to the religious side:

On the religious exemption provision, Catania’s original bill noted that “a religious organization, association or society, or a nonprofit organization which is operated, supervised, or controlled by” a church or religious group “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, facilities or goods” for the purpose of performing any marriage “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public.”

The revised bill removes the “unless the entity makes such services, accommodations, or goods available … to members of the general public” language.

Seeing as I would never be interested in getting married in one of these God-forsaken places anyway, this language is less important to me personally. But it's extremely unsettling that the council's bill includes an allowance for religious institutions to discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation. The provision, at the very least, serves as a reminder that even when same-sex marriage is legal, marriage will still be fucked up in a lot of ways. Why not just opt out and go for a domestic partnership?

The D.C. Council's Committee on Health recently completed a survey of about 250 District high school students' thoughts on sex ed. The results reveal some interesting rifts between the male and female sex ed experience. Below, differing perspectives on sex ed—from condom use to LGBT acceptance—from the District's young men and women. (You can read the full study here [PDF]).

According to the study, young women expressed a greater interest—and perhaps difficulty—in speaking openly about personal sexual issues:

[Y]outh asked for information about how to engage a partner in a discussion about his or her sexual history. Some female participants also want to be able to discuss more personal issues with health educators and used the focus groups to ask questions such as, "What do you do when sometimes when you're having sex and it hurts, but at the same time, you know what I mean—it feels good?"

Young women also voiced an increased difficulty in speaking with their parents about sex:

Youth reported speaking to their parents about sex, but many said the experience was uncomfortable—though male participants reported an easier time talking about sex with their parents than the female participants. Youth also believe that their parents "may not know what to say."

Additionally, the girls in the study were more likely to desire an increased visibility for GLBTQ issues in the sex ed curriculum:

Many youth also admit that GLBTQ youth face greater ridicule in school and in the community, especially from heterosexual males. When asked why, many youth simply responded, "they just do." Some believed that heterosexual males view male-to-male relationships as a threat to one's manhood. There did not, however, seem to be the same feelings among young heterosexual women. Overall, heterosexual female focus groups participants expressed a greater acceptance of GLBTQ youth. Several young women stated that "[gay males] are good friends because they're less catty than women."

The girls who participated in the study expressed shame in carrying condoms:

Youth participants reported that while both males and females should be responsible for having condoms, social mores can make women feel uncomfortable with carrying condoms. One youth expressed, "If I see a condom in my boyfriend's wallet that is fine, but if I see my sister with one then it's a problem . . . I am aware this is a double standard but that's how society has branded her."

Another young female explained, "I don't carry a condom and don't plan to because for one I don't hvae anywhere to put it. I sometimes don't take a puse and I don't want to be at the store pulling cash out my pocklet and a condom out at the same time." Young women are afraid that they will be judged as promiscuous by others or misunderstood by their partenr if they carry condoms. To avoid misperception, some female focus groups participants reported leaving the responsibility to their boyfriends.

While locked drugstore condoms produced shame and frustration in both male and female respondents:

Many youth also reported feeling uneasy when purchasing condoms, citing store employees as a primary source of their discomfort, embarrassment, or shame. Focus group participants discussed being uncomfortable when going into a store and having to ask for condoms from an employee, or having to retrieve them from inconvenient locations such as a click box or closed glass case with a "red button that makes a loud noise." They described this experience as "annoying" and that it alerts everyone to their "business." One youth stated, "the CVS machine to get condoms is loud and difficult to get condoms—if I can get cereal easy, why can't I get condoms like that?"

Obviously, the absence of condoms affects young women differently than it does men:

While all youth reported having knowledge about how condoms can protect against STIs and pregnancy, some reported knowing several peers who do not use condoms because either "it feels better without a condom" or "slip ups happen in the moment." For example, one young woman described her experience with a slip-up, saying, "it only took a few minutes to forget—30 seconds and now I have kids."

Photo by Darrow Montgomery

According to a recent Pew Research study, the District of Columbia has the lowest marriage rate in the country. Only 23 percent of women and 28 percent of men and in D.C. are married, compared to 48 and 52 percent nationwide. The rates in D.C. are so low that they lie entirely off the Pew map's color key. The closest states to D.C.'s numbers are Rhode Island, where 43 percent of women are married, and Alaska, where 47 percent of men are married.

Why aren't D.C. residents getting hitched?

