SOMEBODY HAS TO SAY IT

by Tommi Avicolli Mecca

Tommi Avicolli Mecca

Tommi Avicolli Mecca
Location
San Francisco, California, US
Birthday
July 25
Bio
I am a writer, performer and activist, editor of Smash the Church, Smash the State: the early years of gay liberation (City Lights), and co-editor of Avanti Popolo: Italian-American Writers Sail Beyond Columbus and Hey Paesan: Writings by Italian American Lesbians and Gay Men. To view my creative stuff: www.avicollimecca.com. youtube.com/user/avimecca. myspace.com/peacenikssf.

Tommi Avicolli Mecca's Links

My Links
Editor’s Pick
JUNE 20, 2011 11:39AM

gay pride makes strange bedfellows

Rate: 9 Flag

Whoever thought that a protest march held at the end of June to commemorate a riot by drag queens and others in New York’s Greenwich Village would become like the Chinese New Year parade or Mardi Gras? In some places, such as San Francisco, it’s even broadcast live on TV. 

 

Gay Pride has become an established institution in most major places, generating lots of income in tourist dollars to city coffers. Families bring the kids, despite the occasional glimpse of flesh and gyrating bottoms. These days, there’s not much that shocks the masses at gay pride parades.    

 

It was different 40 years ago. 

 

The first gay pride march I attended was one that I helped organize. It was in Philly in 1972. We assembled in Rittenhouse Square in the center of what was then the gay ghetto, and strode proudly for blocks to Independence Mall across the street from where the Liberty Bell still sits. There were 10,000 of us, according to newspaper reports the following day. 

 

We were fiery, fierce and defiant. We had no corporate sponsorship, no politicians marching alongside us, no churches telling us we were children of god. We weren’t asking for the right to marry or to join the military. We were asserting our right to be who we were, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender. That was radical enough for those days when police still raided gay bars and carted men off to jail for the “crime” of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Their names would be published in the morning papers along with their addresses and employers. Most would end up fired from their jobs and ostracized from their families. That was considered just in those days.

 

We weren’t simply marching against the current, we were re-directing it. Our act of coming out of the closet was revolutionary. Even many in the queer community thought it was a crazy thing to do. 

 

Forty year later, it’s difficult to see any defiance in what we now call pride “parades.” Any semblance of radical politics is buried between the fire fighters contingent and the popular’s bar float with the g-stringed dancing boys and the irritating thumping music.

 

There are the occasional shakeups. Two years ago, some folks here in San Francisco staged a die-in front of the car carrying then-Mayor Gavin Newsom to protest budget cuts that they said would lead to the deaths of homeless and poor folks. They held up the parade for about 15 minutes. But it went on, as it always does, and people quickly forgot that it had even been disrupted.

 

Corporations fork up big bucks to co-sponsor pride, politicians line up to be driven along the parade route and wave at the onlookers, and legislatures issue pat proclamations to honor the event. Seeing CEOs of banks that have caused the foreclosure crisis and police officers that regularly harass the homeless and politicians who vote against tenants rights marching in the same parade with queer activists is disconcerting. 

 

Just because bankers like queers now doesn’t mean I like them anymore than I do politicians who are good on marriage issues but bad on immigration and affordable housing. Queers are immigrants, too, and we need an inexpensive place to live. 

 

These days, gay pride makes strange bedfellows. 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I'm impressed with what you did in Philly in '72! Great read.
Strange bedfellow is endemic to gayness. Pride, not so much, alas.
Gay Pride means you're willing to get out there and fight. Few are, as you well know.
My how things change over time. Thanks again for all that you have organized and the ripple effect it has had on all of us. Personally I am waiting for the day we have a Gay President...Maybe You?
The "LGBT" "movement" has been thoroughly co-opted by the corporations. Non-heterosexuals and non-gender-conforming individuals now are just another target market group.

I recently posted on this phenomenon, including the fact that British Petroleum, for fuck's sake, has a full-page ad in the Human Rights Campaign's current magazine "Equality."

Our "LGBT" "leaders" have sold us out. And we, like sheeple easily led to our own slaughter, have let them.
P.S. to Algis: If our first gay president is anything like Obama is -- a corporate sell-out -- I don't see that it will make a significant difference... I'd much rather have a heterosexual president who is truly progressive than another gay sellout.
I'm with you, Robert, gonna check out your piece on the HRC ad...and I agree that I'd rather have a straight progressive/radical than a moderate HRC-type gay president...for me, it's more than identity politics, it's about economic justice for all people.
Not to promote myself (as I hate it when other bloggers shamelessly try to promote themselves in my blog's comments section...), but this is just further discussion/info along the same topic.

In October 2009 I wrote "An Open Letter to Joe Salmonese," the president of HRC, in which I essentially stated what you just stated: "For me, it's more than identity politics, it's about economic justice for all people." In the letter to Salmonese -- which was a blog post but which I also e-mailed to the HRC -- I lambasted the HRC's support of and partnership with corporations that harm people and harm the planet.

(Link:
http://virtualsoapbox.wordpress.com/
2009/10/17/an-open-letter-to-joe-solmonese/)

My open letter did an awful lot of good, because more than a year later I saw the same old full-page corporate ads in HRC's members' magazine -- PLUS a full-page ad for British Petroleum.

