11/18/2008
Echo Grows: Gay Orgs Must Adjust to New Realities of Activism, or Die
Voices are ringing out from all areas (liberal and conservative, some more critically than others) in the wake of the grassroots-organized protests around the nation, that national gay organizations, which have been the well-funded standard bearers for the gay movement for decades, must adjust to the new activism we've seen these past few weeks.
The New York Times posted a piece about the birth of web-based activism last week.
The new activism, dubbed Stonewall 2.0 by Rex Wockner and referenced as a kind of Stonewall by "Join the Impact" organizer Amy Balliett, has taken hold in a viral way, just as blogging took hold of established media and shook it to its roots. Voices are ringing out that the national gay organizations must, as Truth Wins Out's Wayne Besen notes, "adjust to this new reality" or "wither and die."
Or perhaps, as we witnessed last weekend, they already have in many ways.
"If there's an overriding theme to Taking on the System, my latest book, it's that we no longer have to sit around and wait for the gatekeepers to tell us what to do. We can engage in the world around us at our own discretion, focusing on the things we want to focus on, and no one can keep us out. The era of the gatekeeper is over (or at least dying), since their permission is no longer necessary. A subtext of that overriding theme is that we are bypassing the gatekeepers precisely because they've done such a poor job of providing people what they want. In TOS, I use examples from the music industry, among others, to illustrate that point. When the gatekeepers provide a shitty product, people will organize to bypass those gatekeepers and end up doing a better job of it. Technology and shifts in culture are empowering people to do the jobs that the gatekeepers once kept for themselves, and are doing a better job of it."
"You will notice that the website of the biggest gay rights group in the country has one single mention - it's a blog about a celebrity, of course - of the massive protests that occurred for marriage equality across the country yesterday. (A letter from Joe Solmonese tells us to be nice.) You will also notice that a handful of young non-professionals were able to organize in a few days what HRC has been incapable of doing in Hrcdog months or years. You will know from brutal experience that in the two decades of serious struggle for marriage equality, the Human Rights Campaign has been mostly absent, and when present, often passive or reactive. Here's a simple statistic that might help shake us out of complacency: HRC claims to have spent $3.4 million on No On 8. The Mormon church was able to spend over $20 million, by appealing to its members. Why are non-gay Mormons more capable of organizing and fund-raising on a gay rights measure than the biggest national gay rights group?...It's time gay people realized that this group is often part of the problem, and rarely part of the solution. It needs to be swept clean of its deadwood, overhauled, or if it persists in its ways, defunded. When we are in a civil rights movement and the biggest organization is essentially a passive observer and excuse-maker, it's time to demand better.
"Was it really just six days ago that I wrote here: 'Maybe Stonewall was Activism 1.0, ACT UP was Activism 2.0, the failed corporate activism of HRC and No On Prop 8 was Activism 3.0, and now we are witnessing Activism 4.0 being born.'?...The organization No On 8 failed us. Before the TV ad war started, we were up 14-17 points in the polls. Then No On 8 spent some $37 million of your money to spam the California airwaves with really lousy ads, while the other side spent a similar amount to spam the California airwaves with ads that were, whatever else they may have been, effective. While the bad TV ads were not the only component of our loss (last-minute preaching from the pulpits was a factor), had our ads been good ads, we would have held onto our lead. And producing those mindnumbingly expensive ads (which I and many others publicly criticized as they were airing) was one piece of the war that No On 8 had 100% control over. Although the HRC-like Equality California group is not solely to blame, it's likely fair to say EQCA was the biggest component of the No On 8 coalition, along with such entities as the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, the San Diego Gay and Lesbian Center and others."
"There has been a paradigm shift in the movement following marriage defeats in California, Florida and Arizona. ... The leaders of what is being billed as Stonewall 2.0 are not coming from large, established organizations. ... That this huge outpouring of organic outrage is not being channeled through official organizational channels has enormous implications. ... We are not the same movement we were prior to Nov. 4. ... Organizations that do not adjust to this new reality will wither and die. ... Anti-gay forces unleashed a ferocious storm with powerful winds of change that will only end with the sound of wedding bells."
"Underestimating their opponent's resources, an LGBT community lulled into complacency by an inaccurate Field Poll, a 'pathetic' Web site that at times was not fully functioning, an under-funded initial media buy, and a campaign lacking statewide cohesion are just some of the reasons for Proposition 8's passage, a senior official with the No on 8 campaign told Sacramento LGBT Democrats Monday, November 10."
Posted 8:08 AM EST by Andy Towle in Activism, Gay Rights, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Or to put it another way, THE GAY RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS BACK!!!!!!
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Nov 18, 2008 8:20:42 AM
Yup...pretty much! Of course this is all Monday morning quarterbacking but a good lesson to us all. We fell into the trap of letting the Pro on 8 forces redefine what the proposition was about. It was about taking away rights - instead we ended up with a battle about save the children - and excuse me, but what is wrong about kids learning that gay people exist? It's a fact of life and there isn't anything wrong with it. We let the bigots imply there was... we should have instead gotten in their face about it. I certainly hope we have learned our lesson - and I think we finally have... ;-)
Posted by: Mike | Nov 18, 2008 9:11:06 AM
Yup...pretty much! Of course this is all Monday morning quarterbacking but a good lesson to us all. We fell into the trap of letting the Pro on 8 forces redefine what the proposition was about. It was about taking away rights - instead we ended up with a battle about save the children - and excuse me, but what is wrong about kids learning that gay people exist? It's a fact of life and there isn't anything wrong with it. We let the bigots imply there was... we should have instead gotten in their face about it. I certainly hope we have learned our lesson - and I think we finally have... ;-)
Posted by: Mike | Nov 18, 2008 9:11:33 AM
Ok, I've been out of the closet for almost 10 years now, and I have heard of HRC for that amount of time, but I really never knew what they did. I heard they did activism, but it always seemed they were always fundraising for some cause or another, but nothing ever seemed to get done. Hmmm. Kind of reminds me of a country club, exclusive mentality.
I went to a rally in San Francisco the weekend after Nov. 4th and then to another one in Denver this past weekend. I found out about them here at Towleroad.com. Hmmm. Maybe Towleroad should become the next HRC and get my donation dollars, because I alctually feel empowered at these rallies.
Posted by: Phil | Nov 18, 2008 9:31:45 AM
Wow, the new face of gay activism looks a lot like the old face of gay activism -- rich, gay, white dudes! It's a REVOLUTION!!!! Do you feel that?
Posted by: duh | Nov 18, 2008 9:38:41 AM
So...anyone besides white guys have an opinion? Or does it not matter?
Posted by: justsayin | Nov 18, 2008 10:22:01 AM
I'm with Phil. What exactly does the HRC do besides hold a fundraising dinner every year? And if they're not out in front of an issue like prop 8 then what the hell are they raising funds for?
Posted by: txstevo | Nov 18, 2008 10:44:35 AM
The timing of the release of "Milk" could be very auspicious for the anti-Prop 8 movement. Harvey Milk got his start with protests that were spread by word of mouth, viral protests of the day in the '70s. I saw a screening of "Milk" and it inspired me and I have a feeling it will do the same to many.
Posted by: Cory | Nov 18, 2008 10:48:43 AM
in every snippet i've seen on tv lately of a gay activist/leader, they are invariably saying that we shouldn't be mad... that we should instead be out with a smile on our faces educating bigots about their bigotry. it's goddamn infuriating.
also, every time i've made a donation to the HRC or Lambda Legal, i just get bombarded by them with solicitations for more money. they easily spend more of our money on mailings than on actually DOING something.
Posted by: daisy | Nov 18, 2008 10:58:17 AM
Right On, Daisy. We gave to HRC years ago and had the exact same experiance. All they did was spend our money trying to get more money but never really accomplished anything to advance our cause. Oh, yeah, they did build themselves an expensive buiding for their headquarters. Whenever I see HRC people soliciting for more money on the street I ask them "why are the words 'gay' or 'lesbian' not in your name and why is your = logo so mysterious? Anyone who isn't already familiar with what the = stands for would never have a clue what it means. So when people stick a = on their car it does NOTHING to educate anyone about GAY and LESBIAN equal rights. It just tips off other gays that there is a gay driver and maybe can lead to a date.
Not one volunteer has given me a good answer why the = stickers don't have any words about glbt equal rights and they seem shocked that I would even ask the question. They will never get another dime out of me.
Posted by: Jeffrey | Nov 18, 2008 11:39:28 AM
I echo DAISY's sentiments that every donation to HRC is followed by endless appeals for more money. I understand the tactic: they have a donor on the line, so they want to make best use of their fundraising efforts by focusing on that willing donor. But the way they went about it with me was absolutely retarded. After I donated about $25 to them when I was 24 years old (three years ago, ladies and gentlemen, three years ago), they began spamming me with one appeal after another. And these weren't just simple letters asking for more money. They were four color, multiple page mailers. Expensive as fuck to produce (I worked in advertising briefly, so I know how expensive it must have been to produce those pieces). They even sent out their very own magazine (I think it is called 'Equality'). Within a year of my small donation, HRC had easily spent half of it, if not more, soliciting more money from me. I decided at that point that I would never donate to them again. They continued to solicit donations from me for, literally, years! During the Bush administration, I made the decision to support them once again only to find myself again turned off by the endless expensive mailers requesting more donations. And what, I ask, has HRC done? Deliver $3.4 million to fight Prop 8. Hell, 300 of us raised more than that...$3.9 million...in one evening at Ron Burkle's estate. Never again will I donate to this useless organization.
Posted by: peterparker | Nov 18, 2008 11:52:23 AM
I too agree with DAISY. In addition to HRC, I donated ALOT to No on Prop 8 - and now I ask myself, "Why?" Their endless emails begged for more and more money, "or else" the other side was going to win. Well, we all gave - and gave with all our hearts - at this point I am disgusted with their pathetic results. I guess it's to late to ask for a refund.
Posted by: Steve | Nov 18, 2008 12:13:39 PM
I agree with Daisy and Andrew Sullivan...both are on target!!!
Posted by: JKM | Nov 18, 2008 12:36:55 PM
Finally, people are waking up to the uselessness of HRC (and quite frankly EQCA). Did you people not see this coming years ago, and most recently with the whole ENDA flip-flop? The so called 'leadership' of our community has become way out of touch years ago. They keep saying 'be nice', 'play nice', and 'don't have too gay of a wedding.' Seriously? They're the same ones who say our flashy pride parades actually hurt us. Well, if it weren't for street activism and flashy prides they would still be in their fake marriages cruising the docks at 1am.
Posted by: Mr. E | Nov 18, 2008 12:37:39 PM
I've never been inclined to give a dime to the HRC because, looking at how the money's spent, it's just putting it down the rat hole. The Califonria No campaign was pathetic. They brought in people from out of California to run a California campaign. People familiar with the political turf here were dismissed. My husband and I belong to a grass-roots organizatino, Love, Honor, Cherish (www.lovehonorcherish.org)that raised about $600k for the campaign, not one dime was used to cover expenses, it all came out of our pockets and through some very generous sponsors. Our group is made up of people from all types of backgrounds and races, gays and straights. Several of them are film and television industry folks, and we created some amazing spots that ran on You Tube. We tried offering these to the Camapign, and instead, they ran the pieces of crap that were whiney and, even worse, closeted. We knew from the get-go that this was going to be about children and God. Yet the Campaign was scared to death to tackle this. At training sessions, the Campaign said make this about equality, we don't want to get into religion. Well, that's like the Captain of the Titanic saying to his crew, this is about evening cocktails being served, not getting people into the lifeboats. Denial is not just a river in Egypt. We thought we'd be disbanded after the election. We are not. Our group is already planning for a 2010 campaign, and we've added new members through the various rallys. In fact, when I've been talking to new folks about this, I urge people of color to become involved, because those are the folks who can speak with power to those groups that feel disenfranchised by the movement. This is the new face of activism. That dinosaur that is the HRC can simply fold up and be buried under Rhode Island Ave.
Posted by: Bob Conti | Nov 18, 2008 12:38:43 PM
Some of us have decided we will NOT accept this abuse and persecution from the Christian Right and the Mormons, while our government watches passively.
21st CENTURY PROTEST has begun...
National Equality Tax Prote$t
Wednesday, April 15 ~ 2009
PLEASE CONSIDER:
Americans who DO NOT wish to engage in civil disobedience may protest outside of their local post office. The message is "WE CONTRIBUTE TO
AMERICA; WE DESERVE THE SAME".
Those who DO wish to engage in civil disobedience may stand there withholding their tax forms. The message is "WE USED TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT NOW WE DEMAND YOU TREAT EVERYONE EQUALLY!"
Organizations alone will NOT earn our civil rights; if they could we would be equal by now; organizations by nature have baggage, bureaucracy, personalities (egos) and many limitations.
INDIVIDUALS also need to push this forward (as they have in the past).
Posted by: John Bisceglia | Nov 18, 2008 1:40:21 PM
I came in high school nearly 30 years ago. I have seen a lot of milestons - good and bad - and this new energy is one of the best.
Extremes define the center and it's time we pulled the center our way. The religious right has systematically targeted our rights while we sat on the sideline doing nothing.
Posted by: Ron | Nov 18, 2008 1:50:52 PM
This is where your contributions go
"Both HRC Inc and the Foundation show the group paid then-executive director Cheryl Jacques a salary of $221,917 for her services, and contributed $28,849 to her benefits package."
http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2007/03/hrcs-two-irs-990-files-30.html
Posted by: sharon | Nov 18, 2008 1:51:35 PM
All the successes in the marriage movement have been through private lawsuits, though some of the money to fight them has come from groups like Equity (Equality?). Anyway, groups like HRC get large donations from a handful of wealthy donors and then go and get the majority of their money from government matching grants. They are almost entirely government funded and really don't need us except as a number on their grant application. They lose money every time you send them $25 because it cost more to get that $25, but they get to make it all back when they get their grant checks. They also get grant money from other groups, such as the Democratic party, labor unions, lawyer associations, etc. Who do you think they are going to pay attention to? The community or those that give them money?
Posted by: anon | Nov 18, 2008 1:52:28 PM
As long as we're identifying those who should not be looked up to as "leaders," I repeat, and will keep repeating, include the airhead lesbian Amy What'sHerName from Seattle who virally exploded "Join the Impact" into a national demonstration.
Her skills at that might be great BUT everyone should understand that SHE is preaching the same shameful "leave the Mormons alone" message that the moldy leftovers from the feel good 60s among the now disgraced No On 8 politburo are bleating about.
She actually told 365gay.com's interviewer that CHURCHES should decide what OUR relationships are called!!!! Yes, you read that right. The 26-yr. old credited with mass protests AGAINST Prop 8 somehow doesn't get that she's promoting EXACTLY what IT does.
That's not Stonewall 4.0. That's Stoned 101.
And even if she wasn't so totally confused, we should already be PAST just yelling in the streets to make ourselves feel good and yelling AT our enemies and toward solutions.
Posted by: Leland Frances | Nov 18, 2008 3:41:13 PM
HRC gets GOVERNMENT grants? They're a mess in many ways but you are fucking crazy, Anon.
Posted by: Bob | Nov 18, 2008 3:53:47 PM
Seems accurate in some ways...
BUT...let's not forget that those established organizations (EQCA; Lambda Legal) are still VERY important. Protests are all well and good to get publicity for our movement. But who do you think will be fighting the battle to overturn prop 8 in the Cali Supreme Court? (Not to mention all those other constitutional amendments in other states that have passed in the past 10 years). Keep protesting...but keep supporting the legal battles by supporting our established organizations!
Posted by: Mandy | Nov 18, 2008 3:59:24 PM
Saturday Saturday Rally @ Manchester Hyatt
NOVEMBER 22th -5:00 p.m.
Doug Manchester is one of the leading funders ($125,000) of Proposition 8, a California ballot initiative that discriminates against LGBT couples. While Hyatt may officially disavow Manchester's contributions to Proposition 8 as a personal choice, the fact remains that their multi-million dollar LGBT marketing efforts must be seen as little more than sheer hypocrisy when the revenue this marketing attracts is then funneled into efforts that bite the hand which feeds them. In such a situation, we always have the ability to choose not to feed them any longer.
WHERE: 1 Market Place, San Diego, CA 92101
Posted by: Tony Cochran | Nov 18, 2008 4:06:03 PM
While I've never been one to defend HRC I do think that we have to take a step back and fully evaluate this situation.
We loss a very devestating battle against bigotry and ignorance in California - as well as in Arizona and Florida.
I would agree with many of you that large "gay" organizations such as HRC and the campaigns that run these marriage amendments (No on 8, EQCA) often will be the first to drop the "gay agenda" for political expedience. We saw that in 2006 in Wisconsin when the Fair Wisconsin campaign ordered staff and volunteers not to talk about gay marriage and the word "gay" was frankly taboo. A wedding cake at a fundraiser of supporters was ordered to be removed.
Why? The experts believed it "polled bad" or would hurt our chances. So while I think WE - the average LGBT person - needs to demand more from our organizations, these organizations must also change to reflect the times and to honor the very real challenges, struggles, successes and realities of our lives.
If these organizations cannot or do not make that change than it would be absolutely fair to expediate their closing. Until that point help to keep these organizations honest and accountable.
Posted by: Kurt from Milwaukee | Nov 18, 2008 4:45:58 PM
this posting has to be one of the best I've seen on "towleroad" in a long time (well, excepting the "MILK" previews). my partner and I have been fortunate enough to $$$ contributions to a variety of LGBT, HIV/AIDS and political contributions over the years -- starting with ACT UP & Queer Nation days. HRC has been part of that mix - usually justifed by its sheer size and proximity to DC. Yeah - we thought that it would do something besides send us addtional pleas for $$$, endorse milquetoast candidates and throw unbelieveably boring, "A-List" banquets. Met Joe Solomonese 3x and each time he's dead eyed, stone cold opportunist. HRC - along with Melissa Etheridge, Todd Oldham and the OUT 100 - entitled, overprivileged and redundant celebrities twice their sell-by date - are spent.
Separate issue - can we come up w/ another name for this phase of activism instead of "Stonewall 2.0" or "4.0"? it's not another MS release nor was Stonewall particularly liberatory. It just seems that this movement deserves its own name - not riding off another generation's battles or corporate CE jargon.
Love to see us awaken, activated and in motion. As David E said way up this list - "the GAY RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS BACK"!
Posted by: resurrect | Nov 18, 2008 5:15:41 PM