Connect with us

Opinions

Duplex Diner pioneer hands over the keys

Hirshfield sparked an ongoing renaissance on high-profile block

Published

on

Eric Hirschfield

Eric Hirshfield opened the 18th & U Duplex Diner in June 1998, which quickly caught on with gay patrons who dubbed it the ā€˜Cheers for Queers.ā€™ (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Eric Hirshfield, the founder and now former owner of 18th & U Duplex Diner, has proven to be, above all else, a gracious and dedicated gentleman entrepreneur.

His recent announcement that he had sold the business spread like a wildfire among the Duplexā€™s network of neighborhood patrons and gay community movers-and-shakers alike. An appropriate reaction for a venue attracting a bevy of local gay men and lesbians and their friends where a portion of deceased LGBT and AIDS activist and Clinton administration official Bob Hattoyā€™s ashes are kept in a martini shaker on a shelf behind the bar.

Following a 13-year anniversary ā€œBAR mitzvahā€ celebration on June 25 heralding a month-long closure to ā€œrefreshā€ the venue and after a series of weekly ā€œRoad Tripā€ signature Thursday night events currently underway at neighboring establishments, long-time Duplex Diner bartender and new owner Kevin Lee will re-open the venue at the end of the month and continue the popular and well-regarded landmark enterprise.

Referring to his decision to quit his job sporting a pocket protector as a civil engineer to open a community restaurant and bar ā€œa seductionā€ that began three years prior to the Duplex Dinerā€™s June 1998 opening, Hirshfield jokes that the hospitality industry is the ā€œworldā€™s second oldest professionā€ ā€” if not the first.

Like a teenager constantly riding his bike down the street in front of a cute neighbor boyā€™s house, Hirshfield would walk by the abandoned property just north of 18th and U streets at the intersection with Florida Avenue, N.W., on the way home from his downtown office, pressing his face against the glass and dreaming of what it would be like to feel passion, excitement and commitment in his professional life.

It didnā€™t matter to him that the object of his affection was more than a little rough around the edges. In fact, the conjoined structures at 2002 and 2004 18th St. had seen better days. The weeds inside the building would grow to the height and thickness of trees in the summer and the hollow shell was rapidly deteriorating.

As a young man intent on chasing his desires, Hirshfield threw caution to the wind and told himself that this was the moment to make his move.

Disapproving neighbors

But the challenges involved in consummating such a relationship in the District often prove to be a cruel mistress, indeed.

Despite the fact that he was proposing to rehabilitate a prominent eyesore located at the southern gateway to the Adams Morgan neighborhood where it rubbed shoulders with Dupont Circle, a small group of area residents was quick to disapprove of this new prospective venture.

In a scene re-enacted to this day across the city, they insisted on intervening in this affair. They knew that local tradition allowed them the opportunity to interrupt the courtship and bestowed upon them the potential to call the whole thing off.

Several years later, Hirshfield would join with hundreds of other local business owners in opposition to small citizens groups and Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) members advocating even more onerous restrictions on local businesses, describing the nearly two-year-long ordeal he had endured under the cityā€™s cumbersome alcohol licensing process.

First testifying before the D.C. Council in 2004 during public hearings on the proposed Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) law revisions, Hirshfield captured the attention of city officials by detailing the outlandish elements of a lengthy so-called ā€œVoluntary Agreementā€ he was forced to sign with a small group of liquor license protestants in order to move forward with his contingency lease and property renovation, eventually opening for business.

The document stipulated, among other things, the hours he could open the front windows facing the steady stream of buses, cars and trucks filling this major transportation artery and commercial intersection lest his patrons generate too much noise. It dictated the exact location of his trash containers and required that he install an ā€œairlockā€ double entrance chamber leading into the small 1,000 square foot establishment.

Confessing his ā€˜sinsā€™

Council members sat up in their seats in rapt attention as Hirshfield freely ā€œconfessed his sinsā€ and announced in a characteristically devilish manner that he was in violation of a number of these stipulations.

His only defense: common sense.

Plus the fact no one had noticed, owing to the reality that these intrusive and nonsensical requirements clearly provided no real or ongoing benefit to those complaining about imagined problems in advance of their existence. Hirshfield learned first-hand that local hospitality business operators in Washington are deemed ā€œguiltyā€ until proven ā€œinnocentā€ in the eyes of the few neighborhood nannies necessary to manipulate and abuse the regulatory system and impose their will with ease, regardless of the actual merit or fairness of their supposed concerns.

Hirshfield went on to illustrate how the arbitrary sales percentage requirements dictating the amount of revenue derived from alcohol vs. food sales are counterintuitive to his business model as both a small neighborhood restaurant and bar.

Explaining that his patrons could order an entire homestyle meal for which the restaurant operation was well-known ā€“ with signature dishes like meatloaf and mac ā€˜n cheese and its popular tater tot side, of which a large number of patrons are worried will not make the new menu version (they will) ā€“ for a modest price, Hirshfield totaled the cost of an adult beverage with the meal and, heaven forbid, another drink (or two) at the bar either before or after.

A guest enjoying the evening and visiting with friends was, in fact, making it harder for the business to comply with the law the longer they hung around. All this despite the patron wanting to support this community business and help it succeed.

Although providing a robust and popular neighborhood eatery serving a wide swath of local demographics ā€” Hirshfield often describes the actual bar top as being ā€œnot a gay bar, not a straight bar, but a curved barā€ which, in fact, it is, and will remain ā€” to this day the business struggles, along with many others, to meet these abstract revenue formulas.

Unintended consequences

Hirshfieldā€™s impassioned public articulateness regarding the issues facing local community small business owners over the years has helped create a virtual industry standoff with alcohol licensing opponents. These efforts have contributed to a growing understanding among city residents that the entire license approval process has remained seriously out of whack.

Looking back on the licensing process he underwent, Hirshfield said that his naivetĆ© was his most advantageous attribute, along with persistence and tenacity ā€” otherwise, he might have just given up. After all, he now reflects, a rational businessperson would have simply moved on.

And therein lies the rub. For all the grousing about unruly crowds and late-night drunken revelers clutching pizza slices at the end of a weekend night overwhelming the sidewalks and spilling onto the streets of Adams Morgan, it is the extraordinarily obtuse and out-of-balance licensing process that discourages both sanguine and successful hospitality industry players from locating in the area.

Cumbersome licensing obstacles and hostile regulatory hoop-jumping required by groups such as the long-notorious Kalorama Citizens Association (KCA) and its miniscule active membership are the creators of these unintended consequences, according to Hirshfield. Add the small ad hoc license protest groups formed to oppose local business applicants along with neighborhood ANCs all too eager to extract their own pound of flesh ā€” all wielding what he refers to as an ā€œInvoluntary Agreementā€ as their weapon of choice and demanding acquiescence to their demands ā€” and soon seasoned and savvy community business operators begin looking elsewhere.

Hirshfield contends that it is these licensing opponents who have, in fact, ā€œmanifested what they sought to eliminate.ā€

Without a marketplace mix of hospitality businesses contributing to each otherā€™s success and providing a blend of offerings, Hirshfield argues, those operating on the edges resort to cheap drinks, plastic cups, and college-age promotions to reap volume sales, larger margins and the ability to pay the bills.

Hirshfield points out ā€” from his perspective as a neighborhood resident, consumer and business owner ā€” that the diverse neighborhood enjoys a long tradition as host to a broad range of responsible establishments and a rich history offering an eclectic mix of cuisines and environments and continues to be a vibrant destination for well-regarded dining and entertainment options.

He believes that the neighborhoodā€™s best days are yet ahead, and that the community will successfully confront the problems it is currently experiencing as a result of the misguided policies of the past.

You might think that a business owner would fear the presence of alternatives in close proximity or be concerned with competition from other establishments.

Not the case in Hirshfieldā€™s mind, as he is quick to point out the long-time contribution that the also gay-owned Lā€™Enfant CafĆ© and Bar French-inspired bistro with its comfortable outdoor seating area next door, the adjacent Bobby Lew Saloon on the opposite side, and the addition of several recently refurbished new businesses across the street, including The Blaguard and the Jack Rose Dining Saloon.

Hirshfield is proud to share in the ongoing development that has transformed this southernmost neighborhood area since those early days of entrepreneurial romance.

That is what it takes to grow a neighborhood and expand the amenities available to residents, Hirshfield said, quoting the adage ā€œa rising tide lifts all boats.ā€

Many would credit his vision and hard work and perseverance with being the anchor that has allowed this to happen over time along the once abandoned and neglected high-profile block that many now refer to simply as ā€œLoMoā€ (for Lower Adams Morgan).

Hirshfieldā€™s future plans

After taking some time off, Hirshfield plans to expand his involvement with business development activities in the area, sharing the lessons he learned the hard way and continuing to be an important part of the neighborhood he loves.

He takes some comfort in observing both that the city government has made progress in streamlining its business permitting departments and that the ABC Board has recently begun to cast a wary eye on those who seek to stand in the way of economic development and a fair and equitable application of alcohol licensing law without undue delay due to frivolous protests.

He hopes that Mayor Vincent Gray will encourage the continuation of these advancements when appointing new members to the ABC Board.

Although not yet detailing any specifics, what most excites Hirshfield is the opportunity to continue to be a part of a dynamic urban locale with a long-irreverent spirit and business camaraderie more akin to collaboration than competition.

In the meantime, his legacy will continue at the soon-to-reopen Duplex Diner under the stewardship of proprietor Kevin Lee ā€” along with the familiar faces that have been key to the venueā€™s longstanding success continuing to serve appreciative ā€œstakeholderā€ patrons. Both Hirshfield and Lee have been quick to assure inquiring customers that the popular and long-serving staff personalities ā€œconveyedā€ with the sale.

New owner Lee has undertaken a ā€œmicro-renovationā€ to give the place a ā€œDiner 2.0ā€ facelift, some menu tweaks, and an expanded wine list. The ā€œTater Totā€ lobby has proven as effective as any big-name K Street special interest advocacy firm, the Madonna-themed bathroom stays, and patrons are invited to submit suggestions on the dinerā€™s Facebook page for a new theme for the other bathroom. Images of the venueā€™s renovation progress will be available on the Facebook page.

An excited Lee wants to honor the successful formula that Hirshfield introduced and nourished while adding some new touches and creating traditions of his own. Most of all he wants to continue what Hirshfield lovingly refers to as a ā€œcool space at a great location, where a popular restaurant and bar happened along the wayā€ ā€” a sort of ā€œCheers for Queersā€ where everyone feels welcome and it doesnā€™t take long for them to remember your name.

Mark Lee is a local small business manager and long-time community business advocate. Reach him at [email protected].

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Vote Democratic or July 4, 2025 will look very different

Bidenā€™s debate performance was bad but the sky is not falling

Published

on

(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

As we celebrate the founding of our country, we must recognize the election on Nov. 5 could dramatically change how our country looks in the future. We can debate whether Joe Biden is the best candidate for Democrats on the ticket, but reality is, whoever the Democratic candidate is, they must defeat Donald Trump. Trump is a racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic pig who was found liable for sexual assault and convicted of 34 felonies. A man who spouts lies every time he opens his mouth. A man who uses Hitlerā€™s words, and said he will be a dictator on his first day in office. A man who said he will seek retribution on any opponent, using the Department of Justice and IRS to do his dirty work. 

Yes, President Joe Biden had a disastrous debate, and many pundits are calling for him to step down as the candidate. They are having a field day doing so, because none of them are involved in the process that would follow. None of them mention the two times in recent history, Democratic presidents chose to not run for a second term, Lyndon Johnson and Harry Truman, a Republican won. This time the Republican alternative is the disgusting, evil, Donald Trump. Even the New York Times editorial board, when calling for Biden to step aside as a candidate, wrote, ā€œIf the race comes down to a choice between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, the sitting president would be this boardā€™s unequivocal pick. That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses.ā€

The simple truth is Biden feels he can win, and wonā€™t step aside. The only person who could convince him to do so, is his wife, Jill Biden, and she has shown she will not do that. She reminds me a little of Nancy Reagan, who protected her husband when he had issues with cognition. 

What all Americans need to understand, is no American president makes decisions on their own, without massive consultation with advisers. They donā€™t meet foreign dignitaries alone, but with advisers. And President Biden has shown he has the most incredible group of advisers around him, maybe with the exception of those who prepared him for this debate. 

I have loads of questions for them. If President Biden had a cold as claimed, why didnā€™t they tell him to begin his first statement of the debate with an apology to the audience. Something like, ā€œI want to take a moment to apologize to the TV audience on how my voice is today, and how it will sound to you. I have a severe cold and will sound raspier, and slower, but of course feeling a little ill would not keep me from being here today.ā€ It could have changed the tenor of the debate. It would not have excused his poor performance, but may have given people a few thoughts in his favor. Then there was the closing two minutes. How is it possible the president wasnā€™t coached on ending the debate with the issues he has said he believes will win for Democrats: abortion, climate change, and saving democracy? The debate prep team kept him cloistered for a week; seems they could be sued for malpractice. 

Again, it was a disastrous debate for President Biden. But then rather than what the pundits are saying, grassroots Democrats are responding with money. The Biden campaign reported Saturday that it raised $27 million on Thursday and Friday. The hour after the debate ended was its best grassroots fundraising hour since Biden kicked off his reelection campaign, per the Hill

So contrary to the all the pundits, the sky is not falling. Yes, there is a lot more work to do than before the debate. But the focus for all Democrats, and all decent people, must be to ensure we donā€™t reelect Trump, because of what he would do to our country. How his election would change us. How if he did what he says, and tries to return all decisions on just about everything, to the states, it is not only women who must be scared. It is Blacks, the LGBTQ+ community, every minority; and young people who will live longest with the results of doing nothing to ameliorate climate change. They should all be very scared.

So happy 4th and hereā€™s to hoping Americans are smart enough to vote correctly, and ensure July 4, 2025 will be just as happy. 

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Continue Reading

Opinions

A confused Biden and a deranged Trump

Sad state of affairs after first presidential debate

Published

on

Former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden debate on CNN on Jun 27, 2024. (Screen captures via CNN)

Joe Biden was clearly ready with some facts for this debate, the sad part is he couldnā€™t articulate them. He sounded raspy, and lost track of what he was saying in the first few minutes of the debate. He did get better as the debate progressed but came off sounding and looking like an old man. For those of us hoping he would sound like he did at the State of the Union, or the speech he gave on anti-Semitism, it was a huge disappointment. 

So, where his campaign goes from here is anyoneā€™s guess. Behind the scenes some Democrats are calling for him to step down as the candidate. But that is much more difficult than it seems at this time. And then, will there be a fight for who the candidate will be. Will it automatically be Kamala Harris, or will it be someone else?  So many unanswered questions over the next couple of weeks.

The only positive take-away for Democrats from the debate was how deranged Donald Trump sounded. He refused to deal with any issue, refused to say he would accept the results of this election, refused to acknowledge climate change, or Jan. 6, and kept saying how the states should control the issue of abortion, and womenā€™s health. Every one of these things should be frightening to so many people. It is clear if Trump is elected, we will have a dictator in the White House, who believes Hitler did good things. His election is scary for women, young people, Black Americans, and the LGBTQ community. If states control issues related to any of these groups, they are screwed. 

One of the very few good lines Biden got across was when he said 40 high-level Trump appointees, members of the Cabinet, and his vice president, have refused to endorse him as they know him best. People need to take their word for how bad he will be should he be reelected. Trump kept talking nonsense and it was hard to keep up with the lies. The moderators didnā€™t call him on any of it, but CNN has said before the debate they wouldnā€™t. But then Biden missed so many chances to call him on the garbage he was spouting. I kept hoping he would turn to him and say clearly, ā€œYou canā€™t believe all the BS you are spouting. You sound like a deranged six-year-old and someone who would take our country down the tubes.ā€

Now I accept the fact Biden speaks more slowly and softly. Though after the debate they said he had a cold. He could have said that at the beginning of the debate, if it was true, and explained his voice to the audience. And while we know he has a stutter, it seemed so much worse during the debate than it normally does. Was it nerves, maybe, but difficult nonetheless for him, and for those listening. We must have compassion for anyone with any kind of a disability. Then one had to ask, was he over-prepared for this debate? Was he so scripted he didnā€™t dare say anything off script. When he did, they got into this thing about golf handicaps and both sounded so childish. 

Biden did manage to talk about the things he has done, and the successes of his first administration. There have been many. First bringing the country successfully out of the pandemic. He spoke about unemployment being the lowest it has been in decades, and the more than 15 million jobs created since he took office. He was honest about inflation and the fact that not all the economic successes the country is having are trickling down to every American. He understands that rents are high, and grocery bills are still too high. He made clear he wants to raise taxes on the rich and Trump wants to lower them. He had a plan to ensure Social Security would stay solvent, Trump had nothing as usual. 

Finally, I was surprised that in his two-minute closing, Biden didnā€™t go back to the issues of abortion, climate change, and saving democracy. Did his debate prep team tell him not to? If so, they were wrong. Whether it remains Joe Biden on the ticket, or is someone else, I am 1,000% committed to do everything I can to see Democrats are elected across the board. It is clear to me, and should be to all decent people, electing Donald Trump and his MAGA Republicans, will be the end of our country as we know it today.Ā 

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Continue Reading

Opinions

As fewer anti-LGBTQ bills pass, the fight gets harder

A growing indifference to suffering that is baked into the legal system

Published

on

(Photo by Proxima Studio/Bigstock)

In recent years, advocates have faced an unprecedented avalanche of anti-LGBTQ legislation each spring. In 2024, however, the onslaught seems to have faltered somewhat. While hundreds of anti-LGBTQ bills were once again introduced, as many state legislative sessions draw to a close, fewer bills have been enacted into law.

While that may seem like cause for celebration, itā€™s also cause for concern.

To be sure, the slowdown in anti-LGBTQ legislation is welcome. Beginning in 2020, legislation targeting transgender rights in particular had sailed through state legislatures, with the number and scope of hostile bills increasing each year. Unlike earlier years when one or two prominent anti-LGBTQ bills triggered a national pushback that often chastened lawmakers, hundreds of bills have been introduced during legislative sessions in the last four years, often with little debate or scrutiny, and dozens of them zealously passed into law.

Those bills do real damage when they are enacted, cutting LGBTQ people off from material benefits like health care and domestic violence sheltersrecognition by the state, and equal participation in public life. Even when they fail to become law, they have devastating effects on the mental health of LGBTQ people, throwing their lives into disarray and sapping valuable time and energy from LGBTQ communities. This especially affects children, with more than 90 percent of LGBTQ young people in a recent Trevor Project survey reporting that politics had negatively affected their personal well-being.

But the recent slowdown, far from being a positive signal, may well reflect a growing indifference to the suffering of LGBTQ people that is now baked into the political and legal system. Opponents of LGBTQ rights have normalized hostile rhetoric and enacted draconian laws that seemed unthinkable just a couple of years ago, and even ardent supporters of equality find themselves unsure how they might reverse state laws that unapologetically strip away LGBTQ rights.

If anything, it has become apparent that the damage that has been done since 2020 will most likely reverberate for a generation, and the past year shows that restoring and advancing LGBTQ rights will be a painstaking endeavor.

And one sobering reason for the slowing pace of anti-LGBTQ legislation is that, at this point, many conservative states have already stripped away important rights, particularly for transgender children. As of 2024, half of the states in the U.S. prohibit transgender girls from playing school sports, and half have banned or criminalized at least some forms of medically indicated healthcare.

Put differently, lawmakers arenā€™t targeting some rights this year because theyā€™ve already eviscerated them.

Yet even as the pace of legislation slows, critical rights continue to be stripped away. According to the ACLU, more than 30 anti-LGBTQ bills have been enacted in 2024 ā€” fewer than the 84 enacted in 2023, but still far too many. Among them, Utah and Mississippi restricted transgender people from accessing bathrooms and locker rooms in public schools and other government buildings.

Lawmakers in Ohio overrode the governorā€™s veto to ban transgender children from receiving gender-affirming care or playing sports consistent with their gender identity. South Carolina and Wyoming similarly enacted blanket bans preventing transgender children from accessing gender-affirming care.

Many of the bills that have been introduced this year sought to expand existing anti-LGBTQ legislation in new ways. Alabama, for example, successfully expanded its bathroom ban from K-12 schools to colleges and universities. Even those that didnā€™t pass are in many cases likely to be reintroduced after the 2024 election, particularly if anti-LGBTQ lawmakers increase their showing in state legislatures or if governors who are supportive of LGBTQ rights are no longer positioned to veto hostile legislation.

In many states with anti-LGBTQ legislation, administrative and regulatory agencies are being used to curtail LGBTQ rights even further. Florida offers an instructive example. Even after years of anti-LGBTQ legislation, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles took things a step further within its mandate, and decided in 2024 that transgender people could no longer update the gender marker on their driverā€™s licenses. This echoes recent regulatory crackdowns elsewhere in the United States, from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services investigating parental support for transgender children as child abuse to school boards across the country stripping away lifesaving resources in schools.

And while many believed that courts would provide a bulwark against discriminatory legislation and regulations, in part because of strong Supreme Court precedent to suggest that anti-transgender discrimination is a form of sex discrimination, that has not consistently been the case. Trial courts have largely found in favor of transgender litigants, criticizing the insufficient justification and discriminatory purpose of anti-transgender laws, but some appellate courts have nevertheless allowed the laws to take effect.

Perhaps most alarming, there are advocates and lawmakers who, if in a position to do so, are eager to carry out an even harsher attack on LGBTQ rights. Project 2025, which a group of conservative organizations has drafted as a roadmap for a second Trump administration, promises an even more draconian attack on LGBTQ rights. This would include rolling back existing nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people, reinstating the transgender military ban, and codifying state restrictions on transgender rights at the federal level, in addition to limiting recognition of same-sex relationships.

The anti-LGBTQ backlash may be waning in certain respects ā€” but in other ways, it has only just begun. As we celebrate Pride, LGBTQ people and their allies should be mindful of the need to support those communities whose rights are being eroded, invest in transgender rights organizing, demand that lawmakers prioritize LGBTQ rights, and fight for the independent institutions and protections for basic freedoms that are essential to hold power to account.

Ryan Thoreson is a specialist on LGBTQ rights at Human Rights Watch and teaches at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular