Did Anyone Really Think Obama Was Gonna Sign A Gay-Rights Executive Order Before The Election?

In an announcement that should surprise no one, White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett told representatives from gay-advocacy groups yesterday that the President would not be signing an executive order on LGBT non-discrimination for federal contractors anytime soon.

“While it is not our usual practice to discuss executive orders that may or may not be under consideration, we do not expect that an executive order on LGBT non-discrimination for federal contractors will be issued at this time. We support legislation that has been introduced and we will continue to work with congressional sponsors to build support for it,” she told members of the Center for American Progress, Freedom to Work, HRC and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Jarrod Scarborough made headlines last week when he announced he would broach the topic of the executive order with Obama at Monday’s White House Easter Egg Roll. But, alas, Scarborough never got a chance to speak to the Commander in Chief. (Hint: If you’re gonna ambush the President about a political issue at a holiday party, don’t announce it to the world on national television!)

Look, Barry, we get it. Romney’s basically been anointed the GOP candidate and the election is kicking into overdrive. It would be suicide to make a pro-gay move between now and November. Right now those moronic swing voters could be swayed by the color of your tie, let alone something potentially polarizing. We don’t like it, but we get it. And the activists who hued and cried about your inaction on the executive order—HRC president Joe Solmonese said he was “extremely disappointed”—they get it too.

They just want to remind you we’re watching and waiting.

So we’re gonna give you a pass… until November 7. Then, if we don’t start seeing some action, we’re gonna start squishing some eggs—and we don’t mean the Easter kind. (The preceding should not be construed as a threat against the President of the United States, for whom we have nothing but respect.)

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #barackobama #employment stories and more


  • Brand

    Agreed. Some of us need to stop acting like President Obama is barely the lesser of two evils and start realizing the good he has done for us (both as gay people and in the other aspects of our lives and those of others we care about), and that this November is only half the job done for him. We need to re-elect him and then we need to keep up the public, political, and media pressure that gives him a mandate to follow through.

    He did ask people upon his first election to continue to push for the things they wanted done—health care reform and financial reform being chief among them—and yet look how tepid the supporters of these things were in contrast to the raging lunatics with the Hitler signs screaming about death panels. We don’t need to be crazy about it, but we do need to be actively supporting our side in this race—not just in the White House but all the way down the ticket in the Senate and the House and our states and communities—and then we need to keep it up especially in his first two years after the election.

    God help us if the Republicans’ approach these past three or four years and throughout this election cycle so far takes them across the finish line a split-second before Obama, because that would reinforce their idea that their character assassination/turning-back-the-clock-to-the-fifties approach is what the country wants. And we’d get it alright.

  • Andrew Caldwell

    Stop expecting all the Great Liberal Leaps Forward to be accomplished with a wave of the Magical Executive-Order Pen. Not gonna happen.

    Instead, let’s get busy electing a Congress that can pass ENDA and overturn DOMA. Obama’s already said MANY times he’ll sign those bills–WE have to do the heavy lifting getting those bills to his desk–an inconvenient but real-world political truth.

    How about we start by opening up that “gAy-TM” and shelling out come cash? If you don’t want to give to Obama, fine–you can send some money to Tammy Baldwin or Liz Warren or plenty of other LGBT allies. And if you can’t spare the money, spare some time, volunteering. We need 218 votes in the House; 60 in the Senate. We already have the President’s signature waiting.

    Do it. Now. You have a little over 200 days until the election.

  • jason

    Obama didn’t even push for gay rights when the Dems had a super-majority in Congress, so why should he now? He does not believe in gay rights. The only thing he believes in gay-wise is the money of gay people.

  • Aaron

    With the kind of “pressure” from the gay community that commenter 1 & 2 are giving, why the hell would he have to??

  • Mark

    African American churches are anti-gay for the most part and where’s your guarantee anything will happen after November 7th. Sorry if it has to be pointed out but it’s a FACT you chose to ignore.

  • Mark

    I seem to recall Louis Farrakhan giving a big anti-Michael Jackson tirade to his followers because Michael was swishy.

  • Bi-Coastal

    Calling the president “Barry”? How very anti-Obama of you.
    Referring to swing voters as “moronic”? How very elitist of you.
    Threatening to take political action AFTER Nov 7? How incredibly stupid of you. Obama’s lack of enthusiasm for all things gay should be the very reason you don’t vote him in for a second term. I’m not saying Romney’s any better, but at least he hasn’t lied about having compassion for us while wearing his disdain for us on his sleeve, as has our current leader.

  • Ester Goldberg

    @Andrew Caldwell: Well said Andrew.. I wish more people in the gay community would share your same views ( mine too) and understand politics a lil bit more. Some of these folks think the political process is as easy as flipping from a GAGA tune to a Nicki Minaj auto tuned rant.. It aint like that. Its a chess game..and the GOP is ready to pounce on ANYTHING remotely “gay” . This president..has already proved he is on our side. Look at his record. He needs another 4 years. and he WILL Sign a bill for equl rights and I would suspect executive order if he is re-elected..

  • Stephen

    @Mark–what do African American churches have to do with this?

  • 1equalityUSA

    We need 24,507 more signatures on the petition, asking that Robert P. George not be chosen for the International Religious Freedom commission. “Robby” George, the hateful Princeton Professor who is the brains behind NOM, thinks we should be punished. Please read the scathing article about this man and know that John-defend-DOMA-out-of-pocket-Boehner is behind this inappropriate appointment. You will need to sign in on the White House web site, return to your e-mail box, click onto the link, and then sign the petition before April 27th, 2012. Let’s oppose this appointment. Here is the link. Thanks.

  • Mike

    Obama is not any sort of fierce advocate for LBGT people and he never has been especially with his whole “Gawd’s in da mix!” speech that was a total slap in the face towards everyone that’s LGBT.

  • darkmoonman`

    @Stephen: Because Christianity still has a stranglehold on politics in this nation.

  • Paul

    Obama is no friend of the LGBTQ community and you are guilty of intellectual dishonesty or willful ignorance if you believe otherwise. His greatest gay rights “accomplishment” was to appoint us as cannon fodder to grow an empire which still refuses to grant us equality.

  • Booker

    If there’s legislation being considered to achieve the same goal, then that’s obviously better than an executive order than can be easily rescinded by a successor. However, if the legislation fails, I would certainly expect the order to be issued.

  • robbieoros

    OH MY WHAT A SURPRISE! Barry turns his back on Gay’s…HELLO! There a few Muslims
    that would support the gay lifestyle…if they could admit there were gays in their country. Remember Yale?
    Should we make a list of all the things Barry has turned his nose up to?
    1. The US Constitution
    2. Gay rights
    3. US Armed Forces
    4. Christians
    5. Isreal
    6. Civil Rights…HELLO Eric Holder and Barry the New Black Panthers and the bounty?
    7. Add your own..there are a PLETHORA of them in the last 3 yrs

  • robbieoros

    OH MY WHAT A SURPRISE! Barry turns his back on Gay’s…HELLO! There a few Muslims
    that would support the gay lifestyle…if they could admit there were gays in their country. Remember Yale?
    Should we make a list of all the things Barry has turned his nose up to?
    1. The US Constitution
    2. Gay rights
    3. US Armed Forces
    4. Christians
    5. Isreal
    6. Civil Rights…HELLO Eric Holder and Barry the New Black Panthers and the bounty?
    7. Add your own..there are a PLETHORA of them in the last 3 yrs

    Full story here:

  • Sapphireone

    @jason: Sadly, I must agree. He was also going to put an immediate end to DADT — and he did not, instead APPEALING a U.S. District Court ruling that the policy was unconstitutional and telling us that it would end “When the Armed Forces were ready.” Good thing we didn’t wait for the South to be ready for integration…

  • wdcguy

    Totally agree with Brand, Andrew Caldwell and Ester.

  • steventwleong

    Stop bitching! This president has done some of the most for Gay rights than any other president. Seems the feeling of the nation is switching to less Gay-specific protection, and more inclusive protection! Obama has to stay in office for the Gay community to have ANY hope of getting equal rights. For this, he needs to keep the middle majority happy also. Either support him, or be happy with anti-gay Presidential perspectives, like Santorum, Bachman, Palin, Romney, Perry … now, THAT’s a F%*KEN NIGHTMARE. If we need to bitch, lets save it for NOM, FOF, or 1 Million (40,000) moms!

