Tweet
In his endless quest for constructive community dialogue on the pressing issue of whether LGBT group leaders should attend the White House commemoration of Stonewall next week, John Aravosis first banned me from commenting at his website AmericaBlog and then removed my comment.
Since commenters are responding to my comment which has been disappeared, I am providing it here as a public service.
Funny — I don’t remember gay Greek-Americans turning down opportunities to drink Champagne and eat shrimp at the White House earlier this year when their heritage was celebrated.
I recall reading about, and seeing pictures from, that wonderful celebration somewhere. I wonder where that was, anyway?
Why shouldn’t people go to the White House? It’s very rude to decline an invite, anyway. Keep the queer changepurse closed, and tell the White House people why, if you go.
But go, commemorate Stonewall. Just like the Greek-Americans, LGBTQQIs deserve their heritage celebration.
Nothing obscene, nothing attacking the siteowner’s character, nothing chastizing the siteowner for his views — just a lighthearted disagreement about whether people should attend a White House reception, and a reminder that John Aravosis himself attended a White House reception himself and was happy to share photos and commentary about the event with his readers. I actually agreed with John Aravoses ("keep the queer changepurse closed") about not giving money to the Democratic Party until it improves on our issues.
Is this comment really worth being banned, do you think?
14 Comments
I don’t think this is a bannable comment, but I’m not a siteowner or a moderator here.
I’m interested in what people think.
And I’d like to respond to John’s answer, which reads:
Funny, that was three months ago before all of this happened back when we still trusted him. It’s no great revelation that both Joe and I were big Obama supporters. I even donated $1000 to his campaign, and we raised $50k for him on this blog. I like to think that actually gives me more credibility when I speak out now. But hey, good try, though. And funny, you don’t see me going to the White House next week.
But I can’t. Since I’m banned.
Oh, I’d better put this comment up, in response to Aravosis’ comment, since it likely won’t last long at his site, from someone named kellycanfield:
Respectfully, YOU still trusted him, not WE.
I have not trusted him since McClurkin, then FISA, then Rick Warren x2; debate then invocation.
While, like you, I generally consider gay rights to be the bellwether for civil rights today, the FISA choice last year at about this very time really soured me; but what was the choice? McCain? No way.
And that calculus very clearly figures into this administration’s thinking.
Aravosis is soooo over teh Gay thing, now that he has a shot at a White house slot (I will not speculate about the specific job title… no, I will – outreach and blogs seem a likely guess).
That said, you did attack him where he lives – his cred – and I can see them being threatened. But turning out this particular commenter would seem, how should I say this – unwise.
Wow, you think this whole fight is about John trying to get a White House job? I guess that hadn’t occurred to me. I figured he was taking a principled stand, but I’m such a naif.
I think Gupta thought he had the SurgGen sewed-up. I think a bunch of people were ‘massaged’ about staff positions during the campaign, or led near the water.
All I’m sayin.
OMG, you’ve got to be kidding me. Avarosis as online outreach director?
The single so-called progressive blogger about whom I’ve heard the most complaints regarding banning is Avarosis. Not exactly a good track record for online outreach.
I could understand deleting the comment if it met specific criteria — like repeatedly off-topic, ad hominem, spamming for another blog or product or malware — but the comment doesn’t meet any criteria I’ve heard of or used for deletion let alone banning.
With regard to the actual issue itself, the White House celebration of Stonewall: I wouldn’t go if I were invited. The difference between this situation and Greek-Americans is that Greek-Americans have all their civil rights. Nobody is denying them the right to form civil contractual relationships, whether we call it marriage or civil unions. Nobody is denying them the right to benefits of such contracts based on their Greek heritage. They can party all they want and nobody will even bother to blog negatively about it or castigate them for being Greek-Americans while partying. We can’t say that about LGBT Americans.
Nor can we conclusively rule out that the White House is pandering to LGBT Americans while denying them fundamental civil rights.
huh? “Aravosis is soooo over teh Gay thing, now that he has a shot at a White house slot”?
i have no dog in the argument between TP and JA, but after the past two weeks of excoriating the Obama Adminsitration on DOMA, there is no way that “over the gay thing” is true, and any shot he may have had at a WH appointment is probably as dead as Ed McMahon.
I don’t think it was worth banning over, but I’m not a blog owner.
Maybe I shouldn’t have started out with “Funny….” since he repeats it twice in his response.
This is, after all, serious DeeCee business.
Everywhere I go: Americablog censors disagreement – http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..sagreement
Wow — thanks for sharing that. I knew it was widespread, but I didn’t know people were writing about their ABlog banning at DKos.
My comment from two years ago that got me Banned at Americablog:
Your comment seems pretty darn innocuous to me, Teddy. But I don’t hang out over there, so my opinion probably doesn’t mean much.
I’m tired of hearing about blogs banning comments that reflect opinions that bother the host. Kos and election fraud, for example. That kind of censorship reflects poorly on the progressive movement. Just my humble opinion.
Banned for that comment? For stating your opinion on an issue? But thats what blogs are all about if John disagreed with you he could always reply to your question.