advertisement
advertisement
|
Friday, July 06, 2007
To the Editors:
Re: “Is Gay Pride passé?” (news, June 29)
Pride has indeed evolved into much more of a celebration than a political action. But that certainly doesn’t make it irrelevant or passé. It’s the one weekend of the year when gays and lesbians of every stripe come together for a free-wheeling party. Those elitist mainstreamers who want more upscale, exclusive events should just shut up and stay home. The rest of us in all our colorful, even outrageous, diversity will just party on.
I’ve been going to Prides since the mid-1970s — at least one most every year. Early on, especially in the South where I’m from, it was definitely an act of defiance and courage to attend Pride celebrations, which had much more political overtones. Even in the gay capital of the South, Atlanta, Pride was relatively small but growing until the explosion into the hundreds of thousands of attendees in the mid-1990s.
I lived in D.C. in the early 1990s when we still gathered in a small field behind a school near P Street by the “Black Forest” for a “festival” after a short parade through the Dupont Circle area. Getting permission to use the area on Pennsylvania Avenue for a much-expanded festival was a very big deal at the time.
More seriously, Pride still is an eye-opening, affirming experience, especially for those still struggling to become comfortable with their gay identity.
Plus, it reinforces to the heterosexual community, especially those who claim to know no gay people, that indeed “we are everywhere.”
I love Pride and hope to attend many more — even if I have to be brought from a nursing home in a wheelchair. Of course, I’ll fly the rainbow flag on one handle and the bear flag on the other.
JOHN DeLOZIER
Maryville, Tenn.
Bloomberg’s record on gay issues is dismal
To the Editors:
Re: “Bloomberg faulted for mixed record on gay issues” (news, June 29)
There is one major omission in Joshua Lynsen’s article — mention of the Dignity in All Schools Act, enacted in 2004 by the New York City Council over Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto. DASA prohibits bias harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression (as well as race, religion, ethnicity, disability and medical condition), and the training required by DASA would do much to combat the epidemic of homophobic and transgender-phobic harassment in our city’s schools.
But Bloomberg has called DASA “a silly law” and his administration refuses to implement the duly enacted statute. Just as on marriage, Bloomberg pledged to lobby the state legislature on the Dignity for All Students Act, but the mayor has done nothing to help move that bill through the Republican-controlled Senate, where it is currently stalled (primarily because of its transgender-inclusive language).
The article mentions the Empire State Pride Agenda’s praise for Bloomberg for signing the transgender rights bill into law; but the mayor had little choice, as the City Council passed it by a 45-5 vote, so any veto would have been swiftly overridden. The New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, which led the campaign for that landmark legislation, working in partnership with the Pride Agenda, worked with other groups and the City Commission on Human Rights on guidelines for implementation of the law, but they were issued in December 2004 only after considerable resistance from the mayor’s office.
And because Bloomberg has under-funded the Commission, the task of educating employers and the public about the provisions of the law has fallen to a few small, under-funded transgender advocacy organizations here.
Yes, we would have same-sex marriage in New York City if it were not for Bloomberg’s appeal of the lower court ruling, but his hypocrisy on marriage is part of a larger pattern. High-level appointments to his administration and an elaborate annual Pride event at Gracie Mansion are part of a larger strategy to co-opt LGBT community leaders and organizations.
Anyone who is under the common misapprehension that our mayor is “pro-gay” needs only talk with activists here in New York to learn how truly dismal Bloomberg’s record on LGBT issues really is.
PAULINE PARK
New York
Editors’ note: The writer is chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy.
Washington didn’t deserve second chance
To the Editors:
Re: “Ex-‘Grey’s’ star cites racism for firing” (washingtonblade.com, June 29)
Isaiah Washington’s accusations are completely absurd and without merit. Is he so blind to the fact that using gay slurs is not acceptable that he would argue that his dismissal was due to his race?
Washington’s statements show the hypocrisy in the black community. Look at the outrage by the black community and subsequent dismissal of Don Imus because of his “nappy-headed ho’s” comment, yet a black man who makes equally unacceptable comments about gays states he is being picked on by the “white establishment” and that he felt he lived in a society where a black man could get a second chance.
Why does a black man need a second chance when it’s not acceptable for white or gay society to receive them?
KEVIN HONEYCUTT
Boca Raton, Fla.
|
