According to the GSS, only 10% of Americans reaponded “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” to the statement “Homosexuals should have the right to marry” in 1988 (first year the question was asked).
In 2004, it was 30%.
In 2022 it was 67%.
Also according to the GSS, 40 years ago a third of Americans thought homosexuals shouldn’t have the right to speak.
We’ve made remarkable progress in a very short period.
Is that why I had to fly to a different state to marry my gf instead of my home state who does not recognize same sex marriages?
So now it’s demonstrated this can’t be true was it a lie and if so why? If not then what extra details make it plausible?
All 50 states are recognize gay marriage since Obgerfel v Hodges in June 2015.
Recognize is not perform.
In this case it is. All 50 states are required to perform gay marriages as of June 26th, 2015. The ruling took immediate effect nationwide. Clerks were having to hand-edit marriage licenses to allow for same-sex certificates because within an hour of the ruling people were showing up at courthouses to get married in states where it had been illegal.
Churches aren’t required to perform same-sex marriages nationwide, however.
Pretty sure churches aren’t required to anywhere in the US
Correct. And I appreciate that. A couple wanting a religous wedding should know that the pastor that’s blessing the union supports them.
Yeah, trans people are just new targets. DOMA wasn’t that long ago, but regressives lost the battle against gay people, so trans people are just the next rung on the hate ladder for them.
Conditions have gotten worse and the ruling class has chosen a scapegoat to distract people from the ongoing class war.
So I am a class? Feel so blessed and afraid at the same time.
Everyone is in ‘a’ class. It’s a classification of the populous. Do you work for money, or does your money work for you?
If you receive a paycheck or have to budget what so ever, chances are you are not part of the classification of shitbags that push the propaganda.
Ok probably a stupid question how do these rich shitbags get their money to work for them when in the public they, as you called them shitbags and push propaganda? To me pushing an agenda would do more harm than good instead of using it to organically grow itself without any interference
They (the investment/owner class) make their money work for them by investing and by playing the banks. Generally, they want to invest the vast majority of their money, and never cash out of their portfolio. When they need “cash” to buy something, they do it with loans and there’s lots of tricks (that I’m not super familiar with) to make loans as cheap as possible, and potentially even profitable if their investments are doing better than the cost of the loan.
Now, why would they spend money pushing propaganda when instead they could be investing that money? Well, when you are that rich, you don’t actually have to spend that much to push propaganda. People are already clamoring for your opinion, because they see you as successful and think, if I copy you then I too can be successful. And when you do need to buy an article, it’s pocket change compared to your vast wealth. And if instead you need to buy a TV news network, a newspaper, or a website, that itself can be an investment. As long as you don’t run it into the ground, it may make you money at the same time as allowing you to push propaganda.
And why do they want to push propaganda in the first place? Because if the working class (those that live off paychecks instead of investments) has the time, energy, and knowledge to do something about wealth inequality, then the investment class will start to have to pay their fair share and lose a bit of their wealth. The investment class doesn’t want that to happen so they need to rob the working class of those 3 things. Manufacturing a culture war is one way to steal time and energy from the working class, because they now have to spend that time and energy on defending personal rights. Busting unions is another way to rob time and energy, as the fewer rights workers have, and the less they are paid, the more time and energy they have to spend to stay out of poverty.
It’s all a ploy to get people to pay less attention to how the investment class gets their money so that they can keep racking up the score without interference.
That said, some of the investment class actually truly holds hateful views, as does some of the working class, but the working class has nothing to gain by acting on that hatred except a sense of personal fulfillment. The investment class benefits financially, so they may act out the hatred even if they don’t feel it.
You are an instance
Because gay rights have more and more support so they decided to pick an easier target.
They moved against the gays when abortion stopped being such a wedge issue, which itself replaced school integration to turn out the bigot vote.
Exactly. Its no coincidence we went from Occupy Wall Street and national level discourse about actual healthcare and UBI, to such debates as ‘is genocide okay?’ and ‘are nazis bad?’ Purposeful misdirection that in it’s staunch opposition to anything left of capitalism, created fascism.
You know, it’s perfectly OK to group voters by identity, so long as that identity cannot exclude “Normal” people. Soccer Mom, Six pack Dad, Middle class, working poor, labor, Small Business owner, Rural, Urban, and Suburban are all perfectly fine to promise these groups political power. But you do the exact same thing for queer people or black people and that’s identity politics all of a sudden.
queer and black people don’t have money. those other groups do.
if all the sudden queer people were billionaires, you can sure as shit bet they’d be promised political power. in exchange for their money. they’d be running corporations, in political office, etc.
it just turns out that it’s mostly white dudes who have all the money, and some white women, and the occasional random other non-white person has it. in USA at least. obviously different in other countries.
Gay people have exactly as much money as everyone else. There are proportionately as many gay billionaires as there are gay homeless people.
Is it?
The only identity politics I want to see is us against the ruling elite. Everything else is sparkling fascism.
can you please explain further what you mean? it could be interpreted a number of different ways.
i’m not sure if this is your point or not? but there is obviously overlap between each of those groups, there’s black sixpack dads, and poor/middle class lgbqti etc etc
anyway imo none of this revived division appears organic. there’s always going to be the odd biggot, but afaict the majority of modern biggots are being indoctrinated and radicalised by an organised media effort (and our leaders are either complicit or ‘inexplicably’ powerless at protecting us from it). for sure these radicalised biggots should do better, but we’re also talking about average people going up against billion dollar propaganda machinery. it’s certainly asymmetrical warfare.
The sad truth is that the right are pandering to homophobia because it’s a vote getter for them not because they really care about it.
A huge portion of religious people believe that homosexuality is an especially dangerous sin because it’s a social contagion, they see the increased popularity of gay things and the decreased respect for religion as a clear sign that the devil is winning and faithful, godfearing society is collapsing. To an extent they’re right, modern views on self determination and respect for others is anathema to Christian society as it’s been for over a thousand years - to the faithful it’s like saying the sky is pink or fish live in trees.
There are of course now grifters using homophobia to draw people into their political ideologies but it’s generally people from homophobic families in homoohobic communities that get drawn into it, it’s easy to forget that when you see a twenty something year old kid making homophobic comments it’s likely at his age his dad was going ‘queer bashing’ for fun with his friends and certainly wouldn’t have hesitated to beat up a gay person in a bar or in the street if encountered.
Even big artists like Eminem had deeply homophobic messages in his music, now that’s backtracked and he’s friends with Elton - this isn’t entirely because he’s grown as a person but because at the start of this century it was unconscionable that rap or hip hop could be anything but homophobic. School kids used the word ‘gay’ to describe uncool or disliked things so commonly it was even part of my own vocab despite being raised in a progressive and accepting family in a liberal area.
Things have changed so much just in my adult lifetime but it’s not universal, a lot of religious and conservative people see the ‘gay agenda’ exactly as you see the ‘homophobic agenda’ in that they believe it’s political narrative being pushed just to destabilize morally virtuous power structures to allow corrupt and evil people to take power and steal money.
Companies that shoehorn a poorly written gay character into everything for the sake of inclusivity feel like a pandering cash grab to me but to the homophobic Christian it feels like asymmetric warfare from a deranged and selfish elite hellbent on ruining western society.
It’s a hugely complex issue for me, I honestly have no idea what the best thing for the greater good is. Forcing things too hard can be painful for those unready which causes resentment and reaction but holding back and allowing non-violent homophobic behavior to exist in our society is hurtful to those struggling to find snd accept themselves. (For example being 17 and trying to reconcile popular music explicitly talking about how your unexplored sexual desires are disgusting, realizing you have to make the choice between humiliation and self denial - and this is probably a big part of other emotional troubles which can lead to rejection of otherwise sensible social norms leading to unhealthy drug use, self endangering behavior and other things that still have lasting damage to my life to this day)
I don’t know what will solve these complex issues in our society, maybe making certain concessions to mildly homophobic sections of society would stop driving them into full on culture war crusaders? Maybe highlighting that it’s not only possible but probable to be gay and boring would help ease the anxiety? I actually kinda think straight pride type events and companies pandering to heterosexuals could be normalized and accepted more - not in a way that pits them against everyone else but more of a everyone gets a party kinda way. Stop heteros feeling attacked or at least make those who want to paint that picture looking silly.
It’s sad to admit but humanity is naturally kinda selfish and shitty, bigotry and group thinking is as natural and easy to us as breathing while compassion and understanding takes effort and the right circumstances to flourish.
excellent writeup
i agree with alot of what you said and will try to hit a few key issues and hope i can add something to the excellent perspective you’ve cast.
The sad truth is that the right are pandering to homophobia because it’s a vote getter for them not because they really care about it.
exactly, they know its a very useful mechanism to accumulate power. so imo we should constantly remind ourselves - they’d be doing this anyway. if homosexuality didn’t exist or was non-viable for this, they’d be onto something else. they’d have used any topic to get what they want. (you could ofc have a metadiscussion about why certain topics are more powerful than others. but thats a different discussion).
anathema to Christian society as it’s been for over a thousand years
another critical point, as you correctly identified, this is how christianity has become, not what christianity was even purportedly about. if you take the actual words attributed to jesus in the bible, afaict never said a god damn thing about being gay trans whatever. according to their own book - after centuries of fucking with the bible - it STILL says the greatest commandment of all is to love your neighbour as yourself and you can’t judge cos you’re all fuckin sinners afterall.
so it’s all hypocrisy built upon hypocrisy , basically typical “there are 5 lights” bs. in other words it has all the fingerprints of a propaganda pathology not an expression of positive spirituality.
Things have changed so much just in my adult lifetime
yeah to that end i think the OPs timeline of 40 years was a bit optimistic, or we at least have to recognise that represents a cross-section of OPs experience which wasn’t necessarily universal 40 years ago. that said i feel there has been a backslide in the last say 10-15 years)
conservative people see the ‘gay agenda’ exactly as you see the ‘homophobic agenda’ in that they believe it’s political narrative being pushed just to destabilize morally virtuous power structures to allow corrupt and evil people to take power and steal money.
tbh i think thats because its probably both at the same time, its a documented soviet technique to covertly fund two sides of an issue to control the outcome. not picking on the soviets btw, just that they did a great job perfecting these kinds of things, wrote it down and then the power structures keeping them secret began to collapse and the methology leaked to the public.
we see this in a simpler form where corporations invest in pride month and also unironically heavily invest in homophobic organisations, (so i guess it doesn’t always have to be a cold war operation for powerful entities to effect control via seemingly conflicting interests).
and in what is presumably a less consciously aware context, consider how jk rowling veils her attacks on the trans community behind a thin veneer of “caring about gay people”. i’m strongly of the belief if she’d been born 50 years earlier she’d be jumping on the homophobia bandwagon instead of the currently “trendy” transphobia bandwagon.
to say another way, not everyone pretending to be our friend has our interests at heart, infact sometimes they’re just trying to accumulate power by taking the positive stance on this issue - probably for no other reason than the negative position won’t currently yield them as big a return.
and this can lead to eg. conservatives becoming outraged about a stance taken by someone who is vocal and politically motivated, but who has no business speaking on our behalf, then conservatives end up feeling like they’re “under attack from the homosexuals” when it wasn’t even a homosexual who said it!!
next the conservatives says some hateful thing in retaliation, people respond to that and it spirals…everyone loses (except perhaps the actual perpetrator). this is definitely a flaw in human thinking where our tribalism clouds our perception, we feel under attack and in the heat of the moment incorrectly assess which side someone is taking (or even that there’s only 2 sides, when in life there’s probably rarely ever only 2 sides).
Companies that shoehorn a poorly written gay character into everything for the sake of inclusivity feel like a pandering cash grab to me but to the homophobic Christian it feels like asymmetric warfare from a deranged and selfish elite hellbent on ruining western society.
again, its probably both? tbh i don’t think that laziness is the only explanation for the woefully shoehorned characters we’re currently getting. honestly its fucking insulting (to us, not the biggots - though the biggots might feel insulted too?). as you mention its a profitable cash grab, and i’m sure it hasn’t escaped their notice that a certain type of aggressively half-arsed inclusivity will provide alot more value to them from the hysteria it generates vs actually doing it ‘right’ in a sensitive and compassionate way, which might actually lead to healing.
if healing is what they actually wanted i think it’d look very, very different than how it currently looks. and the kindest interpretation is they’ve realised it’s more profitable short-term to produce hysteria instead of healing.
compare in contrast to what i still think (despite modern news) was a great example of inclusivity characters with the lesbian main characters in buffy:
in 1999 no less, it showed a lesbian couple in bed and instead of a cheap sexiness grab, they’re literally sitting up in bed reading & having a mundane conversation. no sexualisation of the lesbian relationship as something existing only for hetero male gratification, or out attacking heteros. just plain, believable real life characters living a boring normal part of their life. so yes i very much agree that the boring normality is a very powerful thing. surely ALOT more positive overall than aggressive hysteria.
In summary my take-aways are:
-
their MO is to use a scapegoat, they’d be attacking someone vulnerable, regardless of whom
-
not everyone pretending to be our friend actually wants to help us
-
hysteria is sadly apparently more profitable (short term) than healing
A positive note?
I honestly have no idea what the best thing for the greater good is
i really don’t either, though something think how homosexuality has been hijacked in modern perception (by that 1000 years of fake christianity as you mentioned). in eg. parts of ancient societies, men could love men and women could love women, someone could be a third gender, and it wasn’t even a thing to get upset about it, because it was just normal life. why do we suffer when they didn’t even know they were supposed to be suffering?
Insightful discussion! It’s interesting how certain issues are leveraged for power rather than genuine concern. Just like how we use tools to online remove watermark from image, some political strategies are about altering perception rather than addressing real problems.
-
That 40 year step backwards comes from good intentioned politicians making deals with homophobic devils so to speak in order to save other people.
good intentioned politicians
homophobic devils
😂 It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.
The capitalist class has class consciousness, and they understand that this is a class war. Until you develop class consciousness, the capitalist class will continue to take advantage of your false consciousness.
What does sexual orientation have to do with economics?
Surely the LGBT population has no bearing on the economy, right? I feel like I’m misunderstanding you somehow.
Class war isn’t about economics, it’s about power.
The “anti-woke” discourse is not as organic/grassroots as it appears; a large chunk of it is astroturfed.
The media don’t simply reflect the public discourse, they also shape it. Who owns the media? The capitalist class. They use the media to keep the working class divided, fighting each other, and focused on blaming their problems on something, anything but the capital class itself.
Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine
Conservative pundits (and liberal ones, for that matter) are paid handsomely to distract people, to maintain our false consciousness, to pit us against each other.
Who owns the politicians? Again, the capitalist class, who fund their political campaigns. When politicians like Ron DeSantis rant about “woke ideology,” it’s almost always kayfabe; it’s an act.
This is not to say that none of it is organic. Our upset and our anger comes from our deteriorating lives under late stage/neoliberal capitalism—wherein the capitalist class squeezes ever more out of us—creates fertile ground for reactionary fervor.
How did this conversation go from “good-intentioned politicians” to whatever might be going on in Iran? Do you even know what’s really going on there? Because I don’t.
Imperial core countries and corporate media feed us a lot of garbage about countries they consider their “enemy,” so you should be skeptical of what they tell us. With that said, I’m sure LGBTQ+ rights stand to be improved in Iran, but I don’t really know if they’re getting better, worse, or remaining the same right now. What I do know is that the US wants to paint Iran in as bad a light as possible, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the media should run more stories about the plight of LGBTQ+ people in Iran.
You then don’t see the irony in telling the LGBT “we stand with you” and then going to homophobic nations and homophobic sects and saying the same thing (because they promise help with a certain advancement in awareness)?
That goes along with what I was talking about, about people making deals with the devil (a figure of speech by the way). I’m pretty sure this phenomenon does not need any help from class phenomenon, positive or negative, in order to exist.
The irony of who telling which LGBT people and subsequently going to “homophobic” states and saying the same thing to whom?
If someone understands what you’re trying to say, perhaps they can translate for me.
Because the bigots seemed to have found ways to get in positions of influence to spread their toxic ideologies and get laws passed that targets their ‘enemies’. Even when the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that same-sex marriage is legal, I knew in the back of my mind that things are far from over. Because after that? Like one month later, Kim Davis denied legalizing a same-sex marriage.
And things seemed to have worsened thanks to the existence of people like DeSantis, Trump and any GOP still somehow breathing that wants to antagonize everyone over sexual orientation. Because in their psychotic structure, they want America to be purely Christian, purely White and probably Blonde, Blue-eyed and fair skinned.
Even in 2004, George W Bush back then on February was quoted to have said: “Our Nation must defend the sanctity of marriage”. What he means is, to protect the sanctity of STRAIGHT marriage because he seems to have it in his head that marriage is the property of the church and all that shit.
Doesn’t that sound exactly like the kind of people a certain country named Germany aspired to be like back in WWII? Ironic.
Yea but wasn’t that moron Kim Davis denied a same sex mariage on religious belief even thought the constituions says a seperation of church and state? And the SCOTUS ruled in the gay couples favor? And now is trying to fight against paying attorney fees for the gay couple that she denied? That kim davis?
It’s finally reaching such widespread acceptance that 1. Actual bigots are getting concerned they can’t be bad people anymore and 2. Assorted people are getting tired of the discourse.
So how do we deal with the biggots?
I don’t think the site admins would be appreciative of my suggestion :^)
In reality, forcing higher standards across the board raises the floor and can prevent enough bad behavior to be useful. Education and experience also encourage good behaviors. Basically, make it illegal to be a bigot, and let people learn why they don’t want to.
Family sizes are down, birth rates are now 1 per family, maybe 2 children.
This is due to many reasons but mostly
- Hormonal birth control
- Women entering the mainstream labor pool
Basically, there are better things for women to do then just have kids. This has a been a huge force multiplier for the economy
However, this means that family lines, genetic lineage, family names, dynasties… All rests on the shoulders of a single child. That’s a lot of pressure.
When you had 10 children, and one or two were “special”, it may have caused some drama but the lineage was still being secured by the other 8.
When there is only one child who then chooses a alternative life style that does not reproduce that means the END of a genetic line, the end of a name, the end of a dynasty, the end of a family. These things are hugely important to people.
I think people are more angry about sexual choices now, because they’re more important, because people have less children.
Do your research. Birth rate declines as cultural stability and wealth increase. Period.
Birth rate declines as cultural stability and wealth increase. Period.
Does this mean that birth control doesn’t prevent teenage pregnancy?
It’s a valid question—progress sometimes feels like it’s being reversed. Conversations around identity have become louder, but also more polarised. On a different note, if anyone here is working on visuals for advocacy or content, tools to quitar marca de agua online gratis can really help clean up images before sharing.
deleted by creator
exactly. and bigotry isn’t limited to sex or race stuff.
people pretty much hate anyone who is different than them. even so called progressive inclusive hippie types… will express crazy bigotry towards groups they don’t like based on crude stereotypes that are largely not true.
our brains love to generalize. They don’t like treating people who are different than us as worth our acknowledgement and esteem.
deleted by creator
Dude, plenty of Democrats in their 30s who say they are progressive are raging bigots and support racist policies.
They are just quiet about it. They aren’t saying crazy racist nonsense on tiktok, but if you talk to them about issues like housing or schools… they make it very obvious what they think. Using polite language, of course. Black people are great, as long as they don’t live near them, or go to the same school as their kid goes to! These are the same people who are NIMBY because they don’t want ‘people who haven’t worked as hard as I have’ from living near them.
They are just quiet about it. They aren’t saying crazy racist nonsense on tiktok, but if you talk to them about issues like housing or schools… they make it very obvious what they think. Using polite language, of course. Black people are great, as long as they don’t live near them, or go to the same school as their kid goes to! These are the same people who are NIMBY because they don’t want ‘people who haven’t worked as hard as I have’ from living near them.
my favorite version of this “identity politics” minimizing the very real and tragic harms that our hegemony has done to its minorities.
Why are people so interested in defining themselves along sexual identity and orientation in relatively recent western culture?
Why now? Why is it so different from most of human existence?
Because we are no longer facing famine. The Green Revolution has made our relationship with food so secure we no longer define ourselves in relation to it.
Throughout most of history people are farmers or ranchers or shepherds or bakers or butchers or millers.
So, we climb the Biological hierarchy of needs looking for our next characteristic that needs fulfillment.
not even. 1950s we had this idealized version that everyone was heterosexual, owned a home and had strict gender roles.
That shit is now all blown apart. And for most folks the complexities of it all are beyond understanding.
And it cuts both ways. I don’t care about other people’s genders and identities, but boy they care about mine. Gotten plenty of sexist slurs from queer/trans people based on my gender and lots of shitty assumptions. I’m bi, but I ‘present’ as a heterosexual dudebro, and it makes non-gender conforming people angry at me for some reason, also many insecure straight men and women. Only people who don’t seem to care are people who are bi, or secure in their sexuality. Way too many people feel the need to do that though.
I’d just like to say that I’m not defining myself at any point, I’m describing myself.
A trivial point, maybe, but there’s still plenty of bigots around and the ones around me use phrases like “defining yourself” to minimize and erase lbgtq+ people’s experiences.
Identifying might be the best word to use, given the psychology literature all tends to use that, but thank you for your critique.
Also heavily under fire, though the arguments are usually paper thin. They dismiss self-identification under the pretense that it’s not about identity, that your identity can’t be that you’re trans or whatever. Just a fiat argument.
And I’d just like to add: you’re right, this is the way the literature talks about it. You’d think the term being used clinically - with a clear, concise, and well-defined meaning - would mean it couldn’t be targeted and attacked the way it is by the religious right. You’d think, you’d hope, and you’d be wrong. And that sucks.
removed by mod
Wut. No one has an interest in depopulation but a few Malthusian kooks. The capitalist class certainly certainly doesn’t: who would then perform the labor from which they leach their wealth?
deleted by creator
Are the Dharmic faiths particularly inclusive of queer folks? Or just by comparison? I don’t know about Buddhism but China is somewhat antigay, and it’s not like the Kama Sutra had any gay stuff in it, and with all the erotic Hindu temple art I’ve never seen any gay stuff going on. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong in my amateur assessment here
deleted by creator
Fair and kind words, thank you. Pleasant days to you, friend.
I can’t speak for Hinduism, but this Wikipedia article goes into some of the history of Buddhism in regards to sexuality. Generally, sex of all kinds, whether heterosexual or homosexual or sex with celestial beings, was seen as another one of the 10,000 things that could distract one from the path - but otherwise there was nothing particularly immoral about it. Monks and nuns generally had to follow rules that prohibited both, in order to remove distractions, but those rules were never meant for the general public, aside from the precept against the “misuse” of sexuality, which is ambiguous but thought to refer more to things like SA.
When we’re talking about modern China, or the present day state of other historically Buddhist countries, it would be reductive to say that their current attitudes towards homosexuality are a product of religion, because it ignores more recent events and currents, and other historical factors. China was also historically influenced by Confucianism, which was more homophobic, but it was also influenced by a bunch of other philosophies, and today it’s not very religious at all. Japan was historically very gay, and the 11th century Tale of Genji has a bisexual protagonist fucking everybody.
However, every historical tradition had to adapt to contact with the West during the age of colonialism. China at first tried hard to cling to its traditions and stubbornly refuse to adapt to new, Western ideas, but the “century of humiliation” happened and they realized they had to adapt or die. Japan was not directly colonized, but they still had a massive revamping of their society with all these new ideas coming in. Every country in Asia has a story like that. And then you have another 100 years of stuff happening after that.
China’s modern day homophobia does not come from a place of “The Buddha said this was bad,” rather, it comes from seeing homosexuality as a Western invention, and a symptom of “bourgeois decadence.” Sadly, such brainworms are common in many socialist countries. There is a stereotype many people have that gay people all live in cities and spend all our time partying at nightclubs, because that makes for better TV than the reality does. Ironically, there are many countries in the world that once had their own more tolerant traditions that were replaced with Western values during colonialism, who now hold those values up as their own against more progressive, modern day Western values.
