Connect with us

Opinions

Time for a new LGBT march on Washington

Strategy for fighting Trump should include a return to the streets

Published

on

45 headlines, gay news, Washington Blade, March on Washington

National March on Washington for Gay Rights on Oct. 14, 1979. (Washington Blade archive photo by John M. Yanson)

Since the unthinkable happened last month and U.S. voters elected a racist demagogue as president, I have been inundated with emails and personal requests for reassurance. After all, we’ve seen worse – George W. Bush, AIDS, etc., right?

Indeed, we have seen worse, though the impact of a President Trump on our community is so far unclear. He has appointed a cadre of wealthy, anti-LGBT ideologues — some with no government experience — to senior advisory positions and Cabinet-level posts. Some were anti-marriage activists; at least one is a hero of the KKK. It’s hard to fathom that this is our 2017 America, but here we are. After eight years of progress — from the economic recovery to unprecedented advances on LGBT rights under our first African-American president — we’re about to take monumental steps backward. The excuses offered by Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook and others about Russian interference and James Comey’s recklessness ignore the reality that her campaign lacked a coherent message and that the candidate was deeply flawed from the beginning. In a change year, the Democrats put forward the ultimate insider politician, someone who voted for the disastrous Iraq war before apologizing for it; who supported TPP before opposing it; who co-sponsored a bill to criminalize flag burning; who was woefully late to the marriage equality fight; and who even praised Ronald Reagan’s record on AIDS.

Despite Clinton’s flaws and her campaign’s apparent indifference to Rust Belt states critical to her Electoral College strategy, there was only one responsible choice on Election Day. About 2.5 million more voters made that choice than supported Donald Trump, but lopsided margins in California couldn’t offset Clinton’s lack of appeal across the South and Midwest. And so, here we are.

Trump’s gay defenders — and there are a handful — have said not to worry, that Trump reached out to gays during his convention and that he won’t undermine LGBT rights as president. But most of us are more concerned about a disengaged President Trump empowering anti-LGBT figures like Vice President-elect Mike Pence, whose anti-LGBT views are well known, and Reince Priebus, whose party platform was labeled “the most anti-LGBT platform in the party’s 162-year history,” by the Log Cabin Republicans. There’s also Trump’s disturbing pledge to appoint justices in the mold of Antonin Scalia to the U.S. Supreme Court.

What’s coming won’t be pretty. But this isn’t 2000 or 2004, when George W. Bush cynically used anti-gay animus to motivate conservative voters. The Obama era has produced great advances toward equality that will prove difficult to undo. From opinion polls that show growing acceptance of our relationships to court victories like Macy v. Holder and Obergefell v. Hodges, the LGBT community is on much surer footing than eight years ago. Our advocates (and journalists) will need to readjust to playing defense again and fight to preserve those victories. Those strategies should include a new march on Washington for LGBT equality.

Many younger voters came of age during the Obama era and are unaware of our community’s history as a despised and discriminated against minority. Maybe that’s why many of us of a certain age didn’t slip into a post-election depression — we’ve been here before. We’ve marched on Washington and protested government indifference to the pandemic in front of the White House, decades before we were ever welcome inside. A new march would serve to educate and galvanize a younger generation in the way previous marches in 1979, 1987, 1993, 2000 and 2009 inspired many of us. We should send a message to Trump and his supporters that LGBT Americans are NOT returning to the closet and will not abide a rollback of our hard-fought advances. It’s a new era but we’ve been here before. We know how to fight from outside the White House gates.

Kevin Naff is editor of the Washington Blade. Reach him at [email protected].

Continue Reading
Advertisement
4 Comments

4 Comments

  1. Im Just Sayin

    December 6, 2016 at 12:41 pm

    So, is the assumption here that Trump was just clueless about the positions of his VP and cabinet appointments when it comes to LGBT rights? Is he going to see us march, slap his hand to his forehead and ask why someone didn’t tell him about Mike Pence, Tom Price or Jeff Sessions before he nominated them? So we march, then what? It’s not like we can threaten to withhold our votes or money since we have already done that and it didn’t matter.

    Maybe rather than marching on the White House, we should be marching on DNC headquarters. To your point Kevin, running Hillary was like trying to run a con, hoping nobody would notice that she supported the Iraq war, TPP, opposed marriage equality, put personal needs before all else, exercised poor judgment and thought Reagan did a good job handling the AIDS crisis. Maybe we need to demand better, less flawed, more dynamic candidates, run more savvy campaigns, offer sustainable platforms and allow less appeasement of party elders. Maybe we should stop believing that running any woman or man will work if we can just turnout the base. Is there anyone who thinks Senator Schumer and Representative Pelosi are the people to lead the party out of this morass other than Chuck and Nancy?

    • lnm3921

      December 6, 2016 at 7:20 pm

      No one said Trump was clueless about their anti-gay positions. He was just indifferent. GLBT rights for conservatives don’t matter. But we do know what Trump’s positons are on religious freedom laws and marriage equality. Frankly, Trump flip flops so much on his positions that you can’t really believe anything he says! The message changes depending on the audience.

      Don’t want to march on Washington? Then keep your sorry jaded butt at home!

      Marching has an enormous effect on morale and solidarity and keeps the message out there. Why do you think they have a National Right to Life March every year?! Has it changed abortion rights or overturned Roe V. Wade?

      Don’t try and sell us that a march doesn’t matter. It matters more than ever to show we are here, we are many and we aren’t going to stand by idly while religious freedom laws are pushed through Congress and anti-gay activist judges are appointed to the bench. We will fight tooth and nail every which way we can! Silence or invisibility will do far less for us under an oppressive regime! Those of us that have marched before know it. We remind our allies we are out there and still count.

  2. lnm3921

    December 6, 2016 at 7:34 pm

    Well Kevin, twenty-twenty hindsight is easy. Didn’t HRC endorse Hillary/ If you felt she had so much baggage and was the wrong candidate for the nomination, why did you simply remain silent and accept the status quo? Have you know influence or a say with the Democrats when it comes to a nominee?

    Our enemy organizations like FRC have a voice within the GOP when it comes to a choice for a candidate. Why does HRC seem to lose theirs?

    That said, I have advocated for a March on Washington from the get go after the disaster with Trump. A march takes time to organize so now is the time to start planning for it. Remember the old AIDS cry about what silence equals! I would argue that invisibility plays the same role. We are taken for granted, ignored and chalked up as just a fringe noise in the background.

    This march though should not be just for GLBT but also include representatives from all those organizations that scored so well on the Corporate Equality Index. It’s time they take a larger role in advocating for our equality in Congress not just at the state level. Just like they influence religious freedom laws in Indiana and Arizona and recently were involved in NC, they need to be there for us at the national level! The time is now! Enough lip service on supporting equality push and demand for it! Just scoring high on the index is not good enough anymore!!!!

  3. Jake GG

    December 8, 2016 at 3:14 pm

    An out and proud LGBTQ contingent with rainbow flags attending and showing their support for the women’s march on Washington on January 21st could be a really good idea. We need fusion politics to win and stand against Trump.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinions

Blogging my first overseas vacation since COVID

Chronicling life aboard Celebrity APEX

Published

on

I will be blogging a number of times during my two-week transatlantic cruise and sharing my thoughts and experiences. 

The first thing I found is boarding during a pandemic is a little different. People were given specific boarding times yet most arrived at the port when it was convenient for them as many had early check-out times from their hotel or Airbnb in Barcelona. Celebrity didn’t turn anyone away. There was no Wi-fi at the entrance to the terminal so things got a little complicated as many had the information needed on their iPhone Celebrity app. It worked out and when you got inside to the counter they shared a Wi-fi connection. 

I knew in advance from a Facebook connection, some childhood friends whom I hadn’t seen in 21 years were going to be onboard. We ended up arriving at the terminal at the same time and caught up for the next hour and a half as we progressed through the boarding process. We all had to take a Covid test and only those with negative results could board. Of the approximately 1,300 people boarding, less than half the possible number for a full ship, I didn’t hear of anyone getting a positive result. 

When my negative result came back I was allowed to board and went to find my stateroom on deck 11. The key was at the door with all my information on it. Celebrity was doing everything to limit crew-to-passenger contact. We were asked to keep masks on in all indoor spaces except when eating or drinking, which on a cruise is often, and the crew are all wearing masks. Luggage was delivered to the door. 

Shortly after entering my beautiful stateroom there was a knock at the door and my stateroom attendant, Lenie, had come to introduce herself. She didn’t come in but explained how I could reach her anytime and for safety she would only come into the room when I was out. We chatted for a few minutes and I found out she was from the Philippines, had three children, and had worked for Celebrity for 20 years. She was both charming and efficient. 

I then took a walk around the ship and was duly impressed. It is beautiful. I walked through the huge buffet where people were happily eating lunch and saw instead of serving yourself there were servers behind each station filling people’s plates. All passengers had on their masks when getting food, as did the crew serving them. It made for a very safe feeling. 

Instead of a group muster each passenger was asked to go to their assigned muster station where you were met by staff who explained emergency procedures. You also had to look at a video on the Celebrity app and were then logged in and confirmed you had done so. All efficiently and safely done. 

Then I headed to the sail-away party my travel agent, and friends, Scott Moster and his husband Dustin, were hosting in the Iconic suite. The suite has everything from a peloton cycle to a hot tub for eight. It is incredible. I had the chance to catch up with old friends I had sailed with before the pandemic. Then it was a quick tour of the spa and gym open twenty-four hours a day. A way to assuage guilt over all the food and drink. Then back to the stateroom to finish unpacking and change for dinner with good friends in one of the specialty restaurants, EDEN. That meant long pants and a shirt with a collar. That’s as formal as required on this cruise. 

The food was superb and we got to meet the chef, Nicholas. An interesting guy who I will interview during the cruise. The menu was a combination of fresh fish, lobster, to filet mignon, all interestingly prepared. 

After dinner it was a stop at the Martini bar where a large group of LGBTQ friends had gathered along with some who would become friends. I was surprised when a guy came over and gave me a hug. I didn’t recognize him with his mask on but turned out he was another friend from my past I hadn’t seen in years. It is clearly a small world and the gay world seems even smaller. 

Finally headed to my stateroom around midnight, where turndown service had been done, to get some sleep and prepare for day two, and our first stop, Alicante.  

Day two and three on the Celebrity APEX

Time flies when on a cruise; maybe it’s the endless food and drink. All passengers received a letter in their room telling us we would need to report for a Covid test on day 5 the first at-sea day before we get to the Canary Islands. I pre-scheduled mine just before what I planned as my first hour at the gym. I expect to go to the gym on all sea days and there will be eight of those.

Each morning I have had coffee, a bagel and orange juice delivered to the stateroom.  I always miss that knock on the door each morning when I am home but then I would miss my daily coffee at Java House so I guess it’s OK. 

On day two we stopped at our first port, Alicante, on Spain’s Costa Blanca. I was truly surprised at how beautiful the city is. I joined friends for what turned out to be a three and a half hour walk as we were allowed off the ship on our own without booking a tour. We visited churches and the main market in town. We strolled along the beach and the harbor with great walking and bicycle paths. Alicante is a wonderful mix of old-world charm and modern amenities. One friend ventured up to the castle, Castillo de Santa Barbara, but since the elevator (the easy way up) wasn’t working and it’s a very long, steep climb up the mountain I passed. We arrived back at the ship around 1 p.m. and headed to the Mast bar on deck 14 for burgers and fries. Then some time back in the stateroom before heading to the martini bar for a drink and then to the beautiful APEX theater to see the Shamrock Tenors, four Irish performers who are not only talented but cute to boot. 

We decided to try one of the regular restaurants, those not needing reservations and chose Normandy. The food was good and I had shrimp cocktail, rigatoni, and cherries jubilee for dessert. 

After dinner it was up to the Rooftop Garden for ‘Silent Disco’. That is where you get a set of headphones with a few channels of disco music, and you dance to the music only you can hear. It’s really fun but by 11:30 my knees gave out and it was off to bed. 

Day three dawned nice and sunny and we were docked in Cartagena, located in the autonomous of the region of Murcia. I had an 8:45 excursion and again had breakfast delivered to the room. We were instructed to head to the theater to meet the tour group and sign in for our ‘Journey to Murcia’. Murcia is a city in south-eastern Spain, the capital and most populous city of the Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia, and the seventh largest city in the country, with a population of 447,182. It is about a forty-minute drive from the port. It is a fascinating city with an incredible history from the Romans to and Moorish influence. There is a beautiful cathedral, isn’t there one in every Spanish city? This being a national holiday in Spain most of the shops were closed saving some on the tour a lot of money. We strolled around the city with our guide giving us a running commentary on its history for about an hour and a half. She was a little hard to understand because not only did she have a heavy accent but she spoke really fast. But it was still fun and we did learn a lot. We made a second stop outside the city at another church where a wedding was being officiated. The bride was beautiful. Then we headed back to the ship for an early departure. Our tour was the last onboard and we sailed not more than thirty minutes after we got there. 

Then it was off to the captain’s reception. I had the chance to chat a few moments with the Captain Panagiotis Skylogiannis, who is as charming as are most Greek men. We also met the rest of the senior crew who run the ship. Many said they would be more than happy to sit and get a cup of coffee with me during our at-sea days so I can interview and write about them.

Then it was back to my stateroom again to prepare for another tough night of food and drinking. We went to see Andrew Derbyshire in the theater for the 7:30 show and then to dinner at Cyprus.   After dinner Celebrity hosted the first LGBTQ+ event of the cruise at the EDEN bar. A large crowd showed up, not all gay but they all knew where the fun people would be. The entertainers all showed up there as including the Shamrock Tenors, four talented Irish guys and Andrew Derbyshire, a British actor and singer. We chatted and I will meet him for coffee to do a column on him. 

Then about midnight it was back to the stateroom for what some of my friends on board called an early night. Morning would have us docking in Cadiz and we had a private tour planned for over 20 of the people who had booked the trip with Scott Moster, travel agent extraordinaire, taking us to the city of Seville.  

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Continue Reading

Opinions

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ clouds Powell’s legacy

A final act of redemption

Published

on

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell (Photo by Susan Montgomery via Bigstock)

The legacy of General Colin Powell is complicated for those in the LGBTQ community. On the one hand, we celebrate that Powell was the first African-American chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State. On the other, he is also the person who disobeyed the strategic choice of his Commander in Chief, Bill Clinton, on gays in the military. 

Powell stood on the steps of the Pentagon reporting how many calls had been received opposing lifting the ban. He testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the service of openly gay troops would harm unit cohesion. He argued that race was a “benign characteristic” and being gay was not. Congress codified into statute what had been a regulatory ban on gays in the military, making the law that much harder to change. Almost 14,000 lesbian, gay and bisexual service members were dismissed under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a rate of two-four service members every day. Some were subjects of witch hunts. Others faced criminal charges. Many endured harassment, assault and threats. Private First Class Barry Winchell was murdered.

Michelle Benecke and I knew when we founded Servicemembers Legal Defense Network that for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to be repealed, we would have to either win the support or neutralize the opposition of Powell, one of the previously undisclosed strategies described in my new book, “Mission Possible.” Michelle and I first met him at the Arlington, Va., headquarters of America’s Promise. We offered to brief him on the ban’s implementation as he was being asked on the Sunday shows about the law’s efficacy. He agreed to see us.

The question was whether we could find common ground on which to build a new consensus. My theory was that Powell genuinely believed that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was a better policy than the one before it. After all, he had testified before the Senate, “We will not ask, we will not witch-hunt, we will not seek to learn orientation.” 

“General Powell,” I said, “we have received nearly a thousand calls from service members who have been impacted by ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ We have documented that most are being asked point blank about their sexual orientation in contravention of ‘Don’t Ask.’” 

“That’s not supposed to happen,” he said.

That was our first conversation. We might have been able to better enforce some of the meager gains under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if we had been able to prevail upon Powell to help us, but he wasn’t ready. 

In 2003, he told Teen Ink magazine that while discrimination is wrong, “I think it’s a different matter with respect to the military, because you’re essentially told who you’re going to live with, who you’re going to sleep next to.”

Four years later, he called me, prompted by an opinion essay in The New York Times that I had sent him. “Second Thoughts on Gays in the Military”—written by retired Army General John Shalikashvili, Powell’s successor as chairman of the Joint Chiefs—called for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Powell and I spoke for 45 minutes. “I agree with General Shalikashvili that America has changed and is ready for gays to serve openly,” he said. My heart leapt. “I am not convinced, however, that military commanders are ready for that change.” My heart sunk.

It was clear to me, though, that he was moving in the right direction.  I put it on the line. “Sir, you will be a critical voice on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ when it comes up for debate again. I need you to support repeal if we are going to win. Do you know that?”

“Yes,” he said.

Finally, on Feb. 5, 2010, 10 months before final repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and days after Admiral Mike Mullen had testified before the Senate that he supported repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Powell released a statement. “If the chiefs and commanders are comfortable with moving to change the policy, then I support it. Attitudes and circumstances have changed. Society is reflected in the military. It’s where we get our soldiers from.” The stage was set for final repeal.

We too often look for heroes and villains when the record can be complicated. Powell deserves opprobrium for defying Clinton, rallying opposition, and allowing 60,000 troops under his command to suffer the indignity of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” He deserves credit, though, for changing his mind. I admired his willingness to speak with me over nearly two decades. I find that the best leaders engage in a lifelong process of learning and challenging assumptions. Powell will receive deserved accolades for his service to our nation, but for us, his legacy includes a profound betrayal with a final act of redemption.

C. Dixon Osburn is author of ‘Mission Possible: The Story of Repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’’

Continue Reading

Opinions

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal serves as a guide for enacting equality legislation

Equality Act supporters should take cues from Senate moderates

Published

on

Equality legislation is close to passing in Congress, but close isn’t good enough. “Close” won’t change anything for the LGBTQ Americans who face discrimination every day. Senate Democrats and Republicans must make a push to negotiate. With a reach on both sides to find common ground, we can move equality legislation from “close” to “done deal.”

Some Democrats are waiting for the filibuster to end—despite clear evidence that they lack the votes to end it. Some Republicans are practicing a tried-and-true brand of obstructionism. To break this deadlock, we should look to the successful, bipartisan repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) as a guide.

The DADT repeal is the single reference point for LGBTQ advocates for overcoming the Senate filibuster. Other victories have been in the courts; notably, the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell decision that made gay marriage legal nationwide.

Before Obergefell, advocates had success in the state legislatures. I worked on campaigns for the freedom to marry in Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York and elsewhere, finding common ground between Democrats and Republicans who thought it was impossible to negotiate on marriage. Eventually, enough people from both parties came together to pass marriage laws in a majority of states.

Working together at the state level is one thing. Congress is another.

Despite Democrats’ control of the White House, Senate and House, negotiations are failing at the federal level. So, we lets look to ancient history—the 2010 repeal of DADT—for guidance on reaching 60 votes in the Senate.

The most important lesson from the DADT repeal is that Senate moderates must champion the cause and lead negotiations. The more partisan figures on both sides need to step back. Overcoming the filibuster is a job for moderates, not ideologues.

As it happens, the hero of the DADT repeal is still a senator and can help. Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine led the negotiations on DADT repeal.

Senator Collins supports the Equality Act in principle and even sponsored a version of the bill in past. However, the current version is too extreme for Sen. Collins, as a result, she has withdrawn as a co-sponsor. The current bill has also foundered with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, another important figure in the repeal of DADT.

The fact that moderate, pro-LGBTQ senators are unable to back the current version of the Equality Act should send a clear message to Democrats that we need to make reasonable changes to the bill. So far, the message is being ignored.

On the Democratic side, independent Sen. Joe Lieberman was essential to the repeal of DADT. There certainly were passionate, liberal Democrats who could have asserted themselves during the debate. But then, the bill would have taken longer to pass, or even might have failed.

The lesson is clear. Listen to the moderates. Let them lead this charge.

Another important lesson from the repeal of DADT is to be flexible in the legislative strategy. DADT repeal was originally an amendment to a large defense authorization bill. Rather than give up, Collins and Lieberman fought and saved DADT repeal from defeat by pulling out key provisions they knew could pass on their own and making them a standalone measure. Repeal passed with bipartisan support.

The current version of the Equality Act tries to do too much. That’s why it can’t win support from moderate Republicans who have legitimate concerns the bill might suppress free speech or shut down religious charities.  

Over 60 senators can agree on the basic premise of the Equality Act. They would gladly vote to prohibit discrimination against LGBTQ Americans in employment, housing, and public accommodations, so long as the law didn’t intrude on the First Amendment.

If the far left believes that our country has too much religious liberty, they can deal with that in future legislation. But so long as we have a filibuster—and, there’s no indication it will end any time soon—the Equality Act needs to reflect our society’s current views on religious liberty.  

The DADT repeal passed with 65 votes in the Senate, overcoming the filibuster. Let’s replicate that victory by using the same playbook. Moderates: Take the lead.

Tyler Deaton is the senior advisor to the American Unity Fund, a conservative nonprofit organization working to advance LGBTQ freedom and religious freedom

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular