'Lavish spending' at GLAAD: Swiss chalets, first-class flights, the Waldorf-Astoria and more

Hoo boy ...

[quote]Some GLAAD employees were upset when they encountered executives’ globe-trotting Instagram photos and as word spread that Ms. Ellis often flew first-class — especially since employees said they faced scrutiny over minor violations of the group’s expense policy. One employee who expensed a cup of coffee was chastised for taking money away from the L.G.T.B.Q. cause and had to reimburse GLAAD, according to a former employee.

Meanwhile this bitch was spending $6,000 on a one-way flight from JFK to LAX.

Remember that gay rights are largely a settled issue in most Western countries with functioning democracies.

The reason gay rights organisations are pushing so hard on gender is so grifters like Ellis can rake in a huge salary with massive benefits.

All the women are going to be mad at me for this but it makes sense why GLAAD has changed so much and pushed gay men out.

This is gross.

But I ready don’t give to GLAAD because I don’t think they accomplish much.

It's TRAAD now. Don't care.

Hasn't this kind of shit been happening at GLAAD and known about for years?

Why the fuck does anyone give money to them at this point?

A gal's gotta eat.

I lived in NYC in the 90s and worked in media (out gay media) and had nothing but bad experiences with GLAAD. I know they’ve had many ups and downs since then but I can’t help but feel schadenfreude when I see stories like this about them. And they keep coming.

The two GLAAD Media Award ceremonies I attended in 1994 and ‘95 were extravagant, schmoozy, self-important ME-fests. It was really off-putting.

They just naturally seem to attract fraudsters, grifters and backstab-y careerists. Over and over. It’s like a curse.

This is televangelist-level grifting. I'm surprised she didn't charter private jets.

Hahahahaha!

[quote]Sulzberger was upset about GLAAD calling out the New York Times for its transphobia so he put out a hit piece on the org.

I, for one, am happy to support our leaders in the lifestyles to which they are entitled by virtue of having clawed their way to the top.

This makes me SAADD.

Not surprised. She’s a total narcissist and not very bright. She has gotten very lucky. But this is going to blow up in her face.

Being the subject of a NYTimes “breaking news” alert is already blowing up in her face. Someone really doesn’t like her. R10 may have a point.

[quote]Sulzberger was upset about GLAAD calling out the New York Times for its transphobia so he put out a hit piece on the org.

Is it really a hit piece if it's true?

[quote]Is it really a hit piece if it's true?

Of course not. The Times won't do what the Ts tell them to do, any more than Rowling will, so they're all The Enemy.

The details of her compensation package are nuts.

[quote]If Ms. Ellis were to receive the more than $1 million that she is potentially eligible for some years, it would be comparable to what giant nonprofits like Feeding America, the American Red Cross, Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union pay their leaders. Those organizations are many times the size of GLAAD.

[quote]Ms. Ellis’s pay and perks look “much more like a pay package of a for-profit executive and less like that of a person directing a charity,” said Brian Mittendorf, a professor at Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business who specializes in nonprofit accounting.

[quote]“It’s quite a generous package,” added David Samuels, a partner at law firm Perlman & Perlman who previously helped oversee tax-exempt organizations in the New York attorney general’s office. “Is this a proper and reasonable use of the charity’s assets?”

When I chaired a nonprofit board, I once casually mentioned that we consider tying our executive director’s comp to fundraising and was told by my VP who has been on many big nonprofit boards that it’s not considered kosher in that world.

There is no defense of this. None. This is beyond generous for a top executive. For an LGBT rights organizing, it is vulgar. She is going to be fired, I suspect.

This being a gay financial scandal, there's also a lengthy section of the article devoted to her ridiculous annual spending in Provincetown (all expensed to the organization).

I think I'm gonna blow chunks...

I just want to point out to you gentlemen, lesbians don't have it easy -- unless they look like beautiful straight women and can easily manipulate men.

In addition, I have always hated bleached blondes.

In the article, GLAAD spokesman Richard Ferraro‘s hollow explanations for the extravagant spending had my boyfriend and me howling. They’re right out of an AbFab sketch!

“Mr. Ferraro said the spending ensured that Ms. Ellis’s home office was suitable for her television appearances and hosting virtual events… Ms. Gordon used the money to buy an abstract blue and gold artwork from Etsy, a throw blanket and a ceramic vase. (Mr. Ferraro said that the “aesthetics” of Ms. Gordon’s home office had previously not been “suitable for the many externally facing meetings that she is required to conduct.”)“

“He said the car services in Washington were for Ms. Ellis and survivors of a recent nightclub shooting and that the trip was packed with meetings and media interviews. In general, Mr. Ferraro said, Ms. Ellis used private car services at the recommendation of a security consultant, who was hired after Ms. Ellis and others received threats.”

No one needs a fancy backdrop for zooms. Especially if you’re part of a nonprofit.

Grifters gonna grift!

Rich comes across almost as badly as she does.

Can you link a non paywalled article? I canceled my NYT subscription because of all the negative Biden coverage

The comments section is brutal.

For you, r26

[quote]Ms. Ellis used private car services at the recommendation of a security consultant, who was hired after Ms. Ellis and others received threats.

Presumably the 7-bedroom Swiss chalet was bulletproof and had a gay panic room.

I’ve heard similar anecdotes about The HRC…what gives?

The Times should investigate the HRC, too.

GLAAD's donations will plummet because of this.

You want us to be happy don't you?!

R18

I just wrapped a two-year tenure as president of a non-profit board and we discussed this as part of the development director’s compensation, not the ED’s. We ended up not doing it as a bonus, but as an expectation that she would bring in her salary +.

There's a theatre here in Philly where the director makes over million dollars a year, while staff make very little.

