by Jon Robin Baitz Tony-nominated playwright |
Steve Salbu, dean of the Scheller College of Business at the Georgia Institute of Technology, has written an op-ed piece in The New York Times, and ever so slightly missed the point behind a few local officials response to what Colin Corgan in The Guardian has cleverly dubbed “politics by chicken breast.” The Chick-fil-A imbroglio may be a canard, but you cannot duck the actual issue at hand. (Sorry.) If all politics are local, then a city councilman or councilwoman (Christine Quinn for instance), has every right to return fire to a company whose CEO espouses bigotry and intolerance dressed up in the feathered robes of “family values.” Salbu is ‘troubled’ by Boston mayor Thomas Menio pointing out that “you can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population.” Why would that be troubling? Notwithstanding the fact that he knows and you know and the law knows he doesn’t have the actual power to do it. It’s better than municipal silence. He’s simply standing ground. And how is it more troubling than a company basically launching a high-fat culture war in the service of – what? Selling poultry? You reap what you sow, and if a fried-chicken joint that likes to fire people for “sinful behavior” (it’s in their by-laws) wants to get into it, hey, great. Have at it. Yeah sure Chick- fil-A (It’s very hard to type that name over and over, can I please, dear reader, now refer to them as Chifa?) is free to spew an antediluvian reactionary creed in the name of ‘free speech’ well, it is equally appropriate to plant ones’ flag on behalf of the people in one’s constituency who have a higher stake in voicing their belief in the freedom to marry whomever they choose without being (sigh) dissed by a purveyor of deep-fried poultry.
The odd part of the Op-ed is that Mr. Salbu, an openly gay man, and seemingly not a self-hating one (See under Log Cabin) utterly deplores the Chifa manifesto, and yet still puts free market ideology (albeit bundled in with legitimate first amendment concerns), before the ‘Actual’. (By which I mean, conditions On The Ground). He is not alone, joined by Glenn Greenwald and the ACLU, both of whom I obviously agree with pretty much always. But here ‘The actual’ is that Chifa employs gay people, who are struggling under the burden of having to make a living in tanked economy on fewer than 15 bucks an hour, and Chifa does not speak for them. The Supreme Court may have perhaps concluded that corporations are people, but we all know they are not. Not really. So if a bigot at the top of the food chain-drapes himself in piety, and funnels corporate (not personal) profits into paying for a deeply discriminatory kind of anti-gay advocacy, which it does, I am not troubled but thrilled that elected officials tell them to shove it. It’s theatre. It’s theatre. Being gay is still “not easy,” especially in small town America, especially if you’re young and trying to come out, and live a full life without fear. Not too long ago, the Chifa affair would have been met by governmental silence. Not too long ago black people weren’t allowed to sit at the lunch counter. Not too long ago, if you were gay, you could not openly serve your country in the military. I find it heartening that espousals of bigotry (especially when the bible is absurdly invoked in its name) are no longer as quite as acceptable as they once were. Mr. Salbu is understandably caught up in the thorny, knotted problems of commerce and politics, and he’s right to be. But elected officials are not simply elected just to make sure the potholes are filled and the trains are on time. Making people feel safe, making citizens know they are represented where they live and sleep and eat does not exclude denouncing the presence in their communities of a corporation steeped in public declarations of God’s wrath against the arrogance of gay attitudes. It does not exclude the pushback. Again, this is a sort of opera-buffa comedy with pictures of people of a certain size angrily gorging themselves on dry looking sandwiches.
I still am not sure of the larger narrative in this story, or even if it actually means anything, other than decorative distraction from where we are now. I am too worried about the chaotic nightmare that is the Middle East, and our confused schizophrenic involvements there, drone strikes, who our next president is going to be, but most importantly writing my next play. Which hopefully will sort of be about all of the above, including well-meaning academics derailing at the awful crossroads of ideology and real life. It would, once upon a time, be a perfect Billy Wilder movie.
Jon Robin Baitz's latest play, Other Desert Cities, just ended a season-long run on Broadway after moving from Lincoln Center Theatre, and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. Other plays include The Substance of Fire, Three Hotels, Mizlansky/Zilinsky, and A Fair Country, which was also the finalist for the Pulitzer. He created the TV Drama Brothers & Sisters for ABC, and wrote the movie People I Know, starring Al Pacino.He teaches in the New School for Drama's MFA playwriting program as well as at SUNY Southampton.





well done, JRB! like you, i prefer mayor menino's civil disobedience to "Chifa's" uncivil biblical obedience. equality's coming, even though it should already be here!
Robbie, you are brilliant as always.
Absolutely Brilliant and so delightfully written. The difference between a playwright and pundit is palpable. I wonder what your take on the whole corporations as people/citizens united problem. If a corporation is a person then it has the right to free speech? I'm just asking. (might also be an interesting subject for a play) And for a company to want to brand itself as homophobic is just appalling. As for the gay employees I really think you should go to www.randyrainbow.com for a hysterical video about just that.
Marvelously written. As I was reading I felt like I was peeking into the mind of a genius.
Let's see if I have this straight...Boston, Chicago, and LA Mayors have threatened to bar franchises of the Chick-Fil-A corporation because of statements made by its CEO against the proliferation of Pro Gay Marriage changes to our traditional societal values in this nation...i.e. Marriage is defined as One Man, One Woman. And these mayors in their belief that this attitute expressed is foreign to the value systems of their cities stated no enteriprise will be allowed to operate in their cities that espouse a similiar view. Of course, the good Irish folks of Boston, Polish folks in Chicago, and Hispanic Folks in LA that pay heed to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church so active in those cities with long standing tenets of instruction against the hedonism of homosexuality won't be thrown out of those three cities, will they?. Or the fundamentalist churches of the Protestant sectarians that exist in those cities in the White and Black communities with similar views to the Catholic Church in holding against the proliferation of homosexuality and hedonistic sexual gratification at the expense of religious teachings on the shelter and strength of the traditional family headed by one man, one woman.
Given the opportunity to vote on referandums for or against changing the laws of their states to allow for homosexual marriages, the people of every state where that has been on their ballots have said no to "gay or lesbian or bisexual multi partner marriages", knowing the hedonistic sexual practices are an abomination of nature and contrary to tradition based on religious teachings. That is our value system. Everything else is simply secularism run amok, and really not very democratic at all. Let the people choose, not kingpins of the godless secular movement that have wormed their way into positions of governmental power.
Check the polls latel?. for most Americans, that is no longer our value system. . You cannot make that argument without a lie???
You fall back on religion which is the refuge of someone who has nothing else to offer.
Let's see...I pointed out two institutions that tell us what are MORAL values are, 1)the American voter state by state by state that have come down on the side of Traditional Marriage (one man and one woman) and against Gay Marriage every time they had the opportunity to vote, and 2) the religious tenets and and instructions of the fundamentalist Roman Catholic Church and the Protestestant secetarians that also support Traditional Marriage, and speak against Gay Marriage. That seems to me to be vastly the majority opinion, Captain Ron; otherwise there would be a majority of our states that had changed their laws to allow for gay marriage, would there not? So where is the lie in that argument?
Institutions that tell us what our moral values are?
Some of us have learned to think for ourselves in that department. I admit to a bit of warpage owing to cultural bias since the local institution here used to tell men to marry more than than one wife (my great-great grandmother had a run-in with that one, and after the first wife died, the old boy never dared remarry). They also rail against coffee and tea, which I still swill shamelessly, and liquor, which I don't, but do make a few shekels entertaining drunks who do....
Years ago I had a small hand in helping a Catholic priest with his own drinking problem... He had a tough time for a while, but then passed on this bit of wisdom, saying he had to learn he was in advertising, he wasn't in management.
Can you not read? that tell us what are moral values are refers to the evidence cited of the American voters voting down unanimously any attempts to promote Gay Marriage in their states, and also the existance of the two largest Church institutions with their followers, the Roman Catholic and the Protestant sectarians.
Picture clearer now? Let me help you out a little more. Only 3.2 percent of the US of A population consider themselves to be LBGT, and that is a far cry from the the 96.8% that consider themselves to be traditional man/woman heterosexual. Gay marriage is a looooooonnnnng way off in this country. Hence the fact that so many people came to to the Chick-Fil-A restaurants on Appreciation Day that some of those restaurants actually ran out of chicken! LOL!
Marriage is a contract regulated by the state that is a container for money and progeny. LGBTQ citizens have both money and progeny. SCOTUS has ruled that marriage is a civil right. We do not vote on civil rights. We all have them.
For some folks marriage is a religious state and/or a dream of romance as well as a civil contract. The state cannot and should not legislate religion or fantasy.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Not a moral dilemma. The law is not designed to deal in moral dilemmas, only property and contracts.
I say a big PHOOEY to you. Foaming away about the sanctity of marriage and custom would be a lot more impressive if the divorce rate were not what it is.
Well Jonny boy, although I commend you on your style of writing, your ablity to explain the whole thing is a yawner at best. The ability of one cooperate exec to express his opinion on gay marriage is no more wrong than our own President expressing his opinion on the subject just six months ago. It's called freedom of speech. Fact of the matter, when Liberals make audacious comments about Conservatives, you never here a peep about how awful their comments are. Only when a Conservative like Chifa's head exec makes his opinion heard, the Left goes bananas. The Left has always been plastic(fake). You are correct on one matter though? This type of nonesense only deflects from important issues that this country faces.