but it seems to me that the unhappy blowback for the tactic has included many an LGBT activist and dedicated supporter. I can understand that many will say the "ends justify the means" and sometimes action requires a major push, but....

we don't march in lockstep like Republicans do. We think independently, and there are always going to be a greater variety of voices and opinions amongst Democrats than amongst Republicans.

Furthermore, Signorile/Bret Easton Ellis/Jodie Foster ("Maybe I'm gay today; tomorrow, I won't be&quot do not speak for me. Nor you, for that matter.

Supporters of the LGBT community who also support wage equality, equal access to infrastructure, race equality, etc.

In disrupting a private discussion on how to better serve black children and attempting to hijack it into a discussion on the LGBT community, it showed an extreme level of disrespect to the black community.

Michelle Obama has done incredible work on nutrition programs that benefit everyone. She took ONE SINGLE DAY to discuss issues important to the black communtiy, and apparently that was too much for some people in the LGBT community.

I found the interruption and heckling to be disgusting, and the only thing that's preserved my respect for the LGBT community is seeing so many LGBT members speak out against that heckling.

"I don't give a damn about LGBT people other than what they can do for causes I support. If a certain percentage didn't agree with me, I'd lose my respect for an entire class of people for standing up for their rights."

What a fucked up, shitty sentiment. If your support is conditional, you're not really an ally. You're just willing to tolerate LGBT people as long as they know their place.

"I don't give a damn about the black community and if Michelle Obama tries to discuss issues important to the black communtiy for even ONE DAY I'm going to get in her face and tell that uppity black woman to get to the back of the bus."

What a fucked up, shitty sentiment. If your support is exclusionary, you're not really a progressive. You're just self serving and don't give a shit about universal equality.

Shall we continue?

how many of them agreed with me. I mean, sure you can just make stuff up if you can't defend your reprehensible statement up there, but where's the fun in that? Even if not one African American on the planet agreed with me, I'd still support equality for them. Apparently you don't feel the same for LGBT people.

So by all means, let's continue.

Are you sure? Because you seem to have no problem with a LGBT progressive hijacking, disrupting, and heckling Michelle Obama when she was addressing issues important to the black community.

Is my support for the LGBT community conditional? Absolutely. It's conditional on them not being a bunch of racist fuck-sticks with superiority complexes who think that LGBT issues are the only issues anyone is allowed to discuss and everyone else can get to the back of the bus or get kicked out of the tent.

As I said, I don't need to withdraw my support because, thankfully, the vast majority of LGBT members were just as offended by that heckler as everyone else was. It's just a handful of people who seem to think it was perfectly ok.

And thank you for admitting that you tolerate gays as long as they're useful and know their place and you don't find them too disagreeable. At least you're honest about it, which is a lot better than we're going to get from a lot of other people here who feel the same way.

I tolerate LGBT issue advocates so long as they're not racists.

I tolerate black issue advocates so long as they're not bigots.

As soon as you cross the line, you're on my shit list. Sorry if that offends you.

At least, I hope it is.

If you read "I found the interruption and heckling to be disgusting, and the only thing that's preserved my respect for the LGBT community is seeing so many LGBT members speak out against that heckling." as anything other than that, then your reading comprehension is so poor likely my post is the only thing you'll read all day.

Edited to add: If it had read "I found the interruption and heckling to be disgusting, and the only thing that's preserved my respect for the black community is seeing so many black members speak out against that heckling." we'd all be rightly condemning it as racist. Apparently it's ok when applied to LGBT people, though.

She didn't take one day - she mentioned it for a few minutes.


It is a worthy cause, yes. No one is saying that it isn't.


Just don't pretend the real reason for what Michelle was doing there - raising money for corporations.

1) It is not required that we discuss only one topic at a time

2) She has spent more than "one single day" on nutrition.

3) "Oh won't somebody please think of the children" isn't a valid argument as there are also LGBT children who therefore must equally be thought of.

4). You group and stereotype the entire LGBT community as one being. This is extremely offensive. We are not one being, we are millions of people with millions of goals, one of which or a few of which we hold in common.

5) Race has NOTHING to do with this. You assume that anyone who says anything at all is being racist. It is a knee-jerk reaction brought on by mistrust of the LGBT community in this case. Let me make this clear. We all fight for racial equality just the same as we all fight for LGBT equality. WE do not discriminate as a group against the Black community. We were right there beside them (and believe it or not we are frequently PART OF THEM) every step of the way.

6) There are Black LGBT people. Understand this.

7) Protesting is not self-motivated. It is community motivated. Learn this.

I think that's about it.

Give me a fucking break, kid. I'm glad you've been a dedicated keyboard warrior for so long on DU, posting thousands upon thousands of emoticon posts, but trust me - there's a whole world of actual REAL activism going on out there.

We may not get hit directly but we have some pretty bad weather. I expect to lose power more times today.

Also, thanks all that responded to this person on setting the record straight (so to speak).

Hunker down!

it's to the N.W. of us which puts us in the heavy bands of rain.

Get a bathtub full of water ready...just in case.

I forgot where you lived until you just jogged my memory (you guys had it rough). Hope you and your partner faired well.

Now they are out and proud.

+100.

Sometimes you have to say enough is enough. Given that you are in a group that gets taken for granted all to often, I think you can understand that. Now think about your struggles & then what it must feel like to not even have the right.

The 'support' from those who are making a big stink of this never existed anyway. They say 'you have plenty of rights already'. Always have. They used to say 'pony' and 'poutrage' at the drop of a Rick Warren sermon. How is their natural status quo 'blowback'? What are they going to do? Stomp their feet and scream about ponies again? Seen it, not impressed.

but it referred back to MLK and the civil rights movement. Something to the effect that there could never be any daylight in between the moral authority of the issue and the method of activism-- that it is not enough to be "right," one also has to be righteous in the approach. That one can not claim moral authority by way of unrighteous behavior. And, heckling of a First Lady is akin to burning the very bridge we seek to build.

One can agree or not. I certainly can appreciate the righteous indignation that motivates such action and it is not hard for me to argue both sides. But, there is certainly the chance that while these acts won't stop progress--given the majority of the American public is clearly behind the gay rights movement-- it could slow down the rate of progress.


Edited for typos/grammar

Words like 'righteous' are religious, vague, relative terms of art. In my view, those who are in the wrong are the ones who need to prove authority to discriminate, those who simply want to be equal to others are instantly in the right, those who oppose them are in the wrong. Rudeness is not an equal to allowing your neighbors to be mistreated under the law, to allow your neighbors to suffer because you don't care for the way they asked you to stop discriminating against them is a disgusting position to take. They are basically saying those who are abused by the law are not circumspect enough when pointing out the abuse, they are too haughty and loud, as if preventing others from employment was not a position of extreme arrogance and an expression of supremacist feelings.
What do they want, begging on bended knee? What exactly would satisfy them enough to get them to stop clinging to bigotry? If they have a formula in mind, a list of demands that if filled would persuade them to stop holding justice as hostage, they should very clearly state their needs, explain why they feel entitled to kindness in return for years of nasty bigotry and mistreatment. Those who stand against the rights of others should feel shame, not impunity to make demands, but if they have demands, let them state them. Clearly. What they want is more important that fair employment and housing law so it should be easy for them to explain why that is the case.

and health if put at risk by a fetus--even if that conception came as a result of rape or incest (nor to determine the course of my future via reproductive contraception)--yes, I DO understand.

So I know what you mean, and I know you know what I mean.

Not even the Good kind.

no problem with how she chose to handle the heckler. it's her hardcore supporters that went bat shit fucking insane over this that i found disturbing and creepy. i wouldnt be surprised if the heckler was getting death threats from these looons.

to castigate Stutz for, essentially, being rude - he wrote an entire column last autumn about how, during a walk in Chelsea, someone made a homophobic remark within earshot, and he essentially chased that person, pointing his finger and saying shame on you (or words to that effect).

It's fine with Signorile when HE'S rude, but not when others are.

So many of these gay personalities are fucked up mentally, that I really can't take much of what they say seriously. I do consider them GLBT family, so I give them more leeway than anyone who is NOT family, but just calling this one as I see it, FWIW (not much).

was held at the house of a lesbian couple. Kinda ironic, ehh?

Other than an LGBT person disagrees with them. I'm not sure how that's a "fact". Our resident homophobes that only discuss LGBT issues when they can use it as a club are present. As are the people that would defend carpet bombing a major American city if the right person ordered it.

So no, no facts. Just one guy's opinion and the usual people saying what they usually say.

in the 60s for black citizens, in the suffragette movement, women's rights, etc.

"Gee, if only you were doing it JUST RIGHT, I might think about your civil rights instead of my own personal sense of civility and my refined sensibilities."

How...convenient that has always been for some.