National
Parker ‘comfortable’ as LGBT role model
Houston’s lesbian mayor reflects on her first 100 days
Houston Mayor Annise Parker addressed a crowd of more than 700 at Sunday’s 10th annual Victory Fund Champagne Brunch in D.C. (DC Agenda by Michael Key)
The lesbian mayor of the country’s fourth largest city says she’s comfortable serving as a role model for the LGBT community and acknowledged being taken aback by the extensive international media coverage of her political victory.
In a nearly 30-minute interview, Houston Mayor Annise Parker spoke with DC Agenda before her appearance at the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund’s 10th annual Champagne Brunch in D.C. on Sunday to discuss a range of issues and reflect on her first 100 days in office.
Parker recalled how she issued an executive order March 25 protecting city employees against job bias on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. She said she issued the directive because it was something she was “aware needed to be done.”
The inclusiveness of the directive makes it one of the most sweeping citywide job discrimination protections in the country for LGBT people.
Parker also encouraged President Obama to make good on his campaign promises to the LGBT community, even though she said she understands he’s had “huge economic problems, financial problems he’s had to confront.” She identified ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as an issue on which she’d like to see greater effort from Obama.
DC Agenda: You’ve been mayor of the city of Houston for just over 100 days. How would you describe your experience? Has anything surprised you?
Annise Parker: I feel like I’m doing what I’ve been meant to do. I’m the right person at the right time, and I’m thoroughly enjoying the experience. I trained for this job through my years as a lesbian activist, community activist, council member and controller. I even have the small business and the private sector experience. They all are coming together and I’m using every skills set I have.
… The one thing that I’ve had to spend a lot of time and energy on that I did not expect is that because the president made an announcement changing his funding for NASA, and Houston is a big component of NASA and it’s going to have a really potentially devastating impact on the jobs and the economy in my city. So that’s the only thing that was not on anybody’s radar, and that’s filled up a lot of my time and energy.
And so, I’ve been part of pulling together an interesting bipartisan coalition of our local congressional delegation in opposition to my president on that particular issue.
DC Agenda: Have LGBT issues come up during your tenure as mayor in a way that you didn’t anticipate when seeking office?
Parker: No, I’ve issued an executive order extending our non-discrimination protection exclusively to transgender employees, but that’s the only specific issue directed at my community. And that’s something that I was already aware needed to be done.
DC Agenda: Why did you see the need to issue this executive order?
Parker: I was a member of city council when our non-discrimination ordinance passed, and the interpretation at the time was that it was inclusive, but it was never as clear as I wanted it to be, nor the transgender community wanted to be, so that was just an opportunity just to fix something that had been bugging me for a while — and we have more and more transgender employees in city government.
DC Agenda: Were you surprised that the Houston Area Pastor Council spoke out against that executive order?
Parker: No, that’s a fringe group. It received virtually no attention from the rest of the city. Actually, I was surprised that anybody even noticed, but not surprised that no one beyond that really small circle paid any attention to them.
DC Agenda: Do you feel like you’ve been a role model or visible advocate for the LGBT community?
Parker: I believe I’ve been a role model for the LGBT community since the 70’s. During the 80’s, I was — with my colleague in government, Council member [Sue] Lovell — we were the two most visible lesbian activists in the city of Houston for a very long time. So, I’ve been a community role model.
And I am comfortable with that role and comfortable speaking on GLBT issues within some narrow constraints in that my first priority is to be mayor of the city of Houston — for all the citizens of Houston. And I was, as I prepared my campaign for mayor, I had to decide what issues I could advocate — like an executive order that’s strictly my signature going out that dealt with my 21,000 employees and the vendors that deal with them — and what would have to be something, in my opinion, that needed to come from the community.
I know I disappointed some members of the GLBT community in Houston when I said I wasn’t going to immediately advocate for an overturn of our ban on domestic partner benefits. But the reason for that was clear, and I said, I worked through these issues before I entered the race, and how I felt philosophically and where I was comfortable, and that is it was a citizen initiative and referendum that gave us the ban. It needs to be a citizen referendum that undoes that ban. If my community brings a petition to undo our ban on domestic partner benefits, I would wholeheartedly embrace it and help them win it, but it’ll take a vote of the citizens.
