I am also a NOW member and am very aware the President is Terry O’Neill.
NOW is very grassroots and has local leaders and chapters nation-wide. NOW organized the pro-choice activists to be in Neb and stand down the anti-choice wing nuts.

There are almost too many groups sprouting up to fight all the anti-marriage ballot. Where each state was a ballot measure about marriage, the GLBT community has to come together and pick a spokes-person

The march in october needs 1, 2 at the most spokes-persons.

HRC and GL Task force need to get their faces on TV. Be more in the media.

thanks for listening and or reading

I don’t know too much about the formal organizational strategy of the gay rights movement (heterosexual privilege, here), but if it is indeed a concerted effort to avoid appointing a national spokesperson, it seems to be a pretty good idea, as you suggest.

ake acts of domestic terrorism, the murder of George Tiller. Or Timothy McVeigh’s bombing in Oklahoma City. No one argued that these actions exemplified a characteristic of an entire racial group, as if domestic terrorism is some sort of a white male trait.

I’m not trying to undercut your primary point (which is a great point), but I think your analogy here might be problematic. The actions of Roeder and McVeigh did reflect upon their larger communities, though not their status as white males. Roeder’s murder of Dr. Tiller was (perhaps justifiably) seen in many quarters as indicative of the true leaning of the forced-birth lobby. McVeigh’s bombing was (perhaps less justifiably) seen as reflective of the larger anti-government/survivalist movement that is largely white.

I’m not trying to nit pick here, but to point out a basic tendency. What sets any movement (regardless of it’s virtues) apart isn’t necessarily who makes that movement up but that the movement itself is symbolic of people who are deeply opposed to the status quo. Minorities are more easily othered because the differences they carry from those in power are more immediately obvious, but part of the response of people in power is always to look for a figurehead which can then be attacked. I think that one of the reasons the gay rights movement has been as successful as quickly as we have seen is because there is no single, flawed person to be held up for ridicule. Instead, the movement has both avoided having easy targets and emphasized that they’re everywhere and they’re part of the society. Stereotypes break down when they face the daily challenge of another person.

Then again, its only the relative whiteness of the movement which has allowed this tactic…