I was part of the oddest discussion on Facebook the other day that I want to post here with further commentary.  Because it was a public discussion viewable on my wall, I feel comfortable posting it here, but if anyone who is quoted in it, isn’t comfortable with that, please let me know and I’ll make sure to remove what was said. I am not posting any names, only the content of the comments.

At issue is the hunger strike by an activist, Alan Bounville, which he undertook in reaction to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand who has said she would introduce the American Equality Bill, but hasn’t done so. A hunger strike!  That’s pretty drastic sounding, and given that this is day 10 of it, it is pretty serious. Honestly, when there was first talk of this, I was dismissive. The American Equality Bill has almost no chance of going anywhere. What was the point I wondered. Gillibrand has been very supportive, and given how many real enemies the LGBT Rights movement has, wouldn’t the efforts be better placed towards them? But as I have watched this story and the youtube videos each day, I’ve come to a very different perspective, and I’ve become more vocal with my support for what Alan is doing. Let me be more clear about that. I don’t really understand why he would take such drastic efforts, but I fully, unabashedly and defiantly support anyone who is willing to take actions out of his/her conviction to make change. I don’t have all the answers to a perfect road map to Equality, so who am I to say he is in the wrong? And I don’t. I don’t want him to be risking his life, and I I can no longer believe that if we just keep doing things as we always have, that we will ever break out of the status quo.

It can be easy to be critical of Alan’s efforts. At a distance, anyone can find fault with the efforts of another. But to stop there, misses the point in a big way. This past summer I wrote a blog post being critical of an activist action. I had valid and real points, but in making them as I did I failed to also capture the positive power and good elements of that action by individuals who were doing much to generate change to the status quo. I stand by my criticisms and questions of that event, but I also learned a valuable lesson that helps me see much to admire and support in Alan’s actions. And today, I know that if we are to make any progress for the full equality of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer or whatever label is used persons, we can not waste our time simply criticizing others and justifying the status quo. Yes, we must think critically, and make sure we place efforts in directions that will have impact for change. But we must also recognize that times are changing, and in every civil rights movement, there were points where a few brave individuals were willing to step out and do things that other criticized as going too far or being counter productive.

So, here is most of the transcript with names removed, and individuals referred to as A, B, C, and ME:

Here is what I said that started the thread and the full transcript:

I hope you have been following this incredibly courageous effort to get Gillibrand to follow through and introduce this bill. Why is introducing a bill such a controversial act that it takes a hunger strike to try and get somewhere?

A: Senator Gillibrand is in Pakistan & Afghanistan this week and cannot call Alan. She was campaigning all over NY state this summer, and he never went to any of her campaign stops but stayed in front of the only place where she was not – her office in NYC. She even had campaign fundraisers at her home in Hudson two hours north of NYC and he never went there to protest. He posts videos on his wall but never on Gillibrand’s wall (I have done that).

Do you even know what the civil rights act of 1964 is? It is about public accommodations for African Americans giving them the right to sit at lunch counters in the south, drink from any water fountain and shit in the same bathrooms as white people. It was revised a few times, the last time in 1991.

It did not give African Americans the right to work – Affirmative Action did that.

It did not give African Americans the right to marry the person they loved – Loving v Virginia did that.

It did not give African Americans the right to vote – the voting rights act did that (and we have the right to vote).

What we need is unconditional constitutional equality where our 14th amendment right to equal protection under the law is acknowledged – the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on that. The civil rights act of 1964 does not do that.

So Alan is starving to death for nothing – and Gillibrand cannot call him this week because she is supporting the troops and stopping terrorism.

B: wow

C: she’s stopping terrorism is she? can i get some proof on that claim?

Me: This is somewhat laughable. She can’t call Alan. Really? Really?

A: yes she is talking to the Pakistani and Afghani governments – what are you doing besides supporting some dude who is starving to death while Gillibrand is half a world away and who is starving to death so he can shit in the same toilets as heterosexuals a right we already have.

B: this is the first Ihear of this story, but really, she’s in Afghanistan “stopping terrorism?” All by herself? singlehandedly? and she cannot spare 5 minute to talk to a guy (one of her constituents) who’s killing himself just to get her attention? Did you put crack in your Kool Aid?

A: hey idiot she is part of a contingent of senators who are in Pakistan and Afghanistan where Americans are trying to root out terrorists and this is the first you have heard of this – meanwhile Alan is in his room starving to death waiting for her to call him because he thinks we need to have the right to shit in the same public toilets as heterosexuals.

Obviously you have no clue what senators do when they are not in Washington – they do lots of things – like meet with foreign governments – they go with other senators to do this.

Now stop being a jerk and either STFU or STFU

Me: Calling names and telling then to STFU is a symptom of the real problem here. If you can’t have a dialogue, what is your point?

B: for what it’s worth, i’m NOT in favor of this hunger strike. Hunger strike is the last resort, like saying a world where Gillibrand does not introduce the bill is a world not worth living in. and that’s just BS. even if she does introduce it, they can kill it all kinds of dead in either house, and they will, so what’s the point? Unless it’s a protracted suicide-made-into-a-reality-show, like, i’m killing myself anyway might as well get some activism out of it. but if i had not heard about the hunger strike (and i pride myself on staying up to date with LGBT news) not many others have, and certainly not the general populace. So i see no value in it. I’m not defending him. I’m just calling bullshit on your justifications for her, like just about every other commenter has done.

A: for everyone who does not know what senators do when they are not in congress – sometimes they go on fact-finding tours to places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. While there they may engage in diplomacy talking to government officials in those countries. When they return to congress to their committees they talk to United States government officials to decide on funding and conduct hearings to make sure that everyone is doing their job – it’s the system of checks and balances. Working together, they do their job to protect Americans from terrorism. That is what Senator Gillibrand is doing right now while Alan is starving to death for your right to shit in the same toilets as heterosexuals – a right you already have.

He is not starving to death for your right to work – because the civil rights act of 1964 did nothing to give African Americans the right to work – affirmative action passed years later did that.

He is not starving to death for the right to serve openly in the military. African Americans did not need to be allowed to serve in an integrated military-President Truman gave them that right with an executive order.

He is not starving to death for our right to marry – when the civil rights act passed in 1964 African Americans still did not have the right to marry white people – Loving v Virginia gave them that right.

While Senator Gillibrand is on a fact finding tour to stop terrorism and support our troops, along with a contingent of other senators, Alan is starving to death so you can shit in the same toilets as heterosexuals & Senator Gillibrand cannot call him now because she is in Pakistan & Afghanistan this week.

NOW DO YOU GET IT?

A: Actually the idea for constitutional equality came from Senator Gillibrand – she told me that when I emailed her about this but the people behind this shitting in the same toilet as heterosexual civil rights revision did not know this until I told them. I told Senator Gillibrand that I did not think that the civil rights act revision was good enough – that we must have unconditional constitutional equality – she agreed with me in an email.

Next thing I know Alan is camping out in front of the senator’s office, and I am watching what Senator Gillibrand is doing all summer – I live about a half hour from her house. She was campaigning for election to the senate. If you don’t live in NY, you might not know she was appointed to fill Hilary Clinton’s senate seat and now had to run for office, which she did and she won -yeah. She was all over New York state from New York City to Buffalo.

She was at campaign stops with candidates running for state offices too – and in NY we are also fighting for marriage equality so she was supporting their campaigns with her presence there.

She was very available to Alan and all the people who are behind the shitting in the same toilets as heterosexuals civil righs act revision bill. Where she was NOT was her NYC office. That was the only place she did not go this summer. That was the only place Alan stayed this summer – where Senator Gillibrand was not.

And now he is starving to death waiting for her to call him and she is in Pakistan and Afghanistan doing her job as a Senator – on a fact-finding tour to stop terrorism with other senators.

Now that you know the facts, do you still think that my justification for Senator Gillibrand is bullshit – because if you do think that you are full of shit just like Alan & his starving to death to have the right to shit in the same toilet as heterosexuals have (& Thomas if she says my opinion based on facts is bullshit then she is full of shit & if you don’t want me to tell the truth on your wall just unfriend me).

A:I have said all I am going to say on this because what Alan is doing is a waste of time and so is this conversation.

Me: I have more to say on this, but I have to get ready for my blog Talk Radio program this evening. @Demand Equality, I’d love to feel like you were a valuable part of a dialogue, but I read you as condescending, rash, dismissive, flip, and I think you really miss the point.

Gillibrand has staff, and this has been going on for a while now, so to suggest that just because today, she is out of town was ludicrous. She has claimed full support for this bill, and the push has been for her to follow through. Not really too much to ask. When people make claims and don’t follow through- it IS grave and serious, so to use an action like a hunger strike to demonstrate that is vivid, but perhaps not so crazy.

Congressfolks do many things, and I’m glad for that, but to claim that just because she is away doing what Congressfolk do, is the same old Washington. Business as usual. Well, a new type of activist is coming into their own, and claiming that the status quo is not enough and not good enough.

A simple printed statement from Gillibrand’s office that stated her intent to introduce the bill next week would have been sufficient to stop the hunger strike. Too much to ask for? I guess.

Everyone who is working in LGBT activism needs to start to get it, that everything is changing. We just watched that in the entire political system with the last election, and we will be seeing more and more of it within activist communities. The old ways of trying to get things done are not proving effective, and people are reaching out looking for other tools and methods and ideas, and practices.

Everything is changing. It is part of how progress gets made.

I like (B), am not sure I fully get the decision to do the hunger strike. I have written about that here on Facebook, but I fully and unabashedly support individuals who are willing to put it out there on the line to create change. And in that light, I find Alan’s work courageous and deeply meaningful. Are there things about it all, that I think could or should have been done differently? Maybe. Like I wish it had received far more publicity. But it is easy to criticize the efforts of others and do nothing else.

This past summer I wrote a blog post being critical of an activist action. I had valid and real points, but in making them as I did I failed to also capture the positive power and good elements of that action. I stand by my criticisms and questions of that, but I also learned a valuable lesson that helps me see much to admire and support in Alan’s actions.

On the other hand, I find your rationalizations to be more of the same tired BS that has accomplished little in the past and is getting us no where now. Thanks, I’ll get behind new ideas even if they aren’t 100% perfect rather than be like a hamster simply running in a wheel, but thinking I’m getting somewhere.

A: you are a waste of my time so I will unfriend you

Me: Whatever works for you. Have a great day.

C: UM, who is this (biting tongue)…. person exactly demanding equality for? Certainly not for peeps that might have reasonable questions about (still biting tongue)….. his/her/its positions. But at least we can all be comforted that Sen Gillibrand is out there fighting terrorism for us all! LOL

Post transcript summary:

The reality is that no real dialogue is a waste of time, if all individuals participate in it with the desire to speak and be heard, and treat the other participants with mutual respect. As the LGBT Rights movement, in general, continues to move forward, we MUST, MUST, MUST, be willing to consider many perspectives, ideas and viewpoints. And at some points, the old guard of the status quo must step aside for mew ideas, and new energy. I remember how upset many activists were when Act Up! first got started in AIDS activism. How they were seen as not understanding how the system worked, yet I believe every major gain in the fight against AIDS depended upon the work Act Up had done.