Analysis #1 of Stonewall Site

    The world wide web has become one of the most efficient and far reaching tools political groups can use in order to pursue their causes. The internet has allowed topics, such as queer politics, to have a venue by which people who are interested can gain more insight on queer issues in the privacy of their own home and at their leisure. Unfortunately, there is an equal proportion of anti-queer sites that find common ground in the Religious Right perspective. The intention of the pro-queer political sites is to combat against the order perspective with a critical social constructive perspective. The reason why the internet has served the gay community so well is because it has equipped them with an equal playing field with the anti-queer organizations and the Religious Right. Everyone has access to the web and a world wide audience, so it is virtually impossible to silence this group in virtual reality.

     The web site I analyzed was a pro-queer political website called Stonewall. Stonewall is the name of a civil rights group based in the UK that is working for lesbian and gay equality. The main page greets the visitor with the organization’s mission statement, still shots of the group in action, and 10 different links to each aspect of the group. These links include sections titled: general, latest news, stonewall factsheets, immigration group, parenting group, mailing list, support us, get in touch, and Equality 2000.  The format and quality of the site proves to me as a visitor that they are a legitimate organization and are serious about their mission. This website is designed and sponsored by port80 the internet consultancy, and the internet connectivity is donated by Direct Communication. Stonewall is made up of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals that are working with sympathetic politicians and grassroots groups.

    The purpose of this group is to work toward legal equality and social justice for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. As Stonewall’s general page states their full-time staff works throughout the year, “…to combat discrimination and prejudice by pressing home the case for change with MP’s, the media, employers and a wide range of social organizations.” It is important to note that since this is a UK organization they do not mention combating the Religious Right. Upon further analysis I found that just because the official Religious Right is not present in the UK, does not mean that their battle is not composed of the same elements. Stonewall is responding to the essentialized order perspective that uses such ideological weapons such as religion, and political weapons such as government to repress the gay community.

    Stonewall’s position on queer sexuality is a critical one. Not critical in the sense of criticizing queer sexuality, but critical because they are criticizing the dominant order. They view sexuality as being social and political just like race, class, and gender. They are trying to bring attention to the hierarchy that exists, in order to increase social awareness in hopes to obliterate the established order. Having a critical perspective means questioning the established order. Stonewall is doing this through ambitious political action to legitimize and validate their place in the world. Stonewall is contacted everyday by people who are no longer prepared to put up with the discrimination. Stonewall states, “… homophobia remains the last respectable prejudice…” and “…we are tired of being treated as second class citizens in this country where young lesbians and gay men are still growing up isolated and vulnerable.”

    It is not clear if Stonewall takes an essentialist viewpoint or a social construction viewpoint. It is inferred through the statement about young lesbians and gay men that an essentialist point of view is taken. To grow up gay probably means that they were born that way, and therefore binding homosexuality to biological conditions. However, Stonewall’s clear critical perspective allows for social construction elements. How can one criticize the dominant order and say that the current hierarchy is not natural but a product of society without having a social construction mindset. In my opinion there is probably a combination of social construction and essentialism in Stonewall’s mindset. Since their aims are political it might be more progressive to identify as social constructionists because if a social hierarchy can be constructed by man, it can also be deconstructed. The essentialized point of view legitimizes the gay communities behavior, but also leaves them open for being deemed as a mutant and biologically sick. Through the text on the website I gather Stonewall shares a critical perspective with essentialized and social construction elements added in.

    Stonewall agenda is a political one. On the general page they state their political causes at the time first to be the repeal of  Section 28, which excludes lesbians and gay men from public life due to lack of adequate social, medical, and educational services for the gay community. Second political aim is the repeal of the offense of gross indecency between men. Third, the extension of the Sex Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation. This would lift the ban on gays and lesbians in the armed forces. Fourth political aim is the right to form a “family of choice.” This is in hopes to recognize same sex relationships in order to gain inheritance for “full citizenship.”
 Stonewall’s plan of attack is pretty clear, yet difficult. They plan to go through the government system to seek acceptance in the law, not just by society, so their orientation will cease to be a basis of discrimination. Since they are working with politicians, grassroots groups, and members of their virtual community, their cause does seem to have some hope and momentum. They have already had success in Parliament through their age of consent campaign which, “…brought the case for lesbian and gay rights into every home in the nation and won support from all sections of society.” Stonewall is using all media to get their name and cause into the public’s eyes and ears.

    I believe this organization carries a lot of significance on the debate of sexuality. As the site states, “It is becoming increasingly rare that one can open a newspaper or listen to the news without noticing that an issue at the core of Stonewall’s work is being debated.” The tactics being used by this organization are not necessarily radical. The cause is radical, but the means by which they are going about accomplishing their goals are not. They are going through the system, and because of this I believe that all the accomplishments they achieve will stick. It might be a longer and harder road to go through a system that is tweeked in the dominants favor, but the payoffs will be much more plentiful. I feel their arguments are respectable and logical. They do not have any outlandish requests that would diminish their credibility. What they are demanding is equality and social justice. If the government’s intention was to build a nation of equality and social justice, they should walk the walk and not be surprised when groups such as Stonewall get fed up and stand up for their rights.