Really? It was illegal to be attracted to to the same sex? I assume you mean same-sex intercourse (sodomy). It’s also important to note that many of the state laws regarding sodomy were repealed by the early 80’s. Certainly not an admirable thing, but worth noting.
Bullshit. Absolute Bullshit. Has anybody every been acquitted on a “gay panic” defense? How many sane, rational people think a gay person who was murdered “had it coming”. Honestly, don’t you think that’s a pretty far out there?
I never said it wasn’t. However, most gay people back there were in the closet, so they were not bothered by most people. Certainly an unfortunate existence, but still one that many Black people at the time would have sought, hence people trying to pass.
Got any cites on systematic imprisonment of gay people in the US? It’s funny cause I don’t see too many gay people in jail. Give me some examples of the government torturing and executing gay people. Do you think any of that compares to decades upon decades of slavery, lynching, and Jim Crow? OF course, individuals will do truly fucked up things as a result of bigotry and prejudice, but the government was largely uninvolved. That was not the case with African-Americans.
My point is that comparing anything to the Holocaust or American Slavery is wrong for a number of reasons. First, in all likelihood, it will be inaccurate. Second, it diminishes the impact of both events when they are compared to things like gay marriage (or the NFL Combine for that matter). It’s silly, it adds nothing, and is a lazy way of making one’s point that modern forms of discrimination should not be tolerated. More importantly, it doesn’t work. It just pisses people off, and makes them tune you out.
It’s not a contest, it’s looking at the historical record. I don’t appreciate it when people sensationalize and legitimize their grievances by piggy-backing on the work of others. Did the Japanese internment camps have anything in common with Jewish concentration camps? Sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s an apt analogy or a tasteful comparison.
You mean outside of the multitude of laws that TODAY strip homosexuals of their rights?
If Black people were able to “pass” in large numbers, would you be OK with anti-miscegenation laws , and “no blacks in the military”, because so many black people could pass and skirt the laws that discriminate against them?
That’s the life that gays get to live, they either have to “pass” and pretend to be someone they are not, having their love life a secret to everyone, or they are out of the closet and get to be second class citizens.
Seriously now, do you think an openly gay man could get elected president?
Can you name some of them? I’m guessing you have two bullets in your arsenal- marriage and the DADT. It’s debatable whether either situation is stripping anyone of their rights.
I think you have misunderstood me. I personally have no problem with gay people. I had a friend stay at my house with his boyfriend this past week. I have and will continue to advocate for gay issues whenever I can. But, I don’t think the longevity or severity of discrimination against gay people, evil as it is, warrants a comparison to that of African-Americans. It’s a particularly ineffective tactic because the reality is that the Gay rights movement is not beholden to or thankful for the civil rights movement. They are are trying to get theirs. That’s fine by me since they are entitled to all that and more, but the comparison is not a principled stance, it’s a tactic to further their position. It’s an appeal to emotion. That’s why you didn’t see too many gay people advocating for civil rights when it was happening, and that why you don’t see gay groups advocating Black or modern civil rights issues now.
A life that Black people of a certain time and age would have jumped at. That should show you how different in magnitude of their struggles.
Maybe. Honestly, I didn’t think a Black guy would be elected president a few years back. If the right gay politician came along, it might happen. It’s less about Americans having a problem with gay people, and more about their struggle for equality only being a few decades old, and that gay advocacy groups do a piss-poor job appealing to the masses. It took a while for people to become comfortable with Black people. Even now, it took a pretty exceptional Black guy facing a poor candidate and worse incumbent.
I’ll point out it wasn’t illegal for black people to vote in Mississippi either. They just got shot if they actually tried to do it.
If it were 1958, I’d agree that it’s worse being back in America than being gay. But we’re living in 2008. Can you give any examples of existing laws that discriminate openly against blacks? As in, making something illegal for a black person to do but not a white person.