More on that here:

http://open.salon.com/blog/sacrob/
2011/06/14/assorted_shit_gay_pride_month_edition

Of course, those of us who complain about the corporatization of the "LGBT" "community" are just dismissed as cranks, and lectured that we "NEED" the corporations -- when in reality, we're just like a bunch of frogs in a pot that don't notice the gradually boiling water until it's too late and we're all cooked.
It is the nature of the Establishment to attempt to co-opt identity-based opposition groups, particularly wealthy and influential members of said groups. The Romans did this all the time after they conquered a province. They would co-opt and integrate the ruling elite of the conquered province, with the Roman ruling elite, by granting them estates, Roman citizenship, rights to run for the Roman Senate, the right to have procosular and magisterial positions in the gvt and Legions and the like.

All imperialists since Rome have followed this. Its part of "Divide et Imperium." You not only have to divide and conquer, but also co-opt and integrate former opponents into the system, such that their "leaders" can be used to manage the "hoi polloi" beneath them.

Look at the Austrian Empire. They took over countless non-German provinces in Europe. But then they would make the ruling elite of let's say, Croatia, and make them nobles in the Habsburg court. Then they would use these Croatian Nobles to put-down, suppress and oppress the common folk of Croatia, and prevent them from launching a revolution or rebellion or democratic movement aimed at home-rule or self-determination. The Croatian nobility would have more to gain from Austrian domination, than from self-rule and self-determination and it was through such methods that Croatia became, gradually, enslaved.

Its the same thing with all identity-based movements, I suspect, even, with the gay rights movement.

If the big corporations can co-opt the gay rights movement, then the image of the Establishment as liberal and just is preserved. There are fewer people rocking the boat. And the essential and pervasive economic injustice of the system is maintained, because the working classes and lower middle classes as well as the poor, are thus denied of potential allies among the higher orders.

Its a big game of control.
I have also heard fro pals at top Fortune 500 companies, that white homosexuals are prefered for many white collar jobs, because it allows the company to maintain their conformance with Federal diversity guidelines, while not presenting an image, that many claim, "is too urban."

In my opinion, this is a cynical manipulation of affirmative action policies, too.
quite a nuanced and gutsy story ps-i'm a philadelphian by birth, too r.
Yes it's a game of control, but we're in no way obliged to play.

It's the downside of the gay rights mobement. back in the day it was impossible for all but the boho fringe to be out. Now Republicans can't stay in. The closet is OVER. The result is we've become a targeted consumer market.

Just remember -- we're not obliged to buy any of their shit.

Ever.
Yup. We can fight the corporate Borg that seeks to assimilate us.

We can withhold our dollars, for sure, do our part to starve the beast. We can avoid giving money to corporations that cause harm and we can avoid giving money to "LGBT" groups that purport to benefit us but in reality do not. (I haven't given HRC a penny since I discovered which corporations HRC shamelessly partners with.) We can boycott gay "pride" events that only sell us out.

We can boycott bars, which do the "LGBT" "community" more harm than good (even if we're conducting just a one-man or one-woman boycott).

We can stop worshipping politicians, like Obama & Co., who assert that they're doing us great favors when in reality they are only throwing us table scraps -- and when in reality we shouldn't have to practically beg for their scraps, but should have full equality NOW, which the U.S. Constitution guarantees us.

We aren't powerless. Each of us can do his or her part, including calling out those who purport to be helping the "LGBT" "community" but who only selfishly sell it -- us -- out.
It seems to me that as oppressions are lifted, persons who once identified as "gay & oppressed" are now free to self-identify as gay&corporate" or "gay&Latino" or "gay&pro-marriage" or "gay&Asian&anti-marriage&feminist". A purely sexual oppression-based political identity branches outward into many hybrid forms, as once-marginalized participants enjoy increasing freedom to embrace diverse cultural sympathies and complex, knottier, more ambivalent cultural identities.
It's kind of creepy what's happened to the gay movement in the U.S. and elsewhere. Absorption is hardly unique to gay rights, but it's been rather rapid in this case. A friend who worked with HRC tells me they get a lot of their priorities from a marketing survey that targets the buying habits of LGBT people, and that's sponsored by vodka companies. It also contains lots of questions about household, relationship and work status, educational level, involvement in and ranking of issues in importance...but it leaves one wondering whether what is being advocated for is human rights or consumer rights.
Rated.
You acting as if we weren't always absorbed.

Back in the day if you had money you could live exactly as you liked. You just didn't call who you were by its right name.

Tjose who did lived in the streets. Then one night the streets revolted and those who had money started calling themselevs by their right name.
Professional politics, meanwhile continued as it always has with its blatant mendacity.
Wonderful to read this.
Great post. I know just what you mean. It is all political and money driven here in Houston as well.
Robert Crook, President Buchanan lived what we would today call an "out lifestyle". He openly lived with a Senator who was openly mocked as "nancy".

Tommi, I don't deny your right to try to co-opt the word queer, but as a straight white man, let me tell you, I just tune out anything where "queer" is unironically.

The day I can call you queer without it being an insult, then let's talk.