Living
UPDATED: GLAAD president resigns under pressure; Six Board members out
Board member criticized in flap once worked for anti-gay Heritage Foundation
Troup Coronado, a former AT&T executive and current GLAAD board member, once directed minority outreach at the anti-gay Heritage Foundation. (Screen capture from CSPAN video archives)
UPDATE: According to Politico, six members of the GLAAD Board of Directors are out, including American Teachers Federation President, Randi Weingarten.
GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios resigned Saturday after a tumultuous two weeks in which he was caught up in an uproar over the organization’s involvement in the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile.
Barrios came under fire from the LGBT blogosphere after an appearance on the Michelangelo Signorile show by former GLAAD board of directors co-chair Laurie Perper, who questioned a series of official statements released by Barrios’ office supporting telecommunications giant AT&T.
“The GLAAD Board has received Jarrett Barrios’ resignation letter and discussed this among other topics on our call. We expect at our next Board meeting set for Wednesday to reach a conclusion on all issues so that Mr. Barrios can begin to help The Board manage transition and bring on his successor,” the organization said in a statement.
But the story didn’t end with Barrios’ resignation, as several other LGBT organizations were pulled into the fray, either by close association to AT&T, a paper trail of their own similar letters or a connection to a GLAAD board member at the center of the controversy, Troup Coronado.
Coronado occupied seats on the boards of no less than four LGBT organizations in 2009, at the time the letters to the FCC began to emerge from these organizations’ head offices.
In 2009, when the letters containing the pro-AT&T language — later found to be opposing net neutrality — were delivered to the FCC, Coronado sat on the board of directors for GLAAD and the Equality California Institute, and served as dinner co-chair of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, according to Politico and other media reports this week. Each of these organizations sent seemingly innocuous, nearly identical letters to the FCC containing language supporting the telecom industry’s position against net neutrality.
The organizations, except for Equality California and the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, sent follow-up letters to the FCC retracting their original letters after the matter was brought to their attention.
In addition, the Human Rights Campaign refused to support the telecom position by joining the sign-on letter, though Coronado also sat on HRC’s Business Council at the time. Coronado was later removed from the body in March 2010.
Meghan Stabler, a transgender LGBT activist, educator and Business Council member, said though Coronado’s departure was unrelated to the controversy surrounding the letter, his participation on the body was a factor.
“Each year the HRC Business Council reviews member participation and HRC Workplace Project objectives, doing so allows members to retire from the council and new members to be on-boarded as needed,” she said.
Coronado — who once worked for Orin Hatch — is turning out to be a controversial background player in the world of LGBT philanthropy. As reported last week in the Blade, both OpenSecrets.org and the Washington Post have questioned Coronado’s conduct in one way or another over the years.
After an investigation into Coronado’s past, the Blade has discovered that a Troup Coronado who graduated from the University of Texas at Austin the same year as AT&T’s Coronado, and whom an anonymous source confirmed is the same person, appeared in several CSPAN videos from 1991-1993 as a representative of the anti-gay conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation. Jeremy Hooper of the GoodAsYou blog was able to identify several instances of media outlets covering the Heritage Foundation opposition to pro-LGBT legislation in the 1980s and 1990s, and Heritage has been vocal in opposing same-sex marriage over the past decade. The CSPAN video gives Coronado’s title at the organization as Director of the New Majority Project.
The Heritage Foundation declined to comment about the purpose of this now-defunct program, but according to a July 14, 1991 Newsweek article by Charles Lane, titled “Defying the stereotypes,” the project is defined as the body’s “minority outreach program.”
A search of the Heritage Foundation archives reveals transcripts of presentations given on behalf of the program including controversial conservative figures such as Errol Smith, who would go on in 1996 to serve as vice chair of the California Civil Rights Initiative, which successfully pushed for a ballot measure prohibiting the use of so-called “Affirmative Action” at California public institutions. Coronado was present for Smith’s February 1992 speech before Heritage Foundation members on racism in the African-American community, and was referenced several times in the text of the speech.
In addition, CSPAN’s website features videos of Coronado acting as president of the Washington chapter of the Ex-Students Association of his alma mater, as well as another video introducing disgraced radio host Armstrong Williams, who later apologized for taking $240,000 from the Bush administration to promote the Department of Education’s “No Child Left Behind” law on his television and radio appearances.
Coronado was once an executive at AT&T, as well as a lobbyist for AT&T’s former parent company, BellSouth. Coronado left his position at AT&T late last year to launch a consultant firm — where it is alleged one of his most prominent clients is AT&T. The company reportedly tasked Coronado with securing LGBT organizational support for the AT&T/T-Mobile merger.
Coronado could not be immediately reached for comment.
When reached by phone, Jim Carroll, interim executive director of Equality California — who came into the position far after the controversy broke — says the fallout from the Oct. 12, 2009 letter was a wake-up call for the organization.
“I’m not denying the genesis of the letter was a request from AT&T,” Carroll told the Blade. “There were and there are no policies and procedures that would require the executive director to vet such a request … I would assume that this is a wake-up call for all of us to carefully consider requests of support for any of our allies — it doesn’t have to be a corporate ally.”
The letter was never amended, as Carroll was unaware of the letter at the time, and the issue is only now coming to his attention.
Carroll confirms that Coronado remains on the board of the California Equality Institute, despite the controversy, though Carroll says that in his six years at the organization, he believes there has never been an incident where a board member with a corporate relationship has ever asked the organization to take a position on any issue that would be considered a conflict of interest, including Coronado.
However, Carroll has yet to hear from Coronado himself about the controversy, despite requesting a conversation with the board member days ago.
Another organization that recently revealed it too was duped by the AT&T sample text, was the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which has revamped its policies and procedures for vetting what are known as “sign-on letters,” from colleague organizations.
“I signed them and I take the responsibility for the mistake of issuing both the 2009 letter and the January 5, 2010 letter,” Rea Carey, the Task Force’s executive director, told the Blade.
The Task Force issued a correction on Jan.14, after colleagues familiar with the net neutrality issue called Carey’s attention to the true meaning of the AT&T suggested language.
Carey clarified, “we get offered sample text, and language for sign-on letters,” by organizations seeking the Task Force’s support on matters of government policies and legislation, but “rarely get requests from corporations to write letters.”
“Almost always the request comes from a colleague organization — someone in ‘Labor,’ maybe a pro-choice organization, one of the civil rights organizations — those requests almost always come to me, and I forward them on to our Policy staff, and they assess them, and determine whether or not its appropriate for us to sign on to any particular letter,” Carey said.
However, when she saw the letter came from corporate partner, AT&T, Carey forwarded the sign-on letter to staff in charge of corporate relationships to review the request.
“That was the mistake I made,” she admits. “Our procedure now, no matter who on staff gets a request for a sign-on,” Carey clarified, “if there is a policy matter involved, our policy staff are involved in the full analysis and the decision on how to proceed.”
That procedural change was a direct result of the oversight on the Jan. 5 anti-net neutrality letter.
Fausto Fernos hosts the LGBT podcast, “Feast of Fun” with his partner, Marc Felion, where Jarrett Barrios first began giving conflicting statements about the origin of the GLAAD FCC letter.
“Most of our advocacy groups have a profound lack of understanding of how the Internet works, and why it’s valuable in the fight, and what it means to every single LGBT individual,” Fernos said. “We don’t value all of the amazing content that’s being created.”
Fernos became passionate about promoting this story because he believes that the AT&T position on net neutrality will create barriers to LGBT advocacy in the future.
Michael,
I’m 34, and after being on the dating scene for about 12 years, I’m coming to the conclusion that I don’t want to be in a relationship.
I don’t love hanging out with the same person over and over again. I don’t feel all gooey when I’ve been with someone for a while. I run out of things to say, and also, it just gets boring.
I like my space. I don’t like having to share the bathroom or have someone next to me all night, especially when they want to go to sleep holding me. I know that sounds like heaven to a lot of people but it just feels intrusive to me.
It’s a pain to have to compromise what I want to do. When I want to go someplace on vacation, or try a restaurant, or get up early to go to the gym, or sleep in, I don’t want to have to run that by someone else and get their OK. Life’s short. I want to do what I want to do.
I feel like we are constantly bombarded with the message to date and find a mate, but I don’t really see the point. I don’t think I’m an introvert—I have a lot of friends—but I also like to spend time by myself and not be accountable to anyone.
When I think about marriage, it seems like a very old-fashioned concept, developed for straight people who want to have children. Historically you needed one person to work and another one to stay home and raise the kids. And you needed to stay together to give your kids two parents and a stable home. I get that.
But if I’m not having kids, what’s the point? I don’t need a husband to have sex. I can and do hook up all the time. It’s so easy to find someone online. And I get to have a lot more variety when I’m single than when I’m dating. Even though my relationships are always open, when I am dating someone, I always hook up a lot less, because I have to worry about the boyfriend’s feelings being hurt if I hook up “too much.”
I know I sound unromantic and maybe selfish but this is how I see it.
My friends are all about having a boyfriend. They think I’m being ridiculous. Can I get another opinion?
Michael replies:
You make great points. Relationships do require us to give up some of our independence. They can feel stifling at times. And when the excitement of a new partner fades, things will at times feel “boring” in all sorts of ways, including sex. You can choose to avoid all of this by remaining single.
But relationships also give us tremendous overlapping opportunities to grow, including:
Being pushed to develop a clear sense of self: When we must constantly decide what we are willing to do or not do as part of a couple; and when our partner inevitably and frequently has interests, values, and priorities that conflict with ours, then we are challenged, over and over, to decide what is most important to us and how we want to live our lives.
Frequent opportunities to build resilience: All those old issues from our past that get us upset or riled up? We have to work through them so that we can stay (pretty) calm rather than losing our minds when our buttons are pressed.
Improving our ability to have hard conversations – and without rancor: Unless we’re able to disagree, speak up, or confront when it’s important to do so, we are going to twist ourselves into a pretzel striving to accommodate the other person. And being able to engage in tough talks in a loving way is necessary if we want to have a loving relationship.
Becoming a more generous person: You wrote that you like to have things your way. But part of life, whether or not we are partnered, involves being thoughtful, considerate, and willing to put someone else first at times. Great relationships require us to do all of these things regularly—and many of us find that contributing to the happiness of someone we care about can increase our own happiness.
Besides these ongoing challenges, relationships give us the experience of someone knowing us deeply, and knowing someone deeply. There can be great comfort in going through life with someone with whom we have this intimate connection, along with ongoing shared experiences of trust, support, comfort, and love. Long-term companionship is also an adventure: Can we keep the relationship vibrant and fun as we both keep changing over time?
If you choose to remain single: Many people play their friendships on the easy setting, keeping things pleasant, on-the-surface, and non-confrontational; and cutting people off when things aren’t going well. Hanging in there to deal with the rough stuff can lead to deeper, longer friendships, and plenty of personal growth.
I do have a question for you: I am curious what sort of relationships you saw growing up, and what your own relationship experiences have been.
Intimate relationships aren’t for everyone, and you get to decide what is right for you. But if your negative view of relationships is influenced by having witnessed or experienced intrusive or just plain awful relationships, maybe you want to do some work (therapy, for example) to heal from this stuff, rather than letting your past limit your future. A healthy relationship means being part of a couple while also remaining a vibrant individual, not being stifled, bored, and losing your independence.
(Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, and New York. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].)
Autos
Wagons ho! High-class, head-turning haulers
Automakers still offer a few good traditional station wagons
As a teenager, one of the first cars I drove — and fell in love with — was our family’s hulking full-size wagon. It stretched over 19 feet in length and weighed a whopping 5,300 pounds. That’s three feet longer and 1,000 heavier than, say, a Ford Explorer today.
But this Leviathan felt safe and practical, especially when tootling around town with my crew or traveling solo cross-country. Of course, this hauler was also an eco-disaster.
Luckily, that’s not the case today. And even though the number of traditional station wagons keeps shrinking, automakers are still offering a few gems.
VOLVO V60 CROSS COUNTRY
$54,000
MPG: 23 city/31 highway
0 to 60 mph: 6.6 seconds
Cargo space: 51 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Elegant design. Composed handling. Top safety features.
CONS: So-so power. Modest rear legroom. Only two trim levels.
The 2026 Volvo V60 Cross Country doesn’t cry for attention — and that’s the point. This is the automotive equivalent of Kristen Stewart, a celebrity who’s confident in her own skin and sees no need to post about it.
Under the hood, there’s a four-cylinder turbo engine paired with a mild-hybrid system, producing 247 horsepower. You won’t outrun other drivers, but there is a sense of calm authority when accelerating. The standard all-wheel drive and 8.1 inches of ground clearance mean this wagon is ready for dirt roads, bad weather or a spontaneous weekend jaunt.
And inside? Scandinavian minimalism at its finest. Clean lines. Gorgeous materials. Google-based infotainment that mostly works — though occasionally the system could be a bit faster, at least for my taste. The ride is smooth, composed and quiet, even if acceleration feels more “measured sip” than “espresso shot.”
But here’s the twist: After more than a decade, this is the final Volvo wagon in the U.S. Its farewell tour ends in 2026. That alone gives it collector-car status.
MERCEDES-AMG E53 WAGON
$95,000
MPG: 21 city/25 highway
0 to 60 mph: 3.4 seconds
Cargo space: 64.6 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Supercar vibe. Hybrid versatility. Stunning interior.
CONS: Some fussy controls. Can feel heavy when cornering.
If the Volvo V60 Cross Country is subtle, the 2026 Mercedes-AMG E53 Wagon is a screamer. It’s like being at a Lil Nas X concert: flashy, high energy, and full of shock and awe.
This performance wagon — a plug-in hybrid, no less — pushes well over 500 horsepower (and in some configurations over 600 horsepower), launching from 0 to 60 mph as fast as a $300,000 Aston Martin supercar.
Yes, deep down, this is still a wagon. But you also can do a Costco run in something that could embarrass sports cars at a stoplight. That duality is delicious.
Inside, Mercedes leans all the way in. The high-tech Superscreen setup stretches across the dash. Ambient lighting glows like a curated art installation. The 4D surround-sound audio literally pulses through the seats. It’s immersive. Borderline excessive. And entirely the point.
Rear-axle steering helps mask the size of this car, but there’s no hiding the weight — it’s a big, powerful machine. Still, this hauler handles far better than physics suggests it should.
PORSCHE TAYCAN CROSS TURISMO
$121,000
Range: 265 miles
0 to 60 mph: 2.8 seconds
Cargo space: 41 cu. ft. (rear seats folded)
PROS: Lightning fast. Space-age design. EV smoothness.
CONS: Very pricey. Options add up quickly. Limited rear visibility.
The Porsche Taycan Cross Turismo completely rewrites the wagon formula. Fully electric. Shockingly fast. Designed like it belongs in the Louvre.
Performance is instant. Depending on trim level, you’re looking at 0-to-60 mph in less than 3 seconds. No exuberant engine noise — just that smooth, purring EV surge.
Handling? Pure Porsche. Low center of gravity thanks to the battery-pack placement. Precision that makes winding roads feel like choreography. And then — hello — there’s also a Gravel Mode for light off-road use.
Inside, the style is restrained but high-tech. Digital displays dominate, including a 10.3-inch passenger side touchscreen. Yet the layout feels intentional rather than overwhelming. Build quality is exceptional. Options, including leather-free materials and an active-leveling system for hard cornering, are endless — and expensive.
Range varies by model. But as with any EV, your lifestyle (and charging access) matters.
Overall, this is a wagon that looks and behaves like one helluva class act.
Advice
My family voted for Trump and I cut off contact
Now my father is ill and I don’t know what to do
Dear Michael,
I stopped talking to my family last year because they all voted for Trump. It’s not like they didn’t know whom they were voting for — they’d already had four years of seeing him in action.
I decided that I couldn’t remain in contact with people whom I felt wanted to take away my rights as a gay man. That is what they essentially did by voting for Trump.
They had come to my wedding in 2012, they had welcomed my husband and me into their homes for the holidays for our entire relationship, so I couldn’t believe how little they actually cared about me and my community. I was profoundly hurt.
They’ve reached out but I have been too angry at their hypocrisy to engage in more than a perfunctory way. I miss them, sure, but as I’ve watched our community be attacked, I just get so angry that I don’t want to talk. I certainly don’t want to hear them justify bigotry and hatred.
Now one of my siblings has reached out to let me know that my father’s health is rapidly declining. I’m wondering if I should rethink my decision and reach out to him, maybe even visit, before he dies.
But then I think of ICE’s attack on our country and the removal of the Pride flag from Stonewall and I don’t want to talk to people who support what is happening to vulnerable, marginalized people and the LGBTQ community.
My father was a good father to me. Even when I first came out to him, he was loving and supportive. I can’t square his behavior personally toward me with his support of this regime. The hypocrisy makes me so angry. How could he purport to love me and then vote against my freedoms?
I would love some suggestions about how to square my two opposing viewpoints.
Michael replies:
Many years ago, a great mentor taught me that the one thing you can count on in a relationship is learning to tolerate disappointment: Both being a disappointment, and being disappointed in the other person. This is true for love relationships and it’s also true for other significant relationships. All of us are different in some major ways and so we are bound at times to disappoint our loved ones in major ways, and to be disappointed by them in major ways.
That is why I’m not a fan of purity tests. To expect that someone must think like you (much less vote like you) in order for you to have a relationship with them is unrealistic, impractical, and sometimes damaging.
Of course, a person may hold some beliefs that give you reason not to want to have any connection to them. But is that the case here?
From your description, your family has always been loving and supportive of you as a gay man. That is no small thing. They seem to care about you enough to have continued to reach out, even though you have stopped talking to them.
Perhaps they had some other reasons for voting as they did, other than to roll back LGBTQ rights and to attack immigrants.
Instead of wondering how they could be so hypocritical, how about talking with them and striving to understand their choices? I don’t know what they will say, and you may hear different answers from your various family members. But at least you will get some clarity, rather than presuming that they made their voting choices from a place of malice. Then you will be in a better position to decide if you want a relationship going forward.
Another point to consider: Very few things are set in stone. Even if your family made their voting choices based on holding positions that you neither like nor respect, they may be open to shifting their views over time. One way to perhaps influence their thinking is by engaging with them, sharing your thoughts, and asking them to consider the possible consequences of their actions. If you choose to re-engage with them, two points to consider:
First, don’t expect that you will change their minds. You can advocate for what you want, but you have to let go of the results.
Second, they are more likely to consider your points if you do not approach them from a judgmental, self-righteous stance.
Many years ago, when I was newly a vegetarian, I was eager to challenge and “educate” friends who weren’t following my dietary ideas. Guess what? It didn’t work. Then I got some great advice: A great way to influence others to consider eating fewer animals was to serve them delicious vegetarian food.
The same point is true here. We can’t beat people over the head to agree with us. But if we approach them with some kindness, rather than with the certainty that we hold the moral high ground, we may help them see a bigger picture.
And sometimes, we too may see a bigger picture.
Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, and New York. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].
New Hungarian prime minister takes office
Comings & Goings
Learn more about queer love
Calendar: May 8-14
Va. Supreme Court invalidates Democrat-backed redistricting plan
A reign defined by commitment and human impact
Ukrainian MPs advance new Civil Code without protections for same-sex couples
DOE investigates Smith College’s trans-inclusive policy
Key West Pride’s state funding pulled
PHOTOS: Miss Gay Western Maryland
-
Arts & Entertainment4 days agoA reign defined by commitment and human impact
-
Ukraine5 days ago
Ukrainian MPs advance new Civil Code without protections for same-sex couples
-
Federal Government4 days ago
DOE investigates Smith College’s trans-inclusive policy
-
Florida4 days ago
Key West Pride’s state funding pulled
