General Question

seazen's avatar

Gays have recently petitioned (in Ca.) to have LGBT's recognized as an, among other things, ethnic and cultural minority - you say what?

Asked by seazen (6098 points ) December 17th, 2010

I think it’s fascinating how far they’ve come: the idea, online recently, was against bullying them, and President Carter said he thinks the US is ready for a Gay President. Cool.

The petition goes so far as to request that LGBT figures in history be recognized as such, their contribution taught and learnt in schools, and for them to be recognized as both a cuiltural and ethnic (their words) minority (their words).

Interesting. I’ll add my 2 cents after hearing from (I’m guessing) Simone and others first.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

137 Answers

Seelix's avatar

“Ethnic” minority makes no sense, but cultural does (to me, anyway).

seazen's avatar

@Seelix I didn’t touch it. Their words. Ethnic and all.

ETpro's avatar

Cultural minority rings true. There is no question they are a minority, and one that has long been the target of discrimination and bigotry. Even the far right champions of discrimination claim that—in fact deflating numbers with “studies” founded on junk science.

One by one, discrimination against targeted groups has been crumbling. Misogyny was the rule of the day in almost every culture from at least the beginning of recorded history, and it doesn’t even target a minority. Women outnumber men. Just one more sign that if there is a creator controlling things, he loves us.

iamthemob's avatar

@seazen – is “ethnic and cultural minority” in and of itself a term that carries legal importance? For instance, it may be a constitutionally protected category like “gender” in California…and therefore “ethnicity” could be a built in legal term that is superfluous when applied to the LGBT community.

seazen's avatar

@iamthemob I don’t know. I am looking for material – it’s something I heard on the radio and translated: Then asked here to actually get more info and form an opinion.

DominicX's avatar

I don’t know. On one hand it’s good, particularly the part about teaching their achievements in schools because it would hopefully foster sensitivity toward LGBT people, possibly less bullying, discrimination, and hatred in the long run. But then, on the other hand, do we really want even more separation and singling out? It’s often stated that the goal of LGBT people is to have sexual orientation be seen as something like eye color. Of course, the problem with that line of thinking is that currently, that’s not how it’s seen and we can’t suddenly say it is; it doesn’t work that way.

But I’m not sure what else this classification would be doing? Where else would it appear and become significant?

LostInParadise's avatar

It is high time that discrimination against people based on sexual orientation should come to an end. Giving them special status as a separate ethnic group strikes me as a bit weird. Compare it to religious groups. It is wrong to discriminate on the basis of religion, but it does not make sense to treat different religions as separate ethnic groups.

plethora's avatar

Absolutely!! And I see no reason not extend the cultural differentiation to those who have a preference..oops, I mean an orientation….towards bestiality as well. Why not?

squirbel's avatar

Ethnic, no. Absolutely not. Ethnic groups are those which identify with each other through a common heritage. If they want to hold onto the idea that people are born homosexual, they cannot hold onto the idea of gayness being an ethnicity. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Cultural, on the other hand – has some merit.

DominicX's avatar

@plethora

Oh please. That “argument” is meaningless and completely irrelevant to the question.

iamthemob's avatar

Alright – it seems like I was working with a fairly race-centric concept of ethnicity which may be inappropriate in this context. It appears that ”[a]n ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion) and an ideology that stresses common ancestry or endogamy. Members of an ethnic group are conscious of belonging to an ethnic group; moreover ethnic identity is further marked by the recognition from others of a group’s distinctiveness. Processes that result in the emergence of such identification are called ethnogenesis.” (wikipedia)

@plethora – the reason why not, of course, is that bestiality is a practice in which one of the parties cannot consent to the act. Therefore, the development of a heritage would also be devoid of input from 50% of the participants. Considering the profound contribution of the gay and lesbian culture, I don’t see the relevance of the comparison. How are they similar, from a cultural standpoint?

jaytkay's avatar

“Gays” have petitioned? All of them? Is this even a true story? Google leads me to exactly one source – this question on Fluther.

plethora's avatar

@DominicX @iamthemob mmmm…..just a dash of humor guys and sarcasm. I agree that my comment is outrageous…but no more outrageous that the topic.

Oh, and I was unaware that President Carter had now endorsed homosexuals as president. I’m just thinking that it was 4 years of idiotic public comments like that on a multitude of subjects that got him branded as the worst president who has ever served, a distinction he will soon forfeit however.

squirbel's avatar

And on another slant from my first point – regarding teaching in schools:

Before they get a voice in schools, I want to see minorities (Asians, Hispanics, Blacks) getting ethic and cultural recognition and to have their histories taught in school. As of now, they are just a blip.

And I can’t find any news on this either, except for this post. Can you post your source?

breedmitch's avatar

Perhaps you translated “ethnic” incorrectly. Although in Israel they might be using “ethnic” as a slant.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
DominicX's avatar

@anonini So because it could happen to another group, that’s a reason to be “against gay rights”? I’m not following that at all…

@plethora I understand that your comment was sarcastic, but that doesn’t change the fact that you were comparing homosexuality to bestiality, a comparison that is incredibly flawed, as @iamthemob pointed out.

@breedmitch GA. I’m not sure why all these horrible comments are getting GAs.

anonini's avatar

@DominicX I’d rather it be the small minority than the majority who are hated by a powerful few
@breedmitch Then let me put it this way. Gay’s should not be whining about their “rights” because as far as a lot of people are concerned being gay is a mental disorder and I fully support that notion. If it wasn’t, than humans would have been created gay and it would help to move the species forward. However, it does nothing to populate the planet and it is just a creation of our society where survival means nothing to anyone because it is so easy to live in the modern era. Think about that before accusing me of heartlessly condemning this group.

jaytkay's avatar

Before they get a voice in schools, I want to see minorities (Asians, Hispanics, Blacks) getting ethic and cultural recognition and to have their histories taught in school.

