Orlando Shooting Victim’s Mother Gives the Heartbreaking, Angry, Eloquent Must-Watch Speech of the DNC
Bearing witness is often painful, but it is essential if we are to understand how terrible things come to pass. Listening to survivors testifying about their loss sometimes gives us the strength to fight so that the kinds of tragedies they’ve suffered never happen again.
For a few hours on Wednesday night, the Democratic National Convention became a place for survivors to bear witness The speakers included Jamie Dorff, whose husband was killed in action in Iraq; Erica Smegielski, the daughter of the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School who was murdered trying to protect her students from a gunman’s rampage; and Christine Leoninen, the mother of Christopher “Drew” Leoninen, who was killed in the June 12 massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida.
The Path to 2016’s Incredibly LGBTQ-Friendly Democratic Platform Began in 1972
In 2016, no constituency of the Democratic Party has more reason to want to reaffirm and extend the legacy of President Barack Obama than LGBTQ Americans. What Lyndon Johnson was to black civil rights, Obama has been to LGBTQ civil rights. The breakthrough—including the fall of DADT, the securing of marriage equality, and transgender-inclusive policies adopted by federal agencies—came faster than many expected. Yet the roots of this triumphant, if precarious, moment lie nearly half a century ago, during the 1972 presidential election—the first one after the Stonewall uprising—when the two major U.S. political parties first diverged on social issues.
That July, the Democratic Party allowed both a lesbian and a gay man to speak from the podium at its presidential nominating convention about being gay. Forty-four years and 11 presidential elections later, the Republicans last week made it halfway to that mark with Peter Thiel, who, though openly gay,actively minimized his sexuality in his address. Meanwhile, Democrats will make history again this Thursday with the first transgender convention speaker.
The AbFab Movie Isn’t a Supersized TV Episode. It’s a Mash Note to the Show’s Worldview.
The first three episodes of Absolutely Fabulous, which aired in Britain in November 1992, were titled “Fashion,” “Fat,” and “France.” That those words also accurately describe the themes of Absolutely Fabulous: The Movie, which opened in the U.S. this weekend, could be seen as a sign of creative stagnation, a sad commentary on a show that never really expanded its worldview. It could also mean that when Jennifer Saunders created useless publicist Edina Monson (played by Saunders), her constant companion Patsy Stone (Joanna Lumley), daughter Saffron (Julia Sawalha), and assistant Bubble (Jane Horrocks) and plopped them into a seething cauldron of PR, fame, and fantasy, she hit upon a universal fascination—a timeless exploration of the most fraught topics of our time.
The truth is probably somewhere in between. Absolutely Fabulous was rarely laugh-out-loud funny—at least to me, and I consider myself a fan—but it was unmissable because it was reliably fearless and shocking in its willingness to question the values of our age. Even after 24 years, 39 TV episodes, and a movie, I’m still not entirely sure if it has been poking politically incorrect fun at a pair of pathetic middle-aged women who are desperate to seem hipper and younger than they are, or if it’s an exposé of the hypocrisy of a society that is obsessed with fame, consumerism, and bad behavior but hates anyone who admits to seeking the first and enjoying the last two.
Trump’s Pro-LGBTQ Rhetoric Is a New Twist on an Old GOP Tactic
On July 21, when Donald Trump, in his GOP nomination acceptance speech, said that he would “protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology,” it wasn’t particularly surprising that he would make such an appeal. Yes, Trump’s running mate Mike Pence has a particularly distinguished history of attacking LGBTQ people. Yes, the party passed, with this convention, a brutally anti-LGBTQ platform. Yes, Trump, while claiming to protect LGBTQ people, has made targeting Latino and Muslim members of that same community a keystone of his campaign. And yes, the modern GOP has made attacking LGBTQ people one of its signature issues.
But the GOP’s attempted romance of the working class through the last several decades shows us that the party is perfectly fine with claiming support for a group while openly attacking it.
The Looking Finale Isn’t Good—but the Show Was Great for Gay Art
When Looking premiered back in 2014, you could say I found it politically troubling. Those issues faded somewhat in Season 2; but by then, I had decided that politics aside, the earnest tone and gauzy approach of director Andrew Haigh and writer Michael Lannan just weren’t for me. If you like misty shots of the San Francisco skyline and close-ups of Jonathan Groff’s variations on a pained smile, you may enjoy Looking: The Movie, the show’s feature-length finale airing Saturday on HBO.
The film follows our hero Patrick during a visit to town for a wedding after a nine-month absence in Denver. Along the way, there’s copious dimestore wisdom on relationships and finding “something close to adulthood,” and plenty of moments where folks like Richie (Raúl Castillo) or a 22-year-old trick of Patrick’s named Jimmy (Michael Rosen) impregnate pauses with unbearably freighted clichés. The latter, on playing nicely with exes: “You have to bury your dead real good, you know? So they don’t come back and haunt you.” Jimmy, we’re meant to understand, has more going on than a great ass, which we watch Patrick devour in the film’s single—but truly great—sex scene.
Again, whether or not such lines make you groan at your screen is a matter of taste. But if there’s anything interesting about this film, it’s how self-aware it is about the division in reception, especially in terms of the ideological charges leveled against it by haters like me. I had to admire the writers for including—in a logic-vexing scene where Patrick attempts to “close a chapter” by having coffee with his philandering but somehow here morally superior old boss Kevin (Russell Tovey)—criticisms of the show in the guise of reviews of the pair’s failing smartphone app: “Stereotype, cliché-ridden dross,” and “What the fuck is the point?” And later, at a drunken post-nuptials party, there’s a nasty exchange between Patrick and Richie’s queer-blogger boyfriend, “leader of the gay thought police” Brady (Chris Perfetti). It made me LOL with its literal portrayal of the debate over gay representation that’s surrounded the series.
Brady: Is your femmephobia a joke?
Patrick: It’s OK, you can say it. It’s not like it’s the first time you’ve implied that I’m everything that’s wrong with the gay community. … I promise to read more of your articles and hope that one day I can finally learn how to be gay and be as perfectly adjusted as you!
Appreciate the clicks, pato.
On the point of marriage, the film deserves credit for attempting to explore many queer people’s ambivalence around taking part in such a conservative institution, even if the various positions are rather bluntly rendered. Points also for throwing something of a grappling hook to gay political history, with Patrick briefly acknowledging “all those people that came before us that actually had to struggle against something” and legendary activist Cleve Jones making a cameo during the wedding toasts to speak of the need to teach queer youth that “their lives do matter.” (Speaking of cameos, Tyne Daly’s turn as a City Hall marriage officiant provides the only eddy in a steady stream of “how to relationship” bromides that’s genuinely affecting.) Even these small gestures made this visit to Looking-land feel much more connected to the gay world I live in than it had before.
But overall, the stakes of the narrative remain too low to justify the reverence with which they’re treated. Aside from Patrick’s continuing to be a manipulative love tornado, Dom’s (Murray Bartlett) choice to focus on career over sex for a spell is presented as a major conflict point, and Agustín (Frankie J. Alvarez), who finds himself with steady job and a great relationship, actually says the words: “I’m not who I thought I’d be, and that’s tough for me to take.” In a story where apparently the bravest thing a person can do is move to another major city for another good job, this kind of hand-wringing is also tough to take.
Indeed, the only person whose life feels in any way worth exploring is Richie. We hear a snippet about his troubled relationship with his father, and Castillo’s superior acting skills make the character’s emotional travails feel more meaningful. As the film lost itself in Patrick’s puppy-dog eyes, I found myself wondering how the series might have turned out differently had it been told from Richie’s point-of-view, with Patrick as an occasional interruption and Agustín ideally appearing not at all. Who knows? Given that this film represents HBO’s no-hard-feelings farewell to the series, I doubt we’ll get to see a spin-off; but a show about the journeys of a handsome salon-truck owner is something I’d give a shot.
In any case, with Looking at an end, it’s worth asking what we found. Because precious few examples exist in the world, any art that seriously attempts to represent the gay experience will be asked to do an unfair amount of work, to meet the incommensurable expectations of an innumerable audience. For some, Looking was a gorgeous and subtle portrait of a specific collection of flawed humans by the bay. To others, all those moody hues were imbued with tropes too familiar and grating to ignore. And still others found it, well, boring. Haigh, Lannan, and company could never hope to satisfy us all.
