DAY WITHOUT GAYS - HELP!

[JamieMcG]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:36pm

Okay kids, let's go...

Next project is Day Without Gays. A day where we all stay home and don't buy anything. Going to happen on Wed Dec 10 which happens to be International Human Rights Day (how convenient)...there's a facebook group, but we need a better title...help me out!

I think we need something more inclusive and less cute. If you pick the title we use, you win the right to be married. YAY! Go ahead.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:40pm

I shan't be taking a day off work then, as I have to save my days to visit my family over the holidays. This kind of thing, as others have pointed out, is kind of pointless. Not buying milk or not being there to answer the phone isn't going to make any sort of impact.

And I think we should stop choosing days that have other significance.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:47pm

My personal belief is that direct action works best when it is about DOING something. Because, for one thing, it's impossible to prove something didn't happen while it's easy to demonstrate that something did.

When it comes to that sort of general strike idea, many MANY people would have to call in sick, which means never owning up to taking part in DAY WITHOUT GAYS. In this economy/job market, sick outs might be a particular luxury most people can't afford. I also don't think there's enough critical mass for it to have an impact nationally. I could see calling for a general strike among queer workers in California specfically, but again, who can risk losing their jobs nowadays?

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:52pm

Have you all reported the LDS to the IRS


(Broken record!)

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:54pm

And THAT'S an action people can take, and right from the safety of their own computers!

[JamieMcG]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:56pm

With all due respect to everyone here, In my opinion -- and I've been working on several different fronts trying to make several different things happen -- we need to be doing as much as we possibly can.

There was a moment last week when I thought the best thing to do would be to try to control the anger being displayed and focus it. Then i realized that there is no way this is going to be controlled and we instead have to find a way to keep this anger going.

We will win this if we stay in the media and stay as visible as possible. This takes a great deal of stamina. feelings fade and what's going on now will become old news in a matter of days - UNLESS we find other, NEW ways of protest every day and every week.

This is just my opinion, but think about it...If we are truly giving something up for our rights. If we are truly fighting and in the streets EVERY DAY, the way the Californians have been since November 4th, then we won't be ignored.

It's asking a lot of our community to stay interested in something for more than 24 hours, but I think it's what needs to happen.

Day Without Gays is one of literally HUNDREDS of protests going on in teh next few months. So PLEASE find your way of pro-actively participating...If you don't think it's going to work, participate in it that day and then get your friends together to march the next day.

This for me, is about volume...keep going. The angry people in California are 25 years old and they didn't know about Stonewall, but they did have rights one day, and have them taken away the next. It's a slippery slope, if we don't turn this around, we will all lose rights.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 10:59pm

I can actually do MORE damage if I go out in public.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:03pm

I'm plenty happy to shoulder the anger for those who don't want to face theirs.

Very serious question - what do you hope to achieve with this day?

We will win this if we stay in the media and stay as visible as possible.

And that is best served by NOT showing up where people will see you? I mean, even if you go to a rally, you're going to be spending some money.

More power to you, but there are much more productive ways to direct and focus your anger.

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:29pm

In my opinion, the gay community should have been fighting for rights with civil unions or just certain rights instead of fighting for the right to get married. Not to say that if we fought for some of the rights that come with marriage before fighting for the right to marry that the marriage thing would have been easier. Because it probably wouldn't.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:30pm

So we should have been fighting to sit in the middle of the bus?

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:38pm

No. I just think that the gay community went for marriage a bit too fast. (As does all of my friends) The reality is that it has to be done in steps and I think we skipped a step and went for marriage and some people aren't ready for that. And I really can't compare this to Rosa Parks.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:45pm

I agree it's not a great analogy, but I was using it in a metaphorical sense. I don't equate or compare them, nor do I mean to offend.

But what your theory shows is that getting it steps DOESN'T help things. Vermont has civil unions. Did that catch on? No. Massachusetts got marriage, and half the country amended their state constitutions.

The reality IS that if we keep waiting to appease the straight hand that feeds us, we're never going to get anywhere.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:45pm

Updated On: 1/10/09 at 11:45 PM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/10/08 at 11:49pm

Well, if fatigue on our side sets in in a month then we're in trouble. Seriously.

Homobigotry never gets fatigue, y'all!

"Maybe something similar if they behave, if they don't cause too much trouble." -Keith Olbermann

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 12:01am

Phyllis, I actually knew where you were coming from with the bus statement. I was just being kinda smart. I don't look at my thoughts or theory as something that will appease. I am just saying that, unfortunately, the way we may get to marriage is by taking the steps I mentioned before going for marriage.

This is a conversation I have had with many people over the past several years. It was a very hot topic when Amendment 2 hit here in Colorado. I was really hesitant to post my thoughts actually and maybe I should not have. It is probably a better, for me, to have this conversation with someone or people face to face as opposed to posting online.

Updated On: 11/11/08 at 12:01 AM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 12:04am

Yeah, it's hard to read tone. I think I come off as more screamingly aggressive than I mean to sometimes. It's all good.

I know plenty of people who think we want too much too soon, but I think it's about a lot more than just marriage. Rumor has it we have a prop 8-ish type thing in the works for 2010. It's also about trying to STOP the tyrannical majority from infringing on rights some of us NEVER had.

It's really just about basic equality.

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 12:13am

I agree, it is about basic equality. And please know that I wasn't taking your tone as being nasty or anything. You were simply expressing your opinion. I have not known you to be nasty with your posts.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 12:17am

I have not known you to be nasty with your posts.

I think I just heard about 400 jaws drop. :)

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 2:03am

I have been off my meds so maybe I was a little off with that statement!!! :)

Posted: 11/11/08 at 12:51pm

No offense to my hetero brethren but I could REALLY go for a day without straights sometimes.

[winston89]

Posted: 11/11/08 at 6:12pm

JoeKv99, speaking as one of your hetero brethren I am not at all offended with what you said.

I am part of my college's GSA club and I mentioned this and this sparked a very interesting conversation. While I am the only member of the club who is straight there were other members who thought that something like this would be counterproductive and I agree with them. I feel that if the kinds of people who are against gay marriage etc would want this sort of thing. I don't see how you can protest if your giving the other side exactly what it is they want.