The Pew poll offers up one possibly related figure: residents of D.C. get married significantly later in life than do the residents of the 50 states. In D.C., the median age at first marriage is 30 for women and 32 for men. In contrast, the median age for a first marriage in the state of Idaho is 24 for women and 25 for men.

Additionally, marriage rates are generally lower in urban areas than they are in rural areas. A quick review of the Pew map shows that states like Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, and the Dakotas have the highest concentration of married couples, whereas the states which host the nation's biggest cities—like New York and California—generally have a lower percentage of married people. D.C., which is all city, all the time, would clearly trend toward singledom.

But the District also has another demographic issue working against high marriage rates. In the 2000 "gay census," the District of Columbia ranked first in the nation for its percentage of same-sex couples. Same-sex couples, of course, cannot currently be married in D.C., and their out-of-state marriages became recognized in the District only recently.

If D.C.'s gay marriage bill is successful, it won't just ensure equality for all. It will also, strangely enough, make D.C. look a lot better in the eyes of conservative defenders of traditional marriage. When those people glance at a report on the strength of marriage in this country, they probably think that us heathens in the District of Columbia are singlehandedly rejecting the institution. But in a couple years, D.C. may appear significantly more married. I'm not a big proponent of the institution myself, but I can appreciate the irony there: in D.C., at least, the tradition's remaining relevance may just depend upon same-sex couples wanting to opt-in.

First, WJLA cites the obligatory statistic from a Workplace Bullying Institute (!) study—which found that "40 percent of bullies are women and of those, 70 percent target other women."

What does it all mean? Well, it means that most bullies are men, and victims of bullying are split nearly half-and-half between women and men. Now that we've established that, let's just completely ignore the facts and only interview women about how horrible it is that only women pick on only other women all the time. Ha ha, do women ever actually work?

First reporter to get six "local" quotes proving their premise wins!:

"Most men are blunt. They'll tell you how [they] feel. Women will try different methods that don't always work," said Kelly Jones, a D.C. resident. (ONE)

"I've seen a lot of cattiness," said Shari Flowers, a D.C. resident. (TWO)

"Women tend to be sort of undercutting in the workplace," added Claire Lebrun, an Arlington resident. (THREE)

And unlike many men, female victims tend to suffer in silence. "It makes you feel helpless sometimes," said Jones. (FOUR)

"It makes it harder for your job and then you feel uncomfortable coming into work," said LaShawn Jones, a D.C. resident. (FIVE)

"It just very much brings down morale," added Elissa Frankle, a Rockville resident. (SIX)

Ding ding ding! Wow, you had to go all the way out to Rockville to do it, but there you go. D.C. resident Shari Flowers has "seen a lot of cattiness," and somebody—somebody reaaaallly high up—better be in the pocket of the Workplace Bullying Industry, because if nobody is getting any kick-backs for continuing to report on this bullshit, I will be very disappointed.

This week, Metro Weekly reported on three local gay social activists who have been organizing a monthly "Guerilla Queer Bar" in D.C. for the past five years. The concept is simple: Get a bunch of gay people together, descend upon a traditionally straight bar, and declare "We're here, we're queer, we want a beer." Then, like, drink the beer.

After five years of monthly gay-on-straight beer runs, Karl Jones, Amy Mulry, and Christopher Trott are recusing themselves from organizing duties—partly because the gay nightlife scene in D.C. has really diversified over the past five years, and partly because they're getting older and they're kind of sick of partying all the time. I think they should start a new monthly night for older queer scenesters, where they descend upon a traditionally straight sit-down restaurants and politely inform their servers: "We're here, we're queer, meh, we'll just have a water."

The last D.C. Guerilla Queer Bar under the trio will be held on Friday, April 3 at an undisclosed location. Find out where by signing up for the Guerilla Queer Bar group here.

Photo by Tambako the Jaguar

Finally, the debate is over, and we may finally know who is truly to blame for HIV!

As promised, blogger Black Informant has posted a response to my response to his response to my response to his call for a debate based on my response to a blog post he wrote about the District's new HIV numbers, thus concluding our virtual tête-à-tête. Let me begin by saying that it's been a blast, and I hope that Black Informant has a great summer and never changes.

Since Black Informant's post was to be the final one in our debate, which spanned fisting, rimming, irresponsible hedonism, and the importance of a good education, I won't respond to the points he's made here. If anyone would like to weigh in in the comments—by all means. Below, I've collected the greatest hits of Black Informant's closing statement.

"Africa is dealing with an almost completely different set of cultural issues that cannot be compared to the gay and lesbian community here in the West. The only real challenge for us Westerners is deciding whether or not we are going to take it too far in the bedroom. That is a far cry of what is taking place on the African continent."

—

"If you are an adult and of sound mind, economic position in life has NOTHING to do with self-control in the bedroom. While many of the various HIV/AIDS studies out there focus exclusively on those infected with this disease, you will be hard-pressed to find a study that focuses on those who are making the right personal choices. No matter what ethnic/economic demographic you study, the majority on this issue has managed to make the right choices and steer away from risky sexual behavior."

___

"For the sake of argument, let’s say the average cost of a pack of condoms is about $10. Do you really believe that the low income folks in your district can’t afford a $10 box of condoms? “Low income” does not mean “no income“. If people really wanted to make the right choices regarding their sexual practices, do you really think that a locked display at a local drug store would deter them? If that is the case, then cigarettes must not be selling too well in DC. The low-income population in DC may have its share of problems, but stupidity isn’t one of them.

Thanks for the discussion."

Thank you!

Yesterday, I wrote a post calling out Black Informant, a blogger who called out homosexuals for the striking new HIV/AIDS numbers in the District. The blogger then proceeded to call me out, in a post titled “Calling Amanda Hess of the Washington City Paper.” Black Informant wanted to debate. Well, here we go!

I take issue with two main assertions in Black Informant's response to the new AIDS numbers. First, that the "leading cause for this HIV/AIDS jump" in D.C. was due to high-risk homosexual activity. And second, that stepping up HIV/AIDS education efforts in the District would be both fruitless and condescending, because "folks know EXACTLY how this is caused, yet they consistently choose to do the wrong thing." That "wrong thing" goes back to Black Informant's number one—gay sex.

I disagree.

From 2006 to 2008, the number of known HIV/AIDS cases in D.C. increased by 22 percent. Three percent of the District's population is now known to be infected with HIV. But the "jump" can't be attributed to D.C.'s gay community, as Black Informant states. The study notes that "Heterosexual sexual contact is quickly becoming the leading mode of transmission among all HIV/AIDS cases, already surpassing MSM among newly diagnosed AIDS cases."

That means that over the past two years, the majority of HIV/AIDS diagnoses in D.C.—the "jump" we're referring to—were a result of heterosexual contact. Not. Gay. Sex. (Check page 57 of this PDF for those figures).

If it's not the gays, then what's responsible for the jump? Another foe of Black Informant—education. HIV/AIDS infections haven't increased 22 percent in two years—infections we know about have increased. That means:

a. People are getting tested more. Three-fifths of D.C. residents knew their HIV status in 2008. Testing efforts have significantly increased since 2006, the first time the District released a full report on its HIV status. "In mid-2006, the District became the first city in the country to implement a policy of routine HIV testing, and implemented a series of measures to encourage residents to get tested and providers to normalize HIV testing as part of routine care," the study states.

b. People are getting tested earlier. A person's CD4 count is a good indicator of how far along a patient's immunodeficiency has progressed—the more CD4 you have, the better. Only 18 months after D.C. stepped up its HIV testing program in 2005, the study found that "the median first CD4 count had risen to 332, a 50 percent increase in CD4 counts since 2005." That means that more people are getting tested for HIV/AIDS while they're still healthy, before they have signs of a secondary illness indicating an immunodeficiency (a CD4 count below 200 indicates a patient has full-blown AIDS).

c. Patients are living longer. The earlier a person tests positive for HIV, the less likely they are to spread the virus to another person. But early testing helps out the positive person, too: early testing and diagnosis gives those infected with HIV a much higher chance of survival. That's why 40 to 49-year-olds make up the largest HIV/AIDS population in the District, at 7.2 percent. The longer an HIV-positive patient lives, the higher the rate of HIV will be in the District of Columbia.

The 22 percent jump in HIV/AIDS cases is due to increased testing initiatives and medical advancements in fighting the virus. Not. Gay. Sex.

But the District of Columbia can't make people get tested for HIV. To what can we attribute the increase in testing? First of all, making HIV tests easy, accessible, and free, as they are at D.C.'s Whitman Walker Clinics. Second, normalizing the testing process through education. If D.C. residents think—like Black Informant does—that AIDS is a disease for homosexuals and sexual deviants, they're less likely to be tested, and they're more likely to pass the virus on to their partners. Continuing to spread the falsehood that HIV is a gay disease is dangerous to all residents of Washington who may be at risk.

