As goes Maine, so goes ... California? Maybe?

[jlh]

So this is the thing about me, that a lot of my close friends have noticed: I really, really hate groupthink. Get a lot of people talking about soemthing in a certain way, or thinking about something in a certain way, and I tend to edge away from whatever they're pointing at. It makes me nervous. But at this point, I'm beginning to feel like half my flist is going to think I'm a closet homophobe or something if I don't dutifully post 1000 words of outrage about Prop 8 in California, and that makes me feel ... unsettled. Because yeah, I'm outraged. And yeah, when I watched Keith's Special Comment last night--live, on MSNBC, borrowing ali_wildgoose's cable--I thought he was on top of his game. But I'm neither going to link to it, nor be bullied into linking to it, because I reckon you can find it on your own.

Now, I know that CA is a really huge state, and that they were already doing marriage there, and bellweather, and etc. And two years ago, some will know that I was pretty furious that there was piles of outrage on my flist about Texas gay rights, and not one mention that gay rights had passed in Maine. So I'm going to talk about Maine, and how excited I am about what's been happening there, and how that can lead us to a brighter future, and maybe what happened in Maine can be replicated, because you know, I'm just not interested in posting about my outrage. I'm interested in taking that energy and using it to move the process forward. And like two years ago, you're going to see "small random state I don't care about and can't put into my stereotypical red/blue dumb/smart concept of American voters" and skip the entry. But hey, at least I tried, right?

When I was first voting in the late 80s, I was in college and voting absentee back in Maine. I would get the voter's guide from the Maine Sunday Telegram so I could be smart about my vote even though I was living in Cambridge, MA. I remember that one column I was particularly interested in was gay rights, and I was disappointed to see that in '88, even the Maine Democrats were often anti-gay rights. That Thanksgiving, there was quite the debate around the dinner table as I tried to explain to my brother-in-law that no, gay rights weren't "special rights", but would mean that my uncle couldn't get kicked out of his apartment just for being gay. You know, stuff like that.

My last absentee vote in Maine was in the 1992 election. I moved to New York in 1993, was no longer in school, and changed my registration. But I still kept an eye on the growing gay rights movement in Maine. Various bills came up, and the vote was pretty mixed--passed in Portland, but failed in other towns, and still failing in the state as a whole. It was disappointing, but not entirely surprising, mostly because Maine is a heavily Catholic state.

And then, in 2006, miracle of miracles! A gay rights law finally passed in the Maine Legislature! And that November, the excellent voters of Maine defeated a referendum to repeal the law, 57/43! And even better, just this spring, an anti-gay rights group trying to put forth another initiative to not only repeal the gay rights law but also put in blocks to possible gay marriage admitted defeat and pulled the plug!

After years of trying, and vigilance after the act was passed, EqualityMaine (to whom I've given money in the past) finally won the day. Dear reader, I cried, back in 2006 when I learned that my beloved home had passed this law after so many years of working and hoping.

So what's the net net? Change comes, with a lot of work, but not without a lot of setbacks. I was disappointed again and again, but eventually Maine came through. I'm pretty open and unrepentant about my love for the ol' Pine Tree State--heck, most of the reason I can't imagine not being an American is because I can't imagine not being a Mainer--and when they finally did me proud, it was a real occasion for celebration. I'm still disappointed in my LJ friends that I had to do that celebrating alone.

And here we are facing defeat in California. Protest marches are important (and by the way, back in the day the entire point of the protest march was to "fill the jails" so I'm not sure why everyone is so OMG THEY ARRESTED US FOR BLOCKING THE INTERSECTION because, duh) and raising money is hugely important as is chasing the trail of the money on the other side (yes, Mormon Church trying desperately to get in good with the evangelicals, I'm looking at you, but sorry, no matter how much money you throw against the gays they're still going to think you're a creepy cult) and spending your own money accordingly.

But remember that the Obama victory and the Prop 8 passage aren't necessarily contradictory. Both the black churches and the Catholic church are against gay rights, unfortunately, and that's a lot of the religious base of American ethnic minorities. (Heck, most of the Anglicans who are all up in arms about gay bishops in the church are from Africa.) I'm not saying that we should settle for whatever Obama decides to throw at us, but I also don't think that he should spend all his political capital up front--remember what happened when Clinton tried to challenge the military about gays?

And I'll say it out loud: I don't think the modern civil rights movement is a good parallel at all, especially since the gay rights movement has huge strengths that the civil rights movement didn't have, namely, the existence of PFLAG. The idea that hey, you got your president, so can I get some stuff? is understandable but hugely problematic. Civil rights are a public good. Obama has already shown an ability to put those rights in a way that people who might think they are against them--people like my brother-in-law--can understand.

Let's keep working. Let's hold Obama and his inclusion of gays in his speeches to an inclusion of gays in his administration and in his programs. Let's keep raising money. But let's also stay open to new ways of thinking about the issue that can move us out of the stalemate. After all, a lot of people thought Howard Dean's 50 state strategy was absurd and wasteful, but it won the Democrats the Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008. There might be a way out of this that we can't even see right now. If you'd asked me in 1998 if I thought Maine would pass gay rights, I would not have been optimistic. I was wrong.

Let's keep looking.

Comments

[evil-erato.livejournal.com]

&hearts

[honeysuckle-raw.livejournal.com]

I agree with you. I am tired of hearing about Prop 8, not because I'm not sad that it passed, but because there are more important things to think about right now, and because nobody is celebrating the things that did pass (Maine, as you point out, and South Dakota said no to an abortion ban, yay!).

Obama is not going to be able to focus on gay marriage right now-- probably not for a long time, either. And he and Biden have both openly said that they support civil unions, but not marriage, so even if they do secretly support marriage, they still feel bound to maintain popularity by saying they don't. Which shouldn't be a message to shut up and sit down, but people shouldn't feel entitled to everything suddenly turning around just because the Change Guy got elected. It takes time and effort, i.e. more than outraged blogging.

[etakyma.livejournal.com]

Hi!

Life-long Massachusetts resident here, and New England is leading the way. If you'd asked me back in 2004 if the same-sex marriage law would pass here I would had been hopeful, but not optimistic. May 17, 2004 - the first same-sex couples were legally married here. And it has only strengthened our communities, strenghtened our families. And I can not even imagine how much peace of mind it has given to the thousands of gay and lesbian families who have all the same rights and responsibilities toward each other as their heterosexual neighbors.

So I will celebrate with you on the steps Maine has taken for gay rights. It may happen a little at a time, but you are so right when you say it takes hard work, and some set-backs along the way. But it does happen, eventually.

So YAY Maine!

[chinawolf.livejournal.com]

I think it's kind of sad that it is assumed that if you don't speak out, you don't feel strongly about proposition 8. My default position is certainly that every person on my flist hated the outcome, whether they speak out or not.

I do, generally, draw a parallel with universal suffrage and the civil rights movement when speaking with RL people, because they just don't understand what it feels like to be discriminated against this way. I didn't understand five years ago, either. And while I do agree with you that patience is needed unless you want to die from an ulcer, I also can't change that at the moment, I am very upset about this and just want to scream in rage at the unfairness.

If I want to have children with my partner, I only have a window of a couple of years, and then I'll be too old. Yes, sure, we could have a child whenever we want, just without the non-birthmother having any rights. Only, while I do love my partner very dearly, relationships break apart, and when children are involved it can get ugly. It would break my heart for life if my child and I were ripped apart. The California vote might not have changed that much for me personally. But precisely because Obama will be around now, Europe can and will look to America again, and this is one of the issues we might have pointed to as a good example of why America is back to trailblazing. (Sadly, no-one knows Massachusetts in these parts!)

California would have been such a success story for us to argue with. To go to constitutional scholars and make them believe us that something has to be done, to change eminent legal community opinion, and look, even the conservative US is really changing this now! So it's sad and disappointing that it did not (yet).

As for your point about Obama not throwing away his second term (just) for us, for an admittedly minor issue even if it is the one most relevant to me personally? When there are eight horrible years to undo and many other steps forward to be taken? I'm right there with you. As long as he makes very sure that no discrimination happens in *his* house, that is.

(Very happy your home state is thusly enlightened. It's heartening to know.)

[ali-wildgoose.livejournal.com]

Tell me more about your thoughts regarding the modern civil right movement being a bad parallel!

Also, as a New Englander, I'm glad that both Maine AND Mass have come so far on this front. <3

[jlh.livejournal.com]

<3

[jlh.livejournal.com]

I'm so relieved about South Dakota!

I reckon the blog outrage will die down, and I don't blame people for having blog outrage, but I get worried that I'm expected to have blog outrage, when that isn't the sort of thing I tend to get outraged about. At least, on a blog, especially this one, because it's so preaching to the converted.

[jlh.livejournal.com]

And may I say, New England, insane. Solidly Democratic House delegation, and the jury's out on how much Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins really count as Republicans.

I love how you say "rights and responsibilities" because that is absolutely what it's about.

Yay Massachusetts! Yay New England yankees!

[jlh.livejournal.com]

I would hate to think that California has to carry the burden of an entire continent it's not on; I would want people to move towards rights issues for their own reasons. I feel like in all of this we end up in some sort of bad situation re Europe--if we're behind, then you know, we're behind. If we're ahead, we're not ahead enough to provide an example. I'm hesitant about that.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't have outrage, just that people shouldn't be required to be outraged in a specific way all over their journals, which was the feeling I was getting this morning. I get touchy when I see the same thing posted over and over, and Keith's Special Comment was posted 6 times in 30 entries on my flist this morning. It was a little overwhelming.

I wasn't saying he would be throwing away his second term. Clinton certainly got reelected readily enough. I was just saying that while we should stay on his case for gay rights, that it wasn't going to be the first thing he was doing. It isn't a minor issue at all to my mind.

[jlh.livejournal.com]

First, a huge reason why the civil rights movement achieved what it achieved is the potential embarassment to the United States during the Cold War--it gave ammunition to the Soviets to persuade African and Asian nations that the US wasn't on their side. That's why Eisenhower moved federal troops into Little Rock to enforce the federal court order; he was very reluctant to do anything about civil rights before then.

Second, there were 100 years between the end of the Civil War and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. One hundred years of struggle, of the federal government not caring, of nothing happening, of the north saying to the south, whatever, deal with your Negroes however you like. It wasn't until 1910 that blacks started moving north in large numbers; not until after WWII that the modern civil rights movement really started. Based on that, gay rights is on a much more accelarated timeline.

Third, people could be much more removed from blacks or other racial minorities. Feminism is a slightly better parallel because they were talking about your mom, your sister. So many people are related to or work with someone who's gay or lesbian. That has to be hugely powerful. I totally support the idea that some gays and lesbians want to live in a separate community, but one strength of their movement is that they might not. It's tricky, the whole I'm just like you/I'm different thing, but with gay rights the balance is very different.

Fourth, the modern civil rights movement was centered in the church, which was a powerful organizing mechanism for blacks, but also provided a kind of morality to the movement that was difficult for many of the powerful to completely ignore. Black men might be scary but Rosa Parks really wasn't. One lesson the gay rights movement might learn from the civil rights movement is how to pick their leaders and their symbols; right now they're letting the media and their enemies do it for them.

But that's just off the top of my head.

fyi: Julian is fine, though slightly lonely!

[chinawolf.livejournal.com]

Oh, I seem to have misunderstood, and also not made myself clear enough. I'm sorry.

Re Europe - I don't think the US is ahead nor behind in the legal situation at this point, and it is certainly not responsible for how well we do our thing over here. I was just trying to say that it would have been so great to have this as an argument. (Europe has the Netherlands, Spain and Belgium (plus Norway) who have actual equality, a host of countries that are stuck with various forms of not-equality, including Germany, and then some states where gay couples have no rights whatsoever - just like the U.S..) What I said was from a purely personal point of view, as that I all I can claim I feel. The only charity money I gave this year was for the No on 8 campaign, but I still feel like I have really no right to moan about the outcome, seeing as I am not a U.S. citizen. That's why I was stupidly honest above and made the comment about the only directly applicable effect it has on me personally.

I only had the special comment thing on my flist once, and I only ended up watching it because of your post. I can understand why people would link to it, though. When talking about proposition 8, I always feel like I'm back to being an eight year old red-faced kid who stumps on the ground after not getting its way - because I am too emotionally invested in the issue. In short, I become incoherent, angry, prone to generalisations etc., and I think so do many other people who also are angry about what happened. That is the appeal of the special comment, in my opinion - it is concise and well crafted in a way I cannot be because the anger makes me incoherent.

I apologise if you thought I had understood you incorrectly. I was stating my own opinion and mistakenly stapled sentences together that should not have been, with too few words to make clear what I wanted to say.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

But Clio, if you don't post KO's special comment it might not be seen by all the homophobic Yes!Prop-8 voters that make up your f'list who would then change their mind!

Seriously, my computer was out until late afternoon yesterday. I saw your post and thought, "Huh, what's this about?" And then proceeded to go back and see the special comment posted about 30 times on my f'list. I just don't see that this is an issue that most people I know on lj need to demonstrate their support of, since they do it all the time. If somebody didn't post I'd probably assume they leaned that way anyway.

I will also end with yay Connecticut also in the news today moving in the other direction. Because New England simply rocks.