  • Alexi3

    An Executive Order can be effective and at times should be used, but, this simply isn’t the time and quite frankly this particular issue is not worth the expendature of so much political capital. Understand I agree with the principle but it would be far better for Congress to pass such legislation. So get to work and elect a Democratic majority in both Houses. And by the way anyone who thinks that the President is only the lesser of two evils really doesn’t understand what the Conservatives want and how very bad things could become for all sorts of people; not just us. Conservatives do not believe that anyone has a right to live or believe in any way that differs from the way they see the world. That is their great danger. They really believe that they are right and they will not stop until everyone agrees with them or are forced to do so.

  • porsupuesto

    DO NOT stop bitching, be a bitching bitch swing voter yourself! Clearly from all this the major lesson is that swing voters get wooed by all sides while captive voters never get shit.

  • Teh_Bi-Guy

    I’m just gonna have to hold my nose with this one until November. I understand the stakes and don’t wanna condemn the guy for playing his political cards in such a crucial election. “Straight-up”, if we end up with Romney, we’re screwed, and not in a good way. More like in a santorum-laced way (no pun intended). I can’t say Obama has a squeaky clean track record with LGBT rights, but he’s the best out of any Prez we’ve had so far. We’ll see how he does AFTER getting re-elected; we need to keep Romney away from the White House at all costs, even if it means swallowing a clear sidestepping of advancing Queer-Rights in the name of politics. Whatever keeps us from suffering four years under an “R” regime…

  • Ronbo

    Seriously people…Obama COULD have signed that executive order over three years ago after he was elected. He chose NOT to sign it for THREE years. Hummmm…. no imminent elections then, right? I think we know what is in his heart is not what he says… but what he does. And he isn’t going to help us after this election either.

    He is NOT a GLBT supporter and only jumps out in front of the parade when it is in front of the cameras. Has he done ANY positive GLBT activity behind the scenes – lobbying? Nope, not a single time. In fact, Obama asked Pelosi to NOT push DADT repeal.

    Just because you WANT to believe that he is a Democrat or a fierce supporter does not mean a ding, dang, darn thing. Keep WANTING for the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause and the Great Pumpkin Charlie Browns. We’ve seen his support and it is tepid at it’s very, very best.

  • Ronbo

    @Andrew Caldwell: Andrew, well said Uncle Tom. Keep sitting at the back of the bus. Your thoughts were completely violated by Rosa Parks and she certainly didn’t change history. Or did she? Your negativity makes Eyore look cheerful.

    Change doesn’t happen until YOU change.

  • RickB

    For those of you who are complaining that Obama “does not believe in gay rights,” what planet are you living on?? Obama has done more to advance the cause of LGBT equality than every other freakin’ President in U.S. history!

    Passage of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, extending benefits to the domestic partners of federal employees, factoring in a country’s treatment of its gay citizens when determining U.S. foreign aid, calling forcefully (and repeatedly) for the repeal of DOMA, etc. etc.

    The gay community had better get its act together and work hard to support Obama’s reelection, or we’ll risk setting back the cause of gay rights for a generation. A Romney Administration would be a DISASTER for the LGBT community!!!!

  • Times2

    It is just amazing how often progressives give Obama a pass for actions they’d be screaming about were the Bush administration responsible.

    This isn’t just true of “wedge issues” like this. Obama’s administration is actually far worse than Bush in its violation of basic rights like privacy and habeas corpus. He even authorizes murder of American citizens. Obama is prosecuting whistle blowers like nobody before him (including journalists). He is building police state using the excuse of “terrorism.”

    I’m not going to outline all of his offenses in this area. They are well documented in Glenn Greenwald’s columns, just for starters.

    I will hold my nose and vote for him, but I am really, really, really sick of listening to progressives rationalize positions they screamed about four years ago.

  • Teh_Bi-Guy

    I know it’s easy to blame Obama for not doing enough for gay rights, but look at what he’s done vs any other president?! NO one has done more to advance LGBT equality than Obama! Sure he could have done more, but look at the alternative..

    Like it or not, he’s really the only hope we have for the next presidential term, Romney would probably try to take us back to the dark ages of the 50’s, when being LGBT was considered communist and queers were enemies of the state! *shudders*

  • Times2

    I would love to know why I should not be angry that Obama has ignored, even reversed himself on so many things he promised the American people.

    Yes, he’s acted favorably in some respects toward gay people. Those are things that involved very little risk and followed more tolerance by the population. In other words, he’s not leading. He’s following.

    But I have no reason to trust him at all. His absolutely appalling actions in extending government eavesdropping, scrapping basic constitutional law (habeas corpus), prosecuting whistle blowers (whom he once called essential), harassing journalists, extending our endless war, completely turning his back on a single-payer insurance system while putting his tongue squarely in the ass of Big Pharma while lying about it….on and on it goes.

    Our government is getting away with this shit because progressives have gone silent about them. Telling me that it’s a big deal that he overturned DADT when most Americans approved of doing that anyway is just sad.

  • Drew

    Obama did not overturn DADT, he and his administration actually edited out the non-discrimination clause which would have made it completely legal for bisexual, gay, and lesbian military service members to still be kicked out of the military. He and his administration could have stopped the witch hunts and having LGB military personnel kicked out before DADT was abolished by the Pentagon and top military officials yet they did none of this.

  • Chris

    Obama is like every other Democrat- courting GLBT folks until we overwhelmingly vote for him and then turning his back. We have some civil rights for African Americans and various social programs bc of the courage of LBJ in large part. He was a man who did what he said he would. Obama is a coward, too busy worrying about upsetting swing voters or Republicans that he caves at every turn. I would rather have a President who openly despises me than one who lies to me.

  • Olav Owre

    As a Norwegian following American politics with quite some interest, I have to say I’m quite surprised about some of the comments here. One suggesting Obama is a muslim and anti-gay rights, others saying he has done nothing! When in American history has GLBT rights been at this high level before? Under George W. Bush? Under Bill Clinton? Under George Bush sr.? Under Ronald Reagan? Wake up, please, Rome wasn’t built in a day and Obama is not a dictator! It’s the Republicans in the Congress and the Senate who are the real problem here, so it’s really up to you, the American people, in the world’s greatest democracy, who should use your right to vote on the 7th of November. Then things may really change!

  • jason

    The only chess game Obama is playing is the one with your emotions. He’s always wanted you to THINK that he was on your side. That’s the key – thinking. Once he got you thinking he’s on side, he then proceeded to do virtually nothing. He’s been reluctant on gay rights since day one.

    I can’t wait to vote for Romney, frankly.

  • Ned Flaherty

    Romney’s the opposite of Obama on LGBT rights — in 7 ways.

    ? Romney vows to discriminate against same-gender couples; Obama supports DOMA repeal.
    ? Romney may revive DADT; Obama repealed it.
    ? Romney vows to cut pay/benefits up to 40% for military personnel with same-gender spouses; Obama supports equal pay/benefits.
    ? Romney vows to halt on-base military chapel weddings for same-gender couples; Obama approved them.
    ? Romney vows to appoint anti-LGBT judges; Obama appoints LGBT-aware judges.
    ? Romney vows to prevent Americans from marrying their foreign national same-gender spouses; Obama supports immigration reform.
    ? Romney has vowed to always oppose same-gender marriage; Obama admits he is evolving.

    There’s just no comparison.

  • Thom Prentice

    Obama is nothing more than the Evil of Two Lessers. I’m tired of voting AGAINST something. In 2008 I voted FOR some guy from Hawaii and Chicago who never showed up.

  • jason

    Romney will not restore DADT. He said so himself. Stop making things up about Romney.

    As for voting for the lesser of two evils, it will still get you evil.

  • Ned Flaherty

    Presidents only ENACT laws (by signing them); it is Congress that CREATES laws (by writing them).

    Everyone who is disappointed that Obama hasn’t signed more LGBT-friendly laws needs first to look to the Congress that hasn’t written them in the first place.

  • Cheryl

    @<@jason: With the House make-up led by Pelosi the first two years, probably yes. However, there was never a Super Majority in the Senate thanks to the Blue Dog Dems. Could he have pushed harder? Sure, but with guys like Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Kent Conrad it wasn’t going to happen. Our side doesn’t get in line like the Republicans do. This President has done more for gay rights than any other president to date. I predict full “evolution” upon his re-election.

  • Addyboo

    It seems from the comments that we will just fall in line and be dutiful little Democrats. Here’s the deal, and it’s the truth if you’re honest with yourself – Obama is not the man we thought he was. His stance on gay marriage, and Mitt Romney’s, are one in the same. I think it is extremely irresponsible for Queerty to take the editorial position that “just because he’s done shit-all for the GLBTQ’s so far, let’s just vote for him anyway and cross our pretty little fingers”.

    Thankfully, the GOP wasn’t dumb enough to nominate the true enemy of the GLBTQ’s, Rick Santorum. My position is if neither candidate is going to support the causes of our community, at least elect a president who won’t bankrupt our country.

  • Andrew

    Olav Owre you’re not even American, can’t vote in our elections, and you know nothing about politics in the United States. I supported candidate Obama when he was running for President and I did vote for him. I am not going to vote for him again and I will vote for whoever is running for the Green party instead. I also do not like how Obama is spend crazy and bankrupted the United States.

  • Times2

    @ned: sorry, but as far as policies go, Obama does what he wants to Most of his incredible violation of basic civil protections is done with no involvement of Congress and he refuses to release to the courts any documentation warranting the killing and indefinite detention of Americans he deigns to call terrorists. He even publicly declared Bradley Manning guilty before trial.

    He does not favor gay marriage, by the way. And he rejected extension of benefits to gay partners of federal employees. Yes, he’ll mouth some vague affirmations to keep gay people silent and supportive. And then, after election, we’ ll hear all the usual crap about things taking time.

    Go ahead and vote for him but stop making lame excuses for someone who has literally led us farther down the road to the imperial presidency than Bush and Cheney eveR dreamed of. It is not necessary to go silent about the harm he’s done, even if you’re going to vote for him.


  • Elloreigh

    Obama is the best failure on LGBT rights we’ve seen thus far. But he’s still very much a failure; a politician who takes our money with one hand and then slaps us with the other one.

    I’ll decide whether or not to vote and for whom when the time comes. It won’t be for a Republican, but I’m not a one-issue voter and Obama hasn’t earned a vote for a second term from me.

  • Charli Girl

    Ahhhh: hands folded under my chin gazing out the window: thinking how nice it’s going to be
    in 2016 with my new President Cuomo!!!!

  • Ned Flaherty

    For all the naïve, infantile children who are complaining that Obama is neither the benevolent king nor the jolly Santa Claus that they wished for:

    You don’t have to like him if you don’t want to, and you’re free to vote for anyone else, or for no one at all.

    But if you fail to re-elect Obama, who is the most beneficial and the least harmful of all the viable 2012 presidential candidates, then you will get a robot drone from the Republican party (which vows to oppress LGBT people everywhere forever), who has vowed to veto or repeal pro-LGBT laws, vowed to enact anti-LGBT laws, and who will halt the State Department’s worldwide campaign declaring that LGBT rights are human rights.

    Be realistic. When you fail to re-elect Obama, and instead end up with someone 100 times worse, you hurt only yourselves, and accomplish nothing.

  • robbieoros

    ODD…how most of u do not know that Barry’s name is Barry…Check out our Punahou Year Book….look for Barry Dunham…WHAT? yeah…its a kid named Barry Dunham..played on the basektball team at Punahou…best buds with a gay guy called Bobby Titmore…(that is his last name…dad was a Federal judge in Honolulu)…Barry Dunham lived on Round Top Drive in a section called Makiki….behind Waikiki…really great area…Punahou School is in Makiki…oh back to Barry…while attending U of Chicago in the early 80’s, I yell out one day as i see Barry walking across campus…we chat…at the end of the conversation he tells me..”robbie, i no longer go by Barry Dunham…i changed my name to Barack Obama”
    now go crying someplace else…he is what he is…BTW..when Barry attended Occidental College in CA, he kept the Barry name but changed the last name to Sontoreo or something like that…he changed the last name because he applied for a student loan as a Foreign Student…and he did get the loan…interesting character this Barry guy…I have always known him as Barry…and Barry he will remain.

  • robbieoros

    @Bi-Coastal: ahhhh…how dumb are u? i already know that answer…never ask a question in advance that u don’t know the answer to already.

    here is a help aid for u…google Punahou School…( its the prep school Barry and I attended while we lived in Honolulu)
    Google Barry Dunham…up will come Punahou School Barack Obama…

    expecting ur apology in writing…cuz EVERYONE ONE THE BOARD KNOWS BARRY and BARACK are one in the same asshole..

  • David

    robbieoros did you ever smoke pot, use coke or crack, or use other drugs with Barry when you were growing up? Is it true that Barry Obama was highly r acist towards whites despite not being black and being a mulatto, mixed race, or bi-racial?

  • Jim

    Obama promises and never delivers. All those excusing his unwillgness to act are just gullible. Write him a check assholes. He is still “evolving”.

  • Buck

    You said it Jim. +1,000 FTW. Obama will gladly take the money and donations from LGBT Americans and our votes but he won’t give us jack shit but he’ll promise us ENDA, same gender marriage in all 50 states, and on and on but not actually deliver any of it.

  • Dennis

    Ester, and how do you know Obama will actually give LGBT people equal rights? He’s never been for same gender marriage at all. I remember when he and Biden were campaigning and they directly said how “marriage is between a man and a woman”.

    Then when candidate Obama became President he promised LGBT people same gender marriage and equality, then actually defended DOMA more than any other President has and did his whole “Gawd’s in da mix and marriage is between a hetero man and hetero woman” BS speech.

  • Times2

    @Ned, #44:

    Perfect example of what I mean about progressives’ defense of Obama, despite a record that is horrific:

    You say those of us who are angry with him are naive and infantile. Why? Because we dare to claim Obama should be held accountable for reversing himself on nearly every issue of substance.

    It is just as naive to think Mitt Romney will repeal DADT. Remember when Obama said he would be closing Guantanamo as soon as he was elected? Remember all his posturing about FISA, then turning around and doing the opposite? That’s about how much chance there is of Romney banishing gays from the military.

    Doesn’t it make you stop and marvel that we excuse Obama’s failure to do what he promised but think Romney will most certainly do everything he’s uttered he’ll do (in order to get wingnut votes)?

    Obama is essentially a Republican. Infuriatingly, he was working behind closed doors to slash Social Security. After all of his posturing about PACs, now he’s in on them. I don’t see how any progressive has anything good to say about this man.

    There comes a time when voting is basically useless and we are very close to that. Our vote might get a better smile but it doesn’t get much more than that. Read Thoreau’s essay on civil disobedience where he notes that politicians never lead. They always follow and that’s why progressives need to reclaim their voice and hold Obama’s feet to the fire. It won’t happen.

  • Times2

    No. 51: I meant of course that it’s naive to think Romney will undo the repeal of DADT.

  • Obama-is-a-Liar

    Obama and his in-Justice Department fought to uphold DOMA and DADT for over two years — even with a super majority in both Houses of Congress. Only after federal courts repeatedly struck down DOMA and DADT did Obama give up on defending them. Obama is a scumbag. He did nothing that a Republican wouldn’t do to us during his first two years in office. And after losing the House and nearly the Senate, only then did our “friends” in the Congress (during a lame duck session) repeal DADT when they had two years beforehand to do so, as well as get rid of DOMA which Obama was actively defending comparing our Marriage Equality to incest via Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder.

    No, Obama is not afraid of the white liberals and blue collar Union voters on GLBT issues in the Democratic Party, he is more afraid of alienating the Black and Hispanic Homophobic Evangelical and Catholic minority voters. What a profile in “courage” our chicken-$hit, good-for-nothing President Obama is!

    DOMA will eventually be struck down by the federal courts — many Republican judicial appointees have sided with us on several GLBT issues that have come before them in recent years — remember the so-called “Sodomy” laws were struck down by a Republican dominated Supreme Court during another village idiot’s term in office by the name of GW Bush.

  • Derek Williams

    Obama is President of all the United States, not just for the LGBT minority. Only 4% of the US population is openly gay (exit polls from 2004 and 2008 US Census). He could therefore have ignored our 4% demands totally and been far more electable as a result.

