Don’t boycott the plebiscite. The No campaigners won’t be

BOYCOTTING the plebiscite would be cutting our gay noses off to spite our gay faces, writes Gary Nunn. You know who won’t be boycotting? The No campaign.

Marriage equality advocate Russell Nankervis (right) and a child run through the 'Sea of Hearts' event supporting Marriage Equality outside Parliament House in Canberra this week. (Pic: Lukas Coch/AAP) Opposition leader encourages 'yes' vote

There’s an internet meme that I re-read to cheer myself up on weeks like this:

“If they say ‘hell hath no fury like a woman scorned’, they’ve clearly never met a homosexual slightly inconvenienced.”

Its irony is loaded to the brim this week. ‘Homosexuals’ like myself aren’t slightly inconvenienced. We’re deprived of that most basic human right: marriage.

Worse, the nation is being sent an optional, non-binding, expensively taxpayer-funded opinion poll which reads something like this: Do the filthy gays deserve to be treated like human beings? a) No. b) Probably not. c) Definitely not. d) They make me want to throw up my quinoa then force-feed it back to them e) Suppose so.

In short: the whole thing is rigged, set up to fail by opponents of equality.

Worse still, it’s being run by the ABS, controlled by a government who think ‘tech innovation’ means hiring an intern to do all the Twittering. Piss up and brewery spring to mind, after the Census fail, Centrelink loan-shark bots and the glacial NBN.

And how those equality opponents must be panto-cackling right now, as some pro-marriage equality supporters play right into their little plot by stating they’ll boycott the postal ballot, in a bid to undermine it. Some are taking to social media and influencing others to boycott, as the no campaigners look on in utter glee, loving it when a twisted plan comes together.

Michael Kirby’s attack on the plebiscite is understandable, but may have kicked off a dangerous idea. (Pic: Richard Gosling)

The thing is, up until recently, many gays were getting pretty frustrated about the marriage equality debate. Frustration even turned to boredom. Some of my gay friends had started tuning out from stories about marriage equality: either to preserve their sanity at being treated like an endless political football, preserving their dignity by protecting themselves from the hurt at the chip chip chip away at the self-esteem such debates provoke, or actually bludgeoned with boredom by the whole debacle.

Like all institutions, marriage is failing. More marriages end in divorce than those that don’t. It feels like the gays are being used in the same way they are at a daggy disco: wheeled in at the eleventh hour on rollerskates, in giant heels and with eye-catching hairstyles to rejuvenate something that’s flagging. When the gays arrive, suddenly it’s interesting again.

The truth is more dull than that. Committed lesbian and gay relationships do the exact same pedestrian, loving things that straight ones do: shopping, ironing, cooking. In the words of my friend Waynos: a gay relationship is like a straight one: two people asking each other what they want for dinner until one of them dies.

But this week, that frustration and boredom has turned to anger. Those same friends have been writing long Facebook posts about how offensive it is that millions of Australians will be asked to vote in a postal poll about the legitimacy of their relationships. Some have been together so long, I forget which one is which. But I never forget how valid their consensual love for each other is. That’d be farcical.

The problem of making snap decisions when you’re angry is this: they’re rarely wise and never considered.

Talks of a boycott gathered steam after Michael Kirby, a former High Court Judge and the original Gay Influencer called the postal ballot “irregular, unscientific — I’ll take no part in it.”

Penny Wong is now mad as hell, and she’s not going to take it any more. (Pic: Mick Tsikas/AAP)

He has since reversed his position and now says he’ll vote. But I’m afraid he has set in motion a dangerous idea.

You can sure as hell bet the no camp won’t be boycotting the plebiscite — and will be hoping the yes camp does. In the terms of ‘gay marriage’, a self-indulgent boycott would be cutting off our gay noses to spite our gay faces.

Yes, Shorten initially supported the plebiscite. And yes, as anti-equality campaigners are delightfully but desperately digging up, there’s a seven-year-old quote from Penny Wong describing marriage as “an institution that’s between a man and a woman.”

But these are both forgivable ills: Wong tirelessly worked within her party to change it, after Gillard’s woeful leadership on marriage equality, which has done untold damage. Shorten listened to the rainbow families who warned of the harm a state-funded hate campaign would do to them and their children, and changed his position. Isn’t this what we’re constantly asking of our politicians? To listen, respond and act according to those they represent. Whatever your view on Labor, on this issue the party and its MPs have unified and really found their clear voice under Shorten.

Some argue that, by opposing the plebiscite, pro-equality campaigners have delayed marriage equality. But the ultimate consideration isn’t for those who are already in a confident enough place to publicly declare their love to one of the same-sex in a wedding ceremony they’ve long dreamt about.

It’s for those vulnerable young LGBTQI people much earlier in the journey, whose already brittle self-worth would plummet under a government-approved hate campaign to further demean, belittle and bully them. They deserve to participate in the Disney happily ever after dream, but a delay is a preferable evil to a suicide-encouraging plebiscite.

Those who devised this cunning plot, who entrapped well-meaning pro-equality supporters into calling for a plebiscite boycott, need to look in the mirror. They’re the direct descendants of those who spat at the first nine black students walking into Little Rock Central High School in 1957; who gave women fighting for the vote the belittling nickname ‘Suffragettes’ (which they successfully reclaimed) and who plucked young Aboriginal children from their loving families. History will judge them.

As Penny Wong said in her passionate parliamentary speech, “this ain’t a respectful debate already.” The gay gloves are off. Those inconvenienced homosexuals should channel that anger as they’ve always done: not by boycotting, but engaging, persuading, voting and playing the insulting game we’ve been once again invited to play: asking permission to be treated equally.

But believe me when I tell you, we’re taking the sarcastic tone of the drag queen tradition that says: we’ll never, ever forget you made us do this.

@garynunn1