National LGBT-Friendly College Fair to be held Oct. 2 in coordination with Pride Charlotte, in partnership with Time Out Youth and Lesbian & Gay Community Center of Charlotte

(Charlotte, N.C.) – Campus Pride is pleased to announce the historic first stop in its 2010-11 LGBT-Friendly College Fair, a program now in its fourth year connecting LGBT students and their parents to LGBT-friendly colleges and universities across the country.

Campus Pride, a national non-profit working to create safer, more LGBT-inclusive colleges and build future LGBT and ally leaders, will hold its first 2010-11 LGBT-Friendly College Fair in Charlotte, N.C., on Oct. 2, Noon -3:30 p.m., at The NC Music Factory. The event, held in collaboration with the annual Pride Charlotte festival, Time Out Youth and the Lesbian & Gay Community Center of Charlotte, marks the first time the College Fair program has visited the Southeastern U.S. and the first time it will be held in conjunction with a Pride festival.

“Our LGBT-Friendly College Fair’s event in Charlotte presents a unique opportunity for Carolinas and Southeastern students, families and universities,” said Shane Windmeyer, executive director of Campus Pride. “Prospective students want to attend campuses that are a welcoming and safe place to learn, live and grow. Our Fair’s presence in the Southeast will help students there find LGBT-friendly colleges from across the country.”

Last year, Campus Pride made a commitment to grow attendance at the Fair by partnering strategically with local LGBT and ally youth organizations as well as hosting in more progressive metropolitan “queer meccas” of LGBT activism – New York, Los Angles and Boston. That commitment continues this year with the Fair’s first stop in Charlotte and a later stop in Portland, Ore., on Oct. 16.

Windmeyer encourages greater Charlotte, the Carolinas and Southeastern college and university officials to attend the Fair, and said, “There is indeed LGBT progress in Charlotte, the Carolinas and the southeastern United States. Our LGBT-friendly national college fair program showcases campuses who want to recruit out LGBT & ally students. It sends a clear message: ‘Gay students are welcome, even celebrated on this campus.’”

Free and open to the public, the Campus Pride’s LGBT-Friendly College Fairs allow any student and their family the opportunity to interact with colleges and universities that value LGBT and ally people. Registration for schools is $195 to $250 per fair for each institution and is open to any college or university across the United States. Each fair will also feature expert advice about LGBT-friendly colleges, scholarship resources and even effective tips for campus visits.

Campus Pride’s 2010-2011 LGBT-Friendly National College Fair Program will visit: Charlotte (Oct. 2), Portland (Oct. 16), New York (Nov. 5), Boston (Nov. 6), Los Angeles (April 9). More details on each event, which are free to current or prospective students, can be found at www.campusclimateindex.org/events.

In addition to this year’s LGBT-Friendly College Fair program, Campus Pride is proud to announce its forthcoming national LGBT climate research in the report, “State of Higher Education for LGBT People,” in partnership with its Q Research Institute for Higher Education.

Written by Sue Rankin, Ph.D., Dr. Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed.D., Genevieve N. Weber, Ph.D., LMHC and Somjen Frazer, MS, Ed. and a foreword by George Kuh, Ph.D., “The State of Higher Education for LGBT People” is the most comprehensive national research of its kind to date. The report documents experiences of nearly 6,000 students, faculty, staff and administrators who identify as LGBT at colleges and universities across the United States. Recommendations and findings from the national study provide the means for student activists, campus program planners and policy makers to implement strategic initiatives to address the needs and concerns of their LGBT students and employees. The research will be available in September, with a special webinar slated for Sept. 21 and a national policy briefing at the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 23. For more information, visitwww.campuspride.org/research.

To learn more about Campus Pride programs and services, please visit www.CampusPride.org or email info@campuspride.org.

Photo: Pride Charlotte 2008. Credit: Willamor Media, via Flickr, licensed under Creative Commons.

Freedom to Marry, a national organization working to full marriage equality for LGBT couples, is rolling out their new Students for Marriage campaign.

Andrew Blumenfeld, the groups Summer 2010 New Media intern, has put out the call for more youth involvement in the nationwide movement for marriage, but admits it's an issue on which many youth find difficulty in identifying.

