Equality is necessary, but it is not enough.
December 23, 2015 8:46 AM   Subscribe

"Last week the Empire State Pride Agenda, one of the nation's largest LGBT advocacy groups, announced its closure. This came on the same day that staff members of Freedom to Marry finished packing up their cubicles, and a few weeks after cutbacks had been announced by other gay equality groups. For decades the LGBT movement has advocated for legal equality. The new LGBT movement should recognize that equality is necessary, but it is not enough." posted by roomthreeseventeen (55 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite
 
This is a damn fucking shame and i've been pissy about it all month. So many people seem to think the work is done now but with the increasingly unhinged behavior coming from the right i can't see how becoming complacent is anything but a horrible mistake.

Also i will miss their galas lbr
posted by poffin boffin at 8:59 AM on December 23, 2015 [8 favorites]


Well for one thing, we should have an organization that tries to get the NY Times style guide to drop the periods in "L.G.B.T."

But more seriously, I hope that those organizations that stick around realize that their existing robust organizations could be used to make a lot of other things better now that their original missions have been allegedly met.

(though Empire State Pride's "original mission" had to do with the AIDS crisis, and it's serious bullshit if people don't really think that issue still needs some lobbying force behind it)
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:04 AM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I want to start a movement to either alphabetize the insufferable "LGBT" or use something less embarrassing when our self-appointed advocates are pontificating on behalf of a whole fake community, because I'm not elgeebeetee and a mature movement deserves mature semiotics.
posted by sonascope at 9:13 AM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


a mature movement deserves mature semiotics.

I thought the preferred nomenclature was "queer"? Serious question.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:15 AM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's a decent alternative (which I've used for a while, myself), but the de facto powers-that-be rejected it outright in favor of either the insipid LGBT or an ever-expanding alphabet soup initialism that isn't so much inclusive as it is minimizing of the different needs and character of diverse subsections of the gender-variant category of human identity.
posted by sonascope at 9:21 AM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


Doesn't the demise of these organisations mean that their cause is now mainstream, generally accepted and there is no more need for lobbying?

Just saying..
posted by fordiebianco at 9:35 AM on December 23, 2015


I like "QUILTBAG;" it's not all that common, but everything that may not be contained in one of the letters is contained in the bag itself.
posted by aniola at 9:41 AM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


their cause is now mainstream, generally accepted and there is no more need for lobbying

We are still being beaten to death. Denied jobs, denied housing. Some of our community are still being portrayed as terrifying rapists for wanting to use a public bathroom.

We are not mainstream. We are not generally accepted.
posted by mittens at 9:45 AM on December 23, 2015 [41 favorites]


Thanks for putting me on the back of the bus while the rest of you all fight for the right to marry, and thanks for pulling that bus over and getting off now that you all are getting all gay happy married and shit.

thanks a lot. We'll be over here watching our black sisters being murdered in record numbers, no big deal.
posted by Annika Cicada at 9:48 AM on December 23, 2015 [34 favorites]


Bourgeois as fuck, is what this is.
posted by murphy slaw at 9:53 AM on December 23, 2015 [6 favorites]


Yeah, the "LGBT" equality movement was mostly to make it mainstreamish to be a white cis male gay couple, as long as they want to buy into the ideal of basically turning into a straight married couple.
posted by Automocar at 9:55 AM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


Who didn't see this coming a mile away though? :/
posted by Foosnark at 10:08 AM on December 23, 2015


[A couple of comments deleted. Don't come in here to say "problems other people face aren't important problems" - that's not a good way to engage. If you think this isn't a big deal or worth talking about, you can just skip the thread.]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:23 AM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


I think that at least some of these groups might have stayed open and active if they'd changed their names to Well What About Kim Davis? Srsly, though, all you have to do is check some of the better gay blogs like Joe My God to see that the anti-QUILTBAG-or-whatever-you-call-it groups are not giving up so easily; they'll fundraise on so-called "religious exemption" stuff or transpeople in bathrooms or whatever they can.
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:28 AM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Called it.
posted by klanawa at 10:29 AM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I think that at least some of these groups might have stayed open and active if they'd changed their names to Well What About Kim Davis?

To be fair, there are only two major organizations that have closed, and one of them was called Freedom to Marry.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:30 AM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


Freedom to marry also includes "let's make sure all the LGBT people have equal access to love" you know.
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:37 AM on December 23, 2015


Freedom to marry also includes "let's make sure all the LGBT people have equal access to love" you know.

Sure it does. But their mission statement was "Freedom to Marry is the campaign to win marriage nationwide." And for whatever reason, they decided not to evolve their statement and keep going.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:40 AM on December 23, 2015


I think "whatever reason" is open for critique.
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:44 AM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


Absolutely.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:46 AM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


Thanks for putting me on the back of the bus while the rest of you all fight for the right to marry, and thanks for pulling that bus over and getting off now that you all are getting all gay happy married and shit.

Yeah. I've felt that the fight for marriage has sucked all the oxygen out of the room, and didn't leave much space or money left for other queer issues. I was active in the fight over here, I donated, I did my part - but as someone who has been single more often than partnered, and who doesn't envision getting married and adopting babies - I often felt that I was fighting for allies rather than fighting for myself & my own rights and needs and values.

I'm hoping that the groups that remain can move on to other issues now.

With that:

Yeah, the "LGBT" equality movement was mostly to make it mainstreamish to be a white cis male gay couple, as long as they want to buy into the ideal of basically turning into a straight married couple.

1) I know quite a few non-white non-male non-cis couples who fought hard and are now happily married.
2) "white cis male gay" seems to be one of the more popular passive-aggressive insult s on metafilter.
posted by kanewai at 11:00 AM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


So my critique is:

Their goal and reason for existing, having been achieved, places a burden on trans women, and trans women of color more acutely because the right wing conservative war chest that was used to fight gay marriage is now being trained on trans people. To take your money and not put it directly into fighting for trans equality is shitting on us a third time, the first being putting trans people at the back of the line 15 years ago, the second being winning marriage equality without trans protections in place and the third forgetting about us when you got yours as the right wing is retraining their sights on us and we really need help now. LIKE NOW.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:02 AM on December 23, 2015 [18 favorites]


2) "white cis male gay" seems to be one of the more popular passive-aggressive insult s on metafilter.

It's actually an aggressive phrasing (that I'm totally fine with) but only taken as an insult if you think it's an insult to point out that focusing the majority of a movement's energy into mainstreaming those at the top of the acceptability pyramid while sucking energy from all the rest.

Personally, as a white cis male gay, I'm pretty okay with that. YMMV.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:05 AM on December 23, 2015 [14 favorites]


More non-profits should dissolve when they achieve their purposes.

Failing to do so ends up in mission creep, fundraising for the main purpose of salary paying, and distortion / violation of donor intent.

It also can end up with domination of the effort to achieve new purposes by organizations which are fundamentally unsuited to it by organization and leadership.

The movement for gay marriage was in the main by and for otherwise-apolitical (and not infrequently otherwise-conservative) middle-class and upper-class non-transgender gays and lesbians. There is no good reason to believe that organizations with the principal mission of gay marriage would be effective at pursuing transgender causes, or causes with a chiefly left-wing orientation, or causes oriented towards the poor or otherwise marginalized.
posted by MattD at 11:41 AM on December 23, 2015 [11 favorites]


Marriage equality without trans protection is not finished.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:49 AM on December 23, 2015 [19 favorites]


Laws can be repealed.

As we've seen with abortion, anti-rights zealots will continue to use the most marginal cases as wedges to legally enforce their personal beliefs upon the rest of us.

As long as one person feels different and is marginalized because of that difference, there should be organizations that accept that person's difference and help to integrate that person's difference into the rest of society.

Everyone loses when those organizations die and decay, for whatever reason. I understand MattD's concerns about mission creep and non-profit salary capture. At the same time, it is much more effective for other, less accomplished organizations to integrate their predecessors' experiences and frameworks into themselves.
posted by infinitewindow at 11:49 AM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


I'm a lesbian. I still have some work to do before I can get married "as me". The state of Texas is still fucking me around with my gender in ways that to me does not make getting married a "valid union" in the eyes of the state, because the state does not fully recognize my gender as valid.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:51 AM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]




Unless I'm mistaken and marriage equality meant "cis gay married only".
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:53 AM on December 23, 2015


I don't understand why these organizations cannot transition into the other priorities stated in the last link?

I agree that a transition needs to be made, but these groups already have a lot of the resources necessary to begin those fights, never mind the experience to fight for causes. Trashing them and starting over seems awfully inefficient.
posted by lownote at 11:56 AM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


The groups opposing gay marriage sure haven't had a hard time retooling into anti-trans initiative organizations.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:58 AM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


"Screw you, got mine." -- way too often how the L and the G act towards the B and especially the T.
posted by andreaazure at 12:00 PM on December 23, 2015 [9 favorites]


I still have some work to do before I can get married "as me".

Is this specific to marriage, or a general "government form that requires gender" issue? Just curious if Texas has some weird marriage requirements.
posted by smackfu at 12:07 PM on December 23, 2015


The state will only officially recognize your "assigned at birth" gender.
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:09 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


There's a very vague clause in place for intersex people, and it's up to the judges discretion to decide, but even then there's no promise you'll be able to get your birth certificate amended.

It's like knowing how to get what you want when it's not on the menu, and not really sure if it's gonna work when you ask. So yeah there's a way to hack it, maybe? I hope?
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:15 PM on December 23, 2015


Marriage equality without trans protection is not finished.

I took MattD's point to be that the particular organizations that formed around the issue of marriage equality might not be effective in finishing the job to include trans protection, and the fact of their disbanding would seem to me to be evidence to support his position rather than an argument against it.

As someone who experienced the political struggle for gay marriage as a campaign that employed the attention of gay activists in a cause that was, at it's most fundamental level, conservative, I'm not unhappy to see institutions created to pursue that goal disbanding. I'm skeptical that much of the money and energy they were able to command will be re-directed toward more radical projects, but I do at least hope that some of it is.
posted by layceepee at 12:34 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I thought the preferred nomenclature was "queer"? Serious question.

No. Some people identify as queer, sure, and it has become more popular amongst younger folks, but there are two major issues. First, like f*ggot it was/is used to bully people and hasn't been fully reclaimed. Second, it describes a person's sexuality and occasionally a non-binary gender identity (as in "genderqueer") and does not include binary trans people.

I am a gay trans male. I think it would muddy the waters to call myself queer - people would have very different interpretations of what that meant. To me it often calls up an image of an androgynous pansexual.

There really cannot be an umbrella term that also includes trans people because many, if not most, trans people are straight. Those have little in common with LGB folks. Even the non-hetero ones face very different issues. Outright hostility and harassment from LGB folks towards trans people is very, very common. Even though I'm gay I don't feel completely safe or welcomed in supposed "LGBT" spaces.

Trans people need allies because they have the lowest numbers of any of the groups, face the highest poverty rates, and face the most violence and discrimination. There are definitely trans advocacy groups out there but they can't match the funding or media attention that cis lesbian and gay groups get.
posted by desjardins at 12:55 PM on December 23, 2015 [12 favorites]


My goal is to be to be a person to those around me and not a G mixed into a shifting, distancing politicized generalizing initialism. I'm not "a" gay or "a" G—I'm Joe. Nice to meet you.

My T friends include Rachel, and Kris, and I understand far more about the issues of T from knowing Rachel and Kris than I ever got from the drumbeat of academic reductive mass inclusion. My S friends, if you take the alphabet soup more broadly, know more about me being me than me being G, which is fine, because I'm not "a" G or "a" gay or "a" anything. I'm just Joe. "Gay" describes my affections and my behavior, but I was Joe long before I got stuck with the relics of primitive activism in the form of identity assignment that's why I'm also stuck with the double-take I get from people who figure out something about me when I participate in the usual cut-and-thrust of post-curling broomstacking and my language includes the cues that clue one into what I'm into, or when an unexpected gender pronoun flickers by in a mention that my ex has custody of my dogs for the weekend.

"Wait—" comes a beat after, in the midst of a spirited discussion of champion curler Kevin Martin, to whom I attribute my actually diving into our peculiar little sport because of my hots for everyday-looking middle-aged dudes. "Uh...are you gay?"

"What!?" I like to exclaim, because I'm never one to miss an opportunity to be a blowsy provocateur and use my Frank Nelson outraged voice, "Just because I can't believe Kevin Martin can skip without melting a hole in the ice with his hot self, I'm tagged as a homosexual?"

"Oh, no, I mean, erm, uh—"

"I'm just fucking with you. Yeah, I dig dudes," I interrupt, then continue where we'd left off before that little commercial interlude.

And I want people to know me, and know that I am kind and generous and compassionate, by knowing me and not where I fit on some little roster of cut-and-dried identities, and I learned the hard way that I didn't really understand T as I assumed I did, by virtue of knowing people like my friends Kris and Rachel, who are people with identities and not just floating disconnected types that I'm supposed to support because we can't seem to let the clunkiest iron-age tools of activism go. I got to understand A by knowing a person, too, and I understand the Ls in my life as, say, Julie and Liz and Sheila and Ann and Sharon instead of as lines in a 1970s manifesto.

My family, too, knew about G, but they knew and continue to know my ex, Paul, as Paul, the polite, reserved UNC college basketball fanatic and devout fisherman, and attitudes among my family in the supposedly intractable deep South have been considerably moderated or changed outright from knowing me and knowing the company I keep.

"Kid," my dad said, "Did you know Paul sent us a thank-you note after we had him over for dinner the other night?"

"Yeah, he does that. He's straight out of 1952, sometimes."

"Classy guy. You ought to hang on to that one."

And amusingly, I have, though we split up eighteen years ago, and he's still uncle to my nieces and my mother's confidant and Chinese food lunch buddy and the friend who knows me best, not least because he's had the grand tour of my corpus delicti. In the era of not hiding who you are, down to the details that used to be something to dance around and dodge, we don't need to beat our bosoms with the alphabet, clinging to the seductive myth of a community of types of attraction, and without that, we can sort out the things that aren't just easy parallels, like what the experience is of people who deviate from the predominant gender constructions and expectations. It's harder work, and requires more patience and more direct, personal connection and less waving of rainbow flags and repetition of slogans and familiar comebacks.

Marriage was a big win, and access to the military was a big win, and improvements in mass media and social media presence is a big win, too, but those should be the spearhead for us to dig in for the long-term fight, which is to normalize our place in the culture alongside those who aren't regularly required to advocate for the validity of their existence and their own je ne sais quoi, and I think we'd all do a lot better to just be out there, being good, kind, everyday kinds of people, whatever kind we are, so that the way we live is neither exotic nor scary, even to those with the most profound doubts.

Let the pronouns fall where they may, strip away the delusion that there's something about us that's really that different from anyone else, and be you.
posted by sonascope at 1:52 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


Marriage was a big win, and access to the military was a big win, and improvements in mass media and social media presence is a big win, too, but those should be the spearhead for us to dig in for the long-term fight, which is to normalize our place in the culture alongside those who aren't regularly required to advocate for the validity of their existence and their own je ne sais quoi, and I think we'd all do a lot better to just be out there, being good, kind, everyday kinds of people, whatever kind we are, so that the way we live is neither exotic nor scary, even to those with the most profound doubts.

I mean yes, absolutely, but when it comes to the trans community in particular right now, there's a considerable amount of resources being devoted to making our transgender friends, family, and neighbors seem "exotic and scary" at every turn. They continue to be attacked, physically, legally, and mentally. And everyone just living their good and happy everyday lives isn't enough to address that problem.

You're right that activism can involve depersonalizing and labeling the very groups it seeks to support, which is a real problem, but there's still definitely a place for activism and political campaigns, because equality 'aint here yet.
posted by zachlipton at 2:06 PM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


sonascope: "I want to start a movement to either alphabetize the insufferable "LGBT" or use something less embarrassing when our self-appointed advocates are pontificating on behalf of a whole fake community, because I'm not elgeebeetee and a mature movement deserves mature semiotics."

BGLT sounds like a sandwich.
posted by Splunge at 3:28 PM on December 23, 2015


At one point in the mid-90s we were using GBLT, spoken as "giblet".

It was cute, but somehow didn't work for me.
posted by hippybear at 3:39 PM on December 23, 2015


It's kind of weird and probably a major loss that that general advocacy group is shuttering, but I actually think it's awesome that Freedom to Marry is announcing Mission Accomplished. For anyone working in a mission-driven field, there's a background awareness somewhere around the fact that success means eventually laying yourself off, and that vested interest is inherently awkward. I feel like that's how a lot of mission creep happens. So I actually really appreciate this org setting an example for "we were a single issue campaign; we did what we said we'd do; exeunt".

It's not like all the people involved were ceremonially thrown into a sinkhole or something. Now they can apply their skills in service of further goals.
posted by threeants at 3:47 PM on December 23, 2015


And I totally get the critiques re leaving various populations in the dust. But the individuals involved with Freedom to Marry now have more opportunity to engage, say, the struggle for trans rights, if that's something they're motivated to do.
posted by threeants at 4:06 PM on December 23, 2015


But yeah, with regard to Empire State Pride Agenda, that's appalling bullshit. My hedgier words on that were before I had thought through what their closure is supposed to represent. It seems like a seriously unhinged decision to make. Like, Jesus, if the chair or director or whoever was getting bored of the work, just give your fucking notice like everyone else in the world.
posted by threeants at 4:10 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


infinitewindow: "Laws can be repealed."

Marriage equality support has been both trending upwards for decades and has higher support among younger cohorts. This is much different than abortion access whose support has been basically flat since Roe vs. Wade.

Not saying it could never happen but having your marriage annulled by a change in law in the US at this point would probably be the least of your worries if it was to come about. You'd be deep into a constitutional crisis or worse at that point. It'd be like rolling back female suffrage.
posted by Mitheral at 4:29 PM on December 23, 2015


A change in law wouldn't cut it at his point; it would require a constitutional amendment.
posted by Justinian at 5:17 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


About 18 months ago, I made these bumper stickers that say "Our Work's Not Done When Marriage Rights Are Won" for me and some friends. I still have some; if anybody wants one, memail me your address and I'll pop one in the mail to you.
posted by not that girl at 7:32 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


I worked with a LGBTQ people of color organization, and one of our supporters was someone who worked very hard on the whole gay marriage agenda. He was on the city's Human Rights Commission, and he talked to us at length about how disappointed he was that all of these organizations were wasting absolutely valuable resources and email listings and donation funds that could be used to support other intersectional political efforts, like immigration reform or trans rights.

This is why I have a major issue with LGBT politics, because it has so much trouble seeing outside of itself and its ideology regarding gay marriage and mainstream societal mainlining. It's just disgusting and so hard and I'm getting so upset just thinking about it that I can barely write anymore.
posted by yueliang at 7:43 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


Gay politics didn't used to be this way. There was a strong arm of the movement arguing throughout the 70s and 80s that queer folk represented a new insight into human society, walking a line between societal gender norms and learning lessons which were valuable to society at large. It's the domain of the Radical Faeries and the Leather Dykes and many other groups, transpersons included.

It's entirely gotten lost over the past decade or two, but it was once a very powerful force in the LGBT struggle. It's an energy I sharply sense the lack of today. There are lessons and energies about what it means to learn you are queer in a heteronormative society that are worthwhile to develop and preserve and magnify within the larger society. This is all getting forgotten now.
posted by hippybear at 8:05 PM on December 23, 2015 [6 favorites]


A change in law wouldn't cut it at his point; it would require a constitutional amendment.

If only. Look at what's happened to abortion rights. These things can be rolled back frighteningly quickly, constitutionally protected or not.
posted by Proofs and Refutations at 8:23 PM on December 23, 2015


Expecting Freedom to Marry to keep operating after undertaking their core mission seems odd to me. For one, this is an organization that was build around a personal mission of one person; Wolfson wrote his law school thesis on the subject over thirty years ago. For another, it's not like this is a person who didn't do his time in the trenches before FtM came into existence. I'll be shocked if he goes off and ceases being an advocate at this point. Even if all he does is go back to Lambda Legal and frees up donations to go to that organization that's seems like a net win.
Many of the staffers are now working with a new organization that launched this summer called Freedom for All Americans. It is working on gaining protections in housing, employment and public accommodations for LGBT people.

The bipartisan campaign has one singular goal, "winning comprehensive non-discrimination protections for LGBT Americans nationwide," wrote Matt McTighe, its executive director, in an email to supporters of the group last Friday, October 23. "In 33 states, LGBT people are not fully and explicitly protected from discrimination under state law. Together, we can and we will change that."
This seems to be exactly the desired goal here right? Expand the fight. Don't suck up work and air and donations perpetuating an organization that hosts parties, finds work for people in democratic administrations, and fumbles the ball/sells out big parts of who it is supposed to represent. (Imagine me glaring in the direction of Dupont Circle as you read this)
posted by phearlez at 8:51 PM on December 23, 2015


On the HRC's failure to effectively pivot past marriage, in a recent Buzzfeed article: "'They keep on making the same mistakes over and over,' said Barbra Casbar Siperstein, a member of the DNC’s executive committee and political director of Gender Rights Advocacy Association of New Jersey, who spoke to BuzzFeed News in her own capacity and not on behalf of the organizations. 'I really don’t see that they have a plan — have they learned from the Houston experience?' Moreover, she continued, “If LGBT equality laws are being repealed locally, it’s going to make it impossible to do anything nationally.'"

On the HRC rewarding cities with anti-trans policies with a high equality index, an article from the Texas Observer. (I feel like this one may have already shown up in a recent thread?)
posted by mittens at 6:32 AM on December 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


On the HRC's failure to effectively pivot past marriage

Well let's look at this fairly - the real phrase should just be the HRC's failure. It's not like they have been big winners on marriage either, other than by being in favor of it so long as they don't have to actually commit to fighting for it until forced to. They totally dropped the ball on fighting against Prop 8 and they institutionally didn't want to get involved in suing for marriage equality at all. There's been management turnover since then but when it comes to my donation dollars I switched to FtM after 2008 and don't see any reason to go back to giving to HRC; they seem like they're continuing to just want to do the bare minimum and selling out trans folks at every opportunity.
posted by phearlez at 7:49 AM on December 24, 2015 [2 favorites]


2) "white cis male gay" seems to be one of the more popular passive-aggressive insult s on metafilter.

It's actually an aggressive phrasing (that I'm totally fine with) but only taken as an insult if you think it's an insult to point out that focusing the majority of a movement's energy into mainstreaming those at the top of the acceptability pyramid while sucking energy from all the rest.

Personally, as a white cis male gay, I'm pretty okay with that. YMMV.


My problem here is that, while I agree with part of this (the movement's energy went into mainstreaming those at the top of the acceptability pyramid) the movement was neither male-oriented nor - at least in my corner of the world - even majority white. I also know trans fok who were heavily invested in the fight.

Redefining the fight for gay marriage as a "white cis male" movement totally negates the involvement of everyone else. It erases them from the record.
posted by kanewai at 11:27 AM on December 24, 2015


It's entirely gotten lost over the past decade or two, but it was once a very powerful force in the LGBT struggle. It's an energy I sharply sense the lack of today.

From my experience, there is now a sharp political and cultural divide between those who are LGBT and queer, with queerness inheriting and taking on a lot of that power, but at the cost of potentially invisibilizing our elders before us who have struggled to be part of the LG(BT)* umbrella. More specifically, I see a lot of queer people of color continuing the history of taking the forefront of organizing any movement related to social justice (ex. Stonewall Riots and #blacklivesmatter). Mainstream LG(BT)* does not seem to concern itself with it anymore.

*I use (BT) because I think bisexuality and trans erasure is also huge within "LGBT" spaces and I think it's just been a cis/lesbian gay agenda from the past 10 years that I've seen it..
posted by yueliang at 11:47 AM on December 24, 2015


« Older I'm assuming the red nose is going to be a laser.   |   Various tales of Mrs. Santa Claus, helper and hero... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments