It can't be something added to Atlanta's water, they haven't got any

We just keep stumbling over The Palmetto Scoop's gay tourism jihad. The latest is from The Olympian newspaper in Washington's capital:

Published August 01, 2008

South Carolina needs to come out of the closet

Ruth Schneider

South Carolina is so in the closet.

At least that is the impression I got after state Gov. Mark Sanford and tourism officials pulled the plug on a London advertising campaign promoting gay travel destinations.

The ads — posted in London's underground — calls destinations across the globe "so gay." South Carolina joined the ranks of Boston, Atlanta, Las Vegas and New Orleans in being tagged as popular U.S. gay tourist areas.

Gay tourists in 2006 spent roughly $40 million dollars on travel, according to Travel Industry of America. That is 40 million good reasons to want to promote a gay tourist destination.

But South Carolina's politicians don't buy it — the state even refused to pay the $4,942 advertising tab.

State Sen. David Thomas, R-Greenville, called for an audit after the political blogosphere erupted with the news that South Carolina was "so gay."

"South Carolina is a wonderful, family friendly destination, not a Southern version of San Francisco. This campaign goes against our core values," he was quoted as saying in an article on Queerty.com, a source of gay-related news.

And a spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford, Joel Sawyer, added, "Our state tourism dollars should be talking about the beaches and attractions of South Carolina."

Sounds like Sawyer didn't read the text of the actual ad — it does in fact tout the beaches. Under the banner "South Carolina is so gay," it reads, "From plantations to The Civil War, golf to gay beaches ... There's nowhere quite like South Carolina."

Interestingly, Altanta had no such problems with the campaign. Officials with the Atlanta Convention & Visitors Bureau actually considered the ad a steal, Gregory Pierce, executive vice president of the group, told Southern Voice, an Atlanta-based online newspaper.

"It was kind of a no-brainer for us because it was only ($5,000)," he said. "Somebody comes to us and asks if you want this kind of presence in a city that has direct flights to your city, especially with the value of the dollar and the pound being what they were."

What is clever about the advertising campaign is the use of the term "so gay." A taunt I recall hearing daily at recess in elementary school is being used in a positive way.

Amro Worldwide, the company that purchased the advertising, writes on its Web site, "Gays and lesbians have only in recent years begun to enjoy improved social status and acceptance. As part of that ongoing process, certain terms are 'reclaimed' by gays and lesbians as a means of removing previous negative connotations."

Instead of causing hurt by the use of the term, it gives it a new positive light.

Ian Johnson, founder and CEO of Out Now Consulting, who designed the advertising campaign, echoes those sentiments in an e-mail interview.

"The phrase 'so gay' when used as an insult is hurtful to many gay and lesbian people. Out Now felt ... the opportunity existed to communicate to the target audience, and a wider audience as it now turns out, that being 'so gay' is not at all negative to gay and lesbian people," Johnson wrote.

When Johnson worked on the campaign, he promoted the areas that were of most interest.

"Gay and lesbian tourists are as diverse as the mainstream. There is no such thing as a 'single' gay and lesbian market. Our job was to sell each location utilizing its strongest assets."

South Carolina doesn't want to be part of improving the social status of gays, and with the move by many state lawmakers, they are making it abundantly clear that tourism dollars from the gay community are also unwanted.

Let's spend our $40 million elsewhere and show that being "so gay" isn't a bad thing after all.

Ruth Schneider is so gay. Contact Ruth Schneider at 360-704-6873 or rschneider@theolympian.com.