The First Stonewall Rebellion (or “riot,” depending on your point of view) was arguably the (ahem) seminal event in modern lgbt history. Queers, dykes, faggots, cross-dressers, and street kids for the first time fought back against the expectation that they would just allow themselves to be brutalized and arrested out of shame for who they were. No longer would we let electioneering prosecutors make their names by “cleaning up the streets” through closing down our gathering places.
And to the gay and lesbian communities’ credit, it’s happening again. The community is broader, and maybe older, but has lost none of its moxie. A group of bloggers and activists have followed the National Equality March (October 11) with a simple proposal:
Shut Down the gAyTM
The idea is this: lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans have been part of the Democratic Party’s constituency for decades. The Party has been promising movement toward equality for decades. In response to those promises, lgbt Americans have been giving money to the Democratic Party to help elect Democrats who will enact laws furthering our equality. Result? The Defense of Marriage Act. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (and the ignored third leg, Don’t Pursue). No count in the census. No clout for equality, no progress. No Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). We are the first constituency thrown under the bus, tossed to the lions, sacrificed for expediency’s sake, despite the national Democratic Party’s own rhetoric.
“It is not enough to look back in wonder at how far we have come; those who came before us did not strike a blow against injustice only so that we would allow injustice to fester in our time. That means removing the barriers of prejudice and misunderstanding that still exist in America.” – Democratic Party Platform, 2008
The gAyTM shut down movement says we’re not going to pay for our own oppression at the hands of politicians with pretty words and no action any more. Those who sign up pledge not to give money to the DNC or the Democratic House or Senate Campaign funds until we see some actual progress. If you want to give money to your Senator or your Rep., fine. But send nothing to the organization that ignored the campaign to preserve marriage equality legislation in Maine and has decreased its lgbt-specific policy positions.
[Why Obama’s gAyTM PIN has been sequestered, too, after the jump]
Last year, lots and lots of us took President Obama at his word that he would be a “fierce advocate” for our concerns, fighting for our equality. Surely the first black American president would understand that we’re tired of waiting for equality, tired of waiting to make the same choices all other Americans can make: to marry the person we love, to share in more than a thousand rights and benefits derived from federal recognition of the legal status of marriage, to serve openly in the armed forces, to be treated as an equal worker by an employer and not subjected to harassment or dismissal for reasons having nothing to do with our job performance, to participate as full and equal citizens.
[N]o one in America should ever be afraid to walk down the street holding the hands of the person they love. No one in America should be forced to look over their shoulder because of who they are. ~ US President Barack Obama
Instead, with one significant exception (the Matthew Shepard and Robert Byrd, Jr. Violence Prevention Act, otherwise known as the “Hate Crimes Bill,”), there’ve been a lot of symbolic gestures with no real substance, and a whole lot of slaps in the face. So the gAyTM movement has also shut down donations to Organizing For America (formerly Obama for America, local Vermont organizer Jesse Bragg) and the Obama re-election campaign.
There’s a checklist here, with only a single item done – and very few of these items require cooperation from Congress.
You can read lots more about this issue here (and Pam Spaulding has signed on to the pledge) and from Michelangelo Signorile.
The idea originated with Americablog’s John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay (be sure to read the FAQs). Aravosis has negatives both within the lgbt communities and outside it that may cause some natural allies to shy away. On the other hand, Jane Hamsher at firedoglake and Markos of Daily Kos have signed on, as have many other well-respected bloggers and activists. Some stress the idea that withholding funds from the DNC and its associated campaign committees and from OFA is simply a temporary measure, surely a short-term boycott, a “pause’ in giving just until lgbt-and-allies’ contributions to the Party get some respect and some results.
Think Nationally, Give Locally. The VDP is deserving of your political dollars – having supported lgbt equality measures for years and providing support for the legislature’s Democratic majority in finally delivering the last state-enforced recognition in April of this year.
I have an aversion to anything connected to Americablog, partially due to Aravosis’ overt hostility towards transsexuals and partially due to his tendency to make everything about him, to the dismissal of everyone else.
I think this is a good idea in principle, and since I already donate to individuals, not the parties, it’s functionally irrelevant for me. That said, I’d much rather this had originated elsewhere.
And certainly not the last… Kudos for not taking this lying down due to lesser-evilism. I hate the duopoly system sooooo much.
Is It Time For Civil Disobedience in the LGBT Community?
http://www.davidmixner.com/200… & http://www.davidmixner.com/200…
Enough is enough
…And this is definitely the way to get their attention!
I cant think of a group that the Dems have not thrown under the bus lately…
But to my eye it is not the PARTY, which usually endorses the platform produced by the members from the base, BUT THE ACTUAL INDIVIDUALS YOU ELECT (AND MAKE DIRECT CONTIBUTIONS TO) who fall down when it is time to vote for something that may be identified as progressive.
In the current crop of governorwannabees…. ONLY Racine stands out as someone who consistently puts his verbage and his vote where the party needs to be. Other seated officials (to include the Sec of State) have a lot of baggage to drag along when it comes to representing the groups that make up a large part of the Party. Last session, talking to some of the Democratic leadership had me thinking I was actually seated in Jim=Job’s office.
We need to elect Democrats who are going to VOTE like Democrats, not like politicians who want to get a safe reelection scorecard to their credit. Choosing to not fight a battle is the same as choosing to lose one.
I whole-heartedly agree that this is a good move for the LGBT community and their supporters, but I’m not sure I like the comparison to Stonewall. Likening the bravery and unprecedented nature of the Stonewall Rebellion with withholding campaign contributions just doesn’t match-up in my mind. I mean, getting your head bashed-in by riot cops and the threat of jail vs what essentially amounts to “consumer choice” with one’s discretionary spending? Withholding donations may arguably be a good tactic (or better than rioting, at this juncture of time) but the courage it requires pales in comparison to physical revolt.