Anyone familiar with the subject of gay marriage is probably familiar with Adam Bouska’s NO H8 photo campaign – a tessellation of headshots against a white background, with duct tape over the subjects’ mouth and “NO H8” painted on to their cheek. While ostensibly this campaign can be considered a success, it has never settled well with me.
Horns? Why?
At the core, I take issue with the words “NO H8”. Proposition 8 has nothing to do with “hate” and everything to do with a fair vote. It’s unfortunate that some have chosen to demonize those that have voted in favor of Proposition 8 by calling them “haters”. For example, my mother does not think that gays should be allowed to marry. But she does not hate gay people. She quite simply does not believe that they should be able to get married. But marriage equality activists have chosen to throw her into a general bin of those who “hate”. I don’t have to tell you that “hate” is a strong word, and I’m not quite sure that pulling out the heavy artillery is going to get people to cross over to your side.

The ALDO Campaign from 2004. It’s a stretch, but the duct tape makes some sense.
I don’t think the “NO H8” moniker was created by Bouska, but he did paint it on people’s faces, alongside a mouth covered by duct tape. There’s a couple of elements here that upset – that duct tape over the mouth is hardly an original idea. The first example that comes to mind is ALDO’s “Hear No Evil” campaign for HIV awareness several years ago. ALDO’s shots also featured images of celebrities with duct tape over their mouth. I’m still trying to figure out exactly what it means in the Bouska campaign. When I asked two friends that had their photos taken for the shoot, the look on their face said “how can you not get it?”. I shot back with a look that read, “are you sure you get it?” and after a few moments to gather their thoughts, they explained to me that it was “symbolic” of their voices being silenced in the fight for marriage equality. What’s flawed about that explanation is that nobody’s voice has ever been silenced regarding Proposition 8. In actuality, the mere existence of Proposition 8 and your vote on the ballot is proof that your voice was indeed heard. So, if you are still upset that you are restrained from doing something you want to do, perhaps a pair of handcuffs would be a more fitting symbol. Although, if it’s marriage that you want, perhaps that hits a little too close to home.
The campaign appears to have began with a group of friends and has expanded to include an undeniably impressive roster of celebrities – if you consider that to be a milestone of success. But it is no surprise that celebrities would be attracted to this campaign. After all, you walk away with what amounts to an 8×10 glossy headshot. Perfect lighting, smoothed complexion, and a crisp white background. The only people who wouldn’t want to look pretty in a photo are… those people who don’t want to look pretty in a photo. For me, the vanity of the subjects speaks louder than the eyeliner on their cheeks. If you support marriage equality and want to convince others of the same, is the solution to get a photograph of yourself taken?

Has this gone too far?
But wait – what is the message of this campaign, anyway? It’s hard to tell when there are so many distractions. The blank slate aspect of the photos has spawned a competition for attention. People showing off their biceps, singing into microphones, breaking records, making devil horns, wearing sunglasses, and holding ceramic elephants – all next to the photographer’s uncomfortably large watermark. What are we promoting here, the issue at hand, or how cute we are? They say there is no such thing as a selfless act, and I can’t think of a more fitting example than Perez Hilton’s photo for the campaign which features him on his computer, posting the image of himself onto his website that you are looking at. Think about it.

Perez Hilton, never losing sight of what’s important.
In the end, we are left with a bunch of photos that we have we have plenty of reasons to pass around, the least important of which appears to be in effort to change someone’s mind on the serious subject matter at hand. And herein lies the problem. Campaigns are designed to raise awareness for your cause. This campaign fails at that outside of the gay community (the only place it matters). According to the Washington Post, 7 out of 10 black voters in California voted in favor of Proposition 8. If you put up a billboard featuring these images in an areas filled primarily with black voters, I highly doubt an image of someone in a plunging white V-neck holding a rosary necklace with “NO H8” painted on their cheek is going to change any minds. That is, of course, assuming that someone who is not rubbing elbows with the subject can decipher what “NO H8” even means.
At this point, I don’t even know what it means. There are a bunch of beautiful photographs, but now what?
There is no doubt that everyone involved in this project has only the best of intentions, and as long as you are making noise in the ether (including this article), you are doing something. Regardless of what I have written above, the only thing that matters is this: if his efforts have changed just one person’s mind on the issue, or at the very least raised awareness, then it should be considered a rousing success. While the spread of Adam Bouska’s NO H8 campaign cannot be denied and deserves accolade, it is disquieting to know that the efforts for this campaign could have been more focused to create change. Maybe it’s time to rip off the duct tape, and sit down with people like the 7 out of 10 black voters, or my Mother.
Submitted By: CJ Powers
Wanna write? Have an opinion?
We’re excited to present this article, written by a guest writer, as part of “Sunday Submissions“. Do you have something to say? Send your article to sundays[at]homorazzi[dot]com each week by Friday to be considered!


Braden
August 16th, 2009 at 11:33 am
I agree with you CJ. Especially on your lines of “not with us then you are against us” idea with hate. However I do think the “idea” of the photographs of course, was good. But, its like PETA putting naked people on ads saying “no more fur.” A stunt intended for publicity as opposed to real change. And while on that topic as well, I wonder how many people just ate a nice tortured slaughterhouse piece of meat before their anti hate photoshoot supporting marriage to compliment their comfortable North American lives?
Personally, I would like to see more activism supporting gay acknowledgement, acceptance and rights in parts of the world where same sex “love” without even the slightest inclination of marriage is punishable by death.
Don’t misread me, I very much do support gay marriage. We are however living in a Christian settled and established America, and even the fact that certain parts of the continent have it deem it as a luxury. I feel like its a wealthy kid comlaining that they have no car to drive themselves to work, which is something very functional in this part of world right? So take a bus. But then we have little Joseph who has not the energy to complain that he has no food. And no substitute.
Gay rights are a need. Marriage is luxury.
Dsx
August 16th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
“Gay rights are a need. Marriage is luxury.”
I fail to see the distinction. If everyone else in north America is allowed to marry then fundamentally so should the gays. If African Americans were prevented from marrying the uprising would be epic, but there again apparently 70% of the black voters in California (and the baptists) are for segregating gays and picking and choosing who gets what rights. Civil rights movement? Ha!
Braden
August 16th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
We have more in common than you think Dsx. I support gay marriage. I do think it should be made available throughout the world. However I do think more important gay issues need to be settled first. I view it a luxury because many in the world cannot even fathom such a union in their birthplace. This should not have to be stated, but we are in a sense blessed to even discuss such a topic so freely as we are right not.
Nic O
August 16th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Braden I really, as usual, appreciate your well thought out and insightful comments. However, do you not think that, although an epic milestone, the right for gays to marry WOULD be an incredibly helpful platform to support the movement itself in (what was this years pride theme?), educating the masses?
And CJ, your article confuses me a little. I went on a little rollercoaster, from anger, to nodding my head, to left scratching it in the end. “…unfortunate that some have chosen to demonize those that have voted in favor”, in the beginning, yet you are a supporter of changing the mind’s of those that voted for prop 8, in the end. Confusing. So which one is it? Do you feel that the people that supported prop 8’s opinion on gay marriage is an acceptable one? How do you justify this? It makes so much sense to me that the mere intolerance of a marginilized group perpetuates the wrong sort of education on tolerance. So it baffled me that you finish by telling us that we need to educate the masses and discuss the topic with people including your mother, yet view what I consider hateful intolerance as acceptable.
I just believe what you said when you say that “if his efforts have changed just one person’s mind on the issue, or at the very least raised awareness, then it should be considered a rousing success”, and will leave it at that. Because to me, that truly is the only thing that matters. Everything else, just seems slightly nit-picky and nattery to me.
Sameer Ismail
August 17th, 2009 at 12:12 am
I think perhaps the point has been missed here. I don’t believe that everyone who voted for Prop 8 was inspired by hatred. I don’t believe that the NOH8 campaign seeks to make that suggestion. But that said, Proposition 8 was born of hatred. It was born of a group of people who used dishonesty and hatred to impose their views on the private lives of Californians. They abused the legal process to do it, and sadly, the California Supreme Court let it happen.
Virtually every time civil rights are trampled anywhere, it happens for two reasons: you have a group of people driven by a regressive, hateful view who work hard to repress that group, and then a much larger group of people who allow it to happen.
I think it’s time that people stop thinking that it’s ok for others not to support same-sex marriage. It’s time to get them to confront their own prejudices, however uncomfortable that may be. The arguments used now to fight same-sex marriage are the same arguments that were used to fight against interracial marriage some decades ago. It is no more right to oppose same-sex marriage now than it was to oppose interracial marriage then. The only difference is that we have the benefit of hindsight to show us how wrong people were about interracial marriage.
NOH8 is not an exercise in vanity. It is a meaningful part of the puzzle that works like so many ad campaigns, applying symbolism to convey a particular message. It shouldn’t be viewed as something that can or should stand on its own in dealing with this particular fight. It is, however, useful, and I have no problem at all with the NOH8 name.
As I’ve noted before, this movement has been far too nice in trying to get things done, and the end result has been constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in state after state in the US. The policy of playing nice has been tried, and it’s failed. The time has come to be more forceful in demonstrating to people that it’s not justifiable to subject a group of society to the same responsibilities and obligations under the law, without the same rights as everyone else. I’m not saying we should call them names, but by exposing the hatred that formed the core of Prop 8, it might make others think twice.
mattymatt
August 17th, 2009 at 10:08 am
I absolutely agree with you that the symbolism makes no sense.
But!
I think the campaign has successfully attracted attention, not because it makes any sense, but because they are sexy photos of Hollywood celebrities doing something weird. What could be stickier than that?
Even though the message is baffling, at least it has gotten a lot of people talking about equal rights. Do a search — you’ll see that there’s a lot of chatter about the campaign, and those conversations are our best weapon for winning public opinion.
In my opinion, a confusing campaign that a lot of people see if better than a well-crafted campaign that nobody sees.
Of course, what would be best is a well-crafted campaign that everyone sees. But what can you do. Bless their hearts for getting involved, instead of just sitting around and complaining.
mattymatt
August 17th, 2009 at 10:09 am
* “is better,” not “if better”
Michael
August 19th, 2009 at 1:02 am
Of course people including your mother don’t want to think Prop. 8 is about hate, because they want to justify their anti-gay opinion and/or assuage their guilt for voting yes. It’s very simple–if we passed a law preventing Mexicans from marrying, do you think they would consider it “loving?” If you told them, “My mother likes you, but she thinks you should not be allowed to marry,” would they believe that? Would anyone who was being prevented from marrying? If I took away your mother’s right to marry, while insisting that I really liked her very much, would she believe me?
Charlie
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:58 pm
You’re attempt to justify your view is weak. A nice granny from today saying “I don’t hate gay people, I just don’t want them to marry” is essentially identical to a nice white granny from the 1800’s saying “I don’t hate black people, I just don’t think they should be free”. Fear of people not like you = hate.
Harlequin
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:53 pm
I think I enjoy the message, and there HAVE been some nice photos that do make me stop and think. But there have been more than a few that made me stop and -wonder-. Haha. Wonder what the heck they were thinking, and if the person posing REALLY understands the issue at hand. Or if they just want to look ‘fierce’ for NOH8 and put it on their facebook.
I think gay marriage should be allowed (Of course), but we’re still living in a country/world where gay people are getting bashed, beaten and murdered for being who they are. Baby steps!
As they say, Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Naomi S.
December 14th, 2009 at 10:24 am
The no h8 campaign is a self-serving career-building publicity campaign for adam bouska’s career, cleverly created with his boyfriend/partner jeff parshley. Bouska was just one of thousands of photographers who wanted to make it big in the hollywood celeb world. Prop 8 came along & he saw his chance to photograph a few b-list celebs and make them look very pretty.
Then he & parshley created scarcity and a fake buzz, by only inviting certain folks to be photographed. Every celeb has a gay stylist or manager, who saw opportunities to get their clients seen looking pretty. So suddenly everybody wanted their own photoshoot & it became a ’see and be seen’ thing to do in hollywood/west hollywood.
Just like reality tv, it creates the illusion of a political campaign that’s famous for being famous. In perfect matchup the kardashian sisters are even selling no h8 t-shirts while posing in the ‘angelic’ white light of bouska’s pics.
The campaign has no political value whatsoever. CJ Powers is right – it’s not being seen outside the gay media – so isn’t changing minds or votes. And this fluffy ad campaign – selling celebrity not equal rights – is exploiting a very real battle that affects millions of LGBT people’s rights in everyday life – ordinary folks who are discriminated against at work, at school, at hospital bedsides – who stand up for who for who they are on a daily basis … & don’t wear white t-shirts while doing it.
We should boycott their t-shirts/bracelet selling too. I resent the fight for my rights being used by bouska and parshley to make themselves a career & sell their merchandise.
michael
March 14th, 2010 at 3:51 am
I think you are wrong. It is NOT ABOUT right to vote. And it IS ABOUT HATE. or at the very least, voters were misled or misinformed.
People who are against gay rights and gay unions – have an issue with us. Maybe HATE is strong word. But how can you love someone, and deny them a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT?
I am not sure you get it. Maybe you’re not seeing the big picture. Adam wants the shots to look great. to look sexy. to look cool, so that people will use them and publish them.
Sure, some are celebs, but many are everyday people. Many who don’t own a professional photo / head shot.
This is there one chance to have a nice shot done – and then shre their message with the world. And this whole campaign is beyond the Prop 8 issue now. It’s about our civil rights. It’s about gay rights. It’s about standing up, being gay, amd being out 365. Not just one day a year on Gay Pride day.
It’s a viral effect. Spreading the word thru images. If they all looked the same – what would the reason be? You have to capture something unique about every person. And for the waterwark, it has to be there to protect his name and use of the images. Just as I hope to trademarked HOMORAZZI.
happy pride!
Michael and Derrick
Ace
April 21st, 2010 at 10:52 am
you lost me here: “My mother does not think that gays should be allowed to marry. But she does not hate gay people.”
from there on, this article just sound ignorant.
Harlequin
April 21st, 2010 at 12:22 pm
That would make sense about these photos, if it weren’t for half the people I’ve seen -doing- the shots, are turning around and being quite hateful themselves. I mean, just look at Perez Hilton. Perfect example. He’s for NoH8, posing in it, yet he’s notorious for being hateful. I don’t get it.
And @Ace, people are funny that way. I know someone who accepts me being gay, but hopes that I would have the respect and courtesy to not show affection to my boyfriend while he’s in the room. Does it make sense? No. But human beings never do make any.