Connect with us

National

‘Don’t Ask’ could get ‘more humane’ guidelines this week

Service members threatened with potential discharge under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” may

Published

on

Defense Secretary Robert Gates (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key).

Service members threatened with potential discharge under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” may soon be able to breathe easier after Pentagon lawyers complete their assessment on finding a “more humane” way to implement the law.

The assessment, due for completion this week, is taking place because Defense Secretary Robert Gates tasked the Pentagon’s Office of the General Counsel to review the regulations for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to see if the Department of Defense could implement the law in a fairer manner.

After asking last year for a preliminary assessment for what he called a potentially “more humane” policy, Gates announced before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Feb. 2 the review would be complete in 45 days. Earlier this month, Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon’s top lawyer, said during congressional testimony the assessment would be finished on or around March 19.

But what these final changes will entail is unknown because information about them isn’t public. The Defense Department didn’t respond to DC Agenda’s request to comment on the new regulations.

Also unknown is the timing for when the Pentagon will unveil these changes, as well as how long it would take for Gates to implement them once he receives the recommendations.

Repeal advocates say they’re unsure what Pentagon lawyers will ultimately produce, but have issued recommendations for changing the application of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” under the current statute.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said his organization provided the Defense Department in July with a list of possible changes that could be made.

Among these changes are mandating evidence when a possible violation of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” comes from a fellow service member and not a civilian; eliminating anonymous tips as the basis for the start of an inquiry; and requiring that alleged homosexual conduct on which any discharge is based occurs after a service member joined the armed forces.

“And actually, Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen referred to all six of those at the Feb. 2 hearing, but we don’t have any concrete intelligence as to what Mr. Johnson may or may not be recommending to the secretary,” Sarvis said.

During that testimony, Gates raised some possibilities on what the changes could entail. He said the Pentagon could raise the level of the officer who initiates or conducts inquiries, as well as what constitutes a credible source to start an investigation.

Gates also told lawmakers the Defense Department can “reduce the instances” in which a service member is outed by a third party under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the actual benefit to gay soldiers of eliminating third-party outings is unknown because reliable information on why service members are expelled isn’t available.

“Anybody can sort of venture to guess based on their experience and anecdotal evidence,” he said. “But it’s really hard to do that with authority or credibility because we don’t have any statistics on how many discharges are the result of self-initiated outings, how many are the results of third-party outings and how many are the result of behavior being discovered.”

Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, a think-tank on gays in the military at the University of California, Santa Barbara, said if such changes are enacted, it would eliminate important problems, but still wouldn’t address other issues.

“One is you’re not going to be able to eliminate all discharges,” he said. “Two, as long as the law is on the books, you’ll still have the sword hanging over gay people’s heads, and it’s that sword that makes it difficult for them to do their job.”

Belkin said new regulations also won’t change how “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” damages the military “symbolically and reputationally” simply by being on the books.

During the Feb. 2 hearing, Gates said as part of these changes the Pentagon would “devise new rules and procedures” in light of the 2008 Ninth Court of Appeals ruling in Witt v. Air Force, which challenged the constitutionality of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The decision, which was construed to only apply to the plaintiff, determined the Pentagon needed to prove lesbian Maj. Margaret Witt’s sexual orientation was a detriment to unit cohesion in order to discharge her from the Air Force.

Applying the heightened Witt standard on a national basis was one of SLDN’s recommendations for a change under current law. Sarvis said such an application would help the Defense Department “create uniformity” in all “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” discharge cases.

But Belkin said he doesn’t think the Pentagon would apply the Witt standard on a national basis because it would be too big of a change.

“I would doubt that the Defense Department would take a judicial ruling that applies to one circuit and use regulation to expand its scope to the whole military,” he said. “I think that’s too big of a step for a regulatory tweak.”

Whatever changes the Pentagon makes, advocates maintain legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is the only way to properly address the law.

If the Pentagon implements the changes SLDN recommended, Sarvis said it would “go a long ways,” but “wouldn’t diminish the need for Congress to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Sarvis said legislative repeal is particularly needed so any conservative administration following President Obama couldn’t reverse the changes made under the existing statute.

“The next secretary and a new administration could come along and make revisions that he or she may feel they have authority for under the current statute,” he said. “That’s why I go back to changes to the regulations are not a substitute for repealing the statute.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

TransTech Social removing barriers to trans success

‘Technology was the key to my freedom’

Published

on

From left, TransTech members B Hawk Snipes, E.C. Pizarro III, Ang R Bennett, and Adrian Elim. (Photo by Lexi Webster Photography)

It is common knowledge that women earn 84% of the average worker. Less common knowledge? Trans women earn 60% of the average worker. Trans men and non-binary people come in at around 70%, while 16% of all trans people make less than $10,000 annually. 

E.C. Pizarro was lucky, and he knew it. He had a BFA in graphic design and had taught himself how to code. As a stealth trans man in a corporate job, he had access to a stable wage and good benefits. “People that do not have experiences in corporate America or with equitable employment don’t realize [these things] are privileges that a lot of people don’t have access to.” 

He wanted to give back and was gearing up to bring more volunteer work into his life by participating in a fraternity for trans men. When he went to a TransTech event and learned about the educational and career resources for trans people who face barriers to entering the workforce, he knew he had found his place. 

At the event he met, Angelica Ross. Yes, that Angelica Ross, of “Pose” and “American Horror Story.”

Before she was Candy, Ross was a self-taught coder. She went from posing for an adult website to doing its back-end coding to teaching her trans siblings how to succeed in tech. 

“Technology was the key to my freedom,” Ross said in an interview with The Plug. “Technology took me from being exploited on someone’s website to building my own websites and to building websites for other people and getting paid to do so.”

Pizarro was impressed and wanted to help. “I went up to Angelica and I was like ‘Hey, I’m a trans man. These are my skills. I’m down to volunteer and do any type of work—the one caveat is that I’m stealth. You can’t tell anybody that I’m trans.’”

For four years, Pizarro helped from mostly behind the scenes, sometimes getting side-eyed since people thought he was a cis man in trans spaces. “I was still stealth as the Director of Social Media and Communications for the National Trans Visibility March in 2019,” Pizarro says, chuckling a little.

But by that point, Ross — who headlined the 2019 march — was overextended trying to balance being a world-famous actress, advocate, and businesswoman. 

She needed someone to step in as executive director of TransTech and looked to the group of dedicated volunteers. Pizarro was elected by his peers to take the reins of the organization. 

This was a turning point for Pizarro. “I’m very passionate about tech and for me a small sacrifice of being open with my trans experience to liberate other trans people,” he said. “I felt like if that’s something I got to do, then I’m gonna do it.”

And he did it. The infrastructure Ross put together worked: with mentorship, education, community, and networking with trans-accepting employers, trans people were gaining financial security and independence. 

So, Pizarro focused on expanding TransTech as widely as possible. “We have grown exponentially over the last three years,” he says. “When I took over in 2021, we had about 800 members based in the United States. Now we support over 6,700 members across 50 countries.”

TransTech is filling a demonstrated need within specifically the trans community. New research from LGBT Tech found that 68% of transgender adults use the internet to find LGBTQ-friendly employment (compared to 38% of cisgender LGBTQ+ adults). More than 70% of all LGBTQ adults use the Internet to access educational content.

Accessibility is central to the TransTech programming. Despite the growth, everything remains free. “There’s no membership fee. All of our programming is free. All of the certifications and educational resources are free,” Pizarro says. 

They know the financial burden the trans community faces — 29% of trans adults live in poverty. “If we’re asking anyone to up-skill [for a cost] and these are the things they are going through, we are asking them to invest in their future versus their meal today.” 

Pizarro believes that accessibility is more than just making the training free. He wants the community to understand that tech work is something they are innately capable of doing. 

“TransTech was built on the foundation of nontraditional tech. It’s not always coding. It’s graphic design. It’s social media. It’s video editing. It’s anything that uses a piece of technology and nowadays almost everything uses a piece of technology,” says Pizarro.

He emphasizes to participants: “You’re in tech and you don’t even know it,” pointing out how many already utilize tech skills like marketing and monetization with their social media accounts.

Some people involved in the programming are nervous about entering the “tech world” because of headlines about tech layoffs. He makes sure to emphasize that unlike in some other jobs, tech companies often pay generous severance packages, which gives employees “breathing room.” Pizzaro explains that “once you have experience with one tech company, you can go someplace else and make a substantial amount of money as well.” 

While TransTech is designed for the gender-diverse community, the programming is open to everyone Pizarro explains. “We just ask that you don’t be transphobic.” (Or any of the other -phobics too, he says, listing them off.) He also emphasizes that this allows trans members who are not out to comfortably participate. 

Pizarro wants everyone to understand that they don’t just belong in tech, but they make tech better. “Tech is most profitable when you have diverse people building the tech and using the tech,” Pizarro says. “There is an intentional funding as well as support to diversity tech because they understand how that impacts the product.”

He also reminds participants that they have developed transferrable skills in every part of their lives. “I like to tell people if you can manage your life as a trans person in the United States or anywhere you can manage a project.”

Angelica Ross was a self-taught coder before she hit it big with ‘Pose.’ (Washington Blade file photo by Linus Berggren)
Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Fire by arson forced temporary shutdown of Glorious Health Club

Spa and art gallery catering to gay
men expects to reopen in August

Published

on

(Photo from Glorious Health Club's Facebook page)

In a little noticed development, D.C.’s Glorious Health Club, which bills itself as a spa, art gallery, and community center catering to gay men, was forced to close on May 19 after one or more unidentified suspects ignited a fire inside the club that D.C. fire department officials have ruled an act of arson. 

Robert Siegel, the club’s owner, told the Washington Blade that he and investigators with the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department believe one or more yet unidentified suspects broke into the kitchen of the former warehouse building where the club is located at 2120 West Virginia Ave., N.E.  

According to Siegel, investigators with the fire department’s arson squad believe a flammable liquid was used to start the fire in the kitchen and in two other locations within the building.

“Three separate fires were started,” Siegel said. “They started one on a staircase and one on the upstairs storage area,” he said in addition to the one in the kitchen. He said about 40 patrons were in the club at the time the fire started, and all were able to leave without injury. 

Siegel said the fire caused $500,000 worth of damage to his building, with some of the damage caused — understandably he said — by fire fighters who had to rip open doors and break through the roof to gain access to the flames that engulfed parts of the interior of the building. He said he arranged for repair work to begin after the fire was extinguished.

“I expect we’ll be reopening in about a month from now,” he said. “And we’ll be a bigger and better place.”

Fortunately, Siegel said, most of the artwork and art exhibits located in the club were not damaged.

“It was basically the kitchen, patio, and the roof,” he said, adding that much of the solar panels he had on the roof were destroyed by the fire or by firefighters seeking to gain access to the building. 

“And the fire was so hot it did structural damage to the roof,” he said. “It actually melted steel. We’re talking about 50-foot steel beams that have to be replaced,” he told the Blade. “That’s $100,000 right there.” 

Vito Maggiolo, a spokesperson for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, said the fire was “ruled incendiary/arson” and is “under active investigation.” 

It could not immediately be determined if one or more people responsible for the fire targeted the Glorious Health Club because it’s a gay community establishment. 

Continue Reading

National

House Republicans propose steep cuts in federal AIDS budget

Advocacy groups say move would eliminate ‘Ending HIV Epidemic’ initiative

Published

on

The Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative was launched during the administration of President Donald Trump.

The Republican-controlled U.S. House Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies approved a spending bill on June 26 that calls for cutting at least $419 million from federal AIDS programs that AIDS activists say would have a devastating impact on efforts to greatly reduce the number of new HIV infections by 2030.

The subcommittee’s proposed bill, which includes billions of dollars in cuts in a wide range of other federal health, education, and human services related programs, is scheduled to be considered by the full House Appropriations Committee on July 10. Officials with AIDS advocacy groups say they are hopeful that the full committee, like last year, will refuse to approve the proposed cuts in the AIDS budget.

The proposed GOP cuts would eliminate $214 million from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s HIV prevention programs, $190 million from the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, and $15 million from the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary’s Minority HIV/AIDS Program.

Activists say the impact of those cuts would kill the federal government’s Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative, which among other things, calls for reducing the number of new HIV infections in the U.S. by 75 percent by 2025 and by 90 percent by 2030. The activists point out that ironically the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative was launched during the administration of President Donald Trump.

 “Instead of providing new investments in ending HIV by increasing funding for testing, prevention programs, such as PrEP, and life-saving care and treatment, House Republicans are again choosing to go through a worthless exercise of cutting programs that the American people depend on and will never pass,” said Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute.

“While we vigorously fight these cuts, we look forward to working with the entire Congress in a bipartisan fashion on spending bills that can actually become law,” Schmid said in a statement.

 Schmid noted that the bill also includes provisions known as “policy riders” that would take away rights and protections from women, such as access to birth control and abortion, and for minorities, including LGBTQ people.

According to a statement released by the office of Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who is the ranking minority member of the House Appropriations Committee, one of the policy riders would “block the Biden administration’s policies to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation.’  The statement says another policy rider would “prevent policies or programs intended to promote diversity, equality, or inclusion.”

Most political observers believe the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate would also kill the GOP proposed policy riders and cuts in the AIDS budget if the full Republican-controlled House were to approve the budget bill passed by the appropriations subcommittee.

Rep, Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who serves as chair of the full House Appropriations Committee, released a statement on June 27 defending the  subcommittee’s bill and its proposed spending cuts. “The bill provides appropriate and fiscally responsible funding to ensure these departments can continue to perform their core missions while also acknowledging the fiscal realities facing our nation,” he said.

“Importantly, the bill pushes back on the Biden administration’s out-of-touch progressive policy agenda, preventing this White House from finalizing or implementing controversial rules or executive orders,” Cole said in his statement. “It also preserves long standing bipartisan policy provisions protecting the right to life.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular