Tweet
Before WhoSigned.org came on the scene, the public conversation around Referendum 71 was one of positive consideration of our families. WhoSigned.org has disastrously changed the focus to a negative one about fringe tactics.
Since the debut of WhoSigned.org last week, I have identified over 45 news stories, editorials, letters to the editor and blog diaries about Ref 71. Not one of them focused on our families and the importance of protecting the Domestic Partnership Expansion Law of 2009, as they had done previously. Only one focused on the dubious activities of the Ref 71 proponents, which we know to be legion. WhoSigned.org has taken all attention from our two greatest assets: our loving families and a morally bankrupt Radical-Right fringe trying to strip us of equality under the law.
Until WhoSigned.org came on the scene, there was only one fringe element in the debate: the Ref 71 proponents. Rightly or wrongly, much of the public brands all LGBT people with the actions of the one or two who say the most controversial things. So now, in the public’s mind, there are two fringe elements in the Ref 71 debate: the Ref 71 proponents AND ALL OF US.
It is unfair that the public lumps us all together like this, but it is a reality of our oppression which must be accounted for in our collective strategies. Radical-Right Christians work openly to enshrine bigotry into our laws, and the average Christian (unless they be LGBT) remains untarnished by association. We don’t have that luxury. Wouldn’t it be nice to go back to the glory days where only Gary ‘n Larry looked stupid? Let’s hand back the Fringe Queen crown to its rightful owners, Gary Randall and Larry Stickney.
Initially I saw real potential in WhoSigned.org to the extent that it could help us detect petition fraud. However, because its backers have declared that unwelcome, uncomfortable conversations with the Radical-Right fringe (most petition signers) is the main reason for the organization, the public will never see it as anything more than an intimidation tactic. We will not win the Referendum 71 battle or future struggles by locking horns with the Radical-Right fringe. We will win by continuing our positive conversations with the movable middle about why they should protect our families. WhoSigned.org is scaring away the movable middle. We can’t resume the positive conversation until WhoSigned.org steps aside.
Let’s return to the positive conversation that Washington Families Standing Together started with their Decline to Sign campaign.
9 Comments
agreedthis ill-fated scheme has derailed the conversation.
Unintended consequences but I disagreeI think easy reference to who signs the anti gay referendum is in a good idea. I would want to know which neighbors and businesses think I don’t deserve the same rights, fairness, treatment as they do.
I agree that the Anitas and Antis were quick to the press and blogs to claim WhoSigned was just a tool to harrass people.
I don’t agree they should bow out. Just because the anti gay machine can still SPIN faster and louder than what is fair and good doesn’t mean fairness and goodness should not prevail.
Keep “KnowThyNeighbor” tpye thing in Washington.
I wish California had such a source for me to reference, however, California law does not allow for the release of names of those who sign initiative petitions.
Knowing who is a bigot is not about knowing who is “harrassing” glbt citizens and not the other way around.
frankly, this isn’t about us, it’s about the moveable middleand it is they and our strongest allies who are reacting with repulsion, not just the antis and anitas. here, for example, are editorials from seattle times ( and again here), tacoma weekly and spokesman-review. each of these papers has been a rock-solid supporter of equality. now, i’m not saying that everyone needs to agree with these editorials, but the editorials make clear that those influential papers won’t be spending time talking about us and why referendum 71 is bad for our families as long as whosigned is out there. because as long as whosigned is out there, they will be made our story. these editorials are emblematic of other news and opinion sources as well. it is just downright stupid to turn off the people who otherwise are willing to listen to us, even if the database is completely legitimate.
The corporate media and right-wing spin machine are attacking a legal activity by LGBT people in pursuit of their rights? So what else is new?Media, even friendly media, is in the business of creating controversy. Bigots are in the business of perpetuating bigotry. Looks like everyone is doing their job here.
I can’t for one second believe that anyone in the middle is going to look at all of this and decide that they are now going to sign the petition for sure just to show those darned queers. If anything, the artificial buzz will make people even more reluctant to sign. Who needs more drama in their life?
And what if WhoSigned does surrender to the bullying? Then we’ll look good? Then our enemies will be disheartened? Meanwhile, regardless, next week there will be a new story. The same old controversy doesn’t sell papers.
What’s going on in Washington media isn’t a sign that WhoSigned has failed, but that they are succeeding — and I imagine they’re succeeding exactly as planned.
‘Decline to Sign’ was greeted with the same language a decade agoThe mainstream LGBT activists in Washington “have adopted as an essential part of their strategy a tactic that was first used in Washington by a group of gadfly activists who were dismissed by the mainstream activists of their day, just as WhoSigned.org is being dismissed today.”
From:
http://lgbtqnews.com/gaynews/C…
The same kinds of right-wing talking points that are working — for now — against WhoSigned would be directed at “Decline to Sign” if WhoSigned were out of the picture.
even if there were a single entity called “corporate media”,wouldn’t it be prudent to get it back to writing articles supporting our defense of domestic partnerships and sympathetically profiling our families?
one of my neighbors, who is otherwise a very with it straight ally, said to me thursday “you guys are in the news”. he was talking about whosigned, but he included me and all of us because, as i said, straight people lump us all together, for right or wrong. even many allies. now if an ally is doing that, think about the fence-sitter. what “corporate image” do we want people to brand us with? scare tactician is not my first choice. sympathetic loving spouse and tax-paying citizen deserving of equality under the law is more to my taste.
The link you providedoes not support your quoted statement that mainstream LGBT activists a decade ago dismissed or denigrated the efforts of the forerunners of Decline to Sign (which was called Bigot Busters). I have no idea whether you are correct or not. I am simply saying that the piece you quote doesn’t support that contention. Bigot Busters are complaining that anti-LGBT are charging harrassment. Here’s the relevant bit:
Also, Decline to Sign is not at all like Bigot Busters.Bigot Busters was an active campaign of talking to people as the opposition presented them with petitions. Decline to Sign operates differently. It simply asks people to declare that they themselves will not sign, and to let friends know why and ask them to do the same. It is completely non-confrontational. It is a very different thing than Bigot Busters. Comparing them is an apples/oranges thing.
Eastern Washington.The liberal left of Seattle just doesn’t seem to understand the east side of this state politically (i live in Spokane). When things like this come up, it’s painful to see. Like watching two dance partners trying to lead.
The population here has a strange sort of libertarian mindset that needs to be respected and handled the right way, if you wish to employ them in any cause. Many people here are anti-government and strong on individual freedom, so LGBT and pro-choice people can find a suprising lack of resistance you might expect in a conservative culture such as this.
On the other hand, try to raise their taxes or pull something such as this, which to them will stink of government invasion, and you’ve got a problem.
i like the idea. But i don’t think it’ll work here.
As for the Spokesman, i wouldn’t exactly call them ‘rock-solid’ supporters in equality. But i guess it’s all about perspective.