Is gay more of a US identity?

[brnbk]

Homosexuals have existed in the world since man became man and developed a full blown ding dong that did not have to hide behind a penis bone. Men who liked men and women who like women, instead of the opposite sex.

However, 'gay' as an identity has more or less found its expression in the culture and politics of the United States, in a way that it just hasn't in other countries. Compare the gay rights history and political presence in the US to countries in Asia, Europe, America or Africa, and the difference is stark clear. 

My question is,  Is gay really more about a question of being and belonging in, and to the United States; or is it a universal question and freedom and Right? 

 

 

[BootmanLA]

I think you're asking a very complex question in a way that may be a bit oversimplified, especially when phrased as an "A or B" choice.

Gay rights are human rights, as the phrase goes. And as such, they're universal. By "universal" I mean that we believe that every human being should be free from persecution or discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation; it's not merely a political choice that the U.S. seems (largely) to be making, but instead a recognition of a fundamental truth.

They aren't *recognized* universally, of course; plenty of nations criminalize, some even with the death penalty, gay sexual activity. But the key, I think, is that in countries where we're free to express our opinion on the topic, we tend to think this a human right that ought to be recognized by every governmental body.

It's true that the U.S. (or parts of it), for all its other faults, has actually been fairly close to the forefront of the gay rights recognition movement. But it's also true that it gets a lot of attention here partly because we have a free press and freedom of assembly, which can report on gay rights demonstrations and quote participants without fear that the news outlet will be seized and shut down, or that the interviewees will be arrested and charged with a crime.

It may well be, for instance, that an equal percentage of people in the United States and North Korea are gay. But in only one of those nations are people free to publicly acknowledge it. And in only one of those nations are people free to express how they actually feel about the rights of those people. That doesn't mean that the sentiments aren't universal, only that we can't see what the average person in many places thinks.

And it's true that culturally (as opposed to legally), the U.S. is more accepting in general of gay people than, say, Indonesia or Pakistan or even some "western" countries like Hungary. But that, too, may be a product of the freedom issue. Sixty years ago, because it wasn't discussed, most people had a very negative view of gays and gay rights; but as more and more people came out, as more and more media coverage showed us to be not that different, attitudes began to change. And that encouraged more people to come out, which begat more families of those people changing their opinions, and so forth. That shift has been dramatic in the United States.

For instance, 1996 was the first year in which Gallup asked Americans if they approved of same-sex marriage. Just 27% did, that year. By 2021 - 25 years later - that percentage was at 70%. Mind you, that was only six years after the Supreme Court struck down the nation's remaining laws against same-sex marriage.

As a contrast, in 1958 Gallup first asked about approval of interracial marriage. Only 4% approved then. Just 20% approved a year after the Supreme Court struck down such bans. We didn't reach a point where a majority approved of interracial marriages until 1996, and we didn't hit 70% until 2002 - 35 years after the Court's action (again, compared with hitting the same point 6 years after the gay marriage decision).

And a big reason that public opinion shifted so quickly is that press freedom and freedom of assembly made it possible for people to see gays as we are, not as some demonized tiny minority to be feared. You just aren't as likely to see that kind of shift, certainly not that fast, in places that lack those basic freedoms.

 

[evilqueerpig]

"Gay" is too nice and polite.  I identify as QUEER (yes, all caps) because it's bold and in your face.  Given today's political climate, a Stonewall2.0 might be imminent and being polite won't cut it!

[BootmanLA]

18 minutes ago, evilqueerpig said:

"Gay" is too nice and polite.  I identify as QUEER (yes, all caps) because it's bold and in your face.  Given today's political climate, a Stonewall2.0 might be imminent and being polite won't cut it!

Perhaps. But I'm not so sure a Stonewall 2.0 would go over well today. After all, despite the horrendous events that provoked the BLM protests in certain cities, very few people are defending the riots involved, even if the cause were just, and there still hasn't been a great "awakening" moment where the country decided to finally tackle the issue of racial justice in policing (much less the multitude of race-related issues we face).

I'm not saying we've hit our high-water mark of advancing as LGBT/Queer people, nor am I saying we need to be polite about anything, but I am saying that the results might not be what we want. 

[evilqueerpig]

2 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

Perhaps. But I'm not so sure a Stonewall 2.0 would go over well today. After all, despite the horrendous events that provoked the BLM protests in certain cities, very few people are defending the riots involved, even if the cause were just, and there still hasn't been a great "awakening" moment where the country decided to finally tackle the issue of racial justice in policing (much less the multitude of race-related issues we face).

I'm not saying we've hit our high-water mark of advancing as LGBT/Queer people, nor am I saying we need to be polite about anything, but I am saying that the results might not be what we want. 

When we have Il Douchebag Wrong Dumb Insanity doing his best to cancel QUEER Culture and others following suit, I say it's time to rise up.  I was a 10 year old QUEER when the first Stonewall happened and though aware, I was too young.  As a Geezer QUEER, I refuse to be silent!

[BootmanLA]

Just now, evilqueerpig said:

When we have Il Douchebag Wrong Dumb Insanity doing his best to cancel QUEER Culture and others following suit, I say it's time to rise up.  I was a 10 year old QUEER when the first Stonewall happened and though aware, I was too young.  As a Geezer QUEER, I refuse to be silent!

I'm not suggesting you be silent. In fact, I'm not suggesting you do (or not do) anything at all. I'm just saying that the results of rising up may not be to your liking.

There is a perception (not necessarily shared by you) that if enough of a group "speak up", then "they" will have to listen. The history of things like Native Americans being massacred in this country suggests otherwise.

[evilqueerpig]

Just now, BootmanLA said:

I'm not suggesting you be silent. In fact, I'm not suggesting you do (or not do) anything at all. I'm just saying that the results of rising up may not be to your liking.

There is a perception (not necessarily shared by you) that if enough of a group "speak up", then "they" will have to listen. The history of things like Native Americans being massacred in this country suggests otherwise.

I'm simply saying...If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[BootmanLA]

12 minutes ago, evilqueerpig said:

I'm simply saying...If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

And I'm simply saying "rising up" may not be a solution at all. ( Or it may. The point is, actions have consequences, sometimes just for the actor, and sometimes for a lot of other people. )

[evilqueerpig]

1 minute ago, BootmanLA said:

And I'm simply saying "rising up" may not be a solution at all. ( Or it may. The point is, actions have consequences, sometimes just for the actor, and sometimes for a lot of other people. )

You have Nikki Haley saying Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law doesn't go far enough.  If that doesn't call for an uprising, what does?

[BootmanLA]

3 hours ago, evilqueerpig said:

You have Nikki Haley saying Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law doesn't go far enough.  If that doesn't call for an uprising, what does?

I would suggest you pay closer attention to what I actually write and less to things you seem to imagine I'm saying. Nowhere did I use the words "doesn't call for an uprising." I have repeatedly stated that I'm not saying this action is a bad idea (or a good one). I'm merely reminding people that we have the phrase "Law of Unintended Consequences" for a reason.

[evilqueerpig]

I'm far from perfect...I don't apologize for my faults, but I'm passionate about my opinions and causes.  It's who I am and nothing will change it.

[brnbk]

Thank you so much guys for sharing your view on topic, in a spirited way! 

6 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

.....................But that, too, may be a product of the freedom issue.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

For instance, 1996 was the first year in which Gallup asked Americans if they approved of same-sex marriage...….As a contrast, in 1958 Gallup first asked about approval of interracial marriage................…. We didn't reach a point where a majority approved of interracial marriages until 1996, and we didn't hit 70% until 2002 - 35 years after the Court's action (again, compared with hitting the same point 6 years after the gay marriage decision).

And a big reason that public opinion shifted so quickly is that press freedom and freedom of assembly made it possible...............You just aren't as likely to see that kind of shift, certainly not that fast, in places that lack those basic freedoms.

 

 

that statistical comparison between interracial marriage and gay marriage is very interesting. 35 years for accepting gay marriage but just 6 years for gay marriage, which is often seen as something more rooted in and a white cultural institution rather than black!

 

I see your point about press freedom and freedom of assembly, but I am not very convinced that other countries lack it or the US has that much more of it than other countries. I mean there are people who have historically lacked both of those, press freedom or freedom to be present and assemble, and black and native Americans come to my mind, even though I am sure there are more. 

 

Thus, the real reason... behind the advancement of gay marriage, and  gay political rights has to be more...

 

[brnbk]

5 hours ago, evilqueerpig said:

You have Nikki Haley saying Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law doesn't go far enough.  If that doesn't call for an uprising, what does?

What is now illegal in Louisiana....... could become true in the whole country... after all when did one think that someone in the United State would have to take measures to have access to  💪sexualized 🙌 media, which is a quintessential feature of US cultural landscape, such as that which a person in Saudi Arabia or China would have to take; or that abortion would become illegal in the States?

[evilqueerpig]

8 hours ago, brnbk said:

What is now illegal in Louisiana....... could become true in the whole country... after all when did one think that someone in the United State would have to take measures to have access to  💪sexualized 🙌 media, which is a quintessential feature of US cultural landscape, such as that which a person in Saudi Arabia or China would have to take; or that abortion would become illegal in the States?

At the very least, this is why we need to organize and unite the QUEER community....ALL of us!  If I might suggest a slogan, "QUEER people united will NEVER be defeated!"  If we can't find a QUEER MLK, maybe a QUEER Malcolm X will be necessary.  Accuse me of being a troublemaker, remember what John Lewis said about 'good trouble'.  I'm a Geezer QUEER with mobility issues but I'll use my BIG MOUTH as loudly and often as necessary.

[PozBearWI]

16 hours ago, evilqueerpig said:

I'm simply saying...If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

That too is an over simplification.  For you that is the case, but not for everyone.