The Gay Rights Movement is a
civil rights movement. A civil rights movement, as its name suggests, is a
movement that strives to establish civil rights for a group of people
previously deprived of such. The Gay Rights Movement (GRM) has been a controversial
social issue, picking up steam especially during the latter 1950 .
Often people compare the GRM
to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s through which African Americans
gained legal equality.
People compare different elements
from each of the movements via largely popular stock arguments that claim each
group was a minority deprived of basic rights by the majority. I argue that
general comparison of both movements based upon these arguments oversimplifies
the complexity and individuality of the Civil Rights Movement, therefore
rendering the argument null. This blog post will give three supporting reasons
for my argument.
Firstly is the invisibility factor. Yes, invisibility
–as in Harry Potter’s invisibility cloak that conceals anything it touches.
People in the LGBTQ community are invisible to the naked eye: they look no
different than any other person. Most African Americans, on the other hand,
have a naturally darker pigmentation thereby making them readily identifiable
and subsequently, easy targets for abuse.
Secondly is the violence factor. The years of violence
that African Americans have endured/are enduring is incomparable. In 2011,thirty fatally violent anti-gay crimes were committed. Thirty fatal instances is no insignificant sum,
but pales in comparison to African American fatalities: there were "2805[documented] victims of lynch mobs killed between 1882 and 1930 in ten southernstates.” It cannot be forgotten
that a lot of lynching was undocumented. Besides lynching, often when blacks
would peacefully protest for their rights, they were met with harsh
violence.
For example, during the
Birmingham campaign, blacks peacefully gathered and protested segregation.
Eugene “Bull” Connor, head of the Birmingham Police Department ordered for the
use of high-pressure water hose and attack dogs to disperse the blacks on the
street. Gay people been violently targeted by units of the government.
The third factor is intensity. This is an obscure factor
that is not easily defined, but can be readily observed. Gay people have never
been denied service at restaurants or movie theaters. This is not to say that
gay people have never been marginalized, however the extent to which they were
marginalized does not compare to that of African Americans.
I bring up these points not
to underhandedly argue that one movement was more significant than any other.
Whether it is thousands of fatalities over the history of America or one
anti-gay hate-crime, the number of these types of incidents will always be too
high. I raise these points to shine light on the individuality of each
movement. Due to the several factors I presented (invisibility, violence, and intensity) I believe that a comparison
between the GRM and the Civil Rights movement should not be given much
validity. I’d be interested to see if anyone reading this could refute these
points or bring a new perspective to the table.
Arnold, I agree with the points that you list. The two movements are very different and I think the comparison can be unproductive. Both movements face drastically different issues (including different stereotypes, violence, the ways in which the groups were/are discriminated against, etc.). Adopting the strategies from the Civil Rights Movement for the Gay Rights Movement (at least without adaptation) would be ineffective, which is why I think it’s important to be mindful of the differences.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think the most common point between the movements is the issue of marriage. A lot of people liken the struggle for the legalization of interracial marriage to that of same-sex marriage, which, in my experience, is where a lot of further comparisons begin. Both kinds of marriages push for state recognition of “nontraditional” couples:
“Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man’ fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.” (Loving v. Virginia, 1967)
I think a lot of the same principles in this court decision are cited by Gay Rights activists. To me, that makes sense – a lot of the arguments seem analogous. The movements themselves might not be very similar, but it’d be interesting to hear some perspectives on how the marriage issue might relate.
This post brings up a lot of really interesting points that I think are important to consider as we continue to analyze both the GRM and The Civil Rights Movement. Take the invisibility principle for example. Because being gay isn't visible the way being African-American is, people can assert that a person isn't born gay and that they've chosen this sexual preference. Conversely, African-Americans couldn't hide their identities from their oppressors, so "conversion" or "passing" have never been options for them when trying to escape discrimination.
ReplyDeleteWhile the movements are definitely very different and we should by no means treat them like they're identical, I'll say one thing (kind of) in contention to your post. There is a significant reason that I think people value comparisons between the Civil Rights Movement and the Gay Rights Movement: The CRM strikes a chord in so many American people that it's almost gained a kind of "shock factor." By this I mean that people in today's society have largely accepted that denying basic human rights to Black Americans in the past was obviously unconstitutional and unethical, and many Americans believe nothing like that would ever/could ever happen again because we have ethically advanced so far.
Likening the CRM to the GRM often opens people's eyes to the fact that we are, indeed, denying these same basic rights to other humans today (marriage, like Sara pointed out, is usually considered a basic human right). I think this makes it easier for people to recognize that gay people are suffering, since much of their struggle is much less visible than that of African Americans in the past. Comparing the two movements in this way may not be such a bad thing, then; in my opinion, the fundamental injustices that the two groups have both experienced shouldn't be treated differently. Maybe distinguishing between the two movements too much will help to further justify gay discrimination by making it seem "not as bad" as the atrocious oppression historically faced by African-Americans.