Servicemembers Legal Defense Network created a short video celebrating the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell by recounting key discussions, landmark court cases, and the efforts of advocates to end DADT on Capitol Hill.
While this video is nice and all, to me it sort of highlights the divides between the gay advocacy and activism movements. While we both have the same goals, radical activists (the ones who choose to express outrage through civil disobedience) tend to be snubbed by advocates who regard their stunts as childish while activists lean towards viewing Capitol Hill advocates as milquetoast fundraisers who avoid rocking the boat.
Why is Dan Choi-- the most recent and arguably most powerful face of DADT-- absent from this video? While GetEQUAL is thanked at the end of the video, why are they not pictured? Many may think I'm being whiny, but I believe that DADT was repealed because of efforts both from paid advocates and volunteer activists. Aubrey Sarvis certainly helped pass repeal, but in order to present a complete picture of the story of repeal these other elements are necessary.
Whatever. It's a fine video. I hope as the movement progresses further in order to afford the same freedoms LGBs are achieving in the military for our transgender comrades in arms, the divide between advocates and activists can be bridged. I'm not particularly holding my breath, though.
Showing posts with label Gay Inc. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay Inc. Show all posts
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Groupon Not Gay Enough For You? That's Okay, Cuz There's This
I know a few discount queers who are just gonna love this. Yet another Groupon clone, this time with a gay slant:
Before becoming a Gaypon merchant, businesses are put through a background check of sorts, where they are investigated for any bad marks, like complaints of discrimination from customers and employees, poor hiring practices, etc. Gaypon says it also uses various tools, like the Human Rights Campaign’s “Corporate Equality Index” that rates American workplaces on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality.
Gaypon plans to donate a portion of proceeds to charitable organizations, and those that support the gay community, like The Trevor Project, which focuses on crisis and suicide prevention amongst LGBTQ youth, and Affirmations, which is one of the largest LGBT community centers in the United States. The exact percentage of those donations, however, is unclear.All right. It sounds like a well-meaning enough gimmick, and I'm a cheap date (being a broke blogger helps, you can fix that with the donate link to the left) so I'll check it out.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Joe Solmonese Plans December Departure From HRC
Pam's House Blend reports intriguing news sure to interest any involved in LGBT activism: Joe Solmonese, the long time Executive Director of the Human Rights Campaign, is due to step down in December. While it is not yet publicized who will replace him, sources state an independent consultant with a history of working with the organization is slated to take Solmonese's place.
For instance, the end of Solmonese's stint at HRC is spelling a larger shakeup in the staffing of the organization. Pam asks, and I would love to know myself, the answers to a few key points:
I'm neither trans nor a POC, but I would like to see improvements in those areas for sure. Above all, however, I hope that HRC chooses to take a different path. I hope that path is less about keeping allies-in-name-only happy and more about holding "progressive" politicians accountable for failures in our progress to full equality.
During his tenure, the Human Rights Campaign has become a bedrock institution that has played a role in successes -- a hate crimes law passed, the legislative repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell -- the extent of its leadership and success also depends on your point of view and knowledge of the back stories related to the hard work to make these gains happen.Pam is correct in that there are mixed views on his tenure as leader of the nation's premier LGBT advocacy organization. Solmonese has been roundly criticized by many, to include myself, as being a Democratic apologist willing to throw the B and T of LGBT under the bus in order to forward the goals of the L and G. However, what I find more compelling are the possible changes that could come from this shakeup.
For instance, the end of Solmonese's stint at HRC is spelling a larger shakeup in the staffing of the organization. Pam asks, and I would love to know myself, the answers to a few key points:
- What will this mean for bisexual and trans community members? The L and G in LGBT have had much more visibility not only in its leadership composition, but in prioritization of political priorities. Some of this is a result of political expediency, but no doubt influenced by the composition of its leadership, board and donor base. This leads to...
- Will more bisexual and trans staff be added with the staff shake-up? Unknown. Until Joe's successor announces for lack of a better word, "battle plan" we won't know if this means putting people who know bi and trans issues best in positions of influence.
- With DADT at bay, and DOMA on the ropes in court, will HRC put additional to attend to matters of equity in the trans community and speak openly about them? The new executive director will have to address this head on, particularly since Joe Solmonese was seen by many in the trans community as a political obstacle at the minimum, or an outright man not to be trusted. Representing HRC, Solmonese last spoke in public on transgender issues to a trans-specific public audience at the 2007 Southern Comfort conference. He was adamently 100% in support of a trans-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act, but later changed his position on the 2007/2008 version of the legislation -- effectively leaving trans rights behind.
- Will this shift signal a change to include more people of color in positions of influence? Like bi and trans issues, a stronger HRC will come from actually honoring the influence that a socio-economically diverse leadership team brings to the table. Will a change at the top move the organization in this direction?
