Connect with us

Opinions

Will we support all LGBTQ candidates in 2022?

Voters may need to back allies who have a better chance of winning

Published

on

The LGBTQ community, like all minority communities, will have to make some serious choices in 2022. One question we have to ask ourselves is whether we support every LGBTQ Democratic primary candidate. Will we donate money, time, and give endorsements even to those with no chance at all of winning a general election? Or will we make the hard choices, supporting only those with a real chance of winning in the general.

To make those hard decisions we must first recognize and accept our very democracy is on the ballot this year. It is crucial to ensure we do all we can to see Democrats up and down the ballot win. Of course, we will reject any candidate who doesnā€™t actively support the LGBTQ community. Those who are not members of our community will have to make their positions on our issues clear in their campaign. We will look at their record of support. But if there are candidates who support us and are not LGBTQ but have a much better chance of winning in the general election than a candidate from our own community, it is a decision we will have to make. I have always ascribed to the position Barney Frank (D-Mass.) took, ā€œIf we are not at the table we are on the menu.ā€ This year we just might have to trust some other Democrats to keep us off the menu in certain circumstances.

There are national groups like the Victory Fund and others whose mission is to support LGBTQ candidates. I expect and want them to continue to do so. They provide visibility to members of our community. But those groups donā€™t necessarily dictate to each of us what we must do and they donā€™t dictate to the LGBTQ community in a particular district or state what they should do. Recently, as we saw reported in the Blade, a number of LGBTQ activists in Pennsylvania endorsed a straight candidate over a gay candidate for lieutenant governor. ā€œThe LGBTQ leaders ā€¦ said they were backing State Rep. Austin Davis in the lieutenant governorā€™s race on grounds that he is a strong and committed supporter of LGBTQ rights and has the best chance of winning in the general election in November. The move is a stunning rebuke to (Brian) Sims, who has previously been endorsed by national LGBTQ groups.ā€ I imagine this was not done without much thought as to how the community, both locally and nationally, would perceive it. It is a decision that might have to be made a number of times across the nation this year.

It is exciting to see so many LGBTQ individuals step up to the plate, throw their hat in the ring, and run for office. The reality is many of them have no chance of winning this time around but still have a good future. So when money is scarce, will we donate to candidates who canā€™t win, or give it to those who have a real shot now? Will we look closely at each race and make the choice on whom to support on an individual basis in 2022, deciding not only based on a candidateā€™s gender identity or sexual orientation, but on whether they can win a general election.

This is the same decision individuals in every community will have to make when members of their community are in a primary. In 2020, there were Democratic primary candidates with close to zero chance of winning a general election who raised millions of dollars.

In 2022, we must recognize most of the general electorate are moderate, even moderate leaning right. That is not to say there arenā€™t some very progressive districts and localities, but we must accept the Democratic primary voter is often not representative of the general electorate voter. Just look at Buffalo, N.Y., where the Democratic Socialist for Mayor won the primary and then got trounced in the general election by a moderate Democrat who was a write-in candidate.

This will be a very difficult decision for many. It will be for me if I choose to support a candidate against one who is a member of my own community. But facing the reality of where our country is today, how important it will be to see as many Democrats as possible win in the general election, itā€™s a decision I will make.

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

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Boston sanctuary designation must be backed by policy changes

A symbolic but important step for transgender protections

Published

on

Boston (Photo by David Eby/Bigstock)

The city of Bostonā€™s recent decision to give Sanctuary City status for the transgender community, while largely symbolic, is critically important. Following in the footsteps of Northampton, Worcester, Cambridge, and Pittsfield, it represents a local governmentā€™s commitment to standing with and protecting the transgender community. This is especially vital in a time when transgender individuals face increasing threats to their safety.

The number of trans people murdered in the U.S. nearly doubled between 2017 and 2021, a rise that coincided with increased anti-trans rhetoric and policies, particularly during the Trump administration.

Specifically, Black trans women have been disproportionately affected. While Black individuals make up less than one-fifth of the transgender population, they account for nearly three-quarters of known victims of anti-trans violence. Given this reality, a sanctuary designation should signal a meaningful commitment to protecting transgender residents, including addressing systemic issues within law enforcement.

Historically, both the LGBTQIA+ and Black communities have experienced harm at the hands of police. If a sanctuary designation is to be more than just a statement, it must come with actionable steps toward safety, justice, and rebuilding trust. Whether the trans community is widely aware of these votes in Boston and these other communities varies, but for those who are, such designations can provide a sense of validation, security, and hope ā€” especially if they are backed by real policy changes.

While only a handful of cities across the U.S. have declared themselves transgender sanctuary cities, this is a movement that needs to grow. As a provider working with transgender individuals, I see firsthand the fear and uncertainty many faceā€”simply for existing or for trying to access basic healthcare.

There have already been discussions about criminalizing providers who support transgender youth, and we have seen violent threats, including the bomb threats at Bostonā€™s youth gender clinic a few years ago.

These designations send a strong message: that a city stands with trans individuals and the people who support them. They signal that local governments will not comply with oppressive, transphobic policies.

With Donald Trump openly advocating for a society that erases trans identities, it is crucial for cities to take a stand. Historically, civil rights movementsā€”whether for womenā€™s suffrage, Black rights, or LGBTQ+ rights ā€” have only succeeded because enough people pushed back. Progress does not happen without resistance.

If more cities like Boston, step up and take these actions, it could create a powerful network of resistance that makes a real difference. Transgender individuals and their allies need to know that there are places where they will be protected, and these policies are a step toward ensuring that safety.

Predictably, the designation has prompted an outcry and recycled attacks that have been used against the queer community for decades. For example, the false narratives that LGBTQ+ people, particularly trans individuals, are pedophiles or predators or that gay men are inherently dangerous to children. The latter assumption was reinforced by scandals involving priests who abused young boys. Many people wrongly assumed that being a gay priest equated to being a child predator.

This same fear-mongering has since been weaponized against drag queens, particularly those who host story hours, and now it is being used to target transgender individuals.

 While there have been isolated cases of people from any demographic committing heinous acts, it is entirely baseless to generalize an entire group based on the actions of a few.

The reality is that, according to data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 95.5% of convicted pedophiles are men, and more than half are white. Given that transgender individuals make up about one percent of the U.S. population, most convicted pedophiles are not transgender.

Another key issue is the widespread misconception that transgender people already have equal rights. Many people assume that basic rightsā€”like housing, employment, and healthcareā€”are equally accessible to all.

In reality, transgender individuals can still be legally denied housing, jobs, and medical care in many states. Queer people, in general, often face legal barriers to adoption, and while same-sex marriage was only recently legalized, it is now under political threat, with discussions about giving states the power to overturn it.

So the claim that transgender people have equal rightsā€”especially compared to cisgender, straight white peopleā€”is not just misleading; itā€™s entirely false.

Will Dempsey, LICSW, is founder of Heads Held High Counseling, a social worker, drag queen and queer rights advocate. Heads Held High Counseling is a LGBTQIA+ virtual group therapy practice supporting queer and trans individuals across Massachusetts and Illinois.

Continue Reading

Commentary

History of D.C. Pride: 1995-2007, a time of growth and inclusion

Rainbow History Project plans expansive WorldPride exhibit

Published

on

The Gay Men's Chorus of Washington performs at the Lesbian and Gay Freedom Festival on March 18, 1995. (Washington Blade archive photo by Clint Steib)

In conjunction with WorldPride 2025 the Rainbow History Project is creating an exhibit on the evolution of Pride: ā€œPickets, Protests, and Parades: The History of Gay Pride in Washington.ā€ In ā€œFreedom on Americaā€™s Main Streets,ā€ we discuss how during the 1990s the LGBTQ communities became more prominent across all areas of American life, the circumstances of moving official Pride activities to Pennsylvania Avenue, and the origin of the name ā€œCapital Pride.ā€

Throughout the 1990s, LGBTQ visibility increased significantly in American society. The LGBTQ community’s presence extended beyond news coverage of AIDS activism, with members participating in various social movements. Gay Black men joined the Million Man March in 1995, carrying banners and signs proclaiming “Black by Birth, Gay by God, Proud by Choice.ā€ Lesbians led abortion-rights rallies, LGBTQ Asians joined Lunar New Year parades, and LGBTQ Latinos marched in Fiesta DC.

Once again, financial difficulties around Pride activities led to the dissolution of the Gay and Lesbian Pride of Washington as an organization and the gay arts and culture non-profit One in Ten took over organizing Pride. One in Tenā€™s mission was not solely Pride planning, but rather year round activities, including an attempt to make an LGBTQ history museum. Due to the explosion of activities, the crowd sizes, and the growing concerns around feelings of exclusion brought on by the neighborhoodā€™s identity as a primarily gay white male space, in 1995, One in Ten moved the Pride parade and festival out of Dupont Circle to Freedom Plaza on Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Although the struggle for bisexual visibility had successfully added the B to the 1993 March on Washington, the push to add Trans and Queer identities to Gay Prideā€™s name was not yet successful; Pride was reborn as The Freedom Festival. Two years later, in 1997, the Whitman-Walker Clinic became not just a sponsor but also a co-organizer to alleviate some of the organizational and financial challenges. It was during this time that the event was officially renamed Capital Pride.

The name change sparked debate within the community. Frank Kameny, who had organized the 1965 pickets, harshly criticized the new name, arguing that it “certainly provides not an inkling of what we really mean: Pride that we are Gay.ā€ He lamented that the name change “represents Gay shame.ā€ However, others celebrated the inclusivity of the new name. L. A. Nash, a self-identified lesbian, wrote, “Gay is goodā€”Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender is far better.ā€ Elke Martin further supported the change, stating, “A name is your identity, it gives you legitimacy and a seat at the table.ā€ Capital Prideā€™s official name was now ā€œCapital Pride Festival: A Celebration of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered Community and Friends.ā€

In April 2000, the Millennium March on Washington highlighted divisions within the gay civil rights movement. Unlike previous grassroots marches organized by local activists, this event was orchestrated by national organizations like the Human Rights Campaign. However, its Millennium Pride Festival was by far the largest event with major headliners performing, including Garth Brooks and Pet Shop Boys. Critics argued that these events represented a corporatization of activism that sidelined political demands and local groups struggling for recognition.

In 2001, Capital Pride events were attracting 100,000 attendees. The festival was held on Pennsylvania Avenue with the U.S. Capitol in the background of the main stage. This location, often referred to as “America’s Main Street,” symbolized a significant visibility boost for the LGBTQ community. However, the Washington Post failed to cover the event beyond a simple listing in its events calendar. The outrage that ensued led Capital Pride director Robert York to state: ā€œThis is the biggest and best Pride weā€™ve had, and it is important to see it covered other than in the gay press.ā€

It wasnā€™t until 2007, however, that SaVanna Wanzer, a trans woman of color and Capital Pride board member, successfully established Capital Trans Pride. “The transgender community needs its own event,ā€ Wanzer stated, ā€œrather than just using us as entertainment. That’s all we’ve been allowed to do.ā€ Trans Prideā€™s creation was a significant step toward greater inclusivity within the LGBTQ community.

Our WorldPride 2025 exhibit, ā€œPickets, Protests, and Parades: The History of Gay Pride in Washington,ā€ will be installed on Freedom Plaza on May 17 to coincide with DC Trans Pride. We need your help to make it happen.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Cory Bookerā€™s missed moral moment

Imagine if trans stories had been part of historic speech

Published

on

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) shakes the hand of HRC President Kelley Robinson before a hearing of the United States Senate Judicial Committee on June 21, 2023. Harleigh Walker, seated the center of the photograph, testifies in the hearing. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker sounded joyous, energetic, and heartfelt during his historic 25-hour, five-minute Senate floor speech.  

Like millions of others watching the April 1 conclusion of his marathon homily for everyday people, I spontaneously burst into applause when he crossed the threshold and broke segregationist Strom Thurmondā€™s racist filibuster record against the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Booker called Thurmondā€™s 68-year record a ā€œstrange shadowā€ hanging over the Senate.

Bookerā€™s surprise anti-Trump fest, perhaps a predicate for another presidential bid, was a Democratic demonstration of ā€œdoing somethingā€ in homage to his late mentor, civil rights hero John Lewisā€™s call to create ā€œgood trouble.ā€

ā€œI rise tonight with the intention of disrupting the normal business of the United States Senate for as long as I am physically able,ā€ Booker said in his opening remarks. ā€œThese are not normal times in our nation. And they should not be treated as such in the United States Senate. The threats to the American people and American democracy are grave and urgent and we all must do more to stand against them.ā€

Unlike others who offer up the usual stale talking points, Booker said, ā€œI rise tonight because to be silent at this moment of national crisis would be a betrayal, and because at stake in this moment is nothing less than everything that makes us who we are,ā€ including ā€œthat everyoneā€™s rights will be equally protected and everyone will be held equally accountable under the law.ā€

Bookerā€™s message was clear: ā€œThis is a moral moment in America. What are we going to do?ā€

Itā€™s a question poking at the conscience of people who believe in fairness. For instance, podcaster Joe Rogan questioned the deportation of a gay hairdresser to a prison camp in El Salvador.  

ā€œThe thing is, like, you got to get scared that people who are not criminals are getting, like, lassoed up and deported and sent to, like, El Salvador prisons,ā€ Rogan said on Saturday. ā€œThis is kind of crazy that that could be possible. Thatā€™s horrific. And thatā€™s, again, thatā€™s bad for the cause. The cause is: Letā€™s get the gang members out. Everybody agrees. But letā€™s not, innocent gay hairdressers, get lumped up with the gangs.ā€

In Wisconsin, voters were so angry at unelected DOGE head billionaire Elon Musk blatantly handing out money to generate interest in a state Supreme Court race, they elected liberal Dane County Judge Susan Crawford over Trump-endorsed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel in the $100 million contest, the most expensive court race in U.S. history.

ā€œAs a little girl growing up in Chippewa Falls, I never imagined Iā€™d be taking on the richest man in the world for justice in Wisconsin ā€” and we won,ā€ Crawford told supporters after her 55 percent to 45 percent victory early Wednesday.

Crawford won despite a last minute anti-trans attack ad. ā€œLet transitioning male teachers use my girls’ bathrooms at school? Allow boys to compete against them in sports? Giving puberty-blocking drugs to children without parents’ consent?,ā€ a woman says in the ad. ā€œThat’s who Susan Crawford sides with, and I’m not OK with any of it.ā€

Apparently Trumpā€™s endorsement and Muskā€™s millions were not enough to push Schimel to victory; they needed to play the anti-trans card. Crawfordā€™s campaign responded with her own hard-hitting ad that ends with: ā€œIā€™m Judge Susan Crawford, and Iā€™ll always follow the law and use common sense to decide whatā€™s right.ā€

Was the last minute play with identity politics helpful or a moot distraction? Many old Democratic politicos want to get rid of identity politics and focus on the issues ā€“ as if the two arenā€™t intertwined.  

Indeed, Cory Bookerā€™s symbolism-caked epic discourse illustrated how identity is the beating heart of politics for anyone whoā€™s not a white straight Christian man.    

ā€œWe have to redeem the dream,ā€ Booker said. ā€œWe have to excite people again. He, in the highest office of our land, wants to divide us against ourselves, wants to make us afraid, wants to make us fear so much that weā€™re willing to violate peopleā€™s fundamental rights.ā€

And yet, other than a quick reference to Stonewall, Booker forgot us during his 25 hours telling stories of regular people. He forgot Harleigh Walker who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about being a trans 16-year-old needing gender-affirming care in Auburn, Ala.

At the June 21, 2023 hearing Protecting Pride: Defending the Civil Rights of LGBTQ+ Americans, Booker talked about being a leader on the Equality Act with John Lewis leading in the House.  

Lewis, a ā€œChristian, Southern, Black, elder man,ā€ would say that ā€œthese [discrimination] issues are so similar to what he was dealing with…Is there a line that goes through about the basic right to be an American and have equal rights?ā€ Booker asked Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson.

ā€œA lot of Americans don’t understand how widespread the bullying and the threats and the violence are,ā€ Booker said. ā€œSomething’s happened in the last decade, of this rise of threats and bullying and violence and murder of LGBTQ Americans at levels that are frightening to me.ā€

Addressing Harleigh Walker, Booker said: ā€œI don’t think most Americans understand what it’s like to try to just live your truth for the average American that is LGBTQ or trans. Could you just tellā€¦how it feels just to be a teenager, living your life as you do?ā€

ā€œIt definitely is a struggle, day to day,ā€ Walker said. ā€œGrowing up in a conservative state where there is a lot of misinformation spread about what trans people are, what we do, and how we’re just like everybody else, it’s definitely been hard for me. Like I said in my testimony, I was severely bullied in middle school to the point where I had to drop out of public school because there was so much hate every day in the hallways, being misgendered, being deadnamed, and it got to physical violence at a certain point. And so I had to drop out of public school for that year, and the school wasn’t doing anything about it.ā€

Booker closed with: ā€œIf this is about protecting our children, the stories of Ms. Walker and other trans children ā€” it just needs to be heard about what you’re enduring.ā€

Imagine if trans stories had been heard as part of Bookerā€™s incredible ā€œMoral Momentā€ speech. Maybe millions more would have awakened to the idea of fairness and equality for ALL.


Karen Ocamb is the former news editor for the Los Angeles Blade and Frontiers. She is currently working on a new LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters project.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular