Any who follow me, even a little, know that my family is hands down the most important thing in my life. Being a husband and parent are things I never take for granted because I fought so hard to be able to do both. And I try not to shove politics in people’s faces, but I’m going to step out of my usual happy smiling self to address the comments of Dolce and Gabanna.
First, I want to say, I’m not in favor of a boycott (as IF I could afford their stuff, what with a kid who needs to go to school, not gonna happen.) Personally I don’t buy from people who hate me, we moved out of Virginia when they passed the anit-gay amendment to the state constitution in 2005 and took our tax dollars to Maryland, I’ve stop going to Chik-fil-a, I don’t watch Fox News, I won’t go to Hobby Lobby etc, but I don’t pressure others to do the same. Everyone knows what these people or organizations have said, each person needs to decide for themselves how they react. If they ask my opinion, I tell them, but I won’t call for people to follow my lead. Calling for a boycott of one company brings out the other side to support them. Remember this when they called for a boycott of Chik-fil-A?
As stupid and ridiculous as Dolce and Gabanna’s comments are, they have a right to express their opinion. They didn’t cross the line and say, people should go stone married gay couples, or arrest parents who use IVF, they just expressed their archaic opinion on the topics. Their right to speak, my right to answer by withholding my money. And I get a right to speak out against them as well.
It’s hard to watch self-loathing gay men attack their own community, which is why I find it hard to attack them back. So let me focus on why people with their views are wrong—because I fervently believe they are wrong.
Marriage isn’t just for procreation. Apart from the millions of people who get married with no intention of having children, there are so many people who get married who can’t have children. Breaking it down to its most clinical elements, marriage is an affirmation of your love and a legal institution that provides protection for that love. Nowhere does it say, if you can’t or don’t have children in ‘X’ amount of time, your marriage is null and void.
The term ‘traditional marriage’ is a code for, ‘not like us.’ It has been used forever to dress up discrimination in a moral cloak. Who defines ‘traditional’ anyway? Religion? The State? The Majority? We don’t have one universal religion, or one state and do we really want to let the definition of traditional marriage come down to a popularity contest?
Finally, and this might rankle a few people and I’m sorry if it does. I don’t think of us a ‘gay family,’ or as ‘gay dads/parents.’ We’re a family—just like all the others around us. We’re her dads/parents. I don’t introduce myself as her gay papa, I’m her papa. I don’t sign permissions slips as her ‘gay parent or guardian.’ Her birth certificate doesn’t have the word ‘gay’ in front of parent. And I know that some of that is the other side’s point—the laws are forcing society to scrub away the qualifiers and make it seem normal. Got it.
Let me answer that with an example. ‘lil q is three. She goes to pre-school. She’s the only one with a daddy and a papa. The kids don’t make fun of her, but they are curious. They comment on it as if there’s nothing wrong with that. I’ve heard other parents explain to their kids if the topic comes up in my presence that some people have two daddies, some have two mommies and some have a mommy and a daddy. And the kids are fine with it.
It’s the same with racism or sexism, or every other negative ‘ism’ out there, it’s taught. Intolerance or acceptance is taught, not just by words, but by example. I’ve found that, ‘do as I say, not as I do’ is a foreign concept to young children. If you do something, they want to do it too, no matter how much you say don’t. When teaching ‘lil q not to play on the stairs and to hold the handle, I had to learn to ‘use the handle’ all over again. If you do it, they do it. They want to be like you. If you preach hate, you teach hate.
And that cycles back to why I won’t call for a boycott. It’s another form of intolerance. We’re forcing our will on someone. Conform or else we’ll ruin you. Why not just talk with our patronage. Eventually they’ll make the connection. And if they don’t? Well at least we’re not firing up the other side to go support them to ‘make up’ for the lost business.
Coming April 14, 2015 from DSP Publications—
The Eye and the Arm: Champion of the Gods, Book Two
Andrew Q. Gordon wrote his first story back when yellow legal pads, ball point pens were common and a Smith Corona correctable typewriter was considered high tech. Adapting with technology, he now takes his MacBook somewhere quiet when he wants to write.
He currently lives in the Washington, D.C. area with his partner of twenty years, their young daughter and dog. In addition to dodging some very self-important D.C. ‘insiders’, Andrew uses his commute to catch up on his reading. When not working or writing, he enjoys soccer, high fantasy, baseball and seeing how much coffee he can drink in a day.
Follow Andrew:
On his website: www.andrewqgordon.com,
On Facebook: www.facebook.com/andrewqugordon,
On Twitter: @andrewqgordon,
Or just email him: andrewqgordon@gmail.com
Great comments Andrew
Thanks, Suze. And thanks for reading. 😀
I can’t afford them either. Great post andrew
Thanks, Elaine. And so glad to hear you’re doing well! Great news indeed!
Well said Andrew. Succinct and to the point. So glad you are teaching your daughter by example how to be a good person.
Thanks – I hope I’m teaching her to be a good person. I’m definitely trying to teach her to be respectful of everyone. Hopefully that is something she’ll get from us. 🙂
That was great! You voiced my feelings.
Thanks, deb, and thanks for leaving a comment. 🙂
Wonderfully said Andrew!
Thank you, H.B. I appreciate it.
Excellent post, Andrew.
Thanks, glad you liked it.
I disagree. You say a boycott is a form of intolerance; I say some forms of intolerance are good. I absolutely refuse to tolerate sexism, racism, homophobia, and all forms of bigotry.
Sometimes boycotts *are* effective. Comparing the Chick-fil-A situation with the Dolce & Gabbana one doesn’t work, because they aren’t drawing the same customers to start with. An LGBT/allies boycott of Chick-fil-A was ineffective not only because it mobilized the Christian right in support of the company, but because those were a good bulk of the customers already patronizing the business to start with. Withdrawing our own (hardly massive) support wasn’t going to have much effect.
This is different. The Christian right wasn’t out there buying D & G in the first place, nor are they likely to start. As much as they may celebrate D & G’s comments, most won’t be inclined to throw money towards two gay guys (and of those that would just in support of their comments, most can’t afford to, anyway.) A successful boycott of D & G *will* hit their bottom line because they just belittled the families of their own customers.
From here, I suppose the argument is “but why should we boycott them and hurt their business just for speaking their minds? Don’t they have the same right to free speech as we do?” Absolutely. But free speech does not mean speech free from consequences.
For those that feel D & G shouldn’t suffer major consequences for their speech, I ask you to consider: what about the consequences *of* that speech? They didn’t make their comments privately or in a vacuum. They made them in an interview meant to be released into the public.
This matters. Knowingly promoting anti-LGBT-family speech in public arenas matters. As a gay dad you know why, but I’ll be specific for those who don’t.
While 3-year-olds are still very accepting of differences amongst their classmates, that changes as they get older. The ones who have bigoted parents begin to listen to those views aired in their presence, and incorporate those thoughts into their own world views. When individuals with a public microphone use it to air the kind of vitriol D & G did, regular people use that speech to confirm and bolster prejudices they are already inclined to hold.
Can you envision the people who heard D & G’s comments and said aloud, “See, even the gays know being gay parents is wrong.” How many said this in the presence of their kids? How many of those kids then went to school and bullied their classmate with two moms?
I support a boycott because I support doing all we can to eradicate the willingness of those in the public eye to use that spotlight to promote hate. I support a boycott because the more those with public platforms fear the consequences of making hate speech, the less inclined they’ll be to make it. I support a boycott because hate speech *should* lead to the speakers being ostracized, so that future bigots with megaphones will think twice about making the type of comments that embolden bullies. And I support a boycott because I nanny IVF twins with two dads, and I never want them coming home from school having been made to feel less because of who they and their family are.
In closing, I hope Dolce & Gabbana suffer a huge hit to their bottom line, and I most sincerely invite them to bite me.
Nic,
Thanks for the response. I agree we need to confront it and say it’s wrong—that was the purpose of the post – to point out their stupidity—but we’ll have to disagree on whether it’s best to call for a boycott or not.
I join you in hoping their bottom line takes a big hit. They will never get a dollar from me or my family either.