rm | (no subject)

I don't live in town, but I'd come if I did.

Ditto. :)

I volunteer to make and bring my famous corn dogs.

Because really, what would a gay activism fundraising party be without corn dogs?

(sorry, but man, sometimes, you just gotta take those once in a lifetime opportunities to utter sentences that weird).

Seriously though, you rock, and at the moment, I am thinking right at the beginning of April, of course, as my roommate hasn't even heard about this yet, there are logistics to consider.

Well, I'm going to be away April 8-11, but if I can't bring corn dogs, I'll send a check.

And everyone, male or female, gay or straight or bi or trans, young or old, carnivorous or omnivorous, loves corn dogs. If anyone needs cover, we can call it kitsch. Is kitsch still in?

I think so. And I was definitely thinking prior to your trip, like very first weekend in April (like the 2nd or 3rd).

If I had the cash for tickets to NYC, I'd just send that instead.

My years as a bisexual activist taught me that the HRC are the Republican right-wing assimilationists of the lot, despite their size. They occasionally remember to add "bisexual and transgender" to their documents, but almost never to their policies. They favor assimilationism and "we're just like you - we're white church-going Republicans who ski and drive Volvos, it's just that our daughter is a lesbian" (and that's almost a direct quote from an ad campaign a few years ago) philosophy. They refused to work with us at Anything That Moves - at the time we were one of the largest bisexual nonprofits and the only national/international published voice of bisexuality - because our name sounded too much like sex. Sex isn't something the HRC wants to admit that gay people have, you see; it scares Republicans.

Also, the HRC is still dealing with the financial aftermath of the March on Washington and may still be under investigation by the Feds for having lost a lot of the money they brought in.

The HRC has admitted that it supports the scientifically inaccurate "we were born this way, we can't help being gay" stance (which coincedentally leaves bi and trans folks and people who choose way out in the cold) because surveys show more Middle American voters feel "sorry" for gays and lesbians if it's something you were born with, like a birth defect. I can understand a conservative political strategy in some cases, but they've got the nerve to ask bi and trans organisations for money to support this stuff which patently won't help us. (Also, I believe in choice, and I don't want middle America's pity for liking girls as well as guys.)

So I'm more inclined to support Lambda, who've been much better about supporting bi/trans/freaky queer folks instead of just the ones who are socially acceptable these days, and whose finances I'm more inclined to trust.

I have to say, I've been angry at HRC and a lot of other gay activists for being angry at Newsom because this "wasn't the right time". Despite my incredibly pragmatic bent (whatever works), it was never going to be the right time, and now that Newsome has created this rather insane momentum/moment in time, it is time to get the hell on board, and when I see folks not doing that, I am peeved, peeved, peeved.

I love Lamdba legal to death, I just feel like in addition to the legal bills, I want to get behind educating people about the entire situation -- from "gays are not scary" to "this is what ammending the constitution means to our national identity" -- which isn't really LL's department.

Maybe split the fungs between them and GLAAD?

GLAAD has done good work both in defense and "offensive" education and programs for years. They already have some good marriage stuff available on their Web site. I'm a fan. HRC tends to concentrate most on working in DC on legislation, although GLAAD and IGLHRC also do some lobbying. (IGLHRC is an international-targeted org defending queer rights in other countries, based in the US, and working on stuff like asylum issues.)

Thank you for being coherent and useful, even in the face of my truly mind-boggling typing skills.

I would try try try very very hard to attend.

As for the legal group thing, I don't know enough about either, so whoever you deem appropriate would be fine by me. I trust your judgment.

I think it's a smashingly cool idea and wish I was around to make tarts.

While I know my tartness (heh) cannot compare, I can, in fact reproduce tarts in your honor if you'd care to share the recipe. It would be apropo, at the very least.

I've got an exquisitely simple chocolate recipe at home I'll dig up. You could either make one pie, or a number of little ones.

little pies!

Cool idea! I honestly don't often give money for political causes, and I'm usually much more passionate when it comes to environmental issues. Something about this however, prehaps because it's a constitutional amendment rather than just pernicious policy, has me eager to give of my time and energy. I have to agree with one of the other posters, if I had the money for a ticket to NYC, it'd be better spent on a donation. However, it is a *VERY* cool idea. Mind if I shamelessly steal it and do similarly in my city?

Hardly an original ideas -- many orgs fundraise in this way, but yes, please do -- as most of my friends are broke, Ia m encouraing people to bring those jars of change they never turn into bills -- I'll do the work and get it to the orgs in question.