hey i was reading your article and you made some pretty interesting points but where i was a little counter oppressive was where you said that gays can choose to be hetero. and you know what you are completely right but the gay person would not be comfortable with doing that only because society wants to. without any offense to you or the rest of the "black" community, it almost like saying colored people can choose to be "white." there are procedures to change ones skin tone, but you see question is would you do it only because of social constructs?

I had a conversation with a fellow college student who's lesbian, she told me that her professor that happens to be black, was making odd remarks about gays. Everyone knows she's the only gay female in the classroom she was mad about it and debated with him about his remarks. He simply said that he has gay friends so it's ok he's just joking. She asked me how could she have a meeting with his employers, so he'll be made not to insult her or anyone that's gay again. She also ranted that how would he like it if she made black jokes about him and she's going to make that question before him and his bosses.

I stopped her right there, I said she'll lose that fight, when she said why I laid it out for to understand easily. I told here that you can't bring 500 years of oppression from one race to use as a weapon, it'll backfire, gay or straight you can pick or choose who you want to have sex with. Either by dating, meeting or payment sex has no colorlines, only the person of color does and here's a great analogy I used I said if we were walking down the street towards a group of people of other races and there are no blacks, I'm the only black person there then I asked her how can these people know if you're gay she thought for a moment then replied, I have to tell them I said I can't tell you that I'm black...that's the real prejudice. I told her to tell the teacher's bosses privately what happen and if it happens again you will get the LGBT community after the college and it'll make great news on CNN, FOX, MTV, ABCNEWS, NBC, etc. Let them know how much negativity is being brought on gay students in an Art school that has LGBT support sessions every quarter, it'll blow up in their faces and you didn't use the race factor. I don't know what happened after our discussion but hopefully she came out on top.

Just like Michael Jackson chose to bleach his skin, gay men can choose to have sex with women. Does Michael Jackson's skin "condition" mean that his genetics will create male babies that look like deformed white women? No. Does a gay man having sex with a woman mean that he won't be attracted to men anymore, and develop a desire to play with vaginas? No.
Its like you said, being a straight black woman doesn't make you an authority on white gay men (or any other minority group apparently). So why don't you just shut your trap, or at least read a few articles for publishing your own on topic you know nothing about.

Hey. Who said "gay" was the new "black"? I'm a black lesbian female. I have three kinds of discrimination coming at me. But I do equate being lesbian and being black as similar. For me, I was born female. I was born black. And I was born gay.

This who "gay" as the new "black" thing I think you're referring to is some Central Michigan culture thing, so I wish this article was better articulated.

While I agree that blacks experienced much more discrimination, I completely disagree with this statement...

"I cannot change myself from being black to another ethnicity while, with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual."

Um...gays can't choose to become heterosexual and I find it extremely offensive that you would imply that. Being gay isn't a choice. This whole sentence should have been completely taken out of the article. If it had been, you would have had a much stronger argument. Know I question your sincerity about this issue.

Please add my name to the long list of others who have decried this drivel. I am truly appalled at the total lack of journalistic integrity as well as editorial oversight here; a very cursory amount of research in any decent library would have yielded this author with enough material to know that same-sex attraction cannot be changed or redirected. It is not, and never was, a choice.

I totally agree with Sherri on this issue. For those like Daniel who erroneously believe: “We all saw Michael Jackson change from a black man into a white man.” How can you actually believe that? In fact what we all witnessed was an African American man’s skin become lighter. Michael Jackson remained African American until the day he died.

Lightening the skin does NOT change ones ethnicity! And by the way, gays can remain in the closet until they choose to come out, African Americans cannot. So gay is not and never will be the new Black.

There are countless people who have chosen to leave the gay lifestyle and now live heterosexual lives.

This was not the caustic article some have tried to make it out to be.

Interesting debate here, but let me chime in if I may. First of all, there will never be “A New Black.” The Black experience is a unique experience with its own personal history and struggles. Yes there are commonalities amongs the plight of all those oppressed, but these experiences are not equal and it is offensive and naive to imply they are. I don’t know very many people denied loans because they were gay. I don’t know many property deeds that state in writing “not to be sold to gays.” You can lie about being gay, not true for most Blacks I know. If gays are so eager to pick a minority group to identify with, try the Republicans. If Gay is the new Black, then Republican is the new Gay. Excellent Article!

