Tuesday, January 24, 2012

'Glitter-bombing is counterproductive nonsense' and other Tuesday midday news briefs

Dan savaged by glitter before Vancouver talk - Dan Savage got glitter-bombed again, this time in Vancouver. For whatever reason this time confuses me. You just have to read the article.

But allow me to give a little editorial comment on this practice of glitter-bombing.

I don't care who is the victim of it, the practice of glitter-bombing is a cheap, unfocused psychological stunt. It's a petty rush for an attention addict who has deceive him or herself into thinking that they are doing something substantial for the community rather than providing fodder for the opposition on how the lgbtq community is supposedly pushy and will resort to pettiness if it doesn't get it's way.

Glitter-bombing isn't merely stupid; it's the sad sign of a people who are showing themselves not ready for their roles in the important struggle for equality. You see with that role comes structure and planning for acquiring and securing equal rights. With that role comes patience and the knowledge that you are not doing things merely for yourself and what you want at the present, but also how your actions will improve the lives of those who will come up after you.

And let's face it. Throwing colorful bits of confetti at people who offend you is not a suitable substitute for structure and planning.

Also what's with this desperate need for publicity anyway? The opposition gets publicity, but in all honesty, it doesn't need it. You see they are carefully plotting and planning behind the scenes and away from the cameras to achieve their goals.

Now imagine what we could do if we employed that type of discipline for a change.

And in other news (if I haven't sufficiently gotten you angry):

Ironically, it's NOM that's hiding gender here - Jeremy Hooper (the Arn Anderson to my Tully Blanchard) catches the National Organization for Marriage in ANOTHER deception.

Romney’s Foundation Donated To Anti-Gay Marriage Group - Surprising no one with a pulse.

Hate Groups Are Pissed At Christie - New Jersey Governor Chris Christie obviously doesn't want to be vice president.

Family Research Council Launches Boycott of Girl Scout Cookies - I will be buying my Girl Scout Cookies. Hopefully you will be, too.




Bookmark and Share

11 comments:

Stephen C. Toth (rvtoth@aol.com) said...

I Agree with you 100%. While I know that sometimes people frustrate us so much as they stand in the path of equality, we are not going to win them to our point of view by silly pointless stunts. We will do it by sitting down and having meaningful dialogue together. If you want to do something productive, then join the struggle by doing something productive like what you do in this blog and by not being afraid to stand up for equality!

PJB863 said...

From my perspective, it depends who gets glitter-bombed.

I don't agree with glitter-bombing someone who has generally been an ally vs. the Santorums or LaBarberas of the world.

Chris said...

much love for the WWF (WWE) reference

Marcus99 said...

One might also argue it makes less sense for gay activists to sit around writing and reading gay blogs; trying to convince each other how right we all are.

At least they are engaging.

Daniel Francis said...

Amen to that brother.

BlackTsunami said...

Marcus99 - and that's the problem. You are saying "at least." We need to be in this for the long haul and for victory. We shouldn't settle for any action, even if it's done to supposedly support our cause. We need to be intelligent, creative, pragmatic, and follow through with a plan that goes beyond public display of idiocy.

Sage said...

Ultimately, I consider Dan Savage to be a liability to the LGBT communities at present. I am open to the possibility that I may, at some point in the future, think completely differently about that. I also don't exactly view him as an ally to the LGBT communities either, given how I define the word "ally." I have written blog posts and engaged people in other ways where I have explained my positions around these things.

That being said, I believe glitter-bombing him or anyone to be counterproductive, silly and juvenile in all cases.

I believe Dan Savage needs to be held accountable for the things he has allowed to come out of his mouth in public appearances and onto the page in written form. Glitter-bombing him, in my opinion, is clearly not the way to achieve that at all.

At the same time I consider myself to be someone who has at least something of an understanding of the workings of what might be called karma or "energy" and how they might manifest in the world. Savage, I believe, has conducted himself, in such ways, and for years, that are equally as counterproductive, silly and juvenile as the glitter-bombings he has found himself on the wrong side of. As much as many of us in the LGBT communities may despise Rick Santorum, when we are able to take our emotions out of the equation, Savages whole "frothy mix" escapade, from my view, is analogous to the glitter-bombing silliness. Sometimes karma and energy just works that way.

Linnea said...

Glitter bombing is entertaining... but that's it. It's not really going to help the cause in the long run. I think the GLBT community (and straight allies like me) all need to realize we're in this for the long haul, and be strategic, rather than stunt-happy.

Marcus99 said...

Black Tsunami;

I did indeed say "at least" in the context that the least of actions is at times better than no action.

Those kids could be sitting around obliviously unaware of the politics surrounding them - but they are not. I admire those who are willing to hit the streets for the cause.

The only real sin here is that the GLBT community leaders are clearly unable or unwilling to appropriately tap this activist energy and thus focus it in a more mature manner.

I never said I agree with the practice. I'm just not gonna publicly take shots at my side from the fort.

Jay said...

I consider Dan Savage a hero and I certainly think it is absurd that he be glitter bombed, especially by people who seem to be mentally disturbed. However, I agree with PJB863. It all depends on who gets glitter-bombed and why. I thoroughly approve of the glitter-bombing of Santorum and Bachmann et al.

Sage said...

The implication there Jay seems, at least on the surface to be: glitter-bomb someone I believe is a hero and you are mentally disturbed. Glitter -bomb someone I don't think very highly of and you are mentally stable. Additionally, there is a lot of overlap, I mean literally some of the same people who glitter-bombed right wing conservatives are the exact same people/organizations who have glitter-bombed Dan Savage. So they are either mentally disturbed or stable period not one or the other based on who they glitter-bomb. In either case I have seen no commentary that directly speaks of the psychological/clinical stability (or not) of these people, one way or the other, at all.