Thursday, May 11, 2006

Thumbs Up to "A Day Without Gays"

When I first read Susan Lampert Smith's column today, I rolled my eyes, as I do most of the time when I read "The Queen of Sensitivity." In it, she advocates for a "day without gays," in which gay people don't show up for work, to mimic the "day without Latinos" rallies of a couple weeks ago. This is supposed to show how valuable gay people are to our every day lives, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

But it dawned on me that this could actually be a fantastic idea, if only for the comedy and excitement it would present. You'd have legitimately sick guys from all over the state push, pull, and drag themselves into work to avoid being absent. There would be 100% attendance in offices statewide. You'd have men that get into car accidents on the way to work that would crawl out of their flaming cars, and drag their bloody stump of a leg all the way into the office to avoid missing work that day.

I can see a guy calling his elderly mother's doctor:

"Yeah, Doc - I know she's wheezing quite a bit, and she's already gotten her last rites. But I really need you to prop her up for an extra day. If she says she's heading towards the light, just feed her another Brandy Old Fashioned - she'll be fine. I cannot miss work today!"

Some poor guy will take a little extra time getting into work to get his office donuts, and for a half hour his coworkers will be shaking their heads and saying things like "I knew the wife and four kids was just a show."

Productivity would be off the charts. The economy would boom. The Dow would hit 20,000. The only business to really take a hit would be golf courses (they'd be empty). Of course, all those sick guys at work would probably cause some kind of viral epidemic that could wipe out the planet, but at least everyone would know they're swingin' for the right team.

On a more serious note, I think this might actually cause some tension in the gay community. I'm sure that there are some more strident gays and lesbians who resent other gays who choose to remain in the closet. You'd have a ton of closeted gays who would refuse to take part, which could cause a rift between them and the openly gay community. Not to mention all the effeminate straight people who will have co-workers come up to them and say, "Um...weren't you supposed to be off today?" Awkward.

Finally, I was intrigued by the stereotypes Lampert-Smith uses in her column. Needless to say, if any right-wingers were to say gay people are hairdressers, wedding planners, caterers, and waiters, it would send the sensitivity police into a code red mobilization. But I guess as long as you advocate for their pet cause, stereotypes are acceptable. I just hope at some point she makes a list of aggrieved groups it is acceptable to paint with a broad brush and those that are not eligible.

My suggestion: "A Day Without Jim Doyle." Suggested date: November 8th, 2006.