Protestors block traffic, highlight violence against transgender people
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-0321-transgender-rally-20150321-story.html
Article by: Hailey Branson
LA Times
March 20, 2015
Dozens of protesters shut down a busy intersection outside the Beverly Center during the evening rush hour Friday to call for an end to violence against transgender people.
As horns blared and police helicopters circled, protesters marched into the center of the intersection at 3rd Street and La Cienega Boulevard, shouting, "Trans lives matter!"
=============================
I have to wonder that if more areas in the country did things like this if we would start to see a major difference, and more discussion in the media?
I hate this form of protest, I don't care what the cause is. My two cents worth.
Hugs, Devlyn
Usually I do too, but after working in the media, it is things like this that get the public's attention. Think back to the Occupy Wall Street protests. Hated it, but can be somewhat effective to get out the message. There IMO needs to be another Stonewall, but this time focusing on Trans rights to wake up the public, and to make them stop ignoring us.
While I do think that this issue needs some attention I think that this is the wrong way of going about it. All that it's going to accomplish is pissing people off. Here in Boston, protesters blocked the highway for Black Lives Matter and it didnt accomplish a damn thing.
Yeah, I'm in Weymouth. I remember that day very well.
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 21, 2015, 11:20:42 AM
Yeah, I'm in Weymouth. I remember that day very well.
I'm in Medford, so luckily I didn't have to deal with it. But, when I got in the office, no one was there. I thought there was a holiday that no one told me about and I almost went home until I found out about the protesters.
As others has said this type of protest only serves to piss people off and it actually hurts the movement. Blacks did this too around the Ferguson trial but in the end it accomplished nothing and pissed a lot of people off at the same time.
I'm okay with pissing people off. Have at it, protesters.
Bamby Salcedo, you're not doing us any favors by this hamfisted cry for attention.
Traffic sucks bad enough in LA, and you just might have made people who were on the fence move over to the haters side. We need positive attention. Being seen as the cause of another traffic problem isn't going to accomplish that.
Next time I see her, I'm going to tell her she's blowing it.
It wouldn't have become national news had they not blocked traffic. Please name any civil rights protest that accomplished anything without ruffling some feathers.
You catch more flies with sugar than vinegar. :)
Hugs, Devlyn
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 21, 2015, 08:14:41 PM
You catch more flies with sugar than vinegar. :)
I think history would disagree with you.
My experience is that polite, cooperative people willing to work with others get better results than those who are angry, self centered, and unwilling to compromise on solutions. :) History disagrees with that?
Hugs, Devlyn
The way you state it makes it seem like there are only two diametrically opposed manners in which you can present your cause. One can be loud and disobedient while being concerned for the greater good and being willing to compromise. But in the context of securing civil rights, yes, I believe history would disagree that being polite and cooperative gets results.
As long as it is non-violent, I see no issue with it. Several protests have worked out very well using similar methods to this. You may piss people off, but that's what you need to do to get people to notice sometimes. Most people tend to ignore things that don't immediately effect their lives. Well, now it is in their way.
Quote from: skin on March 21, 2015, 08:12:12 PM
It wouldn't have become national news had they not blocked traffic. Please name any civil rights protest that accomplished anything without ruffling some feathers.
"This is a revolution, dammit! We're going to have to offend somebody!" - John Adams 1776 (1972)
Quote from: Eevee on March 21, 2015, 08:58:25 PM
As long as it is non-violent, I see no issue with it.
But, it is violent. There are ways to be violent that don't involve throwing fists and shooting guns. They are using physical FORCE (blocking major roads) to try to get what they want. Furthermore, they are knowingly taking actions that could endanger the lives of others. There could be police or medical personnel stuck in that traffic, and they might be missing out on doing something important because they can't get to where they need to be.
This is a step back for transgender rights. Actively trying to ruin the lives of others is not a method to "raise awareness" for anything. People don't care about you transgender issues, they care about being able to get to work and provide for their families. Preventing them from going about their daily business is not a method to get them to care about your issues, it's just a method to get them mad at you for creating more issues for them.
So, yes, I see a big problem with this form of protest. Anyone found to be intentionally blocking roads should be arrested and probably tried for some sort of crime.
I agree with everything VeryGnawty said.
Here is the problem as I see it. There are hundreds of very worthy issues about which awareness needs to be raised. There are even more whose followers think they are worthy, but they probably aren't.
If every one of them thought it was worthwhile messing up people's lives to get their message out, no one would pay much attention to any of them. No one would have much energy to do anything else but survive, and all the messages in the world would do no good.
Wow, they blocked La Cienega Boulevard in front of the Beverly center? That's a very high traffic area that I hate to drive thru even when there is no protest. That's just down the street from West Hollywood/Santa Monica blvd where the L.A. pride parade happens each year for those who don't know. It's also a very tony area on the borderline of Beverly Hills.
I have a mixed opinion about the effectiveness of what they did. I totally agree that raising awareness of Trans deaths is very important but i'm not quite sure that pissing off people is the most effective way to deliver the message. Still, maybe disrupting people's lives might be a way to raise awareness.
I am not a regular on this site, but wasn't the whole message behind the protest "Please stop killing us and stop doing violence to TG!" Other than blocking traffic, didn't the protesters use signs and their voices (and not violence)? I understand the concerns about inconveniencing people, but aren't we here to support each other in the TG cause. Personally, I wish I had been less concerned in my life about offending people and getting along and more concerned about being who I am. I am not african american and I don't mean to offend anyone who struggles with racism, but there were some people in the 60's who talked the same way about racism. Dr. King incorporated Ghandi's idea of peaceful protest into the civil rights movement in the 50's and 60's. We celebrate King's birthday every year because he gave one of the greatest speeches of the 20th century which asked people to look to the content of a person's character rather than the color of their skin. Are we any different? Should anyone really care if I wear eye make up because I want to and it is the way I see myself as a beautiful person or should people look to see if I am good person inside (with a a bad sense of fashion)? I know sometimes it is hard to look past what we wear, but people also look at how we act. If we are respectful of others and kind, isn't that what matters?
Quote from: VeryGnawty on March 23, 2015, 05:33:17 AM
But, it is violent.
If you say so. I see it as a peaceful, if obstructive, protest, though. Unless someone personally physically injures someone else, then it is not a violent protest by the very definition of the word.
Also, no crime is being committed. I still see no issue here.
Quote from: Eevee on March 23, 2015, 07:19:49 PM
If you say so. I see it as a peaceful, if obstructive, protest, though. Unless someone personally physically injures someone else, then it is not a violent protest by the very definition of the word.
Also, no crime is being committed. I still see no issue here.
Really? Google "willfully obstructing traffic" it's a crime in nearly every state. Open mouth, insert foot.
Hugs, Devlyn
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 23, 2015, 07:35:51 PM
Really? Google "willfully obstructing traffic" it's a crime in nearly every state. Open mouth, insert foot.
Hugs, Devlyn
Even if it is breaking a minor law, I repeat: I still see no problems here. Non-violent protests still have to go there sometimes. I'll be inserting exactly zero feet into my mouth today, but thank you.
Quote from: Eevee on March 23, 2015, 07:44:46 PM
Even if it is breaking a minor law, I repeat: I still see no problems here. Non-violent protests still have to go there sometimes. I'll be inserting exactly zero feet into my mouth today, but thank you.
May I ask this?
What if the black lives matters folks blocked traffic on Monday. Then Anti-rape folks did it on Tuesday. The occupy folks did it on Wednesday. The breast cancer people did it on Thursday. The advocates for the homeless, for abused children, and for world hunger, did it on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. And the next week, seven more worthy causes did it again.
Would you have a problem then?
Quote from: suzifrommd on March 23, 2015, 07:54:38 PM
May I ask this?
What if the black lives matters folks blocked traffic on Monday. Then Anti-rape folks did it on Tuesday. The occupy folks did it on Wednesday. The breast cancer people did it on Thursday. The advocates for the homeless, for abused children, and for world hunger, did it on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. And the next week, seven more worthy causes did it again.
Would you have a problem then?
I think a lot more might get done.
Quote from: Eevee on March 23, 2015, 07:44:46 PM
Even if it is breaking a minor law, I repeat: I still see no problems here. Non-violent protests still have to go there sometimes. I'll be inserting exactly zero feet into my mouth today, but thank you.
Those willing to sit in a cell for their principles can say that.
We are allowed in this country to peaceably demonstrate. No one can decide that their cause is important enough to sidestep law and order without consequence.
Hugs, Devlyn
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 23, 2015, 07:56:03 PM
Those willing to sit in a cell for their principles can say that.
We are allowed in this country to peaceably demonstrate. No one can decide that their cause is important enough to sidestep law and order without consequence.
Hugs, Devlyn
It has been done before for worthy causes, and only a few of us believe those protests weren't worth it. When people don't notice or care, then make them notice and care. Sometimes sitting in a cell is worth it if change happens.
Quote from: Eevee on March 23, 2015, 07:58:16 PM
It has been done before for worthy causes, and only a few of us believe those protests weren't worth it. When people don't notice or care, then make them notice and care. Sometimes sitting in a cell is worth it if change happens.
No, I'm sorry. Pray The Gay Away supporters would gladly sit in cells to have their way. Is that an acceptable solution? Again, you can't just decide you don't want to obey the law to change other laws.
Hugs, Devlyn
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 23, 2015, 08:08:03 PM
No, I'm sorry. Pray The Gay Away supporters would gladly sit in cells to have their way. Is that an acceptable solution? Again, you can't just decide you don't want to obey the law to change other laws.
Hugs, Devlyn
You may not be willing to sit in a jail cell, but others are. It's perfectly acceptable to them. And yes, anyone can decide to break the law. There are always consequences, but in some cases the potential benefits are worth the risk.
I'm done here.
Hugs, Devlyn
Quote5. The posting of messages on the chat or forums which are of a threatening tone; intended solely to communicate sarcasm, contempt, or derision; are intended to belittle or ridicule a person or group; to disgust the viewer; contain obscene or pornographic materials; which are intended to titillate; or which depicts/promotes illegal acts; will not be permitted
.
Ok people please read the quoted tos bit above. Especially the bits in red. We are getting really close to the line here.
Lets not cross it.
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 23, 2015, 08:08:03 PM
Again, you can't just decide you don't want to obey the law to change other laws.
So honest question: Do you oppose the Boston Tea Party, the actions of the Susan B Anthony and other woman's suffragists, the American Civil Rights movement of the 50's and 60's, Stonewall, and the actions that lead to the fall of the Berlin Wall? Because all of those movements were rooted in civil disobedience.
I will also give the same staff warning.
It's close to having issues I really do not wish to deal with.
Agree to disagree but not attack is a fine line to walk.
:icon_suspicious:
I am in no way promoting breaking the law. But I will say that throughout history many protests have happened, that caused inconvenience to the general public, and by doing so, got a lot of coverage, and made some positive changes. Trans Equality/Rights needs to get their heads out of the closest (no pun intended)
Just my two cents!
I side with the protesters, but at the same time, there has to be a more creative way of protest than causing another traffic jam in a city known for traffic jams, most of which, have nothing to with protests of any kind. Disruptive has its place, but I think this is an issue where disturbing might also help. Blocking traffic is a annoying and kind-of-sort-of-disruptive until people get past the jam and get back home, crack open a beer, and turn on the idiot box like they do every other day. What could possibly be done is some kind of a public display of some of the personal effects of murdered trans people :'(
I'd much rather see sit ins and people on the corners with signs. The traffic in LA is so crazy that usually you have to sit and wait so long you could read the signs and such. Frustrating even a single person who are driving ton+ vehicles in my opinion is akin to riling up someone of unknown sanity with a weapon. Blocking traffic is using your physical body to impede someon else. If some yelling anti-trans person stopped me from driving or walking away from them, I would be very scared and upset. These sorts of protests make people who are ignorant of the issues scared of the instigators. Events like trans visibility are MUCH more positive ways of getting attention- I saw tons of pictures in the media from that event and only now just heard about the traffic thing.
There are ways of protesting that don't involve as much injury to innocent bystanders (or drivers) by clogging traffic. Ghandi used hunger strikes, King used abstaining from buses. I know many movements also have violent aspects to other protests during the same times, but they should not have in my opinion. I am just a pacifist unless my life depends on it and I think you can almost always find a way to avoid it, even in regards to self defense.