Connect with us

Opinions

Looking to 2020

Democrats need coherent message, younger candidates to win

Published

on

Democratic Party, Democrats, election 2020, gay news, Washington Blade

Democrats need a coherent message and younger candidates to win in 2020.

The midterm elections are finally over and people can begin to breathe again. The results are as many anticipated, the Republicans held on to the Senate and Democrats took the House.  Not what I hoped for but half a loaf is better than nothing and seeing so many more women elected is something to cheer for.

What Democrats need to do now is show the electorate what they will do if they retake the Senate and the White House in 2020. We will need a national platform to run on and it has to be able to be delineated in a few short sentences.

It is clear the electorate is still divided and we still have a disgusting despot in the White House, a man who sees good in white nationalists and Nazis. One whose ex-wife once said he had a book containing the speeches of Hitler in his nightstand.

So there is a complicated dance about to play out in the Congress. Democrats need to cobble together legislation on infrastructure, immigration, taxes and gun control as well as some fixes to the ACA, pass those bills and send them to the Senate. If they die a slow death there at least Democrats will be able to say in 2020 “If you elect us and give us the entire Congress and the White House this is what you can expect.”

The question for some Democrats is can we move beyond the call for impeachment? Can we focus instead on oversight of federal agencies and hold to account the sleaze that Trump has brought into the administration to run his agencies? That kind of action makes sense. We have to do it smartly not with rafts of subpoenas but with intelligence.

The Democrats have a good lineup as chairs of each committee. My choice for speaker is Nancy Pelosi. While there is some discussion and concern about her age and representing the past, there is not another man or woman in the House today that is being spoken of as a serious alternative. Pelosi has proven she is a brilliant strategist. But I would like to see Pelosi take the position and immediately begin to develop a young leadership team that is diverse and strong and look to handing over the speakership to one of them in 2020 when she will turn 80.

Feel free to call me ageist. While not having chosen a candidate I will support in 2020 my choice is a ticket with candidates under 70. All we have to do is look at our history of winning the White House to see it replete with young vibrant candidates: Kennedy, Carter, Clinton and Obama.

The search for the next candidate officially begins now. We must as a party ensure a fair hearing for women and minorities in the mix of candidates we choose from during the primary season. My desire for a younger leader on the ticket means I don’t want to see Biden, Sanders, Kerry, Clinton or Warren on it. It is time Democratic elders use their experience, wisdom, and fundraising prowess to help the next generation. When we win, the next Democratic president should definitely consider them for Cabinet positions, ambassadors and use them as advisers; but it is time for them to step off center stage.

If we want to continue to generate interest among millennials and those who have sat out previous elections we need to find the candidate that with their knowledge and campaigning ability excites the electorate. I have no doubt we will find that person in the next year and a half as they are forged by getting through a tough primary campaign. After his close loss to Cruz in Texas, Beto O’Rourke must be in the mix.

The criteria for a Democratic primary candidate must be that they are a registered Democrat. There will be candidates who campaign on a more moderate platform and others on a more progressive one. Some will think the way to go is to promise things that can’t be accomplished. It will be important the candidate is someone who clearly understands our government works on compromise. That we can and should have lofty goals but also understand it often takes one step at a time to reach them. As President Obama has said, “Better is good.”

My belief is that candidates like Stacey Abrams in Georgia (whose race is still to be decided as I write this) and Andrew Gillum in Florida, who lost, represent our winning candidates in the future — candidates who can expand the electorate.

I want to congratulate some of the winners: Muriel Bowser on her reelection as mayor and Elissa Silverman on her reelection as Councilmember-at-Large in D.C.; Jared Polis, the new governor of Colorado; and Tammy Baldwin on her reelection to the Senate. Congratulations also to my friend Kathy McGuiness for her win as state auditor in Delaware. There are many races still undecided as I submit this column but my congratulations to every LGBTQ+ candidate, both those who won and those who put themselves out there and may have lost, you all deserve our thanks.

 

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

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Opinions

Queer kids are not brainwashed

Trans children are real transgender people, not trend chasers

Published

on

In some conversations with progressive friends, my peers, despite their proclaimed liberal attitudes, voice concern over the fact that children can experiment with gender and sexuality. They say things like “kids are too young to question their gender…that seems dangerous” or “a lot of children are just following gender trends and are not actually trans.” Other friends state that they don’t believe that transgender children should have access to hormone blockers. 

All of these statements are bogus and harmful. Many people who question gender fluidity in children don’t realize that they themselves have been brainwashed into thinking, from a young age, that being cisgender and straight is the norm. It should not be the norm. In fact, queerness is ever more common now among Gen Z’ers, and this is because the youth of today are feeling more and more comfortable opening up about their different sexuality and gender from an early age. 

Being able to safely come out as trans or gay in high school is an extremely healthy process and greatly improves the mental health of kids who would otherwise struggle. In red states, and conservative high school districts, this kind of coming out is still difficult, and might even be banned in the future, if Republicans continue with their cruel agenda. But there is hope in progressive cities like Portland and New York, where students feel free to question cishet and straight standards. 

Much research points to the fact that trans children are who they say they are: real transgender people, and not trend chasers. Kristina Olson, a psychologist at the University of Washington, started running a long-term study on trans youth in 2013. Olson eventually amassed a group of more than 85 trans kids. Olson kept in touch with both the children and their parents over the years. Her team ultimately found that an overwhelming, vast majority of the children stayed consistent with the gender nonconforming identity they chose in childhood. In other words, these trans children were correct about their gender identity from a young age. The notion that children pick up trans identities as a “fad,” or are wrong about them, is outdated. 

We already know that Republicans are dangerous to trans children, and have already prevented them from receiving health care or playing sports in many red states. But what we need to stop is dialogue from progressive voices that discourages gender fluidity in youth. These statements from otherwise liberal leaning people are contradictory to the very values that Democrats stand for. 

Isaac Amend (he/him/his) is a trans man and young professional in the D.C. area. He was featured on National Geographic’s ‘Gender Revolution’ in 2017 as a student at Yale University. Amend is also on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia. Find him on Instagram @isaacamend.

Continue Reading

Opinions

A rare misstep for the amazing Nancy Pelosi

Taiwan trip a distraction amid good news for Democrats

Published

on

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi leads a U.S. delegation in Taiwan. (Photo via Speaker Nancy Pelosi's official Twitter)

I have always supported House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and continue to do so. She is an amazing woman. She has championed women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, the rights of all minorities, and the rights of people with disabilities. She has worked hard to make our country a better and more equal place for all.

So seeing the repercussions of her trip to Taiwan playing out, with even the South Korean president avoiding a meeting with her, she must now realize the visit may have been ill timed. Speaker Pelosi is a smart woman and politician. I assume her insistence on the trip may have been a response to some promises she made to the Chinese community in her district and around the nation. She has always been a strong supporter of human rights and has criticized the Chinese government in the past. She recently tweeted, “28 years ago, we traveled to Tiananmen Square to honor the courage & sacrifice of the students, workers & ordinary citizens who stood for the dignity & human rights that all people deserve. To this day, we remain committed to sharing their story with the world. #Tiananmen30.” 

The question some are asking is did this trip do anything for the people of Taiwan or could it potentially hurt the people there and here if China decides to restrict trade and begin new sanctions?

As the Washington Post reported, “The visit lasted barely 19 hours. But Nancy Pelosi’s contentious trip to Taiwan was a defining moment in the increasingly bitter rivalry between China and the United States. A fuller picture of the Chinese response will emerge over the coming weeks and months, and there are already signs it will encompass greater economic as well as military coercion. Whatever the final shape of Beijing’s retaliation, Pelosi’s visit heralds a new phase in China’s efforts to control Taiwan’s fate — and those measures are likely to increase the risk of conflict with U.S. forces in the western Pacific.” The New York Times said,  “Ms. Pelosi’s visit was ill timed” and called it “provocative.”

I would never question the speaker’s commitment to the human rights of the Chinese people. But at this time, as the third in line to the presidency, there may have been some unintended ramifications from what she did and what the implications could be. I think the very unusual may have occurred, and the speaker may not have considered everything. The trip was likely spurred on by her knowledge this is likely to be her last year as speaker and this was the last time she could arrange for such a trip having the clout she does. I think Speaker Pelosi may be thinking about what she did and if it was worth adding this to the international problems the White House is now facing.

We are living in interesting and difficult times. With the help of Speaker Pelosi for the first time in a while the Biden administration and Democrats are having an incredible run of successes here at home. Passing the first gun control bill in decades, the infrastructure bill, the chips bill, and now the Senate has passed the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022” as a reconciliation package. The nation added 528,000 new jobs in July and unemployment is at the lowest it has been, matching pre-pandemic times, at 3.5%. Gas prices are steadily going down and inflation has likely peaked. Then there is the vote on the abortion amendment in Kansas, which the pro-choice side won by nearly 60/40 in a landslide definitely not predicted in that very red state. So, poking the Chinese at this time, generating negative headlines, doesn’t make much sense. I hope it will be only a blip in time.

This week we will see Pelosi do what she does best. She will move the House of Representatives to pass impactful legislation. She will keep her small Democratic majority together to pass the ‘Deficit Reduction Act of 2022’ and send it on to the president to sign. In 2018, she cut a deal to become Speaker for two more terms. That time is now coming to an end. If the Democrats manage to hold the House of Representative much of the credit must go to her. Should she then actually leave the speakership, the next speaker will have the unenviable task of trying to fill those four-inch stiletto heels. 

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

Continue Reading

Opinions

Monkeypox is a gay thing — we must say it

Will there be stigma, judgments, and homophobia? Of course

Published

on

The mainstream media and public health officials are being so damn careful not to label monkeypox “a gay disease” that they’re doing a disservice to the gay men who most need important information about the outbreak – while misleading everybody else.

In a July 28 New York Times story of the excruciating symptoms and lack of care available for those with monkeypox in that city, the sexuality of the men profiled isn’t referenced until 11 paragraphs into the story, and even then it refers to them as “men who have sex with men,” which is technically correct but dodgy. Moreover, the article, which supposedly addresses barriers to care, ignores the fact that gay men routinely experience apathy and even judgment from health providers.

Other media stories, and statements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have mentioned monkeypox cases in the context of “the LGBT community.” Really? Should lesbians be lining up for a monkeypox vaccine, whenever the heck they become widely available? This is happening to gay men. Say it.

Journalist Benjamin Ryan, in his excellent Washington Post opinion piece, draws a hard line between attempts not to unnecessarily stigmatize gay men and the importance of telling the truth about monkeypox, writing that “public health officials cannot be expected to police the public’s reactions to epidemiological facts.”

Ryan lays out those facts plainly:

Here is what we can discern from data collected about monkeypox so far: This viral outbreak isn’t just mostly occurring among men who have sex with men. The confirmed cases, at least to date, have consistently almost entirely occurred among this demographic, which accounts for 96 percent or more of diagnoses where data are available.

Per capita, the few monkeypox cases in women and children remain minuscule compared with the rate among gay and bisexual men. Of course, substantial transmission could always occur among such other groups. But researchers at the WHO and elsewhere have speculated that the monkeypox reproduction rate will likely remain significantly lower in such demographics — meaning the virus will more likely hit transmission dead ends among them than among gay and bisexual men.

An uncomfortable truth, one documented in peer-reviewed papers, is that sexual behaviors and networks specific to gay and bisexual men have long made them more likely to acquire various sexually transmitted infections compared with heterosexual people. This includes not only HIV, but also syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, hepatitis B and sexually transmitted hepatitis C.

Global public health experts agree that skin-to-skin contact in the context of sexual activity between men has been the principal driver of the monkeypox outbreak, at least thus far.

Such experts have also asserted that the risk of monkeypox to the broader population not having multiple sex partners remains low — even “very low.” This is hopeful news, and the wider public deserves to be reassured accordingly. Assuaging fears of contagion will help fight unhelpful hysteria and prevent gay and bisexual men from being subjected to even greater stigma should they be painted as culprits of the spread of virus to others.

Monkeypox didn’t begin with gay men, that much is true. As Yale infectious disease expert Gregg Gonsalves explained to the New York Times, “This is not a gay disease; it has been circulating in West and Central Africa for many years… What likely happened, in this case, is that somebody who had monkeypox had a lesion and showed up at a gay rave in Europe, and it spread to those in that social and sexual network.”

Whatever the origins, we’re now dealing with an outbreak almost entirely limited to gay men in the United States and Europe. And that is worth saying explicitly.

Why? Because identifying those at risk and getting information to them is a basic public health strategy for containing an outbreak. Gay men are getting monkeypox and suffering greatly. When gay men understand the threat, we are more likely to take precautions, get vaccinated, or be informed about treatment.

Will there be stigma and judgements and homophobia? Of course. And we’ll have to deal with that. But that doesn’t mean we bury crucial facts in vague, evasive messaging.

Monkeypox is a gay thing. That’s the truth.

Mark S. King is an award-winning blogger, author, speaker, and HIV/AIDS activist who has been involved in HIV causes since testing positive in 1985.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular

[class^="wpforms-"]
[class^="wpforms-"]