Opinions
Fidel’s death leaves us with everything to do
Trump ‘gives’ an enemy back to Cuban government
A sign on the road between the cities of Santa Clara and Sagua la Grande, Cuba, with former Cuban President Fidel Castro‘s picture reads “revolution is unity.” (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)
The man of inconsistencies has died. Founder of schools and concentration camps, endless orator and suppressor of dissenting voices, Fidel Castro is defined by his contradictory gestures. While America was in charge of a suit tailored for the party that was the Cold War, he went to dance a Cossack dance in Moscow. When America opened its nuclear umbrella to defend countries without nuclear weapons, he shouted: “Nikita, shoot first.” Fidel Castro had a paradoxical beard.
Cubans are not sure what to do with this body. On one hand, the reforms of recent years have left Fidel’s regime untouched. Cuba remains under the control of a single party and it has failed to overcome the economic stagnation. The Cuban system, at this point, can only survive if stagnation were to continue. Any attempt to correct it would cause the whole thing to collapse.
The mass funerals prove the need to prolong the myth of Fidel, to make it more pharaonic so that Cuba will continue in the routine of immobility.
Barack Obama’s policies interrupted the lethargy. Trump gives the necessary enemy back to Havana. Another context for the regime’s international isolation and eternity is coming. They have a sense of déjà vu when they remember political speeches of confrontation and the scenario where obstinacy was entrenched. It was a landscape with two sides: A battle between good and evil, depending how you look at it.
Raúl Castro’s government made no concession in terms of human rights during the process of normalizing relations. But at least he agreed to sit at the table. Perhaps the United States was not the best interlocutor, but Obama was. Or so it seemed. Because, in any case, his gifts for political communication highlighted the oldness, the ineffectiveness of the governing discourse in Havana.
Over the last year, however, the situation of human rights defenders has deteriorated. A major campaign began in state media against certain emerging forms of journalism, against alternative newspapers. It reached a climax a month before Fidel Castro’s death: Massive detentions when we did not expect them. The arrests appeared to be an inexplicable remedy in the new context of dialogue.
The great funeral that ended in Santiago de Cuba proves that the era of mass mobilizations, the era of dichotomies and political fanaticism has not ended in Cuba. Fidel Castro left behind a country accustomed to a single command and a charismatic leadership, a failing nation that responds to political diversity with intransigence that still works effectively for the Third World and countries that have recently moved to the left, but rule of law does not work domestically.
Independent activists, these islands of civil society who endure, predicted desperate reactions. Repression will increase. They await new attacks against forms of journalism that are beyond state control. Of course, the samizdat newspapers are already unstoppable on the web. They cannot be burned like papers.
LGBT rights activists, however, remain discouraged because it is impossible for us to associate with each other. The fact that some groups function does not imply that a true movement capable of channeling the demands of a community with so many historical debts exists.
Fidel Castro’s death leaves us with everything to do. Political reform is still pending. The system is preparing theirs and there are many indications that it will reform the military, to build some credibility in their exercise of power.
The following has yet to be done: Marriage equality and the press law, administrative decentralization and a pluralistic Parliament. In short, democracy is about to happen without the “historic generation” of the Cuban revolution, without Fidel’s absorbing trajectory. Yes, we will have the clearest way.
Maykel González Vivero is an independent Cuban journalist and LGBT activist.
La muerte de Fidel nos encontró con todo por hacer
Murió el hombre de las incongruencias. Fundador de escuelas y de campos de concentración, orador infinito y mordaza de palabras ajenas, a Fidel Castro lo definen sus gestos contradictorios. Mientras América se encargaba un traje a medida para la fiesta de la Guerra Fría, él se fue a bailar una danza cosaca en Moscú. Cuando América abría su paraguas nuclear, él gritaba: “Nikita, dispara primero.” Fidel Castro tenía una barba paradójica.
Los cubanos no saben a ciencia cierta qué hacer con este cadáver. Por un lado, el régimen de Fidel permanece intocado, a pesar de las reformas de los últimos años. Cuba sigue sometida al partido único y no consigue superar la deformación económica. El sistema cubano, a estas alturas, sólo puede sobrevivir si persiste en la deformación. Cualquier intento de corrección acabaría por derrumbar el edificio.
Los multitudinarios funerales prueban la necesidad de prolongar el mito de Fidel, de hacerlo más faraónico, para que Cuba continúe en la rutina de su inmovilidad.
Las políticas de Barack Obama interrumpieron el letargo. Ahora Trump le devuelve el enemigo necesario a La Habana. Viene otro pretexto para el aislamiento internacional y la eternidad del régimen. Los discursos políticos de confrontación recuerdan, como un déjà vu, al escenario donde se enquistó la obstinación. Un paisaje con dos orillas. Una batalla entre el bien y el mal, según la orilla que se use para mirar.
El gobierno de Raúl Castro no hizo concesión en materia de derechos humanos durante el proceso de normalización de relaciones. Pero al menos accedía a sentarse a la mesa. Quizás Estados Unidos no era el mejor interlocutor, pero Obama sí lo era. O lo parecía. Porque, en cualquier caso, sus dotes para la comunicación política evidenciaron la vejez, la inoperancia del discurso gobernante en La Habana.
Durante el último año, no obstante, la situación de los defensores de derechos humanos empeoró. Comenzó una gran campaña de los medios estatales contra cierto periodismo emergente, contra los periódicos alternativos que aparecieron en los últimos meses. Llegó el clímax un mes antes de la muerte de Fidel Castro: detenciones masivas cuando no las esperábamos, cuando las detenciones parecían un recurso inaplicable en el nuevo contexto de diálogo.
El gran funeral concluido en Santiago de Cuba prueba que la era de las movilizaciones, la era de las dicotomías y el fanatismo político, no ha acabado en Cuba. Fidel Castro dejó un país habituado al mando único y al liderazgo carismático, una nación defectuosa que responde a la diversidad política con intransigencia, que todavía funciona afectivamente para el tercer mundo y las recientes izquierdas, pero no funciona hacia adentro como un Estado de derecho.
Los activistas, esas islas que la sociedad civil conserva, pronostican reacciones desesperadas. La represión arreciará. Aguardan nuevos ataques al periodismo que se consolida fuera del control estatal. Desde luego, ya los periódicos samizdat resultan indetenibles en la web. No se les puede quemar como a papeles.
Los activismos por los derechos LGBT, en cambio, continúan desalentados por la imposibilidad de asociación. Que funcionen algunos grupos no implica que exista un verdadero movimiento capaz de encauzar las demandas de una comunidad con tantas deudas históricas.
La muerte de Fidel Castro nos encontró con todo por hacer. La reforma política sigue pendiente. El sistema prepara la suya y abundan indicios de que se hará en provecho de los militares, para construirles alguna credibilidad en su ejercicio del poder.
Todo está por hacer: el matrimonio igualitario y la ley de prensa, la descentralización administrativa y el parlamento plural. En fin, la democracia está por hacerse. Sin la generación histórica, sin la trayectoria absorbente de Fidel, eso sí, tendremos el camino más despejado.
Maykel González Vivero es un periodista y activista LGBT independiente cubano.
Opinions
Black Educated Lesbians: A movement rooted in community
Organization’s annual conference is part of a much larger mission
When people hear the word “conference,” they often imagine a weekend event that begins on Friday and ends on Sunday. For Black Educated Lesbians (BEL), our annual conference is only one part of a much larger mission.
BEL was founded because Black lesbians deserve spaces intentionally created with us in mind. Too often, we are overlooked in conversations about health, leadership, philanthropy, education, and community. We exist at the intersection of multiple identities, yet organizations and institutions frequently assume our needs are being met by broader groups. Our lived experiences tell a different story.
BEL is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to creating opportunities for Black lesbians and Black queer women through leadership development, wellness programming, research, education, and community building. While our conference has become one of the few events in the country centered specifically on Black lesbians, our work continues year-round.
Throughout the year, BEL hosts virtual wellness sessions, leadership development opportunities, financial education workshops, community discussions, and mentorship programs designed to help our members thrive personally and professionally. We are also investing in the next generation through our EmpowerHER initiative, connecting Black queer youth with mentors, resources, and leadership opportunities.
Research is another critical part of our work. We are committed to ensuring Black lesbian voices are included in conversations about healthcare, mental health, economic opportunity, and overall well-being. Data drives policy, funding, and services. If our experiences are absent from the research, our needs often remain invisible.
Our annual conference, taking place Sept. 18–20 in Hapeville, Ga., brings this mission to life. Attendees will participate in conversations about physical and mental health, healthy relationships, financial literacy, entrepreneurship, leadership, aging, women’s health, and sexual wellness. The conference also creates opportunities to build meaningful relationships, support Black-owned businesses, and connect with professionals and organizations that understand our community.
Creating spaces like this is not easy. As a small nonprofit, every workshop, meal, scholarship, and resource requires fundraising, partnerships, and countless volunteer hours. Yet we continue because our community deserves spaces where they can simply exist, learn, heal, and grow without explanation.
What makes BEL unique is not simply that we serve Black lesbians. It is that Black lesbians lead every aspect of our organization. We understand the importance of creating programs that reflect our lived experiences rather than asking our community to fit into spaces never designed for them.
Community is not built during moments of crisis. It is built through consistent investment, authentic relationships, and showing up year after year. That is the work BEL is committed to doing.
Whether someone joins us as an attendee, sponsor, volunteer, donor, or community partner, they become part of something much larger than a conference. They become part of a movement dedicated to ensuring Black lesbians are seen, heard, valued, and supported.
As we prepare to welcome attendees from across the country this September, we invite readers to learn more about BEL, support our mission, and help us continue building spaces where Black lesbians don’t just survive, they thrive.
LaJoya Johnson is founder and executive director of Black Educated Lesbians, a national nonprofit dedicated to advancing leadership, wellness, and education for Black lesbians and Black queer women.
Opinions
I respect AOC, even though I often disagree with her
She should work toward House leadership role and skip presidential run
There is a column in the New York Times asking, “Is Ocasio-Cortez ready for the glass cliff?” The author thinks it’s a great idea for her to run for president. I believe it’s a bad idea for her personally, and a disastrous idea for the Democratic Party. However, that is not the only column written recently about Ocasio-Cortez, discussing her options and private life. I think it is cringeworthy what social media, and even some mainstream media, are focusing on these days.
Politicians have become fodder for what were once just stories about Hollywood, and loud showmen like the felon in the White House. Now, like the showman, those like AOC, can’t claim they aren’t asking for it by striving for the biggest online following possible. They obviously see that as a way to validate themselves; politicians use it as a way to raise money, become influencers, and get their message out.
But they also open themselves up to even more intrusion into their private lives. Those who do that also open the door for all politicians to have their private lives made public. Running for president, which the column suggests AOC should do, and which she herself has said she isn’t ruling out, is a great way to grab a headline, and leads to reporters digging to find every little fact about her. AOC is trying to get ahead of the curve by talking about a breakup, and then about harvesting her eggs — topics once considered private that should stay that way. There was once just the National Enquirer, but today every news outlet incorporates what the Enquirer did, as it makes for great clickbait.
I feel for her, thinking all this has to be public, when a single woman wants to run for higher office. We have seen married women, including Geraldine Ferraro, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris, run and be subjected to dealing with questions about their husbands, their former boyfriends, and in some cases, more reporting about those things than what they stood for. Maybe for AOC, that would be a good thing, as the country is far from ready for a candidate who up until now, proudly represents the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Yes, she is trying to step away from them a little, but I don’t think that is possible, which is why I feel it is a disaster for her to run, both for herself, and the Democratic Party. She could decide to run for the Senate if Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) understands it is time for him to retire. Even that could be a difficult race. She might win a primary, which another progressive representative, Bella S. Abzug (D-N.Y.), tried and lost in 1976, if she gets a big enough New York City vote. Should she try, we would see how much change there has actually been.
Back when JFK had women in and out of the White House, Ronald Reagan got Nancy pregnant before they married, and George H.W. Bush allegedly had a mistress traveling with him, those were not the headlines. I think we were all better off. Gary Hart asked for it when he told the press to follow him, and they caught him with a woman not his wife. Again, he asked for that. Then we got to the Clinton era and the right wing, actually David Brock, got the information on Paula Jones, and it all exploded, eventually cascading down to harm Hillary. They tried to find anything they could on Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, but couldn’t find the salacious bits they were looking for. But I bet they will find some things that sound salacious on AOC, even if they have to make them up. She appears to be a normal, highly intelligent, motivated, single woman.
Recent primaries in Michigan and Wisconsin, and general election results, will clearly impact what she decides to do. DSA candidates are not an easy sell to most Democrats, let alone the general electorate. We will find out how Dr. El-Sayed does in the general election. While I didn’t support him in the primary, I do in the general election. Those results, and looking back at other women who have run, may give AOC second thoughts about giving up working toward seniority in the House. I predict she could be much more impactful than one of her idols, Bernie Sanders, has been. He has been there for 40 years and accomplished nothing. I think AOC could accomplish a lot.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
Opinions
Will Michigan save the GOP?
We must stop fighting each other as Democrats and rid country of Trump
Last week in Michigan we saw how dramatically wrong, and misleading, political polling can be. Because of that, and the media hype, it might have made a difference in the Democratic primary for the United States Senate. Haley Stevens lost by about 16,000 votes, and the second Democrat closest to Stevens’s views, withdrew from the race, but her name was still on the ballot, and she received 61,000 votes. So, what would have happened if she had withdrawn in time to keep her name of the ballot? We will never know.
The media have been hyping the few wins the DSA, and far-left Democratic candidates, have had, to the point you might think they are winning hundreds of primaries around the country. I think they have won fewer than 15. But those 15, and the hype, could actually make a difference in the general election. They could make a difference because they clearly divided the Democratic Party, and we don’t know if it will come back together in time to rid ourselves of the control of the felon, his fascist advisers, and their sycophants in Congress, now running our country.
While strongly opposed to parts of the platform of the Democratic Socialists of America, (DSA), and those who would espouse them, I am even more opposed to the felon in the White House who has proven he has no redeeming values. The DSA platform is a mixed bag. In my view there are some frightening parts such as calling for total defunding of the police, for workers to own every business, for the abolishment of the State of Israel, telling their endorsed candidates they may not meet with any Zionist organization, and now, elimination of the United States Senate. Before you respond telling me about what is not in the platform, please just read some of it. But then I am for the parts calling for universal healthcare, a higher minimum wage, strong union support, and working toward affordable housing, and a decent life for all.
So, what do the candidates who won with the support of the DSA do between now and Nov. 3? They must be very clear which parts of the DSA platform they believe in, and tell voters clearly, how they will govern and legislate. Make clear their priorities. That is the only way we will unite Democrats in time to win the general election.
Then those who lost to them should do what Rep. Stevens did in her concession statement in the Michigan U.S. Senate primary. It was a classy statement responding to the election results. She said: “I want to congratulate Abdul El-Sayed on winning the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate. He is a doctor, a community health official, a Rhodes Scholar, and a dedicated Michigander. I am proud to offer my support as he takes on Mike Rogers in the general election. This was a thorough and rigorous campaign that brought out the full span of views within the Democratic Party – and that is why we have primaries. I am proud to have put up my hand to serve, and prouder to continue to work together to make sure this Senate seat remains blue, that we flip the United States Senate and continue the work for Michigan. Now I hope Dr. El-Sayed will run a campaign understanding which voters he needs to appeal to in order to win, and to keep the Michigan United States Senate seat in Democratic hands. When a vote is split 50/50, which was basically the case in this race, reading the 50% who voted against you correctly, is the key to winning. Many of those voters didn’t trust Dr. El- Sayed for a multitude of reasons. But he must now convince them, even with what they didn’t like about him, he is still a better choice than the Republican candidate. This is no different than in so many races around the nation, although it might be harder for a very far-left candidate to sway more moderate voters.”
I would say to the voters of Michigan, “While I did not support Dr. El-Sayed in the primary, I would definitely vote for him in the general election. The goal is saying to the felon in the White House that we will not let you continue to destroy our country. We Democrats may speak with a host of different voices, but they should all say to the felon: you are a loser, and we will see you, your fascist government, and your sycophants in Congress, defeated.”
We must stop fighting each other as Democrats, at least long enough, to accomplish this goal.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
NYC lawmakers seek to repeal bathhouse ban
Black Educated Lesbians: A movement rooted in community
Hegseth uses transphobic slur while campaigning for Iowa congressman
What ‘Queer Eye for the Straight Guy’ can still teach us
I respect AOC, even though I often disagree with her
PHOTOS: Nellie’s Drag Brunch
‘Maddie’s Secret’ defies campy expectations
Remembering Barbara ‘Boo’ Price, a pioneering force in women’s music
White House targets gender-affirming care funding, states fight back
