From FoundSF <\/p>\n
\"I was there...\" <\/p>\n
by Caitlin Carmody <\/p>\n
In April 2013, San Francisco Pride seemed to take an exciting step with the nomination of queer military whistleblower Chelsea (ne Bradley) Manning as a grand marshal for the 2013 Pride parade. Manning would not have been present for the honor, as she was in military custody facing life in prison for revealing war crimes committed by the United States during the war in Iraq. But Daniel Ellsberg, fellow whistleblower and famed leaker of the Pentagon Papers, was happy to accept the honor on her behalf and represent her in the parade. In nominating a queer military whistleblower, Pride was making an important statement about the values of the gay rights movement; grand marshals are the public emissaries of Pride. They represent a mix of individuals and organizations that have made significant contributions to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community. With the help of community input, Pride selects these groups and individuals as Grand Marshals in order to honor the work they have put into furthering the causes of LGBT people.(1) <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Manning contingent was the largest in SF Pride march, June 2013. <\/p>\n
Photo: courtesy Private Manning.org <\/p>\n
No sooner had this honor been bestowed upon Manning when San Francisco Pride Board President Lisa Williams released a statement revoking the honor. The statement indicated Manning's nomination had been an error committed by someone within Pride going rogue and never should have been allowed to happen. Williams wrote: \"Bradley Manning(2) is facing the military justice system of this country. We all await the decision of that system. However, until that time, even the hint of support for actions which placed in harms [sic] way the lives of our men and women in uniform and countless others, military and civilian alike will not be tolerated by the leadership of San Francisco Pride. It is, and would be, an insult to every one [sic], gay and straight, who has ever served in the military of this country.\" The response to Williams' statement from the more radical edge of the gay rights movement in the Bay Area was swift and furious. Williams' statement seemed to many on the queer Left as horribly illustrative of an ongoing tension within the movement for gay rights: are we looking to join the system, imperialism, war, and all, or are we opposed to the rotten status quo and want to radically transform it? Had Manning not made significant contributions to the LGBT community in revealing U.S. war crimes in Iraq? Do queers not care about militarization, racism, imperialism, and massacre in the name of patriotism and freedom? <\/p>\n
Pride president Lisa Williams said naming Manning as a grand marshal would be an insult to everyone who had ever served in the military; for me, what seemed the biggest insult was Pride taking the side of the U.S. military and its war crimes, elevating the military to untouchable status: Thou shalt not utter a word against war, was Pride's party line. It was alarming to see the leadership of one of the largest gay pride parades in the world completely uncritically endorsing what they called the military justice system, as if such a system dispenses what we all call justice. It was also alarming to hear them condemn Mannings actions, which they erroneously claim placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform -- and countless others, military and civilian alike. Many people, including many former members of the military, characterized Mannings actions as an important act of dissidence, blowing the whistle on U.S. war crimes, and saving countless human lives by throwing a wrench in the U.S. war machine. It was not Mannings actions, but the U.S. military establishment, that place in harms way, and actively end, the lives of many people, civilian and military, U.S. and Iraqi alike (though Pride seemed not to care about dead Iraqi civilians). Prides statement via Williams was also alarmingly repressive: not a hint of support for Mannings actions would be tolerated. Hardly the endorsement of free speech and dissent one would hope for from gay rights leaders. <\/p>\n
Video: courtesy Private Manning.org <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n