In the final analysis, though, I’m glad the show existed. During Patrick and Brady’s catfight, galpal Doris (Lauren Weedman) chimes in with a helpful comment: “I love it when gays fight with other gays about being gays.” This seems intended as a blanket dismissal of criticisms like mine (and the rejoinders to them), but I actually think Doris is onto something. Anything that gets queer people thinking about our place in the larger culture, rather than just ambling passively through it, cannot be all bad. In fact, starting those fights could be seen as a kind of activism, a necessary spur to get us moving toward the queerer future—one with space enough for the Patricks and the Bradys—we’re all looking for.
Disclosure: Slate editor Julia Turner's husband works on the show.
Peter Thiel Says Trans Bathroom Access Is a Distraction
Peter Thiel, the openly gay PayPal co-founder and Silicon Valley entrepreneur who spent almost a decade plotting the destruction of Gawker for publishing the open secret of his sexual orientation in 2007, told the crowd at the Republican National Convention Thursday night that personal identity doesn’t matter all that much. Instead of worrying about protecting marginalized Americans from identity-based violence and discrimination, Thiel suggested, we should be focusing on the economy and getting to Mars.
Here’s the transcript:
When I was a kid, the great debate was about how to defeat the Soviet Union. And we won. Now we are told that the great debate is about who gets to use which bathroom. This is a distraction from our real problems. Who cares? Of course, every American has a unique identity. I am proud to be gay. I’m proud to be a Republican. But most of all, I am proud to be an American. I don’t pretend to agree with every plank in our party’s platform, but fake culture wars only distract us from our economic decline. And nobody in this race is being honest about it except Donald Trump.
Who cares! In the bathroom line, Thiel is referring to the ongoing battle over the right of transgender people to use gendered facilities that comport with their identities. A generous reading of his intent here, given his vocal libertarianism, is that the state shouldn’t be involved in policing where people pee. With this, trans folks and their supporters would generally agree. The trouble is, plenty of people, both in the government and on the street, are extremely interested in policing, often violently, bathroom use and many other private activities that are part of LGBTQ lives. Which is why nondiscrimination laws—like the one in Charlotte that North Carolina’s HB2 overruled—are so necessary. Until such protections are in place, “fake culture wars” are very real indeed.
Of course, all the arrogance of this statement really proves is that Thiel lives in a reality-disrupting cocoon of privilege. Only in the last few years could a white gay man like him feel secure enough in American society to think that identity-based discrimination isn’t a “real problem.” Luckily, most of the LGBTQ community isn’t so blind.
Donald Trump Just Promised to Protect LGBTQ People—Don’t Believe Him
On Thursday night at the Republican National Convention, Donald Trump took a moment in his nomination acceptance speech to address an unlikely constituency: LGBTQ Americans. In a segment of the remarks focused on fighting ISIS and terrorism, Trump invoked the June 12 massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, claiming that he would “protect” queer people from similar violence:
Only weeks ago, in Orlando, Florida, 49 wonderful Americans were savagely murdered by an Islamic terrorist. This time, the terrorist targeted LGBTQ community. No good. And we're going to stop it. As your president, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology. Believe me! And I have to say as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said. Thank you.
This statement, and the cheers in the room, are simply galling, not least because Trump’s party just approved a virulently anti-LGBTQ platform, including everything from overturning marriage equality to supporting dangerous "conversion therapy" and anti-trans bathroom laws. But it’s a rhetorical move Trump has been attempting since the days after the attack, when—after thanking supporters for “the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism”—he argued that queer people should support him, our true “friend,” over Hillary Clinton because she isn’t an Islamophobic racist.
I’ve explained at length why this logic is both fallacious and offensive, but it’s worth a quick revisit here, lest RNC viewers be tempted to give credit to Trump or his party for appearing to support LGBT people. For one thing, the large majority of the “wonderful Americans” slaughtered at Pulse were Latino, some undocumented. Trump has spent much of his campaign demeaning, threatening deportation to, and promising to build a wall against such people. Additionally, investigations have revealed that Omar Mateen was almost certainly not connected to any actual “Islamic terrorist” group; indeed, his invocation of ISIS during the attack appears to have been a gambit for attention more than a statement of genuine affiliation. And finally, the idea that a Republican president is going to protect LGBTQ people from “oppression” is, in a word, laughable. In fact, while homophobia in certain parts of Muslim culture is a real problem, queer Americans don't need to look to a “hateful foreign ideology” to find something to fear. We have more than enough homophobia and transphobia to deal with right here at home—much of it emanating from the white, straight, nominally Christian people who make up Trump’s base.
Trump says he'll protect LGBT citizens from "hateful foreign ideology." Can't include hateful domestic ideology, cause that's his base— Joe Sudbay (@JoeSudbay) July 21, 2016
So yeah, you’ll have to forgive me if I don’t put much stock in the idea of a President Trump as queer savior. It’s disgusting—if not surprising—that he’d exploit the memory of our murdered brothers and sisters to try and turn queer people against Muslims. But thankfully, the effort is doomed: LGBTQ people are familiar, painfully so, with what happens when a group of people are demonized as a threat to the safety of the nation. It’s not Muslims we need protecting from; it’s charismatic, prevaricating bigots like Trump.
Why Gay Parents Should Share Gay Culture With Their Children
Hey, Daddy! is a monthly column exploring the joys and struggles of parenting from a gay father’s perspective. Got a topic idea or question for Daddy?Send your letter along to email@example.com.
Is gay culture dead or dying, as so many seem to think? Consider this:
On the 12-foot high, east wall of our kitchen sit nine symmetrically arranged, framed posters from old sheet music. Long-dead celebrities and utterly forgotten songs are the order of the day: Ever heard of “Ritzi Mitzi,” “Little Girl,” or “Running Between the Rain-Drops” (where even the hyphen bespeaks the song’s ancient provenance)? Your eye will soon be drawn to the center square, where “Nevertheless” (from the musical Three Little Words) depicts a high-kicking Vera-Ellen dancing alongside a perfectly balanced Fred Astaire. Not since Paul Lynde on Hollywood Squares has a center square been so gay.
David, my husband, had put these posters up some years ago, and I never thought much of them—until a recent conversation with some neighbors about how assimilated we were. Raising kids and hanging out in our West Philadelphia community with their parents, it seemed we had bored the gay away, settling comfortably into our comfortably progressive middle-class trappings. But then one of them said: “You have show tunes on your kitchen wall.” Until then, neither David nor I had really considered the seepage of our backgrounds—which are markedly different from each other’s—into our not-quite-post-gay lives. Once that sentence had been spoken, though, I started thinking about the small ways that our lives, and our parenting, have differed from those of our straight friends—because there really still is something we can call “gay culture.”
Watch the Powerful Transgender Ad That Will Air on Fox News When Trump Accepts the GOP Nomination
The commercials that play during coverage of the party conventions make a good case for the fast-forward button being the greatest invention since the TV remote control emerged from some genius’s head. Ads that run in this kind of programming typically tout shady products, iffy apps, and services that you hope you’ll never need to take advantage of. But on Thursday night, during Fox News’ primetime coverage of the Republican National Convention, right around the time when presidential nominee Donald Trump is expected to speak, a spot will run that could cause viewers to hit pause and maybe even rewind. Created by the Movement Advancement Project and funded by Fairness USA, the ad is intended to communicate the challenges transgender people face using public restrooms in the age of anti-trans bathroom bills.
The ad features a transgender woman from North Carolina, home of HB2, a rabidly anti-LGBTQ law that my colleague Mark Joseph Stern described as “vicious, shameful, and unconstitutional.” Among other nasty provisions, HB2 prohibits trans people from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity. This is such a barbarous restriction that it’s tough to imagine what it would feel like to be on the receiving end that message. The commercial attempts to convey exactly that.
Caitlyn Jenner Calls Out Her Fellow Republicans on Trans Issues, Bathroom Bills
Now we know how Caitlyn Jenner sounds when she’s talking to family. I’m not talking about Kardashians and Jenners—we’ve seen plenty of those interactions on her reality show, I Am Cait—but, rather, her fellow Republicans. Jenner isn’t part of the official program of the Republican National Convention, but she’s in Cleveland, and she made an appearance at Wednesday’s morning’s Big Tent Brunch, hosted by the American Unity Fund, a conservative pro-LGBTQ group.
In a 25-minute Q&A with American Unity Fund President Margaret Hoover, Jenner was impressively forthright, especially on the subject of anti-trans bathroom bills.