[whiteperil] Sean: Sin of omission

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Sean:
Sin of omission
http://whiteperil.com/posts/1153887978.shtml


   The responses to [1]this post by Steve Miller at IGF are, I think,
   instructive. The point of contention is this:

     I guess they meant well. But publishing [2]this ad in newspapers,
     showing that the usual gang of leftwing activists, liberal
     politicians and big-labor leaders (and some progressive religious
     folks) support marriage equality made me bristle. In my view, if
     big labor is for it, then it certainly can't be good. I think many
     who aren't on the liberal left have the same visceral reaction.

   The issue isn't whether the big-guns unions do good things for their
   members; it's how the positions their representatives take as
   political entities are perceived by voters as part of a pattern. At
   least, that's what I thought the point was. But the would-be
   refutations provided in the comments consist largely of statements
   that unions are forces of saintliness within the workplace, that gays
   who have worked within them are heroic warriors for justice, and that
   any criticism of the reflexive left-ward tendencies of gay advocacy
   can be lumped in with the most hysterical anti-leftist ranting.
   It's a shame that Miller doesn't usually get into the fray in comments
   threads, because amid all the inter-queen class warfare, his point is
   being misinterpreted and therefore not dealt with.
   It's true, as some have pointed out, that most of the signators to the
   ad have no perceptible political position--assorted elected officials
   and church leaders of unidentified affiliation. And the rest? Let's
   see: We have labor leaders, Kim Gandy of NOW, Norman Lear, and Melissa
   Etheridge. One signator is also pricelessly identified as the founder
   of "The Spiritual Spa and Holistic Healing center." (Wonder what goes
   into the facials there?)
   The problem isn't that these people were included. It's that only
   these people were included, giving the average reader the perfect
   excuse for deducing vaguely, before turning the page, that supporters
   of gay marriage comprise no one who isn't along the
   urban/dilettante-celebrity/union/lobbyist liberal axis. We can argue
   over whether that perception is unfair, but Miller is right to point
   out that it's stupid in PR terms to be feeding into it.

References

   1. http://www.indegayforum.org/blog/show/31017.html
   2. http://www.glaad.org/media/release_detail.php?id=3901