Nice article, Mr. Schied. I especially liked your idea at the end to have outgoing, successful people talk about all the wonderful things they’ve done in their life, but then talk about all the things they’ve still been denied because of the inequality we still have in our country. I also think your statement that people have the right to protest in any way they want – whether or not it be the most effective – showed a lot of maturity and respect for all involved.

I would disagree on a few points. First, I think you’re missing a big group of people towards whom this is targeted. There are a lot of people who believe in the notion of gay rights and gay marriage, but don’t stand up for it because they’re afraid that other people will make fun of them – and with good reason. Nearly all my friends – successful, intelligent, mature, and otherwise respectful people – use “gay,” “fag,” and “homo” as slurs on a regular basis. I’ve even given up correcting them because it doesn’t seem to do any good. I know this because I used to be one of those people: angry at the prejudice my gay friends faced, but too cowardly to do anything about it. I don’t have any evidence of this, but I feel like there are a lot of people similar to me. If this video could get even a small proportion of them to realize how many people stand with them in standing up to hate, I think a lot more of them would. I didn’t start calling people out on using “gay” as a slur until I watched one of my friends do just that. Instead of being teased, he seemed like a confident, mature person.

I think it also sends a message that it’s ok to be gay, and that we can be proud of it. I am straight, but I stand with all my gay friends as proud human beings. I agree that prancing down the street in lewd clothing doesn’t achieve much, but for a long time in the gay rights movement pride has been an important concept; this is obvious even now, after almost a dozen gay teens in the past few months have been so dejected (and embarrassed) by their sexual orientation that they thought suicide was the only option. I laud the FCKH8 campaign for trying to spread this message of pride.

I am also certainly with you that this video was over the top. The right to free speech does not mean you need to have 8 year olds dropping f-bombs. That was just uncomfortable. We can all agree on that.

Where I do disagree, though, is on the general direction of the movement. In your article, for example, you note:

“Make it clear that you deserve the same rights as everyone else, by emphasizing your similarities to everyone else. Show that you’re good parents, good business owners, good employees, good citizens. Show that you can handle responsibility, and are therefore deserving of rights.”

Didn’t we go through this in the 50’s with civil rights? Didn’t we decide it was one of our biggest mistakes of the 20th century to wait for black people to “prove” that they were equal before we gave them equal rights? Since when does anyone have to prove his or her right to equality? I do understand, though, that if people don’t agree with that we have to convince them somehow.

There have been plenty of well-rationed, well-reasoned arguments. There have been many discussions with well-meaning people on both sides, and hundreds of hours of news footage. For what? Interviews like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBa6WEUAtww

How can you watch that and not want to try something more radical? Don’t we need to stand up in a way that’s a little bit more eye-catching? I think the FCKH8 campaign serves a distinct and specific purpose, and I think it’s a very important one. In my opinion, the gay rights movement needs a two-pronged attack, with both sides represented. There needs to be a component of every day people talking about all that has been denied from them to convince moderates and independents out there of the tragedy and inequality that is being faced by gay people every day, just as there needs to be an outlandish, “in your face” statement for all those who don’t have quite the courage to speak up – to stand up and say no to hate.

In response to vermonster.

First of all, love the name, Vermont rocks (granite mostly).

I agree that I neglected to mention that the video wasn’t solely targeted at opponents of gay marriage, despite addressing them by name for much of the video. One of the goals of the video is undoubtedly to make money. The campaign is a fundraiser after all. And I agree that the stirring language was in part calculated to rouse supporters of gay rights to action.

I think that mentioning the civil rights movement is pertinent, but disagree with you on the interpretation of the connections. I also need to reiterate that I am not suggesting that gay people need to “prove” that they are equal. I simply think it would be helpful to their cause to point out that they are equal and to emphasize that point. I also think its important to remember that MLK Jr. and other civil rights leaders emphasized just that, civility, and put members of the movement through formal nonviolence seminars so that they would be prepared to accept violence and not dole it out. It’s also important to look at the distinction between MLK and company and the black nationalists of the day, whom MLK saw as a threat to the peaceful movement towards equality. (Let me be clear in saying that the FCK H8 crew is very different from black nationalist groups, and the analogy is only meant to convey the importance of civility.)

I couldn’t agree more that people need to “stand up in a way that’s . . . eye-catching.” My point is that you can be eye-catching without being combative. I have to disagree that there needs to be an “in your face” component to the movement. The recent suicides are “in your face” enough. What there needs to be is rational, vehement discourse, and smart, goal oriented campaigns.

How do you stop discriminating on the basis of race? Stop discriminating on the basis of race.

How do you make equality an accepted, nonfrightening prospect? Stop screaming about it.

In response to Bruce.

Thanks for the comment Bruce, glad we can discuss and disagree on this.

First of all, I’m not suggesting in any way that gay people should sit down and shut up, or that they should aim to trick straight people into thinking that there are no differences between gays and straights. Quite the contrary, I think that gay people (and straight people) should stand up for equal rights, and argue vehemently and strongly about their beliefs. What I am taking issue with—or rather, questioning the effectiveness of—is the antagonistic tone of those arguments. And when I said that it would behoove gays to show that they’re “the same,” I didn’t mean in a cultural or sexual sense, I meant that they should emphasize our shared humanity. Maybe I should have been more explicit about this, but it just seems so simple. Of course gay people are different in ways besides sexuality. I’m not advocating they try to blend in any more than I would advocate a “colorblind” approach to race relations. I’m also operating under the assumption that most gay people don’t go around shouting the f-word (the four letter one). The gays I know don’t at least.

Your suggestion that I not attend Pride Parades if they make me uncomfortable (which, for the record, is a bit strong, I just said they weren’t politically useful), is interesting, and brings up an important counterpoint. See, I didn’t “go” to the parade I mention in the post, exactly. I happened to be at a museum downtown on the same day, and witnessed the parade, which occurred on a major thoroughfare.
To imply that Pride Parades exist solely for the enjoyment of the participants is disingenuous. Parades exist so that people (floats, balloons, whatever) can be seen. It’s kind of the whole point.

I have to confess to being a big Rose Bowl fan, so I suppose we differ on that topic too.

Urban dictionary defines making out as “the act of swapping spit with your significant other.” But I agree that the couples in the video are more “passionately kissing,” than “making out.” I hardly think the misstep makes me reactionary.

In terms of PDA, by all means, kiss your husband in public if you want to (I find all PDA, including heterosexual PDA, a tad off-putting, but do what you want). The reason I took issue with the kissing in the video was because it was purposefully offensive. I won’t repeat the lead up to it, but there was a definite “look how outrageous we’re being” attitude to it.

On a side note, I’m a little confused on your distinction between support and tolerance. In my mind, the best we can all hope for is tolerance. If you want support, talk to your friends and family.

I agree that legal action, especially creative legal action like the link at the bottom of the post, is one aspect of this fight, but if you watch the video that vermonster posted, you’ll hear a very compelling point made by Anderson Cooper as to why this might not be enough.

I’d like to conclude by confessing that writing this post made me uncomfortable. Not because of the subject matter, or even the video, but because I was worried I would come off as telling someone else how to run their movement. I would like to affirm that this is not what I am doing. If gays decide that they think the best route to equal rights is more pride parades and inflammatory videos, that’s fine. This post was a well-meaning attempt to point out what I see as a flaw in the movement, based on my personal experiences and assessment of the political climate today.

Thanks for discussing and sorry for rambling. Glad we’re talking about stuff that matters.

Interesting article.

There are a few points that I agree and disagree on.

We can both agree on the fact that the FCKH8 campaign is somewhat repulsive in the traditional sense as it is very disconcerting to see kids say the F word, etc. We can also agree that the campaign and aspects of the gay rights movement in general is politically untenable. However, I do not believe that the “pride” aspect of the campaign is one designed to increase political support in the first place. It is not a campaign to win the hearts and minds of moderate America; instead, it is the GRM’s “social wing” that seeks to increase support and excitement from its own ranks.

I also disagree with the general tone of your argument which seems to be that gay people should conform to a moderate standard or a precast social role in order to be accepted. I disagree. People should not have to act in a certain way in order to get the fundamental human rights that they deserve. It is society that is at fault for denying people their rights in the first place. Although, I agree that that it is politically untenable and even counter productive for the gay rights movement to alienate the moderate majority through relatively extreme ads. I believe the fault is not with the movement. Sure they can change the focus of their campaign, but why do they have to in the first place? Why should they have to hide who they are in order to receive basic rights. It saddens me that in the supposed “greatest country on earth” that this conversation has to exist in the first place.

Thank you, Paul, for expressing what many of us “middle-of-the-roaders” think, but do not say, with regard to some of these militant same-sex marriage campaigns. I am much more persuaded by your argument that equal rights means equal rights, than I am by watching the exploitation of a small child dropping the “f” bomb. Was the video shocking? Yes. Is it likely to persuade ANYONE from a direction they were already inclined to go? I think not. And, that – I believe – was your point.

Hey all,

Great discussion on all sides! This has been really enjoyable to read.

Also, Bruce, I want to thank you for your efforts working towards equality and gay rights. You’re an honorable man, and I respect you a lot for your work towards a greater cause.

I would like to make a few more comments, though.

First, Bruce, I think you’re misunderstanding something Paul was saying. He was not saying that the idea of gay people kissing is in any way offensive to him, but that it’s offensive to some people. Look at what he says carefully:

“I’m not saying you need to change who you are as a gay person or a gay community. But don’t make FCK H8 t-shirts and make out in publicly distributed videos to freak out conservative straight people. Because ultimately all you’re doing is turning moderate straight people off to your cause.”

I COMPLETELY agree with you (I made this point myself) that the wonderful aspect of this video is the empowerment of young people like myself – whether gay or straight – to stand up and fight for what’s right. But, as ItalGal noted, some people are going to find this offensive. I would call that intolerance, as I bet you would too – but it doesn’t change the fact that people are finding offensive. It’s a double edged sword, so to speak. To continue the Civil Rights analogy, this track is a little bit more like Malcolm X; he was an orator who could get people fired up and ready to fight for their rights like no other, but he also made a lot of people angry and frightened of the civil rights movement and what might come if blacks were given equality (chiefly, violence and retribution, but now we’re straying away from the issue at hand).

I think this gets at a larger point of disagreement between me and Paul, and you. You certainly seem to have a good amount of background in this, so perhaps I’m missing something, but I feel like there’s a gap in your argument. You contend that, in the words Andrew Sullivan:

“…the great struggle for gay people is that politics is just not going to work for us. The idea that these politicians will bring us equality has always been a complete delusion. The only thing that brings us equality is our own testimony and our own lives.”

Yet a few sentences later you talk about how close we are to achieving gay marriage? Legalizing gay marriage is a political initiative, and there’s no way to make that happen if you don’t start convincing politicians of your cause. Furthermore, I really disagree with the notion that public opinion doesn’t create legislation. If public opinion is strongly opposed to something, there’s no way that government officials running on that platform can get elected. A politician running with a strong pro-gay marriage stance would have a harder time getting elected in the current climate than one who favors civil unions or life partnerships (once again, horrific intolerance and inequality, but that’s just the way it is…). If we can change the general view of people in the US – especially all those moderate conservatives and independents, it will make electing pro gay marriage/gay equality senators and representatives a lot easier. The same was true of the civil rights movement. While the majority of people were still against public school integration, , it was after incidents like Selma (where public opinion tide started to turn) that Kennedy and Johnson were willing to stick their political necks on the line and send out the national guard. If 80% or 90% of people had still had strong anti-black sentiments, sending in the guard to enforce integration would have ended Johnson’s political career. He wouldn’t have done it.

I agree totally that building pride among gay people, young and old, is a very significant and very important issue; however, we need to swing public opinion to be more charitable towards gay rights. You can’t simultaneously say that we’re close to having politicians pass gay marriage legislation, and say that since politics hasn’t accomplished anything in 100 years we should give up on everyone but our fellow gay men and lesbian women (and all other transsexual/queer/bisexual friends). Since all gay people (well, hopefully all) will stand up in favor of their rights, it’s not fellow gay people that you need to bring to your side. With no standing gay or lesbian senators or representatives (at least none that I know of), you’re going to need the allegiance of a few straight people. You’ve got me – and a lot of my straight friends, but there are a lot more to go. People will realize their hatred in time – but it will take just a little bit longer, and a little bit more convincing.

I completely agree with your article. I am one of the few right-wing conservative christians who strongly supports gay marriage. I found the video so offensive, especially the adorable children who were paraded in front of the camera to say hateful, offensive things, that it made me question my support of the gay rights movement. I find it hard to believe that a child raised in a healthy environment would be intentionally subjected to that kind of situation (with gay or straight parents).

If you really want gay rights, why would you want to make this the face of the gay family? There are classier ways to do this that would show the country that gay marriage would benefit our society.

one last comment… if you dont do something big and bold, no one is going to hear you. And with continuation complete ignorance on many americans part on what it even means to be gay…. yeah, this is VERY much needed.

You’re not gay you can’t say anything. No me gusta this post!