New Hope to End Genocide

From Huffington Post, by Andrew Slack

Andrew Slack is Executive Director of the the Harry Potter Alliance, which takes a creative approach to activism by mobilizing thousands of kids to spread love and fight for justice in the spirit of the Harry Potter novels. The HP Alliance has been featured in over 200 US publications including Time Magazine, the LA Times, and the front covers of both the Chicago Tribune Business Section and Politico Newspaper.

In the 1977 classic Star Wars: A New Hope, Obi Wan Kenobi shudders just moments after Darth Vader destroys the planet of Alderaan. When Luke asks his mentor what's wrong, Obi Wan replies, "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened."

A real world disturbance happened in the 1994 Rwandan genocide that claimed the lives of over 800,000 innocent people. In the last week we have reached the fifteenth anniversary of this horror when Bill Clinton and his administration did hear those "millions of voices crying out in terror" and allowed them to be silenced.

These calculated decisions by our leaders in Washington coupled by a media obsessed with OJ Simpson led to the perverse reality that a good friend of mine from Rwanda lived through. At the time, her one source of news for what was happening in her country was phone calls from family members saying goodbye and asking why the international community had abandoned them. Some of them were murdered while they were on the phone with her.

While 1994 was the summer after Schindler's List won best movie, the Clinton administration and our allies showed great disregard to the memory of those killed in the Holocaust by failing to protect the millions at dire risk and the more than 800,000 that were killed in Rwanda.

On this fifteenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, will the Obama administration show similar disregard to those killed in Rwanda by failing to protect the millions at imminent risk in Darfur? In short, does the Obama administration plan to commemorate the Rwandan genocide by letting another innocent 1,000,000 Africans die?

When I read the testimony of Rwandan survivorsat this site, such as the story of a young Rwandan woman who was infected with HIV after being gang raped at the age of five, of young men who as children laid next to their parents' corpses pretending to be dead, I am reminded that none of these people are mere statistics. Their tales of horror and their ongoing courage to rebuild their nation is a humbling reminder to prevent these stories of brutality from continuing in Darfur while honoring these brave survivors of genocide in Rwanda.

In order to show Rwandans the world over that the international community of young people will not forget what happened while sharing their hope for their nations future,
the Harry Potter Alliance partnered with a pretty interesting group called the Nerdfighters, and in one week our members made over 300 videos in which they lit a "candle of hope" for Rwanda. Through Candles For Rwanda, these videos will be shown alongside a video of celebrities, world leaders, and leading activists (their video can be seen here) lighting candles of hope as well. Rwandans the world over will see these videos and the best of them will be shown on July 16, during the closing ceremony of the fifteenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide in Rwanda's capital of Kigali.

Through these videos and thousands of book donations meant for a youth village in Rwanda I have seen first hand young people across our world taking the small steps within their power to commemorate the genocide in Rwanda and support the survivors. President Obama can do much more. Putting forward a comprehensive plan to work with our allies to apprehend the killers from the genocide who are hiding in the US, UK, France, and who continue their killing spree in Congo with plans to return to Rwanda to 'finish what they started' is an essential step. But another essential step is that the President authenticate his April 7 statement on the fifteen year anniversary of the Rwandan genocide where he says "the memory of these events also deepens our commitment to act when faced with genocide and to work with partners around the world to prevent future atrocities." As of now, John Prendergast and Jim Wallis have noted that the US policy towards Darfur leaves a great deal to be desired:

What has been missing is America's leadership in forging a coalition that can both negotiate with and pressure Sudan to seek peace in Darfur as well as implement the existing peace agreement for the South. Building this coalition for peace should be Mr. Obama's objective.

In the last month, the genocide in Darfur has shifted to a new phase of horror for the Darfuri people. Over 13 aid groups have been evacuated and over 1,000,0000 lives hang in the balance. Further, as Sudan's President, Omar al-Bashir continues his current attempt at mass murder, he is once more rallying the support of radical terrorists, meaning that Sudan could easily become a hotbed of terrorist recruitment as it housed Osama bin Laden in the nineties. So to those isolationists who can stomach watching innocent children die under the pretense that we need to care about our own country first, acting now on Darfur is not only a moral imperative, it is a strategic one as well.

But as we look to the fifteenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, there is also a historical imperative. To his credit, President Obama has acknowledged activists for their work on Darfur, finally appointed a special envoy to Sudan, and now Senator John Kerry has arrived in Darfur. But with the exception of Kerry, these were all steps that George Bush took for years. An occasional statement here and there about how "Darfur is in a crisis" is not going to get them out of this new stage of genocide with 1,000,000 lives in imminent danger. The people of Darfur need the US to not forget them as they had Rwandans. In the face of this fifteenth anniversary, the US needs to show what we have learned by leading a coalition of allies to do whatever it takes to get the aid workers back into Darfur and find a point of leverage for peace in all of Sudan. As Prendergast and Wallis note, while this is a moment of potential horror, it is also a moment of great opportunity should the President decide to show that he cares enough, not just to talk, but to act.

The Harry Potter Alliance is working to wake up the President to ending the genocide in Darfur the way Dumbledore's Army woke the world up to Voldemort's return in the Harry Potter novels. Thankfully we are part of a growing worldwide movement. You can join this movement by signing up with us, with the Genocide Intervention Network, and the Save Darfur Coalition. Hopefully the actions of these groups will influence action from advocacy organizations like MoveOn.org as well as attention from the blogosphere -- it's time that some of this country's most politically engaged public health activists and intellectuals start prodding our President to take leadership on a public health crisis of over one 1,000,000 innocent people.

Here are some more simple steps that you can take toward showing our president that he has the political capital to take necessary leadership on this matter of great urgency:

1- Call 1-800-GENOCIDE

2- Text 90822 to send a message about Darfur to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton! Create your own message or text "Take immediate action to restore aid to Darfur!" Send a text every day.

Further, each of us today can help Rwandan survivors with their homes and medical expenses by donating at candlesforrwanda.org where you can also upload a video of yourself lighting a candle of hope.

In order to honor these heroic individuals who survived the Rwandan genocide and that part of humanity itself that was lost as we watched yet another genocide and did nothing to counter it, it is time for us to find appropriate ways to commemorate the fifteen year anniversary of the Rwandan genocide by allowing "the millions of voices [that had] suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced" to finally be heard.

I imagine that if we continued to listen to the whispers of those voices that were silenced in 1994, we may be reminded that people's spirit and love cannot be done away with by machete or starvation -- and that we will allow their spirits to guide us in love toward working towards a world where each of us is revered, not forgotten and left to die needlessly.

As Prendergast and Wallis say:

"When the dust clears and the bodies are buried, burned or left to rot in forsaken camps, the world will mourn for what it did not do. What Darfur needs is not a future apology, but steps today that offer hope."

Hope, a New Hope, is what Obama promised our country and our world. He has until July 16 to commemorate the fifteenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide by showing the world that there will no longer be millions of voices suddenly crying out in terror and then suddenly silenced. The "force" of our world must be restored by listening deeply and acting for the millions of voices crying out in Darfuri refugee camps.

While "Change We Can Believe" includes Obama's wish to change humanity's twentieth century style relationship with the environment and nuclear weapons, it must include changing the twentieth century's pattern of inaction toward the mass murder of civilians and toward a reverence of life and love that speaks to all of our most deeply held values.

Time is of the essence Mr. President. Despite all the problems at home and abroad that you and the leaders of both parties are grappling with, now is the time to look to the people of Rwanda and the people of Darfur and say, Yes We Can. Yes We Can Honor the memory and rebuilding of Rwanda. Yes We Can End Genocide in Darfur.

Writing About Values Boosts Grades for Middle Schoolers

Interesting study.... article by Serena Gordon

When children write about their values, these self-affirmation exercises can help boost grades, new research suggests.

However, the positive effect seems to only translate into higher marks for black students, according to the study, which appears in the April 17 issue of Science.

"This psychological intervention can have a long-term positive impact on children's academic performance and help to close the racial achievement gap," said study author Geoffrey Cohen, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

But, added Cohen, "This is not a silver bullet. The improvements came from the psychological interventions paired with good resources and good teachers."

For this study, Cohen and his colleagues had three groups of seventh-graders: European-American children, high-performing black children and low-performing black children. Each group was split into two, with half receiving the intervention and the other half serving as a control. Each group had between 65 and 75 children.

The intervention was a series of structured writing assignments where the kids were asked to select a value and then write about that value. Each writing assignment took about 15 minutes to complete, and was repeated between three and five times throughout a year.

"What we found is that African-Americans who received the intervention did better academically over the two-year study. Grades improved almost a half a grade point for low-performing African-Americans. The intervention consistently closed the racial achievement gap," said Cohen.

For blacks, the rate of remediation or grade repetition dropped from 18 percent to 5 percent for those children who received the intervention.

One of the ways this type of intervention helps children, according to Cohen, is by reducing stress. "If I have a moment to think about my family, to reflect on what matters to me during an important performance situation -- such as before a test -- the stressful performance situation becomes less stressful, and I think of myself as capable and good," he said.

This type of change in thinking might be especially important for minority students, he said, because they may feel that they'll be judged in a stereotypical way.

"African-Americans might have more stress in school, because they have the extra burden of a stereotype threat. They may worry that they'll be seen by teachers or peers through the negative lens of stereotyping," said Cohen.

And, more good news from this study was that the benefits of the intervention persisted for at least two years. Cohen said that's likely because the intervention breaks the negative downward spiral that's often seen in middle school.

"Because it's a recursive cycle, early outcomes make a huge difference. Recursive cycles are sensitive to initial outcomes, and early experiences have a lasting impact," he said.

Dr. Debra Hollander, chief of psychiatry at Providence Hospital in Southfield, Mich., wasn't surprised that the intervention helped some children improve their grades. "The kids were being asked to be more reflective, to think about what's important to them and what they value. This can help reset where they want to be, and it can empower them," she said.

But, Hollander said she was surprised that the positive effects were only seen in black children, and added that it's something that should be explored further in research.

What's important for parents and educators to take away from this study, she said, is that, "how we interact with one another, and the subtle messages we send, can have a huge impact on children."

For example, Hollander said, when children are struggling in school and their parents just sign them up for tutoring, the kids may interpret that to mean that they can't do well on their own. A better way, she suggested, is to ask your children what they want to accomplish and how you can help them get there.

AALDEF Demands Justice for Iowa Student Disciplined for Protesting English Proficiency Testing

This press release was found at Angry Asian Man, I learned about the story via the Addicted to Race podcast.

Honor student deemed an English Language Learner for declaring Lao as her home language

New York, NY - The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), which is representing Iowa honors student Lori Phanachone, has called for the removal of all references to disciplinary action from her school record after she refused to take an English Language Learner (ELL) test. Ms. Phanachone was mislabeled an English Language Learner (ELL) after naming Lao as her home language.

Khin Mai Aung, the AALDEF staff attorney representing the student, said: "Lori Phanachone is an honor student who has excelled in mainstream classes throughout her life, and happens to speak Lao as her home language. Storm Lake has improperly conflated my client's knowledge of Lao with lack of fluency in English."

The Storm Lake School District, which did not assess Ms. Phanachone's English level when she enrolled two years ago, has since subjected her to a yearly test for ELLs. The 3.98 GPA senior did not receive English as a Second Language or other ELL services before moving to Storm Lake as a sophomore. Since matriculating in Storm Lake, Ms. Phanachone has excelled in advanced courses–all of which were taught in English. This year, she boycotted the yearly ELL test in protest. As a result, Ms. Phanachone was suspended for 3 days and threatened with the loss of National Honor Society membership, exclusion from school activities including the track team, prom and other extracurricular activities, as well as further disciplinary action.

Lori Phanachone said: "Storm Lake labeled me an English Language Learner when I enrolled without even bothering to test me. All I want is to continue my education without the school labeling me unfairly."

Among other things, AALDEF demands that the Storm Lake School District:

* Remove all references to Lori Phanachone's suspension and other disciplinary action from her school records;
* Assure in writing that it will not impose further disciplinary action on her;
* Clarify Storm Lake's procedures for classifying students as ELL upon enrollment;
* Explain how and why Lori Phanachone was classified as an ELL under Storm Lake's classification procedures; and
* Reclassify Lori Phanachone, and other affected students if appropriate under Iowa and federal law, as English proficient.

DN! Video: Decades of Disparity: New Study Underscores Severity of Racial Bias in Drug-Related Law Enforcement

DN! Video: New York Legislature to Vote on Overhauling Draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws

Celebrating Coretta, Who Celebrated Nonviolence--and Stopped Eating Animals

by Stephanie Ernst

This is the day when we annually celebrate the life, spirit, contributions, and philosophy of Martin Luther King Jr. But I'm not going to write about MLK today. I'm going to write, just briefly, about Coretta. Those opposed to the idea of animal rights, those who consider the fight for animal rights to be distinct from and lesser than other social justice movements, and--most clearly--those who consider veganism extreme could learn something from Coretta Scott King.

For more than the last decade of her extraordinary, compassionate, and passionate life, Coretta Scott King was a vegan. Really. Not an "extremist," not a "fanatic," not a "one-note," "single-issue" zealot--just a vegan.

In addition to fighting against racial injustices, Coretta Scott King fought openly and loudly for LGBT rights. She opposed war and violence and championed peace. And for the last 15 years of her life, she improved her own health and life and saved hundreds of animals' lives by refusing to eat their bodies or what came from their bodies.

On her health, she said in Ebony in 2003, "I feel blessed that I was introduced to this lifestyle more than 12 years ago by Dexter. I prefer to eat mostly raw or 'living' foods. The benefits for me are increased energy, a slowing of the aging process, and I have none of the diseases like hypertension, heart disease and diabetes that many people my age seem to get." And Coretta and Martin Luther King's son Dexter, also a vegan and, as noted, the one who introduced his mother to the lifestyle, considers veg*nism the "logical extension" of his father's philosophy of nonviolence, reported Vegetarian Times in 1995 in the write-up of the magazine's interview with him.

Every time someone remarks or implies that vegans are nothing but animal rights "fanatics" or health-obsessed neurotics who care about nothing else, who are vegans to the exclusion of caring about or fighting against any other injustices, one of the many people who comes to mind as proving this wrong is Coretta Scott King. So today I remember and honor not only Martin Luther King Jr. but Coretta Scott King as well. If I must be an extremist or a fanatic simply because I am a vegan, then I am at least happy with the company.

From here.

Martin Luther King taught us all nonviolence. I was told to extend nonviolence to the mother and her calf. -Dick Gregory

Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love. -Martin Luther King Jr.


Cowardice asks the question, "Is it safe?"
Expediency asks the question, "Is it politic?"
Vanity asks the question, "Is it popular?"
But conscience asks the question, "Is it right?"
And there comes a point when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because one's conscience tells one that it is right. -Martin Luther King Jr.

On Huey P. Newton and Martin Luther King, Jr.

On this, the would-be 80th birthday of Martin Luther King, I would like to link you to a 3 minute speech by Mumia Abu Jamal.

Listen to it here.

BBC acts over light-skinned doll

The doll (right) differs from how Upsy Daisy appears in the show (left).

The BBC is to replace a doll based on the Upsy Daisy character from CBeebies TV show In the Night Garden following complaints it is too light-skinned.

Full article here.

Typical white-washing of culture and aiming it at children. Because, they're just kids, yaknow? They're not gonna notice.

Watch A Girl Like Me if you think young girls don't internalize the messages society send them every day. It's only 7 minutes long, but a big damn eye opener if you've never though of it before.

The video can be seen for free here.

Five Things White Activists Should Never Say

What do people think of this write-up? I got it from a livejournal post via facebook.

If I'm to be a white ally, I figure I should take some of the burden off people of color to explain what's wrong with some of the things white people say. With that in mind I've decided to compile a list of things that white people -- specifically, white activists -- should never say.

While reading this list, keep in mind that I'm drawing heavily from my own experience. There are plenty of fucked up things white people can say. However, with one exception I've decided to focus on blatantly racist comments that I've heard first hand. Also, I tend to mention anarchists a lot, because I used to be an anarchist, so I organized with other anarchists. This does not mean that white anarchists have a monopoly on racism. In many cases one could substitute the term social liberal or socialist for anarchist, and the point would still be applicable.

1. "They belong to that religion."

I have yet to visit an activist group with religious homogeneity. That said, in my experience certain religious views are more acceptable among activists than others. If a disproportionate number of the people who hold a religious stance are European or of European descent, the stance is acceptable. So it's okay to be an atheist, a pagan, or a Quaker. If a religious stance doesn't meet this criterion, it tends to be viewed with suspicion.

In the US white activists reserve scorn for the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) that they have for few other religious institutions. It would be outside the scope of this piece to argue that the RCC is good or bad. But I will point out that it's folly to treat Catholics as a monolithic, univocal group that stands opposite of everything activists believe in. Individual Catholics have differences of opinion on pretty much everything, and often membership to the church (as is the case with so many other religious institutions) has more to do with wanting to preserve family or community ties than with adhering to a certain set of doctrines. If white people don't want to alienate people of color from their organizing, they're going to have to learn to show more tolerance for the religions they adhere to.

2. "All nationalism is bad."

The idea that all nationalism, including ethnic nationalism, is bad is often rooted in anarchism, an ideology that was first propounded by European men in the nineteenth century and which since then has drawn more than its fair share of white thinkers. Even if we set this aside, white people who raise the "all nationalism is bad" objection often miss the point that the essence of ethnic nationalism has nothing to do with what anarchists mean by state and everything to do with racial or ethnic identity.

It's important to keep in mind that some people link themselves to a nation in order to express racial or ethnic identity rather than allegiance to a state. If white people can avoid doing this, this doesn't mean that they're all awesome anti-statists; rather it means that they have the privilege of being part of the group that is seen as the default racial or ethnic group. When white activists forget this, it's a disaster in the making. For example, I once saw an activist remove a poster from a wall, simply because it said (when translated), "I am as Puerto Rican as the coquí." The message, which should be obvious to anyone who claims to be anti-racist, has nothing to do with a particular state; it is that one's ethnic identity is something to be proud of.

3. "I know what it's like to face racist oppression; I face oppression too."

No, unless you've experienced racism you do not know what it's like to experience racism.

I used to find this response somewhat confusing. Surely, racist oppression isn't completely disanalogous to other kinds of oppression, right? After all, don't we use much the same vocabulary -- words like privilege, oppression, and intersectionality -- while discussing all kinds of oppression? And can't someone who faces one sort of opression gain insight into another by making a comparison? I think the answer to all these questions is a very cautious yes -- cautious because there's a danger lurking just around the corner. If comparing racist oppression to your oppression helps you realize that something you said or did was racist, then it's probably a good thing that you made the comparison. Even so, before you share your insight with the world you should run it by someone who faces both kinds of oppression, because no matter how oppressed or well-intentioned you may be, you're still coming from a perspective of white privilege and you may be wrong about something crucial. Better yet, start reading the works of people who face multiple kinds of oppression and let them guide you into appropriate analogies.

The danger of white people's comparisons is that often the only "insight" gained from analogy is that because the white people making it are oppressed, they can never be racist. This denies one of the central components of anti-oppression work which is that the oppressed have unique insight into their oppression by virtue of having experienced the oppression, including the ways in which it is disanalogous to other kinds of oppression. This is important, because it may be that it was just these disanalogous elements were at play when you said what you did five minutes ago and that what you said is therefore racist for reasons you don't understand. Not incidentally, the unique knowledge that an oppressed group has is known as the epistemic privilege of the oppressed. If your goal is to eliminate inequality, you don't want to appropriate one of the few kinds of privilege that oppressed people have, do you?

Though many examples of analogies gone wrong could be listed, I'll give only one here -- one that's limited to activist circles. Some activists are inclined to make statements like, "I know what it's like to be black; I'm an anarchist." I think what often happens is that white activists identify one sort of oppression, such as state oppression, as the Big Evil. They don't see that other oppressive forces besides the Big Evil are at work and therefore they fail to see that some people face oppression that they don't comprehend. If you're white and have gone to jail for political reasons, that is unfortunate, but this does not mean you know what it's like to be a person of color. As a white person, you have the privilege of choosing whether or not to engage in political activities that may land you in jail; people of color can abstain from such activities and still end up in jail simply for being people of color. As a white person, you will probably be treated better in jail than a person of color who is your counterpart. As a white person, you don't know what it's like to experience the racist oppression people of color experience outside of jail. As a white person, you don't know what it's like to be a person of color in white activists' space, hearing white people say that they know exactly what it's like to experience racist oppression. In short it is incredibly myopic to think that one point of (apparent) commonality gives white people insight into what it's like to be people of color.

4. "If we focus on this other kind of oppression, racism will disappear."

In the previous section I noted a tendency of white people to fail to see any oppression outside of the oppression they consider the Big Evil. In a related phenomenon white people will, while perhaps acknowledging that orther kinds oppression exist, argue that without the Big Evil other forms of oppression would not exist. Therefore anyone who confronts other kinds of oppression is only treating symptoms; the only cure for society's ills is to fight the Big Evil. The Big Evil could be statism, sexism, or any number of other things, but I'd like to focus on classism, because in my experience it's named as the Big Evil in activist circles more than anything else.

If this piece were about the oppressions I face, you'd see I have a lot to say against classism. However, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to focus on it here. All too often white activists derail conversations about racism by bringing up classism. The problem with white activists' saying that racism reduces to classism is that it is an attempt to keep people of color from directly confronting their oppression so that they will instead confront an oppression that directly affects white people.

To support the claim that racism reduces to classism some white activists point out that in the US at least racist institutions were established as a part of divide-and-conquer scheme to keep the working class from rising up against the upper class. Setting aside the fact that this gives an account of only some racist insitutions (the expansion that drove Native Americans west, for example, was already well underway), the argument presupposes that if working class white people had not bought into the view that they were superior to their black counterparts, they may have succeeded in revolting against the upper class. In other words white people's racism prevented the demise of classism. I do not mean to say that we should make a reversal and say that generally speaking classism is reducible to racism. However, I do mean to say that racism is a problem in its own right.

5. "There are no people of color in our activist group; let's go to a meeting of people of color and invite them to join our group."

Many white activists have the impression that they have arrived. They think they no longer have any racist bullshit they need to work on. Therefore if people of a particular racial or ethnic group don't want to work with them, it must be because they have yet to be informed the awesomeness that is their group of white activists.

There's a reason I'm putting this remark last. I hope that after even a small sampling of racist comments white activists make -- there are many others that aren't included here -- it's apparent just how ridiculous it is to think that the only matter keeping people of various ethnic and racial minorities out of a given activist group is a lack of information. If an organization has disproportionately few people of color as members, it's often because people of color don't see how it benefits them, and that is often because the organization has racist tendencies that it has yet to address.

Perhaps the bigger problem with this remark is that it's blatantly tokenizing. The people who make it aren't primarily interested in forming a diverse coalition to confront the problems that people of color face; if they were, they'd visit the meeting of the people of color regularly and ask them how they could help without expecting glory for themselves or their organization. Instead they want to use people of color to make their activist group more diverse. They are making one more thing -- segregation itself! -- the responsibility of people of color.

Condoms Behind the Counter - But Only in Black Neighborhoods

The NAACP and partner organizations are taking on drugstore chain CVS for consistently providing less service and quality to customers in African American neighborhoods. Among the ways CVS discriminates against its African American customers? Keeping condoms locked up in predominantly black neighborhoods, but not predominantly white neighborhoods.

Keeping condoms behind the counter or otherwise locked up creates a barrier to access and unnecessarily draws attention to the person purchasing condoms - which may inhibit them from making the purchase. In cities across the United States African Americans continue to become infected with HIV at rates vastly higher than those among white people. Our country cannot afford for CVS's policies to keep anyone from getting the condoms they need.

Check out the Cure CVS Now website for information and how you can take action.

"More Queer People Murdered. Lesbian and Gay Organizations Seem to Care Less"

By Beau Vyne of BB! News/ BB! Chicago
Bash Back Blog

New Orleans Police discovered the bodies of three young, Black, Queer people in a 7th ward house Saturday. The three people, one of whom was gender variant, were all shot to death in the house sometime around 3 or 4am Thursday. Mainstream media and the Police are as of now ignoring the fact that the three people were queer and possibly trans. However, Facebook groups devoted to the three and comments on news sites, are raising interesting questions by Queer people of color as to why large Lesbian and Gay organizations are ignoring this. Many people have wondered as to whether there would be an LGBT organizational black out on such violence had the three been wealthy and white Gay businessmen.

The Lesbian and Gay movement is currently so focused on begging the state for a marriage license that they seem to have forgotten everyone who is not well off and white. On Wednesday Morning Jennifer Gale, a homeless TransWoman, froze to death because no shelters would take her in. On Thursday 3 Queer People in New Orleans were shot and killed. And on Friday, Join The Impact held silent candlelight vigils for their “Right” to Marry.

Needless to say that in this latest “struggle” for gay marriage, white people have consistently demonized communities of color for their role in passing Prop 8. To many in the marriage movement, Queer People of Color and Trans people do not even exist. It is typical for White people in the marriage movement to claim that Trans people should wait until Gays and Lesbians get their rights. When violence is perpetuated against Queers of Color, HRC and other marriage oriented organizations are typically silent.

(See Duanna Johnson, The New Jersey Four, The 4 people just killed in New Orleans, Jennifer Gale and virtually every other trans person or queer/trans person or color.)

If we put all of the energy and money that is being wasted on the marriage movement into other projects, think of what we could do. We could easily open queer/trans friendly spaces for the homeless throughout the country. We could successfully demand, or better yet, provide free and quality healthcare to all people. Instead of collecting food and giving it to institutions that are notoriously corrupt, and yes, homophobic; we could collect food and distribute it ourselves. We could actively confront classism, racism, sexism, and transphobia amongst LGBTQ people. All the while militantly raising hell in the streets and disrupting business as usual, as every generation of Queers has since 1968. If we did all of these things and more, we would see more change than Barrack Obama has ever offered us.

What’s more important: a marriage certificate or housing for people who are freezing on the street? A slip of paper or the guarantee that when multiple people in our community are shot at point blank range we stand up and bash the fuck back?! Why are we not focusing on the plague that is HIV/AIDS? Shouldn’t we be making a big fucking deal seeing that in the last week alone 4 queer/trans people that we know of have been murdered?

It is long passed the time that queer and trans people got their shit together. We have been fighting since birth, by now you’d think we would now how to do it in an inclusive and effective manner.

Say NO to the Olympics being in Chicago!