Stonewall commemoration at Fort Worth, TX gay club turns into police raid

A hate crimes law...

... might allow for justice for these folks who were absolutely singled out.

Strangely enough, there are calls out to make sure one passes right now.

Too late for these people, though.

Does Ft Worth have any anti-discrimination codes, or are they simply screwed?

Visit http://www.thespectrumcafe.com to see the T put back into LGBT news.

---

by: ynsaen @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:24:19 AM CDT

The more things change...

the more they fucking stay the same.

---

by: Kittyburger @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:31:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes

Does Ft Worth have any anti-discrimination codes

Not tthat I think it will actually help in this situation but, assuming it does, the "effeminate men" will be happy to know that Fort Worth's ordinance is NOT gender identity-inclusive (apologies, but I think I posted elsewhere that it was; its actually the Dallas ordinance that is inclusive.)

Sexual orientation  shall mean heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality or being identified with such orientation.

Will that last clause help?  I dunnow - but I guess its a good thing that its not in Delaware, eh?

Oh...

I forgot...

Where did Delaware get its f**ked up definition of "sexual orientation?  That's right - from the Texas hate crime law:

"sexual preference" has the following meaning only: a preference for heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality.

Now - quick...

Let's get David Carter to write the "definitive and comprehensive" ( http://www.nypost.com/seven/06... ) account of this police raid.

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:34:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The City of Fort Worth Human Relations Council

requested and got a "Discussion of Issues Affecting Transgendered Persons" on March 24, 2009 at City Hall.

I did not attend the meeting. I was told that there was a modest turnout, and that everyone seemed to respect each other, and it was felt that some progress had been made.

I had an ally in the police department, and I hope to learn what this person knows about the raid.

---

by: Cathy Cat @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:47:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A sample of the City of Fort Worth's tolerance:

This January I searched the Fort Worth Municipal Code for "restroom by sex" and found this webpage:
http://www.municode.com/resour...

According to:
Article III Discrimination.
Division 2. Places of Public Accommodation.

Sec. 17-46.  Definitions.
Place of public accommodation  shall mean every business within the city, whether wholesale or retail, which is open to the general public and offers for compensation any product, service or facility. The term "place of public accommodation" shall include all hotels, motels, restaurants, bars, lounges, nightclubs or cabarets where food or beverages are sold or offered for sale, theaters, retail houses, washaterias, bowling alleys, skating rinks, golf courses, all public conveyances, as well as the stations or terminals thereof, kindergartens, day care centers and nursery schools.

Section 17-48. Unlawful Acts.
(b)   It shall not be unlawful for any person or any employee or agent thereof to deny any person entry to any restroom, shower room, bathhouse or similar facility which has been designated for use by persons of the opposite sex.

Sec. 17-51.  Penalty.
Any person violating any provision of this division shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished as provided in section 1-6 of this Code.
(Code 1964, § 13A-16; Ord. No. 6205, § 7, 11-24-69; Ord. No. 13981, § 1, 10-26-99; Ord. No. 14344, § 1, 9-26-00; Ord. No. 14832, § 2, 10-15-01)

---

by: Cathy Cat @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:52:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I really don't see how you believe a hate crimes law would help here

Why do you think another a hate crimes law would prevent police brutality?

The problem with police brutality is not that there are no laws preventing it. The problem with police brutality is that the laws are almost always never enforced. Why do you think that a hate crimes law would be enforced in this case?

Look at the police claims here. They are doing what they always always do in cases of police brutality. That the victims were breaking the law, that the brutality was necessary.

---

by: rfloh @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 11:59:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just another day in Texas

I am a native Texan (I live in Dallas, which is only 25 miles away from Fort Worth), and I am not the slightest bit surprised at this. The mentality of many in this state is amazing. While parts of the state are somewhat progressive (e.g., Austin), others are not so.  

---

by: txgayman @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 06:56:06 AM CDT

We need to go to Fort Worth

And introduce them to irony.

It will fuck them up.

What a day, what a day for an auto-da-fe

---

by: revbob @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:00:29 AM CDT

C'mon, revbob, I'll meet you here.

I may be the only Tarrant County transperson at the protests, however.

No doubt we can get participation from Dallas County and other places.

---

by: Cathy Cat @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:32:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stonewall without the backlash

this is excatly how the Stonewall uprising started, though thse people certainly did not expect it to happen

The Right Wing is on the move, my friends. Yesterday they protested outside of the oldest Spritualist community in America, Lily Dale, NY, claiming that they were full fo witchew and necromancers and therefore damned

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:14:18 AM CDT

Indeed you are right, Maura

The "Human Events" (Gingrich, Coulter, Hannity et al) emails are getting more and more off the wall this past week.

Yesterday they sent out one about the dangers of Islam and this morning the collapse of the dollar. Combine that with the ongoing tea parties (July 4th to be followed by what? Labor Day ones?) and we're seeing some widespread, organized panic being created for the masses.

This is not heading in a good direction.  

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:40:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I have a feeling...

...The focus on this incident is going to be giving Ft. Worth a reputation that will cost them many, many pink dollars, and give them the experience of very loud and significant protest organized from the grassroots up.

That's the thing with Stonewall 2.1 -- the LGBT community grassroots and its progressive allies, working without leaders telling them what to do, well instinctively know how to respond.

My guess is that the Fort Worth Police Department, as well as the the local government and local chamber of commerse, are going to experience a lot pressure from a lot of backlash. And no doubt, the news stations are going to try to Roledex folk who work in LGBT Centers and LGBT orgs for community spokespeople -- totally missing the story of how the grassroots are organizing using tools like Facebook, twitter, and cell phone messaging.

But in the end, my guess is we're going to see local governement officials and commerse leaders trying to identify LGBT leaders to meet with over this soon, and try to figure out how to quell the financial backlash and bad press they're going to be experiencing very soon in ways they weren't expecting at all.

-----
~~Autumn~~

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

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:39:22 AM CDT

Backlash ?

They raid in hopes of driving people out of the city.. So i don't think they really care if there is a backlash..

Unless they loose in a court and have to pay a huge fine for violation of peoples rights.

Maybe a lesson from Iran would be in order for all in Ft. Worthless. Use those video's to document the events. And turn it loose on the world. Cause the thin blue line will defend it's self and with out video evidence it's someones word against the police.

Take a lesson from the paramedic in Oklahoma a few weeks back. With out the video the trooper would have been above reproach.

Pain is Inevitable .
Suffering is Optional  

---

by: Ana @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 11:14:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

and yet Barry's cocktails with Queers goes on

Where the hell is the DOJ civil rights investigation in follow up to this outrageous act by the Cowtown cops?  Unless one is announced by 3pm, our "leaders" need to pass on their visit to The White House.

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:02:03 AM CDT

"Take a Negro to Lunch"

Back in the 60s there was a "tolerance campaign" called "Take a Negro to Lunch."  It was widely derided (as if should have been), by black folks as well as white progressives, and rapidly fell into the dust of time.  People were very quick to realize that that kind of token gesture was not only empty but insulting.  Centuries of racial injustice could not be palliated by buying "a Negro" a sandwich.

But now our first "Negro" president is conducting a similar initiative:  "Have Some Gays In for Canapes in the Rose Garden."  Don't lift a finger to correct unjust treatment.  Don't stop ruining careers and lives through unjust military discharges.  Don't say boo about hate crimes.  Go right ahead and file heinous court briefs that repeat every vile anti-gay talking point on record.  But hey, if you just have your servants circulate among them with a tray of martinis, everything will be all right.

And there are queers who actually go along with this.  Words fail me (and believe me, that doesn't happen very often).

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

---

by: QScribe @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:36:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

This brings back bad memories

I came up and out in South Florida in the 80s, and after that crazyass Anita Bryant crusade in the 70s, the cops used to periodically raid our bars all throughout the Reagan & Bush père years.  I was lucky in that I was never caught up in any of those raids, but I had plenty of friends who were arrested or otherwise harassed by law enforcement for what amounted to Existing While Gay.  Some of them were even outed by cops to bosses or family members from personal information obtained during raids at gay bars.  Of course there was no legal recourse available at the time, everything they did to our community was either legal (because, you know, Florida) or else they could effectively cover it up.

The ghosts this digs up trouble me in deeply personal ways it's still hard to talk about; a lot of my friends from those years are dead due to homophobia.  There is approximately zero chance that this raid in Texas wasn't intentional homophobic police harassment, specifically meant to smack us down over Stonewall, for which they've never forgiven us.  And now they've put yet another gay person in the hospital with a bleeding brain.

You know what we need, is a fierce advocate who has more power than Texas law enforcement.  Hmm, anyone know where we might be able to locate one of those?

---

by: Rev Jane Ignatowski @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:15:28 AM CDT

Fierce advocates, by surname

Smith, Wesson, Winchester.......

---

by: CubPaws2008 @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 13:56:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

meaning

Meaning, of course, the deterrent effect that our right to bear arms is supposed to have against official abuses of authority like we just saw in Fort Worth...

---

by: CubPaws2008 @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:25:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

really?

Somehow I doubt adding gunplay to the mix would've helped this situation in the least.  Most likely it would be FAR far worse.  And it's bad to begin with.

---

by: PunkZanyJ @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:41:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Any chance our "fierce advocate" will condemn these actions?

Or will he (as I expect) praise the cops for showing restraint?

---

by: TechBear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:27:31 AM CDT

I'm guessing

we're going to hear the crickets on the South Lawn for quite awhile...

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:42:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It wasn't the cops who showed restraint.

It was their queer victims.  If they had followed the example of the victims at the first Stonewall, there would be plenty of cops nursing cuts and bruises today.  One more missed opportunity.  Pity.

What's it going to take for us to get angry enough to bash back?

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

---

by: QScribe @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:40:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Since when has Obama ever praised us?

Other than when we give money to enable the Democrats' disregard for our issues, that is.

It will either be silence, or support for the cops. It will not be support for the victims.

---

by: TechBear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 12:55:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

If he says anything at all,

I'm guessing it'll be a statement about how the cops "have to enforce the law."  You know--the way the Justice Department "had to defend the law" when they filed the DOMA brief.

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

---

by: QScribe @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:54:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ah, yes

There is indeed precedent for your supposition. For some reason, I had blocked that out.

---

by: TechBear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 16:32:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What would have happened if the patrons of the bar

had fought back furiously?

Mass taserings. The portrayal of gay people as violent criminals. The problem is that many in today's society instinctively defend police brutality, unless the victim is some 70 year old woman. And EVEN then, EVEN when the victim is some 70 year old woman, there WILL STILL be people coming out to defend the police brutality.

Tasers are IMO a really insidious weapon. They encourage police brutality, because the consequences of tasering someone, while brutal, are not as serious as the consequences of shooting someone. So, police do not need to use them with as much restraint.

---

by: rfloh @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 00:03:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

and "paddy wagon"??!!

It's incredbile how ethnocentrism and bigotry creeps into our language and goes mimicked without thought.  Go look it up, and don't use it again!

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:41:43 AM CDT

Found the wiki

Never knew the back story and have heard the term all of my life:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

And being this close to Boston (and lived there for awhile as well as MA for years), I am surprised that I never heard anyone being offended before now...

---

by: Louise @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:47:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

well...

A significant chunk of me is Scotch-Irish by extraction; I've always been aware of the derivation of the term, and have never taken offense to it.

Even on the left, people vary in our degrees of sensitivity to group-identity references.

---

by: CubPaws2008 @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 13:59:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A close watch.

I live in a small town in Texas, we actually have one "gay" bar.  The cops keep a close eye trained on the place.  They get worse on the nights when straights haven't overrun the place.

I'm not really sure how to take it, some of the officers are very nice.  Most of them are following orders from someone higher up in the ranks.  Others take the other route, believe they are playing the hand of jesus.  But the most they do is offer an unsupportive mustache-topped frown of disapproval.

Funny thing is.. the cops in the larger cities here are worse than the cowtown cops.  And... in Austin, this liberal mecca everyone gushes about, I've been harassed by the cops, bullied, surrounded, property destroyed etc.

It's pretty embarrassing for the DFW cops to have done this.  Add it to the long list of the anti-gay things that have happened in Texas.  BUT I feel that if we take action, this place can change.  It is changing, and pretty quickly... but as usual some people are being left behind.  Just gotta keep up the action.

That being said, I'm going to write some letters.

---

by: flyerfier @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:49:53 AM CDT

easiest way to change Texas....

Help Annise Parker become the next mayor of Houston, America's fourth largest city.  An Out Lesbian big-city mayor who has built bridges among disparate communities will be a political boon to our people!
http://www.AnniseParker.com

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 08:56:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Totally with you there!

I've been supporting her campaign through Facebook, sending out info about her to friends.

She was in the Houston Pride parade on Sat.  She deserves to be commended for a good job as city controller... and I think the next step is the mayor's office!  

---

by: flyerfier @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:02:11 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

the multi-million dollar personal injury/excessive force lawsuit will make them listen

I can't get past the assault on the patron that resulted in bleeding-in-the-brain injury.  OMFG.  I hope the local queer attorneys are writing up the lawsuit against the city as we speak.  City leaders take note of multi-million dollar claims that could come out of public coffers, and they can effectively lean on police leadership.  

Makes me think that as a community we need to have a plan for dealing with raids ... some non-violent something or other where the door attendant pushes a buzzer as the cops enter, and everyone locks arms and sits down.  (Kind of like when years ago same-sex dance partners would switch to mixed couples.)  As individuals or in small groups, we are too easily isolated from the rest of the herd and picked off.

Kudos to the protesters!

---

by: 555catnap @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:06:24 AM CDT

Heh. Texas is behind the times

By Noreen S Ahmedullah
April 03, 2009

Seven federal lawsuits have been filed against a Chicago police officer that allege he made false DUI arrests, used excessive force and harassed gays and lesbians.

On Thursday, four Chicagoans filed lawsuits against Town Hall District Police Officer Richard Fiorito in U.S. District Court in Chicago. Three other people filed lawsuits in February.

All the plaintiffs accuse Fiorito of violating their civil rights by falsifying DUI charges and other traffic violations against them.

Last year, Mothers Against Drunk Driving honored Fiorito for making 313 DUI arrests between Jan. 1, 2007, and June 6, 2008, according to the group's Web site.

Attorney Jon Erickson said Fiorito made up DUI charges in a scheme to earn extra overtime pay.

Fiorito could not be reached for comment.

In some of the lawsuits, the plaintiffs have also said excessive force was used against them, including in a suit filed in February, which alleges Fiorito grabbed Shawn Rauch by the throat in the police station, shoved him against a wall and called him a slur for a homosexual.

Of the cases filed, prosecutors dismissed DUI charges against two plaintiffs, and a jury found another not guilty of DUI. In another case, a judge ruled the officer had no grounds to arrest the plaintiff for DUI, Erickson said.

Jennifer Hoyle, a spokeswoman for the city's Law Department, wrote in an e-mail that the city was reviewing the cases and could not comment on the allegations.

Officials at the city's Independent Police Review Authority, which looks into allegations of excessive force and bias-based verbal abuse by officers, said the authority has received complaints, and they are being investigated.

And that's only one of several anti-gay incidents that has occured with the Chicago Police Department in the past few years.

---

by: kevinchi @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 09:50:35 AM CDT

Several steps backwards

There is, of course, much to celebrate this 40th anniversary of Stonewall. But in some significant ways the entire culture, and not just for LGBT people, has become much more oppressive. I'm old enough to remember the late sixties, when hippies, gays and others actually held their ground and fought back against abuses by the police and the state. It would have been a fitting tribute if the patrons of the bar in Fort Worth had resisted like those at the Stonewall Inn, but these days, the means of oppression used by the police are not just more brutal, they are often lethal. The use of tasers to control people with little or no provocation is just a symbol of the excesses of the police state, and with the constant hammering and agitation from the right, I actually expect things to get worse. In my most frenzied nightmare, it never occurred to me that I would live to see the US become a place where citizens could be imprisoned forever without right to a lawyer or a trial, when the government could tap one's phones with impunity, when the police could use deadly force on suspects just because they don't comply with orders quickly enough. Remember, all it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.  

---

by: buster @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 10:01:12 AM CDT

Docile

IMO the gays of "today" are much more docile than they were back in the Stonewall era.  

I partly blame this Gandhi/"nonviolence" crap: If you're beaten down, beg for another.  If you're called a name, shut up and be happy with it.  If you're approached with a weapon, don't you dare fight back.

I'm almost convinced that the gays teaching this crap are either heavily medicated on antidepressants or something, or they have a really good weed dealer.

---

by: bluegrassfool @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 11:21:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes. Because Gandhian nonviolence

is begging for another beating, because Gandhian non violence being happy and shutting up when called names.

And people who advocate Gandhian non-violence are heavily drugged.

Look at the people making the arguments for detention without trial, for torture, for police tasering and beating of people. Yep, all advocates of Gandhian non-violence. All people who instinctively defend authoritarian abuse. All people who make apologias for police brutality.

---

by: rfloh @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 12:07:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yep

I agree 100%.  In a perfect world, kids getting bullied in school (whether based on gender stereotypes, orientation real or perceived, or something else entirely) would be encouraged by strong, loving parents to be proud of themselves.  Proud enough to knock the bully's block off the next time he goes after them, because they know there's nothing wrong with who they are.

Of course, part of the reason we don't live in that perfect world is because of well-meaning, hyper-regulatory compelled placidity.  (e.g. the "zero tolerance" crap that's swept schools in the last couple of decades).  My mother, who's 52, recalls fondly how teachers in her day more or less knew "who deserved it" and turned a blind eye when Billy Badass finally got his.  They realized that sometimes lessons can only be learned the hard way... through direct experience.

But now?  The kid who teaches the bully his well-deserved lesson isn't hailed as a hero for potentially warding off a future Charlie Manson, or even just left alone to savor the victory.  Nope - s/he is treated as the next potential Columbine, even though s/he didn't (and wouldn't) instigate a damn thing.  Because s/he DARED to get angry.

We pretend it's possible to balance karmic accounts using deposits only.  Well, there are sometimes people who deserve a little withdrawal.  These Fort Worth cops were probably that kind as kids - and never had their accounts adjusted.  And until we come to realize that it's OK to fight asshole with asshole... we're going to get more and more of the same.

---

by: CubPaws2008 @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:12:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

except that's not what happens

This ain't 1950, the kids don't stand up and knock the kids block off, no, not anymore.  They grab a gun, walk into the school and ventilate the place. That's what happens.  And if they do manage to "fight" they end up in trouble, and the bully is labeled the poor victim.
Or, the bully decides to up the odds and he comes and shoots the kid point blank in the face -- like what happened to Lawrence King.

And the problem with your mother's generation is that they had bias too.  Sometimes the one who's labeled as "deserving" is the victim all along -- many gay kids have faced indifference and inaction when they have tried to enlist the help of adults, and then blame when they have acted on their own.

We can't turn back the clock, we have to move forward.

And both of you completely understand ZERO about Ghandi if you really think his philosophy is "beg for another"

---

by: PunkZanyJ @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:48:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just checked out the facebook

In the first hand accounts people are all denying claims the cops were groped or harassed.  From experience with LGBT and police I am sure they gave them wide berth.  
What struck me when I read the early reports last night was that they brought the big paddy wagon with them.  And the state troopers showed up with the city police.
This was an out and out Texas style round up.  


"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

---

by: TruthandLove @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 12:51:45 PM CDT

The more things change...

...the more they stay the same.  

What I'm finding interesting is the way the MSM are reporting this -- they're calling it a "police raid on a gay bar".  When the police hit a non-gay drinking establishment to pinch people for being intoxicated is it reported as a "police raid?"  Of course not.  Even the MSM knows exactly what happened here -- what started out as a routine check to see who's being over-served liquor was turned into a "raid" by over-zealous homophobic cops.  We're not the only ones seeing it any more.

And groping?  Please.  I thought the gay panic defense was only used in Wyoming.

These particular cops need to ride desks for the next 6 months until they learn how to treat citizens.

---

by: BobbiCW @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:10:14 PM CDT

will gay men's white privilege help?

I notice that a majority of the people showed in the video clip read as/appear to be white men -- presumably, mostly gay -- but also bi, transmen, and straight allies.

I hope they are able to mobilize their white privilege (that is, of course, mediated by their gender expressions, class, sexual identities, etc.,) and use it to launch of force of resistance so powerful that this particular expression of white supremacy -- that took the form of police repression -- will not happen again. The police department may be forced to reform and state laws could change.

Like any form of power and privilege used against itself -- the power & privilege of whiteness turned against the power & privilege of whiteness just might yield lasting results for lgbtq people in 2009.

God willing.

This police raid may seem like an episode ripped out of the worst mid-twentieth century anti-gay campaigns but police brutality against lgbtq people -- most especially transwomen of color is a persistent problem in the present day U.S.

---

by: butchrebel @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 14:41:47 PM CDT

really?

what is going on with the "gay white men's privilege" card on this site?

Perhaps your comment is in good taste, I can't really even figure out what you are suggesting here.

Would it have been more acceptable if it were against people of color?  It seems you're not satisfied with the victims being gay white men.

---

by: flyerfier @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 15:25:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No, I think Autumn made this point

in another thread about using her white privilege to her advantage in her coverage of the Angie Zapata trial.

What butchrebel is suggesting is that if this had been a bar populated by gay black/Latino men it may have recived not coverage all...

So it all depends on how the privilege is used?

---

by: kevinchi @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 15:35:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

well, that helps me understand a bit

but just to say... as a white gay male.. I don't think that status would give me an advantage in the DFW bar situation.  

