A front-page article in today's New York Times examines the struggle within the gay community to figure out what, if anything, it should do next in the wake of the 2004 elections, when 11 states passed anti-gay same-sex marriage legislation and the country re-elected a president who wants an anti-gay constitutional amendment. (Groups Debate Slower Strategy on Gay Rights)
There is a fear that we've been overreaching and that the backlash has been or will be insurmountable; that by pushing for full marriage rights while a significant proportion of the country remains uncomfortable with the concept, we have forced the hand of the religious right and mobilized them into enacting laws that set us back. Some wonder if we shouldn't aim just a little lower for now.
I think we need to look back at the effective civil rights campaigns of the past. I'm trying to picture Susan B. Anthony or Martin Luther King, Jr., telling supporters that their goals are unrealistic.
Yes, we need to examine our tactics. Be honest about what worked and what didn't. But let's also not put all our eggs in one basket. There is a place for measured, pragmatic, step-by-step legal techniques and social outreach programs, and it's right along side in-your-face activism.
I categorically reject any suggestion that we shouldn't shoot for the moon. In the short term, we're gonna lose some battles, especially if Bush gets to replace three or more Supreme Court Justices. Given the success of the 11 recent state initiatives, there will likely be more. But these are just laws. Laws are not permanent. Laws are interpreted, amended, and repealed. Sometimes they are judged unconstitutional. And none of the laws that are being enacted now change the daily reality for any of us. They take away rights we don't even have. Practically speaking, nothing is different today than it was six months ago.
Increasingly, however, public opinion is on our side. And that is where the final victory will be won, in the court of public opinion. Trent Lott was hounded out of his senate leadership position when he made casual remarks at a private function that fondly recalled the promise of a pro-segregation presidency. He didn't break any laws. When we can move society to the point where Rick "man-on-dog" Santorum incurs the same outrage, whatever laws passed today will be meaningless and not long for the books.
Specifically, I think we need a more aggressive public relations war. Call every bluff. Publicize every discriminatory remark. Challenge every assertion. Push all the science we can get our hands on. Recently it was exposed that 99.8% of the indecency complaints received by the FCC this year were filed by one organization. There's no reason we can't go after Fox News, the 700 Club and other mouthpieces for the amoral minority and tell the government we're offended.
It's going to be a long, hard fight, and we shouldn't look for any significant victories with Bush in the White House and Republicans controlling both arms of Congress. But we can't be so shortsighted. Looking back over history, the long term trends globally are decidedly in our favor. For the next four years, at least, we'll have to run to stand still. But if we don't, we'll have that much farther to go later.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Well, in a nutshell, the civil rights movement -- in a most general sense -- is about diversity. Of all the minorities, gay people are the most diverse. We transcend every religion, every ethnicity, both genders, economic strata from top to bottom and every hue of the political rainbow. The point is not to find a single voice in unity, the point is to get the powers that be to recognize the many different voices out there. Under the Constitution, all voices have a right to be heard.
I also disagree that the gay community does not understand "the community that opposes" us. Children in this country -- or any country -- are not raised "gay." We are assumed to be heterosexual until, generally in the early teens, we discover otherwise. I may have lived in Manhattan for 11 years, but I grew up in Soccer Mom Hell in suburban Oregon. Just because most gay people tend to be found in large cities and not in, say, Wichita, doesn't mean gay people come from large blue cities. None of my close gay friends here are native New Yorkers; they are from Vermont, Virginia, Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio, etc. Gay people are found in urban centers for a variety of reasons, but one of them is certainly because we fled the hostile environments of our hometowns.
No, I think we understand the opposition all too well. Too often they are our own family.
I would agree with you that the more boring, less colorful faggots like myself need a more prominent role in the public dialogue so that people can really appreciate the diversity of the gay universe. But I don't accept that we should sweep our nelly friends and drag queens and leather daddies under the rug.
Because our elections are decided on majority rule, many Americans have reached the conclusion that when it comes to civil rights, only what the *majority* is comfortable with is what's valid. But that has nothing to do with Constitutional rights. The founding fathers wrote, "We hold these truths to be self evident; that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." It says nothing about the right of the majority to dictate what rights the minorities have or don't have. In fact, it expressly protects the civil liberties of the little guys.
Your views are valid, not least because they are so widely shared, and I really appreciate your taking the time to comment. But if you recognize that not all gay people are "flamboyant" (now I just need to get you to acknowledge that they have a right to be that way), then why are you writing to a non-flamboyant homosexual and telling me we've got it all wrong? When you see news coverage that only shows outrageous drag queens, why don't you call them up and say, "Hey! I'm a straight guy, but I recognize not all gays are like that. I would appreciate seeing more balanced coverage from you." OR better yet, write to that big chickenshit Powell at the FCC and tell him that, as a straight man, you are *offended* by the biased coverage of the gay community you see on television, and encourage your friends to write as well.
Thanks again, and keep reading!
Andy, I think by the picture on your blog the writer understands that you are not a "flamboyant" gay but he lumps you all together for ease of writing. After all, even you don't make the distinction between the two when you say "The gay community needs to...". The word "Community" involves everyone.
Sheez, with this new guy reading your stuff you have effectively doubled your audience over my blog!
Post a Comment