I think Pink Eye’s creating a false dilemma. Boycott and raising awareness are not mutually exclusive. At the very least, the former develops into the latter, much more than continuing life as usual. If it’s a question of whether Fucked Up or Stars are having more of a positive step in repealing the statute, then Stars clearly has, as Pink Eye and us are continuing a discussion they initiated by their boycott. I don’t understand why you have to perform in Arizona to engage Arizonans in debate. How is that influencing the Arizona government? Do you think they’d be more likely to repeal the law if bands are coming to Arizona to show support for the citizens upset for the law or if they’re losing revenue with a boycott? It will suck for Arizonans but I’d hope that Fucked Up concert goers, and those who are against the law in general, would realize that fewer shows for them has larger political implications, and that their sacrifice is for a just end.
I think Pink Eye’s creating a false dilemma. Boycott and raising awareness are not mutually exclusive. At the very least, the former develops into the latter, much more than continuing life as usual. If it’s a question of whether Fucked Up or Stars are having more of a positive step in repealing the statute, then Stars clearly has, as Pink Eye and us are continuing a discussion they initiated by their boycott. I don’t understand why you have to perform in Arizona to engage Arizonans in debate. How is that influencing the Arizona government? Do you think they’d be more likely to repeal the law if bands are coming to Arizona to show support for the citizens upset for the law or if they’re losing revenue with a boycott? It will suck for Arizonans but I’d hope that Fucked Up concert goers, and those who are against the law in general, would realize that fewer shows for them has larger political implications, and that their sacrifice is for a just end.