Thoughts at the end of the Summer of Violence

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The marriage vacuum and the future of the LGBT movement

I've been doing some thinking about the Uniting Against Hate conversation I was involved with last night. It's led me to some reflections -- not altogether uplifting -- about the state of the LGB[sometimes]T rights movement, and where we might go from here.  

At some point in the conversation, I noted that lesbian, gay and bi people have been known to be especially transphobic, and haven't really been the advocates for trans rights that they could be.  An audience member questioned me about that observation, and expressed an alternative view.  In my response, I noted that there were, indeed, abundant examples of the LGB leaving behind the T, the 2007 debacle over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act chief among them.  My critique was (and is, and has been for some time) that the focus on marriage rights above all else has done a huge disservice to other, frankly more important fights.  Marriage is a policy goal of the relatively well-to-do who can afford such things.  Sadly, too many in the LGBT community (such as it exists), have other, far more pressing issues to deal with.  I constantly harp on the four issues that the Sylvia Rivera Law Project so poignantly mapped out:  healthcare, education, employment, and housing.  

Keep on jumpin' (that means read more...)

Thoughts on hate crimes and their impacts on trans communities

I was asked to speak at a panel earlier today called Uniting Against Hate, following a showing of Robert O'Hara's new play BOOTYCANDY at Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company. Below is the essay I wrote to frame my remarks for the event. Thanks for reading.

Keep on jumpin' (that means read more...)

Celebrate 8 years of your favorite activist couple!

Elijah and I are celebrating our 8th anniversary in November 2010, and we decided to celebrate in a big way.  There shall be a party (comment/email if you want details), and you can bring us presents help us support a noble cause!  We're working with a bunch of awesome people to support the first transgender/gender non-conforming needs assessment study in DC in over a decade.  It's a major undertaking, and such things aren't cheap!  So as we celebrate our many, many, many years together, we hope you'll join us in supporting a cause that's near and dear to our little world-changing hearts.  Please donate as little or as much as you can using the handy tool below!

P.S.  We're handing over the cash to Latin@s en Accion, the fiscal sponsor for the study.  They're one of those 501(c)3 things, and so we can get you a receipt for a tax-deductible donation if you really want it.

P.P.S  If you're mean and don't like queer people, you can give us money to buy a KitchenAid.  We'll take one in either Pear, Ice or Green Apple.

My question for the final DC mayoral debate

The Washington Post, WAMU and NBC 4 are hosting the final debate for the DC mayor's race at high noon on Wednesday, September 1.  Because I'm a nerd, I managed to get a ticket to the event before they were all gone.  Even better is that members of the public can submit questions in advance by email.

As you know, I do some grassroots organizing work with members of DC's trans community.  As an activist, I've always been into fighting for rights and justice, and I'm usually drawn to struggles that don't always get the attention they should.  I've written several times before that the fights over gay marriage or Don't Ask Don't Tell have never animated me, for a variety of reasons.  There are much more basic rights that are denied every day to LGBT people who are poor, rural, trans, youth, people of color, to name a few.  Those categories don't necessarily apply to me, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't join the fight against such discrimination, and I frankly believe that you should too.

I know I've got a snowball's chance of getting this answered in what's sure to be a madhouse event with a packed agenda, but nonetheless, my question: 

Mayor Fenty:  In 2008, your administration tried to exempt District custodial agencies from complying with the gender identity and expression provisions of the Human Rights Act.  Your administration failed to report hate crimes against transgender people and failed to include the same population in your recent LGBT health report.  Your Office of Human Rights persistently refuses to enforce laws allowing transgender people to safely access public accommodations.  Overly aggressive enforcement of prostitution free zones has led to rampant and blatant profiling of transgender people as sex workers.  And in 2009, a year in which a transgender woman was brutally murdered in broad daylight, your LGBT affairs director refused to attend the annual Transgender Day of Remembrance because he had hockey tickets.  Is there a particular reason your administration is targeting an already extremely disenfranchised part of the population for additional abuse?  For both Mayor Fenty and Chairman Gray, how do you intend to rectify these problems, including addressing persistent unemployment in the transgender community and the growth of hate violence against transgender people of color?

I'm sure you'll be hearing from me again on September 1 to see whether or not it gets answered.  

You should submit a question too!   Blog it, tweet it, facebook it.  Too often people have said that the race between Fenty and Gray is about style, not substance.  But in this, and in other areas, there are real substantive problems that need to be addressed. Let's make sure those problems see the light of day before this race is over. 

Sunday news: out of character edition

There's been much to report on lately, and I'll freely confess to being largely absent.  This, in part, has been due to not really feeling the need to add to the din lately, and also due to my being in the thick of things.  I'll have a few reflections on those things later.  Meanwhile, a few snippets of interest.

• I rarely find myself in agreement with Our Lord and Savior the Kristof, but in this case, I agree that you must go see the film Budrus, about the nonviolent struggle against the boundary fence in a small Palestinian village.  I have faith that a nationwide nonviolent movement is possible in Palestine (and don't necessarily think it means lining up all the women).  And, I had the pleasure of seeing this film at the Capitol a few weeks ago, followed by a panel featuring Ayad Morrar and Reps. Keith Ellison and Brian Baird.  See the film when it's in your town.  You will be moved.
• A Kansas City barber (nice town, btw) sums up Obama's image:  "That man has a hell of a workload, and Bush left a hell of a mess. I like what he's doing. But I can't feel it." 
• Maybe it's summer fluff, but I still suspect that Sonia Sotomayor will be my favorite justice.
• In spite of all the myriad issues that people have on their minds, I'm increasingly convinced the DC mayor's race is going to come down to education.  Here's the WaPo's take on Gray's plan.  I generally support the age 4-24 approach to education that Gray backs, but share concerns over how to pay for it.
• And while we're at it, what's the role of literature in the fight for justice?  One opinion on To Kill a Mockingbird.

Finally, I want to plug two events this week at the DC Council (Wilson Building, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue NW):

• Monday, 4pm, room 500:  Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary hearing on ICE's Secure Communities Program.  The Council has already unanimously blocked MPD's planned participation through emergency legislation.  Come here advocates speak about why that rejection should become permanent.  DC would be the first jurisdiction to reject participating in the program, which requires mandatory immigration checks.  More details are here.
• Wednesday, 2pm, room 123:  Committee on Aging and Community Affairs roundtable on DC's recent LGBT health report, which notably failed to include information on transgender folks in the District.  My fellow members of the DC Trans Coalition raised a stink over this last week, and a hearing was scheduled 48 hours later.  How's that's for effective advocacy?  Details are here. 

Filed under: things I don't understand

As the scandal around the repulsive George Rekers continues to swirl, Sean Bugg over at MetroWeekly raises a question that I share myself:  why is it that in these scandals, the powerful man who falls from grace ends up relatively unscathed, while the sex worker involved gets the short shrift? 

I don't seem to understand why people can't see sex work as legitimate work (ignoring, for a moment, that it's illegal in most places in the U.S.).  Some people do indeed choose this line of work as their preferred means to support themselves, while others find that economic hardship and systemic discrimination have limited their employment opportunities elsewhere.  Clearly there is a demand for people to do this work, and clearly there are dangers associated with partaking in it -- much moreso for the sex worker than the client.  Why can't we focus on making the work safer instead of ostracizing those who engage in it.  Moreover, why can't we do more to end the systemic discrimination issues (towards, say, transgender women of color), that make sex work the only option some folks have?

Obviously I have no answers here.  In the meantime, support groups like these friendly people.

Why the ultra-conservatives will lose the culture war, if I have to single-handedly defeat each of them myself

So I'm sitting here, going about my life, totally thinking about blogging on other things, when I stumbled across this.  For the sake of emphasis, let's repost the full headline:

'Christianity' in Mississippi: Constance McMillen & learning disabled students sent to fake prom

That's right, the "well-meaning" and "loving" and "concerned" parents of Fulton, Mississippi rented a country club to hold a prom for their duly selected outcasts, while their presumably totally upstanding young Christian virginal children who are totes free from sin had their own prom elsewhere.  

To them I say this:  I hope your merciful God gets Old Testament on your ass. 

Now I've quietly followed the Southern Prom Saga of 2010 for awhile, and I can relate to these kids.  I didn't go to my own high school's prom for fear of being pumped full of redneck lead.  (That's right, I said it, I was scared those whole 4 years.  Savor the belated victory.)  Fortunately, my then-boyfriend went to a much more welcoming school, and I went to the senior prom with him.  We danced with the principal.  Talk about being on another planet a mere 15 miles from your home.  But I digress.

On the one hand, this is a pretty small issue.  One kid (well, two) in one dinky little town was denied access to her prom, on a pretty silly basis.  She rejected that decision, and the school just canceled the whole prom.  Lucky for her, a Reagan-appointed activist judge ruled that her rights were denied, but didn't force the school go forward, on account of the parent-created prom that was to serve as a stand-in for the school sponsored event.  

On the other hand, this whole incident (and the related incident taking place near Macon, Georgia) is indicative of a far greater problem:  Many, many, many, many, many, many, many American schools (particulary middle schools and high schools) are unsafe for LGBTQ youth.  Here's another tidbit from my past you didn't know:  right after my rather forced outing in 10th grade, I was at one of many meetings with the guidance counselor for my grade (nice lady), who assessed the situation I was facing.  Lots of teachers -- including several I'd never known -- were reporting an obscenely large number of hateful language being directed my way, even without me in the room.  That counselor said to me, in blunt terms, "I don't think you're safe here, and I don't think my bosses [the principal and assistant principals] will protect you.  Here's a transfer form.  Pick your school if you want."

Fortunately for me, I come from a long line of exceedingly stubborn mountain people.  To her, I said "I refuse to let them win," and walked out.  The next 3 years sucked monkey balls.  Sure, I avoided physical harm (though I also avoided being alone anywhere), and I walked around just as cocky and arrogant as all the other teenage boys, but inside I was scared out of my brain.  So much so that when I got a viewbook in the mail for a little dinky college that had a picture of kids drawing a pink triangle on sidewalk chalk, I was on them like like a gay man on an antique store (oh... wait...).  I needed an escape.  

Why?  Because at 18, I felt worn down.  I felt old.  I was declared cynical before my time by coworkers twice my age.  And that, friends, is the experience of a gay kid in a small town high school with a penchant towards conservatism.  

I don't want to suggest that all small towns are as teeming with vile, nasty, brutish people as the folks of Fulton who perpetuated this immature affront.  Nor to I have any interest in breathing any life into the myth that only Southern rural locales are unsafe for LGBTQ folks --  the cities and suburbs can be hateful too. 

But as I've told queer kids when I've done trainings and presentations about advocating for their rights:  "Take all that negative energy and use it to make a better world."  You see, over 10 years later, I for one still refuse to be defeated.  And you know what? 

I've got this on my side:  

Blessed are you when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you.

The Gospel of St. Matthew, Chapter 5, Verses 11-12

I almost maybe sort of agree with Dan Choi

I was reading this interview with Dan Choi about his recent escapades in bondage...  er, civil disobedience, and I find myself unsure what to make of it.  Of course, the denial of his basic rights after being arrested is regrettable, but given DC's issues with these kinds of things, sadly isn't surprising.  But DADT is just not an issue I've ever been terribly jazzed about.  On the one hand, it's a blatant employment discrimination issue, and it needs to be remedied.  On the other hand, such a remedy would expand the reach of a bloated and corrupted military system that is used to pad the wallets of lawmakers and corporate executives while being simultaneously targeted against groups of largely defenseless and largely innocent people in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.  Identifying the lesser of those two evils is thus pretty tricky for a relatively pacifistic individual like me.  Thus I wish Choi success in his chosen struggle, while also hoping that the organization in which he rightfully should included is put out of business over time. 

That aside, he's quite right in pointing out how severely out of touch the uber-wealthy homonormative drones at the HRC are.  As I've ranted on too many occasions to link to, many of the mainline national LGBT organizations are doing diddly squat for poor folks, people of color, youth, trans folks,  small town/rural folks, queer people of faith, and on and on and on, and I'm glad someone with Choi's visibility is now making that point (and vainly hope that many both within and outside our community will listen to him there).  I also agree with Pam Spaulding and others that queer politicos should stop equating Democrats with allies, especially given their stunning accomplishments on our issues.  And I certainly have no issue with the use of nonviolent protest to make the case for justice.  

I guess my concern with Choi's actions boils down to two things:

1. What's the grand strategy for equality here?  What battles do Choi and his new organization hope to fight, and when, and in what order?  Nonviolent resistance is a powerful tool, but it's not especially effective if not driven by a coherent strategy with articulated goals.  Yes, having Kathy Griffin headline a rally is a pretty stupid thing.  But so is going to get arrested as a one-off event.  The goal of both events seems more like grabbing media spotlights and donations more than changing anything. 
2. Using nonviolence/civil disobedience to advocate for the right to serve in an organization that is inherently violent seems to require some mental and moral leaps that I don't know that I can make, as evidenced above.  I believe that as activists, we must walk firmly on the side of justice.  Yet the military (whether it does so willingly or not) actively perpetuates injustice both at home and abroad.  At home, it recruits from poor and downtrodden communities and runs these recruits through a few wars before letting them out with the scholarship money they joined to get (yes, that's a huge generalization).  In the field, situations like Abu Ghraib aside, we have to remember that modern warfare results in civilians making up roughly 90% of total casualties.  Prior to the 20th century, that proportion was reversed.  Using civil disobedience to prop up that kind of injustice seems to belittle the sanctity of nonviolent resistance.  

This little mental exercise you've just sat through hasn't really clarified much for me, so I doubt it has for anyone else.  It's just something I'm paying attention to, and it makes me uneasy.  I think I'll just continue to sit quietly on the sidelines of the DADT debate, and focus on some of the other social justice issues we're facing that aren't quite so morally muddled. 

A positive direction for foreign policy?

It looks as though the State Department is gonna look into the state of LGBT rights in Africa.  This is an important step, and it's essential that international human rights law and norms be abided by.  However, I think it's also important that State not move so fast in this area (not likely, really) so that the United States ends up appearing hypocritical.  As I commented at Africa is a Country the other day, the poor and working class experience for LGBT South Africans -- the only country on the continent with progressive laws related to LGBT rights -- isn't necessarily dissimilar from the poor and working class experience for LGBT Americans, and the United States, frankly, has fewer legal protections for LGBT folks than South Africa does.  Thus while I welcome holding other nations accountable for their disregard of human rights, it's concurrently equally important that the same level of accountability be required at home. 

Meanwhile, the rest of the world wants assimilationist gay figure skaters

Since I've already raised the subject in another post, I thought I'd point you to this informative video about Johnny Weir, whom I've recently decided I adore (and, frankly, would boink).  

Again with that whole systemic discrimination thingy.

The NYT loves assimilationist gay theater

Or, one of the stupidest reviews I've ever read.

Apparently, some of the new gay-themed plays this opening this year in New York are somehow "liberated" (and thus better) because they're not overtly political, and nobody dies of AIDS.

What an effing moron.

First, contrary to what one may believe, gay politics consist of much more than marriage, adoption, and being legally allowed to serve as cannon fodder in imperialist wars. It's called systemic discrimination you idiot, and just because a particular playwright didn't beat you over the head with it, it's still there.

Secondly (et quelle surprise), not all gay people have AIDS. Really! I know lots of them! Also, we are perfectly capable of having conflict in our romantic relationships that doesn't center around one of us dying some unspeakable, dreary, slow, agonizing death, like an opera on steroids.

Apparently, these plays are to be applauded for showing gay couples as "just like everybody else." And, in a sense (though not totally -- myriad issues arise that are a product of said systemic discrimination), gay couples are just that. But don't laud the success of stupid political efforts and ridiculously bigoted assumptions about our health by going out and throwing a big party because somebody wrote a play that didn't involve those things.

I'm not a writer or an artist of any kind, but maybe evaluate these gay-themed plays on their artistic merits, rather than their depictions of "normalcy."

Oh, wait, systemic discrimination...

Maine queer activists critique gay marriage crusade

Via Bilerico (an often unlikely source), a video you should watch/listen to. Fair warning: it's about 30 minutes. But it offers queer perspectives that are often left out of mainstream discussions.

For another poignant non-mainstream queer perspective, check out the DC Trans Coalition's recent statement on hate crimes in the District.

The National Equality March and shoddy organizing

I just got back from the rally portion of the National Equality March, and if I didn't believe in the march from the outset, I most certainly don't believe in it now.

As many of you know, the march was called for and organized by Cleve Jones, and as announced this afternoon, the planning committee consisted of mostly Californians. These Californians called for the march because they lost proposition 8 last fall. I hate to break it to them (again), but losing prop 8 was their own damn fault. A campaign of generic tv commercials and cocktail parties is not activism, is not mobilizing, and is not convincing to the general public. On the same ballot, chickens gained rights, while gay couples lost them. It's not the radical right's fault that initiative was lost -- they played their role in that saga exactly as they were supposed to. The lesbian and gay activists in California (and I use only those words intentionally) and their mainstream gay rights organization backers at the national level messed it up, and I don't feel sorry for them. From the outset, it was clear that their main objective was to bring their sad song to DC, and they have done so, and I'm still not sorry for them.

The rally today featured 35 speakers, at least 30 of which most people have never heard of. Marriage rights were clearly the order of the day. Don't Ask Don't Tell played a close second. The pending Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) was hardly mentioned, and healthcare wasn't discussed at all. As the rally was getting started, the announcer kept talking about "securing equal equality for gays and lesbians." Not only does that phrase make no sense, it isn't fully inclusive of what our movement at least purports to be (though is pretty accurate, sadly). In any event, marriage is apparently the be all and end all thing all the little queers are supposed to blindly get behind.

There was very little mention of the unique issues facing transgender and gender non-conforming people in the United States. No mention whatsoever of the rural experience. No mention of the poor and working class experience. No mention of the immigrant experience. No metion of the youth experience. Virtually no mention of the person of color experience. This was a march for the white, the middle and upper class, the educated, the well-to-do, the conformist, the assimilationist, the patient, and most sadly, the blind followers. Barack Obama was given one oratical blowjob after another for his ever eloquent empty promises. Barney Frank, with whom I rarely agree, was scorned for calling the march a waste of time. And, sadly, there were far too many posters saying "listen to Cleve" and "Cleve is right." Right about what, exactly? That he needs and wants attention and thus threw this little party to get it? The only person in the long list of speakers (before I left in frustration) to actually call for people to talk to their legislators at the local, state and national levels was Judy Shepard.

(BTW, there couldn't have been more than 10,000 people there, and that's probably generous. The crowd didn't go much further than the Grant memorial/reflecting pool in front of the Capitol.)

There was no talk of grassroots empowerment (though the grassroots were falsely invoked time and again). No talk of how to actually be an effective organizer. No offers of various strategies to see LGBTQ rights recognized at various levels of government. Instead, the talk was listen to the gay elite, and follow their orders. If you dare ask questions, you must be against us.

Fuck all that. The other day a Human Rights Campaign fundraiser stopped me on the street to ask for money. I tried to politely say I had ethical issues with his organization, and wouldn't give. Rather, than leave me be, he started to argue. I pointed out that that HRC is a racist, classist, sexist, transphobic organization. His only retort was that on "the trans thing," they recently added some words to their charter and decided to not fuck up ENDA this time around. Racist, classist and sexist went unchallenged.

I'll admit, I'm a white, gay, cissexual, well-educated, employed, housed man. I should be the one this march appealed to the most. And yet, it was a turn-off. There was no apparent understanding that injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. There was no recognition that the oppressed of the world need to unite and work for and with each other. There was no recognition that the incredibly conservative mainstream national gay movement has failed us all.

I've recently been reading a collection of essays called Smash the Church, Smash the State by several early radicals who were involved in gay, lesbian, bi, queer, trans, immigrant and PoC liberation right around and immediately after Stonewall. Several of the authors express astonishment that today's movement (with whom many broke ties long ago) is fighting for marriage rights when 40 years ago the goal was to smash unjust patriarchal institutions, and that rather than fighting for the end of violent oppression and imperialist wars of expansion, today's gay movement is fighting to openly contribute to those efforts.

I guess today we're supposed to congratulate ourselves for working backward.

This is not to say that good things didn't happen around the march. There was a town hall yesterday for trans activists from around the country to network, share experiences, and strategize together. And I also had the real privilege of participating in an all day leadership conference for queer youth from DC and all over the country, where they gained training and skills to take the fight back to their schools and towns and build a better future.

Today is National Coming Out Day. Yet if this march is any indication of the future of LGBTQ activism, then we haven't come out at all. We've built ourselves a new closet that will take years to deconstruct.

Vigil for Wednesday stabbing victims tonight @ 6:30pm

In an effort to spread the word just a little further, this is a quick reminder that the vigil for the two trans women stabbed on Wednesday afternoon will be held tonight in the 200 block of Q Street NW. One individual died, and the other remains hospitalized.

Both Transgender Health Empowerment and the DC Trans Coalition have issued statements on the killing.

Please come out to the vigil tonight to observe those killed and injured in this incident, which is being investigated as a hate crime.

More news on trans inmates in DC

Following up on my last two posts on this subject, yesterday the Blade ran an op-ed by the DC Trans Coalition (penned by a great friend and yours truly) on the recent developments regarding DC's new policy on housing trans folks in the DC jail.

Be sure to check it out, and remember, holding your government accountable is fun!

In re: my LGBT life related post of November 2008

Progress, comrades!

Read here, and here, and stay tuned for updates.

Sometimes mockery creates itself

So I was reading this little gem about this young gay boy who was buddies with Barbara Bush the Younger and used to get invited to party with Shrub the Younger after Barbara the Younger decided not to put her college education to use for a good number of years. He does the obligatory mention of how all his other homo friends thought he was an idiot for accepting so many invitations from the would-be murderer of all notions of civil rights, and frankly I think his friends should've knocked him over the head a few times. I'm all for being civil with those whom I disagree, but I will not tolerate their dogs' farts.

Shocker of shockers, this boy starts to question his country's leadership after 9/11, Iraq, the roughshod dismantling of the Constitution, etc. And, his little veil of being a poor working boy who just happened to graduate from Yale is of course blown by the fact that his parents are disappointed that he has failed to join the country club. I find it impossible to believe that his net worth ever existed solely in the cup holder of his beaten up Jeep. (And, etiquette note here: if you are invited to the White House and your car is literally falling apart, please dear lord either rent one or show up on foot).

Anyway, in spite of this boy's semi-cuteness yet blatant idiocy, I submit the following observation of why he's a yutz who gets no sympathy from me: he's a homo boy wearing too many dark colors for one outfit, a button-down collar, and pleated forest green pants. Fashion fail.

See, I told you I'd get back to blogging about things I know. :)

Hat tip: Wonkette.

And Sidebar: I'm exceptionally happy that Tennessee Democrats are savvier than their national counterparts. Way to play the game.

Update on LGBT rights in DC

I realize blogging has been light this month, and for that I apologize, but I did want to (perhaps belatedly) alert your attention to some very local issues that have been going on.

The DC Trans Coalition (DCTC) has been running a long campaign to improve human rights protections within the district for transgendered and gender non-conforming individuals. While the DC Human Rights Act now includes those protections, and progress has been made in getting the Metropolitan Police to improve their policies in this area, engaging the DC Department of Corrections (DOC) has been far more challenging. This summer, after an Inspector-General's report found the DOC to be out of compliance with the law, and after DCTC and DOC had already been negotiating some, the DOC convinced the Office of Human Rights to propose new regulations that would exempt it from the Human Rights Act, which would magically clear up the little problem of their not-complying with the law.

Clearly, this couldn't stand. During the comment period, dozens of local and national organizations wrote to oppose the regulatory change, and DCTC also collected comments from around 200 citizens through an online petition. Out of all that, not one single response agreed with the proposed rules, and thus the Office of Human Rights and the DC Commission on Human Rights did not move forward with enactment. A local resident had also filed a complaint against DOC policy, and received a response in early October that made several specious arguments aimed at proving that the DOC was doing nothing wrong, and in fact was exemplary in its choice of housing people based on their genitalia and nothing else.

All of these various documents pointed the way back to the desk of DC's acting attorney general Peter Nickles. The mayor's general counsel until he forced the resignation of then-attorney general Linda Singer, Nickles has been a controversial character on any number of counts, including his failure to actually live in the District. But his fooling around with the Human Rights Act and a legal opinion he wrote opposing a clarification of domestic partner parenting rights led the DCTC and the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance (GLAA) to oppose his nomination to be permanent AG.

Showdown: DC Council Chamber, Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, October 17. Nickles' confirmation hearing ran for roughly eight hours that Friday, and included some 20 or more witnesses, including representatives of DCTC and GLAA. DCTC members in the audience came equipped with bright neon stickers that said "No to Nickles" which garnered the attention of some Council members. After testimony, each member grilled Nickles on this issue, and expressed extreme concern that he would mess with the Human Rights Act, which is cherished as being among the most progressive in the nation.

Since then, DCTC, GLAA and others have met with 8 of the 13 Council members' offices, and had an initial meeting with Nickles himself. We can be hopeful for a positive outcome, but there is much still to be done. Regardless, this issue has received scant media attention since this summer, so I thought I would bring it to light.

Bring it on, Palin

Look folks, Sarah Palin got interviewed by Katie Couric for the 47,000th time, and she of course lost, again. [How one continues to "lose" at interviews should illustrate the Governor's particular level of skill.] Yet this time she got personal, with some ridiculous blather about her lesbian friend's poor life choice about... you guessed it... being a homo! I dare not repost the actual text, as I don't want to sully my blog (read the last three paragraphs of the link above), but I do want to offer a few general comments, as is my wont:

1. This whole "it's a choice" rhetoric is only a loosely veiled method of classifying queer people as second class (or worse) citizens, as in "I shor do feel for those dumb homos who can't live their lives right, like responsible (read: godly) people."
2. If, then, denigrating language is displayed on national television by a (like it or not) important public official, it's only encouraging more people to think that way, and to believe that such dehumanizing thinking is acceptable. This leads to hateful thinking, and hateful acts, all justified by some bizarre conception of the divine, as sanctified by the good governor.
   
3. I can handle the fact that Palin can't tell Paris, Tennessee from Paris, France., because I'm certainly not going to vote for her anyway. But don't start dishing out ignorant, mean-spirited, hateful crap on TV. She should limit her ignorance to countries and concepts, and leave basic human rights out of it.
4. I hope her "good lesbian friend" becomes her less good lesbian friend.
5. Finally, to all my fellow homos who are still steamed that Hillary lost and are thinking of voting for McCain because your diva lost, and he picked another one (who is a horrific replacement, mind you), I hope this kind of crap causes you to finally come to your meth-addled senses.

Clearly, this week's news is bad for my blood pressure. Good thing I'm now just avoiding the economy, or I would've blown a gasket.

Hat tip: Princess Sparkle Pony.

EDIT: My former prof Dan Chong has another fun take on this.