lifeonq.com

Atlanta Shows Pride In The Life

Black Gay Pride is back, bringing thousands of African-American queers to the ATL starting tonight. Produced by In the Life Atlanta (ITLA), Black Pride festivities will include a film festival, a Healthy Living Conference, a marketplace, a fashion show, a pride march, and of course plenty of parties, picnics and people-watching opportunities.

Atlanta Black Pride is billed as the world’s largest Pride event for people of African descent. Event organizers point out, however, that Black Pride is open to anyone who wants to celebrate the diversity of the LGBTQ community.

A Celebration of Life candlelight vigil will light up the First Metropolitan Community Church of Atlanta to start things off, beginning at 7:00 p.m. A complete schedule is available on the ITLA Website.

In contrast to the multicultural, multiracial Pride Celebration in June, Black Gay Pride is as much a conference as a party, with workshops and forums addressing social, religious, cultural and health issues of interest to the queer community. Black Pride central is moving out of midtown this year to the Sheraton Atlanta Downtown on Courtland Street, due to construction at the previous location at the Sheraton in Colony Square.

Black Pride continues through Labor Day at multiple venues around the city. ITLA’s mission is to promote unity, pride, self-empowerment and positive visibility within Atlanta’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community of African descent through education, advocacy and coalition-building activities.

Chris Dodd Out Standing in a Field During LGBT Presidential Forum

Senator Chris Dodd has posted answers on his Website to the questions posed to Democratic presidential candidates during last week’s HRC/Logo Visible Vote 08 presidential forum. Dodd chose to wait for a copy of the questions, wait to see reaction to the other candidates’ appearances, then wait for his staffers to carefully craft well-spun answers, rather than sit down with the LGBT community. Perhaps the senator doesn’t know what anyone who has ever been tested understands: it’s not fair to know the questions in advance.

The senator did not answer the one question that queer voters were asking: Why didn’t you show up?

Apparently the field of candidates was too much for Sen. Dodd. He chose a different field for his campaign last Thursday. Sen. Dodd had cited scheduling conflicts as his reason not to appear. A check of his schedule as posted on his Website shows that he was at the Greengate House Party in Nelson, New Hampshire at the time of the forum. His campaign posted a photo of the Senator made in Nelson on Flickr.

The fact that Sen. Dodd failed to show tells gay and lesbian voters that when asked to stand up for equal rights, this candidate would rather stand out in a field, isolating himself from issues he finds either politically inconvenient or personally of no concern to him.

Lutheran Church Votes to Turn the Other Cheek on Gay Ministers

Ironically, the Lutheran Church took a page from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” today at its national assembly on Chicago’s Navy Pier. The Evangelical Lutheran Congregation in America (ELCA) voted to direct church leaders to “refrain from or demonstrate restraint” when enforcing the church’s ban on non-celibate gay clergy. Yesterday the ELCA rejected a proposal that would have eliminated the ban altogether, according to an article just posted on The Chicago Sun-Times’ Website.

In essence, the Lutheran Church has chosen to make it OK to ignore its own rules rather than summon the grace and courage to get rid of rules that foster exclusion, intolerance and persecution. Like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the Lutheran’s new “Refrain and Restrain” could be viewed as one baby step forward for gay rights. It will likely allow gay Lutheran ministers to take fewer casualties. But they did not win the battle.

HRC/Logo Visible Vote 08 Presidential Forum: Grade it on the Curve

It would seem that LGBT political power got a big bump in last night’s Visible Vote 08 presidential forum on the Logo Channel. For LGBT Americans, the forum offered a chance to evaluate the candidates from an LGBT perspective, in an LGBT forum. This was in stark contrast to trying to filter candidate positions from the spin and stump speeches designed for a broader audience.Both the panel and the politicians seemed well aware of the significance of the forum in political history.

The panelists–Jonathon Capehart of the Washington Post, entertainer and activist Melissa Etheridge, and HRC President Joe Solmonese–regularly prefaced their questions for the Democratic presidential candidates with expressions of gratitude for their previous efforts to advance gay rights and their political courage to attend an LGBT event that was sure to generate mainstream headlines nationally. The candidates seemed cognizant of the history written by their participation, which likely explains some of the philosophical tone to many of their comments. Just as Ellen Degeneres‘ televised coming-out created a national conversation on LGBT visibility and tolerance, Visible Vote 08 is sure to add spark to the conversation about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered rights and roles in the political landscape.

Winners and Losers

Senator Barack Obama was the first to accept the invitation to the forum and therefore the first to appear. There was a point here for the LGBT community, and Obama was quick to point out his first-in-line interest in gay and lesbian issues. He also gets the highest marks for finessing the gay marriage issue. Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Senator Mike Gravel were the only two to come right out and endorse gay marriage. But both are widely understood as marginal candidates on the far left of the Democratic Party. What makes Obama’s position interesting is his suggestion that the term marriage should be divorced from all legal unions, leaving the definition of marriage to individual religious denominations. This makes perfect sense. If your religion precludes you from recognizing gay marriage, then don’t recognize it in your church. Changing hearts and minds within the religious community should be a separate fight. The work for gay rights should focus on the first amendment’s guarantee to equal rights for all, not on how moral values–which vary in nuance among religions–should be used as precedents in constitutional law.

Watch Sen. Obama explain his civil marriage position:

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards attempted to work his trademark sincerity and “truthiness,” but his shtick was hollow in this setting. He was passionate in relating how he was moved by meeting homeless gay kids in Los Angeles, kicked out by their parents for being gay. But his outrage felt like that of a man who has no idea of the devastating and dangerous effect that an anti-gay society can have on individuals. Edwards came across as someone revealing new and shocking information. Did he genuinely think a gay audience was not aware of family intolerance and exclusion? Perhaps he thought he was speaking to a broader America. Edwards also abandoned his tell-the-truth rhetoric in explaining why he said that he was opposed to gay marriage for religious reasons. His attempt to divert the question by taking off on a tangent about religion and government that was no where near as logical and articulate as Obama’s. When he hit a dead end, he took a U-turn and ended up right back at “I don’t support gay marriage.”

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, one of the LGBT community’s most reliable allies in the House of Representatives, got high praise from the panel that came with a caveat: “But you can’t win.” HRC President Solmonese actually included the phrase, “totally unelectable, but…” in his on-camera reaction to Kucinich. The Ohio Congressman displayed a charming sense of humor, but went over the top in his comments. Listening to Kucinich seems to leave liberals thinking, “I like was he has to say, but I worry he’s a little nuts.”As for former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel, a little nuts is an understatement. While his views on LGBT issues are across-the-board appealing, his overall message leaves you wondering how he could even get on the ballot. Gravel spent an inordinate amount of his 15 minutes ranting about the war on drugs. He proposed that all drugs be legalized and available through your doctor. Why a medical professional would prescribe crack was not explained.

If you disqualify the two widely-labeled “unelectable” candidates, the big loser of Visible Vote 08 was Arizona Governor Bill Richardson. When you listen to Richardson discuss foreign policy, he seems so knowledgeable and rational. But perhaps that’s because it’s such a sharp contrast to our current president. On LGBT issues, Richardson lost it. He described homosexuality as a choice. When Melissa Etheridge jumped in, believing he must have misunderstood the question, he missed the opportunity to fix his fumble. “I’m not a scientist” was his clarification. Richardson also refused to budge on gay marriage, attempting to sell the idea that it’s just not do-able. He double-talked through a rationale that gay marriage isn’t possible because the country “just isn’t there yet,” followed by a dissertation on the importance of being able to lead. Which is it, governor? Either you’re capable of leading the country to equality, or you’re not.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton came across as a candidate with the best foundation of experience and perspective. Her explanation of the history of her husband’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was thoughtful and politically savvy. She gets a perfect score for her grasp of political climate and how a president must compromise and build consensus to move the country forward. Clinton also succeeded in plugging her past efforts in support of gay rights, talking about her work with HRC and others on strategies to defeat a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage. Few provided as much substance or came across as more qualified for the office of president as did Senator Clinton. But she failed the logic test in trying to explain her opposition to gay marriage. She was effusive in her admiration of the community’s fight for gay marriage, but never acknowledged how her anti-marriage position impacted that cause.

Watch Sen. Clinton offer an insider’s insight into Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:

An A for effort; a C for execution

One surprising aspect of the forum was the lack of polish. Read the post on CBS News’ post-forum analysis for coverage of the missteps in Logo’s attempt at live TV news. As for the candidates themselves, perhaps they should be graded on the curve. With so many Democratic debates, maybe the candidates were ill-prepared for a longer-form conversation on a specific issue on live television. The HRC/Logo forum did not fit their 60 second response practice, and their soundbytes had to be strung together–often illogically–to answer the questions. Clinton, a highly coached politician, generally rose to the challenge of the issues (her position on marriage notwithstanding). But even she gave us something for the blooper reel. More on that in a separate post.

