'Get over it'
This letter from the TGLRG to the Coming Out Proud program was sent in September 2006.
Dear COPP Committee members,
At the last meeting of the Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group it was resolved that we would write to you expressing our concern about the text which accompanied your entry in this year’s LGBTI Art Exhibition at the Moonah Arts Centre (copy included below).
The Group feels that, in part, the text is a thinly-veiled reference to our work, and that this reference misrepresents our objectives and achievements.
For example, the text says
“Sure we now have good anti-discrimination legislation but at a cost that has been born by gays & lesbians in local areas bearing the brunt of enraged fundamentalists and homophobes as well as the commiseration of the ‘wellbeing-fairies’ all with very little (or controlled) consultation.”
We do not believe there has been any “cost” paid by LGBTI Tasmanians for our current anti-discrimination and relationship laws. Both reforms had the support of an overwhelming majority of State MPs in both major parties and in both parliamentary chambers. According to opinion polls, when passed these laws also had the support of over 70% of the Tasmanian population. This is a remarkable level of support, and one we claim some credit for because of the immense amount of time and energy we invested in face-to-face community education at a local level about the importance of reform.
We do, however, believe that there was a very great “cost” to LGBTI people exacted in the years these laws were absent. Before law reform LGBTI people had no way to challenge discrimination in employment, education, accommodation or to ensure the law would respect our relationships. What’s more LGBTI people had to endure the social prejudice, discrimination and violence which was fostered by unfair laws. We are not suggesting that this prejudice, discrimination and violence has disappeared, simply that there are now much better remedies for it, and it is much less acceptable, than before.
We also challenge the assertion that the important changes which have occurred in Tasmania occurred without LGBTI community consultation. The TGLRG convened four forums on relationship reform in 1996-7 (two in Hobart and two in Launceston) attended by a total of 300 people. These forums canvassed all the options for reform, including the option of no reform, and were facilitated by people not closely associated with the Group to encourage a wide variety of views to be expressed. The preferred option for change was adopted by the Group and has since become law. The same process was undertaken for the establishment of the current LGBTI Tasmania Together benchmarks, with TasTog Progress Board representatives facilitating two LGBTI community meetings convened by the TGLRG and attended by about 120 people. The TGLRG has also been a strong supporter of genuine, independent community consultation undertaken by umbrella groups in which it has been involved including the original Devonport-based Working It Out Committee and the DHHS LGBTI Reference Group.
In the same vein as cited above the COPP text goes on to state,
“Tasmania has always had an elite establishment that makes decisions about the ‘plebs’ particularly ‘genetically inferior ones’ it is called determinism. This has not changed since colonial times.
“The Coming Out Proud movement hopes to reverse this by facilitating social action to support one-another at the local & regional level to own our shared action and ‘going at the pace of the weakest in our midst’ but not the intellectuals.”
Again, the implication is that the agenda for change has been determined by people who are out of touch, the result being that change is occurring too quickly.
The distinction between LGBTI intellectual elites on the one hand, and local people on the other is a false and dangerous one. Most people involved in the TGLRG grew up in, continue to live in, and/or continue to have close links with, Tasmania’s outer urban and rural communities. Even if we wanted to pretend to some inner-urban elitism, Tasmanian interconnection would make it impossible. The distinction is dangerous because it smacks of the right wing anti-gay tactic of dismissing and silencing people because of their academic training or interests. Every successful social movement has a place for those who reflect on history, ethics and social change.
It’s true that we have a history of taking the lead on issues which sometimes spark controversy. We make no apologies for that. We believe homophobia can only be effectively tackled if its existence is first revealed by direct challenges to injustice and inequality. This belief comes from an understanding of the history of social movements. Rosa Parks would never have sat at the front of the bus if she had worried about the impact resulting anger might have on “the weakest in our midst”. But the fact that she acted on her aspiration rather than her fears, meant that life for “the weakest” is now immeasurably better.
Our belief in the importance of taking the lead is also based on our own experience in Tasmania. For almost 20 years some LGBTI Tasmanians have responded to homophobia by blaming us for provoking it. But each time the backlash has faded and Tasmania has moved forward, the same people have been grateful for the transformation. In this regard the veiled reference in the COPP text to Ulverstone is pertinent. The anti-gay rallies which originated in that town had a dreadful impact, but the responsibility for that impact lies with the prejudice of those who attended and the political interests which stirred up that prejudice, not the ordinary “local” LGBTI people who were at that stage asking for their fundamental human rights to be respected, and who, in many instances, led the local protests against those rallies.
We are confident that the approach we take to change is appropriate. We believe that after a generation of experience at education, advocacy and lobbying we know how far to go to encourage real change without leaving the community behind. The fact that we are the recipients of several local, national and international human rights awards shows that many other people in the human rights and LGBTI movements agree.
At the same time, we understand that not everyone concurs with our approach. We respect different views on how change should occur. But we draw the line at others denigrating our motivation and achievements, which brings us to our final point.
We have been supporters of COPP initiatives such as helping young same-sex attracted people coming out in rural communities and better liaison with local government. We have encouraged debate on your proposal for a statewide LGBTGI consultative council even if we don’t support the detail of your proposal.
However, in the light of what has apparently been written about us in the name of COPP we feel the need to throw the spotlight back on COPP.
Our understanding is that COPP and/or its related organization the League of Gentlemen, submitted an art work for display in a Kingborough municipal building which was the subject of complaints from members of local church groups and concerns from local officials, and that your response to these complaints and concerns was to take a case to the Anti-Discrimination Commission and widely publicise that case. In this instance, you clearly weren’t concerned about “enrag(ing) fundamentalists and homophobes” nor the impact the anger sparked by your actions might have on “the weakest in our midst” (eg young closeted LGBTI people in Kingston’s Christian congregations).
We support every action you took in this regard. We simply note that you did exactly what you condemn us for doing by bringing homophobia to the surface and then taking action against it.
Our understanding is also that you have largely abandoned the original purpose of COPP (developing on-the-ground programs which help young people to come out in rural areas as outlined in the COPP Management Plan), and now concentrate instead on liaison with local and state government (as outlined in the COPP GLBTI Governance Model). This understanding comes from recent discussions within the newly-formed Hobart City Council LGBTI liaison group.
Again, we have no argument with your liaison work. Our question is, what consultation has been undertaken amongst COPP constituencies including the League of Gentlemen, which prompted and mandated this change? The anecdotal evidence we have received from “local people” is that they have very little knowledge or understanding of the elaborate plans COPP has for the LGBTI community, and that at no time have these plans been put to them for their assent.
Ideals like “shared action” and “self determination” and epithets like “thought police” and “well-being fairies” are easy to throw around.
Much harder is to find ways to actually empower individuals, reform laws and policies, and foster social transformation.
We believe COPP has the potential to make great strides towards these latter goals, but only if it focuses on achieving concrete, community-based goals rather than running down the work of others.
In conclusion we seek a face-to-face meeting to discuss our concerns. In particular we would like to discuss
1. whether the art exhibition text is the official position of COPP
2. if it is, whether these sentiments apply to the TGLRG and people associated with it
3. if they do, exactly what problems you have with our work, and
4. how we can work together co-operatively and constructively to tackle homophobia, and foster acceptance of sexual and gender diversity.
We thank you for your time and look forward to your response.
Yours Sincerely,
Michael Dempsey, Jen Van Achteren, Martine Delaney, Rodney Croome, Claire Bonner
For the TGLRG.
***
Coming Out Proud Movement
Get Over It
I am certainly not an artist Comrades as you will now understand, but I am an activist. For too long in Tasmania GLBTI people have been a political football with very few of us having a right to self determine our future and place in the Community. Sure we now have good anti-discrimination legislation but at a cost that has been born by gays & lesbians in local areas bearing the brunt of enraged fundamentalists and homophobes as well as the commiseration of the ‘wellbeing-fairies’ all with very little (or controlled) consultation.
Tasmania has always had an elite establishment that makes decisions about the ‘plebs’ particularly ‘genetically inferior ones’ it is called determinism. This has not changed since colonial times.
The Coming Out Proud movement hopes to reverse this by facilitating social action to support one-another at the local & regional level to own our shared action and ‘going at the pace of the weakest in our midst’ but not the intellectuals.
The aim of the Coming Out Proud Program (COPP) is to provide strategies that will enable GLBTI people in the region to “come out with pride” and live in their community with dignity as fully respected and participating members.
The colours of diversity are intoxicating and I am now a colour addict who cannot stop purchasing ‘colour pots’ at K&D. Hopefully a restored passion for the right we all have to ‘take action together’ and not on ‘behalf of others’ will improve my artistic expression before the ‘thought police’ take total control. If you work out where 315* is you will understand what I mean. In the mean time I hope the more powerful in our midst can ‘get over it’ – if you know what I mean.
*The art work accompanied by these words features five Tasmanian postcodes (ie four digit numbers all beginning with “7”) as well as the numerals “315” printed with the “3” at the edge of the page. If we assume that “315” is a truncated postcode it would be “7315”. “7315” is the postcode for Ulverstone.