I was out of the office yesterday, and so was unable to report on yesterday's meeting between management of El Coyote and local members of the gay community upset about the revelation that a member of El Coyote's family ownership had made a personal, $100 donation to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. I can be saved the time of describing the meeting blow by blow, as there is a factually correct account of it posted on shutupiknow.blogspot.com.
What the report fails to communicate is the level of upset among the El Coyote staff present. Each and every one I spoke to was visibly shaken, some crying openly. Each one stated clearly that although they disagree with Margie's personal position on the issue, that it is not the position of El Coyote as establishment or its management, so they do not understand the boycott. They truly wish everyone could just get along, and allow individuals have their opinions without threatening the well-being of the entire establishment, a gathering place for a uniquely diverse community. I tend to agree with that sentiment.
That said, it is not surprising that the meeting went the way it did, and it need not have done so. One important element is missing from the reportage that helps explain why it turned ugly so quickly. When Sam asked Margie if she would be willing to donate an equal or greater amount to Repeal Prop. 8, she deferred to management. Management stated "We know Margie is so upset about this, and she would take back the donation if she could."
But when Sam pressed his question, Margie refused to donate a C-note to the opposite side, which would have effectively "taken back" the donation. The deeds did not match the rhetoric. I suspect that if Margie had agreed to do this, to put some meat into her apology, the issue would be dead. But, sadly, it is not.
So... while I think the boycott is misguided, and its energy could be directed toward any number of larger, more complicit establishments, I understand and respect the anger and frustration of the community, and the need to make a visible protest of a visible target.
I had plans to dine at El Coyote tonight, at about 7:00... when the protest officially begins. I will honor the protesters by not crossing that picket line. But I will not boycott the restaurant before or after the protest. The gay (and Other) staff, nearly all long-serving, dedicated employees, and truly wonderful people, depend on my dining dollars to feed their families. Suggestions posted elsewhere that employees should "get other jobs" truly don't understand the nature of the restaurant: it is a family place in every sense, where owners, customers, and especially staff treat each other like family. One might as well suggest these employees "get a new mother and father."
You may see me in El Coyote the next few days... you will also see me at the Repeal Prop. 8 rally at City Hall on Saturday. I truly feel that's a more appropriate place to display our displeasure at the passage of Prop. 8.
What the report fails to communicate is the level of upset among the El Coyote staff present. Each and every one I spoke to was visibly shaken, some crying openly. Each one stated clearly that although they disagree with Margie's personal position on the issue, that it is not the position of El Coyote as establishment or its management, so they do not understand the boycott. They truly wish everyone could just get along, and allow individuals have their opinions without threatening the well-being of the entire establishment, a gathering place for a uniquely diverse community. I tend to agree with that sentiment.
That said, it is not surprising that the meeting went the way it did, and it need not have done so. One important element is missing from the reportage that helps explain why it turned ugly so quickly. When Sam asked Margie if she would be willing to donate an equal or greater amount to Repeal Prop. 8, she deferred to management. Management stated "We know Margie is so upset about this, and she would take back the donation if she could."
But when Sam pressed his question, Margie refused to donate a C-note to the opposite side, which would have effectively "taken back" the donation. The deeds did not match the rhetoric. I suspect that if Margie had agreed to do this, to put some meat into her apology, the issue would be dead. But, sadly, it is not.
So... while I think the boycott is misguided, and its energy could be directed toward any number of larger, more complicit establishments, I understand and respect the anger and frustration of the community, and the need to make a visible protest of a visible target.
I had plans to dine at El Coyote tonight, at about 7:00... when the protest officially begins. I will honor the protesters by not crossing that picket line. But I will not boycott the restaurant before or after the protest. The gay (and Other) staff, nearly all long-serving, dedicated employees, and truly wonderful people, depend on my dining dollars to feed their families. Suggestions posted elsewhere that employees should "get other jobs" truly don't understand the nature of the restaurant: it is a family place in every sense, where owners, customers, and especially staff treat each other like family. One might as well suggest these employees "get a new mother and father."
You may see me in El Coyote the next few days... you will also see me at the Repeal Prop. 8 rally at City Hall on Saturday. I truly feel that's a more appropriate place to display our displeasure at the passage of Prop. 8.
No comments:
Post a Comment