Equal rights is not a zero-sum game. Giving to one person isn’t taking from someone else.

And before this conversation goes completely astray – I notice there has been no answer to the question, “Is this true?”

What petition, where? Signed by who? When?

breedmitch's avatar

@anonini Here’s an idea. Let’s persecute the backwater bigots like yourself.

tapestryofregret's avatar

For anyone who has spent 5 minutes in west hollywood, I think you might agree they’re most definitely not a minority.

I kid, I kid. :)

efritz's avatar

@anonini – gays “whine” about their rights because a lot of people consider it to be wrong (a.k.a. disorder, in your words) and so are denied rights granted to the ignorant majority, which includes you. Ever heard of the constitution? Even if you don’t agree with their lifestyles, you can at least recognize the individual rights of every human being and respect that.

Sorry, this was a little off-topic. I think LGBT is a cultural but not necessarily ethnic majority, but I don’t really see how this is a terribly huge issue, no offense meant at all . . .

anonini's avatar

@breedmitch That’s exactly what will happen should we give the gays their rights. They don’t deserve rights because what they want is not natural. And for the record, being a “backwater bigot” is not a mental disorder, that is a lack of education, therefore irrelivant to the arguement. So if you cannot find some other reason why I am not right, then I am afraid that you have no more say in the matter.

seazen's avatar

I don’t think ethnic was meant as a slant – I think it meant simply, well, ethnic: (from dictionary.com pertaining to or characteristic of a people, esp. a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like

Even cultural minority, is well, kinda funny. What culture exactly? There are Gay people from every cultural and ethnic background – they are simply gay and not straight. One in ten, if I remember correctly. Even Inuit and Native American.

So what is a Gay cultural minority exactly?

efritz's avatar

Maybe gayness referred to as a culture could be seen as stereotypical, but since it’s such a persecuted group, referring to it as such is a kind of banding together.

jaytkay's avatar

So what is a Gay cultural minority exactly?

The petition you brought up would address that. Got a link?

Response moderated
DominicX's avatar

@anonini

What do you mean “what we want is not natural”? We already have other homosexuals to have sex with; that’s the “unnatural” part. And anyway, who gets to define “natural”? And depression is a mental disorder; does that mean depressed people don’t deserve rights? You’re all over the place, pal.

seazen's avatar

@DominicX I have to, sadly, side with you here – and furthermore: he isn’t a “pal” at all: They don’t deserve rights because what they want is not natural.

He is, to use a word, ignorant and intolerant. Damn, two words.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora That sure sounds like a false-flag attack. All of morality can be summed up in the golden rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

In matters of sex, would you want someone having sex with you when you did not consent to it? Let’s say a gay dentist put you under, and while you were out for a root canal, he sexually molested you. Would that be fine with you? It wouldn’t be OK with me, and the gender of the dentist wouldn’t enter into it.

Animals cannot consent, and we cannot know whether they object to what we are doing or not. So to conflate bestiality with consensual human sex is outrageous and unsupportable.

seazen's avatar

Nodding head in agreement with the @ETpro

lillycoyote's avatar

Do you have a reference here, my dear, @seazen, you know how I can get sometimes? Did you already post it and I missed it? If so please point me to it. I am very slow on the uptake sometimes. Some LGBTs want to be considered an “ethnic” and cultural minority? Who says? I’d like to get some info on this before I comment because I haven’t heard anything of this.

jaytkay's avatar

As I mentioned – heard it on the radio and translated what I heard. Cannot get Google to cooperate- perhaps I misunderstood – or it’s very very news news).

I would wager that a California news story would not be hidden from Google while its broadcast on the overseas radio .

seazen's avatar

@jaytkay I am not making it up – and I am not instigating anything – from my years here, and even my above posts, one can see I am not against Gays or anyone else (except terrorists).

Try to google it yourself and help me – they mentioned California, Gays and ethnic and cultural minories (peition for law or something like that).

anonini's avatar

@DominicX Forget the mental disorders for now. I am saying natural as in the natural way that the world works and that species strive to survive. Homosexuality is not “natural” and therefore they should not complain when their cries fall on deaf ears. But let me ask you this: the womens rights movements and abolishment of slavery have helped to move civilization forward. What will allowing homosexuals rights accomplish? From what I can see, it will do nothing.

crisw's avatar

I think that the story may have been in reference to this bill.

“California – State Senator Mark Leno is pushing for high school history classes to include LGBT history as part of their curriculum. Currently, students do not hear about the history of the LGBT rights movement, nor do they hear about many gay figures in history.”

DominicX's avatar

@anonini

So it’s all about survival. Then I suppose there should be no rights for couples who choose not to have children, since they do nothing to contribute to the propagation of the species. Furthermore, what it will do is end discrimination against homosexuals. You think that’s nothing? You think kids committing suicide due to anti-LGBT bullying in schools is nothing? You think murder as in the Matthew Shepard case is nothing? Of course you would. Because you’re as heartless as you’re pretending not to be.

seazen's avatar

@crisw GOOD JOB! THAT’S IT. IT’S ON TV NOW – FOX ACTUALLY. Sorry for shouting – I got excited and don’t feel like editing.

crisw's avatar

@anonini

What makes you think homosexuality is not natural? What actual evidence do you have? Here’s some evidence that it is natural. Here is some more. And more.

There are mountains of evidence showing that it is natural; not only in humans but in many other species. Where’s your data?

absalom's avatar

I would not have previously referred to the LGBT community as an ethnic minority (and I still feel uncomfortable applying that label), but the broader definitions of ‘ethnic’ seem inclusive enough. Even so, I agree with @DominicX re ambivalence on the whole thing, particularly the (apparently?) proposed gay contributions to be taught in school. As in, ‘Look, kids, this minority is valuable!’ Of course we are valuable; it’s just sad that it has to be demonstrated with textbooks or something because people can’t see it for themselves.

@anonini

You’re a troll.

From what I can see, it will do nothing.

And you are myopic.

crisw's avatar

@seazen

Thanks, glad to be of help!

I am in California and remembered reading about the bill a few days ago.

iamthemob's avatar

I’m a little concerned that there’s a debate as to whether there’s a gay cultural identity. Modern cultural identities are formed and evolve not as much from isolation, but from interaction with those different from one’s group. Recognition that there are many different kinds of gay men and women from various backgrounds doesn’t mean that there’s not a shared sense of identity, a shared perceived identification from straight society, etc. It’s much like saying that there is no such thing a sa black cultural identity because African Americans are very different from native Ghanians.

When @seazen asks “what is the gay cultural minority exactly” one must also ask “what is the black cultural identity” or “christian cultural identity.” It doesn’t describe a group’s shared identity but rather recognizes cultural phenomena that result from a group’s shared characteristic that is different from the rest of the world’s.

@anonini – the APA doesn’t recognize being gay as a mental disorder. But since you’ve moved past that, there are plenty of things that a species does that is not directly related to its ability to reproduce. When we talk about the physical pleasure associated with sex, it acts as a motivator to reproduce…however, that does not make the purpose of sexual activity reproduction. The problem with your stance is that it eliminates masturbation and non-reproductive heterosexual activity from the natural order. Of course, both happen all the time, and all forms of sexual gratification can be seen in many different species.

There is also both a biological and social benefit to reducing the lifelihood that all members of a population reproduce. Particularly in humans, where child rearing is a resource-intensive endeavor, ensuring that there is a broader than two-member support for a group of infants (e.g., there will be some non-reproducing adult members available to help raise children) will, on average, ensure that more children born survive.

Please let me know why you would disagree.

seazen's avatar

@iamthemob When @seazen asks “what is the gay cultural minority exactly” one must also ask “what is the black cultural identity” or “christian cultural identity.” It doesn’t describe a group’s shared identity but rather recognizes cultural phenomena that result from a group’s shared characteristic that is different from the rest of the world’s.

I ask because I lose stuff in translation at times. Plus, I always take myself with a grain of salt. Literally.

anonini's avatar

What I am trying to get at with the naturality thing is that there are no benefits to allowing gay rights. Units for the gay right movement in school? For one, many religious parents would pull their children out of school for the unit because homosexuality is against many religions. That means its a waste of tax payer dollars to use valuable school time to teach something that is not relevant. That would also mean that it would have to be taught in higher curriculum courses like IB and AP classes, which goes on to mean that all countries that support such worldwide programs would have to include it. That would take up way to much time and money and be completely unbeneficial.
And I wouldnt over react so much towards the gays if they weren’t so open about it. They are 5X louder about it than they need to be. That’d be like walking around screaming about how straight you are and how proud you are to be so.

seazen's avatar

Guys – this thread will get long and heavy soon – move to my other Q in Social about the Gay child that took his life because he was bullied. Thanks!

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
efritz's avatar

@anonini – gay rights benefit gays. If you’re not gay, you don’t benefit, sorry.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
anonini's avatar

@efritz Then why should we hand out rights that benifit a minority?

DominicX's avatar

@anonini

So I guess black people didn’t deserve the right to vote since that was a right that benefited a minority? Are you even listening to what you’re saying? Again, you’re all over the place.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Unhelpful)
iamthemob's avatar

@seazen no intent to call you out…just locating the quote in the thread. I actually think that it’s a good question, but it’s not unique to a description of a gay ethnic or cultural minority.

@anonini – When you say there is no benefit, you ignore, most significantly, the profound benefit it allows gay individuals. If religious people pull their children from classes where a gay cultural contribution is mentioned, they are depriving their children of an education. Those that remain will receive a more enriched education – an additional and general benefit. Further, that “lack of a benefit” is a short-term lack – whites did that when black children were in their classrooms, and Christians did it when Jews were there.

There is no clear waste of money, as I don’t think “gay” will be taught like “math” – gay contributions to U.S. culture will simply be more clearly identified, and they have contributed significantly. Unfortunately, to declare something irrelevant before it is taught is making an inappropriate a priori judgment – it may enrich the curriculum.

I don’t see how this also means that there will be any significant mandatory alteration to an AP program that wouldn’t be part of any other change in the program – I would be horrified to learn that an AP lesson plan remained static year to year.

Gays are loud, though, because they are told to be quiet. They are proud because they are told to be ashamed. There’s a disconnect when you say that gays should not be allowed rights, and then say that they’re to open as a cultural identity. I’m certain that if someone pointed to you and said you didn’t deserve rights, you’d be at least 5X louder than you are right now, right?

Finally, the argument that gays should not have rights because there is no benefit to it is flawed because gays are not allowed rights – they have them. They have been denied them. We all share the same rights, and the constitutional structure of our government is meant to limit its interference in our rights. Saying gays shouldn’t be allowed rights, therefore, until it proves a benefit is the equivalent of saying they shouldn’t be allowed legs.

anonini's avatar

@iamthemob Actually, I wouldn’t care if someone told me I didn’t deserve rights. I would not care because if I was not accepted there I would cope with it or move to a location that did give me those rights. Instead, the homosexuals decide to try and muck up the current state of the country by demanding that their rights are not denied. They have them as you pointed out, so why still complain? Forcing their influence upon the country is not what I consider a position that can be called the “victim” position.

absalom's avatar

@anonini

The meaning of the word ‘rights’ has flown over your head, audibly.

WHOOOOOOOOOOSH goes the sound of ignorance.

anonini's avatar

@absalom define it for me then

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – Your comments are a little vague. If you could support, with some form of citation, as @crisw did, what you’re talking about, we might have a clearer idea.

However, the problem with “moving elsewhere” is that it is not the responsibility of a citizen to go where their rights will be recognized – it is the responsibility of the people to recognize that policies are in place to prevent people from exercising their rights freely.

For instance, less than 100 years ago, women could not vote. Should they have moved to another country?

absalom's avatar

@anonini

‘Rights,’ as in those things to which one is entitled. ‘Rights’ does not mean ‘permissions’.

Gays have the right to marry and the right to be treated equally – they’re entitled to these things – but the rights are denied.

anonini's avatar

@iamthemob That is rediculous, that would be half of the country. And that is a feasible movement. But in todays party society with nothing to do but create new pointless things it is a rediculous request. Unless I am missing something, accepting them will do nothing but fuel the insanity of this whole mess.
@absalom Then why not live with it or move to another country? Especially those gays that moved here KNOWING that their rights are denied and still complaining. That’s like knowing you cant bring a phone to school and crying when it gets taken away

DominicX's avatar

@anonini

So when something is wrong, when something is unjust, you’re just supposed to ignore it rather than try to change it? I don’t want to leave. This is my country, my state. I’m not going to let it stay this way; I’m going to try and change it for the better.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – Again, why should proving worth to society be a prerequisite for having the same rights as other citizens?

Also, what would be the critical mass of population where, because they are below X percentage, it would be better for them to move rather than fight for their civil rights.

Haleth's avatar

That wording, “cultural and ethnic minority,” is ambiguous. If you called LGBT people both a cultural minority and an ethnic minority, that would be wrong. If you used “cultural and ethnic minority” as an umbrella term, then it works.

It would be pretty insane for LGBT not to be called a minority. If we’re still fighting over something this basic, then the rest of the goals are a long time coming. That’s sad.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – I think it’s important, also, that you define what you think the “rights” being demanded are, and how they’re relevant to the situation.

anonini's avatar

@DominicX No no no no no. Thats what you fail to realize. The country does not belong to the people. The country belongs to corporate business leaders. It has and always will. Therefore, it does not matter if you think that you “got” your rights. The country could care less. All that matters today is money, and if giving gays rights will give them that, then they will give them rights.
@iamthemob Thats the thing! WHY SHOULD YOU PROVE YOURSELF TO SOCIETY? Everyone wants to be accepted into the norm….but why? That doesn’t make anyone special.

Winters's avatar

A Cultural Minority sounds plausible to me, but ethnic? That sounds like my home state alright. Downright silly, comical, and stupid. I just hope I’m not having that shoved down my throat when I get back there in about 13 hours.

jaytkay's avatar

It would be pretty insane for LGBT not to be called a minority.

Hmmmm. If I were a legislator I would introduce a bill declaring homosexuals a minority.

When the troglodytes voted it down, I would then declare that homosexuals are a certified majority.

For the lulz.

anonini's avatar

@iamthemob All gay rights: the right to have gay marriage, anti discrimination, same sex adoption, etc.

anonini's avatar

The fact that we are having this arguement proves one thing: EVERYONE CANNOT BE HAPPY. There is no compromise that will ever solve all situations like this. Don’t forget that even if the gays are no longer denied rights, then there will be some other minority that WILL be squashed. World peace is impossible to create, we have seen that through the failed attempts of the League of Nations. There will always be conflict, and resolving this conflict will NOT by any means help anything. Just one more small group that gets a chance in the limelight before it blows up is all.

Winters's avatar

@anonini correction: world peace is possible to create, its called the extinction of mankind.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – In a democratic society, though, it is the responsibility of the government to not limit those rights. If they do, that’s wrong. That’s not about whether people are happy – that’s about law. So, if people aren’t happy that gays can adopt, that does not mean they can legislate against it simply because of that.

Further, I wonder what percentage of the population, still, would mean that the majority would have to respect their rights instead of asking them to leave.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
Response moderated (Unhelpful)
lillycoyote's avatar

I’m not necessarily saying that they are equal in terms of body count but the Nazis manufactured Pink Triangles in addition to Stars of David, in terms of accessorizing the ready-to-wear wardrobes of those they could do without. The LGBT community does have some history that needs telling. They do have some history to be acknowledged, understood, mourned for and honored.

Edit: I know this question is not about WWII and the Holocaust. Just saying that the LGBT community are not just whiners. They have some history. History all over the world. Not just here, not just there. Everywhere. That’s all. That’s all I’m saying.

iamthemob's avatar

@lillycoyote – I think it’s good that specific examples are referenced – no one had really gotten around to that. Thanks.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Dog's avatar

@anonini I know you are young because it appears that you have a narrow view of the world.

It is obvious that you do not have the experience to fully understand what you are saying when you write “Actually, I wouldn’t care if someone told me I didn’t deserve rights. I would not care because if I was not accepted there I would cope with it or move to a location that did give me those rights.”

With all due respect I call BULLSHIT.

This statement is both foolish and naive.

If you and your family were under a regime that limited your freedom- told you that you could not embrace your feelings:

You had to marry those outside of your culture or not at all.

You could not express who you are in public.

Were treated like a second-class citizen, kicked around and called names.

Had to pretend to be something you were not because the regime told you you must.

If you woke up day in and day out unable to express yourself.

If day in and day out you watched others around you enjoy the freedom you were denied.

If you were constantly the fodder of jokes.

If you were considered a freak or suffering from mental defect and treated as such.

If you were fearful for your safety from those who hated you because of who you are.

If you had to sneak around if you were lucky enough to find someone you cared about.

If you could not visit that loved one in the hospital or make crucial decisions on their behalf.

If you were not able to get medical insurance because you were not recognized.

If you were considered unfit to have children.

If you were denied a job because you were not one of them.

——————————————————

If this all happened to you , happened to you every day, every month, year after year after year you would damn well say ENOUGH and fight back rather than just casually saying “I would cope.”

The people on this question have been taking the time to respond to you because they are hoping you will gain some knowledge and wisdom or at the very least, tolerance. You have gone through here starting off stating “mental defect” and working your way to “Money and Government control.” Your position is not backed and you are scraping for more excuses.
——————————————————
In writing the above I want to post again but in a way you might understand:

If you and your family were under a regime that limited your freedom- told you that you could not embrace your African heritage:

You had to marry those within your race or not at all.

You could not voice your opinion in public.

Were treated like a second-class citizen, kicked around and called names.

Had to pretend to be subservient because the regime told you you must.

If you woke up day in and day out unable to express yourself.

If day in and day out you watched others around you enjoy the freedom you were denied.

If you were constantly the fodder of jokes.

If you were considered a freak or suffering from mental defect and treated as such.

If you were fearful for your safety from those who hated you because of who you are.

If you had to sneak around if you were lucky enough to find someone you cared about outside of your race.

If you could not visit that loved one in the hospital or make crucial decisions on their behalf.

If you were not able to get medical insurance because you were not recognized.

If you were considered unfit to have a higher education.

If you were denied a job because you were not white.

Can you see it now?
If not LOOK AGAIN

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
spykenij's avatar

I say give me liberty and the same freedom to pursue my own personal happines or give me death. Maybe all of us homos can stop paying our friggin taxes, since we aren’t even allowed to wed the ones we love and in so many places – we can’t even hold hands and walk down the street.

We are a sub-culture that exists in all cultures, which is what the rainbow is supposed to represent. We have out our preferred music styles, symbols, movies, literature TV network (LOGO) and our own shows… As far as being a minority, statistics show we are 10+% of the populations, so yes, I think we are a minority.

syz's avatar

I am uncomfortable with classifying the LGBT community as a cultural minority. Since my personal philosophy is pretty much “I am no different from anyone else except in this minor detail of who I love” (and what the fuck is your problem with that?), that is the basis of my argument against the denial of my basic rights as a citizen. I understand why a group might consider this action, but my own feeling is that it would could create yet another tool for divisiveness. Gays and lesbians occur in every culture, every ethnicity, every country, every socioeconomic level, every age, every color and in my mind, that doesn’t qualify for a title like “minority”. My personal opinion is that sexual orientation should be no more of an issue than our eye color or the size of our ears – it’s just who we are.

seazen's avatar

@spykenij I found what you said fascinating, however, I have a question for you: what’s with the different music business? I like Streisand, Musicals and even Cher and Christina Aguilera. Who was it that decided they are Gay icons and why? You did mean them, n’est ce pas?

lbwhite89's avatar

Gotta love the wording here. “Gays.” But anyways, I totally agree that they are a cultural minority. Ethnic, no, but that’s been mentioned several times. I personally think it shouldn’t matter how they’re “classified”. They are warm-blooded human beings that deserve the same rights as any other warm-blooded human. It amazes me that we’re breaching on the year 2011 and homosexuals don’t have the same rights as everyone else. It’s not like this is new, like gay people just started popping up. They’ve been here forever, and they’re here to stay. For a country that thrives on diversity (so-called “melting pot”), our people sure are slow to accept something just a little different than them.

It also amazes me that people feel they have a right to judge people based on how and/or with whom they have sex. Sex is one thing you can do that doesn’t affect anyone but the two people engaging in the act. I don’t know where people have the nerve to comment on something that has nothing to do with them. Why can’t we just let people live their lives and focus more on our than damning those that don’t live the exact same way? It’s absolutely ridiculous.

I could go on and on about this, but I digress.

seazen's avatar

@lbwhite89 What part of the “wording” of Gays do you love, newb?

anonini's avatar

@Dog I never once said that I do not understand what they go through, I have sympathy for the suffering, but in all reality, it is a wiser choice to relocate. And if all such problems that are in your list occured at once as you are saying I would definitely move. If I do not like what is going on here, then I will find somewhere where the standards and laws suit me.For example, It is not fitting to walk into a book club, fan club, etc. and tell them to change because you don’t like what they are doing.
And for the record, I am welcome to have my opinion, no matter how cruel or unthinkable it may be to you. I was just stating my point of view, and if others do not agree with it, that does not mean they have to attack me about it. If you don’t like it, state so politely. That is how this whole charade began.

Seelix's avatar

@anonini – I know your comment was addressed to @Dog, but I have to ask: where do you live that gay people are walking into your life and demanding that things change? Homosexuality has been around as long as there’s been life on this planet, and I can guarantee that the gay people in your town/state/country/continent haven’t just suddenly walked in there.

syz's avatar

@anonini Do you consider yourself a bigot? Do you recognize that your stance is bigoted?

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – again, I ask you – how much of the population must the minority group be before the majority is forced to respect their rights rather than ask them to leave.

Also, when you say that it is wiser to relocate rather than stand up for your civil rights, and you think it’s reasonable to say that, you don’t seem to realize that these are shared rights by everyone. Therefore, if the government can take the rights from a minority, and no one makes a huff…well, when they start limiting your rights…don’t be surprised that you’ve let them far enough into regulating your civil liberties that you, yourself, have to leave.

Unfortunately, the other places you’d want to go will be packed with us…and we’ll probably not be welcoming.

plethora's avatar

@anonini I am sooo enjoying your comments

@ETpro “conflate”? Damn, I actually had to look that up.

Animals cannot consent, and we cannot know whether they object to what we are doing or not. So to conflate bestiality with consensual human sex is outrageous and unsupportable

Consent has nothing to do with it. Bestiality is a “place marker” for any and all idiotic politically correct movements the left comes up with, a la LGBT whatever…..and on and on and on. I, for one, believe the Left can come with justification of anything…..Hitler did, Stalin did, Pol Pot did, Muslim terriorist did, Muslim fathers in Pakistan do…..doesnt need to make sense.

iamthemob's avatar

@plethora – the argument that one side can come up for justification for anything is only relevant if a behavior need be justified. Sexuality does not…it just is. However, whether it should be regulated should come under scrutiny as to whether the behavior itself causes harm. And if the behavior is between two consenting adults, it does not, and the government must not be afforded the ability to privilege one group with rights not held by the other.

The above demonstrates why consent does come into it. If you’re going to use a “place marker” then it must be functionally equivalent. It’s not an “idiotically politically correct movement” to say that gay men and women are absolutely no different from straight men or women when it comes to sexual behavior, objectively. One who has sex with a chicken is. And further, the bestiality placeholder doesn’t follow through the civil rights arguments as many of the rights involve legal consent between adults, and therefore animals can’t be involved.

Considering the rights discussed, and the actual behavior we’re considering, how is the ridiculous argument not attempting to say that by supporting gay rights one would inevitable support the rights of an animal rapist?

I mean, I think anyone who equates sex between human adults with the rape of an animal is an idiotic, terror-mongering bigotted fool…right?

anonini's avatar

@Dog once they start taking away my rights, then I know its time to run because that means a dictatorship is forming. And this is extremely selfish, but I won’t face such discrimination because I am an average person, not someone with a specialized characteristic like homosexuality. No medical conditions, normal education, etc, I am completely normal, therefore once I am discriminated it wont matter, because EVERYONE will be in danger.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – you still aren’t giving me the percentage I’ve asked for.

anonini's avatar

@iamthemob why give you a percentage when it could be a lie set by the government? -.O

Dog's avatar

@anonini You entirely missed my point.

I am telling you that your statement saying:
“Actually, I wouldn’t care if someone told me I didn’t deserve rights. I would not care because if I was not accepted there I would cope with it or move to a location that did give me those rights.” is utter rubbish.

No- I do not believe that you would calmly accept the judgement of others on who you are and move from family, friends, comfort, the place you call home to an unknown place where you may not be able to make a living.

I really do not get your odd argument.

I do not think you have the vaguest idea what being treated unfairly is like.

So why are you so special? Why should others have to move to suit your ideals?

Why do you wish to segregate those who are different?

Your suggestion that people move to some vague nirvana is also suggesting that you judge these people as unfit to be in your presence.

::::::::::::::: EDIT because of above comment that appeared as I finished this:::::::::::::::

Don’t you see that in your scenario you are the dictator? In your mind you are determining the worth of others based on your ideals.

Your statement above indicates again that you refuse to accept anyone different than you are.

Regarding your vague and odd statements about Dictatorship and danger:
You state that “everyone” will be in danger?
I have bad news for you. It is never a sweeping blow. It never works like that.

When rights are taken away they start with select groups and expand. This prevents the masses from revolting and uprising in force.

If it ever happens I guarantee you that it will make it to what ever group you are determined to be in and there will not be people backing you. All the other groups will be either already squashed or turning their backs so as not to be the next ones targeted.

You could easily be marked with a bad *characteristic like:*

Your ancestry- “purtity” is not absolute as more than one race feels they are the pure race. This means ANY race could be considered subhuman.

Your beliefs- religious, political, moral.

Your appearance- which can be read and judged as being part of an undesirable group.

Where you live

Who you are related to

How you celebrate

What you wear

Where you were born

All these things are, have been, and will always be used by people (like you) who judge others and determine that they are not worthy.

Seelix's avatar

If bigotry is becoming “normal” in the USA, all you “gays” are more than welcome to stay at my place.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – No, I’m asking you to state what is an acceptable percentage before it because our responsibility to defend the rights of the minorities from the government.

You said half was too much. Therefore, it must be less than 50%. So what percentage of the population is, in essence, it okay to ask to leave?

anonini's avatar

I can see that you don’t understand my view no matter what I say, so I am not going to argue with those who cannot open their minds anymore.

tinyfaery's avatar

I didn’t get to sign a petition. WTF? I hate people.

iamthemob's avatar

@anonini – If you can’t explain your view, that’s on you. I clearly and completely disagree with you, but that’s because your position seems, and I rarely say this, ridiculous. I don’t know where you live, or how familiar you are with your legal and civil rights, what you do for a living, how old you are, etc., etc., but the reason why I ‘m not budging on my standpoint is that you’re just making an assertion – you don’t believe that minorities have the same rights as you. Regardless of whether you think you’re saying that, that’s exactly what your argument. But from where I am, as a U.S. citizen:

(1) the Constitution is founded on a principle of natural equality – and the historical assertion that all men and women are endowed with inalienable rights.

(2) the government is not to limit those rights, except where necessary. Nor is it to privilege one class of citizen above another except where necessary. It must also ensure that those attempting to infringe on the rights of others are punished.

(3) therefore, the very basis of the U.S. legal system requires the opposite conclusion from your assertion.

If you want to support your assertion, please do so. Otherwise, you are complaining about having to listen to people try to fight for their rights, and if they don’t like it they should leave. The irony, of course, is that this means that you can’t argue about hearing us because if it really bothers you…you should leave.

Besides any of that…being a citizen of a nation is so profoundly different than trying to join a club. It’s more like being part of a family. What you’re asserting is, to give you another metaphor, saying that if your mom doesn’t like how you live, and everyone else did…she should leave and become someone else’s mother.

lbwhite89's avatar

@seazen I was actually being a little bit sarcastic. I’m not a fan of the term “gays”. Do people call heterosexuals “straights”? Not so much. I just don’t like it.

iamthemob's avatar

@lbwhite89 – see, at the same time, I cringe a bit at heterosexual and homosexual – they sound like conditions, not identities.

absalom's avatar

It’s like people just say things without thinking about them.

If you’re going to do something as stupid as compare a vaguely defined cohort like ‘the Left’ to individuals behind historical genocides, then you’re going to have to explain yourself. The Left can justify anything? What does that statement justify? It communicates nothing, it means nothing, it justifies nothing. Perhaps the author of that statement should begin to practice the ‘justification’ he’s disparaging, because I certainly can’t find it in his ridiculous comparisons.

I mean: Do people read their own responses anymore?

This has nothing to do with political correctness. This is about civil rights.

I can’t believe how irresponsible and lazy people are with their words. Are you as intellectually indolent as your responses here indicate? Are you really going to compare something like gay rights to Pol Pot’s atrocities and then just leave it at that without thinking any further? I am immensely interested in what kind of half-brain produces that kind of half-thought. Could this be self-parody, could anyone say that seriously?

Where, exactly, does this false or specious justification for gay rights occur? If you’re going to call it that then you’d damn well better explain it. Are you capable? Is there any substance behind that thought, or has it just floated through your head and distracted you for a moment?

All these propositions are operating on presumptions. All these people are operating on presumptions.

@anonini

I can see that you don’t understand my view no matter what I say, so I am not going to argue with those who cannot open their minds anymore.

This is lazy; you are withdrawing because you cannot justify your ridiculous views. People don’t understand your views ‘no matter what you say’ because you are essentially saying nothing. Nothing meaningful, anyway. Nothing that’s supported by thought or deliberation.

It has nothing to do with open minds, and if you say that people just can’t ‘understand’ you and that it’s not worth arguing, then you are the one guilty of closing the door of his own mind against the people who are only trying to understand it. (Do you hear the door slamming now and echoing in the hollow space of your head?)

You have said things and then copped out when asked to explain or justify them. You began with saying that gay people should just accept inequality lest some other group have to suffer after them. I’ve been at Fluther for over a year and now and this is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever seen here. You cannot get rid of inequality by promoting inequality.

Then you called homosexuality unnatural. That was also debunked by subsequent responses.

Then you called it a mental disorder. Someone cited the APA and debunked that.

Then you said to ‘forget the mental disorder for now’ because you were then incapable of arguing that point, and said that allowing gays their rights would achieve nothing.

Then people pointed out the obvious that you seemed to have missed (which is at this point unsurprising): that gays benefit from gay rights.

Then you adopted this pseudo-Randian bullshit view that gays are somehow infringing on your rights by asking for their rights, and you made a bunch of inane comparisons to cell phones in school and book clubs or something. (People are not books; if you ignore them they can feel it.)

Then you said that we should not attempt to make people happy because not everyone can be made happy. This to me sounds like the position of someone perpetually happy in his ignorance of intolerance, in his proud normalcy.

Now, without having justified any of your statements and faced with further contention from more intelligent and better informed people, you have resigned to silence and elected to accuse others of having closed their minds, as if they are somehow avoiding the validity of your argument. I don’t think anyone’s closed his mind here, not really, except perhaps to prevent the bullshit in your posts from polluting it.

My mind is open, though, as I’m sure most minds are here. In fact we’re asking you to speak, to qualify your claims, because you’ve yet to really say anything sensible. To quote someone, ‘You’re all noise and no signal.’

Please, help us to parse one from the other.

iamthemob's avatar

@absalom – Best…summation…ever.

plethora's avatar

@absalom This has nothing to do with political correctness. This is about civil rights.

Bullshit

DominicX's avatar

Isn’t it interesting how conservatives view the very concept of homosexuals wanting to be treated the same as everyone else and receive the same rights as “political correctness”?

Because of course, treating gay people as fellow human beings is some phony facade like political correctness, it shouldn’t just be default.

iamthemob's avatar

@plethora – How is that bullshit? How is it about PC and not civil rights? How are you defining both, and where is your support?

lbwhite89's avatar

@iamthemob People are people, and labels shouldn’t identify us. To me, when people say “the gays” it sounds as if there’s a negative connotation to it. Like it’s a disease or something. I just picture an old lady crinkling her nose in disgust as she says it. Heterosexual and homosexual are politically correct terms that no one should take offense to. However, whether it’s gay/straight or heterosexual/homosexual, they’re both labels. And, unfortunately, we must live with them.

I have no problem with the word gay. As in, “He/She is gay and/or gay men/women.” It’s just the specific turn “the gays” that bothers me. As if they aren’t the same as anyone else.

seazen's avatar

Dom is an openly Gay man. He calls himself Gay. The petition mentioned Gays – what else should I call them? I don’t mind being labeled Straight” if the conversation calls for sexual orientation – I don’t walk around with a sign, and I don’t yell at men “Hey, Gay” or Homo or Queer for that matter. But if you have to identify a Black man as the “robber”, or just the person next door – true, he is just a person, but what can we do but say a woman is tall and blonde, a man is short and white, the boy is Gay – I’m a Jew and swing both ways.

Who cares? It’s the tone and what’s behind the (written, in this case) words that is important. And I did ask the question.

@lbwhite: You don’t mind Gay but you don’t like the plural?

lbwhite89's avatar

I’m also confused at why the word gay is being intentionally capitalized here. It’s not a proper noun.

seazen's avatar

Now bored.

ZEN OUT

lbwhite89's avatar

@seazen Again, I simply don’t like the phrase “the gays”. I don’t see why that’s so hard to comprehend after I already explained why.

DominicX's avatar

For the record, I, as a gay person, don’t mind the phrase. :\

seazen's avatar

^^ Thanks.

Edit: @newbie89 Enjoy You get the last word.

lbwhite89's avatar

@DominicX I didn’t say that gay people found that phrase offensive. I didn’t even say that I found the phrase offensive. I just said that I didn’t like it.

@seazen Real mature.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
iamthemob's avatar

@lbwhite89 – I completely get why you don’t like it – and I feel like part of the reason why I like it and you don’t might be the same….It just seems so old fashioned, and coupled with old ideas about “those types.”

But I kind of love it because of that – it’s all old-timey…

Now, in terms of the OP issue – I think that having identifying terms does serve to generalize a group, but, as noted by the fact that there’s a petition for a cultural minority recognition, it also can help outline a shared experience.

Using the terms to help show how we’re different can be helpful as long as we don’t rely on the term as describing particular beliefs the person has, etc., by necessity. It is productive when it helps show what factors may have influenced one’s perspective.

On that level – I don’t really like “queer” – but if I’m forced to get into deep identity politics, I think it’s the best term we have right now that’s not an acronym.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
crisw's avatar

@anonini

“I am completely normal, therefore once I am discriminated it wont matter, because EVERYONE will be in danger.”

“They came first for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

Martin Niemöller

anonini's avatar

@absalom thank you. This is the kind of response I was looking for. In order to improve myself I had to see what was wrong, but being somewhat egotistical I could not. By telling me how I act when proven wrong in such an arguement/debate, I will be able to better myself.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
ETpro's avatar

@plethora Perhaps you had better look up bestiality while you are in the dictionary consulting mode. It is not a place holder. It is a specific criminal act, and it is criminalized because animals cannot consent to sex. If you want right-wing politics to be superior to left wing, claiming that right wingers recognize that rape is perfectly OK is a very poor way to sell that idea.

I find your list of left wing “politically correct approved behaviors” insulting and ridiculously wrong. The Nazis were a far right movement. You will find ZERO approval of Fascism and Nazism in today’s left. Here are 14 tenets of Fascistic right-wing thought. Try them on for fit:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism
5. Rampant sexism
6. A controlled mass media
7. Obsession with national security
8. Religion and government are intertwined
9. Power of corporations protected
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts
12. Obsession with crime and punishment
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption
14. Fraudulent elections.

tinyfaery's avatar

@ETpro That reeks of something else, don’t a think?

ETpro's avatar

@psychocandy Yes, I recognize the signs of fascism rearing its ugly head again in American politics. “When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”—Sinclair Lewis. @plethora claiming that non-consensual sexual advances are just fine and that all liberals defend Nazis and Communists (pretty weird, since the two were avowed enemies) seems to me to be pretty deep into that 14-point playbook.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Oh yeah, @seazen, remind me again why I have to waste my breath on a thread that brings out so much deep-seated hatred. Nothing against your question, though the ‘CA gays’ don’t speak for me, but I am disgusted, as usual, by some of the responses above and don’t feel like engaging homophobes. @iamthemob made good points that I agree with and bless his heart for having the energy to bother.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
seazen's avatar

:-) Oy. Yeah.

spykenij's avatar

@anonini – You said:

”@breedmitch That’s exactly what will happen should we give the gays their rights. They don’t deserve rights because what they want is not natural. And for the record, being a “backwater bigot” is not a mental disorder, that is a lack of education, therefore irrelivant to the arguement. So if you cannot find some other reason why I am not right, then I am afraid that you have no more say in the matter.

If it is so unnatural, why do animals IN nature do it? If I don’t deserve my rights than you don’t deserve the tax money that a shit ton of gay people pay out of their pockets for you over-breeding straight people popping out more babies! We clean up neighborhoods, we vote FOR your f’n kids after school programs and levies and we pay more for health insurance when you pop out more kids at work… The world need so, so very many less people like you! If this is so unnatural, why did I know I was GAY AT 4 YRS OLD?!?!? I NEVER heard about gays, didn’t know any, so YOU, with all this expertise you seem to think you have on sub-cultures, mental issues…and whatever other licenses you pretend to hold – TELL ME WHY I KNEW I WAS GAY AT 4 YRS OLD? Tell me. Answer me that. You tell me how I learned it when I never saw it or heard of it. You rape my culture out of our tax money for your own benefits and spit on us when we do for you what more than half of your own kind won’t even do for themselves. YOU DON’T DESERVE TO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY, if I don’t deserve my rights, especially after paying taxes for fucking breeders’ kids’ shit. Ever hear of the right to the persuit of your own happiness, freedom to believe or not believe in religion as you so choose, separation of church and state…??? I don’t want kids because I don’t want to hear them. Does that mean, since I believe that MOST people shouldn’t have kids and I hate hearing them, I can tell them they don’t deserve to talk because they’re too stupid to have a real, in depth conversation? That’d go over just as well as any of your posts above. Your comments are offensive, un-American and you should probably move somewhere, like the Middle East, where they obviously share your ideals.

If you remove this post, I demand you remove all of anonini’s hateful rhetoric!

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther