Connect with us


Pete Buttigieg is gay enough

Yes, his homosexuality counts as diversity



Pete Buttigieg, gay news, Washington Blade
Mayor Pete Buttigieg (Photo by Marc Nozell via Flickr)

It took less than four years after the Obergefell decision legalized same-sex marriage nationwide for the first openly gay Democratic candidate in U.S. history to announce his intention to run for president. “Mayor Pete” is generating significant interest in his campaign. He very quickly reached the fundraising threshold to gain a spot on the debate stage of the Democratic primaries and is now, according to one poll, in third place in Iowa. He also just announced a $7 million first quarter fundraising haul. But none of this seems to impress Christina Cauterucci at Slate. 

In an article published on March 28, Cauterucci asks whether “[Buttigieg’s] Gayness Count[s] as Diversity.” This strikes me as a question with an easy answer: yes. Buttigieg is the first openly gay Democratic candidate for president. (Fred Karger, who’s gay, ran a long shot campaign for the GOP nomination in 2012.) His run is historic and, more importantly, significant for millions of LGBTQ people living in America. For the first time, this community, which includes both Cauterucci and myself, is being represented on the national political stage. Rather than applauding the decades-long efforts of LGBTQ activists that made it possible for Buttigieg to run, or reflecting on the progress this country has made on gay rights while acknowledging the work that still needs to be done, Cauterucci chooses to quibble.

“Buttigieg isn’t just gay,” Cauterucci begins, “he’s also white, male, upper-class, Midwestern, married, Ivy League–educated, and a man of faith.” She’s correct —Buttigieg is white, male, relatively wealthy, and educated. He enjoys more than his fair share of privileges. His whiteness and masculinity are immediately visible and will afford him protections from persecution that women and racial minorities will never have. It is important to recognize this as Cauterucci has done and I hope that other cisgender white gay and bisexual men will take the time to reflect on the privileges they’ve enjoyed. 

Cauterucci doesn’t stop there, though: “A marginalized sexual orientation can remain unspoken and unnoticed for as long as a queer person desires [emphasis added].” I don’t know Christina Cauterucci personally. I don’t know her coming out story. But I can’t imagine she believes the closet is a desirable place to be for a queer person. I can’t imagine she felt that being closeted was a desirable state of being. And I can’t imagine she thinks that Pete Buttigieg desired to hide a part of himself from the world until he was in his 30s. 

I came out to my parents almost two years ago. It went well. They supported me and have welcomed my boyfriend, Chris, as part of the family. I consider myself lucky; many of the gay and bisexual men I’ve met had much more harrowing experiences with coming out. I’m even luckier to live in the D.C. area, where gay couples can feel relatively safe publicly holding hands, kissing, and even just leaning against each other on the train. Chris and I don’t have to return to the closet when we leave our apartment.

This isn’t true when we visit his parents. They live in Woodstock, Va., less than 100 miles outside of Washington. Those 100 miles take us from an urban area to a rural one, from Clinton country to Trump country. It takes us from a place where we can hold hands in public to one where we can’t. Being in public in Woodstock means going back into the closet. 

I am a privileged person. I’m white, I’m a cisgender man, and I grew up in a well-off family with two college-educated parents. But I also live with a man in Fairfax County, Va., where we can be evicted from our apartment or lose our jobs for our sexual orientation. I don’t love my boyfriend less when we leave the safety of the D.C. area, but I have to act like I do. This act, playing it straight when we go to Woodstock, is not something Chris or I desire to do. It is something we must do. It is an act of self-preservation, not the fulfilling of a desire.

I haven’t met Mayor Pete, but I think I can safely say that he didn’t want to go through life with everyone assuming he was straight, feeling as though he was hiding a key part of his identity from his constituents. His coming out in 2015 was brave. He and his husband, Chasten, are out and proud. They are comfortable being who they are, despite rising numbers of hate crimes against LGBTQ individuals and despite the Trump administration’s rabidly anti-LGBTQ agenda. While Pete Buttigieg is a long way from claiming the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, his journey as an openly gay candidate is an inspiration. 

Cauterucci may dismiss him as a man with “sturdy ties to straight culture,” and an “apotheosis of respectability politics.” Many more will dismiss him because he is married to a man. Mayor Pete has done more than enough to deserve serious consideration. He doesn’t need to be “gayer,” or change who he is in any way. He just needs to be Pete Buttigieg. 

Patrick Cochran is a program manager from the D.C. area.

Continue Reading


Queer kids are not brainwashed

Trans children are real transgender people, not trend chasers



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


A rare misstep for the amazing Nancy Pelosi

Taiwan trip a distraction amid good news for Democrats



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


Monkeypox is a gay thing — we must say it

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



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

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts