Now Is Not the Time to Criticize Leadership in LGBTQ+ Communities

With the increased political and social pressures and threats against LGBTQ+ people these days, it’s not the time to do anything that would discourage leadership. But the fact that criticism of activist leaders is a predictable response even in less threatening environments means it’s something anyone who tries to lead or speak out for a group that’s been hurt by society is likely to experience.

So, if you ever try to do anything that might be seen as leadership in LGBTQ+ communities, you’re going to be ridiculed, accused of all sorts of evil motives, and just plain attacked from within. And it’s most likely to happen in the most public of forums. 

Have you tried to lead a pride festival? Well, you haven’t done it right. Tried to edit a newsletter or magazine? You’re misusing your power. Stood up to find yourself the public spokesperson for a cause? You aren’t qualified to speak for us. Started a movement? You don’t even have yourself together.

Your motives are suspect. Your income is ill-gotten. Your personal life disqualifies you. Your ego is too big. (Imagine, thinking you can improve things!)

You must have something to hide. You’ve stolen some of your ideas. You’ve left someone out. You’re making “straight” people like us less or criticize us more. You’re taking too long or moving too quickly.

We do this. We do it often, and many of us seem to find our emotional stride in doing so.

We take on an air of righteous indignation when we do. This negative crusade becomes our life instead of creating positive alternatives.

Sociologists know this as a classic victim role activity. It’s easier to pick on each other and eat your own than fight the larger society.

Instead of assuming the best of our leaders, oppression itself has taught us to jump on every flaw, point out when they haven’t done it eloquently enough, over-react to every mistake, and end up destroying what could have been good for all of us. In my over thirty years of activism I’ve seen it happen over and over – to churches, bookstores, magazines, projects, community centers, and movements that were standing up for us against larger cultural forces.

It's the reason I recommend in my workshops teaching healthy activist leadership that leaders take on their cause for what they personally will get out of it. Forget the idea that that thought is selfish – leadership begins when you see a need to end something that is hurting you.

If I lead just to help those other people, I might feel quite charitable for a while, even energized. But I’ll soon learn that victimized people seldom have much personal space to say thank you. They’re still fighting their own external and internalized oppression.

Our communities have so much healing of personal hurts to do, that they have a hard time accepting what’s done at face value. They’ve been so hurt by the motives and actions of others that they begin with the expectation that this will be more of the same.

And, even more than most Americans, hurting people have a difficult time beginning with the assumption that those who lead, even doing so successfully, have good intentions, are trying their best, and will make mistakes.

The first thing someone living in the victim role does when there appears to be some problem with the activities of a leader is what psychologists call “triangulation.” Instead of going directly to the leader, asking them what they meant to do, assuming they meant well, and offering to work with the leader, they find others to discuss the issue with and agree with them that the leader has done something dastardly.

Having a pack of others gives one courage, validates one’s stance, and creates a whole group of people who get along because they have in common that they haven’t gone helpfully to the leader either. It’s all very tacky. It’s all very common. 

What would it be like if we didn’t begin by acting out of our societally conditioned victim role?

First, we would be facing, not denying, our own internal issues so we were not acting out of our unhealed past hurts. When we can take a relaxed, learning stance toward things, instead of reacting, even over-reacting, to others, and when we can assume the best of those who try to lead until we have heard and spoken with them, we will not be living as victims reacting to what leaders do.

Second, we can assume the best of our leaders until we have personally listened carefully to their side of the story. We ask them: “Help me understand this.” When we don’t assume the best, we are reacting to our own past experience and not present realities. We are reacting negatively to protect ourselves because we don’t want to be hurt, ridiculed, abandoned, or have our hopes destroyed again.

Third, we will allow our leaders to make mistakes. If we expect our leaders to wait until they will do something perfectly, we’ll get nothing done. As Melody Beattie, the author of numerous books on codependency put it: “Perfectionism leads to procrastination, which leads to paralysis.” In most cases, something done ineloquently is actually better than nothing.

Fourth, we would always follow with the next thought: What can I do to make this better? Should I offer to help? Should I offer other support to someone over-worked?  If I do begin my own alternative, though, it should not be motivated by just being against the other.

We can step out of the victim role to use our energies to end the oppression of LGBTQ+ people or we can fight among ourselves while society grinds on. It’s our choice, and a crucial one now that we face who knows what backlash to all we’ve gained.

Sadly, fights among those on our side are more likely the more things seem more threatening around us. But even more so now, we can’t afford to participate in them.