The purpose of the Quigley Institute for Non-Heterosexual Archival Archaeology is to restore history as it was, correct the accepted historical record, and to be honest with any findings concerning Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression initially in regard to Whaling in the 18th through 20th Centuries, and eventually in all areas of history.

As I previously stated, inquiries about Homosexuality on whaling ships were answered not with cited instances but with assumptions implied in Moby Dick and  just accepting it had to have happened as men were on long, all-male voyages with few choices for sexual release, following the laws of the sea regarding sex as opposed those on land, and, not being out of the ordinary or worth note, just happened and nothing was said, at least not in log books.

For me, this accepted assumption became reality with the Newport Log entry I had come upon when transcribing that log in 2016. 

Until the summer of 2023, any of my inquiries to see if this was the first entry found related to Homosexuality got the same answer about assumptions and implications expressing the required interest without actually appreciating the significance, until I received a log entry from a professor of UMass Dartmouth, a friend, who while doing research on climate based on the readings of wind and weather contained in whale ship logs since they would return annually to the same areas to hunt, and their readings, compared over the years, showed changes over time that had been, had come across the log entry dealing with Mr. Smith getting lashes on the Charles Phelps among some papers someone he knew who was researching punishments and the reasons for them onboard whale ships had written down. 

The book, “Unruly Desires, American Sailors and Homosexualities in the Age of Sail” by William Benemann was recommended by Silas Costello, a writer, illustrator, museum educator, and historical tour guide (https://www.sj-costello.com) who also has an interest in whaling History, deals with Homosexuality in the navy, a different culture at sea than whaling, has a chapter with other instances of Homosexuality.

I have expressed a concern that many log entries may have had references to Homosexuality that might have used terms unfamiliar to a transcriber or reader, perhaps code words, and were just glossed over, a common practice now, as so long as you get the letters of the words right so there is a transcript with no reason for a transcriber to actually understand what is transcribed. I did have to explain Onanism to quite a few well educated people, and have myself transcribed what seemed gibberish until after my transcription time at the museum I went back to figure out what I had just described. There was, also, the possibility that as a researcher might be looking for information relative to a specific topic, they might overlook something significant because it is not their topic.

“Worked the lathe” remained something transcribed at the end of quite a few entries informing the reader that an activity was taking place, but it was cross referencing with the writings of Sophie Porter that I found the captain was making replacement baseball bats. Whether I took the time to reveal the purpose of the lathe work or not, the action had been a definite one with a definite purpose that could have remained unknown if my curiosity was not peaked or if a transcriber other than myself were just dealing with producing a typed page with or without understanding what was typed. 

This might not have grabbed the curiosity of another transcriber as I am sure there are things significant to someone or even a group of people of which I am not one that I sail right by.

In one scenario we know the nature of the activity, in another, it would be mentioned but open.

In blogs and on this site I have made references to the diary of Sophie Porter, which is actually the official log book of the Jesse H Freeman, which I consulted to fill in the details about social life that were not in the other ship logs at Herschel Island the winter of 1894-1895 as they were kept by the busy captains and first mates as business documents and contained the required information on weather, location etc. while Sophie Porter, accompanying her husband on the voyage had plenty of time to spend writing about daily life. 

The only transcript I had found of “Sophie Porter’s Diary”, which I had accidentally found a link to when researching something else, was that done by Dr. Walter Vanast of McGill University who, according to his bio on www.academia.edu, is a Medical Specialist (General Adult Neurology), working at Kateri Memorial Hospital in Kahnawake, with mostly Mohawk patients. His Phd is in history of science and medicine and he writes mainly about early contact dynamics in Canada’s Western Arctic, especially the Mackenzie Delta Region, with its Inuit and Gwich’in peoples whose native community he is hoping could be reconstructed from the written record.

