Junk Explained: Sydney’s Rainbow Crossing, Or Why We Can’t Have Nice Things

What’s the deal with the rainbow crossing?

Over a month ago, a pedestrian crossing on Sydney’s Oxford Street was repainted in rainbow colours, in honour of the city’s Mardi Gras celebrations. Oxford Street is the centre of the city’s gay community, and the crossing immediately became a popular and beloved attraction. Locals and tourists alike lined up to take selfies with it, and the community basked in the rainbow-coloured glow of tolerance and acceptance. The rainbow crossing was a big hit. And now, because we cannot have nice things, it must be destroyed.

Wait, what?

Early next week, the colourful crossing is set to be painted over, and it seems there’s very little anyone can do to stop it. The rainbow crossing was never going to be a permanent fixture on Oxford Street. Initially, it was only approved for a month; the plan was to keep it for the duration of Mardi Gras, then paint over it. But by the time Mardi Gras celebrations wrapped up, there were calls to extend the life of the rainbow crossing. Lord Mayor Clover Moore spoke enthusiastically about its value as a tourist attraction. The city commissioned an independent road safety audit, which found that the crossing posed no risk whatsoever. Even the police were in favour: Assistant Commissioner Mark Murdoch praised it as a “great innovation” in terms of pedestrian safety.

Keeping it seems like a no-brainer, right? Well, apparently not.

Who are the big meanies trying to get rid of this thing?

We’re hearing rumblings about the rainbow crossing now, but the project has been controversial since its very inception. When Mayor Clover Moore proposed it as a temporary installation for this year’s Mardi Gras, seven of Sydney’s ten city councillors voted in favour. Those opposed were labelled as spoilsports and big, stinky homophobes; independent MP Alex Greenwich actually called them out on their “lack of respect” for the gay community.

These accusations were cynical at best. Of the three who voted no, Liberal Christine Forster and independent Angela Vithoulkas were both in favour of an earlier proposal for permanent rainbow crossings. Forster’s reservations were  purely budgetary. She felt that $110,000 — including a cool $40,000 for non-slip road paint — was too much to spend on a temporary project when the money could instead be used for something permanent.

The usual suspects had a grumble — The Herald Sun went with the snide headline ‘$110,000 Wasted With Gay Abandon‘ — but the project went ahead, and was pretty much a success. After the initial one-month period, the City of Sydney requested that the crossing be allowed to stay for at least a year, but the New South Wales state Roads and Maritime Service had other ideas. Roads Minister Duncan Gay (yes, his name is incredible) is standing firmly by the decision to paint over the crossing.

A spokesman for the Minister’s office claims that safety concerns are behind the decision to paint over the crossing. Said concerns are based on the fact that, during the Mardi Gras period, a number of revellers snapped photos of themselves lying down on its surface. The concern is that the crossing will turn Oxford Street into some kind of gay Abbey Road, with tourists risking life and limb as they hold up traffic to take pictures of themselves.

Yeah, this is all pretty daft. Clover Moore called the pictures a “drop in the ocean”, and condemned the Roads Minister’s decision as “bureaucracy gone wild.” Nonetheless, the City of Sydney has been instructed to paint over the crossing and are complying with instructions to remove it “quickly.”

So who will stick up for the bright, colourful crossing?

MP Alex Greenwich is the most fervent supporter of the crossing. He started a petition urging the Roads Minister to change his mind, and has thus far gathered close to 15,000 signatures. Greenwich makes an impassioned plea for the crossing as a symbol of the struggle for gay rights. “Lesbians and gay men were beaten and bashed on Oxford Street in 1978, and homophobic violence was rife for years,” he says in his opening statement. “To now have our flag on our street celebrates how far we have come and is a tribute to the battles we have won.”

Twitter loves a good outrage, and for the last few days numerous people in Sydney and abroad have gathered around the #rainbowcrossing hashtag. The arguments in favour of it are pretty clear. The crossing is already a tourist attraction, and has provided a boost to local businesses. It promotes a warm, fuzzy feeling of diversity and inclusivity on Oxford Street, and it promotes Sydney as a destination for gay and lesbian travellers. Olympic Matthew Mitcham has been, and he loved it – why would you want to go and make Olympian Matthew Mitcham sad?

Then there’s the simple fact that the crossing is already there, and taking it away would be more effort than keeping it. It will cost $35,000 more to take it away – why not save the money?

All of this, just about some paint on a road?

No, there are definitely other factors at play.

The City of Sydney is experiencing a bit of an image problem right now: locals just won’t stop beating the crap out of one another. In July last year, teenager Thomas Kelly was killed in a violent, unprovoked attack in nearby Victoria Street. The state government had previously put a freeze on the issuing of new liquor licenses around Kings Cross and, following Kelly’s death, the issue of drug- and alcohol-fuelled violence in the area came into focus.

Police brutality was a running theme in reports from this year’s Mardi Gras. Patrons complained of unnecessary and humiliating strip searches, and of course, there was the infamous footage of the violent altercation involving reveller Jamie Jackson. An amateur video, in which an officer slammed Jackson to the ground, went viral around the world and led to widespread condemnation.

With the city’s reputation taking such a battering, the rainbow crossing is just what Sydney needs: a warm, fuzzy human interest story, concrete proof of an inclusive and civilised city where we can all hug and get along. Its loss would certainly be embarrassing in that sense.

The gay and lesbian community have rallied around the movement to save the rainbow crossing; this isn’t just about paint on a road, but rather, part of a bigger push for equality and recognition. The global fight for marriage equality continues, and as other nations begin to recognise the rights of same sex couples, it’s frustrating to see our government sit back and do what amounts to stuff all.

We butt heads with homophobia every day. Believe it or not, but when a malignant troll like Archbishop Mark Coleridge appears on television, as he did recently, to airily dismiss homosexuality as a “warp in the creation”, gay people get pissed. For many the rainbow crossing represents a ‘fuck you’ to Coleridge and the like, and a ‘fuck you’ to those who would slam a young guy’s head against the pavement at Mardi Gras. Its removal represents a ‘fuck you’ right back.

Now what?

Greenwich remains steadfast in his support. In a statement to the media, he declared: “The roads minister has given no justifiable reason for removing a crossing that has been good for business, good for tourism, and good for the gay and lesbian community. There have been no accidents over the past month, and I really think the roads minister just needs to get over his problem with rainbows.” Zing.

As Duncan Gay holds firm against the crossing, the last week has seen a campaign of phone calls, emails and Tweets to Premier Barry O’Farrell, asking him to step in and spare the crossing. This morning, Greenwich gave another call to action. A reprieve has been granted, at least until early next week, but there are murmurings about a protest if the destruction goes ahead. A sit-in — or possibly a lie-in — may be imminent.

_

Alasdair Duncan is an author, freelance writer and video game-lover who has had work published in Crikey, The Drum, The Brag, Beat, Rip It Up, The Music Network, Rave Magazine, AXN Cult and Star Observer.

Images via Facebook.