He writes on Freedom to Marry's blog:

As a student- in high school, in college- it may not always be easy to see why the freedom to marry is something to which we should devote a whole lot of time or thought. We’ve seen our friends, family members, and neighbors find and commit to that special someone later in life than most of our grandparents would have ever considered typical. So when it comes to marriage equality and “winning the freedom to marry,” it can be difficult- at least initially- for the younger amongst us to summon a whole lot of interest.

Blumenfeld says, "I think that’s a big mistake."

Blumenfeld is working with Freedom to Marry to launch their Students for Marriage initiative, a campaign, he writes, "to effectively inform and mobilize young Americans around a new goal in the marriage equality movement: never having to wait for justice."

The group is initially organizing the youth campaign on Facebook: www.facebook.com/StudentsForMarriage.

Blumenfeld explains why marriage is a youth issue:

It’s not uncommon for marriage campaigns to utilize the images of elderly same-sex couples who have been together for decades to convince voters that these individuals deserve the right to marry one another. Jen and Megan have been together for 30 years now—shouldn’t they share in this wonderful thing we call marriage?

Now, it’s easy to see why the marriage issue, after seeing a message like this one, might become very salient to a crowd engaged in their own years-long relationships. But if we as young people don’t see the direct plea to our demographic in that message, then we’ve just missed the whole point.

Of course marriage equality ought to be what we can offer to Jen and Megan and every other committed couple holding their relationships together for years just waiting for their government to recognize them. But marriage equality truly is a youth issue. It is a fight for the freedom from ever having to appear in one of those campaigns, sitting next to the one you love and have devoted a life to, pleading with our communities to acknowledge it.

It’s not often that the progress worth fighting for can be realistically expected in its entirety in any one lifetime or generation. As the young people of this generation, we are primed to see this issue come to a resolution in a timeframe that might mean we enter full adulthood with one less struggle, one less fragment of institutionalized intolerance that weighs on us as individuals and as a community.

The opportunity to realize this potential- to create a society in which our children might never know what a world with marriage discrimination looks like- is real. And not unlike many issues of the past- where a rising generation expected a little better than what the previous generation was planning on leaving behind- this issue will require great effort on the part of the youth, of students.

The controversy over Target and Best Buy contributions to a Minnesota political action committee funding anti-LGBT gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer has reached mammoth proportions. Hundreds of thousands of boycott notices have been delivered to both companies. Those protesting range from LGBT community members upset with Emmer's negative social agenda to those upset with Target's and Best Buy's "buying" of elections through their $150,000 and $100,000 contributions, respectively.

Regardless of any external controversy, one of those companies is continuing in its commitment to offer safe, welcoming and inclusive workplaces for their LGBT employees. Campus Pride's executive director, Shane Windmeyer, experienced that commitment firsthand this week when he was invited as a special guest to address the PRIDE Employee Business Network (EBN) at the Best Buy district headquarters in Charlotte, which oversees the company's Territory 7 including all stores located in North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and Tennessee.

Windmeyer was invited to speak about "Community Partnerships" -- a core belief of Best Buy in enhancing relations with various components and communities of diversity. The PRIDE EBN is an internal Best Buy network with various regional representations of employees who actively work to embrace LGBT employees and customers as well as enhance Best Buy outreach and relations. In 2008, Best Buy through it's employee volunteer program had a student named Zach Rose-Heim who initiated the community partnership with Campus Pride. Best Buy became an annual community partner by donating equipment, goods and services to the Campus Pride Summer Leadership Camp and also making a $2500 monetary donation through Zach's volunteer time.

Continue reading after the jump...

Catholic university Notre Dame isn't necessarily the most LGBT-friendly institution of higher education. Despite a few progressive steps forward, official university policy -- like that of the Roman Catholic Church -- still takes a hostile attitude toward LGBT people.

Regardless, LGBT students and alumni have banded together for years in efforts to make change. They've found unlikely allies in the university's administration. This year, Gay and Lesbian Alumni/ae of Notre Dame and St. Mary’s College (GALA-ND/SMC) honors one of those people: Notre Dame Asst. Vice President of Student Affairs Sister M.L. Gude, C.S.C.

GALA-ND/SMC will also honor Notre Dame alum Lt. Col Victor Fehrenback ('91), an openly gay, 19-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force.

From a release:

The Gay and Lesbian Alumni/ae of Notre Dame and St. Mary’s College (GALA-ND/SMC) will present the 2010 Tom Dooley Award to former Notre Dame Asst. Vice President of Student Affairs Sister M.L. Gude, C.S.C. The group will also give a “Distinguished Alumni” Award to Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, Notre Dame class of ’91 and an openly gay 19-year combat veteran of the United States Air Force. The awards dinner will be in South Bend, IN on Saturday, October 2. Other panels and discussions will occur throughout the weekend.

“Sister M.L. Gude is a true hero for the GLBT community,” said GALA-ND/SMC Chair Liam Dacey, ”She has worked tirelessly to support and advise gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered students over the past two decades, and we are proud to pay her a much deserved tribute.” Sister Gude served as Chair of the Notre Dame Standing Committee on Gay and Lesbian Student Needs from the late 90s-mid 2000s, where she pioneered gay and lesbian educational, training, and social programs.

Lt. Col. Fehrenbach has faced discharge from the Air Force against his will because of his sexuality. He is currently awaiting the decision of his case from the Secretary of the Air Force. Dacey said: “Under current Notre Dame policies, a war hero like Lt. Col. Fehrenbach would not be given non discrimination protection at Notre Dame and also would not be able to start his own gay organization. That is an injustice.”

Ticket prices for the dinner range from $50 for members to $75 for non-members. Students and young alumni can get a discounted ticket of $35. All panels during the weekend are free and open to the public. For more information on registration, visit: www.GalaNDSMC.org.

Outbeat Youth airs next on Sunday, August 22, 2010 at 8PM (PST) only on KRCB Radio FM 91 streaming at www.krcb.org. This month members of the Sonoma County Peer Outreach Coalition join us to talk about their work in promoting mental health online. While this program is located in Sonoma County, anyone with access to the Internet is welcome to learn more about substance abuse, depression, sexuality, physical health, and much more. One of the major goals of this group is to support LGBT youth.

We will also be talking about our special "National Coming Out Day" show that will air on Monday, October 11, 2010. We are giving the mic to anyone who wants to come out or to share their coming out story with the world. You can share your truth for the first time or to a special group of people in your life. We invite you to share your coming out story with the hope of inspiring others to leave the closet and to start living their lives in the truth. We can record your coming out ahead of time or arrange for you to be on the show live in person or by telephone. For more information on how to be part of this special show, email greg@outbeatyouth.com

Remember, you can listen and download our shows on our website or from iTunes. Follow us all month long on Facebook, MySpace, or Twitter. Links are available on our website at www.outbeatyouth.com.

On Thursday, Campus Pride and CampusSpeak presented an exclusive webinar on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. The document below, written by Shannon P. Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Christopher Stoll, senior staff attorney, explains what the decision means for university student groups and policies governing them.

In Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the University of California Hastings College of the Law’s “all comers” nondiscrimination policy, which requires registered student organizations to open their membership to all students, regardless of a student’s status or beliefs, rejecting a First Amendment challenge to the policy. For university counsel and administrators considering implementing or revising a nondiscrimination policy that is applicable to registered student organizations, several lessons can be drawn from the Court’s decision.

• An “all comers” policy is clearly permissible and constitutional. The Supreme Court’s decision clearly establishes that a public university may enforce a nondiscrimination policy that requires all officially-recognized student organizations to allow any interested student to become a member and to be eligible for leadership positions regardless of their status or beliefs. Such a policy would mean, for example, that an African-American student organization must accept members who are not African-American, a College Democrats chapter must accept Republican students as members, and a Christian student group must accept non-Christians and openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students as members. Under this type of policy, student groups that wish to limit their membership based on status or belief cannot be registered student organizations and are not eligible for funding and other school resources; they are treated like other unofficial student groups and are subject to the rules and policies that apply to such unofficial groups.

• An “all comers” policy may be applied to eligibility for leadership positions as well as general voting membership. The Supreme Court upheld Hastings’ requirement that registered student organizations not only must admit all interested students as full voting members, but also must permit all interested students to be eligible to become officers or leaders of the organization. Under the policy upheld by the Supreme Court, student groups may choose any method they wish of selecting officers, but groups must allow any interested student to run for office without regard to his or her status or belief.

• Under an “all comers” policy, student groups can have merit-based eligibility requirements. The Supreme Court upheld Hastings’ “all comers” policy even though some groups, such as honor societies and student journals, imposed grade point average requirements or selected members on the basis of a writing competition. Even under an “all comers” policy, a university may permit student groups to impose objective, merit-based membership requirements. The Supreme Court recognized that merit-based requirements are different than excluding students based on the student’s status or beliefs.

• Category-based nondiscrimination policies are also likely permissible and constitutional, so long as they are enforced even-handedly. The Supreme Court did not directly consider whether a school could have a nondiscrimination policy that prohibits student groups from discriminating against certain categories of people (for example, race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity). However, the Court’s analysis of the “all comers” policy in CLS v. Martinez strongly suggests that this kind of category-based nondiscrimination policy is likely also permissible and raises no constitutional problem. In fact, Justice Stevens’ concurring opinion stressed that a non-discrimination policy based on categories would be constitutional for the same reasons that an all-comers policy is constitutional.

• Rules barring students who engage in same-sex intimacy or any sexual intimacy outside of a heterosexual marriage discriminate based on sexual orientation. In the Supreme Court, the Christian Legal Society argued that it was not discriminating based on sexual orientation, but instead was merely imposing a “moral conduct” requirement that required all its members to refrain from all sexual activity outside of a traditional marriage between different-sex spouses. The Supreme Court rejected CLS’s argument and ruled that imposing such a conduct requirement is discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The effect of this ruling is that universities may prohibit registered student groups from imposing moral codes or other “conduct” requirements on their members that have the purpose or effect of discriminating against lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender students.

• University nondiscrimination policies must be enforced in an even-handed manner that does not single out particular groups for differential treatment. The Supreme Court held that selective enforcement of a university nondiscrimination policy against some student groups but not others may violate the First Amendment. For example, if the university prohibited a Christian student group from excluding non-Christians from membership, but permitted a Muslim student group to exclude non-Muslims, the Christian group may have a valid claim that its First Amendment rights were violated.

For more information about the case or its implications for university student group policies, contact NCLR at: www.nclrights.org or info@nclrights.org.

InsideHigherEd.com reports today on proposed changes to the Common Application, an admissions application used by 415 colleges and universities across the country. The national non-profit group might add questions on sexual orientation and gender identity.

InsideHigherEd.com reports:

The Common Application is considering adding voluntary questions about applicants' sexual orientation and gender identity. The application is used by hundreds of colleges and universities -- including many of the most competitive.

The current norm in higher education is not to ask such questions, even on a voluntary basis. But with more students coming out in high school, and with some colleges explicitly taking steps to recruit gay applicants, some admissions officers and some advocates for gay students want to encourage colleges to ask the questions. But the possible switch could be controversial. The Common Application has conducted a nonbinding survey of its members and -- while not releasing results -- has indicated that the membership is split. (The association's board will decide the question.)

Some of the proposals include adding a drop down menu listing several sexual orientations. Such a form, InsideHigherEd.com reports, "would let students select gay/lesbian, bisexual, straight/heterosexual or "another identity" that could be listed." Another proposal suggests adding a blank text field allowing students to enter any identity of their own choosing.

The proposals on gender identity are a bit stickier. Some federal regulations require collection of information on students' male or female gender. InsideHigherEd.com reports: "On the issue of gender identity, the Common Application is considering options that would explain why the male/female question must be asked consistent with federal reporting requirements, but which would then go on to tell applicants that if there is a word that better describes their identity beyond male or female, they are welcome to add that."

Campus Pride Executive Director Shane Windmeyer was interviewed for the piece:

Shane L. Windmeyer, the founder of Campus Pride, a national group that works on behalf of gay students and sponsors college fairs at which gay students can meet college representatives, said it was past time for colleges to add such questions. "It is 2010," he said. "Colleges should take responsibility for their LGBT students at the front end of the admissions process. We have students from across the country who are already out when they apply, and this should just be part of the process. There is no reason these students should be invisible when it comes to applying for college."

Both Campus Pride and the Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals have been among groups urging adoption of the new questions in the Common Application.

Read InsideHigherEd.com's entire report...

What are your thoughts? Would you complete voluntary questions regarding your sexual orientation and gender identity? Tell us why or why not in the comment section below.

Co-Ed Dorm Rooms: Can College Students Handle It?
http://thestir.cafemom.com/big_kid/107645/coed_dorm_rooms_can_college

Co-ed dorm rooms latest option for college students
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/03/2932184/co-ed-dorm-rooms-latest-option.html

Top West Point Cadet Resigns Over DADT: ‘I Have Lied To My Classmates And Compromised My Integrity’
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/10/miller-dadt/

Rural LGBT youth face challenges using the Internet
http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=108685

Gay Fraternity Coming to UCF Following Expansion Committee Vote
http://knightnews.com/2010/08/gay-fraternity-coming-to-ucf-following-greek-council-committee-vote/
(P.S. -- Be sure you don't miss Lambda 10 Project's upcoming OUT & GREEK National Leadership Conference.)

President of Hampshire College to Resign
http://chronicle.com/blogPost/President-of-Hampshire-College/25940/

Photo via Queers United

"I don't blame them," a friend told me, taking sympathy for Target, as I explained their anti-gay donations and the ensuing boycott threats from LGBT community members.

"What do you mean?"

He responded, "They're just playing both sides of the aisle. I don't blame them. I would too."

(Photo right: An image from a Facebook group urging a boycott of Target, via Minnesota Independent)

My friend has a point: Large corporations often give donations and contributions to all sorts of organizations of all sorts of ideological stripes. In Target's case -- wherein more than 250,000 people have pledged boycott over its donations to an anti-gay PAC in Minnesota -- the political contributions to "both sides of the aisle" aren't nearly as even as they should be. One could make the argument that Minnesota-based Target has never been as "Tar-gay"-friendly as it's appeared.

The controversy started when Target was blasted for a $150,000 donation to MN Forward, a political action committee run by and endorsing Tom Emmer, an anti-LGBT, Republican candidate for Minnesota governor. But that wasn't nearly the end of the story. As gay activists dug deeper, they found Target employees gave overwhelmingly to the anti-gay side of California's Proposition 8 ballot initiative. According to OpenSecrets (via The Huffington Post), employees gave $3,250 to the campaign to pass Proposition 8. Only $750 was given to organizations working to defeat the anti-gay marriage amendment. (To be fair, Target has released a statement distancing itself from Proposition 8 contributions.)

And, of course, it doesn't end there. By all accounts, Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel seems to be of an evangelical Christian stripe -- a stripe that routinely works to deny LGBT people their rights as citizens and dignity and respect as humans.

Read more after the jump...

Yesterday we posted about Stop The Hate and Campus Pride's November Webinar on developing a bias incident response team on your campus. We've got so much more in store for this Fall's Campus Pride Webinar Series...

Fall 2010 Webinar Series, in partnership with CAMPUSPEAK

A preview of each below, and remember: you can register for any webinar in the series and have a chance to win free registration for your college to attend next year's Campus Pride Summer Leadership Camp (a $795 value!).

Get more information about each webinar and register today.

The Impact & Interpretation: Supreme Court Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (UC Hastings) Decision
Thursday, August 12th :: 1:30 p.m. EST

In early July, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a ruling that could have a major impact on how colleges and universities interact with student organizations, especially those which discriminate against other students based on sexual orientation, gender identity or other characteristics. How does the UC Hastings decision impact student organizing, free speech on campus and the rights of students? In particular, could the decision positively or negatively affect LGBT student groups? Join Campus Pride for this special webinar moderated by Shane Windmeyer, executive director of Campus Pride, with expert panelists John Culhane, professor at Widener Law; D’Arcy Kemintz, Esq., executive director of the LGBT Bar Association; Shannon Minter, Esq.,, Legal Director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights; and Brian K. Sims, Esq., staff counsel for policy and planning at the Philadelphia Bar Association and chairman of the Gay & Lesbian Lawyers of Philadelphia (GALLOP).

See more previews after the jump...