Skip to main content

I find diaries like this Why Everyone Should Study Slavery to be a Rorschach's test about unspoken assumptions on gay rights. It tells me more about writers and commentors than any direct conversation does.

The diary stated:

It's been in the back of my mind for quite a few days now, since the avalanche  of diaries on Rick Warren, and Prop 8, and numerous comments and flames here about black folks, and comparing slavery as history to the status of GLBT battles for civil/human right.

There was never any significant number of commentators making this claim. So, why seize on this obviously out of the mainstream argument?  

I asked why was it necessary to bring up gays in the context of a diary about the study of slavery? Unfortunately, I never got a clear answer. Were this just me, I could accept comments that it was just my take on the diary. But, it wasn't just me. Thus, I think I understand the problem. Gays must be denied historical metaphor. I don't believe this belief is intentional by most people, but I do believe this is a part of our implicit assumption that we do not question or even want to admit is part of the conversation.

Let's start with queer history to understand why we must be denied even metaphor. Gay rights did not begin with Stonewall. It's been an ongoing battle for a thousand years, especially since Christianity first outlawed it and the religion (along with Islam) spread the doctrine through colonization.

So, it's with irony that the forces that tried to extinquish our existence world wide now claims that homosexuality is not accepted in most cultures through out the world when it was the spread of religious doctrine which ensured the truthiness of the statement.  Many indigenous cultures did accept some form of queerness (ie, Two spirits in some Native American culture, shamanism in others). But, that's a diary for another day. The key point is the denial. This denial is a powerful thing:

"When the international community sought atonement for the victims of Hitler's Germany at the Nuremberg Trials of 1946, neither the atrocities committed against homosexuals nor the anti-gay legislation and measures were mentioned"

link Link

If you want to understand the horrors of attempts to exterminate gays  also read Granny Helen's incredible diary on the subject.

This denial allows people to deny our suffering ever happened, and any comparion to the suffering of others is per se "offensive" because we are nothing like other humans. The denial makes it virtually impossible to know the extent of the oppression. Nor has this denial of gays right to exist subsided:

"The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The Holy See’s observer mission issued a statement saying that the declaration “challenges existing human rights norms.”

"The declaration, sponsored by France with broad support in Europe and Latin America, condemned human rights violations based on homophobia, saying such measures runcounter to the universal declaration of human rights.
“How can we tolerate the fact that people are stoned, hanged, decapitated and tortured only because of their sexual orientation?” said Rama Yade, the French state secretary for human rights, noting that homosexuality is banned in nearly 80 countries and subject to the death penalty in at least six.

France decided to use the format of a declaration because it did not have the support for an official resolution.

" Link

This process of denial is both internal (the closet, suicide and self-hate) and external (killing, jailing, maiming, socialized terror (repairative therapies, etc), firings, lack of housing, etc.). When I look at all of this, I am dumbstruck by how easy it is for others on here to ignore it.

"FBI statistics show there were 1,265 hate crimes based on sexual orientation in 2007, up from 1,017 two years earlier and 1,239 in 2003. That compares to 3,820 racially motivated incidents in 2007 and 1,400 in which the victim's religion was a factor.

Because not all states allow attacks motivated by anti-gay bias to be charged as hate crimes and because some victims are reluctant to reveal their sexual orientations to police, gay and transgender rights advocates suspect the numbers to be much higher."

The later sentence should give anyone pause in claiming to know the suffering of gays.

Much of our history is not taught at all and much of it has been destroyed or is not aknowleged. If we teach it, then we are trying to convert children to homosexuality. The oppressors have effectively wiped out gay history. So, when the leader of Iran said that Iran has no gays, he was making a statement of how the world has treated gay existence in general. We don't exist.  Indeed, Iran is one of 7 countries where our existence is cause for us to be condemned to death.

Our suffering according to men like Warren and Huckabee also does not exist. That's how Huckabee describes why gay rights are not like black rights. Blacks suffered. Gays did not.  Warren is similar. He compares us to pedophilles and supports men who have passed legislation that is the equivalent of the Nazi's Paragraph 175.

Nor is the destruction regarding our existence simple or easy to calculate. Terror is often used to reinforce social norms that hid the real damage. Recently, for example, in Brooklyn a man was murdered for appearing to be gay. Not that he was. Just the appearance. How many people hearing this story will now hide?

This denial can take even smaller forms of history. On the subway, I saw a woman scold her son because she felt the 4 year old was acting too effeminate. What willt hat boy think growing up about gays? Or himself? We are taught at an age before we have  learned our ABCs to deny our existence because that existence is wrong. Yet, people here pressume to know the impact of oppression on gays? This to me is hubris.

When people say this terror is not true in the U.S. in general, I always suggest a simple test: Go to middle America as a gay man with your partner and hold his hand outside of a gay safety zone. Better yet- kiss him. What do you feel?

With a society so powerfully against our even existence, it is not a surprise that our use of metaphor becomes a problem.  Contrary to recent beliefs by those who would deny gays the use of metaphors, the purpose of metaphors is not about exactness of facts, but, instead, about general lessons on which we can understand the world. Historical metaphors are to aid us in understanding Martin Luther King's statement, "Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere."

Yes, history can help us understand uniqueness, but it also helps us understand sameness. To paraphrase Maya Angelou: There is nothing so unique in your experience that we can not understand one other. Where history is denied its value for metaphor, we lose a way for understanding each other.

However well meaning people are regarding understanding the intricate diffrences of histories, without our ability to use history as metaphor , there is another truism that comes to mind: Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Here, our memory is shoddy because we lose a tool (historical metaphor) for analyzing what history is teaching us.

If we do not understand gay rights, women's rights, the rights of Jews, the rights of Native Americans, the rights of blacks and many others as trees in a greater forrest of the same rights of human rights- we lose the ability to remember why history matters to us all even when its not our history. This argument is not about what people should be. It's about what they are.

Metaphor is about breeding empathy for understanding how the plights of others relates to ourselves. Julian Bond understands this:

"Civil rights are not special rights, he says. They are "shared by all." "It isn’t 'special' to be free from discrimination. It is an ordinary, universal entitlement of citizenship." Most importantly, Bond takes on the ridiculous right-wing argument that civil rights for gays and lesbians somehow diminishes the black experience in the civil rights movement. "When others gain a civil right, my rights are not reduced in any way," he writes. "Civil rights are a win/win game — the more won by others, the stronger the army defending my rights becomes."

Bond continues: "People of color ought to be flattered, however, that our movement has provided so much inspiration for others, and that our tactics, methods, heroines and heroes, even our songs, have been adopted by or served as models for others."

Link

He also says:

"No parallels between movements for rights is exact. African-Americans are the only Americans who were enslaved for more than two centuries, and people of color carry the badge of who we are on our faces. But we are far from the only people suffering discrimination -- sadly, so do many others. They deserve the law's protection and they deserve civil rights too. Sexual disposition parallels race -- I was born black and I had no choice. I couldn't and wouldn't change if I could. Like race, our sexuality isn't a preference -- it is immutable, unchangeable, and the Constitution protects us against prejudices based on immutable differences."

So did Coretta Scott King:

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union," she said. "A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."

Contrast to those who would use black civil rights as weapon to deny gays their equality:

"To equate a lifestyle choice to racism demeans the work of the entire civil rights movement," the statement said. "People are free in our nation to pursue relationships as they choose. To redefine marriage, however, to suit the preference of those choosing alternative lifestyles is wrong."

Link

So, who does the denial of the use of historical metaphors serve? That's the question that was not answered last night. It goes deeper than whether the diarist mischaracterizes the arguments of gay civil rights leaders and activists both at Daily Kos and elsewhere. I believe it serves those ultimately, regardless of the diarist's intention, who would deny me equality by denying  my existence.

The use of metaphor is so powerful that it can circle back. As the NAACP Legal Defense Fund recently argued in its opposition to Proposition 8:

"We would be making a grave mistake to view Proposition 8 as just affecting the LGBT community," said Eva Paterson, president of the Equal Justice Society. "If the Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to take effect, it would represent a threat to the rights of people of color and all minorities."

"We cannot become a society that picks and chooses who is entitled to equal rights," said Alice A. Huffman, president of the California State NAACP. "We should include all people from all walks of life in the entitlement to all freedoms now enjoyed by the majority of our population As a civil rights advocate, we will continue the fight of eliminating roadblocks to freedom."

Link

Without historical metaphor, how do we expect people to understand the NAACP's meaning? Without metaphor, these events that occur to gay people are abstractions to those who do no suffer them,.

“By helping us frame meaning, metaphors provide us with a unique way of portraying the world.”

“Metaphors help us describe, visualize, and make sense of the world around us. For example, a possible metaphor for the brain is a computer. The images this metaphor creates help us to make sense of something complex -- many would consider the brain, like the computer, to have intelligence, memory, and organization, and perhaps even to be user-friendly."

Link.

Rather than continuing, let me allow the comment of one poster to describe the situation best:

Let me clear this up (10+ / 0-)
As best i can. I am a black man born and raised in 1950 and 60s Mississippi. I recall three incidents that happened to me personally. The first incident happened at the age of 9. Let me say first, these are only 3 of the thousands of incidents i experienced

My grandfather and i went to a five and dime. though we were there first in line, when the little white girl about my age came to the counter. One of the people behind the counter said to my grandfather "move back boy, don't you see that white woman". That person was a known white gay.

The second incident happened when i attempted to go into a library (which turned out to be on the wrong side of town), after i had been told by a white person, i could do so. And because it was a new library on the center line between the black and white communities. I told the white fellow behind the counter, that i wanted to checkout a book. The white man behind the counter told me,"niggers can't check out no dawn books here, get the hell out of here boy, scat". The man behind the counter was another well known gay man.

The third incident, nearly cost the lives of me and my family. a black classmate of mind, was accused of asking a white girl at one of the departments stores for a date. The white councel (kluxers) held a meeting that night. It turned out, they were told the person was me. The white man for whom my whole family picked cotton for many years (share croppers), came ahead of them and warned us, that "we had better leave right now, don't bother packing anything, because the mob was coming down the steet behind him". The person who said it was me, was another known gay guy that worked at that store.

These people were known to be gay, even in the 50s and 60s in Mississippi. They worked in places blacks could hardly dream of working. They were so comfortable in their whiteness, they treated blacks the same way the heterosexuals did. Yes, they were gay, but they had the trump card, they were white.

Please stop making the comparisons of gay discrimination to the jim crow south. Got news for you, thousand of blacks were killed whenever white people wanted to kill us. They worked us for free in jim crow, they raped us when they wanted too under jim crow. They put us away on county farms (me included, on parchman) under jim crow, where they really killed a lot of us. Not one of these racist ever paid for it and no one gave a dawn about it. For blacks gays, even though i don't believe in all this religious crap. GOD HELP YOU.

Link

How quickly the conversation is a denial of gays what have happen to them. how quickly others agreed with this poster that his suffering was an excuse to deny the suffering of others. To deny their deaths, their lives ruined, their world destroyed. This poster says there is nothing in common between the terror he felt from Jim Crow and the terror gays feel across the world. Really? Do you still believe this after the information I wrote above? If you do, ask yourself is it really about the history.

When you deny the  use of metaphor, you give license for poster such as this one to deny the death and destruction of others. A simple google on the death and destruction in the lives of gay people would have corrected the poster. But he felt emotionally justified after having read that he was justified in feeling no connection to gay issues. Others agreed enough to promote his post. Nor is this view some insignificant view. I repeatedly see this is the press and on this site. Unlike the diarist, I am prepared to provide links if people dispute this claim. What this poster is doing is saying  he can see nothing of me in his suffering.

As I wrote previously, there is much that our suffering has in common.

Originally posted to bruh1 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 11:56 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  There is no reason to assume that (9+ / 0-)

    African Americans are going to be any more sensitive to the exclusion of others.  There's no reason to assume that African Americans can't be as committed to a special status as anyone else.  
    Some African Americans are especially attached to their status as historical victims.  Some are inclined to lay a guilt trip on whites.  So?
    If we are committed to the proposition all people are equally prone to virtue and vice, then these attitudes should not come as a surprise.

    Besides, we should now know from experience that having suffered abuse does not reduce the propensity to inflict it.  Quite the opposite.  The abused tend to become the abusers.

    How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

    by hannah on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:05:09 PM PST

    •  I think it's a Constituitional issue rather... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grada3784, TheCid

      ...than just civil.

      Confront all issues in a timely manner...

      by 2questions on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:09:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wow (36+ / 0-)

      Some African Americans are especially attached to their status as historical victims.

      Or perhaps people would like others to stop spreading ignorance regarding the historical experience of African Americans.  Clearly too much to ask, lest we be accused of being "attached" to a victimhood "status."  So were Native Americans to object to feminists asserting that unequal pay is equivalent to the Trail of Tears, they'd just be attempting to maintain some unseemly attachment to victimhood, not at all attempting to preserve an honest retelling of their history, right?

      America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

      by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:19:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And some African Americans want to rewrite their (13+ / 0-)

        Historical experience...

        Last February during our work's recognition of Black History Month I mentioned the name Baynard Rustin

        Everybody went who?

        I then said When Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his speech on Washington he did so standing (figuratively) on the shoulders of Baynard Rustin.  And the reason we do not hear about him is largely due to him being not just a black man but also a gay black man

        So why a man so instrumental in civil rights so over looked

        An FBI undercover agent managed to take a photograph of Rustin talking to King while he was having a bath. This photograph was used to smear King that Rustin was having a homosexual relationship with King.

        This forced Baynard out of the limelight

        Roy Wilkins of the NAACP was also against him in part because Rustin was a member of the American Communist Party (up until 1941) but also because Rustin was imprisoned several for acts of homosexuality and he Wilkins believed it would be used against him as was Rustin relationship with King was at the time being used against King

        Rustin a year before his death in 1987, was correct to say that "Twenty-five, thirty years ago, the barometer of human rights in the United States were black people. That is no longer true. The barometer for judging the character of people in regard to human rights is now those who consider themselves gay, homosexual, lesbian

        •  very interesting post (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          marge
        •  Please there are tons of people (0+ / 0-)

          who were instrumental to putting together the March on Washington who I can't name and nobody other than true blue historians can name either.  That has nothing to do with rewriting black history.

          America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

          by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:38:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Rustin was very well known (6+ / 0-)

            As a white Jewish kid growing up in 1960's New York City, I was quite familiar the name of Bayard Rustin. While I had no idea at the time that he was gay (I had no idea at the time, that I was gay either) I most certainly knew of his importance in the civil rights movement even then. By no stretch of the imagination could I have been considered an insider or even particularly knowledgable; at that time, everything I knew about current events I read in the New York Times, where Bayard Rustin's name appeared on a reasonably regular basis. To now relegate Rustin to the ranks of the obscure is condescending at best.

            •  Condescending? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DMiller

              How the fuck is it condescending to note that many significant civil rights figures aren't taught or known?  

              America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

              by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 07:37:11 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Bayard Rustin wasn't just one of many (8+ / 0-)

            he was one of the central figures of the early Civil Rights movement. And he was forced out for being gay.

            I'm sorry, this one galls me a little bit GN1927; for someone who is so concerned with trivializing the African American experience, you just trivialized an extremely important figure to both the Civil Rights movement as a whole, and the LGBT rights movement.

            •  To clarify (6+ / 0-)

              he was forced out of the limelight. He continued to be a very active force behind the scenes; to him, winning the battle was far more important than any personal slights he might have suffered along the way.

              Among other things, he is widely credited with introducing MLK to the notion of non-violent resistance.

            •  I didn't "trivialize" anyone (0+ / 0-)

              I personally knew little of Rustin until adulthood.  Is that because he was gay, or because outside of MLK, Rosa Parks and Jesse Jackson, civil rights figures aren't sufficiently studied across the board?

              How presumptuous of you.

              America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

              by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 07:36:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  And the point of the main comment (0+ / 0-)

              was that Rustin was somehow ommitted by African Americans from study of civil rights because he was gay.  That's a bullshit claim, considering that several major figures from the civil rights movement are not frequently discussed.  Is that because African Americans have issues with Rustin, or because civil rights is largely not taught comprehensively, particularly at a grade school level?  

              America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

              by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 07:40:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  His name is Bayard Rustin (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          GN1927, sedonared, fromdabak

          if you're going to be informing people about the man, it might be a good idea to give the name correctly.

      •  this is a weird comment (0+ / 0-)

        were Native Americans to object to feminists asserting that unequal pay is equivalent to the Trail of Tears, they'd just be attempting to maintain some unseemly attachment to victimhood, not at all attempting to preserve an honest retelling of their history, right?

        Has any feminist compared the unequal pay women receive compared to men to the Trail of Tears?

        •  Isn't it bizarre? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          homoaffectional

          And no, I've never heard anyone try to force that comparison.  The comment was made for illustrative purposes.

          America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

          by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:39:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  but what does it illustrate? (0+ / 0-)

            Your imagination?

            •  It illustrates the manner in which (0+ / 0-)

              experiences can be trivialized.

              America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

              by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 07:38:25 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  What frustrates me about your example (0+ / 0-)

                is that it is created out of whole cloth. Nobody said it. You said it merely to say something outrageous that you could point to and say it was outrageous. Oh, that's called straw man, a fallacy.

                If it's true that it's an ongoing problem that people are being insensitive by inappropriately making analogies between their experience (or their group's experience) and another's experience then it ought to be easy enough to find real examples, perhaps even egregious ones. Is it too much trouble to provide one? If you find lots of juicy examples it would make an exciting diary.

                •  I'm currently having discussion (0+ / 0-)

                  in another diary, albeit a really poorly written one, which declares that if GLBTs want full rights, then GLBTs must be willing to take economic and physical casualties commensurate with the black experience in this country in order to prove commitment to seeking those rights.  Idiots in that thread are joking about having to be hosed or douse themselves on fire in order to be taken seriously under the diarist's frame (suffer equivalent civil rights injury).  I just ask myself why in God's name people cannot resist these comparisons because they always end up in pissing contests and ignorance spreading rather than education.  

                  America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                  by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 11:36:42 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  pissing contests and ignorance spreading (0+ / 0-)

                    sounds like the human condition.

                  •  not the least of which (0+ / 0-)

                    because they ignore in their attempts to find exactness that the point is that people are being killed and injured for being gay. Theya re demonstrating their ignorance of the subject matter. Again the point of analogies are not perfect overlap. You must question why people require perfect overlap rather than why we should not use common techniques of understanding each other. That's why I wrote this diary. I work off common sense mostly. Common sense raise the red flag when people are telling me that techniques uses in nearly every aspect of life are now not available to me. I want to know why? And it needs to be a good reason. I am talking about using the same techniques that MLK used . Do they seriously think that he did no use analogies and metaphor? SHould the people from whom MLK took his analogies have raised a stink as well because this analogies were not exactly the same conditions as the Jim Crow experience?

                    •  Wow, how about that (0+ / 0-)

                      the diarist ignorantly attempts to shoehorn one movement into the other, and people got mad when their experiences both current and historical were misrepresented?  Wonder why.

                      America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                      by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 01:11:52 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  That diarist that you are using an example is a (0+ / 0-)

                        bigotted asshole.

                        I took the effort to read the diary. It really makes my point for me.

                        It's not about the analogy not having any value (since again we are talking about analogies), but that they don't like the group to whom they are being compared.

                        I m not interested in placating to spinning bigotry. I simply want it to see light.

                        On the flip side, there have been arguments made that I agree with in this thread that disagrees with my diary in a way that makes sense in a non-bigoted way.

                        One poster wrote- the problem is that an analogy assumes that Americans understands what racism is or understand the history of Jim Crow. That would be a great response back. Americans, black or white, don't understand our own history much less those of others.  I have certainly seen this with how marriage in this coutry works and equal protection. The ignorance there is stunning.

                        Ignorance, at least, seems more plausible a reason not to do it than  bigots are not going to like it. I don't want the bigots to like it. I want them to spout their mouths off to make my point for me about denial of suffering.

                        •  Are we talking about (0+ / 0-)

                          accurate analogies and comparisons which draw upon a historically correct picture in order to provide guidance to other movements?  Or are we talking about comparisons which themselves display a lack of understanding regarding the history of African Americans in this country?

                          America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                          by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 01:42:58 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  you know I giveup (0+ / 0-)

                            the fact you want to parse this that much says a lot to me. Nothing can ever be connected to anything unless its exactly the same. In fact, no black person can every talk about any other black persons experience being similar unless they are all exactly the same. so hence forth no black person not having grown up in southern virginia can ever use me as a comparison because its impossible. our experiences were no exactly the same. and I am gay too so that means its in no way  possible to address the overlap like say with equal protection analysis. good luck with that sort of atomized existence. it plays directly into the hands of the right because we are sinking a part rather than realizing how we are interconnected.

                          •  Please this isn't parsing (0+ / 0-)

                            this is the cause of the entire freaking dustup, no matter the maligning of the diarist who asked people to educate themselves about the African American experience in this country before making comparisons.  I'm going even further and suggesting that people just find another damn frame because the entire conversation degenerates into nothing but a comparative pissing contest that serves to trivialize disparate experiences and gets us nowhere.  That's not parsing, that's the entire point of this debate.

                            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                            by GN1927 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 02:04:03 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  can you provide a link to that diary? (0+ / 0-)
    •  Maybe you should insert "people" instead (10+ / 0-)

      of just one race.

      It's not a good look when you do that.

      Happy Holidays From TWD. And don't shoot your eye out (unless your Cheney!)

      by sluggahjells on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:24:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  this is way off (22+ / 0-)

      Some African Americans are especially attached to their status as historical victims.  Some are inclined to lay a guilt trip on whites.

      I doubt there are many people who do this at all. I mean, as if being a victim is fun or something.

      This makes about as much sense to me as saying that gay people are just going around trying to get attention and shock everyone.

      It's an insensitive and ignorant statement.

    •  sounds like rush limbaugh! (5+ / 0-)
  •  Where is your tip jar? (37+ / 0-)

    This was really well-written and hit on a lot of really great points.

    I don't think most straight people understand the extent of homophobia in our society, and the dismissive attitude of many people is sometimes far more painful, as it just adds insult to injury.

  •  Is it possible to just look at someone and... (6+ / 0-)

    ...believe they are "Black"...!?!?

    Then...

    Is it possible to just look at someone and determine they are gay...!?!?

    Discrimination starts with color or behaviour NOT private activity.

    Confront all issues in a timely manner...

    by 2questions on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:06:36 PM PST

    •  Is it possible to look Jewish? (19+ / 0-)

      If you dont' appeart Jewish then discrimination would never happen against Jews.

      •  Of Course it Is (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RonV, brenda, sephius1, homoaffectional

        If you don't think most Jews looked different than northern Slavs, man, you should do some reading.  And that says nothing about clothing dictated or influenced by religious traditions, the fact that Jews circumcised while the people around them didn't, etc.  

        It's obvious that how you look is the shorthand, but it's far from infallible, which is sort of the point in undermining "racial" discrimination.  And I say this as someone whose family at some point around the turn of the century "passed" from being Indian (in a time and place where Indian children were taken from their families and sent to government schools) to being "white."  

        "Dignified people, without a whimsical streak, almost never offer fresh insights, in economics or anywhere else." Paul Krugman

        by Dana Houle on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:23:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's a bit of snark on my part (19+ / 0-)

          It's analogy to point  out the silliness of the argument that discrimination is more or less dependent on ease of identitification when quashing identification is part of the oppression.

          The concept of identification here is flawed.

          A boy on the subway being hit by his mother for being too effeminate. Hearing stories about people being murdered for being gay in the wrong part of the country. A guy being murdered becaue his assailants thought he looked gay. Those are part of the oppression. The oppression works in a different way to reinforce the same point.  After slavery,t he point of oppression black was to control them in social context. The point of oppressing gays (by denying their existence) is to oppress gays in a social context.

          It's ironic. The quashing of the impression of being gay  is  itself used as a claimt hat one is not discriminated against. This is little like a right winger who recently told me that gay s are discriminated against because they can marry the opposite sex.

          •  I would argue that the invisibility of ... (14+ / 0-)

            ... homosexuality generates an alienation in some ways deeper than that of racial / ethnic minorities because you believe you are the only one. People of color can at the very least see that there are others like them, suffering in the same or similar ways. The gay boy / man or lesbian girl / woman suffers alone.

            This has changed a great deal in recent decades, but when I was struggling with my homosexuality in the late 1960s, I believed I was uniquely evil.

            The only "freedom in Christ" for a follower of Rick Warren is the freedom to be a Good German.

            by The Werewolf Prophet on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:10:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I dont think we can know whatyou are saying (0+ / 0-)

              as being true or not. We can come up w th general comparisions, but that's about it. Metaphors and analogies but not certainties assuming we know what others suffer

              •  not really, bruh1... (4+ / 0-)

                as an AA gay man, put yourself in this situation...

                if someone shouts a racist epithet at you as a child, you have a family "safety net" to go to and gain   empathy.

                on the other hand, if you are an AA gay child and someone calls you by a homophobic epithet, your family might be able to sympathize, but not being gay they can't possibly empathize (unless, of course, your family also has one of those "crazy gay uncles" like me).

                again, it's the slipper slope of "the bigotry shown to me is worse than your bigotry" meme that i'm finding beyond mind-numbing here at dKos (from people of all colors and sexual identities).

