discrimination – Seven Troublesome Sisters

Today it is my pleasure to welcome author Lucky Stevens and his historical LGBT novel, The Duplex.

Author’s description

THE DUPLEX is a thrilling tale, set in 1950s L.A., of four gay friends who hatch a daring scheme to live life on their own terms, during a time of systemic governmental persecution.

Los Angeles, 1956. Shangri-La. Palm trees, swimming pools, movie stars. And if you’re gay—persecution. In a society that demands conformity and lockstep conventionality, gay people find out quickly and the hard way, how difficult, dangerous and downright terrifying it is to be different.

So, when the constant fear of arrests, evictions, job loss and ridicule become too much, four gay friends and lovers pull together to hatch an ingenious scheme designed to allow them to live freely, without harassment.

But their secret plan is not without its flaws. Internal struggles and personality conflicts conspire to make their situation harder and more life-altering than any of them could have predicted, leading to valuable and universal lessons about the high cost of blending in—or not.

My Review

In The Duplex, Lucky Stevens has written a story that both packs a punch and needs to be told.

I liked so many things about this book, including the way Stevens captures the fifties along with all its many ingrained biases. I enjoyed watching the tale evolve through the eyes of four protagonists, often seeing the same incident through different points of view. I appreciated how Stevens demonstrated the way prejudices against any group seep into the beliefs and self-images of those most adversely infected until they begin to doubt themselves. Sometimes it was painful to read, but, as I said, it’s a story worth telling.

In fact, I liked almost everything about this compelling tale. It moved quickly, and the voices rang true. I suppose one could complain that certain aspects of the two gay men, and two lesbian women, were too stereotypical, and they would have a point. I suppose others might struggle with four alternating first-person points of view, although I liked it.

Some might prefer a neater, more happily-ever-after ending for all, but I thought the ending worked fine. Without giving anything away I’ll just say things get messy but happiness is found, much like in real life.

I recommend this book to anyone, but especially those who like historical novels, are fascinated by the 1950s, or are fans of reading about Los Angeles. The novel may appeal to those in the LGBTQ+ community, but I have a special recommendation and this one comes from the heart.

I HIGHLY (caps intended) recommend this novel to those with close friends or family members who are LGBTQ. It’s an eye-opening look at the world they could be living in. I know it made me aware of the need for us all to be vigilant about preserving the basic human rights this group has had to fight so hard for. This novel is important food for thought for a caring community.

About the Author

Lucky Stevens lives, works and plays in exotic North America. He has written three novels. He was also a finalist in a nationwide screenplay writing contest. He was inspired to write The Duplex because he wanted to tackle a subject that grappled with universal themes in a creative and exciting way.

He can be contacted in the following ways:
https://twitter.com/LuckyStevens1
https://www.facebook.com/luckystevens.writer/
luckystevenswriter@gmail.com
https://bublish.com/author/luckystevens

Buy The Duplex at Amazon. The book will be $0.99 and is
Amazon’s #1 New Release in LGBT Historical Fiction!

Yes, there is a giveaway.

Lucky Stevens will be awarding $40 Amazon or Barnes and Noble GC to a randomly drawn winner via rafflecopter during the tour.

Enter here to win.

This post is part of a tour sponsored by Goddess Fish. Check out all the other tour stops. If you drop by each of these and comment, you will greatly increase your chances of winning.

My Favorite Excerpt

With the tone of the evening in its proper place, we exited the apartment.

As much as I adore Cliff, I figured I better latch onto Jerry. I don’t know, he just seems a little more like the babe-in-the-woods type. Besides that, it would give me a chance to get to know him. So I stood next to him and slipped my hand around his arm. I gave his bicep a little squeeze. “Ooh, al dente. Just right.” He smiled, and I smiled back. Naturally Cliff and Dot paired up themselves, and us girls held on to each fella’s arm as the men escorted us down the stairs.

As we headed to the car, I was happy to see that my landlady—her name is Mrs. Tambler—was on her patio watering her flowers. She has always been a very nice woman, but she can also be on the nosy side of the street. Because of this fact,

I have had to be careful with Dot, whom Mrs. Tambler has now seen numerous times.

I have told her that Dot is my closest friend, but I am not sure she buys it. For one thing, Dot is quite beautiful and ten years younger than I am. A fact that is a plus for me, but I think a little suspicious looking for Mrs. Tambler. I also only have a one-bedroom apartment, so the idea of Dot spending the night or ever moving in is strictly out.

In any event, with “our men” in tow, I waved to my landlady good and hard in an effort to build up some nice heterosexual brownie points for any possible future mishaps. She looked more than pleased to see Dot and me hanging off the arms of two handsome characters of the masculine variety, shall we say.

The boys, for their part, were just swell. Opening our doors for us, helping us off with our coats, the works. And the fact is, I think we all enjoyed it. It was fun. And nice to be pampered for the night. The boys took care of everything.

It was the perfect mixture too, of chivalry and flirting and teasing which was all made possible by the incontestable fact that no one of the opposite sex was attracted to each other. This is a situation that is very freeing. When there is no chance of romance. No sexual tension. We just played.

I saw this on Facebook, and you can imagine how the rest of the post went. Because I have remained politically undecided up until now, I was surprised by how sad this post made me.

time2 I considered that all manner of male politicians have come and gone over my lifetime, but only one qualified woman has ever been a serious candidate for the US presidency. That alone means that I would like to see her win. And I have to ask, is this discrimination? Or just plain foolish? Well, let’s look at some facts.

As a disclaimer, I consider myself a pragmatic, slightly left-leaning moderate who wants to live in a safe and fiscally responsible country in which the rules are fair, or at least are becoming more fair and not less so. I would like to see compassion triumph over other concerns.

As you might guess, I like a lot of Bernie Sander’s politics. I don’t particularly like him, however, because I don’t see him being an inspiring leader of all Americans, or a particularly effective representative to the rest of the world. I’m not sure I want him to be president, even though I like some of his ideas.

On the other hand, at one point in my life, I was a Republican. It was long ago, during a time when one could believe that the GOP was really on the side of the small business owner (which my parents were) and on the side of personal freedom (which I was and still am.) Over the years, the party has split into those who fight for advantages for big business and those that have turned their social agenda into a justification for inserting government control into life’s most personal matters. I’m sad that the sort of Republicans I once respected are not running for president.

True, some of the remaining candidates are less scary than others, but that is a low bar to cross. Rand Paul’s sense of the importance of most liberties (not just those valued by the far right) inspires my respect. John Kasich has yet to say anything terribly unreasonable (that I’ve heard), and in this strange year that is worthy of commendation. Carly Fiorina (yes, I realize she is a woman too) lacks qualifications for what is arguably the the most important political office in the world, and she has failed to show the sort of leadership abilities that would make me want to overlook her lack of experience. (Railing against Planned Parenthood based on a falsified video does not constitute leadership to me.) So it is hard to imagine a scenario in which I am voting Republican in 2016.

Which brings me to Hillary Clinton. Am I rooting for her just because she is a woman? She is ridiculously qualified. She is intelligent and she sharers much of my politics. I believe that she has a good heart. I was very impressed with her testimony in front of congress and I believe that she would at worst do a decent job of governing this country.

But she isn’t perfect. In my case, I’ve held back on my support because she’s too hawkish and her ties to established politics and to big money in this country are closer than I’d like. She has yet to charm me, to melt me with her sincerity or warmth. She’s not perfect.

However, I’ve voted for nine men for president, and none of them were close to perfect in my mind, or in reality. I didn’t expect them to be. I’m pragmatic, and election after election I picked the person I thought could win and also best represent my desires on how this country should be run. I had no use for Ralph Nader or his supporters late in the 2000 election, when the chance to be noble and alter history for the better was cast aside for hubris.

sungazing3 So why am I now anguishing over this particular candidate’s lack of perfection? Maybe my issue isn’t supporting her because she is a woman at all. Could it be that I am holding her to a higher standard because she is one? Have I really bought into the belief that I will follow a good man or a nearly perfect woman? Deep down, do I think that a female can only lead us well if she is a head and shoulders above all the males who could lead instead? I sure hope not.

So back to my question. Am I guilty of discrimination? Inverse discrimination? Is this whole discussion just plain foolish? It’s time for me to make some decisions.

This is it. I’m thankful to Bernie Sanders for pushing the conversation and the democrats away from the status quo. I would love to see him play a role in the new administration. I hope many of his ideas receive serious consideration. But now that he almost won Iowa, I have to say that I really, really hope that he doesn’t march his way to a nomination. It would be unfortunate enough if he got there on enthusiasm for his outsider’s ideas, without due thought on the part of his supporters as to how good he would actually be at the job of president. But it would be particularly sad if part of his successful march was an ingrained tendency on our part to demand more of a female candidate.

So tonight, I’ve made my decision. I think that we have a chance to make history as a nation, and a chance to elect a decent leader at the same time. I think it’s high time for girl to be president. I’ve waited my whole life for it, damn it, and I’m voting for Hillary Clinton.