Category: politics
2-4-6-8! Smash the Church! Smash the State!
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on August 10, 2009
- Categories: performances| politics
- 2 Comments
Last week I participated in a phenomenal event called 2-4-6-8! Smash the Church! Smash the State!, which was a benefit for SOUL (the School Of Unity and Liberation in Oakland) and held at the Galería de la Raza (which, incidentally, has a great show up now from the folks at Dignidad Rebelde — check it out!). It was also a release party for Tommi Avicolli Mecca’s new anthology about the early years of the gay liberation movement, with a similar title. I’ve since been reading the book, and it’s pretty phenomenal to hear personal accounts from the days when the movement aligned itself with other leftist political movements seeking collective liberation rather than assimilationist demands like gay marriage.
-
-
-
The other performers and readers were all phenomenal: Dani Montgomery, Tina Bartolome, Erica Benton, Merle Woo, Paola Bacchetta (who was part of a group in the day called Dyketactics!), Thisway/Thatway, Malaya Arevalo (who read a gorgeous piece about Lawrence King), James Tracy (who did a great piece from an hetero), Annie Danger (who reprised her amazing motivational speech on rioting), and of course, Tommi Avicolli Mecca. The audience was also really phenomenal — a great mix of elders and youth (including a bunch of kids in high school), politicized, and energetic.
I was excited to do a new piece that I’d been thinking about for a while — a cheesy, marriage-is-so-stupid-in-the-face-of-a-truly-radical/progressive-agenda thing to Judy’s “Get Happy.” Video is here — sadly, the space was small and I kept knocking things over, and I totally didn’t realize that my dress was popping out the bottom, which ruined the reveal (oops):
Thanks to Angelique and Mariana for their work in pulling this together!
Healthcare = Human Right
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 31, 2009
- Categories: politics
- No Comments
Right now I’m listening to the Congressional Progressive and Tri- Caucuses’ press conference demanding a strong national healthcare option, and vowing to not vote for the so-called Blue Dog’s watered-down plan. While I’d rather see a Single-Payer system, I guess I’m ready to concede to the moment and see us win something decent, even if not perfect. Also, while I’m not always that into electoral politics, it’s still inspiring to hear Congresspeople talking about healthcare being a human right.
Also, while I’m at it, a friend of mine is part of a group organizing young people to fight for quality healthcare for all. They’re called Young Invincibles, and I highly recommend checking them out.
Two takes on Sotomayor at the same time
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 22, 2009
- Categories: politics
- No Comments
I’ll admit it: I haven’t been following the Sotomayor nomination or hearings very closely at all. Basically, I watched Rachel Maddow’s interview with Pat Buchanan and was horrified (and clearly not surprised) by his overt racism. I also read John Nichols’ article in The Nation about Senator Klobuchar’s engaged questions during the hearing process. And I’ve skimmed a couple of other articles here and there that touch a bit on her record. But that’s about it.
I’ve also come across these two images in the past few days, and I wanted to display them side-by-side, because I partially agree with both of them:
(Click the second one to read it completely.) The first is by Bay Area artist Favianna Rodriguez, who I’ve met a few times, whose work I love, and whose politics and political commitment I admire. (It’s also in the window of my adorable downstairs neighbors.) The second I discovered on the Queers Against Obama blog, which reposted the image from a political web-comic called For Fuck’s Sake.
I guess I just want to hold both of these at the same time. Like Obama’s election, I think the historic moment and feeling of victory — especially, but not exclusively, in many communities of color — are not to be completely dismissed. On the other hand, I don’t want the symbolism of the moment to obscure the realities of our present crises (and their historical legacies).
As is often the case, I’m looking for an analysis that’s both, or at least somewhere in the middle. Is that too much to ask for?
Why I Don’t Like Gavin Newsom
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 20, 2009
Well, this is but one reason. But it feels like a more legit reason than just citing this picture. (As I recall, the one on the cover made him look like even more of an ass. I do appreciate that he’s getting older and now he’s moving more into conservative-looking politician, and less young gay-but-not-gay hotshot. It’s something about the hair.)
Anyway, I just read that Newsom vetoed what could have been a really super piece of rent control legislation, aimed at helping renters through the current economic crisis. Basically, the legislation would have done three things:
- Allowed renters to take on additional roommates to help pay rent. There are certain cases (ie. marriage or DPs) in which this is already kosher, but in this case, they wouldn’t have to be related.
- Limited “banked” rent increases to 8% per year. That’s because even though they can only raise your rent a certain percentage per year, they can also choose to “bank” it and raise it later to make up for years in which they haven’t. While this feels somewhat fair, it also means that during tough times on everyone, rents could suddenly go way up on your apartment in just one year.
- Prevent landlords from increasing rent to more than 33% of one’s income. The initial bill didn’t have any restrictions, but the version that passed already limited this financial hardship restriction to people who were unemployed, lost more than 20% of their income, or were on government assistance and didn’t receive a COLA.
More background is here and here.
Needless to say, I’m pissed off. Here’s what Ted Gullicksen of the Tenants’ Union had to say:
[Newsom]’s more concerned about getting contributions from the real estate industry for his run for governor than he is about the people of San Francisco being hit by recession. He has vetoed almost every piece of pro-tenant legislation as a mayor, and opposed every piece when he was a supervisor.
And here’s a bit more background on his voting record.
I’m also totally sick of all the gays who fawn over him because of his marriage stunt. He’s like the gross straight boys who flirt with you but you know they’re not really going to put out. In this case, putting out means supporting tenants’ rights.
And while we’re at it, what’s up with Bevan Dufty, the gay Supervisor of the Castro? Apparently he supported item #2 up there, but not the other two, leaving them one vote shy to override the veto. Does he realize what’s happening to the Castro? Gentrification is getting so bad even the gays are moving out. It feels ironic because I actually went to his apartment once, after a United ENDA demonstration against the HRC, and I thought it was really nice to have a City Supervisor on our side and welcoming us into his home for the afterparty. And it was a nice home. And I’m not sure if he’s a renter, but I’d assume not. But I also feel like he’s not on our side anymore. And I hope people remember these things when it’s time for re-election.
Marriage vomit
Posted by admin on July 14, 2009
- Categories: gay| politics
- 2 Comments
If you know me at all well, you know that I’m so over gay marriage.
But if you don’t: Do I think that having a constitutional amendment preventing a particular class of people from accessing a particular privilege is wrong? Yes. Do I think that marriage should be the forefront of queer activism? No. And don’t even get me started on the whole “separate is inherently unequal” bullshit.
I’m finally catching up on news, and I wanted to share some interesting pieces I’ve been reading today about gay marriage:
- Back to the California voters in 2010: Alex Blaze at the Bilerico Project on the debate about whether to put an initiative on the ballot in 2010, and quotes from the ridiculous rhetoric an organization called Love. Honor. Cherish. — which, hi, despite making me think of Love! Valour! Compassion! is just about the gayest and more boring name ever — that is run, surprise surprise!, by equally boring-looking (mostly) white gay men who apparently have no sense of communications or strategy. Here is one of their arguments:
Seniors. There are about 4.5 million Californians over 65 years old. Of these, 450,000 are gay or lesbian. In any two-year period, more than 13,000 of those people will die. Thus, if Prop 8 is repealed in 2010, there will be 13,000 more elderly gays and lesbians who will have lived to see their right to marry affirmed by a vote of the people. If we wait until 2012, these men and women will never experience that affirmation. [my emphasis added]
- Prepare to Prevail: A statement issued by the Jordan/Rustin Coalition, API Equality, HONOR PAC and others urging folks to wait until legalized gay marriage is winnable. Even though I don’t really want to see this come to another vote at any point in the foreseeable future (it just doesn’t make sense in California, given Domestic Partnerships!), I’m grateful for more mainstream organizations putting out a call to slow down, and especially their call to not waste/steal resources from more deserving projects.
- A Look at the Gay Rights Movement Beyond Marriage and the Military and What’s Right With Utah: Lisa Duggan is a brilliant thinker and writer. The first is her appearance on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman, and the second is her piece in The Nation about the way the gays and queers in Utah are building a truly broad-based coalition, and advocating for an “Adult Joint Support Declaration” registry as a way of getting around their “Super DOMA,” but which actually offers more possibilities for legal caring relationships than gay marriage.
- Inequality in the Marriage Equality Movement: Amy Sueyoshi’s arguments are similar to Duggan’s and others’, but still worth reading, and she has some good documentation of orgs losing funding because gay marriage isn’t their primary goal. Also, one thing that she brings forward that I hadn’t considered: it’s not only gay dollars that are being diverted to marriage rather than social services, but also anti-gay dollars (ie. churches that run soup kitchens may divert some of that money to political action). I’m not sure I’m particularly invested in where that kind of money goes, but in a time of decreased social services across the board, it feels noteworthy.
- Proof: The Gay Marriage Movement Is Draining Resources from Queer Activism: Yasmin Nair’s latest piece on the Bilerico Project, through which I found Sueyoshi’s. She’s also got a good analysis.
Oh, and as an interesting ongoing source of information about this, I’ve been following Nancy Polikoff’s blog, Beyond (Straight or Gay) Marriage, which is often very legal, but which I find interesting.
Anyway, I wish these viewpoints could be expressed in more mainstream places, and wanted to do my part to put them out there!
2-4-6-8! Smash the Church! Smash the State!
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on August 10, 2009
- Categories: performances| politics
- 2 Comments
Last week I participated in a phenomenal event called 2-4-6-8! Smash the Church! Smash the State!, which was a benefit for SOUL (the School Of Unity and Liberation in Oakland) and held at the Galería de la Raza (which, incidentally, has a great show up now from the folks at Dignidad Rebelde — check it out!). It was also a release party for Tommi Avicolli Mecca’s new anthology about the early years of the gay liberation movement, with a similar title. I’ve since been reading the book, and it’s pretty phenomenal to hear personal accounts from the days when the movement aligned itself with other leftist political movements seeking collective liberation rather than assimilationist demands like gay marriage.
The other performers and readers were all phenomenal: Dani Montgomery, Tina Bartolome, Erica Benton, Merle Woo, Paola Bacchetta (who was part of a group in the day called Dyketactics!), Thisway/Thatway, Malaya Arevalo (who read a gorgeous piece about Lawrence King), James Tracy (who did a great piece from an hetero), Annie Danger (who reprised her amazing motivational speech on rioting), and of course, Tommi Avicolli Mecca. The audience was also really phenomenal — a great mix of elders and youth (including a bunch of kids in high school), politicized, and energetic.
I was excited to do a new piece that I’d been thinking about for a while — a cheesy, marriage-is-so-stupid-in-the-face-of-a-truly-radical/progressive-agenda thing to Judy’s “Get Happy.” Video is here — sadly, the space was small and I kept knocking things over, and I totally didn’t realize that my dress was popping out the bottom, which ruined the reveal (oops):
Thanks to Angelique and Mariana for their work in pulling this together!
Healthcare = Human Right
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 31, 2009
- Categories: politics
- No Comments
Right now I’m listening to the Congressional Progressive and Tri- Caucuses’ press conference demanding a strong national healthcare option, and vowing to not vote for the so-called Blue Dog’s watered-down plan. While I’d rather see a Single-Payer system, I guess I’m ready to concede to the moment and see us win something decent, even if not perfect. Also, while I’m not always that into electoral politics, it’s still inspiring to hear Congresspeople talking about healthcare being a human right.
Also, while I’m at it, a friend of mine is part of a group organizing young people to fight for quality healthcare for all. They’re called Young Invincibles, and I highly recommend checking them out.
Two takes on Sotomayor at the same time
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 22, 2009
- Categories: politics
- No Comments
I’ll admit it: I haven’t been following the Sotomayor nomination or hearings very closely at all. Basically, I watched Rachel Maddow’s interview with Pat Buchanan and was horrified (and clearly not surprised) by his overt racism. I also read John Nichols’ article in The Nation about Senator Klobuchar’s engaged questions during the hearing process. And I’ve skimmed a couple of other articles here and there that touch a bit on her record. But that’s about it.
I’ve also come across these two images in the past few days, and I wanted to display them side-by-side, because I partially agree with both of them:
(Click the second one to read it completely.) The first is by Bay Area artist Favianna Rodriguez, who I’ve met a few times, whose work I love, and whose politics and political commitment I admire. (It’s also in the window of my adorable downstairs neighbors.) The second I discovered on the Queers Against Obama blog, which reposted the image from a political web-comic called For Fuck’s Sake.
I guess I just want to hold both of these at the same time. Like Obama’s election, I think the historic moment and feeling of victory — especially, but not exclusively, in many communities of color — are not to be completely dismissed. On the other hand, I don’t want the symbolism of the moment to obscure the realities of our present crises (and their historical legacies).
As is often the case, I’m looking for an analysis that’s both, or at least somewhere in the middle. Is that too much to ask for?
Why I Don’t Like Gavin Newsom
Posted by Lil Miss Hot Mess on July 20, 2009
Well, this is but one reason. But it feels like a more legit reason than just citing this picture. (As I recall, the one on the cover made him look like even more of an ass. I do appreciate that he’s getting older and now he’s moving more into conservative-looking politician, and less young gay-but-not-gay hotshot. It’s something about the hair.)
Anyway, I just read that Newsom vetoed what could have been a really super piece of rent control legislation, aimed at helping renters through the current economic crisis. Basically, the legislation would have done three things:
- Allowed renters to take on additional roommates to help pay rent. There are certain cases (ie. marriage or DPs) in which this is already kosher, but in this case, they wouldn’t have to be related.
- Limited “banked” rent increases to 8% per year. That’s because even though they can only raise your rent a certain percentage per year, they can also choose to “bank” it and raise it later to make up for years in which they haven’t. While this feels somewhat fair, it also means that during tough times on everyone, rents could suddenly go way up on your apartment in just one year.
- Prevent landlords from increasing rent to more than 33% of one’s income. The initial bill didn’t have any restrictions, but the version that passed already limited this financial hardship restriction to people who were unemployed, lost more than 20% of their income, or were on government assistance and didn’t receive a COLA.
More background is here and here.
Needless to say, I’m pissed off. Here’s what Ted Gullicksen of the Tenants’ Union had to say:
[Newsom]’s more concerned about getting contributions from the real estate industry for his run for governor than he is about the people of San Francisco being hit by recession. He has vetoed almost every piece of pro-tenant legislation as a mayor, and opposed every piece when he was a supervisor.
And here’s a bit more background on his voting record.
I’m also totally sick of all the gays who fawn over him because of his marriage stunt. He’s like the gross straight boys who flirt with you but you know they’re not really going to put out. In this case, putting out means supporting tenants’ rights.
And while we’re at it, what’s up with Bevan Dufty, the gay Supervisor of the Castro? Apparently he supported item #2 up there, but not the other two, leaving them one vote shy to override the veto. Does he realize what’s happening to the Castro? Gentrification is getting so bad even the gays are moving out. It feels ironic because I actually went to his apartment once, after a United ENDA demonstration against the HRC, and I thought it was really nice to have a City Supervisor on our side and welcoming us into his home for the afterparty. And it was a nice home. And I’m not sure if he’s a renter, but I’d assume not. But I also feel like he’s not on our side anymore. And I hope people remember these things when it’s time for re-election.
Marriage vomit
Posted by admin on July 14, 2009
- Categories: gay| politics
- 2 Comments
If you know me at all well, you know that I’m so over gay marriage.
But if you don’t: Do I think that having a constitutional amendment preventing a particular class of people from accessing a particular privilege is wrong? Yes. Do I think that marriage should be the forefront of queer activism? No. And don’t even get me started on the whole “separate is inherently unequal” bullshit.
I’m finally catching up on news, and I wanted to share some interesting pieces I’ve been reading today about gay marriage:
- Back to the California voters in 2010: Alex Blaze at the Bilerico Project on the debate about whether to put an initiative on the ballot in 2010, and quotes from the ridiculous rhetoric an organization called Love. Honor. Cherish. — which, hi, despite making me think of Love! Valour! Compassion! is just about the gayest and more boring name ever — that is run, surprise surprise!, by equally boring-looking (mostly) white gay men who apparently have no sense of communications or strategy. Here is one of their arguments:
Seniors. There are about 4.5 million Californians over 65 years old. Of these, 450,000 are gay or lesbian. In any two-year period, more than 13,000 of those people will die. Thus, if Prop 8 is repealed in 2010, there will be 13,000 more elderly gays and lesbians who will have lived to see their right to marry affirmed by a vote of the people. If we wait until 2012, these men and women will never experience that affirmation. [my emphasis added]
- Prepare to Prevail: A statement issued by the Jordan/Rustin Coalition, API Equality, HONOR PAC and others urging folks to wait until legalized gay marriage is winnable. Even though I don’t really want to see this come to another vote at any point in the foreseeable future (it just doesn’t make sense in California, given Domestic Partnerships!), I’m grateful for more mainstream organizations putting out a call to slow down, and especially their call to not waste/steal resources from more deserving projects.
- A Look at the Gay Rights Movement Beyond Marriage and the Military and What’s Right With Utah: Lisa Duggan is a brilliant thinker and writer. The first is her appearance on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman, and the second is her piece in The Nation about the way the gays and queers in Utah are building a truly broad-based coalition, and advocating for an “Adult Joint Support Declaration” registry as a way of getting around their “Super DOMA,” but which actually offers more possibilities for legal caring relationships than gay marriage.
- Inequality in the Marriage Equality Movement: Amy Sueyoshi’s arguments are similar to Duggan’s and others’, but still worth reading, and she has some good documentation of orgs losing funding because gay marriage isn’t their primary goal. Also, one thing that she brings forward that I hadn’t considered: it’s not only gay dollars that are being diverted to marriage rather than social services, but also anti-gay dollars (ie. churches that run soup kitchens may divert some of that money to political action). I’m not sure I’m particularly invested in where that kind of money goes, but in a time of decreased social services across the board, it feels noteworthy.
- Proof: The Gay Marriage Movement Is Draining Resources from Queer Activism: Yasmin Nair’s latest piece on the Bilerico Project, through which I found Sueyoshi’s. She’s also got a good analysis.
Oh, and as an interesting ongoing source of information about this, I’ve been following Nancy Polikoff’s blog, Beyond (Straight or Gay) Marriage, which is often very legal, but which I find interesting.
Anyway, I wish these viewpoints could be expressed in more mainstream places, and wanted to do my part to put them out there!
Honey, if you don't trust me,
then I don't trust your taste.
Be My Friend!
