[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Can we change, too? As we celebrate a turning point in America, it’s time to set aside our cynicism for action By LAURA DOUGLAS-BROWN It’s been a rollercoaster week for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Atlantans. On Sunday, we joined other gay people from around the country in being moved by openly gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson’s prayer at Barack Obama’s inauguration kickoff event. But that was only after we were outraged that it wasn’t included in HBO’s broadcast of the event, and we had to find it online. On Monday, we were inspired by dozens of protesters who turned out on a chilly morning to counter Rev. Rick Warren as the keynote speaker at Atlanta’s MLK Jr. Day Commemorative Service. But then we were outraged again when the leader of the King Center suggested the protesters lacked the “maturity” to understand the slain civil rights leader’s “beloved community,” simply because they opposed a pastor who would deny our right to our own beloveds. On Tuesday, we watched in awed admiration as President Obama was finally sworn in, heralding a milestone in American politics and what we can only hope will be a new era of inclusion for gay citizens. But how long until we will be outraged again? Obama has already disappointed some gay rights activists by not appointing an openly gay person to his Cabinet, and by choosing Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration. And with all of the critical issues and constituencies clamoring for the new president’s attention, new disappointments will surely come. PERHAPS THE challenge for gay and transgender citizens in this era of change is whether we can channel our anger into productive, positive action. During the previous presidential administration, it was tempting to believe that being angry was enough. With little hope of accomplishing proactive change with a president who threatened to veto any piece of gay-supportive legislation, we could take some comfort in criticism and cynicism. After all, it’s a familiar stance for many lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, who frequently face taunts and discrimination in our families or in the schoolyard long before we come to understand the legal or political rights we are denied. The stereotypical sarcasm of “bitter queens” often has its start as self-protection for young sissies and dykes, who bury our pain beneath a cloak of jaded cynicism. Yet as our new president asks us to join him in idealism and optimism despite tough challenges ahead, it’s up to all of us to set aside the urge to just critique and complain, and join our fellow citizens in rolling up our shirtsleeves for the hard work ahead. That may mean turning out to protest when serious issues like Warren and Proposition 8 arise, but also looking for opportunities to work with our usual opponents on issues on which we can agree. It may mean, as columnist Jennifer Vanasco suggests below, going beyond simply coming out, to actually speaking out — not only when we are angry, but also to the people who love us but may not fully understand or advocate for us. It may even mean letting some smaller possible slights slide, if they risk detracting us from the larger goals of securing safety, justice and equality for ourselves and our relationships. To that end, it was a relief to see gay activists and bloggers mostly take a pass on the fact that Obama did not specifically mention gay people or issues in his inauguration speech. While it could have been interpreted as an omission, it’s worth noting that he did not include any long laundry lists of constituency groups, and his overall message was about inclusion for all. As H. Alexander Robinson, head of the gay National Black Justice Coalition, said this week after the gay bishop flap, “If we look for reasons and ways in which we might be overlooked or slighted, we’ll always be able to find them.” Let’s see what real progress we can find instead.
Poster Comment: This is almost exactly what David Duke would have written if Paul had won.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Prefrontal Vortex (#0)
Is this person using the royal we, the editorial we or the gay we? It's a really annoying rhetorical device.
“It’s difficult to talk about Nintendo because we don’t look at their console as being competitors.”
Wii?
Sorry. Just freely associating.
I take that back. There is a point, too. That being, Duke is an apostle of negritude. (But I still like his books.)
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||