sparkindarkness: (STD)

This piece originally appeared at Womanist Musings where Renee has very generously allowed my random musings to appear on her excellent blog

I have been looking at various brouhahas about activism lately, especially in the LGBT community. In particular, I’ve been looking at a lot of arguments.

And part of me is happy about that, I have to make that clear now. One of the things I love love love love about LGBT activism and the LGBT community is there is never any idea that we should all be reading off one page. There are few, if any, grand leaders of the movement and we don’t put many people on pedestals. And when you gather us together you either have the best party ever or the biggest argument ever. Maybe even both. And I like that, I like that we’re not all reading off the same page, I like that there’s a variety of opinions and I like that individuality is still a mainstay of us.

But, I digress – on activism itself. I am seeing a lot of arguing as to what is good activism and what isn’t. What people should be doing. What people aren’t doing. Why X form of activism is better than Y. And here I have to add my own disagreement.

I don’t think any FORM of activism is wrong.

I think screaming in fury, waving angry signs and jumping up and down is great activism – it shows you’re passionate, it shows that you are angry, it shows that there is something real and tangible and awful to fix.

I think civil disobedience, chaining yourself to fences, holding sit ins, are all powerful activism. It’s brave, it’s courageous, it shows how determined people are to see this change, again it shows how important it is. It draws attention, it creates visibility, it highlights injustice.

I think spreading the stories of pain is effective activism. Showing everyone the real people who are hurt by discrimination and hatred, remembering the names of the fallen, reporting the hate incidents, putting faces to the numbers and making it clear that the problem is still there are vital to prevent them being dismissed.

I think objectively listing discriminatory laws and policies, of compiling statistics of people fired, of lives lost, of the large scale numbers the problem brings in a calm, clinical manner is effective activism. It presents the issues and the scale of them in an accessible format.

I think marching and demonstrating are a great form of activism. It shows energy, it shows numbers, it shows dedication. It connects you to more people in your cause and increases morale and energy – as well as drawing attention

I think pride parades are a great form of activism. It helps the isolated connect, reinforces the messages of exposure and attention. It sticks two fingers up at the closet and asserts loudly and proudly that we exist and have every right to do so. That we’re proud to do so.

I think blogging is effective activism. It spreads the word quickly, to a huge audience and establishes relationships between activists across the globe. It draws attention to stories missed by the mainstream press, it engages people, it brings new insight and opinions to people who were unaware or didn’t think on those terms.

I think tweeting is effective activism. I think a tweet can span the world in an instant and have a thousand furious people informed, engaged and responding. From Southwest Airlines to Jan Moir, we have seen the power of social networking.

I think mass mailing elected representatives is effective, especially if each letter is personalised. Ultimately, even the most corrupt and bought politician is elected and has to at least give a nod to his constituents. If enough weigh in on an issue, then that issue becomes important. You may even find one that cares *ducks flying pig*

I even think professional activist and lobbyist organisations – that come under a lot of criticism – are effective activism. I think they establish relationships with legislators, they become groups that they have to acknowledge, even if they ignore them. They become groups that politicians even have to court and make at least some gestures towards (hollow as they may be at times), they have an in.

I think all of this activism is effective, powerful and to be encouraged. I don’t think any of them is doing activism wrong. But I think it’s possible to do them wrong.

I think that the shouting in anger can often devolve into incoherent rage.

I think meticulously enumerating the facts can seem emotionless and unimportant, ivory tower philosophy rather than real lives and real people.

I think sharing stories of the tragedies can become maudlin and unproductive – especially if we focus on the bad without any considerations for how to make them better or move forwards.

I think Pride Parades can become heavily commercialised and become more about the show and the display than about the message and the community.

I think the professional lobbyists become more concerned with the august circles they move in, their profiles, their profits and the celebrities they get to rub shoulders with rather than the cause itself. I also think it’s very easy for these high profile lobbyists to lose connection with both the cause and the people they’re fighting for.

Yes, they can be done wrong – gods yes they can be done wrong. And we certainly need to speak up when it is. In fact, I think we have been a lot less critical of the lobbyists than they deserve (to pick one set of failings among many) -  but that doesn’t mean that that form of activism is wrong. And that we have to be careful with. There is no one true way – all are effective within their own sphere. But again and again I am seeing people say “we need this activism, not that kind” or that “X is ineffective” or deriding, say, internet activists for their online work, or mocking the civil disobedient for media hounding or sniping at the angry for “putting people off.”

I don’t see this as productive – I also don’t see it as practical, apart from anything else, there are some forms of activism certain people simply can’t do. They don’t have the money, they don’t have the time, they can’t reach that march and if they could they aren’t physical able of walking it. They fear the repercussions of it, they have a lot to lose – whatever reason. But just because they can’t/won’t do one particular kind of activism doesn’t mean their activism is worthless.

I would rather have a 100 voices, than just one voice echoed 100 times. But at the same time, I don’t think it’s very useful for those 100 voices to spend all their time bickering with each other about how the others talk. We should certainly criticise when there is a problem, when someone is failing badly and not even remotely helping (and, again, I think one of the main problems is that that HASN‘T been happening) – or even hindering the way forwards. But there’s a difference between criticising them for doing it wrong – and criticising them for not doing it your way.

sparkindarkness: (STD)

Today we can look across the Atlantic and see some beautiful examples of activism. Dan Choi, James Pietrangelo and Robin McGehee have been arrested for a DADT protest at the White House (Dan Choi and James Pietrangelo remain in prison without bail) and other brave people have staged a sit in over ENDA at Nancy Pelosi’s offices in DC and San Francisco

And, of course, there is some hand wringing and hyperventilating and even a clutching of pearls. This isn’t polite, this isn’t respectful, ZOMG he was in UNIFORM how terribly disrespectful to the military establishment (which, y‘know, is TOTALLY owed respect from GBLT people, right?

It seems we need to remember something – rights are not given, they‘re demanded. People shouldn‘t have to ask freaking politely to be treated as people. When pointing out that you are treated like a second class citizen it is done with a scream, not in a whisper following a polite cough if

They’re angry. Why aren’t you?  Because there’s damn good reason for it. GBLT rights in the US on a federal level have stalled rather badly and there seems to be little or no movement from the people in charge to get it moving again. Virginia is removing the GBLT protections it had, leaving people very much in the lurch. Putting gay rights on the ballot box nigh inevitably results in a whole bunch of straight people screaming “that’s for REAL people, silly homos” and receives zero support from the powers that be.

Guess what? While you’re being polite and quiet and calm and asking “please sir, can we have some rights?” the haters are still screaming.

The Catholic church has had so many child rape scandals now that it barely even counts as NEWS any more! But despite systematically protecting and covering up child rapists across the globe, they’re still presuming to MORALLY judge us and speak against US?! They present US as a threat to families while shuffling around child abusers to protect them from justice!

In the laughable DADT hearings (and the mere fact there are HEARINGS is repellent – seriously you need yet ANOTHER study to see if gays are as good as straights? How is this even remotely ok?) the arsehole ex-general Sheehan blames the presence of openly gay soldiers in the Dutch military for the massacre of Srebrenica. You get that? GAYS cause massacres. Why wasn’t this man just removed from the hearing?

Dr. Rowan Williams, the bigot in charge of the Anglican church finds it highly regrettable that a Lesbian has been made a bishop in the US. Of course, this is the same man who didn’t crack his damn TEETH about the Uganda kill-gays law. Yet, still, the man uis viewed as some kind of moral authority.

It has now come out that GBLT people matter so little that we can be excluded from clinical trials, especially about family, partnership or sex issues. No scientific reason, just keep the GBLTs out – of course, discrimination against GBLTs is perfectly legal in many places (and certainly not a priority to overturn – the straight powers that be have more important worries) and why treat us like people when you don’t have to?

The American healthcare bill looks like it’s going to be passed through reconciliation. And the GBLT provisions? Stripped. An easy sacrifice to make by straight legislators.

DADT is a sick, ridiculous game to force soldiers to play – and Jene Newsome played that game. She wasn’t asked. She never told. She quietly lived with her partner – and then the police found her marriage certificate and, in what could only be considered an act of spite, outed her to the military. She has now been discharged.

Who do you think is listened to? The GBLTs at the back waiting their turn to be considered people because the straight people have “more important” things to get on with – or the loud, frothing haters who are vehemently and furiously fighting and shouting against everything GBLT people have every step of the way? What do you thinks going to happen – more pandering to the loud haters, more discrimination which is the NORM – or them listening to you quietly asking to be treated as people?

If you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention. And maybe Dan Choi, James Pietrangelo, Robin  McGeehee and the brave people in the sit-ins are right are right. Maybe it’s past time for GBLT voices to be louder than the haters. Maybe it’s time to stop asking and start demanding. Maybe it’s time to display the anger – the real and justified anger – that the GBLT community seems to have lost along the way.

We have a right to our anger, we have bloody good reasons to be angry and maybe the powers that be need reminding of that.

Profile

sparkindarkness: (Default)
sparkindarkness

April 2015

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728 2930  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags