Organizers of a planned LGBT march on Washington scheduled for June 11, which has been named The Equality March for Unity and Pride, released on Wednesday the names of 12 of 13 co-chairs of the event but provided few additional details such as how it will be financed or the route of the march.
“The Equality March for Unity and Pride is less than two months away and we are thrilled to host this historic march in our nation’s capital,” a statement released by organizers says.
“Permits are being worked on, sponsors are being engaged, the website is forthcoming, and just this week we selected 12 of 13 National Co-Chairs!” the statement says. “This national group of diverse leaders in the LGBTQIA+ liberation movements will help shape the mission and vision of the march by elevating voices of those most underserved,” it says.
The statement adds that the diversity represented by the co-chairs would ensure “that in these trying times our communities can come together, march in solidarity, and demand equity, representation, protection of our most vulnerable, and safeguarding the many triumphs our communities have gained in the previous years while working towards championing many more.”
Among those named as co-chairs are Anika Simpson, Ph.D, founding coordinator of the Women’s and Gender Studies Program at Morgan State University, one of the nation’s historic black colleges; Ashley Smith, an official with the Capital Pride Alliance and a Human Rights Campaign Foundation board member; Catalina Velasquez, a widely recognized LGBT immigrant rights advocate and Senior Director of Strategic Partnerships and Communications for D.C.’s Casa Ruby community services center; and Jose L. Plaza, president of the D.C.-based Latino GLBT History Project.
Also named as one of the co-chairs is David Bruinooge, the New York City LGBT rights advocate who initiated the June 11 march through a Facebook posting in January that quickly drew thousands of messages of support for the idea of an LGBT march on the nation’s capital similar to the women’s march held the day following President Trump’s Inauguration.
The announcement on Wednesday of the names of the co-chairs and assurances that more details of the march would be disclosed soon came at a time when messages have surfaced on social media expressing concern that so few details of the event had been disclosed less than two months before the march was to take place.
Some Facebook postings have asked whether the march would actually happen and whether people who have made airline reservations to come to Washington should cancel them. Others expressed concern that as of this week no money had been raised to help pay for an event of this scale.
“There’s still plenty of time,” said D.C. gay activist Peter Rosenstein, who has been serving as a volunteer on a march planning committee prior to the selection of the co-chairs. “It’s all being worked out. The permits are in the works and the route will be decided on in a few weeks,” he said.
An application for a permit for the march submitted on March 10 to the National Park Service of the National Capital Region by Bruinooge, which the Park Service released to the Washington Blade, calls for two possible routes for the march.
One calls for participants to assemble on the National Mall between 3rd and 7th Streets, N.W. and for participants to disperse at that same location but doesn’t say whether or where the march would travel.
The second proposed route states, “Dupont Circle/assembly at 17th Street (March across Penn. Ave. in front of White House. Disperse on 15th St., N.W.).”
Bruinooge told the Blade the march route is still under discussion among organizers and that he would be consulting with National Park Service officials and D.C. police to determine which areas of the National Mall and other locations will be available and best suited for the planned march.
The march is set to take place on the same day as D.C.’s annual Capital Pride Festival, which takes place on Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. between 3rd Street, near the U.S. Capitol, and 7th St. The June 11 march would also take place one day after D.C.’s annual Capital Pride Parade, which usually travels from the Dupont Circle area past the 17th Street, N.W. commercial area to 14th and R St., N.W.
Ryan Bos, executive director of the Capital Pride Alliance, which organizes the Capital Pride events, said the group is cooperating with organizers of the Equality March for Unity and Pride but would not serve as the fiscal agent for the march.
Bos said no one associated with the march has approached Capital Pride Alliance about using the large stage near the Capitol that Capital Pride sets up each year to be used for political speeches associated with the march. March organizers, meanwhile, have not disclosed whether they plan to set up their own stage and sound system for speeches associated with the march.
“We have been discussing how to best represent and acknowledge these unique times and the desire for members of our community to voice their feelings,” Bos told the Blade in an email message. “We want to assist in getting individuals connected to organizations and activities that would allow them to take action,” he said. “In addition, we are discussing how best to represent this narrative on the Concert Stage as well.”
In recent years, Capital Pride has shunned political speeches at the annual festival and has used two separate stages largely for musical entertainment, including performances by nationally known singers.
In the statement released on Wednesday, march organizers point out that the Washington march will be accompanied by numerous “solidarity” marches and events throughout the country and internationally.
“Together we will continue to propel beyond a march but a movement for years to come, resisting and fighting for our communities’ rights, dignity and safety,” the statement says. “So please join us in D.C. or at solidarity events around the world. We welcome all!”
“And stay tuned for more information and details in the days/weeks ahead,” it continues. “We thank all of our supporters for their patience as we put this movement together and look forward to another historic event in Washington, D.C.”
The June 11 march would become the sixth national march on Washington for LGBT equality since the first national “gay” march was held in 1979. Subsequent LGBT marches on Washington took place in 1987, 1993, 2000, and 2009.
Following is the list of national march co-chairs as released in the April 19 statement:
1. Anika Simpson, Ph.D., Founder, Beyond Policy LLC | Founding Coordinator, Women’s and Gender Studies Program at Morgan State University | Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy | Co-Chair, MSU’s Presidential LGBTQA Advisory Council | Co-Chair, National Black Justice Coalition’s HBCU LGBTQA-Equality Initiative Advisory Council | Pronouns: She, Her, Hers
2. Ashley Smith, The Capital Pride Alliance | Human Rights Campaign Foundation, Board Member | Pronouns: He, Him, His
3. Catalina Velasquez, Consult Catalina President | Casa Ruby Senior Director of Strategic Partnerships and Communications | Washington DC Mayor’s Office of Latino Affairs Commissioner | Our Revolution Board Vice Chair | GetEqual Board Co-Chair | Megaphone Strategies Board Member | Inclusv Board Member | Trans United Fund Board Member | United We DREAM’s Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project (QUIP) Advisory Council | Pronouns: She, Her, Hers, Trans Goddess.
4. David Bruinooge, Founder: The Equality March for Unity & Pride | Pronouns: He, Him, His
5. Elle Hearns, Executive Director of The Marsha P Johnson Institute | Pronouns: She, Her, Hers
6. José L. Plaza, President, Latino GLBT History Project | Chair, DC Latino Pride | Executive Board Member, DC New Leaders Council | Pronouns: He, Him, His
7. Lydia X. Z. Brown, Chairperson of the Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council | At-large board member of the Autism Women’s Network | Pronouns: They, Them, Theirs
8. Lynnette McFadzen, President, BiNet USA | Producer, The BiCast | Core Organizer | The Bi Brigade | Pronouns: They/Them She/Hers
9. Nicole Murray Ramirez, International Court System, U.S.A., Canada and Mexico | Harvey Milk Foundation | Pronouns: He, Him, His
10. Sean Coleman, Executive Director, Destination Tomorrow | Board Member, Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF) | Pronouns: He, Him, His
11. Sue Doster, Co-President, InterPride | CTO, amfAR | Strategic Planning Director, NYCPride | Pronouns: She, Her, Hers
12. Thomas Tonatiuh Lopez The International Indigenous Youth Council | Standing Rock Activist | Two-Spirit & Indigenous Activist | Pronouns: He, Him, His
Honoring the legacy of New Orleans’ 1973 UpStairs Lounge fire
Why the arson attack that killed 32 gay men still resonates 50 years later
On June 23 of last year, I held the microphone as a gay man in the New Orleans City Council Chamber and related a lost piece of queer history to the seven council members. I told this story to disabuse all New Orleanians of the notion that silence and accommodation, in the face of institutional and official failures, are a path to healing.
The story I related to them began on a typical Sunday night at a second-story bar on the fringe of New Orleans’ French Quarter in 1973, where working-class men would gather around a white baby grand piano and belt out the lyrics to a song that was the anthem of their hidden community, “United We Stand” by the Brotherhood of Man.
“United we stand,” the men would sing together, “divided we fall” — the words epitomizing the ethos of their beloved UpStairs Lounge bar, an egalitarian free space that served as a forerunner to today’s queer safe havens.
Around that piano in the 1970s Deep South, gays and lesbians, white and Black queens, Christians and non-Christians, and even early gender minorities could cast aside the racism, sexism, and homophobia of the times to find acceptance and companionship for a moment.
For regulars, the UpStairs Lounge was a miracle, a small pocket of acceptance in a broader world where their very identities were illegal.
On the Sunday night of June 24, 1973, their voices were silenced in a murderous act of arson that claimed 32 lives and still stands as the deadliest fire in New Orleans history — and the worst mass killing of gays in 20th century America.
As 13 fire companies struggled to douse the inferno, police refused to question the chief suspect, even though gay witnesses identified and brought the soot-covered man to officers idly standing by. This suspect, an internally conflicted gay-for-pay sex worker named Rodger Dale Nunez, had been ejected from the UpStairs Lounge screaming the word “burn” minutes before, but New Orleans police rebuffed the testimony of fire survivors on the street and allowed Nunez to disappear.
As the fire raged, police denigrated the deceased to reporters on the street: “Some thieves hung out there, and you know this was a queer bar.”
For days afterward, the carnage met with official silence. With no local gay political leaders willing to step forward, national Gay Liberation-era figures like Rev. Troy Perry of the Metropolitan Community Church flew in to “help our bereaved brothers and sisters” — and shatter officialdom’s code of silence.
Perry broke local taboos by holding a press conference as an openly gay man. “It’s high time that you people, in New Orleans, Louisiana, got the message and joined the rest of the Union,” Perry said.
Two days later, on June 26, 1973, as families hesitated to step forward to identify their kin in the morgue, UpStairs Lounge owner Phil Esteve stood in his badly charred bar, the air still foul with death. He rebuffed attempts by Perry to turn the fire into a call for visibility and progress for homosexuals.
“This fire had very little to do with the gay movement or with anything gay,” Esteve told a reporter from The Philadelphia Inquirer. “I do not want my bar or this tragedy to be used to further any of their causes.”
Conspicuously, no photos of Esteve appeared in coverage of the UpStairs Lounge fire or its aftermath — and the bar owner also remained silent as he witnessed police looting the ashes of his business.
“Phil said the cash register, juke box, cigarette machine and some wallets had money removed,” recounted Esteve’s friend Bob McAnear, a former U.S. Customs officer. “Phil wouldn’t report it because, if he did, police would never allow him to operate a bar in New Orleans again.”
The next day, gay bar owners, incensed at declining gay bar traffic amid an atmosphere of anxiety, confronted Perry at a clandestine meeting. “How dare you hold your damn news conferences!” one business owner shouted.
Ignoring calls for gay self-censorship, Perry held a 250-person memorial for the fire victims the following Sunday, July 1, culminating in mourners defiantly marching out the front door of a French Quarter church into waiting news cameras. “Reverend Troy Perry awoke several sleeping giants, me being one of them,” recalled Charlene Schneider, a lesbian activist who walked out of that front door with Perry.
Esteve doubted the UpStairs Lounge story’s capacity to rouse gay political fervor. As the coroner buried four of his former patrons anonymously on the edge of town, Esteve quietly collected at least $25,000 in fire insurance proceeds. Less than a year later, he used the money to open another gay bar called the Post Office, where patrons of the UpStairs Lounge — some with visible burn scars — gathered but were discouraged from singing “United We Stand.”
New Orleans cops neglected to question the chief arson suspect and closed the investigation without answers in late August 1973. Gay elites in the city’s power structure began gaslighting the mourners who marched with Perry into the news cameras, casting suspicion on their memories and re-characterizing their moment of liberation as a stunt.
When a local gay journalist asked in April 1977, “Where are the gay activists in New Orleans?,” Esteve responded that there were none, because none were needed. “We don’t feel we’re discriminated against,” Esteve said. “New Orleans gays are different from gays anywhere else… Perhaps there is some correlation between the amount of gay activism in other cities and the degree of police harassment.”
An attitude of nihilism and disavowal descended upon the memory of the UpStairs Lounge victims, goaded by Esteve and fellow gay entrepreneurs who earned their keep via gay patrons drowning their sorrows each night instead of protesting the injustices that kept them drinking.
Into the 1980s, the story of the UpStairs Lounge all but vanished from conversation — with the exception of a few sanctuaries for gay political debate such as the local lesbian bar Charlene’s, run by the activist Charlene Schneider.
By 1988, the 15th anniversary of the fire, the UpStairs Lounge narrative comprised little more than a call for better fire codes and indoor sprinklers. UpStairs Lounge survivor Stewart Butler summed it up: “A tragedy that, as far as I know, no good came of.”
Finally, in 1991, at Stewart Butler and Charlene Schneider’s nudging, the UpStairs Lounge story became aligned with the crusade of liberated gays and lesbians seeking equal rights in Louisiana. The halls of power responded with intermittent progress. The New Orleans City Council, horrified by the story but not yet ready to take its look in the mirror, enacted an anti-discrimination ordinance protecting gays and lesbians in housing, employment, and public accommodations that Dec. 12 — more than 18 years after the fire.
“I believe the fire was the catalyst for the anger to bring us all to the table,” Schneider told The Times-Picayune, a tacit rebuke to Esteve’s strategy of silent accommodation. Even Esteve seemed to change his stance with time, granting a full interview with the first UpStairs Lounge scholar Johnny Townsend sometime around 1989.
Most of the figures in this historic tale are now deceased. What’s left is an enduring story that refused to go gently. The story now echoes around the world — a musical about the UpStairs Lounge fire recently played in Tokyo, translating the gay underworld of the 1973 French Quarter for Japanese audiences.
When I finished my presentation to the City Council last June, I looked up to see the seven council members in tears. Unanimously, they approved a resolution acknowledging the historic failures of city leaders in the wake of the UpStairs Lounge fire.
Council members personally apologized to UpStairs Lounge families and survivors seated in the chamber in a symbolic act that, though it could not bring back those who died, still mattered greatly to those whose pain had been denied, leaving them to grieve alone. At long last, official silence and indifference gave way to heartfelt words of healing.
The way Americans remember the past is an active, ongoing process. Our collective memory is malleable, but it matters because it speaks volumes about our maturity as a people, how we acknowledge the past’s influence in our lives, and how it shapes the examples we set for our youth. Do we grapple with difficult truths, or do we duck accountability by defaulting to nostalgia and bluster? Or worse, do we simply ignore the past until it fades into a black hole of ignorance and indifference?
I believe that a factual retelling of the UpStairs Lounge tragedy — and how, 50 years onward, it became known internationally — resonates beyond our current divides. It reminds queer and non-queer Americans that ignoring the past holds back the present, and that silence is no cure for what ails a participatory nation.
Silence isolates. Silence gaslights and shrouds. It preserves the power structures that scapegoat the disempowered.
Solidarity, on the other hand, unites. Solidarity illuminates a path forward together. Above all, solidarity transforms the downtrodden into a resounding chorus of citizens — in the spirit of voices who once gathered ‘round a white baby grand piano and sang, joyfully and loudly, “United We Stand.”
Robert W. Fieseler is a New Orleans-based journalist and the author of “Tinderbox: the Untold Story of the Up Stairs Lounge Fire and the Rise of Gay Liberation.”
New Supreme Court term includes critical LGBTQ case with ‘terrifying’ consequences
Business owner seeks to decline services for same-sex weddings
The U.S. Supreme Court, after a decision overturning Roe v. Wade that still leaves many reeling, is starting a new term with justices slated to revisit the issue of LGBTQ rights.
In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the court will return to the issue of whether or not providers of custom-made goods can refuse service to LGBTQ customers on First Amendment grounds. In this case, the business owner is Lorie Smith, a website designer in Colorado who wants to opt out of providing her graphic design services for same-sex weddings despite the civil rights law in her state.
Jennifer Pizer, acting chief legal officer of Lambda Legal, said in an interview with the Blade, “it’s not too much to say an immeasurably huge amount is at stake” for LGBTQ people depending on the outcome of the case.
“This contrived idea that making custom goods, or offering a custom service, somehow tacitly conveys an endorsement of the person — if that were to be accepted, that would be a profound change in the law,” Pizer said. “And the stakes are very high because there are no practical, obvious, principled ways to limit that kind of an exception, and if the law isn’t clear in this regard, then the people who are at risk of experiencing discrimination have no security, no effective protection by having a non-discrimination laws, because at any moment, as one makes their way through the commercial marketplace, you don’t know whether a particular business person is going to refuse to serve you.”
The upcoming arguments and decision in the 303 Creative case mark a return to LGBTQ rights for the Supreme Court, which had no lawsuit to directly address the issue in its previous term, although many argued the Dobbs decision put LGBTQ rights in peril and threatened access to abortion for LGBTQ people.
And yet, the 303 Creative case is similar to other cases the Supreme Court has previously heard on the providers of services seeking the right to deny services based on First Amendment grounds, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. In both of those cases, however, the court issued narrow rulings on the facts of litigation, declining to issue sweeping rulings either upholding non-discrimination principles or First Amendment exemptions.
Pizer, who signed one of the friend-of-the-court briefs in opposition to 303 Creative, said the case is “similar in the goals” of the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation on the basis they both seek exemptions to the same non-discrimination law that governs their business, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, or CADA, and seek “to further the social and political argument that they should be free to refuse same-sex couples or LGBTQ people in particular.”
“So there’s the legal goal, and it connects to the social and political goals and in that sense, it’s the same as Masterpiece,” Pizer said. “And so there are multiple problems with it again, as a legal matter, but also as a social matter, because as with the religion argument, it flows from the idea that having something to do with us is endorsing us.”
One difference: the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation stemmed from an act of refusal of service after owner, Jack Phillips, declined to make a custom-made wedding cake for a same-sex couple for their upcoming wedding. No act of discrimination in the past, however, is present in the 303 Creative case. The owner seeks to put on her website a disclaimer she won’t provide services for same-sex weddings, signaling an intent to discriminate against same-sex couples rather than having done so.
As such, expect issues of standing — whether or not either party is personally aggrieved and able bring to a lawsuit — to be hashed out in arguments as well as whether the litigation is ripe for review as justices consider the case. It’s not hard to see U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, who has sought to lead the court to reach less sweeping decisions (sometimes successfully, and sometimes in the Dobbs case not successfully) to push for a decision along these lines.
Another key difference: The 303 Creative case hinges on the argument of freedom of speech as opposed to the two-fold argument of freedom of speech and freedom of religious exercise in the Masterpiece Cakeshop litigation. Although 303 Creative requested in its petition to the Supreme Court review of both issues of speech and religion, justices elected only to take up the issue of free speech in granting a writ of certiorari (or agreement to take up a case). Justices also declined to accept another question in the petition request of review of the 1990 precedent in Smith v. Employment Division, which concluded states can enforce neutral generally applicable laws on citizens with religious objections without violating the First Amendment.
Representing 303 Creative in the lawsuit is Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that has sought to undermine civil rights laws for LGBTQ people with litigation seeking exemptions based on the First Amendment, such as the Masterpiece Cakeshop case.
Kristen Waggoner, president of Alliance Defending Freedom, wrote in a Sept. 12 legal brief signed by her and other attorneys that a decision in favor of 303 Creative boils down to a clear-cut violation of the First Amendment.
“Colorado and the United States still contend that CADA only regulates sales transactions,” the brief says. “But their cases do not apply because they involve non-expressive activities: selling BBQ, firing employees, restricting school attendance, limiting club memberships, and providing room access. Colorado’s own cases agree that the government may not use public-accommodation laws to affect a commercial actor’s speech.”
Pizer, however, pushed back strongly on the idea a decision in favor of 303 Creative would be as focused as Alliance Defending Freedom purports it would be, arguing it could open the door to widespread discrimination against LGBTQ people.
“One way to put it is art tends to be in the eye of the beholder,” Pizer said. “Is something of a craft, or is it art? I feel like I’m channeling Lily Tomlin. Remember ‘soup and art’? We have had an understanding that whether something is beautiful or not is not the determining factor about whether something is protected as artistic expression. There’s a legal test that recognizes if this is speech, whose speech is it, whose message is it? Would anyone who was hearing the speech or seeing the message understand it to be the message of the customer or of the merchants or craftsmen or business person?”
Despite the implications in the case for LGBTQ rights, 303 Creative may have supporters among LGBTQ people who consider themselves proponents of free speech.
One joint friend-of-the-court brief before the Supreme Court, written by Dale Carpenter, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who’s written in favor of LGBTQ rights, and Eugene Volokh, a First Amendment legal scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles, argues the case is an opportunity to affirm the First Amendment applies to goods and services that are uniquely expressive.
“Distinguishing expressive from non-expressive products in some contexts might be hard, but the Tenth Circuit agreed that Smith’s product does not present a hard case,” the brief says. “Yet that court (and Colorado) declined to recognize any exemption for products constituting speech. The Tenth Circuit has effectively recognized a state interest in subjecting the creation of speech itself to antidiscrimination laws.”
Oral arguments in the case aren’t yet set, but may be announced soon. Set to defend the state of Colorado and enforcement of its non-discrimination law in the case is Colorado Solicitor General Eric Reuel Olson. Just this week, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would grant the request to the U.S. solicitor general to present arguments before the justices on behalf of the Biden administration.
With a 6-3 conservative majority on the court that has recently scrapped the super-precedent guaranteeing the right to abortion, supporters of LGBTQ rights may think the outcome of the case is all but lost, especially amid widespread fears same-sex marriage would be next on the chopping block. After the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against 303 Creative in the lawsuit, the simple action by the Supreme Court to grant review in the lawsuit suggests they are primed to issue a reversal and rule in favor of the company.
Pizer, acknowledging the call to action issued by LGBTQ groups in the aftermath of the Dobbs decision, conceded the current Supreme Court issuing the ruling in this case is “a terrifying prospect,” but cautioned the issue isn’t so much the makeup of the court but whether or not justices will continue down the path of abolishing case law.
“I think the question that we’re facing with respect to all of the cases or at least many of the cases that are in front of the court right now, is whether this court is going to continue on this radical sort of wrecking ball to the edifice of settled law and seemingly a goal of setting up whole new structures of what our basic legal principles are going to be. Are we going to have another term of that?” Pizer said. “And if so, that’s terrifying.”
Kelley Robinson, a Black, queer woman, named president of Human Rights Campaign
Progressive activist a veteran of Planned Parenthood Action Fund
Kelley Robinson, a Black, queer woman and veteran of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, is to become the next president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s leading LGBTQ group announced on Tuesday.
Robinson is set to become the ninth president of the Human Rights Campaign after having served as executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Fund and more than 12 years of experience as a leader in the progressive movement. She’ll be the first Black, queer woman to serve in that role.
“I’m honored and ready to lead HRC — and our more than three million member-advocates — as we continue working to achieve equality and liberation for all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer people,” Robinson said. “This is a pivotal moment in our movement for equality for LGBTQ+ people. We, particularly our trans and BIPOC communities, are quite literally in the fight for our lives and facing unprecedented threats that seek to destroy us.”
The next Human Rights Campaign president is named as Democrats are performing well in polls in the mid-term elections after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, leaving an opening for the LGBTQ group to play a key role amid fears LGBTQ rights are next on the chopping block.
“The overturning of Roe v. Wade reminds us we are just one Supreme Court decision away from losing fundamental freedoms including the freedom to marry, voting rights, and privacy,” Robinson said. “We are facing a generational opportunity to rise to these challenges and create real, sustainable change. I believe that working together this change is possible right now. This next chapter of the Human Rights Campaign is about getting to freedom and liberation without any exceptions — and today I am making a promise and commitment to carry this work forward.”
The Human Rights Campaign announces its next president after a nearly year-long search process after the board of directors terminated its former president Alphonso David when he was ensnared in the sexual misconduct scandal that led former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to resign. David has denied wrongdoing and filed a lawsuit against the LGBTQ group alleging racial discrimination.
Protests interrupt Moms for Liberty meeting about removing books in Howard County schools
No, you really don’t have to put down 20 percent
PHOTOS: Pride Reveal
Gay author takes us on his journey to fatherhood in ‘Safe’
Lesbian road movie returns with campy ‘Dolls’
An unpleasant experience with American Airlines
Trial for man charged with assaulting gay men in D.C. park postponed for third time
New Biden campaign hire is the first LGBTQ national organizing director
Partisan disagreements imperil efforts to redress harms of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
Anti-transgender Ariz. ballot measure dies
Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast
Opinions2 days ago
An unpleasant experience with American Airlines
District of Columbia4 days ago
Trial for man charged with assaulting gay men in D.C. park postponed for third time
Politics3 days ago
New Biden campaign hire is the first LGBTQ national organizing director
Congress3 days ago
Partisan disagreements imperil efforts to redress harms of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’