The other day, I wrote a piece about Liberty Law’s withdrawal as a co-sponsor of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), due to the fact that the conservative gay group GOProud was also a sponsor. The fundamentalist freak-out, was, of course, inevitable, because groups like Liberty Law don’t believe that gay people deserve to be treated as human beings, much less as equal co-sponsors at wingnutty political conferences. I also pointed out that I find it strange that any group of self-respecting LGBT people would even want to align themselves with groups that see them as inferior, and who fight against their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Daniel Blatt at GayPatriot took issue with my piece, suggesting that the entire thrust of the piece was my antipathy to gay conservatives. Here’s part of what he said:
Gay activists should welcome this news; it shows that Americans of all stripes are becoming increasingly tolerant and accepting of gay people. And shouldn’t their goal be an America were gay people are welcome in all endeavors? But, it seems that trashing conservatives has become such a part of the modus operandi of some gay leftists that even as the facts change, their prejudices do not.
It would be one thing if GOProud’s inclusion in CPAC represented a legitimate opportunity for LGBT people to open hearts and minds among the CPAC set. But this is not that.
It might be helpful here to review who else is a co-sponsor at CPAC, for anyone who might be unaware of what kind of a scene CPAC is. Jeremy helpfully pointed out a few of the other groups on the roster:
-The National Organization For Marriage’s entire existence is built around hurting gay families.
-The Alliance Defense Fund goes to court to fight even the most basic pro-LGBT benefit or protection.
-Concerned Women For America’s most pressing “concern” of the past decade or so has revolved around the possibility that society might accept LGBT people.
-Focus on the Family is, well, Focus on the Family.
So, those four groups are very much still co-sponsors, along with GOProud. Now, lest anyone say “But Evan, maybe this is a good opportunity for the group to offer a voice of LGBT support to compete with those voices,” it’s useful to remember some other information. David Keene, who heads up CPAC’s organizing group, specifically stated that GOProud would not be offered a speaking spot at the conference and that, because of the CPAC consensus against LGBT people and issues, the subject of rights for our families wouldn’t even be “open to debate”:
In his e-mail response, Keene admitted GOProud “has signed on as a CPAC co-sponsor, but will have no speakers and we told them that, in fact, since opposition to gay marriage, etc are consensus positions (if not unanimous) among conservatives, these topics are not open to debate.”
(…)
…Keene’s e-mail defended the agreement, explaining GOProud’s “interest is in demonstrating that not all gays are liberals rather than promoting their life style.
Okay, so…GOProud can come, but they cannot talk. They can’t try to advocate for LGBT people being treated as equal citizens, because “opposition to gay marriage, etc. are consensus positions (if not unanimous).” They can come, as long as they don’t “promote their life style.”
?!?!?!
Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but my sense of dignity as a gay man doesn’t put up with people who refer to my advocating for my own equal rights as “promoting my lifestyle.” My sense of dignity would be offended by a group saying that I can come to the party as long as I keep my faggoty mouth shut. (And that is exactly what CPAC said, when you translate it out of wingnut and into the slurs they prefer behind closed doors.) It would seem to me that GOProud has so deeply internalized the idea that they don’t deserve equal treatment that they are merely over-the-moon at being invited to breathe the same air space with the people who hate them the most. Some might call that progress, but I don’t buy it. I would have called that progress in 1975, but it’s 2010, and we’re dealing with real issues of equality now, having moved far beyond being simply thrilled to be invited.
So yes, Daniel, “an America where gay people are welcome in all endeavors” is indeed a worthy goal, and you be sure to let me know the second that CPAC offers you all a true opportunity to reach their people with the message of full equality for LGBT citizens. But as things currently stand, the anti-gay forces of NOM, Focus on the Family, the Alliance Defense Fund (currently fighting against us in California, in case you hadn’t heard) and Concerned Women for America have the microphone at CPAC, and GOProud is little more than a wallflower, content to play second fiddle to bigots in their desire to be included.
I, for one, have moved far beyond being excited that people will “tolerate” my “lifestyle.” Perhaps GOProud has not.
Enjoy your table scraps.
Related posts
14 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Hi – love your columns and read them regularly. I would disagree with you on GOPride, I think it is important for them to be there and talking with conservatives about basic conservative values like limited government, individual freedom & liberty. They may not like us but they should at least be exposed to some of us in a civil environment. If relationships develop that is even better. We decrease homophobia when we develop relationships with others. If we are never around them their false stereotypes of us will continue. Having said that, I just started my first blog returntogoldwater.com where I have no problem attacking the religious right and urging republicans to take back the GOP from the Jerry Falwell Republicans. Might I remind you that if Goldwater was still alive, you would love him. He was called “Mr. Conservative” and even he attacked Falwell conservatives and warned about religious crackpots trying to take over the GOP.
Please keep up your writing. I always enjoy it. My blog is not as polished as yours, I just started it this month.
V/R
Cotton
Comment by Cotton Hill — January 14, 2010 @ 11:57 pm
Well, first of all, no, I wouldn’t love Barry Goldwater. :)
But the problem with that analysis is that this group is going there, already having ceded the opportunity to develop those relationships. They’ve already said “You know, you’re right, it’s okay for us to stay silent while others demonize on us from the stage, we’re okay with that.”
None of the people at CPAC are the “movable middle.” These are are the furthest right organizations out there, and the fact is, GOProud isn’t a good representative of gay rights in the first place. You have to remember, they split off from the Log Cabin Republicans because they were fed up with the LCR’s principled stands on equality and their refusal to support candidates who demonized us.
GOProud came along and said “Nah, that’s okay, we’re not worth equality anyway” and they came up with this mangled definition of “gay rights” that somehow magically aligned with far-right GOP talking points which have been roundly disproven. Seriously, look through their talking points sometime. It’s nothing more than Michele Bachmann tomfoolery with a few lame attempts to say “AND THIS IS BETTER FOR GAYS BECAUSE.”
They’re not serious members of the LGBT political establishment.
Comment by Evan Hurst — January 15, 2010 @ 12:03 am
I never understood the point of GOProud other than to be contrarian, and I have to agree with Evan here. Why pursue the farthest end of the spectrum, when they are the least likely to moved on any issue, especially GLBT issues?
I have no problem with gay conservatives. I agree that the GLBT community should not be beholden to any one party, and if we truly believe in diversity, then we should accept a diversity of political ideologies as well. But nothing–*nothing*–beneficial comes from devaluing yourself before you are allowed to have a conversation with your opponents, a conversation they aren’t serious about to begin with.
The term “self-hating gay person” is *way* overused, but its description of GOProud seems appropriate here, given how low they’re willing to prostrate themselves.
Comment by Christopher‚Ñ¢ — January 15, 2010 @ 12:32 am
Seriously, I don’t see why any self-respecting gay man or lesbian woman would want to align themselves with a party that already has it in for us. This “maybe if we expose them to people like us they will change their minds” mentality is just pure and utter hogwash. Their belief system is ingrained deeply in their psyche. No amount of exposure, persuasion, or anything else for that matter is going to change that.
Comment by Ray — January 15, 2010 @ 8:53 am
Well, and as I said in another thread, Ray, it would be different if there was really some opportunity here for understanding.
I’ll argue with conservatives all day long on their other issues, like their lack of understanding of economics, their shoot first, ask no questions later, hide-under-the-bed and turn every threat into the boogeyman conception of national security, etc., on their merits, because they’re wrong about those, too.
But on this issue, we’re dealing with something as whether a group is fundamentally respected as human beings, and it’s clear that GOProud is not respected in their circle as deserving of equality, and in fact, again, their attendance and sponsorship are conditional on their agreement that they keep their mouths shut about gay issues. That’s disgusting. Their idea of “acceptance” seems to be “they don’t beat us up.” Yeah, well, bully for them. But then again, gay conservatives also oppose hate crimes legislation, calling it “thought crime.” They don’t seem to want to repeal the hate crimes legislation that protects religious people, but they oppose it for themselves.
It’s the very essence of self-loathing.
Comment by Evan Hurst — January 15, 2010 @ 8:59 am
I consider the GOProud and Log Cabiners to be a very sad lot. They actually think they can change hearts and minds in the Rethuglican Party. Look around you, lads and lasses. Does it LOOK as if you are changing minds and hearts? As noted in the post these people have not evolved beyond the 70s. THESE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT YOU.
I knew a Log Cabiner back in the early to mid-90s. He would whine and cry to me about not having a boyfriend and fulminate about BS such as “misogyny being turned into misterogyny by the feminists.” (I think he meant miandry but that’s a whole other issue. I tried to talk to him about women’s and other issues, but all he did is whine. Once he found his boyfriend, I never heard from him again. I guess that he just wanted someone he could whine to. Here it is 16 years later and the Log Cabiner lot are still waiting to be accepted and treated as other Rethuglicans. These people are Rethuglicans because they basically vote their wallets. They truly are “self-hating gay people”.
These people are wasting their time and their breath. The Rethuglicans do not want them (except possibly for the donations). Someone needs to whack these fools with a clue-by-four.
Comment by Merlyn — January 15, 2010 @ 9:00 am
I like the fact that GOProud will be there to make wing nuts uncomfortable. “What, we can’t even go to a right wing, wing ding with out them, there hooo-mooo-sexuals, infesting it?”
But, Evan does make a persuasive case that it is a waste of time and effort. More Go-Nuts, that GOProud.
Comment by Wayne Besen — January 15, 2010 @ 9:02 am
I guess now that they worship Dick Cheney, the Log cabin has been replaced by a concrete bunker.
Comment by Wayne Besen — January 15, 2010 @ 9:06 am
First Cotten Hill, please show me where conservatives are mindful of government size. Please show me where they are mindful of government spending?
I’ll tell you when if you don’t know. Only when dems are in power. When Clinton was president, he reduced the government size. He even left a surplus. But, when Bush was in charge and repukes had both houses, we saw the government size explode as well as government spending. There was not a single spending bill that went before Bush that he did not sign.
So, not only did repukes go through a surplus, but they also but us trillions in dollars of debt.
Wow, ain’t the conservatives great.
Comment by Bob Olivarez — January 15, 2010 @ 12:58 pm
You’re right, Bob. It’s really more of a narrative than anything. It’s not substantiated by facts.
Indeed, the thing that conservatives rail against the most (and which we’re not going to get), a national healthcare system, would reduce government spending on healthcare exponentially, and not only that, the dollars would be spent SMARTER. But that’s counter to their narrative. You see, for the most part, conservatives are not well-traveled, world-savvy individuals. They believe their own lies, that the rest of the Western world, which DOES have national healthcare, lives in some sort of squalor. Of course, French citizens live longer than American citizens, and their medical bankruptcy rate is ZERO.
But when you’re dealing with people whose idea of a an exotic vacation is getting in the RV without a solid plan, you’re going to run up against ignorance.
Comment by Evan Hurst — January 15, 2010 @ 1:09 pm
BRAVO!!
Comment by GraciesDaddy — January 16, 2010 @ 11:20 am
[...] what Daniel Blatt says in his latest non-response to my piece on the CPAC/GOProud [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - Apparently The “Gay Left” Never Gave Dick Cheney For His Support For Marriage Equali — January 17, 2010 @ 12:38 am
[...] don’t consider themselves to be worthy of full equality, and who are simply excited that they get to eat at the big boy table as long as they agree not to talk, I guess you just have to keep correcting [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - A Missive From the “Gay Thought Police” — January 23, 2010 @ 8:30 pm
[...] Anyway, so there you go. Jimmy LaSalvia made a funny and nobody’s been gay-bashed yet at CPAC. Glad to see, again, that they’re persevering in their quest to win the gay rights battles of the 1970’s. [...]
Pingback by Truth Wins Out - “Who’s the Pansy at CPAC?” — February 19, 2010 @ 5:23 pm