If the LGBT movement is the same as civil rights, why didn't it get resolved then?

[Super_Lantern]

This is a question about culture. Not sure if this is the best place to discuss this question. So I understand if this needs to be moved



This LGBT movement and push to redefine what a family is, it is being compared to a modern-day civil rights fight equal to what minorities and America saw in the 50s/60s. People always equate the two.


If they are so similar, when American society was reassessing rights and culture, why wasn't this LGBT stuff cleared up then?

If it is the exact same thing?


Why did it take you bleeding heart liberals till 10 years ago to start fighting this issue/caring about this issue?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What do you mean by "exactly" the same?


.

 

[Super_Lantern]

What do you mean by "exactly" the same?


.

A group of people being discriminated for a way they are born and not being privy to the same rights as the majority. LGBT advocates always say today's LGBT movement is the exact same thing as the civil-rights movement for minorities in America during the 60s

So if it's the exact same thing, why wasn't it resolved then?


Why do more people claim LGBT today than they did back then if this is so clearly something people are born with?

 

[Dutch]

Easy, most people did not talk about sex in the 50s and 60's. Hell, it was a scandal when a married couple on a sitcom slept in the same bed. If you wanted to see boobs you had to read National Geographic. Younger people started rebelling against the norm in the mid 60s' and early seventies, but homosexuality was still taboo. Societal norms change. Always have, always will, and mostly they change towards more acceptance. In the Victorian era it was shamefull for a woman to show you her ankle. Think about it.

 

[Super_Lantern]

Easy, most people did not talk about sex in the 50s and 60's. Hell, it was a scandal when a married couple on a sitcom slept in the same bed. If you wanted to see boobs you had to read National Geographic. Younger people started rebelling against the norm in the mid 60s' and early seventies, but homosexuality was still taboo. Societal norms change. Always have, always will, and mostly they change towards more acceptance. In the Victorian era it was shamefull for a woman to show you her ankle. Think about it.

But if you're born gay and it's been that way since humans came to be, how could societal norms put this lifestyle away for so long? It would be like trying to put away heterosexuality due to a societal norm focus. You can't do that. Straight people want their straight sex. Gay people want their gay sex

So for the 1000s of years of recorded history, since it's such a natural thing and a good percentage of people are born lgbt, why did homosexual activity ever become seen as different? It's the "same love" after all isn't it?

 

[nodoginnafight]

This is a question about culture. Not sure if this is the best place to discuss this question. So I understand if this needs to be moved



This LGBT movement and push to redefine what a family is, it is being compared to a modern-day civil rights fight equal to what minorities and America saw in the 50s/60s. People always equate the two.


If they are so similar, when American society was reassessing rights and culture, why wasn't this LGBT stuff cleared up then?

If it is the exact same thing?


Why did it take you bleeding heart liberals till 10 years ago to start fighting this issue/caring about this issue?

You've hit upon an important (imho) question. What goes into becoming a protected class? Just political clout? Numbers to sway elections? Or an honest attempt at "liberty and justice for ALL"???

 

[Nyvin]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

 

[g5000]

This is a question about culture. Not sure if this is the best place to discuss this question. So I understand if this needs to be moved



This LGBT movement and push to redefine what a family is, it is being compared to a modern-day civil rights fight equal to what minorities and America saw in the 50s/60s. People always equate the two.


If they are so similar, when American society was reassessing rights and culture, why wasn't this LGBT stuff cleared up then?

If it is the exact same thing?


Why did it take you bleeding heart liberals till 10 years ago to start fighting this issue/caring about this issue?

Why weren't civil rights for blacks all cleared up when women were given the vote? Why did it take you bleeding heart liberals until the 1950s to start caring about negroes?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

That and their numbers are between only 1.0% of the population and 5% depending on where you look. That number would've been much lower in the 60's when it was much more taboo. They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

 

[Dutch]

Easy, most people did not talk about sex in the 50s and 60's. Hell, it was a scandal when a married couple on a sitcom slept in the same bed. If you wanted to see boobs you had to read National Geographic. Younger people started rebelling against the norm in the mid 60s' and early seventies, but homosexuality was still taboo. Societal norms change. Always have, always will, and mostly they change towards more acceptance. In the Victorian era it was shamefull for a woman to show you her ankle. Think about it.

But if you're born gay and it's been that way since humans came to be, how could societal norms put this lifestyle away for so long? It would be like trying to put away heterosexuality due to a societal norm focus. You can't do that. Straight people want their straight sex. Gay people want their gay sex

So for the 1000s of years of recorded history, since it's such a natural thing and a good percentage of people are born lgbt, why did homosexual activity ever become seen as different? It's the "same love" after all isn't it?

Ancient Greeks and Romans pretty much accepted it as a normal behavoir. Greek soldiers often had a young men carry their gear and provide "companionship" during their campaign season.

 

[g5000]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

That and their numbers are between only 1.0% of the population and 5% depending on where you look. That number would've been much lower in the 60's when it was much more taboo. They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

Which makes me wonder...if gays boycotted buses, would anyone notice?

 

[bodecea]

This is a question about culture. Not sure if this is the best place to discuss this question. So I understand if this needs to be moved



This LGBT movement and push to redefine what a family is, it is being compared to a modern-day civil rights fight equal to what minorities and America saw in the 50s/60s. People always equate the two.


If they are so similar, when American society was reassessing rights and culture, why wasn't this LGBT stuff cleared up then?

If it is the exact same thing?


Why did it take you bleeding heart liberals till 10 years ago to start fighting this issue/caring about this issue?

Are you making the assertion that civil rights (as in the 50s and 60s) has been completely "cleared up"?

 

[nodoginnafight]

They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

So becoming a protected class is based on political clout?

Doesn't bode well for the anti-abortion fight. How much political clout does a fetus have?

 

[Jarhead]

Simple answer to a complicated question....

It wasn't politically expedient until now.

 

[bodecea]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

That and their numbers are between only 1.0% of the population and 5% depending on where you look. That number would've been much lower in the 60's when it was much more taboo. They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

Which makes me wonder...if gays boycotted buses, would anyone notice?

Mary...pul-leeze! Why ride a bus when we've got Beamers.

 

[g5000]

Easy, most people did not talk about sex in the 50s and 60's. Hell, it was a scandal when a married couple on a sitcom slept in the same bed. If you wanted to see boobs you had to read National Geographic. Younger people started rebelling against the norm in the mid 60s' and early seventies, but homosexuality was still taboo. Societal norms change. Always have, always will, and mostly they change towards more acceptance. In the Victorian era it was shamefull for a woman to show you her ankle. Think about it.

But if you're born gay and it's been that way since humans came to be, how could societal norms put this lifestyle away for so long? It would be like trying to put away heterosexuality due to a societal norm focus. You can't do that. Straight people want their straight sex. Gay people want their gay sex

So for the 1000s of years of recorded history, since it's such a natural thing and a good percentage of people are born lgbt, why did homosexual activity ever become seen as different? It's the "same love" after all isn't it?

America has been uptight about sex all the way back to the Puritans. It isn't just gay sex that is seen as different. Anything outside of the missionary position was considered abberant behavior. Oral sex, anal sex, a little bondage...fuggedaboutit!



Dancing? That could earn you some time in the stocks back in the day.

 

[Jarhead]

They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

So becoming a protected class is based on political clout?

Doesn't bode well for the anti-abortion fight. How much political clout does a fetus have?

the anti abortion fight has already been lost.

 

[Dutch]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

That and their numbers are between only 1.0% of the population and 5% depending on where you look. That number would've been much lower in the 60's when it was much more taboo. They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

Which makes me wonder...if gays boycotted buses, would anyone notice?

Maybe flower shops. I kid, I kid ......

 

[TheOldSchool]

Society becomes accepting of different things at different times. Kinda like how blacks got the right to vote about 50 years before women did, even though it pretty much was the exact same thing too.

That and their numbers are between only 1.0% of the population and 5% depending on where you look. That number would've been much lower in the 60's when it was much more taboo. They're obviously not exactly the most powerful force in politics though they're slowly winning their fight.

Which makes me wonder...if gays boycotted buses, would anyone notice?

Probably as many people would notice as noticed the underground gay railroad

 

[nodoginnafight]

Dancing? That could earn you some time in the stocks back in the day.

That's exactly why Baptists don't have sex standing up.

They're afraid someone will think they're dancing.