...I see it's time to cut out again for at least a few months.
No, no, folks -- this is nothing like a GBCW post, or bait for "Please don't go!" replies -- it's just me wanting to express my appreciation for the few LGBTs left here, and our cherished allies, and remind you -- and all our dearly departed who are undoubtedly lurking -- of a few things before I take off on one of my long breaks.
Yeah, "break." I can't quit DU -- not in the way Jack couldn't quit Ennis -- but in the way I expect a crackhead can't quit crack. I've never done crack and I never will, but from what I gather, it feels really good until it doesn't, and the crash is a killer. And then you're really sorry you ever gave in to temptation again.
So, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to go over a few things. If you've been here a while, you'll know this stuff backwards, but you may forget it in the heat of banging your head against the wall and wondering if
everyone has gone mad -- and if you haven't been here very long, you may not have noticed some of this.
That said...
If there's one thing I've learned in the past decade, it's that election time is a very bad time to be gay and discussing politics online.
There's always
something going on that directly impacts our lives, and usually it's one big thing entirely out of our control. Once that thing -- say, a lawsuit -- is underway, we are absolutely powerless to steer its direction or bend its timing -- and sometimes it hits right before an election.
In 2004, there were marriage-equality bans on the ballot in 11 different states (and all passed). That assault on our rights (rights we didn't even know we might ever be entitled to) was the brainchild of Karl Rove -- a brilliant move to get gay-haters out to the polls (and thus re-select Bush) -- and, as I have written many times, here and elsewhere, we didn't instigate the marriage battle; it blindsided us.
I wrote this on DU in 2006, and have quoted myself many times since, especially on my own blog, because I can't put it any better (and I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over):
You have to understand something.
There was no “big movement” from the LGBT side; we were quite aware that full equality was a process of baby steps. The “big movement” was a (right-wing) attack tactic, and once they dropped it in our laps, what were we supposed to say? “Thanks, but no, we don’t want to get married” - ?
I feel quite confident in stating that most of us would have been quite happy with “just” equal rights in housing, employment, hospital visitation, inheritance, and ... immigration, et al., and then, ultimately, civil unions. To be honest, I never thought we’d get full-fledged marriage in the U.S. (and now, I know we never will, at least not in my lifetime), and I for one wasn’t pushing for it when the whole anti-marriage movement came crashing down on our heads.
It wasn’t strange timing at all. It was perfectly timed, by the anti-gay brigades.
With one tweak (I think I
might see federally-recognized marriage in my lifetime, although with my luck, it will happen two weeks before I die of old age), the rest of the above still holds true: we didn't bring this on -- the right wing did.
But, from the reaction of some, you'd think we had put those anti-gay measures on every ballot (with more to come in 2006 and 2008) ourselves, in order to... what, I don't know. Maybe we're all such self-loathing homosexuals with an incurable martyr complex, we wanted to codify our second-class citizenship (and reinstall Bush) just to make sure we'd have something to whine about later. (Yes, I'm debating putting a "LOL" at the end of that sentence for the sarcasm-impaired, but I'm feeling so morose right now, I don't feel much like LOLing about anything. And anybody who wouldn't get the sarcasm without a tag wouldn't get the rest of this post anyway.)
Between
Lawrence v. Texas and the Mass. decision, 2003-2004 were really, really good for equal rights -- and really, really,
really bad for LGBT folks who thought everybody left-of-center would be standing with us and cheering us on.
Boy, were we surprised. And not in a good way.
Believe it or not, the 2004-election backlash against gays actually started in 2003, right after the Massachachusetts SJC decreed same-sex marriage legal in that state.
I could give you dozens of quotes by people blaming
us for the SJC's decision, and moaning that
we were going to be responsible for handing the White House back to Bush...
the following year.
I can't give you those quotes if I want to keep this post from being deleted. You're just going to have to trust my word -- and believe that I have all those quotes saved, not out of revenge, or because I'm a masochist, but because, a couple of years ago, a commenter to my blog asked me what impact I thought the (pro-marriage) May, 2008, California Supreme Court decision would have on the upcoming presidential election -- and all those quotes made a point better than I could.
I can tell you how my answer began:
(The decision) will be used against Democrats by the Republicans, and against all LGBTs by the same Democrats who have blamed us for every electoral loss since 2000 — no matter whether a Democrat wins the WH, or how many congressional seats Dems pick up in November.
A lot of Dems who claim to be pro-equality are already hitting us with the cry, “Why NOW?! You’re going to kill us in November!” — as if we ever have anything to do with the timing of any court decision. (This one took four years, btw.)
Happens every election cycle. You can set your watch by it.
Then I quoted Gavin Newsom, who was asked virtually the same question -- will the decision "hurt" the Democratic Party in November? -- and this is what he said:
I’m fed up with tactics. I’m fed up with being a member of the Democratic Party that cares more about winning than what it is we’re supposed to do once we win.
If we can’t stand up on the principle of supporting gay and lesbian rights, then how dare we claim to support civil rights, or human rights, or women’s rights? That’s the basis of the foundation of our party.
And so, for me, with all due respect, those that are playing tactical games, that are concerned about the politics today or tomorrow, there’ll never be a good time to do this. It wasn’t good two years ago during the congressional mid-term elections. It wasn’t good enough four years ago because of the presidential election, it’s not good enough today, it won’t be good enough two years ... from now, for the governor’s race. It’s never the right time, and that’s why it is the right time. We have an obligation, a moral and ethical one.
And then I wrote to my correspondent:
There will be (and always is) the same rending of garments and gnashing of teeth as there was immediately after the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision in November, 2003, which got much worse once Mass actually started issuing marriage licenses in May, 2004 — not even six months prior to the last chance we had to throw George W. Bush out of office.
When the New Jersey civil-unions decision came down just two weeks before the November, 2006, mid-term elections, the howls of doom became deafening. The timing was somehow our fault, and it was our fault the Dems were going to lose the mid-terms, big-time. (As I told some hysterical naysayer at the time: “If only we queers had as much power as you credit us with, we’d rule the world. What do you think we did, influence a state supreme court by mass telepathy?”)
Contrary to all the Criswell-like predictions, Democrats swept the 2006 mid-terms, picking up 31 seats in the House (putting Republicans in the minority for the first time in twelve years), the largest gain for the Dems since 1974.
Meanwhile, Democrats replaced Republicans in five open gubernatorial races, and booted the Repub incumbent, Robert Ehrlich, out of Maryland’s governor’s mansion.
Not a single Democratic incumbent in Congress, or in any gubernatorial race, lost his or her seat.
Not only that, but Arizona became the first state to vote
down a marriage ban (can you believe that now?) -- but that was only because the ballot measure was so draconian, it would have stripped cohabitating
heterosexuals of all their rights too (turning Arizona into another Virginia). Of course, Prop 102 passed in 2008 -- but, for a moment, it seemed like victory was in the air.
What was really happening? A
cycle. Everything happens in cycles. That's it. That's all. The pendulum swings both ways.
But do you think all the
"We're doooomed because of the gays!" folks took back a single word?
Of course not.
Since then, it has seemed as if minds are again changing, for the better -- but while minds sometimes do change, they change at a glacier-like pace. The unusually rapid (if still slight) shift to support for marriage in California in the two short years since Prop H8 is an anomaly -- but I think the reason for any shift at all is that we were so goddamnned angry and hurt, we raised holy hell, and
forced people to sit up and listen, and to ask why we were so...
damaged. I mean, for every jerk who spits,
"You lost -- get over it!" there is one who really didn't understand how badly they hurt us, hurt our families, trampled our very humanity. Now, some of them understand. And some of them are sorry about their votes.
Still, Prop H8 remains an anomaly. I have never in my lifetime seen so many cities,
all over the world, stage protests on our behalf. In New York, D.C., Chicago, even Salt Lake, they turned out by the
thousands. But when I saw photos from the protests where it was damned
dangerous to protest -- Idaho Falls, Grand Forks, Jackson, Macon -- I wept. And when I saw the photo of the
six protesters who turned out, in
November, in the freezing cold, in Sault Ste. Marie -- where they
have marriage, but showed up in solidarity anyway -- I wept that much harder.
Look at this. I don't know if the links work anymore, but look at it anyway. And tell me if you don't at least get a lump in your throat.
But I digress, as usual.
The points I'm trying to make, as I ramble all over the place, are:
1. If the Dems lose big in November, it will be your fault. If by some miracle the Dems do better than expected, you will receive no credit. Either way, don't bother fighting it. People need someone else to blame. Hell, that's half the reason gays are so hated to begin with -- everybody's got to have a bogeyman, and we're a very convenient one. Scapegoating The Other is often the only glue that holds groups together. (Read Karl Popper. Or Chris Hedges. Or both.) In any case, don't try to fight it -- you know what they say about wrestling pigs, right?
2. There is never a "good time" for
other people to fight for
our rights. Yes, our true allies will always stand with us, no matter what anyone else says. But there are many more who will try to convince us they're just swell folks by giving us lip service when it's convenient, but dive into the nearest hole when supporting us becomes inconvenient to their own agenda(s). That's a fact, and there's not a thing we can do to change that. All we can do is tune our bullshit detectors so we can tell -- before we need their help -- who is a real ally, and who just wants to appear cool and trendy by being "pro-gay" only when it's convenient.
3. Trust your gut. You already know who your allies are -- they prove themselves again and again, risking a lot to stand with us no matter what the climate.
At the same time, let them know how much you treasure them. Stand up for
them and the issues nearest
their hearts.
We've been accused of being tunnel-visioned, and we often are. If someone --- especially someone with no dog in this fight -- has been standing up for us, take it upon yourself to learn more about the issues that impact his/her life (unions? public education? poverty? green power?), and then speak up. There's not one genuine left-of-center issue advocated on DU that doesn't benefit us all.
Show your solidarity with your straight allies as they have with us -- not in order to gain something more, but just because it's the right thing to do. That's why the greatest of our aliies do it for us -- because it's the right thing to do.
Sorry if I sound like I'm lecturing -- but if I can't speak honestly with my LGBT family...
And, yes, I've been negligent myself in this area -- which is probably why I'm so adamant about it.
4. This election is going to be especially rough for us LGBTs and for our true allies. No way around it: the Dems
are facing losses. How many, I don't know. Where, I don't know. I used to be pretty good at predicting nationwide wins and losses, but I've lost that intense concentration I had four, six, eight years ago -- and this whole Tea Party thing is a wild card.
All I know is that the Dems
will lose congressional seats, and probably some gubernatorial races. And, because the current administration has been, while not the utter catastrophe of a McCain-Palin White House, an unfathomly deep disappointment to most LGBT Americans (except for those of us who didn't expect much from the beginning),
and, because we have not been silent, obedient little boys and girls, we are going to be blamed again. You are going to hear that
we were responsible for discouraging turnout of "the base" -- of which we have been told, endlessly, we are not a part, but somehow, over which we hold some magical power -- yet which seems to consist of Dem voters who dismissed our significance (and the importance of our rights) all along.
Hey, don't make me explain it -- all I know is what I've been told, endlessly: We are too insignificant a minority to count for anything, and yet so powerful, it's our fault when the Dems lose.
And don't ask me why we never get any credit when Dems
win, especially as LGBTs are a steady 75% Dem bloc. I guess that's when we become insignificant again.
(
4a. Don't let anybody blame you for that 25% of LGBTs who vote Repub. What do they expect us to do, go to the homes of Log Cabinettes and hold guns to their heads as they fill out their absentee ballots?)
And if anybody thinks I'm talking only about DU, I'm not. I'm feeling the bullets whizzing by my head elsewhere already -- sadly, on
gay blogs, too. You want to see a circular firing squad? Just head over to Queerty or Joe.My.God. -- two places I used to enjoy visiting, and where I participated in discussion threads a lot more often than I do now.
There is some weird-ass vibe on the gay blogs, and the only explanation I can come up with is that we're all so angry, so hurt, so frustrated, and left without any outlet whatsoever that might actually
accomplish something, we're turning on one another.
You've seen that happen on DU a million times since we lost a common enemy in Bush. It's one thing to get stabbed in the chest by Republicans -- you
expect that -- but to be stabbed in the back by the party you kept convincing yourself was on your side... Well, I can't think of many psychic scars (that don't involve unthinkable violence) worse than having your bubble of cognitive dissonance burst, especially after you
knew it was going to happen, but you just kept on denying, denying, denying... and now you're kicking yourself for being so damned stupid.
Except... You weren't stupid. There's so little to believe in anymore, when President Dreamy comes along, and all the other kids are screaming and fainting at the thought of touching the hem of his garment... well, I'm not going to beat you up for allowing yourself to be swept away and thinking:
"This time, it's real! This time, I won't wake up alone with nothing but a wet spot on the sheet and a matchbook with a phone number that's not in service! This time...!"But I will tell you: he's not going to call
you either. And if the roses haven't arrived by now, you've been fucked, in more ways than one.
But the degree of pain any of us is feeling is moot. All of us LGBTs -- those who fell for President Dreamy and those who kept begging everybody else to take a second look -- are feeling more powerless than ever.
Look at this big DADT dog-and-pony show. While I'll never understand why any self-repecting gay person would want to defend rights they're barred from exercising, I'm as disgusted by this turn of events as anyone. As I keep saying, if only Obama had thrown half as much weight behind the DADT vote as he did behind his pet health insurance plan... but he didn't. He wanted insurance "reform." He didn't want DADT repealed. If he did, he would have worked for it.
Now, take another thing out of our control -- and happening right at election time: the Prop H8 trial. As much as I'm (cautiously-optimistically) cheering on Olson-Boies, those of us following the case are
thisclose to being starking-raving mad with anxiety. And we have no outlet. So we turn on one another.
Ever been to
Prop 8 Trial Tracker? I can't recommend it enough -- not just for keeping track of the Prop H8 trial, but for getting a great education in the law (in addition to folks like that godsend Shannon Minter chiming in from time to time, there are several other lawyers who are regular readers/commenters there, and are happy to answer questions). P8TT offers the most civilized (and active) exchange on LGBT issues available on the Web -- and yet even the P8TT regulars are more than frayed around the edges, and some are sniping at one another in the most surprising, dismaying ways.
How about Box Turtle Bulletin -- another gay blog I respect, a
lot, but whose most prolific writer, Timothy Kincaid, has often been less ballsy than I wish he'd be -- but only because Timothy is
nice, and I'm... well, I'm not. I'm old, and I'm pissed off, and my patience is at an end.
Well, even Timothy finally blew this week -- at Geoff Kors (whom I've ragged on countless times). Maybe it was a one-time thing, or maybe the nice, even-tempered, more-than-fair, see-every-issue-from-all-sides Timothy has just finally had it with the bullshit from Gay, Inc.
(Not that I blame him. Every group has its "Inc.," more concerned with preserving its own monetary interests than with the people it's supposed to be fighting for. Gay, Inc. ... LDS, Inc. ... the DLC {Inc.} ... They're all the same. In any case, I hope Timothy's blow-up wasn't a one-time thing.)
Nevertheless -- and point of
that digression: Whatever --
whatever -- you do, please, please be kind to one another, LGBT DUers. If the past is any indication of the all-too-near future, you are in for Hell Ride 2010.
I say "you" because I can't allow myself to be here for it. I've been through this too many times, and I just don't want to deal with it again.
Selfish?
Fuck yeah! LOL I've earned that much.
And I've got a family to love (and not torture quite so much with my pacing-back-and-forth rants of "Did you
hear what happened today?!"), and appalling stories of right-wing sex scandals to research, and a blog that needs tending every once in a while.
And I'm working on a new series of YouTube videos. I'd tell you what they're about when I've got the first one up, but I won't be here, so check my blog from time to time.
Now, I have to go grab those photos of Bishop Eddie Long in his skin-tight muscle T's, and mull over the script (and find some music) for the first in my new video series.
See, contrary to some people's beliefs, I never quit. I retreat from one thing when I know I can't effect any positive change, and go find something else I think may help the cause.
But I never, ever
quit.
So, be good to each other. If you want me, hit one of my Web sites, and don't feel slighted when I don't answer your PM, because I'm logging out and deliberately misplacing my password.
The only way to get off the crack -- even temporarily -- is to break the pipe.
See you... maybe in January, if the dust has settled by then.
With that...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6yLRmo7CjULove to all my LGBT brothers and sisters, and especially to our straight allies, who are
gold --
Sapph
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
