Sunday, June 29, 2008

ONE homosexual liberal Democrathas a message for Obama

Senator Obama, it could be that you have a conflict within your supporters over what may be the most important issue, national security.

And it could be that you are only hearing, for instance, the “gay” view from a small, elitist, professional “gays” crowd that do not represent the vast majority of homosexual voters.

I am a homosexual, liberal, Democrat, and I have common sense—I may only know what I read in the newspapers, but what I know is that where Islam controls, they are killing homosexuals.

Therefore, it is clear to me that I must support any war that keeps Sharia law from taking over, any place. I think too many “gays” only read the slick gay publications that ignore our issues and try to sell us expensive cars, clothing and cover only “gay entertainment,” most of which is by non-gays. I see little on the “gay” network (LOGO) that helps our community/movement-what I see are old movies.

I'm not saying you should not use these resources, but don't think you have reached the vast majority of homosexual voters, or our friends,neighbors, families, allies by reading the Advocate.

It is good to get same-sex marriage, but that will be of no value if we allow Muslims to take over our government and impose Sharia law. (Obviously that is true of extremist “Christians” too, including the “religious” preacher person from New Orleans that just lost a lawsuit in Wisconsin where he suggested, in some way, that listeners should shoot homosexuals.) But homosexuals, I say again, are being killed in Islamic countries.

To quibble over whether or not Iraq is worse off now than before is nonsense when we should not be bringing the troops home- the “heterosexual” troops (since our nation still fears homosexuals as much as Islamists so we are, in theory, not allowed to fight for our country even when we would suffer more under Islamic control than heterosexuals, although women would also)-but sending them to Afghanistan to actually fight the people who attacked us and are still in control makes discussion of when to withdraw, etc., irrelevant.

How to stop sending our money to enemies like Saudi Arabia (for oil) I can't help you with. But I tell you security may hurt you if you only listen to those who want you to be an idealist and ignore

Something these young “gays,” making lots of money running gay organizations don't know is that our community/movement has succeeded beyond our wildest imagination, because our pioneers did NOT work for money or power but for their beliefs in change within the system and from one secret organization we grew each decade. What these young people—as young people in all civil rights struggles—need to remember is they started from where we brought them, taking risks they don't have to. Which, come to think of it, is true of all Americans, who benefit from what the founders of this nation, and subsequent citizens have done to bring us to where we are today as we celebrate another 4th of July.

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Bayard Rustin: Troubles I've Seen

Bayard Rustin, by life and words, left a message that too many black preachers have not learned from. I suggest they need to stop preaching hatred of homosexuals since their lives today are better because of a black homosexual: Bayard Rustin.

Do they not know that it was a homosexual who was the main force behind the work of Dr. Martin Luther King, and the main strategist for several early black civil rights groups? If not, they can read, among other books, Jervis Anderson's biography of Rustin, titled: Bayard Rustin; Troubles I've Seen. It would also be a very worthwhile book for all Americans to read, especially activists today in the black and homosexual civil rights movements.

The most important point about Rustin's life is that he, as the book shows, did not waste any time trying to explain his homosexuality to his co-workers, all of whom where heterosexual, male and female, black and white, young and old. You "hear" of his arrest on sex charges in Pasadena CA early in his career, and that is the end of discussion except for the bigots in the FBI and black organizations who tried to use the arrest to prevent him from doing his work, which they were jealous of.

There is a direct parallel between the black and homosexual civil rights movements, and only ignorant people try to deny it. Rustin was the perfect example. The tactics used by southern racists against him were due to his being a proud black man who happened to be homosexual. He combined the two movements even though he only worked for the black movement.

The issues he and the black organizations faced were the same that homosexual movement pioneers faced. They were both attacked by the FBI and politicians and churches. There are many examples given, but one that stands out to show how the media was complicit in working against both civil rights movements is that the Alabama paper allowed itself, as did the New York Times, etc, to be used by his enemies to attack Rustin and the black leaders of the march in Alabama. And it is not widely known that Rustin was a main organizer of this work, as well as the famous March on Washington. People in the black movement who were jealous of his power and influence, including Adam Clayton Powell, who blackmailed leaders to keep him out of the movement. Some good leaders tried to stop Rustin because they felt he, as was and is true of both movements today, was trying to join/combine too many issues together, in his case pacifism and black civil rights, and poverty, etc. An issue relevant today in politics thanks to Senator Clinton's famous remark that Dr. King's work and words were important but it took president Johnson to change the laws, was used by Roy Wilkins against Dr. King—he said to King, your words have not changed any laws.

Rustin, in the black movement, like Don Slater in the homosexual movement, was not always in agreement with the views and tactics of the majority of his co-workers. Many plans and events that Rustin warned his friends against turned out to do harm to the movement when his warnings were ignored. His views on affirmative action were not in the mainstream. Same with Don slater. He came to think that the time of marches had passed. Same with Don Slater. He was the most important person in the background in several organizations and few knew of his great work. The same is true of Don Slater.

Southern racists used Rustin's skin color against him. Jealous co-workers used his homosexuality against him. In the end Rustin remains the most important unknown person in the black civil rights movement. His words are as important today as when he was speaking them. And it would be a good idea for Senator Obama and his associates to take the time to read about Bayard Rustin-as he was the person behind the scenes who helped make Dr. King and later black civil rights leaders who they were. And he planned what they did.

Again, the book is: Bayard Rustin: Troubles I've Seen, a biography by Jervis Anderson, published by HarperColins, in 1997.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Thinking about how the internet would have affected the pioneers of the homosexual civil rights movent

At first it seems that if the pioneers of the homosexual civil rights movement would have been able to do a lot more if they had the tools, such as computers and the internet and cell phone, that we have today.

I don’t think so. You can not judge such things by looking back. But it is clear that nothing they could have said to more people with the internet, or had cheaper ways of reaching people, etc. would have affected the world of that day any better than they did.

We forget, not only in the homosexual civil rights movement but in all civil rights movements, that it is not just the words and “news” that the public gets that instantly changes them, but education over time. We also forget that the same “media” in the 1950s and ’60s that were extremely anti-gay were also extremely anti-black, etc.

It might be a good sociological learning experience to read a biography of Bayard Rustin, the Don Slater of the black movement, such as Bayard Rustin, The Troubles I've Seen. He was one of the greatest organizers of his time, and did the March on Washington. But he had to constantly fight the lies of the FBI, jealousy of other black leaders who were afraid Dr. King et al. would get more credit for changing things than they did. If you think Senator Clinton’s words saying that it took President Johnson to fulfill the dream of Dr. King, you will know find that Wilkins and the NAACP were thinking the same thing: he once told King that he had spoken good words but had not changed a single law, which is the same argument.

And it was the local newspaper that tried to get Bayard killed, and worked with bigoted politicians to try to stop the marches in Alabama. Nothing a computer or the internet could have done then would have changed that fact. And when Bayard’s homosexuality was used by jealous black leaders, nothing at the time would have prevented that. Rustin, like Don Slater, and sort of like the Barney Franks of today, was a practical person who didn’t waste time talking about some dream but worked to get things done that could be done at the time.

So I don't think we need an article praising the computer and internet. We need to use it today, but it would have made no difference in the ’50s and ’60s. AND, it can be helpful today ONLY because of what we did in the ’50s and ’60s to prepare people to “hear” the truth.

While is is truly frustrating in each decade to hear young people say they did not know there were others like them, and they can now find information and chat rooms on the internet, these were available from the day Mattachine’s group opened shop as ONE in 1952 and had a phone, public office, and a magazine that was available on newsstands in most major cities. Anyone who sought information in the 50s could have found ONE Magazine, and then the Mattachine Review, The Ladder, Drum, Vector, Advocate, and we were holding national meetings, appearing on radio and television shows, so that there has to be some other explanation if people in the ’60s on did NOT know that homosexuals were speaking out. We were winning court decisions in the U. S. Supreme Court in 1958. The media ignored this and only ran terror articles accusing us of being child molesters, or traitors-quoting McCarthy without doing any checking for facts, which they are guilty of today. And so it seems to me that it is the fault of these people if they did not learn about homosexuality until they saw Ellen, or saw some cute girl or guy on a TV show.

And when people seek information on the internet today, which websites do they go to? HRC’s? The Tangent Group’s? Or do they go to some sex chat room and share ignorances?

What has truly changed is that the media can no longer just publish or speak what anti-gay bigots say. And MTV shows homosexuals living with heterosexuals in The Real World. And Brothers and Sisters shows discussion of a gay wedding, and reaches people no gay publication can. LOGO does nothing that helps promote homosexuality. And the glossy gay men’s magazines do little for our community/movement—they promote expensive cars, clothing, and vacations. If that is what the computer and internet have given us, it is no improvement.

Where is serious discussion of issues of homosexuality? The media is flooded with “news” about same sex marriage. Is that the only issue homosexual Americans face? What about how we deal with issues that are not simple. For instance, we oppose in theory the war in Iraq, BUT we must face the news everyday that Islamists are killing homosexuals. What do you think we should do if you oppose the war? If you have no altgernative, you are no better than the present administration. Again, even Bayard Rustin had to come to a view about dealing with the world that he did not have at first as a pacifist. And he had to deal with the issue of trying to work for more than one cause at the same time. He chose the black cause, but never doubted that the homosexual cause needed support too, but knew that it would hurt both causes if they were combined. That is an issue we face today.

Are all of these courses/classes in colleges actually giving information on homosexuality any better than MTV? Are all of these websites and blogs on the internet giving us any better ideas? THAT is why we need the pioneers back. They were thinkers. I don't see any thinkers in our community today. And the internet, so far, can not doing the thinking. And much of their thinking is available today, in our dozen or so libraries/archives. But the gay press ignores these resources. They aren’t “sexy.”

The only hope is that once we get all of our history on the internet, some day serious citizens will seek this information out and it will be there, thanks mainly to the pioneers.

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Will ONE ever quit hounding us?

As probably only one of two living people who "were there" and parties to the separation of ONE, Inc, into two parts, starting in 1965, I am shocked that supposedly responsible people active in efforts to save the history of this civil rights movement, would be sounding like anti-gay bigots and would still be attacking my integrity without ever seeking the facts, which are on our website (

Why would CLAGS believe the lies of Joseph Hawkins and the other incompetents at ONE Institute, and why would USC support the group that attacks on another homosexual archives/library? Hawkins, nor any other person at ONE Institute, which is NOT ONE, Inc, since about 1965 have ever known the facts, nor apparently read the legal documents giving HIC the material we possess. And why would anyone believe that material acquired obviously since 1965 be subject to false claims by Hawkins, et al?

It is curious that CLAGS would be trying to act "legally" where no other internet groups or service is including Yahoo, Google, etc.

I want to state clearly, that Hawkins is a liar, everyone who claims that HIC material is theirs is a liar, and if there ever was any question of material belonging to ONE, Inc., Dorr Legg would have taken legal steps to get it back, as he did to keep control of the name (ONE, Inc). ONE Institute cannot legally or otherwise act in the name of ONE, Inc. It is not ONE, Inc. ISHR owns the name, just as The Tangents Group owns the name Homosexual Information Center, Inc., even though the "group" is the dba.

I knew ONE, Inc, and the Institute for the Study of Human Resources, as I was a paid staff member of both at the time of the separation in 1965. And I can tell you that the present people at ONE Institute are not ONE, Inc. people. Dorr would never have had them around more than a month. It is a disgrace that the wonderful work of Jim Kepner and Dorr Legg has ended up with such incompetent and unethical people, and USC should think about its association with the organization.

But it is a serious question of how the homosexual community/movement will continue to stand aside and ignore the lies of one and the attacks of one organization on another. This very issue is mentioned in the book coming from Chicago, (Out and proud in Chicago). If we can't support the honest work of groups, then we can hardly wonder why anti-gay people and groups find us unreliable.

It is not the integrity and work of the Homosexual Information Center and me, as co-founder and vice-chair, that is in question. It is the competent and ethics of the rest of the homosexual community and academia.