2012 Election | Activism | Michelle Bachmann | News | Newt Gingrich

BigGayDeal.com

Activists Who Glitter-Bombed Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann Interviewed: VIDEO

Espinos

The Uptake interviews Rachel E.B. Lang and Nick Espinosa, the activists responsible for the "glitter-bombing" protests of Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich over their anti-gay positions.

And a second interview with just Lang, who says she would glitter Obama if she had the opportunity.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Another interview with Lang:

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. How is this glitter thing not just stupid! How is this not some 'fairy' stereotype distraction from the real issues. Bachman, Gingrich, Lang are NOT the issues. The issues are EQUALITY and SOCIAL VALIDATION. How does glitter in someone's face help the fence sitting public agree with us. How does this advance our cause.

    I am Gay, but these two 'activists' need to grow up.

    Posted by: Rick | Jun 20, 2011 10:42:27 PM


  2. I just don't understand how this helps. It reinforces unfortunate stereotypes and, I fear, does more harm than good.

    Posted by: LincolnLounger | Jun 21, 2011 12:01:51 AM


  3. This "activism" seems pretty useless. I just don't understand the rational...

    "So, Mrs Bachmann , I hear you don't agree with LGBT rights?"
    "This is true," says Bachmann
    Activist throws glitter in their face. "Do you agree with me now?"
    Bachmann walks away thinking gays are angry, fairy-like, violent and unconcerned with other citizens dry cleaning bills...

    This kid is seriously deranged. Find a more productive way to get attention. Maybe you are having selfish fun, but you aren't helping anyone.

    Posted by: mike27 | Jun 21, 2011 12:47:15 AM


  4. glad to see other people think is a piss poor way to try and change people's minds about our rights; do something constructive instead of stunts like this

    Posted by: Grover Underwood | Jun 21, 2011 1:04:12 AM


  5. I agree entirely. It is assault. If anything it gains the victims sympathy. Stop it, it's not funny, it's not effective, if anything it's counterproductive.

    Posted by: Chris | Jun 21, 2011 3:38:52 AM


  6. I'm still on the fence with this, but I do think it's a statement, it's a pie in the face, the homophobic pink triangle. It gets attention. Gay community has shown time and time again we can be very intellectual, educated, and beat the other side every time, but we are also creative, witty, assertive. Why should we conform to their standards anyway? It's just that we are fewer than the other side and discriminated against. It's not like anything is going to change Bachmann's mind, but at least she'll walk around in the light for a day.

    Posted by: MSquare | Jun 21, 2011 5:52:43 AM


  7. I live here in Tucson and what happened to Rep Giffords is still on everybodies mind. I think it's a little irresponsible for these guys to go up to an elected official or someone else and do what they do. I can't wait for the video of when they get thrown to the ground, tased or even shot. Grow up guys there are other ways to get the message across.

    Posted by: DAVID | Jun 21, 2011 5:56:21 AM


  8. i just fell in love with nick espinoza. the kid is young, bright, handsome and doing stuff to promote equality. the negativity from some of the commenters toward this boy is disturbing to me. LINCOLNLOUNGER is utterly predictable in his response. (a word to the stupid, there has not been anything Lincoln-like in the repug party since, well, Lincoln. give up the ghost, already, you pathetic queen.

    you other queers should no better.

    Posted by: nic | Jun 21, 2011 7:33:43 AM


  9. What adolescent morons think this glittering nonsense does a damned thing to advance our cause? Seriously?

    Posted by: K in VA | Jun 21, 2011 7:40:41 AM


  10. I think they deserve more than glitter in their hair.

    Posted by: kodiak | Jun 21, 2011 8:08:37 AM


  11. There are gay politics and there are twink politics. They are not the same

    Posted by: Uffda | Jun 21, 2011 8:28:46 AM


  12. Whenever I see one of these glitter attacks reported on the news, they are reported as just that. Attacks. The politician in question usually comes out looking like the victim and the person doing it comes out looking aggressive, stereotyped and angry. I have never seen reporting on this in such a way as would help advance our causes and in fact, paints the gay community negatively.

    I agree with most of the comments here and @Nic: It is not a matter of "You are with us or you are against us". Most of the comments here are well thought out and, except for one sentence ahead of your post, not even directed at the individual. Your comment, however, was a direct attack on a commentator and a general swipe at everyone who doesn't agree with you - so it would stand to reason that you would endorse an attack of this sort. We don't all have to support the tactics of everyone who takes matters into their own hands.

    I was once surrounded by Prop 8 supporters who unloaded a fire extinguisher on me. Did it hurt? No. Was I terrified at the time? Yes. Did it make me want to support Prop 8? Absolutely not and it made me hate the supporters even more (esp the guy with the BYU sweatshirt that was holding the thing). An assault on another person is terrifying for the recipient, whether it is a pie in the face or glitter thrown at you or something more brutal. The line should be drawn to say that we won't resort to attacks on other people. It does not advance our cause.

    Posted by: Chadd | Jun 21, 2011 9:04:19 AM


  13. Personally, I think it's perfect. It's the obviously gay-themed version of pie-in the-face, which - while the victim characterizes it as an "attack" - Joe Public realizes instantly the harmlessness of it. So it's the perfect act of quick protest. Attention-getting, violence-simulating, sense-of-humorish, and actually harms no one.

    Anything that gets press attention to a cause without a backlash from non-nutjob citizens is brilliant activism. IMO. Kudos to the Glitterati.

    Posted by: Zlick | Jun 21, 2011 9:18:10 AM


  14. @Chris: What happened to Matt Shepard and Gwen Araujo was assault. If you think sprinkling someone with glitter is the same thing, you're missing a fairly obvious point.

    Posted by: jomicur | Jun 21, 2011 10:43:22 AM


  15. These glitter attacks are just plain stupid.

    They demonstrate nothing other than the desire of the glitterers to gain publicity.

    There are more effective means to advance gay rights.

    Posted by: Continuum | Jun 21, 2011 10:59:26 AM


  16. @JOMICUR....might I suggest you look up the definition of assault. To make things easier, I included a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault
    These can easily be classified as assaults. The fact that your example is one does not mean nothing else can be.

    @ZLICK: When in history has "a pie in the face" advanced anyones rights or cause? I don't so how these selfishly fun attaches are anything more than one child's amusement. They are counter-productive and only make those politicians and their supporters who already hate us hate us more.

    If people think this is a productive thing to be doing, I worry for the LGBT movement and I am thankful that those people are likely stuck at home with their computers as opposed to actually trying to fight for change.

    Posted by: mike27 | Jun 21, 2011 12:21:11 PM


  17. In no way will a "calm rational sit-down talk" with Michele Bachmann work.

    She has lesbian family members. She promotes hatred against them.

    I'm not angry at the glitterbombings. No people hate gays "because of glitterbombings"

    As others have pointed out, it's about shaming. It's like with Anita Bryant and the pie.

    This is a woman whose chosen anti-gay stance runs contrary to any known and available logic, reason, factual evidence and common sense.

    It thus makes no sense to think applying rationality, reason, common sense and logic will change her mind.

    as for all of you saying "there are others way to do this"...umm.... with Michele Bachmann?

    really?

    if you think a sit-down talk with Bachmann will work, you're probably the type who has GOP-voting anti-gay parents yet thinks they're not "bigots" because they still let you sit at the Big Kid's Table at dinnertime.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jun 21, 2011 2:40:40 PM


  18. oh, and those wimps on here complaining about "stereotypes", can you please grow a pair and some being such babies?

    If your families vote GOP, they vote against YOU. wake up and realize that your families dont' support you. do something about it.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jun 21, 2011 2:43:02 PM


  19. Plain and simple this is BULLYING-- their intention is to physically intimidate their victims. I agree with most of the comments here. In the wake of the Giffords shooting I think this is dangerous. There's nothing "fun" nor "safe" about it. He has a screw loose and she reminds me of one of those Manson girls with the vacant stare and the rambling justification for her bullying.

    Posted by: Joe L | Jun 21, 2011 2:52:38 PM


  20. Assaulting people by throwing glitter at them is childish and stupid. It accomplishes nothing except gaining attention for the ego of the glitter thrower.

    If Lang ever attempts to throw glitter at the President of the United States, she can expect to be immediately apprehended by the Secret Service and brought up on charges that will result in serious prison time. The Secret Service rightly can not afford a sense of humor, and our courts don't much condone assault and battery on the President no matter how minor.

    Posted by: Glen | Jun 22, 2011 1:16:50 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Santorum Supporter Heckles Fred Karger for Taking Up Some of Her Anti-Gay Time at the State House: VIDEO« «