Opinions
A second open letter to Ivanka Trump
All sense of honesty and decency have escaped those at the White House

The LGBT community’s pleas to Ivanka Trump to moderate her father’s views have fallen on deaf ears. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
On Nov. 15, 2016 with high hopes for what you could do I published an open letter to you. It began, “I believe we must always keep an open line of communication with those we don’t agree with and the person on your side of this election I would enjoy having a cup of coffee with is you. As a supporter of Hillary Clinton the election didn’t turn out the way I wanted it to. This isn’t the first campaign where my hopes were dashed. But the fight for the things I believe in and care about goes on. Ivanka, it would be great to have the opportunity to share with you how I lived my life. It is my conviction you would understand where those like myself are coming from and as senior adviser to your father that could be important and helpful as you help mold the administration.”
At the time many of us hoped you might be a moderating influence on social and economic issues relating to women, immigrants and the LGBTQ+ community. You didn’t respond to the letter when it was published. Then I met Omarosa Manigault, the president’s Director of Communications for the Office of Public Liaison, at a reception honoring the new Secretary of the Veterans Administration. We had a very pleasant conversation and I handed her a copy of the letter in an envelope addressed to you, which she promised to deliver.
I never heard from her or you again. Seeing what your father and his administration are now doing and saying, you are probably correct in thinking responding wasn’t worthwhile. Clearly you either agree with what your father is doing or have zero influence to do anything about it. Both scenarios are disappointing. This time I am not expecting a response.
Your father, the president, has become an embarrassment to the nation. He has been called all kinds of names by those who disagree with him and some may be over the top. But I can only conclude by his behavior and speeches he can fairly be described as a boorish pig. His conduct overseas including roughly pushing aside the prime minister of Montenegro to get to his place in a photo op and his remarks on the figure of the wife of French President Macron were offensive.
His statements on efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act leave one perplexed and with the clear impression he has no idea what he is talking about. Inviting members of the House of Representatives to the Rose Garden one day to celebrate passage of their bill, then calling it ‘mean’ days later. Yes it is mean. But then he supports an even meaner Senate bill finally begging them to do something no matter how hateful it is. Thankfully three decent Republican senators and every Democrat agreed both the House version, the Senate version he first supported, and the ‘skinny’ version are all mean-spirited and wrong-headed and voted them down. Clearly your father has yet to figure out the ‘art of the political deal.’
Then your father went further in showing how boorish and totally clueless he is with his speech to the Boy Scouts at their Jamboree. I am a Scout. In 1960, along with nearly 60,000 other Scouts, I attended the National Jamboree in Colorado Springs celebrating 50 years of scouting. That year another president, Dwight David Eisenhower, spoke. Whatever his politics he was a man with a reputation for decency and a military hero. Though I was a Democrat even then, supporting John F. Kennedy for president, I was inspired by Eisenhower’s words when he talked about trustworthiness, honor, honesty, valor and the importance of service to the nation. There is not one scout who when they think back on your father’s meandering remarks will be inspired to service. His use of curse words, talking about cocktail parties and women in New York; bashing a former president and threatening to fire one of his cabinet secretaries if a bill didn’t pass Congress, (let’s see if he does that now that the bill has failed) were totally inappropriate. The Boy Scouts for the first time ever had to apologize for a president’s speech. I can’t imagine even you weren’t embarrassed by that spectacle.
Your father has gone so far off track I find myself feeling sorry for Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a man I have always considered a racist. Your father talked about loyalty to the Boy Scouts; clearly your father’s concept of loyalty is a one-way street. Threatening Sessions for upholding the ‘rule of law’ is the height of stupidity and as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said, if your father fired him there would be ‘holy hell’ to pay.
In a random early morning tweet your father attacked the LGBTQ+ community and heroic transgender members of the military announcing trans people will no longer be welcome to serve and possibly die for the nation. Something he was never willing to do. His new press secretary trying to explain the tweet lied about it saying it was in concurrence with the Department of Defense. In reality the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense have said they knew nothing about the tweet and the secretary had just announced a six-month study of the issue. Clearly lying at the White House has reached epidemic proportions.
