April 2000 Out in the Mountains 11 Should We Be Taking it To The Streets? BY ERNIE MCLEOD hen to quit being ‘ polite and take to the streets? In the aftermath of California’s passage of the Knight Initiative — which pro- hibits recognition of same-sex marriages legally performed in other states, never mind that no such marriages exist — activist-writer Eric Rofes draft- ed a manifesto titled “Life After Knight: A Call for Direct Action and Civil Disobedience.” In it, he out- lines possible strategies “to directly confront mainstream resistance to same-sex mar- riage.” Among them: Until same- sex marriage is legal, we should openly protest mixed- sex weddings. We should demonstrate against newspa- pers that celebrate only hetero- sexual unions, and against het- erosexist TV shows like “The Newlywed Game” and the vile “Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?” Following the lead of clergy who have risked their careers to perform same-sex marriages, we should organize mass same- sex couple registration attempts at town clerks’ offices. We should chain ourselves to build- I ings and be led off to jail singing songs of liberation. We should strongly encourage our heterosexual allies to refuse participation in marriage until we all have access. - When Rofes’ essay was posted on the Vermont discus- sion list, my immediate ‘response was: Yes! ‘It tapped right into my escalating anger and sense of powerlessness. I quickly reminded myself, how- ever, that Vermont is not California, an unfortunate fact in some respects, but a lucky one in regard to same-sex mar- riage. At least our lawmakers-— with some notable exceptions—~are working to extend rights rather than pre- empt them. Our uninformed masses don’t yet have the power to control minority des- tinies through regressive initia- tives. And we do have that Supreme Court ruling in our favor. Yet anyone who sees only matrimonial bliss on our hori- zon is—to borrow a favored ornithological symbol—a duck with its head underwater. Remember that veneer of civil- ity at the first marriage hearing, back on that blizzardy night- when it seemed our side’s elo- quent testimonies could not go unheard? By the time Town Meetings hit some seven weeks later it had been pretty much stripped away. Despite the fact that the civil unions bill passed by the Judiciary Committee swept gay marriage off the table, the opposition’s rhetoric has grown only more rabid. In a futile effort to soothe foamers-at-the- mouth, the debate has increas- ingly shifted to the hetero—cen- ter. Real gay lives—the lives actually affected by whatever bill does‘ or does not pass—are being shoved back in the closet. There, we’re supposed to wait patiently for whatever bone gets tossed our way. For those who have been off on swank vacations (according to “Who Would Have Thought, Inc.” 26.5 percent of us are fre- quent travelers!), let me cite a few examples of how .we’re being represented in the media. First, the ads...Funny, the ‘opposition can’t talk enough about the all-powerful “homo- sexual lobby,” yet they’ re snap- ping up radio and newspaper space like oceanfront property. The “1t’s 'a Duck! Protect Traditional Marriage” ad, eye- catching in its simplicity (though it does make one want to holler: “Quack!” followed by: “From?”), is sissy stuff compared to the “fact”-packed “Civil Rights——Who Says?” ad which explains in detail how “Homosexuality Hurts Everyone.” Summary: We’re disease- ridden smarty-pants trapped in ed gay marriage would turn Vermont into another Provincetown, where naked men (stroll hand-in-hand through the streets. While only a handful of towns held non-binding votes on the issue, the next day “The Free Press” headline read: “Gay marriage loses at ballot box.” In other words: Your lives were entered in a straight popularity contest and—guess In a futile effort to soothe the focimers—ot— the—mouth, the debate has increasingly shifted to the hetero—center. a chosen lifestyle of special rights, continuous sex——-prefer- ably with children—and pricey vacations. Then there are letters to the Editor. Same-sex unions will lead to the acceptance of incest, polygamy, bestiality, and, final- ly, to the extinction of humankind. In seeking rights we are trying to force our beliefs on society and, if any- one dares to object or lovingly suggest we let God lead us from relationships which are “a danger to the common good and stability of the state,” we have the nerve to accuse them of being intolerant homo- phobes. Besides, we have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as everyone else. At one town meeting a for- mer state senator stood up and described us as “disease- spreading cornholers.” At another, with TV cameras rolling, a plea for tolerance was congratulated with: “I think that was a very good pro—faggot speech.” VPR aired the com- ments of a woman who predict- what?—you’re losers! lt’s tempting to dismiss some of the more outlandish lies—most recent example, a guy who’s “no bigot” distribut- ing flyers claiming anyone who favors gay marriage also sup- ports sexual abuse of young boys by older men—as the work of crackpot outsiders. But, in fact, most of the garbage is being hurled by our neighbors. In slightly subtler but no less harmful ways, some religious leaders and legislators are working madly to overturn the Baker decision. Bishop Kenneth Angell’s anti-gay mar- riage letter was read in Catholic churches throughout the state. Rep. Nancy Sheltra, quaking with furor, said the civil unions bill would———gasp!—legalize sodomy (memo to Nancy: it’s been legal since 1977). Representatives from the town I grew up in——one of whom sat in my parents’ living room last year—are at the forefront of the kill-any-bill campaign. Personally speaking, I don’t relish the idea of engaging in Get A Lift! (RIW haircuts 6 beard-styling O shaves 6 body hair removal hair texturizing O gray management 0 coloring I50 3 Church Street -- Burli civil disobedience. I hate con- frontation. I ’ve no desire to be chained to my bedpost, much less the Statehouse. Seeing my portrait lit by police station flu- orescents would surely depress me for years. I . passionately loathe public sing-a-longs. On the other hand, there are only so many dishes in the house. Within the gay community, marriage has ofi been tagged— wrongly——as a conservative issue. An issue incompatible with confrontational activism. In Vermont, the issue was trans- ported to the foreground by a very traditional vehicle, thejus- tice system. That vehicle has served us well. Trading it in for a new model would be foolish and disrespectful to all the heroes at the wheel. But, at some point, we may need a second vehicle. An eighteen-wheeler with a kick-ass diesel engine and a horn that’ll blast them quackers clear out of the sky. What form civil disobedi- ence might take in Vermont is currently being debated by many of us who won’t let our voices go unheard. Our actions will certainly be influenced by what happens in the weeks and months ahead. I f a bill that truly fulfills the Court’s mandate is passed without opposition sab- otage, I will stay home penning thank-you notes. I will not sit home ifthe bill is killed, watered down, or oth- erwise de-gayed; if hateful rhetoric is tolerated in the name of “balance;” if straight dis- comfort continues to rule the day. I’ll take to the streets. I’ll even sing, if required, and pray there are lots and lots of people singing with me, because if there aren’t—well, consider it a threat. Oh yeah, I’ll vote, too. V AFULLSERVICE SALON THE MEN’S ROOM ‘ -- 864.2088 -- Across from C Hall