Bil Browning makes an interesting point about the pro-marriage equality TV ads being run in Minnesota and Washington, where same-sex marriage referendums are on the ballot in November — where are the gay people? The ads are almost devoid of actual gay people, consisting of straight couples talking about their gay friends or family. Here’s the Washington ad:
And the Minnesota ad:
And Bil says:
Personally, I’m sick of seeing super happy straight couples with their arms around each other telling other straight people what marriage means. Fuck that. Let’s hear it from the people who actually want to get married and hear what it means to them.
It boils down to this for me: The whole point of coming out was to show people that the LGBT people they deal with on an everyday basis aren’t monsters or pedophiles or three-headed dragons. Instead, we’re just as good as they are and remarkably normal Americans like the majority of straight people. It’s been the most successful aspect of the modern LGBT rights movement.
So why do allow pollsters and marketing flacks to decide that it’s okay to hide our faces in the television closet when it comes time to fight for our own rights?
This is certainly a reasonable argument, and I don’t blame him a bit for taking it. But there’s a good argument for why these ads are the way they are, which is that the vast majority of the people who will actually be voting for or against those laws — the people the commercial is obviously aimed at — are straight. So if you’re going to appeal to those voters, it’s a good idea strategically to speak to their reality as straight people who may have gay friends or family.
But these are two different kinds of arguments being offered. Browning’s argument is, in some sense, a moral one (that may not be the right word here, but I think you know what I’m saying). The other side has a purely pragmatic position. And I recognize that I may put greater weight on the pragmatic one because I am one of those people the ads are aimed at, a straight person with many gay friends. And while I obviously don’t need to be persuaded to support marriage equality, it is precisely because the sentiments in these ads, the concern for the well-being of people I care about, already convinced me.
37 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
marcus
September 24, 2012 at 11:16 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Seems like there should be at least some videos of the people most affected by this issue speaking to “their” family and friends as well. IIRC, one of the complaints about about the anti-H8 campaign was that it didn’t show enough actual gay people speaking out.
Gretchen
September 24, 2012 at 11:18 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m at work and can’t watch the ads. But would it have been so hard to show straight couples and gay couples together? Having dinner? Or just sitting around chatting? Or something?
It’s certainly true that like is more persuasive to like. But it would seem to me that the best way to represent gays and show how “like” they really are would be to have ads depicting the superhappy gay couples right alongside the superhappy straight ones. Enjoying each other’s company. Maybe playing with each other’s children. Living, you know, together.
Michael Heath
September 24, 2012 at 11:19 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I appreciate Mr. Browning’s argument; considering it reveals the failure of character in those still requiring persuasion on this matter. But I’m also heartened whenever when I see liberals playing to win rather than occasionally winning in spite of how they played.
I also wonder what the demographics are of the audience who are seeing the TV ads. If they’re the Fox News target demographic which is my perception, then Mr. Browning should also consider the promotions younger demographics more frequently encounter, such as Dan Savage’s “It Gets Better” campaign. Those efforts targeted at younger demographics predominately feature gay people and their families. Both approaches also signal the fact we’re facing a generational death knell of Christian bigots obstructing the government protecting gays’ and their families’ rights equally.
So hopefully Mr. Browning also appreciates the ads he finds risable are a mere rear guard action needed only temporarily when thinking in terms of generational periods. They won’t be needed 2 – 3 generations from now.
barbrykost
September 24, 2012 at 11:19 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Political ads are supposed to sway your vote. Why waste the ad money persuading gay people that they should vote yes on the law? By concentrating on the opinions of straight couples, they are trying to convince other straight people to vote for SSM, and those are the votes they need.
Dennis N
September 24, 2012 at 11:22 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Which further proves the point that civil rights should not be to subject to the whims and votes of the majority.
Abby Normal
September 24, 2012 at 11:25 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Me too. But if that’s what it takes to achieve victory, it’s not such an onerous price.
Look in a mirror when you ask that question. What’s stopping you from making the kinds of ads you think people should see?
DaveL
September 24, 2012 at 11:26 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
More to the point, a large proportion of those voting against marriage equality are likely to score high on the RWA scale. That means they’ll be well-practiced at simply disregarding any argument or experience that comes from an established out-group. When an RWA discovers that a person they considered already part of their in-group is actually gay, it can have a profound effect on their opinions – but if you’re going to approach one as a stranger, it’s best not to come pre-identified as a member of the out-group.
slc1
September 24, 2012 at 11:30 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Michael Heath @ #3
But I’m also heartened whenever when I see liberals playing to win rather than occasionally winning in spite of how they played.
As the late Raiders owner Al Davis put it, just win baby.
frrolfe
September 24, 2012 at 11:30 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
still navel gazing. nothing to lose: you shower couldnt argue yourselves out of a paper bag. atheism is a belief system. whats wrong with that. as hitchens once famously said: another whisky. (he didnt have the sense to drink irish whiskey)
John Phillips, FCD
September 24, 2012 at 11:37 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
is it whack a troll time already?
RickR
September 24, 2012 at 11:39 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@9- Non-sequitur cleanup on aisle 4….
frrolfe
September 24, 2012 at 11:40 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
fundie atheists, whod a thunk? respect other people’ views fundies. why oh why are bloggers going to patheos?
ed and others, respect. stop whining about your beliefs.
frrolfe
September 24, 2012 at 11:43 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
is mr heath the best you can throw at me?
dingojack
September 24, 2012 at 11:45 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
frrolfe – the topic for discussion is ‘Same Sex Marriage’ advertisement that conspicuously don’t have gay people in them.
Have you anything to contribute, any arguments to make, or are you simply ‘one-hand typing’?
Dingo
Gretchen
September 24, 2012 at 11:51 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I could if I showered in it. Wet paper’s pretty damn flimsy.
Trebuchet
September 24, 2012 at 11:54 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@Ed:
I’d suggest that as a straight person with many gay friends, you are in fact NOT one of the people the ads are aimed at. People with gay friends most likely understand that gays are not the demonic creatures we hear about from the Xian right and will vote in favor of their friends’ rights. The target audience is straight people who DON’T have gay friends; who are uncomfortable about the whole issue, but can be swayed by people like themselves. Folks who will listen to people like themselves but might react negatively to ads featuring, say, two men holding hands. Baby steps.
frrolfe
September 24, 2012 at 11:55 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
hi dingo,
sorry to appear off-topic, but, all posts from ed over,say, the last 300 hundred years, have been “poor me”. i have yet to see any positive posts here, apart from knocking some one else. i dont know if you still live in stralia but i lived in melb for 20 years. look around you and weep.
frog
September 24, 2012 at 11:57 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
It’s not about convincing radically opposed people that their beliefs are wrong. It’s about convincing the fence-sitters that it’s okay to hop down on the pro-equal-marriage side of the fence.
Someone who doesn’t know any gay people (or, more likely, doesn’t know that they DO know gay people) may be taking their cues and opinions from their surrounding group. They’ve never had to think about what gay marriage means. (Or the lack of it.)
By showing them people they can identify with, it becomes easier to think about the issue. There are probably lots of people whose social/religious/peer groups officially stand opposed to equal marriage rights, but individuals may be more conflicted. These sort of ads say, “It’s okay to disagree with your tribe. We’re also part of your tribe, and we agree with you.”
dingojack
September 24, 2012 at 11:58 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Well a life sentence in the Grey City no wonder you spend a lot of time weeping.
;) Dingo
Artor
September 24, 2012 at 11:59 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I think it would be awesome to see a commercial depicting a family getting ready to go to some dear friend’s wedding. Everyone can talk about how great it is that (conveniently androgynously named friends) are finally tying the knot, how much they love eachother, etc. Flowers & balloons & buffet tables, happy in-laws, running kids & photographers. Treat it like a perfectly normal event, right up to the big moment, when the camera circles around the happy couple to reveal that they’re both women with a huge, happy, smiling crowd behind them.
frrolfe
September 24, 2012 at 12:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
hey dingo. where do you, did you live? gold coast? got your white shoes and “jo for prime minister button”?
Bronze Dog
September 24, 2012 at 12:08 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Didn’t watch the videos, but I get the impression. I think there is room for messages from hetero couples expressing their support and pointing out that they have no reason to feel threatened by marriage equality.
But I agree it should be mixed with same sex couples showing that they’re decent people who just want to enjoy life together. I think we need more gay couples in the media so more people can get used to the idea. If they only see hetero couples and notice the omission, I’d think it’d reinforce the image of LGBT people as anonymous devils conspiring in the shadows. “If they’re really decent people, why are their campaigners hiding them?”
snafu
September 24, 2012 at 12:20 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
As a resident of Washington state, I think the adds I have been seeing for SSM are quite good and make an effective case for SSM. We shall see if this is true in November.
cptdoom
September 24, 2012 at 12:30 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
To be fair, some of the ads have actually included gay people, although I can’t remember from which states. There was at least one (in Maine, I think) that had a grandfather talking about how all his grandchildren, including his gay grandson who is sitting right next to him at a family dinner, deserve the right to marry.
Although I understand Browning’s concern, there is a very real difference between these ads and the anti-Prop 8 ads, which were IMHO horrible. Many of the anti-Prop 8 ads, like the ones that were satires of the “I’m a MAC, I’m a PC” ads, didn’t address the central question of marriage equality at all. At least these ads show “normal” straight people talking about the impact of anti-gay laws on their families and loved ones.
The truth is that you often can’t convince someone to support minority rights until you make it real for that individual. During the pre-Civil War era, abolition was a fringe movement until laws like the Fugitive Slave Act began impinging on the rights of white people and the Civil Rights Movement didn’t gain majority Northern support until, sadly enough, white people started getting killed in the fight for Civil Rights. I think these ads are trying to do the same thing for the large percentage of voters who are not, specifically, anti-gay, but who don’t see any impact on their lives if marriage equality fails.
whheydt
September 24, 2012 at 12:34 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I see it like the comment my father made to one of my sisters…First we get you your drivers license, then we teach you to drive. (His opinion was that. if you couldn’t drive a vehicle with a manual transmission, you didn’t really know how to drive. The “family car” had an automatic and that was what we all used for the driving test when the time came.)
In this case, make SSM legal. *Then* start showing the people that are allowed to marry.
Is that rough on the gays that want the marriage equality laws in place? Probably. Will it better the chance that marriage equality *will* become law? Yes.
justawriter
September 24, 2012 at 12:55 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hmm, seems my previous comment was deleted for quoting Blazing Saddles(?). It was the these are the people of the land line, you know ….
Anyway, the point I was trying to make, this time without a disparaging quote, is that the ads are aimed at possibly sympathetic but scared heteros, which will be the swing vote that could decide these elections.
lofgren
September 24, 2012 at 1:00 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I don’t even… this is so ridiculous… How do I even respond?
Is gay marriage advocacy some kind of zero-sum game, where for every straight couple who gets in one the act, one gay couple has to go back into the closet?
Browning is correct that coming out and taking a greater share of the media spotlight, especially to show more variety amongst gays than just Sandra Bernhard and Ellen, has been one of the most successful aspects of the gay rights movement. Does that mean we should never try any other approaches?
“Why do we allow experts on swaying the opinions of others to use the methods that they have found effective at swaying the opinions of others? It’s almost like we’re trying to accomplish something.”
“As everybody knows, straight white middle class people hate seeing themselves on TV. That’s why all of the most successful sitcoms feature poor black lesbians.”
“Why do we allow white college kids to risk their lives in order to help Negroes vote? Only Negroes should help Negroes vote!”
Making a person comfortable with homosexuality through the kind of exposure that Browning describes is a slow, intimate process. The people these ads are aimed at have been increasingly exposed to gay people on TV over the course of the last 30 years or so. Maybe, just maybe, the targets of these ads are not the same straight people that have effectively been converted into allies using the same old methods?
You would think that people of privilege going on television and advocating for the rights of others would be a positive thing. Apparently it is an attempt to push gay people back in the closet.
Browning acknowledges that many gay people are already advocating for gay marriage. He seems to believe that, rather than simply adding MORE voices to the chorus demanding equality, the creators of these commercials are actually silencing gay civil rights advocates somehow. I would like to hear more about this purge of gay people in the gay rights movement. That definitely seems like something that we should correct before the gay rights movement is completely dominated by straight people, with their focus groups and their opinion polls. Because that seems like a totally plausible scenario.
Browning to straight advocates of gay marriage: STFU. We’ll do this our way, without any of your condescending “empathy” or “concern” or “advocacy for social justice.” You can take your “love and support of gay couples” and just stuff it.
dingojack
September 24, 2012 at 1:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
justawriter: – You mean this?
Dingo
Ed Brayton
September 24, 2012 at 1:42 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
frrolfe is going bye bye. All he ever does is hijack threads and he has absolutely nothing to add to any conversation.
Pierce R. Butler
September 24, 2012 at 2:09 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Wait – where is there a law that says Strict (or Severe) Sado-Masochistic couples can’t marry?
justawriter
September 24, 2012 at 2:17 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@Dingo, that’s the one.
dingojack
September 24, 2012 at 2:24 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Pierce R. Butler – Ha Ha.
I read the header as ‘S&M Ads with No Gay Couples’ and thought WTF?
‘Till the more careful second reading, that is.
Dingo
eric
September 24, 2012 at 2:26 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Gretchen – excellent point.
Whatever the target audience, there is no reason one couldn’t appeal to those voters by showing them AND gay people in a commercial.
lofgren
September 24, 2012 at 4:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
So… the daughter of the couple in the first commercial and the gay neighbors of the couple in the second commercial just don’t count?
leonardschneider
September 24, 2012 at 6:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Tough call, and one I can’t make. Personally, my uncle and his husband are two of the most staid, middle class, and — dare I say it? — kinda boring people on the continent. Really, Uncle Billy’s only concession to stereotype is that he’s a successful hairdresser. (Gail works for an airline as a freight coordinator, IIRC.)
What throws people is when they show up in their two SUVs, toting their six adopted kids*… A chosen way of living that 99% of us would be completely overwhelmed by, gay, straight, or omnisexual. Billy and Gail have more love, patience, and straight-up cojones than anyone you’ll meet in the next month, and could be considered archetypes of what a gay married couple can be…
… Only they don’t want to be. They’d rather be thought of as a two-husband household with a lot of children, and have it left at that. A point made in the film-to-be is that it’s not their relationship that makes them unusual, it’s their choice to devote their lives to raising what are essentially throwaway kids… And if they can do it, why can’t more people?
————————-
*Yeah, I keep linking to the promo site here.
I won’t lie, I use many opportunities to promote the completion of the movie: my uncle’s an awesome guy (and Gail’s a sweetheart too) and it’s a story that can open a lot of eyes. If even one homophobe or bible-thumper sees the film and has an epiphany of, “Holy shit, I’ve been hating people for no reason! I need to stop that!” then the movie has been successful in my view.
mikee
September 25, 2012 at 5:13 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
check out this ad from Australia.
lofgren
September 25, 2012 at 9:11 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That was a powerful commercial.