There's an advantage to the high visibility of HIV/AIDS in the gay community—gay activists have been mobilizing since the 1980's for gay men to be tested regularly for HIV. But the visibility has also hurt other at-risk populations who think that their own behavior is "normal" enough not to subject them to the "gay" disease. Now that the rest of Washington D.C. has been proven to be as at-risk as the gay community, hiding behind homophobia will only impede our efforts to make everyone—gay and straight—healthy and safe.

Okay, Black Informant. It's your turn.

Dear [Possible Donor],

Feminists have an unprecedented opportunity to move forward. At this transformational time in history, Ms. is determined to be on the frontlines, keeping feminists armed with the knowledge we need at this historic time.

Ms. is opening for the first time a Washington Bureau—and we need your help. [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help open Washington Bureau].

Our nation must and will make massive changes. But change is never easy. To help ensure it is the change we need and want, feminists must organize, organize, organize. And we must be armed with rapid fire, behind the scenes knowledge from a fearless feminist lens. Ms. is determined to meet the challenge.

We want Ms. reporters in the White House and the halls of Congress. Imagine President Obama or Speaker Pelosi calling on a Ms. national correspondent at their press conferences [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help fund questions to Nancy Pelosi].

Ms.—together with its daily online wire service and MsMagazine.com—must gear up and ratchet up its unique analysis and investigative reports. [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help fund unique analysis and investigative reports]. This is our moment. For so long we feminists have worked, picketed, and taken action for real change. We must maximize the opportunity now [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help maximize opportunity].

Please help Ms. meet the challenge of our times and establish a Washington Bureau. We can make a difference. We can reform the debate with information so powerful it cannot be denied. [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help empower undeniable information].

Please make a special, tax-deductible "This is our Moment" contribution to Ms. today. Put Ms. reporters on the frontlines. [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help fund our moment].

For a strong feminist media and future,

Katherine Spillar
Executive Editor

P.S. Please help Ms. open our first-ever Washington Bureau. [Link to page suggesting a donation of $35 to $5,000, by Visa, Mastercard, or American Express to help fund unnecessary postscripts]. Feminists must be empowered with rapid fire, behind the scenes reporting from a fearless feminist lens. Help Ms. meet the challenge and open our first-ever Washington Bureau.

As the inauguration nears, Craigslist has been a-flutter with the romantic overtures of dudes looking for inauguration ball arm-candy and other dudes looking for inauguration week couch-surfing-with-benefits. Your best bets:

* This man-seeking-man inauguration ticket offerer has a range of interests, including "hiking, backpacking, mountain biking, snowboarding, reading, writing, cooking, dining out, watching movies, dancing, exploring the city and good conversation." Could you be his other interest? "I tend to like younger, or at least youthful, intelligent, energetic, interesting, skinny/lean guys who look at the world differently," he writes. Interested parties could get more than just a dance: "I'm also well-endowed and pretty damn good in bed."

* A recent widow based in Old Town Alexandria is hungry for French cuisine—and historic dancing. "I'm thinking about meeting at the nice French Restaurant La Gaulois in Old Towne, one of my favorite places. Wine, dinner, dessert on me," he writes. "I also have passes to inaugural balls—we can talk about—if that is something you would be interested in accompanying me to." For those with discerning dinner date standards, this Virginian comes highly recommended. He is a "very nice man, no children, upscale professional, nice house in Old Towne, former military leadership position, great job with job security, 6'3'', well cultured and well traveled."

* This inauguration invite is strictly local—this ticket-holder seeks "an attractive woman who would like to go with me to the ball and maybe even the inauguration itself"—as long as she keeps it in the neighborhood. "Please live in DC near GW (like FB, Dupont, Georgetown, Logan, etc)," he writes. "I have heard that traffic is going to be horrible and don't feel like getting stood up because some bridge is closed."

* This 48-year-old inauguration week visitor seeks three days of "clean and bug free" housing for "sleeping and rejuvenating for the next day." Interested renters net $150—and perhaps "a little fun."

"One of my goals will be to pass out business cards foldable but I am trying to create. www.stopthemurders.org your picture gets mine," he writes, adding: "I am 420 friendly but cannot participate."

* This 56-year-old unemployed Philadelphian "will pay $25.00 to you, for the privilege of sleeping on your sofa for one night, Inauguration Eve." The remainder of the post bears repeating:

I will provide my own food, probably take out.

All I require is a sofa, some blankets, and a sink for shaving, brushing teeth, and washing up.

