File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/97-02-21.035, message 89


Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:52:25 +0100
From: m-14970-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Hugh Rodwell)
Subject: Re: M-I: Rattles for closets


In the discussion on M-I between Rob S and Gary M on outing, Gary writes:

>I agree with this, Rob.  But the gay community  is very divided.  there is
>no one with the authority to do it. The AIDS Council leader is a member of
>the staff of the Premier - Rob Borbidge, so he is unlikely to out you know
>who.
>
>There is also a feeling in the community that if they out this  person then
>the alternative will be Horan the Homophobe and that would be much worse.
>
>One's sexuality should be off the agenda but the closeted conservative gay
>is vitally involved in watching gays being oppressed. He will in all
>probability vote for it.  But his outing and exposure will in some ways set
>back the cause of gay people.  Leastways that is the general opinion.  I
>know him of course and am sorely tempted to name him on this list, but I
>have decided not to because I am not a gay community *spokesperson.*
>
>
>Tricky....


This indicates that the state of opinion in the gay community is a higher
instance than any principles involved. Opportunism?

Perhaps we should sharpen the issue by comparing it with say a Communist
sympathiser (or Jew or Jewish sympathizer) in a high position in the Nazi
hierarchy. ... OK. By being in this position, this person is obliged to
witness and participate in and give orders for attacks on Communists and/or
Jews.

Questions:

1) Why is this person in this position?

If it was a party or community decision there should be no real problem.
The consequences were known and taken into account. Presumably benefits
were considered to outweigh disadvantages.

If it was an individual decision, then there is no reason for the party or
community to treat this person any differently from anyone else in such a
position -- except perhaps blackmail, where this person could finger a
number of closeted party or community members.

If it was an individual decision there is a big difference between a
careerist move -- in which case the  individual deserves no mercy, and an
idealistically motivated one -- "taking on the system from inside", which,
however crazy, might be respected by the party or community, if this person
has demonstrated concrete good will towards them.

2) What obligations are imposed on members of the party/community when it
comes to speaking out?

If someone not an "official" voice of the group should speak out, would
this lead to "disciplinary" action, regardless of the reasons?

This sounds like harsher penalties being imposed on the whistle-blower than
on the person doing real damage on behalf of the oppressive apparatus.

3) What sanctions are available to discipline the oppressor beside "outing"?

Social ostracism? What social links does such a person have with the party
or the community anyway? Would this person give a damn?


I'd be grateful if Gary could clarify these things.

Thanks,

Cheers,

Hugh




     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005