Does being a “shit stirrer” make Matty Healy less of a hero?

Everything came apart quickly after that. 1975 was pulled from the stage, the show was cancelled & the tour was cancelled

Published

on

By

HOLLYWOOD – Of him, columnist Alex Petridis has said, “Matty Healy is a shit stirrer. He knows how to get people talking, and he loves doing it. He’s not afraid to say what he thinks, even if it’s controversial. Sometimes it’s refreshing, and sometimes it’s just annoying. But there’s no denying that he’s a talented musician and a gifted provocateur.”

Healy is certainly a commercial and artistic success. His band, 1975 has been praised by critics who embrace its eclectic sound with elements of indie rock, pop and electronica. Their albums have all been in the top 10 on the UK and US music charts, with number 1 singles in the UK.

With that success, and attention, Healy clearly has claimed the privilege to say what he thinks and act how he feels, whenever he thinks or feels it. The bad part of his reputation ranges from being self-serving to being outright racist and misogynistic.

He has apologized and explained himself on numerous occasions, but his detractors feel so strongly that they felt Taylor Swift’s clean reputation was in danger of being soiled due to association, and possible romance, with him. He has explained himself saying, “It’s very well for me to say, I don’t understand how famous I am. I don’t like being famous. But reality is reality. And I think that I’ve said some things or kind of, I make a joke out of everything. That’s my thing. And I can take it too far sometimes in front of too many people. And I feel a bit embarrassed. So that’s the truth.”

While he praised Black Lives Matter, detractors found his comments opportunistic and promotional. He participated in a podcast where he laughed at the hosts who were making racist jokes about Ice Spice, and seemed to encourage them. He publicly apologized. Years earlier, he was accused of raising a Nazi salute during a concert, which he outright denies doing.

He has been accused of “queer bating” but understandably, in an era of sexual fluidity awareness, has claimed the right to not define his sexuality. Those who are not satisfied with that reasoning, are likely also not pleased about his behavior in Malaysia.

They may want to just get in line with all the others who are mad about his behavior there.

Malaysia has very strict laws against homosexuality, and tough “morality” rules for foreign performers. The government delivers a forty page document to prospective foreign acts that includes how the performers may dress on stage, how they may not intermingle with audience members, and more.

Most significantly, the performer may not criticize the government of Malaysia from the stage. Healy’s manager signed an agreement stipulating that 1975 would adhere to the stipulations.

Apparently, Healy did not get the memo. When he found out, presumably the day before the concert, he almost pulled the show, but did not want to disappoint the kids because “they’re not the government.”

Decision made, but the attitude walked with Healy onto the stage the next day. He had, after all, been in a similar situation before in Dubai where homosexuality is illegal as well. There, he defied the authorities and lip locked with a male audience member. He had made his point, with no bad ramifications except for his own speculation that he would not be invited back to Dubai.

Things did not go so well in Malaysia. Healy’s anger bubbled over “I’m fucking furious,” he declared in his on stage rant against the Malaysian government’s stance on homosexuality. In a throwback to his Dubai actions, Healy then passionately kissed bass player Ross MacDonald.

Everything came apart quickly after that. 1975 was pulled from the stage, the show was cancelled, the tour was cancelled, and the festival itself is both in trouble and on the brink of financial ruin. Even some whom he was presumably standing up for, did not appreciate his gesture. Carmen Rose, a Malaysian drag queen is quoted by the BBC criticizing Healy for taking a stand as just part of his act. “If he was doing it for our community,” she added, “he would know what consequences we would have to go through.”

With all due respect to Ms. Rose and the hardship of being LGBTQ in Malaysia, now, thanks to Healy’s actions, the world is more aware of the Malaysian atrocity. Homosexuality there is punishable by 20 years in prison.

Healy has never been quiet on issues, from gun control, to Brexit, to global warming. While his humor, delivery and intentions may be dubious or mis-understood, his lack of filter does not seem to just be tied to enhancing his wild card brand.

It is amazing, given that our progressive narrative in the United States is, rightly, furious over the attacks on drag performances, and the oppression of being able to openly discuss homosexuality, we are expected to conform and placate horrific laws like those in Malaysia. Perform politely and just say nothing?

Could Healy have expressed himself better? Does this action self-serve his ongoing rebel brand? Should he have looked out for unintended consequences and hurting people whose livelihoods are affected? Did he harm fans who are already oppressed by a backwards regime? On all accounts: probably.

The bigger question is, does it matter? As Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, “The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.”

We should not be asking why Healy kissed his bass player as a gesture of support for the LGBTQ suppression, but why in the world are any artists willing to play in such a venue where that kind of oppression exists? Why are the bands not refusing to be there until the country’s human rights and respect for human dignity are in place?

“I don’t see the fucking point,” stated Healy.

For that, he is a hero.

*****************************************************************************************

Rob Watson is the host of the popular Hollywood-based radio/podcast show RATED LGBT RADIO.

He is an established LGBTQ columnist and blogger having written for many top online publications including The Los Angeles Blade, The Washington Blade, Parents Magazine, the Huffington Post, LGBTQ Nation, Gay Star News, the New Civil Rights Movement, and more.

He served as Executive Editor for The Good Man Project, has appeared on MSNBC and been quoted in Business Week and Forbes Magazine.

He is CEO of Watson Writes, a marketing communications agency, and can be reached at [email protected] .

If your kids are trans? Jamie Lee Curtis’ bottom line: “Love is Love”

The Tom Holland “controversy” that isn’t

Swedish indie-pop star on the rise, Oscar Stembridge debuts in LA

U.S. appeals court grants Indiana trans students bathroom access

Federal court denies a “Right To Bully” trans students in Ohio

Jamie Lee Curtis knows a lot more than she thinks she does. Somewhere in her, she knew she would not get a second chance at this

Published

on

By

HOLLYWOOD – Years ago, as a gay dad, my kids’ elementary school had PTA meetings, and events, and lots of chores for needing parental support. I showed up and joined a bunch of, usually, moms to pitch in.

Many of the women would gush “Oh, you are SUCH a great dad!” I heard it a lot.

NO I AM NOT, I would think, well—OK, maybe I was striving to be that, but not for the reason they were saying I was one. I was, as they were, doing what my children needed me to do. I was a decent dad in those moments. I was doing what, to me, was the bare minimum, nothing outstanding, nothing heroic.

I was just showing up.

I do not personally know the national treasure known as Jamie Lee Curtis, but her reaction to praise of her parenting is similar to mine, “People have said ‘you are so great to accept her,’ and I am ‘WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?’ This is my daughter. This human being has come to me and said, ‘This is who I am ‘ and my job is to say ‘Welcome Home’ and defend her right to exist to anyone who claims that she doesn’t, and there are those people.”

Jamie Lee is an actress, author, sober advocate and more. Her role with her daughter takes priority however. She has said, “Being a parent … that is the real reason we are here.”

Jamie Lee Curtis is about showing up, not just for kids, but for all human beings. Her recent Oscar win was for putting depth to a character she describes as “a forgotten woman.” In her children’s book Is There Really a Human Race, she writes “Take what’s inside you and make big, bold choices. And for those who can’t speak for themselves, use BOLD voices.”

Jamie Lee uses a bold voice. She showed up visibly at Disneyland dressed in Pride. She wrote to the world, “Love is love. A mother’s love knows no judgment. As a mother, I stand in total solidarity with my children as they move forward in the universe as their authentic selves with their own minds and bodies and ideas. On this trans visibility day my daughter and I are visible.”

Her voice has inspired her daughter not just to be herself but to pass it on and stand for others as well, “My mom has supported me ever since I came out as trans. I love her so much. There are allies everywhere for the trans community. You just need to look for them, and we will stand by your side for the long run,” Ruby has declared.

Jamie Lee also exemplifies the struggle of parents of trans kids. While she does not point this out, parents, such as her, are under as much attack as their kids. They are being villainized, derided and in some cases, legally harassed. Many are fleeing unfriendly states, just so they can continue showing up for their kids.

“The most important thing is that I don’t know everything, and I wake up everyday sober saying, I don’t know everything. I’ve gone to teachers, I ‘ve gone to people and said please teach me,” Jamie Lee confesses.

Jamie Lee Curtis knows a lot more than she thinks she does. Somewhere in her, she knew she would not get a second chance at this. Eight years ago, another mother did not recognize a crucial moment when it came.

That mother was the parent of Leelah Alcorn, who had come out to her as trans. “We don’t support that, religiously,” Alcorn’s mother told CNN later. “But we told him that we loved him unconditionally. We loved him no matter what. I loved my son. People need to know that I loved him. He was a good kid, a good boy.”

Leelah left a note before walking in front of a truck, not long after that talk with her mother.

Her note said, “After 10 years of confusion I finally understood who I was. I immediately told my mom, and she reacted extremely negatively, telling me that it was a phase, that I would never truly be a girl, that God doesn’t make mistakes, that I am wrong. If you are reading this, parents, please don’t tell this to your kids. Even if you are Christian or are against transgender people don’t ever say that to someone, especially your kid. That won’t do anything but make them hate them self. That’s exactly what it did to me.”

Leelah’s mother had not even listened enough to know her child’s name was now “Leelah”. The first she heard of her daughter’s chosen name was on the note left behind. She had wanted to be a good mother, but she failed to show up when her child needed her the most. The Alcorn story is not a rare one, and parents of trans kids have learned that their reaction, their support, their willingness to advocate for their kids, is a matter of life or death. (A study by the National Center for Transgender Equality found that 41% of 6.450 trans respondents had attempted suicide.)

So, yes, Jamie Lee Curtis had the instinct, and the guts, to show up. She lays it out simply, in a way that any parent, mom or dad, can follow: “They have demonized trans people. It’s awful. It’s terrifying. Every day, it is getting worse. Bottom line, life is about love. Being a parent is about love. I love Ruby. Love her… There is no handbook, there are people who can be helpful guides, but I get it wrong, I’m learning, I’m trying, I’m human.

But the bottom line is—I am a mom.”

Be a mom. Fight for your kids. Their lives depend on it.

*****************************************************************************************

Rob Watson is the host of the popular Hollywood-based radio/podcast show RATED LGBT RADIO.

He is an established LGBTQ columnist and blogger having written for many top online publications including The Los Angeles Blade, The Washington Blade, Parents Magazine, the Huffington Post, LGBTQ Nation, Gay Star News, the New Civil Rights Movement, and more.

He served as Executive Editor for The Good Man Project, has appeared on MSNBC and been quoted in Business Week and Forbes Magazine.

He is CEO of Watson Writes, a marketing communications agency, and can be reached at [email protected] .

How homo-eroticized idiots spin a web of homophobic panting in the Twitterverse

Published

on

By

HOLLYWOOD – Out Magazine declared “Homophobes are mad about Tom Holland’s Gay Sex Scene in The Crowded Room, while The Advocate spun the situation as Tom Holland being “Defended by Fans.” Minor clickbait gossip sites claimed that the “controversy” and “backlash” had split Tom Holland’s fan base in two.

In case you missed it (and were blissfully unaware), Tom Holland, famous for this Spiderman franchise role, took on a more complex character role in Apple TV+’s The Crowded Room, playing a disturbed character named Danny Sullivan. The portrayal was so grueling, that Holland has described it as both taxing on his personal relationship, as well as his own mental health. He has taken time off as a result.

Oh yes, and for those of the junior high school mentality, he does two scenes depicting man on man sex. Big whoop.

To quote Shakespeare, the trending hashtags around it is all “much ado about nothing” and the Twitter pearl-clutchers who claim to be “offended” seem to fall into the other Shakespearian “the lady doth protest too much” category. While obsessing over Holland and Zendaya’s sex life (her recent filmic sexual depictions also get scrutinized), those “offended” compulsively share the two scenes in question, one of oral sex, the other anal, and seem to be in utter fascination with taking “back shots.”

The vast majority of the #notmyspiderman crowd appears to be trolls. They are not articulate, and have followers only in the double-digits. Their veiled homo-eroticism titillation is masked by obvious homophobia, misogyny and racism. They seem to be less of an representative of Tom Holland’s massive fanbase than they do a glimpse into the latest state of the Twitter culture. Funny how none of this conversation is going on in Meta’s new Threads environment.

The fact is, real Tom Holland fans do not seem to care. While critics have been down on Room, his fans have thrilled over his realistic portrayal and put their approval in the 90-something percentile on Rotten Tomatoes.

To be sure, good intentioned and logical people have tried to bring reason to the conversation. One was offended because while the scenes were sexual, Holland did not actually get NAKED. At least that poster was honest about what he wanted to see. Others pointed out that ALL the actors who have ever played Spiderman have subsequently played gay.

I am not sure that logic will play any better than arguing against those who were going to boycott Target for having Pride gear, and taking their business to Walmart instead.

To Walmart, who also sold Pride gear.

Still others felt the need to point out that, HELLO, Tom Holland is an actor. Spiderman is a character. They are not one in the same, and actors play other roles, often different than their previous ones.

I am pretty sure the trolls already know this, however, or don’t care. Maybe they might consider it as they take their phones, go into the bathroom, lock the door and contemplate “back shots” as they watch Holland’s erotic scenes over and over again.

In any case, Tom Holland will be fine, The Crowded Room with have higher ratings than it otherwise would have, the Spiderman franchise will progress unharmed.

And the migration to Threads cannot happen fast enough.

*****************************************************************************************

Rob Watson is the host of the popular Hollywood-based radio/podcast show RATED LGBT RADIO.

He is an established LGBTQ columnist and blogger having written for many top online publications including The Los Angeles Blade, The Washington Blade, Parents Magazine, the Huffington Post, LGBTQ Nation, Gay Star News, the New Civil Rights Movement, and more.

He served as Executive Editor for The Good Man Project, has appeared on MSNBC and been quoted in Business Week and Forbes Magazine.

You must pursue justice with just practices and in just ways — the practices cannot be tainted by injustice

Published

on

By

By Rabbi Aryeh Cohen | LOS ANGELES – Why is a rabbi suing the County and City of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD), the Sheriff of Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), and the Chief of the LAPD?

The official answer is that I, along with other clergy plaintiffs, are challenging the unconstitutional use of our taxes to fund the unlawful detention of individuals who are unable to pay bail.

We joined with six people who were in jail because they could not pay money bail. The point of our lawsuit is to stop the practice of keeping people in jail before they have been found guilty of any crime just because they cannot pay the amount of money that is set by LA’s uniform bail schedules.

The real reason that I am part of this lawsuit is justice.

My day job is training rabbis. I teach ancient and modern Jewish law at the Ziegler School for Rabbinic Studies. My students, some of whom were ordained this month, will teach and preach at Conservative Jewish congregations and university campuses around the country.

One of the main teachings that I hope they carry with them is the centrality of justice. In Deuteronomy 16 we read: “Judges and overseers you shall set for yourself within all your gates.” This is followed by: “they shall judge the people with just judgment. You shall not skew judgment,” and “justice, justice you shall pursue.” Justice and only justice must be pursued. That is, you must pursue justice with just practices and in just ways — the practices cannot be tainted by injustice.

Our criminal legal system is tainted. It is broken. It is unjust. All of the people we are talking about are considered innocent; and in truth many of them are. One in three California arrests never lead to a conviction. From 2011 to 2015, over a quarter-million Californians were jailed on accusations that ultimately did not even justify the filing of a criminal charge.

If, however, the person arrested is unfortunate enough to be poor, they will stay in jail. While bail is supposed to ensure that people will show up for a trial, in truth it is just another poverty tax which does not improve public safety and makes life worse for the individuals and families that are already struggling.

Thirty percent of people who are employed and are jailed pretrial lose their jobs. Twenty three percent of people who are jailed pretrial lose their housing. One of the plaintiffs in the current lawsuit could not get to a job interview. Another could not get her medicine.

It should not be the case that if two people are arrested, one will be freed because they have more money. This is not justice. And when people are kept in jail they are kept in inhumane conditions which have been called “a living hell,” in an ACLU filing. There is garbage, urine, and feces on the floors where, because of severe overcrowding, people are forced to sleep. Again, none of these people have been convicted of anything.

In our lawsuit, Urquidi v. Los Angeles, on Tuesday, May 16 the judge issued a preliminary injunction eliminating the unjust burden of cash bail in low-level cases. In his ruling, the judge explained that money bail makes everyone less safe: study after study proves that it neither promotes court appearance, nor prevents re-arrests.

In fact, the research shows the exact opposite: money bail is so destructive to the lives of those who are jailed for their poverty that it makes them more likely to commit crimes in the future. Plus, there are far less disruptive ways to assure that people will show up to their court dates. Something as simple as texts and mailers sent to people who were arrested reminding them of their appearance dates. In New York City, text reminders reduced missed court appearances by 26 percent.

In the lawsuit we demand that the County and City and their law enforcement agencies end these widespread constitutional violations. The County and City do not deny that these practices constitute violations of the Constitution, yet they have not stopped them.

We also assert that they are gross violations of conscience. They are violations of our humanity—the humanity of all the citizens of Los Angeles City and County in whose names innocent people are being held in unconscionable conditions for the crime of being poor.

Isaiah condemned the ancient city of Jerusalem for caring more about the temple rituals than about the lives of the people they walked over getting to the Temple. We look out over Los Angeles, and, all things considered, see a similar landscape. The beauty and glitter of our city hides an ugly reality that many of us do not want to see.

We, however, echo Isaiah’s prophetic cry that this city will only be redeemed by justice and righteousness. We must end the cash bail system now.

******************************************************************************************

Rabbi Aryeh Cohen, a plaintiff in the case Urquidi v. Los Angeles, is Professor of Rabbinic Literature at the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Literature of the American Jewish University and the author of Justice in the City: An Argument from the Sources of Rabbinic Judaism (Academic Studies Press).

How did we get to the point in my community that our school board is actively targeting and attacking these vulnerable students?

Published

on

By

By Christina Gagnier | CHINO, Calif. – A banner was intentionally placed on a freeway overpass this past week that read, “THE RAINBOW BELONGS TO GOD, NOT THE LGBTQ.” It was placed by a hate group that is becoming an unfortunate fixture in the Chino Valley, the Proud Boys. They are not alone.

Imagine being a LGBTQIA student and driving by this sign one week after four members of your school board voted to ban pride flags in your schools and are set to pass a policy on July 20 that would out LGBTQIA students. The message that you are receiving from the people who are elected to care about your education and success in school? You are not safe. You are not protected. Even further, you are a target.

How did we get here? How did we get to the point in my community that our school board is actively targeting and attacking these vulnerable students? It was not always this way.

I have lived in Chino nearly all of my life, and I had never seen signs (literal or otherwise) for hate groups in this community, even when I served as a member of the Chino Valley Unified School District Board and, most recently, as its Board President, until the 2022 election. I have first-hand knowledge and a front row seat to how manufactured lies and hate bring corrosion to a community, and it starts in the public schools.

If the Proud Boys sign was a one-off, it would certainly be alarming. What is egregious is that it is part of a targeted campaign against LGBTQIA students led by far-right evangelical churches meddling in politics (a tax-status conversation for another time) and astroturf political groups who dug up school board candidates they could easily puppet to do their bidding.

What brought hate groups to the Chino Valley? The 2022 election for two school board seats. Many people do not pay attention to who is elected to school boards or what they actually do. Chino Valley Unified was known for its good schools, so most people were satisfied with them. That is, most people. Ours is a cautionary tale.

My co-founder of Our Schools USA, Kristi Hirst (a former CVUSD teacher and parent of three children in our schools), and I, knocked on thousands of doors and talked to voters. For most people, the quality of the schools and the prospects for their children post-graduation were the top priority, but they had no idea who was on the Board or what was happening. The manufactured chaos and crisis that was routine in our Board meetings for two years was not common knowledge, something that is hard to realize when you experience it every other week.

Yet, we started hearing accusations bubbling up on doorsteps. “Christina wants boys in girls’ bathrooms” was a common refrain. We realized that my Moms for Liberty opponent, who eventually became the new school Board President who is the primary facilitator of hate against LGBTQIA students, and her volunteers, were telling this lie and others door-to-door.

I want to be clear: hate is highly motivating. The voters who had been misled by what they believed to be the “takeover” of our schools by LGBTQIA issues went out and voted. On a rainy day and a very low turnout election, 317 votes decided the election in our trustee area. Over 1,400 voters who cast a ballot for higher office did not even bother to go down the ballot to vote for school board in our trustee area. The Board majority flipped.

The effects? Direct discrimination, harassment, and intimidation of CVUSD students and staff. Today’s CVUSD Board actions and policies are a far cry from the District’s motto, which includes phrases such as “Safe Schools” and “Positive School Climate.”

The Board President placed a resolution for a vote on the agenda to support AB 1314, the controversial parental notification bill introduced by a Republican Assemblymember (who, by the way, is not our Assemblymember). The bill had not even been heard by the California State Legislature’s Assembly Education Committee, and the Board passed a resolution supporting it. Three days later, the Chair of the Assembly Education Committee denied it a hearing. It was a contentious Board meeting all for nothing, but a meeting created out of a manufactured crisis: the myth that public schools are making children identify as LGBTQIA.

Two members of the Board have a history of comments and actions targeting LGBTQIA students. In November 2021, a Board Member brought a resolution to deny transgender students access to school activities and facilities. Let’s not pretend that he did not know it was illegal: the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Attorney General advised the District of such. The purpose was to place the Board majority at the time, two of us who were up for re-election the next fall, in the position of voting against the resolution because it would break California law. I am not sure why anyone would expect a former police officer, a lawyer, and a former teacher to do otherwise, but this opened the floodgates to the manufactured crisis around LGBTQIA youth in our schools.

You may be asking yourself a logical question: why would school board members find it acceptable that hate groups are coming into our community, attending our board meetings, and threatening our LGBTQIA students and staff?

The outrageous answer? They have invited them in (and posed in photos with them), inviting local leadership in the hate group Gays Against Groomers to lead the Pledge of Allegiance at a Board meeting.

It’s not just the Chino Valley. Within a 60-mile radius of my community, school boards and districts in Glendale, North Hollywood, Orange Unified, Placentia-Yorba Linda, Temecula Valley, and Redlands have been overcome with hate groups and increasing hostility and violence towards LGBTQIA youth. They are fed misinformation and myths about what is happening in public schools. This list continues to grow as these hate groups, enabled by newly elected far-right wing extremists, go from district to district in California. Word to the wise: your district could be next, regardless of where you live. You are not immune to this.

Even if these crises from these hateful people and groups are manufactured, they have real impacts on students. It really does make a difference when students know their school board has their best interest and well-being in mind.

At my last meeting, I saw the fear in students’ eyes about what was going to happen when their Board no longer enforced the law and protected them. I can only imagine what that must be like for these kids. We adults are supposed to be protecting kids, not making them feel unsafe when they go to school every day.

In districts with flipped extreme boards, we are not going to stop their hateful actions, but we should be focused on stalling their implementation, using whatever legal tools are available to make this happen. In districts on the precipice, we need to take action now to prevent another community, and another LGBTQIA student, from becoming a target. The 2024 election is sooner than you think, which is a chance to take back these boards in the best interest of all students.

I can sound the alarm bells, but, really, it is time to start listening to our students, including this local high school student who sent our organization this anonymously:

As a gay student, especially when I initially transferred to [school removed], it was very difficult to adapt to that campus and accept my identity at that time. When I came out to my peers, I faced discrimination and homophobia as a result, creating rifts in friendships and feelings that I may never be seen in the same way again. Compounded with this and being reintegrated into a totally new school [identifying detail omitted] absolutely no support system, it was a truly lonely and isolating experience that I wouldn’t want my worst enemies to feel because of how awful it was. Despite this, when I first walked onto campus and saw a small little pride flag in my English 9 Honors class, it made me feel seen and safe, at least in that classroom. Although it may seem superficial or small to someone who wouldn’t understand or feel this perspective, seeing that small piece of allyship was truly helpful in making me feel safe and welcome.

The kids aren’t all right, but we have the power to help them be. We need to attend school board meetings and speak out. We need to donate to and support candidates who actually care about quality public education. We need to go down the ballot and vote for these school positions. We need to be vocal that we will not tolerate this hate.

*************************************************************************************

Christina Gagnier is the founder, Our Schools USA, and currently serves as the chair of the board of directors of the Chino Valley Chamber of Commerce. She previously served as president and vice president of the governing board for the Chino Valley Unified School District.

We spend millions to keep intruders out of our schools, but we put our kids in harm’s way on the inside with policies like Middletown’s

Published

on

By

By Julia Scotti | OCEAN COUNTY, NJ. – When Middletown, NJ classes resume this fall, its transgender students will have yet another obstacle in their way as they struggle for identity, freedom, and personal safety in the classroom.

On Tuesday, June 20, their school board voted nearly unanimously to enact a policy which would require teachers to notify parents if their child wants to be publicly known by a different name, seeks to use a different bathroom or locker room other than their birth gender or if a child opts to play on a different sports team.

This is in direct opposition to the State’s guidance which states that schools “shall ensure” students’ preferred pronouns and names be used, that they may dress in accordance with their gender identity and that it be respected, while specifically noting that “parental consent is not required.”

I must confess that in my opinion, there is no definitive right or wrong answer here. But as a former NJ middle school teacher in Monmouth County, AND someone who secretly transitioned in my first year of teaching, I have some thoughts on the subject of ‘outing’ students against their wishes.

A school is a microcosm of the community in which it exists. There are few secrets. Gossip flies and teachers hear most of it. Sometimes the students, especially the ones in pain, need to share that pain and occasionally it is a teacher who is entrusted with their secrets.

The only time a teacher is legally bound to inform authorities of a student’s situation is if the teacher believes the child is being abused in some way. Having said that, and knowing firsthand the difficulties of coming out to the world as transgender at any age, I know that a trans child needs a haven to exist in safety, and oftentimes it’s their school environment in which they find it.

One of the first things we learned as teachers is that nothing, NOTHING is more important than the safety of our students. We are duty bound to do whatever we can to protect them both in the school and out.

So you might ask, what’s wrong with notifying parents that their kid is identifying differently in school than they are at home? Well, I think the bigger questions are, why don’t the parents know already and if they don’t why is their kid afraid to come out to the people who are supposed to offer them the safest of all environments?

Over the years, I have met many loving parents of transgender kids. And while they may not understand their child’s gender struggle, they make herculean efforts to educate themselves. And to the best of their ability, they support, advocate for, and most of all, love their kids unconditionally.

But there are parents who, for whatever reasons, find the idea of someone being transgender abhorrent—even sinful. And who will resort to extreme measures to ‘cure’ their child of what they perceive to be the disease of being transgender. And as you might imagine, informing a parent of this type could be harmful to a child, especially when they might be under the influence of someone like Washington state pastor, Jason Graber, pastor of Sure Foundation Baptist Church in Spokane, who said he believed parents of transgender children deserved to be killed. One can only imagine what kind of home life a transgender child might have under those circumstances, and it’s easy to understand why he/she/they would want to keep it a secret.

So what is the child to do? It is a fact that a disproportionate amount of homeless youth identify as Transgendered. It is also a fact that a disproportionality high percentage of transgender kids attempt suicide. For many kids, these are their only desperate choices. Implementing a policy such as Middletown’s can only add fuel to an already raging fire of Transgender hate and misunderstanding that is sweeping this country.

There is no doubt that Middletown’s decision, as well as the towns of Marlboro and Manalapan-Englishtown (who have similar policies) can only have a negative impact on these students somewhere down the road and the State of NJ is fighting to keep the original protecting policies in place. The decisions of these districts are no doubt politically motivated. We have an increasing, nationwide conservative movement in this country that will stop at nothing to take away the civil rights of those who dare to be themselves proudly and openly.

I said at the beginning of this piece that there is no definitive right or wrong answer here, but maybe I was wrong. The safety of a child and their right to just “BE” is everything. And if we destroy that right in our schools, whose mission is to teach, educate and protect their charges, then we are responsible in part for the fates of their lives. We spend millions to keep intruders out of our schools, but we put our kids in harm’s way on the inside with policies like Middletown’s.

************************************************************************************

Julia Scotti is headlining comedian, actor, transgender activist and former licensed NJ middle-school teacher. She is the subject of director Susan Sandler’s highly praised documentary film, “Julia Scotti; Funny That Way”.

In addition to performing around the country, Julia has been invited to speak at schools around the state to teachers and students about her life as a transgender woman in the national spotlight.

ILGA head writes about the DNA that drives LGBTQ activists in a Europe where there’s a mistaken assumption everyone has access to democracy

Published

on

By

By Evelyne Paradis | BRUSSELS, Belgium – Across Europe, authoritarian leaders continue to target and scapegoat LGBTQ individuals, bringing increased polarization of public discourse and violence in the streets. LGBTQ activists counteract by defending democratic values with unwavering determination. But this defence is not merely a reaction; it is part of their DNA.

Although we may assume that everyone has equal access to democracy, this is not the reality, and reflected on why marginalised groups need democracies and why democracies find some of their greatest champions among LGBTQ activists.

People who have remained marginalized want to have the same rights, and it is crucial to address their aspirations for equality. Marginalized groups require a system that not only permits but actively enables the protection of their basic rights. While democracy may not be flawless, marginalized communities, including LGBTQ people, rely on its rules and practices; they depend on them to access their fundamental rights.

This is one of the key reasons why LGBTQ activists find themselves at the forefront of defending freedom of assembly, association, expression, and media freedom. These freedoms are not only rights that LGBTQ individuals, like everyone else, are entitled to, they are also essential to enabling communities and individuals to advance equality. It is thanks to these rights that LGBTQ communities can organise and march in public spaces in safety, can freely inform and contribute to public discussions, and so on.

Another reason the defence of democracy matters so much for LGBTQ people is that attacks on democracy are coming at a very real cost to them. The rise of authoritarian regimes across Europe comes hand-in-hand with scapegoating by populist far-right leaders of LGBTQ individuals, migrants, and other vulnerable groups as part of their divisive tactics for political gain. This has concrete and dire consequences in people’s lives, as last year we witnessed the deadliest rise in anti-LGBTQ violence in over a decade.

But it’s not just about pointing fingers at far-right parties and authoritarian leaders. We must look at ourselves in the mirror and accept our democracies are not perfect, also in places where things seem to be fine.

While democracy may be one of the most promising systems for ensuring basic protections, not everyone enjoys equal access to them and many are left behind. At its core, democracy is made of trust. To earn and have trust, people need to feel listened to, heard and included. At the moment, there’s a high risk of many disengaging and becoming more disillusioned by democracy simply because they do not find themselves in it.

This is why it is crucial to listen to LGBTQ people and other marginalised groups when they demand equality. Firstly, democracy is about protecting everyone’s rights. By paying attention to their needs, we honour that principle. Secondly, LGBTQ activists are some of the fiercest defenders of democracy. Their commitment contributes to ensuring that our democracies are alive and flourishing.

By addressing their demands, we can build a more inclusive democracy while making sure that its champions remain strong.

******************************************************************************************

Evelyne Paradis is the Executive Director of ILGA-Europe. She is responsible for providing overall leadership, strategic direction and management of the organisation. She joined ILGA-Europe in 2005. Before becoming ILGA-Europe’s Executive Director, she held the position of Policy Director, coordinating the organisation’s advocacy work with European regional organisations.

Prior to joining ILGA-Europe, Evelyne worked with the UN High Commission for Human Rights, the Council of Europe and human rights NGOs in Canada.

She worked as a research assistant to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression and Special Representative for human rights defenders, as well as a member of the preparatory team of the World Conference Against Racism.

Biologist E.O. Wilson writing in On Human Nature: “Homosexuals may be the rare carriers of the altruistic impulse in the human species”

Published

on

By

By Don Kilhefner | WEST HOLLYWOOD – Growing-up as a poor, working-class kid in very conservative Lancaster County, Pennsylvania—Amish-Mennonite-Central—my budding intelligence always seemed to naturally lean Left on the political compass.

In the late 1950s at Millersville University, a branch of the Pennsylvania state university system, Maynard Keynes, a gay man, Frederick Engels, Karl Marx, as well as Adam Smith, entered my consciousness and political vocabulary.

In my early 20’s, I began correspondence with Gus Hall (1910-2000), head of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and Norman Thomas (1884-1968), head of the American Socialist movement and six-times presidential candidate. Their short notes back to me were supportive and encouraging. I was in love with their ideas.

It was a brief marriage. It ended in deep disappointment but not cynicism. At that time, I discovered the words “bourgeois decadence” which Marxist/Communist ideology said resulted in homos like me who frequently had lust in my heart (Jimmy Carter, yes!) for men.

Communist ideology advocated that it would be best if gay men were not around. [The persecution by hetero supremacists then was primarily directed against gay men.] Those pesty gay flies required a hetero supremacy fly swatter. In 1934, the Soviet writer Max Gorky declared in Pravda, “Destroy homosexuals—Fascism will disappear.”

It’s also worth noting that the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality (Volume 2) states, “There can be little doubt that, as far as they thought of the matter at all, Marx and Engels were homophobic….”

All kinds of stupid trash-talk and pseudo-intellectual bullshit occurs in hetero dominant cultures regarding gay people—dehumanization always, genocide usually. When it comes to gay and lesbian people, there is very little difference between right-wing or left-wing dictatorships, as well as democracies—all suffused by hetero superiority.

I kept evolving as a self-accepting gay man. Soon, I discovered Walt Whitman and Allen Ginsberg, beginning a life-long love affair with all things gay and, to tell the truth, all things “decadent.”

I appreciate still very much the message in Marx’s Das Kapital that helped me understand industrial capitalism as a system of oppression and how that system created much suffering for working poor people, like my parents. The book’s insights are still relevant today with our old-wine-in-new-bottles techno-surveillance, billionaire, capitalist economic structures of the small, large, and Big Gulp-sizes.

During much of the 20th century, Marxism was an important, but organizationally-shadowy, intellectual presence on U.S. college campuses and in U.S. culture. In 1938, the CPUSA purged suspected gay and lesbian members. It was not until 1991 that the CPUSA voted to admit for the very first time openly gay and lesbian members, 23 years after the 1969 Stonewall Rebellion and the truly-revolutionary Gay Liberation movement had already quickly transformed the lives of American homos. Only in 2005 did CPUSA unequivocally support LGBT rights—2005!

In the 1920s and 1930s, many times the best, brightest and most creative of that generation, many of them gay and lesbian, were drawn to the idealistic possibilities on the new, Marxist horizon that promised a more equitable society and believed that the CPUSA would help to facilitate that revolution. Stalin’s purges and the Soviet invasions of Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1968) ended in disillusionment by most CPUSA members and supporters.

By the end of the 20th century, Gus Hall bellowed against glasnost, perestroika and homos like an old, bull mastodon sinking into the La Brea tar pits. The CPUSA bifurcated into a reactionary Party led by Hall which soon became largely irrelevant and fellow travelers who left the Party, becoming largely absorbed into the eruptions of democratic socialism in the early 21st century.

Recently, Bettina Aptheker has written a much needed, growing edge historical account about gay and lesbian people and their involvement within the Old Left, with particular emphasis on the CPUSA and its numerous front groups. The history of queers and the New Left remains to be written. Aptheker’s book is titled Communists In Closets: Queering the History 1930s-1990s (Routledge).

She came out publicly as a Communist in 1962 through the Free Speech movement in Berkeley and as a lesbian in 1979, 10 years after Stonewall. Evidently, being publicly Red was easier than being Lavender.

Ms. Aptheker is an astute academic historian in her own right, and, as is always routinely mentioned, like now, is also the daughter of Herbert Aptheker (1915-2003), a distinguished Marxist historian and author of numerous books on African-American history and historiography, particularly his outstanding American Negro Slave Revolts in 1943. I first encountered his voluminous research on Black history while a history graduate student at Howard University in the mid-1960s and came across him again in the late 1960s while at UCLA through my anti-Vietnam War movement participation. I lionized him.

In 2003, Ms. Aptheker gained my deep esteem and compassion when in her Intimate Politics: How I Grew Up Red, Fought for Free Speech and Became a Feminist Rebel she courageously revealed openly that in her youth she had been sexually molested often by her father.

As soon as Amazon Prime delivered the book, I immediately began reading Communists In Closets, devouring it in two sittings. With growing excitement, I soaked up the new gay and lesbian historical information. During a second reading a few weeks later, my gay-centered critical intelligence kicked in and questions began to emerge. I’ll share both experiences.

First Reading

It was refreshing and delightful reading about 20th century gay and lesbian political and cultural activists that I had never ever heard about previously and my admiration for these ancestors grew the more I read. For a change, it was not just about the privileged ones and celebrities, the glitterati and literati. It’s mostly about ordinary gay and lesbian people with strong social consciences that guided their embodied political and social justice work from early to late in the 20th century in the United States and internationally. Ms. Aptheker also makes them whole people by also including snippets about their love and lust lives.

The CPUSA was founded in 1919 as an offshoot of the early militant labor union movement. Closeted gay and lesbian people joined the nascent Party, as Ms. Aptheker makes clear, even though their proclivities were often apparent if you had eyes to see.

In 1938, in the customary ways of hetero supremacists, the CPUSA leadership kicked out known and suspected gay and lesbian people and forbid their membership as security risks. Through blackmail, it was claimed that homos might reveal the Party’s clandestine machinations and secret membership, the same lame excuse used by the U.S. State Department—as if heteros could not be blackmailed or security risks, only homos.

When the blackmail issue came up in the early Gay Liberation movement, we said, “You can’t blackmail an honest person. Come out.” In the early 1970s, conservative homo opponents of the militant Gay Liberation Front of Los Angeles used “red baiting” as a tool to discredit Morris Kight and me, like in 1953 it destroyed the Mattachine.

Kight was referred to in print as “Moscow Morris” and I was called “Peking Don” and rumors were spread that identified me as a hetero member of the Socialist Workers Party (Trotskyites) sent to take over GLF for the SWP—all balderdash. In those days, the way to destroy any social change movement was to label it “Communist.”

Gay and lesbian people’s contribution, even leadership, to radical, 20th century social change movements, as gay and lesbian people, is often not acknowledged by historians, talked around, or even erased in the Old Left. Like a cultural archeologist, Ms. Aptheker has unearthed layer upon layer of buried, closeted and not-so-closeted queer treasures. After 55 years of making and assiduously studying gay history and political culture, 95% of the names are new even to me, silently ohing and ahing as I read.

In a sacred way, let me call out a few names of these gay and lesbian ancestors: Harry Hay, Lillian Wald, Anna Rochester, Gerald Meyer, Maud Russell, Bertha Capen Reynolds, Marc Blitzstein, David Graham DuBois, Virginia Mercado, Marge Gelders Frantz, Betty Boynton Millard, Bayard Rustin, Elanor Flexner, Lorraine Hansberry, and many, many more—I could go on for pages.

They were involved, many times in leadership positions, sometimes as foot soldiers, in every progressive social change and social justice cause you can think of in the 20th century.

Even though they were forced to hide their true selves, they lived lives of righteous integrity and important social contribution. LGBTQ people, and others, as I keep reminding, you have a history you can be proud of.

As I laid down Communists In Closets, sitting with my eyes closed, thinking and feeling the book, the prophetic sentence by evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson in his 1978 Pulitzer Prize-winning On Human Nature came floating to mind, “Homosexuals may be the rare carriers of the altruistic impulse in the human species.”

A few weeks after my emotionally-exuberant, first reading of Communists In Closets, I read the book again. The second reading engaged my gay-centered critical intelligence, causing me to have a dialogue with the book, less a conversation with Ms. Aptheker, and more with my pre-1950 gay and lesbian ancestors written about in the book. This is how the dialogue went:

The questions I’m about to put to you collectively are asked with great respect and admiration for the radical social change work of your generations. There is something, however, I don’t understand. You Marxists, CPUSA members prior to 1938 and after, Leftist good trouble- makers, and social change warriors excelled at political analyses of social problems, articulated the sources of oppression for a wide variety of minorities and classes, and organized people from different sectors of society to address these problems.

So, why didn’t you use those same skills and abilities to analyze the sources of gay and lesbian oppression and organize against the discrimination hurled at you? Why didn’t you fight back, even one of you? Why didn’t you organize homos? You knew how.

Why did it take until 1950 for homos in the U.S.—Harry Hay and the other six progressive men who organized the Mattachine—to call us an oppressed minority group with a unique homo culture? [A very short-lived attempt was made by Henry Gerber to organize a homo group in the mid-1920s in Chicago, but it was quickly crushed by the police]

I don’t get it, and I’m a veteran gay activist playing on your team. Is there something about the depth and depravity of hetero supremacy in the first half of the 20th century in the U.S. that needs to be brought into clearer historical focus? Or, was it something else?

Yes, I totally understand your point of view. I agree that there was systemic and institutionalized hetero supremacy throughout the Western world that shamed and devalued you. Yes, you could lose your families and jobs. Yes, lobotomies were done on you involuntarily with ice picks. Yes, yes, every religion called you sinful, inferior, and disgusting, and laws at every political level made it possible to arrest you for being openly you. Yes, the psychologists poisoned your minds. I understand why suicide was a rational way out for some. Yes, dead homo bodies were found in ditches along country roads and no one cared.

Why did no one fight back and tell Gus Hall and the other hetero chauvinists to shove it, so to speak? This is an extremely friendly question.

Did you not know about Edward Carpenter (1844-1929), an openly gay man in England who lectured publicly throughout that country about socialism, women’s equality, and the intermediate type (his term for homos instead of ‘sodomites’) and wrote books on these subjects?

Did you not know about Karl Heinrich Ulrichs (1825-1895), an openly gay man in Germany, a lawyer, who assertively and publicly fought back against hetero supremacy there?

Did you not know about the new, so-called scientific field of sexology that emerged at the end of the 19th century in Europe which first coined the terms ‘heterosexual’ (good, normal) and ‘homosexual’ (bad, abnormal). In Germany, a very visible and published Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935) and his Institute in Berlin contributed to a pro-homo, law reform political agenda.

Did you not know about the relatively open gay, lesbian, and trans life and culture during the Weimar Republic (1918-1933) in Germany with homo organizations, publications and a proto gay community, destroyed by the Nazis, and advances in several other European countries. Both the Communist Party and Social Democrats in Germany during the Weimar period supported the decriminalization of same-sex, consensual relationships.

This baffles me. Why on the European side of the Atlantic was there gay and lesbian action and forward movement and on the American side seemingly silence on the homo political front? There was much intellectual cross-pollination between European and U.S. peoples and cultures during the first half of the 20th century, particularly by Leftists. Did you not know about those homos inching forward in Europe?

In any case, I want to give each of you a warm hug and listen to your tales of personal survival and resistance.

Perhaps, I might be misreading the homo information flow between Europe and North America before 1950. Here’s a valid doctoral dissertation topic for a bright LGBTQ history graduate student.

Communists In Closets is an important book and tells a significant story for both LGBTQ people and society at large.

And, after all this is said and done, I bow slowly and deeply, with much gratitude and respect, in the direction of Bettina Aptheker.

*************************************************************************************

Don Kilhefner, Ph.D., is a pioneer Gay Liberationist, co-founder (with Morris Kight) of the LA LGBT Center and Van Ness Recovery House, and co-founder (with Harry Hay) of the international Radical Faeries movement.

Bud Light & Target came under far-right fire for including LGBTQ+ people in products & advertising. The speed at which they caved? Not good

Published

on

By

By Erin Reed | WASHINGTON – Even before Pride season has begun, evidence of corporations succumbing to far-right, anti-LGBTQ+ led boycotts is emerging.

Bud Light, for instance, recently faced pressure after featuring transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney on its cans. The simple act incited a boycott campaign by anti-LGBTQ+ conservative activists, including Matt Walsh. In response, Bud Light placed the executives responsible for the campaign on leave.

Following this, Target faced a similar situation when it displayed its annual Pride merchandise. Calls for boycotts from the same far-right influencers ensued. Videos emerged of individuals trampling on Pride displays in stores and harassing staff members. Target’s reaction was to pull several Pride items and relegate Pride displays to less visible parts of its stores.

When these companies faced anti-LGBTQ+ hostility, they backed down with little resistance. This reveals the reason why transgender people have been wary about corporatization of Pride: if corporate advocacy consists merely of rainbows that disappear at the first gust of fascist wind, it amounts to net harm. That support was never truly there.

This is all happening against the backdrop of a broader cultural climate marked by over 530 bills directed at the transgender community, withholding of medication for transgender youth and adults, bans on books featuring LGBTQ+ characters, cancellations of Pride parades, travel warnings discouraging LGBTQ+ individuals from entering certain states, and arrests of transgender individuals in restrooms.

The retreat of corporations from supporting the LGBTQ+ community, caving to anti-LGBTQ+ pressures, does more than fail to assist the community they professed to support when adversaries looked away. It actively damages the community by feeding a narrative that suggests LGBTQ+ individuals are not worth protecting.

The campaign against LGBTQ+ inclusion in stores is not grassroots, but rather a calculated move by the same far-right influencers responsible for the early anti-trans bills this year. Matt Walsh, who advised on and posted the very first anti-trans bill this year, delineated the strategy in April. His approach: “Pick a victim, gang up on it, and make an example of it. We can’t boycott every woke company or even most of them. But we can pick one, it hardly matters which, and target it with a ruthless boycott campaign. Claim one scalp then move onto the next.”

What followed was mass harassment and violent threats to LGBTQ+ advocates and store employees. Of Particular note is Ethan Schmidt, whose videos of walking through Target knocking down Pride signs began to reemerge. See this video from Ethan Schmidt tearing down pride signs in target, originally from 2022:

Ethan Schmidt has since promised to revive his actions, warning, “We’re gonna be exposing Target… We are going to be going on hunting expeditions soon. Hunting LGBTQ+ supporters across Arizona and Phoenix.” ‘

Numerous other videos have emerged. One person’s viral tiktok expressed anger over rainbow themed and tuck-friendly clothing while going through Target racks. OAN anchor Alison Steinberg expressed dismay at cards that include two moms and two dads. Matt Walsh called for people to “make pride toxic for brands. If they decide to shove this garbage in our face, they should know they’ll pay a price.”

Sure enough, Target acquiesced, announcing that it would be dropping some “controversial items” and moving displays to the back of some stores. Pictures emerged of empty Pride display racks shortly after:

The speed in which some companies are caving to anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment shows the danger in entrusting Pride events to the care of corporations, who have no meaningful skin in the game and who are willing to pull support at moment’s notice. Pride has its roots in a response to anti-LGBTQ+ oppression in 1969, particularly the raid on the Stonewall Inn.

Interestingly, both then and now, anti-drag laws proliferate and LGBTQ+ people find themselves targeted by the state and by bigotry on the streets. The first Pride was a riot, and its early celebrations were not about touting corporate advocacy or organizational support for queer people, but rather about fostering our own communities and networks to ensure that overt oppression would never prevail.

By shifting from the original spirit of Pride to Bud Light-sponsored block parties and parades filled with corporate floats where we are merely spectators rather than active participants, we risk losing sight of the essence and purpose of Pride – to forge strong bonds in the face of oppressive forces.

Target is removing LGBTQ Pride products because of terrorist behavior like this.Yes, this is absolutely terrorism & Target should be ashamed for caving in. Just like Anheuser Busch caved in.And people wonder why there’s so much fear in our community. pic.twitter.com/0kMab9s44k

Moving forward, we need a new vision of Pride that is more in line with the reason Pride was first conceived. This vision of Pride should not be dependent on corporate sponsorships, but rather, should uplift the community and support the creation of social networks. Local organizations should be centered rather than multinational corporations.

This vision of pride is one where we collectively march together in solidarity and celebration and express to the world that our joy will not be eradicated. I envision a pride where local businesses are supported, where drag thrives, where our block parties truly support the locals who call those blocks home.

We must make it unequivocally clear to corporations that raising rainbow flags, only to retreat when confronted by oppressive forces, contradicts the essence of Pride. Symbols demand action to substantiate them.

Corporations wishing to demonstrate support for their LGBTQ+ employees should implement comprehensive paid family leave, include full coverage for trans-specific medical care in their insurance policies, and cease all donations to politicians endorsing anti-trans stances.

Should a company truly aim to support its LGBTQ+ employees, it must stand with queer and trans people, even in the face of harassment and abuse by right-wing aggressors. Instead of hastily retreating in the face of even a fraction of the hatred endured daily by the LGBTQ+ community from these same individuals, these corporations need to show resilient support.

****************************************************************************

Erin Reed is a transgender woman (she/her pronouns) and researcher who tracks anti-LGBTQ+ legislation around the world and helps people become better advocates for their queer family, friends, colleagues, and community. Reed also is a social media consultant and public speaker.

Follow her on Twitter (Link)

Website here: https://www.erininthemorning.com/

******************************************************************************************

The preceding article was first published at Erin In The Morning and is republished with permission.

Anyone could have predicted he would make a mockery of CNN’s town hall, turning it into another extremist political rally

Published

on

By

By Eric Kleefeld | WASHINGTON – Disgraced former President Donald Trump appeared Wednesday night for a prime-time campaign town hall event on CNN, during which the live audience cheered his continued lies about the 2020 election, applauded his pledge to pardon January 6 insurrectionists, and laughed as he described sexual assault.

Moderator Kaitlan Collins addressed him as “Mr. President” throughout the event, even though the title currently belongs to President Joe Biden, and she failed to fact-check many of his various blatant lies, including a heinous claim about infanticide that CNN debunked years ago. When Collins did push back on Trump’s flagrant lies, the fawning audience rallied to his defense with laughter and applause.

The entire display was so debasing to the network, Fox News gloated about it.

The fault for this debacle lies with CNN itself.

The network should have known better, especially after stocking the live audience with Republican primary voters in New Hampshire. That same demographic previously nominated election-denier candidates during the 2022 midterm elections, and Trump himself in 2016, so it was obvious from the start that they would provide a receptive crowd for his never-ending trail of falsehoods.

In one telling moment, Collins seemed to temporarily stump Trump with a persistent rebuttal to his false claims about mishandling classified documents, but the audience laughed and applauded when he personally insulted her in response:

"You're a nasty person" — Trump to Kaitlan Collins (the audience cheers) pic.twitter.com/Sa7XMTBPI9

It was also clear in advance that Trump would use CNN as a rhetorical punching bag for his own benefit. Tuesday morning, he posted on his social media site that he would be appearing on CNN, “because they are rightfully desperate to get those fantastic (TRUMP!) ratings once again.”

When CNN first announced the town hall event last week, the network indicated that it would treat Trump like any other candidate, despite the unprecedented nature of his candidacy and his previous tenure in office — among other things, he spurred an insurrection to stay in power. In addition, Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav declared the company was “happy that he’s on our network” because he’s the front-runner for the Republican nomination, seemingly casting Trump and other extremist Republicans as equal voices on both sides of a political debate.

Former District of Columbia police officer Michael Fanone, who is now a CNN contributor, wrote a scathing piece on the network’s various rationales for hosting Trump. His guest piece published at Rolling Stone on Wednesday was titled “CNN Is Hosting a Town Hall for a Guy Who Tried to Get Me Killed,” referring to Fanone’s own experiences when he was brutally attacked by insurrectionists on January 6, 2021. (By his own admission, Fanone actually supported Trump in 2016, but he later became disillusioned with the former president.)

“Putting him onstage, having him answer questions like a normal candidate who didn’t get people killed in the process of trying to end the democracy he’s attempting to once again run, normalizes what Trump did,” Fanone wrote. “It sends a message that attempting a coup is just part of the process; that accepting election results is a choice; and that there are no consequences, in the media or in politics or anywhere else, for rejecting them.”

Maybe CNN didn’t set out to produce an hour of pro-Trump propaganda, but that’s exactly what it did. Other media outlets need to learn a lesson from this spectacle and realize that Trump is unlike any other candidate in American history — whatever the rules used to be, they don’t apply to him or his radicalized base of Republican primary voters.

****************************************************************************************

The previous commentary was originally published by Media Matters for America, a Los Angeles Blade contributor, and was republished with permission.

The ACLU’s Drag Defense Fund aims to educate and activate supporters and push back against restrictive anti-LGBTQ legislation

Published

on

By

By Johanna Silver | NEW YORK – The highly anticipated finale of RuPaul’s Drag Race will feature incredible ensembles, sensational lip sync performances, and of course, the revelation of the season 15 winner. Alongside the competition, the finale will also highlight a joint effort with the ACLU to help defend constitutional rights and creative expression in the LGBTQ community.

With our nationwide network of affiliates, supporters, and advocates, we’re showing up to fight back against hate, and holding politicians accountable for their anti-trans agenda — and you can join us.

ACLU employees represented the ACLU on the red carpet during the April 1 taping of the finale, which featured drag queens from past and present seasons. During the airing of the finale, the ACLU’s Drag Defense Fund will also get a special shoutout as a way to mobilize against mounting legal attacks against drag performers.

In partnership with production company World of Wonder, MTV, and RuPaul’s Drag Race, the ACLU’s Drag Defense Fund will support the ACLU’s work defending LGBTQ rights, including censorship of drag performers themselves. The ACLU is committed to the importance of drag as a First Amendment right and an important form of artistic expression. It will also fuel the ACLU’s expansive advocacy work in support of the LGBTQ community, which includes everything from courtroom battles, to guidance on state-level legislation, to challenging LGBTQ censorship in classrooms.

Drag performance has always been a hallmark of the queer community, allowing members to express themselves openly and joyously. Due in large part to the explosive success of RuPaul’s Drag Race over the years, drag performers have received widespread fanfare and support. But in the past few months, dozens of bills have also been introduced in states around the country that restrict how and where drag queens can perform. One recently-passed Tennessee bill bans drags shows in public spaces around the state, effectively criminalizing them.

These bills censor a fundamental human right to freedom of expression and attempt to remove LGBTQ people from public life — a strategy that ACLU Ambassador for Transgender Justice and former RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant Peppermint recently explained.

“It is sort of a catch all that allows them to attack a word or a notion or an idea, drag, when really what they’re talking about is transgender folks,” she said on a recent episode of our At Liberty podcast. “Trans issues, trans rights, you know, anything having to do with gender and sexuality, they’re trying to dismantle that — dismantle any of the progress that we’ve had on that, and turn us into the boogeyman.”

These legislative attacks against drag performers, coupled with the anti-trans legislation across the country, underscore an unsettling trend. These bills are bald attempts to prevent people from expressing themselves authentically and restrict their right to bodily autonomy and self-determination. The majority of this legislation specifically targets trans youth and aims to obstruct their ability to find support and access health care. These attacks not only undermine drag queens and trans youth, but the broader LGBTQ community, and the very foundations of gender justice.

Many Drag Race alumni — and RuPaul — have come forward to promote the fund, speak out against the targeted legal attacks, and uplift drag queens as champions for equal rights.

“Drag has influenced everything about my queer identity — as a performer, as a trans individual, drag has just blurred all of the things I love and am into getting to be this kind of walking art installation that is also a protest,” drag queen and season 15 finalist Sasha Colby said of the art form.

A post shared by RuPaul's Drag Race (@rupaulsdragrace)

The ACLU will always show up to defend our LGBTQ community, especially amid these ongoing legislative attacks. Along with mobilizing our Drag Defense Fund, we will continue to push back against censorship, hold legislators accountable for their anti-LGBTQ agendas, and take legal action to protect our communities. With your help, we’ll be stronger than ever. Join us as we work to preserve our right to freedom of expression, inclusive communities, safe schools, and the right to be who we are without fear.

******************************************************************************************The preceding commentary was originally published by the ACLU.

******************************************************************************************

Drag performers and the LGBTQ+ community are facing threats across the country. In the face of these threats and censorship, you can fight back with the ACLU for the protection of all our rights.

The freedom to express ourselves and our gender identity in creative ways fuels artistry across our country and culture – and Drag is protected by the First Amendment like any creative expression such as dance, fashion, and music. That’s why RuPaul’s Drag Race, MTV, and World of Wonder are proud to donate to “The Drag Defense Fund” in support of the ACLU’s LGBTQ+ rights work.

Please make a tax-deductible gift to this crucial fund now.

If your kids are trans? Jamie Lee Curtis’ bottom line: “Love is Love”

Federal court denies a “Right To Bully” trans students in Ohio

Iowa school district removes 400 books including Buttigieg bio

A legacy bigger than ‘Pee-Wee,’ Paul Reubens dies at age 70

Out Black dancer O’Shae Sibley killed, NYPD probe as hate crime

Neo-Nazi group disrupts Wisconsin Pride: “Us or the pedophiles!”

Two nights in Bangkok: The spectrum of the Thai sex industry

British coffeehouse uses transman in mural, transphobes outraged

India considers reforms to country’s Uniform Civil Code

Bonta launches civil rights investigation into Chino Valley Unified