"Gay is the New Black" . . . uh oh.

[donco6]

From an AP article in the Orange County Register:

Opposition to gay rights often has a religious basis, and blacks and Latinos are more churchgoing than society at large. Twenty-six percent of blacks attend religious services more than once per week, compared with 16 percent of Latinos and 14 percent of whites, according to a 2007 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

"I do not consider (gays) to be a minority in legal and adjudicated terms, the same way people who only like to eat broccoli with butter aren't a minority," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. "We can't categorize things according to behavior. It's based on ethnicity, on who we are rather than what we do."

"Who am I to say that you weren't born that way ... (but) sexual activity, what you do, who you sleep with, is your business," Rodriguez said. "That's between you, your lover, and the good God Almighty in heaven. I don't want to know. Let's leave sexual activity in the bedroom. The government shouldn't be legislating what we do behind closed doors between two consenting adults. And to compare it to the African-American struggle, to me that's an abomination."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IS_GAY_THE_NEW_BLACK?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

I'm sure someone, somewhere has pointed out to Rev. Rodriguez that gayness is not defined by activity, as he insists, but that it is integrated into our humanity, just as melanin in skin cells. Yet, he chooses to ignore this in favor of his own ideas that align better with his religion.

To me, THAT'S an abomination.

[frebrd]

1. K&R! n/t

[Creideiki]

2. I would argue it's not about how we define our own humanity

I think that being gay, much like being Black, Hispanic, Jewish, a Gypsy, Polish, or any other minority that has been or is discriminated against, is more about how others choose to define us as not human.

[bluedawg12]

3. When others define us. *sigh*

The leap in logic is that:

a.)The government shouldn't be legislating what we do behind closed doors.

b.)And the gay rights struggle is about what we do behind closed doors.

Actually, not so long ago, what anyone did behind closed doors was a legal issue. May yet be, in some states?

The actual legal issue is about equal rights under law to protect human beings.

More bad logic:

"Who am I to say that you weren't born that way ... (but) sexual activity, what you do, who you sleep with, is your business," Rodriguez said."

So, if it's OK by him that gay people are born gay, his problem is our claim to the very basic human right of expressing that love and/or sexuality?

So we can be born gay, just don't dare express our sexuality by actions? He side steps gay by birth and conflates it with the "choice" not to live in loveless isolation.

File this under: utter bull sh*t.

[donco6]

5. Oh yeah, Donny Osmond said basically the same thing.

Someone else posted something from Donny Osmond, basically saying it's not the proclivity, but the act that's sinful. So if someone has gay feelings, but doesn't act on them, he is not sinning. But once he acts on those feelings, he is sinning. And yes, it's a sidestep, because the next logical question is, "So, God made me gay, but made it a sin for me to do what my nature tells me to do?"

[bluedawg12]

7. The old: "Love the sinner, hate the sin," slogan

only with more words.

They must have all gotten their new December rw talking points.

[elshiva]

10. Someone once referred to this as the

"you can be a dog, as long as you don't bark" argument.
WOOF! WOOF!

[donco6]

12. That certainly sums it up. n/t

[elshiva]

13. Yes, and I say bark as loud as you can!

WOOF! WOOF! WOOOOOF!

[DarkTirade]

14. ... which is the exact opposite of what Jesus himself preached, if I recall correctly.

I seem to recall something about 'sinning in one's heart' being the same as actually going out there and doing it.

Is there anybody better versed in biblical verses who knows which one I'm thinking of?

[donco6]

16. Here it is:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matt. 5:27,28)

[DarkTirade]

22. That's the one, thanks.

So once again the people who call themselves 'Christians' are ignoring the words of Christ himself. :banghead:

[GodlessBiker]

4. He's an idiot. How would he apply his rationale to religious minorities?

[donco6]

6. I think he'd say they were minorities. . . .

. . . because it's *really* about gay sex being "icky". He's come up with some justification in his head, but it makes no logical sense (as you pointed out).

[keepCAblue]

8. This guy at the Sacramento protest would disagree...

And Rev. Rodriguez is a moron...

[donco6]

9. Cool.

I saw several of these signs at the Denver protest - not held by AAs, tho.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HamdenRice]

15. This phrase -- "the new black" -- trivializes both blacks and gays

Seems most people don't know what it means. "<Insert ___> is the new black" does not mean what the OP suggests it means. It's not about black people; it's about fashion.

The phrase originated because in New York fashionista circles, there was a period about 10 years ago when so much clothing was black (especially Prada). There were a few years in NYC when downtown, everyone was dressed in black always, from head to toe. You would walk down, say, First Avenue in the East Village, and there was just a sea of black coats, pants, dresses, hats, etc.

When black clothing finally broke its stranglehold on fashion some other color became popular (I forget what it was), but the phrase "beige is the new black" meant that beige was the color you had to wear from head to toe and that all the new collections had to feature beige.

Somehow, somewhere, someone thought that "the new black" meant the new oppressed minority group, and it started being used that way.

Whenever I hear it, it makes me think that blacks (or gays) are being trivialized as fashion accessories.

[GodlessBiker]

17. As in Legally Blond: "Whoever said that orange is the new pink is seriously deranged."

[HamdenRice]

18. Yup, that was the original meaning nt

[noiretextatique]

28. it is a strange title given the resentment

about Prop 8. from the orange county register, it doesn't surprise.

[yardwork]

19. I'm constantly being called an abomindation by people who claim to be Christian.

Who would Jesus call an abomination? These people are weird. I seek to limit my contact with them.

[noiretextatique]

20. infant mortality rates, incarceration rates

unemployment rates,life expectancy rates etc. when gay people have the same statistics that black people do...then we can talk. the comparison is ridiculous.

[donco6]

21. How do you know they don't? n/t

[noiretextatique]

26. please provide the statistics

i don't discount the real discrimination gay people face, but "the NEW BLACK" is insulting to both gays and black people. some gay people are black...are we the new BLACK BLACK?

[donco6]

30. The burden of proof is yours.

You stated: "when gay people have the same statistics that black people do...then we can talk. the comparison is ridiculous."

So, let's see your statistics.

Before you waste your time, my point is, there can't BE any statistics - supportive or otherwise. Gays can't be surveyed accurately because to self-identify is often too dangerous. So, you have no basis for your claim that gays don't experience the same proportion of bias as blacks.

[dsc]

23. the fact is that at least life expectancy would almost certainly be lower in gays than blacks

for much of the 1980's and 1990's. AIDS ring a bell? Infant mortality is obviously nowhere close but as to unemployment we have no idea one way or the other.

[noiretextatique]

27. AIDS...thanks for reminding me

African-American women are 23 times as likely to be infected with the Aids virus as white women and account for 71.8% of new HIV cases among women in 29 US states, government research shows.
The Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-profit health organisation, has found that in 2001 roughly 67% of black women with Aids had contracted the virus through heterosexual sex - up from 58% four years earlier.

Government studies in 29 states found that black women comprised roughly half of all HIV infections acquired through heterosexual sex, in men and women, from 1999 to 2002. Medical experts put the sharp increase down to a combination of segregation, social exclusion and social and sexual mores. But some were eager to point out that there is scant empirical evidence to explain the rise.

http://www.allaboutblackhealth.com/black_women_in_us_23_times_as_li.htm

[dsc]

34. And gay men are something like a hundred times more likely to have had AIDS in the 80's and 90's

I mean, get real here. Gays still can't give blood due to the high infection rate in those years. I absolutely, positively guarantee that AIDS lowered the life expectancy of gay men vastly more than it did that of heterosexual black women. No way, no how that it didn't.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

24. When black kids get kicked out of their homes for being black then we can talk.

YOUR post is ridiculous.

Pissing matches over who suffered more when it comes to human rights are stupid.

[noiretextatique]

25. isn't that the point of this article?

"the NEW BLACK" :wtf: is THAT supposed to mean? and surely you are aware that some gay kids who get kicked out of their homes are black. not the new black, the old one.

[MNBrewer]

36. NOBODY care, NOBODY collects the statistics. Nobody.

[noiretextatique]

29. someone help me understand this article?

what does the author mean by "gay is the new black?" hamdenrice mentioned the fashion context of the term, but i don't understand what the author is trying to convey by using the term. i assumed it was a racial connotation, but that really doesn't make much sense to me. perhaps i am not getting the real meaning.

[donco6]

31. I understood it as talking about the focus on civil rights.

Right or wrong, I believe what they're saying is that the focus on civil rights recognition has moved from racial minorities to GLBT.

"Gay is the new Black" meaning "insert the word 'gay' whenever you think of rights racial minorities have already gained over the years." The right to interracial marriage is now the fight for gay marriage. The right to job protections for racial minorities is now the fight for job protections for gay minorities.

[bluedawg12]

32. The article is saying that gay rights is the "new" civil rights movement.

"NEW YORK (AP) -- Gay is the new black, say the protest signs and magazine covers, casting the gay marriage battle as the last frontier of equal rights for all.

Gay marriage is not a civil right, opponents counter, insisting that minority status comes from who you are rather than what you do."

That's relevant because of the legal basis for fighting discrimination against gays is the status of gays as a minority.

Opponents claim it is not a minority and use terms like being gay is a "choice" or a "lifestyle."

.........

"The gay fight for marriage has its own integrity, its own background," said Andrew Cherlin, a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns Hopkins University. "The experience of blacks in the United States is very different. ... I don't think it helps the fight for equality to make that claim."
........
This is true.

........

"Cherlin says that fight began in the 1980s when the AIDS epidemic unfolded. Gay partners had few rights to help their ailing loved ones, visit them in hospitals or inherit their property, which led to the push for civil unions."
........

This is partly true, it also began with the realization at the start of the AIDS epidemic that the government and religious leaders blamed gays for AIDS as a punishment and Reagan did nothing for six years and funding for research to treat AIDS was denied, even as the infection and death toll rate was rising.

If being gay was an ethnic entity, it would almost sound like some form of purge, denying the existence of a disease and retarding research for treatment.

[kwassa]

33. Gay marriage is the new civil rights struggle, but ....

"gay is the new black" is not a good analogy.

The types of oppression that both groups have suffered are quite different, from a historical point of view. The very valid arguments for gay marriage do not need to rest on this comparison, other than the basic recognition that separate is not equal, a lesson well learned from 100 years of Jim Crow separation of blacks and whites. There is no way that separate can be equal, and we now have the history to prove it.

I think this argument needs to be presented over and over again, that separate is not equal, in the reasoning for rejecting civil unions in favor of full marriage rights, before the entire American public. This argument has traction.

"Gay is the new black" suggests that the black struggle for equality and equity is over, and I don't think that most black people would agree with that, despite Obama's victory. The use of this as a slogan will have the net effect of alienating potential black supporters, I think, as if the unique history of their struggle has become co-opted. The gay struggle for rights is also unique and compelling, but it is a different story and needs to rest within it's own uniqueness, and not rest on other struggles that have great dissimilarities.

[donco6]

35. That I can agree with.

I'm not interested in co-opting what should be our greatest ally's struggle.

[bluedawg12]

37. I agree with you.

I disagreed with this comment from the OP:

"Racism was defanged by Obama's triumph, leaving gays as perhaps the last group of Americans claiming that their basic rights are being systematically denied."

Both groups have a struggle that continues.
In fact, neither struggle is new.

Both groups share a "civil rights" struggle in common, not an identical struggle and their histories are unique.

I thought the title of the article was trying too hard, to be, flippant, or provocative, or just punchy.

I know editors have a lot to say about titles, but, it could have been a clearer title if they had just talked about the on-going struggle for justice by gays.

This seems a little more balanced:

>>"I believe we are very much in a modern-day civil rights struggle," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights organization.

"We liken some of the experiences that we have had and will have to the (black) civil rights struggle. We also are enormously respectful of the differences," he said. "What we are best served doing is when we take lessons from the civil rights experience and apply them to our work."<<

[bliss_eternal]

38. Very interesting comment on the article title.

Given this was written by the OC Register, I'm inclined to wonder if the title isn't deliberately divisive.

Wouldn't be the first time Orange County has attempted to divide and conquer what they consider minority factions. Particularly considering how much of the area progressives have succeeded in turning blue (whereas the orange country area has almost always been predominately conservative).

Apparently a significant populace of orange county went out to vote on this proposition. I saw election night coverage of a "yes on 8" party, in Irvine. :eyes: Lots of wasp-y looking families in attendance (yes, people took their kids to that crap). A few commented on how proud they were of their vote.

[bluedawg12]

40. It seemed like it wanted to be provocative

and, yup, just a tad divisive. :grr:

Not from Calif. but seems like OC has some ties to Reagan and John Wayne and all of that repug culture?

[bliss_eternal]

41. Yes, definitely.

I share the following as one that spent most of my life in Los Angeles County, visiting Orange County (primarily for the amusement parks, friends, family, etc.).

I grew up knowing of it as the area "behind the Orange curtain." ;)

Orange county california became one of the primary areas many "white flighters" fled to, from the inner city (late 60's, early 70's).
http://juh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/6/995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight#White_flight_in_Southern_California

The Richard Nixon foundation in Yorba Linda.
http://www.nixonlibraryfoundation.org/

John Wayne airport in Santa Ana (named as such in 1979).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wayne_Airport

But I found this interesting information on Reagan, that I wasn't aware of. Regarding a anti-gay legislation he denounced.

http://www.gaypolitics.com/?p=223

Disneyland became Orange county's claim to fame. While today's Disney company get a "liberal" label based on family friendly films with multicultural casts, diverse employment policies, etc.--this was not always the case.


Walt Disney created Disneyland to be a bit of a fantasy. A place where people could step back to a "nicer time" and forget the issues of contemporary life.

Some of the employment practices are based on the time, some on (imo) Disney's personal views. Women worked in food service or as tour guides exclusively. "Negro" women portrayed Aunt Jemima in the pancake house. "Navajos" worked in the Old West area--rowing in canoes. Eventually (70's I think) Hawaiian women were hired to dance in the polynesian revue.

Walk down memory lane, the Aunt Jemima pancake races of 1961.

http://matterhorn1959.blogspot.com/2008/04/aunt-jemima-pancake-race-1961.html

http://www.yesterland.com/auntjemimamemory.html


On edit--DU rules forbid my posting links to some "choice comments" from some hate groups (housed in Orange county).

[Zhade]

39. It's also similar in that we are persecuted for something we don't choose or control.

So in that regard, our struggle is exactly like that of any ethnic minority.