Roseanne says gays don’t care about the minimum wage.
I was listening to this radio show online from the station KCAA which Roseanne is a regular co-host of. They had as a phone-in guest African-American lesbian activist Jasmyne Cannick.
Anyway, Roseanne made a pretty outrageous statement at about the 29 minute mark — the show is here:
http://yardtv.gotdns.com/kcaa-podcasts/roseanne/20070406.html
Never once in my 54 years have I ever once heard a gay or lesbian person who’s politically active say one thing about anything that was not about them. They don’t care about minimum wage, they don’t care about any other group other than their own self because you know, some people say being gay and lesbian is a totally narcissistic thing and sometimes I wonder.
I’ve never heard any of them say anything except for “accept me ‘cause I’m gay.”
It’s just, it’s screwed. It’s no different than the evangelicals, it’s the same mindset. They want you to accept Jesus and you guys want us to all believe it’s ok to be gay. And a lot of us, a lot of them, I do, I don’t give a damn who anybody has sex with, as long as they’re not underage and an animal. I don’t give a damn, it’s none of my damn business. I’m just sick of all the divisiveness, it’s not getting any of us anywhere.
Now while it’s a pretty outrageous statement, it probably does track close to what many straight people on the left believe — that queer folks are single-issue. Of course, we could show lots of exceptions — The Rainbow World Fund, Queers for Economic Justice, and the work that queers in San Francisco have done around raising the minimum wage (see Roseanne’s quote!), peace efforts, housing rights, medical marijuana, and a host of other issues. Lesbian and gay legislators have sponsored legislation on a wide range of topics.
Who’s being divisive now? But it’s also true that it’s been hard to get some gay organizations to take a stand on other issues — for instance, the unsuccessful attempts to the the Human Right Campaign to come out against the war. And what will it take to get others on the left to realize that we’re interested in other things than what Ralph Nader called “gonadal politics.”
April 8th, 2007 at 9:11 am
The Milk PAC Meeting’s panel last Tuesday should illustrate the outrageous of Roseanne’s statement. We had LGBT Leader David Campos, commissioner of the SFPD; President (and LGBT Leader) Mark Sanchez, commissioner of the SF Board of Education and LBGT Leader Eric Quesada, housing activist.
We have also had Cecila Chung and Larry Brinkin talk about human rights and Eileen Hansen, Commissioner on the Ethics Commission talk about clean money and ethical campaign practices.
Roseanne needs to open her eyes and look around her.
April 8th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Umm…apparently Roseanne never bothered to look into it. Just looking at the blogosphere, that notion is ridiculous. Look at AmericaBlog. Single issue? Or my blog, Calitics, we actually should be posting more on LGBT issues. In fact, several bloggers from the BlogPac network have emerged from the LGBT community, but these blogs are anything but single issue.
Yes, I care about LGBT issues. If I don’t, who else does? But Roseanne totally misses the point. Doesn’t she have something better to do with her life?
April 8th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Well said, Larry, thanks and keep up the good work!
Kenny
April 8th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
How ignorant– though I’ve heard that sentiment many times from straights.
The state senator who represents most of LA’s celebrities in Sacramento– as the state senator representing a district that stretches from Hollywood through Beverly Hills all the way out to Malibu– is Sheila Kuehl, a very out lesbian whose focus has been passing single payer health care.
Roseanne apparently has paid absolutely no attention whatsoever to politics, and is just showing her ignorance and bigotry.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:02 am
Yeah. Well, if all you ever see are the HRC types and big money A-list Hollywood/New York gays and lesbians, no wonder you would think like that. How often does Roseanne venture outside of her insular showbiz world to talk to real people of ANY sexual orientation? She has no right or reason to lump gays and lesbians into one group and then say we don’t care about anything other than bullying people into accepting us. She’s just showing her ignorance and she’s no better than fellow washed-up celeb Michael Richards - and just as embarrassing.
I’m gay and I’m more working class than Roseanne and John Goodman will ever pretend to be. I’ve spoken out on my blog and to people I know about not supporting Golden Gate Restaurant Association members until they drop the class action lawsuit against the City over the healthcare for the uninsured legislation. I’ve put my money where my mouth is, time and time again.
In January 2003, before the invasion of Iraq, I sent the Executive Director of the HRC handwash and asked her to wash the blood off of her hands from the people who were to die in Iraq - the war they refused to oppose because it wasn’t a “gay issue”. I was instrumental in pressuring the Task Force to take a stand (although a pretty weak one).
I not only care about many issues regarding human rights, economic rights, and the environment but I actually DO SOMETHING to support the things I believe in - rather than go on a fucking radio show and demonize gays/lesbians.
Frankly, when it comes to Roseanne Barr, Larry Kramer may have a point!
April 9th, 2007 at 9:26 am
By “a gay or lesbian person who’s politically active” she must mean her stylists and hangers-on.
Solely on the issue of minimum wage, there’s an entire group called Queers for Economic Justice that fights for that and other issues relating to poverty and economic justice (e.g., queer access to welfare benefits, job training, discrimination against queer homeless folks, etc.). But yes, it’s a tiny group, not exactly the HRC.
Unfortunately, Roseanne is probably correct that there is TOO MUCH single-issue politics in the lgbt community. We can all think of imoprtant counter-examples, queer folks who are leaders in other struggles, but the fact is that far too many queers (gay men especially) define their political passions very narrowly. If they have political passion at all.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:03 am
“Unfortunately, Roseanne is probably correct …far too many queers (gay men especially) define their political passions very narrowly. If they have political passion at all.”
I think the American public is far too apathetic, politically. Yes, that includes many queers.
However, many activist groups that were accused of being too gay-centric, like the original ACT UPs and Queer Nation, have included many members who have been active in political efforts for the rights of others.
You don’t hear much criticism of NOW for being too concerned with women’s rights, or the NAACP for being too concerned with African-American rights. Some of criticism of queers (for being too focused on queer rights) is really bigotry– the stereotype of gays as narcissistic and selfish.
April 9th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
It makes sense, of course, for lobbying groups to be narrowly focused (though I personally think they’re often more effective when working in coalition movements).
I think what Roseanne was hyperbolically pointing to is a larger sociological trend, that of gay men being not very political, and if they are political, only concerning gay rights as very narrowly defined. (I don’t think anyone could accuse lesbians of the same problem, since lesbians have always historically been disproportionately involved in various social justice movements).
I agree that there’s some stereotyping going on, and the way Roseanne articulated the idea was crude and oversimplified. However, as an out queer guy who’s been politically active for fifteen years, I’ve observed more political apathy and narcissism among gay men than other groups. It’s a problem that we have to deal honestly with, that gay male culture(s) is/are very focused on cheap thrills. In general.
And I say that as a veteran activist who has nothing but respect for other queers who have put in their time (and God knows there are loads of gay men who are much more dedicated activists in various movements than I am). But let’s keep it real: I at least know a lot more queer women than queer men who are fellow veterans of social justice movements.
April 9th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
(also, sorry for my redundant comments about QEJ in my first comment — I read this, did some other stuff, and commented 45 minutes later, so I forgot that Larrybob had already mentioned QEJ).
April 9th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Funny, nobody compains that handicapped people only care about disability rights. Or that senior citizen’s group only care about the elderly.
I, for one, care about the minimum wage, as I understand that the lowest paid workers affect wages for the entire population and believe everyone should be paid a living wage. I also care about reproductive rights and abolishing the death penalty becaue I believe this country was founded on a deep mistrust of the government. Why would we give them power over life and death.
I believe in stem cell research. I and many of the people I love dearly live with incurable diseases that could be cured by stem cell research. I personally think living, breathing people are more importan than a glob of goo that may or may not ever become a bigot or fundamentalist, GW-loving hypocrit.
But above all this, I believe that I have the God-given right to f*ck, marry, divorce, cheat on, stalk (okay, maybe not that) anyone I damned well please.
Thank you, Roseanne, for all of your support throughout the years. But it’s my f*cking cross, and I’ll stay on it for as long as I damned well please.
April 9th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
I’m queer, and I don’t care about the minimum wage; I care about a living wage (and health benefits, and retirement, and paid sick leave, etc.)
April 9th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I hate to even respond to her stupidity with the numerous LGBT organizations and people who work on behalf of economic justice issues, including Pride at Work. She is absurd and should apologize.
April 9th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Um hello? So if your an activist for lets say Breast Cancer and all you talk about is Breast Cancer - will Roseanne attack them? DUH YOU STUPID F*&KING BITCH!
April 9th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Yeah, I guess all those years working as a gay man assisting with abortions at Planned Parenthood were to further the cause of dicksucking.
April 9th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Hey, maybe we should get her together with whatisname, the guy from Lake Woebegon. Garrison Keilor? Who took a swing at narcissist gays in Salon.
April 9th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Roseanne is a deeply uninformed and unintelligent woman. I suppose by pitting liberals against each other she thinks she’s making some kind of profound statement. All she does is deflect attention from warmongers, republicans, and other assorted evil-doers.
Sorry Roseanne, we’re not the enemy you stupid bitch.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Roseanne, what the f**k? She can attack gays all she wants. At least I never lied about my parents being incestious child molesters when they were not.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Sheila Kuehl, who may well have represented Roseanne in Sacramento at some point over the years, is also author of the bill to modify the Ellis Act.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
and yet evangelicals are able to marry whom they want, join the military, and are not legally discriminated against in 3/4 of the states in the US. get a clue roseanne.
April 10th, 2007 at 1:24 am
Hmmm…
just listened to the entire radio show via a link on towleroad. The most outrageous remarks were those which blame the LGBT community for the election of George Bush. In other words, if we had not been so selfish and narrow-minded in pursuing our own civil rights, the Democrats would have won! Weird logic especially from an entertainer who spent her time during the Clinton years stuffing her face and then having it sucked out repeatedly. Unbelievable how many celebrities pander to our community with a Cheshire grin and outstretched arms, purely for profit & personal gain. Roseanne is too damn washed out to be on anything but KCAA, clearly a station that was begging for callers. Perhaps her next Gay Cruise gig will find her anything but gay. The radio show was just a plug for the remaining 2 weeks of her Vegas Show which appears to have plenty of vacant seats.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:33 am
One thing easily forgotten is that LGBT activism can be more than just activism; since it’s a human rights-based activism that deals with people’s identity, a lot of activists do this because it allows them to deal with their difference in a constructive way.
Then, more than political activism, it becomes a way of affirming one’s identity, which might not forgive this attitude from an ethical point of view, but which explains most of it.
April 10th, 2007 at 4:43 am
Roseanne, Honey…. you need to get out more! Pull your head out of your ass while you are at it… it will be quite a revelation!
April 10th, 2007 at 6:15 am
You’re all gonna scream at me now, but I do understand where she is coming from on this. I think when someone’s rights are not given to them as they are in the states, its very hard to be anything else besides the issue you are fighting for. It is a bit limited to throw us all into the same bucket, but i appreciate her frankness about her perception of the gay community. Im sure you guys are all enlightened beings, but this isnt the first time ive heard this perception of our ‘community’. perhaps we need to do a bit of PR.
April 10th, 2007 at 8:43 am
I agree with James’ comments. It’s all well and good for people in San Francisco–where being gay is about as outsider as wearing sunglasses–to spout about all the wonderful other things that they work on. But either try living somewhere else, or remember back to when you did. Try living in Ohio, with a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships. No rights law. No hate crime inclusion. No gay-inclusive anti-bully legislation. Nothing.
In most parts of the country, yes, gays are fighting for gays. And while many of them are also fighting for economic parity for all people, for other social justice causes, the majority of what you will hear out of the LGBT community is about the fight for our rights.
April 10th, 2007 at 9:27 am
Ugh, coming from a woman who dropped half-witted babies all over the place while trying to solve her inner-demons with botched plastic surgery I would expect this. Notice she is no longer working. Nobody in Hollywood would ever work with her again and THAT is saying alot considering that town. She is an unremarkable anus.
April 10th, 2007 at 10:27 am
So Roseanne basically only knows a bunch of self-centered homos. And therefore ALL OF US are the same? Give me a fucking break. How could someone who has previously seemed so intelligent when it comes to politics be suddenly so misinformed?
And don’t feed me this whole “only in SF” bullshit. I have queer friends all over this country who do work outside of gay rights issues regardless of the climate of their given community, town, city, etc.
The point is: blanket statements are always a mistake. Saying “all” or “everyone” or “always” just leaves you wide open for (well-directed) criticism.
April 10th, 2007 at 5:35 pm
Well, it looks like Roseanne has apologized for her comments…
http://www.roseanneworld.com/blog/2007/04/my_bad.php
and here’s what she meant to say:
http://www.roseanneworld.com/blog/2007/04/what_i_meant_to_say.php
April 10th, 2007 at 8:16 pm
hey now they need to leave that old lady alone cause it aint even that serious for people to be messing with her
April 12th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
As a lesbian I feel I have a right to say this proudly but I completely agree with her and the flack she is taking from our community just reinerates how same minded our own community can be as all the rest!
April 12th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
As a gay Libertarian blogger, I disagree with the concept of government setting wages rather than employees and employers negotiating.
However, I’m not going to get into that debate here.
Rather, I’m going to note that Ms. Barr’s comments are hilarious for two reasons.
First, most gay groups are in complete agreement with Ms. Barr’s political agenda (including her calls for wage and price controls) — most notably, NGLTF, which spends more time agitating for so-called “economic justice” than it does on actual gay issues. That’s not enough for her?
Secondly, *ROSEANNE BARR* has no place accusing anyone of narcissism. She’s an idiotic fame whore who earned most of her money through “look at me” tactics such as screaming the national anthem out-of-tune at baseball games, cursing out politicians, and generally keeping the media spotlight on herself for years. If she can get away with accusing someone of being “narcissistic,” then George W. Bush should have full license to take people to task for being “inarticulate.”
Ms. Barr is also a multimillionaire, living in an expensive home in Southern California, and continuing to profit from her celebrity. If she’s such a believer in improving the minimum wage, why hasn’t she downsized to a more reasonable home and donated all that extra cash to the poor and downtrodden?
Oh, that’s right, like most wealthy Hollywood socialists, she’s willing to be generous with cash taxed from the middle class and working class stiffs, while basking in her own wealth and power.
Regardless of your political beliefs, one can easily dismiss the cantankerous cow’s conniption fit.
April 26th, 2007 at 11:50 am
All I have to say is that as a black gay working-class male experience has taught me Roseanne is absolutely right. These upper middle class gay activtists don’t care about anyone not like themselves and it is about time someone on the left said so instead of adopting this PC stance that the gay community can do no wrong.
May 28th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
listen people the gay community as a whole should not support roseanne in anyway !! speaking from personal experience she is just as mean and rude to our community as the rumors suggest. i casually ran into her on memorial day near my home in vegas . i immediately told her how much i loved her and enjoyed seeing her recent show. i had a recent copy of a vegas magazine and opened it asking her to sign her show’s ad because my partner , michael, of 20 years , would not believe this !! she just said you gotta be shittin’ me get out of here and leave me alone. i apologized and told her i was just being nice and the whole time she just kept saying get out of here and leave me alone. even when i said that i was a u.s. veteran meeting her on memorial day she had no time. come on community roseanne does not want or for that matter does not need our support. give our support to the true friends of our community, like michael’s and my friends mary wilson and martha reeves. ” god bless america ” !!!!!
July 28th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Uh something like this is only offensive if it’s untrue.
And it seems that the extreme overreaction of all these statements here only prove her point.