In some ways, we've lacked a certain sophistication about how hard it is to
win people over to our side. We're asking people to do something, to
think,
and change, while the antigay side is asking them to do nothing.
Asking for
something
vs. Asking for nothing
- Do you contribute money to every worthy cause?
- Do you vote in every election, and if you do, are you familiar
with every candidate and question?
- Do you contact your elected representatives about every
important issue?
- Can you intelligently discuss social problems that don't affect
you personally?
Chances are, probably not.
If you've ever cared about anything that goes beyond your own
well-being, maybe at some time you've thought something like this: Why do other
people not see what I see? How can other people think the way they do? Why
aren't other people as angry about this as I am, and why aren't they doing
something about it?
These feelings of frustration and disappointment with other
people are understandable, but as the four questions above show, you are
probably one of "those people" for someone else. So am I.
Let's face it. No one can do everything, and not many people
even do everything they can. I don't. But this little interrogation isn't meant
to make you or anybody else feel inadequate. Instead, it's meant to show one of
the most important things that the movement for gay equality needs to take into
account today: People are busy, tired, distracted, stretched thin as it is, and
sometimes simply uninformed. Think for a second about the most generous,
thoughtful, and selfless person you know. If even this person can't do it all,
how can anybody else? Even the best of us can't do more than a small fraction of
all the things that we probably should.
This understanding of most people's involvementóor the lack of
itówith major political and social issues may sound discouraging, but it's
crucial to the gay-equality movement in ways that a lot of us haven't fully
appreciated.
We've always known that we faced a long, uphill struggle before
gay people would be treated fairly, but in a lot of ways we still haven't
reached a clear understanding of exactly where we are in that struggle, and
where we need to go from here. In some cases, even though we've usually had the
best intentions, we have lacked a certain sophistication about how hard it is to
win people over to our side. This lack of understanding has gotten in the way of
getting more done.
It's true that we've already made a lot of progress toward
getting the same legal and social treatment that everybody else gets, but we've
also run into some unexpected obstacles. We need to understand how and why this
happened, and what we need to do about it.
Redefining the problem
Until recently, the worst problem in the struggle for gay
equality has been ignorance. Most heterosexuals knew little about the facts of
sexual orientation, and thanks to powerful antigay stereotypes, they didn't even
want to know more. They thought they already knew what they needed to know:
homosexuality was a sin, a crime, and a sickness. Keep 'em away from the kids,
and don't talk about it.
This kind of antigay misinformation and ignorance is still a big
issue, but the last 10 years or so have seen a dramaticóand in some ways,
troublingóchange. Big legal victories and a greater familiarity with gay
concerns than ever before have been accompanied by a deepening of resistance
among antigay conservatives. In other words, we have made progress, but it has
been taintedóand sometimes undoneóby setbacks and outright tragedies:
- In the United States, gay-equality laws have passed in a few states,
cities, and counties, but in 1996, Bill Clinton signed the so-called
Defense of Marriage Act, which preemptively denied federal recognition to
gay marriages. DOMA was meant to help deny gay people a right that even
heterosexual prisoners have, and it remains in effect today.
- More and more people seem to feel safe coming out (and at an earlier
age), but there may be a rise in antigay violence, reflected most brutally
in hate crimes like the murder of Matthew Shepard in 1998. To make matters
worse, many people still don't believe that there is any connection
between antigay rhetoric and antigay violence. Archbishop Charles J.
Chaput of Denver, for example, restated the Catholic Church's position on
the sinfulness of homosexuality just a few weeks after Shepard's murder.
- Coverage of gay issues in the media is probably more even-handed than it
has ever been before, and yet it is still common for public figures like
Pat Robertson and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott to make outrageous and
inflammatory statements about gay people yet still be treated by
journalists as sane, reasonable people with a legitimate point of view.
Even worse, journalists still actually seek out antigay extremists to get
"the other side of the story" and to add "balance" to
their reporting. Today almost no reporter would ask for the opinions of
local anti-Semites when covering issues that affect the Jewish community,
yet this is essentially what many reporters still do for gay issues.
We allómeaning gay people and our heterosexual friends and familyóurgently
need to understand why we seem to be taking one step back for so many of the
steps we take forward. We need to understand why the usual approach to gay
equality has failed to motivate a majority of people to support us. And we
ourselves may need to take a step back in our thinking before we can move
forward.
The usual explanation for the backlash we have encountered is
antigay ignorance. Misconceptions about sexual orientation are assumed to be the
heart of the problem, and we have assumed that if we eventually get rid of these
misconceptions, we'll solve the problem.
Ignorance still is a big part of the struggle we face, but this
is only one part of the explanation. The problem today is not only that antigay
conservatives are ignorant. We need to take a closer look at why this ignorance
is so hard to overcome, and how we go about trying to overcome it.
Asking for something vs. asking for nothing
The questions at the beginning of this chapter showed that
almost everybodyóincluding me and probably youóis uninformed about issues that
are important to somebody else, and we all ignore causes that we probably should
support. This doesn't mean, however, that we're all evil. You are not a horrible
person just because you didn't volunteer today at an animal shelter, read a good
newspaper in detail, or write a check to UNICEF.
What all of these commendable but seldom-practiced things have
in common is that they require people to do things: volunteer, study,
contribute. None of them is impossibly difficult, and hopefully we all do things
like this at least some of the time. But depending on your work, the general
pace of your life, and how much money you make, there are limits to what you or
any of us can do. Even for the things which we all know in the back of our minds
that we probably should do, it's hard to find the time or energy to do them. And
as difficult as that is, it's even more difficult to get motivated to do
something about issues that we don't understand. Did you, for example, have
strong opinions one way or another about Kosovo before the war broke out? Unless
you had close ties of some kind to the area, probably not. We need to recognize
that for some people, gay issues are as foreign and far-off-sounding as the
Balkans.
The gay-equality movement suffers from a disadvantage that
follows naturally from these limits. We're asking people to do something. Not
only that, we're asking them to do something about an issue that most of them
don't know much about, and which makes some of them feel uncomfortable. We are
asking them to contact their elected representatives. We are asking them to
confront antigay bigotry when they meet it. And for those who don't already
believe that antigay attitudes are one kind of bigotry, we are asking them to do
something even more difficult: we're asking them to put aside what they think
they know, to learn, and to change. We are asking people to do something, and
it's not at all easy for them to do.
That's bad enough, but things get even worse. The antigay side
has a natural advantage that's a mirror-image of our disadvantage: they have the
advantage of asking people to do nothing. They win if people don't do anything.
It's true that some antigay conservatives are quite active, but
these efforts are simply to keep from losing the control of the ground that they
already hold. Our legal system and a lot of our social structures and customs
are tilted so far against gay people that if things stay the same as they are
right now, we continue to lose. We lose every time the law fails to protect gay
people from discrimination on the basis of something which has nothing to do
with our ability or character. We lose every time someone continues to believe
that our sexual orientation does have something to do with our ability or
character. We lose every time that gay relationships are denied any of the
hundreds of rights, benefits, and privileges that are given to even the most
spectacularly unsuccessful married heterosexual couples. We lose every time that
gay people feel so intimidated or hopeless about the prospects for leading a
reasonably happy life that they stay in the closet, or kill themselves.
All of these things are still pretty common, and all it takes
for things to stay this way is for the majority of people to take the path of
least resistance and continue doing nothing. This is the advantage that the
antigay side has, and it's one of the biggest reasons why change is so slow.
"Don't write your representatives," the antigay side is essentially
saying. "Don't ask about your gay co-worker's partner. Don't think twice
about accepting a right, a privilege, or a benefit that is available to you
because you're heterosexual. And most important of all, don't question what
you've heard about homosexualityódon't learn, and don't change your mind. Do
nothing."
Again, this is not meant as a harsh judgment of people who
aren't rallying around the gay cause. It's simply a description of the way
things are, and most of us need to admit that we are probably just as unhelpful
to (and maybe just as uninformed about) any number of other worthy causes that
we aren't doing anything about either. But to make progress in changing things
from the way they are now, we need a better understanding of the kinds of
obstacles and inertia that we are up against.
All our efforts need to take into account this fact: the antigay
side has a much easier sell than we do. It's almost always easier to ask people
to do nothing than it is to get them to do something, but we even have a tough
time with relatively informed, well-intentioned people. We are asking them to do
something even though they may already be burdened with things to do, and who
may have any number of other responsibilities waiting in the wings. We are
asking people to learn, reconsider, and ultimately to support and work on a
difficult social problem.
So what does this somewhat discouraging assessment of the
situation mean? Where do we go from here?
For starters, it helps to remember that we're in good moral
company. Every worthy cause that depends on the generosity, support, and
understanding of other people to succeedóincluding efforts to promote racial
tolerance, preserve the environment, and care for people who are sick or poorósuffers
from the burden of having to ask for something. Usually, they ask for people to
learn and change their minds, just as we are asking them to do. So at least we
know we're in the same boat with other worthy causes: we're all working against
the status quo.
Another encouraging conclusion that we can draw from this is that the
odds against us may not be as great as we think. Most people are not hardened
antigay bigots. They are not failing to support us because they are consumed by
hatred, any more than you (presumably) hate an endangered species that you
aren't helping to protect, or the victims of a natural disaster that you haven't
written a check to help. Most people aren't supporting us simply because it's
easier for them to ignore the whole issue.
There is a vast middle ground in societyómore than enough to
swing any election and to start making serious progress toward gay equality and
other worthy goalsóif we can get their attention and win their sympathy.
Unfortunately though, we can't expect everyone to just stand up, come forward,
and lend us a hand. We need to compete for their attention. Whether it's fair or
notóand it's notówe need to make the case for switching from doing nothing to
doing something about our unequal treatment.
This is a case that we can make, but we need to take a closer
look at how to do it. And that is what the rest of this book is about.
The fact that we need to overcome the natural disadvantage that
comes with asking for something instead of asking for nothing means that we need
to get better at a number of things. We need to get better at understanding
exactly what it is that our opponents believe and what motivates them. We need
to ask ourselves questions like these:
- Are antigay conservatives stupid, or have they just started from the
wrong assumptionsóassumptions which we can do a better job of
understanding and correcting?
- Do their beliefs really have to do with us, or do they have much more to
say about the people who hold them?
- Do antigay conservatives wake up in the morning with a determination to
make life difficult for us, or do they think (in a misguided way) that
what they are doing is good for society and the peopleóeven the gay
peopleóthey know?
- Are they motivated by hate, or are they motivated by a form of loveóeven
if it's a disastrously misled form of love?
These are important questions, and we will look at all of them in
more detail in the chapters ahead.
Does this mean assimilation?
By this point, readers with activist inclinations may be
thinking that this approach sounds like "assimilation": trying to tone
gay life down and make ourselves "presentable" so we can fit in, not
offend anybody, and make it easier to ask for support.
Without going into the details of my own liberal (and religiously
agnostic) beliefs, I want to say that nothing could be further from the truth.
Any attempt to achieve equality for gay people that depends on assimilation is
doomed to failure. Not only that, but who really would want it to succeed
anyway?
The reason that assimilation is doomed is that we are not the
source of the problem. Assimilation doesn't work because no amount of
middle-class aspiration, conservative appearance, or churchgoing on our part is
going to make any difference to people who fundamentally misunderstand what
sexual orientation is and who think that homosexuality is a threat, a sickness,
and a sin. In fact, cloying attempts by gay people to "fit in" may
only increase some antigay conservatives' disdain for us, as well as their
suspicion that we are "lurking among them." There's no reason that we
can't show how crazy and stupid the antigay conservatives are while still being
ourselves.
There are, however, situations where it can be helpful to
consider what the best way is to get our message across. For instance, I'm not
quite sure what was accomplished by the topless lesbian fire-spitter with the
filthy, stringy hair at this year's "pride" celebration in my town.
Even the people who turned out for the parade booed. But ultimately, considering
how to get our message across can't mean trying to be something that we're not.
Radical activists might also argue that we don't need to ask
people to do anything for us, and that certain rights are ours and that no one
has any right to deny them. This is basically true, but it's still important to
ask ourselves some questions. Are we doing everything we reasonably can to win
other people's support, or are there cases in which we are making things
needlessly difficult for ourselves? Are we alienating people who might otherwise
have been on our side, or who might have at least stayed neutral?
As a kind of mental exercise, it helps to return to the
questions raised at the beginning of this chapter, especially the ones you
answered "no" to. What would motivate you to do what you would need to
do to be able to answer "yes"? If there is a worthy cause which you
could donate money to but haven't, what would make you more likely to send a
donation? What would motivate you to contact an elected official about an issue
that you haven't before? What would encourage you to learn moreóand care moreóabout
a problem that doesn't affect you personally? What kinds of things help you
realize that a problem that you didn't think affected you really does?
These are important questions, and finding the answers for
ourselves can help us to understand how other people see the struggle for
equality that we are inóand how they might be encouraged to join it.
Is this a competition?
This naturally raises the question of whether we are in
competition with other worthy causes. Are we just competing for people's
generosity and goodwill? Do our efforts essentially come down to marketing?
To some extent, we are competing. There is a lot of work to be
done, and people don't have an infinite amount of time, money, or energy to give
to our cause or any other. We need to convince them to give us some of theirs.
But there are two things to keep in mind.
One is that work on behalf of gay issues goes beyond gay
equality. This is a human-rights issue. As we do a better job of making our own
case, we will find more allies among people who are working on other
human-rights issuesóand we may become better allies to them.
The second thing to remember is that we are really not after the
time, money, and energy that is being given to other worthy causes. We are after
the time, money, and energy that is being given to unworthy causes. What we
working toward is a total victoryónot a victory in which we crush our
opponents, but a victory in which we turn them to our side and make them realize
that they should have been with us all along. I don't want support for gay
equality to come at the expense of AIDS research, the environment, or racial
justice. I want it to come at the expense of the Christian Coalition.
In this way, the approach described in Straight Answers is a
very "in-your-face" approach, but it's a more sophisticated
in-your-face approach than we usually see. The most devastating thing we can do
to antigay prejudice is not (only) to denounce it and rally against it, but to
understand it better. We need to "know our enemy." We need to get
inside antigay beliefs and knock them down from the inside.
This isn't going to be quick or easy, but this kind of progress
is possible with the approach described in the rest of this book.
What would antigay conservatives say?
The antigay side might respond to this argument about asking for
something vs. asking for nothing by saying that we are the ones asking people to
do nothing by refusing to change or acknowledge our "sinful
lifestyle." How do we answer this charge?
The critical difference is that asking people to change their
sexual orientation is completely arbitrary. As we'll see throughout the rest of
this book, the reasons that people have for wanting us to change our sexual
orientation say a lot more about them than they do about us. Their beliefs are
based on misunderstandings, anxiety about sex, and views of religion and
morality that are spiritually empty. Antigay conservatives are the ones who need
to change, not usóand unlike them, we can explain why.
This is also a question in which we, for a change, have the
natural advantage. Among fair-minded people, it's much harder to make the case
that we do not deserve to be treated the same as everyone else than it is to
make the case that we do. Instead of reacting to the antigay charge that we are
asking for "special rights," we need to do a better job of setting the
terms for this debate. We need to insist that antigay conservatives explain why
they believe that we don't deserve to be treated just like anyone else.
They aren't able to do it.
Their ignorance, our ignorance
Antigay conservatives are ignorant about us, but we need to
remember that too often we have been ignorant about them too, in a way. We have
not fully understood the natural advantage that they hold by asking people to do
nothing, and we have not fully understood the advantages that we can have if we
reach a better understanding of our opponents.
In the next two chapters, we'll look at one of these issues: the
way in which we have formed a dangerously oversimplified picture of antigay
conservatives, and how we can reach a more sophisticated understanding of what
they believe.
