Hey, there! Log in / Register
Warren, Markey and Pressley get $850,000 in funding for housing for LGBTQ seniors in Hyde Park that Republican homophobes had earlier blocked
By adamg on Wed, 04/10/2024 - 9:11pm
Sen. Warren called LGBTQ Senior Housing Executive Director Gretchen Van Ness with the good news today.
The new 74-unit Pryde apartment building on Everett Street is New England's first apartments building aimed at LGBTQ seniors.
Developer Pennrose, working with Van Ness's group, have spent the past 18 months converting the former William Barton Rogers middle school into apartments - 50 of which are being rented as affordable.
The Biden administration had included an $850,000 grant for the project in its budget in 2023, but it was blocked in the House by Republicans who accused it of being a place to groom young children.
Stripping out the grant did not stop the project - the grant was meant to pay for such things as as furniture in community areas and a finished courtyard.
In addition to apartments, the plans called for a meeting room available to the public and space for the group that honors the 54th Massachusetts regiment, which trained in Hyde Park.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Earmarks suck.
The city and state should have funded it ourselves.
Earmarks are essential
In 2011, Congress eliminated earmarks. In 2021, they came back. What did we learn? Earmarks may seem unfair, but they are an important tool for party whips to keeps their party's members in line. Members of congress need to be able to tell their voters that they are doing things for their districts. If you remove earmarks, the only thing the member of congress can be judged on is ideological purity. When every member of congress spends their time grandstanding on social media or for the news, we have a problem.
So, sure, it's a little legalized graft, but given that congress is not a collection of mythological philosophers but are real people who act in response to an array of real incentives, they're fine. It's only a problem if it really is a bridge to nowhere or if the congress member's buddies are getting the contracts.
Bi-partisanship
They're also important for bipartisanship, which is especially important when congress is so narrowly divided. Regular, normal funding bills, authorizations, confirmations, etc need to continue, and earmarks are a way to get congresscritters to come together and vote on regular business.
Oh, is that outraged people pounding on keyboards I hear?
No, straight people are not barred from the building - anybody who applied for the lottery for one of the apartments (and who met income eligibility for the affordable units) was eligible should their application be picked. Going forward, anybody can apply for an apartment when vacancies open up (again, subject to income limits for the affordable units).
It's just the marketing was focused on the LGBTQ community, as will be any programs meant specifically for residents of the building.
Why so angry?
Two comments and one of them is yours. You even beat Lee to comment.
Are you getting a lot of private push back or something? I’m honestly confused by your post.
Becuz prior coverage ...
Both here and elsewhere has created a strong contingent of ill-informed persons getting jiggy with God, country and "but the children" and then making ridiculous assumptions and assertions.
Makes sense to me
I think Adam’s getting out ahead of the not-yet-existent comments he’s replying to, because such comments are so very predictable.
Yeah, that's it
I'm not angry, but, yes, just trying to deal with the sort of comment this project has gotten in the past. And, yes, I don't normally do that.
It's a great project
Very well designed adaptive reuse of an old school and I can't wait for it to be occupied !
Just check out the original Twitter post
by Sen. Warren for countless examples of the angry backlash against this project and the LGBTQ+ community. You're not wrong, Adam!
Since you seem curious, bobo, …
… I think it’s a fine thing to market to a segment of the population that may have experienced or fear marginalization. It’s also fine that there is no illegal discrimination going on, despite what some people may assume.
I only regret that this project was awarded to an out of state developer and management company rather than our well respected and long established local non profit organization, Rogerson Communities.
You’ve got your main question answered above.
Lest you and others forget ...
Adam has to read all the anonymous asshole comments and spike them so we never have to see how stupid, bigoted, and brutal brainwashed bots can be.
Needs
The only thing I'm wondering about as an LGBTQIA+ male over 65 myself is exactly how the "needs" of LGBTQIA+ seniors are different than the needs of any other seniors. I have both gay and straight friends and, honestly, our needs at this age don't seem all that different. Unless it's more a social thing. Maybe some LGBTQIA+ folks feel more at ease in housing with other LGBTQIA+ folks? (I myself never tire of rambling on about the old days and "oh, remember the 1270 in the 1970s when the drinking age was 18", etc, and it's good to have somebody who knows what I'm talking about). But other than that, it seems like a further Balkanization, of the kind so prevalent now, to me.
The Fair Housing Act
The Fair Housing Act prohibits the denial of housing based race, religion, or sex but there is no federal law that explicitly protects people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/lgbtq-seniors-fear-discrimination-when...
Which might be relevant in another state, but ...
In Massachusetts, the state fair-housing law specifically includes "gender identity" and "sexual orientation" as being prohibited reasons for barring somebody from housing.
So the recent redevopment of the Lenox Apt
Violoate both the MA and Federal Fair Housing laws?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/lenox-aparcootments-boston-s-...
You're reading that wrong
No, the city did not just announce its first housing project for Black people.
What it announced was a major renovation of a project that, historically, was the first BHA project for Black people - built in an era when the BHA was as segregated as Boston schools.
But today? Don't fret: If you meet the income requirements, you, too can apply for an apartment no matter how pale your skin is.
That’s great to hear
Maybe it’s a throwback to earlier times when gays weren’t allowed to marry and had difficulty adopting? A lot of childless singles that need a community.
Might be more relevant for trans people, especially in old age they are vulnerable to physical attacks and discrimination in healthcare.
two neighbors had lived
two neighbors had lived together for ages, the one who owned the condo passed away unexpectedly. as they were not married and family was not approving of his "lifestyle" they kicked out the partner who didn't have a lot of money. This would be great for people in similar situations that still exist and of course multiple other stories
Trusts
Which a good reminder to make sure you have wills and trusts set up, especially if there could be complicated inheritance upon your passing.
"male" may have something to do with it
Straight-looking straight-acting white gay men who are now of "retirement age" (ha, as if), as a group, experienced much less economic discrimination than the entire rest of the LGBTQIA+ community. If you're in that group, your financial picture is likely much rosier than that of the rest of us for numerous reasons.
"who are now of "retirement age" (ha, as if)"
A comment that sounds arrogant and immature.
Guess what deary dear, there are many "Straight-looking straight-acting white gay men" who never managed to live the life of Riley, with regular vacations in Provincetown and Key West, regular dinners at 4 star restaurants, fabulous trips around the world, etc.
If you were to spend some time in reality, instead of pounding courageous exclamations on the keyboard, and actually come to know of "Straight-looking straight-acting white gay men" who are over 65 you will find many men who have lived with chronic health issues, grew up at a time when daily life was a trauma of hiding their sexuality lest they be beaten or actually killed, and have survived despite the scars of having been treated as subhuman for much of their lives.
Add the Straight-looking straight-acting white gay men who are dead from AIDS or murders. Would you whine about Matthew Sheppard as having been a "Straight-looking straight-acting white gay" man?
Umm
What are you on about? Other than finding a new abuse target now that Cybah said fuck off?
As if? How is that arrogant when many will never be able to retire?
Start reading for comprehension before letting loose the flying monkeys from your anxiety closet.
Leave yourself alone, "deary dear"
Your outrage is misplaced. My comment was in response to a gay man who didn't see the need for LGBTQ-focused senior housing. I don't know his specific situation, but clearly he doesn't have housing insecurity or concerns about being able to support himself, and if you don't think that sex and gender conformity have a lot to do with that, you're disingenuous. Or maybe you're one of those "I got paid shit wages and therefore the gender wage gap is not a thing" dudes?
The need is enormous!
If you think about it, this generation of LGBTQ+ elders came of age when there were no laws protecting our community from discrimination and harassment, when every major medical and psychological association said that we were mentally ill, and when every major religion condemned us. Coming out often meant losing your family, your faith community, and your home. Courts routinely held that just being LGBTQ+ made you an unfit parent, foster parent, and adoptive parent. You could be dishonorably discharged from the military, denying you veterans benefits for the rest of your life. During the AIDS epidemic, long before equal marriage, if your partner died intestate you could lose your home and belongings with no recourse. You would not qualify for Social Security survivor benefits. All of this means that LGBTQ+ older adults have smaller support systems and are more likely to experience housing, financial and food insecurity. Older adults are the fastest growing cohort of the homeless and LGBTQ+ elders are overrepresented in that group. Welcoming and affirming housing like The Pryde is a lifeline to low income LGBTQ seniors. Without places like The Pryde, LGBTQ+ elders in senior communities are often isolated and forced back into the closet, forced to live among the same people who hated them growing up. Everyone -- gay and straight -- who has applied to the Fair Housing lottery for an apartment at The Pryde knows that it's a welcoming and affirming community and wants to live in this kind of community.
Indeed
And it's still an issue, and may be again if certain Supreme Court justices get their way. I have a friend from high school who built his law practice around estate planning for LGBTQ folks. It was absolutely necessary.
Odd that you cite the 1270 ...
The epitome of balkanization on those multiple floors of fun and frivolity where most of the gay white guys would rarely interact with the women, people of color and trans community members.
You really see no benefit of such a service offering for a marginalized group of people, which as they continue to age become even more marginalized and vulnerable? That's quite a bubble you live in.
History Lesson
Your post is manifestly inaccurate. It also practices presentism. I was a frequent denizen of the 1270 from the mid 70s to it's closing.
1) The "gay white guys" most assuredly interacted with the men of color. Black, Latino, Asian. The dance floor was a rainbow of people dancing with each other, socializing, and, yes, hitting on each other. The 1270 also had several staff members including bartenders and doorstaff who were people of color.
2) This is where the presentism comes in. Women were rarely seen in the 1270, save for a very small handful of heterosexual women who preferred the company of gay men. We know the rhyming name for these women. Back then they were small in number. As for lesbians, it was mainly a matter of self selection. They preferred their own bars including Somewhere (later to be known as Somewhere Else) and Saints. Saints was strongly separatist. No men were allowed and two large female bouncers stood at the door to be sure this rule was enforced.
3) Similar to #2, there were few of what now are known as trans people in the 1270. Again they self selected. The Other Side, Jacques, later Haymarket. Those establishments were the province of what we know as drag queens, but those who we now know as trans, if they chose to go to a bar, would more often than not choose them.
I may be proving your point by pointing out this self-selected separatism, but is is not a lot different from today when there are safe spaces for trans people, for woman, for queer people of color, etc.
The LGBTQIA+ "community" is simply not the monolith so many would like to believe it is.
You're forgetful
The women at 1270 had a floor pretty much to themselves, much like they did at Randolph Country Club. Your presentism seems to omit the reality of the past.
Not the reason you’re assuming.
There are many documented stories nationwide of LGBT+ residents having to go back in the closet after moving into senior housing. The bullying and shunning in a lot of places was robust, and many described the hostility as making them feel like they were back in high school and facing the mean cliques. After decades of living in a private space as out, they did not feel comfortable in their new home and hid their true identities. Hopefully this type of housing won’t be necessary in the near future , but for now the attitudes remain a problem.
Out
I have a friend in senior housing who isn’t out to everyone because of mixed company within her building. Sad to think about walk back toward the closet in one’s 80s after all it took to get out of it in the first place.
A lottery for human shelter
That's the sickening part.
The GOP
The GOP is so repulsive.
Going to brighten the area
I think the project is going to be great when it's finished. It's a plus to hear there will be space for current 54th members and I wish Benny White was still with us to see it happen.
Reminder once again
That Massachusetts is a net payer of federal funds.
Your congresspeople had to fight people from other states to get your money back that you already worked for so that your neighbors could have a place to live.
I'm really not clear what the argument is at this point in favor of Massachusetts remaining in the Union. With friends like these in the other 49 states, who needs enemies?
And South Bostonians?
What do you plan to do about them after the revolution?
Find the ones who voted Trump
And steal from them, since they're okay with being victims of theft and fraud.