Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I've been one of those constant critics of HRC, usually in the queer left vein. But recently I've felt like I've had to defend them and other LGBT orgs more and more, which simply isn't what I wanted to do when I got into blogging. But I didn't predict the coming out of a group of people even more mushily-centrist, culturally isolated, and single-issue than HRC, but... voila. This is the new reality.

Just a couple weeks ago, HRC announced a new campaign to lobby Congress on LGBT issues by helping them set up August meetings with their Representatives and Senators, called the "No Excuses" campaign. To be fair, it's a great idea and I have no idea why they haven't been doing this for years. Even with Bush in office it was a good idea for constituents to develop working relationships with their members of Congress, and HRC, as a lobbyist organization, was perfectly situated to facilitate that.

Still, this is great. It's a real step that will help move some of this legislation forward. And democracy can be more participatory if people have the means, knowledge, and the will to make it so.

What I do find interesting, though, is the way HRC coopted the language of the post-Prop 8 anger:

"Demanding"? How many times have I read from these new folks something along the lines of "We're not going to ask for our rights anymore, we're going to demand them!" with no explanation as to what the concrete difference between the two is? And there's that free-floating, undefined "equality" again....

Pam Spaulding wrote, when this was announced, "Should the authors of The Dallas Principles[...] feel flattered that HRC has now come on board?" They should - their document had more influence than one would have thought. Even though it didn't take over the movement by any means, it did get passed around and read by people as the manifesto to this new group of gay activists, fairly or unfairly.

Plus, it seems like HRC is cribbing language:

Not that there's anything wrong with a movement attempting to stick to the same talking points and keeping to the same language. But it's an interesting etymological question.

Here are the goals of the HRC's campaign:

• Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which denies legally married lesbian and gay couples more than 1,000 federal protections;
• Prohibit workplace discrimination for the LGBT community by passing an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA);
• Repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell to ensure that service members who contribute to our nation's security are no longer summarily discharged for who they are;
• Pass immigration reform that recognizes permanent same-sex couples and ends the painful separation of families;
• Provide health benefits equally to the nearly 3 million federal government employees, including same-sex domestic partners.

And the National Equality March's:

• Repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) so that every marriage in every state has the same federal rights.
• Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell so that LGBT persons may serve in the military openly and with the same rights as their straight counterparts.
• An end to workplace discrimination for everyone with an Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) that protects everyone.
• The right to adopt children and raise families like any other parents.
• Hate Crimes legislation that includes LGBT people and protects us like any other targeted group.
• Immigration reform that recognizes same-sex couples and ends the needless separation of families.

The only differences are that HRC didn't include hate crimes, probably because they keep up with the news, and the Marchers didn't include benefits for federal employees, probably because it's not even on their radar as most aren't federal employees (although most aren't soldiers either yet DADT was included, but whatever, DADT is a lot worse than a lesbian partner of a bureaucrat avoiding a doctor even after she finds a suspicious lump on her breast because she doesn't want to have a preexisting condition in case she ever does get a job with health care). And adoption, even though that isn't really a federal issue.

HRC's statement in favor of the National Equality March politely mentions the changing conditions of this past year:

WASHINGTON - On October 11, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists and allies will meet by the United States Capitol in Washington, DC. The first national gathering of LGBT volunteers, community members, and supporters since the 2008 elections and the passage of Proposition 8, this event provides a powerful opportunity to harness the energy--both excitement and anger--that this historic year has sparked.

Indeed, it's a response to the Prop 8 backlash, and it is a better way for people to expend their new-found energy and anger than their usual methods (writing Facebook comments calling Obama a huge disappointment because he didn't disband Congress and repeal DOMA himself within 3 months of taking office or writing blog comments saying that anyone who thinks that issues like health care and the wars are also important is distracted and giving the enemy cover).

Also in their calculus is the fact that this march is going forward no matter what, which might explain why they waited until 2 months before the march to support it. And like most indie acts that get picked up by a large corporation, at least the production value will improve. HRC has a lot to bring to the table here, and these people all seem to be of the same political stripe, which is probably why it took only about 6 months for HRC to get the message from the angry gay centrists while they never really paid attention to the queer left.

HRC is back, and this is what it's going to look like. No spa nights for a couple months, people. These are trying times.