The largest nonviolent direct action in history

[Joe Brummer]

I almost think this idea would be violence if carried out, but I though I would write it out for others to debate that.

I thought of this after asking a few gay adversaries about their goal. I asked on my blog (http://joebrummer.com/WordPress/?p=359) as a challenge for anti-gay advocates to tell me what the world would look like if there "goal" has been met. I thought in my mind their answers would be the eradication of "homosexuality" in society.

That lead me to wonder what if we did that, globally for one day. What if every gay person and every gay supporter in every country, just stayed home for a day. Don't buy anything, don't go to work, just stay home and read a book. WHat would happen?

If a day without immigrants could make any change, can you imagine a day without gays? Would the world stop for just a day to see just how much we do count? What if we just picked a date to do this? No teachers, no mailmen, no Broadway, no haircuts, no Ellen show? How big could we make it and would people really do it?

[keltic63]

I remember something like this being attempted a few years ago, but I don't think it was successful. I remember thinking that I was able to call off work that day, but I was concerned about how others might be able to do that. For some it was a sacrifice of a day's wages, which is manageable. For others, it could mean the loss of a job. I like the idea of this one day sickout/boycott. How could it be organized that it would happen successfully?

[Joe Brummer]

How could it be organized that it would happen successfully?


I would love to figure that out. My guess is that we would need to appeal to people sense of justice. Look to the Bus Boycotts of 1955 for the answer whatever that answer is, I bet it is there.

[Daniel]

I would love to figure that out. My guess is that we would need to appeal to people sense of justice. Look to the Bus Boycotts of 1955 for the answer whatever that answer is, I bet it is there.

Joe- It would take a lot of support from many organizations- not just one- would it not?

A little reading on the boycott you mention reveals that plans were made ahead of time: they waited for an event to spur the community into action.

http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/civilrights-55-65/montbus.html

" By 1955, the Women's Political Council had plans for just such a boycott. Community leaders were just waiting for the right person to be arrested, a person who would anger the black community into action, who would agree to test the segregation laws in court, and who, most importantly, was "above reproach." When fifteen year old Claudette Colvin was arrested early in 1955 for refusing to give up her seat, E.D. Nixon of the NAACP thought he had found the perfect person, but Colvin turned out to be pregnant. Nixon later explained, "I had to be sure that I had somebody I could win with." [4] Enter Rosa Park

What I find interesting about this writer's analysis is the organizers use of African-American anger and injustice. Perhaps the most recent example of this would be the death of Matthew Shepard. By contrast, recent anti-gay marriage court decisions have not seemed to generate the same degree of outrage.

Based on this methodoloy, what would it take, one wonders, to impel a nation of GLBT persons into action? I'm not unaware, however, that the writer's slant on historical events may be at odds with the methods of nonviolence. But perhaps this is my own parsing of linguistics.

[Dash]

I think the staying home for a day would be a wonderful lesson for society if we could pull it off.

I also wish that we could on that day, or some other day (perhaps October 11th (http://www.hrc.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Coming_Out/Get_Involved3/National_Coming_Out_Day/Index.htm)) really convince a multitude of closeted gay celebs to cast their cares and fortunes to the wind and come out. What a powerful statement that would make! How many people that have won the adoration of millions are quietly gay? How many would stand with their brothers and sisters? Again...how to pull it off is the question. You can't make people do it...and there's always so much at stake.

National Coming Out Day (http://www.hrc.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Coming_Out/Get_Involved3/National_Coming_Out_Day/Index.htm) has the potential for real power. It is a call to direct, truthful and completely nonviolent action and solidarity.

Unfortunately, it depends on some of the weakest among us...those who have not yet cast off the shackles of fear and bondage to which almost all of us first awoke when we began to face our sexuality.

[Joe Brummer]

Maybe on October 11, 2007 we should do it. I would be willing to pay for and build a website to promote it. I would do this, I would also pubically urge people to do it with us. I wonder how many people we could pull on board.

Look at Brad Pitt, he has gone the extra mile by not marrying till we can. Imagine of we found the support of people like him. We could make the biggest nonviolent statement ever. BUT to be perfectly nonviolent, there would need to be a demand and a way out. I would think that adding gays and lesbians to the Federal Hate crimes bill would be the demand, and that it could be avoided if that should happen sooner than the event.

I will think more abou this. I am starting to think this could happen, at least here in America.

[Dash]

I'm so busy right now that I barely have time to think, but here's a couple things...

A boycott by church musicians could be coordinated with the Day of Silence (http://www.dayofsilence.org/). Working with allies among pastors and laity, where possible, would make it more powerful. Professional & volunteer musicians and congregants could all be silent for a Sunday. This could be very difficult for people (like me) who need the work. Thinking about my organist, I don't know if I could convince him to do this. Tension between professional ethics and active participation might not allow it.

I've been reading about "not gay" folks. People in television, film, sports, politics, entertainment, etc. that assert they are not gay. That's certainly their perogative, but in conjuction with National Coming Out day, perhaps we could find a way to include these people. It's not that I think they would want to come out (though some might) but somehow we could all acknowledge together the pressures that are placed upon all gay people to keep secrets by highlighting the endless questions and rumors that high profile personalities face. Ending the pressure from publicists, managers, employers, and public opinion to hide any non-straight life would be the goal, I think. Even people who choose to be single are not playing the "straight publicity" game, and we need as many allies as we can to join with us against the subtle bigotry that pollutes our society preventing gay people from being honest about who they are...or forcing people who aren't gay, to live what may be an exaggeratedly straight life for show.

We need methods, contacts, and publicity...

(sorry this isn't really clear, but seriously...i've no time to get my thoughts in good order...)

[Vanessa White]

I am not sure on the logistics of planning, but I do agree that the LGBT community and our allies, family members and friends could plan and pull something like this off. I am thinking along the same lines as Joe and Dash, needing some celebrity and group support and involvement in order to get the numbers, exposure and power of it all. I am also thinking that on one given day, be it National Coming Out day or another day, that several events be taking place all over the country to further emphasize the impact of the issue. It is also an initiative that could be a comfortable level of involvement for those persons who don't like being in the forefront of activism.

[Joe Brummer]

So if we did such a thing, what would we be asking people to do?

Stay home from work
Try not to spend money

It seems radical anti-gays want "gays" to go away, what if we did. We could show them the world for one day without us.

I am quite serious that I would start this if others could help me frame out the details. From there it is a matter of spreading the word.

I am positive this would have a very negative impact on the economy and the lives of many, so I also believe there needs to be a goal to it ( a demand) and an out should that demand be met before hand.

[Emproph]

A boycott by church musicians could be coordinated with the Day of Silence (http://www.dayofsilence.org/). Working with allies among pastors and laity, where possible, would make it more powerful. Professional & volunteer musicians and congregants could all be silent for a Sunday. This could be very difficult for people (like me) who need the work. Thinking about my organist, I don't know if I could convince him to do this. Tension between professional ethics and active participation might not allow it. How 'bout a designated speaker? Does your organist know how to make 'yes' and 'no' sounds with the organ? Or the disappointed sound WAH Wah wah.. -have 'em study a baseball game for a day. :D I've been reading about "not gay" folks. People in television, film, sports, politics, entertainment, etc. that assert they are not gay...It's not that I think they would want to come out (though some might) but somehow we could all acknowledge together the pressures that are placed upon all gay people to keep secrets by highlighting the endless questions and rumors that high profile personalities face. Ending the pressure from publicists, managers, employers, and public opinion to hide any non-straight life would be the goal, I think. Even people who choose to be single are not playing the "straight publicity" game, and we need as many allies as we can to join with us against the subtle bigotry that pollutes our society preventing gay people from being honest about who they are...or forcing people who aren't gay, to live what may be an exaggeratedly straight life for show.

We need methods, contacts, and publicity...

(sorry this isn't really clear, but seriously...i've no time to get my thoughts in good order...)I thought it was perfectly clear and a really good idea too. Like the recent additions to hate crime and anti-bullying laws that include the phrase “or perceived to be gay.” That one really infuriates them, which exemplifies the problem, The damage really does affect more than just us.