So, Ivanka, the hope you and your husband would have any ability or even desire to moderate some of you father’s behavior is long gone. Instead we have seen you and Jared hire lawyers to defend what seems indefensible. We have witnessed both you and his inability to honestly fill out government forms including financial disclosure forms and at least his SF-86 needed to get a security clearance. The excuse on finances from your husband seems to be he is so rich it’s natural he forgot to report on numerous holdings. As to the security form he now admits he forgot over 100 meetings with foreign agents and is on his third or fourth iteration of the form in what he says is an attempt to be honest and forthcoming.
My God, how can he do his job if he really has such a poor memory? Or was he simply displaying selective memory hoping he could get away with it? When he signed the original form he swore to its truth that could be enough to send him to jail.
In fact, it appears all sense of honesty and plain decency have escaped most of those at the White House. You are all being caught up in the sludge oozing out of that venerable building; the building often called the people’s house. If this keeps up decent people will not want any association with that beautiful building, recently home to a family that represented what is best in America, until your father stops disgracing it and the country.
Many of us who harbored hope you would be a champion for decency now count the days until your father either leaves voluntarily or is thrown out. Only then will the American people once again be able to lift up our heads with pride when facing the world community.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBT rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.
Opinions
Barney Frank’s powerful legacy for LGBTQ federal employees
The ‘Great Gay Communicator’ deserves respect
Former Congressman Barney Frank, who died last week, was dogged during his life over being gay. The self-proclaimed only “left-handed, gay, Jewish congressman,” in Congress deserved better.
Frank’s perseverance paved the way for others. With wit and intelligence, he helped educate Americans about sexuality. As a federal employee and a member of the Federal Gay, Lesbian or Bisexual Employees (GLOBE), a government-wide organization founded by Dr. Len Hirsch, I saw Frank’s unforgettable speaking style when he was a guest speaker at our monthly events.
Frank’s detailed presentations about federal employment policies were not recorded. The only record of them, edited by Dr. Hirsch and other members of the GLOBE board, is in the minutes of the GLOBE meetings. I held several positions in GLOBE, including secretary, assistant newsletter editor, and as an elected member of the board. I drafted the minutes of the meetings.
GLOBE’s minutes were edited to protect the identity of federal employees. This was important because then-U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) attempted to obtain the minutes. Helms felt LGBT advocacy in the federal workplace was an illegal form of political activity. GLOBE was also concerned that the minutes would be illegally accessed and forwarded to Helms or used to blackmail federal employees. GLOBE’s minutes are preserved at the National Archives.
When I was named Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Program Manager at the Department of Agriculture in 1993, I immediately notified Frank’s office of my appointment. After a federal newsletter published an article about a speech I gave, Helms accused me of using government resources to support “a homosexual agenda.” During several hours on the evening of July 19, 1994, Helms told the Senate and C-SPAN’s television audience that LGBT federal employees had their minds in their crotches. He called LGBT federal employees “perverts.”
Helms had government documents that described the position of “Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Program Manager.” It was a program that used the incendiary words “promote” and “recruit” homosexuals. It was a huge mistake for government bureaucrats to have written such a program. Helms published it in the Congressional Record. Frank helped us through this battle and others.
Aside from Frank, there were other LGBT members of Congress in the 1990s. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.), Steve Gunderson (R-Wisc.), and James Kolbe (R-Ariz.). Studds was censured for an affair with a 17-year-old male page in the House. Gunderson was publicly outed by a fellow House Republican. Kolbe was subject to sexual accusations.
Among these gay congressmen, Frank weathered a hostile media, personal scandal, and vicious attacks from his Republican colleagues. In 1995, former Texas GOP House Majority Leader Dick Armey was caught referring to Frank as “Barney Fag.” His apology was grudging.
“I rule out that it was an innocent mispronunciation,” responded Frank. “I turned to my own expert, my mother, who reports that in 59 years of marriage, no one ever introduced her as Elsie Fag.”
