Don’t get frustrated! I **am ** trying to understand where you’re coming from and I’m not intentionally taking anything out of context, I promise you that. I apologize if it seems like I did – I can be rather dense, this much I know.
The point I was getting at is that I really have to agree with SteveG – dialouge and debates don’t work a lot of the time. They don’t, and it gets very old very fast having the same arguments day in and day out and trying to explain a very elementary thing that seems like it should be within the scope of common sense over and over again. There was a thread not too long ago [can’t find it at the moment] where just that was going on – a poster basically asked, IIRC, why gay marriage should be allowed or some such, and Gay Dopers (and straight!) posted explanation after explanation and reasonable argument after reasonable argument and personal story after personal story, only to be hit back with “Well, I’m not a bigot, but I don’t think it’s right [roughly paraphrased].” Sooner or later most people just gave up and DID start slinging the nasty words, because what do you do after the reasonable dialouge fails you, over and over?
I’m not being a smart ass when I say this – note the frustration you feel with me? Imagine feeling that every single fricken’ day with most everyone you meet.
I’m going to respond to you, tomndebb, soon as I get some more housecleaning done!
No, that’s the sort of attitude you have to take when you’re dealing with Bin Laden or al-Zarkawi. Which descriptor applies to all too many leaders in the crusade to restrict and abolish gay rights. There is no communication or middle ground with these people because those are the terms under which they have chosen to operate. Just as trying to find a middle ground with Osama would only lead to more dead Americans, trying to find a middle ground with Jerry Falwell is only going to lead to more restrictions on the lives and rights of homosexuals.
Of course, not everyone who doesn’t support gay rights is as bad as Jerry Falwell, a fact that’s often overlooked in the heat of the moment. I’m as guilty of that as anyone. The fact is, there isn’t just one approach that will work with everyone who’s still on the fence or just barely the other side of it. Some of them will come around through reasoned debate. Some of them will react better to the justifiable anger of the gay community. And some people simply won’t ever be convinced, no matter what. But if we can demonize this last group effectively, they can be used as a tool for our own ends. If we can create the public perception that Jerry “Fags caused 9/11” Falwell is a bigotted, evil old shit, people are going to distance themselves from him and from whatever positions he endorses, including his support for institutionalized homophobia. Taking another page from the first civil rights movement, note how the KKK ultimatly did as much to end segregation as the Freedom Riders, because their inexcusable actions, once brought to national attention, tainted their entire side of the debate.
It all comes down to recognizing which approach works best for every specific situation, which is not always easy to do. And, of course, there’s also the pesky problem that gays are human, too, and are every bit as likely to be an asshole or an idiot as any heterosexual. Which brings us back around (finally) to the point of the OP: no one poster on this board, no one gay activist out there in the real world, speaks for all gays everywhere. To hold the rights of the entire gay population hostage because you* met a coupla dicks on the internet is grossly unfair, and bespeaks a lack of moral fiber in the complaintant. You do what’s right because it’s the right thing to do, not because you want to be popular.
[sub]*That’s a general “you” there, not SA in particular.[/sub]
Don’t worry if nobody does. I’m used to thinking hard and constructing what I regard as reasoned and trencheant arguments, and then having them competely skipped over by the other side in the debate.
I’m not going to wait around. Anyway, I just got back from the dentist - gonna lose about 4 teeth, and I’m in pain. If I stay in this mess, I will not be able to pay much attention. All those years of brushing and flossing, when I could have been drinking more and chewing tobacco. I pit having good teeth and rotten gums :smack:
Sorry, matt. Your post was excellent. I meant no offense as I thought you were just expressing a thought or making an observation. I wasn’t aware you expected a response.
lissener, where do I begin? You are a very intelligent guy, but you act like I’m your enemy in this and that I’m actively engaged in an effort to deny you your rights. How you come to this conclusion is anyone’s guess, but coming from a guy who throws around terms like “fascist” and “Nazi” the instant you hear something you don’t like, I suppose it isn’t surprising. But just for the record, know that I support the gay rights struggle. It should be obvious from my words here on this thread.
Equipoise’s post grossly misstates my position and is silly and over-the-top, like most of her posts, and I’m not going to respond to it.
kaylasdad, you are right of course, and your point is very well taken. I hadn’t considered it before.
chatelaine, thank you for the clarification and explanation.
Miller, again an excellent post from you. Intelligence will out.
When the status quo is wrong, anyone who doesn’t actively engage against it is, in fact, in support of it. Therefore, SA, anyone who says “go slow, be polite,” is, IN FACT, my enemy.
Nowhere will you find where I’ve said “go slow, be polite.” In fact, what I have advocated is more of the type of strong and dignified (and as it turns out, highly effective) style of effecting change personified by Rosa Parks’ stand.
But you sound like one of those tomndebb spoke of who looks at a 90% supporter as a 100% enemy. If that’s the case, what sort of positive outcome do you expect to accomplish by such a stance?
You can’t be polite and reasonable when dealing with hate. There was never a calm, clear argument that would deter people like Hitler, Torquemada, or Maddox. They’re screaming, intolerant, bigotted bullies. There’s no point discussing the topic with them, the only thing to do is to fight them and drive them where they belong: to the despised fringes of civilization.
laigle, perhaps I should make myself a little more clear in light of your comments. I’m not talking about dyed-in-the-wool, hate-filled politicians or lawmen when I say the things I say. I am talking about the interaction between the gay community and society at large. I think an agressive and/or hostile stance is self-defeating in regard to the relations between certain members of the gay community and society at large, because it is from within society at large that the struggle for gay rights will ultimately be won.
All the folks going on and on about Parks and King never heard of Malcolm X or Stokely Carmichael? I firmly believe it takes both a King and a Carmichael.
I wish I didn’t have to keep saying to myself that I support gay rights/gay marriage/etc. despite the shrill activists. I’m not going to change my mind, I’m not suddenly turning against the idea of gay marriage, I’m just sick of having to tell myself that I will continue to support gay rights despite the fact that I’m damn sick and tired of some of the shrill activism going on.
I’m not insisting that things change, I’m just sick of shrill activism sometimes.
What you fail–I was gonna say “refuse,” but I’ll let you have my last scrap of benefit of the doubt–to grasp is that this kind of thing–
Is so not-getting-it that I don’t hardly know where to start. I know, I’ll go totally non sequitur:
In many Flannery O’Connor stories, there’s a character that counsels reason and caution, and tries to convince the protagonist that passion and zeal are messy. That one must always take into account what others think. By the time you read a handful of these stories, it becomes pretty clear that this character represents–sometimes almost literally–the voice of the devil. The soft, seductive voice tempting those fighting the good fight to take a break, have a cigarette.
In that admittedly outlandish and maybe even surreal context, your advice is dangerous. Put more simply, you are wrong. And your way lies stagnation.
First of all, my words you quote are my suggestions and/or observations only. People are free to take them to heart, take them partially to heart, or to ignore them altogether. It is my advice only; it doesn’t have to be taken (although of course I think to take it would be the wisest course of action ).
Secondly, you are committing the same error that several others in this thread have fallen prey to: you misinterpret my idea of what should be done as my saying an overly polite, obsequious and/or fawning type of behavior would be best. This is not the case! Reason and caution is good. But passion and zeal is also. However, I don’t think passion and zeal necessarily includes the type of shrillness, hate and vitriol that is being championed by certain of those in this thread. MLK had passion and zeal, and he confronted his oppressors to force change. But he didn’t get in their faces and call them evil, vile, racist honky pig-fuckers, either. See the difference?
No, King never did talk like that. He had a way with words, so he could make people take a long hard look at themselves. He was also well aware that he WAS upsetting a lot of people just by daring to speak up. He was in their faces. He went right to Washington, with an army of supporters. That is in your face, in a huge way. But, it would be good to remember that there were others who could and did use other words. The message was still there and was still the same: “Leave us alone and quite trying to run/ruin our lives”. I was one of those who equated your thoughts with obsequiousness and fawning. My main point, which you seem to have missed, is if the folks in charge refuse to give you even the slightest pretext of what belongs to you, it is time to stop discussion and start “outsourcing” to someone who will - vote 'em out and get someone else. The iron fist in the velvet glove, walking softly while carrying a big stick. Wanting something is not good enough, unless you are strong enough and willing to make it happen. If it is not given, take it.
