Responding to news that Britain is counting its precious homosexuals in a new survey beginning in January, everyone’s favorite troublemaker, Larry Kramer, has called on U.S. gay organizations to do the same in an email that wound up posted on Eric Leven’s blog yesterday.
Kramer wrote:
“When are gays in america going to fight to find out how many of us there are. I am tired of not knowing. i am tired of hearing numbers quoted all over the map from practically zero to only a few million, all of them certainly far less than i believe we are.
i think it is, psychologically, now the time to try and do something about this. we need to know as we go forward into our never-ending fights with THEM how many of us there are. we just do.
i have long implored our “major” gay organizations, particularly HRC, to commence a project that would reap these figures. we are never going to get our government to do what england is now doing. therefore we have to do it ourselves. i am always arguing with that gary guy at ucla’s william institute that is always putting out his numbers, based, so far as i can tell, by his viewing into his own crystal ball. i want better. i want something that will hold up in court, in the halls of government, etc.
joe solmonese, could you and hrc spearhead something like this? could urvashi or tim sweeney or the gill foundation or all the people with some money still left on this list, could people just get together and brainstorm this. could the williams institute?
correct me if i am wrong, but aren’t we better, stronger being able to go forth knowing how many of us there are, no matter how many of us there are? otherwise we continue as the sort of only half-visible population.”
This is kind of weird, right? I’m not talking about the e.e. cummings-esque punctuation, but the general statement. Kramer usually rails against the powers that be and it’s a little puzzling that he wants for an accounting of the gay community by HRC of all gay people.
While divining the motives of Larry Kramer is always a dicey proposition, I think it’s either one or the other of the following:
Larry Kramer actually would like a gay census
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
I mean, why not? I think such a census would prove to be a nightmare for any statistician. Certainly it will be easy to identify openly-gay middle and upper-class individuals, but gay organizations have been working for years to find ways to reach and talk to communities of color and lower-income gays and lesbians. And who do you define as gay? And isn’t the whole classification of straight vs. gay hopelessly heteronormative* anyway?
Larry Kramer wants to piss off HRC, the Gill Foundation and mainstream gay organizations in general
Now, if this were a casino game, the odds would be even for this. Larry Kramer’s default state is that of mainstream gay organization gadfly, and I sort of think the main reason he wants a census is because there’s no chance it will ever happen, so it gives him something else to rail at– and if by some chance HRC or some similar group did manage to pull it off, he could then argue that we’re being cataloged for the upcoming great gaypocalypse.
So, which is it? Is Larry for real or just playing?
*Queerty apologies for the use of the word “heteronormative.” It’s the sort of nonsense word that queer studies teachers use to sound cool and generally we’re against it because it’s a word bandied about by the same kind of people who think talking about Deleuze and Guattari is the sort of thing that can be done in polite society, ie: asshats. We just went with it because the word fits in a Larry Kramer discussion. We’re really sorry and hope you won’t think we’re asshats, even though we probably are.
Asshat
Hey! I use heteronormative in polite society all the time. And I read Deleuze and Guattari like its my job. Er, it is. Don’t knock the queer theorists, yo! Queer politics wouldn’t look the same without us 😉
Asshat
Also, technically speaking, Larry Kramer is the asshat. He’s the one who sold-out on his wildly radical activist roots and starting calling on gays to normalize. Punk.
conrad
yeah, that anti-intellectual * makes this blog look like its written by tools. no wonder you asshats have almost no other stories to post than boring assimilationist prop 8 bullshit.
i check this blog less and less…….
Qjersey
Love or hate him, ask yourself…where would we be without him?
Who else in our community has consistently shouted from the rooftops (without using graduate school, queer studies lingo…thats for your Urvashi…and where have you been?)
If we take the conservative estimate that 3% of our population is gay (as in they take that label), there are almost 10 million of us.
Joe Moag
Doomsday
Raymond Sawyersmith
As usual, my fellow Yalie, Larry Kramer, is right on. He was right with ACT UP and he is right for a census of US.
Think of it, guys like Warren, Dobson, Perkins, Hagee, Land et al. are that we are FEWER THAN A HANDFUL STATISTICALLY IN TERMS OF THE POPULATION….and of course, WE CHOOSE TO BE GAY, OTHERWISE IF IT WERE INATE, THEIR ARGUMENT WOULD BE MOOT SCIENTIFICALLY.
bunnygloves
Larry Kramer is a faggot. A bad faggot. He nothings but a bitter old queen who grows increasingly shrill as the public becomes increasingly less interested in his insipid notions about what gays should or should not be doing.
Who is he to tell the rest of us how to live our lives, what’s good for us?
The man is an idiot, and I have no respect for him. Loudness does not equal importance.
Alan down in Florida
@ Bunnygloves
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
Larry Kramer’s biggest fault is being right almost all the time and standing up to the “mainstream gay leadership” who would prefer he would go away and shut up.
It is the increasingly less interested public that is our most dangerous enemy. They are the ones who stay at home on election day and allow heinous amendments and propositions to succeed in taking away our rights.
Even had he done nothing else in his career, Larry’s posing of the question “Where’s The Outrage?” solidified his position as one of the most influential leaders our community has ever had.
Don’t blame Larry for crying wolf so often that people stopped listening, even while the wolves are at their doors.
AJD
I have to agree with Alan. Kramer can be pretty far out sometimes, but I’ve always had a soft spot for him because, more often than not, he’s right. He’s an old gay man with HIV, so he doesn’t have to care what others think. And as someone long frustrated with the incompetence of the “mainstream” gay-rights groups, I appreciate that he’s willing to call bullshit when he sees it.
adzomelk
kramer is a godfather he deserves a certain amount of respect from the queer community if for no other reason than the fact that he has been so outspoken & a such radical in the queer/hiv community while our friends for years were dying uncared for & unattended by the reagan & bush 1 white house i think the idea of a gay census is a good one weve been relying on other peoples research for decades & few of those studies agree my vote is for a queer count of queer people asap
Asshat-er
How conveniently ironic that you can invoke the conceptual logic of queer theory by using a word like “heteronormative” and reap all the benefits of 2 decades of intellectual labor by queer theorists while at the same distancing yourself from our ass-hat-ness and suffering none of the stigma that comes with actually doing the work of seriously thinking about these things!
An perfect instance of what Deleuze and Guattari would call becoming-obnoxious.
I’m not saying there isn’t a lot of absurd, pretentious bullshit that calls itself “queer theory,” but the fact that you even know who Deleuze and Guattari ARE suggests strongly that you doth protest too much, lady.
J
I’ve actually been saying for a long time that there needs to be some good demography done on the gay community. I’d totally be in favor of a “gay census”, although it’d be pretty impossible to do. But, knowing more concrete numbers would probably be a good thing.
Raymond Sawyersmith
You know, you can dismiss all of us as “old pervs” because we were in our 20’s by the early 1960’s.
Dismiss us, Gen X and Y, and especially the latter, because we were born when television did not exist, and then belonged to a few, black and white, live, and for a few hours a day. It was mostly radio.
Dismiss us. We were told by psychiatry that we were sick, by the Church that we were abominations, and by the state that we were criminals.
Dismiss us. The undercover cop was sitting in the gay bar, trying to entrap us. The dance bar was an old speakeasie, and same number of lesbian and gay couples. Lights and switch.
Dismiss us. We stood up and ACT UP was born. It is our generation who were initially decimated and worse. The AIDS epidemic was Larry’s loud sonorous voice confronting FASCISTS.
The FASCISTS had bought a Grade B actor couple, and they knew Hollywood and the truth about how Tinseltown hated queers. We even had a T and A beauty queen Anita Bryant who started the culture war with Falwell.
How many gays and lesbians, or more accurately, LGBT folks in the USA…one in ten…..ask the fascists…..they say one in a hundred…….you see, Larry wants to stop their bullsh*t about numbers.
WHEN YOU CAN STAND UP AND BE COMPLETELY FREE LIKE ME, AN EXPAT WITH A CANADIAN SPOUSE, THEN THOSE WHO HATE LARRY SHOULD STFU AND GO BACK TO THEIR CRUISING AND PARTYING.
D
kevin
I don’t think anything I’ve read so far will make me lose respect for Mr. Kramer. Kramer’s only fault, like all heroes, is that he’s lived to old age. Our culture seems to only respect our heroes when they die young or at the height of their activism. Why can’t we respect those of us who live? Isn’t that the goal? To live?
The Gay Numbers
It’s a good idea to have a census. The fact is one of the arguments that the Christian right used just this weeks is that we are just representative of a small minority that’s no where near 10 percent.
BrianPrince
I’m with Kramer, Count the Queens.
GranDiva
With all this discussion, no one is going anywhere near Japhy’s lynchpin comment: who exactly is gay? What is the objective criteria, especially given that as often as not, people who participate in same-gender sexual encounters simply do not identify as gay? (Are you listening, Senator Craig?)
Kramer makes a huge pronouncement with no practical means of achieving his stated (albeit not necessarily intended) goal. Par for the course.
The Gay Numbers
@GranDiva: Par for the course is the “I am too lazy because its work” response that you just gave. No one said it would be easy. Just a good idea to try to find out a general number even if it’s not exactly right.
GranDiva
@The Gay Numbers:
That’s not what I’m saying at all, really. Methodolgy asks that we define our terms, no? As such, we have to establish what the objective standard is as to what qualifies as “gay.” Would it be a matter of self-identification, a question of specific behaviors, or some other set of questions?
I mean, Kinsey said 10%, but that was based on asking a fairly narrow sample of people (college educated white men, realistically speaking) about their behaviors with no real means of establishing who among the sample were actually telling the truth; the Guttmacher Institute may have had a broader sample, but it was still a matter of, as Kate Clinton put it, who was comfortable admitting to homosexuality to a bunch of Germans.
By Kramer’s own statements, there is a difference between being gay and being homosexual; which direction would this census be directed in?
When Kramer sets forth a clear methodology (and, frankly, a less funding-driven organization than, say, HRC), I’ll take him seriously. Until then, Tante Fred is just blowing smoke.
The Gay Numbers
@GranDiva: I don’t think anything you cite as a criticism is actually a poison pill to the idea. You are simply why such a study would be hard, but not that it’s not a good idea. yes, it would be hard. No doubt about it. It still would be good to have some numbers beyond a study thats over 50 years old now.
Anthony in Nashville
I think this is a good idea in theory, but I doubt accurate numbers could be obtained due to people’s fear of what would be done with the information. With the threat of data theft, I imagine many people would be scared of what could happen if their information fell into “the wrong hands.”
I believe this is sort of like the idea of researching the gay gene. Some kind of “hard proof” could be a strategic tool (if the evidence was in our favor) but I think the fight for LGBT rights is basically a moral appeal and shouldn’t rely on statistics or scientific research.
tommy
How can we count the many that are married to women and cruise the bathroom. Gays are in and stay in the closet. The ones we see are the small minority. This website has taken a turn and I think where it is headed is out of site. To bad you can’t just give the news without your limp attitude. Until you grow balls, I’ll read this less, and less.
Kramer has done more for the gay movement then probably anyone reading this! Including the writer, don’t be so quick to judge.
gkruz
@Asshat: Yeah, and queer politics has been such a stunning success so far, hasn’t it?
Ummm
Sounds like a useful idea…until you realize you’d never have a true accounting: most gays/homosexuals would not respond to such a survey and if they did, they’d lie. As they’re doing now.
GirlsAloud
@gkruz:
Do you know why laws against “Sodomy” are no longer on the books?
gkruz
Yes, and it’s not because of academic “queer theorists”.
seitan-on-a-stick
I love it when he bursts into Seinfeld’s apartment and slides along the floor on his socks….