I've been in similar situations with cops and I gotta say.. the gay card trumps away the white privilege nearly 100%.  Cops are a team, they stand up for each other against other teams (gay, black, latina, transgendered, the list never ends)

I sent out word of the news to all of my friends BEFORE I saw all the white faces.  If it had been a different club, say one more frequented by gay black or latino men and played out exactly the same.. I believe it would have still received the same meager coverage this incident did.  But, that wasn't the case.. I don't have a crystal ball.

---

by: flyerfier @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 16:08:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

suggest reading Tim Wise about privilege

Another white gay male here.  Yes, cops act as a team when working together in concert.  Doesn't mean they treat all the other "teams" the same though.  I was kinda shocked to read you thought that your status as a white male wouldn't have helped you if you'd been at the DFW bar.  True, it might not have.  But when police fail to live up to the highest ideals of police work, when there is brutality, a quick look at history shows that those who are "other" often get much, much worse treatment.

I imagine AAs, women, etc. must grow weary of educating us GWMs about privilege, just as LGBTs grow weary of educating some straights about heterosexual privilege.  Heck, I thought when I was kicked out of the club for being gay that I was suddenly just the same as everyone else who didn't belong.  I didn't "get it" at first that privilege didn't just have two sides, but was a continuum.  And I still carried significant privilege as a white male, especially when I chose to "pass," even passively, just by letting others make the polite social assumption (bleh!) that I was straight.  

Fortunately, there's this white guy named Tim Wise who has made it his mission to educate other whites about the privilege we enjoy as part of the dominant culture.  I suggest checking him out.  The link is to just one of his many articles.

---

by: 555catnap @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 22:38:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Use the privilege to crack the system!

Yes, kevinchi!

That is most definitely what I was trying to say:) Wherever we identify our power and privilege -- or the power and privilege of another group -- yes, that power/privilege is used to oppress. But it can also be turned on the agents of oppression.

I was really excited to see lgbtq people in Fort Worth, TX fighting back for that reason (and many other reasons too).

---

by: butchrebel @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 11:36:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I slightly disagree with

you on the 27% vote for McCain in the general election, for a lot of reasons that I've posted about.

That was a combination of, yes, Southern racism but also anti-gay baiting by the Obama campaign.  IMO, of course.

I've done a regional breakdown of the vote which shows that the Mason-Dixon line pretty much accounts for those numbers. And the fact that the polling of GLBs is flat out better nowadays.

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 11:44:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

McCain's gay supporters

kevinchi,

Again, I did not mean to imply that I believed there was only ONE reason explaining any act among gay white men. My post was already so long I gave a quick "for example" and then signed out.

I agree with you -- of those gay men that voted for McCain -- gay men's white privilege/white racism is not the sole explanation for their having done so.

Without reviewing your posts on the gay votes for McCain issue (and I will do so if the comments are available) I would pose the following question: Did the anti-gay baiting in which Obama campaigners engaged push queers of color to vote McCain at the same rate as it did gay white males?

My guess is: No, it did not.
And the reasons for that are also rooted in the complex experience and history of people of color and white folks in general -- and particularly, queers of color and white queers.

Of those gay white men that decided (consciously or unconsciously) that McCain campaigners appeals to white racism were more attractive (or the lesser evil) than Obama campaigners' anti-gay baiting -- what makes or breaks that decision for them?

The fact of their whiteness and their white privilege, I believe, is a major force making and breaking that decision for them.

---

by: butchrebel @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 12:20:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not in the general

There was division in the black gay community as far as the primaries were concerned, in the general election, no.

Of those gay white men that decided (consciously or unconsciously) that McCain campaigners appeals to white racism were more attractive (or the lesser evil) than Obama campaigners' anti-gay baiting -- what makes or breaks that decision for them?

This is a good question. But again, it breaks down regionally, not across the broad swath of "white gay men."

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/...

It was the South as far as I could tell. Make no mistake about it.

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 12:42:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

i think I got it, now

With regard to McCain's gay white male supporters -- You are taking issue with my non-specific reference to gay white men in the South.

Point taken.

And thanks for the link -- it made it A LOT easier for me to get the backstory to your comments here.

I was not aware of the regional specificity of the gay white male McCain supporters voting trend.

Re: your statement that:

Many white gays undoubtedly just can't imagine a black/mixed-race man putting aside "racial special interest". It may not represent conscious racism, just the acquiescence to the subliminal message that old white men represent competence, and that blacks and women don't have a track record, thus, must be less competent - the old "I am colorblind" dodge. I daresay this presumption is more common in the South, Midwest, and Rocky Mountains regions than in the Northeast.

