Reflections on Queer Advocacy: Lessons from This Week, Gaps in the Call for Action

This is an expert from the QPAC weekly newsletter, a program hosted by MoCA. More information to sign-up is below!

David’s Pondering of the Week
Y’all, does my brand of being gay really mean subjecting myself to awkward governmental listening sessions and forums with people outside our community—people who are trying to get it, but sometimes just… fall short?

Short answer? Yes.

This past Wednesday, I attended a listening session held by Mountain View’s Human Relations Committee (HRC) and Santa Clara County’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs. Andddd let me tell you—it was interesting! Truth be told, the event wasn’t well attended; there were maybe five community members present beyond the HRC members. It was just a listening session, so nothing with too much teeth. However, these types of events are so valuable for collecting information in a low-stakes environment.

The Queer community members in attendance raised concerns about the lack of visible gathering spaces for our community—which, let’s be honest, isn’t news to any of us. What I always find poignant is how community organizers, especially young ones, can be unintentionally disenfranchised by governmental organizations. And you may be saying, “Well, no duh, David!” But here’s what I mean:

First, Mountain View’s HRC held the meeting without City staff. Sure, the HRC can make recommendations to staff, but true commitment to serving marginalized groups looks like having the people who can actually create city programming—and who have access to city funds—in the room.
Second, the county Office of LGBTQ Affairs is a fiduciary of funds. That means they hold the money for programming at the county level, but their primary role is to make recommendations. (Side note: do you know what a fiduciary is? It’s a good word—give it a look up!)

My point is this: to create real change and bring about civil services that benefit our population, we as community members have to understand how these services get made. That means knowing where the funds come from, who hosts the programs, and who can advocate for them. It also means us advocating for and creating the programs we want to use.

This listening session was all about the county collecting data to recommend to city and county officials. How great would it be if our community members had a stronger voice in those decisions? In fact, the idea of micro-grants came up—an idea that could make a real difference.

To wrap up, I want to make something clear: there’s currently a gap in our community organizing because both governmental offices and the community treat program design and development as a "special skill." For paid city staff, sure, it is—but they use it with open ears. For the community, building programs isn’t about having an academic or professional background; it’s about the validity of your on-the-ground experiences.

When government gets too clunky to respond, we hand things off to non-profits. When non-profits struggle, we pass the torch to the community. But honestly, it should always be in the hands of the community to lead and own.

We’ll get there—when we’re agile and ready enough to claim that position. Only you know the changes and needs of your community. That’s why you are the change. This isn’t a pipe dream or idealism; it’s practical.

And finally, a reminder: no one is an island. If you feel like an island—or see someone acting like one—grab their island and invite them to join yours. We’re only as strong as the raft we collectively build, and the waters may be looking rough.

With Radical Love,
David Garcia

---