The reason you didn’t see many gays (besides, perhaps, Bayard Rustin) advocating for civil rights at that time – they were in the closet because society demanded that they be in the closet. As a gay, black man, I do my part for whatever efforts are needed to further modern civil rights, as you put it, but I can see myself giving more of a priority to moving beyond second class citizenship for myself as a gay man. First, insofar as there is a major effort needed on the front of modern civil rights there are many, many available to fight that fight, but since the cause of gay rights – full (not separate but equal either) – lags many years behind that of blacks, I think I’ll focus more of my energy in that area.
I’m going to have to ask you for a cite (or at least something more substantive) showing the gay rights movement is not beholden to or thankful for the civil rights movement, and how that segues or leads into the conclusion that they are [just] “trying to get theirs.” Of course we are trying to get ours; we can do that and, by building on the strides achieved during the, uhm, paleo-civil rights movement period, gratitude and thankfulness are being shown.
And while, like most people, got it that the phrase was borrowing a fashion quip, if anybody thinks that such use gets anywhere near the crux of either issue or history, then perhaps they’re not ready to engage in the discussion or be asked their opinion.
The only thing you can’t do as a gay person is get married. We are largely past de jure discrimination against any group. When gays start seeing the types of concentrated poverty and incarceration you see in the Black community, you might have a point.
One reason why you see less overt discrimination against Blacks is because society is so segregated in areas where such things are likely to happen. It’s not just progress, it’s lack of opportunity.
Like who. Name some gay groups that pitched in during the civil rights movement? Name some that have pitched in bringing light to the current struggles Black people face in this country.
What is their excuse now? The struggle for civil rights is not over, yet I don’t see many gay people advocating for anything other than gay rights.
Fair enough, but don’t pretend that when the gay community tries to hitch it’s wagon to the civil rights star, they are doing anything but trying to further their own agenda. It has nothing to do with principles or injustice, just utility. Again, that’s fine, but don’t be shocked when it rings hollow to people who disagree with the comparison.
I don’t think gay rights lags behind that of Blacks. Are more gay people likely to live in jail cells than in dorms? Do White people move out of neighborhoods when gay people move in? Do gay people get pulled over on a more regular basis because they are gay? Are people with a gay sounding name more likely to have their resumes trashed?
What kind of cite were you thinking of? With the exception of HRC, I have not seen any gay advocacy group making any real steps to address Black issues, or civil rights in general.
I would also like to point out that most people love to rent to and hire married (or partnered) gays, at least in my world. Good taste, physically fit, and no kids. When I was growing up, lots of black families would have felt blessed for just a decent house and a good reliable job.
Gay is actually the new Asian.
Blacks, Asians, women, NIAs … we have all been victims of a particular oppression. When we buy into my-oppression-was-worse-than-yours, we are playing the Oppressor’s game.
Or adopt children. Or have joint custody. Or have partner benefits. Or serve in the military openly.
And the amount of legal discrimination isn’t really the issue. There’s no acceptable minimum.
I’d argue that when you let the Oppressor play “divide and conquer” you’re playing his game. People would be better off jointly working for equal rights for everyone rather than each group individually trying to grab as much as they can for themselves. Equality is not a zero-sum game.
I can see your background point that all such analogies are (potentially) not conducive to actual understanding. OTOH, you seem to be bringing a lot more passion to this particular discussion than would seem to be indicated by a simple frustration regarding simplistic analogies.
Single people have been adopting kids throughout most U.S. states since the 1980s with some states permitting single-parent adoptions back in the 1970s.
I was mostly talking about couples adopting. IANALOAH but my understanding is that several states restrict a gay couple from adopting a child more than they would a straight couple. The same goes for one partner of a gay couple having a child and having the other partner legally recognized as the other parent.
You are correct, but it seems like Florida is the only state specifically that prohibits gay adoption outright. Most large companies provide partner benefits also.
I’ve never argued that that discrimination against gay people is acceptable, just that “gay is the new black” is a stupid, ineffective slogan, and that the civil rights movement and the gay right movement have few important similarities.
I should have seen this coming I suppose.
I’m not too passionate about it, but it bothers me that you can’t state your opinion without several people going off half-cocked trying to jump down your throat. The implication that I’m a bigot is unfair and completely at odds with everything I stand for. If I seem riled up about anything, it’s that, not the slogan.