I find this article to be extremely concerning. It paints "mainstream gay and lesbian culture" as mercenary, regressive and right-wing. The thesis seems to be supported by naming a few particular wealthy individuals who are themselves gay/lesbian - I hope I don't need to tell readers here that this does not constitute a defence, so much as an attack. Indeed the entire article seems to be positioned as if every fault that America currently has is down to the people who supported and fought for gay marriage.
I hope that the editorial team at Current Affairs are not under the impression that supporting free speech is akin to printing anything that anyone wants to say - in this case such an outpouring of vitriolic unkindness and bigotry might have been better confined to the dustbin.
To respond to everything in this that I found either intellectually or personally offensive would be exhausting.
Gay marriage doesn't fit neatly into left/right ideological politics and the author's core complaint is that the supporters of gay marriage aren't sufficiently leftist.
The claim that the only people benefitting from the overturn of doma were/are the wealthy is patently absurd and factually false. The claim that the push for marriage caused harm by diverting resources from community health causes is also ridiculous. The disregard for gay families with children is palpable.
The core argument is no different than an extreme conservative libertarian argument that gay marriage shouldn't be supported because marriage shouldn't be the concern of the state. The near or medium term possibility of a socialist or libertarian utopia us zero. The harms of lack of access to the social institutions that do exist are real. Describing gaining access to those existing social structures as actively harmful because it doesn't suit your hard left ideology is gross.
The ability for people to marry, regardless of their sexuality, is symbolically important IMO even if marriage is not a major gay issue.
This article reads like the author is mad that people are losing focus of LGBTQ+ issues. But isn't that part of what it means to move toward equality? Sometimes it feels like minorities want equality, but then when things start moving in that direction, they also want to keep focusing on their unique differences and issues. Seems hard to do both.
5 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 27.5 ms ] threadI hope that the editorial team at Current Affairs are not under the impression that supporting free speech is akin to printing anything that anyone wants to say - in this case such an outpouring of vitriolic unkindness and bigotry might have been better confined to the dustbin.
https://twitter.com/lyta_gold/status/1428011761635143681?s=1...
Let the reader understand.
Gay marriage doesn't fit neatly into left/right ideological politics and the author's core complaint is that the supporters of gay marriage aren't sufficiently leftist.
The claim that the only people benefitting from the overturn of doma were/are the wealthy is patently absurd and factually false. The claim that the push for marriage caused harm by diverting resources from community health causes is also ridiculous. The disregard for gay families with children is palpable.
The core argument is no different than an extreme conservative libertarian argument that gay marriage shouldn't be supported because marriage shouldn't be the concern of the state. The near or medium term possibility of a socialist or libertarian utopia us zero. The harms of lack of access to the social institutions that do exist are real. Describing gaining access to those existing social structures as actively harmful because it doesn't suit your hard left ideology is gross.
"We're coming for your children, we're coming for them"
You lost...forever.
This article reads like the author is mad that people are losing focus of LGBTQ+ issues. But isn't that part of what it means to move toward equality? Sometimes it feels like minorities want equality, but then when things start moving in that direction, they also want to keep focusing on their unique differences and issues. Seems hard to do both.