In the aftermath of the Rodney King verdict and a heightened sensitivity to a racial issue throughout the country, many male-dominated and/or white-dominated organizations within the Gay community may redouble their efforts to recruit "minority" members. This is not necessarily a good thing.

For some time now, it’s been politically incorrect for Lesbian/Gay organizations to be dominated by one race and/or sex. We’ve been striving for internal diversity for so long that we may have forgotten why we think our organizations ought to be integrated by sex and race.

I can think of three answers, none of them very compelling.

Increasing membership: Many organizations believe bigger is better. Some of these groups target their recruitment efforts to populations that aren’t already well represented within their ranks, thinking that these are their "untapped" markets": if they did a better job of outreach to Lesbians, they’d have more women members.

Like the goal of diversity itself, increased membership is not an ultimate goal – it is a means to an end. Except for relatively rare events such as marches, public hearings, elections, and the like where high numbers truly do make a difference, activist groups don’t need bodies. They need people with energy, time and skills to devote to achieving the group’s goals.

Being non-oppressive: Sometimes the unspoken reason why majority-white or majority-male organizations seek women and racial minority members is to prove to themselves that they aren’t sexist and racist.

I applaud and encourage anyone who is trying to eliminate racist and sexist behavior. But having "minority" members does not mean an organization is free from oppressive components. Conversely, a lack of "minority" members should not automatically brand an organization racist or sexist.

Those of us who are double minorities – Lesbian, Gay Latino, etc. – often need the safety and comfort of being surrounded by others who share our experience of the world, we want to experience being in the majority in our social and/or political circles. We choose these safe havens because we want the unique things they have to offer, not because they’re our only alternative to the "first choice" of a mixed organization.

On the other hand, some of us choose to remain a minority even within our social/political circles. We do so not because the groups are completely free of oppressive behavior (I’ve certainly never found one that was!) but because the positives outweigh the negatives.

Representing the community: The last major reason why some organizations seek a more racially and sexually diverse membership is that they believe this diversity will allow them to be more effective and/or more responsive in meeting the community’s needs. While this is a truly laudable purpose, it usually doesn’t work out the way people expect.

Many organizations recruit non-majority members in order to benefit from their different perspectives. What these groups don’t often realize is just how different those perspectives can be. As local activist Courtney Williams pointed out in last month’s First Person commentary "Black Gays doin’ it for ourselves," many Lesbian and Gay male African-Americans don’t agree that eliminating homophobia ought to be their priority. Nor do they have the same