Monica Roberts

Your Pink Sheets Are Showing

Filed By Monica Roberts | January 17, 2009 4:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Politics, The Movement
Tags: Gay racism, GLBT, Monica Roberts

Thumbnail image for pink Klan hoodI wrote a post a little over 24 hours ago on TransGriot that basically called the gay community out for their continued pattern of knee jerk hostility to President-elect Barack Obama dating back to last year's Democratic primary. I pointed out that the man hasn't even spent one day in the Oval Office yet and the predominately white GLBT blogosphere is already making comments that he'll be the worst president ever on GLBT issues.

Well, Queerty linked to that post and the commenters slapped on their pink pointy hooded sheets and began blasting away in the comment thread.

One commenter compared me to Jasmyne Cannick, who is another African-American LGBT blogger that white gays have a visceral hatred for because she tells it like it is as well and got a Chuck Knipp Shirley Q. Liquor performance in LA cancelled.

By the way Queerty fans, being compared to Jasmyne Cannick is an honor, not an insult.

But comparing me to Jasmyne was one of the nicer ones. The rest were nasty, racist personal insults, weak justifications of their hatred of Obama, et cetera.

white privilege card.jpgThe Queerty peeps negativity in this comment thread is an example of what I and other Black GLBT and non GLBT people have dealt with for years when trying to work with the white gay community in coalition with them. While not all white GLBT peeps exhibit this behavior and are wonderful allies, in many cases there are, however, too many of them that exhibit the same reprehensible tactics to silence messages they don't want to hear to where it constitutes a major problem.

Too many times white GLBT people will whip out the white privilege card and dish out criticism concerning my community, but are too thin-skinned to take it. They will get their noses out of joint and bellow "homophobe," "transphobe," "you're playing the race card," or cry "racist" at you if you dare utter it. If you are Black (or any color) GLBT or non-GLBT person and call them out on their shady, borderline racist or less than honorable behavior, they go apoplectic about it and give you that "how dare you?" look as you do so.

black gay2.jpgWhite GLBT people, if you can't take constructive criticism then you are going to continue to have problems working in coalition with other people, especially fellow GLBT peeps of color who are supposed to be your allies.

Another fact of life is that you don't get to decide what offends me or my community, nor will I or any other person of color stop speaking our minds or telling it like it T-I-S is on this blog or any other we post on.

You have the right to disagree with what I have to say, but you don't have the right to call me everything, but a child of God for simply pointing out that something is unfair and my viewpoint doesn't neatly line up with your worldview.

atlanta Black gay pride.jpgThe sterling example of the racism on the Queerty thread exposed the Number One reason with a bullet why Black GLBT peeps get so sick of your crap to the point that we say "Enough" and form our own organizations, clubs, and pride events.

Yeah, your pink sheets are showing, and if you don't stop using the Cali Prop 8 loss as an excuse to let out your inner racist, you're not only going to continue to have a difficult time getting African descended GLBT peeps to help you garner support and craft a message for same-gender marriage that wins in our community, you risk creating the permanent split between you and the Black community that the Religious Right was trying to foment when they peddled that "Blacks voted 70 percent for Prop 8" lie in the first place.

Cross-posted to TransGriot


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


You know, when I first came out as a transwoman and lesbian, one of the things I was thankful for was that, at least I was not black.

Even a cursory look at the statistics shows that being a black transwoman is one of the most dangerous things to be in the US. White privledged gays and transpeople just can't know the type of shit that you have to put up with. Even now, after so many years post civil rights era, white priveledge is alive and well. As bad as it is to lose that 'male priveledge' that I was used to, it is nothing compared to having the 'priveledge' of being white which the black trans community has never known at all.

Our society still supports racism, though it has gone 'underground' for the most part. It is going to take a lot more time for all sides to get over their own versions of bigotry and racism and change our social fabric to one of complete equality.

We (collectively), just have not evolved enough for that to happen yet.

Thank you for writing this, and for taking all the shit that I'm sure you'll have to take for it. It's sad and frustrating how conservative the "gay community" is, and becoming more so in the last few years since marriage and military have become the central issues for activists. The Obama bashing is racist and shameful.

Most bloggers, and commenters, would do well to spend more time listening (well, reading) than writing. (And I know how ironic it is to say that in a blog comment) The immediacy of blogging, the anonymity or near-anonymity of the 'net, and the whole 'narrowcasting' nature of the medium allow people to shut out or deny entire realities that they may be uncomfortable with. Upon meeting uncomfortable truths, many of us react with knee-jerk anger instead of thought. Perhaps they don't know how to put themselves in the other person's shoes, to see beyond themselves.

Once again, Monica speaks truth. I'm not surprised at the commenters reaction, but I'm saddened. I'm glad, though, to see Monica's post here.

I think part of the issue is that not everyone understands where you're coming from, Monica. Are you saying that any and all criticism of Barack Obama is off-limits until after his inauguration? I would disagree there - he's making important decisions now that will affect us for at least the next four years, and we need to be raising a ruckus on them. Larry Sanders? Robert Gates? Not going to investigate the Bush administration's war crimes? These are important decisions that were made before he installs himself in the Oval Office.

I agree with a lot of your post. Many white LGBT people do have an issue with black people, especially black men, in positions of power. I think that many white LGBT people irrationally project their fears of homophobic attacks on Black men (as well as working class men) and then act from there. I think we saw it play out when it came to the knee-jerk reaction many LGBT took against him, like that Advocate cover story on Hillary illuminated, as well as back with Donnie McClurkin.

But comparing me to Jasmyne was one of the nicer ones.

I agree, I like Jasmyne's writing too, but I wouldn't take it all that seriously. The guy who made that comment used to comment on Bilerico all the time and he compared pretty much everyone here to Jasmyne, including me!

Lots of those folks don't come around these parts after we got labeled a "PC" LGBT blog based on the way many people on this site called out the racist "Black people caused Prop 8 to pass" meme right after the election. I remember how a few people said a while back that we were "too black," and I can't see at all where they're coming from on that. We're not diverse enough, if anything.

Bill Perdue Bill Perdue | January 19, 2009 8:21 AM

Alex, who is Larry Sanders?

Do you mean Larry Summers, Clinton’s Treasury Secretary who’ll craft Obama's economic policies. He and Clinton threw all their weight behind repeal of the Glass-Steagall (banking regulation) Act by supporting, as did almost all Democrats (sic), the Republican Graham-Bliley-Leach Act. Signed by Democrat (sic) Clinton, now a gazillionaire, Graham-Bliley-Leach was a bipartisan gift to Wall Street that laid the groundwork for today’s slide towards a depression. Bankers spent over $300 million dollars ‘lobbying’ for it!

I ask because you left a false impression when you claimed several times during the campaign that your fellow Democrats (sic) voted against it. That’s wrong, of course. Democrats (sic) supported it by the same overwhelming margins as they voted for welfare for the Wall Street looters. And by the same huge votes for anti-GLBT bombshells like Clinton’s DADT and DOMA, union busting acts like NAFTA and draconian welfare cuts.

Why do Democrats (sic) always want to erase their own history?

According to the Wikipedia article you partially quoted on a couple of occasions Graham-Bliley-Leach repealed “Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies… passed the U.S. Senate in one form on a party-line vote of 54 (53 Republicans and 1 Democrat [sic]) to 44 (all Democrats [sic]) and on a 343-86 vote in a different form in the House of Representatives, before being resolved by a joint conference committee; the conference report was approved by both houses of Congress (Senate: 90-8-1, House: 362-57-15) and signed by President Bill Clinton.” Link here http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/wallstreet/weill/demise.html and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act.

Summers, who’ll be a key player in the new administration is infamous for saying that toxic materials should be exported because the lives of workers in overdeveloped countries cost less. He’s a racist pig, but he’s a Democrat (sic) racist pig so he isn’t mentioned, much less condemned by either Monica.

Summers gets a pass, just like Biden, Powell, Nunn, Clinton and the others. Hillary and Bill Clinton waged a campaign of clearly racist innuendo during the primacies, which McCain-Palin ran with. Why do the Clintons get a pass on their racism?

As usual when you Democrats (sic) support what smells and looks like a pile of excrement (Graham-Bliley-Leach) you apply a fig leaf, in this case a trifle about the CRA. Why not just own up to it? Attempts to ignore your own history condemns you to repeat it ad nauseam. The problem is that all of us end up paying the price, and this time it could easily be a depression.

Jasmyne knows Los Angeles and her OpEd in the Los Angeles Times made alot of sense. There are two sides to every story and I believe that NoOnProp8 folks innocently believed they had outreach to the black community covered by giving a grant to NAACP. They received a half million dollar budget to do the job. Frankly, I wouldn't go down to Los Angeles black areas and knock on church doors with a bible telling them what their holy book says about homosexuality and how wrong Apostle Paul was. They would laugh at you all the way back to Hollywood whether you were black or white.

Thank you, AirMonica. You gave me another perspective on why there have been so many hateful comments long before Obama took office. "He isn't going to this. He isn't going to do that. He's going to do this. He's going to do that." And, they justify these things with predictions and baseless facts that even Nostadomus would find silly.

