Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 6:03 AM
Mon Nov 30
18 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/12/09
10/12/09
Grammatically, the shirt may be a mess. Gay people are not illegal, nor is queerness our sole identity. But it gives the option to elaborate: "legalize gay...marriage" or "legalize gay...adoption" or "legalize gay...tax rights." I can think of so many nouns to go after the adjective that I find these shirts enjoyable and conversation starters, especially in my small town in Virginia.
10/12/09
10/11/09
Until I see POC/non-White LGBTQI people represented more fully in the gay marriage debate, I'm not impressed.
Also, I think the American Apparel "legalize gay" shirts are stupid because:
1) they support a "faux-liberal" company that gladly objectifies and sexualizes women and youth- yes, it's just a shirt, but as consumer citizens, we vote with our dollars, and those dollars support patriarchal notions of women's and youths' sexuality.
2) "gay" so... Gay people are illegal? Or does it refer to gay marriage? Either way, it is problematic because it is on the same level as referring to gay individuals as "gays," thus assuming that their sexual orientation is the entirety of their identity. You don't refer to a Black person as "a Black"- why would you refer to gay people as "a gay?"
Just saying.
10/12/09
it is pretty condescending to say that the few poc you see in those twelve pictures (which are hardly representative of the march) are merely tokens at diversity. this isnt a republican fundraising convention. lgbtq poc have just as much (if not more) at stake as white lgbtq. no one was bussed in and forced to stand next to white people for the camera; every poc who was there was there for the exact same reason as the white marchers, because they want equal protection under the law regardless of sexual orientation. while white men may have the privilege of being the face of the movement, they are in no way representative of it and to imply that the poc who took to the streets today were tokens is to deny their agency. if you want to see representations of poc in the gay community then you should have been there today. MANY poc were marching in the rank-and-file (many more than these pictures would suggest, esp. considering half of them are not crowd scenes). and the organizers obviously had the diversity of the gay community in mind when they planned the thing. there were over 30 people who delivered speeches in front of the capital and they represented a wide and inclusive range of racial/gender/religious/class identities.
you raise good points, there needs to be a greater effort by mainstream gay activists to include poc AND transgendered people, but your criticisms ring hollow because you're resting on preconceived notions and not actually critiquing this event in particular. you're never going to be impressed unless you bother to look.
although i totally agree about the legalize gay shirts. i hated how many people were wearing them.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/12/09
10/11/09
I've officially watched too much Arrested Development when I wanted to chant "We're here, we're queer, we wanna get married on the ocean!"
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
@dcdulce:
10/12/09
However, something tells me plenty of homophobic people would be fine if interracial marriage was banned, too.
10/11/09
I was there! One of the best parts was at the beginning when everybody cheered at the rainbow that hovered over our heads. It was a good way to spend my birthday. :)
10/11/09
10/11/09
Damn you for destroying America, guys.
10/11/09
10/11/09
I have cousins that live in DC and they'll confirm the fact that sometimes it totally sucks to have no say in national politics. It's pretty much a political no man's land - actually they call it "political purgatory." But at the same time, I think DCers have an especially important/interesting role in passing legislation if only by protesting and voicing their opinions. I just really hope that they're finally given a vote in Congress (and the funny thing about that is how Republicans are willing to give DC a congressman so long as Utah gets one more).
10/11/09
12/28/08
When I divorced my ex that was put in our custody order that neither one of us could have people staying with us if the children were there. We had to be married to the person.
I ended up being a royal bitch about it and taking my ex back to court over his girlfriend (they eventually married) as I didn't care that they were living together and I even allowed the kids to go over for their overnight visitation as I thought the order was silly. When I went stupid was my children coming home and telling me that they were sleeping in the bed with the two idiots and they were having sex while my children were WATCHING. I totally lost it then and hauled him back into court and asked the judge to order that he not have any overnight visits until he could adequately have room for the children and his girlfriend either was not there OR that the kids would never be subjected to what they had seen.
12/29/08
12/28/08
12/28/08
12/28/08
I mean, did he ask that the courts not allow her and her partner to be together when the children are there? If yes, that dad has some issues. If not, the courts are really stepping over a line. Even bigger than the gay rights issues, that becomes a personal freedom issue that affects all parents.
12/28/08
12/28/08
12/28/08
12/28/08
12/28/08
12/28/08