                "A time comes when silence is betrayal." ~ MLK, Jr.

                by liberaldemdave on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:10:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Not only is what you say ... (4+ / 0-)

              correct, but often a gay person is disowned by their entire family.  Never happens for ethnic minorities.

              And yes, I too thought I was not only the 'only one', but that I was inherently evil, mainly because that's what youth are taught about homosexuals.

              Not so ethnic minorities, either.

              The person who has lost the ability to trust based on the actions of the party no longer trusted is not the one who has to do the work for restoration.

              by emsprater on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:29:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Please don't buy into this diary's framing (23+ / 0-)

      and head into this diarist's Oppression Olympics trap.

      GLBTs catch hell in a manner that is unique to GLBTs.  It doesn't have to be better or worse than the experiences of African Americans to be acknowledged.  Leave this useless framing, because to step in it opens the door to ignorance about the experience of GLBTs in a homophobic country.

      America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

      by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:15:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  My Suffering Is Worse Than Yours??? Lame. (52+ / 0-)

      When people of color face a hostile world, they can rely on their family's support, knowing that they are together in their fight for equality.  On the other hand, GLBT Americans are a minority within their own families, often facing devastating rejection.  

      The point is not to compare wounds.  The point is that discrimination is wrong and anyone who has suffered from it should be sensitive to others' suffering.  Period.

      •  Unless of course they are gay members of the (4+ / 0-)

        minority are their families even more supportive.

        The Grand Old Party is really a small cook-out with rancid meat as fare.

        by Adept2u on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:22:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Great comment! n/t (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tnichlsn, stitchmd, Predictor

        Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

        by MA Liberal on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:35:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  As a black woman I agree with you. (15+ / 0-)

        Although I was annoyed with blacks getting blamed for Prop.8 passing, that does not mean that I wasn't embarrassed about 70% of blacks voting for it. As for gay rights activists using the Civil Rights movement as a metaphor, I think it is rather ineffective to use it. It would be more effective using the language used by the civil rights movement rather than using the movement itself as a reference. The Civil Rights movement implored the American people to live up to its highest ideals.

        "Liberals are never so happy as when they are unhappy."--LBJ

        by Micheline on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:47:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think that there are several things (11+ / 0-)

          mixed up together. The gay rights movement has the goal of acheiving the same level of legal protection of their civil rights as has been attained by the AA civil rights movement, specifically strict scrutiny under the terms of the 14th amendment of the US constitution.

          Many gays who were not very familiar with the AA community and its religious institutions assumed a level of empathy on the part of that community for their cause that doesn't exist. They were genuinely shocked when prop 8 brought them face to face with that reality.

          •  I think there needs to be reaching out to (7+ / 0-)

            minorities and vice versa. It is a two way street. You mentioned the 14th amendment, which has been the foundation for various movements, but it is not necessary to mention the Civil Rights movement. When you say Civil Rights movement it sounds forced. Remember that what made the movement successful is that people were horrified at marchers getting beat or hosed down. This made whites identify with blacks. Now I don't think gays need to get beat or hosed down. But you have to appeal to the heart as well as the mind. Someone on another thread had flicker up showing various married gay couples. They looked everyday people. When people realize that gays are like anybody else then finally we won't be discussing this.

            "Liberals are never so happy as when they are unhappy."--LBJ

            by Micheline on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:06:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Hello? (14+ / 0-)

            Many LGBT people were shocked because we have heard solid expressions of support from black civil rights leaders, including the NAACP, Coretta Scott King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and John Lewis.

            We were shocked because black support for Prop H8 seemed so out of sync with that.

            We were shocked because many of us continue to fight to clean up our own house with respect to issues of race. Many of us are working hard to make our communities, organizations, events and leadership more inclusive while fighting racism, discrimination, and ignorance.

            We were shocked to find so many people who have experienced discrimination willing to perpetrate it on others.

            We were shocked at how many people told us to sit down and shut up.

            Goddamn right we were shocked.

            "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

            by homogenius on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:29:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  We/Us and Them (8+ / 0-)

              Your terminology is instructive. It manages to express your shock even as it elides the double oppression of people of color who are gay; who must hide (or fight) within their own communities; but who are rendered invisible by you.

              the various civil rights movements in this country lived or died by ACTION rather than after-the-fact shock at the various blows to progress. Outreach was needed; alliances needed to be formed with those who are on the front lines of their communities' oppressions. Instead, what was expected was an automatic acknowledgment of analogous pain and suffering with no preparation/eduction. As if "rights to the analogy" would automatically legitimate the struggles of gay people (of all "races"). The struggle in this country has always been to first have your pain made real to the larger public. See Philip Fischer's Hard Facts: Setting and Form in the American Novel. He talks about the "hard" cultural work done by Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin in rendering for whites a sense of the shared humanity of black people. Once the cultural work of the novel had been done, people then took this notion of black subjectivity as "fact."

              Please lose the shock. I'm ready to work with you to fight this third front on social justice.

              •  No. (3+ / 0-)

                We'll lose the shock when we have had time to process this. You don't get to tell us how long is too long. We've had people shoving this down our throats and that has only prolonged the process.

                How do I render LGBT people of color invisible?

                Did you even fucking read my comment? What part of "working hard to make our communities, organizations, events and leadership more inclusive" was unclear to you?

                No, you just want to continue the argument and make us wrong.

                Fuck that.

                "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

                by homogenius on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:02:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  No. (3+ / 0-)

                  I wasn't trying to tell you how long is too long. But if you want to make the analogy, study it. My point was that it takes time.

                  How do you render LGBT people of color invisible?

                  Many of us are working hard to make our communities, organizations, events and leadership more inclusive while fighting racism, discrimination, and ignorance.

                  I "fucking read" your comment: "Our communities, [our] organizations...more inclusive" etc.

                  I don't want to continue "the argument" and "make you wrong." I truly believe that this is the third front on the battle for social justice and if one of us is deprived of our rights then we all are.

                  Also, you don't even know who I am.

                  "fuck that"

            •  Listening to Coretta Scott King (8+ / 0-)

              for all of her exemplary qualities and think that you have acquired a full understanding of the complexities of the AA community and culture would set one for being shocked.

              I'm not arguing fairness or justice here, just the realities of opinion.

              Frankly I wasn't shocked at the people who told us to sit down and shut up, disappointed, pissed off yes, but not shocked.

              •  Thank you! (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theran, sephius1, CaliSista, princss6

                If Coretta saying something was indicative that all Blacks operate out of some Hive Mindset, then Bernice wouldn't be opposed to GLBTQ rights!

                I wish people would stop waving the Kings and Julian Bond around like they are magic wands that will 'put the Blacks in line'.

                Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

                by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:22:00 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't pretend to have a vast familiarity (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  theran, Predictor

                  with the dialog about this issue that has gone on within the AA community. However, I'm inclined to suspect that there may not have been a lot of it. Perhaps Mrs. King and others were mostly concerned with trying to build coalitions with various white minority groups. Now that's a worthwhile undertaking, but it doesn't necessarily have much impact on the thinking within the AA community.

                  I'd be really interested in hearing any thoughts you might have about this.

            •  Blacks didn't support prop 8 (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RonV, sephius1, TenthMuse

              That is a lie design to do exactly what it is doing. Divide and conquer.

              I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

              by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:04:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You might disagree (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                chowder, Predictor

                but to accuse dishonesty is inflammatory and isn't helpful to generate understanding. The numbers do support the assertion that the California AA community didn't support Prop 8. I'm glad though, that you did support it, as implied by your response.

                •  Meant to say, AA's DID support prop 8 n/t (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Predictor
                  •  You are wrong (0+ / 0-)

                    The numbers do not support your assertion that blacks voted overwhelmingly in favor of prop 8. That is simply a lie.

                    I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

                    by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:48:13 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Who said "overwhelmingly"? (3+ / 0-)

                      Nice red herring.

                      The issue is that an initial analysis said blacks supported it disproportionately.

                      I'm really sick of having the same stupid fucking argument over and over again.

                      "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

                      by homogenius on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:05:00 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •   i distinctly remember reading, upthread, (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Predictor, homoaffectional

                        ...a comment by an AA female who quoted a statistic of 70% support FOR prop 8. that sounds pretty "overwhelming" to me. however, that doesn't mean that it was necessarily race-based in its totality. one must also factor in the "soft bigotry" (cited above) against glbt's, a higher level of participation in evangelical churches (where they are taught that homosexuality is an abomination), etc., when discussing the overall dynamic of that "70%" previously cited.

                        "A time comes when silence is betrayal." ~ MLK, Jr.

                        by liberaldemdave on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:21:36 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  The 70% is a zombie meme (0+ / 0-)

                          It's a myth, based on the exit polls from the CNN website, which CNN itself warns are not accurate representations of the overall voting patterns of the subgroups within them. Why this is, yet they are still accurate predictors of election outcomes, is beyond me.

                          Later polling has shown that while the majority of AAs did vote Yes on Prop 8, it was in proportions far more similar to other racial/ethnic minority groups in California.

                          The only groups with actuall asshole levels of 70/80% participation are the elderly and heavy churchgoers.

                          •  Then there should be heavy diarying... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ZhenRen

                            ... to debunk this issue.

                            All we hear about is the racism of the "white" GLBT community towards African Americans and the invective these accusations and counter-accusations results in on both sides.  We need to start dealing in facts.

              •  I don't know why people keep (4+ / 0-)

                regurgitating the 70% figure. The NYT has done a re-analysis of the prop 8 votes and has revised down to 57% for african american votes for prop 8. But even before that, Shannika's diary, and Nate Silver over at fivethirtyeight.com did a much more detailed breakdown.

                Just to summarize:

                1. Blacks are 6% of the total pop. in California
                1. 55-60% of that 6% is incarcerated (can't vote)
                1. 15-20% of that 6% is not old enough to vote

                That leaves ~25-30% of eligible african american voters. So even if 70% of ELIGIBLE african americans vote AGAINST Prop 8, it would have been 70% of the remaining 25-30%, and it would not have matter. Nate Silver deduced that it was AGE, not RACE, that allowed Prop 8 to pass. Two weeks of both the AA side, and GLBT side saying thing out of anger towards one another, based on faulty poll analysis from the MSM. However, I not excusing the fact that alot of AA voted for Prop 8, but it was older blacks, not younger blacks.

                Some people are like Slinkies . . . Not really good for anything . . . . . But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

                by sephius1 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:04:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  And you're going to stay shocked (0+ / 0-)

              because you refuse to listen and to get past your own shit to learn from what people are trying to tell you.

              Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

              by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:45:30 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yah, HomoG - I was stunned, too. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musing85, Predictor, homoaffectional

              Hurt like a motherfucker, especially since I'd fund-raised, donated & canvassed for Obama.

              Perhaps the old guard of the Civil Rights movement made the public statements they did knowing full well they were speaking against the tide? My experience of the black Christian church is that it's pretty conservative but I thought altruism would win the day. Obviously not.

              It get it now that it was naive to think that one minority who had suffered discrimination would automatically be supportive of another also suffering discrimination; doesn't make it any easier to swallow, but there you have it.

              That some straight Kossacks would piss on us didn't surprise me; I mean, they're straight, after all. What blindsided me was the virulence of the AA identity politics types telling us to SDASTFU. I've learned a bit from some of them who can indeed think despite their vitriol, but others are so stuck in exceptionalistic victimhood / martyrdom as bad or worse than that of the Christianists. Fuck 'em, leave 'em to wallow as we move on to our own civil rights.

              The only "freedom in Christ" for a follower of Rick Warren is the freedom to be a Good German.

              by The Werewolf Prophet on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 01:12:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  re black community (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                The Werewolf Prophet

                and for that matter the entire straight world. The problem is that at some point gay activists decided to segregate themselves into safety zones and gays in general did that. Thus you had the No on 8 campaign ran this way. This left a vacuum for a very long time that the right wing political machine has started to fill. THis is why I advocate that gay groups start to really engage black, latino, low income etc communities direclty with gay activists within the community etc. This is a long term project ot change the way this country is. to do that requires bringing in new faces who get that this must won at the community level.

          •  Thank You (0+ / 0-)

            A clear, informative, and non-judgemental post is too much of a rarity here these days.

      •  Arguing backwards from ignoraqnce (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CaliSista, jazzence, bvig, gobears2000

        When people of color face a hostile world, they can rely on their family's support, knowing that they are together in their fight for equality.  On the other hand, GLBT Americans are a minority within their own families, often facing devastating rejection.

        It's nowhere NEAR as often AS it used to be, and it CONTINUES to bear stressing that EVEN in the face of all that, gay people are NOT over-represented IN PRISON. They are not FAILING TO EVEN GRADUATE FROM HIGH SCHOOL at ANYWHERE NEAR the rate that black boys are failing, ESPECIALLY in such bastions of enlightenment as New York, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

        Can't you see that the argument you are making here UNDERCUTS your own case??  EVEN without the family support, gay people are STILL doing better than black people!  Of course, this could be because black families never had any resources TO GIVE ANYway (the median net worth of black households in this nation IS ZERO).

        The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

        by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:19:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  gay black kids (4+ / 0-)

          are overrepresented among the homeless, among the abused, among the murdered -- the more effeminate, the worse the situation.  

          •  And in pretty high numbers of droputs (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LuvSet, homoaffectional

            and suicides, IIRC.  My cousin was a black gay/AIDS activist and acted as mentor for a lot of these throwaway boys.

            I really want Christianity as I was taught it by my family to have a renaissance in this country.  I'm not religious but my extended family is.  It's a mostly working-class family whose members are fiercely loyal.  I've been around gays and known it my entire life.  It wasn't considered a big deal that they lived among us.  This representation of bigoted, church-going black folks is not an image that I'm familiar with, I certainly don't see it in my nearly-97-year-old grandmother or her children who are in their 50s, 60s, and 70s.  It's not who they are.  The only time I heard them refer to "the gays" [and, yes, they used that term] was in reference to real estate and sprucing up Asbury Park, where my mother was born and most of her family raised.

          •  Over-represented WHICH WAY?? (0+ / 0-)

            By race or by orientation?
            You can't have this BOTH ways.
            Black kids ARE NOT more likely TO BE KICKED
            OUT OF THEIR HOMES FOR BEING GAY than white ones!
            They ARE, however, more likely to be homeless
            FOR OTHER reasons.  The ones of these who just HAPPEN to be gay are being double-counted in this argument.

            the more effeminate, the worse the situation

            and among the seriously effeminate/transvestite, THE BLACKER, THE WORSE THE SITUATION.

            Since the debate here was about whether gayness or blackness MADE IT WORSE, people who are both to start with either don't count at all, or have to have their problem attributed more to one than the other in order to count, and AFTER that's done, well, if the black people wind up over-represented, THAT IMPLIES THAT BEING BLACK IS WORSE, NOT that being gay is.
            You would need to talk about how bad gay WHITE kids are having it in order to make being gay worse.

            The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

            by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:51:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Bullshit (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, homoaffectional

          A black person will most likely still have the support of his/her family even if s/he is a drop-out or in prison, even if all the family can do is be supportive emotionally.

          Thrown away GLBTI kids don't even have that much ...

          The only "freedom in Christ" for a follower of Rick Warren is the freedom to be a Good German.

          by The Werewolf Prophet on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 01:24:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Not gay people of color. (0+ / 0-)

          Many of them are struggling, and I don't just mean gay African Americans, but gay Hispanics, and even gay Asians (which encompasses a lot of various ethnic backgrounds) aren't doing all that well.

    •  You ask (19+ / 0-)

      Is it possible to just look at someone and determine they are gay...!?!?

      In the eyes of a bigot, the answer is absolutely, whether or not the person they perceive to be gay is actually gay or not.

      What an ignorant comment on your part.

    •  by the way (16+ / 0-)

      You didn't read my diary- I gave two examples where it affects gays even when they aren't saying they are gay. The guy they recently kills in brooklyn was one. The socially enforced terror on gays is such tht you don't have to be out. Even the theory of it is enough to mean you should die or be maimed. I have had friends walk downthe street , relatively preppy conservative guys, who were called fag by street hoodlums. These hoodlumsw ere white. The reality is that more you pretend there is some uniqueness that goes beyond any other descrimination the more yo make it clear that you are holding up to your own, whether you intend to or not. That's the point of this diary- what views do we hold on to that continue discrimination whether we intend it or not?

    •  But conversely (18+ / 0-)

      People have been attacked for "looking gay" even when they're not gay. So one problem with LGBT bigotry is people can have their lives destroyed by the mere rumor that they're gay.

      It's a long story, but my parents thought I was gay, and treated me horribly with disgust and negligence as a result. It was painful to me and very damaging to my health and development as a teenager. If anyone wonders why this "straight" guy (I hate these absolutist labels, because a high proportion of straights have had homoerotic moments) has so much empathy for my LGBT brothers and sisters, that's the reason.

      So the invisibility aspect cuts two ways. Have the "visible" minorities ever had that particular problem? Let's just not go down this road of structuring a hierarchy of persecution. Why do this?

      •  Yes. Yes they have. (8+ / 0-)

        I have a friend that is darker than her other brothers and sisters who is derided on a daily basis by her parents about how dark she is and how it wasn't possible to be the dark child of of two light skin parents.

        Or my best friends who recently confessed to me she wished when she was a little girl that she could become a white woman because that was the way the world was supposed to be.

        I remember one radio host on a morning program describing how relieved she was that her child came out with lighter skin than she did because she didn't want her child to grow up like she did being teased and tormented by those who disliked dark skinned women.

        I have tons of other stories like this that aren't told or aren't shared for different reasons or another.

        Colorism isn't discussed much outside of the black community, but it is very real, especially for dark skinned black women.  

        •  Having had many, many discussions (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wader, Predictor, Niwind

          about this with friends (and I'm white, btw) thanks for bringing this up. I've heard the downsides from both dark and light skinned women. It's not something I think the larger white community knows much about.

          Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - WSCoffin

          by stitchmd on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:50:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I acknowledge that such issues exist (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wader, Predictor, KentuckyKat

          but you haven't acknowledged that discrimination can begin with mere assumption when it comes to behavior. Few people will assume I'm Black because I do something that is associated with Black culture. The point is your notion that there aren't points of similarity as well as unique disadvantageous between all forms of bigotry and discrimination is erroneous.

          Different forms of bigotry and discrimination have obvious similarities and commonalities as well as their own unique aspects.

          •  I agree with that. I agree that (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mainefem, Predictor, ZhenRen

            many are taught that men doing something that seems to be so called unmasculine are treated as outcasts and mistreated.  I've seen it first hand and have corrected and informed relatives that it is not acceptable to me to do such things.  That it is in fact ignorant.

            But I am also asserting that black women are also treated as abnormal or unacceptable by not only their actions but also by the color of their skin.  It is not completely applicable but it is very similar in terms of the silence it is treated with.

            •  And that means what to you (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tonedevil, Predictor

              vis-a-vis the comparisons of the LGBT lack of equality to AA lack of equality? Just why does that comparison bother you? You can't acknowledge even some justification of the comparison? This is obvious oneupmanship. It's an exercise in "who can trump whom?"

              When we point out similarities, you say we're wrong and you point out the differences. And when we point out differences or unique disadvantageous, we're wrong there too, and you point out the similarities. You're trying to have it both ways.

              When I say there are unique disadvantages that each oppressed group has, including GLBT's, you have to trump that with something to disprove my thesis? That no matter how valid some these views are, you must find some stretch of the truth to refute them? It seems as if you want to establish a hierarchy of suffering. It is as if you want to find a way to distance one group of oppressed from the other, as if that group would be tainted by acknowledging glbt's are in any way similar.

              •  First, chill out... (6+ / 0-)

                second, I agree with you. I do  think there are relevant correlations between the Black Civil Rights movement and the Gay rights movement.  I don't mind the analogy being made between them.  At all.  I agree with you.  I believe fully in complete rights for all gays and that they should be protected and people need to accept, not only tolerate, them in society.  

                And if I were to switch this around and say "Why is it so offensive to you that I am comparing the the struggle of black women to gay rights?  Of course that means you are totally against black rights and bigoted because you won't connect the two!"

                But that isn't what you are saying anymore than it is what I am saying.

                What I was answering was that, yes, black women have felt that type of discrimination that you, yourself, asked for.  It is not saying that there aren't differences, because no experience is totally the same, but it is an experience that Black Americans experience and can be familiar with.  That feeling of not belonging or being rejected by family members because of who you are or how you look, or what you believe in.

                That is all I am saying.

                •  Okay... (5+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mainefem, zett, dharmafarmer, Predictor, Niwind

                  Thanks. I misread your intent. And I don't object to comparing the struggle of Black women to the LGBT rights struggle. Not at all.

                  It all breaks my heart, and I want all of these forms of discrimination to end. I'm sorry if you experienced that kind of parental rejection. It can really hurt.

                  •  It's okay. (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    LuvSet, zett, dharmafarmer, Predictor

                    I think we all are a little edgy about this and I think that I have made some mistakes in terms of reaching out to others in the past couple of weeks in not understanding where they are coming from.  Sometimes I've looked back on some of the posts I made and said "Shit, I shouldn't have made that post that totally came out the wrong way."  lol

                    But much love to you.

                    •  I went back and reread your posts (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      zett, dharmafarmer, Predictor, Niwind

                      in reply to mine, and have a better understanding of the point you were making. Maybe that's what we all need to do. Just listen a bit more to each other. It's not always easy, but without that, how can any understanding ever be found?

                      •  Thank you for that. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Predictor, ZhenRen

                        I've just been sitting here reading all the posts, "listening" to all the personal stories, and I started thinking about Martin Niemöller's poem - the one that begins each stanza with "First they came for....," and it caused me to reflect on who "they" are in that poem.  It's kind of easy to hold oneself outside of it, especially because the poem ends with "and then they came for me," but it truly seems that each of us is capable of becoming part of "they," if but for a few moments and if we don't listen to one another. So, thank you again for your post.

      •  I wonder why "passing as white" (4+ / 0-)

        doesn't seem to show up as an analogy for the closet in these discussions. It's certainly struck me as having many commonalities.

    •  Or sex (14+ / 0-)

      You can't divide it all and say just becuase of color, that that is the only determining factor. How about Asians? By their eyes we can know them. And how about women? Women have been discriminated against for centuries and were easily recognizable just by looking at them.
      We need to stop this pissing contest about black civil rights being more important than anyone else's. It's all about human rights. And the fact that one group would deny those rights to another just becuase they don't think they've suffered enough is a bit beyond my ken.

      Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

      by MA Liberal on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:34:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No one is saying that (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RonV, Balam, bvig

        No one is saying that Black civil rights are more important than anyone else's. That is the diarist's strawman.

        I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

        by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:25:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're abusing your HR privilege above. (n/t) (17+ / 0-)

          39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

          by Larry Bailey on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:30:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think the diary should be deleted (0+ / 0-)

            So I indicate my displeasure the only way I can. The entire diary, and in particular the very first comment, borders on race baiting. We don't need that here.

            I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

            by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:09:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Brenda, if you're referring to... (11+ / 0-)

              ...the first comment in the diary itself, can't see what you're talking about.  If you're referring to the first comment in Comments, then that comment was not by the diarist. If you're referring to the first comment BY the diarist, it said nothing more than "Tip Jar".

              And, the diarist is a Gay African-American. How could you say he's race-baiting?

              You've been here long enough to know the rules on use of the HR, and you abused those rules.

              39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

              by Larry Bailey on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:23:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The first comment (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                RonV, evilene689

                is quite bad and it does reflect badly on the diary. How much do you wanna bet it shows up on O'Reilly?

                "How could you say he's race-baiting?"
                I think what we have here is a full blown narcissistic personality disorder meltdown. The diarist is at times not even coherent and switches tactics when they don't receive the negative attention he so desperately needs. I think he will do and say anything to get attention. Anything.

                I don't think we've yet to see the last of this either. I think he'll amp up the crazy even more.

                I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

                by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:00:38 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, people are "saying that" (5+ / 0-)

          Here's a few examples of ranking the status of the two movements. Now, to be clear no one has stated the LGBT movement is identical to other movements, only that it is analogous. The comparison is about oppression and the demand for equal rights. Who suffered most shouldn't be an issue. It isn't the degree of suffering that is compared, but rather the nature of the social inequality in terms of rights, and of the struggle to achive those rights.

          Notice the construction of these statements, and the use of the word STATUS. Aside from the fact that no one compared the LGBT movement with slavery, but rather with Jim Crow, the comments clearly are attempting to rank the two movements.

          This reveals the preoccupation with status and ranking is what most concerns this particular diarist:

          Why everyone should study slavery, by Deoliver47

          It's been in the back of my mind for quite a few days now, since the avalanche  of diaries on Rick Warren, and Prop 8, and numerous comments and flames here about black folks, and comparing slavery as history to the status of GLBT battles for civil/human rights.

          Homophobia, and the status of gay rights or lack of rights in the US is not the same as slavery.

          •  ZhenRen (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Predictor

            I read that differently.  For instance, sometimes in my work, I call a court to get a status update on a document I've filed. I'm inquiring about where in the process it is, how soon there will be a ruling, etc.  That's the manner in which I read that diarist's expression - where in the process of achieving gay rights are we?

            •  The context of Deoliver47's dairy (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bruh1, Predictor

              doesn't suggest that interpretation of the word status, in my view. I left out several other statements from the dairy for brevity's sake, but the overall objection of the diarist to the comparison indicated a strong discomfort with any correlation between the LGBT's struggle for equality and that of AA's. The diarist felt that the comparison was actually detrimental to the AA movement, as if such a historical analogy was tantamount to violating a trademark or copyright.

              So where does that leave me?  Pissed off and ready to fight all oppressions, I think.  But also reflective about the fact that they vary, and acutely aware that some counter movements actively work against others.

              But history is history, and it is completely appropriate to make such comparisons, and no one will be harmed by the comparison. The diarist cryptically never defined just what sort of harm would occur, leaving us to speculate. But clearly, the comparison was so upsetting and disturbing to her that it leaves the clear impression that she sees it as reflecting very badly on the AA struggle for equality, as if there is something so unsettling and unnerving about GLBT's that she didn't want any correlation to be made. The attempt to completely distance the AA struggle from GLBT's is so arbitrary and forced that it clearly reveals more than just an academic difference of opinion, but rather a strong visceral reaction on the part of the diarist. That's my opinion.

              •  Agree with your post (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ZhenRen

                The danger for the gay activist is to allow these arbitrary arguments to continue without challenge. That was the mistake of No on 8 and it continues into discussions on Warren. By not challenging arguments, people will act on them as if the arguments are per se true. At least, by debating whether the arguments are true into the open, it gives gay rights activists a chance to fight the arguments. The opposite- is a clear loser.

    •  yeah... (5+ / 0-)

      ...but each kind of hate has it's own perils.

      I find it easier to be a cis black woman than a transwoman... you know with respect to violence and all.

      The bigotry is not the same... but it sure as hell is related.

    •  So, just stay in the closet? (11+ / 0-)

      That's completely asinine.

      I do think there is a huge difference between how gays and blacks are discriminated against, but it's still discrimination.

      Blacks are basically told to remain separate, distinct, and subservient. They are visually distinctive, so they aren't given a place at the table.

      Gays are basically told to sit down, shut up, and fit in. When someone says that homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice" they mean "get back in the closet you filthy fucking faggot, we'll tolerate you if we cannot see you".

      (-7.38,-2.51) 76% of dKos readers think I'm a secret wing-nut operative!

      by Gustavo on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:23:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You speak as if there were just one model (9+ / 0-)

      of discrimination, and that model was definied by racism.

      I'm curious as to what your distinction is, incidentally, between behavior and private activity (which is, after all, behavior).

    •  of course it's possible ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      musing85, LuvSet, Predictor

      to look at someone and assume they are gay.

      Hate crimes occur on such a basis frequently.

      The person who has lost the ability to trust based on the actions of the party no longer trusted is not the one who has to do the work for restoration.

      by emsprater on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:26:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor

      Not all people who identify as black look like they just stepped off the boat from Africa. I know one individual who, were it not for his habit of wearing a dashiki, could be taken for someone from the southern Mediterranean, or as an Australian aborigine.

      And yes, it is possible to look at someone and determine that they are gay. Oftentimes, that "determination" is wrong--as it was in New York a few weeks ago when some thugs shouting anti-gay epithets severely beat an Ecuadorean man (who was not gay), because he was walking home arm-in-arm with his brother. They were possibly walking that way because they'd both been drinking, or perhaps because it's a custom among their people. One of the brothers died of his injuries. In New York fucking City. Surely if there's anyplace where you'd think it would be "safe" to be gay, it's New York City, right?

      Discrimination starts with anything that someone else thinks is different or devalued.

  •  Another excellent diary! (24+ / 0-)

    Thank you.

    The ability of gays to remain relatively invisible has been a protection to some extent, but has also been a curse. For individuals it has often meant a lonely burden of trying to come to terms with one's own personal realities. For gays as a social and/or biological group  it has made it easy for the mainstream to convince themselves that homosexuality is an extremely rare aberration.  There really is much about the experience that is unique. While the abilities and contributions of women have been under valued, there has never been any question about their existence.

  •  At this point, what exactly is the use (15+ / 0-)

    of this discussion other than shutting down dialogue?  Some assert that the current GLBT struggle for civil rights is identical to that of African Americans during Jim Crow.  Many, including myself, don't think that is accurate and the comparison, normally articulated by people who don't understand the horrors of Jim Crow and the near total economic deprivation which accompanied it, would like the ignorance to stop.

    This is a very useless discussion at this point IMO.

    America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

    by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:12:57 PM PST

    •  I don't think folks are saying it's identical (28+ / 0-)

      in every way. it's obvious that each group of people fighting for their rights endure different hardships (let's not forget women).
      But the fight for civil rights is a fight for human rights. And for one group to get so upset that they would deny others theirs simply because they haven't traveled the same road confuses me.

      Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

      by MA Liberal on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:30:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And herein lies the problem (22+ / 0-)

        for one group to get so upset that they would deny others theirs

        This has nothing to do with denying rights for anyone.  This has to do with not allowing what is the unique experience of African Americans in this country to become basically trivialized.  I have absolutely no problem with the use of Jim Crow-era Civil Rights as an illustrative tool, to educate others using accurate analogies, or the examination of that struggle to find successful strategies and framing.  

        I do have a problem with:

        1. People forcing comparisons to the point at which an experience is trivialized in order to make the comparison work: for example, in a diary describing what life is like being forced into the closet, someone goes, well, women victimized by misogyny and those subject to a pathological view of religion are in the closet too.  I objected to that, not because as a woman I am somehow insensitive to misogyny or want to deny myself rights, but because the experience of being forced into a closet as a GLBT in this country is a unique experience and deserving of discussion without other experiences ignorantly shoehorned into that discussion.
        1. People inaccurately retelling the African American experience in order to make an otherwise valid point, but unwittingly and unmaliciously spreading ignorance: for example, a comment declared that Jim Crow was largely a social order, similar to the social order which denies personhood to GLBTs.  Totally absent was a recognition that Jim Crow in fact was also designed to brutally enforce a near-total economic exclusion of African Americans from the wealth which was produced from their labor.

        Why does the African American experience need to be so carelessly cited in these discussions?  And if it's causing a problem regarding communication between GLBTs (of every color) and the African American community (of every sexual orientation), why not use more care?

        America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

        by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:51:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your question (7+ / 0-)

          Why does the African American experience need to be so carelessly cited in these discussions?

          (I would disagree with your word 'carelessly', btw)

          can probably best be explained within the diary:

          Please stop making the comparisons of gay discrimination to the jim crow south. Got news for you, thousand of blacks were killed whenever white people wanted to kill us. They worked us for free in jim crow, they raped us when they wanted too under jim crow. They put us away on county farms (me included, on parchman) under jim crow, where they really killed a lot of us. Not one of these racist ever paid for it and no one gave a dawn about it. For blacks gays, even though i don't believe in all this religious crap. GOD HELP YOU.

          Who brought it up first? Did members of the African-American community, or members of the LGBT community? Frankly, does it even matter anymore?

          The comparison and analogies continue to be made on both sides. And I personally have heard black individuals refuse to support LGBT civil rights as civil rights at all, specifically because they do not see the struggle as even remotely comparable. As shown in the quote above.

          It comes from both sides. And used to support both (all?) sides of the argument.

          Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - WSCoffin

          by stitchmd on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:00:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm sorry that's really not true (10+ / 0-)

            the original diary in which that comment was posted was really and truly in response to these comparisons.  The comment (which I tipped) was about a retelling what life was REALLY like during Jim Crow, and thank God there are still living witnesses to tell it.  Could I have done without the comparison to GLBT's, you bet!  But I personally had to tip for the refreshment of hearing an accurate recounting of what African American life was really about pre-civil rights.

            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

            by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:22:00 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Bullshit. (8+ / 0-)

              The point of that comment was to paint gay white men as "oppressors" who didn't suffer any discrimination. And it is directly at odds with the life experience of the vast majority of gays in the South during that period.

              "Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole. Troll-be-gone...apply directly to the asshole."

              by homogenius on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:34:19 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  I just disagree (4+ / 0-)

              not with the story of life under Jim Crow laws. That was horrible and the stories should continue to be told. As a white woman growing up in the South, I've heard the stories from both sides, and we should not ever forget.

              But too often I've heard these kinds of horrific stories used not just to describe what happened to African Americans during that point of time but also to diminish the hell that LGBT people have endured, and by that to justify their own ongoing discrimination. More than once I've heard people say, "You can hide the fact that you're gay, but I can't hide the fact that I'm black!" To which I want to say, would you want to hide your color if you could? For some people, I think an honest answer to that question could speak volumes.

              No, LGBT people have not been formally denied their rights to vote. But their stories are just as valid and important to hear as those of people who lived under Jim Crow laws. I know I don't need to bring up Matthew Shepard as perhaps the most well known example of what homophobia can do; but he's far from the only one. I've known people who were afraid to walk in areas because they were gay. I've known people kicked out of their own homes for being gay. So many, many stories are out there; are they any less valid?

              Not equivalent, mind you, but no less valid and important. And so I don't think the comparison is careless, at all.

              Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - WSCoffin

              by stitchmd on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:11:15 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  "Trivial" is another way to play the Oppr. Olymp. (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          stiela, KMc, TiaRachel, homogenius, KentuckyKat

          Particularly when the participants and audience of the metaphors discussed in this diary are hostile toward, or at best largely ignorant about, the rights theory that you want to explore in such nuance.

          What purpose does it serve for you to denounce GLBT comparisons to Jim Crow?  Sure, you want a more nuanced discussion, but you seem to be ignorant that the people who need to hear these comparisons are not at all open to having such a nuanced discussion.  Here on the kos we can, because we share a strong rights background and understanding, but your average Yes-on-8 supporter isn't going to understand the "nuance."  They're just going to hear "gay's aren't being oppressed since it's not as bad as Jim Crow."

          So I ask again, what purpose does it serve for you to denounce GLBT comparisons to Jim Crow?  It seems that all that you are doing is playing the oppression olympics, when what you should be doing is standing up for the common cause of civil rights.

          •  THERE IS *NO* AVERAGE!! (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Predictor, RinaX, bvig

            but your average Yes-on-8 supporter isn't going to understand the "nuance."  They're just going to hear "gay's aren't being oppressed since it's not as bad as Jim Crow."

             This is simply factually false.  You cannot get to 51% of something as big as California (with all that cultural, ethnic, and ideological diversity) with ONE viewpoint.  Different people voted yes on 8 for DIFFERENT reasons and PLENTY of those people understand that Jim Crow was not the ONLY form of oppression, that other people still can be and still are being oppressed in other ways.  In particular, the 53% of the California electorate THAT IS FEMALE understands that there exist modes of oppression other than Jim Crow.  So in the first place, there IS NO SUCH THING as an "average" H8-supporter, and in the second, far too many people DO understand other modes of oppression for NOT understanding them to be the PEAK of the bell curve.

            The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

            by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:13:53 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  If the horrors (7+ / 0-)

            of Jim Crow aren't being accurately discussed, then this piece of history is in fact being ignorantly trivialized.  There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

            If we're really interested in educating, fighting ignorance with more ignorance simply isn't going to cut it.

            Not if we're looking for real progress here.

            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

            by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:18:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're still playing the OO. (7+ / 1-)
              Recommended by:
              chase, stiela, KMc, TiaRachel, DMiller, Tonedevil, Valahan
              Hidden by:
              jazzence

              You still insist that the comparison is not valid unless the "horrors" that African Americans experienced are explicated at great length, otherwise the comparison is cheap and tawdry because LGBT Americans haven't suffered to that degree.

              You're not getting it.  I'm not interested in playing that game, and neither is the diarist.  I'm interested in how reminding people about past struggles for civil rights may open their minds about current struggles.

              Metaphors are not absolute equivalencies.  When I say, "the lamp was like the sun," I am not predicating that the lamp was larger than the earth and fueled by nuclear fission.  Stop getting so bogged down in the trees and focus on the bigger picture, which is getting civil rights for all Americans now.

              •  Making the analogies WILL HELP with this (0+ / 0-)

                Metaphors are not absolute equivalencies.  When I say, "the lamp was like the sun," I am not predicating that the lamp was larger than the earth and fueled by nuclear fission.  Stop getting so bogged down in the trees and focus on the bigger picture, which is getting civil rights for all Americans now.

                Why can't we ALL JUST AGREE on this??
                In real life, things OTHER than this get said FAR too often.  The single most damaging trope that recurs here is the allegation that black people legally have some rights that gay people don't yet have, therefore, a fortiori, gay people are currently "more oppressed", at least legally.  The truth is in fact the opposite: black people in general are so much more hated and despised in this culture THAN gay people that EVEN with superior legal protections and family support, BLACK MEN ARE STILL DOING WORSE than gay ones by a VAST number of measures, from health to life expectancy to high-school-graduation rates to incarceration rates to homeownership rates to  GAWD, AD NAUSEAM.

                The best argument toward  ending "the Oppression Olympics" between THESE two groups is simply to note that THAT HEAT IS OVER AND THE BLACK SIDE WON.

                The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

                by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:37:01 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Okay (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sebastianguy99, CaliSista, bvig

                So if I claim that as a female dealing with statistical pay disparities, this is just like the Trail of Tears and anyone who cares about equal rights must buy into my framing, is that reasonable to you?  Or would you ask why one belief needs to be the prerequisite of the other?  Particularly if during the course of my comparison, I make misstatements or display ignorance regarding the Trail of Tears?  "I'm just like the Native Americans during that march because denying me equality means I can't eat just like they couldn't."  Would such a statement, ignorantly trivializing what went one, seem remotely useful to you?  That's what I'm saying.

                America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:42:27 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Jim Crow is old and tired (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tonedevil

              If the horrors
              of Jim Crow aren't being accurately discussed, then this piece of history is in fact being ignorantly trivialized.  

              WILL YOU NEVER shut your ignorant YAP about what black people ought to be trying to get discussed?!?  I AM BLACK and I AM LIVING with the legacy of Jim Crow (as are my parents and sisters) and WE DO NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK IF ANYBODY ever discusses Jim Crow again!  JIM CROW HAS been adequately and accurately discussed!  What NEEDS discussing are the present ongoing consequences of Jim Crow, AS OPPOSED to the "history"!!  Right now, discussing the history HAMPERS progress because everybody compares the present to that history and says "look how much easier black people have it today, THAN they had it during Jim Crow -- and they overcame -- Barack Obama overcame -- SO WHY CAN'T YOU ??"  THAT is what is hampering "real progress".

              fighting ignorance with more ignorance simply isn't going to cut it.

              Then YOU should STOP talking.

              The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

              by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:31:47 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Where are you getting this? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sebastianguy99, skrekk, pinkbunny

                I'm expressing my opinion, period.  I don't speak for you and you sure as HELL don't speak for me.  Say your peace and move on.

                America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:43:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  When the CAPS come out (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  GN1927, sebastianguy99, skrekk

                  it's best just to move along, I think.

                  •  It's a shame (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sebastianguy99

                    because IMO george always has a good point hidden in his rantings.  And I mean hidden, because the comments are so nasty when he gets wound up.  This comment has a very spectacular point: who needs to talk about the history of Jim Crow when the present circumstance of the African American community, which is a consequence of racist institutions in this country, should be the center of conversation.  Brilliant point, but articulated in such a foolishly hostile way.

                    America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                    by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:47:49 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  We don't need more oppression olympics (0+ / 0-)

                      LGBT people should stop fighting for equality because black men have it worse?

                      •  Of course not (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        TenthMuse

                        And the fact that this either/or scenario has been created is exactly my problem with the sloppy use of these comparisons.

                        America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                        by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:57:24 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  This is not the fault of the comparisons (0+ / 0-)

                          it's the fault of people who are only interested in comparing suffering and oppression instead of uniting to end all injustices.

                          •  Then why did you just make it? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sebastianguy99

                            George posted (an albeit, really nastily stated) comment regarding, in part, the need to examine the current implications of the African American experience rather than the historical ones, and (IMO, really needlessly) stated that African Americans have had and do have it worse.  Do I agree with that framing?  No.  But you replied that this insinuates that GLBTs have no place fighting for equality if African Americans still catch hell.  I personally don't see why this framing is at all necessary.

                            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

                            by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:02:17 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No idea what george is trying to say, tbh (0+ / 0-)

                            Once people start raging with the capslock, I tend to be unable to distinguish what they mean sincerely and what they mean sarcastically.  I wouldn't take my reply to him as some sort of thesis of my beliefs.

                          •  ge0rge ALWAYS uses capslock, even when calm. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Predictor

                            Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

                            by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:38:39 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  I agree with you (5+ / 0-)

          but I suspect Bruh1 does too; I don't think he's positing that we should claim these experiences are identical; rather that there are points of resonance.

          I think the key is to find a way to have this discussion without forcing the analogy. I don't believe that it's good to pretend that there are no similarities; can't we acknowledge difference and similarity at the same time? If we can't, then I have little hope for language as a means of communication, frankly.

        •  if you think pointing out (6+ / 0-)

          gay discrimination has analogies to black discimination under Jim Crow- perhaps thats the problem right there. You dont' see the points of similarity. The violence, the denial of equality under the law, the use of religion to justify it, the labeling of activists as angry, etc are all things each has experienced. Tell me again why we don't have thing sin common and why we can not speak of these commonalities, and why such commonalities trivalize anything?

      •  Some are. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil

         

        I don't think folks are saying it's identical in every way.

        THAT is NOT the issue!  The issue IS that PLENTY of folks are saying that oppression along the sexual-minority axis is AS BAD OR WORSE!
        IRrespective of whether it is or isn't identical!
        They are dick*SIZING* about it!  The issue is not whether they're identical, but rather whether one is as LONG/*bad* as the other!

        AND IT ISN'T.

        It's NOT EVEN CLOSE.

        But the METAPHOR is still valid, which is why allegations that the metaphor is somehow being "denied" are just BULLSHIT.
        The people TRYING to deny the metaphor are right-wing idiots, who unfortunately come in more than one color.  I don't personally know of any liberal black people who
        are denying the metaphor, and given that this is a liberal board, I don't concede the local relevance of ANY attempt to deny the metaphor.

        The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

        by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:09:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Difference of interpretation: (19+ / 0-)

      Some assert that the current GLBT struggle for civil rights is identical to that of African Americans during Jim Crow.

      I feel like the heart of this problem is that many people hear what you said above, when in fact what is actually being said is:

      The current GLBT struggle for civil rights is similar to that of African Americans during Jim Crow.

      Because there are similarities.

      And there are differences.

      Because every struggle for civil rights is a different.

      But no matter how many faces oppression wears, it is always oppresion behind the masks, and we are stronger for acknowledging that it has been fought again and again, in many different ways and times, and to draw on those battles for knowledge.

    •  Given the rather breathtaking ignorance.... (17+ / 0-)

      ...that has been on display in a lot of these diaries from people hell-bent on trivializing the experiences of LGBT people, I don't agree it's useless.  Analogy, metaphor, and applicability are not the same thing as identicality.  And objecting to the idea that there's any applicability between an effort to secure equality under the law for a despised minority and the archetypal example of an American movement seeking to secure equality under the law for a despised minority is not only nonsense, but deeply offensive.  It is offensive primarily because it seems by and large to be coming from those who are seeking to justify their own refusal to consider the matter of equality for LGBT citizens as a matter of fundamental justice.  People who don't, in short, give a fuck, and who therefore resort to "come back and talk to me in 400 years" to end discussion.

      The only choices in dealing with this are attempting to educate people as to what many of us are thinking and feeling about this crap, flame it mercilessly, or simply leave.

      •  We can't fight ignorance with more ignorance (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99, Balam, bvig

        I'm going to be flamed for saying this, but a great way to trvialize the experience of GLBTs is to open an Oppression Olympics contest with African Americans (of every sexual orientation).  Guaranteed to trivialize.  Because the response is going to be: you don't know anything about slavery or Jim Crow and don't go through anything because you have not have had to rebuild a community after those experiences.  Set up the Oppression Olympics, and everybody loses.

        People do not have to believe that gay rights exactly equals the historic (and incomplete) struggle for African American civil rights to care about fundamental justice or equality, or support full marriage rights for gay people, or promote education and tolerance.  Framing it in such a "with me or against me" fashion is almost a waste of time.

        America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

        by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:09:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Everybody DOES NOT lose (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Adept2u

          Because the response is going to be: you don't know anything about slavery or Jim Crow and don't go through anything because you have not have had to rebuild a community after those experiences.  Set up the Oppression Olympics, and everybody loses.

          God DAMN, you SUCK at this.
          I AM RIGHT HERE.
          I can RESPOND FOR MYSELF !!
          I do NOT NEED YOU telling people what MY response is going to be!

          The Olympics get participation from a GREAT MANY countries, just as there are a great many groups that get oppressed.  But NOBODY WAS TALKING about having the oppression olympics HERE!  We WERE talking about TWO groups specifically!

          And that is a HELL Of a much LESS complex situation!
          THAT is a heat that CAN be run, and adjudicated, AND WON, and BLACK PEOPLE WIN that heat!  IT IS NOT close!!

          The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

          by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:16:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not trying to talk for you george (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sebastianguy99, pinkbunny

            you have your own opinions and please don't feel constrained by me when expressing them.  I don't talk for anyone, but I am going to bring my perspective into this.

            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

            by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:23:19 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  And btw (4+ / 0-)

            I am deliberately refusing to engage in this particular "who has it worse" contest: that of GLBTs (of every color) and African Americans (of every sexuality) because it is pointless (I have bold html code too) number one, and number two, it is much more important to me to acknowledge the legitimacy of the GLBT struggle for equal rights and that includes at the very least an acknowledgement of my (admittedly and very limited) understanding of what life is like for GLBTs in this country.  I'd rather that be the starting place of conversation than "who has and had it worse."  Your perspective is different because you are both black and gay.  I don't have to be wrong for you to be right and vice versa.

            America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this. - President Obama

            by GN1927 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:35:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I don't disagree with you (4+ / 0-)

          that "setting up the Oppression Olympics" is a bad idea.

          I disagree with you as to who's doing it.  And I sure as hell don't think this diarist is, your rather dismissive why-have-this-discussion comment notwithstanding.

    •  identical? (0+ / 0-)

      I missed this claim.

      Similar - obviously. But identical? Really?

    •  I don't believe anyone is asserting that they (5+ / 0-)

      are identical (or if anyone is, they're a distinct minority). Bruh1's assertion is that it is harmful to pretend that there is no point of connection or relationship. And as I agree with him that it is harmful to pretend such a thing, I believe that no having this conversation is worse than useless.

    •  Wrong (5+ / 0-)

      I have not read anyone who asserts that the struggles are identical. Not one diary, not one comment, no one. What I have read is people comparing the two struggles.

      Funny, the Civil Right's Movement often drew upon the struggle of the Jews in Captivity as their historical metaphor.

  •  The Semantic Metaphorical Wars to Claim Oppressio (16+ / 0-)

    n. I don't see why the idea of solidarity is so controversial. Oppression is evil. The idea that comparisons based on certain similarities is false is one that flies in the face of all rationality.

    Allowing those differences to be exploited is giving in to divide and conquer syndrome. Tipped & recc'd.

    •  it doesn't have to be about claiming oppression (3+ / 0-)

      Some people just don't think the analogy is very useful. What people think of the analogy isn't necessarily a measure of their commitment to justice or solidarity.

      •  IT IS SO TOO (0+ / 0-)

        Some people just don't think the analogy is very useful.

        Well, ALL of THOSE people are EITHER bigots or IDIOTS.
        But why do we have to speculate about what "some people" think!  Can't you have enough integrity to simply state what YOU think, or, if someone else's opinion is relevant, TO QUOTE it???

        The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

        by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:10:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  What a red herring (5+ / 0-)

        This is fresh.  How could it not be useful for a civil rights movement to make comparisons to previous civil rights struggles?

        What's really going on is that some people don't want the legitimacy of a historical civil rights struggle to be questioned at all by way of comparing it to a current civil rights struggle.

        It's just like how some feminists who oppose female genital mutilation will do everything they can to shut down comparisons between female genital cutting and male genital cutting.  They fought their battle and won, and they don't want to risk their spoils to help anyone else be protected.

        The same situation is happening here, in my eyes.  We are seeing a race/sexual orientation division.  Some people who have gained from civil rights struggles based on race don't want their spoils risked to help the LGBT people of America.  Such people want to create as much distance as they can by denying LGBT activists historical metaphors.

        I don't think anyone could intelligently argue that historical metaphors aren't useful.  That's pretty asinine.

        •  red herring, indeed (0+ / 0-)

          I don't think anyone could intelligently argue that historical metaphors aren't useful.

          Thanks for that. Yeesh.

          OK, now, a good start would be to read the diary that bruh1 linked to in the first sentence.

          What's really going on is that some people...

          ...like to engage in mind-reading. ;)

          •  Nothing new (0+ / 0-)

            Read it when it was on the Rec list, still think it's extremely ignorant and missing the point.  Still think you're only interested in playing the Oppression Olympics.  Don't think it's productive to play that game.

            •  so, why do you think that? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CaliSista

              Seriously, I'd like to get inside your head on this. If I believe that some people who aren't homophobic -- indeed, who are LGBT allies -- are critical of some analogies between black civil rights and gay civil rights, just where does that place me in the "Oppression Olympics"?

              •  Ask "Who's the audience and what's the goal?" (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mainefem

                To answer your question, we have to get to the root of why we're even having this discussion in the first place.

                People like Deoliver47, who wrote the diary Why Everyone Should Study Slavery, argue that the LGBT movement should not use historical comparisons to past civil rights struggles for two reasons: 1) the LGBT community has not suffered to the extent that other disadvantaged groups have suffered.  This is the Oppression Olympics, wherein minorities create a circular firing squad and bash each other while the White Heterosexual Christian Male laughs all the way to the bank.  This argument is what people like Mike Huckabee use when they say that gay rights are not like Black rights because "the gays" haven't been killed enough.

                In short, it doesn't do the social justice movement any good to play the oppression olympics. We should not be in the business of tearing each other down and marginalizing each others' experiences.

                1. the LGBT community's struggles are not sufficiently similar to other minorities' struggles, and thus the comparisons are not valid.

                To analyze this argument in full would be to create a whole nother diary.  I don't really have the time or energy for that, but I think I can answer briefly.  Comparisons, similes, and metaphors are not absolute equivalencies.  When I say, "The lamp is like the sun," I am not predicating that the lamp is many times the size of the Earth nor that the lamp is fueled by nuclear fission.

                Equivalencies aren't good comparisons, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find people who are arguing that the LGBT movement is identical (note: identical) to something like American slavery.

                What the diarist here is saying is that historical comparisons are incredibly useful in advancing the social justice movement forward, and that no civil rights struggle is too "special" to be compared with another.  The diarist is saying that past civil rights struggles give context, knowledge, and power to current civil rights struggles, and that's the most important thing we can take from historical comparisons.  Yes, there are differences, nuances, etc. between civil rights struggles, but when you're making calls, knocking on doors, and marching in the streets, what's important is to make that connection between groups and people.  It is important to say that injustice for me is injustice for you.

                If you're in a university classroom and you're writing a thesis, you would likely want to explore the differences and nuances.  But we have to ask ourselves, "Who's the audience and what's the goal?"

                •  silly me... (5+ / 0-)

                  I figured deoliver47 probably meant it when she wrote:

                  Can we find a way to embrace our shared history without using it as a wedge to play into other sets of divisions - whether they be by class, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation?

                  I hope so. To reformulate simply what I am getting at here. Homophobia, and the status of gay rights or lack of rights in the US is not the same as slavery.  The legacy of slavery and race here in the US stands on its own. The legacy of homophobia, discrimination, stigma and inequality faced by the various LBGT communities in the US stand on their own, as a battle we must all embrace as well.  

                  Let us learn to hear each other - and in some cases, for those black folks who are also LBGT, the other is us.  

                  And I can't for the life of me figure out what this has to do with the Oppression Olympics. If there's a dog whistle in here, it's surpassing subtle, methinks.

                  •  I agree HudsonValleyMark (3+ / 0-)

                    Unfortunately this diary is based upon a misreading of Deoliver47's diary. You have correctly quoted her conclusion, which is also her plea to the community for some understanding and cooperation in the struggle ahead.

                    In my comment in Deoliver's diary: Worth waiting for I said.

                    Why study slavery?

                    Why indeed?

                    Let us learn to hear each other - and in some cases, for those black folks who are also LBGT, the other is us.  

                    Because we all have so much to learn. None of us so far removed from the issues that we're completely innocent. None of us so deeply involved to be beyond redemption. We need to be reminded of our collective past and how it shapes us now for the future. Your student's comment was great.

                    Moving from the social science to philosophy, from oppression and suffering to healing, and from the collective to the personal I suggest Viktor Frankl's 1946 book Man's Search for Meaning. The book describes his suffering as a prisoner of a concentration camp and his discovery of the principles that would become his meaning-oriented humanistic psychotherapy, Logotherapy.

                    Frankl's approach is based on three philosophical and psychological concepts:
                    Freedom of Will
                    Will to Meaning, and
                    Meaning in Life

                    Why?

                    According to LTEA humans are called upon, on the grounds of their freedom and responsibility, to bring forth the possible best in themselves and in the world, by perceiving and realizing the meaning of the moment in each and every situation. In this context it must be stressed that these meaning potentials, although objective in nature, are linked to the specific situation and person, and are therefore continually changing.

                    Let's bring out the best in ourselves and others to overcome our problems.

                  •  except thats not all she said (0+ / 0-)

                    which many of you seem to ignore and thus why I don't take cut and pastes that ignore the other points the diary said seriously. You cut and paste the part that ignores what she said in addition to that.

  •  There are two reasons (10+ / 0-)

    that come to mind when I think that gay marriage is the right way to go.

    The first is that I am totally against civil unions because I think that demeans the value of marriage by reducing it to a contract, so any two people should be allowed to get married.

    Secondly, separate is inherently unequal.

    I also think the argument that gay marriage diminishes conventional marriage is absurd how does someone else getting married diminish my marriage if I still love my wife and there is no way that it changes the relationship.

    I'll get off my soapbox now.  Thanks.

  •  Excellent diary.... (16+ / 0-)

    You eloquated it much better than I am capable of.  Thank you.  It irks me when religious people vehemently attempt to deny the suffering of LGBTS and dismiss it, citing the differences between the plight of LGBTs and blacks.  Hello?  Every group that has been the victim of discrimination has unique charictaristics as to how they have been marginalized.  We are never going to have a "tit for tat" comparison.  

    rec'd

    (-6.25, -4.36) Just another socialist lesbian undermining the sanctity of marriage by breathing

    by Gertrude on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:24:15 PM PST

  •  So right (25+ / 0-)

    I find the anger over comparing black civil rights to gay civil rights rather alarming. Civil rights know no gender or race. Whether we're talking about women's rights, black rights, gay rights, they are all human rights. There's no need to get into pissing contests about whose history was worse. Each group has suffered and how can anyone compare one person's suffering with another's?
    Let's stop acting like because one person's suffering wasn't as bad as another's that they don't deserve equal rights.
    Anyone interested in civil rights should be for the rights off ALL people. It's about love, respect and common decency.

    Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

    by MA Liberal on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:26:37 PM PST

    •  To defend bruh1, I think its not about (8+ / 0-)

      arguing who has it worst, but for people to respect deeply the suffering that gays have taken.

      But still, well said.

      Happy Holidays From TWD. And don't shoot your eye out (unless your Cheney!)

      by sluggahjells on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:33:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I am not interested in a pissing context (10+ / 0-)

      Not interested in putting history up on a pesdesal so that we learn nothing from it. If the emotions are so strong that one can not learn anythign from it, then we are doomed to repeat it in other ways. That's the point of the metaphor. Without , how can we learn anything from history?

      •  Liar (1+ / 3-)
        Recommended by:
        Adept2u
        Hidden by:
        Larry Bailey, The Werewolf Prophet, futurebird

        A contest IS EXACTLY what you were trying to have.
        Good grief.
        Worse, you certainly SHOULDN'T be interested in a contest since black people win and gay ones lose, at
        least in the context of AMERICAN culture, which is what we are trying to be about.

        And a classic example of the inequality is right here on DKos, where the only way I can maintain TU is using all the mojo I get defending gay rights to make up for all the TRs I get for trying to be a black man defending black people.

        The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

        by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:05:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Don't Piss..Learn (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CaliSista

        Why not emulate what worked for African-Americans once they reached the point where Civil Rights was their chief struggle? What worked for the Suffragettes?

        Let's learn from their tactics rather than play this comparative game.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:49:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  we did learn (5+ / 0-)

          thus why we are using the techniques, language and approaches of those who struggled before us. as did MLK when used language borrowed from other movements before him. This is about not being that continuity of the struggle for equality for all regardless of gender, race, sexual orietnation ,religion or whatever. Whatev er the category- one group should not be denied the metaphors of the civil rights movments. To do so, or to claim that any particular group doing so is trivializing it as others have said- is to miss the point. That there is nothing trivial about it. The comparision is apt as Julian bond says above not because we need to be exacltyt he same but because we are similar enough of the ways that matter regarding equality and human rights for all.

          •  Excellent Point (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bruh1, TiaRachel, skrekk, Predictor

            No one invented civil rights struggles.  MLK drew upon the experiences of European Jews and Gandhi, in particular.  AA's were not the first group to experience wholesale discrimination and oppression, and won't be the last.  There is no starting point and stopping point in the struggle for civil rights.

            I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

            by Skylarking on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:30:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  What we also should have learned (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skrekk, Predictor, homoaffectional

          Is that plenty  of Suffragettes didn't support African American 's Rights and Plenty of African Americans didn't support women's rights. See Visions of Liberty The Bill of Rights for All Americans By Ira Glasser

          Being a victim of discrimination isn't immunization from being a bigot.

    •  The anger IS NOT about COMPARING!! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Balam, Micheline, bvig

      The ANGER is about EQUATING!!

      The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

      by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:03:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't see people equating (6+ / 0-)
        - I see them comparing.

        I do not mean this in a snarky way - I am honestly confused: Can you show me where people have been saying that the the struggle for civil rights on the part of GLBT folks is exactly the same as that by African-Americans?

        Because the closest I see to that is people saying that they are all civil rights struggles. Which is, well, true. That statement does leave unsaid that each struggle has similarities and differences with others, but I don't read it as saying they're exactly the same.

        •  You are correct (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skrekk, dedmonds

          no one is equating the two. Except in the minds of certain folk here.

          I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

          by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:36:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  there have been plenty of people who (0+ / 0-)

          go well beyond acknowledging similarities between the two struggles, to equating them and insulting those who dare not to do the same. in the minds of more than a few posters on this site, if you disagree with the refrain that rick warren is the modern day equivalent of a klansman or that the fight for marriage equality is point by point equivalent to the fight to end jim crow, then it means you cannot be someone who supports gay rights. and yes, the word bigot has been thrown around far too freely with regard to those opinions as well.
          the notion of an oppression olympics is also sometimes thrown out very quickly to dismiss the opinions of those, who are supportive of the gay rights cause, but caution that certain over generalizations may border on offensive or dismissive; there is absolutely a lot of "with us" or "against us" language going around.

          McCain adviser on Blackberries: "You're looking at the miracle that John McCain helped Create." SEE, John McCain IS TOO aware of the Internets!

          by moja31 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:00:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If you oppose marriage equality, are you not a (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bruh1, Predictor

            bigot?

            Can you find any examples on dKos where people have directly equated the civil rights struggle between GLBTs and blacks?  I've been following the gay marriage diaries here pretty closely, and I'm not aware of any.  I do know of some people who consistently interpret comments that way, and tend to derail threads into a discussion of which group has suffered the most.

            Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

            by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 06:03:02 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  mostly I see it as metaphor for undrestaning (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              skrekk, Predictor

              equality under hte law discussions. thus my confusion for why such analogies are a problem.

            •  i'm not sure where i said anything about opposing (0+ / 0-)

              marriage equality; all i said is that understanding that some people might find statements which equate rather than actually compare aspects of the two struggles offensive doesn't mean you don't support marriage rights for gays and it certainly doesn't make you a bigot; this is exactly the immediate jump to "us vs. them" assumptions that i'm talking about. i can agree that inviting warren to give the invocation was stupid and offensive to the gay community (and should be to everyone really); but for example, i don't agree that however ignorant warren is, that he's like a KKK member, something which plenty of people here assert, is a kind of equivalency that i don't thinks is accurate. not joining the chorus that calls warren and his ilk klansmen doesn't mean that i think one group is less oppressed than another, or that i think his position is a valid one, i just think the kinds of activities that the klan was engaged in were very distinct, and it's one part of the analogy with the civil rights movement, that while it's tempting to throw out there because it encapsulates the anger and disdain which people feel for warren, in my view is neither accurate nor useful. calling this kind of claim a false equivalency doesn't make me bigot, and it doesn't negate my support for gay rights.

              McCain adviser on Blackberries: "You're looking at the miracle that John McCain helped Create." SEE, John McCain IS TOO aware of the Internets!

              by moja31 on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 01:47:36 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  the only way you can (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                skrekk

                say warren is not equivalent is to ignore his actual actions which is exaclty why I say part of issue is denial. Your denial does not mean something is a false equalivance.

              •  I think I understand better what you're saying, (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                katynka

                but I still don't think there are any (or at least many) cases of people drawing a direct equivalence between the two civil rights movements in question.

                Regarding Warren, I think the gay community's reaction is a bit of an overreaction...but I'm not gay.  And in the political context of Prop 8, there really is a problem.  It's just that Warren represents hate for at least several different groups: gays, Jews, and women.  He's a bigot on many levels.  And when anti-gay rhetoric contributes to violence and murder, I'd say the KKK is a good analogy.

                Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

                by skrekk on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 03:44:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Warren also endorsed abroad (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  skrekk, katynka

                  a bishop who pushed for and got legislation in Nigeria that is considered on par with Para 175. For those of you who don'tknow- that's the legislation passed in Nazi germany. essentially, we can't congregate, they can jail gays, etc. This man is dangerous, but since he does it with a smile , no one cares.

    •  Because It Was More Than Civil Rights (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SDuvall, CaliSista, Adept2u, TenthMuse

      The first hurdle in equating the GLBT is that it reduces the African-American struggle down to what happened in the 60's and nothing else.

      If you're one that is going to insist on using this battle of the struggles approach, then you need to be prepared to do a better job than what you're doing now.

      You need to be able to answer with intellectual honesty questions such as what in the GLBT struggle compares to being kidnapped, sold, hauled in the bottom of slave ships, then stripped of language, religion, your name, your culture, sold and traded like property, your discrimination written into the United States Constitution?

      It is not enough to say to most African-Americans, well "one civil rights struggle is the same as the other". While it may be true in the most abstract of senses, in practical sense it strikes some as offensive.

      "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

      by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:46:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, it doesn't matter. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kerplunk, SDuvall

        NOTHING matters now, aside from the GLBTQ struggle.

        Racism is over. Mission accomplished.

        There's no real reason for Blacks to talk about civil rights as related to us, because hey - we're done with that now! So there's no reason for GLBTQ people to talk about the problems and injustices they face on those terms alone.

        They can have Black Civil Rights, since nobody is using that anymore.

        Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

        by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:52:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  You deliberately mis-interpreted the poster when (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Balam, Adept2u, unertl

    you wrote:

    How quickly the conversation is a denial of gays what have happen to them. how quickly others agreed with this poster that his suffering was an excuse to deny the suffering of others.

    Gays have suffered. Gays have died or have been killed. There have been campaigns against gays. Black gays have suffered doubly.

    What gays have gone through - and continue to go through - cannot be compared to what blacks have suffered. Your parents were not gays so you did not see them humiliated on a daily basis. You didn't see their shame as they were treated as less than in front of your very eyes. Your siblings aren't (necessarily) gays. Your children will not (necessarily) be gays. Suffering and shame in not necessarily embedded in your DNA. Your people were not uprooted from their own land   to be taken elsewhere and treated as sub-humans. Worse than dogs and horses and cattle. Your children will not be taken from you and sold to others. Your partner will not be raped in front of your eyes while you stand helplessly by and you had better smile or else. Your virgin children will not be given to Massah to cure his STD. And oh, I can go on and on.

    Gays have suffered. Gays are still suffering. And suffering is suffering. Still, it is not to be compared to what Blacks have been through, sometimes at the hands of gays.

    It's a beautiful day!

    by JoanMar on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:26:46 PM PST

  •  The very first comments (8+ / 0-)

    in the very first anti-Warren diaries asked the question, "Would Obama invite an openly racist minister to give the invocation?"

    The analogy between racism against blacks and bigotry against gays was not as rarely evoked as you suggest.

    "Someone who does not see a pane of glass does not know that he does not see it." --Simone Weil

    by AgnesBee on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:30:14 PM PST

  •  Suffering is suffering (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tnichlsn, stitchmd

    I don't think one should seek metaphors of human beings flogged just because of this so called "respect" factor.

    All suffering is equally bad, across the board.  

    Happy Holidays From TWD. And don't shoot your eye out (unless your Cheney!)

    by sluggahjells on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:30:43 PM PST

    •  Not In Everyone's Eyes Though (12+ / 0-)

      This fight is about full civil rights denied to citizens. It has been brutal. But equating this fight as equal to the evil others have suffered feels good, but is counterproductive because people don't agree that your evil=their evil.

      Is what the Native American's suffered in losing almost all of their land, their sovereignty the same. The disappearance of entire cultures, is that the same battle we are facing?

      Are we going to say to a Holocaust survivor that what they face is the same? I'm not, because I believe what they faced was pure evil and this fight is not the same.

      All suffering is bad, but it is not the same.

      "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

      by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:56:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Definitely not the same. (10+ / 0-)

        Are we going to say to a Holocaust survivor that what they face is the same? I'm not, because I believe what they faced was pure evil and this fight is not the same.

        Except, you know, for the gays and lesbians that also died in the camps. Do you know where the pink triangle symbol came from?

        I think everyone acknowledges that the struggle today is not a struggle against enslavement or wholesale slaughter.

        The comparisons that I have always seen made about today's struggle are to the civil rights struggle in the 60s, which do strike me as similar in nature.

        So I guess the question is, do people only get to use civil rights metaphors from other struggles after a certain percentage of their number have been killed? Is there a threshold for a certain amount of property damage or physical torture that has not yet been reached?

        Because, from my knowledge of GLBT history, I agree that if we were going to have an oppression olympics, that African-Americans and Native Americans would certainly 'win'. And I think most people aren't saying any different.

        That doesn't mean that the struggle for equality on the part of the GLBT community isn't a struggle for civil rights, or should not be able to look back at the struggles that have gone before and draw parallels.

        •  Stay On Point Please..You Went Way Off Course (0+ / 0-)

          You've been running around this thread talking about how you don't see any equating going on.Some times meaning is implied.

          Well open your eyes, because the comment by me that you responded to was in fact a response to a direct comment equating suffering.

          sluggahjells said:

          All suffering is equally bad, across the board.

          But you ignore this comment and instead go off into b.s. such as "do you know where the pink triangle symbol comes from?" Of course I do, don't be an a-hole and try to remain on point please.

          "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

          by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:32:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're right - (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Predictor, homoaffectional
            - I was reading your comment as a response to the diary, not as a response to sluggahjells, in part because I think I had trouble parsing sluggahjells's meaning, and so interpreted your comment over-broadly.

            I still see way more people responding as if the struggles were being declared the same than people actually declaring they're the same.

            And I'm glad you know about the origin of the pink triangle - I had read your comment about Holocaust survivors to mean something like, "GLBT people have not had to deal with things like the Holocaust," rather than, "The current struggle for equal marriage recognition and legal protections is not like the Holocaust." I disagree with the first, but definitely agree with the second.

            I think, in retrospect, I was viewing your comment through the lens of others I responded to above, and went overboard. I apologize for misunderstanding what you were getting at.

  •  That's not what I got (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RonV, GN1927, Balam, Predictor, gobears2000

    out of the diary. I believe the diarist was trying to deal with horrors of bigotry without the comparisons.

    •  there was no need to make comparision (5+ / 0-)

      at all if that was her goal. What you got out the diary, and what she wrote are two diffferent things. That's the rorshach element. Many posters ,including those who used it as an excuse to say "see those gays don't suffer like I did" , got what i got from it.

      •  but they didn't (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RonV, Balam, Micheline

        the suffering is not the same... it is very different-- you can't say one is "worse" than the other.

        Growing up as a gay teen in a small town is suffering.

        Not being able to vote is suffering.

        But they are not the same.

        unless what you meant was that people are saying gays "didn't suffer as much" in which case that's bunk.

      •  And that is your rorshach element (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RonV, fisheye, gobears2000

        Or are you the only one capable of truly divining her intent? The diarist of whom you're speaking specifically, explicitly rejected this bit of histrionics of yours: "see those gays don't suffer like I did"

        I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

        by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:43:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  We Must Persuade More People (9+ / 0-)

    I believe in marriage equality for all, without conditions. I believe in full rights for LGBT's.

    Unfortunately, many others do not, including a disproportionate amount of African-Americans who came out to vote in this past November's election.

    I have read African-Americans, and others who say that "using" the African-American experience for comparative purposes as it has been done to this point, is counterproductive.

    Whether I believe this use of metaphor, as it is called in this diary, is just or not is not the question. If something is offending people and causing many of them to not fully engage with your argument, then you should stop. Perception management is what really is needed in this situation.

    I think that many are underinformed about African-American history, including many African-Americans. The 400+ year struggle from enslavement(the first African-Americans were not slaves) to the legislative and cultural breakthrough of the late 60's and beyond is unique in the world's history.

    There were many battles and "victory" took centuries. I dare say that will not be the case with marriage equality.

    Perhaps the change that is needed is for the movement to emulate the strategies used by African-Americans.The LGBT needs to develop leaders who will be effective spokespersons for the cause.There were many grassroot organizations developed, where are they in this movement? So far it looks like a top down organization.

    If those of us who believe in marriage equality and full civil rights want to be successful, then we need to reach the hearts and minds of people. Perhaps using the African-American experience as a play book rather than a two-by-four as some see it, is the better way to go.

    "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

    by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:36:31 PM PST

    •  simply accepting that it offends people (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stiela, sgary, Predictor, KentuckyKat, abrauer

      does not respond to why. It offends them because we are gay. Thus to me its not an acceptable reason.

      •  that's not why it offends me in a few cases-- (17+ / 0-)

        I have been annoyed when a mostly white gay mens group starts talking about how they are being oppressed "just like black people" when that same group has done NOTHING to help queer youth of color in our city and NEVER shows up when the black community needs support.

        Than I'm offended-- I feel like my history is being used as a mascot by people who don't even understand it.

      •  Wasn't The Point (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Balam, CaliSista

        Doesn't matter why, it is what it is.  And if something is not working for you, you change it.

        But let me try to distill it down as is my impression of why. It is because many people see this as a Civil Rights matter.

        When we reach back and point to the struggles of African-Americans, and others, the Civil Rights fight was secondary to the fight to survive.

        There is no mass movement to put all GLBT's on reservations, or make them work for free. GLBT's have not been sold to another country and stripped of their language, religion, and culture, and their names.There is no megalomaniac rounding GLBT's up and taking them off to concentration camps.

        While I see the similarity in fighting for the same rights others already enjoy, I can at least appreciate that the path to attaining those rights are different. I can also appreciate from a tactical viewpoint that getting into my suffering=your suffering is not working as we think it should and we should adapt, change,persevere and overcome just like those we claim we are like did to win their rights.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:10:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Maby, maybe not (0+ / 0-)

        It could be you and not your sexual identity that offends.

        I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

        by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:45:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  How can you make such a blanket (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KentuckyKat, Micheline

        statement?

        It offends them because we are gay.

        An oversimplified adoption by any group of the context and struggles of another would offend me.  Would it help to explain the atrocities of Darfur by comparing it to the Holocaust?  Would you understand the injustice and (American govt) disgrace of Japanese interment by saying it was similar to slavery?

        Who is the audience?  I've seen many make the comment that it helps those who voted for prop 8 understand why it was wrong by comparing it with the civil rights movement by Blacks or with the Black struggle for equality.  Is this for the (supposed) 70% of Blacks who voted for Prop 8?  If so, I sincerely doubt it will work.  Even here at DKos, where I would imagine the overwhelming majority of Black California Kossacks voted against 8, the equivalency argument is being met with a fair bit of resistant.  

        Is this equivalency argument for the White racist homophobe?  They are not going to give a crap about either group and are ecstatic that we are fighting amongst ourselves.  I would suggest we need to work from areas of agreement towards an ultimate goal.

    •  "Victory will not take centuries" (7+ / 0-)

      It already has.  Jeremy Bentham wrote the first essay (of which I'm aware, though I'm sure it wasn't the first) calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality.

      In 1785.

      It was repressed, so it didn't see the light of day until well after his death.  Even advocating for changes in the law was considered unacceptable, and liable to subject people to reprisals.

      The Scientific-Humanitarian Committee, a German organization is believed to be the first organization dedicated to ending the repression of gay people.  It was founded in 1897.

      We didn't all just spring out of the ether after Stonewall.

    •  No, hearts and minds (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TiaRachel, Brother Love, NYWheeler

      Yes, the marriage equality/GLBT rights movement needs to emulate the black civil rights movement and the first thing they can do is remember it wasn't about hearts and minds. It was about challenging the system and laws.

      If the black civil rights movement had waited for hearts and minds to change they'd still be waiting for their rights. I think this election season has proved that there's still a lot of people who don't want to see black people as human.

      Goddamn Bush for adding more conservatives to the court. There must be hundreds of cases waiting to be heard by SCoTUS concerning gay marriage but I bet they get denied.

      Obama: "Cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom."

      by BrighidG on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:52:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, that's not true (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        homoaffectional, deePA, Micheline

        There was a lot that took place before people sat down at lunch counters or took freedom rides. There came a point where those challenging actions had real impact. But there was a time before then that those actions would not have had any impact at all, if not a negative one.

        I'm from the South and I know first hand hearts and minds had to be changed. It wasn't just laws.People don't follow laws if their mind and/or heart isn't into it. In fact, they start looking for ways to maintain the oppression.

        We tried changing laws before hearts and minds were ready during Reconstruction and what resulted was a century of Jim Crow.

        Our challenge for rights survives where hearts and minds are the most amenable to the idea of full rights. Where they are not fully prepared, our cause fails.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:45:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  One of the realities of reconstruction (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          homoaffectional, BrighidG, Micheline

          was that the north quickly got bored with it.

        •  But there's a big gulf (0+ / 0-)

          Between thinking children shouldn't have police dogs and hoses turned on them, that families shouldn't be terrorized and adults shouldn't be murdered for exercising their right to vote and sending your children to the same school as black kids or being ok with your daughter marrying a black man.

          I just think it's easier to focus on de facto homophobia like DADT, DOMA and Prop 8 than the de jure.

          Obama: "Cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom."

          by BrighidG on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:56:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, to be more accurate and holistic... (0+ / 0-)

          First, a movement needs to change just enough hearts and minds to make the change in laws sustainable after it's done... once the change in laws has been stabilized, more hearts and minds can be changed through action or simply those hearts and minds "getting used" to the new reality until you go far beyond a critical mass in support... when the hearts and minds are now overwhelmingly in favor of the new reality.  The GLBT movement should pay attention to the reality behind what I've described -- if they had Proposition 8 would have narrowly been rejected and we would now be in the stage of sustaining the victory so any future challenges to equal rights would be rejected, and the future generations would be taking care of the rest.

      •  Another thing this election season has proved... (0+ / 0-)

        ... is that there's still a lot of people who don't want to see gay relationships as human relationships.

  •  Thanks for this TREMENDOUS diary nt (8+ / 0-)

    Men with guns maturing in age will always pay a shitty wage.--Belle & Sebastian

    by andrewj54 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:37:52 PM PST

  •  As I put in my diary: (7+ / 0-)

    Gay Rights activists should focus on coalition building with minority group

    There is conflict, and you see it crop up on dkos all the time, about is gay rights a comparable civil rights struggle to the 60s battles, or who has had it worse in recent decades, minorities or gays, etc.  These arguments not only foster a divide where there is an either/or aspect to gay issues and minority civil rights issues, but also wastes valuable time and energy

    Is that what we really want to do, argue back and forth about this?

    I like Michelle more than Barack.

    by duha on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:39:48 PM PST

    •  Yes (6+ / 0-)

      because otherwise people continue to deny our humanity. The divide is folstered becauae of the denial that gays are subject to human rights just like African Americans. There will no solutions so long as this intrinsic bit of homophobia persists. Read the coment at the end. This poster didn;t just deny the metaphor, he denied that gays have been subject to any bodily harm.

      •  Not True (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        duha, Balam, deePA

        The denial is resistance to the idea that the GLBT struggle is exactly the same as the African-American struggle.

        If we just realize that we can make our case without using the moral capital built by other struggles, then we can move on and get on productive ground.

        We can win on concepts of human rights, fairness, upholding the Constitution, etc... We don't need to continue to pursue something that antagonizes people and turns off many who would otherwise be receptive to this fight.

        Even though those of us who understand what this fight is are upset at this group or the other, we need to be about changing minds.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:22:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Stop playing the O. Olympics (8+ / 0-)

          No one is arguing that the LGBT struggle is "exactly the same" as previous civil rights struggles.  That's such a strawman.

          Previous civil rights struggles give context, knowledge, and power to current civil rights struggles.

          No civil rights struggle is so "special" that it can't be analyzed, understood, and used to help further another civil rights struggle.

          •  Stop Saying "No One" Because It's A Lie (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            carlos the jackal

            I have responded to such direct statements in this thread. You need to read all of the comments more carefully before you start lecturing people on something you apparently aren't aware exists.

            "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

            by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:49:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  examples? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              skrekk, Predictor

              I've been reading through the very long list of comments and I have yet to come across anyone arguing that the GLBT struggle is "exactly the same as previous civil rights struggles." Since your eyes seem to be sharper than mine, could you reply with links to the comments that do?

        •  why not use the moral capital (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          katynka, CKendall

          built by other movements?

          Why does that antagonize progressive thinkers?

          •  Moral capital? (0+ / 0-)

            What would that be? I don't think there is any such substance.

            So let's talk tactics then. A better tactic might be to give a little respect for the feelings of others. To listen to what they have to say. To understand their point of view and perhaps even make concessions for their view point.

            Dick sizing one's oppression does not appear to be working.

            I understand there's some kind of upcoming political contest? -- Molly Ivans

            by brenda on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:25:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  moral capital - I would define that (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musing85, sebastianguy99

              as being the goodwill established through the process of consistently doing the moral thing. And I disagree with your assertion that it does not exist.

              So let's talk tactics then. A better tactic might be to give a little respect for the feelings of others. To listen to what they have to say. To understand their point of view and perhaps even make concessions for their view point.

              Dick sizing one's oppression does not appear to be working.

              We agree then that attempting to discover who has suffered more is a poor tactic. However, the diarist is making the point that we should recognize the similarities that exist in the struggle for equal rights among non-whites and the struggle for equal rights among gays. I agree. And I wondered why you hide rated his tip jar if you are truly trying to listen to other points of view.

            •  Moral Capital Is Why People Embrace Previous ... (0+ / 0-)

              ...struggle. If the African-American or Suffragette movements had not been successfully in their moral appeals, people wouldn't be trying to compare to them now.

              "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

              by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:56:28 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  That's funny (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Predictor

              Because Moral Capital is the title of a fantastic book by historian Christopher Lesblie Brown on, as the subtitle puts it, the Foundations of British Abolitionism.

              As to listening and understanding et cetera, when were you planning to start, miss know-it-all-and-don't-want-to-hear-it-again?

          •  Because It's Not Working (0+ / 0-)

            That has been my main point.

            I believe we can make the case for full and complete Civil Rights without the heavy use of metaphor.

            Why should we continue to do something that steers us off course?

            "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

            by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:52:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well I agree with you that on a practical (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bruh1, Predictor, homoaffectional

              level.... it has failed.

              But where I get stuck is trying to understand why it does not work. What disturbs me is the willingness to tolerate bigotry against gays and the willingness to grant bigots against gays big honors while STILL claiming to be progressive.

              But you are so right - it ain't working. The GLBT community is wrong to expect mainstream progressives to stand up with us.

        •  "make our case without using ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KMc, homoaffectional

          ... the moral capital built by other struggles"

          Well then, I guess that means we have to edit all the words of MLK's to expunge any reference - direct or metaphorical - to the Exodus of the Hebrews, right? Too bad, because one of the modern era's greatest speeches would be trashed:

          And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say that threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?

          Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

          From MLK's "I See the Promised Land" speech, delivered 3-APR-1968, the day before he was assassinated.

          Please note that what I've bolded is a EXPLICIT reference to Moses. But hey, that's NOT using the moral capital built by the Jewish struggle, because MLK said it, right?

          The only "freedom in Christ" for a follower of Rick Warren is the freedom to be a Good German.

          by The Werewolf Prophet on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 02:21:07 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Your statement encapsulates the futility of this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99

        waste of time:

        There will no solutions so long as this intrinsic bit of homophobia persists.

        If you really believe that you can't make any solutions or progress until you get satisfactory acknowledgment in your mind about how bad one group has it compared to another group you will never be ready for solutions or progress, just ready to argue and build up frictions between groups.

        I like Michelle more than Barack.

        by duha on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:58:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Amen To Coalition Building (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bruh1, duha, TenthMuse, BFSkinner, pinkbunny

      If we really want to use history as a guide, then we know that there are persuadable minds out there that we have not currently reached.

      A grassroot approach is where history teaches us movements begin. In order to do this, coalitions must be built and all sides must listen and build respect.

      "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

      by sebastianguy99 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:14:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Julian Bond... (15+ / 0-)

    ... also makes a statement to the effect that the failure to discuss sexuality, especially gay sexuality, is primarily responsible for the rise of AIDS/HIV in the African-American community (but also other minority communities) as a whole: I see that as an end result of the religious persecution and the reactionary dogma imposed on the LGBT community by most sections of Christianity and Islam.

    Well written, and thank you for the diary. I can't tell you how many times I've railed against those who would insist that the civil rights struggles of the 60's somehow are a unique province of the African-American community... when in reality it applies to everyone.

    To paraphrase MLK, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

    (1) D.I.E.B.O.L.D.: Decisive In Elections By Ousting Liberal Democrats.
    (2) R.A.T.S.: Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia.
    (3) -8.75, -8.10

    by Archangel on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:43:32 PM PST

  •  black people are gay and also black, double (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    homoaffectional

    whammy some would say.  Gay people are gay, also black white or other, but gay people are not black unless they are black.  there is a difference.

    Too frequent rewards signify that the enemy is at the end of his resources; too many punishments betray a condition of dire distress.

    by publicv on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 12:59:39 PM PST

  •  No, we're not (6+ / 0-)

    Anybody  can, and everybody does, draw whatever metaphorical connections they like.  The struggles are (obviously) similar in some ways and different in others.  The only thing that bothers me personally is people talking about lack of black support for gay civil rights without talking about gay white men who vote Republican (which is not only anti-black, but anti-gay AS WELL).

    The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

    by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:03:05 PM PST

  •  I refuse to answer this diary really (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RonV, GN1927, sebastianguy99, brenda, Balam

    why?

    Because the 'We've had it worse' game is one where everyone loses.

    I'm quite honestly not sure exactly what your point is here because you seem to ramble a bit and veer off topic.

    But I completely and unequivocally reject any attempt to turn this into a contest to see who's been screwed worse.

  •  Maybe it is just a crappy metaphor (13+ / 0-)

    Both blacks and gays are clearly the Other, and people are pretty clearly wired to mistrust the Other. But once you get past that, on every detail the metaphor breaks down.

    Blacks were brought over by force, enslaved, unenslaved (still working on that emancipation thing, sadly), moved into specific neighborhoods, and bred with moderate mixing for generations, remaining visually distinct in most cases.

    Gays (and bisexuals, and lesbians...) simply appear throughout society for no known reason.

    Blacks are the Other that lives over there and and is easy to spot. Gays are the Other that are secretly all around you.

    Except for a few very light skinned Blacks, Blacks don't have the option of being in the closet -- they face employment discrimination and housing discrimination and the casual discrimination of bigots and assholes all around them.

    I'm not saying that the closet is a good thing, it is horribly damaging, but gays ultimately make a choice about how to act -- they can be flamboyant, or they can be invisible, or they can be somewhere in between.

    When the radical right describes homosexuality as a "lifestyle choice", I don't think they mean that homosexuality is not ingrained into someone's being, I think they mean "get back in the fucking closet, faggot". And that's very, very different from "stay over there and don't get uppity"

    In both cases, it's a reaction to the Other, but the nature of the reaction is very different. Blacks are told to remain the Other, gays are told to blend in.

    I'm a bisexual man, and to the vast majority of society, bisexual men don't exist. Some, like noted Sexpert Dan Savage, actually state that they don't believe bisexual men exist, but most people just don't consider the possibility. Depending on who I am dating and who knows, I will or will not face discrimination -- luckily so far, just the casual discrimination, and nothing affecting my job or home -- but nothing ever prepared me for the sheer douchebaggery of people when I was dating a black woman. Perhaps it's just a matter of visibility, that most people assume two men together are friends, but assume a man and a woman are a couple, but it was a fairly constant level of douchebaggery that never quite let up.

    (-7.38,-2.51) 76% of dKos readers think I'm a secret wing-nut operative!

    by Gustavo on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:09:52 PM PST

    •  in the Great Britain I was born and brought up in (4+ / 0-)

      the Other could just as easily be a pedson who looked and was just like you, except they happened to come from a village five miles down the lane.

      Xenophobia and any kind of social phobias have a myriad roots and branches not limited to race, creed and color, gender, ageism etc.

    •  One portion of your comment especially calls for (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chowder, bruh1, mainefem, katynka, Predictor, deePA

      reflection:

      In both cases, it's a reaction to the Other, but the nature of the reaction is very different. Blacks are told to remain the Other, gays are told to blend in.

      Early in the primary campaign what I found particularly offensive was the question "Is Obama black enough?" The suggestion was that Barack's speech, mannerisms, and lack of flamboyance made it difficult, if not impossible, for him to connect to the African-American community.

      Moreover, accusations were hurled that he hadn't paid his dues, that he was building his campaign and his legitimacy on the backs of a civil rights movement in which he hadn't participated.

      This was clearly an insistence that Obama remain "The Other". Yet it was a demand that simply couldn't be met. Intrinsic to his very nature is his ability to "blend in" with the dominant "white culture", drawing attention to commonalities rather than differences in skin pigmentation.

      Had he not succeeded in "blending in" he would not be the President-elect.

      Yet Obama cannot be said to have abandoned his African-American roots in an effort to gain acceptance.  To the contrary, he has embraced his heritage, claiming it as key to his understanding of how to bridge the political and cultural divides that plague our nation and our world.

      To me the most significant aspect of Obama's victory is the triumph of reason over fear, of succeeding in convincing a majority of Americans that the pursuit of shared interests is crucial to protecting our self-interests.

      Ultimately, the struggle for civil rights is a struggle for acceptance. I personally revel in the diversity of our nation, and of the discourse enjoined by my fellow Kossacks. There isn't a day that passes without my having learned something, often forcing me to reconsider what I thought I already knew.

      This diary is exceptional in that it does provoke a serious discussion of both the differences and similarities of the African-American Civil Rights Movement and the GLBT Civil Rights Movement, and forces us to examine each.  Both movements are a demand for acceptance of the intrinsic humanity of the groups they represent, a commonality that should inform, not divide.

      "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich." JFK - January 20, 1961

      by rontun on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:28:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here's the thing about Obama... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bruh1, Richard Lyon, rontun

        I don't think he really has African-American roots.

        His heritage and upbringing are not typical of African-Americans. He has a Kenyan father, and a globe-trotting childhood, and by all accounts a middle class life.

        He's not descended from slaves. He is not the product of a culture that has had generations of discrimination, reducing opportunities at every level.

        Not to say that he hasn't faced discrimination, or that he doesn't understand how destructive it has been, or that hard-core racists make a distinction between him and more traditional African-Americans.

        The question "Is Obama black enough?", which comes out as sounding offensive, really speaks to this. If Obama didn't straddle all these weird social lines, I don't think he would have been elected. He only seems a little bit like the Other to most white people.

        And, at the risk of sounding as offensive as those who asked that question in the primaries, I'd have to say, I don't think America is ready for a "black" President, but I do think America is ready for an Obama Presidency.

        I don't think his election was about transcending race in America -- with all the history that race has in America, from slavery, to Jim Crow, to race riots and the civil rights movement -- so much as doing an end run around it. And that's a good step, but it's only a step.

        (-7.38,-2.51) 76% of dKos readers think I'm a secret wing-nut operative!

        by Gustavo on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 06:03:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's about right (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, rontun

          It can be a racially offensive question if say it was asking if he is black enough because he talks proper and is well educated. But it's not when the question of did he come from the African American experience. Its a short hand for those unique experiences versus say my friend who is Haitian. Although she's black, she's not African American, and she and I would readily agree that our experiences haave therefore been both the same and very different. We appreciate both. No one could say Obama hs not probably faced racism for example.

        •  Read "Dreams from My Father", and you'll (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, rontun

          understand exactly why Obama self-identifies as black: he is treated as such in America.

          However, Obama's general perspective is different, something which he shares with many people who have spent a lot of time abroad.  Unfortunately that's a very small minority of Americans, and it gets reflected in the provincialism of our culture.

          Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

          by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 07:02:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  As a Jewish gay man the point is rather simple in (28+ / 0-)

    my eyes. All hate, all attacks come down to one simple fact.

    People who dislike us, who hate us hate us for being black, for being Jewish, for being Muslim, for being gay, for being any other minority.

    If we continue to try to 'protect' our own 'minority' as being more special then someone elses, i.e. 'we' 'deserve' this' metaphor 'more' then yours we will go down to defeat.

    Do we really think the KKK, Nazis, or others really support blacks, gays, Jews any more or less compared to any of the other groups? We need to support one another and not let internal division drive us apart.

    Metaphors work for us all. Let us use what work. If a metaphor works for multiple groups, then let it be used for multiple groups. We cannot afford to revert to fighting among ourselves.

    Economic Left/Right: 6.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92

    by BFSkinner on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:15:15 PM PST

    •  I'm about to open another (9+ / 0-)

      can of worms, I fear, but I want to add on to BFS's very wise comment.

      I was very active in the Women's movement in the early '70's.  We were  making tremendous progress until the Right Wing fractured us with the abortion controversy.  I don't deny that women are vastly better off than we were, but I've thought a lot about why so many women now start or end sentences with "I'm not a feminist...." -  being a feminist has been made "dirty", as has being a liberal.  

      I have an uneasy feeling that going down this road, metaphorical or otherwise, can end up fracturing the GLBT movement in similar ways.  

      I can't really speak to this without haring off into tinfoil-hat territory, but I'm concerned that there's a payoff to keeping GLBT's and AA's angry with each other, and the payoff is only for the people who want to keep all of us irrelevant, powerless, and separate.

      I'm white, straight, and have led a relatively privileged life in comparison to what my black and gay friends have experienced.  I've experienced discrimination as a woman, and as someone with a mental illness, but I don't find comparisons in my life that match what I've seen others experience.  

      I'm not saying this well, but the bottom line for me is that if anyone in this country is denied human rights, everyone in this country is vulnerable to the same losses.  And if we're all working to overcome bigotry, I'll achieve wage parity sooner, you'll be able to marry the person you love sooner, and you'll be able to drive while black without getting stopped by the cops.

      Or I'm hopelessly naive.

  •  For a little bit of context... (12+ / 0-)

    ...here's an ultra-brief survey  of 1963 in review.

    It would be great to compare apples and apples for a change.  I know nobody who is claiming that being gay has anything to do with slavery.  But the struggle for civil rights was what it was...and did not take place in a time of slavery either.

    •  I think some people confuse civil rights (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TiaRachel

      with "Civil Rights" (as in the 1964 Civil Rights Act), the former being the larger issue of which the latter is just a part.  The Suffragettes were after all campaigning for mere civil rights.

      Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

      by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 07:11:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  'Minorities' have one *very* telling thing... (10+ / 0-)

    in common: oppression. While we bicker back and forth about who has had it worse, one thing seems absent from the discussion. The source of the oppression.

    Black, gay, women, Jew, Native American, etc.

    What group oppressed all of the fore mention groups and why do they get a pass?

    IMO, this energy is misdirected.

    •  agreed (6+ / 0-)

      thats why in 2008 i wish this diary was not necessary. But as my conservative haitian friend said when prop 8 passed (and she's not gay) don't they get this means they can come after us next? That's the value of trying to underestand each other rathe rthan saying how we are so different there are no points of commonality.

      •  Points of commonality, agreed... (2+ / 0-)

        but I do feel that the territory can get hostile when comparing experiences.

        Our commonality is that we've all felt oppression by the same group. This is the fact should be highlighted and built upon, imo.

        •  if it were that simple (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, CanyonWren

          the problem is that the claim is increcibly broad. if we say that equal protection should apply to us like with race, there re those conservatives who will argue that race is nothing like sexual orientation. how far do we go with denying any similarities at all? and for what reason? is it really over sensitivity over history or to continue bigotry about gays? I don't pretend to know. I just don't like simple one size rules that white wash what may be happening underneathe.

          •  I'm militant so my response is... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CanyonWren

            there are more 'oppressed' than there are 'oppressors'. It's a sorry state that we continually consider ourselves 'minorities' when there are more of 'us' worldwide than 'them'. We are dividing ourselves unnecessarily. That we all have our unique experience of oppression should not be a bone of contention unless we make it so.

    •  A thousand recommends (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, imchange, pinkbunny, mellowwild

      for pointing out the distraction of the bickering and what is missing from discussion.

      "Don't let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do." John Wooden

      by CKendall on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:48:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The times they are a-changin' (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mellowwild

      For reasons that I am one of the very few people here to have bothered articulating, black people at large and on average ARE NO LONGER getting it around this issue.  Marriage in particular is a SORE point because DESPITE the fact that it is legal, the reality is that MOST BLACK men are not free to marry EITHER! MOST BLACK CHILDREN in America are born OUT of wedlock!!  All three of my black sisters managed to get married (the oldest one twice) but two of them had to choose black men whose parents are from the Caribbean as opposed to the US!  Gay advocates HAVE GOT to make an effort to understand where this is coming from as opposed to merely beating black people over the head with how they are not learning the right lesson from what they themselves have been through.

      The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

      by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:39:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I understand that its using gay rights (0+ / 0-)

        as a bogus issue to address a very real  issue int he black community. Howeve,r understanding does not mean acceptance of the argument. The reality is that gay rights have nothing to do with the issues of marriage in the black community precisely because black ministers are using us as a distraction rather than talking directly to their church members about the problems they really face. If they stopped using us as targets, they may actually have allies. One example tha tcomes to mine, is on the issue of DL men. How helpful is it to the black community to not address sexuality issues openly and honestly when it comes to marriage? By not doing so, how does that help improve the chances of marriage?

        •  It is NOT bogus IF you CARE about the issue! (0+ / 0-)

          The reality is that gay rights have nothing to do with the issues of marriage in the black community precisely because black ministers are using us as a distraction rather than talking directly to their church members about the problems they really face.

          Would talking about spaying or neutering your pets, like they do on The Price Is Right every day, constitute distracting black churchgoers from their difficulties in getting married?  NO, it WOULDN'T, because black churchgoers canNOT MAKE ANY CONNECTION BETWEEN pets and marriage.
          The only reason WHY talk about gay marriage CAN operate as a distraction IS BECAUSE the issues ARE related!!

          You cannot automatically expect black people to be down WITH ANYbody's liberation struggle FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, BECAUSE black people, DESPITE all the laws that have been passed, STILL ARE NOT GETTING liberated THEMSELVES!  ALL THESE DISPARITIES PERSIST, EVEN in the face of the legal protections!

          How helpful is it to the black community to not address sexuality issues openly and honestly when it comes to marriage? By not doing so, how does that help improve the chances of marriage?

          TONS AND TONS AND TONS of bisexual men who lean MORE toward
          homosexuality than hetero (on the Kinsey scale these would be men
          between 3.1 and 4.9, out of a possible 6) HAVE GOTTEN MARRIED AND
          FATHERED CHILDREN, at least back when marriage was
          in vogue. Obviously it is the opinion of the people who are attacking gay marriage that THIS IS A SACRIFICE THAT THESE MEN ought to make FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY, and that is ENTIRELY appropriate for the church to encourage altruistic behavior!  For these men to JUST do what makes THEMSELVES happy is seen as UNChristian!!

          The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

          by ge0rge on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 12:50:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  My Advice (0+ / 0-)

            Don't talk down to me about race. I lived in the communities you describe.  I grew up in a town that had 11 percent unemployment before the recession. I am a child of an  unwed mother. I still live in a working class black community.

            You can play this shit with some white poster who doesn't know better. But with me, it's not going to work.

            •  I am NOT playing (0+ / 0-)

              You can play this shit with some white poster who doesn't know better. But with me, it's not going to work.

              And I certainly don't give a shit whether you felt talked down to.
              Both of us need to be less worried about talking to each other and more worried about talking to our respective black communities IN WAYS THAT WILL ACTUALLY WORK.

              The reality is that gay rights have nothing to do with the issues of marriage in the black community

              Have you ever actually said that to anybody in the black community?
              Have you ever said that in any church-related context?  If so, what kind of reaction did you get?
              THEY could just as easily tell YOU not to "talk down to" THEM!
              I still have not said much of anything either (I have
              an unfair advantage in that just saying "I'm gay" makes some small initial impression in itself), but I certainly look UP to you as someone who is qualified to recommend what to say!
              Because my black father was a black judge who was notorious for championing the equal protection clause (he once got a little news coverage for acquitting some people on a gambling charge by noticing that the police weren't raiding the poker games of his white fellow judges), people will forgive me somewhat when I insist on the constitutional defense and say that EVEN if this is somehow damaging you, THE CONSTITUTION STILL SAYS YOU HAVE TO LET US have our basic human rights.
              That resonates a little because they know dang well
              that it was not a majority of white America that decided we would finally have these rights; they know that it had to be imposed from the top on the basic of civic and moral principles.
              But,
              obviously,
              That Only Goes So Far.
              The outcome in California makes it clear that
              we really do have to SAY SOMEthing in our communities that will win more "hearts and minds".

              SO WHAT SHOULD WE SAY ??

              How helpful is it to the black community to not address sexuality issues openly and honestly when it comes to marriage? By not doing so, how does that help improve the chances of marriage?

              If I Answer this question, will that constitute talking down to you?
              The black community thinks it is helped by not discussing sexuality openly BECAUSE that allows MORE of the community to REMAIN CLOSETED.
              That ENABLES FURTHER DENIAL of the existence of homosexuality within the community.  This is generally seen AS A GOOD thing because homosexuality itself is generally seen AS A BAD thing.  The community already stands convicted in the public eye of having more crime, poverty, drug use, births-out-of-wedlock, ad nauseam.  At both the individual AND community levels, FOR ANYbody to add homosexuality ON TOP of that is just TOO MUCH;
              the average black man ALREADY HAS ENOUGH to overcome WITHOUT the ADDED burden of the additional bigotry he is going to have to deal with by coming out.  When they deny you $ and deny you education, MACHO IS WHAT'S LEFT, and homosexuality is seen (wrongly, but still seen) as incompatible with that.
              THESE ARE ALL REASONS WHY everybody winds up conspiring in the refusal to deal openly/truthfully.

              Now, obviously, those reasons are at least somewhat
              rebuttable, but seriously, I am more interested in what you think, at this point, than in trying to explain anything, since, yes, you're right, you probably already knew that.

              The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

              by ge0rge on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 04:36:04 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Black men are not "free" to marry? (0+ / 0-)

        Um... hardly.  Black men have issues with and about marriage, but they aren't legally blocked from it.  If anything, there are societal blocks.  Talk about comparisons that break down...

        •  It DOES NOT MATTER whether the block is LEGAL (0+ / 0-)

          or IS SOMETHING ELSE!  It is LEGAL for you to have health insurance but IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD it then it IS NOT legal for you to get medical care! You can't LEGALLY STEAL it!  Acting as though the legal blocks are more important than ANY OTHER KIND of blocks is IDIOTIC!  It was ILLEGAL for Bernie Madoff to steal all the money he stole but HE DID IT ANYWAY, WITH IMPUNITY, FOR YEARS!!  Blocks ARE Blocks.  Outlawings and illegalities may sometimes FAIL to be BLOCKS!!

          You have to complain about, or strive to fix, THE ACTUAL blocks and NOT JUST the laws.  MOST of the time this is NOT a problem because MOST of the time you ARE free, in a free country, to do what is legal, and outlawing things does in fact prevent you from doing them. MOST of the time.  BUT NOT all the time!
          And THIS time IS one of the times where the disconnect MATTERS!

          The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

          by ge0rge on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 12:42:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Were I a gay man... (8+ / 0-)

    ...I could walk into a store in the Bible Belt and noone would necessarily know anything about my sexuality. Were I black, well there is no hiding that fact.

    The gay community is probably the most diverse community racially, ethnically, income levels, ages or any other demographic you may choose. Why do we need to compare how people are marginalized and denied civil rights?

    Personally, I think it is inaccurate to compare the suffering of gays to blacks (or jews, natives etc). More importantly, it's pointless. I'm a progressive that supports civil rights for everyone. How much someone has suffered does not change my opinion of a need for remedy.

    -7.5 -7.28, What's a guy gotta do to get impeached around here?

    by Blueslide on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:41:37 PM PST

    •  Why not simply (5+ / 0-)

      acknowledge the similarity as well as the diferences? What's the reason for denying the commonalities that obviously exist?

    •  I was a transwoman... (6+ / 0-)

      ...living in the south when I transitioned.  How much do you think I could hide?

    •  I think you underestimate... (4+ / 0-)

      ...the degree to which homophobic men search for--and pick up on--signs of effeminacy in other men and immediately associate that with homosexuality.  I walked into a restaurant back in college.  My friends I were talking as we walked passed this table with two men.  After we sat down, one of those men pointed at men and said, "There a fag."

      This isn't necessarily something that only homophobic men do. Have you ever heard--or engaged in--discussions about a new colleague or acquaintances sexual orientation?  "Do you think he's gay?"  "Have you heard the way he talks?"  "Look at how he walks.  He must be gay."

      I'm gay, I'm pissed, I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not shutting up, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:19:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong assumption. (0+ / 0-)

      I could walk into a store in the Bible Belt and noone would necessarily know anything about my sexuality.

      •  its intended to miss the point (0+ / 0-)
        •  Snark? Sarcasm? Sardonic statement? (0+ / 0-)
          •  If I am reading the thread correctly (0+ / 0-)

            I maybe in the wrong part of the thread (If I am sorry):

            You are commenting to a poster separate from me who is avoiding the consequence of discrimination against gays by saying we don't have to act on being gay. Their argument is sophistry or superficially plausible until you think about what they are saying.

            Jim Crow was about social controls over Blacks. So long as blacks stayed in their place, they were fine too. Indeed, to this day you have African Americans who believe that blacks would have faired better if separate but equal was made equal rather than requiring integration. This was Malcolm X's early argument. Once they acted in a way outside of the social norms, this is where problems occured under Jim Crow. That's the sophistry here. That both systems (Jim Crow) and bigotry against gays require social actions as to status. Not just status.

            The point being we can be safe by passing as straight. Blacks could be safe by staying with in their safe zones socially.

            Also, the poster to whom you are replying is not right- it does not matter if you act straight since the opression  is about control even when one is not holding hands. The guy I mention in the diary who was recently murdered in Brooklyn was straight,b ut it was perceptions that he was not that got him killed. The boy who was punished by his mother was punished for seeming gay. The whole avoidance only works if you ignore the system of oppression in full.

            It does nothing to answer the oppression involved other than to say "you can hide it."

            Its a weird way to define a lack of oppression or to say there is less oppression. "You are facing death so long as you deny who you are." Taken the argument in reverse- one would assume that means blacks would want to pass if they could.  Does anyone buy that argument? Some did, but they are universally in the black community looked down upon. So it can't be the standard that- we are talking about the ability to pass.

            It's meant to avoid discussion of what happens when we don't pass.  That's why I don't take it seriously. It's not about the physical harm that gays experience for being gay, but trying to once again a) find exact sameness between discrimination and b) say one opression is greater than the other since there are the differences.  My point is those differences do not change the big picture.

            This is the same sort of frame a right winger would use. When I once told this christian conservative guy that I do not have the right to marry, he said that's not true because I can marry the opposite gender. That's not a discussion of the topic. It's sophistry. It's meaningless avoidance.

            It's something the US Supreme Court by the way had to face in Bowers v. Hardwick (the case that found gays were not discriminated by status because homosexual acts are separate and thus could be criminalized). The reason that case was so quickly overturned (20 years is short for a S.C precedent) is that its an avoidance through sophistry. Its superficially plausible to separate status from actions, but it becomes meaningless in practice since they are often intertwined.

          •  quick follow up (0+ / 0-)

            the problem with trying to pass is that it requires a near perfect day to day to day performance in which one must hide feelings, body language and anything that may give away the impression or suggest that one is not straight, but instead gay. In this reality, that's why the social terror matters. It's not like one could ever let up one's guard if  our goal is to hide it.

            •  Wow... (0+ / 0-)

              I guess noone will read this because I am late in returning to this thread. Nonetheless, I am surprised by all the hullabaloo.

              Here's the problem and the one I was criticizing, why does any marginalized group have to identify themselves with another? I am neither black nor gay, but why does their need to be comparisons made all the time? The reality is a discussion about the denial of fundamental civil rights not similarities about the experience.

              ...the degree to which homophobic men search for--and pick up on--signs of effeminacy in other men and immediately associate that with homosexuality.  I walked into a restaurant back in college.  My friends I were talking as we walked passed this table with two men.  After we sat down, one of those men pointed at men and said, "There a fag."

              So what are you saying? That gay men have their civil rights stepped on or simply effeminate men?  

              Thank you! This "gay men can pass for hetero so easily" meme is beginning to bug me.

              Versus the likely inaccurate "gay experience is similar to the black experience" meme?

              Bruh1...

              The simple fact is, were one inclined to hide being gay, one could make the attempt. It's not an option if your black. Furthermore, many gay men and women don't need to hide anything anyway to not be singled out. Last I heard, the requirement for being gay was having sexual desires towards the same sex, not opposite sex voice tone, appropriately quaffed hair, a limp wrist or whatever else appears on the average bigots gay-dar.

              I do not disagree with anything you said about systems of oppression. But it seems to me that your argument is not just about being gay, but exhibiting what can be construed as gay characteristics in public. I've been called gay in public and threatened with physical abuse, have my civil rights been violated as a gay man? Of course not. And what of my need of not appearing gay in public? Isn't it the same as a gay man's when in a potentially antagonistic situation? What's that? It's simply not the same? Okay then, do tell. But please don't tell me how your rights are being violated the same as blacks in America. I don't think gay people can speak to that any better than I can, unless they are gay and black.

              -7.5 -7.28, What's a guy gotta do to get impeached around here?

              by Blueslide on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 06:51:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Cheers to ending the Oppression Olympics (8+ / 0-)

    And winning our battles against injustice, working together for equality, civil rights, and the end of senseless discrimination.

  •  Isn't the problem... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    carolita, Predictor, appletree, I love OCD

    ...that some have read the assertion of an analogy between the two movements to be an assertion that gays have suffered as much as blacks, and this offends some people, especially when they have the impression that gays in the US are at least an economically advantaged group? Personally, I think it's useless to try to rank the suffering of one group over another, whatever one might actually think about the relative misfortunes that have befallen various groups. Not all illegitimate discrimination may be alike, but all of it should be remedied, however it may rank relative to other forms of discrimination.

    There are analogies between racial discrimination and discrimination based on sexual orientation. There are common points of principle and legality that can be highlighted to clarify some of the issues at stake. But no one I know who has used the analogy has meant to "equate" discrimination against gays with discrimination against blacks. Indeed, I think the charge that such equating is taking place is made cynically by white right-wing opponents of gay rights as a way to stir up hostility among groups who should be the natural allies of gays' and lesbians' struggle for equality.

    -7.75, -7.64 www.politicalcompass.org "When the intellectual history of this era is finally written, it will scarcely be believable." -- Noam Chomsky

    by scorponic on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 01:55:51 PM PST

    •  I should have (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor

      waited until you posted - you said this so much better than I did.

    •  No there are a lot of black folk (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      homoaffectional

      who think that way too. There are also gay racists who think that way. It's complicated. Then you have folks who are academic types who parse everything that you cease to see the forrest of discrimination being the problem for the trees of  each case of discrimination. There is no overarching understanding that injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. There were black folk shocked to realize that Prop 8 may have implications for blacks for example.

  •  Gay rights is not a metaphor for slavery. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RonV, WeBetterWinThisTime

    Diary starts off OK noting that no one makes the comparison of oppression of gays to slavery. Diary then goes into the ditch by claiming gay rights should be able to claim a "metaphorical" comparison to slavery.  Nooooo.

    Both are civil rights issues as are women's rights but there is no "metaphorical" relationship between slavery as the basis for oppression of blacks and homophobia as the basis for oppression of gays.

    All are equal rights issues. Each has a different basis.

    •  except the diary never says that gays rights (5+ / 0-)

      is a metaphor for slavery. what is beleive on the use of metaphor is found in what Julian Bond- whom I quoted- said.

      •  Then you might want to rephrase your title (0+ / 0-)

        Your argument is that gays are "denied the metaphor of slavery" and your diary argues that is a valid metaphor.

        It's not.  Being gay is like being a slave would be the metaphor.  It is not only not applicable, it makes no sense.

        •  I think you are projecting (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, homoaffectional

          Here's how my diary starts:

          Gays denied metaphor of black civil rights
          by bruh1 [Subscribe] [Edit Diary]

          Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 11:56:46 AM PST

          I find diaries like this Why Everyone Should Study Slavery to be a Rorschach's test about unspoken assumptions on gay rights. It tells me more about writers and commentors than any direct conversation does.

          The diary stated:

          It's been in the back of my mind for quite a few days now, since the avalanche  of diaries on Rick Warren, and Prop 8, and numerous comments and flames here about black folks, and comparing slavery as history to the status of GLBT battles for civil/human right.

          There was never any significant number of commentators making this claim. So, why seize on this obviously out of the mainstream argument?  

          I explicitly deny the other diarist's argument. I say that the civil rights era to which gay s are referring as metaphor are civil rights area of 1960s. Which is why I use quotes from leaders fo that era to emphasise the point.

          The problem I had with the diary yesterday was that it was not the argument gay civil rights leaders , and indeed black civil rights leaders, have made when using race as a metaphor. I dont' know what else to say to you. Most everyone else gets the point is not comparing gays to slave.  Civil rights is not limited to slavery.

  •  Both Groups Have Fences to Mend (9+ / 0-)
    Central to African American culture is a theological conservatism and a strong belief in biblical literalism and inerrancy.  This is the real driver behind the less than reasonable view toward the LGBT community.  There is also a rather archaic view of masculinity that defeat understanding as well.  

    African-Americans should really be the first community to want to discuss and accept the LGBT community because there is an ongoing public health issue related to closeted black men and the transmission of HIV to black women by these men.  It is the eternal shame of some black theologians that the the lives of their congregants (the women sitting in the front rows and the choir leaders directing the music) are endangered because of the fanatic homophobia preached in their pulpits.  The reaction to Prop 8 in California is just one very ugly example.

    However, the LGBT "community" is not really a community.  By and large, this community is a "white male" club with others somewhat tolerated.  Gay white men idealize other white men (gay and straight) and internalize the biases and prejudices that white male culture has fostered. When you are attracted to the captain of the football team, you tend to model his behavior.  Excluding the "other" is a big part of this behavior.  The stories about how black, brown and yellow gays and lesbians were ignored and mistreated before and after the Prop 8 vote show that gays have a long way to go to be an inclusive group.  

    Not everyone can be an Abercrombie and Fitch model, but for many gay white men, these are the only people that really matter.  Is it any wonder that many (if not most)of the leading gay programs (Will and Grace, Queer as Folk etc.) are exclusively white and largely male?  Racism is ugly from any community; it is all the more disappointing when it comes from another oppressed group.

    Bottom line: Both groups have some fences to mend.

    •  A lot of good points (5+ / 0-)

      I don't really disagree with the fact that both communities have their issues at all. We need to learn how to listen and not deny our similarities is what I am trying to convey here.

    •  I agree, but would add... (15+ / 0-)

      that it serves our oppressors well to let us be defined as wealthy white men.

      I'm certainly not saying that the wealthy white gay men aren't doing that, too... I'm just saying it has no basis and we need to stop being complicit with that framing. Don't let our community be defined -- whether by its members, our friends, or our enemies -- as something it's not.

      One of the things about being queer is that we're born into families and social groups that are NOT queer. We also usually don't know we're queer until later in life, typically adolescence but often long after. And we struggle and deny to ourselves and try to hide, whether we are gay or bi or transgendered, and it creates a terrible conflict between our desire to be part of -- and SAFE IN -- our communities, families, churches, schools, army, etc. It is disempowering, dangerous, and alienating. And it can and often does cost us our families, our homes, our jobs, our relationships, and sometimes even our lives.

      There are queer poor people, queer women, queer people of color, and there are queer people in every single nation and of every religion on the planet. Those of us in those groups have each and every form of economic, class, and other injustice and oppression that poor people, racial minorities, and other members of stigmatized groups have wherever we live, and on top of it, we're often ostracized or physically harmed, even killed, because we're LGBT.

      Allowing our community to be defined by well-off white gay men -- NO MATTER WHO IS DOING THE DEFINING -- allows us to be seen as privileged as queers when in reality, our numbers are made up of the exact same demographics as the rest of the human race: rich, poor, educated, uneducated, ugly, pretty, fat, thin, black, white, religious, atheist, American, Chinese, whatever... we're everyone and everywhere.

      When people perceive Will Truman as the quintessential gay person, it makes poverty-stricken transgendered women turning tricks to stay alive invisible. It makes queer youth sleeping in doorways invisible. It makes lesbian moms feeding their kids on food stamps invisible. It makes queer people of color invisible, it makes queers being executed in Iran invisible, it makes LGBT soldiers being thrown out of the military invisible, it makes elderly widows and widowers of same sex partners who lose their homes after their partner dies invisible.

      The reality is that the vast majority of queer people who live the exact same lives as everyone else in their families, communities, and cultures are invisible, ignored, and discounted.

      I believe we allowed our community to be defined by its best-looking, rich, white, male members as a reaction to something that happened during the 80s. There was a massive movement in society towards consumerism and materialism, and the "gay community" got sucked up into that along with everyone else. If we could be perceived as having MORE money, especially more disposable income, than other groups, we'd get respect. We'd get ads in our publications, we'd get a seat at the table, we'd get invited to the White House. It felt like power.

      And trust me: during the AIDS epidemic, that perception was not a bad thing. It honestly helped get more and better services for people with AIDS, and sending our white, college-educated guys with good haircuts and nice suits to talk to Big Pharma while the young, punk, and pissed off disrupted the stock market and tied up traffic was a pretty shrewd "good cop/bad cop" strategy that paid off.

      But I look around now and I think, this is bullshit. It's nearly impossible to reconcile our public image with our reality.

      And our enemies LOVE IT, because they get to present us as hedonistic rich people trying to hitch our wagon to the civil rights movement in between gay cruises and shopping excursions to Rodeo Drive, instead of a stigmatized, despised minority which in most places is not protected against being fired from our jobs or evicted from our homes, who can't get pensions or social security after the death of our partners, who are often -- and I can't state this enough, because I think many straight people would be stunned to know how common this is -- prevented from even visiting, let alone making medical decisions for, our partners when they're hospitalized.

      If those who object to us describing our struggle as a fight for civil rights knew us, really knew who we are, it would be very, very hard for our enemies to use this tactic against us. We need to define ourselves based on who we are, not who they tell us we are.

    •  You are practicing the same stereotyping you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bruh1, Predictor

      accuse gay men of.

      I am a very non-Abercrombie and Fitch gay man, and most of the loving and caring gay man, I know, and even most of the non-loving and caring types who are not obsessed with that physical type.

      I'd certainly like to know more about the Prop 8 situation.  If the accusations are true, it will be a bitter lesson.

      Cliquishness, including racial cliquishness, is a problem among gay men black and white, (although bears are a bit less clickish, it would seem, and I don't think that's because I'm in the click).  Somehow this is due to our constant sexual high-wire act (which also bursts through walls of clique and type and race).

      I'm not saying that we don't have issues to work on, but admit, its not always easy to reach out to certain lesbians who are mad at us before we even open our mouths, just for being men.

      I had one lesbian bartender burst into a conversation I was having trying to get supporters for Barack Obama this summer and she announced that she wanted him assassinated so that Hillary could be nominated.

      OK, that is an extreme case, but it was not something I read - it happened to me in real life, which made it very real.

      In short.  Life Sux.

      But somehow we all seem to help each other with a great deal of regularity.

      One stumbles, the other lifts, one is blinded with rage or anger, the other soothes, calms, and then wipes away the flood of tears.

      People can be wonderful. Simply wonderful.

  •  You are rapidly becoming my favorite diarist (5+ / 0-)

    Thank you for this, bruh!

    Great analysis and insight. Recc'd.

    God is good, God is great, because we can use him for our hate.

    by RfrancisR on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:12:56 PM PST

  •  This "metaphor" shows lack of understanding (6+ / 0-)

    I'm a white lesbian and I loathe when gays try to say that gay civil rights are "just like" black civil rights.

    No, they aren't.  For all the reasons stated in the original slavery diary.

    You're insisting that "they" grant "us" the metaphor. Well, why don't "we" be considerate and acknowledge that our plights are different.

  •  its funny that i mentioned it (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larry Bailey, TheCid

    i made a statement on this blog that we gays are now the new blacks. it was rejected out right and not given another thought. sad that we will not be recognized in the obama administration as equal people. sad that we are cast aside by politicans that talk the talk but can not walk the walk. sad that we have to be second and third class citizens in this great country. sad,sad, sad.........and so it goes..........................................

  •  I cannot for the life of me (8+ / 0-)

    imagine why two groups of oppressed people are arguing over whose oppression is worse.  This is a form of Stockholm Syndrome.

    •  Because it's easier to masturbate ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor

      ... than win a marathon?

      The only "freedom in Christ" for a follower of Rick Warren is the freedom to be a Good German.

      by The Werewolf Prophet on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 02:32:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with that (0+ / 0-)

        But as you read some of the comments here, you realize that people are  looking for easy solutions. Talking honestly to each other is part fot hat marathon. Their easy solutions is "make the american people feel comfortable with you by not talking to them about these things" or "don't engage in telling them that any of their ideas are homophobic" You read the stories I mentioned above. How do you not tellt he American people that when they think gays are like pedophilles or that they create a culture of suppression and violence against gays orthat discrimination against gay are all example sof homophobia. How do you say that without saying? Yet, in this very thread, you have posters saying that exact thing.

  •  The problem of the metaphor lies in how it erases (6+ / 0-)

    the economic dimension of black oppression. Class and race became inseparable through colonialism. I don't know of an analogous historical process in the case of homosexuals. While the experiences of violence (both physical and psychological) might be highlighted and understood through analogizing African-American and homosexual experiences, the differing causes of each oppression are obscured. Widespread poverty in African American communities cannot be explained through social intolerance alone.  

    •  no it does not (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, futurebird

      and nor does it take into account the economic dimensions for gays (which you don't know and neither to I because the denial of our oppression is such that to even discuss it is grounds for denying it even happens).

      There is a reason why congress is trying to pass the anti discrimiantion in employment and housing acts for gays. It's because we can be fired for being gay.

      Not all gays (and I know you did not say this, bu twant to point it out) are well off or middle class. Many are poor. Many are blue collar. Etc. They just are not the popular image , when our images are even allowed to be out there.

      As i have gotten older, I am stunned when I think back on how many gay people I know who are not even anyones thought process as being gay or the fact that they are gay can be used conomically agains thtem. So even that is not as simple as you describe.

      Nor does it help with regard to what happens globally.

      •  I should have been clearer... (0+ / 0-)

        I mean that "black" as a category was (is) used as a tool for economic exploitation and that the fact that the African-American community remains economically disenfranchised cannot be separated from its abuse as a source of labor in the colonization of the Americas (I think this was the point of yesterday's diary that you disliked so intensely). I do not know of a parallel condition of economic exploitation in the history of homosexuals in the Americas (i.e. a situation where gay people - because homosexual - were forced to labor so as to generate capital for heterosexuals).

        Of course, there are gay people from working and lower class backgrounds; I think that gay movement's singular focus on marriage is a sign that they have been forgotten by people who abstractly claim to be their brothers and sisters.

        •  actually the biggest (4+ / 0-)

          groups affect by a lack of marriage equality in states like ny at least are people of color. here's m y logic. the largest concentration of gay families possibly in america is believe or not in the bronx. just because the gay white media (yes there is such a thing) does not show it- there are a lot of people of color affected by this when it comes to benefits, etc. but no one hears abou thtem. that's the subject of another day.

  •  Re this diary: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larry Bailey, Predictor

    Amen.

    Uncle Sal

    "I certainly feel much more like I do right now than I did when I first came in..."

    by Sal Bovoso on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:29:38 PM PST

  •  Where (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GN1927, High Tide

    This denial allows people to deny our suffering ever happened

    Did you come up with this?

    I can't find a single reference to a denial of gay suffering or oppression in your diary. Just a bunch of questionable inferences.

    for instance
    This poster says there is nothing in common between the terror he felt from Jim Crow and the terror gays feel across the world. Really?

    The poster didn't say that. The poster clearly thinks (imo) the distinctions outweigh the commonality to the point of bellitling people's suffering. The hyberbolic misrepresentations of people's words with absolutist inferences just didn't impress me with any usefulness to your argument. And certainly failed in any attempt at expressing a desire for 'mutual understanding'.

    Moving on, finally.

    by fisheye on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 02:29:58 PM PST

    •  seeing whaty ouw ant to see does not mean (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor

      it doesn't exist. No more than arguing the earth is flat means it is.

      The poster does in fact say exactly what I said. You are doing what i expect you to do. Pretend he does not. Denial is part of the point.

      The poster thinks its trivializes how? How does it trivializes his experience to point out that other people are being murdered in the name of injustice too? This kind of analysis requires honest accessemnt of what's been said. What exactly is trivial about either situation? His or those gay people dyin across the planet/ What's trivial about gay bashing? If that's  not trivial then what does that say of the poster claiming it is?

      •  The difference is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        evilene689

        I see what's written and you see something else.

        Your expectations seem to cloud your vision.

        If you can't acknowledge the differences in scale, character and overt nature of violence and oppression against blacks in American history to that of gays, then you are the one in denial.

        No one said historical oppression of gays is trivial, neither is it a holocaust, or Alexander's sacking of Tyre.

        There are plenty of differences that, if you acknowledged them, would actually highlight the insidious and particularly heinous nature of anti-gay sentiments and behaviors, which would be helpful.

        A 'Don't ask don't tell' policy just couldn't apply to skin color could it?  

        The fact that the issues, while both being humane rights issues, have distinct natures both in societies perspectives and by the particular identities, doesn't diminish either plight in it's own context.

        Moving on, finally.

        by fisheye on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:57:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  arguing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ManhattanMan

    over whether or not there is a similarity between gay rights is a waste of time.

    Ofcourse there are similarities and differences.  But that is not as important as ending the discrimination.

    Gay rights activists need to do a better job of educating people of these injustices.  The civil rights era is well documented and studied even in courses at universities.

  •  great diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor

    Not sure what's going on with all of the comments, but I liked your mentioning of the denial of historical metaphor.

    Yes we can all be broken down in to very unique groups, but we are all part of the human experience.  You said it well here:

    Yes, history can help us understand uniqueness, but it also helps us understand sameness. To paraphrase Maya Angelou: There is nothing so unique in your experience that we can not understand one other. Where history is denied its value for metaphor, we lose a way for understanding each other.

  •  The argument for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GN1927

    gay rights is plenty strong argument without trying to tie it into another struggle.

    Infact, it seems to me that there those who argue that they should be able to use civil rights metaphor, secretly believe that those who disagree with them are indeed homophobes. That this argument about civil rights and gay rights is just a proxy fight for gay rights.

    To me, the two struggles just feel different and my eyes roll everytime I hear them compared to eachother. Its not that I'm a homophobe, but rather that sometimes a cultural meme can get worn out, or not worn out but if appropriated for other reasons can raise suspicion in the audience. Its like calling a candidate you don't like "the second hitler" or when Mrs. Palin advertised herself as the last defense against the "second holocaust". She may have had the right intentions, especialy in light of Ahmadinejad's recent rhetoric...but the metaphor was over the top and not appropriate for the discussion.

    I guess what I'm trying to say, is that when the two struggles are compared in a similar way...it dumbs down the argument and in a very patronizing manner. As if us straight-folk are in such lack of empathy that we need it to be compared to another "straight-cause".

    What I find works better (as a straigt,white,male) than the civil rights metaphor, are the personal stories of being kicked out of families, disinvited from thanksgiving and being fired from work for being gay. Stick to your own cause, your own stories of pain and isolation are powerful enough and certainly done a lot to change my mind about the subject.  

    •  no argument is plenty strong enough (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LuvSet, Predictor

      that it can avoid using ways and techniques of communciations that are proven to work. Just as the black civil rights movment relied on metaphor, and every means necessary to win, your argument fails on its face in terms of why areyou requring use to tie our hands? For what purpose? To what end? If it's a good one. fine. But if not,then the answer should be no. Nothing is so sacrosanct that we should walk around on glass afraid to discuss it.

      •  don't like the "tied hands" metaphore (0+ / 0-)

        I'm just trying to encourage you to tell your story, and genuinely connect with the american people instead of standing behind the castle walls and shouting "bigot","homophobe" and "your just like a racist".

        •  I'll be blunt (0+ / 0-)

          I don't care if people don't want to hear that they are being bigots and homophobic.

          The short term for the gay movement is pain while we start to address the realities of how bigoted people are on sexual orientation issues.

          That will change over the long haul if we consistently make the arguments such that they sink in.

          That's the lesson of the civil rights movment. Read MLK's writings on the subject. read a lot of other civil rights movmenet. The goal was not that we were going to change race relations over night, but that by being honest and not trying to play politicians of sparing feelings we address the underlying assumptions that propectuate the system.

          It's like people who ask me questions like "welld o you think Obama is bigoted then to say not to marriage equality." of course he is. Arbitrary discrimination without any compelling basis for it is a cornerstone of our society. To say that's not bigotry, is to cause cognitive dissonance about wht words mean.

          THe only reason I would be doing that is to spare  feelings. Not improve the situation. Since by sparing feelings, it allows oneto propectuate that the  feelings here are right, when in fact, they are wrong. Hence the Warren situation- the cognitive dissonance of thinking its okay for a guy to call us pedophilles. It's simple- there is no way to spin that statement. There is no way to claim its reaching out in any meaningful sense of the word.

          If you want a conversation, start by realizing what baggage peo bring, and realizing that real conversations begin with honesty- not making people feel good about their prejudices. Its a different approach that has not been tried in a long time.

          People have been trying your approach for 25 years now on sexual orientation. Prop 8 ran your strategy and lose. that's the reality.

          •  failure of yes on 8 (0+ / 0-)

            wasn't the result of a particular strategy, it was how that strategy was executed.

            The few ads that I saw were pretty smarmy and smart alecky, were not targeted to specific groups. The ground game sucked, the rhetoric was clunky 1960's "us vs. the oppressors" and the overall feeling was that the "no on 8 cause" was some kind of hipster movement for those who went to Hollywood parties and shopped at whole foods. Not that there is anything wrong with that...but certainly it was a narrow population in california.

            As being part of the demographic you need to communicate to, I feel like that if I'm telling you what generates support for your cause and what degrades it...that is not a point of contention. If you think I'm lying to you, and that I'm apart of some kind of anti-gay conspiracy, that I'm one of warren's goons...then I can't help you.

            So you can wave the pitchforks and torches, and shout epithets...but its not likely you're going to change anyone's mind. What does change minds is honesty and genuine communication. It was from reading a few stories on here about gays being kicked out of their families that moved me from "don't give a sh*t" to "this is important".

            •  Part of the failure on 8 (0+ / 0-)

              was a lack of forthrightness.

              Read this:

              http://www.dailykos.com/...

              Part of being able to anticipate what the others wide will do, even if it's to use positive spin, is to admit - "there are some homophobes who will try to stop us." Those homophobes will rationalize their homophobia.

              I am fine with addressing and combating igorance or misunderstandings, etc. What I am not okay with is pretending that everyone is coming to the conversation fairly or honestly. They simply aren't.

              You can spin this as much as you want. I see it just like I see race. It's just a part of life. We need to deal with it rather than pretend its not there. That was part of the 8 failure. They assumed they would win by ignoring the bigots. Thus, rather than going into the red areas of the state to persuade the people who maybe own the fence. Theyignored them. tried much fow hat several of you advocated along this thread. And they still loss. That's the reality.

            •  by the way (0+ / 0-)

              nothing that I write here is a magical solution. Nothing is short term. But if youwant real change- just like those who came before us- you have to be willing to use proven strategies. Calling a duck, a duck, is the one of the best weapons progressives have. Shining the light on ugliness helps us.

              Pretending, just go give an example, like there is nothing discriminatory about civil unions (when the facts say the oppose) is not about trying to accomplish anything. It's bout the fear of having to actually fight for it by gay leadership and some straight allies

              •  I still disagree (0+ / 0-)

                There were certain elements in the civil rights movement that thought MLK was too soft, that non-violence didn't work. They too sought to shine the light on ugliness, though they used words like "white devil". I don't think those tactics, and that language achieved the desired effect.

                •  I dont care if you disagree (0+ / 0-)

                  especially when you do so being over the top. If you are going to accuse gay activists of being violent, then you need to back that up or stop using right wing lies. That you choose that says a lot about your thinking.

  •  Thanks Bruh1 (5+ / 0-)

    I was too emotionally exhausted and fearful to write a challenge to the slavery diary.

    You did a great service.

    I do fear the last long quote needed much more "unpacking" which I can understand you may not have been ready for at the end of a long diary.

    Gay beneficiaries of hate are as much a part of our history as our victims, even if less numerous.  That man had real reasons for his homophobia, just as some people have "real" reasons for racism. (Not valid or good, but grounded in a real wound).

    Hmmmm.........

    Perhaps the best way to restore a more balanced picture might with my favorite Coretta Scott King quote:

    Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Georgia, and St. Augustine, Florida, and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions.

    Like most so many other groups, we are both victim and oppressor, collaborators and liberators.  And just like all the other imperfect groups out there,

    We demand our equal civil rights.

    •  I have a question (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      futurebird, TenthMuse

      Do people think if they quote either of the Kings or Julian Bond enough, that the AA community will roll over and fetch, because we're hearkening to our masters or something?

      I have no problem with them being quoted in context, but it is beginning to seem like people have some expected response they are waiting for, or that they are waving a big stick in our faces. "Oh, you're gonna get it now! Coretta said blah, blah blah!"

      We aren't some monolith and we have no "official spokesperson" whose words are a surefire way to get us to shut up and get onboard. Making a valid argument for your own issues and stating your case based on the facts is what works.

      You'd think people would know this by now.

      Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

      by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:16:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  what I think is thatyou operate out of pure (4+ / 0-)

        emotions. You probably read my name, and started posting. I say this because I quote both people in the diary extensively as to their views on the subect. So when you say "we aren't some monolith" its just bullshit deflection. if aren't going to engage me honestly or without hostility you will find that I give what I get.

      •  Oh God (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Predictor

        Now we can't even quote the black leaders who support us!

        "How dare you think you have the right to quote OUR elder generation!"

        MLK had a quote on this BTW.....I'll be getting back to you on that.

        There are many black homophobes who are just as free to hang on to their repugnant homophobia as long as they'd like, or until it become - socially uncomfortable for them to do so, and then they can still go into the closet like the hard core racists.  Have fun there.

        They just don't need to extend it to owning the entire black community, or pretend that the represent the progressive wing of the black community.

        Next time I'll have my gay black friends sick Coretta Scott King on you :-P

        •  That's not what I said. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          futurebird

          Calm the fuck down and stop misreading me, in your haste to defend yourself from non-existent attack.

          I'm just wondering why people feel the need to pull this out like it means we must fall in line at their invocation, whether the sentiment behind the words is correct or not.

          Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

          by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:35:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think you are going over the top. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bruh1, Predictor, Skylarking

            These quotes are most frequently used in response to the claim that there aren't any significant parallels between the gay and AA experiences. These are well know people who felt that there were.

            I don't think anybody in their right mind would think that they could make you fall in line with anything. I'm not really sure what your agenda is, but one really can't help but get the impression that you regard gays with more than a little hostility.

          •  Um... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bruh1, Predictor

            People quote authorities to support their arguments.

            If you feel like someone quoting an authority "means you MUST fall in line," then I would suggest some serious self-examination (probably best with guidance).

            It must indeed be difficult to go around thinking people are trying to control you.

            I have no doubt there are very real personal roots, but continuing to project them can do you no good.

            •  On re-reading this (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Predictor

              I wish I could have expressed myself with more compassion and empathy, but it was a hard thing to say.

              But more compassion might have seemed smarmy/snarky too.

              The essence of my reading of the situation remains unchanged.

            •  --it patronizing (0+ / 0-)

              to quote black people to impress black people-- quote the people who said it best.

              •  Personally I really do find Coretta Scott King (0+ / 0-)

                to be an eloquent speaker and writer. If that's patronizing then that's too bad.

              •  I wasn't trying to impress you (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Predictor

                this is where the projection comes into play. I dont care (to be quite frank) that much to impress others. I used the quotes because i realized I am not a lone and here are other people who agree with me. Part of the problem here is that everyone is so quick to judge that they dont understand. I am gay and black. I was happy to see black folk who were head of the civil rights era who are not out there attacking the gay part of me. So I didn't use the quotes to say- you have to be like this. But I am definitely using it to say- you know what- don't act like I m the only one or that there is omething out of whack with my ideas or anti-black about it. So far we have this crew saying black is what they say it is. My response is - no. There are more views than yours. Heres some examples.

                •  OK that makes sense. (0+ / 0-)

                  But can I just say there are a LOT of progressive black people who want to get this issue right already? Especially on a forum like this one! But often I feel sort of invisible.

                  And I say I want to get it becuase I'm still learning.

                  But some of the time its as if people think I need EXTRA remedial sensitivity classes just becuase I'm black... you know?

              •  I'm not trying to impress anyone (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Predictor

                I am using authorities to support my argument.

                Feel free to criticize the arguments or quote other authorities.

                Who do you want me to quote in a discussion with black people - only white people?

                •  What I'd like... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Richard Lyon

                  ...and I cannot speak for all black people.

                  Is for people to stop talking down to me like I'm in capable of caring about anything but racism. You don't need to address me in a different way than you'd address a cis straight white person.

                  Some of the time the conversation about intersectionality takes on this slightly patronizing tone like "how can we reach the black people?" If that's not the intention that's great-- but lets try to avoid it if we can.

                  I don't know if I'm doing a great job of explaining this, but what evil mentioned-- dragging out black heroes to be impressive can be a part of it.

                  •  that's true (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Richard Lyon, Predictor

                    but you realize gays find the same things happening to them?

                    peo will say stupid shit to me about being gay that's based on them being the majority and my not being th emajority in that way.

                    Majorities, as I have discovered, on the front of how they are the majority will say stupid things because they aren't forced to know better like the minority group is.

                  •  That I think I can relate to. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Predictor, futurebird

                    The talk about outreach turns me off. It gives me visions of the Salvation Army with a kettle. If it is a matter of convincing AAs to behave in a manner that is deemed politically correct, then I can see where you would get irritated.

                    However, the statements from the likes of King and Bond are about all that much of the white community has ever heard from the AA community on the subject of homosexuality, so that is where they are starting from. This is something that really hasn't been talked very much. It's a conversation that is overdue and none of us are entirely comfortable with it.

                    •  This outreach thing came (0+ / 0-)

                      not from the white GLBT's "trying to outreach."  You to can drop the "white people are always the initators" crap here.

                      We were ATTACKED by the the AA's and we responded.

                      OK I'm going to make the assumption here that you're  a straight AA (for the sake of developing the positions in the text below).  

                      So please no more of this white gays being patronizing shit  (in this case ;)

                      That number doesn't work here, so you don't need to play the tape.

                      I know you are not used to thinking of yourselves as part of the oppressive and privileged majority (even if you are a majority/minority, believe me we understand that position) but get used to it.

                      We've been used to getting our white shit called forever even thought were queer, so you better get used to have your heterosexist (black variant) shit called too, even when its the black version, and you better get  used to having BLACK heterosexism call just like we are used to having queer racism called.  Here the main problem with black heterosexism seems to be in denying us our very oppression.

                      Your thoughts on the quotes are correct.  We know your historic, nationally recognized leaders, so that's where we start.  Moreover the people who were at the heart of the most critical stage of the AA civil rights movement.  I'll be eagerly waiting learning more about the views of younger people so I will know who to thank and quote and whose heterosexism and/or homophobia needs to see the bright light of day.

                      Writing this, I realize there may be a generational dynamic here within the AA community that has nothing to do with gays.  The "they were the greatest generation vs. we will never live up to their moral authority" angst.  Well sorry.  Don't project that battle onto us.  Get some moral authority.  And helping us, and first and foremost  your very, very oppressed black glbt brother and sisters, would be terrific way to start, although there  are certainly many other options open in other areas, too.

                      We need your your support and guidance.

                      •  Its antagonistic (0+ / 0-)

                        first, it's not crap. Just like if you heard what you just wrote from a straight person trying to tell you about being gay. You need to realize race is a factor. It doesn't mean you need to not make your point. It's that you can't do so by pretending race is ot a factor. Just like sexual orientation. Or Gender. Or class. It just is.

                  •  That talking down to you is in your head (0+ / 0-)

                    not in my attitude.

                    But I must say, it is not easy to figure out who you can talk rough to and who you have to dance around because they are just waiting to be offended.

                    If your too nice, the latter will then pull the "you're talking down to me" number.  Perfect.

                    OK, we're beyond that.  Good.

                    If the discussion is about comparing the black civil rights movement and the glbt civil rights movement who am supposed to be quoting, Mary Poppins????

                    I cried when I read Coretta Scott King's quote - is that necessarily patronizing because I am white, and not because I was touched as the oppressed at her reaching out as a majority/potential oppressor and oppressed mintory (at the same time, like us white LGBT people), recognizing the courage of GLBT aid to the African American Civil Rights movement?

                    Get out of your angry and passive aggressive  heads, and into your full-blooded, compassionate hearts, people.

                    And believe me, coming from my family, I have vast experience in the world of passive-aggressive technique.

      •  That bugs me too... (0+ / 0-)

        I don't need to hear from black people to know when something is right or wrong.

    •  100 percent agree (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gladkov, skrekk, Predictor, imchange, RfrancisR

      there are gay bigots who do not l ike blacks as well. None of it is justified.

  •  bruh1, you did it again! (5+ / 0-)

    An amazing diary that clearly explains your well-reasoned thoughts in well-measured language.

    I am really glad that your unique perspective - being black and gay - is expressed here giving us much valued insight.

  •  black gays are as bad as white gays? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    katynka, Predictor

    These [racist] people were known to be gay, even in the 50s and 60s in Mississippi. They worked in places blacks could hardly dream of working. They were so comfortable in their whiteness, they treated blacks the same way the heterosexuals did. Yes, they were gay, but they had the trump card, they were white.

    And this is used as justification for not allowing gay blacks to marry?

    This is what I don't get about the You-gays people. We gays are in your family, too. Gays died in Africa fighting the slave trade, died on slave ships, died on plantations, died taking up arms against slaveowners. But don't give 'em any credit for it -- after all, gays are white and did all the bad things white people did.

  •  Beautifully written. n/t (3+ / 0-)

    Air strikes on cities intentionally kill innocent people just like a suicide bomber in a café does. The only difference is the size of the bombs.

    by expatjourno on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:25:29 PM PST

  •  I grew up in a part of Texas where blacks were (6+ / 0-)

    not permitted to live or even be there after dark.  It is a big area, about 20,000 square miles.  We never talked about blacks.  We knew black people existed because we studied slavery in American History in high school, and once in a while a black person would appear in a movie, such as Gone with the Wind.  I don't think I ever heard a single word against black people, but that did not mean that our people were not racist.  Racism was in the soil of my hometown, but, because there were no blacks to mistreat, we never gave them a thought.

    But gays were another matter.  There were a few in my hometown and they often were spoken about behind their backs.  Then the local boy scout leader was arrested for pedophilia and the talk against gays spilled out in ugliness.  It was everywhere I went for a while.

    When I was very young, we had Catholics living in our town, there was even an active church.  When I started school the last Jewish boy was one of my classmates.  He left when we were in the fourth grade.  By the time I reached high school the Catholic Church was closed and most of the Catholics and Jews were gone except for those oldsters who had lived their lives there and wanted to stay to the end.  

    I learned later that our county had been settled largely by Jews, and the Catholics came later.  I must add that the Catholics were not Hispanic.  There were no Hispanics living in my county when I grew up.

    So what was once a diverse part of our state, was over time changed to a narrow-minded, white, Baptist community.  I am sorry if what I am about to say will offend you, Gentle Reader, but it is the truth.  The Southern Baptists where I live have been for more than a century, and are still today, equal-opportunity bigots who want to deny civil rights to anyone who is not like them.

    If you don't have an earth-shaking idea, get one, you'll love building a better world.

    by hestal on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:31:15 PM PST

  •  When I was picked on in high school, (0+ / 0-)

    I was often beaten, spat upon, and had my clothes torn to shreds all while being publicly humiliated by my peers.  It was just like what happened to the Jews in the prison camps.  In fact, it was EXACTLY WHAT JESUS WENT THROUGH!!!

    Guys, can we tone down the volume just a tad?  Yes, many gay people have gone through very difficult trials throughout history, but 'going there' (even if true) makes you look crazy, and is never healthy for any reform you're trying to pass.  That's just how it is.

  •  Good points, good research of history (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor

    Though, I would still say there is a slight difference between the two struggles for acceptance and equality. One group does not merit more priority or value than the other, but there is a difference in my mind.

    To me, the first level of 'basic human rights' or 'civil rights' is that because (or if) you are human, that puts you in the 'class' of deserving an equal level of and all the rights in the designated class.

    People are human, in that sense, than before they are anything else.  In the case of American black civil rights experience, they were treated the way they were perceived by others visually, at first.  Black - 'human' was 'secondary' if at all.

    In an abstract sense, a homosexual person can be 'seen' as 'just another human' first, until other cues (or deliberate life expressions) might indicate they are then in a subset category of 'homosexual.'  In the main, a non-'white' person never has that moment of assumed 'equalness.'  Obviously, in real life there are also examples of light-skinned people of whatever ethnicity who are 'undetected' by their white arbiters, but my example is meant only to help decode in a generic way at the most intrinsic level. (ha ha, but now re-reading, I'm not so sure it will help!)
    ;-)

  •  Great diary! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    psychodrew

    I wish it wasn't necessary.  

    -gadfly

    "Sunlight is the best disinfectant" - Louis Brandeis

    by the national gadfly on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 03:40:35 PM PST

  •  If you aren't white, male and rich (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    psychodrew, Predictor

    you've faced some kind of discrimination in your life.  Everyone has in some form or another and I always hesitate to equate any one groups suffering to another group.

    But what we have most in common is our humanity and that we share much more than what we have as differences.  

    Race is a construct to define our differences.  Culture tends to be more important to how we are different but how we look is much easier to identify.

    I think African Americans assume that being gay is something you can hide (as if anyone should have to, but many still do, it's still common practice even the most liberal places) and that being black is well, not something you can hide.

    But if someone isn't free to speak of their significant other, bring them to a company picnic and truly be who they are, that hiding is quite destructive to one's soul.

    The struggles are not the same but I would never be so bold to say that they are that different either.  

    Then again, I'm just a straight, white woman who feels I don't even have a right to say much.

    •  Everyone has a right to their views (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, Ellinorianne

      Even Warren whom I hate. The point is whether they are righ tor not. My diary is not an easy question. It's not like whether Warren is a bigot or not? We know he is. When to use a metaphor or not is not that easy. My point here is not a black and white rule.

    •  but (0+ / 0-)

      I think African Americans assume that being gay is something you can hide (as if anyone should have to, but many still do, it's still common practice even the most liberal places) and that being black is well, not something you can hide.

      Some of us ARE gay and not all of us think this.

      I HONESTLY don't think there is a big gap, in terms of how homophobic people are by race-- a lot of it is based on how religious people are and income and such.

      Black people tend to be poorer and more religious... there's you "gap" ... next question?

      Generalizations like this drive me a little batty. Honestly.

      •  I dont people are more or less (0+ / 0-)

        racist or homophobic by race or sexual orientation.

        •  great (0+ / 0-)

          I fear I've run in to a lot of people who do think there is some kind of mind blowing difference...

          •  I run into that too (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Predictor, Ellinorianne, futurebird

            I will run into some person who will say "well blacks should get it" because we are black. And I am like why? blacks are humans. We don't think as a monolith. Your first mistake is to think that we do.

            •  There is a particularly obnoxious form (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              futurebird, TenthMuse

              of white liberal condescension that says that blacks are expected to conform to a model of politically correct behavior after all we've done for them. A classic case of this was the outrage over Colin Powell and Condi Rice taking prominent positions in a Republican administration. They really do have a right to be Republicans if they want to.

            •  Omg. Something we agree on. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ellinorianne, futurebird

              I will run into some person who will say "well blacks should get it" because we are black. And I am like why? blacks are humans.

              There was SO. MUCH. of this flying around this past month it was infuriating!

              Omg.

              I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that was bullshit.

              Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

              by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:47:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  If you read me in a gay context (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                LuvSet, Predictor

                where I m arguing with gay white folk s you would realize like I 've been trying to tell you that my arguments re trying to reach for some nuiances.  for example, when I am discussing civil rights- I make it clear- I am not discussing slavery other than to say this is not the argument gay activists are making. They are linking the civil rights movemnet on the 1960s. Thats not the same as linking what happened before that. Some random comments may say that, but that's not same as it being a argument  a lot of gays are making. Its unfair to say that a lot of gays activists are making an argument just as its unfair to say that all blacks think one way. that was my point.  I may fail,. but that's what I am tryin gfor.The point is I would never say "all blacks think x " because that's stupid to me. All blacks don' think the same. Never have. Never will. if youw ant see an example of that come visit my crazy ass family.

      •  I really should (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Predictor

        have qualified my statement from personal interactions and said from people I've spoken to that is an issue.

        I hate generalizations just as much and should have said that I've personally heard this.

  •  until you take to the streets (0+ / 0-)

    and DEMAND the rights you yearn for, aint nothin gonna happen.

    Sorry, but that's how it is.  Nobody ever shamed or debated their way to the table...they had to wrestle their way there.

    So get the hell off of the computer, and call up your friends and acquaintances, and prepare to do battle...

    Because civil rights, at the end of the day, have never been won without a battle.

    Blogging won't do it, and excoriating others via a blog certainly won't do it.  

    It comes down to the street.  And your voice.  And your fist.  And your perseverance.

    THIS WON'T BE HANDED TO YOU...NO MATTER HOW DESERVING YOU MAY THINK IT IS...YOU WILL HAVE TO GRAB IT FROM THE STATUS QUO, AND CLAIM IT AS YOUR OWN, AND DEFY OTHERS TO TRY TO TAKE IT BACK.

    This whole DKos thing?   it's bullshit.  and it gets you nowhere.

  •  Who's doing the denying? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor, futurebird

    I think you meant to say that some people dislike the metaphor, not that you or anyone else is being "denied" it.  

    "'Shit' is the tofu of cursing" --David Sedaris

    by LiberalVirginian on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:00:37 PM PST

    •  without asking the question of why (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor

      you dont' understand the dislike. it maybe for innocent reasons or it is more liely I feel a continuation of a pattern of denial. that to say gay sare anything lik eme is offensive because gays are nothing like me.  it could be just cherished history, but either way, we need to ask why.

      •  It's not that. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        evilene689

        or it is more liely I feel a continuation of a pattern of denial. that to say gay sare anything lik eme is offensive because gays are nothing like me.

        Not in my case, at least. It has more to do with people who do not understand racism trying to compare their experiences to racism. I find this offensive.

        Gay people who "get" how racism works don't offend when the make comparisons.

      •  Wouldn't it be easier... (0+ / 0-)

        to stop using the metaphor on people who object to it than undertaken a massive mind-reading and psychoanalytical operation?

        it maybe for innocent reasons or it is more liely I feel a continuation of a pattern of denial.

        "'Shit' is the tofu of cursing" --David Sedaris

        by LiberalVirginian on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 04:34:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not if the reasons are that they don't like (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor

          the comparison due to homophobia. If you want easy, you are not interested in civil rights. You have to change people's thinking. THat's part of the deal. It would have been easy for my mother to stay in the black high school rather than get attacked each day by people who also had their reasons that made sense at the time to them. I don't iknow if thats whats happening here, but just because theya re black does not mean they get a pass on the hard questions being asked.

  •  Another terrific diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ChristieKeith, Predictor

    Thank you, bruh1, for making an enormously powerful, thoroughly-researched and well-documented argument.

  •  Makes for an interesting debate (0+ / 0-)

    But no one being intellectually honest with themselves can compare what African Americans went through in the last 400 hundred years to the gay rights struggle.

    If you were gay at any point in time you still had a white mother and white father and were considered human. Maybe a little bit naughty but human non the less. The same cannot be said of African Americans. Leading scientist of the day labeled them sub human and less intelligent.
    Still goes on today. Read the Bell Curve.

    •  what's my race? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor
      •  Does not matter. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        brenda

        At the heart of African American oppression lay a belief supported by the leading scientists of the day that blacks were not really human like everyone else.
        African Americans were dehumanized.

        Like i wrote above there has never been any doubt as to the humanity of any gay person.

        Again makes for interesting debate but we all know there's no comparison.

        •  You are factually wrong (3+ / 0-)

          Even in the subject of gays and blacks and science. The arguments are basically along the same lines about their being something wrong or deviant about the person that either needed to be controled (through Jim Crow) or fixed (through being put in mental institutions, having ones genetialia damanged through shock therapy, etc). There's a lot more . but you argument is on its face false.

        •  Are you kidding me? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bruh1

          Like i wrote above there has never been any doubt as to the humanity of any gay person.

          There are all kinds of doubts.

          Sorry, you're wrong on this one.

          •  This is the sort of shit I hear (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Predictor

            all the time. People not even knowing their own ignorance, but displayin git with confidence. I mean- the poster apparenltydoes not realize that yes gays are considered subhuman and have been treated such. How much effort would it have taken to have googled the subject before posting here?

            This is my thing- and this is how race becomes a factor. When I am talkin gto someone- I want to be able to say to them. No tthey aren't exactly the same, but you understand when someone is trying to act like you are crazy for something they are doing to hur tyou? Well we get the same thing for being gay. You know how they had the Tusgee experiement with you? Well they used to shock our private area? I am not saying they are the ame things, but don't discount what's happened . Dont let them deny my history here like they have tried to do with you.

    •  huh?? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bruh1, futurebird

      If you were gay at any point in time you still had a white mother and white father...

      Aaaaaaauuuuuuuuuuuuuggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhh!

      Sorry. Just saying.

      ...and were considered human. Maybe a little bit naughty but human non the less. The same cannot be said of African Americans. Leading scientist of the day labeled them sub human and less intelligent.
      Still goes on today. Read the Bell Curve.

      Trust me on this: there's plenty of pseudoscience around sexual orientation, too. And I'm not sure in what sense the people who have been killed for being gay were "considered human."

      I'm really not interested in debating commensurability or equivalence, believe it or not. But whatever we say, let's keep it real.

  •  You are now on my "rec on sight" list (0+ / 0-)

    There are maybe half a dozen folks on that list--the people whose diaries I recommend before I even finish reading them. This may or may not mean anything to you but I hope you'll accept it as a compliment.

  •  It is a stupid move, politically... (5+ / 0-)

    ...for Gays to try to use the Black Civil Rights Struggle as a metaphor, model, or reference for their own struggle.

    First, because Black Rights took (are taking) too damn long!  Black Civil Rights were won over a 200-year period of tiny incremental gains.  Does anyone know any Gays who will wait that long?

    Second, even if it is a valid metaphor, it takes too long to explain, it takes great big long diaries like this one, and still people aren't convinced.  Gays need to Keep It Simple and say "Equal Rights Now!" and quit trying to exhume MLK.

    Comparing Black Rights to Gay Rights is not "wrong", "offensive", or "insensitive"...it's just Bad Framing.  The Civil Rights frame risks alienating Blacks who might be friendly or neutral and activates red-state enemies who want a rematch against Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln.

    A much better Frame is "Get Government Out Of Your Bedroom".

    We Progressives have a duty to get Gays equal rights ASAP...and we must be willing to use some Libertarian-style messaging to get it done.  But we gotta get this done fast because I do not want to go through 200 years of Gay couples staging sit-ins at the Justice of the Peace's Office and singing "We Shall Overcome".  

    If the Left can't get it together, we will need to get help from the Libertarian Right.  Frame Gay Marriage as an over-regulation, Government-in-your-bedroom issue.  

    Let's get this done, please, and move on!

    •  This makes too much sense (0+ / 0-)

      Comparing Black Rights to Gay Rights is not "wrong", "offensive", or "insensitive"...it's just Bad Framing.  The Civil Rights frame risks alienating Blacks who might be friendly or neutral and activates red-state enemies who want a rematch against Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln.

      For some around here that need to take what you say seriously, to actually do so.

      Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

      by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:07:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It depends on what motivates them (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, homoaffectional

      If its motivated by homophobia, it's better to bring it to light. If its motivated by something else, talking about it makes that clear too.

      •  I strongly disagree. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sapphire1

        I think this is comment brings to light one of the core problems with the Gay Rights movement...the over-emphasis on "homophobia" speculating what "motivates" so many Americans to be bigots.

        Forget trying to get people to like Gays, accept Gays, whatever.  That requires long-term Social Change and is beyond the power and scope of a political movement.

        We don't need America to suddenly turn into Classical Greece.  We just need 51% of the registered voters to tolerate Gays long enough to get key political rights in place.  Once we have that, people will see that Gay Marriages work, and the Hearts & Minds will follow...slowly, over many years.

        Getting our fellow humans to love and accept each other regardless of differences is an important job and one at which we must all work.  But we should remember that Jesus has been at it for 2000 years and even He hasn't made much progress on that front.  

        So, in the short-term, I propose that we focus on getting the right Propositions and Amendments passed in the right states, and that we do whatever framings and political manoeuvrings are necessary to get to 51%.

        •  I vehemently disagree. (3+ / 0-)

          If someone opposes marriage equality because they don't understand what marriage is, or aren't aware that marriage already is just a civil contract and that the religious ceremony has no legal merit whatsoever, that's one thing: those minds can be changed.  If however someone is bigoted against gays and uses their religion (the inerrable word of god) to justify that bigotry, not much can be done about that other than to call that person on their bigotry...or to advance a ballot initiative to prevent bigots from marrying.

          Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

          by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 08:11:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I see, (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            skrekk, homoaffectional, Sapphire1

            We need to figure out why people think they way we do so we know where to focus energy.  Makes sense.

            •  Actually (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              homoaffectional

              Yes, you do need to understand why people thinkw hat they think or else you are wasting your energy, not focusing it. You seem to advocate. You kep saying a lot crap to be quite frank that when push comes to shove is not saying anything all. Explain how your view works in the real world for accomplishing anything, and I will listen. Otherwise, I will just assume its one fo those "I got the magic solution" argumets I here all to often. There are not magic solutions. The fact you think there is exactly why I am quesitoning this whole line of thiought.

              •  From my first comment... (0+ / 0-)

                ....a much better Frame is "Get Government Out Of Your Bedroom".

                That is an example of the kind of strategy I am advocating: Stop asking for "civil rights" and instead ask for "privacy", "limited government", and "equal protection".

                •  tried and failed in liberal CA (0+ / 0-)

                  with Prop 8. That's exactly the kind of abstract argument they used. It failed miserably.

                  •  "NO on 8" didn't "fail miserably" (0+ / 0-)

                    The Prop 8. vote was the closest we've ever come to an electoral victory in a major state.

                    We are close to victory, very close! Trying to exhume MLK is like throwing a Hail Mary when all we need is a field goal.

                •  You really shouldn't (0+ / 0-)

                  assume as much as you are assuming here. There are reasons that I am writing this diary that go beyond just the topic at ahand. the truth is the light let's not rile the boat appraoch has failed. They ahve been trying your suggestions for 20 years now. I don't think you have much knowledge of the gay  rights efforts? If you did, you would know what you describe is pretty much what they do. They didn't even show gay couples in the No on 8 campaign strategy for fear of offending someone.

        •  "Classical Greece"?? (0+ / 0-)

          That statement alone gives away your condescending attitude towards gay people and their struggle.  And capitalizing the word "gay" doesn't really make up for it.

          •  I don't understand... (0+ / 0-)

            ...what is wrong with the Greek reference.  Classical Greece was a successful society that accepted Gay relationships.  I cited it as an example of the high level of tolerance we don't need in the short term.

            Homoaffectional, you need to realize that Government does not have the power to curtail "condescending" attitudes.  Government can't make your bigot neighbor invite you over for BBQ.  If there are people in your family who hate your lifestyle, Government can't make those people come to your house for Christmas.

            The only things that are on the table now are Marriage, Adoption, Inheritance, Taxation, Visitation Rights, Discrimination, etc.  This is a political struggle over political issues.

            Your allies are Straights like myself who promise to fight for Gay Rights.  But I am warning you now, when we win the prize will only be "Justice".  Nobody is promising you "Love" or "Acceptance".

            Black people have been free for 150 years and people are still "condescending" towards them. If you are in this fight for real, you better toughen up.

    •  Gays have been in the closet for 1600 years, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, homoaffectional

      at least (not to compare the two).

      Constantius issued a decree in 342 A.D. calling for gays to be beheaded.  The penalty of burning alive was first decreed by Valentinian II on August 6, 390 A.D.  The practice of burning gays
      alive continued in Europe until the latter part of the 18th century.

      In some countries today it's still a crime punishable by death to be gay.

      Human rights = civil rights, but "Civil Rights" refers to a specific period, and is but a subset of civil rights.  Note however that title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act also included women as a protected class - "Civil Rights" is also about civil rights, it just wasn't fully implemented.

      I think the "Civil Rights" metaphor is apt, especially on the use of religion to justify bigotry.

      Dubya's legacy: 25 million really pissed Iraqis...50 million shoes

      by skrekk on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 08:04:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, it is an "apt" metaphor... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sapphire1

        ...and requires a deep understanding of History (such as you've demonstrated) to know why it's "apt".

        We need better frames that don't require a Classical education to understand, that's all I'm saying.

        •  The problem with your argument (0+ / 0-)

          is that people will never understand then when you try to discuss any basic concept of analysis. It's like the people who do not know what equal protection is. I mean for people argue that equal protection is majority rule means there can be no real discussion of equal protection. How does one get around their lack of knowlege. Your view is easy to say - go to the lowest common denominator,b ut even harder to do- considering how low that civic education denominator is. OT: they did a study by the Scholastic Company a few years back of high school students asking them to list reasons (or something like that) for getting rid of the first amendment. I can't remember all the reasons, but it amounted to if the government thought it was a good idea, then yes, we should eliminate the first amendment. What would you have people do with this as the denominator?

          •  I'm not saying... (0+ / 0-)

            ...we need to go for a "lower" argument.  Just a different one.

            For example we could frame it as a "get-government-out-of-your-bedroom" argument.   This rests on solid Constitutional principles and widely held values...but does not require 1600 years of history lessons.

    •  "Equal Rights Now!"... (0+ / 0-)

      ... clearly hasn't worked any better than the metaphors you claim aren't working as well.

      Perhaps it's time for a more nuanced strategy that includes, among other things, better coalition building and outreach to other disadvantaged groups, including blacks and Catholic-leaning Hispanics.

  •  COMPARING GLBTTO SLAVERY PISSES BLACK PEOPLE OFF (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    brenda

    1.  Blacks were stolen from their homeland

    1.  They were chained, shackled and millions died  in and in route to the United States
    1.  Their names were changed.

       Their language was lost    
       Their past was erased

    1.  They were seperated from their families
    1.  The women were raped
    1.  They were forced to mate
    1.  They were forced to serve slave  masters
    1.  They could not complain to a judge or anyone else.

    I could go on and on.

    Slavery was an institution.  The injustice was built into the culture.  It was the culture.

    I think the struggles of the GLBT is a different plight.

    So, don't compare the Hell of Black People in America to the GLBT to slavery.

    A gay person can have and do have  good jobs, money, cars, houses and I think most people would support civil unions.

    A black person can't hide their skin color and discrimination is life every day for the majority of Blacks in America.

    If anyone reads this post I hope it makes some sense.

    •  It's not making sense to me. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      homoaffectional

      If only becuase you seem to be trying to impress us all with how awful slavery, Jim Crow and modern day racism are.

      I know all about these things-- I mean really.

      I also know that gay people have been repressed, lynched and have also suffered for centuries too.

      I mean it's not the same, but it's not any worse... or any better.

      Maybe I'm missing your point.

    •  This is where you lose me... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, homoaffectional, Marja E

      Of course comparing anything to slavery is absurd.

      But some of what you say is not about slavery, and you dip into the shit that makes me want to scream, which is:

      A black person can't hide their skin color

      Because some of us (not all) can "pass," we're not as oppressed as people of color who can't? Huh? Please think about that for a minute... really think about it. Do you understand... and you MUST, if you let yourself... what "passing" really means? Because until you realize that NO ONE can truly "pass" as straight forever, and that the closet is a prison, and that the day we're caught "passing" is the day many of us have our children taken away, lose our jobs, get excommunicated from our churches, get thrown out by our families, or get the shit beaten out of us on the streets, you can't understand the blind terror of "passing" as straight when you're not.

      I am a lesbian who doesn't read as a typical lesbian to most people, and I've been bashed, harassed, threatened, and had my own family members shun me. I am unwelcome in the church in which I grew up, and while I've carved out a life for myself, if I step out of the "safe zone" of my life, I'm in fear of my physical safety. And I live in San Francisco.

      Can you imagine what that's like for the mother of three children who works for a conservative Christian school and has a vindictive ex-husband... and is a lesbian? Take my experience and fear and multiply it times a thousand.

      You say:

      A gay person can have and do have  good jobs, money, cars, houses

      This is a right wing homophobic frame that you've been sold and we haven't done enough to counter, but it's just crap. There are also people of color who have good jobs, money, cars, and houses. The last two Secretaries of State and the next President of the United States are all Black. Does that erase racism? Does that give good jobs to unemployed Black people, or eradicate the legacy of slavery?

      Well, neither do a few white guys in the Castro with disposable income and two cars change who we are... which is EVERYONE, in every walk of life, of every color, race, religion, ethnicity, gender, age, and economic level.

      I have never compared being gay to being a slave and I never will, but realize that we, too, have been abused and tortured and beaten and killed. LGBT people have been imprisoned in mental hospitals, given electro-shock therapy, had our youth abused in facilities that use brainwashing techniques and social deprivation, loneliness, and even drugs to try to "change" our orienation. In other countries even today lesbians, gay men,and the transgendered are executed for being who we are, and even in the US lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered girls have been forced into marriage and childbearing. Trans people, many of them people of color, are frequently shut out by everyone including homeless shelters that have no place for them, and are raped and murdered, like Gwen Araujo, or let die, like Jennifer Gale.

      And our history, too, has been denied, suppressed, and hidden -- so much so that you, for instance, don't know a lot of it. We were systematically imprisoned and killed by the Nazis as degenerates and perverts, and countless of us committed suicide after our lives were destroyed in the 50s by McCarthyism. Up until the 80s, gay bars were routinely raided by cops, and gay and lesbian and trans people rounded up, beaten, blackmailed, and raped... including, again, large numbers of queer people of color.

      No, I don't compare that to being kidnapped, bought, and sold, and I never will. Anyone who does is out of their mind.

      But do you think we don't know what it's like to have our children torn from us against our will and with the full force of the law?

      Think again.

      Do you think we don't know what it's like to walk in fear on the streets?

      Think again.

      Do you think that having a highly visible token number of us who've "made it" economically fixes everything for the rest of us who haven't and can't?

      Think again.

    •  Hardly anyone is comparing "GLBTTO" slavery. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Gays have not been denied the metaphor (0+ / 0-)

    of Black Civil Rights...

    They have refused to take up the burden of that Civil Rights struggle.

    Where are your marches, your sit ins, your mass demonstrations, your spokespeople?

    Where are your public displays of grievance?  Your public clamor for your place at the table?

    Show us your face...and your numbers...and your defiance.  

    Otherwise, comfort yourself with landing on the rec'ed list at Dkos, without anything else much changing.

    Tough love.

    •  why aren't you paying attention...? (3+ / 0-)

      or helping...

      I mean I'm aware of this stuff and I'm not even gay it's not that hard.

      •  blah blah blah (0+ / 0-)

        show me your numbers...and show me your passion...and not on DKos...at the square in DC...and find somebody eloquent to step up to the mike and speak to the nation.

        I'm thinking Rachel...as opposed to Rosy.  But that's just a suggestion.  It's your movement...MOVE IT

        I help by voting no on every state measure that comes along that whittles away at gat rights...but let's be real...I don't have a dog in this fight.

        I'm waiting for the one's that do to step up to the fucking plate and make a real statement...when they do, I'll be there.  

        I'm not, however, going to drive to their house, pick them up and drop them off at the Prom.

        •  Show me (0+ / 0-)

          What did straight people do to earn their civil rights?  

          It must have been all those protests they held.  Or that march on Washington when straight people earned the 1183 rights that come with marriage.  That's when they really showed us their numbers and their passion and convinced us that they deserve equality.  

          I remember that.  Wasn't it around the same time that  white people found somebody eloquent to step up to the mic and demand equality?

          Good to know that everyone has to make their case that they deserve equality.  I'll try my hardest to prove to you that I deserve it so you'll deign to grant it to me.

    •  Um... (0+ / 0-)

      ... I think that is beginning to happen.  Guess you haven't been paying attention to the Post-Proposition 8 reaction.  I myself attended one such march last month.

  •  This is simply NOT the problem (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor, evilene689

    Thus, I think I understand the problem. Gays must be denied historical metaphor.

    People can't insist on denial of something about which they were ignorant to begin with.  They have to know it was there before they can decide to suppress it.  As the diary itself points out re Nuremberg, gay history simply hasn't been told in the first place, to great degree.  Most of us didn't learn that Barbara Jordan was a lesbian until the day she died, and even now, even among the few black students who remember who Barbara Jordan was, many still don't know that.   Students get told that A.Philip Randolph organized the 1963 March on Washington without getting told that the details were mostly managed by Bayard Rustin, who was out and gay and whose gayness was used against the movement at the time -- King stood by him anyway, which ought to tell EVERY black minister of TODAY where KING stood -- but King was unpopular with conservative sycophantic (to secular power) black ministers EVEN WHEN HE WAS ALIVE, so why should it be different now?

    The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

    by ge0rge on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 05:44:10 PM PST

  •  Bruh1 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor, homoaffectional

    Great diary.  More dialogue needs to be opened between AA and LBGT communities, and someone who falls under both categories is just the type of person to open that dialogue.  For that reason, you have my deepest sympathies :-)
    I have to ask this question, and if it is racist, then I wish someone to call me out on it.  But reading through the comments from AA's on this thread, I get the overwhelming impression that many see civil rights as a zero-sum game.  Many AA's commenting on this thread seem to come from the perspective that more civil rights for LGBT = less civil rights for AA's.  Is this so?  Don't people (all groups in general) see that more civil rights for certain groups multiplies the civil right they already have?

    I'm waiting to be written in The Book of Love. SGWM, 40, seeks VGL HWP....

    by Skylarking on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 06:34:51 PM PST

    •  where are you getting this? (0+ / 0-)

      Many AA's commenting on this thread seem to come from the perspective that more civil rights for LGBT = less civil rights for AA's.  Is this so?

      Just curious.

    •  I will ry to answer but its just my opinion (4+ / 0-)

      a) First I don't think asking questions is racist. Making assumptions and running with them is racism. But that's me.

      b) The truth is I don't have a clear answer to your question. For some, your point maybe true. But for many I think it's just not trusting where this coming from. It's like how I as a gay person do not trust where people are coming from on gay issues, but that's true of race too. In  a way, the rights job is easy- their view is simple- hate the out group. Ours is more complicated. We are bringing to gether people who don't have much in common other than they are in some way not the in crowd. The point is there are any number of factors. I simplifyit i my diary to address the one that concerned me- the denial part. but there are others. some of this maybe a subgroup of black folk who are just bigots. Some maybe folks who see civil rights as sacrosanct. There are a lot of reasons. I don't want to prtend there may not be.

      The key is to figure it out. To not assume, but try to cut through the b.s. to find the answer. We aren't going ot find it by guessing. People will get annoyed, angry, pissed, whatever- but if you say "i am not going anywhere, and I am asking this question not to offend you but to get where you are coming from" enough time- eventually hopefully people will hear it.

      I hope that helps.

      •  Can I say something about this? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        futurebird, Micheline, gobears2000

        But for many I think it's just not trusting where this coming from.

        This isn't rocket science. I'm frankly surprised people aren't groking this point.

        One would have to be in complete denial that so far the public face of the GLBTQ rights movement has been overwhelmingly white. Then the fact that racism does exist within that community has to be fully ignored, along with the fact that many of us see GLBTQ PoC being marginalized.

        So to then when some (but not all) white people wanting to pull the Civil Rights argument out and shake What Some Black People Said at us, "feels" like people just using whatever analogy they can to get over, instead of it being what they deeply believe, or practice more than they preach.

        Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

        by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 07:22:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is a great deal of truth in what you are (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Predictor, Micheline

          saying. Would you agree that there also hasn't been much room for gay PoC in the ethnic communities into which they were born?

          •  I wasn't aware that we're disputing that point (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            futurebird

            for us to have to agree on it.

            But sure.

            I agree.

            That is NOT me agreeing to "Omg, those Blacks are just totally homophobic", to be clear, because I've heard enough of that too.

            Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

            by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 07:32:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It wasn't an effort (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bruh1

              to start an argument. It was an attempt to explore reality.

              I don't think that blacks are anymore homophobic than anybody else. I grew up in the south drowning in evangelical Christianity. It is my impression that black evangelical churches are an off shoot of the same thing. IMO that is where the homophobia is coming from.

            •  but thats not what people have (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Predictor, Micheline

              been saying. yes you have seen the dan savage/andrwe sullivan type ssay stupid shit like that, but its not everyone talking on this. The people who really care about these issues outside of drama queens understand that this is more compilcated and it got this way from years of a lack of buidling the right elements to have the movement happen.

              •  You have to stop saying (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gobears2000

                "This isn't what people have been saying", or either be clear who you are referring to.

                If you are only talking about GLBTQ activists in the public eye/MSM, that is one thing.

                If you are talking about conversations that have happened on this site, then you obviously weren't around after Proposition 8 passed, or you didn't read enough.

                People don't have to make shit up about this. I have made an effort to be more receptive to what you are trying to get across. I'd appreciate the same consideration on this.

                Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law. James Baldwin

                by evilene689 on Sun Dec 28, 2008 at 07:48:35 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  As I said you didn't read my posts (3+ / 0-)

          on sites like Towleroad in the lead up to the Prop 8 defeat. I kept saying until my fingers hurt- this is the stupidest campaign I have seen ever. Where are the poor gays? where are the people of color? Where are teh fucking people who are affected by the differences between the laws. I was either ignored or told i was wrong. So yes, that's their fuck up - the white gays who don't listen to how to get shit done. Everytime I say it- they get mad because they ask "why should it matter." I say because it does. Youcan either ride into town on the horse backwards or you can fight for the battle that matters. The battle over right is about being smarter than your opposition,a nd not about how hurt you feel because black straight folks or poor straight folks don't accept you.

          However, this is a separate point than I wanted to address in this diary. I wanted to say that metaphors are not the problem per se. If it was a black person who is gay or even straight given the same metaphor it would have a differnet impact. This is simple marketing. Package your message in a way the audeince understands. You aren't going to reach everyone, but you will reach more.

          The problem is that when I say these things- people- white gays get defensive, just like when I say "hey, black folk need to be told some truths here too" and the response is that I am attacking black peo when its more complicated. I am trying to fight both ends to get them to cut through their mutual defense mechanisms built up because we needed them, but which allows the bigots to win in both communities.

chase, keirdubois, keestone, burrow owl, TKinVT, tiponeill, janinsanfran, tnichlsn, Hummingbird, CPR, bernalman, LuvSet, oysterface, John Campanelli, celdd, chicagochristianleft, recentdemocrat, theran, sobermom, marge, expatjourno, hestal, Mary Julia, sarahnity, Ian S, DaleA, Kevvboy, KMc, boadicea, LeftofArizona, Larry Bailey, Bearpaw, wader, ChristieKeith, danthrax, fightorleave, MA Liberal, gmb, TiaRachel, astronautagogo, ourprez08, Heartpine, claudew, homogenius, Dave in RI, Wertz, ExStr8, Duke1676, TheGeneral, jrooth, stitchmd, catleigh, YucatanMan, cassidy3, QuickSilver, sunbro, RElland, grothenberger, The Fat Lady Sings, sgary, Matt in AA, grada3784, Do Tell, katynka, Themistoclea, units13, liberalconservative, Luminous Animal, carolita, Marcus Tullius, triv33, dedmonds, NearlyNormal, gabriella, Potus2020, AndyS In Colorado, creekobear, andrewj54, AmericanRiverCanyon, GetTogether, psychodrew, Richard Lyon, wildweasels, sfbob, bnasley, akdude6016, jamesia, thursdays child, millwood, Moderation, Curufinwe, Rumarhazzit, cloudbustingkid, Predictor, JDWolverton, Dem in the heart of Texas, Erik W, Shane Hensinger, Scioto, rontun, Archangel, QueerMark, tofumagoo, luckylizard, nokkonwud, PLCOT, rigso, Tom0063, Ellinorianne, dmhlt 66, ZhenRen, pataphysician, KingCranky, ChicagoStudent, exist2002, smellybeast, Scott Wooledge, BoiseBlue, ColoradoWantsWolves, imchange, panamaniaco, ZilV, allep10, davespicer, ruscle, Neglected Duty, BrighidG, Sam James, kyakaha, robertacker13, MarkMarvin, KentuckyKat, 2questions, Eddie L, Mercurio, Gertrude, elginblt, abrauer, MsGrin, Sal Bovoso, judybrown, ardyess, the national gadfly, dakini03, Utahbama, GinaSpadafori, Herodotus Goes to Washington, RfrancisR, IL JimP, enhydra lutris

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site