I am quiet, will not disturb your routine. I will read or watch tv with you.

I will be gone first thing in the morning and will not need to return to your home after that.

Having said that, I am not crazy about long distance relationships. but I can return the favor if you travel to Philly and perhaps a friendship could develop.

Any race, any age, any religion.

If required, I can provide a photo ID (uploaded to email) in advance of completing the arrangement.

Thanks.

Photo by soundfromwayout.

In the Blade, Lou Chibbaro Jr. runs down some of the challenges facing a ballot referendum banning gay marriage in the District. They are many: For one, 21,000 signatures is a lot.

Meanwhile, in WaTimes, Gary Emerling examines how gay-marriage advocates are “re-evaluating their strategy.” Pretty much everybody says it’s all about timing. Emerling manages to get one minister on the record, the Rev. Derrick Harkins of Nineteenth Street Baptist, who says he doesn’t think a bill “would be met with great enthusiasm on the part of the African-American church.”

Trouble viewing? Try the youtube version.

In case you haven't signed up to volunteer for the high heel race—or run it yourself—you can take in all the ostentatious glory of this pre-Halloween drag tradition tonight between P and S Streets on 17th Street. The parade up and down 17th (which will be closed) begins around 7 p.m.; the race starts at 9 p.m., and lasts about 15 minutes.

Photo of last year's race by Poldavo (Alex)

The Manliest Workplace in D.C. tournament is live! Over the next several weeks, the Sexist will be rating 64 D.C. organizations to find the manliest local workplace—the one that employs the most men, all the time, and in the highest positions. Who's manlier—the National Cathedral or the Founding Church of Scientology? The Supreme Court or the U.S. Postal Service? Only the Sexist's unsophisticated and highly arbitrary ranking system knows for sure.

Stay tuned with The Sexist as the tournament continues to see which workplaces are manly enough to ignore all those pesky cracks in the glass ceiling. Also stay tuned for Crack Watch!—where we tally the number of women we find creeping into the org. charts of D.C. institutions.

Think you know manly from mannish? Fill out a bracket by Monday, Oct. 20, to be submitted in our contest. The entrant with the bracket that most closely resembles the Sexist's findings will win a City Paper prize pack!

This weekend, I bought a new bicycle over at Phoenix Bikes, which I hear from a reliable source is D.C.'s best bike shop. The acquisition was an important one for me—I'm poor green, so I don't drive a car. And I haven't ridden a bike in earnest since I rocked a purple mountainy thing out of my parents' garage in real Phoenix, Az.

I've been riding this little blue Ross number for a day or so now, and it's been a shaky start. My legs are short and unaccustomed to the finer points of pedaling. Most of my head is obscured beneath a ridiculously oversize "skater helmet" reserved only for Tony Hawk and particularly clumsy two-year-olds. When riding, my face is plastered with a cartoonishly anxious look, revealing the sophisticated machinations of my biker's mind. "PLEASE DO NOT DOOR ME," reads my furrowed brow. "MY ASS HURTS," reveal my down-turned lips.

I look, in a word, stupid.

That hasn't stopped the District's intrepid cat-callers from working with me a little bit. When faced with the utter unattractiveness of an awkward biker, they get creative: In my short time biking the streets, I've found that the accessory elicits a new and different vocabulary from the sidewalk commentator. "Damn, would I like to be that seat!" called one, from his vantage point on a neighbor's front porch. "Girl on a girl bike! Girl on a girl bike!" another exclaimed, as I pedaled to work. "Hey! Hey hey hey hey," called another, after rolling down his window and finding, I assume, little inspiration.

So, what else can I look forward to? Have any other lady (or dude!) bikers heard some particularly interesting bike-calls?

Photo by Salim Virji

If you're feeling frisky, head over to the George Washington University's Kogan Plaza at 21st and H Sts. NW, where the "Trojan Evolve Bus" will be parked until 3 p.m. The 40-foot bus features a Trojan-sponsored lounge, a trivia game, the opportunity to take a pledge to "use a condom every time," and a student race "to put condoms correctly on plastic bananas."

If you'd prefer to eat your food, Marvin, at  2007 14th Street NW, is hosting a "Tip Out Aids" evening to fund AIDS Walk Washington team Black Gay Speak. Call Marvin at (202) 797-7171 to schedule a reservation between 5:30 and 10 p.m. this evening; mention "tip out," and your tips will be donated to the cause [via Brightest Young Things].