    Opinion polls showing majority support for certain LGBT issues are not the basis upon which people elect a president. While our straight supporters may feel sorry for us, they have other more important (to them) things to worry about, like having a job.

    But since you think Obama is the enemy of the LGBT community, you must therefore believe that the previous Republican presidents’ record and their new candidates’ views on LGBT rights are superior, so you have only one choice – vote Republican.

    Best of luck.

  • Veritable Virgo

    I am not surprised by the President’s course of action, but some of the comments here are short-sighted at best. While equality should be our complete and ultimate goal, badgering the most progressive President on LGBT issues to date is not the answer. As I see it, President Obama has done a lot of good, even as he’s made some missteps or unpopular decision from our community’s perspective. We need to be sensitive to the overall job of the President and realize that granting all of our wants is not his primary objective. Three years ago – and to a great degree even today – the economy is his primary focus. Along the way he has worked with key members of his administration and those political allies in Congress to push forward on LGBT issues whenever and wherever possible. If this weren’t true, DOMA would still be fully supported by the White House, DADT wouldn’t be history (despite the GOP efforts to revive it) and the ban on HIV-positive travelers would still be in place. The folks bitching out there need to get a grasp on the political process and understand the tremendous political risks any President tasks when he or she aligns with a minority segment of any population.

    Whatever your feeling are about President Obama and the things he has or has not done for our community, know this full well; Romney or any other GOP leader will almost certainly undo the progress we have achieved under Barack. Understand that and own your vote on Election Day.

  • jason

    Derek Williams,

    Most men are bisexual in their orientation. I”d say close to 90% are bisexually oriented. Therefore, your citing of the 4% for exclusively gay is pointless.

  • jason

    Despite mounting evidence of Obama’s reluctance on gay rights issues, there are still a number of gay men who think he’s the next best thing to sliced bread. I can only assume that these gay men enjoy getting fucked up the ass by the Democratic Party.

  • Olav Owre

    @Andrew: No, I’m not American, but I do know about American politics because we have a quite huge coverage of what’s going on “over there”. I have also American friends and family that has informed me. I’m just surprised that so many of you seems to think that a president can do whatever he wants. Your Supreme Court is not an objective court but very political. At the time there is a majority of conservative/republican ones. Obama needs another period to change that. Also it’s the Republicans in the Congress and Senate blocking for initiatives. Obama do as best as he can, but when even LGBT people are letting him down it’s sad. He’s not perfect, but 10 times better than Romney, at least!
    (We have an American friend in Norway that moved to Europe when Reagan was re-elected. She had given up America. She voted for the first time since she left last time to vote for Obama, and she will do it again this time. And she follows American politics quite closely, but not from Fox news, more from Huffingon post….:-))

  • Jeffrey Fichtelberg

    Obama stayed withn the racist gutter minister Jerimiah Wright for 25 year who hates whites and gays. Just a reminder that the voice from coast to coast from the black church at the beginning of the Aids crisis was “Praise you lord for helping rid the earth of the white homosexuals”. This mended only when the body count from aids in the black communityy could fill loand fills. He further is the spawn of a Nigerian Muslim. We need to further understand that his repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” his great accomplishment for gays, may be in fact his way of placing them in a better position for elimination in war zones, which his years with Wright and Muslim foundation would be consistent with.

    I as an American first, and Gay Jew clearly have not observed his leadership as one of a patriot, or an allie of the gay community. He hates our only true allie min the Mid-East Israel. He supports enemys of Americans, and specifically Gays, Jews, Christians, and freedom in the Arab Spring under the cover of supporting Demcracy.

    The gay community must open there eyes and understand that actions and performance speak loud and clear. This president is an enemy of all we hold dear. Obama is the Wolf in Sheeps clothing and a greater danger to this nation than any we have ever faced. He is our cancer and his performance confirms it.

  • Jeffrey Fichtelberg

    I in reviewing the the comment policy for moderation obseved that if your readers elected to dislike my opinion or as you deescribe it view me as a jerk, that you would not publish my comments.

    I support free speech by all and respect all opinions whether they agree or disagree with mine. Your comment policy of silencing those who your readers might consider those of a “Jerk” is not free speech.

    I do not want my name associated with a publication that silences those who dissent and this gay proud man will not have his name associated with ignorant gutter fagots who silence others

    You are dismissed and have no value

  • Derek Williams


    Kindly do not misquote me. I never claimed that “4% are exclusively gay”. I said that “4% are openly gay”. I have no idea how many are exclusively gay, but I am confident it is a lot more than 4%, because many will be in the closet.

    My evidence comes from the 2004 and 2008 US Census exit polls.

    Where is your evidence to support your claim that 90% of the male population is bisexual?

    As for your assertion that we are getting “fucked up the ass” by Democrats, you likewise fail to adduce any substantive evidence to substantiate such a contentious claim.

    President Obama has more than lived up to his pre-election LGBT commitments. As promised in his first term, he has:
    • repealed DADT
    • orphaned DOMA
    • recorded YouTube “It Gets Better” videos together with Vice-President Joe Biden for suicidal LGBT youth
    • spoken at HRC conventions
    • held LGBT Receptions at the White House
    • promulgated a Memorandum on LGBT Rights from the White House – delivered at the United Nations by Hillary Clinton
    • supports ENDA (blocked by Republican Congress)
    • said he is opposed to states taking away rights from LGBT people.

    Supported by over 70% of respondents to a military survey, over 70% of the general population, passed by Congress and the Senate, backed by military chiefs and supported by the President and Vice President and their families, DADT repeal is here to stay, thanks to the backing of President Obama.

    If that’s not good enough for one term, and you call all that effort made for us “getting fucked up the ass”, then you’ll never be satisfied. When I read bitter and unreasonable comments like yours, I start to understand why there is homophobia in this world.

    It’s pointless having the President make Executive Orders if they’re not supported at large, and are likely to be thrown out with Congressional veto. It is up to us to win over the people by good citizenship and articulating our case. The President is just one man who cannot change the hearts and minds singlehandedly. It is impossible to rule over a hostile populace.

    Anyway, since it is clear you’re unhappy with the Democrats, I suggest you’d best go vote Republican. Perhaps they deserve you.

  • Times2

    @Derek Wililams:

    None of the actions you mention were the least bit risky. As you say yourself, a majority of Americans favored ending DADT, His decision to stop defending DOMA in the courts comes with refusing to support gay marriage. Kinda takes the wind out of “orphaning” DOMA, doesn’t it?

    And please don’t make the argument that it would be “risky” to endorse gay marriage during an election season. He had plenty of time to do this earlier. Oh wait, his entire term has been an election season, right?

    And what do you mean “supports ENDA”? Again, you mean he pays lip service while refusing to actually take action:

    The rest of your list is also lip service, and that’s what’s so frustrating. Progressives can’t seem to make a difference between real action and nice rhetoric, patting their hearts in anticipation of something that will come when Obama feels it’s the right time.

    Yes, Obama’s rhetoric is nice most of the time. His action does not follow his rhetoric unless he is sure it won’t offend a majority of Americans.

  • Derek Williams

    @Times2: Obama didn’t have to do a single thing for us. We numerically insignificant. Don’t misinerpret polls as translating into anything more than public sentiment. They don’t translate into votes compared to jobs and the economy.

    You believe the President can transform a nation of homophobes into a gay paradise with a stroke of the pen. That is completely unrealistic and in any case would result in massice civil disobedience. It is always better to have the population onside.

    I suggest you listen to Clinton’s UN address where she said “no-one ever changed their belief because they were forced to do so.”

    As for your contention that this was zero risk, the Muslim countries walked out.

  • Ned Flaherty

    @Times2: Times2, if Obama’s deficiencies upset you even a tiny bit as much as you claim, then you certainly would re-elect him, from among the available choices, rather than get results that are hundreds of times worse by not re-electing him.

    Leading the nation and Congress to permanent, legal repeal of DADT was infinitely more difficult — and infinitely more wise — than merely issuing an Executive Order that could be overturned by any future president. Doing it the harder way was also the best way, and you should be grateful for that, not critical.

    The same principle applies to comprehensive ENDA reform.

    Obama’s lack of current advocacy for same-gender marriage in no way belittles his cessation of DOMA defenses in court.

    Everything this president does, no matter how inconsequential, becomes risky in the hands of Fox News and the Republican spin machines, so yes, he is wise to remain aware of that, and to not give his opponents more material for their 24-hour critique factories. That’s not a fault; it’s a skill, and not having it would end in his defeat.

    You argue “he had plenty of time to do this earlier” but that’s irrelevant because time is not the issue. He has always been ready to enact ENDA; Congress has refused to send it to him.

    The President is not a king; he can only enacts laws that Congress sends to him. All your screeching should be directed at your real enemies in Congress who obstruct and delay most of the good and necessary legislation whenever it comes up for debate.

    You fault Obama — wrongly — for only taking actions supported by a majority of citizens. Well, yes, that is what he does, and that’s what he was elected to do, and it wouldn’t be a democracy if he acted otherwise. Once again, you fault Obama for not decreeing everything you want, but that’s not a fault. He’s ready, willing, and able to enact any pro-LGBT legislation that is placed on his desk. Your problem is not in the White House; it is in Congress.

    Your glaring silence about the source of the problem suggests that you have no idea about how our government works, and think presidents can do anything, anywhere, any time, without repercussion. They can’t.

    Barak Obama is the least of your worries; the energy you spend complaining about him would do wonders if you spent it getting Congress to do its job.

  • David

    Derek It gets better is just a bullshit PR campaign, nothing more. Telling kids both LGBT and hetero to put up with bullying until they leave school is not constructive advice. It’s cruel. School boards, school administrators, teachers, etc, need to have zero tolerance policy for bullying. It’s not uncommon for teachers to bully unpopular kids themselves. That’s where the changes need to be made… The reason “It Gets Better” caught on with politicians and celebrities is because it’s great PR and it requires absolutely NOTHING from them in the way of real action.

    Those of us in Seattle know that Dan Savage is an opportunistic parasite who will not hesitate to throw you under the bus if you don’t fit into his vision of right wing Log-cabin-lite politics. The It Gets Better campaign does nothing to empower queer youth. in fact, we are seeing a whole generation of gay kids make these videos and then kill themselves, while Dan Savage tells them to pull themselves to up by their bootstraps and he profits off the dead by hawking his self-help books. what we need is action and strategy, a battle plan to help gay kids survive, and deal directly with the homophobes (for example, how to file a complaint and lawsuit against your school district) and not snake oil charms like the It Gets Better media sham.

    Dan Savage only started the it gets better project not to actually help LGBT youth all while practicing his right wing bigotry and hypocrisy of being transp hobic, biph obic, and ra cist; but to self promote and get a reality TV show on MTV.

    LGBT youth are not watching the it gets better videos and we’ve seen LGBT youth who actually made videos who kill themselves.

    As for Obama he’s a hypocrite towards LGBT people and the LGBT community and doesn’t deserve our donations, votes, or a 2nd term at all.

  • Times2

    @Derek: Again, you’re telling us that Obama took a risk, but you don’t actually name the risk. Are you talking about the risk of losing votes? You say that polls should not be trusted, and I actually agree with that. But it’s quite clear that most politicians follow (and exploit) public sentiment. They don’t lead.

    You’re aware that the Civil Rights Act was adopted when the majority of Americans still favored segregation and that LBJ twisted arms anyway, right? A leader, leads. Ditto for the amendment granting women the right to vote, as I recall. In both these cases, progressives hit the streets and demanded that elected officials grow balls and lead. Progressives do not do that now, although the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to head us back to that.

    The same thing happened with the gay rights movement. It was only when gay people grew enough balls to get on the streets and raise hell that things started to change. And I remember when ACT UP organized and “nice gays” were furious that the public protests made gay people look so bad. Yet it was ACT UP that convinced the FDA to change its policies about experimental drugs.

    I assume you remember too that Bill Clinton backed down and signed onto DADT in order to avoid the 6 months of controversy that might have followed. And discharges for homosexuality actually increased as a result of this idiotic policy.

    And here we are again biting our nails and making excuses for a coward who would not sign an executive order to end discrimination in federal hiring. Please. We are our own worst enemies.

  • Dennis

    Jason no way are there 90% bisexuals in the human population either male or female. If this were remotely true bi p hobia and homo p hobia would not be issues, nobody would be closeted or keep their non hetero sexuality a secret or be in complete denial about their sexuality, and issues like same gender marriage and END (employment non-discrimination) would not be an issue for bisexual and gay men

    Also keep in mind that most gay men worldwide are not out about their sexuality and are closeted and married to women or partnered with women.

    There are a whole shit load of latent bisexuals masquerading around as gay men because they are ignorant of the fact that bisexual doesn’t only mean an equal attraction to both genders, they want a relationship with a man and are just sexually attracted to women, or they’re too scared to admit it because they’ve invested so much of their time and energy cultivating a gay identity. Also the fact that a lot of gay men are bi p hobic and practice bisexual erasure towards bisexual men, plays a huge part in why more ‘gay’ identified men who are actually bisexual don’t actually call themselves bisexual.

    The dirty little secret that never gets addressed in the so called “gay” world is the fact that many gay men do go through a second coming out and re-identify as bisexual. These men may still overwhelmingly prefer men, but their orientation and identity are not exclusively towards men. And how their attraction to both sexes manifests differently as well.

    I do have to say this though. A good number of men who say they are gay aren’t fully gay. They only say they are gay because they want a relationship with a guy. But a good number of them if they can’t find a guy when they are horny will just have sex with a woman and they’re sexually attracted to women as well as men so they are bisexual.

  • Derek Williams

    @David: Then you believe Republicans offer you a better deal. Go vote for them.

  • Matt

    Olav Owre LAMO Huffington post is just as bad as Fox news only it’s on the left. You’re no expert on United States politics at all and neither are your American friends. America has had a democrat majority house and senate and yet Obama still does nothing to help LGBT people and he’s a total hypocrite who will claim that he’s all for LGBT equality yet doesn’t live up to his fake promises of same gender marriage, ENDA, and actually allowing bisexuals, gay men, and lesbians to serve openly in the military and ending DADT which wasn’t ended by him but was ended by our top military officials instead.

  • David

    Derek why are you assuming that I’m going to vote Republican? I’m going to vote for whoever is running in the Green party.

  • Times2

    Ned, you’re not reading my posts. I blame progressives for not holding their candidates’ feet to the fire. Politicians are mainly interested in power. That is why Obama is totally comfortable lying through his teeth. That his rhetoric moves left when it preserves any given cohort is just true. It as easily moves right — right beyond Bush.

    Look at Obama’s outrageous enlargement of the imperial presidency (while we weepily thank him for doing the progressive best he can elsewhere). Indefinite detention, literal murder of American citizens without trial, approval of eavesdropping, secret deals with Big Pharma that rival Bush’s, on and on. And most recently, we watch him prosecute whistle blowers under the ESPIONAGE act. Do you realize how incredibly radical that is? He exploits in every way possible the meme of terror, greedily grabbing more and more power.

    And you say he’s not a king. No he’s not. But we’re on the way to that.

    All this and yet we’re to believe he’s doing the best he can for gay people.

    I’m with Thoreau. There comes a point when voting is totally useless and that’s why millions of Americans don’t even bother to go to the polls. Only when progressives stop settling for the bone leaders like Obama throw them will “real change” occur in this country. Until then, that phrase merely spins language like an Orwellian maxim. Accuse me of “screeching” if you want. But history proves it’s the apologetic silence of the complicit that is the problem.

  • Times2

    @Derek: There you go. If I disapprove of Obama’s behavior, I must be a Republican. Exactly the hush-hush attitude of the current progressive movement. I’m surprised you didn’t say if I don’t love America, I should leave it.

    In matters of the national security state, it would not make one bit of difference if a Republican were elected. Obama has gone far, far beyond Bush in that regard. That’s why Cheney toured TV land complimenting him. Of course, it didn’t hurt that Obama refused to indict him or any of the other liars that took us to war under provably false pretenses or caused the economy to collapse through massive fraud. We should “move on” — unless you’re a whistle blower. Then you are a traitor and deserve life in prison. Nobody says a critical word about any of this here or in the media. If they were to, I guess they’d be told to shut up because Obama’s doing the best he can.

    I seriously doubt that Mitt Romney, if elected, would try to re-establish DADT at this point. And I doubt he’d attempt to scrap the Obamacare that he invented. Whether he would say nice things about gay people, I have no idea. Probably not.

    But I repeat: I want progressives to hold Obama accountable. Stop giving him a pass because he makes you feel good while you look away from the awful things he’s doing in violation of our Constitution.

  • Derek Williams

    [email protected]Times2: You want a king not a president. LGBT have to the footwork. You can pass all the laws you like but unless there is majority support, they are unenforceable.

  • Derek Williams

    @Times2: btw you misquoted me. I never stated you were a Republican. I said you should vote Republican if you think all the things in that list I quoted that were accomplished by the present Democrat administration were meaningless.

  • Times2

    @Derek: I want a king? Are you serious? You think doing the right thing without majority support means you’re a king?

    If we waited for majority support, then please tell me how the Civil Rights Act came into existence and WAS enforced? Ditto for Eisenhower’s desegregation order? The majority of Americans opposed both but they were most certainly enforced. Same, as I said earlier, for suffrage. You think the amendment was adopted, but it took majority approval to actually let them vote? And you think a poll tax continued to be exacted from black people after the Voting Rights Act was enacted until a majority said, “Hey, yeah, let’s let ’em vote”?

    The reason — and this is just simple Constitutional law – that minorities are protected is because the founders recognized that majorities can be tyrannical.

    I stand corrected about the Republican thing. You said that I should vote Republican, not that I’m a Republican.

  • Times2

    @Derek: I see you told David that he’s a Republican (or should vote Republican), too. You might wanna examine your proclivity for reflexively reacting that way. It’s exactly what I’m criticizing in the watered-down progressive movement. It’s what we used to call the “Uncle Bruce” mindset in the gay civil rights movement.

  • jason


    Most men are bisexually oriented. Even the ones that aren’t bisexually oriented will engage in sex with men due to their libido driving their behavior. One of the tenets of male sexual behavior is that, in addition to sexual orientation driving it, the male libido drives it.

    One of the reasons that women have become pushier and more prone to dressing in revealing clothing in recent decades is because they see male-male sexuality as a threat. Women want to see male-male sexuality reduced. They don’t want men turning to other men. This is achieved through stigma (which is greater on male-male than it is on female-female) and through women dressing in revealing clothing (which is permitted much more in women than it is in men).

    Male-male sexuality is thus potentially massive and, therefore, needs to be reduced. Ironically, it is not just women but also gays themselves who have reduced it. By politicizing our sexuality so much – through the gay lib movement – we have effectively reduced male-male sexuality to a margin, to the 4% that no-one really cares about.

  • Derek Williams

    @Times2: It’s all very well for you to say what “the right thing” is, but if the majority believe it’s the wrong thing, then any such law is a toothless tiger.

    Again and again you construct straw man fallacy against my posts, all the while accusing me of doing the same to you.

    Kindly read what I actually write, not what you think I write.

    I am well aware of equal protection and the paradox of the ‘tyranny of the majority’ – it was observed long ago by President John Adams.

    I never said we had to wait for a majority to agree with civil rights before enacting specific civil rights laws. I merely hold the view that it is better to try and get people onside then simply boss them around. “You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” as the saying goes.

    You come across to me as a very belligerent, impatient person with little apparent understanding of what it takes to transform a homophobic nation from one that until very recently imprisoned homosexuals in the here and now, and believed we go to eternal damnation in the hereafter, into a humane and respecting society. Moreover, 30 states have enacted statues against marriage same sex marriage.

    If 50 years ago, any president had waved his executive wand and imperially declared marriage equality, enacted ENDA and decriminalisation of homosexuality, there would have been lynchings of homosexuals, burning down of our houses and stonings in the streets. Without public education, it would set gay rights back a generation. We’re still getting this now.

    DADT repeal could have been enacted with presidential executive order on the strength of its unconstitutionality. But the President chose to let it go to Congress – he must have been aware of what happened when Clinton failed to get it through, and it got worse instead of better. I consider that a political masterstroke. By putting this to the people, and having it pass both houses, and subjecting it to a military survey which disclosed support more or less commensurate with the 70% in opinion polls, President Obama produced an outcome that is far more secure than if he had just signed an order.

    The more such rights are subjected to public debate, the more public education occurs, and the more people come out and tell their stories, then the more human we begin to appear to a public that still thinks of us as diseased, immoral, bum fucking pedophiles. Sadly, there are enough of these still around to be inflamed by the media to slow reform to a snail’s pace.

    If you can’t be bothered to do the hard yards of winning people over with good citizenship and public articulation of your cause, and are expecting the President to do it all for you overnight by forcing it on people then yes, you do want a king.

    No presidential administration before Obama ever did buckshee for us. This president has already done enough to alienate the religious right irrevocably.

    I repeat, if the majority do not approve of a law, they can all choose to disobey, enforcement is only possible at the point of a gun. I don’t see any likelihood of the military taking their tanks into the streets to enforce gay marriage.

    This question of enforceability was one of several reasons why laws against homosexuality were repealed. In Tasmania in Australia, homosexuals started turning up to police stations to have themselves arrested for homosexuality. Because there were nowhere near enough prison beds to accommodate them, and gays outnumber the military 7/1, the police refused to arrest them. That and a memo from the United Nations saw the law repealed within a few years. Now the society has changed.

    That is what I consider effective activism, homosexuals doing the footwork ourselves, highlighting the absurdity of discrimination with reductio ad absurdum civil disobedience.

    It works both ways.

  • Derek Williams

    @David: You misunderstand what the It Gets Better program was for. It was not intended to relieve schools of any responsibility for bullying of LGBT teens. It was a plea to kids on the brink of getting daddy’s gun, getting a rope out, a syringe or a razor blade to think again, and have a look at the future that awaits them if they can just hang on.

    I don’t know why you could think that it is a bad thing to try and stop a kid from necking himself. The program had the support of the Trevor Project, the Matthew Shepard Foundation, and just about anyone who cared.

    You cannot stop bullying overnight in schools, and it may be impossible every to eradicate it completely, but from my lifelong experience in education I can attest to the fact that it can be drastically reduced.

    The It Gets Better campaign was clearly a short term measure to try and keep these kids alive while we look at strategies to combat anti-gay bullying. You have to realise that we’re dealing with families whose forbears raised them to hate us, believe we are diseased, immoral beings who should be shot, or imprisoned, and certainly beaten up and victimised at every opportunity, because, they believe God Hates Fags and we’re all going to burn in hell. Changing a twisted mindset like that is not a straightforward matter, chiefly because it involves intense dialogue about their religion that spawns such hatred in the first place. The other conundrum lies in the fact that homophobia is almost certainly a by-product of closet homosexuality. Trying to sell that to a homophobe ain’t easy, but done in the right way with the tabling of the now widely available empirical research that proves this, usually shuts homophobes up for good, in my experience.

    People are working very hard to change the hearts and minds, but “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.” In the end, change has to come from within.

  • Derek Williams

    @jason: Is this just your personal opinion, or do you have empirical proof you’d like to share?

  • Derek Williams

    @Derek Williams:


    my para 5: “then simply boss them around”
    – should read: “than simply boss them around”

    my para 6: “30 states have enacted statues against marriage same sex marriage.”
    – should read: “30 states have enacted statues against same sex marriage.”

  • Drew

    Jason, actually most men are heterosexual and not bisexual and don’t have any interest in having sex with men at all. Yes bisexuality in men exists but even sexologists who do research on human sexuality and even Kinsey himself never claimed that 90% or even 50% of the male population is bisexual. At best bisexual men represent 10% or even as much as 15% of the population but not 90% like heterosexuals do.

  • Seattlequeer

    Derek, if you think that the It gets better project is about helping suicidal LGBT teens you haven’t been paying attention. It’s as someone else said a way for Dan Savage who I also agree is a highly big o ted, trans pho bic, and bi pho bic individual and drama queen a reality TV show on MTV, money, and self promotion. The closeted Z list actors and celebrities who made It gets better videos or who were in the MTV special did so not because they cared about LGBT teens who are suicidal but for blatant attention and self promotion PR bull shit.

  • Derek Williams

    @Seattlequeer: I certainly have been paying attention, yet I have watched hundreds of these ‘It Gets Better’ videos and never once saw Dan Savage in any of them.

    If this entire project which had the active support and participation of the White House among others, was created solely for the purposes of furthering the career of Mr Savage, then I’m afraid it was entirely lost on me. Until you mentioned his name, I had never heard of Dan Savage.

    Are you also contemptuous of Joel Burns’s heartbroken address to the Fort Worth Council meeting that spearheaded the promulgation of It Gets Better?

    While there are clearly questions as to the efficacy of It Gets Better, when some of those who made these videos subsequently still succumbed to depression and ended their short lives, I cannot for one moment believe anyone would deliberately start the project with that foreknowledge.

    You can be contemptuous as you like of all the hundreds of youth, parents, clergy and politicians who got involved, but I’d still rather have that than nothing, and as I said it’s a short term measure, the long term solution is highly complex.

    Changing the hearts and minds of people who hate us with a passion to the point of homicide is not quickly or easily fixed. However I don’t see your seething contempt and scornful attitude as helpful to anybody. It seems to me you do nothing but criticise.

    I have the runs on the board in terms activism over decades of first hand involvement with government funded LGBT youth helplines, anti-violence projects and legislative reform.

    What have you done to help suicidal LGBT Youth?

    As for your notion that people get involved in LGBT issues for self promotion, I don’t know what part of the country you’ve been living in recently, but globally LGBT are a massively disliked minority. For what possible reason would anyone even bother complicating their otherwise comfortable lives with problems of LGBT welfare, when there are so very many more heterosexual youth that they could assist with absolutely zero backlash?

  • jason


    Male sexual feelings are guided by libido and not just orientation. Therefore, a man’s sexual feelings are a mix of the two.

    How men behave sexually is determined not just by orientation but also by libido Male sexual behavior is controlled by stigma. I would say that, if you were to segregate all men away from women, virtually all men would engage in sexual activity with each other provided they were able to overcome the stigma.

    The politicizaton of gay rights by Gay Inc has reduced us to the mythical 4% when, in fact, male-male sexuality is a concept that is pervasive in virtually all men due to their high libidos. This explains a lot of the homophobia towards men, a homophobia that is greater than that demonstrated towards women.

    If we were the mythical 4%, society wouldn’t be so opposed to us. We’d be s small harmless fraction. But because male sexuality – and hence male to male sexuality – is pervasive, it needs to be controlled by stigma, much of which is imposed by women.

  • Times2

    Actually, Derek, it is perfectly fine to me if you revise yourself, which you do constantly here. I’m sure you’d say you are “clarifying.” Or, of course, that I’m too shrill to read your mind.

    This is what you wrote in your last post:

    “I never said we had to wait for a majority to agree with civil rights before enacting specific civil rights laws. I merely hold the view that it is better to try and get people onside then simply boss them around. “You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar” as the saying goes.”

    This is what you wrote earlier: “You can pass all the laws you like but unless there is majority support, they are unenforceable.”

    I then asked you how you explain adoption AND ENFORCEMENT of the Civil Rights Act in the absence of majority support. Instead of answering, you announce that I didn’t read what you said correctly and you then turn the question of “enforcement” into one of the law’s adoption. And you do such tricks repeatedly.

    You also have quite a strong penchant for the usual reactionary style of attacking people personally: I’m “a very belligerent, impatient person with little apparent understanding of what it takes to transform a homophobic nation.” And (paraphrasing): “Then go ahead and vote Republican,” as if detesting Obama’s lying means one would rationally vote Republican…because there apparently aren’t write-in and third-party options. Oh yes, I know. That will be Ralph Nader all over again. Well, that’s what happens when people vote their convictions in the absence of real leadership. That’s why we need a real movement — something as strong as the Tea Partiers.

    And then there’s this: “If 50 years ago, any president had waved his executive wand and imperially declared marriage equality, enacted ENDA and decriminalisation of homosexuality, there would have been lynchings of homosexuals, burning down of our houses and stonings in the streets. Without public education, it would set gay rights back a generation. We’re still getting this now.”

    Would you care to explain what you base this virtual Kristallnach on other than your own fear. When Eisenhower sent in the military to desegregate Alabama schools, was there anything like the nightmare you’re describing? I’m certainly aware that a few churches were bombed and Freedom Riders were murdered during the civil rights struggle. There was real terror, but nothing on the genocidal scale you’re describing happened. It’s not as if gay people aren’t being killed now. Hello, hate crimes legislation.

    I think your “measured” strategy is the one most progressives advocate and its failure is obvious. So, as you suggested to me, vote for Obama and give him a pass on his constant reversals and institutionalization of the worst of Bush’s ad hoc policies. Watch HIM gather more imperial power to the presidency in national security matters (and that is undeniable). Meanwhile tell yourself that the same man who kills American citizens without judicial involvement and brands whistle blowers traitors really, truly cares about you in his heart of hearts. I know: straw man. His ignoring the Constitution in one area has nothing to do with us.

    I’ve enjoyed the debate. It’s clear by this point that we’re not changing one another’s mind and, actually, I think the debate is healthy. While ACT UP was screeching (Ned’s word) in the streets, it was also meeting face-to-face with FDA officials. My overall point is that the latter is not going to work without much more of the former. The past,as I’ve said, is full of examples of that and the accomplishments of the 99-percent movement has already demonstrated that too.

    Thanks for the discussion.

  • Tomas

    Derek, Joel Burns’ speech did nothing to start the It gets better project. It gets better was started by that media whore Dan Savage for no other reason than to get Savage media exposure, a reality TV show on MTV, and to self promote himself and his brand. I agree that Savage is r_acist, biph_obic, and transph_obic, and not any sort of avocate or ally for the LGBT community just because he’s a media and fame whore who wants to get rich from the suffering of LGBT youth and LGBT people who have been bullied and who are suicidal.

    Jason you clearly know nothing about human sexuality or LGBT people. Not every man is bisexual or has bisexual tendencies, and even if you did somehow segregate men away from women most men would not somehow have sex with other men if they’re heterosexual.

  • Derek Williams

    @Tomas: That makes absolutely no sense. For a start, LGBT are an intensely disliked minority, so why would anyone in their right mind launch a career lassoed to gay suicides when straight suicides would be 10x more popular?

    Secondly, despite having so far watched hundreds of these It Gets Better videos, I never heard of Mr Savage until yesterday, so his alleged self promotion was a huge flop. I also asked around a few friends, gay and straight – most have heard of It Gets Better, but not one ever heard of this elusive Mr Dan Savage.

  • Nick

    Derek-Way to be a professional victim. LGBT people are NOT an intensely disliked minority and anyone who has been paying attention to the It gets better campaign or media sham should realize that LGBT at risk youth are not watching the videos, and we’ve seen an entire generation of LGBT youth who did make or even watch IGB videos and who were involved with the Trevor Project kill themselves. This is not to say that most or even ALL LGBT people are suicidal since most are not even if as a gay male friend of mine says that “Bullying has become the new AIDS!”

    Dan Savage is the creator of the failed it gets better project, and as others have said IGB is a snakeoil media sham.

  • Derek Williams

    @Nick: Your contention is that we are “not a disliked minority”. How then do you explain bashings, bullying, discrimination, incarceration, suicide, entrapment, execution, disenfranchisement, religious condemnation and ostracism, chemical castration, aversion therapy, the death penalty in Islamic regimes and homophobia itself? Are all subjected to these really “professional victims”?

    A study by the British Psychological Society revealed that extreme prejudices are highest against gay men, followed by lesbians, while some prejudices can be found in 41% of people polled against lesbians and 35% against gay men.

    The study, being released January 16, 2009 at the British Psychological Society’s Division of Occupational Psychology Annual conference indicated:

    “The main prejudice that was revealed related to sexual orientation. Results from the tests classified seven per cent of the participants as being strongly anti-gay and three percent as being anti-Lesbian, a further 35 per cent displayed some anti-gay predilection and 41 per cent some anti-lesbian prejudice. These negative implicit attitudes were stronger than those for age, gender, religion, disability or even ethnic origin, where 28 per cent of the sample showed some prejudice towards Asian people, 25 per cent against Black people and 18 per cent against South East Asian people.”

  • Nick

    Derek Williams, I’m glad I don’t live in your world where everyone that’s LGBT is a professional victim.

  • Nick

    I voted for Obama the first time I’m not going to vote for him again. No I’m not going to vote for a Republican either. Barak is such a fake politician like they all are and like all politicians he promises the moon to you yet doesn’t actually do anything or deliver those promises especially when it comes to actually ending DADT so bisexual, gay, and lesbian, and even Trans people can serve openly in the military, getting rid of DOMA, passing ENDA, and actually being supportive of LGBT people, our rights, and our fight for equality.

  • Ned Flaherty

    @Nick: Nick, if any of your issues are important to you at all, then you must vote for the best candidate available to you.

    You complain that politicians promise more than they deliver. So what? Regardless of how true that is or isn’t, you always have only 3 choices:

    1 – Vote for anyone who vows to oppress you forever, and accept what they do to you (they could return all LGBT people to automatic criminal status, re-outlaw our sex lives, re-outlaw sharing an apartment, cancel existing marriages, retain the 40% pay cut for soldiers with same-gender spouses, etc.).
    2 – Vote for no one, and forfeit any say in what happens to you later (see above).
    3 – Vote for whoever promises you the best, and accept some fraction of that.

    A. Obama promised to sign every LGBT-friendly law that Congress writes, and he has not failed us (although Congress often fails us, because we let them).

    B. Romney & friends vow to continue supporting the official Republican platform of permanent oppression for all LGBT people, everywhere, forever.

    Your only 2 choices (A vs. B above) are starkly different.

    Even if you don’t care about yourself, or your welfare, or your fate, think of your fellow LGBT people, and vote in the way that they would most appreciate. It’s the least you can do.

  • Derek Williams

    @Nick: No-one in “my world” is a professional victim.

  • Derek Williams

    @Nick: No-one in “my world” is a “professional victim”.

  • Derek Williams

    @Times2: Far more activist work needs to be done by the LGBT minority to deliver the President some prospect that his Executive Order won’t be laughed at and universally disobeyed. Personally I am against the Executive Order because it shows the President to be acting against the will of the people. Just as was accomplished with DADT Repeal, this should be passed at Congress, because only then will it show the country that Americans are starting to accept LGBT as citizens.

    If the President signs an executive order that forces people who hate homosexuals to employ us regardless, that will achieve nothing but open hostility, and zero compliance, with enforcement tying up the courts for years.

    Of course civil rights should not be subject to the whim of the majority, but there is no point in such an executive order being issued if it won’t be respected. This kind of law is largely symbolic and almost impossible to enforce. The net result of such foolishness is to diminish the power of the executive order and all future executive orders once it becomes apparent they can be flouted with impunity.

    It is up to us to address the root causes of why people hate us, and don’t want to employ us in the first place. This takes hard work, but there is no other way. Decreeing a law without going to the people, that forces homophobes to employ the very homosexuals they despise will produce nothing but grief for homosexuals in such workplaces.

  • Ned Flaherty

    It is useless to wish for, or depend upon, an Executive Order that any future president can alter or cancel at any moment without anyone’s permission.

    To be lasting and permanent and effective, the protection we really want has to be written by Congress and enacted as an untouchable law (not just a temporary president’s whim/whimsy), and it has to be applicable to all employers (not just federal contractors).

    Instead of fighting the President over this small skirmish related only to federal contractors, American’s 31 million LGBT citizen should hold every Congressional obstructionist responsible, and make each and every one of them un-electable, if they don’t pass the full, all-employer version of ENDA now.

    President Obama is not the problem here; Congress is. And we are responsible for allowing Congress to continue to ignore and dismiss us. All the wrath should be directed at the Congressional opponents of equality, not at the one president who’s done more for LGBTs than all other presidents combined.

  • Vadren

    Obama and the radical capitalist warmongering democrats have failed the gay community, excepting the log-cabin republicans, whose ideals he has embraced in combining token scraps to GLBT people mixed with his agenda of endless war, enriching wall street fat cats, and using the espionage act to crack down on more government whistle blowers than all previous presidents combined.

    Under the O-bomber gay whistleblower Bradley Manning was tortured in solitary confinement and will possibly face the death penalty for leaking evidence of war crimes to the international community. Meanwhile, under he and his party’s right wing economic policies, young GLBT people have been adversely affected. A hugely disproportionate number of homeless youth are GLBT, and they are being left to rot on the streets and be exploited while people focus on marriage and making sure that openly gay soldeirs can fight in the coming war against Iran that both political parties want.

    I will never support Obama, and if you do, you are the problem, you are anti-gay.

  • Ned Flaherty

    Vadren, most of your complaints about Obama may have some marginal validity, especially to an idealist or a perfectionist, but everything of which you complain would be 10-100 times worse under John McCain (over the last 4 years) or Mitt Romney (over the next 4 years).

    Furthermore, warmongering, Wall Street subsidies, and whistleblower crackdowns are all the product of a Republican-dominated Congress, not Obama. He can only act upon laws that they send to him.

    Finally, young LGBT homelessness was neither invented by Obama, nor aggravated by him; it is the long-term product of a careless, negligent Congress which values tax breaks to oil companies more than shelter to homeless kids.

    Focus your anger where it’s deserved: Congress, especially the Republican party leaders whose official platforms are dedicated to oppressing LGBT people everywhere, forever. By comparison, Obama’s slight faults are pale, indeed.

  • Vadren

    Everything I hate would be 100 times the SAME under Romney or Mccain. The democrats and republicans are the same, and their followers are the same in spreading their vapid partisan propaganda to pretend that they are so different. I love the ‘slight faults’ of ordering the assassinations of 16 year old US citizens, expanding the war in Afghanistan, ordering more drone attacks then president Bush did in his two terms, murdering over 500 civilians in the process (including women, children, and yes, GAY PEOPLE!) ensuring that the healthcare policy we got was not single payer or even public option, but corporate healthcare, waging war on Libya without even asking congress, putting off the Bush tax cuts until a time when his shallow right wing democrats lost power…

    No amount of ‘blame the republicans’ propaganda can wash away the stains of this war criminal scumbag who stacked his department with wall street traitors. You have failed to even address my point about Bradley Manning. It can NOT get any worse than torture, solitary confinement, and a show trial with Obama having already proclaimed him guilty before it even began. Obama and all the democrats and republicans are the 1%. We will tear them away, we have real principals, not just party loyalty.

  • Ned Flaherty

    You write that both parties are the same. That’s untrue. If they were the same, then proposed laws would never be filibustered, and would always pass quickly. In fact, however, the Republicans admit that one of the ways they are trying to ruin Obama’s first term is by blocking any legislation that he would sign while concurrently blaming him for doing nothing.

    Because you dislike both parties equally, you think — incorrectly — that both must be the same. They are not. Your dislike of each is so great, however, that it blinds you to the distinctions.

    You complain that national health care omits single-payer and omits the public option, but you ignore that fact that both were attempted by Democrats, and defeated by Republicans. These are just two of the stark party differences to which you remain blind.

    Yes, Manning was tortured at the Marine prison, but once public complaints escalated to the White House, he was moved to a separate facility, and treated fairly and humanely from that point forward, according to his own lawyers.

    You write that all Republicans and all Democrats are “the 1%”. That’s untrue. The members of both parties now total 69% of the population, not 1%. You also write that “we will tear them away” but don’t say who “we” are, and you don’t say from what they’ll be torn, and you don’t say where the torn will be sent.

    You write that you have “principals” but that’s impossible; you meant “principles.”

    Your anger may be justified, but it is so out of control that it prevents you from proposing any usable solutions. Think Rumplestiltskin, the Brothers Grimm fairy tale character whose angry rage ruined any possibility of a resolution in his favor.

  • Derek Williams

    People, my apologies for this random post, but I am hoping you might go to a YouTube video about bashings at a Pride Parade in Serbia and post comments to rebut the tide of LGBT hate. Some are calling for all gays to be killed, gassed, bashed etc, others post “God Hates Fags” type comments. It helps if you vote down the video, and vote down the hate comments, as well as vote up the supportive ones. Even better, if you feel inclined to post a comment of your own too!

    You can skip past the intro ad in a few seconds.

Comments are closed.