As a result, his transcription of what is the log of the Jesse n H Freeman concentrates on things connected to the Indigenous People while leaving out much that could have been in the original but not necessary for his purposes. As he states at the beginning of his transcription, “I have taken out sentences referring to the barometer and temperature, removing the former entirely and replacing the latter /with a numerical figure immediately after each date. I’ve also removed most wind directions which are highly repetitive and soon annoying.  I’ve kept references to wind volumes airs light fresh blow and blizzards”

He also left out minor details in Sophie’s Log, as a multi-sentence description of a celebration on board ship attended by all the captains whose names and ships are mentioned, as were the details of the gathering including descriptions of food and decorations in her writing is reduced to the single sentence,”We had a party on board….” and that is all.

He would often mention an event like this, giving the Topic sentence, but leaving out the paragraph, to get closer to a more relevant entry that he would transcribe and include in detail.

When it came to mentions of Indigenous People he was more detailed and complete as that was his interest. He made sure to include the names of individual “Natives” and any medical situations and cultural practices Mrs. Porter wrote about while leaving out much of the detail in the entry that was about the crew and officers.

As part of his ongoing study of the Indigenous People on the Western end of Canada, Dr. Vanast also transcribed the Western Arctic logs of Captain Hartford Bodfish who spent seven winters at Herschel Island, five at Baillie Island, and eleven summers in the Beaufort Sea, kept from 1893 through 1899

Bodfish had begun as a deckhand, moved up to the rank of Mate, and eventually to captain of the Newport where he included in the logbook, 

“Monday Feb 11th: A light breeze from the W.N.W. Cloudy and misty Bar. 30.10. Ther. -4 Got a load of meat put the Steward (Scott) forward for Sodomy and Onanism of Bark Wanderer one of the men deserted but was overtaken and brought back.”

Omitting the wind, weather and a reference to the meat delivery, Dr. Vanast, in accordance with his purpose, reduced the entry to

“Put the steward Scott forward for sodomy and onanism on Bark Wanderer one of the men deserted was overtaken and brought back.”

And the inclusion of this log entry, though not complete, kept the log entries sequential and complete. 

This collection of Bodfish log transcriptions, just as with Sophie Porter, had major points with few details, except when it came to the Indigenous People.

The truth of what had been an ongoing assumption should have been a known fact as the abbreviated entry, as quoted above, appeared in the collection of logs the professor had transcribed 10 years before I had come across it while doing a transcription of that very same log, not known to have been transcribed in any form, when I was doing mine in 2006, one brief sentence, nine significant words in a 135 page document.

Either because of it being of no importance to his interest in Indigenous medicine and as important to him as was the meat delivery, it went by unnoticed and had been there while people claimed there were no such known entries.

Doing my transcriptions I noticed the terms ”sodomy” and “Onanism” as I was familiar with them for a variety of reasons, and took notice where the Doctor had not.

It sat unnoticed for 10 years but was there and visible, able to answer the question about Homosexuality as a real thing on whaling ships, but no one saw it. It would have been the same if he had chosen to delete the reference to the Homosexual activity so that we might only know that, on that day, the ship got a load of meat, the omitted fact to be discovered a decade later for the first time when I was making my faithful transcription.

Which is basically what happened.

So the conundrum.

The reference to Sodomy and Onanism was typed out in 2006 by someone who saw just words and attached no meaning or significance, thus not letting the world know that Homosexuality was no longer an assumption but a fact because he did not notice what he had found.

It was as if it wasn’t there while it actually was.

This might become an annoyingly common occurrence as with a new system of crowdsourcing transcriptions with, as the head of the department in the museum that does transcriptions explained, “our final edited product is crowdsourced, worked on by multiple people”, resulting in just transcribing random pages, not necessity connected as the claim, in spite of past realities including this one, now is, this is better than if one person “owned” a page or a whole log/journal” which seems to be countered by what has been found by transcribers working on whole logs over the years and the fact that an important piece of historical information had been in plain site without notice while people sought an answer that entry could have supplied and could when found.

I came along to the same log entry, transcribed it in full and made the discovery which technically had already been made with the person discovering it just moving on with no idea of its value. If he knew its value, he certainly would have offered it as the answer to the question he would have to know was being asked, even if only from having read Moby Dick in high school, and would seem to have erred by saying nothing.

Consider this.

Because it was on my radar, I saw the significance of the two terms and saw their place in correcting the accepted historical record. The original transcriber did not, so the log entry had been there but unseen.

In the dividing up of the Newport log into two parts, by total chance I got the section with the entry which might have been glossed over as just more words whose meaning may be known or unknown as part of the document and so are deciphered and typed with no other attention given if it had gone to the other transcriber who may or may not have seen the importance, while I was skimming past something extremely important to him as his family goes back to whaling on Nantucket.

This would mean not only was the partially transcribed entry left obscure for 10 years, but it could have been transcribed in its entirety and still have remained available but unseen with the knowledge simply overlooked.

This is why the Institute is important. We need to restore our place in history, finding us with our own eyes and replacing vocabulary and removing the veil. 

So I amend my original claim when creating this site.

Dr. Walter Vanast typed the first found reference to Homosexuality on whale ships without, apparently, assigning any significance to it, and I came along and, when transcribing the same entry, saw it for what it was.

If his transcription of the Newport had been deemed sufficient enough to not call for a further transcription, in 2016 instead of being assigned the Newport log I would have been assigned the next one on the list, and this entry would have continued present but hidden until some future date beyond now. 

That is why we as a Community, whatever we call ourselves, whatever flag we prefer, whoever we like to think started Stonewall must go back into the historical record and find us.

Obviously, others have found us but told no one, not even us.

I am sure it was not a conscious thing as I know my own experiences as a transcriber, but it is a good indication that we are the ones who need to start looking.

As it is not about credit but fact, and the fact is that two people of different ages, interests, and countries, had found the same fact and assumption definitely died, and the need to find ourselves has another illustration of need that goes far beyond whaling into the very fabric of history.

I will be an adult about this, and while still loving the idea I am, now at least, the first to see the significance of what is now fact, I will keep the tiara, but let the Doctor have it on weekends and major holidays.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

According to Elon Musk, the answer to why the plane panel blew off was simple.

“Do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritized DEI hiring over your safety? That is actually happening. People will die due to DEI.”

He was joined in these sentiments by Don Jr. who claims the fault was in too many minorities working for Boeing

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A person may not have cured all the ills and may not have eliminated the threat completely but they had lessened them so it is safer for the next generation, and when that generation begins to be themselves it should build on what had been gained before. However, rather than build on what was done, they view it as not being enough judging past progress by modern standards forgetting the modern standards came about because of that past progress.

You do not destroy the rungs of a ladder because, once passed, they are no longer needed, or the ladder loses its stability and a dropped tool, a need to go back and restore a loss, might get retrieved but you cannot reach the first available whole rung to get back up to where you can continue from where you were. 

The present is not like the past mainly because people back then saw what was wrong and did what they could to make the necessary changes for the greater good within the constraints against which they fought. For some it was like planting trees. They knew when the time came people would benefit from the planting even if they themselves were long gone and would never benefit from their own work.

In Boy Scouts we were told to leave the campsite better than you found it.

Back in the mid-nineties, Gay rights were uneven. Some places like Boston and Los Angeles might have been on the brink of total equality or shoring up what of it had been established so far.

In the “heartland, the fly-over states, not so much and it was oppression that was present in various degrees

I was teaching Special Education and since one of my classes was science, on the appointed days, my sixth graders would join the other sixth graders to attend the mandatory D.A.R.E. class where I learned the names and effects of drugs I did not know about and my students learned which ones were the safest when  the neighborhood dealer would [pretend that a lack of Pot limited his wares and offered alternatives on which they would become addicted to and effectively weaned off a drug that was actually a natural plant and should not be treated like what is made in labs.