Frankly, I was getting sick of it. And, don't get me started on the "you-know-who" BS that just isn't going away. Obama isn't getting ANY FLEXABILITY from this community, and it seems that the white LGBT people are the biggest, and only complainers. I hope you will always look upon me as one of the few white LGBT people you can count on.

SeaMonica

Thank you for this. I had a horrible personal experience with this issue in my own family. My son cam out when he was 16 and started to hang out with some stereotypical queenie-racist punks. The type that hate their parents and anyone who isn't an effeminate, young white queen. But the crash came because they don't have queer parents who have been there and dealt with that. Needless to say I ripped his head off from a very different perspective that included my own family history of racial mixing, my own interracial dating and the fact that one side of his family has the straight people outnumbered.
He got a clue to some extent and go over himself, he voted for Obama BTW... just like his Da.... good little Irish boy that he is.

Alex,
If my critics had bothered to scroll down to the next to the last paragraph of my post, they would have read this:

Once again, I'm not saying that President Obama should be immune to criticism. What I and the African-American community are talking about here is simple fairness. We see it as shady that you're blasting the man before he's even taken the oath of office and had time to prove what type of president he'll be for the GLBT community. Hell, y'all gave George W. Bush's idiot savant behind more slack than you're giving the presidential brother.

I'm not saying he (or any president) should be immune from criticism. I blasted George W. Bush back when he was my failed governor, called Bill Clinton out on multiple occasions, and when Obama does something I feel is wrong I will criticize him as well.

But the difference is that I will at least give Obama a chance to govern BEFORE I start criticizing.


You know, when I first came out as a transwoman and lesbian, one of the things I was thankful for was that, at least I was not black.

Diddlygirl, while I understand what you're trying to say in your comment, I have to ask the question why is being a Black transwoman looked at as something that it negative?

I look at being a Black transwoman as something to be proud of, not thankful that I'm not.

That, my dear is the 64 dollar question now isn't it? Before I did come out, I read the stories and statistics of what I faced as a transwoman, the only 'good' news I saw, was that only minority transwomen had a worst time of it than I was likely to have.

I am not proud of the reaction I had, but at the time it was one of the few positive things I could see.

I had a racist upbringing from my father and have struggled with my own prejudices ever since. I try to go beyond what he taught me as a child, but sometimes I get hung up on the paraphenalia of prejudice such as stereotypes and 'conventional wisdom'. Since I had a 'white' upbringing, meaning there were almost no black families or children around where I grew up, I had no reality with which to compare the lies and stereotypes that my father tried to teach me. I knew that what he was showing me was wrong, but I had no personal experience with which to counter him from. For me, equality was mainly a mental act of defiance against his hate and stupidity.

Up until I finally had to come out, that is all that equality ever was to me, a mental exercise that stood within the realm of theory rather than reality.

The old adage of "walking a mile" in the other person's shoes makes a lot of things more concrete and real. Having lived now as one of the unequal, it has given me a perspective on the whole concept of equality that I never had before. Though I know that it is not the same as what you have had to face your whole life from being born black in this white society, still I can better understand the ordeal you have faced.

As with most, I am still a work in progress.

"Jasmyne Cannick, who is another African-American LGBT blogger that white gays have a visceral hatred for because she tells it is..."

I have a problem with Cannick because she goes on Fox News and lends herself to get ratings for the likes of Bill O'Reilly.

She's right on about Charles Knipp, though. Don't get me started on that bigited creep!

"Jasmyne Cannick, who is another African-American LGBT blogger that white gays have a visceral hatred for because she tells it is..."

I have a problem with Cannick because she goes on Fox News and lends herself to get ratings for the likes of Bill O'Reilly.

She's right on about Charles Knipp, though. Don't get me started on that bigoted creep!

I disagree, Monica. I think that's exactly the message being sent when people jump all over me and call me a racist for daring to question Obama's choice of Rick Warren or his stance on same-sex relationships.

Let's not forget that Obama didn't just pop out of nowhere, he's been campaigning on these issues for almost two years nationally and a lot longer at the state level. It's perfectly fair and reasonable to call him out when his actions don't match his rhetoric, as in these cases.

For example, don't you think it's interesting that when the Jeremiah Wright flap got out of hand in the media Obama distanced himself from Wright and denounced his positions, but with Rick Warren, as with Donnie McClurkin during the campaign, he's standing firm and ignoring the complaints of those on the left that having the invocation at his inaugural, which is really a national celebration not his own personal party, done by a man who is openly and proactively anti-equality and anti-fairness?

Personally, I think that sends a message about how important he sees the LGBT community, our issues, and our feelings. I'd also point out that when someone like Rick Warren or McClurkin bash LGBT people they're not bashing just some of us but all of us, regardless of race or ethnicity.

