News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile

Access 11/5 Senate ENDA Hearing Live Blog

Access Tuesday's Election Live Blog


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


Family Equality Council's Chrisler: 'Movement Malpractice?'

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Jun 25, 2009 at 06:06:20 AM EDT


This is a guest post by Jennifer Chrisler of the Family Equality Council; as executive director for the organization, she attended the Presidential limited federal benefits extension signing ceremony last week. Chrisler is also one of the invitees at the White House's upcoming commemoration of Stonewall, billed by the administration as an event in the vein of its St. Patrick's Day or Cinco de Mayo fetes. Jennifer is here to share her view that this social gathering is an opportunity for members of the community to meet with the President and convey their thoughts about progress (or the lack thereof) and to keep open communication channels with those who can effect change.

Of course there are others who do not share Chrisler's view, and believe that the social event should be boycotted and is nothing more than a dog-and-pony show opportunity for this White House, with those attending being used as PR props. I'll give my personal take at the end of the essay.

Now -- I shouldn't have to remind anyone, but I will -- civility is key here on the Blend, particularly with content that may be polarizing. It's healthy to have spirited, cordial debate in the comments between readers, the diarists and baristas, not attacks; consider this the one and only trapdoor warning. --Pam


Movement Malpractice?

By Jennifer Chrisler, Executive Director of Family Equality Council

Malpractice is defined as engaging in professional wrongdoing that will result in harm.

As one of those many leaders across the country fighting for equality for LGBT families, failure to accept the President's invitation to meet with him at the White House this coming Monday would be committing "Movement malpractice."

For more years than I care to remember we have bemoaned the lack of access and the lack of progress at the federal level for LGBT equal rights.  It is no surprise then that after years of toiling to elect fair-minded leaders, and with the assumption that we now have that in the White House and the Congress, we want action and we want it swiftly.  When we¹ve struggled as a community for more years than we care to count to achieve equality and we believe for the first time that it is now achievable, our hopes are incredibly high. The knife of disappointment cuts that much deeper and the wounds take much longer to heal.

But that anger, justified as it may be, is no reason to stage a walk off. Time and time again LGBT people have suffered painful setbacks in our struggle to achieve equality.  Giving up and walking away from the work is not an option for effective leaders. Each time, we must re-group and re-strategize for the challenges ahead.  Walking away from the opportunity to meet with the leader of the free world to make our case for equality yet again would be movement malpractice on my part.

That is why I will be at the White House on Monday, commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Stonewall riots. I will be there in the spirit of those who stood up for themselves and all of us in June 1969. If anything, it insults those who came before us, on whose shoulders we stand, to not acknowledge the birth of the modern LGBT rights movement at the invitation of the President of the United States.

Pam Spaulding :: Family Equality Council's Chrisler: 'Movement Malpractice?'
My job as Executive Director is to educate and enlighten lawmakers and the American public about our families, the impact discrimination has upon them and to advocate for full equality. That means speaking up and speaking out, in EVERY venue possible so that we remind those in power that real lives and real families are affected by their actions and inactions.  This act of speaking up and speaking out is something every LGBT person needs to do. I already do this on behalf of my family and the families I serve everyday at soccer games, at school fundraisers, around the table during Sunday dinners and yes, finally, at the White House with the President of The United States.

On June 17th, I stood with the President prior to his signing of a Presidential Memorandum extending some federal benefits to same-sex couples. In those few minutes I showed him pictures of my twin 7 year old boys. I spoke to him about the millions of children like mine being raised by LGBT parents and how important his leadership is to protect families.  He looked and he listened and we made a connection -- one parent to another. And he got my message. Our families are more alike than we are different. And my family deserves the same rights and protections as his family.

At Family Equality Council we train LGBT parents to share their personal stories with friends, family, co-workers, educators, faith leaders and elected officials.  We know that when the public is educated about our families, we change hearts and minds.  We are proud of the impact our advocacy has had all around the country ­ one person at a time. Youth bravely standing up to school administrators who deny them gay-straight alliances. Parents bravely standing up to politicians who deny them custody and family recognition. Grandparents who challenge their faith leaders about the inclusion of their grandchildren in their places of worship.

Speaking up is never easy but it is the strongest tool we have in our quest for equal justice.

When Sharon from Illinois tells us of the devastating financial impact her family is experiencing because her company doesn't offer domestic partner health benefits for her long term partner who is receiving expensive medical treatment, people listen and learn.

When Martha, who lives in the Netherlands, tells us she cannot move back to the United States to be with her ailing 80 year old mother because her wife is not allowed in the country and Martha cannot sponsor her as a heterosexual spouse could, people listen and learn.

And when Chris & Rich and their teenage children tell the President on Monday, that their California marriage is just as meaningful as those shared by their straight counterparts, the President will listen and hopefully learn.

These are our stories. These and thousands more are the compelling arguments we present for equal treatment under the law. On Monday, while at the White House, in the company of those who can change our laws to provide equality ­ I will tell these stories.

For decades we have been invisible to our government.  Today, we have a President who is welcoming us to his home and wants to hear from us. He has made promises that our community will hold him accountable for, and I hope on Monday he will speak with the passion and conviction his voice carried forward on the campaign trail.

Yes, I will be at the White House this Monday. I will have one of the most important conversations we can have with one of the most important leaders in our nation¹s history.

I will honor the bravery and vision of the LGBT families I work daily to support. I will share their stories with people in power and mince no words about what we want, when we want it and how.

This is the oath of my office. Hold me to mine, as I work to hold the President to his.

Jennifer Chrisler is Executive Director of Family Equality Council, the national LGBT organization working to ensure equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender families by building community, changing hearts and minds, and advancing social justice for all families.  Jennifer is raising her twin sons with her same-sex spouse in Newton, MA.


My two cents -- I think our community should meet with the President for substantive discussions about policy; I also believe that social gatherings can present a means of cultivating communication and relationships between groups, particularly ones that need to bridge gaps in strategy, outlook, and timelines about policy.

That said, there's not a lot of trust out there for our various professional advocacy organizations, based on the tons of email to me (thousands - my inbox is a mess), Facebook messages (another mess) from average LGBT people. And these are the orgs that are seen by the White House, Congress, and the MSM as representing the voices of the community. A common theme is that for too many of our "leaders" there is more emphasis on personal and professional upward social/political/financial mobility than there is community advocacy. Similarly, charges of fealty to the administration at the expense of the good of the community for the sake of gaining employment (well, DC is a company town, right) has been a running theme.

Well, from my POV, since I don't need a job in the admin, or work for one of these organizations, or live inside the Beltway (or get invited to these events, lol), it appears the truth lies somewhere in between. No, we don't vote for who serves as leaders of the LGBT community; the people who are there stepped up to the plate. They work long and hard to do the right thing from their perspective, and often feel they are in a no-win situation and can't please everyone. That said, those same people have to take the public lumps for the miscues, dodges, mistakes and biases that set the community back as well -- after all, they are $$$upported by the community. How about each invitee to that White House Stonewall gathering bring a discharged service member to meet the President, or someone who was fired for being gay in the private sector? What about bringing as a guest a transperson beaten as a result of a hate crime? There's a bit of reality to bring to the President's attention, some activism in that social setting.

I want to remind folks of the Call to Action of The Dallas Principles:

CALL TO ACTION

1. We demand that government officials act now to achieve full civil rights without delay.

2. Our organizations and individuals need to develop a collaborative and revolutionary new organizing model that mobilizes millions of supporters through emerging web and phone technologies.

3. All LGBT individuals must accept personal responsibility to do everything within their power for equality and should get involved in the movement by volunteering, giving and being out.

4. We will hold elected officials and our organizations accountable for being transparent and achieving full civil rights by active participation when possible and active opposition when necessary.

5. Our allies need to be proactive in public support for full civil rights.

6. Every government measure that quantifies the US citizenry must permit LGBT individuals to self-identify and be counted in every way citizens are counted.

7. We demand that the media present LGBT lives in fair, accurate and objective ways that neither include nor give credence to unsubstantiated, discriminatory claims and opinions.

In this new world of politics and activism, "leadership" is more than someone who earns a paycheck for an organization that represents a specific portion of our community. The face of leadership has changed -- it's not just a figurehead, it's all of you -- those who take the responsibility of contacting, meeting and holding your elected officials accountable. Those of you who show up to volunteer, those who organize -- online or offline -- to mobilize action; individuals who come out of the closet in less-hospitable parts of the country -- that's the most powerful advocacy tool of all.

The real problem is that there is often a lack of alignment between leadership and the grassroots, exacerbated by differences in race, class, gender, location -- a multitude of factors. And the principal difference is access to those in power. The advocacy groups have served as the buffer between political institutions and the average LGBT citizen. Messages that are not in alignment can and do result in PR and policy disasters of epic proportions, not because everyone isn't on the same page, but because they often aren't even in the same library in the same country. It appears that many LGBTs out there see much of the community's leadership as out-of-touch, unwilling to listen, and, by extension, cannot be trusted to lead and hold a slippery administration accountable lest they lose access.

And that's where the fundraiser comes into play. While one can debate the utility of social gatherings to effect change, it's impossible to justify emptying the gAyTM to support repeated nose-thumbing at the community by this administration and the Dem party, either by silence, foot-dragging, evasive answers or outright offensive acts like some of the arguments lodged in the DOMA brief. You have money to donate? Give to your state organization; give to specific candidates that don't pussyfoot about supporting equality. Send a message.

It's been made clear over the last few days that while the social glue of niceties is one thing, withholding cold hard cash gets attention much more quickly. And your pressure on this LGBT DNC fundraiser, as the invited guest list shrinks by the day, can be repeated over and over. The DNC is hurting, take a look at the May fundraising date. Those queer dollars aren't meaningless, or you wouldn't see the scrambling for crumbs to toss at the community.

What we need is better and more engagement all around, less paranoia, more reality-based conversations -- within the community and with those in power, not efforts to stifle dissent or worse, pretend it doesn't exist -- or that it can be solved at a cocktail party or barbecue with a particular group of people.  

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I agree
This sounds like a great opportunity.

I do hope there's someone there to bring up the issue of health insurance discrimination against trans people.

Tax the Christian Taliban!


The two-track approach is right
Jennifer Chrisler writes eloquently of why it's right to engage with President Obama (and I've just sent a contribution to the Family Equality Council). We are also right to boycott fundraising for the DNC and to hold the lily-livered suck-ups in contempt. And, of course, Pam's balanced assessment is right on target, as always!

co-sign
Absolutely. While folks shouldn't let themselves be showpieces for shams (I'm talking to you, Solomonese), nor should we be throwing open our purses for those who do nothing in return, meeting with the president at the White House is an entirely different story.  It is an opportunity to get him to listen.  The Lt. Colonel who is fighting his discharge is going to be there, and I can't think of anyone I would rather have in front of Obama to ask him why he won't issue a stop-loss order on DADT.

Keep the purse closed, keep the channels of communication open.  It is working!


[ Parent ]
Give the Administration their own diplomatic strategy

"Keep the purse closed, keep the channels of communication open."

It is like the Administration's own methods of engaging North Korea and Iran!

But in this case, the tools are applied to people who understand American cultural norms (hear that, Iran?), and who aren't insane. (We mean you, Kim Jong Mentally-Il)
So maybe we can feel optimistic of success.

"In this new world of politics and activism, 'leadership' is more than someone who earns a paycheck for an organization that represents a specific portion of our community."   Pam, you are perfect!


[ Parent ]
several times
in her letter Ms. Chrisler used the terms "meeting" and "work" or "working" multiple times.

I would have no problem with her sentiments if what she were talking about was a legitimate working meeting.  But, this is a cocktail party.  It has been billed as such by those hosting the event.  

In fact, in my opinion this event has been described in an inappropriate manner by likening it to a St. Patricks Day or Cinco De Mayo "celebration".  These both immediately bring to mind a "beer bash".

We're talking about commemorating the Stonewall "RIOTS".

I'm sure that it is normal procedure for the White House to be very careful in organizing and promoting events.  I'm sure words used are always reviewed by multiple eyes before being put out into the public.  I'm sure language used is carefully vetted so as not to be considered offensive or inappropriate.

So, after this careful vetting process, the phrasing they came up with was to describe this event to commemorate a riot for civil rights as "ya know, kinda like a St. Patricks Day party".

Could the White House be any more tone deaf on LGBT issues?

It just gives the impression that they don't care and / or don't feel it's important enough to worry about.  I hope they are not being intentionally insulting.  But, after the DOMA brief, who knows.  The oft talked about incest comparison is offensive.  But, just as bad is the reasoning that we shouldn't be given our rights because it will save the government money.  At what price are we considered too expensive to deal with?

Will this event actually be an opportunity to "work" or "meet" with anyone of authority?  I doubt it.  Yes, the president will likely show up to give short (very short) remarks and then move on to more important work.

The administration KNOWS what we want as the result of the DMOA debacle which was of their own making.  Apologize for DOMA, suspend DADT and explain the timetable and agenda for our other issues.

The constant attempts to find something else to do to quell the uprising is insulting.  What we want is in their power to give.  The refuse to give it and refuse to give a explanantion as to why they refuse.

Watch carefully, the next DOMA brief will be coming soon.  And, at the moment, I have a feeling it will be very similar in language to the first one.


Exactly
Those defending attending this cocktail party keep describing it as a place where they will go, exchange ideas, really communicate with the President.  My understanding of these things is that these gatherings in no way provide opportunity for that.

And as for bringing "controversial" guests, don't hold your breath.  Why not?  It might be considered confrontational and you won't be asked back.  And we couldn't risk that could we?


[ Parent ]
Cocktail parties are an essential part of doing business.
A social event is when you hang out with your friends or family.  This sort of event is as far from social as you can get, as anyone who has ever been to one can tell you.  This is a networking event and all that will be discussed all night long are all of our issues.

And I don't have any problem with celebrating Stonewall, or the successes we've had since then, or the lives of those who have gone before us.  In fact, I and millions of others do it every year and we call it Pride.  That the White House is joining us this year is not a bad thing.

I agree entirely with Ms. Chrisler.  She would not be doing her job if she didn't go to this event, and when she goes to this event it will be to do her job.  Yes, there's prestige to this event, but that's what makes it an excellent opportunity to help get the best work done.  

Boycott the fundraisers by all means, but not the events where we can actually be heard.  I totally support the strategy of starving them of our money while continuing to communicate to them what they can do to get our money back.

And if we can get them to pay for our drinks in a fancy setting while we're doing it, then good for us.


[ Parent ]
Great essay, Pam
Are the professional gays communicating the desires, concerns, and issues within our community, that is the question. The White House should, at least, understand that such a split that exists. Now the Whiye House shouldn't do anything about that split, per se (that's the community's problem) they should be question these leader likewise and keeping them honest.

That's assuming, of course, that the White House even cares. And like timNC said, the White House and the Obama Administration is giving off signals that they really don't care.


Money Talks
We need to communicate. Removing funds sends one heck of a message.

We're effectively suing the DNC, and Obama, for political malpractrice. Professional conduct that has done us harm.

By all means communicate by other methods too. While they have proved to be remarkably ineffective by themselves, they could be a useful part of what is happening. As we say in Australia, "You get more done with a quiet word and a piece of 4x2 than a quiet word alone."

It was Alexandre-Auguste Ledru-Rollin, Leader of the French Revolution of 1848, who said as the mob streamed into Paris's Jardin du Luxembourg: "There goes the people. I am their leader, I must follow them!"

I suggest that our leaders do likewise, because right now, there's an uprising on the Internet that echoes Stonewall. We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more.

If you wish to lead, then follow.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse


Apt quote.

The grassroots are the leaders now -- top down thinking & management by LGBT non-profit/civil rights officers & staff is no longer going to cut it on how to run the LGBT civil rights/human rights movement.

The "leaders" need to consider the grassroots stakeholders, as much or more important than the donor base shareholders, or they will become completely irrelevant to this movement for equality under the law.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau


[ Parent ]
Domestic partner benefits are well and good
But we'd do much better with universal single-payer healthcare, which is off the table (and now, apparently, the public option is in danger of getting swept off the table).  Since Obama has no intention of exerting political will on the Democratic Party for the repeal of DOMA that he "supports", DP health benefits cost thousands more for a same-sex couple than they would for an opposite-sex couple.

If Ms. Chrisler were to ask my opinion, which she's not--she's explaining the professional gay mindset of privilege that I will never attain--I'd tell her that rather than showing pictures of a child, she should bring Lt. Choi or LtCol. Fehrenbach or Lt. Tsao as her "and guest".  These are people's lives that Obama could easily help while the Congress gets off their fat, dumb, lazy asses and crunches numbers to find out if they can afford to ditch the GLBT community off to the wayside.

I understand that there's a lot on Obama's plate.  I understand that there's a lot on the Democrats' plate.  Right now, however, they're far more interested in their own self-interest.  

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #


LtCol. Fehrenbach is already going
As a guest of SLDN, so that's covered. I am glad to see Ms. Chrisler's organization is also planning on bringing guests who can attest to the detrimental impact of discrimination in our lives.

I personally understand the point Ms. Chrisler is making, and I have to admit being of two minds about it. Although I agree it is vital to keep our issues front and center, and communicate not only what we want from our leadership but also why it is so vital, what bothers me about both the "benefit expansion" signing and this cocktail party is that they appear thrown together at the last minute. It is one thing (and a positive thing) to commemorate Stonewall at the White House, but the impression left on the rest of us is that this is yet another crumb meant to pacify the Beltway insiders (and get them to quiet us - fat chance), while the Administration does nothing. All of those attending must make it clear that this better be the beginning and not the end of the administration's advocacy.  


[ Parent ]
a suggestion
A suggestion I would make for all the "professional" gays attending the White House cocktail party.

If you want the community (well maybe just me) to believe you are attending this "party" to meet, discuss and accomlish anything, then do this one simple thing

REFUSE ALL PHOTOS.

Don't allow yourself to become "cover" for the adminsitration by having your photo taken with anyone who can then use that photo for their own propoganda purposes.

That means no photos of you shaking hands with Obama for the "few minutes" that he is actually there.  NO photos of you and Obama engaging in what appears to be "meaningful conversation".

Yes, the professional orgs will lose a photo they could use in their fundraising appeals.  But, the White House will also lose the opportunity to use that same photo.


Shorter idea
Show up, but leave the checkbook at home.

Talk is important but silence speaks too..
"In those few minutes I showed him pictures of my twin 7 year old boys. I spoke to him about the millions of children like mine being raised by LGBT parents and how important his leadership is to protect families.  He looked and he listened and we made a connection -- one parent to another. And he got my message."  

If that is the case then spending $x to get into a cocktail party for another 2 minutes is fiscal malpractice.  Sometimes one's silence can say a lot too.  If the President gives a party and no one attends....I think that sends a stronger message this time.  If anything, all those gay dollars could be combined to create a commercial showing the hypocrasy of Obama, or telling the stories about families, or training some nonwhite spokespeople to take the place of our 'in the beltway' crowd. I don't want to pay my leaders to go to parties and schmoozing events.  That is how the 'good ole boys' do it and we have all had enough of that.  I expect more creativity than that from my leaders, especially the ones on salary.  I would rather pay Pam to do the Blend full time than pay for any other leader.  Pam does more good for our community by blogging than anyone in Washington.  Let's pay Pam to stay home with her wife and doggies and blog full time.  


Remind me again
A fantastic professional opportunity for Chrisler, of course she should go.  Remind me again how this helps my family achieve equality?  Attending parties is not a winning strategy.  My checkbook remains closed to the DNC, HRC and the Family Equality Council.



The conversation I want to see happen...
I have no problem with the leaders of GLBT organizations hob-nobbing with the Administration.  I don't particularly mind when they lend their names to photo-ops, either.  We're all cynical enough to understand what's really going on there.

But leaders of GLBT organizations ought never to replace our individual responsibility to express our irritation with the way things are going.  I think everyone agrees that money talks, so that's how I go about expressing my displeasure. Since I don't have unlimited funds, I'm sticking to contributions to groups that actually represent my views.

If the money dries up, the conversation I really want to occur will: "Why's the gay money abandoned us?"  Perhaps some hob-nobber will be able to pipe up with the bleeding obvious: "Well, could it be because you took 'em for granted?"

Years and years ago, ACT-UP and NAPWA used to use this kind of good-cop/bad-cop technique with great results.  Nobody wanted blood on their hospital steps, so they were more willing to work with the 'more presentable' activists.  

Ultimately, it's progress that matters to me.  Whatever tactic works is fine by me.


Who said don't go?
I haven't read everything that has been written about the party - and its mostly been hush hush anyway - but Crisler is missing the point.  She is being defensive and consequently only hearing that she is being attacked for having the opportunity to meet the President.

Go to your celebration.  But don't go without knowing that you are responsible to do more than bask in the glow of power under the impression that an invitation to celebrate is somehow equatable to success.  

You have a responsibility to represent the outrage that you are hearing - the voices of the people that don't get invited to soirees, but are expected to give $ during campaigns and work to help elect politicians under the impression that the devotion will result in positive change.

I'm so sorry that you (and others like Crisler - community organizers of all stripes and levels of activism) are in the position of intense scrutiny.  We (if I may use the plural and represent the uninvited) are finally getting impatient.

There are still many among us that are content to let politicians and community leaders take their time to figure out how to make things happen...and not ruffle any feathers...and wait for a better time.  

Who do you represent?  People that are content with the status quo and want you to enjoy parties or people that have expectations of the changes that has been promised them - changes they worked to help make happen - changes that they are counting on to make their lives better?

If you aren't put under scrutiny - if our elected officials aren't put under scrutiny - if our political parties aren't held accountable for the advocacy they claim yet don't produce - then WE are failing at our responsibility to advocate for ourselves.  

Can't stand the heat?  You know the answer...


Good shot. Wrong target.
I guess you don't know that earlier this week, John at AmericaBlog sent his flying monkeys after her and the only organization that has consistently and persistently advocated for LGBT parents.

It was a great example of why we still need single-issue orgs that put moms and kids (and dads and kids) in the center, not the beneath-contempt margins.

Watch for the personal attacks and dismissal of our issues on this thread. I can promise you a handful of threats to 'stop paying for' the FEC from people who don't know what it is and can't name any of its policy positions or accomplishments.


But wait, there's more!


[ Parent ]
I would add
That anyone who is planning to go, to try and do some good. In addition if they read the blogs about the event, would feel a need to be a little defensive at the moment.

If for no other reason, that they don't have their motives picked apart afterward by people on blogs who don't know why the org went. Filling in the information they don't have with their own personal theories.

Help defend equality, visit One Kalamazoo http://www.onekalamazoo.com/


[ Parent ]
LGBT Leaders should show up for White House Stonewall Commemoration
I agree that LGBT leaders can't complain about "lack of access" and then "boycott" when invited to a meeting. That's hypocritical and childish! If you want to call yourself a "leader, step up and speak up directly and face-to-face. If you don't, you are just a spotlight-grabbing, big-mouth egotistical coward who needs to get another job!!!!!
BTW I speak as a person who devotes 90% of my time to working as an unpaid advocate-activist-community organizer. Being disappointed is part of the experience.  The challenge is to keep pushing and making the most of every opportunity.  

this is NOT A MEETING
and has not been billed as such.  A "meeting" is when a group of people sit around a table and discuss issues based on a published agenda.  Minutes are published from meetings.  Results and assignments are expected to come out of meetings.  Next steps are expected to be formulated at a meeting.

This is a "party" and a schmooz event, where maybe, just maybe, you might be able to express an opinion to some lower level staffer that might get passed along.  More likely you will be talking to other activist guests as opposed to anyone who has the power to do anything.


[ Parent ]
If this is a Celebration of Stonewall Riots, Where Are Our Queens?
Personally, I would like to re-enact the riot in front of the Mandarin Oriental, beer bottles flying and all. I will be there with my sign "NO GAY APARTHEID"  and I will be extremely vocal.  Barney is not going to get away scot free.  The Washington Blade will be there, cameras rolling, I hope they tackle all 3 of those Rep.s and get them to commit to something tangible - a real timeline for legislation would do (DOMA repeal, DADT repeal, ENDA enactment, pledge by these pols to uphold the Dallas Principles.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. - The U.S. Constitution Article IV.Section. 2. Clause 1



FUN!!!!
Now THAT would be a cool and fun idea: re-enacting the Stonewall Riots, right in front of the coctail party!!!

I'd do that, only on the condition that I can use Maggie Gallagher as a human shield from the flying bottles.


[ Parent ]
keep talking but close the checkbook
Good idea.  Stay willing to talk, but keep that checkbook closed.  The DNC has not earned our money.  If you feel a need to donate, there are plenty of worthy organizations out there.  If you feel a need to be loyal to your party, consider giving to a state democratic party organization.  Chances are the dems on the state level have done more to earn your contribution than the dems on the federal level have.  (that's certainly true here in Washington state).

After we begin to see some tangible results (starting with 1) signing the Hate Crimes Act into law and 2) formally withdrawing the offensive brief in the DOMA case), then we can consider resuming donations.  We make clear, however, that for the checks to keep coming, we need to see positive results (ENDA, DADT, DOMA, etc)


Beware the Lame Excuses
I went to Family Equality Council's website when Ms. Chrisler first announced that she was attending.  Instead of outcries about the Obama Administrations brief, there was a big picture of Ms. Chrisler attending the memorandum signing.  I suspect the main reason Mr. Chrisler and the other DC Professional Gays want to attend the cocktail party at the White House is so they can dupe people into thinking their organziation has connections so that they can get more money in their bank accounts.   Stop giving money to the professional gay "lobbyists" in DC and start giving to the local organizations that ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE!!

This is Fine as Far as it Goes
No one accuses our "leaders" of lacking the talent to put together a good defense of their actions.  Ms. Chrisler eloquently defends the mindset of the DC area GLBT organizations in her essay.  She is, of course, not entirely wrong and not entirely right.  Showing Obama pictures of your kids is not going to get us anywhere.  "Connecting" as a parent is terribly naive and unsophisticated from someone in her position.  Obama does not give a damn about your kids.  If you are going to this party to gain access and make sure the message is delivered, you need to be a lot more aggressive.  In this thread are perhaps at least ten excellent suggestions that would justify your attendance and perhaps lead to some accomplishment.  I wll disagree with one point, however,  face time with the President, which is lovely, is not what we need.  Face time with senior staff, in the West Wing, at a scheduled meeting, with Rahm, is what we need to engage this Administration.  

When you get that meeting, begin with "We are pissed."  Let them have it in no uncertain terms.  Then, proceed to what we want and when we want it.  Get a firm commitment, and explain that if you don't have a firm commitment by the end of the meeting, the press is waiting outside for your reaction.  In other words, do what REAL special interest groups do.  Put away the pictures of your children and start doing the real work we need to get this Administration on track.  If you get nothing else from this party, get a meeting, with a real date, with real senior staff.  Happy talk from Uncle Barry is not worth shit.    


I understand Ms. Chrisler's views
and agree with most of what she said, but I don't think anyone is walking away from this fight, we just don't want to fund a party that has continued to make empty promises to our community to get our dollars.

When I left the Republicans 10 years ago, I refused to join the Dems because of Bill Clinton's pandering to the right I was running from.  But I supported and campaigned for Obama because I felt in my heart that there was a real man who would stand up to their undermining of this country.


"They say that time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself." - Andy Warhol



"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal


Though there are parts of her statement I can't disagree with
overall she sounds like one more Beltway wonk who doesn't grasp the difference between "access" and "accomplishment."  As if having cocktails at the White House was an end in itself, a goal our movement should aim at--and be happy with and settle for when we achieve it.  The idea that us ordinary LGBT folks might actually make a serious impact--by withholding our money and our votes, if nothing else--seems quite alien to her world view, as if schmoozing the in crowd matters more than, say, participatory democracy.

One way or another, no matter how many cocktails our "leaders" sip in the Blue Room, the unalterable fact is that they don't have anything like the "access" enjoyed by T.D. Jakes, Kirbyjon Caldwell, Rick Warren and the rest.  Obama not only shares dry Manhattans with them, he actually does what they tell him to.  When he starts consulting with Chrisler, Solmonese and the rest instead of his "spiritual adivsers" before he does anything, then and only then will "access" mean much.  

Relying on the dress extras at his cocktail parties to make serious inroads for equality hasn't worked for decades.  We'd be fools to think it will accomplish much now.

One more time:  POLITICS AIN'T BEANBAG!

The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


Shame is a powerful motivator
Ms. Chrisler,

This past election season, I did not toke on the Hopium pipe. I did not donate to the Obama campaign. Call me cynical, or maybe just a fast learner, but I am aware that anyone who panders to the professional christian set is not going to change. Here is a link to an October letter to the Obama campaign if you want to read it.

http://keori.livejournal.com/2...

If you want to go to a cocktail party and show pictures of your children to people whose only interest is staying in power, that is your prerogative. I was raised in a mormon household, and I know better than to bother making nice-nice with religious people in power who don't care about those under their boot. What DOES motivate such people is their public image, and money. They will do almost anything to save face. Shame works wonders. So, go to this soiree, get the access, and make our case as eloquently and as bluntly as possible. But go with press waiting outside. Make sure the attendees KNOW there are press representatives waiting outside. Be prepared to go outside and tell them that the Obama White House is made up of liars, cowards, and bigots who are willing to sell out the most vulnerable law-abiding, tax-paying citizens in the country if it will keep them in power. Be prepared to use shame and money, because that is the language these people understand. Making nice-nice with bigots and being afraid to offend people is what got us Prop 8.

One last thought: we are to the DNC what the Jesus freaks are to the RNC. We are the crazy, angry, single-issue people that no one wants to deal with, and everyone wishes would just shut up and go away. The difference is that the Jesus freaks still run the show at the RNC, while we're still sitting politely on curbs across the street from the party, waiting for the invite inside. Why is that, do you think? And how do we change that dynamic?

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi


People should go to the cocktail party
I always remember what Woodrow Wilson said--"I learned everything I needed to know about politics from working at Princeton."

At my professional/academic conferences, the work --the connections, the hook-ups, the back-scratching -- happens at the parties, the hallways, the casual lunches.  

Very little happens in "meetings."  


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox