Gayle Madwin (queerbychoice) wrote,
Gayle Madwin
queerbychoice

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Lessons for Heterosexual Democrats

Once and for all, this is to all of the heterosexual Democrats who believe supporting same-sex marriage cost them the election and that in order to win, they need to have a candidate who won't support it anymore.

1. You already DIDN'T support same-sex marriage. Your candidate already DIDN'T support same-sex marriage. You already put ABSOLUTELY NO PROPOSITIONS ON THE BALLOT IN ANY STATE that aimed to give queers more rights.

2. Moaning about how in order for your party to win the election, you have to not be seen by homophobes as the party who's failing to defend the homophobia of marriage is not exactly likely to stop Republicans from sponsoring any further such propositions. Rather, it is likely to encourage them to sponsor more such propositions than ever - causing you to lose more elections than ever, since no amount of having your candidates disclaim all support for same-sex marriage is ever going to break homophobic voters' habit of viewing you as the ever-so-slightly less homophobic and therefore less appealing political party in anything less than 50 years, unless maybe your candidates start actually walking the streets mass-murdering queers, and possibly not even then.

3. That being the case, it's in your best interests to start ACTUALLY supporting our rights, since you're already firmly associated with us in homophobic voters' minds anyway, and the only way to make being associated with us stop being such a handicap for you is to start actually working to cure homophobic voters of their homophobia.

4. In order for you to have any chance at doing so, it would probably help considerably for you to bother curing YOURSELVES of your homophobia first. This includes recognizing that for you to go around telling us we should just shut up and stop demanding the right to marry who we love until sometime when it's more convenient for you, while you show no willingness to sacrifice your OWN right to marry or remain married to who you love and to benefit from all the legal rights associated with marriage, means that you believe you have an inherently greater right to marry than we have.

5. Really though, if all the heterosexual Democrats in the nation, or even half or even one fourth of the Democrats in the nation, all stood up en masse and filed for divorce, announcing that they were doing so purely in solidarity with queers' inability to marry the people they love, who knows what the sight of all those heterosexuals "living in sin" might SCARE the homophobic Bible-thumpers into agreeing to? (Note: I'm not really one of those who seriously advocates that all heterosexuals should refrain from opposite-sex marriage until queers get access to same-sex marriage, for the reasons explained here. Heterosexuals who are actively asking queers to stop demanding the right to marry who they love, however, are quite a different matter.)

6. 23% of the queer electorate voted for Bush. Granted, these people do have something seriously wrong in their heads. Even so, the odds of your getting them to vote for your candidate would be a lot better if your candidate didn't go around announcing all over the place that he (because it always is a he, isn't it?) doesn't believe they deserve the right to marry the person they love.

7. Just to summarize, in case you still haven't gotten the point: It's not QUEERS who cost you the election. Rather, it's HOMOPHOBES who cost you the election. Therefore, instead of ditching the queers and committing yourselves to extinguishing queerness from society, you need to ditch the homophobic presidential candidates and commit yourselves to extinguishing homophobia from the electorate. Including the red states. Understand?
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 12 comments