Once a cause wins a resounding victory, should it pack up and go home or keep looking for things to fight for?
I’m thinking the former because if not, you start seeing Pride get degraded all the way to Jew-bashing and. . . I don’t even know how to describe this shit. See for yourself.
Make sure to scroll all the way to the end for a photo that will restore your faith in humanity after the insanity quoted in the post.
I do not think the main reason is winning “a resounding victory” since practically every progressive movement is going “all the way to Jew-bashing” because intersectionality demands to be pro-Palestinian, which is interpreted as allowing zero Jewish symbols at their tolerance events … to make people feel safe.
Has BLM won a resounding victory too?
LikeLike
There was an article in yesterday’s NYTimes about the huge problem of too many straight people going to gay bars. That’s what I call having solved all serious problems. It’s like the first world feminism that frets about word usage and idiocy like mansplaining, etc. Once you win the fight, you run the danger of becoming a parody.
LikeLike
In the LGBT rights movement, there is a tension between (1) a desire for acceptance/inclusion/assimilation and (2) an anti-normativity/anti-assimilationist perspective. For the radicals, assimilation is bad, so one wonders if inclusion is bad.
It is true that the personal is political, but I think that the average LGBT person just wants to live their life, as long as they don’t face discrimination or violence. They don’t want their life to be needlessly politicized, and they reject the radicals’ idea that they have to be oppositional, anti-normative subjects. To invoke the language of SJWs, the radical call to be anti-normative seems to involve additional emotional labor, and who wants to do more work when it’s not necessary?
(By the way, straight people going to gay bars…you’d think that would be a good thing, right?)
LikeLike
\ they reject the radicals’ idea that they have to be oppositional, anti-normative subjects.
I would reject it too. It sounds dehumanizing to me.
Regardless of additional emotional labor, just because somebody is gay or Jewish doesn’t mean one should (be forced to) have oppositional rather usual middle class or even Conservative personality.
By Conservative, I do not necessary mean voting for Trump,yes? Just the type of person who dreams about a standard middle-class family and life, even if the family has two gays or minorities in it. 🙂
LikeLike
I think the majority of people in this country have realized that gay folks are normal, regular, slightly boring, just like everybody else, people. And I think it’s a good thing. Even older people from conservative cultures have gotten over their anti-gay feelings. My parents, for instance, have moved from a hardcore homophobic stance to acceptance and even support. And it makes me happy to see that.
Good point on the additional emotional labor.
LikeLike
The story is like that of the three blind men and the elephant. What you see depends on where you are. I see the continued mistrust and intolerance between the gay and transgender communities, which makes no sense to me at all. I don’t see a natural link between Zionism and gay rights; I’m curious how that got entangled. And yes, the dialog has shifted, hopefully permanently.
LikeLike
I feel bad for that Jewish lesbian. She’s been showing up to these events for years, and now all of a sudden she is not wanted. It’s always sad when an individual is rejected by a group without even having done anything.
LikeLike
It’s an ironic part of human nature that after a long, heart-felt effort to achieve a major goal, people often feel a strange let-down when victory is reached. Great, we’ve won — but what do we do now to keep all our positive energy and sense of purpose going?
You see this with many identity groups: the feminists who got votes for women, the right to hold corporate leadership positions, protection against employer sexual harassment, etc. are now embracing “intersectionality” and finding new issues to complain about every day … the blacks who got their right to vote in the South and abolished Jim Crow laws are now demanding that universities change the names of buildings named after slave owners … the dedicated Jews who spent their entire lives since WWII hunting down Nazis can’t accept the fact that all the major Nazis have either been punished or are long dead, so now they’re going after 95-year-old accountants … and the list of groups like this is endless.
You’re right. Sometimes it’s best just to accept victory and go home!
LikeLike
These movements could go internationalist and advance their causes overseas, where these victories haven’t been won yet. For instance, Ukraine just held its first Gay Pride. This is HUGE for a country like Ukraine. How great would it be to have activists from the US and Canada get in touch with their brothers and sisters in Ukraine and help them achieve the same goals of marriage equality, for instance? How great would it be if feminists went back to the struggle against FGM both overseas and abroad? It’s the Internet era, for pete’s sakes. You don’t need to travel to be there.
LikeLike
\ These movements could go internationalist and advance their causes overseas, where these victories haven’t been won yet.
I think we should thank our lucky stars the activists haven’t begun doing it yet. Considering West’s relationship with the Middle East, any Western support for liberal group X would be a great boon to conservative forces in that country. The rulers would also have additional reason to attack progressive forces since it would bring them even greater political capital.
The above would be true even if all activists were mature individuals, more interested in human rights than in their egos. From reading about many Western activists, I got the opposite impression.
Thought about this old post of yours:
Who Killed Russia’s Progressive Activism?
And about the post I’ve recently linked to titled “U.S. Support of Gay Rights in Africa May Have Done More Harm Than Good.”
What I would be happy about is for American progressives to stop American evangelicals from “taking their fight overseas” and promoting pro-AIDS, anti-gay and anti-birth control policies in other countries. That would have been a great mission for American progressives.
\ a panel discussion at Netroots Nation about how American anti-LGBT activists are contributing to the globalization of homophobia. These evangelicals have helped build support for anti-gay laws not only in Africa but also in Russia, Eastern Europe, the Caribbean and South America, the panelists said. […] they’re supporting laws that make LGBT people criminals and in some cases even supporting laws that make LGBT advocacy illegal.
LikeLike
Gay Wedding Cakes Goes to SCOTUS
The Supreme Court on Monday said it will consider next term whether a Denver baker unlawfully discriminated against a gay couple by refusing to sell them a wedding cake.
Lower courts had ruled that Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, had violated Colorado’s public accommodations law, which prohibits refusing service to customers based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.
I just find it absurd that religiosity is going to bleed over into every commercial transaction and it’s tolerated if you claim a certain faith or it’s some anti woman thing.
“The fact the employer insurance I provide might somehow be used by my employees to fuck nonreproductively offends my religious beliefs. But not enough to have never have covered birth control. Look at the sincerity of my belief. I’m an Evangelical Christian.”
“Ok then.”
Peyote is an essential part of my tribal and religious identity and we’ve used it in religious ceremonies.”
<a href=”“””Nope.”
Gay people aren’t a protected class at the federal level when it comes to employment law or housing. Overwhelming victory!
Conservatives must also be thrilled about the Missouri religious playground case.
There’s plenty of fighting to be done if you’re so inclined. Holding the tide against reactionaries is important.
LikeLike
For feminism in America there is still real work. For instance:
Men Legally Allowed to Finish Sex Even If Woman Revokes Consent, NC Law States
…
On March 30, state Sen. Jeff Jackson, a Democrat, filed a bill that would change this horrific law. (He filed a similar bill with two Republican co-sponsors in 2015.) The text of SB 553 is short and to the point, reading, in part: “a person may withdraw consent to engage in vaginal intercourse in the middle of the intercourse, even if the actual penetration is accomplished with consent and even if there is only one act of vaginal intercourse.”
…
But traction has been slow in getting this change implemented. He points to one conservative blog as an example for why. In it, the writer ridicules Jackson’s work to address the “‘rules’ of fornication” as “pandering to the Wimmen’s Studies Department alumni.”
LikeLike
There is a point in the sex act where stopping is just not possible, for man or for woman. I can’t imagine what purpose it would serve to criminalize this and how it can be enforced.
LikeLike
“There is a point in the sex act where stopping is just not possible”
If Shakesville had a stake… you’d be ashes.
LikeLike
No, seriously, we are all adults here. We all know it’s a fact. What’s gained by pretending it isn’t?
LikeLike
There is a point in the sex act where stopping is just not possible, for man or for woman.
That’s not the situations in which this ruling is being applied to. This isn’t about “oops I just bust my nut right after you told me to stop.”
Are you seriously going to say this woman consented at any point?
she testified that the perpetrator, Donnie Way, threatened to beat her if she didn’t have sex with him while hanging out at a friend’s apartment. When she tried to leave the bedroom, he allegedly slapped her in the face.
Hester went on to tell the court that Way penetrated her anally and forced her to perform oral sex on him. She said he began having intercourse with her—though she begged him not to because she was a virgin—but stopped when she complained of severe stomach pains. Later, at the hospital, she told her mother she was raped.
Or that there is no such thing as safe word sex? Or agreeing on what the sex is going to be beforehand? I can think of all kinds of ways it can go from “great” to “get the fuck off me right now” for men.
Or that the withdrawal method is absolutely impossible to execute?
LikeLike
This is clearly rape but the situation we are discussing has to do with consensual sex.
As for the “withdrawal method”, not only doesn’t it fail to prevent pregnancy, it’s a great way to get an ED. But again, it’s all in the consent. If people choose to practice it, or any other perversion, it’s absolutely their right. But forcing them to do it legally is bizarre.
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment