JIMMY BIBLARZ: The fight continues for LGBTQ+ rights

ADVERTISEMENT

The city of Los Angeles’ Fifth Council District shares a long border with the city of West Hollywood, with several CD 5 residents referring to this portion of the district as the “LA part of WeHo.” It’s only natural, then, that CD 5 has the largest LGBTQ+ population of any City Council district.

But we’re at an inflection point in our community’s history. The upcoming June primary, less than a month away, will determine whether or not there will be any LGBTQ+ representation in the county and city of Los Angeles. Our current queer elected leaders, Sheila Kuehl, Ron Galperin, Mike Bonin and Mitch O’Farrell are either termed out, stepping down, or in tougher-than-expected primaries. We’re at risk of backsliding from the historic gains our community fought and sacrificed for. And we know all too well what happens when queer voices aren’t represented in government.

Growing up, I felt like politics and public service were off limits to someone like me. Coming of age in the mid-2000s, LGBTQ+ victories were scattershot, and the arc of the queer moral universe did not seem like it would inevitably bend toward justice. I know I’m not the first to use this analogy, but I was buried so deep my friends and family now call it my “walk-in closet.” The joke’s a lot funnier in retrospect.

Upon coming out, I threw myself into learning about local gay political history, and saw that while LGBTQ+ folks had historically been brutally excluded from political institutions, they certainly were political. I studied LA’s rich queer history–from the Mattachine Society to the Black Cat uprising to the gay bars of downtown in the 1920s. Learning this history, my history, our history, was a revelation. I felt proud, empowered, and confident enough to enter political life as an openly gay person.

Photo by Sarah Ford

We’ve come so far as a community in such a short amount of time, it’s easy to forget the years of fear, struggle and pain that lead to those victories. One such struggle happened in the district I was raised in, the district I’m running for: CD 5. How many of you know about the Black Pipe 21?

In August of 1972, the LAPD raided a fundraiser for HELP (Homophile Effort for Legal Protection) being held at the Black Pipe, a popular leather bar on La Cienega. Twenty-one men were arrested and subsequently prosecuted for lewd conduct under under 647(a) of the California Penal Code. One of those arrested was a deputy state attorney general who was fired by then-California Attorney General Evelle Younger when the charges were filed. The ACLU of Southern California even got involved, filing an amicus brief on behalf of the men. While 647(a) is no longer used for discrimination against LGBTQ+ spaces, it remains on the books.

ADVERTISEMENT

It’s easy for the Black Pipe raid to feel like a story from another time and place. We have made huge progress since then, boasting so many historic local LGBTQ+ electoral victories, including Jackie Goldberg, Jeffrey Prang, Bill Rosendahl and Sheila Kuehl amongst other queer pioneeers. But we would be wise to remember our history. LGBTQ+ progress has come through winning elections, public activism, and high-stakes litigation. We have seen scary, dark backsliding on gay rights throughout the country. The Human Rights Campaign has logged 240 anti-LGBTQ state bills filed in state legislatures in 2022 alone. We must remain vigilant.

California, especially Los Angeles, can feel immune from these bigoted realities. West Hollywood and Los Angeles have been models for what inclusive politics can look like. But even here, LGBTQ+ people fare far worse than the general population by every metric on all major social issues: homelessness, housing affordability, public safety, substance use, wage and housing discrimination, and the list goes on. It’s abundantly clear that the fight for full LGBTQ+ inclusion, even in progressive bastions, is far from over.

For the LGBTQ+ rights movement to live on, to grow in the ways it must, to always be on the cutting edge of social policy, we must continue to demand representation. We must support LGBTQ+ candidates especially in the few remaining LGBTQ+ parts of the city. There is no better way to honor the sacrifices of those who came before us, the Black Pipe 21 whose lives were ruined on bogus charges because they lived their truth, than to get informed, learn what’s on the ballot, and make political participation part of our daily lives. We know the very real consequences of not having real LGBTQ+ representation. Just ask anyone you know who lived through the AIDS crisis of the 1980s.

So here’s my challenge to you: get informed, get involved and most importantly, VOTE. It doesn’t matter what your party is (or isn’t) or where you lie on the ideological spectrum. Democracy only works and is sustainable if its citizens participate in it, especially at the local level. We owe a debt to those who came before us. Let’s learn our history, learn more about what’s on the ballot and vote on or before June 7th. We’ve come too far and we won’t go back.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
ADVERTISEMENT

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

15 Comments
Newest
Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
WeHo Mary!
WeHo Mary!
1 year ago

I just skimmed through this because after being forced to listen to his barrage of ads on TV, I don’t want to hear anything else from this person. I’m guessing the ad ran at least 20 times. I can’t imagine what his poor students go through, it’s like listening to Kermit the Frog run for office.

Miss Piggy
Miss Piggy
1 year ago
Reply to  WeHo Mary!

Ouch Mr. Mary! That is just so not nice. Please change your channel.

WeHo Mary!
WeHo Mary!
1 year ago
Reply to  Miss Piggy

Sorry, but I get annoyed when it’s the same ad with that Kermit voice over and over and over again on a streaming service.

greeneyedguy
greeneyedguy
1 year ago

Just curious because other commenters are posting statistics:

How many LA city council members are LGBTQ? Jimmy is running for CD5 in Los Angeles, not West Hollywood.

I find this part of his op-ed the most important: “LGBTQ+ progress has come through winning elections, public activism, and high-stakes litigation. We have seen scary, dark backsliding on gay rights throughout the country. The Human Rights Campaign has logged 240 anti-LGBTQ state bills filed in state legislatures in 2022 alone. We must remain vigilant.”



Alan Strasburg
Alan Strasburg
1 year ago
Reply to  greeneyedguy

I am well aware of where Mr. Biblarz seeks to represent citizens in the city of Los Angeles. I was making a point about representation using West Hollywood as an illustrative example. I think Ms. Meister and Ms. Horvath have represented and continue to represent the LGBT community just fine, and as far as I know, neither is a member of that community.

Alan Strasburg
Alan Strasburg
1 year ago

I am seriously trying to find a public policy reason why this man wants to run for office, other than for his identity. His argument dismisses allyship completely. West Hollywood is less than 40% LGBT yet is represented by 60% LGBT councilmembers. I think the 40% of non-LGBT councilmembers do fine job of representing the interests of LGBT residents. We can slice and dice identities to a level that is beyond absurd. The terms representation and intersectionality are the two most malignant terms in democracy.

Preoccupied
Preoccupied
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Strasburg

Likewise. His credentials added up to running for office? Seems he was overly preoccupied with identity politics which bring more problems than solutions which seems to diminish his credibility. No wholeness here.🙄

Say What?!
Say What?!
1 year ago
Reply to  Alan Strasburg

Like I said, he’s better off staying an activist.

Ham Shipey
Ham Shipey
1 year ago

good grief

Say What?!
Say What?!
1 year ago

You might be more effective as an activist working outside of politics. That way you won’t need to be elected to anything or get bought by special interests.

Huh?
Huh?
1 year ago

Failing basic journalistic practices again here boys. I assume Jimmy Biblarz wrote this piece and not WEHO Ville. You don’t identify the author either at the top or at the bottom, which is especially bad considering this person is a candidate for office.

Please don’t fall into conniptions because a reader wants to know whose words they’re actually reading.

greeneyedguy
greeneyedguy
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

Op/Ed is literally in the title.

Failing basic reading comprehension again?

Huh?
Huh?
1 year ago
Reply to  greeneyedguy

This article was published as an op-ed with WEHO Ville bylines, which cannot both be true at the same time. I had no idea who wrote this, so I opened the photo and found its file name: biblarz.jpg. Genuinely I had no clue who was in the photo. After I submitted that comment, Biblarz is now credited as the author rather than this website. If this is supposed to be a legitimate news source rather than an amateurish blog, then details like that matter. It’s painfully lazy that they still don’t plainly disclose, “Jimmy Biblarz is a candidate for the… Read more »

Robin
Robin
1 year ago
Reply to  Huh?

The author is stated at the top of the article.

Jim Nasium
Jim Nasium
1 year ago
Reply to  Robin

Robin, Robin, Robin. Read what “Huh” says happened. Read it slowly and pay attention to the words. Duh!

15
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x