Published 6/96

I Agree With Your Tactics

I don't Know About Your Goals

Give us an inch — we'll take a mile.

Satisfy our demands and we got twelve more. The more demands you satisfy, the more we got.

I never know what the "issues" are at demonstrations. They're always decided by people who like to go to meetings to debate for hours what the issues should be.

All we want from those meetings are demands that the Establishment can never satisfy. What a defeat is they satisfy our demands!

Demonstrators are never "reasonable." We always put our demands forward in such an obnoxious manner that the power structure can never satisfy us and remain the power structure. Then, when we scream, righteously angry, when our demands are not met.

Satisfy our demands and we lose.

Deny our demands and through struggle we achieve the love and brotherhood of a community.

— Jerry Rubin, "Do It!" (1970)

    I found this quote when writing this column. Although its author might not be adhering strictly to what it says since he wrote it, I think that it speaks directly to my beliefs about the shortcomings of the essential identity-based gay rights movement.
    Far too often, it seems that our spokesperson and leaders focus on rights as our collective aim, without putting much thought or effort in developing a vision of what a hate-free society might look like. For example, during the Same-Sex marriage hearings in Congress, and adherent of the Religious wronf posited the opinion that if the State condoned homosexual unions, then it would have to sanction polygamy, since those awful Bisexuals need "one of each" gender to be "satisfied." NONE of the people speaking on behalf of same-sex marriage was sufficiently conversant about Bi issues to counter this bigoted remark.
    It's easy enough for me to point out that bisexuality is an orientation, and not a behavior; that some Bis are non-monogamous while others are strictly monogamous (as, indeed is the case with gays and straights). But the question that arises first, in my mind, is why are we still being faced with these tired, old stereotypes in 1996? Haven't we been over this ground before, in the last 25 years, with "our" gay/lesbian counterparts?
    Biphobia has much to do with the inability of many to speak about our issues. However, the lack of collective vision continually hampers the fight against institutionalized heterosexism. Why is it just enough to amend and modify the WASP-ish nuclear family institutions to be Gay-inclusive, when the fact is that these institutions are fundamentally bankrupt, as divorce and other statistics clearly prove?
    It's not enough to plaintively say, "Gays are family too," and then cede the entire family values debate to the evil minions of Ralph Reed. We need to be speaking about positive solutions to fundamental problems; we need to be questioning the dominant paradigm about what our society meand, and what place we queers have in it. Is the Quality of Life really that diminished if people don't tell faggot jokes in polite society anymore?
    An ongoing dialogue with the gay community and bisexuals, who presumably have some insight into the much-coveted institution of Marriage, might be a productive undertaking. When creeps like Bob Dornan drop hot-button words like bisexuality, promiscuity, and AIDS spreaders, it would be nice to have our community representatives respond with something better than nay-saying and apologia, seeming like so many cockroaches scuttling under the refrigerator when the light comes on...Having the right to create our own identity and hold our own beliefs in the face of institutionalized and pervasive disdain gives us the power to create common ground with other disparate groups! What would the "Christian Coalition" do, if their Bi focus didn't divide the gay/lesbian/bi/trans community — instead, it alienated polygamous Mormons?
    I can't think of a better way to take the fight out of the Right than to point out that enforced conformity shuts out the Majority, from the permanently-single straight woman who wants a career rather than a man or children, to the fundamentalist Christian family trying to hold their beliefs in the face of popular ridicule and scorn. And I don't believe that this is too much of a challenge; after all, the Gays in the Military debacle challenged some pretty basic concepts, such as what it means to be a man...
    We can make our struggle a less difficult one if and only if we can convince the majority that they have a personal interest in a less homophobic, more tolerant society — that it benefits their quality of life directly. That will mean that we need a cadre of advocates to spread this message; Warren Blumenfeld, Barney Frank, and a handful of others just isn't enough anymore.