This last Friday, 70-year-old LGBT advocate and journalist Paul Varnell died of complications with pneumonia and a stroke. His obituary at Windy City Times pay respects to his activism and intellect, but also includes some great bits about Varnell applying for a same-sex marriage license in 1989, ticking off readers by wanting to cut trans people from the LGBT movement and his younger days as a sex worker. Now let’s pay our respect to the man, warts and all.
First off, Varnell spent most of the 80s and early 90s working as an LGBT advocate:
Varnell held nontraditional jobs and began his activism in full force in Chicago. He was a board member of Parents and Friends of Gays in Chicago from 1983 to 1984; chaired the Media Committee of the Illinois Gay and Lesbian Task Force from 1983 to 1990 (for part of that time he was also IGLTF’s research director); was a member of the Chicago AIDS Task Force from 1982 to 1990; was a co-founder of CARGO, the Chicago Area Gay Republican Organization, in 1984; and helped to promote the Gay History Month founding in 1994.
He also tried to get married to fellow gay journalist Rex Wockner back in 1989. According to Wockner:
“He and I, as a journalistic exercise, tried to get a marriage license in Cook County in 1989. And when rebuffed, we filed human-rights complaints with the city and the state. We lost. We claimed sex discrimination but they told us it was sexual-orientation discrimination and that that wasn’t illegal at that time in Illinois. The Sun-Times made a big story of our little effort. We turned down an invite to appear on Oprah. I suppose everyone is unique, but Paul was unlike anyone I’ve ever known. I think it was the degree of his independence and the degree of his self-sufficiency that stood out.”
And while Rick Sincere, president of Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty, remembers Varnell as “a man of many and varied interests”…:
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
“He could discourse with equal facility about the philosophy of Friedrich Hayek or the latest superhero comic books. He could review a book of art photography, describe an opera recording or analyze the latest public-opinion data about issues of concern to the gay community.
…the obituary makes sure to point out that Varnell’s well-known “often-conservative political views” and columns would often “provoke angry letters:
“In a column posted on outonline.com, Pittsburgh’s Out newspaper, March 2010, he said: “I have no quarrel with various sorts of ‘trans’ people and I wish them well. But I cannot see any justifiable grounds for their inclusion in the gay movement or in the acronym LGBT. Transpeople have different issues from gays and it is important to keep those distinctions in mind.” He also objected to the use of the word “queer” by the gay movement.”
But on the more liberal side, Varnell was also okay with male sex work:
“I do not understand why men engaging in sex for money (‘prostitution’) is illegal. I suspect that most commercial sex laws were instituted to prevent the exploitation of women. But I am unaware of any analogous cases of the exploitation of men. It seems to be a law that catches men in its purview as if by accident. When I was younger (and better looking), I occasionally accepted money for sex. It was a useful income supplement and harmed no one. When I have mentioned this to other gay men, quite a number have said, ‘Oh yeah, I’ve done that.’ One man paid his way through graduate school that way.”
In an age where we need bold LGBT activists and journalists more than ever and where our Facebook and Manhunt accounts threaten to doom our runs for the Presidency forever, we give homage to Varnell; a guy who Wockner says, “had very specific ideas about how he wanted to live his life—and that is exactly how he lived it, each day and without compromise.”
bagooka
I don’t know how his exclusion of trannies makes him conservative. You have to ask WHY he excluded them.
Norris
Wow, I wish I had known about this guy sooner. I agree with just about everything he said.
the other Greg
Interesting… an “LGBT Journalist” [sic] who disliked the term “LGBT” and thought Ts should be out of the acronym?
Is an “LGBT Journalist” lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual simultaneously?
Oh, and he disliked the word “queer” too? Thanks Queerty!
Gorbeh
I honestly see no reason why T is included and I mean no disrespect either. I’m a guy and like guys, that is one issue. I can’t even begin to imagine how life would be like wanting to be a women or actually transitioning so I think there is a major disconnect that I can’t possibly understand. I’ve never understood why gender identity is connected to sexual orientation, they are completely separate issues in my mind. It seems to me all the groups that could be considered “disfunctional” by society are lumped together whether gay or trans which is largely why I dislike the word queer as well.
For a lot of people “queer” is an identity or means something positive but where I grew up it was always used as something derogatory like anyone that fits under the umbrella term is a deviant or abnormal when the complete opposite is true. There is nothing abnormal about being a guy and liking guys. Tons of other guys are gay. It even happens in animals. Using a term like “queer” which MEANS abnormal or unusual I think is counterproductive. Including every little sexual/gender minority just emphasizes the fact I think. As I said before, I can’t even begin to relate to how life as a trans person would be and so don’t see why T is included in GLB much less all the others such as A, Q, I, and any others I’m missing. It just seems watered down. That we’re all just one big group that can be addressed in umbrella terms or legislature or marketing or anything really when we are all distinctive in our cultures, societal needs, etc.
I also don’t get why lesbians have their specific term and why that goes first when that is a subset of gay people. All the gay women I know refer to themselves as gay women not lesbians. I’m a gay man. Having L in there when G already is just seems redundant to me, much less having it first when the G covers gay women as well.
Anyone should feel free to respond. While this may be my personal thought process there may be legit reasons to lumping us all together that I don’t see.
Jeff Lassiter
I met Paul several years ago when he interviewed me for the Windy City Times as part of their gay artists series for Pride month. He was a funny, kind man who would call me once in awhile if he was doing something on art for the paper. I saw him about a month before I left Chicago, and wasn’t in contact very often in the last year. I’m very sad to hear of his death. We’ve lost a very important member of our community.
Jeff Lassiter
@Jeff Lassiter: agh, sorry, meant Chicago Free Press.
SiRaP
Complications from pneumonia?
Jason
Dan Villarreal, are you capable of drafting a post about a deceased person without being insulting and disrespectful? We have already read with amazement your incredibly offensive post about Tyler Clementi. Now you do a piece about Mr. Varnell, who did not identify as “LGBT” and who questioned the logic and legitimacy of that term. Yet you use that same term to describe him, against his wishes and against his will.
Villarreal, you are truly a vile person. You must work for free or else be in some sort of relationship with Queerty’s owner because there is no other reason for you to be employed at the site.