Tacos, with a side of bigotry

15 12 2008

To hear her tell it, Margie Christoffersen is a hapless victim with a shattered life. “I’ve almost had a nervous breakdown,” she tells the LA Times in a column published this Sunday. “It’s been the worst thing that’s ever happened to me.”

Through sobs, she tells the reporter how hard her life has been since she was outed online for contributing $100 in support of Proposition 8, the ballot measure to restrict marriage in California to heterosexual couples only. Christoffersen is the manager and public face of El Coyote, an LA landmark famous for its throngs of customers. Following the Prop 8, revelation, though, many of those customers apparently decided to go elsewhere. Business is off 30 percent and large sections of the restaurant sit empty.

Now Christofferson is singing a slightly different tune. “I love [gay people] like anyone else,” she tells the Times. But as the proverb goes, she’s already put her money where her mouth was, and that’s on the side of intolerance.

Nobody, gay or straight, was trying to deny Christoffersen anything–not her business, not her (heterosexual!)  marriage– but that didn’t stop her from not just voting for, but actually coughing up $100 to support an intitiative to rescind the rights of thousands of gay Californians. She may never come around on the gay marriage issue, but, with the restaurant once owned by her mother at the  brink of collapse, at least now she knows what it feels like to have the most important thing in your life taken away.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

12 responses

15 12 2008
LossAngeles

I’d find it hard to believe if El Coyote went out of business. I had lunch there with my dad last Friday and the place had plenty of customers. That place has always surprised me. The food is OK as far as mexican goes and does it’s best business during happy hour selling drinks that taste more like gasoline lol.

What isn’t talked about much is how you’d better be careful of what you say , 50’s style hang and lynch paranoia is alive and well in the US.

15 12 2008
King of Pants

Blog post, with a side of self-righteousness.

TRUCK NUTZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

15 12 2008
noh8

Lynch mob? Over the weekend a straight man died of injuries sustained after a group of gay bashers attacked him. He was walking home with his BROTHER, and they mistook them for a gay couple. If anyone has to deal with a lynch mob, it’s us — the gay community. And it’s not a figurative lynch mob either. It’s the literal kind.

And don’t even start with b.s. about McCarthyism and blacklisting. Openly gay actors are relegated to permanent second tier status in Hollywood. Any time a straight actor plays gay he has to talk about his girlfriend or wife in interviews so people won’t make the mistake of thinking he’s really gay, because being openly gay can still damage your career.

15 12 2008
the problemwitcharing

These people are voting with their pocket books or threatening to quit their jobs and positions in protest until those donors are ousted.

This isn’t McCarthyism. If you don’t know who your constituencies and customers are, its only right you find out and make adjustments.

15 12 2008
megger1018

When I was a kid, maybe 2nd grade, we were taught a lesson on prejudice. We were separated into groups based on our eye color. Brown-eyed kids got to go to recess, the rest didn’t. Blue-eyed kids had to clean the classroom, while the green-eyed kids were only allowed to play in one part of the classroom. This lesson went on for a week, and everyday a different group got the better treatment. I never, in my entire life, forgot this lesson. I’m glad that Margie Christoffersen is finally being taught this lesson. It’s too bad she didn’t learn it sooner, but as they say better late than never.

15 12 2008
Polly

For anyone interested in a counterpoint to/critique of the LA Times column noted above, Alex Blaze writes about it at Bilerico.

“now she knows what it feels like to have the most important thing in your life taken away.”

Not my favorite way to get people to become thoughtful or compassionate. But it certainly is a dose of the same medicine.

Ditto the history/civics lessons above. The name of the man who died: Jose O. Sucuzhanay. Google it and you’ll find the first several pages are about him and his death. He is to anti-gay violence what Ryan White was to AIDS phobia. Insofar as once an “innocent” heterosexual is vicitimized with the same thing that has victimized homosexuals for hundreds of years, people sit up and take notice. Neither Ryan nor Jose deserved to have been subjected to the kinds of deaths they had. Likewise no one deserves to be the victim of a hate crime of any stripe. Fortunately, Ms. Christoffersen has not been similarly victimized so far.

Economic boycotts and/or selective support of ethical businesses are things most well-informed consumers do all the time, as a matter of course. Not so much drama in that.

The drama here is that queer people, as a group, are getting together and acting in public in various often effective ways. That is drama.

16 12 2008
warnick68

Homosexuals in America have the very same rights as everyone else. What is being sought is additional rights.

The mob mentality has taken over at least a portion of homosexuals, how long until there are homosexual terrorists? I’m not being extreme in asking this question, if the ‘radical’ homosexual keeps moving in the direction they are then some form of terrorism is a logical step that would have to be taken sooner or later.

You could make a case that this step has already been taken since they have invaded churches during services and burned religious texts on the steps of a LDS (Mormon) church building (and worse), sooner or later it is more than safe to assume that if not their egocentric demands are not allowed, then their actions will amp up.

16 12 2008
Jon-Paul

Hey!

Just love what I seen of your blog! I love the design and lay-out; it’s so very bright. You have every reason to be quite proud of your work. I do not intent on being unpleasant; however, I must disagree with the assessment made in your article, and as blogger’s we do have to cheer for each other and even show our support and/or disagreement for our various positions.

I fundamentally disagree with your premise based on the reality of language and how various traditions are identified within any given society or culture. Of the first part “marriage” in California and for most of the world, specifically The American Heritage Dictionary as well as the Oxford English Dictionary (Unabridged) define marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman.

Not so bad; however, since centuries of language conventions have used the Latin form of matrimonium where other words such as mater for ‘mother’ and matrilineal for tracing ones ancestors through the female, and also matron, for the confirmed and dignified woman, and maternity for being pregnant or with child.

I hope you would be able to respect this notion: all marriage is, is the union of a man and a woman; therefore, if folks want to have same-sex unions, why not stick to those conventions such as ‘civil-unions, unity-liaisons, or get creative with an identifier for same-sex unions? (Please see The Thinker on WordPress.)

Of the second part I find cause for alarm when anyone gets ‘outed’ on the Internet for a donation they’ve made. I do respect the notion that these are public records; however, to use someone’s donation for what they believe in or how they spend their money is to me, still a privacy issue. Actually this was the most costly initiative in history with approximately 80 to 100 million dollars spent by both sides.

And finally as for me I would submit that any group or organization that wants to change a constitution would themselves, be rank and file members of not violating the U.S. Constitution. Mobbing a person’s place of business (public exposure) is for me, not what the Founders had in mind when they penned the right to “peacefully assemble.”

Nice brain massage…I enjoy thought and especially critical thinking. Love what you’re doing here!

16 12 2008
Larry

Why does everyone forget that the official Yes-on-8 campgaign were the first to threaten outing and boycotting donors? They sent this “blackmail” letter to 30 some odd companies shortly before the election. One of the signers is Andrew Pugno who will be at the court hearings to decide the fate of this twisted propostion.
At this link you can see a copy of the actual letter that was sent by Yes-on-8. This was from the OFFICIAL campaign signed by four members of the executive campaign committee. Hypocrites!

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/10/23/4145

17 12 2008
mademark

warnick68 – no, we do not have the same rights. Unlike religion (a true lifestyle), gay people to not enjoy protected status. There are plenty of places where we can be fired, denied housing, and in the case of marriage, be kept from an entire juicy bundle of rights because we can’t marry.

As for Margie, I guess I’m just a sucker for a woman in tears. I feel kind of bad for her. Not because she’s in the right, but because she can’t hold two opposing thoughts in her head, like many people: one, she can be a good Mormon and do whatever she wants with her life, and two, gay couples getting married have nothing to do with her and are none of her business. Likewise I can be distressed and angry at all the props and amendments hurled at us, and still feel kindly toward someone like Margie. She’s a sheep. The villains are the wolves, the LDS leadership, the Catholic heirarchy, who brainwash all the sheep and send them out to do their bidding, in this case fund and work for the passage of Prop 8. But taking it out too much on someone like Margie is like shouting at a dimwitted child, or trying to convince a brick wall that it’s in your way. Just not worth it. Better to infiltrate the Mormon leadership (homosexuals are good at infiltrating) and see what evil they’re up to next (New York? Oh, never mind, we’ve got the lovely ‘Reverand’ Diaz.)

19 12 2008
dumdum

I, for one, hope this eventually leads to marriage of all kinds being removed from any legal recognition. Why should I be penalized on my taxes/company benefits, or anywhere else, just because I am too ugly or smelly to find a wife?

No gay marriage, and no straight marriage either. Marriage is a religious issue, and all it should require is a church to sanctify it. A church of one will do, if that’s all you have.

If someone is dissatisfied with this proposal, I would like to hear why.

27 12 2008
tantraking

Boycott Utah and Marritot, and anyone else who supported this. Those in Utah who say that the mormons are a small percentage, should help to push them out of the state. If you are going to host such evil religious fanatics you have to deal with the consequences. Mormons are the height of hypocrites and homophobics. They are no different than the Catholics during the inquisition. Which incendently with the popes recent message shows that these people (Catholics and Mormons) are hate mongers. If they are allowed any amount of political control they would commit all types of atrocities in the name of “God”. Apart of the old addage “when you mix religion and politics you get fanatics”, look at the militant Muslims, Iran, etc. Their treatment of women, gays, etc. We do not want to go back to the dark ages. These religious fanatics need to be taught a lesson NOW. Do not mess with our private lives. If you want to beat each other with your mad rituals fine, but leave us decent clear headed folk out of it. Boycott Utah now, let the rest know that if you support these people you will be isolated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: