The Day After

More. Here’s what GetEQUAL has been devoting itself to.

6 Comments for “The Day After”

  1. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    Groups come and go.

    The Mattachine Society, the Daughters of Bilitis, the Society for Individual Rights, the Gay Liberation Front, the Gay Activists Alliance, Stonewall Democrats, GOProud, ACT UP, the Gil Action Fund, AFER, Freedom to Marry, and a myriad of other groups, most local or regional but a few national, once active and vibrant, have passed from the scene and are now of interest only to historians.

    The reasons for each group’s’ demise vary.

    Sometimes groups explode/implode under internal stress. GetEqual, like GOProud, seems to be an example.

    Other times groups are replaced by other groups more in tune with current needs. The Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis meet the needs of the 1950’s and 1960’s, but quickly sank under the waves post-Stonewall, for example. The Gay Liberation Front met the needs of the 1970’s, but was superseded by more mainstream groups as the movement became more mainstream.

    Most often, though, groups fade away because they not longer serve a purpose. Stonewall Democrats became redundant after Democratic Party activism moved from outside to inside the party. Freedom to Marry, according to plan, dissolved itself after Obergfell.

    But whatever the reasons in each particular case, tt is just part of the ebb and flow.

    Issues also come and go, as one issue is resolved and another takes its place. At each step in the process, the activists at the forefront of an upcoming issue are seen as radical.

    I don’t suppose that too many on IGF are old enough to personally remember, but the Mattachine Society denounced the Gay Liberation Front as too radical in the aftermath of Stonewall. Most everyone on IGF is probably old enough to remember the vicious infighting over the question of focusing on marriage equality, with those of us focusing on that issue rather than on other then mainstream issues called out as radical fools and worse, but for anyone who isn’t old enough, take a look back at the posts from 2000-2006 and you’ll get an idea. And now, with marriage equality won, the same thing is happening as other issues emerge and are defined.

    Bumping and rubbing as issues come and go is normal, just part of the ebb and flow.

    As Harry Hogge aptly put it, “Rubbing, son, is racing.”

    Reply
  2. posted by Jorge on

    GetEQUAL? Well they lost their mandate. Obama’s not president anymore.

    PFLAG? Not until the wall’s built. At worst it’ll splinter and merge into something else.

    “In 2010, less than 3% of LGBT adults in the U.S. gave money to any national LGBT organizations. The majority of funding to LGBTQ organizations comes from foundations and corporations.”

    That explains much that I did not know when I was a part of one upstart organization. “You’re really needed.” “You’re really needed.” Grants are everything. “You’re really needed” only translates into money when you translate the message to other people with money.

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      At worst it’ll splinter and merge into something else.

      Probably some multi-site hospital located in Mark Zuckerburg’s bedroom.

      Reply
    • posted by Tom Scharbach on

      If the 3% estimate is accurate, it doesn’t surprise me. I suspect that few gays and lesbians see the value to national LGBT organizations. Most are obscure and ineffective. HRC is an exception, I guess, because it isn’t obscure.

      I don’t see the value, anyway. I can’t recall contributing a dime to “any national LGBT organization”, unless you count the ACLU as a national LGBT organization. I’ve contributed time and money to state and local LGBT organizations where the work on the ground is being done, and I’ve contributed to various specific cause-organizations in the legal arena. But I don’t see the value to lobbying efforts at a national level, and that’s what most of the “national LGBT organizations” are all about.

      As to “the majority of funding to LGBTQ organizations comes from foundations and corporations” that doesn’t surprise me, either. After all, foundations and corporations contribute a lot of money to causes of all kinds.

      I think that it makes sense to look for foundation/corporate funding. A non-profit railroad museum where I volunteer about 20 hours a week is constantly on the lookout for grants, matching contributions, and the like, and that’s just common sense. As Slick Willie Sutton said, “I rob banks because that’s where the money is.”

      Reply
      • posted by David Bauer on

        Unfortunately, their are enough sectors of society – at the federal level – that oppose the “gay agenda” , gay rights bills (even modest ones) are lucky if they get decent hearings, let alone a floor vote.

        The Republican base is certainty a problem, but gay rights bills can be something that many blue collar Democrats dislike or thing too much time is already spent on it.

        The lesson is that more constructive education has to happen in certain states and districts.

        Reply
  3. posted by David Bauler on

    Again. Most national LGBT rights groups have less and less success with the world beyond the beltway and certain urban cities.

    This puts in the ball in the court of local groups, which are less likely to have the hrc or the lcr national resources.

    Reply

Leave a Comment