

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Corporate executives must be held accountable for their exploitative behavior, and we need to push lawmakers to incentivize corporate decision-making that aligns with the interests of workers, communities, and the planet.
As June approached this year, queer people across the U.S. braced for the typical rainbow-washing we have seen corporate America push at all our local retailers in recent years. However, this year, many queer people were surprised to see so many companies pull back on their outward support of the LGBTQ+ community. Popular brands like Target, Nike, and North Face chose not to release or scale back Pride merchandise this year. In fact, several large corporations have stopped changing their logos to rainbow alternatives and instead decided not to make any public acknowledgement of Pride.
This year, Pride Month is a reminder that voluntary initiatives will not save us.
So why does this corporate walkback feel like a bitter disappointment, despite general consensus in the queer community that corporations are just profiting off of the queer community during Pride month rather than making meaningful shifts year-round to dismantle discrimination and exclusion? It could be because this pullback shows yet again that corporations seem to only care about the queer community as far as it benefits their profits. (The same can and should be said for the BIPOC community, as corporations have also been walking back on their DEI commitments since 2021, the year after the murder of George Floyd in 2020.) This trend marks the highly concerning sentiment that it is no longer profitable to support queer people in the U.S.—that the fire against LGBTQ+ people has grown larger than our purchasing power.
Here’s the truth:
Companies like McDonald’s and Amazon profit off the the genocide in Gaza killing thousands of queer people, make massive campaign contributions to homophobic and transphobic politicians, crack down on worker unions, profit from the prison labor of a disproportionate number of BIPOC queer people, and increase homelessness, which also disproportionately affects BIPOC queer people. These large corporations are the same ones paying for Keke Palmer to join the stage of D.C.’s Capital Pride Festival to celebrate the month. Meanwhile, corporations that sponsor Pride events and/or change their logos to be rainbow are at the same time growing the wealth gap with exorbitant executive pay, unfair wages, anti-ESG campaigns—policies that directly contribute to homelessness, mass incarceration, and climate change.
This year, Pride Month is a reminder that voluntary initiatives will not save us. Corporate executives must be held accountable for their exploitative behavior, and we need to push lawmakers to incentivize corporate decision-making that is aligned with the interests of workers, communities, and the planet. Because at the end of the day, campaign finance reform, criminal justice reform, restrictions on buying up affordable housing, protecting the right to unionize, and regulating executive pay and stock buybacks, and a progressive tax code directly benefit the queer community made up of working people across the country more than any rainbow logo or product ever could.
For a gay high schooler living in the U.S., it is with extreme difficulty that I watch the American and Israeli governments exploit my sexual identity to excuse ongoing ethnic cleansing.
The Progress Pride Flag was never intended to fly over the corpses of dead Palestinians. Like many queer young people today, I have watched with paralyzing anger as the symbol of our liberation waves atop armed Israeli killing machines and our existence is commodified as justification for Israel's imperial violence. Israel has no right to wave any flag over the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Yet, for that flag to be colored with a rainbow is illustrative of the settler state's incorrect, dangerous rationale for carrying out its ongoing genocide.
In 2011, a New York Times op-ed popularized the term pinkwashing, accusing Israel of using pro-LGBTQ rhetoric as a cover-up for its illegal and brutal occupation of the Palestinian territory. The term describes how colonial powers like the U.S. and Israel use false acceptance of sexual minorities to distract from and justify rapid, brutal expansion. Any queer person who has been an advocate for the rights of Palestinians has encountered this phenomenon: “Try living in Palestine for a day and see how you like it,” online colonialist apologists tell us. “Where are the pride flags in Gaza?”
The point of LGBTQ advocacy has never been the indiscriminate bombing of school children.
These remarks are a result of a targeted Israeli marketing campaign that has been defending its ongoing genocide since 2005. The 88 million dollar program, called ‘Gay Israel’ or ‘Brand Israel,’ is a global effort to “underscore [Israel’s] diversity in a population that tends to judge Israel harshly, solely on its treatment of Palestinians."
As Israel and its associated settler colonies market themselves as “gay havens,” they perpetuate the flip side narrative as well—that Palestinians are a barbaric and homophobic population of uncivilized heathens. The narrative itself is an erasure of Palestinian queer life and Israel’s oppression of LGBTQ residents. It ignores that Western colonialism has historically led to worse treatment of LGBTQ minorities in colonized regions. When the British claimed “Mandate Palestine” in 1920, they passed sweeping anti-gay legislation that still governs homosexual relationships in Gaza today. Throughout history, in the name of bringing civilization to Middle Eastern communities, colonialists have criminalized queerness and facilitated queer oppression.
Moreover, Israel itself has punished LGBTQ identities since the state’s birth. The current Netanyahu administration has positioned homophobic leaders at the peaks of the Israeli government, refuses to legalize gay marriage, and faces rampant rates of anti-LGBTQ sentiment in the country. Israel cannot be considered a pro-gay force for freedom as it continues the erasure of Palestinian queer life, facilitates an ongoing genocide, and furthers anti-queer lawmaking.
Today, a glance at Israeli social media shows “In the name of love” written across a pride flag, flown over rubble in Gaza. Another scroll shows the Star of David printed onto a rainbow flag proudly held in front of an armed Israeli military tank. “Under Hamas, being gay means death. The hidden Palestinian LGBTQ+ community can be HOPEFUL as soon they will live and love free of Hamas,” the posts decry. These common criticisms that pit the queer community against Palestinians miss the mark entirely. Queer advocates uniquely align themselves with the Palestinian cause because our oppression overlaps.
The idea that a violent invading army can be the catalyst to end all homophobia in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is as absurd as it is dangerous. Academics and journalists are already realizing how perilous pinkwashing as a practice can be, as it leads to queer people of color internalizing that our liberation is necessarily tied to the erasure of Palestinian culture. As this siege is consistently positioned as a battle for civilization and the preservation of Western society, LGBTQ citizens must refuse the Israeli government's attempt at forcing us into defending the state’s genocidal militarism.
For a gay high schooler living in the U.S., it is with extreme difficulty that I watch the American and Israeli governments exploit my sexual identity to excuse ongoing ethnic cleansing. LGBTQ-identifying kids and students across the country are now being made to reckon with our government’s insistence on killing children in our names. In every discussion on the topic, it becomes clear that not only are we made to live in this country knowing that our government is funding and enabling genocide, but we also must be reminded that our queer existence is being used every day to justify it.
A generation’s worth of high schoolers like myself are growing up in institutions that weaponize our inalienable identities for violent colonial expansion.
The point of LGBTQ advocacy has never been the indiscriminate bombing of school children. The point of LGBTQ advocacy has never been to displace 1.5 million people, nor to kill 26,000 Palestinians—innocent men, women, and children—in cold blood. It has never been to destroy 70% of Gazan homes. Regardless of what the IDF has to say, the largest cause of death for a queer Palestinian is an Israeli bomb. The worst oppressor of queer Palestinians is the Israeli occupation.
It is time that Americans and the rest of the outside world reject the Israeli narrative that queer rights are mutually exclusive with Palestinian lives. When I, and people like me, advocate for Palestinian people’s right to life, it is not our job to defend our existence as members of a sexual minority. Israel’s siege has never been for our rights, and genocide can never be justified in our names.
'These partnerships embarrass the LGBTQ+ community at a time when much of the cultural world is rejecting ties to these toxic industries'
Just Stop Oil protesters temporarily blocked London’s Pride Parade Saturday afternoon to protest the event accepting sponsorship money from “high-polluting industries.”
Pride faced accusations of “pinkwashing” over its decision to make United Airlines the headline sponsor of this year’s event.
Seven protesters were arrested at 1:30 pm after blocking the road in front of a Coca-Cola truck. Coca-Cola is seen as the world's biggest plastic polluter.
LGBTQ+ members of Just Stop Oil called on organizers to condemn new oil, gas, and coal licenses and stop allowing the inclusion of floats from these corporations in the parade.
James Skeet, a Just Stop Oil spokesperson, said in a statement:
“Pride was born from protest. It speaks to how far we’ve come as a community, that high-polluting industries and the banks that fund them, now see Pride as a useful vehicle for sanitizing their reputations, waving rainbow flags in one hand whilst accelerating social collapse with the other. It is queer people, and particularly queer people of color in the global south, who are suffering first in this accelerating social breakdown. What would those who instigated the gay liberation movement during the Stonewall riots in 1969, make of the corporatized spectacle Pride has now become?"
“These partnerships embarrass the LGBTQ+ community, at a time when much of the cultural world is rejecting ties to these toxic industries. We call on Pride to remember the spirit in which it was founded and to respect the memory of all those who fought and died to secure the rights we now possess whilst taking the necessary steps to protect our community long into the future.”
London Mayor Sadiq Khan speaking before the parade said:
“I agree with protesting in a way that is lawful, safe, and peaceful. I think that Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil are really important pressure groups trying to put power on those who have power and influence."
“I fully support the right to protest. It’s really important to recognize the joy of democracy is protest."
“I am somebody who feels quite passionately that we have to tackle the climate emergency. And I feel quite passionately about encouraging people to join the movement to tackle the climate emergency. In my view, protest should be peaceful, lawful, and safe.”
Peter Tatchell, the legendary LGBTQ+ rights campaigner, and prominent member of the Gay Liberation Front and the civil resistance group OutRage! Said:
“I helped organize the first Pride in the UK in 1972 and have attended every Pride London march since then. Pride was always meant to be both a celebration and a protest. From the outset, we stood in solidarity with other struggles for freedom and social justice, against corporate pinkwashing and all forms of exploitation. We saw queer liberation as just one aspect of a wider liberation movement.”
“Climate destruction is destroying communities, jobs, homes and lives across the world, especially in poorer countries. Fossil fuels are endangering the survival of humanity – including LGBTQ+ people. Our community must not collude with environment, species and climate destroying companies.”
As corporations nationwide "go pink" in recognition of Breast Cancer Awareness Month beginning Friday, an advocacy group has launched a campaign targeting one of the best known names related to the fight against the disease--Susan G. Komen--over the organization's partnership with Bank of America, which "funds the cancer-causing fossil fuel industry."
The campaign is part of Breast Cancer Action's ongoing efforts to push back against what it's coined "pinkwashing"--when a company promotes a product emblazoned with pink ribbons signifying the battle against breast cancer but simultaneously markets or produces a product linked to the disease.
"At Breast Cancer Action," said the group's executive director, Dr. Krystal Redman, "we demand accountability and transparency, and we expect our allies in the breast cancer field to follow through on their promises to address and end breast cancer. We call out those who use the pink ribbon with no intention other than virtue signaling, or worse yet lining their own pockets."
Komen has been at the center of previous "Think before you pink" annual campaigns by BCAction, including its 2010 "What the cluck" effort targeting Komen's partnership with KFC.
At issue this year is the Pink Ribbon Banking program. When a Bank of America customer uses a Pink Ribbon credit card, "Komen receives at least $3 plus 0.08% of all purchases (less returns)," the foundation states on its website. Those funds are part of the $1.5 million the bank pledged to Komen from the start of this year until the end of 2023. The bank also offers a Pink Ribbon debit card.
According to BCAction, the cards "are a blatant example of pinkwashing." The campaign explains what it frames as the heart of the problem:
Bank of America is a top financial contributor to the fossil fuel industry, an industry that increases our risk for breast cancer through environmental exposures produced all along the fossil fuel continuum. We are exposed to chemicals such as benzene, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), dioxins, and PFAS from extraction to processing, to exposure to fossil fuel products and byproducts.
Susan G. Komen is pinkwashing by accepting money from a Pink Ribbon Banking Program that also grows the profits of Bank of America, which funds the cancer-causing fossil fuel industry. Susan G. Komen cannot claim to care about ending breast cancer while pocketing MILLIONS from an industry that causes the disease.
As one example, the campaign notes Bank of America's financial backing of the controversial Line 3 tar sands pipeline--support which has already led to accusations of the bank "greenwashing" by climate campaigners.
Also referenced by the campaign is a recent analysis led by Rainforest Action Network naming Bank of America as among the four worst banks in terms of financing fossil fuels globally from 2016 to 2020.
"The financial industry's continued support of fossil fuel projects," Breast Cancer Action program manager Jayla Burton said in a statement, "proliferates a legacy of climate destruction, environmental racism, and public health negligence."
Komen's partnership with the bank must come to an end, the campaign aruges, if Komen is to stop running afoul of its own stated goal.
"Susan G. Komen claims to be 'where the end of breast cancer begins.' If this is true," organizers wrote, the foundation "must stop banking on breast cancer and divest from pinkwashing! Phase out the Pink Ribbon Banking Program with Bank of America, a primary funder of the fossil fuel industry--an industry that's fueling the climate and breast cancer crises!"
Embracing queer pride while also rejecting corporate involvement and police violence, tens of thousands of people marched in New York City on Sunday as part of the Queer Liberation March.
The march was an alternative to and rebuke of the NYC Pride March, though both marches, as well as other World Pride events across the globe, commemorated the 50th anniversary of the uprising at the Stonewall Inn.
The Queer Liberation March's path flowed in the opposite direction of the corporate-captured march, and followed the same route as the original Christopher Street Liberation Day March of 1970, which took place on the one-year anniversary of the Stonewall uprising.
Among the alternate march's backers was currently imprisoned U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who shared a message with particpants.
"Today, I hope you will look around you and see this world," she said in a message read at the rally. "It is not a utopia in the far-away future. It is here. It is our community. It is us. We got this."
The Reclaim Pride Coalition organized the Queer Liberation March, which said that 45,000 people took part. The coalition described the event as "a people's political march--no corporate floats, and no police in our march," and explained that it seeks to recleaim "the NYC Pride March so it better represents the TBLGQIATSNBGNC+allies."
The coalition summed up the differences between its march and mainstream one on social media:
Marchers highlighted those points with signs with displaying messages like "Queer Liberation not rainbow capitalism" and "End the murder of black and latinx trans women."
"The current Pride Parade is shameful--a corporate extravaganza that completely ignores the profound fights we're still waging all over the world," said Larry Kramer, author and LGBTQIATS+ rights activist, in a press statement earlier this year. "We must send a powerful message to the homophobic, racist Trump administration and regimes and corporations everywhere that are killing our brothers and sisters."
Sunday's march featured two moments of silence. One honored those whose lives were "lost to homophobia, transphobia, racism and sexism, to HIV/AIDS, and to violence in all its forms." The second paid "special tribute to the trans women of color murdered throughout the country merely for proudly being truly themselves," as well as "those killed by police or while incarcerated, those who have died by gun violence or by lack of access to housing and medical care."
Images such as these from participants captured the event as it happened:
"I've seen first-hand the violence the vast militarized police state has done to our queer and trans communities," Manning said in an earlier statement. "Our history is one of rebellion and solidarity. We must stand united and refuse to march with police, corporations, and the systemic violence they continue to inflict on immigrants, people of color, and marginalized folks across the queer and trans spectrum."
As activist Evan Greer said recently, "the struggle is not over," and neither corporations nor politicians nor law enforcement are "going to protect us."
In a video op-ed published last month at the Washington Post, she asked, "Do we simply want to be included in a fundamentally broken and unjust system?"
"Or," she said, "do we want to return to the roots of what people were fighting for at Stonewall and work to dismantle that system and replace it with one that takes care of everyone?"
Breast cancer is the darling of corporate America, with pink ribbons adorning everything from handbags to handguns. Corporations put a pink ribbon on their products to boost sales and build their brand. And it works--sales go up and profits increase. Unfortunately, despite 25 years of pink ribbon marketing, breast cancer diagnoses have not gone down.
It's one reason the national education and activist organization that I lead, Breast Cancer Action, has long called October "Breast Cancer Industry Month." October was designated Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) more than 30 years ago--by the corporation now known as AstraZeneca, in partnership with the American Cancer Society. Three decades later, corporations in virtually every industry participate in breast cancer promotions. It's no surprise that Pharma and biotech companies that produce treatments get involved. But corporations that manufacture products that increase the risk of breast cancer also join up with multimillion-dollar cancer charities to "raise awareness" during BCAM. This coordination produces a neat profit cycle for all involved, by keeping the spotlight on awareness and early detection while ignoring primary prevention.
The pink ribbon isn't just a symbol of breast cancer awareness; it's a symbol of the breast cancer industry. This October marks 25 years since the multibillion-dollar cosmetics corporation The Estee Lauder Companies helped launch the pink ribbon and with it the global marketing bonanza.
The now pink ribbon was, from the very beginning, a corporate take-over of what began as a peach-colored ribbon focused on prevention. Charlotte Haley developed the first breast cancer ribbon to promote political action and bring resources and attention to breast cancer prevention. When Estee Lauder and Self magazine approached Haley in 1992 to partner, Haley declined, saying they were "too corporate." Not to be deterred, Estee Lauder and Self "rebranded" the ribbon at their lawyers' advice. And when they changed the color of the ribbon, they also changed the focus from prevention to their own corporate profit.
Nothing reveals the profit motive behind the corporate pink ribbon more clearly than the practice of pinkwashing: when companies claim to care about breast cancer by promoting their pink ribbon products, but at the same time produce, manufacture or sell products that may increase the risk of the disease. When Estee Lauder slapped the first pink ribbons on their products they not only launched the breast cancer industry, they became the original pinkwasher. Estee Lauder tells us to buy their products because they care about breast cancer. But they don't tell us that their products contain chemicals that may increase the risk of the disease--or even interfere with treatments.
A number of chemicals have been associated with increased breast cancer risk. Hormones play a critical role in the development and treatment of breast cancer. And a large body of research implicates commonly-used hormone disruptors in increasing risk of the disease. Some newer research suggests that these same chemicals might also interfere with the most common breast cancer treatments.
Cosmetics and personal care products are one of the least regulated industries in the U.S. Which means that Estee Lauder can comply with the law, and still their products may expose users to chemicals that are suspected to increase the risk of breast cancer. Indeed, Estee Lauder is choosing to celebrate 25 years of pink ribbon marketing by encouraging women to buy their "Advanced Night Repair" serum--which comes with a collectable Pink Ribbon Keychain--but contains the hormone disruptor ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate, more commonly known as octinoxate. Octinoxate is absorbed through the skin and mimics estrogen. The health group Silent Spring advises the public to avoid products that contain oxtinoxate.
Octinoxate is not the only chemical of concern in Estee Lauder's products. In fact this year, nearly every product sold under Estee Lauder's Breast Cancer Campaign lists "fragrance" as an ingredient. Anything that is labeled "fragrance" is protected as trade secret, which means that companies are not required to disclose the specific chemicals used. Numerous studies have shown that fragrance often includes hormone disruptors and carcinogens, as well as sensitizers that can trigger uncomfortable side effects for women undergoing treatment for breast cancer. Without this basic transparency, there is no way to know all of the chemicals in Estee Lauder's products that may increase the risk of breast cancer or interfere with treatments.
In addition to cleaning up their cosmetics, to protect consumers from chemicals of concern, Estee Lauder should join companies like Johnson & Johnson that have committed to removing 1,4-dixoane, a mammary carcinogen, from their production processes. Actions that might bring them a step closer to their self-proclaimed goal to "create a breast cancer-free world."
It takes more than a pink ribbon to show a company really cares about women living with and at risk of breast cancer. Instead of taking steps to clean up their products and manufacturing process as part of their work to "create a breast cancer-free world," Estee Lauder is congratulating themselves on distributing more than 150 million pink ribbons at their beauty counters and illuminating more than 1,000 landmarks around the world pink "to raise awareness." They even hold the Guinness World Record for "Most Landmarks Illuminated for a Cause in 24 Hours." But in our book, the only record they hold is longest running empty awareness campaign.
As Estee Lauder promotes 25 years of pink ribbon marketing, we are calling on them to stop the betrayal and stop pinkwashing. Hypocritical marketing and publicity stunts in the name of awareness get in the way of the true work needed to address and end the epidemic.
More than a quarter of million women are diagnosed with breast cancer each and every year. More than 40,000 women still die from the disease annually. And despite widespread mammography screening, estimates are between 20-30 percent of patients diagnosed with breast cancer--even at an early-stage--will eventually develop metastatic disease, which is when the cancer spreads to other organs. And women of color and underserved communities fare worse and bear a disproportionate burden of the disease. By pretending that distributing pink ribbons and illuminating buildings is meaningful action, Estee Lauder is trying to keep the focus off of the ingredients in their products that may contribute to increased risk of breast cancer and interfere with breast cancer treatments.
Women at risk and living with breast cancer deserve better.
Join us in telling Estee Lauder why this is Knot Our Pink Ribbon--send your letter to Estee Lauder now.
What do you get when you cross a breast cancer charity with a frack job?
The answer is the image above which, as I am writing, is going epidemically viral.
It's hard to stop staring in utter baffled amazement. Is it some kind of ... phallic cyborg?
The opening scene of a yet another sequel to Tremors? (Kevin Bacon! Nevada! Subterranean, worm-like, cross-dressing graboid!)
A sex toy from hell?
In fact, it's all these things and more. Susan G. Komen, the largest breast cancer organization in America with more than 100,000 volunteers and partnerships in more than 50 countries, has teamed up with Baker Hughes, one of the world's largest oilfield service companies with employees in more than 80 countries. Susan G. Komen hands out pink ribbons for breast cancer awareness, and Baker Hughes fracks. So, there you have it: a pink, fracking, drill head.
That's Susan G. Komen pink, by the way. It's special. Like John Deere green. And that signature color has been painted by hand on a thousand drill bits, which will soon be shipped by Baker Hughes to well pads all over the world, thus facilitating a thousand fossil fuel extraction projects just in time for Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Which is this month. (But please don't confuse Baker Hughes pink drill bits with Chesapeake Energy's "even-rigs-can-rally-for-a-cure" pink drill rigs. That was so 2012).
I am not making this up. Read more about the Komen/Baker Hughes frack-for-the-cure effort here. Watch a little promotional video about it here. And then share the contents of your heart with Susan G. Komen headquarters: right over here.
As the story explains, when the pink drill bits are shipped in their boxes (and, yes, the boxes are pink, too), they come packed with information about "breast health facts, breast cancer risk factors and screening tips."
And exactly whose breast cancer awareness quotient will be bolstered out there on the well pad? Inside the trailers and the trucks? Down on the drilling floor? Up on the derrick?
"The hope is that the roughneck who cracks open that container learns a little more about the disease that afflicts 200,000 women per year."
Here's what I'm wagering that roughneck does not learn from the literature shipped with his drill bit this October: I'm betting he does not read about the recent study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control that found dangerous levels of benzene in the urine of workers in the unconventional (aka fracking) oil and gas industry. Benzene is a proven human carcinogen.
According to Bernard Goldstein, MD, toxicologist and former dean at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, "These workers are at higher risk for leukemia. The longer, the more frequently they do this, the more likely they are to get leukemia particularly if the levels are high."
In addition to leukemia, benzene is also a suspected cause of, well, breast cancer.
Benzene exposure is known to induce breast cancer in laboratory animals and is modestly associated with breast cancer among women. But the best evidence we have for the benzene-breast cancer link comes from studies of young male workers exposed on the job. Male breast cancer is clearly linked to occupational exposure to benzene.
So, maybe those pamphlets really will come in handy in the man camps.
The carcinogenic dangers of fracking begin at the job site and extend far beyond. They include silica dust (a lung carcinogen); volatile organic air pollutants (linked to lymphoma); radioactive wastes, such as radon and radium (lung and breast cancers again); and drinking water contaminants, such as arsenic and brominated byproducts (both bladder carcinogens). Indeed, cancer hazards are present at every stage of the drilling, fracking, processing, and distribution process.
Researchers at the University of Colorado School of Public Health found higher excess cancer risks in people living within a half-mile of drilling and fracking operations than people living further away.
But I'll guess that particular study is not packed in the box with the drill bit and the cancer screening tips.
So, here's a message from me to America's biggest breast cancer charity:
Susan G. Komen, it's time to stop taking money from the frackers and come home. Your roots--as well as my own--are in central Illinois. (I grew up near Peoria. And so did the woman named Susan, in whose memory the organization was created. And so did her sister Nancy who founded it).
While your pink drill bits are multiplying on social media, here's an image from Illinois that's also enjoying a bit of traction. Take a look: more than 100 people pack a county board meeting last night in objection to plans to drill for oil in McLean County. The signs they hold: "Not one permit."
Here is the vision statement that your $100,000 donor, Baker Hughes, distributes to the world:
"We are looking forward to the next 100 years of working side by side with our customers to continue expanding the limits of oil, gas and alternative energy drilling, completion and production ..."
Meanwhile, back in your home and mine, folks are hunkered down in the fight of their lives against fracking and are messaging under the banners #NoDrilling and #ClimateChange.
Those are the hashtags of awareness--enough for this month and all the rest to follow.
All together, it's the beginning of the cure we've been racing after.
Pinkwashing is the word activists use to describe Israel's branding of itself as the gay oasis of the Middle East. It's a government-supported public relations strategy, they say, designed to help us all forget about Israel's occupation of Palestine.
These activists are part of a growing movement of anti-pinkwashers, committed to exposing Israel's pro-gay messaging as cynical propaganda, while at the same time bringing more attention to what many have labeled as Israeli apartheid.
"There's a really strong current all over the globe" of queer Palestinian human rights activism, said 26-year-old organizer Selma Al-Aswad. "It's a current that I didn't feel in my early days of organizing Palestine solidarity work. That was an isolated experience, and I do not feel that isolation anymore."
LGBTQ people in Palestine with groups like al-Qaws are actively trying to dispel the myth that Palestinian queers are interested in being "rescued" and integrated into Israeli society, and advocates for Palestinians around the world are forwarding the idea that gay tolerance, like allowing gays to openly serve in the country's conscripted military, doesn't excuse Israel's human rights violations. Meanwhile, in Israel's supposed gay mecca of Tel Aviv, violence against queer people persists.
A queer Palestinian American from Seattle, Al-Aswad remembers when she became aware of pinkwashing. It was the early 2000s, and she started seeing "certain messages popping up around gay culture in Israel, juxtaposing this vibrant queer community in Israel against the backdrop of bleakness in Palestine."
The most difficult to stomach, for her, are the messages that tell a certain narrative seen in the film The Invisible Men, which centers around conflicted love between gay Palestinians and Israelis. In the movie, Israel is depicted as a gay haven, while the West Bank is shown as being a dark, dangerous place for queer people. In the end, the invisible men of Palestine turn to Israel for salvation.
"The state of Israel actually saves queer Palestinians from their own kind," Al-Aswad said. "That's the hardest stuff to watch."
And so, in 2012, at the film's Seattle opening, Al-Aswad and her "fabulous queer crew, dressed in pink, with huge pink wigs, huge pink brushes," stormed the theater to bring attention to what they saw as the pinkwashing present in the movie. Similar actions took place when it premiered in San Francisco, Toronto and Vancouver.
June is Gay Pride month. For Natalie Kouri-Towe in Toronto this month brings an annual series of actions connecting queer struggles to the struggle in Palestine.
Today's Gay Pride celebrations have increasingly become another opportunity for big banks and liquor companies to advertise to gay consumers. For Kouri-Towe and others in Toronto's Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, or QuAIA, anti-pinkwashing activism is particularly meaningful because it's a chance to link Pride with its political origins. She points out how the original Pride march was actually a response to police violence against the gay community in New York City after the Stonewall riots in 1969. In Toronto, Pride marches formed in response to gay bathhouse raids during the 1980s, when, according to Kouri-Towe, "the cops raided the bathhouses, and the community took to the streets. None of that is part of [today's] Pride Parade."
QuAIA has tried many strategies over the years to bring more attention to the occupation. Several events have hailed the work of Simon Nkoli, a gay South African anti-apartheid activist who often linked queer and anti-apartheid struggles. (The chairperson of South Africa's post-apartheid ruling party, the African National Congress, called the current situation in Palestine "far worse than Apartheid South Africa.")
QuAIA has also denounced Israel's work to promote Tel Aviv as a gay vacation destination. As part of the boycott, divestment and sanctions, or BDS, movement, QuAIA marched in a recent Gay Pride parade, calling for a boycott of tourism in Israel.
Pitching QuAIA as a discriminatory, anti-Israel group, pro-Israeli lobbyists have pushed politicians to withhold public funding from LGBT organizations that allow QuAIA's participation.
Kouri-Towe's favorite anti-pinkwashing action happened during Toronto Pride 2011. Conservative mayor Rob Ford made it clear, she explained, "that he would ensure that Pride would not receive funding if QuAIA marched. So QuAIA said, 'We're not going to be used as the pretense for your homophobia. If you cut funding for the parade, that's all on you, because we're not going to be used as the platform you use to justify this." In response, the organization decided not to march.
"We were really nervous about that move," she said. "The response we got back was that it was a really good gesture of mutual responsibility around solidarity, and we still did a big event that year, with a banner drop in the Village in front of the subway that's right next to the Parade." The move received significant press coverage and increased QuAIA's numbers.

Another well-known gay event held every June is the Frameline LGBT film festival in San Francisco. Advertising itself as the largest and longest-running LGBT cultural event in the world, the festival is sponsored in part by the Israeli consulate. A growing list of artists and filmmakers -- including John Greyson, who was famously detained in Egypt for several months last year, author Alice Walker and former political prisoner Angela Davis -- have either pulled their films or called for "discontinuing its financial relationship with the state of Israel." So far, however, the festival's leadership has refused to cut ties with the consulate. (In 2011, leaked emails revealed a collaborative effort between Frameline, the Israeli consulate and programs within the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco to thwart protests.)
Kate Raphael has been organizing against pinkwashing as part of the majority-Jewish group Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism in San Francisco since the early 2000s. In May, the group picketed Frameline's press briefing.
"It infuriates me that they're allowing our identity to be co-opted," she said. "I don't know any other way to say it than if someone is going to speak in your name, and what they say is abhorrent to you, you just have no choice [but to fight back]."
In another action, Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism pulled all of the Israel-produced items off the shelves of a Trader Joe's market.
"We don't worry so much about being transparent all the time -- some people would say we try to be really opaque!" Raphael said. "But we feel that if people don't understand something right away, that's not such a bad thing." The creative actions, she explained, "are just more fun for us," and they combat member burnout.
"There are times when things get a life on the Internet because they're flashy and interesting," Raphael continued. An early BDS action she helped to plan that involved occupying a Starbucks in Berkeley, Calif., was soon replicated in places as far away as Beirut and Sydney.
At the same time, Raphael -- who was once arrested and deported from Israel after filming clashes between Palestinians and the Israeli military -- believes consistency is key to getting the movement to where it is today.
"If we want Target to stop selling Soda Stream [a carbonated beverage maker made by an Israeli company that produces many of its products in the West Bank], we have to be out there [protesting] every week," she said. "You can't just have one flashy action every few months and expect to have an impact."
One of the most effective anti-pinkwashing actions took place during the spring in 2012, in response to a West Coast tour by pro-Israel organizations A Wider Bridge and StandWithUs. It featured several Israeli gay rights activists with funding from the Israeli consulate.
"There were events that were going to be held in Olympia and Tacoma," said Al-Aswad. "But the most prominent event was going to be held in Seattle, and it was going to be hosted by the Seattle LGBT Commission [which advises Seattle's mayor on LGBT issues at City Hall]."
Al-Aswad and two other queer Palestinians went to the meeting, and got up in front of the commissioners to tell their story. "The really beautiful thing that happened is that people actually heard," she said.
After listening to Al-Aswad and the others talk about the injustices in Palestine, the commissioners were visibly upset; some were even crying. "It was this incredibly unprecedented event," Al-Aswad said. "They voted to cancel this major city-sponsored event."
There was backlash. Several major Seattle LGBT organizations -- including, according to Al-Aswad, those that run the queer and trans film festival, HIV outreach organizations and several that provide community mental health support -- were pressured to sign a letter criticizing the LGBT Commission's decision and calling for an independent review.
According to Al-Aswad, while the fallout "really compromised the trust that queer people of Seattle had for these organizations, it also created an opportunity to address racism, and misunderstanding about Palestine in the LGBT context. Several people from our community actually joined the Commission after the organizing." Al-Aswad was later invited to share the experience with attendees of the World Social Forum in Brazil, and the success of the action led to the creation of Queers Against Israeli Apartheid in Seattle.
"By the time we had our first Seattle QuAIA meeting there was a regular group of about 50 people showing up," said Dean Spade, a Seattle organizer who is currently working on a film about the action. "In addition, the other long-standing groups of Palestine solidarity activists in the region, including Jewish Voices for Peace and others, have all remained involved with and supportive of anti-pinkwashing work in Seattle."
After many years of organizing, mainstream media like The New York Times have run articles on pinkwashing, bringing the concept to a mainstream audience. A widely publicized academic conference on pinkwashing was held in New York City last year. Israel's publicity blitz continues, though, particularly with respect to gay tourism; its Gay Tel Aviv campaign launched with a huge government investment of close to $90 million four years ago.
"In a lot of ways I think that Israel's use of pinkwashing, and really trying to get at this niche community, if you will, speaks to the success [of anti-pinkwashing activism]," Al-Aswad said with hope and excitement in her voice. "This is happening all over. It shows you how threatened the powers that be are with losing legitimacy, and losing support."
News reports yesterday indicated that Bradley Manning, widely known to be gay, had been selected to be one of the Grand Marshals of the annual San Francisco gay pride parade, named by the LGBT Pride Celebration Committee. When the predictable backlash instantly ensued, the president of the Board of SF Pride, Lisa L Williams, quickly capitulated, issuing a cowardly, imperious statement that has to be read to be believed.

Williams proclaimed that "Manning will not be a grand marshal in this year's San Francisco Pride celebration" and termed his selection "a mistake". She blamed it all on a "staff person" who prematurely made the announcement based on a preliminary vote, and she assures us all that the culprit "has been disciplined": disciplined. She then accuses Manning of "actions which placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform": a substance-free falsehood originally spread by top US military officials which has since been decisively and extensively debunked, even by some government officials (indeed, it's the US government itself, not Manning, that is guilty of "actions which placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform"). And then, in my favorite part of her statement, Williams decreed to all organization members that "even the hint of support" for Manning's action - even the hint - "will not be tolerated by the leadership of San Francisco Pride". Will not be tolerated.
I originally had no intention of writing about this episode, but the more I discovered about it, the more revealing it became. So let's just consider a few of the points raised by all of this.
First, while even a hint of support for Manning will not be tolerated, there is a long roster of large corporations serving as the event's sponsors who are welcomed with open arms. The list is here. It includes AT&T and Verizon, the telecom giants that enabled the illegal warrantless eavesdropping on US citizens by the Bush administration and its NSA, only to get retroactively immunized from Congress and thus shielded from all criminal and civil liability (including a lawsuit brought in San Francisco against those corporations by their customers who were illegally spied on). Last month, AT&T was fined by OSHA for failing to protect one of its employees who was attacked, was found by the FCC last year to have overcharged customers by secretly switching them to plans they didn't want, and is now being sued by the US government for "allegedly bill[ing] the government improperly for services designed for the deaf and hard-of-hearing who place calls by typing messages over the web."
The list of SF Pride sponsors also includes Bank of America, now being sued for $1 billion by the US government for allegedly engaging in a systematic scheme of mortgage fraud which the US Attorney called "spectacularly brazen in scope". Just last month, the same SF Pride sponsor received a record fine for ignoring a court order and instead trying to collect mortgage payments from bankrupt homeowners to which it was not entitled. Earlier this month, SF-Pride-sponsoring Bank of America paid $2.4 billion to settle shareholder allegations that Bank executives "failed to disclose information about losses at Merrill Lynch and bonuses paid to Merrill Lynch employees before the brokerage was acquired by Bank of America in January 2009 for $18.5 billion."
Another beloved SF Pride sponsor, Wells Fargo, is also being "sued by the US for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages over claims the bank made reckless mortgage loans that caused losses for a federal insurance program when they defaulted". Last year, Wells Fargo was fined $3.1 million by a federal judge for engaging in conduct that court called "highly reprehensible" relating to its persecution of a struggling homeowner. In 2011, the bank was fined by the US government "for allegedly pushing borrowers with good credit into expensive mortgages and falsifying loan applications."
Also in Good Standing with the SF Pride board: Clear Channel, the media outlet owned by Bain Capital that broadcasts the radio programs of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck; a pension fund is suing this SF Pride sponsor for making cheap, below-market loans to its struggling parent company. The health care giant Kaiser Permanente, another proud SF Pride sponsor, is currently under investigation by California officials for alleged massive privacy violations in the form of recklessly disclosing 300,000 patient records.
So apparently, the very high-minded ethical standards of Lisa L Williams and the SF Pride Board apply only to young and powerless Army Privates who engage in an act of conscience against the US war machine, but instantly disappear for large corporations and banks that hand over cash. What we really see here is how the largest and most corrupt corporations own not just the government but also the culture. Even at the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade, once an iconic symbol of cultural dissent and disregard for stifling peities, nothing can happen that might offend AT&T and the Bank of America. The minute something even a bit deviant takes place (as defined by standards imposed by America's political and corporate class), even the SF Gay Pride Parade must scamper, capitulate, apologize, and take an oath of fealty to their orthodoxies (we adore the military, the state, and your laws). And, as usual, the largest corporate factions are completely exempt from the strictures and standards applied to the marginalized and powerless. Thus, while Bradley Manning is persona non grata at SF Pride, illegal eavesdropping telecoms, scheming banks, and hedge-fund purveryors of the nation's worst right-wing agitprop are more than welcome.
Second, the authoritarian, state-and-military-revering mentality pervading Williams' statement is striking. It isn't just the imperious decree that "even a hint of support" for Manning "will not be tolerated", though that is certainly creepy. Nor is it the weird announcement that the wrongdoer "has been disciplined". Even worse is the mindless embrace of the baseless claims of US military officials (that Manning "placed in harms way the lives of our men and women in uniform") along with the supremely authoritarian view that any actions barred by the state are, ipso facto, ignoble and wrong. Conduct can be illegal and yet still be noble and commendable: see, for instance, Daniel Ellsberg, or most of the leaders of the civil rights movement in the US. Indeed, acts of civil disobedience and conscience by people who risk their own interests to battle injustices are often the most commendable acts. Equating illegal behavior with ignominious behavior is the defining mentality of an authoritarian - and is particularly notable coming from what was once viewed as a bastion of liberal dissent.
But the more one learns about the parties involved here, the less surprising it becomes. According to her biography, Williams "organized satellite offices for the Obama campaign" and also works for various Democratic politicians. It was President Obama, of course, who so notoriously decreed Bradley Manning guilty in public before his trial by military officers serving under Obama even began, and whose administration was found by the UN's top torture investigator to have abused him and is now so harshly prosecuting him. It's anything but surprising that a person who was a loyal Obama campaign aide finds Bradley Manning anathema while adoring big corporations and banks (which funded the Obama campaign and who, in the case of telecoms, Obama voted to immunize).
What we see here is how even many of the most liberal precincts in America are now the leading spokespeople for and loyalists to state power as a result of their loyalty to President Obama. Thus do we have the President of the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade sounding exactly like the Chairman of the Joints Chief, or Sarah Palin, or gay war-loving neocons, in depicting any meaningful opposition to the National Security State as the supreme sin. I'd be willing to bet large amounts of money that Williams has never condemned the Obama administration's abuse of Manning in detention or its dangerously radical prosecution of him for "aiding the enemy". I have no doubt that the people who did all of that would be showered with gratitude by Parade officials if they attended. In so many liberal precincts in the Age of Obama - even now including the SF Gay Pride parade - the federal government, its military, and its federal prosecutors are to be revered and celebrated but not criticized; only those who oppose them are villains.
Third, when I wrote several weeks ago about the remarkable shift in public opinion on gay equality, I noted that this development is less significant than it seems because the cause of gay equality poses no real threat to elite factions or to how political and economic power in the US are distributed. If anything, it bolsters those power structures because it completely and harmlessly assimilates a previously excluded group into existing institutions and thus incentivizes them to accommodate those institutions and adopt their mindset. This event illustrates exactly what I meant.
While some of the nation's most corrupt corporations are welcome to fly their flag over the parade, consider what Manning - for whom "even a hint of support will not be tolerated" - actually did. His leak revealed all sorts of corruption, deceit and illegality on the part of the world's most powerful corporations. They led to numerous journalism awards for WikiLeaks. Even Bill Keller, the former Executive Editor of the New York Times who is a harsh WikiLeaks critic, credited those leaks with helping to spark the Arab Spring, the greatest democratic revolution the world has seen in decades. Multiple media accounts describe how the cables documenting atrocities committed by US troops in Iraq prevented the Malaki government from allowing US troops to stay beyond the agreed-to deadline: i.e., helped end the Iraq war by thwarting Obama's attempts to prolong it. For all of that, Manning was selected by Guardian readers as the 2012 Person of the Year, while former Army Lt. Dan Choi said yesterday:
As we move forward as a country, we need truth in order to gain justice, you can't have justice without the whole truth . . . So what [Manning did as a gay American, as a gay soldier, he stood for integrity, I am proud of him."
But none of those vital benefits matter to authoritarians. That's because authoritarians, by definition, believe in the overarching Goodness of institutions of power, and believe the only bad acts come from those who challenge or subvert that power. Bad acts aren't committed by the National Security State or Surveillance State; they are only committed by those who oppose them. If a person's actions threaten power factions or are deemed prohibited by them, then Good Authoritarians will reflexively view the person as evil and will be eager to publicly disassociate themselves from such individuals. Or, as Williams put it, "even the hint of support" for Manning "will not be tolerated", and those who deviate from this decree will be "disciplined".
Even the SF Gay Pride Parade is now owned by and beholden to the nation's largest corporations, subject to their dictates. Those who run the event are functionaries of, loyalists to, the nation's most powerful political officials. That's how this parade was so seamlessly transformed from orthodoxy-challenging, individualistic and creative cultural icon into yet another pile of obedient apparatchiks that spout banal slogans doled out by the state while viciously scorning those who challenge them. Yes, there will undoubtedly still be exotically-dressed drag queens, lesbian motorcycle clubs, and groups proudly defined by their unusual sexual proclivities participating in the parade, but they'll be marching under a Bank of America banner and behind flag-waving fans of the National Security State, the US President, and the political party that dominates American politics and its political and military institutions. Yet another edgy, interesting, creative, independent event has been degraded and neutered into a meek and subservient ritual that must pay homage to the nation's most powerful entities and at all costs avoid offending them in any way.
It's hardly surprising that someone who so boldly and courageously opposes the US war machine is demonized and scorned this way. Daniel Ellsberg was subjected to the same attacks before he was transformed many years later into a liberal hero (though Ellsberg had the good fortune to be persecuted by a Republican rather than Democratic President and thus, even back then, had some substantial support; come to think of it, Ellsberg lives in San Francisco: would expressions of support for him be tolerated?). But the fact that such lock-step, heel-clicking, military-mimicking behavior is now coming from the SF Gay Pride Parade of all places is indeed noteworthy: it reflects just how pervasive this authoritarian rot has become.
Corporate corruption and sleaze
For a bit more on the dominance of corporate sleaze and corruption in our political culture, see the first few paragraphs of this extraordinary Politico article on a new book about DC culture, and this Washington Post article detailing the supreme annual convergence of political, media and corporate sleaze called "the White House Correspondents' Dinner", to be held this weekend.