When Obama flip-flops on his publicly stated 1996 position in favor of same-sex marriage to a strategic "No" in 2004 and then again to hiding behind religion in 2006 to shy away from supporting SSM entirely as he begins running for President that sends a message too.

Obama has been an elected official and taking positions on our issues for well over a decade. I believe it's completely fair to ask questions when those positions change over time, just as it's fair in the case of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, or any other elected official.

And not for nothing, but there's also another aspect to all this: It's precisely because Barack Obama has shown us that he gets it that we expect more from him than we would from those who we've come to expect far less from. Call it being a victim of his own success if you will, but I hold Obama to higher standard than most because he's spent the last two years telling all of us that he can and will meet such a standard.

It is not racist to ask these questions or to challenge the positions and actions of politicians, regardless of who they are, what position they hold or will hold, their race, or anything else. It's the proper functioning of a free press.

I, for one, will continue asking such questions, and I will continue calling out those politicians and others who deserve it. For me, race does not and has never entered into it. As I've said before, it's all about credibility.

Am I going to tell you I've never had a racist thought or feeling in my life? Of course not. I grew up a white guy in suburban New Jersey in the 70's. The high school I attended had exactly one black student during my time there. Casual racism was common in those days and I was as guilty of it as anyone.

But I'll also tell you what altered my perspective was when I went from the top of the food chain as a heterosexual white male to near the bottom as a transsexual lesbian woman, when I became a member of a minority myself. Going from being steadily employed since high school to six solid years post-transition of being unable to get a serious job interview much less actual employment can do wonders for changing your perspective on such things.

I'm going to be just as tough on Obama as I would be on any politician who makes promises and tells me that he stands for something. I'm going to do my best to hold him to those promises and call him out when he fails to do so. I see that not only as my job as a community mediamaker, but also my duty as an American citizen.

After all, he's my President too.

I will admit I don't read Queerty much other than for the RSS feed from the site. The commenters there seemed quite insular so I don't bother reading the comments or commenting there myself. However, I don't get where you're coming from with statements like the following:

the predominately white GLBT blogosphere is already making comments that he'll be the worst president ever on GLBT issues.

Really? The worst huh? After Bush? Examples and links please.

Hell, y'all gave George W. Bush's idiot savant behind more slack than you're giving the presidential brother.

Seriously? You claimed this without meaning to be sarcastic? I don't recall a single non-wingnut-first-gay-second LGBT blog that was giving Bush credit. It was more a 'oh shit, we're fucked' kinda of resignation than cutting Bush any slack. Ok well maybe that was just my outlook, but it'd be nice to actually have some quotes and links to back that up if you're going to go all drama queen on us.

Hell, y'all gave George W. Bush's idiot savant behind more slack than you're giving the presidential brother.

Seriously? You claimed this without meaning to be sarcastic? I don't recall a single non-wingnut-first-gay-second LGBT blog that was giving Bush credit.

Well what about all of the nauseating praise he received while he was preparing for his theft of the presidency? While I was writing for the Texas Triangle, in 1999-2000 I regularly told the truth about what the coke-snorting, draft-dodging rich brat was - and was going to be. Yet, it met with so much 'you have no proof whatsoever that he will be anti-gay' crap that I lost track. While it predates blogs, it does show that there was plenty of gay myopics who were willing to chastise anyone who dared to criticize their tax-cut-in-waiting. And, truth be told, the only thing that most of them have ever come to criticize the coke-snorting, draft-dodging rich brat for is is stance on marriage because they're well-heeled enough not to need ENDA.

This was a good post, but I have to say that while it was great that Jasmyne Cannick got Shirley Q. Liquor's minstrel show banned in LA, my support for the woman ends there.

There does need to be a lot of discussion about racism in the gay community, but Cannick's writing on the subject too easily stoops to sweeping generalizations; if one were to go entirely on her word, one would believe that every gay person with white skin moonlights as a KKK member or is completely clueless about race issues. On top of that, she goes on Fox News and basically confirms for the legions of homophobes watching the channel that the gay community and the African-American community are mutually exclusive.

Bill Perdue Bill Perdue | January 18, 2009 2:44 AM

I know that Obama is a lap dog of Wall Street, a two bit hustler trained by the Chicago Machine who'll continue to pander to bigots and expand the racist oil wars in SW Asia. I know he’ll continue to support the racist ethnic cleansing policy against Palestinians. He says so. It’s so obvious that only the terminally naive or those with a partisan agenda would bother to think otherwise. His statements and his deeds make that crystal clear.

Nevertheless I think it's only fair to give his supporters all the rope they need to politically hang themselves. They’ve done a pretty good job so far. While they’re tightening the noose with their witch hunting offensive, trying to equate criticism of Obama with racism, I’d like to offer them all the support they deserve.

In that spirit I’ll refrain from criticizing Obama until the day after he’s inaugurated. And I’ll never criticize him again if he immediately

0 - Calls for a constitutional amendment ending all support for or promotion of cults. The Constution should guarantte freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.

0 - Calls for a constitutional amendment guaranteeing green jobs at good wages, good housing, socialized medicine, free education other social programs.

0 - Orders the immediate recall of all US military, terrorist and mercenary forces from the 737 US bases on foreign soil to permanent duty at US home bases. (Except bases in Puerto Rico and Hawaii pending votes on full independence).

0 - Apologizes for his association with bigots like Warren and calls for a hate crimes law that will automatically co-indict those who call for violence when hate crimes occur.

0 – Nominates Cynthia McKinney to head the Department of State.

0 – Nominates candidates for the Secretary’s of Labor and Commerce from union members suggested by the AFL-CIO Executive Board.

0 – Nominates a person recommended by environmentalist groups to head a superagency to rebuild the infrastructure, create green jobs and enact draconian anti-pollution measures aimed at shutting down polluting companies.

0 – Nominates Ralph Nader to head a superagency to nationalize banks and major financial institutions without compensation and organize a massive effort to end foreclosures, restore credit to to working people and investigate and prosecute all managers, major stockholders and owners of companies who looted the economy.

0 - Calls on Congress to fund emergency efforts to fund HIV/AIDS and breast cancer research, enact a tough ENDA and hate crimes/hate speech law and launch an all out law enforcement assault on bigots.

And etc. Obama has huge staffs and can have all that ready by the morning of the 21st, say by 11AM EST. If not I'll resume my critical stance and encourage others to do so.

Because the truth is that Obama never will do anything like that, not on Wednesday, not in two weeks and not in four-eight years because he’s a Democrat and that’s just the other side of the Republican coin.

If you criticize Obama, you're a racist. (It doesn't matter if you are criticizing him for his homophobic appointments.)

And you're letting the terrorist win.

Sorry, if the guy didn't want to get criticized before January 20th, he shouldn't have made any decisions or held any press conferences before then.

Please let me know when I am free to exercise my Constitutional rights again.

I am likely to get hammered a bit for this, so I've hesitated in expressing my views.

One can critique the President-elect's positions and actions to date without being a racist or doing so from a position of "white priviledge."

My opposition to anc criticism of the Warren selection have to do primarily with his advocacy of war crimes. Sorry, I don't see legitimising someone calling for the murder of a head of state by having him front and centre in the first official event of the new administration. Also, his advocacy on behalf of reactionary and oppressive religious leaders in Nigeria and Uganda leaves a bad taste in my mouth. African LGBT's are sentenced to the equivalent of slavery by the men that Warren whitewashes and holds up as examples of "true christian leadership."

The appointment of a homophobe to the cabinet also leaves me cold. One can go on about inclusiveness all that you want, but had Chancellor Adenauer included Dr Wilhelm Stutgart, the author of the Nuremberg laws, in his post war German government on the grounds of "inclusiveness" and "having all German viewpoints represented" the Allies would have screamed, and rightfully so. Discrimination and bigotry are not valid viewpoints for inclusion; I am sorry, but they simply are not.

His violation of the principles of the American secular republic, with his "God is in the mix" opposition to same-sex marriage, also disappointed me. Read Thomas Jefferson, certainly one of the founding fathers, on what he would have thought of "god in the mix" of principles of American government.

Had the President-elect not made enormously controversial and, in my opinion, poor choices on certain matters, there would be far less criticism from LGBT's. Not that there is not racism present in the community; in a group only united by sexual preference or violation of gender stereotypes, there is bound to be a vide range of experience and sadly so. We have gay men who are rabidly misogynistic or entitled classists, Lesbians with personal antipathy for disabled Lesbians, Lesbians of operative history, trans-people, etc. Our ands are not clean, not entierly.

But, the fact remains that the President elect made some thoughtless decisions. The criticisms remain valid and most of them remain valid and not based upon racism or priviledge.

Oh, and I was critical of Bush, far more strongly, before day one of his administration. Less than eight months into his administration a group of us were sitting and toasting the fact that he was such a blunderer that he could not possibly be re-elected, but alas, that was on 10 September 2001 in New York City, and ironically at a restaurant called Windows on the World atop the World Trade Center.

While I agree with the general premise of Monica Roberts' post, I am a little offended by her willy-nilly use of blanket statements that, intentionally or not, indict the whole white LGBT community for the sins of the few.

I'm all for open discussion. I'm all for saying like it is. I'm all for calling out white privilege where and when it exists (thanks to Rev. Irene for these lessons), but I am NOT for making blanket characterizations of whole communities.

That's what Monica's done in this post with statements like "the white LGBT community" and "white LGBT blogosphere."

Although Monica had a little foreword ("not all white GLBT peeps exhibit this behavior"), her later use of blanket labels is unacceptable.

We shouldn't stand for stereotyped images or language about black people, and we shouldn't accept it when stereotyped images or languages are used against white people, either. Fair is Fair.

Further... I'm extremely, extremely offended ("outraged" and "pissed off" would be better words) that Monica Roberts has compared white gays to the Ku Klux Klan. As an LGBT Southerner (as is Monica - she should know these lessons already), I'm outraged that my entire community is being compared to a group of people (or people influenced by that group's legacy) that would just as quickly beat or kill me as they would Monica.

The KKK is nothing to joke or play around with.

Several times, students at N.C. State University have tried to organize a KKK chapter. In the late 1990s, several pro-LGBT messages painted in NCSU's "Free Expression Tunnel" were defaced with violent messages.

Picture 1
Picture 2
(Photo credit: NC State University GLBT Center)

Notice how one of the messages is displayed right under announcements for African-American History Month.

Does anyone seriously think the KKK-organizing and this type of anti-gay hatred and violence are unrelated? Whether she intended it or not, Monica Roberts has thrown all white gay people, perhaps all white people, into the same group as the KKK.

I sure as hell know I'm not the same as the KKK. I know my 80-year-old grandpa isn't the same either.

"No body ever knew who they were. They weren't public. I never really did care for them much," my grandpa told me when I once asked him if he ever knew people in the KKK. "They did a whole lot of hurt and caused a whole of pain to a lot people who didn't deserve it." He went on to use words like "downright terrible" to describe the things he saw. I could see the anger in his eyes when he talked about remembering them riding though town.

Perhaps we should be more careful about how we throw around the KKK's hateful and murderous legacy.

I think Monica Roberts owes an apology to all of the white gay people and white straight people who have stood up against the KKK since their inception. I think she owes an apology to all the gay people who've suffered directly at the hands of the KKK, or indirectly from the hateful legacy they've left in the South.

And I think she should be more careful about how she paints the entire white gay community based on her contempt for the exhibited white privilege of a few, anonymous users at Queerty.com.

Matt- We will see an apology from Monica Roberts about as fast as we'll see that apology from North Carolina gay activists for inviting, and standing with, the New Black Panther hate group to scream death threats at the Duke lacrosse team back in 2006 (specifically at the half-Jewish Reade Seligmann).

Becky,
That's your perception that you're being called a racist for expressing your opposition to Obama.

My point that people seem to continue to miss is that the African-American community finds it less than fair that the gay and lesbian community is attacking the man before he's had a chance to enact policy.

Rebecca, you're not being called 'crazy', an 'Obamatron', nor do you face 1/10 the hostility I, Jasmyne Cannick or other African-American bloggers face from people that share your ethnic heritage just for speaking our minds on issues that affect this community.

I even got attacked in the comment thread of your own Tranny Wreck Radio show after my May 2, 2007 appearance by one of your commenters, who bluntly said they didn't like me and I pissed them off.

the point is, we are a long way from being 'post racial. Race permeates everything in American society, and that includes our little subset of it.

Instead of dancing around the subject, we need to confront it head on.



n just faced from people that share have any problem watching the Queerty folks or some people here call me an 'Obamatron', spout vile, racists comments for expressing my opinion.

You entitle a post "Your Pink Sheets are Showing," compare us to the KKK, and say "it's our perception" if we think we are being called racist?

That's rich.

Sorry for typing the word "rich," it came from a place of white privilege.

You know these constant topics on this blog kill me. Someone talks about how they've suffered more than anyone else, and no one will ever be able to understand it. Then we get 20 or so comments filled with people trying to purge their guilt for contributing to society's incliction of said suffering.

And now we have to stop the suffering by refusing to criticize the leader of the free world, a man who pulled himself up through his own hard work without making excuses.

Well, at least the weather will be appropriate if I have to wear a pink robe.

Agreed. It was a blanket statement that should have been narrowed quite a bit. Queerty's readers/commenters definitely aren't the entire white LGBTQ community!

But while Monica paints with a broad brush in some spots, my main problem is something Alex brought up in a previous comment. I reserve the right to criticize any President or President-Elect for anything I deem worth of criticism. I wasn't nice to Bush before his election (and I must admit, Monica, I don't remember a huge groundswell of support for Bush by queers!), but so far I've been pretty tolerant of Obama's rookie mistakes.

Surprisingly, the most criticism I've seen has come from African-American LGBT critics like Bilerico contributor Rev Irene Monroe.

To Bil, Maura, Alex, Becky and a dozen others, I think there is something that all of you are missing. It is not necessarily in what Monica wrote, but a deeper issue that I have seen. It is one thing to get upset with a person for making stupid mistakes, and all of you are not only doing it, but belaboring the issue over and over again. It's another when you take these stupid mistakes as an absolute sign of what this new President will do before Michelle has picked new sheets for the Lincoln Bedroom.

A prime example was the misguided article by Mittilda, "The Audacity of False Hope" http://www.bilerico.com/2009/01/the_audacity_of_false_hope.php Mittilda was not only so far in left field, but in a whole different ball park. It is as if gay people have somehow acquired ESP and can predict the future for the next 4 years when it comes to Obama. I have to get my cut and paste all ready, because I may have to say "I told you so," more times then I care to. We can keep track of who gets to say it the most, if you'd like.

The audacity is coming from all of you who think you know better. If I were you, I'd leave the predictions to Jean Dixon. With her poor track record, it'll still be better than all of yours. Just wait for the reality to reveal itself, because it will be stranger, and different than your fiction.

Monica;
It is not a matter of belabouring the point; it is a matter of objecting in the hopes of a change. There is still 46 hours left to get rid of Reverend Warren on the basis of pissing off half of the Arab world or his association with someone who may at a later date be indicted for the murder of 700 Muslims

Further, my objection to the President-elect blurring the demarcations that ostensibly keep this a secular republic, particularly after Bush when that fence needs the most mending, is to hopefully get enough people on the issue to keep him away from too much God in the mix of Constitutional rights. Civil liberties tend to suffer proportionally to the amount of God intorduced into government,

I've not given up hope, my friend, nor do I think that these errors necessarily foreshadow the trends of the President-elect's administration, but letting him know that we find these actions hugely objectionable just may keep him more honest.

Letting him know when he screws up is part of our rights as Americans. But, I'm talking about predicting his actions over then next 4 years from these stupid mistakes. That is way beyond giving him crap for Warren.

In 2.5 hrs, there will be a protest in front of the Ebenezer Baptist Church here in Atlanta. It's just before Warren speaks and before the parade. I would have been there, even after what I have said, but I have to be at work in less than 1 hr.

Monica, I don't host Tranny Wreck, that's Rebecca Ney. If you have issues with those commenting on her shows in her forum, I suggest you take it up with her. I host the Rebecca Juro Show, and the show site is http://rebeccajuro.com.

And um, I'm not being called "crazy"? Lady, I've called far worse than that right here on TBP and elsewhere...like "racist" for example. I'll admit that I don't let most of it bother me. When you're an opinionated political blogger and radio host, it's just part of the deal. That said, when I'm called a racist with zero evidence backing it up as in this case, yeah, I tend to get a little testy.

Furthermore, one thing we're in full agreement on is that this certainly is an issue that needs more public community discussion than it's been getting. Therefore, I'd like to make you a public invitation.

Come on my show (this coming Thursday at 7pm eastern if you can make it, the following if not) and let's get into it. While I'm limited technologically to only one phone caller at a time on the air, anyone who can use Skype can join our conversation while we're live. Interested? Let me know and I'll get in touch by email with the details.

Monica R., I think some criticism of soon-to-be-O44 is coming from those with unrealistic expectations of the first Democratic president after a drought. I am encouraged by the appointment of an out gay man as the Civil Service's equivalent of HR director. I am not crazy about having misogynist and likely homophobe Summers appointed, but most of this is that he, like so many others, encouraged the economic mess that we are in. Summers may have technical proficiency in day-to-day actions of bull markets, but refused to see the long-term picture, which involves human behavior as well as market behavior. I can understand why O44 would choose Warren to give the invocation at the Inauguration - O is trying to soothe the non-ideological Middle Americans who might be apprehensive, partly for conscious or subconscious racist reasons, at the thought of a black President, fearing he might not be up to the challenge. Warren is a useful and cheap symbol - I am not sure that Warren has got the best deal here - O is likely to use him as long as Warren remains a fad, but I don't think that O is likely to be easily influenced, and Warren is bound to lose face with his own core constituency.

There are many who have idealistic hopes about O. O is a pragmatist, a skilled politician, rather than an ideologue. Yes, we need to watch carefully and speak up (in a sensible fashion, not like stereotypical screaming queens or splinter-group Communists/anarchists), so we don't get shafted on substantive issues. I do expect that we will have significant improvement under O, but I never expected to get everything accomplished in 4 years.

Dear White People;

If it is not about you don't make it about you. Monica much like myself often speaks about whiteness in its systemic form and therefore there is no need to say this particular person or that particular person because whiteness is what runs this world.

If you are white you are in position to decide what is and isn't racist. Sorry that is just how it goes. You have not spent a lifetime living as a POC and therefore do not have the requisite experience to make this call. Often times your desire to maintain your own unearned privilege is enough to cause you to declare that something isn't race when it is.

Finally racism is experienced on a personal level. If it makes a POC feel like they are an "other" regardless of your intent the act or commentary is racist. You do not exist with the right to tell someone that how they feel is wrong.

Monica I'm sorry that I was so late to speak up. Once again I am not surprised to see people on this blog display their inner ignorance to the world. Try a little intersectionality GLBT community perhaps you'll gain more allies.

This is what I was trying to get at in my comment above, although I (as a middle-aged middle-of-the-road white gay male) would not be the right person to say it.

We each have our own truth, as individuals, and as members of our own many and several communal identities. Can we not -- on this day of all days, in this week of all weeks -- practice listening with respect?

This is the single most ignorant comment I think I have ever seen on this website. Whites can't say what is racist and what is not because we're white but you can because you're black? Talk about racism, this is a textbook example of it in action.

You think gays can't understand what it is to be discriminated against? You think transpeople and particularly transwomen can't understand what it is to be discriminated against or be seen as "lesser than" based solely on our appearance?

Personally, I'll defer the definition of racism to a neutral source, Dictionary.com:

rac?ism
? ?/?re?s?z?m/ [rey-siz-uhm]
–noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Who's words in this thread fit this definition?

Get a clue, it's not all about you.

Actually racism equal privilege and power. POC do not exist with the systemic power to realize any form of racial bias we may or may not hold. The word you want is prejudice but if you had spent anytime actually listening to anti-racists you would know that. Oh BTW your whtieness is showing.

Try a little intersectionality GLBT community perhaps you'll gain more allies.

I think this goes to the heart of the matter. Monica was trying to direct some attention to the problem of how LGBT criticism is playing in the black community. She was asking us to rein in some of the criticism of Obama because it is dividing us from allies, rather than uniting us to them.

She didn't say this, so I will... the incessant criticism of Obama doesn't promote our interests. Some criticism is good, and necessary. But it needs to be measured for best results, not simply indulged to vent anger.

Dale, if that is what Monica was trying to say, (and I am not convinced, being as she won't even respond to calls for an apology for a comparison to the KKK)then she have done in a post not titled "Your Pink Sheets are Showing."

Oh, Chuck, Monica has responded: At her blog.

She says she doesn't have to apologize because Dan Savage and Queerty haven't. I guess she never learned: "Two wrongs don't make it right."

Oh, and evidently, I'm a "chump" and a "hater." Ha.

I made the mistake of going there to check it out. Good grief-just what I noted earlier-Monica is a pro at the "I've suffered more than you so you must take whatever I say" deflection.

Nice of her to also delete your comments when the logic got too much to bear.

Oh, how I wish there was a way to read this blog that would allow the reader to never have to see posts by certain contributors.

Could you possibly display any more white privilege? Seriously get a clue. I don't care what kind of persecution you have suffered as a gay man, you don't know what it is to be subject to racism anymore than a straight person knows what it is to be subject to homophobia. It is not a matter of "I've suffered more than you", it is a matter of acknowledging that the GLBT community is a reflection of the larger community i.e prone to promote unearned white privilege. Why should you be any different than any other social justice movement when it comes to racism? It does not matter whether it is the GLBT community, feminism, disability rights etc all have a vested interest in protecting white privilege because it serves as a normalizer. This is especially true when you are a stigmatized body so don't give me this bullshit about needing an apology. How about you apologize for being so blinded by privilege you refuse to even acknowledge that her point holds a great degree of merit.

Well, since that's the exact opposite point of this blog, that feature is not in the works.

If it makes a POC feel like they are an "other" regardless of your intent the act or commentary is racist. You do not exist with the right to tell someone that how they feel is wrong.

I'm generally sympathetic with your side in this debate, but the above statement is just ludicrous. No one is responsible for someone else's feelings. I don't have the right to tell someone that what they are feeling is wrong, but I do have the right to tell someone that what they are feeling has nothing to do with me. Let's give each other the benefit of the doubt here.

Rebecca,
If off Thursday...so if you still want to do that radio show, I'm available.