Leave a Comment Sagesse
NOM raises questions over ABC News experiment; raises more question about own organization
May 24, 2011
This is a remarkable experiment and video -Adam
Cross-posted at Good As You
By Jeremy Hooper
In response to this much-circulated video wherein ABC News explores how everyday patrons of a Texas diner might react if confronted with a waitress’ cruel homo-hostility…
…the National Organization For Marriage writes the following:
We can expect a lot more of this from the MSM. Let’s note first of all that the behavior of the “waitress” in this setup up is outrageous.
No boss, and no customers would tolerate it. Not even in the “conservative” towns of Texas. Good news for American common sense.
The insidious propaganda point from ABC News is the suggestion that millions of good Americans who believe marriage means a man and a woman because children ought to have moms and dads, would or are behaving like this. Shame on ABC.
Be prepared for lot more prejudiced stereotyping of decent and honorable Americans down the road by powerful elites.
Uhm, not sure when, exactly, Brian Brown or Maggie Gallagher walked in the shoes of a gay person. But as someone who grew up in very rural Tennessee and attended college (and came out) in slightly-less-rural Tennessee, let me tell you: This stuff. Does happen. Still. In America. Of the 21st century.
NOM is quite obtusely taking a “best case scenario” position. And yes, in that best case, a server like this would be heard and reprimanded instantly. But the world is not a series of best cases. There are anti-gay business owners. There are employees who largely self-police their own on-job behaviors, and who choose to use this freedom to show their disgust towards certain kind of people. So that’s what ABC is exploring: If and when this happens, how will the everyday Joe and Jane react to it? Even if this kind of behavior is not the rule (and thankfully I don’t think it is, writ large), ABC News wants to see how customers might react to the theoretical scenario. Because it’s a not absent possibility for an America that still has a quite obvious problem dealing with LGBT normalcy.
The real question: Why does NOM feel intimidated by this? Because it’s not even marriage we’re talking about here, as TX doesn’t offer or recognize same-sex marriages (or any kind of legal partnerships, for that matter). The topic in question here is the average lesbian-headed family eating out at a local diner and the unjust behavior directed towards the same. Doesn’t NOM want to join us in opposing that kind of behavior, no matter how prevalent or rare it may be? Because this writer would gladly stand up for Maggie Gallagher if her personal privacy and general welfare was being violated in a similar way.
Filed under: NOM Exposed
26 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Adam Bink | May 24, 2011 at 4:23 am
This really is an incredible video.
2.
Mark Mead-Brewer | May 24, 2011 at 4:33 am
Robert and I watched the show itself on Friday night and when one of the actress' (who actually happened to be a lesbian) reacted to the support she and her TV family were recieving had us in tears. It was so moving…..
I am not at all surprised by NOM's stance on this, as they couldn't possibly show any support for our side.
NOM may think this sort of behavior is rare, but I would ask them how they would kow that……when was the last time they lived as a gay person? When was the last time they felt the stares, and heard the whispers?
3.
Chris from CO | May 24, 2011 at 4:49 am
Right, the interesting part of the their reaction to this video is their ads they push out about our family's have these same key comments the actress spewed off. They do not see that they are the SAME. Their anger over ABC is discusting to me. Remeber their gathering storm ad how the Hell is that different than what we just watched from the waitress.
4.
Xiphias | May 24, 2011 at 5:05 am
"The topic in question here is the average lesbian-headed family eating out at a local diner and the unjust behavior directed towards the same. Doesn’t NOM want to join us in opposing that kind of behavior, no matter how prevalent or rare it may be? "
I think it's pretty clear that NOM doesn't want to oppose that kind of behavior. Gallagher and the rest know that openly admitting they support all forms of discrimination against LGBTs would be a PR disaster.
But let's be realistic – NOM's entire purpose is to encourage discrimination against LGBT people. Of course they get uncomfortable when a less marketable version of that discrimination gets airtime. It makes them look bad.
If a nation-wide ban on gay marriages were to occur, do you think NOM would consider their mission complete and disband? I sure don't. They'd go after something else – gay teachers, single gay parents adopting, gay parents having custody of their own biological children, gay people being allowed to have sex without going to jail…
5.
Gregory in Salt Lake | May 24, 2011 at 5:06 am
@ "There are anti-gay business owners"
Yep, me and hubby were thrown out a popular non-drinking dance club in SLC 2 yrs ago for "dancing to close". This was Latin night where the straight couples where doing the salsa-go-bump-hump-thang. We pointed out we were not even touching or holding hands…I asked what the real reason is…the owner stated "you are gay, admit it!" My hubby said no you are gay! (tried not to laugh). Owner said "you guys are sick…we have good kids here, they do not need to be exposed to 'that'" I was pretty much speechless. We had to fight to get our $10/each admission fee back….and ultimately ended up being escorted out by the police (who by the way was very considerate and just following request of the private club owner). Upon investigation, yes, Utah is one of those states we can be asked to leave w/out service.
6.
Andrew Martinez | May 24, 2011 at 5:14 am
"The insidious propaganda point from ABC News is the suggestion that millions of good Americans who believe marriage means a man and a woman because children ought to have moms and dads, would or are behaving like this."
No. I'm pretty sure the insidious act is convincing Americans that bigotry doesn't happen. And if it does, it's justified in this case because it's just defending what's "natural."
7.
Michael Adrian (SF) | May 24, 2011 at 5:25 am
The NOM dog whistles are deafening.
"decent and honorable Americans" – because anyone who thinks that a child can have a good life with a non-traditional family is indecent and dishonorable?
"powerful elites" – I hate this meme about the elites taking power away from "us regular town-folk". Populist, conspiracy theory dreck.
"marriage means a man and a woman because children ought to have moms and dads" – once again conflating marriage with child-bearing in order to impose their limited view of what the "correct" kind of family is. As was mentioned, these hypothetical gay families (and their real counterparts) exist without the benefit of marriage in Texas and other states that outlaw it. When will they admit that their marriage crusade does not achieve the ends they claim to fight for?
8.
SoCal Dave | May 24, 2011 at 5:30 am
Wait a minute… NOM thinks it's bad to suggest that people would talk exactly the way NOM does on its blog and in its ads?
Well, one good thing. They finally admit that GLBT-headed families are indeed families. Now if they could just get over the idea that their family is better than my family.
9.
Sean | May 24, 2011 at 5:47 am
I think Donovan might be my new favorite person
10.
Sean | May 24, 2011 at 5:50 am
Also, just how far down the rabbit hole is NOM these days? Can they get any more outrageous??
11.
Maggie4NoH8 | May 24, 2011 at 6:39 am
@10
Sean – I suspect we haven't seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to NOM's outrageousness…
>:-(
12.
Nicole | May 24, 2011 at 6:59 am
I found the comments on the NOM blog to be outstandingly hilarious, to me anyway. The point that Maggie tries to make in her blog was that this video attempts to perpetuate stereotypes about the opposition – but listen to the comments.
"It is not just the waitress conduct that is outrageous but also the alleged customer who is intervening. That male customer conduct is in appropriate for him to take upon himself to attack the waitress and tell she must leave her place of employment is a ludicrous scenario."
another comment:
"First, the waitress' conduct: It was courageous and charitable for her to express her opinion initially. Her concerns were valid, as homosexual behavior (NOT homosexuality as a personal trait) is bad for the individual, bad for the family, and bad for society"
This waitress acted outrageously and totally doesn't represent us at all. Granted she was being hounded by a pro-gay radical who was disrespecting her just for having an opinion and voicing it. I mean I totally don't blame her given the circumstances, she had their best interest at heart. She only did what I would have done – I MEAN, er, what she did was outrageous and absurd but, you know, I understand.
right….
13.
Steve | May 24, 2011 at 7:23 am
The waitress's talking points could have been straight from NOM's website: Think of the children! They deserve a father!
So NOM's point is really: "Don't be mean to gays in public and to their face, but stab them in the back when no one else is looking"
14.
Chris in Lathrop | May 24, 2011 at 7:29 am
During my enlistment, I was stationed in both San Angelo and San Antonio, TX. Quite a culture shock from California where we seem to distance and insulate ourselves from one another. I found the people of Texas to be very personable and friendly, just like in this video.
Kudos to Donovan and all the others who stood up for what is morally right here.
And SHAME on NOM, Maggie and Brian in particular, for being unable to see the harm they are causing. I've been through this kind of scenario, from a Wiccan point of view. I've been accused of all kinds of devil worship and made fun of. Fortunately, I've never been physically attacked. I cannot conscience ONE SINGLE THING that NOM has done, because it causes exchanges like the setups in the diner.
15.
Regan DuCasse | May 24, 2011 at 8:36 am
Steve, you nailed it, my friend. It can't be helped if there are less restrained people out there who do EXACTLY what this waitress does. And more.
Haven't several children been buried because they couldn't endure the anti gay torment and assault in school anymore?
How about those children on America's street because their parents don't love them anymore and are willing to throw them from the house and family?
Those soldiers discharged from service?
Lesbians raped and gay men outright murdered, not only on the street, but sometimes in their own homes?
This waitress scenario is actually quite tame compared to what really happens and no person can EVER know what someone feels about them.
Because, as you just said….a lot of people do keep their bigotry a secret from the target of it, and instead, hurt them in other ways.
In fact, I'm reading "The Help" and one of the maids in the story talks about how white women stick in the knives, cut open the hearts of black people and do what they can to murder them in other ways different from white men.
I can't speak for being gay either. I'm not gay. But I can, as a black woman empathize, and I've witnessed for myself the EXACT SAME BEHAVIOR in the distrust and suspicion people harbor against blacks, expressed against gay people.
How anyone black could even ignore it or say it's not the same kind of treatment, I don't understand.
But it IS the same treatment. Which can be witnessed whenever WWYD ALSO sets up racial issues to test how people will react.
Brian Brown is an ignorant pussy that never had to think at all about being on the receiving end of having his life, or civil liberties TAKEN AWAY or threatened at all. Let alone by the strength of the government.
He WOULD have an objection to WWYD.
We KNOW what HE would do.
He's doing it already and always has been.
16.
Reformed Conservativ | May 24, 2011 at 8:42 am
How is this any different than any other "what would you do" type presentation. So, why the shame on ABC?
Do we have yet another thing gays cannot do? I am keeping a list you know. In this case, "have your cause appear on "ABC news."
Do these things happen, well, less and less over time. Gee, I wonder why? But ya know, all these recent earthquakes and twisters kinda back up the Phelps clan's claim that God is judging the USA for becomeing more tolerant.
17.
Joel | May 24, 2011 at 9:27 am
OT, but this just in (I saw it the local news): Governor Sandoval has signed the bill protecting people who are transgendered in the workplace. Yeah!
18.
Lodrelhai | May 24, 2011 at 10:24 am
Sorta OT, but there's at least one anti-equality group out there that is admitting they're losing the fight. http://www.christianpost.com/news/focus-on-the-fa…
19.
Gingerwall | May 24, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Sorry, I just have to say it, because somebody always brings it up when something shitty happens in Texas:
"Of course, it's Texas! Why expect anything different?"
(Let me be proud of my state for once – we did better than the more "civilized" New York.)
20.
Greg | May 25, 2011 at 1:08 am
I suspect that NOM's leadership has just enough self-awareness to realize their own guilt in promoting discrimination – hence they felt the need to defend their own, shameful activities.
21.
DaveP | May 25, 2011 at 1:34 am
@Regan #15 – Thanks for this excellent post. I have sometimes heard people say things on this subject that amount to "you can't compare being gay with being black!". I think the source of the conflict in these cases is often the choice of words used.
Of course being gay and being black are two different things. The experiences, the history, especially in north America, cultural influences, and more make these two things very different. BUT – the bigotry and prejudice that gets aimed at both groups is the same. Because bigotry is bigotry. All of us who have been the target of it should be able to refer to our experiences with bigotry to give us empathy for other groups who have also been the target, regardless of how similar or different the other group may be.
22.
fiona64 | May 25, 2011 at 2:37 am
What Maggie et al seem to be missing is that it is 100 percent legal in Texas for a business to refuse to serve gay couples. What she also seems to be missing is that it's people like her who help to put those policies in place.
I will say this; I wept when I saw that video, most especially the letter that the gentleman wrote and gave to the couple. I was pleasantly surprised at what good people there were (although I noticed that no one intervened when it was two men posing as the parents — or when the same event happened in NYC). Wow.
Love,
Fiona (still too lazy to log in)
23.
Carpool Cookie | May 25, 2011 at 4:17 am
Wow…I was impressed by the brave actress playing the waitress…I guess I'm from a liberal state, but I'd be afraid to be assaulted!
Unfortunately, am not reading the rest of the comments, as the new format without responses being strung together gives me a vertigo headache. How is it that in this day and age we can't achieve an electronic adaptation?
24.
Samantha | May 25, 2011 at 6:05 am
I'm stunned… what a beautiful video and a great show of what we do go through every day, even if bigotry does not show itself in such concentrated efforts, I have been asked or had those exact comments that the waitress used, spoken to me, or written about me more times than I care to reflect on. It does happen, and to see so many standing up for… us… is a beautiful thing to see.
25.
Joe | May 25, 2011 at 5:36 pm
Not only does it happen, it just happened in the MN legislature. During the debates, one of the GOP representatives told a lesbian couple he felt bad for their kids, that they were being raised without a father and thought it was so sad they didn't know where they came from. The couple was rightfully flabbergasted at his ignorance.
26.
Joe | May 25, 2011 at 6:26 pm
Did anyone else read the brief the Prop 8 folk put out basically saying SSM doesn't harm existing marriages?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/…
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.