WhoSigned.org Needs to Bow Out Gracefully

agreed

this ill-fated scheme has derailed the conversation.

---

by: ggw59 @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 11:44:14 AM CDT

Unintended consequences but I disagree

I think easy reference to who signs the anti gay referendum is in a good idea.  I would want to know which neighbors and businesses think I don't deserve the same rights, fairness, treatment as they do.

I agree that the Anitas and Antis were quick to the press and blogs to claim WhoSigned was just a tool to harrass people.

I don't agree they should bow out.  Just because the anti gay machine can still SPIN faster and louder than what is fair and good doesn't mean fairness and goodness should not prevail.

Keep "KnowThyNeighbor" tpye thing in Washington.
I wish California had such a source for me to reference, however, California law does not allow for the release of names of those who sign initiative petitions.

Knowing who is a bigot is not about knowing who is "harrassing" glbt citizens and not the other way around.

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 12:15:00 PM CDT

frankly, this isn't about us, it's about the moveable middle

and it is they and our strongest allies who are reacting with repulsion, not just the antis and anitas.  here, for example, are editorials from seattle times ( and again here), tacoma weekly and spokesman-review.  each of these papers has been a rock-solid supporter of equality.  now, i'm not saying that everyone needs to agree with these editorials, but the editorials make clear that those influential papers won't be spending time talking about us and why referendum 71 is bad for our families as long as whosigned is out there.  because as long as whosigned is out there, they will be made our story.  these editorials are emblematic of other news and opinion sources as well.  it is just downright stupid to turn off the people who otherwise are willing to listen to us, even if the database is completely legitimate.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 12:49:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Eastern Washington.

The liberal left of Seattle just doesn't seem to understand the east side of this state politically (i live in Spokane). When things like this come up, it's painful to see. Like watching two dance partners trying to lead.

The population here has a strange sort of libertarian mindset that needs to be respected and handled the right way, if you wish to employ them in any cause. Many people here are anti-government and strong on individual freedom, so LGBT and pro-choice people can find a suprising lack of resistance you might expect in a conservative culture such as this.

On the other hand, try to raise their taxes or pull something such as this, which to them will stink of government invasion, and you've got a problem.

i like the idea. But i don't think it'll work here.

As for the Spokesman, i wouldn't exactly call them 'rock-solid' supporters in equality. But i guess it's all about perspective.

Are you talking about what it is you know, or just repeating what it was you heard?

Grace Slick

www.anonymous-t-girl.blogspot.com

---

by: Anonymous T-Girl @ Sun Jun 07, 2009 at 13:50:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The corporate media and right-wing spin machine are attacking a legal activity by LGBT people in pursuit of their rights? So what else is new?

Media, even friendly media, is in the business of creating controversy.  Bigots are in the business of perpetuating bigotry.  Looks like everyone is doing their job here.

I can't for one second believe that anyone in the middle is going to look at all of this and decide that they are now going to sign the petition for sure just to show those darned queers.  If anything, the artificial buzz will make people even more reluctant to sign.  Who needs more drama in their life?

And what if WhoSigned does surrender to the bullying?  Then we'll look good?  Then our enemies will be disheartened?  Meanwhile, regardless, next week there will be a new story.  The same old controversy doesn't sell papers.

What's going on in Washington media isn't a sign that WhoSigned has failed, but that they are succeeding -- and I imagine they're succeeding exactly as planned.

---

by: diablorobotico @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 13:41:35 PM CDT

even if there were a single entity called "corporate media",

wouldn't it be prudent to get it back to writing articles supporting our defense of domestic partnerships and sympathetically profiling our families?  

one of my neighbors, who is otherwise a very with it straight ally, said to me thursday "you guys are in the news".  he was talking about whosigned, but he included me and all of us because, as i said, straight people lump us all together, for right or wrong. even many allies.  now if an ally is doing that, think about the fence-sitter.  what "corporate image" do we want people to brand us with?  scare tactician is not my first choice. sympathetic loving spouse and tax-paying citizen deserving of equality under the law is more to my taste.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 14:58:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

'Decline to Sign' was greeted with the same language a decade ago

The mainstream LGBT activists in Washington "have adopted as an essential part of their strategy a tactic that was first used in Washington by a group of gadfly activists who were dismissed by the mainstream activists of their day, just as WhoSigned.org is being dismissed today."

From:
http://lgbtqnews.com/gaynews/C...

The same kinds of right-wing talking points that are working -- for now -- against WhoSigned would be directed at "Decline to Sign" if WhoSigned were out of the picture.

-- Robin (seaQwa.com)

---

by: robinev @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 14:21:17 PM CDT

The link you provide

does not support your quoted statement that mainstream LGBT activists a decade ago dismissed or denigrated the efforts of the forerunners of Decline to Sign (which was called Bigot Busters).  I have no idea whether you are correct or not. I am simply saying that the piece you quote doesn't support that contention. Bigot Busters are complaining that anti-LGBT are charging harrassment. Here's the relevant bit:

It is a common misconception, repeatedly propagated by the supporters of Initiatives 608/610, that Bigot Busters harass and intimidate both voters and petitioners. This has become a sort of accepted wisdom ("the big lie," one among many the Right is telling here lately). The truth is that Bigot Busters operate in a respectful manner (there are many good and obvious reasons for doing so), and this approach was an integral part of the training Bigot Busters received. Bigot Busters are, moreover, well aware of the legal and public relations ramifications of acting otherwise. Many people making this false claim have no first-hand information of any Bigot Buster action.

 

---

by: Pollyanna @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 16:06:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Also, Decline to Sign is not at all like Bigot Busters.

Bigot Busters was an active campaign of talking to people as the opposition presented them with petitions.  Decline to Sign operates differently.  It simply asks people to declare that they themselves will not sign, and to let friends know why and ask them to do the same.  It is completely non-confrontational.  It is a very different thing than Bigot Busters.  Comparing them is an apples/oranges thing.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 16:19:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]