Notice I said “critique,” rather than attack.

Rich at FourFour has a really unique understanding of social media, viral videos, and they way they intersect with pop culture, having contributed quite a bit in all three areas over the years, and he’s also a gay guy, so he sort of knows what he’s talking about.  He starts with a critique of Ke$ha’s ridiculous “contribution” to the It Gets Better project, which comes in the form of her ridiculous single “We R Who We R,” which she claims was written after the gay teen suicides of September.  [Who knows?]

Ke$ha has no business talking about queer people. She doesn’t seem to know the difference between drag queens and transgender people (whom she refers to as “trannies“). In her It Gets Better video, she assures those subjugated because of their sexuality and/or gender identity, “However you are choosing to live is beautiful” [emphasis mine]. In the interest of fairness, I’m willing to concede that perhaps she has no other choice than to be ignorant (some brains just don’t function as well as others). However, no matter where it’s coming from, the fact is that she is combating ignorance with ignorance. She makes me long for the days when, “I am not a role model,” was sufficient. I’ll take apathy over exploiting the cause du jour for the sake of marketing any day. That is some cancerous shit right there.

I tend to agree.  Of course, if there’s some gay kid out there who worships Ke$ha, they’re likely to be hearing the sentiment, rather than parsing the words.  As video after video has appeared, with celebrities from all corners telling gay kids that It Gets Better, I’ve noticed that they can pretty easily be divided into vapid and non-vapid categories, and hard as it may be to imagine, Ke$ha’s video is pretty vapid.

Rich then tackles the user-friendly, “everybody can be an activist” set-up of the It Gets Better project, which produces results that range from one extreme to the other:

On one extreme are those who come eerily close to fetishizing their bullied pasts (I can’t imagine such catharsis helping anyone more than themselves) and on the other are people whose privileged positions have themselves so far up their own asses that of course they believe it gets better.

I would point out, though, that there are also many, many heartfelt messages in the middle, in which people simply relate their experiences and then describe how their own lives have gotten better.  In that vein, I think that Fort Worth City Councilman Joel Burns’ speech, itself having gone beyond viral at this point, was one of the most powerful messages I’ve seen on the subject.  The juxtaposition of this attractive, successful guy and his tears as he remembered what he had been through, next to who he is today, was jarring, and I would imagine that they would be encouraging to a hurting gay kid.  I agree with Rich, though, that I have my doubts that one video could “save” a kid.  Pulling a kid back from the brink of suicide would likely result from a combination of factors, but I don’t see how a video like Burns’ could hurt in anyway.  Hell, it helped me, and I’m neither a teenager nor suicidal.

Rich continues:

This is not to condemn the idea of It Gets Better. Dan Savage seems to understand the medium of YouTube well and as a result has devised a campaign for maximum involvement. However, understanding the other side of the medium at least a little, I doubt that a YouTube video is going to change anyone’s mind or life (experience has me wary of the Internet’s tendency to foster overstatement, and so I find fawning YouTube comments that proclaim, “You saved me!” to be suspect). I think that when you’re young, the last thing you want to do is listen to old people telling you about yourself (or worse: tell you about themselves!), no matter how cool of a rap session they’re attempting. And given the medium’s insatiable hunger for newness, I worry about what happens when the meme is dead. Does it go the way of, “Is that your final answer?” Does Keyboard Cat play it off? On a larger scale, are gay people the new crack babies?

That said, anything is worth a shot and maybe if individual videos amount to little more than the weight of a blog post (like, say, this one!), perhaps collectively there is something of value there. The need to treat gay people as people is an increasing part of our global discourse and maybe the more we talk, the more others will speak up in situations where it actually matters. Maybe there is something to be said for the subliminal effects of all this chatter. Maybe all these personal accounts basically converge into a simple chant, just like at a rally. I don’t think that talking about yourself on YouTube is an act of bravery, but I’m not counting out the possibility of it inspiring one.

I think that’s it.  It’s not about the individual videos themselves — it’s that there are so damned many of them, from everyone from regular middle class gay people to students to older folks to the biggest celebrities in the world, all lending a word of encouragement, in their own ways, to gay kids.  That’s the part that’s got to be powerful, because the teenage years are a self-centered time [you know it's true], and there are now scads of videos specifically directed at our gay kids.  They don’t have to parse the message; they don’t have to look for the lessons — they’re right there, video after video after video, at the click of a mouse.

My hope is that the video campaign is inspiring people to go further in helping these kids, beyond setting up a webcam.  Obviously, most won’t, as is the nature of all things viral, internetty and social justice-y.  But if it’s inspiring a few to get their hands dirty and give back, to create support systems for some of these kids, then that’s a Good Thing.

On the Exodus blog, Exodus spokesman Randy Thomas earlier this week defended “Pastor” David Manning, after YouTube removed Manning’s video for inciting antigay violence, encouraging blind hatred of LGBT customers of YouTube, and violating YouTube’s terms of service.

In addition to promoting hate-based violence against LGBT people, Manning encouraged a government shutdown of all non-fundamentalist media (including, presumably, YouTube).

Thomas falsely claims that U.S. constitutional protection of free speech applies to private properties such as YouTube.

Manning, Thomas, and ex-gay activist McKrae Game also falsely blame the federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act for the removal, ignoring YouTube’s terms of service. That federal law only applies to sentencing following conviction for felony acts of violence.

Game added ominously, “The statement that Hate Crimes legislation was passed supposedly to protect not just homosexuals but people of faith is extremely questionable.” That, too, is a lie: The legislation was an add-on to existing law that already offers full protection to persons of faith who are subjected to felony violence. The add-on legislation reiterated that no part of the law may be used to inhibit speech.

Lies, incitement to violence, and censorship: Exodus becomes ever-more anti-Christian, indecent, apostate, and selfish in the methods with which it “equips” its Exodus Church Network to violate LGBT Americans’ lives and undermine public morality.

Meanwhile, for better or worse, it’s a free country — and YouTube can host or remove whatever it pleases.

When a self-proclaimed ex-gay 12-year-old boy named Scott began to post YouTube videos, in which the boy committed acts of violence against himself and threatened to commit violence against others, the ultra-conservative publication WorldNetDaily applauded the boy for conducting his emotional breakdown in a manner that WND considers politically correct:

Scott’s portrayals of self-abuse and irrational confusion drew a legion of YouTube visitors who posted profane remarks and threats of their own in the boy’s YouTube comment section, serving as evidence (in WND’s warped opinion) that civility, tolerance, and non-violent conflict resolution — not to mention parental supervision of a 12-year-old — are evil.

As some observers, myself included, became aware of the problem in the past week or so, we opted not to draw additional attention to Scott and his obvious emotional disturbance because of the additional comment abuse that such attention might bring. Instead, we urged readers of various other blogs that did cover the story to flag the boy’s videos for official intervention and to call upon YouTube to get help for Scott — and for his parents, who were either negligent or abusive in allowing the boy’s crisis to develop.

According to Edge Boston today, help may have finally arrived.

EDGE received an email from an individual claiming to be Sgt. Chris Meehan of Texas’ Collin County, which includes suburban Dallas.

The correspondent claiming to be Sgt. Meehan, who is attached to an Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, told EDGE, “I have been working on several cybertips reports that have been received regarding Christianu2uber.

“Several news publications were referenced on this, including your recent article,” the individual who self-identified as Sgt. Meehan added.

“I wanted to update you that we have located this 12 year old, and spoke to him and his parents about this situation,” the correspondent wrote.

“I know many readers expressed concern for his well-being and safety. He has decided to delete his youtube [sic] site and videos, and we will provide him counseling and assistance to get through this situation.”

While it saddens me that sites such as YouTube are full of vile and sadistic commenters, I am glad that authorities were apparently able to track down the boy and that YouTube finally suspended the boy’s account.

I wish such action had occurred in one day instead of ten, but better late than never.

Be warned: Those new National Organization for Marriage anti-GLBT actor auditions videos Wayne reported about this week are gone. NOM noticed that its evil ruse had been exposed and demanded that YouTube take them down. Even a clip of a recent MSNBC Rachel Maddow clip that included the audition tapes is gone. NOM’s reason: copyright infringement.

YouTube has to develop a bigger pair. The fact that a national organization is working to deny equality under law to millions of certain citizens makes the story newsworthy. Showing at least excerpts is fair use — under law.

Why are people so afraid of the anti-equality crowd? It’s so obvious that the organized fundies are the ones to fear. NOM was willing to lie, manipulate, and terrify the ignorant segment of the public, low-info types who can be compelled en masse to do what is right for their brand of Christianity, but wrong for anyone who really believes in basic American ideals. The tactic is cynical, selfish, immoral, and destructive. And it works: Remember Proposition 8?

At HuffPo, Lambda Legal’s Evan Wolfson provides a description opf the ads and refutes their vicious claims, so that at least some of those unable to view the outrage can see clearly the threat with which we are dealing. It’s a long excerpt, but it is an important one:

Consider what the actors in the NOM ad pretend to be:

A doctor who wants to discriminate against her patients, despite civil rights laws and medical ethics that the California Supreme Court upheld – in a case having nothing to do with marriage.

An officer of a New Jersey group that for years voluntarily operated a beachside pavilion with special tax-breaks that required it be open to the public – but then tried to turn down a lesbian couple. The case did not turn on marriage, since New Jersey doesn’t yet allow gay couples to marry, but, rather, basic civil rights laws about open access to public accommodations.

A Massachusetts parent who sought to dictate public school curriculum about the diverse families children will need to be aware of to thrive in a diverse world, and then wanted to remove her child from classes in a way that would have disrupted class and imposed unreasonable burdens on the school and other kids.

The law in California, as elsewhere, is that doctors can’t discriminatorily refuse to treat patients ‚Äî Christian, Muslim, or Jewish, gay or non-gay; that has nothing to do with marriage, and yet NOM incites fear. The law in New Jersey, as elsewhere, says that organizations running public accommodations such as restaurants or rental halls cannot discriminatorily exclude people ‚Äî African American, Latino, or Asian, gay or non-gay; that has nothing to do with marriage, and yet NOM says that the discriminators are somehow the victims. The law in Massachusetts, as elsewhere, of course allows parents to teach their kids whatever they want, and even to send them to private schools or do home-schooling. The law also rightly sets rules for determining public school curriculum without having every parent, or special interest with an agenda, coming in and imposing their views on everyone else’s kids ‚Äî yours or mine, gay or non-gay.

I encourage you to read Wolfson’s entire piece — he has worked on the front lines of this fight and knows the terrain. And he’s a lawyer.

National Organization for Marriage may believe that its copyright trumps our right to know the truth, but the group is wrong. Here is an opportunity to dtake action and do some good: Anyone with a thirst for a truly equal US will share descriptions of the ad — along with the truth about marriage equality and the fact that is is no threat to anyone, save those who need legal supremacy — with everyone they know. It is particularly urgent that we talk with those who question the need for civil-marriage equality. If we can’t trust YouTube to stand up to transmit the truth, we must do it.

Here is a debate between NOM’s Maggie Gallagher and Human Rights Campaign Joe Solmonese on CNN’s “Hardball,” where the HRC chief handily obliterates his opponent’s position using truth and fact.

HRC\’s Joe Solmonese on Hardball 04/08/09