He's the highest paid cultural ex executive in the city. I boycott as a matter of principle and pride.

Like everyone else, I am pretty stunned at the bonuses she received: not only a high salary (which could be argued is somewhat commensurate with other national non-profits) but the Provincetown rental and these extras:

The contract granted Ms. Ellis a $150,000 signing bonus. Then there were additional payments of up to $300,000 per year tied to GLAAD’s fund-raising. There was also a discretionary annual bonus of up to 40 percent of her salary. Finally, there was a $225,000 “farewell appreciation bonus” that Ms. Ellis would collect in 2027 assuming she still worked at GLAAD.

R35, the T brigade funders have deep pockets. *Gays and lesbians to the back, please and thank you*

Trans trans trans!

How do you like it how do you like it

Trans trans trans!

How do you like it how do you like it

She’s not a T.

Who said she was T, R38? The focus and fundraising have shifted dramatically to supposed T issues to the detriment of LGB rights.

What does that have to do with her compensation?

Agreed about base salary. In NYC, I don’t find that so out of line after a decade of service. The perks are crazy and the bonus tied to fundraising is nuts.

I once did volunteer work for GLAAD and thought that it was a horrible organization: well meaning people at the bottom working hard; star-chasing, social-climbing creeps at the top. This article doesn't reveal just how nasty that organization has become.

Give money to gay organizations where you know where the money is going. Not to ones where the money disappears into home renovations and fancy dinners.

Lavish shpending!

Shwissh chaletsh and firsht-classh flightsh!

Both GLAAD and HRC have long since stopped being effective or useful lobbying organizations on behalf of gay and lesbian rights.

Setting aside the self-serving nature of their activities which are geared toward maintaining their positions as the voices for gays and lesbians, they're openly prioritized in their platforms things having NOTHING to do with gay people.

Gays and lesbians need to start from scratch to build organizations whose sole purpose is the advancement of gay and lesbian rights, not some rainbow coalition whose interests at best diverge and at worst actively negatively impact the lives and futures of gay people.

Just so everyone knows, a GREAT majority of T related charities along with radical T related adolescent medical care, is funded by the Pritzker family of Illinois. We're talking tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

Why do they care? Why is transing a thing to push? What is the gain to those pushing it? Please explain.

R46? Let me Google that for you!

And the Gettys, R45. They are mentioned in the article, but only in a minor way. They have been majorly funding GLAAD since the T push began because they have a trans kid.

OMG r22 you are so right! All of that is totally something Edina Monsoon would do.

Funnily enough, the only time I’ve found GLAAD effective in recent years is in the period where they were apparently nearly broke. Around 2012, when hey were doing the Boy Scouts thing and really holding the marriage bigots to the fire, they were actually acting like advocates. But I guess that wasn’t as profitable.

Hope they shut down

Good for them! I hope they are having a fuckload of fun spending it. And I never donated to them anyway without thinking "they're just blowing it on whores and drugs and bathhouses".

Jeff Varner reads them to FILTH.

[quote]GLAAD is 100% a trans organization today. And queer too. When anything queer gets shoved down our throats or in the faces of our children, it is my firm belief GLAAD is behind it in someway. They not only have removed gay men from their website and their mission, they’ve literally labeled us outdated slurs. See their resource guide. There is a concerted effort in my opinion to erase homosexuality. In the effort to convert gay kids, lure kids into transition, and eliminate same sex attraction, there’s all kinds of smoke coming from under the doors of that place. I’m so happy someone is finally looking for the fire.

What do they actually do, besides 'issue a statement' when a trannie is murdered or something?

[quote] I canceled my NYT subscription because of all the negative Biden coverage

[bold]r26 Cancels NY Times Subscription And Why This Is Bad For Harris[/bold]

R52 = Andy Cohen

Has she hosted any lavish dinners at HAGS?

Someone should have tossed out the old, moldy container of GLAAD from the back of the refrigerator years ago. But now, it's still there pretending to be in your best interests and quite delicious and important, too!

Can I put you down as a Table Captain?

Why is young Trisha Yearwood pictured at the article in OP's link?

Lots of opportunity in the non profit grift!

^you're telling me!^

[quote]Lots of opportunity in the non profit grift!

Yes we know. But we'd never considered the LGBTQIA2S+ nonprofits before.

Thanks for pointing us in that direction.

[quote]GLAAD’s Rich Ferraro tells THR. “The tabloid-esque article excludes much of our critical advocacy work and grossly mischaracterizes the organization, which consistently garners top marks from charity rating organizations. The Times should spend more time and resources bringing its coverage of transgender people up to par.”

Of course, there's always the opportunity to sue the Times, but somehow I don't think GLAAD will.

And I did love that there's no mention of gays and lesbians in this statement, but guess who pops up at the end?

When I think of GLAAD and HRC, I feel…abandoned and ignored. They don’t care about grassroots, everyday gays and lesbians…transgender people have become a pet project for them. And of course you should be well off, white and attractive. But what organization doesn’t cater to the elites? I gave up on the NAACP for the same reasons.

Agree with you about ignoring gays and lesbians, R64, but disagree about the white an attractive part. These days, they don’t want white attractive people; they want overweight trans people of color. It’s actually very hard to find the old image of an attractive gay couple. Sara Kate is actually an anomaly in this sense.

That’s a real woman?

I guess lesbian was sort of the only choice.

Anyone giving them a dime is brain dead. Unless they are billionaires pushing a 100% trans agenda. Then it makes sense

Psst Sarah....over here it's Sam!! I got some good dresses for you gurl!!!!!

I too am shocked that the CEO of GLAAD is a lesbian, and not a Tranny. How is that possible in 2024??

Does this Marie Antoinette even eat pussy or just cake?

R64, look up Gay Men’s Health Crisis.

GIRL. Last night, just before the story dropped, GLAAD scrubbed its website of its board of directors.

They KNOW they're in deep doo-doo.

Never trust anyone with three names.

Oh, she will be replaced with a tranny. Mark my words.

[quote]Ms. Ellis used private car services at the recommendation of a security consultant, who was hired after Ms. Ellis and others received threats.

I don't see those threats going away anytime soon.

R69, I just assumed she was a trans woman given the organization's recent push to erase gay men from its mission statement. A mistaken impression the photo in the original post did nothing to correct.

This undoubtedly happens at most non profits. I’ve never worked for one but friends who have have repeatedly told about low salaries and minimal raises while the top dogs flew first class, took limos and stayed in first class hotels.

More than any one group, GLAAD is the reason why LGB and T rights are now inextricably linked despite being wildly different and in some cases at direct odds. GLAAD is why you started seeing trans stuff everywhere around 2013-2016. It wasn’t an accident. It was a concerted push.

Making matters worse, GLAAD spokesman tries to blame NYT story on dispute over reporting on Trans issues.

Just an FYI!! Not so such the Getty's anymore!!

The Pritzker family, the 1 he-she tranny has 3 billion of her own money!!

This cow is making $700K to $1.3M in salary plus lavish travel expenses and holiday lets all in the name of GLAAD business and she has the nerve "to expense" $20,000 in renovations and art upgrades (from Etsy!) to the room she uses for Zoom meetings. You'd think she could spend less than a week's salary ($25,000) of her own fucking money for her own fucking art as a backdrop for her Zooming, or use a blank accent wall the better to show off her peroxided hair. Shameless.

GLAAD has been good at graft for ages now, but this is entirely a new level. Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals would be much better off without this useless organzation.

I’m thinking these charity rating sites are bullshit too.

Guarantee you will see no contrition for GLAAD. The only people defending them on social media are current or former staffers or people who are somehow entangled, and yet they will dig in their heels and claim this is a retaliatory hatchet job from the NYT. They no longer answer to their constituents. They have appointed themselves our overlords, with trans rights the main demand.

I got a very nice call from my boss in NYC yesterday telling me to give a call back to some attorney from GLAAD.

I told Big G that I got the message too but ignored him because the GLAAD attorney was told at least 6 times that the monies have dried up& will never be donated to them. I told my boss I will call him back and remind him why the donations were cancelled.

Grifters Love Attention And Dollars

Sarah Kate Ellis is totally the type who doesn't bother with the "little people." You have to be rich/famous/influential or she won't give you the time of day.

Bravo, PhillyWhore!

Not to sound sexist but considering that there are many fewer lesbians than there are gay men, it's odd to me that GLAAD has a female chief executive, a female CFO (who has apparently left), a female COO and a female chair of the board of directors. Why is that?

Not wrong, R85

GLAAD doesn’t do much other than throw galas and put out an annual media report do this doesn’t surprise me. I always felt like it would be a lot better use of their budget to actually fund some queer media instead of just talking about how many or few LGBTQ characters there are per year.

No, R38. She’s a C.

Boss babe!

You're right, R59!!! And all this time I was wondering who she looked like.

Of course, I always had my suspicions about her -- and even more so after she married Garth Brooks. A little too convenient...

But I digress.

Mmm, this is delicious turn of events.

BLM folks were accused of the same thing.

Such a great take-down, and all the journalist does is state the facts. Mr. Ferrarro comes off even worse of a sleaze ball than the subject.

Congrats to Emily Steel!

Anyone in-the-know is aware GLAAD has been full of shit since the 90s. It’s a little heart breaking to read all the comments in the original NYT article of people saying just now that they’re shocked and won’t be sending the organization anymore money. Still, I’m glad this article happened.

One year ago a coalition of more than 100 LGBTQ organizations and notables called out the New York Times’ pattern of publishing inaccurate, biased pieces about transgender people that are regularly used by extremist lawmakers and extremist organizations in court as justification for banning trans people from accessing best practice medical care.

GLAAD, the world’s largest LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) media advocacy organization, was among those in the coalition demanding better from the Times.

To date, the coalition has not received a response from the Times. The coalition had three asks of the newspaper, none of which appear to have been met.

Demands from the 100-plus organizations and notables (full list below) signed onto coalition letter on February 15, 2023:

Stop printing biased anti-trans stories, immediately. Listen to trans people: hold a meeting with trans community leaders within two months. Hire at least four full-time trans writers and editors within three months. On the one year anniversary of the letter’s publication GLAAD returned to the New York Times headquarters with a digital billboard.

“The New York Times’ inaccurate, irresponsible coverage of the transgender community is regularly utilized by extremist lawmakers to justify taking away best practice health care from youth,” said GLAAD President & CEO Sarah Kate Ellis. “The Times has continued down its path of ignoring the trans community, their healthcare providers, and medical experts.

They have not taken our coalition up on our offer to meet with leaders from the trans community, nor have they hired any trans journalists full time, and have gone so far as to discipline their employees for bringing up valid and accurate critique of the newspaper’s trans coverage. As the Times continues down this path, they become more irrelevant every day. We remain eager to meet with the Times to help correct these coverage failures.”

R97 Too little, too late GLAAD!

LOL this last line of one of the comments at the NYT:

“The organization's acronym does not express my feelings at the moment.”

[quote]As the Times continues down this path, they become more irrelevant every day. We remain eager to meet with the Times to help correct these coverage failures.” [GLAAD quote in r97]

And as GLAAD continues down its path, it's going to be a national organization with a membership consisting solely of its own board members.

Here in Sydney we have ACON - the AIDS Council of New South Wales. Established in 1985, the title is self-explanatory. But now AIDS is a manageable condition and new HIV infections are stable or falling. So why does ACON still exist? To quote from a website set up to expose this:

"With substantial and increasing public funding, ACON has become Australia’s largest LGBTQI+ charity, and is currently receiving over $17 million in government funding per year. With its focus now on the gender identity ideology movement, it has successfully introduced concepts of Queer Theory into Australian public bodies including the media and education departments, and these concepts are increasingly being enshrined in school curriculums and legislature in a manner that is undermining and replacing women’s and girl’s sex-based rights. This work has also served to act against the interests of the LGB communities ACON is funded to represent."

Interesting—r101.

Organizations are self-perpetuating and are not inclined to say “mission accomplished,” pat themselves on the back, and go away. Charities formed during the AIDS crisis and when gays and lesbians were oppressed have to find a new “mission.” I think a large part of the trans and queer (whatever that means) movement is the result of these organizations existing, having a pool of money and talent, and looking for something to justify their continued existence.

Unlike past presidents, Sarah Kate did not have a background in activism. She had never been on the front lines of anything. She got on the LGBT radar because she and her wife were one of the attractive kissing couples featured on a series of Time magazine covers about marriage equality. When she came to GLAAD, she saw it through the lens of communications and, specifically, marketing. She was the first head to seem to want the organization to be what its critics had claimed it to be. Under her leadership, galas and courting billionaires and a serving as a glossy PR shop for the movement became not only the main focus, but the only focus. She also saw herself as a star and made every effort to market herself as such. This behavior may be coming out now, but it’s been a long time coming.

Gross. Her boobs are too big for anyone to take her seriously as an executive. FIre her immediately but drag here through the mud more. Make an example out of her. Bring in an outside consultant to redo all salaries, bonus structures and travel policies.

An outside consultant can’t save them.

She recieved a $100,000 signing bous. What is she a Dominican second-baseman?

Their board is pathetic. Frankie Grande is on it… so he can lure his sister to events, no doubt.

They need to clean house.

Like Black Lives Matter. Started out right, then taken over by a few who spent millions on houses and made excuses for spending. Now BLM means "Big Large Mansions. As for donors, "Thank you, fuck you"

But what about the sparkly mix of red carpet arrivals, self laudatory main stage moments and grift bags?

[quote]as GLAAD continues down its path,

it will expect elegantly appointed tables with linen cloths, crystal, silver and individualized catering tailored to each of these smug, spoiled, entitled assholes.

These Nazis who push gay conversion therapy aka transitioning should be locked in prison. LOCK HER UP!

I’m not convinced that “she” doesn’t have a dick.

R103 - somehow this woman from a no-name college was able to get her career started at Conde Nast, which had very sought after positions in the 90s.

Her wiki is weird - just very generic. Obviously she knows how the publishing and PR world works, so there's that - but her knowledge isn't exactly uncommon in NYC.

All non-profit execs need to be audited every year. This is bullshit.

Look - execs need to be paid relatively well - but this is insane.

This organization’s sole purpose is to push the Tranny Agenda. You have to wonder why “Trans” doesn’t appear anywhere in their name.

R87 that’s what is happening across many industries. These Woke SSRI-eyed White Women are taking over and putting their white cunt cronies in the rest of the positions. They hire 1 or 2 obedient black women with funky hairstyles and rad fashion for some token and bullshit peacock position like “Director of DEI”, and then they pat themselves on the back for being so progressive and virtuous, while emptying the company coffers to cosplay as some passive aggressive, deranged, virtue-signaling corporate version of Marie Antoinette. They are a scourge in business and anyone who has worked for one will tell that they are fucking evil, abusive monsters far beyond any man.

Oh, brother.

Done, R114. And eleven years ago:

[quote]On March 24, 2013, GLAAD announced that it had formally dropped the "Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation" from their name and would now be known only as GLAAD to reflect their work more accurately; the name change was a commitment to incorporate bisexual and transgender people in their efforts to support the LGBTQ+ community in its entirety

R117 source: Wiki

[quote]the name change was a commitment to incorporate bisexual and transgender people in their efforts to support the LGBTQ+ community in its entirety

As well as a commitment to suck up every possible penny of donations in sight.

The only gay charity I've ever donated to has been hospice care for HIV positive and a shelter for homeless gay youth. The rest of them are a bunch of fabulous bullshitters and it's idiocy to give 'em a dime. The NYT story is proof. And I loathe the NYT.

How does shortening the name to the acronym reflect an expanded commitment?

R115 Perfectly stated.

Why would trans people even *want* to be represented by a bunch of lesbians, rather than by trans people? It makes no sense. The trans community is just piggybacking on the infrastructure that gays and lesbians created years ago, and the people who run that infrastructure now sees trans people as their way of maintaining the gravy train. Meanwhile the interests of actual gays and lesbians are ignored.

Never trust a blonde straight woman executive. NEVER

She’s not straight.

R117 - but what they hell have they done for bisexuals? Aren't the rights of gays and lesbians, by their nature, a benefit to bisexuals? How are they any different? Can someone name a bisexual issue that is uniquely different?

Meanwhile - T issues are a completely different subset.

And they didn't change their name - they still go by the acronym, so this is just bullshit posturing. Who is giving to these organizations anymore? Sounds like straight people and businesses cuz I don't see gays and lesbians emptying their pocketbooks for this nonsense.

HRC is next.

What R101 & R102 posted is correct!! The shift is towards the B's and the T's in terms of money. HIV& AIDS fundraising is more geared to the Trannies& Bi's and other messed up shit that they believe. The MONIES to the gays & Lesbians is over, the trannies got it now

To R120 , I do the same thing with my clients money, hospice care for HIV positive& foster care& Shelter for Homeless Gay& Lesbian youth, plus shelters for animals with medical care. As long as I can keep my name out of it, I'm fine with that. It is amazing the grift that is available for people who figure it out.

I've seen this happen before with 501(c))3)s and similar (scamevanglist come to mind). Their never seems to be anyone with juice to say 'NO, you can't do that'. Why, oh why don't these groups put in writing policies and practices regarding this type of spending?

Even if all of this is true, why does it only matter when the org represents oppressed people? You see these accusations hurled at BLM as well. Never at other orgs.

It’s almost as if someone wants to discredit the orgs’ work on behalf of gay, black, and other victims of discrimination. 🤔

GLAAD needs a complete reset. In board. In staffing. But also in purpose.

I think HRC is going to go bankrupt or absorb into another charity, whatever idiot gives the HRC money is fucking stupid.

I told a HRC fundraiser in June, 2024 in DC, if the HRC stands for "Hillary Rodman Clinton" I'll give money to them. Other than that much like Gladd, the money train from my boss's companies is OVER. It's been over for years, not coming back, get the trans to give u their company donations.

Unfortunately there is no viable way to fix GLAAD because the trans agenda has derailed it. Anyone who takes the leadership will have to go all-in on ideas that are scientifically and logically unsupportable, not to mention antithetical to LGB and women’s rights. It might sound reductive, but the T has ruined the possibility of LGB groups being what they were or might have been.

[quote]They need to clean house.

They need to close up shop.

I remember when they announced the name change. It was at one of their awards shows and their president at the time, who seemed drunk, slurred out the worst explanation for why they would still be called GLAAD but with no meaning attached to the acronym. It made absolutely no sense because it makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.

They need to go dilate.

R130 that’s your confirmation bias. It’s just like how when a thread is opened that criticizes a woman or black person posters start screeching “racist!”, “misogyny!” and saying “you would never speak about a man, especially a straight man this way!” while ignoring the thousands of threads that tear men (straight & gay) to shreds.

Several charities have faced scrutiny over spending by their CEOs or other employees. Some major examples:

1. **United Way**: In the early 2000s, the United Way faced criticism over excessive salaries and lavish spending by its CEO and executives.

2. **American Red Cross**: The American Red Cross has faced criticism for its handling of funds, particularly in after major disasters like Hurricane Katrina.

3. **Wounded Warrior Project**: This organization came under fire for its high executive salaries and extravagant spending on conferences and events.

And let’s not even start with Goodwill. I’ll await your reasonable response.

[quote] GLAAD doesn’t do much other than throw galas

Don’t forget HRC.

GLAAD made that announcement that the G and L in GLAAD no longer stands for gay and lesbian because it’s not inclusive. That’s when I was done with them.

They weren’t trying to exclude gays and lesbians. They were trying to be more inclusive.

You don’t like it but you seem to hate trans people.

[quote] The only gay charity I've ever donated to has been hospice care for HIV positive

Who goes into hospice care for being HIV positive? Maybe in third world countries.

R140 is a retard who can’t read. Must be the synthetic hormones growing tumors in his brain.

R140 is a nasty psychopath cunt

White gay men are the ones who have all the money. Nothing can get funded without them. GLAAD has become a joke.

[quote]Even if all of this is true, why does it only matter when the org represents oppressed people? You see these accusations hurled at BLM as well. Never at other orgs

Fucking hell, R130 would apply the advice to "take whatever crumbs fall from the table, no matter how small and putrid." R130 will happily overlook corrupt board members who fleece the organization, and funders with very specific agendas that have fuck all to do with advocacy for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals except to fleece them for GLAAD Gala tickets.

Why? Because R130 is not sure of the veracity of any of this avalanche of years and decades of allegations, now having sunk to a new and unprecedented low of shameless and sham? Because R130 thinks the officers are GLAAD have been targeted and are themselves victims - victims of gays and lesbians and bisexuals who dare not ask anything of their "leaders"? Because we're all fucking victims and it's a plot?

R130 deserves better than such dirt low expectations.

And anybody but an arch enemy deserves an organization more useful than GLAAD.

[quote] never seems to be anyone with juice to say 'NO, you can't do that'.

In fairness, the ethical and frankly brave, CFO called it out. And now they trashed her publicly for her efforts.

To R141, there are hospices in the US for HIV positive men and women (Lesbian& Gay patients too)

Too many Str8 drug addict are becoming infected with HIV due to working the streets or sharing needles.

To R144-you are correct, and now we want a "big mother fucking say in where our money is going who it is supporting"

I'm surprised the NY Times allowed comments for that article. They're mostly negative.

The money, perks and bonuses being handed out to this cunt are akin to a Latin American dictator.

The reaction is almost exclusively negative across all social media, not just the NYT comments. But rather than apologize, GLAAD is blaming the Times for being “anti-trans.” All LGB people should be offended.

Their utterly unrepentant response really shows the internal attitude there, even more so than the story itself.

Unfortunately, it also suggests they know their funding from institutional investors is secure so they don't need to be concerned at what individual donors think. Hopefully the IRS takes up the case.

I meant to say institutional donors, of course. Though, given most are donating not out of philanthropy but to get something out of it, maybe investors is right after all.

GLAAD is basically a social networking organization for wealthy A-Listers. They don't give a fuck about ordinary gay men and lesbians who have been attacked, harrassed, fired from their jobs etc. It's a total joke.

How can you take seriously an organization that has a board member named “Peppermint”.

R141, to reduce your ignorance:

R155, are you Canadian?

R140 - why does the gay and lesbian movement have to be inclusive of EVERYTHING?

Straight people who call themselves queer but have never slept with someone of the same sex, asexuals, people who say they're multiple genders, transexuals, etc.

None of that has anything to do with gays and lesbians.

No - start your own stuff. We fought DECADES to build and strengthen these organizations through our own money and literal blood. Why do we have to change our interests to include people we really don't have anything in common with?

r157 it's madness

No, R156. Why?

When this started, Ts were a small group who were not otherwise represented, so we adopted them. Who knew that all that “visibility” we provided would lead to an epidemic of gender nonconformity?

[quote] Like Black Lives Matter. Started out right, then taken over by a few who spent millions on houses and made excuses for spending

Don’t think that wasn’t be LEO design, the same way unions were infiltrated by and taken over by the mob. Police and crooked judges and lawyers looked the other way while unions begged them to arrest criminals who were rubbing out the genuine labor leaders. True labor leaders were murdered by Pinkertons while the Goodfellas gang were handed unions on a platter.

In 1970s the black panthers were so thoroughly infiltrated by FBI via informants (who were threatened with life imprisonment sentences after being snared in set ups by LEO) that in the end it was just informants informing on other informants.

Look at the ACLU. When was the last time they genuinely represented a good group of people and did it for the good of the country? Totally infiltrated. Environmental groups like Sierra Club, infiltrated. AstroTurf groups destroyed real citizens groups.

It’s the techniques of international spy craft and industrial espionage being used against grass roots movements to keep citizens confused and agitated.

Too bad we can’t access comments via archive ph

R148, they close the comment section quickly.

R156 aren’t end of life care and infections covered by Canadian health care system? Why does there need to be a separate charity for something that’s paid for?

R164, to provide a customized level of personal care, above what the system pays for.

Fourteen beds? Who decides which people get beds?

For the benefit of R164.

Opened in 1988 during the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, Casey House has a long and proud history in Toronto. Founded by a group of intrepid volunteers led by journalist and activist June Callwood, Casey House was Canada’s first stand-alone treatment facility for people living with HIV/AIDS, and Ontario’s first free-standing hospice.

At the time of our founding, the average life expectancy for people living with AIDS was nine months. Many people were dying alone, cut off from the support of family, friends, and the medical community because of stigma. Guided by the strong conviction that when a person is dying, they should do so according to their own wishes, surrounded by loving caregivers, June Callwood’s goal was to create a place of medical excellence in HIV/AIDS treatment and, most importantly, a place of love and compassion. When the first client arrived at our front door he was greeted with a hug – it was the first time he’d been touched in months.

Our founders believed that everyone deserved to be cared for with dignity and compassion. They created new approaches to palliative care, and played a leading role in both end-of-life care and HIV/AIDS health care, delivered in a welcoming and homelike environment.

“We wanted Casey House to be a place where people who were dying would feel loved, and get hugged.” – Margaret McBurney, co-founder of Casey House

Over the years Casey House evolved from a hospice to a specialty hospital, providing care and support for people living with and at risk of HIV. Today, Casey House remains a warm and welcoming place, where we provide compassionate, judgment-free and socially-just health care.

R157 because homosexuality is inherently gender nonconformity and if you let right wing Christian nationalists attack one form of gender nonconformity they will not hesitate to come for you respectability politics gays & lesbians next…it’s a trap you’re walking right into

Or, homosexuality is a sexual orientation where biological men and women are attracted to members of the same biological sex.

Bullshit, R169. The crazy Christians can do what they want, but we had reached a crucial critical mass of public support by 2016. The constant trans shit has made us lose support and has alienated a lot of smart gays and (especially) lesbians.

R169 - bullshit - how our we inherently gender non-conforming? We don't dress up as a different gender. Yes there are some Nellie queens and butch dykes - but that's what 10-15?

And if a woman looking a bit masculine was gender non-conforming, then most of the Midwest farmer wives would be non-conforming as well.

Stop just spewing bullshit you've read - think about it instead of just blindly repeating what others say.

And who says that gays and lesbians should take in non-gender conforming people? What the hell does that have to do with us?

Listen up, you fags & dykes, the trans community are your new overlords, & you will bow in our presence!

By the way, could you drop some cash in my "Go Fund Me"? I've already spent my disability check & food stamps this month.

My friend’s boyfriend was nominated for a GLAAD award for a tv show he worked on.

He had to pay $500 to attend the awards.

Bringing your boyfriend? Another $500, please.

They make you pay to attend.... FUCK THAT SHIT!!

Yep. I know others in the same boat, R174. They don’t automatically invite nominees, not even the winners.

I hope Ellis is living it up in Ptown this weekend.

This is their inadequate response.

I hope they all go down like a plane crash. And shutter the doors and transfer what's left after their $500,000 Davos ski chalet rentals to other organizations - ANY other organizations (the worst could scarcely be as bad as this farce.)

[quote]And let us be clear – where we’ve needed to introduce new policies or practices to uphold that stewardship in a way that’s congruent with our growth, we’re doing it

Yes, as the article made clear, you changed the rules to exclude your execs from the rules which apply to everyone else in order to allow them to continue to waste money

Their official statement about the article is pretty low-impact. Seems designed to “grey rock” anyone looking for intrigue. I’m sure their strategy here is to hope this whole thing becomes invisible and people forget about it.

Saying they’re “introducing new policies” probably isn’t the best phrase to use. Apparently they do that all the time!

[quote]To further strengthen our financial practices as we continue to grow, we engaged leading audit firm Marc and leading nonprofit financial consulting firm BDO in late Spring 2024 for strategic financial support, including a comprehensive analysis of our expenses.

And they gave us several fabulous meals at world-renowned restaurants.

BLM was started by three insane lesbians. No one bothered to read their original manifesto. The only surprise was that the three were also crooks. AClU’s main focus these day is editing speeches to remove the word woman. Not inclusive enough. Many if not most charities exist to enrich the leaders not do good works. But I give GLADD credit for pissing away money in really OTT ways. No conspiracy theories about infiltration needed.

Buyer beware in all things.

"Quelle surprise!" personne n'a dit!

And we know Marsha P. Johnson was not trans and didn't throw the first brick at Stonewall.

Let’s have another gala!

Gays and lesbians are inherently non-gender conforming in our choice of partners. Being gay is going against traditional gender roles in a fundamental way. Traditional gender roles are not just about clothing and mannerisms and interests. They dictate whom you’re supposed to be attracted to.

[quote]because homosexuality is inherently gender nonconformity

Trans people are gender-nonconforming in their head. Gays and lesbians are gender-nonconforming in their genes. There's a gargantuan difference.

How are you so sure there is no biological reason for transgender non-conformity?

R187 - says you. There's homosexual behavior and coupling found in most mammal species. It's a small behavioral trait that is part of the two genders - it's not strictly unnatural or gender non-conforming.

But trans people ARE gender conforming - they don't want to be non-conformists, they want to switch genders completely. That's conforming. How does that have ANYTHING to do with LGB?

Guess what? Transvestites and cross-dressers, who are largely heterosexual, aren't gender-conforming - but do you see them trying to take over the LGB space? Should we change our space to cater to cross-dressers and transvestites now?

You gotta let this non-conformity line of reasoning go - you're trying to form a connection between LGB and trans and there just isn't one.

And the same goes for this bullshit 'non-binary' cult. We don't want you either. If a guy wants to wear a bit of eyeliner or put on some heels - fine - but that doesn't make you a third gender somehow. You're just a man in eyeliner or heels.

That statement is long on big words and short on specifics.

They're turtling, hoping it will go away.

[quote] There's homosexual behavior and coupling found in most mammal species. It's a small behavioral trait that is part of the two genders - it's not strictly unnatural or gender non-conforming.

I didn’t say it was “unnatural.”

Marrying your own sex certainly does go against traditional gender roles. Arguing otherwise is ridiculous.

That’s exactly right, R190. Trans is the ultimate gender conformity, at a 1950’s June Cleaver level. It’s at odds with what we gay activists used to know and preach: that things like clothes or makeup do not make one more or less of a man or woman.

Back to GLAAD: a PTown friend told me Sarah Kate was on the beach all weekend.

Going out to work and not being a housewife and mother goes against traditional gender roles.

Men taking paternity leave goes against traditional gender roles.

Gender roles reflect styles, conventions and the evolution of human thought.

Sex has not changed since the beginning of time. There are biological males and females.

R194 - thanks - I was just typing the same thing. Just because homosexuality has been taboo and not been a traditional or accepted behavior doesn't it make it any less than an observable natural behavior for both genders.

By your way of thinking, since all gender non-conforming behavior should be under the LGB umbrella and protection, then we should open up our spaces and platforms to cross-dressers, stay at home dads, female mechanics or police officers, etc?

The mental gymnastics some of you go through to justify handing over all of our organizations to the Trans community is insane.

What should happen but won’t: A complete relaunch of GLAAD in which it is divided into two groups. One is a media monitoring, activist organization focused on LGB issues and LGB issues only. Even with so many of your fights behind us, there is still a place for advocating on behalf of little LGB kids, struggling adults, etc.

The other can be a T group that tries to make that, a far from settled case.

R195, I'm gonna make a slight correction to "doesn't it make it any less than an observable natural behavior for both genders."

Doesn't it make it any less than an observable natural behavior for both sexes.

That's the crux of it. Homosexuality and bi-sexuality is not an issue of identity or convention. It is as innate to the individual as their sex organs. Lumping us in with the identity nuts makes no sense beyond a general support for people living their lives in peace and dignity. But then we should feel that way against all people whose lifestyle choices fall outside the norms or the usual, from trans to immigrants.

R197 - to add to that is the issue of understanding and representation. How do gays and lesbians have any TRUE understanding of trans issues other than empathy and what they've read? Conversely, how are trans people going to advocate for gays and lesbians? (I've never seen that at an organization level anyway - but I digress.)

I don't know and can't fully understand what it's like to be transgendered. I can be empathetic and supportive as a gay man, but I'm probably not the best person to lead the discussion or fight for legislation.

Obviously all groups have allies and support from people who aren't part of that group. But I don't see the board of NOW being populated by men. I don't see NAACP headed up by white people? I don't see the Jewish Defense League headed up by Christian Evangelicals?

That's why trans need to go their own way. Their fight isn't our fight and never will be.

Does Ellis take the GLAAD helicopter out to PTown?

R197 & R198 nailed it. I used to follow the creature posted @ R173 on Facebook, he identifies as a 1950's lesbian housewife, in other words, he lives in a fantasy world. Michelle hasn't been gainfully employed in years, claims to be disabled, but, once admitted he doesn't like having a job & prefers to sleep all day. In order to be a 1950's lesbian housewife, you have to be a time traveler, have a partner & not be the owner of a penis, Michelle meets none of these requirements.

Head of GLAAD seems to be a 200K a year position. Who puts up with this shit, especially donors? Suckers.

You should see the Wymon Run Centre which is the Victorian Pride Centre in Melbourne Australia. Trans / Wymon everything. Gay went out the window over here too.

[quote] No, [R156]. Why?

That’s a Canadian web site.

It used to be in that ballpark, r201. Now the communications director makes almost 300k! It’s nuts.

Who hasn’t the show messed up in some way? Whether families or marriages or health or sanity, virtually every single cast member gets poisoned eventually. Jackie got in too deep and it changed her.

Oops. Sorry, wrong thread.

When I began working in the late 1970s, in the absurdly sexist male-dominated corporate structure, I believed that women are 'better' than men, less greedy or unethical. OK, I was young and naive. But then in the early 2020s, right before I retired, I encountered or observed several corporate women who were just greedy bitches. This was when private equity started buying up companies and corporations, and the executives they hired were blatantly grifters. Like the woman CEO who got her M.D. from a third-tier college, but once she got in that corporate position she was never in the office and was taking cruises to Antarctica and flying everywhere in a private jet.

Then there was the woman who was hired as President of a local community college who required a chauffeured SUV with an armed escort, plus a yearly salary of at least $1 million, and golden parachutes and bonuses. Meanwhile the college paid part-time teachers a pittance.

Makes me ashamed to be a woman.

So the board is just going to ignore this and pretend it never happened. No sincerity toward donors whatsoever. They will just go on raising money to sustain their own extravagance. They will never get another penny from me.

To R208...Yes, they will ignore it and pretend this never happened! The board of GLAAD are following their fearless leader, even when she flies off the cliff. Monies(donations) are drying up& there is only so much "Trans $$$$" they can get their hands on!!

The board will come to their senses when it becomes clear that donors have closed their wallets.

In time most non profits find themselves more dedicated to sustaining the organization rather than advancing its mission.

R211 I don't think that is true. Not "most". I would say many, sure.

I’ve worked in nonprofits over the past 36 years. This isn’t the norm at most. I think it happens more at less formalized smaller organizations that are under the sway of a charismatic founder/ leader or at larger organizations that have a weak board comprised of individuals who come from extra cushy private sector jobs in fields like entertainment and or VC.

This is what happens the minute you get too many stars involved.

Very grand non-profits with hundreds of millions or billions in endowments can offer sky high executive suite salaries and fringe benefits. Harvard is a non-profit. The Metropolitan Museum is a non profit. This folie de grandeur at GLAAD is offensive, ridiculous, and unethical. Garbage people. Embarrassing.

What a hard looking woman at the link.

Excellent article in The Atlantic on this story and how GLAAD and other LGBT organizations have struggled to find purpose in recent years after such victories as marriage equality and the end of DADT:

That is an excellent article. It will scare the fuck out of the gay ivory tower crowd, because The Atlantic is serious business.

That's a fantastic article at R217 that says a lot of what DLers have been saying for years (only to be called anti-trans, right-wing, fascist, etc.).

Someone posted this tweet from Sarah Kate Ellis which exemplifies how dumb they’ve become. “There’s no LGBTQ without the T.” Well no shit, lady — that’s because you have force teamed all of these groups into a ridiculous acronym so that we can no longer be gay lesbian or bi. When we became an unpronounceable acronym, that’s when it all went south.

R220 = and I would say there isn't with out Gay Lesbian and Bisexual - y'know THREE out of the FOUR?

It makes me angry. The people who are the big decision makers at GLAAD are not the deep thinkers of our people, and yet they have drastically reshaped our movement. If you are a gay person with even mild criticisms or simply questions about something like youth gender transition, you are cast out as a bigot because these braintrusts say so. It’s deeply offensive to the many of us who fought so hard for our rights.

Thanks for posting that article BonniePrince. I really wish these organizations would just merge into the Trans Rights Activists Are Right About Everything society and stop pretending to be anything else, or to give a shit about gay rights apart from trans rights or whatever the fuck queer is supposed to mean.

R217 Wow, that’s Atlantic article is great. Really sums up the roots of the problem.

That was a great article. Too on point regarding the transgenda.

Gay white men get shit on constantly yet we're the ones who started and nurtured the movement and we're also the only ones who have all the fucking money to fund everything.

Not true r226. People from all backgrounds have been involved in gay rights…

If the gay rights movement had actually been in the hands of trans women of color, homosexuality would still be illegal.

James Kirchick, who wrote the Atlantic piece, is far more conservative than I but he's a good thinker and a good writer. And what he says makes sense.

R226 - actually lesbians did a lot of heavy lifting in the courts. Lesbian attorneys and plaintiffs. Considering their size, lesbians contributed a larger part to the gay rights movement than gay men. And let's not forget who was doing double-duty to help their gay brothers out during the AIDS crisis.

But yeah - it's all been co-opted willingly by these organizations. Literally with a finger snap it seems.

When one group starts to take a disproportionate amount of time and resources from an organization, it's time for it to go its own way. The trans community now is significant. They can do their own stuff now.

Let them do the hard work we had to do - the decades of lobbying, fund-raising, court battles, research, etc.

Sarah Kate Ellis, who has clearly learned nothing and has been smug in the face of accountability, showed up at the New York Liberty games, in her official capacity as a GLAAD leader, wearing Hermes sandals. Now, no one should be wearing Hermes sandals in October, but that’s another matter entirely. A nonprofit leader accused of lavish spending should not be posing in a GLAAD tshirt and an eight-hundred dollar sandal.

[quote]Let them do the hard work we had to do - the decades of lobbying, fund-raising, court battles, research, etc.

We've "let" them for a long time. They've simply refused to do it.

Like failure to launch children, they've continued to DEMAND money and time from mom and dad while telling us they hate us and can do what they want because they're mature adults.

They take OUR (gay) money and spend it on Swiss chalets and advocating for trannies. I hope the next tranny dick that gets hacked off gets shoved right down her throat.

[quote]A nonprofit leader accused of lavish spending should not be posing in a GLAAD tshirt and an eight-hundred dollar sandal.

Just the one, r233?

R234 Well, she is a lesbian.

Listen Sweetums. You better enjoy it. You better lap it up like it was cream because it’s not gonna last.