CBS News and MTV Networks Contribute Gaffes to Logo’s Presidential Forum

The Logo Channel’s presidential candidate forum, held live tonight from Los Angeles, was historic. The network’s Visible Vote ‘08 effort should be lauded. Then CBS News and MTV ruined the mood. Fresh off the high of the first-ever presidential forum on LGBT issues, the bliss of history got a black eye from CBS.

First was CBS on Logo Anchor Jason Bellini’s stumbling, shrugging coverage. It started with what smelled like the edge of transgender acceptance. Introducing Anchor Itay Hod’s next interview, Bellini emphasized that the interview was with “a woman….who we saw her face in this forum.”

His sidekick jumped right in with an awkwardly inappropriate wrap-up question for former city manager Susan Stanton, fired after revealing she is transgendered. He almost giggled the question, “Some people have concerns voting for a woman. I assume you don’t have any issue with that?”

Sharing his insight into LGBT trends, Bellini declared that “faith is really a cutting edge LGBT issue.”

We later learn from his political insight when he informs us that “LGBT people get dissed after the primaries.”

Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese apparently has a new title. It’s “Head.”

In his final question for forum moderator Margaret Carlson, columnist for Bloomberg News and former Washington Bureau Chief for Time Magazine, Bellini seemed desperate to get a clue: “Was there any news made tonight?”

You got your gay TV! We want your money!

Then, there was the bizarre declaration of “We’re using you, and we want your money!” by Judy McGrath, the Chairman (sic) and CEO of MTV Networks. In the interest of full disclosure, that is not an exact quotation. This is an exact quote: “It feels like it’s in the tradition of the best things about our company, when we engage people in the, you know, public, with under-served, passionate, important consumers that might otherwise go unheard.”

Later, she tagged Logo’s expansion online as another way LGBT people can consume the network’s product. She sold us that Logo Online allows “even many more people to access the content, the entertainment, the message of Logo.”

Her most authentic, passionate moment? When she effused: “They are a great marketing opportunity! They’re smart, educated, passionate, fantastic, you know, consumers. So I’m absolutely thrilled!”

Giving this roast a rest

After a snack of Cheez-Its and milk, it seems selfish to criticize a corporation that had the courage to take advantage of every market opportunity, without prejudice. With the Logo Channel, MTV Networks risked advertiser loyalty, political favor and public opinion. So they deserve thanks for their vision, support for their willingness to include political and social programming, and a little encouragement to improve on execution. Logo could use a little tweaking. Like having their programming sync with what TiVO says is recording. Or working with corporate sister CBS to send over talent that is eligible to vote to cover unprecedented political history. But Logo’s Visible Vote’08 is a major step forward for LGBT political visibility. Thank you.

Awkward candidate improv

The candidates, for their part, were by and large contemplative–almost self-conscious in their attempts to put their participation in the forum into a philosophical perspective. All expressed a commitment to equality for all people and emphasized the importance of taking “gay marriage” off the table as a political card to play for bigots. Some were more effective than others in seeming sincere, explaining positions in a conciliatory tone, and getting through some high-level details on policy without stepping on any political land mines. Of course, as they felt their way through the gay agenda, the candidates themselves offered up a few off-message moments as well. More on that in a separate post.

We’re Here. We’re Queer. We Vote.

On the eve of the first-ever televised presidential forum on LGBT issues, research firm Community Marketing reports that gay and lesbian Americans vote in extraordinarily high percentages. The San Francisco-based company released some details today from a new national survey on gay and lesbian voting patterns, part of the Gay Consumer Index™ and Lesbian Consumer Index™, Community Marketing’s research into the consumer behavior and preferences of more than 12,000 gay Americans and 10,000 lesbian Americans.

The survey revealed that nine out of 10 gay men (92.5 percent) voted in the last presidential election in 2004; more than eight out of 10 (83.8 percent) in the mid-term elections last year. Lesbians voted in equally impressive numbers: nearly 91 percent in the last presidential election and 78 percent in 2006. Community Marketing compares the numbers to reports showing only 64 percent of the general population going to the polls in 2004 and a dismal 40 percent in the 2006 midterms.

Although no data was included to indicate how those numbers compared to previous elections, one can assume that Republican and religious right efforts to marginalize and oppress the LGBT community have motivated trips to the polls en masse. Efforts by gay rights activists are also likely deserving of some credit for these impressively high numbers.

And queers don’t just vote. Gays and lesbians also put their money where their ballots are. Within the last year, over 40 percent of gay men and a third (31.1 percent) of lesbians gave money to a political party.

More »