We all know that no one knows “classy” like Matt Barber but yeah, this does seem a bit over the top. Maybe something better would be to have people pack a lunch or buy it somewhere else and make a point of eating it on public land near a Chick-Fil-A to show that they really don’t want to do business with them. These kissing couples are also going to have to buy something (cheap) there, but that’s still profit.

Actually, I think it’s a very appropriate demonstration technique. Confronting these restaurants with this sort of peaceful protest will force them to either grit their teeth and endure it, all the while imagining how icky it is, or have the protesters arrested on the spot. If they arrest, they are going to look like total asshats. I consider it a direct comparison to those African Americans who opted to sit down at whites-only lunch counters and endure the calumny of the patrons and staff, and were arrested too. Anything which drives the haters to even more visible displays of hatred is only going to work for us. Face it, we’re not trying to change anyone’s mind. People don’t change their mind about homosexuality based on political action. This kiss-in might just stir the pot enough to get some complacent gay people and our allies to counter the elevated levels of hate from CFA and their supporters. That might lead to more consciousness raising. That is really the ultimate goal. That is what the women’s rights movement did. Nobody in America can now say things like “mailman” without wondering if they have used a sexist term, because they have had their consciousness raised. We need to do the same thing. Our biggest problem, as a movement, is that we have let the opposition frame the debate, right from the beginning to now. The christians have done a great job portraying their hatred as “love” and their revulsion as “morality”. How is arresting a couple who are kissing going to look like either thing? I think it’s brilliant.
Most Americans are completely unaware that gay people live largely without any anti-discrimination protection. Most Americans believe that gay people are all doing just peachy, and do, in fact have not only equal rights, but “special rights”. We need to show them just how America really feels about us.

I don’t see it as a direct comparison to the lunch counter protests at all. The civil rights protests were strategic and well-planned. This happens to be a grassroots effort as response, with no organizing at a high level.

If you want to have a protest that is effective and draws an accurate parallel, having LGBTs and allies picket Chick-Fil-As carrying the “Imagine How Stupid You’re Going To Look in 40 Years” images you see in the post would be eons more powerful than a kiss-in because it addresses the key issue of bigotry and discrimination in historical context. And it doesn’t leave the frame of gay=sex wide out in the open for the haters to appropriate and wrongly exploit.

As I said over on FB, sadly I don’t have much hope for the media coverage of this. Reporting to date has continually reported this story as a controversy about marriage equality rather than the bible-based bigotry funded by Chick-Fil-A.

I’m not confident that the kiss-ins will be reported in a context that is favorable to the LGBT community. The media is lazy, and since these events are “organic” there will be enthusiastic participants without media training who get on camera may feed the media quotes that will inadvertently fuel fundie fires. And as far as LGBT orgs go, it’s their call, they will accept the laurels if it goes weill, and will have to clean up the PR mess if it goes badly. As you said, they won’t have control over these events.

i also think the kiss ins will give the haters that images they need to stir up yet more trouble and possibly turn voters against us at the polls in md, mn, maine and washington state.
but i also think this could backfire on the haters. judging from yesterday’s showing, there may be counter-protesters at today’s kiss-ins… the kind that could actually start trouble and hit or verbally abuse lgbts and our supporters. i hope our side is ready to video that nonsense on the part of our loving, christ-like haters.

I totally understand your point of view on this subject. But I’m getting pretty tired of waiting for the news media to treat the subject of gay rights in a positive light. I don’t think I can remember that happening. I do remember hearing from perhaps one or two spokespeople like Keith Olberman being on our side, or Rachel Maddow. But other than that, the usual news media reaction to a story like this one is to show a few clips of the event and then have Tony Perkins comment on them. If we’re lucky we might get someone from our side to counter, but usually the media just reinforces whichever belief they had before the whole story aired.
In other words, why can’t we just work on the people who are there. If a person is so disgusted by the sight of a gay couple kissing that they are motivated to react, that’s a pretty good representation of their true feelings. Right now, I think that is the issue. There’s been way too much spin doctoring from the haters, about how this is free speech, or family values or christian business practice, or whatever pleasant euphemism they have employed to provide cover for their disgust and animosity. I would welcome an opportunity to graphicly demonstrate the level of hatred and disgust that actually inhabits their hearts. And I suspect it would be mighty obvious to anyone else watching the footage too.
And I cannot stress how little we have to lose. Those who oppose gay rights aren’t going to start thinking well of us. But they might become uncomfortable publicly aligning themselves with the kind of haters who will be positively foaming at the mouth in defense of CFA.

Wow, this is an old argument.

You all might want to google “Queer Nation” and “ACT-UP” … not to mention something called “Stonewall”.

Please. I said I support direct action, but I personally disagree with this particular framing. We can agree to disagree on what will be most effective. The fact is that even ALLIES are under-informed about CFA’s support of virulent anti-gay hate groups and its discriminatory practices against non-Christians and women. A kiss-in does not address any of this and plays into their political frame.

Also, I hardly equate this with the work of ACT-UP — if you want to make a comparison of commitment, then these protesters should block access to CFAs and get press for being arrested for civil disobedience. I just happen to think this isn’t going to be effective. I’ll be happy to say I was wrong about it if it turns out to effect positive change.

I recommend nice, sweet romantic kisses. Go easy on the tongue action.

/light-hearted satire

Pam – I am pretty sure that the people in the 40 year old photo do not think they look stupid. They would probably tell us that they were right.

American white folks are hard to convince that their thoughts, beliefs and actions are stupid, no matter how obvious it is to everyone else.

And you are correct that a “kiss-in” will backfire.

And the media will focus on the participants who are nearly naked or dressed outlandishly or engaging in outlandish behavior.

Which will reinforce a lot of bigoted folks’ minds that being gay or lesbian is an aberration from “normal” people.

Another worthwhile action item: using as much good cheer and goodwill as you can muster, ask the friendly Chick-fil-A employee who is taking your order for a glass of water. If he or she says you must order food to receive the water, remind him/her that Chick-fil-A claims to be a “biblically-based” enterprise and cite Proverbs 25:21 – “If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.” If things get awkward, ask to see the manager.

It’s painful for me to vote for “will hurt more”. It’s not because of an ick factor, but because of a simple unfamiliarity factor. The image (and this IS an image weapon) is too uncommon to assume it will be accepted, with or without comfort, and all beside the question of whether it makes a worthy statement.

I have to presume the general population is not ready to respond the way we want or intend. Because even I am taken aback by it in a public arena. Which makes me privately sad because it’s something I do enjoy and have enjoyed same-sex intimacy for most of my 70 years. In private. Though mostly because I’m not cool with public demonstration of intimacy at all, including with women. (I’m bisexual).

Help or hurt? It depends how they’re carried out. We’ll see and hope for the best.

I would say there’s a warning flag, though. There is a Hate-A-Chick contingent which has been going about this the wrong way. They are letting themselves get egged along by masturbatory outbursts from the likes of Emanuel and Menino. Those two are inciters who appeal to the worst instincts of some hotheads regardless of the merits of any cause. Their real goal is not tolerance at all, but a “just” counter-hatred to balance things out among an at risk constituency. That’s exploitation.

Whether that is bypassed today remains to be seen. The goal is difficult. It must be to steer those with antisocial inclinations toward shared values and mutually beneficial stances over time rather than making a bad climate even worse. It will take patience, persuasion, and thoughtful alternatives.

First, a decision must be made to not interfere with Chick’s customers or employees at Chick’s outlets. There must be no harassment or intimidation whatsoever regardless of how tempting and accessible those targets may be. There must not be rumors floated about research on where these people live (e.g., logging license plates of customers and employees even if just for show). Instead, demonstrations should be non-interfering, and either off the property or on site and out of the way, and legal. Peaceful protest means constructive theater which does not intimidate anyone. It should always be positive and ask for agreement from the public.

Second, it must be realized that leveraging a governmental licensing cudgel, such as Menino slyly threatened with coded language, will be challenged and fail even before it is invoked. That is already apparent by Menino’s having to back track, which was costly. It was a very bad idea. The gov’t cudgel cannot be leveraged based on any business owner’s personal attitudes or where a corp donates. There are other ways.

Third, consider how Chick’s locations are set up. Which sites are owned and which are leased? For leased sites why not encourage a lessor to not renew a Chick lease? Use peaceful protests and encourage a peaceful boycott against an entire mall as well as against the Chick inside. For Chick owned sites find out if there are any unpaid taxes or fees on the property or zoning issues. A lot of legwork there, but just the news of ongoing research will remain a continuous reminder to the public. There are a lot of Chick outlets on the map. Where will that research team show up next?

Folks, it has to be about measured persuasion. Belligerence will be self destructive.

I agree with Pam, this isn’t the best way to get our message across.

“Folks, it has to be about measured persuasion. Belligerence will be self destructive.”

Aye,

A civil frank discussion RAISING the issue’s so pertinent
and poignant
such as the point made above
“you’d never see that many xtians lined up to help at a food bank…”

THIS

would be the MOST effective form of dialogue!

“So why do you keep calling me ‘Lord, Lord!’ when you don’t do what I say?

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=6&v=46&t=NLT#comm/46

“For only love can conquer hate”-Marvin Gaye

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obwMsk5JzxQ

Pam, we are discussing your article at a gay site, and it seems most people agree with you. IMO Kiss Ins have always been a stunt or meant as shock value. In the past, they were sometimes not even local. People would be bussed to Salt Lake City from say San Francisco. IMO, all they dont change any hearts and minds and merely make the already bigotted upset. Maybe they work in NYC but its not an effective tool in Alabama.

The suggestion I made was that instead of kiss ins, people hold weddings in front. Or hold receptions inside or have Chik-fil-A cater a reception elsewhere. This targets Chik-Fil-A itself and would engage them in the actual issues at hand. Maybe Chik-Fil-A could become a gay marriage tradition! Aside from sticking it to the company, this could open up legal options should the company refuse

Though mostly because I’m not cool with public demonstration of intimacy at all, including with women.

Yes, aside from the fact these “kiss ins” have usually been coastal gay groups swooping in from outside, my main issue is that I just dont like PDA from anyone. I dont mind the occasional peek or hand holding but long kisses and groping is not something I want to see. And if I had kids I wouldnt necessarily want them exposed to that from and combination of couples.

I think the kiss-in is a terrible idea. It is not going to win over any supporters, and it will just raise the level of animosity towards gays with the type of people who make up Chick-fil-a’s clientele.

I think flagrant displays of PDA are inappropriate in a public venue, regardless of whether it’s a same-sex or opposite-sex couple. When I go out to eat, I don’t want to see some other couple smashing face. Get a room.

What’s the point? I see absolutely no benefit to be gained. Instead, it will most likely give us a black eye, and photos from this will become fodder for wingnut fundraising letters for months to come. Our best hope is that the media doesn’t cover it.

The problem with analogizing the Kiss-Ins to a sit-in by blacks at a drugstore counter is that Chick-Fil-A makes no attempt to discourage gays or gay couples from sitting in their restaurants. In order to have any hope of provoking a response, the activists have to do something with shock value, which then shifts the argument from “was the restaurant management tolerant enough” to “what’s with the icky PDAs, which are as unattractive among straights as among gays?”

The wedding reception idea is a good one, though again the problem will be that no one at Chick-Fil-A will object in the slightest, and then what?

Gay activists could start applying for franchises in huge numbers, but the visuals aren’t compelling.

American white folks are hard to convince that their thoughts, beliefs and actions are stupid, no matter how obvious it is to everyone else.

Why is this not racism?

Groups like Focus on the Family know all too well that burying your lies and hate in scripture and simply calling yourself a “Christian” organization is a very effective means of garnering blind trust and support from the religious community and its leaders.

So what I want to know is what Chick-Fil-A and the Cathy family plan to do now that they have been made aware that they have been financially backing several organizations that are either being closely watched by or have already been classified as hate groups by the SPLC alongside other pseudo-religious hate groups like the KKK and Neo-Nazis.

What I’d like to see happen here is for the Cathy family to publicly withdraw its support of these groups and apologize to gays and Christians alike for ever giving these hate groups a dime… that would be HUGE!

I’m sure they are praying about it as we speak.

you know what is MOST EFFECTIVE for the right wing?

incessant diaper pissing and sternly wagged fingers from those whining about what is the ‘most effective’ framing and what is the ‘most effective’ activity –

IF you don’t like what they say, don’t repeat it. IF you don’t like what they do, don’t do it.

I do love our lefty ‘diversity’ – ‘everybody agree with MY definition of unity and solidarity, otherwise the righties will lie and then we’ll lose, cuz we didn’t have solidarity and unity.’

ever since ’68 and ’72 the orgs of ‘the left’ have fallen over themselves to NOT scare the middle, OR, they’d lose … how’s that been working?

IF you’re in 1 of the appx. 22,000,000/113,000,000 households with 2009 money income over $100,000, IF 1 of the appx. 24,000,000/211,000,000 over 15 years old with 2009 money income over $75,000

THEN you have lots and lots of company of sternly finger wagging professionals worrying about scaring the middle and losing – and IF you’re part of the appx. 56,000,000 households living on under 50k or 1 of the appx. 159,000,000 individuals living on under 50k, you’re just f’ked, again, and again, and again, by a political class which excels at making excuses & losing to fascists.

does it hurt?

fucking pathetic hand wringing is what hurts.

rmm.

Apparently civil thoughtful dialogue is beyond your capabilities. Nothing to see here, move along…

Personally, I LOVE being lumped in with bigots because of my color./s

Cathy has made it clear he’s not going to withdraw support. He’s doubling down on bigotry.

What needs to be made crystal clear is the a follow the money path that shows that Cathy has actively engaged in trying to make his personal opinion LAW.

It’s be far more effective if there were numbers that show exactly HOW MUCH money Chik Fil A has contributed to groups that have actively campaigned to keep marriage between a man and woman in each state.

Cathy is entitled to his own opinion. THAT isn’t the problem. The problem is the amount of money he has spent to codify his own personal opinion into LAWS.

I agree with Pam’s analysis — kiss-ins for something like this are tailor-made to provide ammunition to the Peter LaBarberas, Matt Barbers, Bryan Fischers, and Brian Browns. (And if they didn’t happen, Tony Perkins and Maggie Gallagher would just make them up.)

And when it comes right down to it, PDAs, gay or straight, make people uncomfortable, but not in a way that is going to cause them to think about their reaction.

Pam’s right — the way to keep the whole discussion on message, and to force the media to deal with the substance, is to engage Chik-fil-A’s customers on their hiring and employment practices, their funding of hate groups, and the management’s avowed mission of stripping basic rights from gay and lesbian Americans. Those are the sorts of things that most Americans don’t like very much. (At least, not publicly.)

Hate to say it kids, but I was deep in Queer Nation (and ACT-UP) in San Francisco back in the day and this is EXACTLY the type of shock theater we used. In fact where do you think “We’re here, we’re queer, get over it” came from? We invaded shopping malls as herds of drag queens. We had kiss-ins and die-ins and the fact is we are here and people have no choice but to get used to it. And until they do we’re staying in their face. We don’t have to prove that we’re more pious and conservative than they are just to be accepted. Furthermore I resent people who weren’t on the forefront of radical queer politics back then telling me what we stood for and what our tactics were. This is the closest thing to a QN action I’ve seen since then.

You refer to campaigns from quite a long time ago.

Do you see any progress since then? If so, how did that occur? If not, why? Also, if not, then did the “in your face” technique fail somewhere along the way? If it did fail, is a new method worth considering?

Have you made as many friends as enemies in all these years?

Exactly.

Our enemies must be positively salivating at all of the footage to be gained of “Freakish Homos” twirling tongues and grabbing each other’s crotches–oh yes, there surely were some who did that–and then cut to an image (staged or not) of an “Ozzie and Harriet” family looking horrified and shocked when all they wanted was some lunch.

Image wise: Fundies 1, queers -100000

I’m almost ready to start a betting pool on how fast the first “make-out in the streets” images make their way into campaign literature this fall, especially on GLBT-related issues. And no, this was not a “peaceful activity”; everybody I know who talked of participation couldn’t wait to get out there and swap tonsils in as conspicuous and in-your-face way they could. You know–precisely what we are constantly being accused of doing by the Right Wing. Now they’ll have film footage to prove it.

Even our local LGBT Center’s Director was interviewed about this, and the only parts of his interview that made the cut were “There’s gonna be lots of making out”, with all of the interview relating to WHY this happened cut out.

The Fundies LOVE every image they can find of “salicious homos”, especially in the vicinity of “innocent children”. The media–never interested in the truth, but in reactions–will perform double-twisting backflips to give them this footage, trust me. We’ll be seeing these kisses for a decade at the very least on FOX news every time a gay issue is brought up.

The point that @bearpaw was trying to make is the debate of what forms of protest will harm or hurt us has been going on within the gay community since we started fighting for equality. ACT UP was viewed as very confrontational and very negative by a big part of the gay community. They felt that the actions that ACT UP was taking with their forms of civil disobedience was make the gay community look bad; was not helping us achieve equality and was definately NOT making the general public sympathetic the cause of fighting HIV/AIDS. Today we see those actions and protests as something different; something that we can be proud of. @bearpaws statement was not about equating kiss ins with disrupting church services, but equating the debate of harm or hurt to something that we largely look back on now as being a positive and very effect tool that helped to get us where we are today.

I am not planning to participate in the local Kiss-In in Hollywood, but I have been rather touched by several Straight friends asking if it would be appropriate for them to participate with their spouses and/ or gay friends as a show of solidarity.