On the "Will of the People" (tm)

Boehner says no House vote on DOMA repeal | Washington Blade - America's Leading Gay News Source

Here's an interesting lesson in political jargon. When DADT, Proposition 8 and the recent votes to legalize gay marriage in NY state were major political issues, we'd hear quite consistently how we needed to "Let the people vote!!!". The reason for this is a sheer matter of numbers and social conservative pragmatism, as NOM and the likes assume (narrowly in the case of Proposition 8) that people will invariably vote to suppress the rights of their neighbors should they "disagree with some aspect of their lifestyle choice". They assume- marginally correctly- that (older, more religious) people will find the gays vile enough, and have no network connections to actual gay people and therefore will be more apt to enshrine glbt discrimination into policy (or at least vote in favor of it).

But there's some indication that this assumption can be made less safely now, as the above article makes an interesting distinction:

“A number of House Republicans have told me privately that they feel the same way,” Nadler said. “This, coupled with the fact that there is now a majority of Americans who support equality and with the recent polling data showing that a majority of Republican voters want GOP leadership to give up their position on this matter, means that it is only a matter of time before we act in a bipartisan manner and repeal DOMA. And, believe me, we will keep pushing to get it done until we have succeeded.”

Interestingly, the data from Proposition 8 even showed a gradual sea change on the attitudes of younger Americans towards same sex marriage. Glenn Beck, the afore-reviled Ken Mehlman and other staunch conservative figures have since noted that the vehement traction on the wedge issue is much less there. (With the likes of Mehlman this is of course too little, too late as he's one of the architects of DOMA in the first place.) During the elections that hammered through anti-gay marriage legislation on both the state and federal levels during the Dubya years, the anti-gay rhetoric was turned up to 11, and the "Will of the People" was done; At least according to the staunch conservative policy groups like NOM who make a very handsome living being professional homophobes. Look at the rhetoric being used here: Allowing people to vote on gay rights issues = the will of the people. Not allowing people to vote on DOMA = prudent officiating. Its artifice at its most transparent to suggest that NOM and the American Family Association are interested in the will of people who do not side with them on this issue. For groups like this, their tactics and ploys to perpetuate political inequality are good and noble...but only when they do them. Some of their press on gay rights issues shatters the misconception they push about "just being about preserving marriage" and "not being explicitly anti-gay". NOM's activity, tweets and talking points have long since gone beyond opposite sex marriage and ballooned into full blown completely transparent anti-gay rhetoric. If anyone ever bought the idea that they "merely disagreed over allowing gay people to call it marriage" we can dispense with that naivete now.

The consolation prize is that these issues are nominal in the grand scheme, and ultimately love will win over inequality. I'm confident of that much. The world can be a beautiful, inclusive place, "the kids are allright" and I for one am pleased to see the changes on the horizon for what they are.

Here's some Earworm for you, courtesy of Empire of the Sun- "Walking on a Dream" (Seriously, I'm trying not to adore this song) The original is lovely too.

Vandals at the Gift Shop

OneAngryQueer: HRC Store Vandalized, Radical Queer Group Claims Responsibility

Above: The ever rad OneAngryQueer on the happening.
Below: The pithy, snarky, irreverent press release of those claiming responsiblity for this...silliness.

The modern LGBT movement owes its success to three days of smashing, burning, punching, and kicking–all of it happily indiscriminate–and the confrontational tactics of groups like ACT-UP that followed in the decades since. Yet, somehow we’ve forgotten our riotous roots.

Gay Pride, for example, wasn’t always a suburban county fair with less fanny packs and lined with banks and politicians. The first Pride was the 1970 Christopher Street Liberation Day march, a celebration of the riots the year before (and to this day, Pride festivals the world over are celebrated in June).

But we’ve been snorting ritalin and drinking whiskey all night and this manifesto tomfoolery is wearing us down so let’s bring it home, shall we?

Why, you’re asking, did we specifically target the HRC, a massive national gay rights non-profit as opposed to vomiting urine on Rick Santorum or something equally fun?

Put simply, they suck. What do they suck? Cash. Lots of it.

The HRC rakes in something approaching 50 million dollars a year in revenue–their executive director, Joe Salmonellamayonaisemanese pulls in a salary of several hundred grand. What have we gotten out of this bloated carcass? Not a thing worth mentioning and every now and then, they eagerly sell trans people up the river. Seriously, this is an organization that hordes money and does nothing useful. It’s a sad, sick dinosaur.

"We lack a homeless shelter...so lets attack the few things 'we' actually have." The HRC is incredibly visible, so its faults (sometimes glaring) are fairly visible too. Does this mean we take our eye off the prize and take pot shots at it while we have sworn enemies actively trying to disempower us at every turn? Well, according to this little band of pranksters it does. Way to take a credible argument (in some ways) and make it less relevant than the act that punctuated it.

That said, regarding civil rights movements and activism, there are more than a few ways to skin the proverbial cat and win hearts and minds. Dr. King and Malcom X had differing tactics to be sure, but the end game was always improving the way of life of a disenfranchised people. Similarly, pointing out when the Emperor has no clothes is not the problem as much as the juvenile tactics employed to do so are. Its not easy being an activist. Often there's a thousand legitimate gripes and not enough people self aware enough to even begin to care about them in a genuine and meaningful way. One way to turn people off entirely though? Dull and tactless stunts that damage people and organizations that are far far less odious than those we should be marshaling our energy for.