The American people have spoken, and what they've said is that they want Bush and what he stands for. How do we change their minds?
Remember only 51% of American people, mostly "concentrated" in very rural, low density areas of the country, spoke this message. Bush's constituency is a coalition of the wealthy on one end, voting their pocketbooks in as cynical a manner as can be imagined, and the otherwise disenfranchised (often poorly educated, marginalized, financially precarious) people of the rural U.S., many areas of which are only maintained by, ironically, government handouts to farmers. It's the latter group that is attracted to the message of anti-gay everything and pondering the question "Can Christians Put Women in Burqas Too?"
(Some pundit described Pennsylvania's demographics as Philly and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between.)
There's a whole slew of interesting articles and op/ed pieces in the NYTimes today--Gary Willis's "The Day the Enlightenment Went Out," and an article called "A Very Blue (Disconsolate, Even) City in a Red Country" talking about the fact that both Manhattan and the Bronx voted for Kerry by 80% or more, and how they feel, as do I, completely alienated from the red zones of the nation--and I live here! And then there's Maureen Dowd's "The Red Zone" which is just good for the stomach's craving for sour grapes. (I'd link, but the Times is a subscription service and so you'd have to register and then the links turn to paid-links only so . . . )
My point, and I do have one somewhere here, is that we are at least 48% of the country as a whole, probably more, really, and in some important regions we are much bigger than that. My main hope: I don't think young people generally (as opposed to simply "young voters") are nearly so antigay, at any rate, as the others in this "red state" cohort.
I teach them everyday, my partner is a high school teacher. My impression of these students is that they are mostly, even the conservative ones, sympathetic to gay rights; they virtually all have "gay friends"--even at conservative, church-related schools--and they think it's wrong to deny gay people basic rights. They often believe this with a small sense of rebellion, because their parents ARE often very conservative and gay-bashing. Now many of them do struggle with issues related to child rearing, but they are pretty convinced of gay people's right to be in relationships and to love each other, to live in houses and hold jobs. (again, this is an impression, and it's anecdotal, but I feel it's accurate.) That all may sound like cold comfort, but I think it is hopeful, still.
Abortion for that group is much more complex. I actually think Madonna (!) was the most forward thinking of all the cultural analysts when she sang "Papa Don't Preach" in the 80s in terms of capturing young people's attitudes towards "unwanted pregnancy." Young women in the Midwest are, again painting broad strokes, very sentimental about babies AND they see it as a kind of "grrrl power" to say: "I've made up my mind, I'm keepin' my baby!" I really believe many of them see girls who get abortions as more "chicken shit", cowardly and irresponsible. By contrast, those who, okay they had sex, maybe it was a mistake, but they're going to take responsibility and decide to keep and raise the babies, are kind of rebellious/heroic. These young women, if they do get pregnant themselves, often also believe it will be easier than it typically turns out to be to still go to school, get a good job, etc. They're romantic about these things--they think they can do it all.
They don't understand that when abortion was illegal, many young (white) women who became pregnant were sent off to quiet places to give birth, had their babies taken from them, and were told never to speak of the experience. They don't know that the only time when keeping the baby became an option for a young woman, single, was when the women's movement insisted that women should have control over their reproductive lives, including abortion. That the movement towards seeing unmarried women as legitimate parents proceded from a logic that: if I am morally able to make a decision about ending this pregnancy, then I'm also fit to raise a child without having to have a shotgun ceremony.
My suggestion for myself is to keep teaching these young women, and especially to keep teaching women's history (women's studies, women's literature, women's lives) AND to teach queer theory and the history of the gay and lesbian movement. I know it makes a difference to many of my students. I have proof of it all the time--students tell me that my work makes a difference to how they see the world.
My question for myself: Can I try, would it do any good to try, to share some of this knowledge with my extremely conservative, rural red state relatives? |
