TO STATE the obvious, the construction of a large building is not an overnight phenomenon. Rather than conjoining a series of 15-story Legos and Lincoln Logs, contractors build skyscrapers through a tenuous arrangement of cinder blocks, girders, concrete, plumbing and electricity.
So it is with major political movements. On Thursday evening, Elizabeth Birch, Executive Director of the gay rights group Human Rights Campaign, presented herself as one willing to take incremental steps to achieve a broader, more ambitious goal. Citing the warming of corporate America towards the gay and lesbian community, Birch discussed a desire to alter Americans' personal attitudes toward those same people.
She talked broadly of how gay and lesbian leaders "must build [their] movement on love." She articulated an ambitious vision wherein all persons "are all deserving of sacred grace and dignity."
Amidst these general emotional statements, Birch mentioned a desire to alter Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act to include various categories of gender and sexual orientation. Clearly, Ms. Birch speaks as an activist and has the idealistic, change-the-earth vision of an activist.
In contrast to such broad-ranging goals, the key components of Birch's Thursday talk dealt with framing two normally controversial issues - hate crime legislation and gay marriage - in non-threatening, mainstream terms. With respect to a federal law expanding hate crime protections to crimes of sexual orientation, Birch did not talk about preventing future assaults. Opponents of such legislation generally argue that focusing on the motivations of one crime over another crime does nothing to prevent future bad acts and creates a hierarchy of crimes based on who is attacked rather than the form or function of the attack.
Amazingly, Birch deftly brushed aside such traditional arguments, stating that the legislation "has nothing to do with sentencing." In fact, she focused on how the legislation would provide federal funds to localities prosecuting crimes of a protected nature so that the locality would not go bankrupt. Her portrayal of the legislation made it appear almost as a traditional, tough-on-crime statute that Virginians would embrace whole-heartedly.
Birch did the same with the divisive issue of legal recognition of gay marriages. Stating, "We need to uncouple the religious ... elements from what is a contract," Birch attempted to portray marriage as a simple, government-approved contract. By making marriage the moral equivalent of buying two tons of cement, Birch may effectively appeal to the much-ballyhooed mainstream of America that may view matrimony as more of a social than religious entity. The shift from viewing marriage as a straight institution to viewing it as a gay and straight institution begins with reducing its status to a contract. Birch understands this progression, and her incremental stance helps make her agenda a more mainstream one.
After watching Birch present her methodical vision of the gay rights movement to a crowd of approximately 200 observers, I spoke with leaders of the campus-wide gay and lesbian movement. Kate Ranson-Walsh, President of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Union, spoke broadly of a desire for students to have greater awareness of and respect for the organization. She mentioned specific things she wished would take place in Charlottesville, such as football fans not shouting "not gay" during the Good Old Song and how gay and lesbian students should feel safer on Rugby Road and in first-year housing than they do currently.
However, unlike Birch, none of the leadership of the LGBTU seemed to have specific ideas and goals oriented toward altering the attitudes and opinions of University students, faculty and administrators. Although students had a few ideas about what would constitute an improvement for gay and lesbian students at the University, nobody articulated any sort of cohesive and attainable vision to which the gay community should strive.
From a pragmatic standpoint, the gay community has two issues relating to safety that probably could provide political traction: safety on Rugby Road and comfort in first-year housing. Attempting to stifle drunken morons from painting homophobic graffiti on a bridge or stopping drunken football fans from asserting their heterosexuality will likely marginalize and frustrate gay activists on Grounds.
Adapting Birch's approach of emphasizing a mainstream issue, such as safety, would allow the LGBTU a winning and positive issue that a majority of the student body would support.
From that point, the gay and lesbian community could move on to consider issues that currently seem unattainable or unreachable. On Thursday, Birch gave a clinic on how to build a major social change within an existing political system. On-Grounds organizations, including the LGBTU, would do well to learn from her example as they choose and shape issues for their future interests.
(Seth Wood's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily.)
Read More
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | YesterdayPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 5 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | April 27, 2024The University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