After celebrating his 72nd birthday, Frank married his longtime partner. He successfully worked to place marriage equality into the 2012 Democratic platform, which President Obama endorsed.
Still, Frank was dogged by homophobia. The Tea Party’s Doug Mainwaring called Frank’s wedding “a mockery, a parody, a staggering caricature of the most fundamental and towering of American institutions.”
In an interview with Washingtonian magazine, Frank said he “hates being classified as ‘the gay congressman,’” as his legislative accomplishments go beyond gay rights. He co-sponsored the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
Frank will especially be remembered in Washington for his sharp wit. He once referred to advocating for gay marriage legalization as “cruising for gay rights.” He wrote devastatingly funny op-ed pieces, notably for the Washington Post.
Though Frank may not have wanted to be known as a gay congressman, when he spoke, the LGBT community listened. He was the Great Gay Communicator. Barney Frank deserved respect. May his memory be a blessing.
James Patterson, a life member of the American Foreign Service Association, is a writer and communications consultant in the D.C. area.
If I admit I’m HIV positive, some men immediately reject me. If I lie and say I’m HIV negative, many of those same men will gladly have unprotected sex with me.
That contradiction has haunted me for years and made me wonder: What would the gay men who died of AIDS in the 1980s think if they could see us now?
The future would absolutely astonish them. Everybody carries around a handheld device that can instantly broadcast their thoughts, faces, bodies, and lives to the entire planet. We elected a Black president twice. Same-sex marriage is legal. Gay people can openly marry, raise children, grow old together, and even get divorced like everybody else. HIV itself is no longer “the deadly disease” it was when I learned I was infected in 1985 at age 23.
Back then, life expectancy was often measured in months. Surviving long enough to grow old felt like science fiction.
Now there are medications that can suppress the virus so effectively, a person living with HIV can become “undetectable,” meaning they cannot sexually transmit the virus. Countless people who once expected to die can now live long enough to worry about all the ordinary things people worry about as they age: heart disease, bad knees and what restaurant closes too early.
Back then, that wasn’t even a pipe dream. But the future also got weird.
What shocks me most is not the medical progress. It’s the emotional contradiction surrounding it. The general public no longer fears sharing space with people living with HIV. Most people understand you cannot get HIV from a hug, a handshake, sharing food, breathing the same air, or sitting next to someone on a plane.
But sex is different. Especially in the gay world, where stigma still lingers in strange and contradictory ways.
I’ve watched gay men reject HIV-positive men while simultaneously engaging in anonymous unprotected sex with people whose status they know only because somebody typed a word into an app. “Negative.” “Clean.” “DDF.”
As if viruses never lie.
At the same time, we now live in a sexual culture far more open and visible than anything most gay people from the 1980s could have imagined. The bathhouse has largely been replaced by hookup apps and social media. Sexual behavior is documented, broadcast and archived in real time.
But greater sexual freedom did not necessarily bring greater emotional clarity.
Some men still fear HIV intensely. Others eroticize it. Some even document their attempts to acquire it.
We solved the medical crisis of HIV far faster than we solved the psychological, emotional and sexual contradictions surrounding it.
As a long-term survivor, I sometimes feel like a time traveler trapped between two worlds: one that remembers the terror and one that barely remembers the war.
That feeling became the seed for my new novel,“The Unfrozen Few.” I imagined a group of AIDS patients from the late 1980s choosing cryogenic freezing rather than death, only to wake up in present-day America. They emerge into a world of smartphones, same-sex marriage, social media and medical breakthroughs, but also into a world that still doesn’t fully know what to do with people living with HIV.
In many ways, the frozen few are simply long-term survivors with the volume turned all the way up.
I think the dead would be amazed by how far we’ve come. And stunned by the ways we still haven’t.
Randy Boyd is a longtime HIV survivor, five-time Lambda Literary Award finalist and author of five novels, including ‘The Unfrozen Few,’ a speculative series about AIDS patients who were cryogenically frozen in the 1980s and awaken in present-day America. More information is available at randyboydauthor.com.
Opinions
Dual endorsement for Independent Council-at-large: Patterson or Crawford
Let’s move the District forward
(Editor’s note: This column reflects the writer’s opinion and does not constitute a Washington Blade endorsement of any candidate.)
The race for Independent Council-at-Large is interesting. There are three main candidates and I suggest making your choice easier by first eliminating Elissa Silverman from consideration. She is a retread, and it is time to move forward, not backward.
There are two candidates whom I have taken the time to talk with in some depth. They are both impressive, and either will make a great addition to the D.C. Council. I have some minor issues with both, but then have never found a candidate who I would agree with 100%, and never expect to.
Jacque Patterson has held public office, and served the community well, as president of the D.C. State Board of Education. Just recently a study was released, and while we know there are many outstanding issues in our schools, this new Education Scorecard report from Harvard, Stanford, and Dartmouth, ranks District of Columbia students first in the nation for academic growth in both math and reading between 2022 and 2025. While they are still not doing as well as we want all our students to do, progress is important, and this scorecard shows how the District is working to help its students. Take a look at Jacque’s website to see what he will focus on. You will find it impressive. He understands among other issues what small businesses mean to D.C., what we need to do for safer communities, and to provide more opportunities for all our youth.
Then take a look at Doni Crawford who has now been serving on the Council for about four months, having been chosen to replace Kenyan McDuffie until the election, when he resigned to run for mayor. She previously worked in his office as committee director for the Council’s Committee on Business and Economic Development. Prior to that she worked at the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute. Her focus is also on safer communities, economic development, housing, and youth. You can look at Doni’s website to get a more detailed understanding of where she intends to focus her time.
Both candidates have talked about how they will work to fight for D.C. statehood, and to ensure the 700,000 residents of the District can set their own budget priorities, and make their own legislative decisions, without oversight from Congress.
When looking at who you choose to vote for as a Council member in D.C., it is important to understand the person you select will be working closely with 12 other members. They have to understand the art of compromise to get their initiatives passed. They must have the personality that will demand respect of the other members, and a style that will make them stand out on the Council. I think Jacque and Doni are the two choices in this Independent Council-at-large race who will be able to do that. Also, remember in an at-large seat on the Council the focus is a little different than when you are selecting a Council member for your own ward. These members need to have a little broader view, and be able to balance all constituents in every ward of the city. That is a little more difficult.
I know from talking with them that both Jacque and Doni are committed to equality, and just as important, economic equality. They understand for the District to do well; everyone needs a fair playing field. I have gotten the strong feeling they both understand what is happening around the nation is impacting the people of D.C. That includes the resurgence of antisemitism, as well as racism, Islamophobia, homophobia, and sexism. They understand we are faced with a White House, and Republican-controlled Congress, who instead of doing anything to combat these issues, are making them worse. And because home rule still gives Congress and the felon in the White House much-too-much control over D.C., this impacts us directly. I have confidence in both Patterson and Crawford, that they will fight this, and do it intelligently, and successfully, to the benefit of all the people they are looking to serve.
So, my recommendation is you look at both their websites and decide who your first choice will be. Then rank that person #1 on your ballot for Independent Council-at-large. Then because you can with ranked choice voting, rank the other one #2. Then stop! You don’t need to rank any more.
Again, I think either Jacque Patterson or Doni Crawford will serve us well on the Council. They are both smart, experienced, and both will bring something new to the Council. Elissa Silverman had her chance before, and there were reasons the voters turned her out. Let’s not go backwards, but rather let’s move the District forward, with either Jacque Patterson or Doni Crawford.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
-
Opinions5 days agoDual endorsement for Independent Council-at-large: Patterson or Crawford
-
Real Estate5 days agoIntroducing Next-Generation Assisted Living & Memory Support.
-
District of Columbia4 days agoD.C. Pride flag raising ceremony set for June 1
-
Theater5 days agoCedric Neal on his juicy narrator role in ‘Pippin’