And so, the key for me is very clear communication that I care passionately about GLBT issues. I will go — here I am in Washington — to raise money for GLBT candidates. I will speak out when it does not interfere with my duties as mayor.
But on the other hand, I’ve — within the boundaries of the city of Houston and sort of the greater Houston area — I have a friendly incumbent role. I’m not getting involved in any local races, unless they’re actively anti-gay, and so I know that I’m a Democrat, but some of my Democratic colleagues are disappointed that I won’t help organize and take out incumbent Republicans. If they’re working with me, it’s about my city, not my community. So I have to wear multiple hats.
DC Agenda: Going back to the domestic partner benefits for city employees, what will the LGBT community need to put forward to undo that?
Parker: It’s a petition drive. It has to go to a vote of the voters. I cannot undo it as mayor. The mayor and council together cannot undo it. It’s in our charter through citizen initiative and referendum. It would need to be undone, and I could, yes, as mayor, with support of council, I could put the issue on the ballot, but the community has to show a willingness to get out and fight for this and that’s why I suggested they do their own petition drive and bring it forward because it’s ultimately going to be a political battle at the ballot box.
DC Agenda: Do you want to see the referendum undone during your tenure as mayor?
Parker: I would like to see the ban on domestic partner benefits undone during my tenure as mayor. I don’t know that any sitting politician wants to have a divisive vote during their tenure, so it’s a little bit different answer. [Laughs] But I’d also like to see a more complete non-discrimination ordinance that applies citywide. But that’s something that will have to be negotiated with the 14 members of city council, and that actually, too, could come — I think a non-discrimination ordinance is something that, since it already hasn’t been pre-empted by a referendum process, could be done on city council, but the community needs to be involved in that. It shouldn’t be something that’s all driven by city hall.
DC Agenda: Let’s move to federal issues. There’s been a lot of criticism that the Obama administration hasn’t been making good on the promises made to the LGBT community during the 2008 campaign. How would you evaluate how well the Obama administration has handled those issues?
Parker: We’re clearly not high on the president’s agenda, but I don’t know that we necessarily should be, considering the huge economic problems, financial problems he’s had to confront. But we deserve to be on the agenda somewhere and he did make promises to the community, and I think we have been more than patient.
DC Agenda: If you had to give the president a grade on how well he’s done on these issues, what would it be a why?
Parker: Oh, I hate giving letter grades. Maybe a B minus.
DC Agenda: What makes you choose a B minus?
Parker: It sounded a little bit better than a C plus. I cut him some slack because he came in and he has tackled some really, really tough battles, but he made commitments during the campaign, and I think it is always important to be very clear what you intend to do and then do what you said you were going to do.
DC Agenda: Is there any one particular LGBT issue that you’d like to see more initiative from President Obama on?
Parker: Gays in the military. That has just been festering out there for a very, very long time.
DC Agenda: What do you want to see specifically from President Obama on this issue?
Parker: To press forward to a resolution that allows our service members to serve openly — easy for me to say, since I don’t have to navigate the politics of Congress or the Joint Chiefs.
DC Agenda: How important do you think President Obama’s memorandum offering hospital visitation benefits to same-sex couples was and do you think it’ll particularly help LGBT Houston residents?
Parker: I think it’s an important action. I think it’s a humane act while it has been a problem for some members of our community, that is something that fortunately has gotten better over the last few decades of working on that issue. I appreciate him doing that, but it is a problem that we have been making progress on. More and more of us have chosen to take the legal steps necessary to allow us full access.
DC Agenda: This November, we could see an unprecedented number of LGBT candidates running for office. What advice do you have for those candidates?
Parker: Every race is different. The dynamic of every race is different. I’m asked since I’ve been in my office — starting my 13th year now in office in Houston. I’m asked regularly about the candidates, what they should do, what they should know.
I would say the most important thing is run for the position that you want, be passionate about the issues. I see too many people who say, “Oh, I want to be in office.” You have to love what you do. Don’t run for local government office or city office if you don’t care about trash pickup and potholes and barking dogs — and I do.
And then decide what your positions are on the range of gay issues that you [are] going to be asked, understand what your answers are, and go out and be honest. Voters appreciate honestly.
DC Agenda: Is there any race that you’re particularly paying attention to this November?
Parker: Not really. I am focused on our races in Texas. We’re electing a governor of Texas. And there are — as I said, I’m staying out of my local races in Texas, including the governor’s race, but I’m very passionately interested in it because it will have an impact on my constituents.
DC Agenda: Have LGBT issues or anti-gay rhetoric been playing any role in the gubernatorial election?
Parker: Not as far as I know so far.
DC Agenda: What do you think former Houston mayor and Democratic candidate Bill White’s chances are for election as Texas governor?
Parker: Difficult but not impossible. He’s a very smart, hard campaigner. He’ll have plenty of money to spend and he’s running against a governor who has the potential for fumbling the ball, so I certainly think it’s a competitive race, although it’s an uphill battle.
DC Agenda: How concerned do you think LGBT Americans should be about Democrats losing control of either chamber of Congress this fall?
Parker: It’s not unusual to have a midterm fallback for the party in power, but because so many state Republican parties have been hijacked by the Tea Party movement, and many of our Republican Congress members have taken a turn to the right, we need to be very vigilant to make sure that we don’t allow Congress to backtrack on our issues and that we do our best to keep out those who have taken these hard right turns.
DC Agenda: Do you think your position as mayor has influenced how the people of Texas or the Texas state government have looked at LGBT issues?
Parker: I hope so. I have been fielding media [interviews] from around the world, actually. I think it’s also affecting how people around the world view Houston and view Texas. I’ve had dozens and dozens of national and international media interviews since my election, and they fall into two categories: one category is “Wow, you’re a lesbian mayor,” and the other category is, “How did this happen in Houston or how did this happen in Texas?” It gives me an opportunity to talk a little bit about my hometown and why it’s different in Texas.
DC Agenda: Same-sex marriage is prohibited by the state constitution in Texas. What do you think would need to happen to reverse that?
Parker: A statewide referendum. I mean, literally, it’s a very simple answer. It would have to be declared unconstitutional by our state Supreme Court or we would have to do a statewide vote to undo it.
DC Agenda: What kind of planning do you think we’d need to see from the LGBT community for that to happen?
Parker: … It’s not just about putting more openly LGBT elected officials or putting more into — we have a statewide Equality Texas, a statewide organizing and lobbying effort. It’s going to take all of us convincing our families and our friends that recognition of intimate relationships is an important issue to them as well. We have to win the hearts and minds fight before we go back to legislative fight, and that’s a slow process.
DC Agenda: When, if ever, do you see that happening?
Parker: Really within my lifetime, but I don’t know how long that’s going to be. I have been an activist for more than 30 years, so, more like 35 years. I’ve seen a lot of changes for our community, and I can take the long view. I think it would have been unimaginable when I was out in college organizing on campus to have three members of Congress — let alone the mayor of Houston — who are out and open. We are so far beyond what I would have expected to see back then.
DC Agenda: Would you be interested in pursuing other political office after you’ve finished your tenure as mayor?
Parker: I haven’t even thought about it. Hopefully, I will be able to serve my full allotted terms under term limits — a maximum of six years. At that time, I will have been in office 18 years in Houston, and I’ll have to consider what I want to do next. But I love local government. I think it’s the most important level of government because it’s the most immediate to the people.
California
LGBTQ community calls out Radio Korea over host’s homophobic comments
Station acknowledged controversy, but skirted accountability
On Monday, Nov. 3, Radio Korea aired its regular morning talk show program, where one of its hosts, Julie An, discussed her lack of support for the LGBTQ community, citing her religious beliefs. She also went on to comment that gay people spread HIV and AIDS, and that conversation therapy — which has been linked to PTSD, suicidality, and depression — is a viable practice. Clips of this have since been taken down.
Radio Korea offers Korean language programming to engage local Korean American and Korean immigrant community members. Its reach is broad, as Los Angeles is home to the largest Korean population in the U.S, with over 300,000 residents. As An’s words echoed through the station’s airwaves, queer Korean community members took to social media to voice their concern, hurt, and anger.
In a now-deleted Instagram post, attorney, activist, and former congressional candidate David Yung Ho Kim demanded accountability from the station. Writer and entertainer Nathan Ramos-Park made videos calling out Radio Korea and An, stating that her comments “embolden” people with misinformation, which has the ability to perpetuate “violence against queer people.”
Community health professional Gavin Kwon also worries about how comments like An’s increase stigma within the Korean immigrant community, which could lead to increased discrimination against queer people and their willingness to seek health care.
Kwon, who works at a local clinic in Koreatown, told the Los Angeles Blade that comments like An’s prescribe being gay or queer as a “moral failure,” and that this commonly-held belief within the Korean immigrant community, particularly in older generations, strengthens the reticence and avoidance clients hold onto when asked about their gender or sexual orientation.
“When you stigmatize a group, people don’t avoid the disease — they avoid care,” Kwon explained. “They avoid getting tested, avoid disclosing their status, and avoid talking openly with providers. Stigma pushes people into silence, and silence is the worst possible environment for managing any infectious disease.”
For weeks, Radio Korea did not offer a direct response to the public criticism. Its Instagram feed continued to be updated with shorts, featuring clips of its various hosts — including An.
On Friday, Radio Korea CEO Michael Kim released an official statement on the station’s YouTube page. In this video, Michael Kim stated that An’s comments “included factual inaccuracies” and that the station “does not endorse or share the personal opinions expressed by individual hosts.” Michael Kim also stated that Radio Korea “welcomes members of the LGBT community to share their perspectives” in order to deepen understanding through dialogue.
Afterwards, Michael Kim continued that though he acknowledges the “pain” felt by queer community members, he concluded: “I don’t think Radio Korea needs to apologize for what was said any more than Netflix should apologize for what Dave Chappelle says, or any more than Instagram or TikTok should apologize for what people say on their platforms.”
Michael then offered a justification that An’s statements were “not part of a news report,” and that he was “disappointed” that David Yung Ho Kim, specifically, had been vocal about An’s comments. Michael Kim stated that he was the first person to interview David Yung Ho Kim in 2020 during his congressional campaign, and that he had provided the candidate a platform and opportunity to educate listeners about politics.
“After all these years, the support Radio Korea has given him,” said Kim, “the support I personally gave him, even the support from other Radio Korea members who donated or even volunteered for him — he dishonestly tried to portray Radio Korea as being an anti-gay organization.”
Michael Kim went on to criticize David Yung Ho Kim’s purported “hurry to condemn others,” and also questioned if David has disowned his father, who he states is a pastor. “What kind of person is David Kim, and is this the kind of person we want in Congress?” Michael Kim asked viewers, noting that Koreatown is “only about three miles from Hollywood, and some people just like to perform.”
At the end of the video, Michael Kim stated that his duty is to guard the legacy of the station. “My responsibility is to protect what was built before me and ensure that Radio Korea continues serving this community long after today’s momentary controversies disappear,” he said.
For community members and advocates, this response was unsatisfactory. “The overall tone of the statement felt more defensive than accountable,” Kwon wrote to the Blade. “Instead of a sincere apology to the LGBTQ+ community that was harmed, the message shifts into personal grievances, political dynamics, and side explanations that don’t belong in an official response.”
Michael Kim’s portrayal of the criticism and calls to action by community members as a “momentary controversy” paints a clearer picture of the station’s stance — that the hurt felt and expressed by its queer community members is something that will simply pass until it is forgotten. An continues to be platformed at Radio Korea, and was posted on the station’s social media channels as recently as yesterday. The station has not outlined any other action since Michael Kim’s statement.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Pentagon moves to break with Boy Scouts over LGBTQ and gender inclusion
Leaked memo shows Hegseth rejecting Scouting America’s shift toward broader inclusion
The Pentagon is preparing to sever its longstanding partnership with the Boy Scouts of America, now known as Scouting America.
In a draft memo to Congress obtained by NPR, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth criticizes the organization for being “genderless” and for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.
“The organization once endorsed by President Theodore Roosevelt no longer supports the future of American boys,” Hegseth wrote, according to Defense Department sources.
Girls have been eligible to join Cub Scouts (grades K–5) since 2018, and since 2019 they have been able to join Scouts BSA troops and earn the organization’s highest rank of Eagle Scout.
A statement on the Scouting America website says the shift toward including girls stemmed from “an expanding demand to join the Boy Scouts” and a commitment to inclusivity. “Throughout the late 20th and early 21st centuries, it has undergone significant changes to become more inclusive of the adult staff and volunteers that drive its programming as well as of scouts and their families,” the organization says.
Part of that broader push included lifting its ban on openly gay members in 2014 and on openly gay adult leaders in 2015.
Once the Pentagon finalizes the break, the U.S. military will no longer provide medical and logistical support to the National Jamboree, the massive annual gathering of scouts in West Virginia that typically draws about 20,000 participants. The memo also states that the military will no longer allow scout troops to meet on U.S. or overseas installations, where many bases host active scout programs.
Hegseth’s memo outlines several justifications for the decision, arguing that Scouting America has strayed from its original mission to “cultivate masculine values” by fostering “gender confusion.” It also cites global conflicts and tightening defense budgets, claiming that deploying troops, doctors and vehicles to a 10-day youth event would “harm national security” by diverting resources from border operations and homeland defense.
“Scouting America has undergone a significant transformation,” the memo states. “It is no longer a meritocracy which holds its members accountable to meet high standards.”
The Pentagon declined NPR’s request for comment. A “War Department official” told the outlet that the memo was a “leaked document that we cannot authenticate and that may be pre-decisional.”
The leaked memo comes roughly one month after nearly every major journalism organization walked out of the Pentagon in protest of new rules requiring reporters to publish only “official” documents released by the department — effectively banning the use of leaked or unpublished materials.
President Donald Trump, who serves as the honorary head of Scouting America by virtue of his office, praised the Jamboree audience during his 2017 visit to West Virginia. “The United States has no better citizens than its Boy Scouts. No better,” he said, noting that 10 members of his Cabinet were former Scouts.
Hegseth was never a scout. He has said he grew up in a church-based youth group focused on memorizing Bible verses. As a Fox News host last year, he criticized the Scouts for changing their name and admitting girls.
“The Boy Scouts has been cratering itself for quite some time,” Hegseth said. “This is an institution the left didn’t control. They didn’t want to improve it. They wanted to destroy it or dilute it into something that stood for nothing.”
NBC News first reported in April that the Pentagon was considering ending the partnership, citing sources familiar with the discussions. In a statement to NBC at the time, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said, “Secretary Hegseth and his Public Affairs team thoroughly review partnerships and engagements to ensure they align with the President’s agenda and advance our mission.”
The Scouting America organization has has long played a role in military recruiting. According to numbers provided by Scouting America, many as 20 percent of cadets and midshipmen at the various service academies are Eagle Scouts. Enlistees who have earned the Eagle rank also receive advanced entry-level rank and higher pay — a practice that would end under the proposed changes.
The White House
Trans workers take White House to court over bathroom policy
Federal lawsuit filed Thursday
Democracy Forward and the American Civil Liberties Union, two organizations focused on protecting Americans’ constitutional rights, filed a class-action lawsuit Thursday in federal court challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s bathroom ban policies.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of LeAnne Withrow, a civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard, challenges the administration’s policy prohibiting transgender and intersex federal employees from using restrooms aligned with their gender. The policy claims that allowing trans people in bathrooms would “deprive [women assigned female at birth] of their dignity, safety, and well-being.”
The lawsuit responds to the executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office. It alleges that the order and its implementation violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Title VII protects trans workers from discrimination based on sex.
Since its issuance, the executive order has faced widespread backlash from constitutional rights and LGBTQ advocacy groups for discriminating against trans and intersex people.
The lawsuit asserts that Withrow, along with numerous other trans and intersex federal employees, is forced to choose between performing her duties and being allowed to use the restroom safely.
“There is no credible evidence that allowing transgender people access to restrooms aligning with their gender identity jeopardizes the safety or privacy of non-transgender users,” the lawsuit states, directly challenging claims of safety risks.
Withrow detailed the daily impact of the policy in her statement included in the lawsuit.
“I want to help soldiers, families, veterans — and then I want to go home at the end of the day. At some point in between, I will probably need to use the bathroom,” she said.
The filing notes that Withrow takes extreme measures to avoid using the restroom, which the Cleveland Clinic reports most people need to use anywhere from 1–15 times per day depending on hydration.
“Ms. Withrow almost never eats breakfast, rarely eats lunch, and drinks less than the equivalent of one 17 oz. bottle of water at work on most days.”
In addition to withholding food and water, the policy subjects her to ongoing stress and fear:
“Ms. Withrow would feel unsafe, humiliated, and degraded using a men’s restroom … Individuals seeing her enter the men’s restroom might try to prevent her from doing so or physically harm her,” the lawsuit states. “The actions of defendants have caused Ms. Withrow to suffer physical and emotional distress and have limited her ability to effectively perform her job.”
“No one should have to choose between their career in service and their own dignity,” Withrow added. “I bring respect and honor to the work I do to support military families, and I hope the court will restore dignity to transgender people like me who serve this country every day.”
Withrow is a lead Military and Family Readiness Specialist and civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard. Previously, she served as a staff sergeant and has received multiple commendations, including the Illinois National Guard Abraham Lincoln Medal of Freedom.
The lawsuit cites the American Medical Association, the largest national association of physicians, which has stated that policies excluding trans individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have harmful effects on health, safety, and well-being.
“Policies excluding transgender individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have detrimental effects on the health, safety and well-being of those individuals,” the lawsuit states on page 32.
Advocates have condemned the policy since its signing in January and continue to push back against the administration. Leaders from ACLU-D.C., ACLU of Illinois, and Democracy Forward all provided comments on the lawsuit and the ongoing fight for trans rights.
“We cannot let the Trump administration target transgender people in the federal government or in public life,” said ACLU-D.C. Senior Staff Attorney Michael Perloff. “An executive order micromanaging which bathroom civil servants use is discrimination, plain and simple, and must be stopped.”
“It is absurd that in her home state of Illinois, LeAnne can use any other restroom consistent with her gender — other than the ones controlled by the federal government,” said Michelle Garcia, deputy legal director at the ACLU of Illinois. “The Trump administration’s reckless policies are discriminatory and must be reversed.”
“This policy is hateful bigotry aimed at denying hardworking federal employees their basic dignity simply because they are transgender,” said Kaitlyn Golden, senior counsel at Democracy Forward. “It is only because of brave individuals like LeAnne that we can push back against this injustice. Democracy Forward is honored to work with our partners in this case and is eager to defeat this insidious effort to discriminate against transgender federal workers.”
Comings & Goings
Impulse Group DC to host fundraiser
Calendar: November 28-December 4
D.C., Va., Md. to commemorate World AIDS Day
D.C. theater scene has something for everyone this holiday season
Bowser announces she will not seek fourth term as mayor
Pentagon moves to break with Boy Scouts over LGBTQ and gender inclusion
Pattie Gonia calls out Hegseth’s anti-LGBTQ policies — while doing better pull-ups
Second gay candidate announces run for Ward 1 D.C. Council seat
Second ‘lavender scare’ is harming our veterans. We know how to fix it
-
District of Columbia3 days agoBowser announces she will not seek fourth term as mayor
-
U.S. Military/Pentagon3 days ago
Pentagon moves to break with Boy Scouts over LGBTQ and gender inclusion
-
Drag4 days ago
Pattie Gonia calls out Hegseth’s anti-LGBTQ policies — while doing better pull-ups
-
District of Columbia4 days ago
Second gay candidate announces run for Ward 1 D.C. Council seat