- What kind of relationship will the HRC build with the LGBT media (including bloggers) and grassroots activists (like GetEqual) under new leadership? To be kind, there has been a tense and guarded relationship with activists and new media that work outside of the comfort zone of the HRC. The fact that these entities cannot be "controlled" or managed like a press release is old news - it's how the game of politics works now; any person who succeeds Joe Solmonese has to grasp this reality and find out how to work nimbly with not only the Hill and the White House, but to engage with these entities.
I'm neither trans nor a POC, but I would like to see improvements in those areas for sure. Above all, however, I hope that HRC chooses to take a different path. I hope that path is less about keeping allies-in-name-only happy and more about holding "progressive" politicians accountable for failures in our progress to full equality.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Louis Marinelli Is Totes Pissed At HRC For Stealing His Bus Tour
It seems that bus tours are the political shill of choice this summer, with every candidate and organization under the sun taking their crazytalk across the country (side note: progressive candidates? Save the gas and take the train). Now, some are saying that HRC may have stolen Louis Marinelli's idea for his "Road to Equality" bus tour:
"By the way, nice name for the tour, HRC. ‘The Road to Equality’ has a nice ring to it and if you need a good graphic for promoting the tour, I put one on the NOME website a week or so ago to promote my marriage equality tour. See the big slide graphic for the equality tour where the flags of each state we intend to visit are? Well, right above that is where you’ll see the green highway signs on one of which is written ‘Road to Equality’. I spent a lot of time on that in Photoshop but [you] can take that, too, if you need it.
"I understand the HRC has the manpower, resources, reputation and ability to do their tour and do it well. I won’t even contend the fact that they’re [sic] tour will likely draw more media attention and more people will likely attend their events and sign up for their newsletter and give their credit card information to a young man or woman walking around with a clipboard soliciting donations. Hey, you need money to get the job done and I fully understand that."
Louis is PISSED.
"By the way, nice name for the tour, HRC. ‘The Road to Equality’ has a nice ring to it and if you need a good graphic for promoting the tour, I put one on the NOME website a week or so ago to promote my marriage equality tour. See the big slide graphic for the equality tour where the flags of each state we intend to visit are? Well, right above that is where you’ll see the green highway signs on one of which is written ‘Road to Equality’. I spent a lot of time on that in Photoshop but [you] can take that, too, if you need it.
"I understand the HRC has the manpower, resources, reputation and ability to do their tour and do it well. I won’t even contend the fact that they’re [sic] tour will likely draw more media attention and more people will likely attend their events and sign up for their newsletter and give their credit card information to a young man or woman walking around with a clipboard soliciting donations. Hey, you need money to get the job done and I fully understand that."
Whoa! Bitter and catty, table for one! While the two tours have different concepts, I can totally understand his beef. Dear HRC: why don't you just come up with something else?
Monday, July 18, 2011
Dan Choi: "Tell HRC To Abandon White Privilege"
Dan Choi and I got really angry yesterday and decided to make some noise about it.
This week, on the 20th, Congress will be holding hearings to get testimony on the possible repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. While this is a great occasion and the beginning of the process to bring marriage equality to every LGBT American, Dan noted on his Twitter that all the folks providing testimony (to include Joe Solmonese) are uniformly white.
We felt that the exclusion of gay people of color and binational couples was an outrage, and we feel that the fact that HRC's leadership is racially homogeneous (rich white gay men) tends to promote that image and give white members of our community an advantage. The fact that binational couples (who are hugely impacted by the lack of marriage equality in our country) are not present in testimony is insane. If Joe Solmonese, for instance, were to give up his spot to a binational couple that had a powerful story to tell, the case for marriage equality would be made in simple terms of an appeal to common sense and decency.
Instead, he's going to join Maggie Gallagher in his photo op.
So we started a Facebook page and a Change.org petition telling HRC to abandon white privilege and promote the true image of our community: a rich, diverse group of people from all ethnicities and nations.
I've already gotten some flack for my small efforts. Some detractors (who are also friends) argue that HRC doesn't deserve our ire-- after all, they don't schedule who speaks at congressional hearings, congresspeople do! However, consider this: is the leadership in our community really doing the best they can to include every facet of our various backgrounds?
HRC is very much responsible for how much of Congress and the straight world view us. Like it or not, they are the most visible organization to everyone else, and I for one will urge them to use that visibility positively and abandon racism to include all Americans in this discussion.
Will you join me? Like our Facebook page and sign this petition. Tell HRC that our rainbow includes every color possible, and we would like people to know and understand that.
This week, on the 20th, Congress will be holding hearings to get testimony on the possible repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. While this is a great occasion and the beginning of the process to bring marriage equality to every LGBT American, Dan noted on his Twitter that all the folks providing testimony (to include Joe Solmonese) are uniformly white.
We felt that the exclusion of gay people of color and binational couples was an outrage, and we feel that the fact that HRC's leadership is racially homogeneous (rich white gay men) tends to promote that image and give white members of our community an advantage. The fact that binational couples (who are hugely impacted by the lack of marriage equality in our country) are not present in testimony is insane. If Joe Solmonese, for instance, were to give up his spot to a binational couple that had a powerful story to tell, the case for marriage equality would be made in simple terms of an appeal to common sense and decency.
Instead, he's going to join Maggie Gallagher in his photo op.
So we started a Facebook page and a Change.org petition telling HRC to abandon white privilege and promote the true image of our community: a rich, diverse group of people from all ethnicities and nations.
I've already gotten some flack for my small efforts. Some detractors (who are also friends) argue that HRC doesn't deserve our ire-- after all, they don't schedule who speaks at congressional hearings, congresspeople do! However, consider this: is the leadership in our community really doing the best they can to include every facet of our various backgrounds?
HRC is very much responsible for how much of Congress and the straight world view us. Like it or not, they are the most visible organization to everyone else, and I for one will urge them to use that visibility positively and abandon racism to include all Americans in this discussion.
Will you join me? Like our Facebook page and sign this petition. Tell HRC that our rainbow includes every color possible, and we would like people to know and understand that.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
HRC Store Vandalized, Radical Queer Group Claims Responsibility
This is about as useful as board shorts in Antarctica.
The HRC store staff in DuPont Circle arrived to work this morning to find the store vandalized, with cosmetic damage done in the form of pink paint on the window and the word "Stonewall" spray-painted on the sidewalk. The act was claimed by a group calling themselves the "The Right Honorable Wicked Stepmothers’ Traveling, Drinking and Debating Society and Men’s Auxiliary," and urged the gay community (after referencing snorting ritalin and drinking whisky) to cease giving money to the gay rights giant.
From their press release (via the Washington Blade):
"Why, you’re asking, did we specifically target the HRC, a massive national gay rights non-profit as opposed to vomiting urine on Rick Santorum or something equally fun?
"Put simply, they suck. What do they suck? Cash. Lots of it.
"The HRC rakes in something approaching 50 million dollars a year in revenue–their executive director, Joe Salmonellamayonaisemanese pulls in a salary of several hundred grand. What have we gotten out of this bloated carcass? Not a thing worth mentioning and every now and then, they eagerly sell trans people up the river. Seriously, this is an organization that hordes money and does nothing useful. It’s a sad, sick dinosaur.
"Meanwhile, in Washington, DC violence against the LGBT community is on the rise; DC’s only LGBT center is forced to go hat in hand to real estate developers and beg for space, only to face eviction a few years down the road; We lack a homeless shelter for queer youth and services for our community are the victims of budget cuts. Can you think of something better to do with a few million dollars?"
"HRC’s DC Action Center and Store was vandalized last night with paint on the front windows and an LGBT group has claimed responsibility for the crime. It’s unfortunate that after a marriage win in New York that represented an unprecedented coming together of LGBT groups, some are more interested in fostering division in the community."
The HRC store staff in DuPont Circle arrived to work this morning to find the store vandalized, with cosmetic damage done in the form of pink paint on the window and the word "Stonewall" spray-painted on the sidewalk. The act was claimed by a group calling themselves the "The Right Honorable Wicked Stepmothers’ Traveling, Drinking and Debating Society and Men’s Auxiliary," and urged the gay community (after referencing snorting ritalin and drinking whisky) to cease giving money to the gay rights giant.
From their press release (via the Washington Blade):
"Why, you’re asking, did we specifically target the HRC, a massive national gay rights non-profit as opposed to vomiting urine on Rick Santorum or something equally fun?
"Put simply, they suck. What do they suck? Cash. Lots of it.
"The HRC rakes in something approaching 50 million dollars a year in revenue–their executive director, Joe Salmonellamayonaisemanese pulls in a salary of several hundred grand. What have we gotten out of this bloated carcass? Not a thing worth mentioning and every now and then, they eagerly sell trans people up the river. Seriously, this is an organization that hordes money and does nothing useful. It’s a sad, sick dinosaur.
"Meanwhile, in Washington, DC violence against the LGBT community is on the rise; DC’s only LGBT center is forced to go hat in hand to real estate developers and beg for space, only to face eviction a few years down the road; We lack a homeless shelter for queer youth and services for our community are the victims of budget cuts. Can you think of something better to do with a few million dollars?"
They then suggested that money could be better used by buying glitter (cute, guys, cute).
I've often been a critic of the HRC and other organizations falling under the tongue-in-cheek term "Gay Inc," but vandalizing property on a whim while extolling the effects of snorting ritalin is not only stupid, but completely pointless. I hate to say it, but I agree with the HRC's Director of Communications, Michael Cole Schwartz:
"HRC’s DC Action Center and Store was vandalized last night with paint on the front windows and an LGBT group has claimed responsibility for the crime. It’s unfortunate that after a marriage win in New York that represented an unprecedented coming together of LGBT groups, some are more interested in fostering division in the community."
Do I think that the HRC alone is to thank for marriage equality in New York? Hell no. Do I think the HRC's efforts are ineffective? Most times. Do I think they are Democratic apologists? Uh-huh. Should we wreck their shit? Hell no, what's the point of that?
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
GetEQUAL To Host Pride Cocktail Party Of Their Very Own
Tomorrow President Barack Obama will be hosting a Pride Party at the White House, undoubtedly to hit up the HRC and other big gay orgs for some much-needed campaign funds. Who better to go to for some quick cash than the GayTM?
GetEQUAL, ever the ones to pressure Democratic leaders to fulfill their promises, will be holding their own cocktail party, starting out with a rally at 4pm at the White House, after which the festivities will move to the Green Lantern for some drankin' and whatnot.
"First we will gather at the White House at 4 PM.
"There we greet invitees to the White House Pride reception with a simple request -- to help lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans become fully equal under the law. We will distribute 'GetBOLD to GetEQUAL Scavenger Hunt' game cards to provide them an opportunity to communicate the needs of the LGBT community to the power players inside.
"The scavenger hunt will ask attendees of the reception to 'GetBOLD' by urging President Obama to be the fierce advocate he promised the community during his campaign. The game is meant to be a fun but meaningful opportunity for attendees to step up the pressure on the Obama administration for full LGBT equality.
"After we distribute the cards, we will adjourn to The Green Lantern where our reception begins at 7 PM."
GetEQUAL, ever the ones to pressure Democratic leaders to fulfill their promises, will be holding their own cocktail party, starting out with a rally at 4pm at the White House, after which the festivities will move to the Green Lantern for some drankin' and whatnot.
"First we will gather at the White House at 4 PM.
"There we greet invitees to the White House Pride reception with a simple request -- to help lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans become fully equal under the law. We will distribute 'GetBOLD to GetEQUAL Scavenger Hunt' game cards to provide them an opportunity to communicate the needs of the LGBT community to the power players inside.
"The scavenger hunt will ask attendees of the reception to 'GetBOLD' by urging President Obama to be the fierce advocate he promised the community during his campaign. The game is meant to be a fun but meaningful opportunity for attendees to step up the pressure on the Obama administration for full LGBT equality.
"After we distribute the cards, we will adjourn to The Green Lantern where our reception begins at 7 PM."
So if you're in the DC area tomorrow, stop on by and chat with the GetEQUAL folks about opportunities to get involved. Link below is to the Facebook event page.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
The Right Has The Gall To Criticize GLAAD On Big Business Gaffe
The blogosphere has been up in arms over GLAAD's letter to the FCC supporting the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, a scandal that has resulted in the ouster of Jarrett Barrio and six GLAAD board members. Further consequences of the issue have popped up today, with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council using the incident as proof of corruption within the LGBT community:
"This incident exposes the seamy relationship between homosexual activists, government, and big business. For example, activist groups have persuaded some liberal jurisdictions to adopt 'equal benefits ordinances,' forcing corporations to offer 'domestic partner benefits' to homosexuals or forfeit government contracts.
"This incident exposes the seamy relationship between homosexual activists, government, and big business. For example, activist groups have persuaded some liberal jurisdictions to adopt 'equal benefits ordinances,' forcing corporations to offer 'domestic partner benefits' to homosexuals or forfeit government contracts.
"They then tout those benefits policies to bring pressure on other companies--never mentioning the policies were only adopted because of such 'pay-to-play' demands. After using government to pressure business, the activist groups may have used business to put pressure on the law this spring when it was rumored that Coca-Cola pressured law firm King & Spalding to drop the Defense of Marriage case--an action widely criticized in the legal community. But GLAAD crossed the line--even with their supporters--in accepting a corporate payoff in exchange for their own effort to pressure government regulators.
"Corporations would be on safer ground if they would steer clear of groups like GLAAD and simply remain neutral in the culture wars."
While I couldn't give two shits about T-Punk's opinion, it's truly unfortunate that GLAAD's poor leadership has exposed our communities to this sort of rhetoric. Plus! I find it amusing that a right winger has the balls to criticize the gay community on its relationship to any sort of big business.
Friday, June 10, 2011
UPDATE: Tina Fey Gives Tracy A Talkin' To, Plus! HRC Ain't Buyin' It
I really hope this Morgan shit gets resolved so that I don't have to write about this moron anymore.
Tina Fey stuck it to him in her usual witty, humorous fashion, reminding him and his viewers that Tracy owes a lot of shit to the gays.
"The violent imagery of Tracy’s rant was disturbing to me at a time when homophobic hate crimes continue to be a life-threatening issue for the GLBT Community.
"It also doesn’t line up with the Tracy Morgan I know, who is not a hateful man and is generally much too sleepy and self-centered to ever hurt another person.
"I hope for his sake that Tracy’s apology will be accepted as sincere by his gay and lesbian co-workers at 30 Rock, without whom Tracy would not have lines to say, clothes to wear, sets to stand on, scene partners to act with, or a printed-out paycheck from accounting to put in his pocket."
Well, Gay Inc. hasn't accepted his apology, with the HRC continuing to lambast the comic:
"Tracy Morgan exercised extremely poor judgment and he did the right thing by apologizing. But that’s just not enough. He’s a role model and Morgan now has a responsibility to make amends for his horribly hurtful and dangerous ‘comedy’ routine. He also needs to go further than his apology and correct the record: no one should feel ashamed because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender and they should definitely not become a victim of violence. Words have consequences and Morgan should be held to a higher standard. Until he does something meaningful, his brand will remain tarnished."
One could say that Fred Sainz and the HRC should have better things to do then get fussed about Morgan, but I guess they can roll with it. I'm sure we'll get a PSA or something out of it.
Tina Fey stuck it to him in her usual witty, humorous fashion, reminding him and his viewers that Tracy owes a lot of shit to the gays.
"The violent imagery of Tracy’s rant was disturbing to me at a time when homophobic hate crimes continue to be a life-threatening issue for the GLBT Community.
"It also doesn’t line up with the Tracy Morgan I know, who is not a hateful man and is generally much too sleepy and self-centered to ever hurt another person.
"I hope for his sake that Tracy’s apology will be accepted as sincere by his gay and lesbian co-workers at 30 Rock, without whom Tracy would not have lines to say, clothes to wear, sets to stand on, scene partners to act with, or a printed-out paycheck from accounting to put in his pocket."
Well, Gay Inc. hasn't accepted his apology, with the HRC continuing to lambast the comic:
"Tracy Morgan exercised extremely poor judgment and he did the right thing by apologizing. But that’s just not enough. He’s a role model and Morgan now has a responsibility to make amends for his horribly hurtful and dangerous ‘comedy’ routine. He also needs to go further than his apology and correct the record: no one should feel ashamed because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender and they should definitely not become a victim of violence. Words have consequences and Morgan should be held to a higher standard. Until he does something meaningful, his brand will remain tarnished."
One could say that Fred Sainz and the HRC should have better things to do then get fussed about Morgan, but I guess they can roll with it. I'm sure we'll get a PSA or something out of it.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
GLAAD Supports AT&T Making Tons Of Money
Really, GLAAD?
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation has suddenly decided that an organization designed to protect the image of LGBTs in television suddenly has the right to chime in on whether or not the FCC should approve a telecommunications merger of two giant corporations. WTF?
"In sum, we believe that the proposed AT&T-T-Mobile merger will serve the public interest in multiple ways. If approved, it will expand the availability of true high-speed access to millions of Americans who do not currently have it. This new deployment also holds the promise of dramatic improvements in healthcare, education, the arts and the overall economy.
"Thank you for your consideration of this letter and for keeping in mind the voices in the LGBT community as you consider, and hopefully approve, this merger."
Not only that, but the company that stands much to gain from this merger, AT&T, is a member of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce that screwed ant-discrimination law in that state for years to come. Now why should GLAAD join the HRC in giving AT&T a pass in the TN debacle?
Yet again, it's the money. Not only does AT&T have a member on the board of GLAAD and donate to the Alliance, but the annual awards show put on by the organization is underwritten by the communications giant. I mean, really, what does a gay rights organization care about a business deal like this?
To this I have to say: FUCK YOU, Gay Inc. By no means has the HRC nor GLAAD shown in recent weeks that they accurately represent the interests of the gay community, instead having the gall to speak for LGBTs and toss our "approval" onto projects and companies that benefit only the contributions made to those organizations.
I in no way benefit from this merger, and I am tired of being spoken for by these corporate chumps. Let me make this clear: The interests of OneAngryQueer and the queer community as a whole are not represented by these people. They represent a sell-out: the selling out of our advocacy for corporate dollars. Fuck that.
[AmericaBlogGay]
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation has suddenly decided that an organization designed to protect the image of LGBTs in television suddenly has the right to chime in on whether or not the FCC should approve a telecommunications merger of two giant corporations. WTF?
"In sum, we believe that the proposed AT&T-T-Mobile merger will serve the public interest in multiple ways. If approved, it will expand the availability of true high-speed access to millions of Americans who do not currently have it. This new deployment also holds the promise of dramatic improvements in healthcare, education, the arts and the overall economy.
"Thank you for your consideration of this letter and for keeping in mind the voices in the LGBT community as you consider, and hopefully approve, this merger."
Not only that, but the company that stands much to gain from this merger, AT&T, is a member of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce that screwed ant-discrimination law in that state for years to come. Now why should GLAAD join the HRC in giving AT&T a pass in the TN debacle?
Yet again, it's the money. Not only does AT&T have a member on the board of GLAAD and donate to the Alliance, but the annual awards show put on by the organization is underwritten by the communications giant. I mean, really, what does a gay rights organization care about a business deal like this?
To this I have to say: FUCK YOU, Gay Inc. By no means has the HRC nor GLAAD shown in recent weeks that they accurately represent the interests of the gay community, instead having the gall to speak for LGBTs and toss our "approval" onto projects and companies that benefit only the contributions made to those organizations.
I in no way benefit from this merger, and I am tired of being spoken for by these corporate chumps. Let me make this clear: The interests of OneAngryQueer and the queer community as a whole are not represented by these people. They represent a sell-out: the selling out of our advocacy for corporate dollars. Fuck that.
[AmericaBlogGay]
Airman Discharged In April Under DADT
Chris Geidner of MetroWeekly first reports: the Air Force has confirmed that at least one servicemember has been discharged under Don't Ask, Don't Tell after the October repeal signing.
"Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez wrote today to Metro Weekly, 'The only separation approved following the Oct. 21, 2010 policy change is an Air Force separation, approved Apr. 29, 2011.'
"Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez wrote today to Metro Weekly, 'The only separation approved following the Oct. 21, 2010 policy change is an Air Force separation, approved Apr. 29, 2011.'
"Air Force Major Joel Harper, an Air Force spokesman, clarified the specifics of the discharge to Metro Weekly, writing, 'On April 29th, 2011, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the discharge of an Airman under the provisions of 10 USC 654, after coordination with the DoD General Counsel [Jeh Johnson] and the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Stanley].'
"Harper continued, 'Each of these officials evaluated the case carefully, and concluded that separation was appropriate. The Airman in the case asked to be separated expeditiously.'"
Wow. While Obama has made some strides in progressive issues since taking office, it is exactly cases like this that highlight how inappropriate it was for HRC to endorse him so soon before the election.
"Harper continued, 'Each of these officials evaluated the case carefully, and concluded that separation was appropriate. The Airman in the case asked to be separated expeditiously.'"
Wow. While Obama has made some strides in progressive issues since taking office, it is exactly cases like this that highlight how inappropriate it was for HRC to endorse him so soon before the election.
Can we please get DADT repeal certified so crap like this stops happening?
Friday, May 27, 2011
HRC: Premature Eja... Uh, Endorsement.
The Human Rights Campaign, the highest profile gay rights organization in the country, has endorsed Barack Obama for President a year and a half before the election.
HRC's endorsement, which seems fairly straightforward, brings up some questions about their role in holding public figures accountable to their commitments to the gay community. Should Gay Inc. really be endorsing a candidate who has yet to make any specific promises regarding equality in his second presidency?
John Aravosis of Americablog speculates that this means we can forget any commitment from the president on marriage equality:
"While an eventual endorsement of Obama by HRC is inevitable, expected, and fine, there's a dance that's expected where both sides get something. And the expectation should be for gay rights advancements, not appearing at your dinner or giving you a job. (HRC may be the only folks in town worse at negotiating than the White House itself. ) But now that HRC has already given the President the prize he seeks, what incentive does the President, who claims he's 'evolving' on marriage, evolve before the election? He has no need to. HRC clearly hasn't learned the lessons of the first two years of the Obama presidency."
I've long been a critic of the HRC as Democratic apologists. They seem far more interested in fundraisers and getting candidates with lackluster records on gay rights elected. Even more alarming is their recent "pass" given to the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce regarding the restriction of anti-discrimination laws in local jurisdictions in that state. Long story short: Corporations like AT&T and Comcast bear responsibility for an anti-gay bill being passed through the Chamber's lobbying efforts in the TN legislature. After the bill passed, with a blow being struck to gay rights in Tennessee, the member companies got the Chamber to denounce the law.
Then, of course, Joe Solmonese congratulated them on their ground-breaking work for equality.
And why did HRC gush on about the great contributions of the member corporations who withdrew their support for the discriminatory bill after it had already passed?
Will Kohl at Back2Stonewall did a simple Google search to research the issue and discovered that fully half of those corporations have some form of contribution to HRC, to include AT&T having an award named after them-- the AT&T E-Hero Award-- at the annual HRC Fundraising Gala. Essentially, you want a glowing report from Solmonese on your "achievements" in gay rights? Write HRC a check!
I'm sorry, but I'm just not happy with Gay Inc.'s approval-- and thus, through their representation of our community, MY approval-- being purchased. That isn't advocacy nor activism, that is the privatization of our interests, and it should be stopped.
HRC's endorsement, which seems fairly straightforward, brings up some questions about their role in holding public figures accountable to their commitments to the gay community. Should Gay Inc. really be endorsing a candidate who has yet to make any specific promises regarding equality in his second presidency?
John Aravosis of Americablog speculates that this means we can forget any commitment from the president on marriage equality:
"While an eventual endorsement of Obama by HRC is inevitable, expected, and fine, there's a dance that's expected where both sides get something. And the expectation should be for gay rights advancements, not appearing at your dinner or giving you a job. (HRC may be the only folks in town worse at negotiating than the White House itself. ) But now that HRC has already given the President the prize he seeks, what incentive does the President, who claims he's 'evolving' on marriage, evolve before the election? He has no need to. HRC clearly hasn't learned the lessons of the first two years of the Obama presidency."
I've long been a critic of the HRC as Democratic apologists. They seem far more interested in fundraisers and getting candidates with lackluster records on gay rights elected. Even more alarming is their recent "pass" given to the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce regarding the restriction of anti-discrimination laws in local jurisdictions in that state. Long story short: Corporations like AT&T and Comcast bear responsibility for an anti-gay bill being passed through the Chamber's lobbying efforts in the TN legislature. After the bill passed, with a blow being struck to gay rights in Tennessee, the member companies got the Chamber to denounce the law.
Then, of course, Joe Solmonese congratulated them on their ground-breaking work for equality.
And why did HRC gush on about the great contributions of the member corporations who withdrew their support for the discriminatory bill after it had already passed?
Will Kohl at Back2Stonewall did a simple Google search to research the issue and discovered that fully half of those corporations have some form of contribution to HRC, to include AT&T having an award named after them-- the AT&T E-Hero Award-- at the annual HRC Fundraising Gala. Essentially, you want a glowing report from Solmonese on your "achievements" in gay rights? Write HRC a check!
I'm sorry, but I'm just not happy with Gay Inc.'s approval-- and thus, through their representation of our community, MY approval-- being purchased. That isn't advocacy nor activism, that is the privatization of our interests, and it should be stopped.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
DOMA Defense Update-- HRC Under Fire for Pressuring Law Firm
When I last touched on Boehner's vow to defend DOMA no matter what the cost (to taxpayers), we learned that the House had hired the law firm King and Spalding at an estimated cost of $500k. Since then, a couple key developments have taken place.
Perhaps the biggest is that the aforementioned law firm has dropped the case altogether and the Speaker has been forced to find other attorneys to represent the State's interest in the matter. Why? Because the HRC (and many other groups, my pals at GetEQUAL included) set their crosshairs on the firm and their clients, asking them to not further the cause of discrimination.
"Far from being abashed about this campaign, Fred Sainz, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, shared new details about it. He confirmed to me that his group did indeed contact King and Spalding clients to let them know that the group viewed the firm’s defense of DOMA as unacceptable.
"Sainz said his group did not ask any of the firm’s clients to drop the firm in retaliation for taking the case, as is being assumed by conservatives who are alleging an untoward pressure campaign. Rather, he said, his group informed the firm’s clients that taking the case was out of sync with King and Spalding’s commitment to diversity, which it proudly advertises on its Web site.
"'King and Spalding’s clients are listed on its web site, so we did what you would expect us to do,' Sainz told me. 'We are an advocacy firm that is dedicated to improving the lives of gays and lesbians. It is incumbent on us to launch a full-throated educational campaign so firms know that these kinds of engagements will reflect on the way your clients and lawschool recruits think of your firm.'"
It looks like one of King and Spalding's major clients, Coca-cola, was the one to directly intervene in the matter when approached by the HRC.
"Sources with knowledge of the backlash confirm that one of King & Spalding's top clients, Coca Cola, also based in Atlanta, directly intervened to press the firm to extricate itself from the case.
"A Coca Cola spokesman declined to comment on or off the record for this story, but pointed TPM to the company's long public history of support for equality and diversity."
Some are not happy about HRC's interference in the matter, with right-wing supporters attacking HRC's involvement as un-American, while some lefty bloggers are criticizing the HRC for being unliberal:
"To put pressure on lawyers defending clients or laws because lobby groups don't like them is deeply illiberal. It remains disgusting, for example, that rightwing groups targeted lawyers defending terror suspects and Gitmo prisoners. When the far right did this, it was despicable. Now that the left is doing it, it remains just as despicable.
"Memo to the gay rights leadership: the ends do not justify the means. Let DOMA have the most robust defense it can possibly muster and let us argue just as passionately for its unconstitutionality. When civil rights groups bully, they lose the moral high-ground. When you have men like David Brock leading the charge - and there are no means he has ever eschewed to achieve his ends - the danger is that we prove the far right's point. We must be better than them."
Okay, we all know I'm no big fan of the Human Rights Campaign. I think they are essentially a bunch of Democrat apologists who spend more time fundraising than actually assisting the process of real change. I think their abandonment of the trans community is despicable. However, actions like this? Where they use their corporate and political clout to wage war against the religious right's insistence that gay Americans are second-class? Hell yeah, you go HRC!
Because here's the thing: This isn't a criminal trial. If it were a criminal trial and we were bullying people into not representing defendants who could be sent to prison for crimes they may not have committed, this would be inexcusable. But it's not. This is a civil case, being paid for by American tax dollars in defense of a policy the majority of Americans now do not want. DOMA doesn't have the right to an attorney in civil cases.
If we can weaken the public perception of the DOMA defense by establishing a media narrative showing that the policy is, in essence, indefensible? That's not only our right as advocates for the gay community, that's our prerogative and our responsibility.
Congratulations, HRC. You've shown the LGBT community what you're good for.
[Towleroad]
Perhaps the biggest is that the aforementioned law firm has dropped the case altogether and the Speaker has been forced to find other attorneys to represent the State's interest in the matter. Why? Because the HRC (and many other groups, my pals at GetEQUAL included) set their crosshairs on the firm and their clients, asking them to not further the cause of discrimination.
"Far from being abashed about this campaign, Fred Sainz, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, shared new details about it. He confirmed to me that his group did indeed contact King and Spalding clients to let them know that the group viewed the firm’s defense of DOMA as unacceptable.
"Sainz said his group did not ask any of the firm’s clients to drop the firm in retaliation for taking the case, as is being assumed by conservatives who are alleging an untoward pressure campaign. Rather, he said, his group informed the firm’s clients that taking the case was out of sync with King and Spalding’s commitment to diversity, which it proudly advertises on its Web site.
"'King and Spalding’s clients are listed on its web site, so we did what you would expect us to do,' Sainz told me. 'We are an advocacy firm that is dedicated to improving the lives of gays and lesbians. It is incumbent on us to launch a full-throated educational campaign so firms know that these kinds of engagements will reflect on the way your clients and lawschool recruits think of your firm.'"
It looks like one of King and Spalding's major clients, Coca-cola, was the one to directly intervene in the matter when approached by the HRC.
"Sources with knowledge of the backlash confirm that one of King & Spalding's top clients, Coca Cola, also based in Atlanta, directly intervened to press the firm to extricate itself from the case.
"A Coca Cola spokesman declined to comment on or off the record for this story, but pointed TPM to the company's long public history of support for equality and diversity."
Some are not happy about HRC's interference in the matter, with right-wing supporters attacking HRC's involvement as un-American, while some lefty bloggers are criticizing the HRC for being unliberal:
"To put pressure on lawyers defending clients or laws because lobby groups don't like them is deeply illiberal. It remains disgusting, for example, that rightwing groups targeted lawyers defending terror suspects and Gitmo prisoners. When the far right did this, it was despicable. Now that the left is doing it, it remains just as despicable.
"Memo to the gay rights leadership: the ends do not justify the means. Let DOMA have the most robust defense it can possibly muster and let us argue just as passionately for its unconstitutionality. When civil rights groups bully, they lose the moral high-ground. When you have men like David Brock leading the charge - and there are no means he has ever eschewed to achieve his ends - the danger is that we prove the far right's point. We must be better than them."
Okay, we all know I'm no big fan of the Human Rights Campaign. I think they are essentially a bunch of Democrat apologists who spend more time fundraising than actually assisting the process of real change. I think their abandonment of the trans community is despicable. However, actions like this? Where they use their corporate and political clout to wage war against the religious right's insistence that gay Americans are second-class? Hell yeah, you go HRC!
Because here's the thing: This isn't a criminal trial. If it were a criminal trial and we were bullying people into not representing defendants who could be sent to prison for crimes they may not have committed, this would be inexcusable. But it's not. This is a civil case, being paid for by American tax dollars in defense of a policy the majority of Americans now do not want. DOMA doesn't have the right to an attorney in civil cases.
If we can weaken the public perception of the DOMA defense by establishing a media narrative showing that the policy is, in essence, indefensible? That's not only our right as advocates for the gay community, that's our prerogative and our responsibility.
Congratulations, HRC. You've shown the LGBT community what you're good for.
[Towleroad]
Monday, April 25, 2011
GLAAD Issues Trump Boycott
Donald Trump is not only trying to remake his image on the unfortunate birther meme, but also as a conservative Christian who doesn't want the gays to have the same rights as everyone else. Fine, Donnie! You don't want us playing with your toys, we'll stay off your playground.
GLAAD issued a boycott of his business holdings, and the Gay and Lesbian Travel Association is planning on issuing a ruling on the travel destinations that he has a stake in. Here's GLAAD's list:
[GLAAD]
GLAAD issued a boycott of his business holdings, and the Gay and Lesbian Travel Association is planning on issuing a ruling on the travel destinations that he has a stake in. Here's GLAAD's list:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)