Hartman 1

Andrew Hartman
Mr. Chelis
English 15
24 April 2012
Second Class Citizen
As you sip your coffee, read this newspaper, and attempt to forget about all of the
embarrassing things you probably shouldnt have done this past weekend, try to consider a
deeper thought about the future state of our country. In the biracial, multicultural, and bilingual
melting pot that we all know as The United States of America, all citizens are blessed with the
virtues of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. However, since this faithful statement
was originally written in the Declaration of Independence, many segregatory events have tainted
the benevolent nature that our country was founded upon. Japanese internment camps and
constringent policies, womens rights laws, and racial profiling of African Americans are a few
of the most memorable fallacies that we, as Americans, have allowed to occur in our 250 year
history. By considering our malevolent behavior shown in these events to be a problem that the
past has solved, we are arrogantly and naively placing our current society on a pedestal that it has
not yet reached. In our modernized, democratic culture of 2012, we face a deep separation in
opinion between the rights of homosexual and heterosexual individuals. In January of this year,
Ryan James Yezak, a pro-gay rights activist, posted a seven minute YouTube video of the
history of the Gay Rights Movement with the intention of persuading a predominantly neutral in
support, group of gay rights individuals, that that time has come to abandon anti-gay prejudices.
Upon watching this video, I am confident that you, as open minded individuals can become the
initiators of change that our country needs in the upcoming 2012 political election.

Hartman 2

As college students, we tend to have strong beliefs on nearly every issue that affects us.
Even the most football clueless students here at Penn State tend to defend themselves and their
football team in a conversational rivalry with an Ohio State friend. By nature, we are young,
argumentative, and proud individuals of our beliefs and choices. For more serious issues like gay
marriage, our stand points on debatable topics may tend to become more extreme. However,
before I watched the Gay Rights Movement YouTube video I considered myself to be
impartial in regards to the support of Gay marriage. I, as a viewer of Yezaks video, fell into the
category of a neutral audience who was indifferent about the issue of Gay rights. A neutral
audience, like ourselves, is often easier to convince than one who is extremely against an issue.
Though it can be more rewarding to convert pure opponents of gay marriage to a pro-gay
marriage stand point, it is more efficient to seek the persuasion of a moderate crowd of viewers
and use their added support in the upcoming political election.
This November, a Republican candidate will face off against the current president,
Barack Obama, with the goal of becoming the leader of our country for the next four years.
Barack Obama, a Democrat, was originally against gay marriage but is gradually beginning to
support it while the leading Republican candidates, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, are strong
opponents of the issue. Ron Paul, third place amongst Republican nominees is the most liberal of
the four in stating that his desire is to make gay marriage a state right. After gathering the
support of over two million viewers, Ryan Yezak intends to direct his following towards a
potential candidate who has the same beliefs he haspro gay rights. Whether or not that
candidate is Barack Obama or Ron Paul, Yezaks ultimate purpose is to create a sounding
difference in the social balance of our government and the only concrete way to accomplish such
a thing, is through politics. By electing a pro-gay rights candidate, the chances of a law being

Hartman 3

passed to legalize gay marriage increases. After seizing a large audience of converted neutral to
pro-gay rights supporters, Yezak will be well on his way to accomplishing this goal.
Many of our college English professors would agree that the key to capturing the
attention of any audience is the introduction. In Yezaks short compilation of events that have
occurred in the history of the Gay Rights Movement, he chooses to begin with a showcase of
negativity in the actions of anti-gay protesters. The negative images and clips of anti-gay rights
activists of the 50s and 60s that Yezak includes, tug on the viewers emotions and cause them
to feel that it must be morally wrong to prosecute a fellow American in such a negative way.
The rise in back ground music volume and vigor stimulates the viewers sense of hearing and
causes a more enhanced and emotional connection to the negative and positive moments which
behave in coherence with the musics tone. As the clips presented progress into more positive
aspects of the gay rights movementrecent media support from pro-gay rights activistswe
begin to see Yezaks credibility on the issue at hand. He provides us with a large variety of clips
that he has gathered from antagonists, protagonists, and neutral news coverage that gives a full
perspective of the gay rights campaign. As a credible author who pulls on the emotional appeals
of his audience, Yezak is able to persuade neutral viewers like myself, to side with him as a progay rights voter.
So, how was I pulled into the pro-gay campaign? You may be a hardcore supporter, stark
opponent, or an indifferent spectator of the gay rights movement and the way Ryan Yezaks
video affects you will depend on which way you characterize yourself. If you are indeed neutral
to the issue of gay marriage, as I was, you may find all of the negative aspects of the anti-gay
campaign to be more interesting than the positive aspects of the pro-gay campaign. As a former
Boy Scout, I found it interesting that Boy Scout Leaders went public in saying that homosexuals

Hartman 4

and atheists are not allowed to be registered as scouts in the Boy Scouts of America. It is
shameful that certain citizens of our country are being barred from joining great organizations
like the Boy Scouts of America simply because of their sexual orientation. A man who once
served in the Army and who was willing to give his life in our countrys defense was fired from
his position because he came out on television. This example of persecution due to sexual
orientation illustrates the negativity our government has for gays. It also is used in the YouTube
video as a great deterrent of anti-gay thoughts and beliefs. Fortunately, now that Dont Ask
Dont Tell has been scrapped, our military can now be considered an organization that heirs to
the pro-gay rights hemisphere.
It is terrible enough to not allow an individual to participate in an organization or group
of people different than themselves, but to push people of homosexual description to suicide and
fear of murder is atrocious. As referenced earlier, Ryan Yezak includes negative images in his
film in order to convince the viewer to be emotionally on board with how appalling anti-gay
protests used to and continue to be. As these negative clips transition into positive ones, Yezak
touches on the intensely emotional topics of suicide and death. The most touching ones are the
episodes of children being bullied to death and pushed to killing themselves because of their
sexual preference and the effect it has on others who dont agree with it. Loss of life is a
universal event that brings out sympathy in almost all peoplepro gay rights and anti-gay rights
alike. Surely a member of Yezaks audience who is impersonally positioned will usually tend to
side with the family and supporters of a perished gay child. Using this connection with human
emotion, Yezak is again able to gather support to the pro-gay movement; a movement that would
never take the life of an innocent child.

Hartman 5

Our government has consistently restricted the rights of homosexual individuals in order
to prevent them from enjoying many of the freedoms and hobbies that heterosexual individuals
find no difficulty in participating. By continuing to allow these restrictions to exist, we are
segregating a portion of our population and behaving in a way no different than that of racists in
the 1950s and slave owners in the 1800s. Ryan Yezak, seeking to redirect our society into an
era of less judgment and prejudice, made his video Gay Rights Movement with an initial goal
in mind: to convince you and I, as viewers, to side with him as pro-gay rights activists. When it
comes down to it, whose side would you have been on if you could now travel back in time to
the era of Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks? Would you support the disgraceful
confinement of Japanese-American citizens in the early 1900s? The real question behind the
issue of gay rights that we face today is where does the general moral character of our country
stand? Which side are you on? Where will your vote go?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u62OtM_vt5k

Search: Gay Rights Movement