comsc US Politics | AMERICAblog News: An anti-gay Hill staffer responds
Join Email List | About us | AMERICAblog Gay
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff

An anti-gay Hill staffer responds



| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

I was surfing the Net this weekend, and I came across this post on another blog. It talks about the issue of outing gay Hill staffers who work for anti-gay members of Congress, specifically members who support the anti-gay constitutional amendment, and its writer says he's one of the staffers who was "outed." I think this post does a better job than I could ever do to show how messed up these people are.

Here's what the person had to say, and my response follows:

Speaking as one of Rogers/Aravosis recent "victims" I can say that their tactics are not helping their cause at all. They are setting out to ruin lives and careers, and when they find out that most of us are already out to our offices and bosses, it totally infuriates them. They then try to goad offices into filing harassment complaints, so that they can get even more attention.

This is not the 1970s. We are not cowering in fear, we have made conscious decisions as adults. I, for one, will work twice as hard to defeat these so-called activists, who simply take joy in causing other people a lot of pain. As Ben noted, it is not staffers who make these decisions. They are based on what the voters of a district support.

Poliguy
My response:

1. How are you a "victim" of outing if you're already out to your office and boss? And how does this campaign ruin your life and career" if you're already out to your office?

2. You're openly gay and out to your bosses and offices, yet you still choose to work for some of the most anti-gay members of Congress, helping them pass anti-gay legislation and helping them get re-elected. And you think this is some badge of honor? You've admitted to your boss your willingness to work against your own community for pay, and somehow that makes you all honorable while you do the screwing. If anything it suggests that you aren't some terrified closet case for whom we should have pity, but rather an openly gay adult who can choose to work for whomever he pleases - let's not forget there are lots of pro-gay Republicans you could have worked for - yet still you choose to work for the anti-gay ones, helping them bash your own community.

3. You say this isn't the 1970s and that gay staffers working for anti-gay members aren't cowering in fear - and that you've made the conscious decision as adults to work for these anti-gay members. And that's your defense? That you chose with full knowledge of what you were doing to help anti-gay politicians get elected and stay in office? Ok...

4. You say you're going to work twice as hard to "defeat these activists." You mean, you're going to work twice as hard to help your boss pass the FMA? Or are you going to now work for Rick Santorum?

5. And finally, you say that it isn't staffers who make the decisions about which legislation to support, but rather your bosses.

First, that's a bunch of crap, and anyone who's ever worked on the Hill, as I have, knows that staff has a very large say on everything.

Second, even if you were telling the truth, and you were to have no say whatsoever regarding your boss' support of the marriage amendment, you DO have a say in whether you work for your boss at all. You have chosen to accept money in return for actively helping defend the anti-gay constitutional amendment in the media (at least one of the "victims" is the press secretary for a virulently anti-gay member of the House from Pennsylvania - the member is commonly referred to as "Rick Santorum's lap dog"). Several other of the "victims" are chiefs of staff to anti-gay congressmen - you're telling me they have no say in the boss' position, the boss getting re-elected, and in positioning the boss' message in the media? Puhleeze.

The only one who is consciously causing pain here is you. You've chosen to take a job in which you actively help our enemies try to make us second-class citizens in the US Constitution. A legislative crime that is frankly unthinkable in recent American history, let alone gay history. And in the case of the press secretary of the anti-gay member, you even write press releases and give interviews IN DEFENSE OF THIS AMENDMENT, AND YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT?! And somehow you're the injured party here?

Yeah, I bet you're just being a good German.


blog comments powered by Disqus