Gay Pastivists

Ever heard of gay pastivists? Do you know what a pastivist is? No? Well that makes sense, because it's what I call them.

Some people in the gay community do not support gay activism, at all. It sounds completely ridiculous, doesn't it? Why would you choose to settle for less in the hope that it gets better some day in the future?

I'm not talking about the gays who don't take part in activism (it's up to you whether you do or not), but the gays who oppose the fight for equal rights and cannot begin to fathom why some gays - like me - are outspoken. However, these people still want equal rights, but just expect them to turn up. This is where my term 'pastivist' comes from.

A pastivist is someone who is gay, but doesn't see the need to fight for equality and (the 'and' is what's important) calls out gay activists for doing so. A pastivist is like a "passive activist"; wanting equal rights in the end, but settling for the thought of never getting them in their lifetime. I also think they're a bit wet and floppy (just like pasta); they want something but they don't want to fight for it, they'll also tell everyone else to do the same thing.

Sure, rights are 'granted' by the government, but you have to let people know you want them first. If women didn't speak up and fight for their right to vote then we would still be in a society where voting is seen as a "man's role", and the inequality between sexes and the extrapolation of gender roles would be far greater than it is today, because we would be stuck in the mindset of the late 1800s still. Activism, equality, and the celebration of diversity and difference are what open people's minds. That's how women got their rights, how African-Americans got their freedom, and how Ireland (my home country) was freed from British rule. Notice the first word in that previous sentence; "activism". These civil rights wouldn't have been granted if there was no civil rights movement behind them. When it comes to civil rights, governments tend to have an "if it's not broken, don't fix it" attitude. That's why the British government is running a public consultation on gay marriage - to see if people actually want it. If no-one is unhappy with the laws in place, then everyone must obviously be happy.

The Stonewall Inn, New York (S)

In fact, I'll say this to the pastivists: If it weren't for a bunch of gay guys in a little bar called Stonewall kicking up stink back in 1969, then your relationship with your partner would still be illegal. If it weren't for the It Gets Better campaign, you could rest assured that even more LGBT teens would be taking their own lives today. If it weren't for all the campaigning that gay rights organizations do and the support they receive, then same-sex marriage would still be a "not-in-our-lifetime" concept, no matter what country you're in, whether it's the Vatican or the Netherlands.

If it weren't for activism, us gays would still have far fewer rights than our heterosexual counterparts. Look at other countries like Uganda where gay rights activism is illegal and no progress has been made. Sure, it's actually stopped by the governments, but those who do want to fight for their rights can't do so for fear of imprisonment or even death. It's the same as no-one fighting at all, which is why the governments have the bans in place. Now, if a large majority of the population were to speak out in support of gay rights (not suggesting they will), the government would have no choice but to enter into discussions. Outside pressure from other countries and organizations such as the UN, as well as common sense on the government's part, would stop them from slaughtering or imprisoning the majority of their citizens.

Strength is in numbers. A rainbow doesn't just appear out of nowhere. It needs a certain amount of rain and the sun to be at the right angle. There are lots of factors that contribute to equality bills being introduced, read, and signed into law. But for any of that to be possible, they need a reason. If they turned around and said "we're going to give equal rights to pasta" people would probably think they've gone mad, because have I got news for you! Pasta can't talk, and therefore there's nothing to say that the law would make a difference to anybody's lives so why go to the bother of doing it?

Sitting about and waiting, settling for less, and telling others not to bother isn't a good attitude to have. It doesn't just 'get better' overnight. We have to fight for equal rights if we want them and 'make it better'. We must also understand and respect the view that some gays don't want to take part in activism, it's not everybody's cup of tea. If you don't want to get married and therefore don't feel the importance of the right to marry is that great, then that's fine and it's up to you, but it's the ones that actively go around telling other gay people to stop fighting for what they believe in or what they want that annoy me. The same goes for people of all religions, whether you're atheist or Christian, Muslim or Jewish; respect other people's points of view. It's fine to disagree, or not have the same opinion - that's healthy for discussion -, but don't tell anyone what they should and shouldn't believe in or be fighting for. That almost makes you as bad as the anti-gay organizations that are saying the same thing.