Reg sent this link to me and I thought it might be worthy of comment on dis-n-dat (fe). Here's the link: http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/06/when-it-comes-to-michelle-obama-where.htmlTo me, the Washington Post op-ed piece offers even more evidence of how the supposedly "gay rights" (e.g., HRC) or "women's rights" (e.g., NOW) organizations are all REALLY just about advocating for issues meaningful/pertinent to white gays and white women only. Their hypocrisy is so blatant and indefensible yet each offending organization refuses to recognize the truth and is quick to cry, "foul!" How can they possibly be called, "non-inclusive"? All you have to do is look at their marketing materials and you can see how committed they are to diversity, right? Well, someone needs to tell them that putting pictures of people of color in brochures and on web sites is nothing more than window dressing to create the illusion of inclusion. To use a phrase shouted at the recent Michigan-Florida delegate debate, this is akin to "putting lipstick on a pig!" In other words, the organization might look slightly more attractive [inclusive], but in the end it's still just a pig with lipstick on (kinda like Geraldine Ferraro, huh?).
If one scratches the surface of how gay rights and women's rights organizations have responded to relevant issues involving people of color (such as the recent events involving Michelle Obama), it becomes clear that mere "lip service" has been (and continues to be) paid to the notion of true inclusion/representation. Until organizations such as HRC and NOW acknowledge that mistakes have been made (to put it mildly) and avow to right these wrongs and begin to stand up for ALL their members, then it will be hard for me (and the rest of America) to take them seriously.
No comments:
Post a Comment