All week long, I’ve been continually astonished at how many people I know who have publicly expressed their support for same-sex marriage. I’ve also been hearing grumbles on Facebook and Twitter about how all these profile pictures are basically just pointless “slacktivism” and don’t really affect any actual change. To address that claim, I’d like to consider how social change usually happens.
In the beginning, the first generation of activists sets out to change minds on a major issue. The abolitionist movement, the suffragist movement, the civil rights and gay rights movements are all examples where a few activists and authors pounded ground and wrote essays for decades before finally getting the mainstream of the population to seriously reconsider the received wisdom and social order.
Eventually, we reach a sort of social tipping point as droves of ordinary people start having conversations among themselves and come to realize that the old order has precious little argumentation to stand upon other than appeal to tradition and our collective fear of departing therefrom. Would-be elected officials start sensing the change in the air, and the only thing holding the old ways in place is a sort of social inertia and fear of speaking out. It is around this point that the reactionary elements among the clergy will inevitably step up with appeals to the inspired word of Jehovah or Allah or whomever, exhorting us to turn our backs on the process of moral reasoning and trust instead in alleged revelations to ancient peoples and books which have long codified whatever particular prejudice they seek to preserve today.
This is we find ourselves right now with respect to same-sex marriage. The social tide is turning and the conservative stalwarts from all the Abrahamic faiths have once again taken their stand athwart the flow of history shouting for it to stop, or even demanding that it flow backwards in deference to their traditions and holy books. For them to win, they must persuade us to believe that gays and lesbians are inherently morally inferior, or at least persuade us not to speak out.
What is the best way for faith-based moralisers to prevent people from speaking out, short of actually threatening harm? Make them feel like they are completely alone in holding an opposing view. What then is the point of putting up these silly little avatars? To let people know they aren’t alone. To give them the confidence to speak out and stand up for their gay and lesbian friends and family, perhaps for the first time. To provoke open argumentation and ratiocination instead of widespread quiescence was mistaken for consensus.
Putting up an avatar isn’t doing much, it’s not nearly doing enough, but every march to victory begins with a first step. Rather than talking people down for doing slacktivism, why not instead ask them what their next step is going to be?