Are you saying that you believe the aforementioned "this presumption is more common in the South, Midwest, and Rocky Mountains regions than in the Northeast" among white people? Or...?

Why do you think this?

(I don't mean to push you to make a lengthy comment if you don't want to. I want to understand where you're coming from before I respond, that's all. I'm new to this blog and after reviewing old posts I can see very clearly that folks require specificity, and clarity -- generalizations produce misunderstandings and strife. Not tryin' to strife:)

---

by: butchrebel @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 13:04:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not only the South

In the South that might count for a vote against Obama. In, say, San Francisco or New York, that could have been an affirmitative action vote for Obama by "liberal white gay man."

That was a comment by another poster in my thread, not one of my statement.  

The Midwest would have been an exception to the above, though. After all, Obama is one of ours and we get pretty territorial about stuff like that. Obama won Indiana, remember?

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 13:23:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

One more thing...This works both ways

I want to take this comment in the thread I posted below:

Many white gays undoubtedly just can't imagine a black/mixed-race man putting aside "racial special interest". It may not represent conscious racism, just the acquiescence to the subliminal message that old white men represent competence, and that blacks and women don't have a track record, thus, must be less competent - the old "I am colorblind" dodge. I daresay this presumption is more common in the South, Midwest, and Rocky Mountains regions than in the Northeast.

Liberal white gay men could have taken their white privilege into account and voted for Obama, in part, because he was black. That may account for some of the percentages in some liberal "white gay enclaves" being in the 85-90% range for Obama.

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 12:54:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

discussing race & racism in this way is never a "card"

flyerfler,

In order to explain my comment I had to write a longer comment. Thank you for bearing with me:)

I understand your response to my post -- I do hope you take the time to read the short essay that 555catnap recommends. Tim Wise has a lot of really good short essays and videos (available on youtube) on this matter, though -- to my knowledge -- none of his printed essays address the way in which race & sexual identity (or white privilege & one's queerness/homosexuality/heterosexuality/bi-sexuality) are connected.

I certainly do not feel less satisfied -- or less upset about the police's oppressive act -- because the victims were gay white men (were you a bit upset when you wrote that?:)

My comment was not meant to be divisive -- the statement I made was my first reaction -- as a queer person of color -- to seeing the news clip. Just as it can only be beneficial for people who are NOT queer to understand the ways in which they are advantaged by their heterosexuality -- I believe it's beneficial for people who ARE white to understand the ways in which they are advantaged by their whiteness. After all, if more straight people truly understood the damage that anti-queer discrimination, anti-queer oppression & the inequality of lgbtq people did to our lives -- lgbtq people would achieve equality, wouldn't we? I apply the same thinking when I discuss race -- I'm talking to white folks and people of color -- and I do so by making it very clear how whiteness works (in my opinion).

That's part of the reason I discussed gay men's white privilege --I believe  knowledge of one's power as well as the ways in which one is disempowered makes us even more powerful. The gay men dealing with the police raid can use the power of their whiteness -- and those gays/lesbians/bis/transpeople who are gender conforming can use the power of looking more "relatable" to straight folks -- to their advantage in this fight.

I will use a historical example to further clarify my point here: First wave feminists (most of them middle & upper class white women had the support of about half of the (wealthy white) men in Congress when they gained recognition of women's voting rights (the 19th Amendment). Without the support of privileged and powerful white men, first wave feminists would have never gained recognition of their voting rights, and thus, the passage of the 19th Amendment. No matter how long and hard feminists fought -- and they had fought for voting rights for almost 6 decades -- if Congress hadn't voted to pass the amendment, feminists voting rights battle would have been lost.

WHAT DOES RACE & CLASS HAVE TO DO WITH ALL THIS? First, feminists' victory was extremely important for women -- most especially, for white women. Why? Because in 1920, the vast majority of African American women and men lived in the South where Jim Crow laws -- or race segregation laws -- prevented them from voting. Until 1964, the vast majority of blacks could not vote -- even though the 15th Amendment was passed after the Civil War (in 1870) , which recognized black men's voting rights -- and the 19th Amendment recognized "women's" voting rights -- blacks could not vote because race segregation laws (& white racist violence, economic repression, etc.,) prevented them from doing so.

So, in 1920, black women and black men could not vote -- white women and white men could. The right to vote was a white right, a white power, a white privilege -- (a right, power, and privilege white women and men shared in spite of gender inequality/sexism -- just one example of how an oppressed group, in this case, white women -- can access power & privilege even though they are oppressed).

Second: In 1920 (just like today), if you were middle or upper class you were much more likely to acquire middle & high income jobs in government, business, etc., -- you were more likely to acquire the kinds of jobs that carry power and prestige (like the power to decide whether or not someone should have the right to vote). Most middle and upper class people in the 1920s (like today) were white. But because of social norms (that dictated that white women's proper place was the home, for example), and because of institutionalized sexism -- that is, discriminatory practices against white women -- white women were far less likely than white men to acquire college educations, or be hired for middle & high income jobs -- simply because they were white women, and overwhelming majority of the people doing the hiring for the most powerful positions in society were white men.

In 1920, an overwhelming majority of poor white people -- white men AND white women -- would be trapped in poverty, and thus, a state of joblessness or toil away at low-paying (dangerous) jobs -- that would bar them (and many of their children) from getting the kind of educations they would need to become a Congressperson or to occupy any middle-income or high income job for that matter.

So, there's a good example of how white privilege works -- all white people living in the U.S. access (frequently unseen, unexamined) privileges -- because they are white -- and they do so both consciously and unconsciously. But the degree to which a white person will benefit from the privileges they access (simply because they are white) will change based on their social identities (so, because of classism/the oppression of the poor, a poor white person does NOT access the same measure of racial privilege as a wealthy white person -- because of sexism/the gender oppression of women, a white woman does NOT access the same measure of racial privilege as a white man -- and because of heterosexism/the oppression of lgbtq people, a homosexual/gay/queer white man does NOT access the same measure of racial privilege as a heterosexual white man.

That is why I talked about white gay men having white privilege -- because of racism/the oppression of people of color, white lgbtq people extract benefits from their whiteness -- they draw these benefits even while they are oppressed because they are not straight. White lgbtq people benefit from their whiteness -- while lgbtq people of color do not have skin privilege because they are oppressed by racism).

I've written a lot here, so I will make one final point before ending my comment. As you know, as lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, transgenders, and queers are oppressed because we are NOT heterosexual -- but our experiences of anti-queer oppression is different because of our different racial, gender, class identities -- because of our differing ages, because some of us live with disabilities, and some of us are able-bodied (etc.,). For example, most of the wealthiest members of lgbtq communities are gay men -- I'm NOT saying ALL gay men are wealthy. I'm saying that gay men frequently earn more money than do lesbians, and especially transgenders. In general, however, white gay men access more wealth than do gay men of color -- white lesbians earn more money than do lesbians of color -- and transgenders, and particularly transgenders of color face fare more economic obstacles than do lesbians and gays -- especially those lesbians and gays that are gender conforming.

That is a hierarchical reality -- a reality of inequality in our own community that would do us (lgbtq people) well to recognize. So we don't "forget" to acknowledge the struggles and include the rights of certain segments of our community in our agendas as we push for equality. So often, for example, transgender rights are NOT included in the agendas of gay and lesbian organizations -- because gays and lesbians are not immune to transphobia and sometimes believe that including the rights of transgender folk will make it harder for "us" to achieve the rights we are fighting for.

If more white gay men understood that they had white privilege -- if they understood the way that their white privilege works for them and against them -- perhaps so many of them would not have voted for John McCain in this last election. The largest queer voting population that voted for Republican John McCain were white gay men -- they cast their vote in support of a man whose beliefs and voting record passed and upheld racist, sexist, heterosexism/anti-queer, ableist (etc.,) policies.

---

by: butchrebel @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 11:28:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

sorry for the delayed response..

let me say, butchrebel, you are a damned genius.  

Really, you ought to write a book.. and I hope you do.  I appreciate your thought out response.. and it really has opened my eyes to something that I saw, but was just squinting at from a distance.  

I've always known there is a privilege to being white.  I have examined it a lot.  But, I've always forgotten about it when thinking about LGBTQ issues.  The lot of us don't want to believe there are inconsistencies within our own group in relation to oppression or privilege.

These are the types of conversation I want to have.  If we don't, then things will stagnate.  Thanks for your well thought out reply.  You, and many other blenders make me want to go back to school.. I feel simpleminded around this lot.

(And yes, my first comment was made in haste out of being upset.  Truth hurts, eh?)

---

by: flyerfier @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:59:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rise Up!

Here we go again!

I hope the same sort of uprising will happen that did for that radio show as well as the recent hoax.

It shows we're not going to take it anymore.

---

by: RadarGrrl @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 00:20:55 AM CDT

When ya rise up in TX, use Tom Delay as a human shield

he gives me gas

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 13:31:16 PM CDT