Guest Blogger

GetEqual: A Response & Clarification

Filed By Guest Blogger | June 02, 2010 7:00 PM | comments

Filed in: The Movement, The Movement
Tags: direct action group, gay rights, GetEqual, Heather Cronk, HRC, Human Rights Campaign, LGBT community, new organization

Editors' Note: Guest blogger Heather Cronk is the Managing Director of GetEQUAL.Heather_Cronk.png

Hey there, Bilerico readers. After reading through Bil's post this morning, I asked him if I could write a response to clarify a few things and to offer up a counter-narrative from a different perspective. I've elected to pull out a few pieces from Bil's post to respond to directly. Though I wouldn't usually spend this much time away from what I consider "the work," I felt it important to clarify a few things and to correct others.

In the interest of full disclosure, I consider Bil a friend and am glad that he and others are pushing for more transparency within the LGBT movement -- including GetEQUAL. So it's in that spirit that I wanted to engage both him and you in a conversation. So here goes!

"I'm starting to feel as if I've been sold a bill of goods; I wanted orange juice but got Tang. Instead of a radically different, transparent and community-focused direct action organization, I got HRC Lite (now with more action!)."

I'm glad that Bil didn't beat around the bush! I'm not sure exactly what Bil or others expected to see in the first three months that GetEQUAL has been in existence -- but I don't think anyone promised a three-month revolution. (And, for the record, I have very fond memories of drinking Tang early in the morning with my grandfather in Texas before my grandmother could catch us -- it shouldn't be underestimated as a refreshing beverage!) GetEQUAL is still in start-up mode -- we're getting our sea legs and creating a strategy for effective action. The onslaught of an unpredictable LGBT direct action outfit is the best blessing that the movement could ask for -- while HRC is in White House meetings, GetEQUAL hands them a "radical, unpredictable left" that can take the blame for crazy shenanigans while the moderate and reasonable orgs sit nicely at the table and negotiate. Whoever said that there can be only one effective approach to social change just wasn't imaginative or strategic enough.

"As the Managing Director, it can be assumed that [Cronk] will be making more than McGehee and Williams."

This is news to me. If I'm supposed to be making more than Robin and Kip, then I wasn't aware of the conversation -- and shame on Bil for "assuming" this is the case. I will earn $70,000 a year at GetEQUAL and have yet to even come on board full-time...I'm still transitioning out of my former position and into my new one. This is just slightly more than I was making previously, with a good deal more responsibility for strategy -- the financial and management responsibilities are similar. Living in the DC area with a mortgage means that this isn't remotely exorbitant.

And, regarding Kip and Robin's salaries, it seems like we need to clear the air a bit. Robin is earning $89,000 a year at GetEQUAL -- exactly the same as she was making as a college professor with advanced education under her belt and two children to support. Kip is earning $72,000 a year, slightly more than he was previously at Radical Designs, but is taking on significantly more responsibility as the co-director of a national organization.

Say what you will about the numbers, but GetEQUAL believes that investing in organizers and in leaders will have tremendous dividends at the end of the day. Nonprofits have, for too long, gotten away with not paying fairly for good work. Folks might differ with me on that philosophy, but we'll just have to agree to disagree.

We will be gathering the staff together in June for a staff retreat, and will be setting benchmarks then -- all three of us, and our other two staff members, will all be responsible for hitting those benchmarks over the course of the next year.

"Three Director level salaries at $90,000 per year is $270,000. If we assign $50,000 each to the advance and logisitics [sic] team members, that's another $100,000. Grand total for salaries for the year? $370,000. Lewis' check for a quarter of a million dollars won't cover the payroll costs for GetEqual this year."

All of these numbers are wrong -- we're looking at closer to $300k, depending on whether other staff salaries remain the same and/or whether we hire on additional staff. While I don't feel at liberty to give a grand total until we file paperwork and a report at the end of the year, the only thing that Bil has right is that we will be doing more fundraising this year in order to cover the costs of organizers, events, actions, trainings, etc. While we have not yet asked for a dime from our supporters or from new funders, we will do so after our staff retreat when we can show work plans and benchmarks -- and not a second before. We are not spending money on tchotchkes -- we're spending resources on organizers and on the things that will help those organizers organize. I don't know when that became a bad thing.

We've also spent less than $140k to date -- I wouldn't draw causality between some of the minimal progress our community has seen lately and GetEQUAL's work, but I think you could certainly draw correlation. And that's a bargain, in my humble opinion.

"Most organizations are ruled by their boards - usually individuals who have donated large sums of money to the group and want a voice in guiding how the org moves forward. The motivations behind organizational decisions aren't always what's best for the community as much as what's best for the board member."

This is actually offensive. Given that Bil has no knowledge of who has been invited to join the board or who we are planning to invite to join the board, everything that follows this paragraph is irresponsible speculation. And I can't wait to see Bil's post on GetEQUAL's accountability to donors, the (not-yet-formed) board, or the community from which we have not raised a dime. We're not holding back the names of board members -- they're simply just not confirmed yet. We're happy to make those names public once they're finalized.

It is true that GetEQUAL is in the process of applying for tax-exempt status -- and with that status comes a demand for accountability. Even if we weren't applying for that status, I think all of the staff would agree that we owe that to the LGBT community and to our allies who support our work. We will certainly continue to answer questions when asked and to offer information when available -- and, more than that, we look forward to engaging folks in actions that will target pressure points and create openings for real social change.

We hope you will join us.


Recent Entries Filed under The Movement:

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.


I'm not going to get much into this debate about incomes (since apparently the most debate you want is to agree to disagree, so thanks for starting the conversation with a nice "Shut up!"), but I wanted to ask about this:

while HRC is in White House meetings, GetEQUAL hands them a "radical, unpredictable left" that can take the blame for crazy shenanigans while the moderate and reasonable orgs sit nicely at the table and negotiate.

What makes GetEqual the "left," much less "radical"? I haven't seen much except for liberal politics out of GetEqual, and your goals seem pretty much the same as the group you call "moderate," HRC. In fact, if you see your work as just another way to advance HRC's agenda, it seems like you've bought into their "moderate" agenda completely.

That is, if you all are working for the same things (DADT repeal, ENDA, and the other bills Kip used to dismiss as a "laundry list" but now motivate his actions), then how can you claim ideological distance from HRC? If you're actually coming from different places and have different goals, yours radical and theirs moderate (as your boilerplate suggests), then why would you want to be seen as the "radical left" HRC can leverage to achieve its goals?

I wouldn't call you all "HRC Lite," but if you're working for the same goals, kicking them in the pants for being "centrists" or "moderate" seems gratuitously mean. And you're not kicking them in the pants here, but I've seen the GetEquallers get mean to Gay, Inc.

And I was gratuitously mean to HRC before it was the in thing to be. FWIW.

And I was gratuitously mean to HRC before it was the in thing to be. FWIW.

Someone should give you a medal. Your self-righteousness is a beacon.

Not a medal, a cookie. :)

Maybe Heather could respond to people who aren't AndrewW here? I know he's our most eloquent commenter and everyone wants to talk with him, but there are other people with questions and criticisms worth addressing here.

Ha, yes - "Radical, unpredictable left?" The phrase is mysteriously in quotation marks, so it's hard to tell if Heather Cronk was being ironic - but I doubt it.

There's nothing, repeat, nothing radical about the way GetEqual is set up and absolutely nothing radical about its agenda. Let's see: Marriage, DADT and, I'll dare to assume, the rapid enforcement of hate crime laws which will ensure that more people, including many, many queers (the kind who won't be counted by HRC or GetEqual) end up in jail for life or longer.

And anyone who knows anything about the left knows that a left that is not in shambles, like the putative left that's left in the U.S., is anything but unpredictable. "Radical" and "organised" are not incommensurable terms.

For the record, I actually support activists getting paid well - union organising in this country struggles as much as it does because of the massive turnover in its own labour forces; it's notorious for hiring people at crappy wages and squeezing their labour for long hours before they finally quit in desperation. And the non-profit industrial complex, of which GetEqual is now so proudly a part, has a long-established tradition of paying its top officers well and screwing over the rest, who toil fruitlessly with meagre salaries because they've been deluded into thinking that it's somehow noble and necessary to be exploited for the larger "good," even if they lose sight of what that "good" might be.

You can read more of that in my piece here:
http://www.dakshina.org/2009/12/14/guest-yasmin-nair/

But the problem with orgs like HRC and GetEqual is that they inevitably are accountable only to their rich donors and board members and lose sight of anything that matters to the larger community. That's one reason several non-profits are going through a crisis - even as their clueless board members are whining, "what did we do wrong?" The world of donors-and-board-member dominated non-profit work is a highly insulated and incestuous one. Couple that with the ridiculously liberal and assimilationist politics of the holy trinity that I outlined above, and you have a recipe for well-funded failure.

Perhaps it's time these orgs woke up and realised that things are really crappy here in the real world - and that most queers are, actually, like everyone else. Marriage, ending DADT, and increasing the scope of the prison industrial complex aren't going to mean a damn to the millions struggling to either hold on to their jobs or trying to find the next one. None of that guarantees decent health care, and none of that ensures a decent workplace. And if we cared about how everyone is treated in the workplace, we'd have fought for EFCA - instead, on that, HRC and GetEqual have given us nothing but the sound of crickets.

So, yes, please keep showing up at Obama's speeches and get laughed out of the room (this Prez, for all his problems, is not lacking in wit or smarts, but you keep pretending that he's GWB). But please stop describing yourself as the left.

I see from your website that someone almost describes you as similar to ACT UP. Tell me again: How is fighting for life-saving drugs analogous to fighting for the right to, um, you know, kill people in other countries? What's radical about that, exactly?

Yasmin- always love your perspective.

I must admit HRC makes it so easy to hate on them, but one thing they have going is they do have a unionized work force. I know everyone thinks every person at HRC makes $150,000 bucks, but that is hardly the case, and I know their union contract has helped their low- and mid-level employees earn a more respectable wage.

The Task Force, PFLAG, and I believe NCTE are all unionized as well.

It will be interesting to see if Get Equal employees ask to be represented by a union.

Sometimes I feel like I'm watching a gay version of the implosion of the "left" in the 60's and 70's. National Equality March spawns Equality Across America, creative differences spawn Get Equal.

It is like being at the famous SDS convention in Chicago, but being able to watch it all on the internet.

Except instead of battling about ways to end the war, we're battling about ways to get our LGBT folks to serve openly in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe Iran next!

And as much as we would all like to think HRC is not carrying the agenda of the LGBT rights world, Cronk's statement comparing themselves to HRC shows who is still firmly in the driver's seat.

Thanks, capitalistpiggy (and I love JWJ, btw!)

And I'm very glad - and admittedly quite surprised - that HRC has a unionised workforce, along with the others. That's, seriously, really good to know.

And I could not agree more with: "Except instead of battling about ways to end the war, we're battling about ways to get our LGBT folks to serve openly in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe Iran next!" Ha, yes, and as you know, some of us are already rumbling for war with Iran or at least something akin, on the basis of the hangings of gay people (the stories of which are controversial, to say the least). The fact that many Iranians, straight and gay and lesbian, have been persecuted for reasons other than their sexuality for many years matters not a whit...shades of Laura Bush's rationale for bombing Afghanistan (liberating Afghani women, whome the bombs would not touch, of course).

But that's for another day.

"...while HRC is in White House meetings, GetEQUAL hands them a "radical, unpredictable left" that can take the blame for crazy shenanigans while the moderate and reasonable orgs sit nicely at the table and negotiate."

This demeaning of other organizations as "sitting nicely at the table" is offensive. It also indicates your lack of an understanding and appreciation of the numerous groups that are simply doing "their best."

Your solution to the weakness of all the other organizations is "crazy shenanigans." By this I assume you mean it is your intention to be seen as "crazy." Therefore, you probably accept - with a sense of pride - Barney Frank's comment that GetEQUAL stunts were "childish, immature" and "they didn't change any minds." To achieve our equality we need to change minds and garner support. GetEQUAL isn't doing that and apparently has no intention to honor that important responsibility.

Being "crazy" is sufficient. Interesting. Perhaps you can explain how having the LGBT Community seen as "crazy" is helpful. While you're at it, please explain how this simplistic "demanding" business works. Is it the volume of the demands or the number of demands? Or do we just need to wrap demands in a bunch of "crazy?"

I don't by the "start-up" mode bullshit. You and your fellow "crazies" may be jeopardizing the work of dozens of organization, thousands of advocates and millions of volunteers - including numerous sincere volunteer activists. It is important enough to develop both a strategy and some organizational structure prior to your "crazy" stunts.

I do hope you will provide some rationale for "demanding" and "crazy shenanigans" besides the childish "good cop, bad cop" analogy (an interrogation method). How about effective cop?

It's easy for you to dismiss HRC (and apparently everyone else) because you don't actually have a strategy or a Plan. You wanted to get attention and you did briefly, but you never got participation. That reality should give you pause.

Please stop risking the progress we have made and please stop the "crazy shenanigans." We're better than that. We're creative, clever and crafty - we're not clowns.

It's interesting that we stumbled on the same paragraph, but for completely different reasons.

Just wanted to point that out.

It was a "self-important" statement. Most of their evolving strategy/organization/purpose is troubling.

I have a couple nephews. They are 7 and 8 years old. We engage in "crazy shenanigans" as often as possible - for ice cream, not $89,000. But, given this explanation for GetEqual I can see them sitting around and concocting the "let's bring Chairman Miller some markers" stunt. Sadly, I can see my nephews coming up with something very similar.

I don't expect this rather empty "Response and Clarification" generating many comments. It's clear GetEQUAL took the time to make sure they were compensated, but they didn't take the time to figure out how to be effective OR accountable.

They do have a nice logo, though. Well, unless we find out they paid $25,000 for it. I wouldn't be surprised.

Heather C | June 2, 2010 8:05 PM

That's surprising -- AndrewW has something nasty to say about GetEQUAL...

Andrew, I'd invite you to submit some constructive feedback to me at heather at getequal dot org. I've grown tired of your demoralizing and defeatist comments across the web - let me know when you're interested in having a fruitful and constructive dialogue.

I was in no way attempting to "risk our progress" by responding to Bil's post. If our progress is that fragile, then it's no progress at all. I'll defer to my thick-skinned friends at HRC to defend themselves if they see fit...but I doubt that they'll feel as though that's necessary.

Just respond to my comment above. That would be constructive. I acknowledged your admission that GetEQUAL was all about "crazy shenanigans."

We're all interested in the answers to those questions. Tell us how "crazy shenanigans" change minds or garner any support. Tell us exactly what you are trying to accomplish.

You may not take the importance of our Movement seriously, but most of us do. Bilerico created a forum for you and Kip and Robin to enlighten us. Make sense of GetEQUAL. Tell us how your "crazy shenanigans" are helpful.

We're paying attention.

JonathonEdwards | June 2, 2010 9:39 PM

Ms Cronk,

I have argued in favor of "the work" GetEqual has been doing in many fora. And I have been reading Bil's "behind the veil" series with a grain of salt. Until now.

Your post is the most self-serving, careerist bullshit I've read out of an "activist" in a while. You dismiss responding to Bil as something that takes you away from "the work", but sister, if you are supposed to be working on my behalf then convincing me I should support you IS "the work".

Bil, don't bother writing the rest. I see all I need to see. Just another group of "professionals" who will very quickly lose touch with the people they are supposed to be representing.

(For the record, I earn about $30k pastoring a small church in a very conservative area preaching week in and week out for the full equality of GLBT people. On that same salary, I preached and spoke against Prop 8 in numerous places during that campaign and I try to support the work of my local EQCA and California Faith for Equality as much as I can. It doesn't take money to do "the work" if you know that "the work" is reaching real people with a real message instead of slick political crap inside the beltway.)

Very disappointing. Our movement needs fewer professional activists. The money needs to stay local and fund direct action here. I thought that's what GetEqual might have been. Disgusted that they are trying to take hold of ACT Up's legacy. Some of my friends are turning in their graves.

My problem with GetEqual has always been the same, not the goals but the execution. Frankly, I couldn't even watch the YouTube video of the George Miller magic marker protest because I found so embarrassing on behalf of the community. It reminded me of the Joe Wilson "You lie!" outburst.

That said, I fully supported the White House fence protests and Pelosi office sit-ins, though I think the Durbin sit-in was utterly useless and just made us look like we're too stupid to know which Democrats are on our side.

It'd like to see GetEqual do some actions where it might actually matter, like in the districts of Blue Dog Democrats who are leading the Congressional rush for the exit door on ENDA.

For the resources this org has been blessed with, a budget many activist orgs would kill for, I see a lot of time and money being wasted on tearing down allies and nowhere near enough being spent to take on our real enemies, cowardly Democrats who clearly care far more about protecting their own jobs than those of the people who sent them to Washington in the first place.

Well said. And, reverberating.

There is room for disagreement AND constructive conversation about effectiveness and accountability. GetEQUAL should join that conversation. It's important.

Tough crowd isn't it Heather? Reminds me of a couple of years ago when Susan Stanton voiced the opinion that Transsexuals needed to do more educating and she suffered massive vitriolic attacks. Of course then the "community" actually did spend quite a few man-hours attempting to educate congress-critters and the public. Meanwhile Susan secured a job as a city manager at a salary higher than yours and she completed her surgeries. Strange how all that worked out and ENDA still hasn't passed or even been reported out of the house committee. Oh, but I forget, Susan is a credentialed professional so we can write her of as an aberration.

I guess my point is that there will always be nay-sayers and those who engage in arm chair quarterbacking. I admire your dedication and wish you and your team all the best. Let me offer you one simple observation. Washington responds most readily to two things. One is money, lots of it in the campaign funds of each Congress-critter and I doubt you have those funds. The second thing Washington responds to is massive public outcry. The kind that news coverage can't ignore because the crowds are too huge. In my opinion the anger hasn't built yet to that level. Think Vietnam and Selma. Ask John Lewis. He was there. You want good advice tap into John and others serving in Congress who walked the walk and have real street experience.

But Deena, how on earth do you expect GetEqual to walk and talk in the halls of Congress when their 'actions' cannot be mature and respectful to the politicians? Taking direct action to those supporting equality is an easy media stunt, taking it to those actively against equality is yet to be done. I have asked in other forums about GetEqual staging a sit in at National Organization for Marriage, or in the offices of AFA, FOTF, or FRC, but no leaders, paid leaders respond.

So Heather how about taking on the radical and religious right?

As for funding, we have enough local organizations that we need to support; Equality Maine, Equality Florida, Equality California, than seeing some more fingers reaching for the dollars. Here in California we need to rebuild the war chest to get married rights back.

R. Conrad | June 3, 2010 3:27 PM

do NOT give more money to Equality Maine...

they waste money on frivolous shit (like $6.1 million in 9 months for a poorly run gay marriage campaign) while every other queer/trans organization goes down the toliet for lack of funding. seriously! no no no no no!

Oh please...

We didn't go after Susan Stanton just because she said we do more educating, we went after her because she told a mainstream Florida newspaper that the country wasn't ready to treat us as equals, and because HRC was trying to pimp her out as a trans activist spokesperson to advocate their agenda, not ours.

If you're going to cite history, Deena, at least do so accurately.

OK Rebecca we'll play it your way. Obviously the country was not ready to treat transsexuals as equal so you have affirmed (or at least subsequent events have affirmed) her position. As to HRC, I canceled my involvement with them long before Susan became an issue and I have absolutely no interest in anything they do until Joe resigns. So I do not know who they are pimping nor for what.

Now let's bring it back to Heather. Do you want to tar and feather her? For what exactly?

Read my comment above, Deena. My problem is with the way they are doing many of these actions, not the fact of the actions or the goals and motivations behind them.

I have no interest in tar and feathering anyone, I just wish these people would get their shit together and go after the right targets.

Bill Perdue Bill Perdue | June 2, 2010 11:37 PM

'Boards' and self-appointed leaders are inherently anti-democratic. They represent the pro-Democrat, bureaucratic layer of overpaid hustlers who've attached themselves leech-like to the movement in the last two decades.

Arguments between groups and factions run by self appointed leader are pointless.

The real work of fighting for equality can only be done by democratically functioning assemblies of activists. We desperately need to build organizations that have leading bodies that can reflect the will of activists, correct blunders and increase the pool of activists by organizing mass actions.

My comments come from a slightly different angle.

In term of money and funding, at this point I'm not all that interested and concerned. If a large donor and some activists choose to start an organization and grant salaries then that's their prerogative. In my eyes $70,000+ for an annual salary is a very cushy sum, but I come from a moderate Midwestern city and have no first-hand knowledge of the cost of living where these activists are located. So, in that regard and as I have donated no money, it's not really my business as of yet.

I have to agree with Alex's comments previously that there really isn't anything "radical" about GetEQUAL yet. Using tactics that are radically different from the established LGBT organizations (though not particularly radical in and of themselves) doesn't make your goals radical. The goal of full federal equality, one I whole-heartedly support, is hardly radical. It's quite bourgie actually. And that's ok in many ways.

My concern is this: so far GetEQUAL is not an organization that I am able to be involved with in any capacity and, therefore, it cannot yet represent me. All the actions that have been carried out have been done under the cloak of the organizations leaders, logically, and without input, notice, or opportunity for my involvement. Concerns about being a part of the day-to-day operations, budgeting, oversight, etc. are all valid, but don't really concern me as much as my ability to be incorporated in to an organization that is claiming to be an alternative to the exclusive establishment. It is understandable that direct actions require a certain level of secrecy and surprise, but until someone like myself, removed from the seats of money and power but still willing to act, can be directly involved, I cannot claim GetEQUAL as representing me.

Our goals and our hopes are the same and we can debate tactics and strategies for centuries, but until I'm allowed to be involved, aside from giving my money, I'm too far removed to invest my energies.

Heather -

good luck - you're going to need it.

why anybody bothers trying heard these cats is beyond me.

i'm going to go chase my tail with the rest of them.

Patrick

P.S. I hope you keep pissing off and embarrassing Democrats. Obviously it makes them nervous or they wouldn't be crying in the comments all the time. That party takes advantage of us all the time and they have for years. The idiots that fall for it will never learn...so sad. There is nothing more pathetic than a gay Democrat that refuses to let go (except maybe a Log Cabinette but really whats the difference?).

I guess that's the power of abusive relationships, though. Keep it up the pressure and keep raising a ruckus and keep raising hell and making demands. Just because some people are complicit suckers doesn't mean we all are. We need you to be better than the HRC and the rest.

"Chasing your tail" is much easier than making sense of these childish publicity stunts. It's much easier than providing some rationale for pissing on our friends and angry "demands." Sooner or later GetEQUAL needs to demonstrate HOW their "crazy shenanigans" change any minds or garner any support.

Dan Choi is now leading the LGBT Activist Contest of "crazy shenanigans." What's next? Hostages?

I'd like to suggest a "vow of silence" as the next GetEQUAL stunt. That would actually be helpful. Remember, "helpful" is a good thing.

"a vow of silence"

Oh, you tease! That is such a great idea. I hope my direct reply to you isn't a breech of the terms of service here.

I agree with you, AndrewW.

Please show us how its done. Clearly we need the direction and guidance from someone with experience and perspective like YOU. YOU are the kind of person we have been waiting for to come along to show us the light.

Please, AndrewW - be like Dan Choi but better - begin a vow of silence as a way to ASK for LGBT justice. Someone has to take responsibility for being the adult around here. There is so much chatter and nonsense...ENOUGH I say!

Good on you for ending the noise and starting the silence NOW!

You are an inspiration to us all. I will help spread the word about your mission...since obviously you are now in silent protest to ask for equality.

Namaste!

Tell us what GetEQUAL does that:

1) Changes minds, or

2) Creates any support for our Equality.

Angela Brightfeather | June 3, 2010 10:08 AM

Hmmm, hostages, that's not a bad idea Andrew. Why don't you come over to my house some evening and we can discuss that in a bit more detail.

Will there be other hostages? Stats? Pics?

Heather, thanks for the insight!

Kip, Robin and Heather should use this opportunity to answer the questions posted above and to provide some rationale for their actions so far.

Andrew,

Here's a thought: Why don't you give us a game plan? You have claimed to have offered a hundred million dollars (do I have that right?) for a sustainable plan of action - surely someone gave you even the germ of an idea? Instead of showing up on every LGBTQ blog out there (and I know very few billionaires with that kind of time on their hands - but then, maybe you're one of the retired ones?), would you like to tell us exactly what to do?

I mean, seriously: I don't like GetEQUAL or HRC - but that's also why I do activist work at the grassroots (and you can find out all about that if you troll the internet for just 10 minutes). And my analysis, whenever presented in verbal or written form, is always germane to the conversation. You, as far as I can tell, appear to be a figment of your own imagination - and you keep repeating yourself, ad nauseum without ever contributing to the conversation.

I appreciate your opinion Yasmin and I am glad you express is frequently on Bilerico.

This inquiry is about GetEQUAL. They are raising money and seeking participation in their still undefined organization.

I have expressed my opinion and I have made suggestions. I am pleased that our community has begun embracing "accountability." Bilerico is doing that NOW. I will try limit my input to that topic.

There is significant change coming to the LGBT Movement and it is exciting. It is a focus on "winning," not earning a living or surviving as an organization, but actually winning.

The majority of the comments above are very interested in GetEQUAL's tactics, strategies, purpose and organizational structure. I hope they enlighten us. It would be helpful for them and our Movement.

I fully agree Andrew. GetEqual should use this opportunity to respond to community concerns about their advocacy, and I have to ask why they're not doing so. Apparently, when it comes from Bil it's worthy of a response, but questions and concerns from the rest of the community thus far remain unanswered. And we know how orgs which don't effectively and honestly engage with the community are popularly seen by the LGBT rank-and-file, don't we?

Personally, I think GetEqual ignores our publicly expressed concerns to their own detriment. There's a history here, and GetEqual would do well to understand and learn from it.

Here is what concerns me, Rebecca:

Where is Bil getting all of his information? Is he just regurgitating the Advocate article? It seems like he is filling in some blanks, but not revealing his sources of information.

At the risk of violating the terms I will keep this next concern anonymous, but SOME people with less of a track record of commentary and input but plenty of ubiquitous commenting, is a one note Charley.

After at least two decades of carrot and stick games with the Democratic Party in regard to our citizenship as queers, I am highly suspicous of any anonynmous person that harps will zeal and a real thirst for vengence in a position that defends the political party that is responsible for DADT and DOMA and for the lack of action on other matters vital to us - particularly ENDA.

It's one thing to be critical and investigatory and to have an opinon but someone here goes way beyond the pale in terms of attack on an organization that at the moment is guilty ONLY of being mysterious. This person may not agree with the actions of GetEqual and this person may even think the actions are dangerous - even if that opinion is not based in American history (or reality). But....

There has been way too much defensive scheming manipulation - especially on line in political blogs etc - by Demcoractic party dogmatic syncophants. The kind that blame Ralph Nader for Bush's victory and blame same-sex marriage for the Democrats loss in 2004 and that defend Bill Clinton for his compromises. These people threaten that we must support the DNC or the Republicans will get us and advocate for incremenatlism because it's safer for The Party.

This is why I am highly suspicious of the repeated rantings by certain people that do things like I see an awful lot at Bilerico. This kind of fanaticism is just as - if not more - suspecious because it is anonymous. GetEqual is on camera and in jail. Internet figures that lurk and throw mud and offer nothing are scheming and destructive.