On Militant Respectability

A gay protest outside the Pentagon (1965) 

Photo: Kay Tobin (New York Public Library)

Until recently, I had never heard of the strategy of protest termed by historian Marc Stein militant respectability. But now that I have, I'm intrigued by the idea.

For whilst there are times when one is obliged (politically and ethically) to break the law and resort to the use of force, what matters most is not whether a demonstration is violent or non-violent, legal or illegal, but whether it is effective; that is to say, whether it achieves its aims.

And there have been times when the most carefully choreographed, polite, peaceful, well-ordered and well-mannered of protests have been the most successful not in capturing, but in charming support from the public, the media, and, indeed, even opponents. For example, the demonstrations organized by Frank Kameny and the Washington branch of the Mattachine Society in the mid-1960s requesting (not demanding) that gay men and lesbians be given their full civil rights as American citizens, were absolutely carried out in the right manner and cleverly placed squarely within the tradition of lawful American protest. As David Johnson writes:

"Because they had long been seen as subversive and a threat to national security - perhaps even connected with the Communist Party - MSW members were exceedingly careful to highlight not only that they were homosexuals but that they enjoyed rights as American citizens ... suggesting that sexual identity and political rights were not incompatible."  

Wanting to be seen not only as upstanding citizens, but also as potential employees of the civil service, those who marched outside the White House and other government buildings, dressed appropriately; women in dresses, men in suits and ties:

"The MSW drew up strict regulations stating that 'picketing is not an occasion for an assertion of personality, individuality, ego, rebellion, generalized non-conformity or anti-conformity'. Dress and appearance were to be 'conservative and conventional'. Signs had to be approved, neatly lettered, and carried in a prearranged order. Talking among picketers, smoking on line, and acknowledging passers by ... were discouraged."

Militant respectability is thus an ordered and dignified - but also subversive and seductive strategy - rather than a chaotic and confrontational one. Those who do not see how this might at times be necessary and effective - those who think protesting must always be noisy and involve skirmishes with the police - are idiots (and useful idiots at that to the state and its security services).

Torpedo the Ark sometimes means: shut your mouth, smarten up, and put down the petrol bombs; because the 'ark' just might happen to be counterproductive revolutionary posturing, empty political rhetoric and ideological cliché.

Ultimately, if you want to be accepted and have your arguments heard, then you just might consider behaving in a socially acceptable manner and speaking in a pleasant tone of voice. Likewise, if you want to be accorded your rights, then face up to your duties and obligations as a citizen.      


Note: The lines quoted from  David K. Johnson are from The Lavender Scare, (University of Chicago Press, 2006), pp. 200-01.

Cocksuckers and Communists

As everybody knows, the witch-hunts in Cold War America during the early 1950s, led by Senator Joseph McCarthy, were not directed against individuals who liked to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight, but those who were - or were suspected of being - communists or left-leaning fellow-travelers.

But what is rather less well known is that McCarthyism was not merely a paranoid political response to the perceived Soviet infiltration of the US, but also manifested a phobic concern with homosexuality as an equally threatening and related form of subversive deviance.

Thus it was that the Second Red Scare was also tinted with lavender. In fact, the so-called Lavender Scare resulted in far more people being persecuted and hounded out of their jobs (or worse) than the more widely reported anti-communist campaign.

Both queers and reds were regarded as profoundly Un-American - that is to say, anti-God, anti-family, and anti-wholesomeness or what we might term apple-pie morality. They were believed to be actively conspiring to bring about a revaluation of sexual and cultural values and the overthrow of government.

For McCarthy and his supporters, someone such as Harry Hay was virtually the embodiment of evil and the link between political radicalism and perversion was proven beyond any shadow of a doubt. On one occasion McCarthy even brazenly announced to reporters that anyone who opposed him had to be either a communist or a cocksucker.

Happily, those of a lavender persuasion not only survived this ugly period in American history, but were strengthened by it. For ironically, the forerunners of today's LGBTQ movement came out of the McCarthy era; the Mattachine Society was founded in 1950, for example, followed by the Daughters of Bilitis in 1955.

As for old Joe, he died a broken man aged forty-eight, in 1957, from acute hepatitis (exacerbated by alcoholism), having been censured by the Senate three years earlier and seen his power and influence dramatically wane. As President Eisenhower is believed to have quipped, McCarthyism had become McCarthywasm. 


Notes

See: David K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare, (University of Chicago Press, 2004). 

A feature-length documentary by Josh Howard based on the above work is presently in post-production.