Are we selfish?
Remember when Roseanne got raked over the coals by those of us in the âgay communityâ for saying gays are selfish?
âNever once in my 54 years have I ever once heard a gay or lesbian person whoâs politically active say one thing about anything that was not about them. They donât care about minimum wage, they donât care about any other group other than their own self because you know, some people say being gay and lesbian is a totally narcissistic thing and sometimes I wonder,â she said in April on a radio show she co-hosts.
Sheâs got a point, I think. And itâs not a new one, but one that, to me, was illuminated for two hours last night.
I watched the HRC/Logo Democratic presidential debate and truly listened to each candidate. Iâve watched other debates before, and confess Iâd often get bored and tune out. They all have stock answers and I could read the summary in the newspaper the next day anyway.
But last nightâs frank discussion of gay issues, issues that directly affect me, was exciting. Some tough questions â on marriage equality, "Donât Ask, Donât Tell," hate crimes and job protections â were asked. I think we were treated to some new insight into not only these peopleâs stances on gay issues, but also into their characters and personalities.
The candidates each had their âgayâ message planned and delivered it regardless of the question, like any other debate. But there were also some very revealing truths unveiled.
Didnât you just cringe when New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson essentially said being gay is a choice? Ouch. But, yes, he does have a strong track record for fighting for us as he quickly pointed out. And, you know, for some of us, it is a choice.
Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois plugging himself talking to black ministers about homophobia in the black church, and how this needs to be overcome as one way to stem the tide of the high number of AIDS cases among African Americans, was interesting and powerful.
I knew Rep. Dennis Kucinich, from the heartland of Ohio, was the perfect candidate because, like Washington Post editorial writer Jonathan Capehart noted, thereâs nothing we could ask for that he wouldnât support. His going on about love and interconnectedness of the nation was nice to hear and see, if not a bit goofy and over the top. It would be fascinating to have him as the person in charge of this country.
Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York taking on Melissa Etheridgeâs question about gays being thrown âunder the busâ during her husbandâs administration made for a good TV moment. But Hillary Clinton held her own and even faced a couple of tough questions about gay marriage from HRC President Joe Solmonese, although some say Clinton is his top pick to be the Democratic presidential candidate.
Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, well, he really did look uncomfortable around gay people (although his hair was perfect), even after denying he ever said such a thing. I wish him well on his "journey." We all have to take them. Donât think his will end at the White House, though.
Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel got his 15 minutes, and that was fair. His attacks on the other candidates brought some drama.
But it was during the post-debate discussion where I heard the most interesting question. How come nobody talked about the war in Iraq, the most pressing issue facing our entire country, whether you are gay or straight?
The only person who brought the hot mess of a war up in any serious way was Kucinich, who noted how he opposed the war years ago when nobody agreed with him. And now the majority of the country is on his side.
Each candidate said they support ending DADT, which, in some ways, impacts the war in Iraq. The firing of gay Arabic linguists is the most notable.
But I wonder: If we as LGBT people, a marginalized group, canât incorporate even a couple questions into this âhistoricâ debate that touch other issues facing the marginalized within our own community â the poor, the elderly, the youth â how can we expect to be considered real team players in the fight for equality for everyone?
Truth is, we canât.
Others will argue that last nightâs debate was simply to talk about LGBT topics. We can hear about what the candidates think on the war, the economy, poverty, education, gas prices, stem cell research, etc., during the other mainstream debates. Yes, this is true. But itâs true all these topics are also queer.
Health care for all was brought up, thankfully, because this is an issue that not only affects people living with HIV and AIDS, but everyone. The discussions on medicinal marijuana were also informative to me.
Last night we had a national forum to try to erase the stereotype â however true or false it may be â that all we care about is ourselves and are focused on just gay marriage or DADT.
Transgender issues were touched on, which definitely needed to be â but would this have happened if Susan Stanton hadnât made national headlines after being fired as the city manager of Largo, Fla., for being transgender?
I know plenty of queer people who work on issues facing us other than gay marriage and ENDA, although these issues are important. But even they say those in charge of the âgay movementâ are narrowly focused, and they distance themselves from such groups as the HRC. This is just one area of division within this thing we dub the gay community.
I believe we all took a step forward last night. We all learned a lot. We may even have a better idea who we want to vote for based on how the candidates stand on issues that directly affect us as gay Americans.
But as we gain more political clout, letâs use that clout to raise the many other issues that face us as queers and speak to the interconnectedness that Kucinich so cheerfully, and eloquently, spoke about.
Heâs a dreamer. But if thereâs anything I know about gay people, and this may be a stereotype, too â we like to dream. And dream big.
–
Posted by 4health on 08-15-2007 at 12:08 am
Posted in viewpoint
No Comments »
No comments yet.
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.