From: LASAGA <LASAGA@corral.uwyo.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Minds Change *or* How to Mislead With Numbers
Date: 4 Jan 1993 00:15:53 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu





Misek@boulder.parcplace.com (Steve Misek) writes:
                                                                        
>I find your response to Andrews posting was blatently offensive.   

             [stuff deleted about "truthfulness" on net...]                   

>Since #2 was passed, most state reps have been busy working with
>the Gay community finding ways to thwart, repeal, and correct
>this measure.  Most responsible Gay leaders in the state disagree            
>with the Boycott - we are currently working **WITH** our political  
>leaders in the state.                                                   
        
You clearly do not agree with the boycott of Colorado.  And the boycott
has certainly been controversial.  But I am surprised with your attempt
to refer to "responsible Gay leaders" in an effort to persuade people of
your opinion.  There are numerous responsible gay people (leaders or
not) that are _in favor_ of the boycott.  (In fact, I find it odd that 
you seem to refer to yourself as a gay "leader."  An activist perhaps...)
Please do not purport to represent the entire gay community of Colorado.

I worked many countless hours for EPOColorado (more than I care to 
remember).  What I am about to say is not a criticism of EPOC, because
I know that those in charge of EPOC worked very hard.  But I do feel
that the campaign waged by EPOC was unsuccessful for one main reason
(seen clearly only in hindsight):  they made a policy decision _not_ to
educate about homosexuality, but rather, to simply keep stressing that
Amendment 2 was about discrimination.

And at the time, this policy seemed reasonable because none of us
thought that the people of Colorado were really _that_ unenlightened
as to believe the garbage that CFV (Colorado for Family Values) was
plastering all over the place.  Well, we were wrong.  We know that because
Amendment 2 passed.  In _retrospect_, it is clear to _me_ that CFV's smear
campaign worked because their ugly claims about homosexuals went 
_unanswered_.  Absolutely unanswered.  They said, "homosexuals are 
pedophiles."  We said, "Amendment 2 is about discrimination."  They said, 
"homosexuals want to recruit your children."  We said, "Amendment 2 is 
about discrimination."  They said, "homosexuals spread sexual diseases and
are promiscuous."  We said, "Amendment 2 is about discrimination."  Etc.,
etc., etc.

It was exactly like the Bush-Dukakis campaign.  Dukakis couldn't believe 
that people would fall for the Willie Horton ad, the Dirty-Boston-Harbor ad,
etc., and so he left those ads unanswered.  Well, people _did_ fall for 
those ads.  They didn't know better.  When people's fear buttons are pushed,
they tend to respond fearfully unless their fears are allayed.  That's what 
they did during the 1988 presidential campaign. And Clinton clearly learned 
from Dukakis' failures.  He did not let a single Bush attack go unanswered.

I say, let's learn from our own mistakes:  In my opinion, the people
of Colorado are _not_ going to learn that bigotry is unacceptable
because we nicely try to work with legislators to change an amendment
that _they_ voted for.  We need to speak _louder_.  Nice just won't work
given the campaign that CFV ran.  We took quite a beating, and I refuse to
turn around now and say the equivalent of, "Yes, Mass'r."  I refuse to
say, "OK, you voted to take away civil rights of gay people, but please 
could you soften your position?"  Even if legislators can manage to "soften 
up" the amendment, that won't change the fact that so many people actually 
went into a voting booth and voted to take away the civil rights of others.
Those people aren't going to change their feelings.  They need to hear 
_clearly_ that what they did amounted to bigotry, plain and simple.   

Now, that is _my_ opinion.  You have a right to disagree.  So, don't 
support the boycott.  But don't speak for the gay community.  I believe
the boycott is one good way to speak loudly and get the people of Colorado
to notice. 

Some people argue that the boycott hurts those that voted _against_ the 
amendment.  Well, that may be true, but as has been said before, the _state_
passed the amendment, and the state should be held accountable.  Even those 
counties that voted _for_ the amendment still contain people that voted
against it.  Where do you draw the line?  We can't figure out how each
individual voted.  If we lose _any_ support because of the boycott, then
that support wasn't very strong and genuine to begin with, was it?  
Holding our breath for fear of rocking the boat will not get us too far.
 
>Ask yourself this question:  If our straight leaders are faced with    
>the choice of helping us thwart #2, or have to use their time to             
>prevent or circumvent misguided boycotts - which do you **REALISTICALLY*
>believe they will do?  We are working within the system, stop making
>it so difficult for us.

No, Steve.  _You_ are working within the system, and good luck to you.
Let other people raise their voices as they see fit, even if it makes
you feel uncomfortable.  Do what you need to do, but don't criticize
others for voicing their opinion in whatever way they feel is most effective.
I may not feel comfortable with ACT UP's methods, and would never engage
in those methods myself, but we need people like that to do what
they are doing, and we need people like you to do what you are doing.
We need each and every one of us to do what we are able to do _most_
effectively.  Please, let's stop criticizing each other.  We need to keep
trying to create change in as _many_ ways as possible because in so doing,
we will have more chances of success. 

You want to play nice?  Play nice.  EPOC (now Equality Colorado)
wants to play nice? Let them play nice.  Me, I'm tired of it.  I need to 
_shout_ to the people in the grocery stores where I used to shop, in the 
libraries, in the post offices, etc.  No more whispering for me.  They don't
seem to be listening when we speak softly.  That is my opinion.

>If you really want to help the situation, put your money where your
>mouth is and contribute money to either CLIP or the Lambda Legal
>defense fund.  If your contribution is as big as your mouth, I'm
>sure we can expect a fairly large contribution.

That's one way to do something, but not the only way.  The boycott is 
another way (and there are still others).

For those of you who are actively boycotting Colorado, do know that your 
efforts are _greatly_ appreciated here by a good part of the gay community.
It has been a source of strength for many in the community (at least many 
people to whom I've spoken).  As a shop owner in Denver put it when
I asked him if the boycott was affecting his business: "you know, I voted 
'no' on 2 [a typical disclaimer these days],  but I admit I am worried about
losing business with this boycott thing.  Yet I have to say, it's kind of 
neat that so many people are outraged by Amendment 2. I didn't realize the 
pro-gay sentiment was that strong in this country."  Well, I second that 
emotion:  After election day, it felt overwhelming to even go buy a newspaper
in Denver because it felt like there were so many "enemies" everywhere 
[almost every other person in Colorado had voted to take away the civil 
rights of gay people]; feeling so betrayed by the people of Colorado, I 
cannot express how _comforting_ it was to hear city after city and 
organization after organization  officially voice their outrage.   

The boycott has also placed the words "gay and lesbian" in the news almost 
every day since it began, and that alone is significant.  Hopefully, the 
people of Colorado will continue to be reminded daily that they passed an 
amendment that makes many other people feel uncomfortable, and perhaps 
that will get them to at least ask why.  And hopefully, the amendment 
will either be deemed unconstitutional or will be repealed within the next
two years.

-maria lasaga




Newsgroups: soc.motss