There were two officers from OKCPD who ran the class. One was short and besides liking the job enjoyed hanging out with the teachers if he ran into them and had a good attitude toward the Gay Community as he admitted his night time after bar closing shift at Denny’s, the Gays were better behaved and were more fun, and never broke into fights inside or in the parking lot.

The other officer was friendly in his own way, was a decorated officer who because of past training and military experience was often training his fellow officers, locally and elsewhere, in various policing techniques and was known as a good cop in the way we would want good cops to be.

While the former was single and prone to rely heavily on his “little man syndrome” to charm the ladies, the other was married with kids so his scheduled shifts were not like the other officer’s and was a more predictable schedule and patrol area making his personality important to his policing.

I moved on to the high school and at a Community meeting during the time I was advocating for Gay student inclusion in  school district policy, a woman approached me, told me she had been following my story in the media, and she was happy we had worked together. It was obvious to her that I had no idea who she was so, she made the introduction and introduced me to herself.

During those D.A.R.E. years, this officer, while continuing his duties had come to the deep realization that he was not being his true self and much of what he had engaged in, the military, the martial arts, athletics, had all been his unconscious way of trying to be what was expected of her by the world and by osmosis himself, until it got to the point she had to accept herself for who she was, and be her.

This meant exposing herself and her intentions to her boss and fellow police officers and a very macho police department in a city in a state that prides itself on God, Country, and manliness for men.

She had gone through the whole transitioning process, which she had actually begun when I had known her, during which she had to deal with the reactions of the other officers who were often slow or late to answer a call for backup, if at all  which would have been instant in the days prior.

She had to endure being judged as unstable by the uninformed police department leadership, getting assigned to a much safer desk job in an office away from the public and other officers, an action she fought and won in court all while her story, with which I made no connection, was in the media as a policeman had become a police woman in Oklahoma, and she carried a gun.

She was the involuntary face of the Transgender Community in the reddest state in the union whose major power was the Southern Baptist Convention and all its evangelical off-shoots, any politicians who cozied up enough to be seen as an ally, and a newspaper that had become known as the most conservative newspaper in the country whose readership was fed a point of view on current events dependent on how treatment influenced income.

She may have been the local version of  what Christine Jorgensen had been in the 50’s and Rene Richards later, but she was a cop, one of the manliest of professions and had become, well, not a man.

Once, when I was doing one of my downtown one man sit outs supporting Drag Queens and Trans people, an older gentleman came up to me explaining he used to go fishing, watch sports, go to car shows and stuff like that with his nephew who is now his niece. He didn’t understand it all yet, but they still did the same stuff together, so he figured for now he only really had to deal with getting used to how the kid dressed now.

The police in Oklahoma City were not even that far and clung to and acted on attitudes that other places had or were way ahead in the process of growing out of.

There were the supportive kids and a wife, who had their own lives and should not have to uproot themselves to get away from all this making her burden even greater by adding that while her life might be better she may have destroyed those of her family.

She proudly and publicly marched in Gay Pride eParades, attended community events, spoke in churches, having herself fought to maintain her standing in her church which needed to learn a lot.

She could not run away, not just for her, but for her family, and those unseen many who were watching and did not need to see another one like themselves driven off perpetuating the myth that there was something wrong with being your true self.

Her private life and her public life had blurry borders in the media, pulpits, gossip, and police officers’ locker rooms.

She persevered, won back here “fellow” officers, and by example took some of the scary out of Tranbsgender as people who knew her then saw she was actually the same person now.

Her experience led her to help others and eventually she moved away from the police force over to Social Work and Counseling, and training others in these fields especially in regard to gender variance at the college level.

She never hid. She wrote books, became a regional poet who addressed her situation at times to help others, was a presence in Pride Parades and events.

She was a Transgender Cop who had blazed a trail for those to follow.

She is history.

It is part of the history of the last thirty years.

However, and, yes, there is one for obvious reasons, the police do not have a good reputation at the moment, excepting the Capitol Police in D.C. There has been all the business with Black Lives Matter, some cops confusing duty with politics, shootings of unarmed Black men and women under not so questionable but too often clear circumstances.

My friend had joined the military in the days of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell. Guys of that era did that.

As a teacher who hates the idea that I teach a student to be able to have a great life and build a rapport in the process good enough to really get bothered when they go off and get killed in an old man’s war, old men who lived the years these kids won’t. As a Gay Activist I had to remember that to join the military is a right and some want to do it, and, so, it was a goal to open the military to any patriotic American who wanted to enlist.

My classmates went off to Vietnam, and not necessarily as volunteers. We had the draft. I make no distinction between those who enlisted and those drafted when I deal with veterans either on the same faculty or as members of any group to which I belong. They served and regardless of my feelings toward war, they are to me who they are when I meet them.

People were angry at the police during the heady days of BLM, and every police officer was the same. Killers of innocent people.

Over 50 years ago the police played their role at the Stonewall rebellion, as they had in previous raids in New York City and elsewhere and it was not a good one and after that there were still overly policed Gay events as progress was made and the old guard with their prejudices gave way to a more enlightened force, not perfect, but not as bad as it was. 

Harassment in the bars ended in the late 70’s early 80s’ when an activist challenged the charge of lewdness that resulted from his putting his hand on another Gay man’s shoulder while sitting at the bar and going no further

After serial harassment at a newly built club in the Gayborhood, a lawsuit victory required hat the police department train the staff on dealing with Gay people and ridding themselves of misconceptions and prejudice that affect their interaction with this Community. This ended the harassment that would take place in the parking lots of the bars at closing when charges of public drunkenness would guarantee arrest and fine income.

A few final raids when a city councilor running for reelection while dating a high level police officer were so blatantly political, they were the last of the raids that all took the same form, emptying the bar to inconvenience everyone before letting patrons back in and a fine for the owners, and all that ended.

That was over 25 years ago. A person would have to be over 46 years old to have been in a bar legally to have experienced a Gay bar raid in that city.

Sgt Seymour Pine, who, because of his role as Deputy Inspector in the Morals Division of the NYPD was charged with leading the police the night of Stonewall, apologized at a public forum for his role in the raid and the prejudice upon which it had all been based. He, like his officers, was a victim of the prejudice of the times to which they were enslaved. 

(FRor those interested, had this raid gone routinely, there was another scheduled for the following Friday, and would result in the closing of the Stonewall Inn. It would have become th Gay George Bailey. There would have been no follow up action as there would have been no action to be followed).

Now there is erasure.

There is anger now among the young, and rightfully so because of certain bad actors in law enforcement in recent years that they have seen. It is understandable.

However, many who resent being painted with broad brushes especially when it comes to identity should apply the same requirement that people see them as individuals and not part of a monolith to themselves.

Because of Stonewall, 50 years ago with progress as a result; bar raids that no longer happen; Police brutality at “Queer” gatherings when there really haven’t been any; and because of the bigoted actions of some bad actors, young people do not want the police anywhere near their events as if there are no “Queer” police officers, that the old days are not theirs but those of history, and a police connection makes a person part of the problem as my friend now seems to be as traditional invites for this Trans Person who had taken on a city and a state by extension, changing the minds of people, and not being the thing people feared because they had been misinformed but was, rather, an example of truth, is no longer welcomed as she had once been a police officer and now with some anti-military spirit seeping in, also because she had been in the military.

How any of that played into her journey and had the possibility of helping those with a similar trouble is disregarded and kept away from the even younger by those who, it seems, base everything on the now and are willing to give up a better future.

While complaining about rejection, they reject those who made the world this safe this far, way beyond what it had been in the past assuming the work would continue according to the times. 

I just do not understand how one piece of a jigsaw puzzle is enough to judge the whole puzzle by.

And to reject what a person could offer because it is not a clean fit into a perfectly comfortable history is to deny the information needed for the future.

This is an example of a real historical figure and of the erasing of history.

Why do they do this? 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.