Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« NASA Dismisses Concerns about ... | Street Stylin' »

Monday, June 19, 2006

Heteros Need Not Apply

Posted by on June 19 at 10:51 AM

Eli beat me to the post about the story in this morning’s Seattle Times—”some” feel that Ed Murray’s 43rd District State House Seat should stay in gay hands.

“We want to hold as many seats as possible,” said Bill Dubay, a longtime gay-rights activist in Seattle, who lives outside District 43. “We feel that particular seat should be held from a member of our community.”

If “some people”—i.e. Jamie Pedersen and his flying monkeys—feel that this particular seat must be held from a member of “our” community, then “some people” should have the courage of their convictions. If they feel that Murray’s seat is a gay seat, then “some people” should ask the five heterosexuals running against Pedersen to withdraw from the race. Pedersen’s supporters should explain to Bill Sherman, Stephanie Pure, Jim Street, Lynne Dodson, and Dick Kelley—and all the non-gay voters in the 43rd—that they are not qualified to hold this seat on account of their sexual orientations, and that “some people”/Pedersen supporters are going to encourage gay voters to discriminate against the other candidates in the race on the basis of sexual orientation.

If they’re not willing to do that, then “some people” should shut the fuck up.

CommentsRSS icon

as a fag who lives in the 36th, can I just say that if I hear one more goddamn knee-jerk liberal freak old school queer talk about something we should all do, or be for, or vote against, simply 'cause we're queer (candidates, parade routes, etc.) I'm going to stick my size 12 boot up their ass. Unless that's their fetish, in which case I'll tease, but won't actually do it...

Though I am gay, I do not feel Ed's seat is or should be a "gay" seat. In fact, I will not be voting for Pedersen.

i agree.

i feel that all of these candidates would vote the same way on gay issues, which politically takes more guts if they're straight. its sad, but true. we need strong legislators who stand up for gay rights, sure, but they don't HAVE to be gay to do it. we should be looking at how the candidates are qualified across the board. this isn't a "gay seat", its a "gay-rights-supporting" seat and i think all of the candidates qualify.


El Ganador, I couldn't agree more. Never "drink the kool-aid".

I've always thought that the "gay agenda" was something fabricated by the paranoid right. But this quote from Bill Dubay makes me wonder if I've been missing something all these years.

Some racist people also say the mayor of New Orleans needs to be black and refuse to vote for any white man. Racism and homophobia are everyhwere.


Nothing wrong with supporting gays in office, but this definitely sounds like a whisper campaign for a sole gay contender.

grammar rodeo, you should change your name to 'spelling rodeo.'

Some people sit on their butts;
got the dream, yeah, but not the guts.
That's living for some people,
for some hum-drum people I suppose.
Well, they can stay and rot!
But not Rose!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Monkeys it is, sorry about that.

Oh, and...

If Momma was married we'd live in a house
As private as private can be...

Dan, your continuing attack on Pedersen is really tired. You wrote: "If “some people”—i.e. Jamie Pedersen and his flying monkies—feel that this particular seat must be held from a member of “our” community, then “some people” should have the courage of their convictions."

"Some people" is a clear reference to Bill Dubay, who made the comment. I am not aware that he is Pedersen's spokesperson. In fact, the article quotes Pedersen on this, reading: "He said he's aware some people believe a member of the gay and lesbian community should hold the House seat. Pedersen said he doesn't, however, "have any sense of entitlement that a gay person should have that seat."

The real story here is that the Times ran a lame article, taking a statement by one person, Bill Dubay, who doesn't even live in the 43rd, and making it sound like there's a group of gays determined to keep straights from winning in the 43rd. And even that isn't much of an interesting story to comment on.

Your post is petty and your anti-Pedersen affliction makes you sound like a bitter old queen. Why don't you take your own advice and shut the fuck up.

Not to beat up Bill Dubay but reading the P-I and Times, you would think that he is the only "gay-rights activist" in Seattle. He seems to be the only "go-to" guy the mainstream papers hit on a regular basis. That should change. Dubay should speak for himself by using "I" instead of "we"... since who the hell knows who "we" is. On the same token Dan, I don't think its right to take what Dubay says and then paint "Jaime Pedersen and his flying monkies" with the same brush without being able to tie them together. It makes your journalism or op/ed no better than that of some of the same blather that comes out of the larger papers downtown.

To be fair, Dubay isn't the only one of "some" who think Pedersen should be the nominee because he's gay. Tim Bradbury, a Pedersen endorser, also sorta says it.

This looks to me like a put-up job by the big-money downtown corporatists (i.e., his contributors). If the Blethens and others of their ilk want their favorite candidate nominated, they're entitled to back him. But don't hide behind the disgusting "it's a gay seat" crapola in that article.

Hispanic voters don't need a latino voice in government to represent them, nor do women voters need a woman. Gays, blacks, and all minority groups should get over their racism and vote for whoever runs the best campaign.

The idea that women need a woman to represent them is as stupid as gays thinking someone has to be gay in the government to represent gay issues. Thankfully our government doesn't work that way.

Dan Savage speaks for the majority of gays when he states that we've never needed gay government officials. That's old school gay nonsense. Anyone can understand gay political issues. Gay live is not some special thing you have to be gay to understand.

Ooops! Should have been Gay LIFE, instead of Gay LIVE. (For you captious spelling and typo queens out there)

Any gay politician or businessperson who uses on their gayness to get ahead isn't worth the time of day.

From plumbers to restauranters to politicos, I've been duped into the whole community support thing, and what have I gotten: Leaky pipes, Hepatitis scares and do-nothings who show up in the bars before elections to "meet the community"

That's not to say I won't patronize a gay-owned business or vote for an openly gay politician, but they'd better have a track record and know what they are doing. Pimping your sexuality to pander to your fellow homos doesn't cut it with me.

The 43rd district has a lot of needs that have nothing to do with whom the citizenry sleeps with. Ed Murray and Cal Anderson knew that, and that's why they were effective. There's nothing to say that a straight politician couldn't me just as effective in representing the gay voters.

by the way, this is off-topic, but worth mentioning....

Glad to see Portland survived the Xtian prophecy of destruction on Gay Pride day.

Fagola sez: "Dan Savage speaks for the majority of gays ..."

That's almost more disturbing to me than the idea that a particular seat belongs to a gay candidate.

I'm supporting Jamie Pedersen and not because he's gay. Jamie came to my door in my Montlake neighborhood last week. Upon meeting him, I found him to be a most sincere, honest, and hard-working fellow. He talked to me about healthcare mostly. I think his work on gay issues just shows his ability to get things done. That's what we need in Olympia.

Dan, the article today in the Times doesn't say anything about Pedersen advocating a "gay" seat.

It doesn't help to pull things out of the paper to create a story about Pedersen that's not there.


Have you been doorbelled by any of the other candidates? They're all sincere, honest, and hard-working. They're all interested in healthcare, and some of them have actually done something about it. For example, take Dick Kelley:

In 1977, Dick managed Charles Royer’s first campaign for Mayor, and after winning the election he became one of the two Deputy Mayors, working primarily with health and human service agencies, rights agencies, and internal City administration. He chaired the City’s Affirmative Action Task Force.


In President Bill Clinton’s final term, he appointed Dick the Regional Director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, for the four Northwest states. Taking an aggressive attitude to the job, Dick led the Region in Census outreach to previously undercounted minority groups, resulting in the greatest improvement in their count of any region in the country. He also used the many resources and contacts of DHHS to promote enrollment of working poor families in the State Childrens’ Health Insurance Program. Another of his initiatives was with the network of community and migrant health clinics, many of which he visited to personally assess their needs and explore possible sources of assistance. None of this appealed to George Bush, who terminated Dick and the other Clinton Regional Directors in 2001.

Talk about "ability to get things done". Oh, and Dick Kelley is also the only one of the six Democratic candidates who has actually worked with the Legislature in Olympia.

The times went on to quote Dan Savage:

"'When a district with a powerful gay bloc sends a pro-gay heterosexual to the Legislature, that makes a statement to the other heterosexual legislators about the possibility of being a pro-gay straight legislator,' said Savage, a vocal critic of Pedersen"

The Times characterized Savage well. I'm not sure why Savage has an axe to grind against Pedersen, but his consistant attacks seem to be of an ad hominem nature.

The fact of the matter is that some people will vote for Pedersen because he is a gay person with a demonstrated track record of fighting for LGBT equality - and much moreso than any of the other democratic candidates. With an impending Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage, a case that Pedersen argued, it is certainly legitimate to think that he would be more willing and more adept at figthing against the backlash that may very well follow such a decision in the legislature. Pro-gay heterosexuals, as Savage points out, are important for equality, but there are quite a few self-professed heterosexual supporters in the legislature.

Voters for Pedersen may also support him for his knowledge of transportation issues and work on the Monorail, his efforts to help preserve health care access with Pac-Med, or his commitment to preserving and increasing quality k-12 public education. That a reporter quotes one supporter for their particular motives does not represent the motivations for all of Pedersen's supporters, or the intentions of his campaign.

The contrarian contentiousness Dan Savage displays toward Jamie Pedersen leads me to suspect that there is more behind this lame, bitchy vendetta than Dan's continual desire to be the story rather than the storyteller. Anyone remember Maureen Dowd or Helen Thomas wiping their own snot on a doorknob to create a story? In the end, the candidate who prevails on September 19th will be the one who courted and impressed the most voters. And judging from voters' lazy-assed record of actually voting in a primary, that won't be many.

Dan's sort of an ad hominem guy, really.

Not that any one person deserves to be the appointed spokesperson for any group, but Bill Dubay has paid his dues where these issues are concerned over the years (certainly more than Dan has, unless you consider giving out bad sex advice in a syndicated column a qualification).

Castic or crackstic? You must be one of the flying monkeys. Look at the points you make.
“With an impending Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage, a case that Pedersen argued”
Pedersen DID NOT argue the case!
“Knowledge of transportation issues” (I thought that was the other gay candidate in the 43rd)
“Work on the Monorail” Yes this is the attorney who put together the debt forever plan that sent the Monorail to its death.
“Help preserve health care access with Pac-Med” If you are progressive on health care explore this one and vote for anyone else but this guy.”
“Pedersen because he is a gay person with a demonstrated track record of fighting for LGBT equality” Can you say gay person: Joe, Jim, Dave and the other gay candidate in the 43rd. Are they turning leadership over to a freshman or is there something about them the flying monkeys are not telling us?

Don't we already have enough white male attorney's in office? Over 50% of the district are women so should I vote for the woman? Over 40% of Seattle is single so should I vote for the single candidate.

Since the white male has enough representation I would like to see a single, female, labor friendly, IT worker who rents and is involved in the community. Hey wait that would be me!

If "some people" want to imply that telling you who to vote for is the same thing as telling you that you have no right to vote for whomever you want, then "some people" should turn the next Stranger endorsement issue into an anti-democratic screed. Otherwise, "some people" should stop putting words in others' mouths in order to make them look stupid.

Advocate, actually Pedersen was one of the lead counsel in Andersen v. Sims, and did participate in oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

Pedersen has knowledge of transportation issues, and as he is not running against Rep. Murray, I don't see how Murray's expertise is relevant to Pedersen's qualifications. As to the knowledge of the other gay legislators, one finds it hard to believe that the addition of another dedicated advocate, who has worked for many years fighting for LGBT equality with Lambda Legal and locally, would detract from their effectiveness.

Flying monkey or not, Pedersen has my support. Perhaps the Savage following critics could add some substance to their critiques and stop basing them on personal attacks and name calling.

Dan Savage speaks for most of the gay community in saying we do not need any gay politicians. Anyone can understand the needs of the gay community.

Identity politics help no one.

Dan, you've harped on this issue again and again. Ok, I get it. It's old and boring and lame.

Attack politics work because they draw a distinction between candidates in a way that anyone can see. Problem is, I don't see you drawing any distinction here -- you're just slamming one candidate, saying he has exactly what everyone else has (support of gay rights) and then trying to base his campaign on it. Fair enough observation -- but what SHOULD this campaign be about? Who SHOULD we be voting for, and WHY? Why is Pedersen BAD for the district, and why is anyone else BETTER?

Is it the seeming number two man, Kelley? Somebody here remarks he has 'legislative experience'. He's also the former leader of the district dems, and frankly, anyone who has a pre-built connection to that group of knee-jerk, backbiting CAVERs (Citizens Against Virtually EVerything, the Seattle NIMBY) has a mark against them for being an effective future legislator.

No one ever raised a statue to a critic -- you can tear Pederssn down, who will you put up?

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).