We’ve got enough openly 'out' celebrities too, publicity-wise, so I concur with your and Vanessa's thought on that as well.

...I am also thinking that on one given day, be it National Coming Out day or another day, that several events be taking place all over the country to further emphasize the impact...

an ititiative that could be a comfortable level of involvement for those persons who don't like being in the forefront of activism.
'Co-opting' or perhaps cooperating/coinciding with something like Day of Silence is my feeling too.So if we did such a thing, what would we be asking people to do?

Stay home from work
Try not to spend money

It seems radical anti-gays want "gays" to go away, what if we did. We could show them the world for one day without us.

I am quite serious that I would start this if others could help me frame out the details. From there it is a matter of spreading the word.

I am positive this would have a very negative impact on the economy and the lives of many, so I also believe there needs to be a goal to it ( a demand) and an out should that demand be met before hand.-We have to remember that we're dealing with a people who have a lower than normal tolerance for pain, I am one of them.

To illustrate the above and add to Dash's point below, asking to go without working or making/spending money can be like asking someone whose versed in starvation to go on a hunger strike for food. (..bear with me :))
Unfortunately, it depends on some of the weakest among us...those who have not yet cast off the shackles of fear and bondage to which almost all of us first awoke when we began to face our sexuality.Stay home from work:
Stay home = 1) out of sight out of mind 2) loss of a days pay 3) potential loss of job itself 4) Impractical for those with careers, 5) etc.

Day of Silence-type effort:
Our silence is visible. (catch phrase?).
Each situation where the silence is noticed (writing a note, pointing instead of speaking, etc.), makes the statement.

As a mass event, I think that a workday that revolved around someone who wasn’t speaking would create much more of a buzz outside of the event itself – especially on a personal level with/between those who had to deal with those who weren’t speaking. Potentially sparking many lasting and novel conversations.

Try not to spend money:
-What if on that day we went out of our way to spend money on things we normally would, but make it a point to do so at one of the gay friendly companies. Going out of my way for a day could be within my reach even if being 'out' about silence was not.

Like with the HRC’s Corporate Equality Index (http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Get_Informed2&CONTENTID=31668&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm). -It's a good read, it seems they're getting somewhere. :tup:
I love that by focusing on which companies do best it avoids the antagonistic spirit of a boycott.

-No lifestyles would be disrupted. (no pun intended)
-Those who were unable or unwilling to participate in the “out-ness” aspect of the day could still participate.
-It would promote a more lasting/permanent awareness of the list itself and the gay-friendly companies on it.

Ultimately I think something like the Day of Silence embodies the spirit of non-violence. It’s ‘in your face’ so to speak, without the confrontation. The goal is to get people to literally STOP and think, as opposed to thinking BE-CAUSE of something... -No challenge and not a threat, it’s left to them to acknowledge or not. (Wow, I think I’m getting the hang of this non-violence thing...:weee:)

Ultimately I think we need to organize such an effort into an actionable way-of-life somehow, in the same spirit of those waiting to get married until everyone else can get married. A innocuous yet consistently visible statement/stance that requires minimal effort.

P.S. -Bloggers could participate too by posting only n/t (no text), with just a link to the web site for the whole day...

P.P.S. -I’ve got another essay incorporating Daniels points too...

[Dash]

I love that by focusing on which companies do best it avoids the antagonistic spirit of a boycott.

I've been thinking about boycotts lately because of Mel's latest book, and it occurs to me, that boycotts have been taken over by fundamentalist Christianity. They cry for boycotts at the drop of a hat. Boycotting worked for King, but it may not be an effective method for us, since it often turns into "boycott wars".

I like all your thoughts, Emproph.

[Joe Brummer]

I am not sure I would call it a boycott since we are asking people to sort of boycott life for a day

[Emproph]

If we want Largest non-violent action, then it has to be the Largest practical action.

Non-violence doesn’t mean non-action, it means non-harm. I don’t think this has been fully articulated yet.

Sometimes the truth hurts. Saying NO can hurt. How do we say ‘NO, we refuse to be hurt by you,’ without hurting "them," yet do so actively and effectively?

So do we stay home and not spend money, or do we go to work strategically and spend our money strategically? This is what I was suggesting.

What if every gay person and every gay supporter in every country, just stayed home for a day. Don't buy anything, don't go to work, just stay home and read a book. WHat would happen?

If a day without immigrants could make any change, can you imagine a day without gays?This COULD work, my concern is that like ‘a day without a mexican,’ it would be easier to make a movie about it than to accomplish the event itself.

Actually I’m going to leave it at that. "What a Difference a Gay Makes," you’ve got a screenplay on your hands there Joe.

[midtnscott]

This could work if the demand is right, the timing is right, and something is done to wake people up ahead of time.

We still don't have a FEDERAL law preventing work place discrimination!

For those who can't afford a day off, the wake up. It worked years ago in areas where locals were trying to get Naval bases closed. Instead of us pay with plastic, I know - the horror, get a stamp set and stamp cash money "GAY MONEY" and use cash for a week only for a week or so before the walk out. We already know that most of the Fortune 500 Corps are getting more gay friendly because they recognize our buying power.

When we don't come to work and they look back at how much "GAY MONEY" the took in, a lot of business owners will realize how vital we are to their own success. It sounds so mercenary to stoop to the economic level but it has worked in the past.

I wouldn't consider this violent in anyway. I think it is more like aggressive non-violent action, but still not violent.

The day really doesn't matter except that it coincide with the re-introduction of ENDA or other meanignful legislation. These are just of few of my jumbled thoughts.

[Dash]

So...would it be nonviolent to take people like Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Tony Perkins, Peter LaBabera, Robert Knight and their associated organizations to court for slander, libel, defamation, etc? Would it be possible?

Perhaps some kind of class action suit representing the millions of people that they defame by their lies. I would just love to see these folks called into a public court to face once for all, and before the entire nation and world, the facts that disprove their false claims against us...the claims that work such harm against our reputations and even our safety. Not only so, but they should also face and acknowledge publically their own misuse of scholarly and scientific literature as they have sought to slander us by their twisting of the truth.

Let it be written in public record to silence these offenders and their unjust attacks against us.

[marutidas]

Boycotting worked for King, but it may not be an effective method for us, since it often turns into "boycott wars".

The Mongomery bus boycott worked because it was one company that many blacks used on a daily basis. Bus the success wasn't over night either. It took months and months of continous boycotting, and there was an organized effort to make it easier to live without the buses. A communal carpool.

I agree with Dash, Boycotts are carefully planned events, not something to be done on a whim, you must have absolute support in the cause you are fighting for. It doesn't work for the fundi's because they are not united, even though they may want the same thing, getting rid of us, they cant agree on how to do it.

So what is one company that is predominatly used by the GLBT community?
And how could we adapt so that we could live without it?

[Joe Brummer]

The bus boycotts of 1955 lasted for 381 days. It started as a one day boycott. After seeing its success a group of citizens formed the Montgomery Improvement Association and asked a young Martin Luther King, Jr. to head up the fight.

You are correct in saying there was an organized movement against the bus company, but in the nonviolence direct action I am suggesting the company I ask that we boycott is America. I say we boycott the whole country for one day. Just disappear for a day. They anti-gay religious right wants us either back in our closets or out of existience, so give them a sample of what life would look like for one day without gays and lesbians (and those who support us)

A popular battle cry against is that we make up such a small portion of the population, if that is so, lets see if anyone notices if we all disappear for the day. If we are so insignificant than it won't matter, right?

I think this should take about 6 to 7 months to plan. Spread by email, a website and full page ads in the papers. Press releases would help prior to the event. Perhaps we could do this on Martin Luther King Day? Perhaps Valentines day would be a good day? We could call it Freedom Day or "A Day without Gay"?

I think this would work only for the sake if immigrants can do it, so can we!

Either way, it is time to take a stand and a large one, but drenched in nonviolence and love.