Connect with us

Opinions

Re-elect Jim Graham for Ward One Council

Time to move past negativity and focus on best interests of city

Published

on

Jim Graham, D.C. Council, District of Columbia, Ward One, gay news, Washington Blade
Jim Graham, D.C. Council, District of Columbia, Ward One, gay news, Washington Blade

D.C. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) (Washington Blade file photo by Jeff Surprenant)

By ALAN ROTH

LGBTQ voters in Ward One have a profound choice to make in the April 1 primary. That’s because when a new D.C. Council is sworn in next January, it will lack an openly gay Council member for the first time in nearly 18 years — unless Jim Graham is re-elected.

With Jim being challenged by someone who has no real record or experience beyond the narrow boundaries of her former ANC single member district, and with David Catania giving up his at-large seat to run for mayor, now is the time for LGBTQ voters in the Ward to focus seriously on an old political adage: ā€œIf you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.ā€

Simply put, that adage reminds us there is no substitute for being represented by one of our own — someone who, like Jim Graham, has lived what we have lived, experienced what we have experienced, and will never allow those personal life lessons to be cast aside for reasons of political expediency.

It also means that if we aren’t ā€œat the tableā€ as part of the decision making process, other politicians with other constituencies to serve are liable to be carving up our interests like a Thanksgiving turkey when the hard decisions (like funding for programs essential to our community) have to be made.

Earlier this year, the Advocate named D.C. the gayest city in America. It’s therefore difficult to imagine a D.C. Council without a single LGBT Council member — someone with whom we would be able to have open, honest discussions about our issues and concerns when they arise.

Before his election to the Council, Jim led the Whitman-Walker Clinic for more than 15 years, providing HIV/AIDS-related, STD, and other health services when few others would.Ā On the Council, he has obviously been a leader on LGBTQ issues. His knowledge, understanding and support of our community’s concerns is not only unquestioned, it is unparalleled.

As a former Adams Morgan ANC member and chair, I can attest personally to Jim’s devotion to his Ward and his commitment to providing the best constituent service in the Wilson Building. By contrast, most of what we’ve heard from Jim’s opponent turns primarily on innuendo and negativity.

So let me confront the ā€œethics issueā€ head on, because I know it’s on some people’s minds, and let’s begin here: After more than two years of public discussion and Post editorializing, no prosecutor has ever charged Jim with any crime; the one civil lawsuit filed against him was dismissed; and not even his opponent has alleged that a penny of public or private money has found its way into his pockets.

If you’ve actually read the reports of the Ethics Board and the Cadwalader law firm hired by WMATA, you could well conclude, as I have, that Jim in fact had the best interests of his Ward One constituents at heart when he questioned a certain bidder’s interest in developing the Florida Avenue Metro property involved in the most serious allegations against him.

Cadwalader’s report said many of Jim’s objections to the bidder and one of its principals ā€œappear to have been based on legitimate concerns with public safety and welfare. For example, Graham was concerned with [that principal’s] reputation as a landlord as well as his ownership of a club in Ward 1 that had lost its license to operate due to a fatal stabbing of a club patron.Ā  Moreover, Council member Graham appeared genuinely concerned throughout the joint development process with the development experience and expertise of [this bidder] – legitimate concerns that manifested themselves in the outcome of the process.ā€

Perhaps there were better ways to go about all this. Still, I don’t have any doubt that Jim’s intent was to protect his Ward. Did he do it to benefit himself personally? The Cadwalader report certainly found no evidence of that.

It’s time for us to move on. Let’s focus on what’s best for Ward One and D.C.’s LGBTQ community over the next four years. Keeping our strongest representative on the D.C. Council by re-electing Jim Graham certainly beats being listed ā€œon the menuā€ by relying on the platitudes and innuendo of an ambitious wannabe.

Alan Roth is a former chair of the Adams Morgan ANC, a current member of the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority board of directors, a member of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club and a member of Friends of Vernon Street.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Brad’s Story: An Unexpected Diagnosis

From Boston Qualifier to Heart Transplant Survivor

Published

on

Brad Tennis (left) with his husband Drew Roberts.

Brad Tennis loves running. For years, the meditative rhythm of his feet on pavement brought him peace like nothing else could. And it turns out, he was quite good at running as he  even qualified for the Boston Marathon. But while Brad was chasing his goals, unbeknownst to him, his heart was slowly deteriorating.

In November 2018, out of the blue, Brad was diagnosed with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy or ARVC, a rare heart condition that causes the heart muscle to break down over time. ARVC increases the risk of abnormal heartbeats and chance of sudden cardiac death. Brad was fitted with an internal defibrillator and told he could no longer run. Doctors warned him that endurance exercise would only accelerate the disease.

After processing the news of this condition, Brad felt like himself for a while. But in 2020, he started experiencing Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) shocks to halt life threatening arrhythmias. Despite numerous surgical and medical interventions, the shocks began to get more frequent. By 2023, the toll of the disease, the ICD shocks and the treatments led to progressing heart failure. By the end of 2023, he was feeling breathless on stairs, having trouble playing physically with his children and finding it difficult to keep up at work. His world was shrinking.

In February 2024, Brad started the process with Johns Hopkins Hospital to be listed for a heart transplant. A couple of weeks later, he had another shock, more testing and then a doctor put him on ECMO (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), a life support machine that is used when a person’s heart is failing. Soon after, he got the news of a lifetime: ā€œThere’s a heart available and today is the day!ā€

The organ transplant marked the beginning of a new journey. Brad focused on recovery — building up his strength, learning his new body and adjusting to life with a new heart. Last summer, he was cleared to exercise again and is enjoying playing with his kids — something he deeply missed.

“I would never say I’m back to feeling normal. I’m always going to have to carefully manage my stress and my activities to protect my health and my new heart,ā€ said Brad. ā€œBut the transplant was lifesaving and means that I will be there to build a life with my husband and my kids.”

Brad is still moving forward. He and his family are enjoying life again — and he’s even bought a new pair of sneakers with the hope that he’ll be able to return to running regularly.

ā€œOrgan donation and transplant have reopened doors that I had thought were closed forever,ā€ Brad shares. ā€œIt’s given me the chance to be present and have a full, happy life with my husband, son and daughter.ā€

His husband, Drew, adds, ā€œEvery day, I’m reminded of Brad’s strength, resilience and bravery.ā€

Brad doesn’t take this lifesaving gift for granted and is grateful to his organ donor hero. ā€œI think it’s an amazing thing — to give life and give hope. Even in tragedy, someone gave me a gift… a second chance. Everyone can register to be a donor and save lives like Brad’s at infinitelegacy.org. 

Continue Reading

Commentary

Fight against TERFs goes global

UK Supreme Court on April 17 ruled legal definition of ā€˜woman’ limited to ā€˜biological sex’

Published

on

Transgender activists protest in Sheffield, England, on April 19, 2025. (Courtesy photo)

After last week’s U.K. Supreme Court ruling that reduced the legal definition of ā€œwomanā€ to ā€œbiological sex,ā€ footage of a group of women celebrating the decision with champagne spread virally across the media. These women are known as trans-exclusionary radical feminists, or TERFs. 

In response, thousands of transgender people and their allies — including parents, siblings, and pro-trans celebrities — flooded the streets of London, Sheffield, Manchester, Cardiff, and other cities across the U.K. on April 19, to protest the erosion of trans rights. The fight between TERFs and trans* people have become more visible to those outside of the British LGBTQ+ community.

But this isn’t just about the U.K. The problem has gone global. For me, as an openly trans person who has lived in four different countries, it feels deeply personal.

For years, British TERFs have been spreading misinformation about gender around the globe, collaborating with far-right politicians and inspiring anti-trans violence.

At a pro-trans protest I attended in Sheffield, one of the speakers, Sofia Alatorre, a trans woman from Mexico now living in the U.K., dedicated her speech to the ways British TERFs, with their powerful movement supported by celebrities, such as ā€œHarry Potterā€ author JK Rowling, are influencing people in South America.

ā€œWhen I go to Mexico now, I don’t just hear people talking about transsexuals as degenerates anymore. Instead I hear about what bathroom we should use, or whether we belong in sports,ā€ Sofia told the Washington Blade. ā€œThese are not lines that come from Mexico. They are finely crafted narratives designed to drive a wedge by weaponizing ā€˜common sense’ gut reactions to complicated subjects. Because without these, they’d have to face the uncomplicated reality: We are just people trying to live our lives happily. In the U.K., the entire media infrastructure is sympathetic with ā€˜gender critical’ TERF ideology to the point that sympathy blurs into outright support. With these lines finding footing in the Global South, it seems clear that the U.K. has become an exporter of transphobia.ā€

Unfortunately, TERFs even showed up at a trans event, attempting to argue with the speakers. 

One of the trans* organizers of the Sheffield demonstration, who preferred to remain anonymous, expressed their love for the trans* community and trans* people. They emphasized that they are not expressing hatred toward TERFs — they simply want them to reconsider their position.

ā€œIf you’re a TERF and reading this, we don’t hate you,ā€ they said. ā€œWe don’t hate you. There is nothing I hold in my heart but deep pity for you. You do not know the community of love that we have as transsexuals, and you only know your community of hatred. If you are tired of feeling nothing but hate, come and talk to us, we’re nice, I promise. This protest is a rallying cry that we can’t lose, that we are all here for each other, and that we can do whatever the f*ck we want when we work together. We may be out here today in rage, but what keeps us alive is love.ā€

But it doesn’t seem like TERFs are ready to show love toward trans people — or to see trans women as their sisters. At our local protest in Sheffield, they were so agitated, jumping toward speakers and trying to engage with them, that the police had to intervene and remove them to prevent a fight. It reminded me of TERFs’ behavior I encountered in St. Petersburg, Russia, and in Russian-language online spaces.

Unfortunately, it’s not just South America that has been influenced by UK TERFs. The country I currently live in is known within European and U.S. queer communities as ā€œTERF Island.ā€

Some trans Americans even avoid traveling to the U.K., afraid of the influence that Rowling holds over millions due to her wealth and cultural impact.

In Russia, Ukraine, and other Eastern European countries, so-called ā€œradical feminismā€ is the most prominent feminist movement. Radical feminism, which emerged in the 1960s, is based on the belief that patriarchy is the root of all other forms of oppression.

In modern Eastern Europe, this has led to a situation where many feminists fail to acknowledge racism, ableism, and transphobia — excluding everyone except cisgender people, Slavic, atheist, and able-bodied people from their movement. Historically, radical feminists have not focused much on the trans* community, but with the rise of trans* activism in the 2000s, many became fixated on targeting trans people.

Many of my Russian-speaking trans friends have been badly bullied by local TERFs. Some even experienced suicidal thoughts and severe anxiety due to online harassment from them. And these TERFs weren’t developing their ideology locally — they were importing it. The anti-man rhetoric was inherited from American prominent radical feminists like Andrea Dworkin and Ti-Grace Atkinson, while the transphobic elements were ā€œexportedā€ to Eastern Europe, primarily from the U.K. and specifically Scotland.

Even before Rowling, there was Magdalen Berns, a Scottish TERF YouTuber who was extremely popular among Russian girls and women. It was Berns who helped bring Rowling into anti-trans activism.

I spoke with Sophie Molly, a Scottish trans activist and politician who ran as an Independent MP candidate in the 2024 U.K. general election for the Aberdeen South constituency. 

TERFs ruthlessly harassed her during her campaign.

ā€œTransphobia is institutionalized in the UK. It is systemic and it’s getting worse with each passing dayā€ she told me. ā€œLocal TERF have a slew of legal professionals on their team too. Like Sarah Phillimore and Joanne Cherry. TERFs have been continually lobbying the government to oppress trans and gender non-conforming people. Dragging their rights and freedoms through the courts. All under the pretense of protecting the rights of women. In reality these conservative groups are backed and funded by billionaires. Billionaires that want to remove trans people from public life, due a personal prejudice they hold. The majority of TERFs are wealthy and privileged white women. Most of them are not LGBTQIA+. They have obscene amounts of money to spend on persecuting a tiny minority. Trans women are women — no matter what the U.K. Supreme Court dictates.ā€

But another problem of TERFs is that they are policing women as well. Even the Supreme Court decision targeted women.

ā€œThe [Supreme Court] decision is an attack on the rights of both trans people and women,ā€ Sophie said. ā€œIt reduces women to their anatomy, which is extremely regressive and misogynistic in my opinionā€

Women for decades have fought to ensure their lives wouldn’t be defined by the sexual organs they were born with. TERFs are now doing exactly that — attempting to reduce womanhood to biology, while also dictating how women should behave, all in the name of ā€œsisterhood.ā€

Modern British TERFs have received support from figures like musician, far-right influencer, and convicted murderer Varg Vikernes, as well as ultra-conservative organizations such as the Russian Orthodox Church, an institution notorious not only for justifying the war in Ukraine with homophobic rhetoric but also for its long history of opposing women’s rights. This kind of ā€œfeminismā€ is a global threat, not only to trans* people but also to girls and women everywhere.

Editor’s note: The author uses trans* in order to be inclusive of nonbinary and gender queer people.

Continue Reading

Opinions

David Hogg’s arrogant, self-indulgent stunt

DNC officers should not be involved in primaries

Published

on

Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg (Photo by Peter Rosenstein)

With his recent announcement his PAC will challenge incumbent Democrats with primaries, David Hogg came off as a self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing, young man. That is sad. This is difficult for me to write as I admire him, and what he has done with his life. However, his recent actions have me, and others, looking at him through a different lens. 

I am a strong supporter of gun control. I proudly participated in the massive rally for gun control in D.C. after the horrendous shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, a rally David helped organize and spoke at so eloquently. I had the opportunity to chat with him recently when he spoke at the Women’s Democratic Club in D.C. I wrote how impressive he was that evening. Not only do I share his views on gun control, but agree with him we need more young people actively involved in the political system, and holding office; from school boards, to congress. I wrote a Washington Blade column in 2018 calling for term limits, and mandatory retirement at 80 for both the Supreme Court and Congress.Ā 

So I was as surprised as others when I heard David announce he is going to use his PAC, ā€˜Leaders We Deserve,’ which he began in 2023, to run primaries against incumbent Democrats in 2026 who he thinks aren’t doing what he wants. What was shocking about this was he was doing it as an officer, a vice president, of the Democratic National Committee. This was the office he just won. There are two reasons this is so wrong. First is the DNC should not be involved in primaries. Second is the officers of the DNC should be raising money for the DNC, not for themselves, and their own interests. 

I can only assume David had this all planned before he ran for that office, which makes this so self-indulgent, and arrogant. The question needs to be asked: Exactly what will this PAC do and what are the criteria for the candidates it will support and those they decide to challenge? David says he wants young people to run, but then says he decided his PAC wouldn’t support anyone challenging Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), both over 80. So, that leads me to ask who will make the decisions as to which incumbents to challenge and which young candidates to support? What are the criteria? I think he needs to be very transparent about his PAC if he wants people to take him, and his goals, seriously. 

I read his PAC’s website, and it leaves much to be desired. It appears there are two people making decisions, David and his co-founder, Kevin Lata, campaign manager for Maxwell Frost, the first Gen Z member of Congress. The mission states, ā€œLeaders We Deserve is a grassroots organization dedicated to electing young progressives to Congress and State Legislatures across the country to help defeat the far-right agenda and advance a progressive vision for the future. Our mission is to identify and elect more trailblazers – youthful, audacious, and charismatic leaders who aren’t afraid to challenge the status quo.ā€  

The website goes on to say the PAC wants to be the EMILYS List for young people. ā€œTo provide day-to-day support to help campaigns build from the ground up, and work with them directly on fundraising, messaging, coalition building, voter contact, and volunteer recruitment. To run paid media campaigns, and run a well-funded independent expenditure program.ā€ 

All of this is great, but again, David needs to be more transparent about all of this, particularly since he is clearly using his post as vice chair of the DNC to promote his PAC. I guess he counts on the old saying ā€œany publicity is good publicityā€ will come into play. But based on his using his election as a DNC vice chair as the platform to announce this, it is fair to ask what he and his co-founder are being paid by the PAC? How much do they stand to make? How much raised will go to consultants? What percentage of funds raised in 2024 went to the 12 listed as their candidates last year? One, Sarah McBride (D-Del.), won her race for Congress, the 11 others ran for statehouses around the country. Some won, some lost. 

David tried to get ahead of the reaction to what he is doing in an interview with the New York Times, saying, ā€œThis is going to anger a lot of people, and predicted a ā€˜smear campaign’ against him.ā€ 

He might think I am participating in a smear campaign. But David, it’s not a smear campaign. You are just getting a strong, appropriate response to how poorly you handled this.


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular