Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

And Now, a Message from Some Gays Against Gay Marriage

Posted by on Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:29 AM

It's possibly NSFW, and if I'm reading it right—granted, I may have been distracted by the hot guys—but if I'm reading it right, this poster I just spotted on Capitol Hill manages to totally miss the point of the marriage equality movement while also creating a false dichotomy and offering a new twist on the bogus conservative argument that gay marriages will somehow be forced on people who don't want any part in them. Neat trick!

NeatTrick.jpg

(And for the record: The gay marriage movement is about equal opportunity under the law, nothing more and nothing less; straight marriage has already proved that the institution of marriage in not necessarily incompatible with the scene above; and if R-74 is approved, it will still be the case that no one, whether gay or straight, has to get married if he or she doesn't want to.)

UPDATE: And, via Dominic, another poster from the group:

NeatTrick2.jpg

 

Comments (34) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
rob! 1
Nguh. I will always have a soft spot (in my heart) for vintage porn.
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on October 17, 2012 at 11:41 AM · Report this
2
"Queers Against Capitalist Crap"???
I'm no huge fan of American-style capitalism, but to try to make an assertion that marriage is part and parcel of capitalism indicates to me the authors have no real convictions. They just hope to shock the viewer.
Posted by TJ on October 17, 2012 at 11:46 AM · Report this
3
At least they named themselves appropriately (quacc's).
Posted by drawn on October 17, 2012 at 11:49 AM · Report this
Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In 4
Let me guess: They're also big fans of Andrea Dworkin.
Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In on October 17, 2012 at 11:50 AM · Report this
5
I am skeptical of marriage myself (all of it, honey), but Queers Against Capitalist Crap? If that's not fake, somebody needs a bigger slogan-writing budget. I say it's fake.
Posted by Prettybetsy on October 17, 2012 at 11:59 AM · Report this
6
Dude, it's not "Possibly NSFW" - it's "Clearly NSFW unless you're part of the <1% of the workforce that works for a porn publisher or an alernaweekly."
Posted by BGKev on October 17, 2012 at 11:59 AM · Report this
Sargon Bighorn 7
Clearly they have no clue about the world in which they live. No one is denying anyone "love".
Posted by Sargon Bighorn on October 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM · Report this
matt 8
Trollish
Posted by matt on October 17, 2012 at 12:11 PM · Report this
9
Confidential to QACC:

You can have marriage and group sex. They're not mutually exclusive.

Dan
Posted by Dan Savage on October 17, 2012 at 12:12 PM · Report this
Pick1 10
@6 I would have to agree...

If an actual image from porn gets the "possibly" tag wtf will it have to be to get a full on "NSFW" tag.

Excuse me while I go ponder that for a bit...
Posted by Pick1 on October 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM · Report this
11
Possibly NSFW? I think you've lost track of the fact that places of employment like The Stranger are the unicorns of the employment world. Most of us are working at companies where this is unequivocally NSFW.
Posted by I Got Nuthin' on October 17, 2012 at 12:15 PM · Report this
12
@10 Maybe seeing actual genitals? I think that's probably a firm NSFW. Since all penis was strategically covered in this flyer, I think it's fair to label it "possibly". And none of you whiny bitches have any excuse- you were warned beforehand and it was covered by a jump.
Posted by UNPAID COMMENTER on October 17, 2012 at 12:25 PM · Report this
13
Does anyone know where the porn comes from? I'd love to get a copy of that photo without the juvenile anarchist bullshit superimposed. Preferably in color.
Posted by Joe Glibmoron on October 17, 2012 at 12:28 PM · Report this
14
"Nguh. I will always have a soft spot (in my heart) for vintage porn. "

And I will have a hard spot in my pants.
Posted by Dr.Duck on October 17, 2012 at 12:47 PM · Report this
Bauhaus I 15
I don't drink so no one should have to. Slap that vodka right out of their mouths (after you remove the dick, I suppose). You know, much to my chagrin being gay doesn't always mean being worldly. You'd think so, eh? But yeah, I've heard that argument from the get-go: Why do we want to emulate straight people - as if that's the point. And being proudly gay means that you mustn't harbor the same romantic desires and wishes that breeders do. I've always thought people who fucked around a lot and said it was a political statement were just trying to rationalize their sluttiness (for lack of a better word): "I like to fuck around; you should, too." And if that's what they want and they don't have trouble finding participants, I say, "Go on w'ich yo bad self!" But don't tell me I ain't a proud gay man because my knees aren't dirty.

Einsteins, the lot of them.
Posted by Bauhaus I on October 17, 2012 at 12:53 PM · Report this
16
This is fucking awesome. I wholeheartedly support ending all marriage for everyone! Why enter into a system that awards benefits and privileges to this particular way to be in relationship with someone? So, unmarried people can't get tax breaks? Single parents cannot designate anyone from their chosen family to care for their child in the event they become ill? Marriage is ruining this country. Let people create family however they'd like, and offer benefits and privilege to anyone who would like them.
Posted by ethanethan on October 17, 2012 at 1:02 PM · Report this
Cato the Younger Younger 17
Marriage should be available for all, probably a good idea for many but required or expected of no one.

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM · Report this
18
Is this the work of Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore whom Dan Savage has given no press time to?
Posted by jeffy on October 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM · Report this
JensR 19
@2 someone hasn't read their Engels (although why anyone really would is beyond me, that hack made absolutely nothing worthwhile on his own)...

But yeah this is kinda typical of the "if its not exactly to my damn liking I will get very very cross" crowd. The fuckwits who sincerely believe that by banning their own rights they will mysteriously make everyone else "liberated" in some wonderful way.

Fuck that. The beauty of equal rights is that if you DON'T want to get married you don't fucking want to. Also if these guys are assuming that the path to liberty is vintage porn or butt-sex they are just idiots. God help us from the comfortable middle class kids postmodernist "fight from oppression". Actually, never mind, screw 'em they are the upholders of the capitalist crap they oppose.

(I should point out that as a married gay commie-pinko-marxist-lefty dude, I may be biased. But this just pisses me off. Not because they want to try to speak for my sexuality, who gives a shit about that, but because they are an ulcer on any social movement they cling to for kicks, identity or a sense of belonging)
Posted by JensR http://ohyran.se on October 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM · Report this
JensR 20
want#2 = "have"
Posted by JensR http://ohyran.se on October 17, 2012 at 1:35 PM · Report this
21
I am not so quick to dismiss it. Obviously, I could be putting words in their mouth, but what if their statement is that chasing cultural approval and sanction is kind of a bullshit game. I am more inclined to have uniform civil unions as a right for all people, and leave marriage for the religious, conservative, etc. Gays want acceptance, most anyway. And they want the legal protections afforded married couples. But maybe chasing "state sanctioned gay marriages" is a misdirection, standing around asking for a handout instead of demanding uniform legal rights. I am all for legalized gay marriage, but I would be just as in favor, or more so, of uniform civil unions for all and no state sanctioned legal marriage for anyone. Of course, if anyone wants to call themselves married now, they can and should. The state can not tell us how to speak. Anyway, maybe that is their point, in which case, I agree.
Posted by rp on October 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM · Report this
south downtown 22
obviously the work of the McKenna campaign...
Posted by south downtown on October 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM · Report this
23
If I were walking by and saw the first poster, my instant assumption would be that it was put up by homophobic anti-marriage fuckwits wanting to elicit an instinctual "ewww" response out of straight people. I suspect I'm not alone in this.

Of course, further reading would reveal it was just some homosexual anti-marriage fuckwits.
Posted by Lynx on October 17, 2012 at 2:12 PM · Report this
Chelydra_serpentina 24
I can't tell if the posters are meant as a genuine political statement against marriage of all types, of if they're someone's joke or artistic endeavor.

"The Queers Against Capitalist Crap" on the bottom poster and the "Washington United for Mayhem" on the top one lead me to suspect the latter. Neither comes up in a Google search, unless you count the hits that discuss these posters.
Posted by Chelydra_serpentina on October 17, 2012 at 2:32 PM · Report this
25
@19 - just because Engels argued that marriage began with the industrial revolution doesn't make that true either. Marriage has been around since man created laws.
Posted by TJ on October 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM · Report this
26
@23 if pictures of sex are homophobic, then guess i'm a big giant homophobe. Shoot.
Posted by ouch on October 17, 2012 at 3:32 PM · Report this
27
@21 I would prefer civil unions for all too. I'd really like churches to get out of the business of performing state-sanctioned marriage. But the whole debate brings to mind the abortion slogan: "Don't Like Abortion? Don't Have One."

@23 I still think it could be trolling from homophobes. As in, look, the queers hate marriage! Look how they will debase the institution! It doesn't have to add up perfectly to come from people who think the Earth is 4000 years old. Or it could just be art/a joke, as @24 says.
Posted by Prettybetsy on October 17, 2012 at 5:22 PM · Report this
28
What @21 said. Marriage is a conservative institution, built around property and patriarchy. So, yes, disallowing same-sex marriage is inequitable and that isn't right. But granting the legal and financial privileges to a different, select set of people isn't necessarily fair either. There isn't only one solution to this issue. I think it's good to address the inequity, but I really don't support the campaign arguments that idealize marriage.

It makes me sad that some of you are so close-minded as to dismiss different perspectives on this issue. I appreciate those who question the conformist tendencies and inherently conservative qualities of marriage.
Posted by failure of imagination on October 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM · Report this
Jeffrey in Chicago 29
Thank you, @21 & @28 (glad I opened your unregistered comment!). As long as institutionalized marriage exists for straight people, it ought to exist for gays.

**But I'd rather break the paradigm altogether.**
Posted by Jeffrey in Chicago http://www.somethingawful.com/flash/shmorky/babby.swf on October 17, 2012 at 8:51 PM · Report this
30
You seem to have missed the point. Marriage laws unfairly favors married people over non-married people. Why do married people deserve tax benefits when non-married people don't? What is so special about marriage that the government should give special rights to married people? It is total bullshit.
Posted by GLITUR_Chad on October 18, 2012 at 12:16 AM · Report this
watchout5 31
Confidential to Dan:

You are forcing me to pay into a system I don't think the government should be involved in. The fact that any benefits go out to anyone willing to pair up is the government trying to encourage me economically to find one person and decide to spend forever with them. I'm against this action in all it's forms. I might be for marriage equality for no other reason than it's the right and moral thing to do, but if I got to wave a magic wand and the world would act exactly how I want them, there would be no government giving money to human beings to pair up together. They aren't outlawing group sex, but economically group sex homes are at a disadvantage unless they figure out some kind of scheme where some part of the group is married but sometimes you leave a 3rd wheel out. Why you gotta hate on third wheels Dan? What's with you?

Crazy Concerned Citizen.
Posted by watchout5 http://www.overclockeddrama.com on October 18, 2012 at 3:14 AM · Report this
Paxlotl 32
Conservatives are always getting their panties in a wad over giving "special privileges" to gays and other minorities. "Marriage equality" just attempts give the special privileges that married people have to queers. That's why conservatives are so afraid of it. They know that granting marriage to gays will just show marriage for what it is: Special Privilege.
Posted by Paxlotl on October 18, 2012 at 1:08 PM · Report this
33
These posters are awesome (vintage porn YES!). Marriage in our culture is a busssiness agreement which gets the government invloved in your relationship. I think this may be why QACC is against it. I understand why gay people want equal rights-because all humans deserve basic respect. The suggestion of ending marriage puts everyone on an equal playing field. If two people love eachother, they'll be together. You don't need governments or contracts to show your love. Well done QACC :)
Posted by wildcat on December 12, 2012 at 12:12 PM · Report this
34
These posters are awesome (vintage porn YES!). Marriage in our culture is a busssiness agreement which gets the government invloved in your relationship. I think this may be why QACC is against it. I understand why gay people want equal rights-because all humans deserve basic respect. The suggestion of ending marriage puts everyone on an equal playing field. If two people love eachother, they'll be together. You don't need governments or contracts to show your love. Well done QACC :)
(and well said, Paxlotl)
Posted by wildcat on December 12, 2012 at 12:18 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy