Posts Of The Year: What Happened In 1990?, July 7, 2009

(I joined the gay rights movement publicly in 1989 with a cover story for TNR, making the case for marriage equality. I had been out for a while, and made the same case in the Advocate a year earlier, but that was my first foray into public advocacy for civil rights for gay people. Looking back, I am in shock and disbelief at the progress we have made.

This first decade of the 21st century has been an astonishing thing. I'm now legally married in both places I reside: in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. Five states now recognize marriage equality and many countries. My home country offers all the rights of civil marriage to my husband. The cynical use of homophobia by the GOP worked for a while, but has since faded. Meanwhile, the dialogue has deepened and widened, and, as it has done so, attitudes have shifted more profoundly than at any previous point. Ted Olson is now one of the faces of gay equality. The next generation gets the fact that gays are human beings, have relationships as valid as straight ones, and have love as deep.

It can be hard to recognize it, but we have come an enormously long distance, even past the narrow defeats in Maine and California. We have overcome. And we shall again. – Andrew)

6a00d83451c45669e20115719a35ed970b-800wi

Several readers have wondered what my best guess is for why that year was the turning point for gay rights in America. Here's my best shot at some of the factors, although it seems clear to me it was multi-determined as my shrink often (helpfully) says. The first is that this coincides with a re-framing of the issue in public discourse. Many of us then derided as right-wing fascists believed that the focus on sexual liberation, on "queerness" and subcultural revolt were not actually very descriptive of most gay lives and not the most persuasive arguments for gay equality. I mean: if you want to be queer, why seek any legal acceptance at all? Isn't marginalization the point? Why not revel in oppression as the only legitimate way to live as "the other"?

So in the late 1980s, the homocons, as we were subsequently described, started making the case for formal civil equality, not counter-cultural revolution. 1988, I wrote a piece for the Advocate arguing that the legal bans on military service and civil marriage should be the focus of the movement in the next decade. I gave a speech on those lines to HRC a little later (they were, for the most part, appalled). In 1989, I wrote the first cover-story in favor of same-sex marriage in a national American magazine. By 1993, with the military ban in the news and Hawaii's ruling on marriage equality, the intellectual structure for re-framing the debate on grounds finally favorable to gays was in place. Ever since, the dynamic that posits gay men and women as heroes trying to serve their country or human beings trying to construct families keeps adding to the momentum – and the next generation, having imbibed this new order, are the most adamant of all.

But much, much more important than all of this, in my view, is something the younger gay generation rarely mentions, remembers or honors any more. That was the transformative, traumatizing effect of AIDS on both gay and straight America.

It came in the early 1980s, but the deaths only reached their stunning peaks in the early 1990s – which is when the polling shifts.

Remember: most of these deaths were of young men. If you think that the Vietnam war took around 60,000 young American lives randomly over a decade or more, then imagine the psychic and social impact of 300,000 young Americans dying in a few years. Imagine a Vietnam Memorial five times the size. The victims were from every state and city and town and village. They were part of millions and millions of families. Suddenly, gay men were visible in ways we had never been before. And our humanity – revealed by the awful, terrifying, gruesome deaths of those in the first years of the plague – ripped off the veneer of stereotype and demonization and made us seem as human as we are. More, actually: part of our families.

I think that horrifying period made the difference. It also galvanized gay men and lesbians into fighting more passionately than ever – because our very lives were at stake. There were different strategies – from Act-Up actions to Log Cabin conventions. But more and more of us learned self-respect and refused to tolerate the condescension, double standards, discrimination and violence so many still endured. We were deadly serious. And we fight on in part because of those we had lost. At least I know I do. In the words of Mark Helprin:

He knew that this was because the war was still in him, and that it would be in him for a long time to come, for soliders who have been bloodied are soldiers for ever. They never fit in. Even when they finally settle down, the settling is tenuous, for when they close their eyes, they see their comrades who have fallen. That they cannot forget, that they do not forget, that they never allow themselves to heal completely, is their way of expressing their love for friends who have perished. And they will not change, because they have become what they have become to keep the fallen alive.

Yglesias Award Nominee

“As a Christian organization, Focus on the Family Action encourages pro-family policies. As such, we respect the desire of the Ugandan people to shield their nation from the promotion of homosexuality as morally equivalent to one-man, one-woman marriage. That said, the purpose of laws is to make societies safer, and there is legitimate concern that the legislation being debated in Uganda will incite violence against homosexuals. That is morally unacceptable, as is enacting the death penalty for homosexuals, which some versions of this bill are reported to require,” – Jim Daly, President of Focus on the Family

Dissent Of The Day

A reader writes:

Your cultural hangover seems to extend to embracing unfortunate aspects of British nonsense as well:

`Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

`No, no!' said the Queen. `Sentence first – verdict afterwards.'

Obama has already proved he’s not Bush, otherwise he would be clubbing down the press and political opponents by suggesting that any critique of government would embolden “the enemy”. Rather, Obama has conceded to a breakdown in the system and vowed to correct it. Can you conceive of Bush ever admitting to a mistake on his watch?

Demanding the immediate sacking of Napolitano as a symbolic gesture of accountability is akin to requiring idiotic new airline screening procedures – it provides the illusion of decisive action and does nothing except create a false sense of “something is being done”. If an investigation shows that she utterly failed at her job, then by all means she needs to go. However, to fire Napolitano without evidence of incompetence would be opportunistic, craven, and foolish (also trademarks of the Bush administration).

Accountability

John Cole and ED Kain cannot get their head around my call for Napolitano to be fired. It may be a cultural hangover from my British youth but in my view, when government reveals itself as incompetent in tracing potential terrorists, even when basically handed them on a plate, someone needs to take the fall. That person need not be directly personally responsible for the mistake, but since the error that could have led to the preventable deaths of scores of people comes under Napolitano's broad responsibility, she should go.

One of the federal government's core responsibilities is public order.

They've had eight years to figure this out and they are still clueless. Sure, Bush was president for much of that time and bears the bulk of the responsibility, but Obama is now president. When officials screwed up under Bush, they were defended, backed up, told they were doing great, etc etc. Even when they offered to resign, as Rumsfeld rightly did after the torture program was exposed at Abu Ghraib, Bush refused.

Obama needs to prove he is not Bush. Hold a thorough investigation and fire everyone in the chain of command who let the Jihadist onto a plane. Every single one. But before then, fire Napolitano. The buck stops with her.

The Pivotal Presidency, Ctd

A reader writes:

This sentence stood out to me especially:

“What Obama is doing is trying to cement this new liberal era in the conservative institutional structure of American government.’

The key words here in that sentence for me is “conservative institutional structure.”  This essential nature of American government is something that I don’t believe that the whiny, purist left understand, or don’t want to understand or accept. 

This is one of the main reasons I stopped calling myself a liberal and started calling myself a liberaltarian (that and because the demonization of the free market from the increasingly nutty far-lefties turned me off). 

When Obama became president I welcomed a resurgence of the reality-based community.  Too bad the leftie whiners haven’t decided to join the reality-based community with this fact: American govenrment is conservative in it’s structure. 

I am so tired of hearing the whining from the left about this basic fact of American life, because in my mind, you can work with that reality to the best of one’s ability to more or less achieve liberal goals like Obama, or spin in anger and talk like joining the Tea Baggers is a good idea (again, Jane Hamsher and her histrionics). 

Enough already. 

Move Your Money

Here's an interesting idea that does not rely on government but can put pressure on the big four banks that just robbed us blind, threw so many out of work and are now refusing to make loans to people who need them: take your money out of the big banks and place it in community banks, ones that were not responsible for the meltdown. You can find local alternatives here. Just because Arianna supports the idea should not dissuade you. Her argument makes sense:

The idea is simple: If enough people who have money in one of the big four banks move it into smaller, more local, more traditional community banks, then collectively we, the people, will have taken a big step toward re-rigging the financial system so it becomes again the productive, stable engine for growth it's meant to be. It's neither Left nor Right — it's populism at its best. Consider it a withdrawal tax on the big banks for the negative service they provide by consistently ignoring the public interest. It's time for Americans to move their money out of these reckless behemoths. And you don't have to worry, there is zero risk: deposit insurance is just as good at small banks — and unlike the big banks they don't provide the toxic dividend of derivatives trading in a heads-they-win, tails-we-lose fashion.

Maybe readers will immediately see some unintended consequences of this, but I can't see any at first blush.

Top Ten Posts Of The Year By Traffic

  1. Worst Logo Ever: 402,400 page views
  2. Sarah Palin Does Not Understand Cap And Trade: 235,551 page views
  3. Chris Wallace, A Teenage Girl Interviewing The Jonas Brothers: 198,593 page views
  4. "My Favorite Memo Ever": 113,582 page views
  5. The Odd Lies Of Sarah Palin: A Summary Before The Next Round: 98,642 page views
  6. Death Panels Without the Panels: 91,709 page views
  7. To Our Readers: 80,122 page views
  8. The Drunkest Nation: 80,055 page views
  9. The Cannabis Closet: The Parents II: 69,874 page views
  10. Follow-Up On Earlier Posts: 68,254

All this is according to Omniture Web Analytics. Traffic from posts with the same title (Quote For The Day, The View From Your Sickbed, Mental Health Break, etc) could not be differentiated. Such posts are therefore excluded from this ranking.

All in all, you get a glimpse of what succeeds online: masturbating priests, Matt Stone's potty mouth, Sarah Palin's gargantuan lies, taking a moment to make sense of Sarah Palin's gargantuan lies, Chris Wallace's fellatial non-journalism, shit-faced Brits, and stoned parents. But the logo that gave us over 400,000 pageviews?

So dirty you'll have to click:

6a00d83451c45669e201156f47782f970c-500wi