July 13, 2007
Eternally-bitter, combative me
Posted by: Chris
"Bloggernista," an occasional reader of this blog who hides behind a pseudonym on his own, takes a shot at Andrew Sullivan and me for criticizing the Human Rights Campaign-Logo "forum" of Democratic presidential candidates. In a cross-post on his blog and Pam's House Blend and Bilerico, he writes this under the headline "Fight the Right, Not Each Other":
Even now as the Senate is set to debate the federal hate crimes bill, much of the energy among progressive LGBT activists is focused on attacking the Human Rights Campaign for a political forum featuring presidential candidates. … This just goes to show that we are not nearly as politically sophisticated as we would like to believe ourselves to be and that our activism is steeped in personal self-expression rather than a focus on political effectiveness. … HRC staff should have recognized that eternally bitter homocons like Andrew Sullivan and Chris Crain would piss all over their efforts no matter what…
He goes on to acknowledge "comments" by Pam Spaulding that criticized HRC for not including a real journalist as a moderator and Bloggernista's own view that Mike Gravel should have been invited.
You just have to love the irony in a blog post with the headline "Fight the Right, Not Each Other," which then proceeds to fight each other, and not the right.
So "Bloggernista" thinks Andrew Sullivan and I are being "eternally bitter homocons" for registering criticism about the HRC candidates forum, while Pam Spaulding's "comments" about the event were on point. How does that work exactly? Pam and I raised the same issues, as did Andrew. But we're bitter while her points are well taken. I'm glad we're not wasting time on senseless fights with each other!
In fact, I posted a second time yesterday crediting HRC with deciding they need a real journalist moderator and saying I wasn't bothered by the exclusion of Mike Gravel. So, in reality, "Bloggernista" and Pam were more critical of HRC than eternally-bitter me.
Here's our fundamental difference in strategy, from my point of view (and crazy me for thinking the blogosphere was supposed to be the kind of place we had these types of open discussions without shushing each other up): "Bloggernista" seems to think we win our equality by "fighting the right." I disagree. I think we win our equality -- and much faster, btw -- by pressuring those who say they support our rights to expend political capital on our behalf.
Otherwise, they will act only after the societal consensus is so overwhelming that there's no risk at all to supporting us. "Bloggernista" can wait for that distant day, and in the meantime make himself feel better by pointing out obvious silliness of "wingnuts" and the like. I'd rather focus on the here and now, and converting gay-friendly rhetoric into the passage of gay-friendly legislation.
You want to see the hate crime law passed? The immediate problem is not "the right." It's whether leading Democrats will make it a priority to keep the amendment in the DoD authorization bill and then not blink if Bush threatens veto.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
The comments to this entry are closed.