that's actually a really good idea.

i have some critical feedback around civil disobedience tactics to offer.

i'm not saying you shouldn't go forward with your plans. i'm only observing its weak points that would need to be addressed in order to build the most effective strategy.

first off, i'm pretty ignorant around tax forms and other paperwork. i admit that i didn't realize it was an arrestable offense to check the married box when one's marriage hasn't been legally recognized. is this really something that people could be arrested for???

you write: "See middle America may be homophobic, but they're usually pretty lazy about it. Saying "you can't get married" is a passive sort of oppression. They don't have to drag anybody to jail, they just refuse to issue certain documents."

middle Americans aren't the only ones who are lazy and/or passive. imnsho, a great deal of support from the larger Gay and Lesbian community for marriage has been rather lazy/passive. many seem to feel that they are "doing their part" for equality by donating money to organizations or going to marches with signs. Marching and protesting seem rather ineffective in influencing others these days. i still go to them, but they are way less productive than they used to be. Dubya managed to ignore millions of anti-war protestors gathered around the world and still invaded Iraq.

in my experience people have to feel really strongly about something in order to put their asses on the line for it. there would have been alot fewer couples in line to get married in San Francisco if they had been facing risk of arrest. also, the actual number of Gays and Lesbians who are in relationships and want legal marriage seems to me to be a minority of the G/L community. (support for marriage seems more about lip service because it's trendy to say you support it. actually it sometimes seems quite difficult and rather unpopular in a groups of Lesbians and Gay men for a Gay person to dissent and say that they don't agree that marriage is something desirable for whatever reason.) thus, there is a relatively small pool of potential people to draw upon since straight supporters of marriage equality cannot be arrested unless they lie on their forms.

"Oppression becomes a lot more difficult when the victim dares his oppressor to act. Think about the riots years ago in San Francisco and New York. People saw gays being violently mistreated, and some of them started to sympathize. This was a great source of momentum. "

ew yuck. i don't like language which casts Gays and Lesbians as "victims" of oppression, unless that is were talking about actual violence. and even then, seeing ourselves as "victims" is incredibly disempowering. how bout "survivors".

Civil disobedience where people get arrested is way less effective than it used to be. Attitudes toward non-violent protestors seem to have shifted in the U.S. in recent years. Unlike the classic days of civil disobedience in the struggle for racial equality, people these days are less inclined to see martyrdom as noble. Such tactics depend on the majority of people adopting a more or less Christian approach which idealizes suffering for one's beliefs. People in general seem more jaded and callous these days. They are moved by suffering caused by national disastors. But activists and protestors who are willing to risk police brutality and arrest are often seen as stupid, extremists or rabblerousers who are getting what they deserve. After 9-11, many people tend to see the cops as heroes. Thus, police brutality against protestors is less likely to create feelings of sympathy and support.

On the other hand, since the Gay and Lesbian people getting arrested would be less inclined to be filmed with their asses, cocks or tits hanging out or in their leather or drag, such efforts would might turn out to be a good bit of PR to continue balancing out the more "stereotypical" images reinforced by the wilder participants at Gay Pride Marches ;D