Interesting debate here, but let me chime in if I may. First of all, there will never be "A New Black." The Black experience is a unique experience with its own personal history and struggles. Yes there are commonalities amongs the plight of all those oppressed, but these experiences are not equal and it is offensive and naive to imply they are. I don't know very many people denied loans because they were gay. I don't know many property deeds that state in writing "not to be sold to coloreds." You can lie about being gay, not true for most Blacks I know. If gays are so eager to pick a minority group to identify with, try the Republicans. If Gay is the new Black, then Republican is the new Gay. Excellent Article!

I totally agree with Sherri on this issue. For those like Daniel who erroneously believe: "We all saw Michael Jackson change from a black man into a white man." What a completely ignorant statement. What we all witnessed was an African American man's skin become lighter. Michael Jackson still remained African American until the day he died.

Lightening the skin does NOT change ones ethnicity! And by the way, gays can remain in the closet until they choose to come out, African Americans cannot. So gay is not and never will be the new Black.

There are countless people who have chosen to leave the gay lifestyle and now live heterosexual lives. With God ANYTHING is possible.

This was not the caustic article some have tried to make it out to be.

Intense responses.

Maybe saying "choose" was the wrong word--I think a fairer comparison would be that if you are black, for the most part, people *know* you're black without having to know you, thus making it "easier" to discriminate. Laws/treatment that are unfair to LGBTQ are so are based more on action/perceived action (and the "morality" of said actions) versus literally saying, "Hey, that person's skin is pretty dark."

I'm not going to compare which treatment is worse (as both groups, historically, have gotten a raw deal), but I do think it's fair to say that a comparison between a reaction based solely on race (which then dives into deeper psychological issues) and one based on sexual orientation (which is sheer physic) is unfair.

>>i’m gay. i’m latino. i’m adopted. and i’m under five foot five.

Why, exactly, do these features qualify you for special treatment in twenty-first century America? Good golly, Miss Molly, this country is obsessed with entitlement.

"Human rights" as enforced by who? The United Nations? They have zero authority over any person or nation, let alone legislating the pleasant-sounding, yet empty phrase of "human rights."

LGBTs saying that they deserve rights because LGBT-affiliated or funded think-tank organizations create statistics and reports saying LGBTs deserve equal marriage is circular reasoning.

Lisa: Think on what you just said for a moment. Do you really *decide* who to be attracted to, or do you find them attractive (or repulsive) automatically whether you want to or not?

Choosing a sexuality most definitely is possible we all have preference as to whom we think is a attractive so not whether that is male, female, tall, short and so on....therefore the is a choice!!

Gay isn't the new black - blacks have it MUCH BETTER than gays do and should stop whining so much. America elected a black man as President, gays can't even get basic rights, think about it. Gay is the old black, blacks are doing quite fine these days.

First, of all, I am disappointed that the writer spends her time criticizing an over-generalization of a statement, rather than delving deep into this fascinating topic.

But most importantly, ma'am, you missed the most important fact here. The reason gay and black are the same? Lynchings. I am tired of watchign my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters swinging from fences, trees, and nooses.

Just as I am tired of hearing the same thing about my brothers and sisters of African descent.

Now, straight Sherry, stop worrying about an anguished people mis-speaking as they confront the terror and hatred of being a persecuted minority in a harsh world...and open your heart and realize that your pain isn't the only pain in the world.

Or put it another way...go tell Matthew Shepart that his story doesn't mean as much to you as James Byrd's does.

so sad that an intelligent woman in these united states would have such a backward and misguided perspective on queer people in the world.

it just goes to show the ignorance people still have about us "gays".

and of course highlights the successful brainwashing ms. keaton has received that has led her to conclude that humans are not humans. humans are populations and races and species that need divisions between one another in order to make sense of their world.

i'm gay. i'm latino. i'm adopted. and i'm under five foot five. but most of all i'm a human and human rights are everyone's rights. i hope ms. keaton can understand that.

Of course ethnicity and sexuality aren't the same thing. As far as I know, no one has ever tried to argue that they are. But in some (not all) ways they're analogous. And, while I'll readily believe racial discrimination has historically been worse, at least you never had to worry about whether your family would reject you if they ever found out that you are a black woman.

There are arguments to make against using the phrase "gay is the new black," but Ms. Keaton chose to rely on ignorance instead.

Gregory,

Since you seem to like U.S. documents and how they form laws in our country, I hope you consider that the Declaration of Independence details that every person deserves certain unalienable rights which include "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I hope you consider this in your thoughts of why people deserve rights regardless and if current laws deny this from people, then why shouldn't they be changed?

>"I cannot change myself from being black to another ethnicity while, with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual,"

A small percentage of African Americans have skin light enough to pass as white. Because of that small percentage, I don't think there are any civil rights concerns for blacks as a whole.

Come on. Your lack of logic is truly astounding.

Sherri, your column is quite offensive. Many people have already chimed in, but I wanted to make it clear--I chose to be gay about as much as you chose to be black. Anything you read about being able to "chose" is a fabrication. Civil rights are the topic, and the point of the "Gay is the new black" that has been running around the media is to say both groups have/are treated unfairly. Why not focus on the issue instead of discussing who has been treated worse? I'd say both groups have gone through their fair share.

>>To Gregory: Why should they have to prove they deserve something that they should already have?

Nothing can be said in opposition to the above pre-determined statement, as the above is expressed in an ironically inflexible way.

>>We as heterosexuals have never had to prove that we have a right to marry someone of the opposite sex.

That is because the millennial old institution is designed to protect and propagate the state while advancing society/civilization.

>>Why should LGBTs be denied something that another group is automatically entitled to?

They are denied because it is not expressly guaranteed in the US Constitution, and subsequently, the Bill of Rights.

>>Discrimination laws are not meant so much to guarantee rights but to ensure one group is not given preferential treatment or rights over another.

With that being said, would you allow polygamy to be legal, so that Mormons and Muslims will be allowed to have multiple wives and marriages as defined by their respective religions?

>>There are studies on differences in specific brain areas that show LGBTs are born with their sexual orientation and homosexuality is even found on a regular basis in the animal kingdom.

That's understandable; however, extreme parts do not determine the whole.

>>What kind of proof do you need to have in order to believe it is not okay to deny rights to a minority while giving them to the majority?

Rational, non-hysterical legislation founded in logic with practical applications. Thus far, LGBT advocacy has bordered on melodrama rather than reason.

>>Also, why do you think it’s okay for the general public, which is mostly heterosexual, to vote on whether this minority group should be given rights?

Because this is a free democratic-republic wherein the people decide laws, whether some groups agree or disagree. The subversion of one group's opinion in favor another (in this case, LGBT advocates) is, paradoxically, as intolerant as the opinions LGBT advocates claim to fight.

>>Just based on the numbers of the majority versus the minority more often than not this vote will not be passed.

Then that's how the people will speak. What I find amusing is that LGBT advocates proclaim how wonderful the polls are when events go their way, yet decry the same system when they don't get what they want. "Hypocrisy From Democracy"

>>This matter should be decided by the US Supreme Court and those individuals need to leave any religious bias out of their decision and make it purely based on scientific fact.

I never, ever stated that I based my opinion on ecclesiastical arguments. The above statement is phrased in such a way to assume that I am speaking from that point of view. Beyond vague "facts," no hard data has been presented on the part of LGBT advocates as to why they deserve new preferential treatment.

To Gregory: Why should they have to prove they deserve something that they should already have? We as heterosexuals have never had to prove that we have a right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Why should LGBTs be denied something that another group is automatically entitled to? Discrimination laws are not meant so much to guarantee rights but to ensure one group is not given preferential treatment or rights over another.

There are studies on differences in specific brain areas that show LGBTs are born with their sexual orientation and homosexuality is even found on a regular basis in the animal kingdom. What kind of proof do you need to have in order to believe it is not okay to deny rights to a minority while giving them to the majority? Also, why do you think it's okay for the general public, which is mostly heterosexual, to vote on whether this minority group should be given rights? Just based on the numbers of the majority versus the minority more often than not this vote will not be passed. This matter should be decided by the US Supreme Court and those individuals need to leave any religious bias out of their decision and make it purely based on scientific fact.

"Redefining morality? Whose morality? You cannot be taken seriously if you’re suggesting that there is a *single* morality on earth, in a country, or even in a community."

Neither was I suggesting that in the slightest. I stated this because I feel that LGBT advocates are attempting to redefine what is socially acceptable and what is not socially acceptable for the whole of American society. I am not offended by LGBTs; I am offended by the arrogance of intending to force others to embrace LGBTs by sheer legislative force.

>>"Same-sex marriage is specifically *forbidden* in many states, gay couples are *forbidden* to adopt in many states, and gays are *forbidden* to serve openly in the military."

Beyond the condescension of the previously posted remarks, that's a states-rights issue. Advocates can either attempt to ram through federal legislation and fail across the board, or attempt to change state-level law, win and build up support for a larger movement. Frankly, I would go with the latter of the two options to refine what works and what doesn't work in the approach to adopting new LGBT legislation.

>>"When you say something confused and offensive like “Frankly, I do not feel that LGBT’s automatically deserve rights simply for being LGBT”, do you not realize that you can replace “LGBT” with “blacks” or “women” in that sentence and get your same point across?"

I didn't until I realized that you are putting words in my mouth to distract from what is being discussed. "Blacks" and "women" have nothing to do with this context. I never, ever said that blacks or women should be denied anything that has been discussed thus far. You are pulling a classic rhetorical move by changing the subject.

"After all, wasn’t isn’t people’s morality that told them women and blacks were inferior?"

We have amended the Constitution to rectify those historical errors. In time, LGBT marital rights may become another amendment.

"The gay rights movement is not about forcing a certain morality on anyone; no one is forcing you to stop being a bigot after gays are recognized the right to marry. It’s about removing barriers that prevent an entire group of people from pursuing personal happiness. Barriers that exist for *prejudiced* and unfounded reasons."

This is the classic martyrdom example of "everyone in the world is against me." It is utter bollix that injects emotion in place of reason. Furthermore, it results to personally attacking an opponent, another diversionary tactic. I have said this before, and I'll say it again, this time in caps to get my point across. I AM NOT ARGUING THAT LGBTS ARE LEADING IMMORAL LIFESTYLES. I AM NOT SAYING THAT LGBTS ARE EVIL, INHERENTLY INFERIOR OR ANYTHING OF THAT SORT.

I am saying that they don't get a "get out of jail free" pass when it comes to marriage until they have logically, consistantly proven why they should deserve these same benefits... Why they deserve to fundamentally alter federal law, and subsequently, societal perceptions and understandings as to the nature of what constitutes a marriage.

It's like attempting to build a new home design without blueprints or testing the foundations; a poorly thought out result will occur. I am not wholly unreceptive to LGBT marriage, but I have yet to see clearly thought-out, practical approaches towards truly equal marriage. In fact, to get this across clearly, I say the following; I will vote in favor of LGBT marriage as soon as clearly thought out, practical and rationally-based reasoning is presented.

From my perspective, the real question should not be,"is gay the new black?" Regardless of whether you are black, gay, or both, you are still largely marginalized in this country and that is the REAL problem that we need to focus on.

Taking the time out of your god-given life to express that gay IS NOT the new black or that gay IS the new black is simply facilitating a crabs in a bucket mentality. Social justice is social justice and as a person who is of the dominant group (in terms of overrepresentation in positions of power and influence) across most of my various identities, I often get disheartened observing marginalized people in this country poster for the attention.

Get your mind right people!

I used to think Jason Gillman was the worst writer for CM Life.

He still is. Stop trying to take that away from him, think before you write next time.

Gregory,

The LGBT community aren't asking for rights "simply because they are LGBT." They are asking for protection against discrimination for BEING LGBT. I think it is insulting that you are comparing their struggle for equality to "throwing a tantrum for a new car from your parents." The fact is, level-headed reasoning has been given for giving LGBT couples and individuals the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts--it is the opposition that does not use any logic to form their arguments.

"LGBT are not covered for their sexual preferences by default under the US Constitution because the concept of “Freedom” was not widely interpreted as the ability to marry anyone you wanted simply for loving them."

How can "Freedom" be interpreted for heterosexual couples, who CAN marry anyone they wanted simply for loving them, while LGBT couples can't? This is not a sound argument because it is not inclusive. Freedom is only defined in the US Constitution through the First Amendment--freedom of press, religion, etc.

"Right now, stammering out something to the effect of, “Well, [name of country] has these rights and I want them, too!” as evidence in support of these rights just comes across as petulant. There are no “free rides” in this country; demonstrate clearly why LGBTs deserve the same rights as heterosexually married couples and the American people will consider the issue as presented."

This is not at all what LGBT groups have done. They have plenty of evidence as to why they deserve these rights just like everyone else:

-They are directly and indirectly discriminated against for being LGBT (reasoning for discrimination protection laws)

-There is no scientific, researched-based, evidence to prove that they are bad parents, they would destroy the fabric and sanctity of marriage, or that they have the power to choose their sexual orientation (reasoning for allowing them the right to adopt children, allowing them the right to marry, and most other arguments against the validity of sexual orientation)

-Allowing LGBT couples to marry does not affect heterosexual marriage and will not lead to bestiality (slippery-slope arguments are not valid)

-And as far as your arguments go, if LGBT couples and individuals must prove reasoning for having rights and being able to marry--what have heterosexual couples done to prove that they deserve the rights that they already have? If we are talking about fulling interpreting "Freedom", this model exhibits double-standards which cannot exist in a country that promotes and values Freedom. This is why the Civil Rights Act was made--because a group of people were being given a different set of standards that another was given that prohibited their personal freedoms--including the pursuit of happiness and basic human rights.

LGBT individuals are not whiny babies that just want to have rights because others have rights. They are mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, and brothers that want to have a chance to fulfill their dreams, have families, love, and be happy just like anyone else.

“No race, social class, or orientation will EVER go through the same struggles blacks went through.”

Ignorance, ignorance, ignorance.
I do understand the fact that you have gone through some hard times and have experienced prejudice in this country. But I don't have any sympathy for this ignorant comment due to the following:

-LEGALLY I cannot be married to a person who I pour my heart out to

-If my partner is in the hospital and dieing, I have NO legal rights to help make decisions. And after they die, I will have no legal documentation bonding me to the possessions that we have worked hard for: house, car, adopted children, income, property... etc

-I am PROVEN to CURRENTLY be the MOST HATED people in the ENTIRE WORLD. There are places in the world that I cannot travel to. This is simply due to the fact that there are laws that still make homosexuality (which are naturally the cards I have been dealt, just like the color of anyone's skin) PUNISHABLE BY DEATH!


I have gone through hard times. I have be beaten up for being who I am. I have been ridiculed, tormented, insulted and disregarded. I have had articles in CM-life protesting and belittling the very essence of my being. It must feel good to live in a country where you have rights. Guess what... I don't know what that feels like.

"How about deserving rights simply for being human? Why are LGBT’s less deserving of the same rights you enjoy?"

Beyond the unenforceable rules of the United Nations, there are no universal laws regarding human conduct. With that being said, the Constitution of the United States is the ultimate arbiter in matters pertaining to rights within the context of this article; namely, America.

LGBTs do have basic rights, as covered by the Bill of Rights. They have the same ability to vote, to own firearms, to not have unlawful search and seizures, to name but a few automatic American rights. What they are asking for is a diverse society to uniformly change what it means to be married. LGBT are not covered for their sexual preferences by default under the US Constitution because the concept of "Freedom" was not widely interpreted as the ability to marry anyone you wanted simply for loving them.

For the record, I am firmly opposed to amending the United States Constitution to solve this issue. However, if LGBT's want the same benefits as married heterosexuals, they need to put this issue to the American people in the form of proposed legislation changes at the state-level. Not everyone will agree with these proposals, but that's the way true democracies work; you need to accept the fact that not everyone will agree with you 100% of the time.

LGBTs are not, in spite of the brash comments of the above poster, "less deserving" of marriage rights. I do feel, however, that LGBTs are not automatically entitled to marry for simply being LGBT. This issue has denigrated into one of extreme entitlement, where people are automatically granted benefits rather than demonstrating why they should deserve state-funded benefits.

It's the difference between throwing a tantrum for a new car from your parents and illustrating why you deserve said car by level-headed reasoning and raising your own money through hard work. Right now, stammering out something to the effect of, "Well, [name of country] has these rights and I want them, too!" as evidence in support of these rights just comes across as petulant. There are no "free rides" in this country; demonstrate clearly why LGBTs deserve the same rights as heterosexually married couples and the American people will consider the issue as presented.

"LGBT advocates demand to be socially respected and embraced by means of redefining morality."

Redefining morality? Whose morality? You cannot be taken seriously if you're suggesting that there is a *single* morality on earth, in a country, or even in a community. Morality is an *individual* device, and for that matter, completely arbitrary depending on what culture or time period you are from.

Gregory, please understand this: rights are only granted after they've been taken away. Same-sex marriage is specifically *forbidden* in many states, gay couples are *forbidden* to adopt in many states, and gays are *forbidden* to serve openly in the military. When you say something confused and offensive like "Frankly, I do not feel that LGBT’s automatically deserve rights simply for being LGBT", do you not realize that you can replace "LGBT" with "blacks" or "women" in that sentence and get your same point across? After all, wasn't isn't people's morality that told them women and blacks were inferior?

So, do you now see why it's not healthy for the government to legislate morality? The gay rights movement is not about forcing a certain morality on anyone; no one is forcing you to stop being a bigot after gays are recognized the right to marry. It's about removing barriers that prevent an entire group of people from pursuing personal happiness. Barriers that exist for *prejudiced* and unfounded reasons.

It isn't about favoring one morality over another. Who someone sleeps with should have no bearance on how they are treated by other people. Why is it okay to discriminate against someone because they like people of the same gender. It's not okay to discriminate based on color, creed, or religion. Why sexual orientation?

It's really ridiculous that CM Life published this. What is the point? To have some girl whine about how blacks have been persecuted. And now since gays are discriminated against, she wants so say "My situation is worse."

Life is what you make of it. Obviously being black didn't stop Obama from becoming president.

Every race has experienced discrimination throughout history. Stop complaining about it. If you want things to change, it starts with your attitude.

"Frankly, I do not feel that LGBT’s automatically deserve rights simply for being LGBT."

How about deserving rights simply for being human? Why are LGBT's less deserving of the same rights you enjoy?

The comparison isn't supposed to be direct, OBVIOUSLY.
But, just like ethnicity, except for bisexuals, no one is able to CHOOSE their sexual orientation. They can choose to be repressed and miserable or accepting and out, but they do not choose their orientation.
And, just like black people, gay people are marginalized and alienated in American society.

The point of a comparison is not for the 2 things being compared to be the same thing... there would be no point in making a comparison. But, there are similarities between the history of black culture and gay culture in relation to society as a whole that can be compared.

I suggest that you probably just don't like the comparison because you, on some level, just do not like being compared to gay people. To what degree, I cannot know, but to deny any similarities that make the 2 comparable is pretty blind.

Saying "gay is the new black" is not literal. Just like saying "Orange is the new Red," it does not mean the 2 are the same thing. Orange is orange and Red is red. But, there is a comparison in how they are treated and understood.

@mike :

If you think that gay people haven't been lynched and dragged behind vehicles, you haven't read much.

It's not as bad as the 50's but hey, we were both persecuted then.

This is so... meaningless.

The point of the comparison is to say "it was once acceptable to be racist, but that's not okay" and now in many places it is still acceptable to be homophobic, but that's not okay. Whether or not gays and blacks have/had the same type of discrimination is so irrelevant to anything important. This just reads like some twisted "whose group suffered more" competition... but that is entirely not the point. Discrimination is still discrimination.

@Gregory
Please look up moral relativism. Morality varies depending where you are, it is not singly defined. You may think that your set of morality is the correct one, but that is not the case. Believe it or not, LGBT people are not trying to dismantle YOUR set of morality. Gays are not looking for special privilege just for being LGBT, they are looking for basic rights of being human.

Also, both women's suffrage and civil rights were enacted at the federal level... so if you had relied on these "fair, democratically-decided decisions" by the states, women and black rights would still be in the dark ages

By continuously referring to yourself as an "oppressed minority," a group as a collective whole will never rise above self-imposed segregation. Constantly advocating separatism in the form of "awareness" groups and mono-ethnic only organizations (i.e. "Asian Awareness" or a "Black fraternity/sorority") ironically makes the problem worse. I do not see "black," or "African-American;" I see American, period.

LGBT advocates demand to be socially respected and embraced by means of redefining morality. I am not a Catholic; I am not a church-goer, but I do feel that this is what is at stake... Changing the language of a problem when the reality does not suit your goals. Frankly, I do not feel that LGBT's automatically deserve rights simply for being LGBT. If the people of this country decide that we should grant these rights, then so be it... I am not one to argue with fair, democratically-decided decisions of that sort. But demanding others to favor one morality over another "goes both ways," and LGBT advocates need to understand that.

They relate to each other because they both involve human rights, freedoms and discrimination. Gays aren't trying to steal attention from you, they just want the same rights and respect that you want.

There is no need to feel threatened by gays. You should go out and meet some, they are people exactly the same as black people are people, and they deserve the same freedoms that you deserve.

This article is an example of the type of oppression homosexuals go through. People like you who think that they "sometimes" have the ability to choose who they are attracted to you. I ask you, what kind of men are you attracted to? Most people could answer this question with pretty limiting characteristics. What most people could not answer is why they like tall, short, thin, large, or any other characteristic of person. This is because it is the result of body chemistry and the culture that person comes from. Just like you cannot choose the physical appearance of the person you are attracted to, neither can a homosexual.

I am surprised that such a closed-minded, naive, view would be published in our paper. All minorities experience oppression in one way or another and this article making light of the current state of discrimination against homosexual people in America is simply ignorant.

There is a difference between choosing who you're having sex with and choosing what you are attracted. The latter is not something you can control. I can live the lifestyle of a heterosexual man, but I will not magically forget that I love every bit of a man.

We won't ever have a shotgun pointed at our face for entering a "straight-only" space? Is that so? You do realize that LGBT[QI], the "gays," encompasses transexuals, right? We DO have those problems. We DO get turned away from stores, housing, employment, bathrooms, .... ; we get SHOT for being present. And our murderer's defense when in court? "It smiled at me." And they get reduced jail time. Our cases are often not investigated, we're homeless, we're rejected, we're looked at with derision and loathing. I am a bisexual black transexual woman, so yes, try that again.

Black people aren't the only people who have suffered in the past. And now our rights are being denied and there is this attempt to make a "separate but equal" with our classes. And we don't CHOOSE to be LGBT, I didn't wake up one morning and decide "I feel like defying gender norms today... and tomorrow I won't." It's biological. Not a choice.

Ms. Keaton,
I too as a Puertorican man who grew up in the “Ghetto” of Spanish Harlem back when drug abuse was rampant and now living with my partner, who is black know discrimination THREE fold: Poor, Minority and GAY.
1). People do NOT BECOME Heterosexual any more than Gays Choose to be discriminated and called Fag**ts. Anymore than you can “become” gay tomorrow.
2). You state you have an understanding of both sides of the issues of being gay. I sincerely doubt that. Unless you “plan” on becoming gay, in which case I know of several LGBT organizations to further your understanding.
3)The issue isn’t whether one is Heterosexual,Gay,Black,White or Bisexual its about having the same rights as everyone else.
4). Unlike Mike who wrote ” No gay person will ever have a shotgun put in there face for entering a straight only restaraunt” I believe and know they (and I) have. Gays have not only been gay bashed, denied housing, shot,and murdered, but we have been denied our right to love openly and freely,with the 1000-plus marital bennefits afforded Straights.
5) I quote you ” I can see why some people might equate being black with being gay”.Maybe one day you will truly see, along with the others who try to withhold rights from so many so that we can all learn to live together in real understanding.

That is the most important part.

My ethnicity is Jewish and I am a lesbian. I've been called a "fag" and a "kike". My grandparents fled pogroms in Russia emigrating to the United States so they could be free from discrimination. When my mother was five years old, Christian boys grabbed her jump rope, tied it around her neck, hung her from a basketball hoop and told her she killed Jesus, and they were going to kill her.

When I worked for a university and I came out as a lesbian, I was physically assaulted, gay bashed daily, ridiculed, given extra work that no one else had to do, told I could not take time off, and blocked from getting any other jobs. After two years of this abuse, I quit, and I was told by the head of the department that he knew why I was quitting, and there was nothing he could do about how I was treated on the job.

Bigotry has nothing to do with the targets of hate. Bigotry is about the people who hate. They believe they are superior to anyone of different ethnicities, religions, genders or sexuality. They use their illusion of superiority to justify denying anyone they don't agree with, accept, approve of or tolerate the same constitutional rights they have.

Heterosupremacist tyrannical theocRATS are just as wrong as white supremacist tyrannical theocRATS, and are usually the same people, though not always. Unfortunately today African-Americans, whose families have experienced white supremacist hate for centuries, have joined with heterosupremacists to justify denying gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans unconditional constitutional rights, because just as the with white supremacists, they believe that only the people they agree with, approve of, tolerate or accept are entitled to unconditional constitutional equality.

It is not so much that gay is the new black, but that blacks are the new heterosupremacist tyrannical theocRATS, including President Obama, whose administration has blocked the Supreme Court from hearing cases on Don't Ask Just Kick the Gays Out, and he has discharged more than 420 gay men and lesbians from the military. His administration has blocked Supreme Court challenges to the Discriminatory Offensive Marriage Attack (DOMA), equating consensual adults same-gender marriage with heterosexual men raping their daughters (incest).

Candidate Obama supporters voted for him for president, and voted to deny equal constitutional rights for gay and lesbian Americans in Florida, Arkansas, Arizona and California. Many of the people who voted against unconditional constitutional equality were also African-American.

Maybe if you tried to do unto others as you would have others do unto you, we could all live Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream. Unfortunately Dr. King's daughter has joined the heterosupremacist tyrannical theoCRATs.

Wow, Mike, do you have some memory issues. "no race, social class, or orientation will EVER go through the same struggles that blacks went through." - Now I'm not saying that black people didn't suffer, but didn't Jewish people suffer too, for example? Yes, their slavery was a lot longer ago. That doesn't make it any less real. And please, may I remind you of a little thing called the Holocaust? There were many people targeted during that time, it's true, but there's a reason people associate the Jews as its main victims. I'm pretty sure that it's reasonable to say that Jewish people have suffered just as much as black people.

"No gay person will ever have a shotgun put in there face for entering a straight only restaraunt, nor will a gay person ever be told that they are not allowed to use the straight only public restroom or drink from the straight only water fountain.. gays can sit where they want, eat where they want, and get an education wherever they want." Oh, wow. If you really believe that, then you need a serious wake-up call that I can't give you here. I doubt there's enough space in this box, and I seriously don't have that much time on my hands to deal with your small-mindedness.

To the OP - "with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual". No, I'm sorry, you are so very wrong there. People can*NOT* choose. Sometimes they can *DENY* their sexuality, and live lives based around that denial, but that is not the same as choosing to be heterosexual. That is choosing to *PRETEND* to be heterosexual, for whatever reason, while being homosexual. And no one, ever, should have to feel like they have to do that. It's comments like yours that help further the issues LGBT people have with gaining equality. It's comments like yours that help further the narrow-mindedness these people have to face when they try and live their lives.

Discrimination is discriminstion, and it's wrong. Whether it's because of race, sexuality, gender or religion. No one's persecution is worse than anyone else's, because ultimately, it destroys part of the people it's directed against, no matter why they're being discriminated against. No one victim of discrimination suffers more than another. And to say so is just wrong.

"No gay person will ever have a shotgun put in there face for entering a straight only restaraunt, nor will a gay person ever be told that they are not allowed to use the straight only public restroom or drink from the straight only water fountain.. gays can sit where they want, eat where they want, and get an education wherever they want."

Mike,
I agree that 'Gay is the new Black' is a bit of a misnomer, but my partner and I have been asked to leave businesses because we're perceived to be a couple. We've also had the apartment manager ask us not to use the pool because it 'upsets' our straight neighbors.
I've also lost my job because the 'wrong' person at work found out I was gay.

But the primary difference between the Black experience and the Gay experience in America is, the Civil War aside, that the rights of Black people have never been decided by the majority at the ballot box.

@Drew Very well said Drew! i couldnt agree more

I would like to say one thing.."GAY IS NOT A SWITCH THAT YOU CAN TURN ON AND OFF!" It really makes me laugh when heterosexuals honestly believe that we choose to be gay or that we can choose heterosexuality. Gimme a break! Did you choose to be black? Can u change it as you will to blue,purple or green? I am a black gay male and I can say that "gay" is the new "black". We say this because blacks were discriminated for the color of their skin. The color of my skin is the "rainbow flag" and I get discriminated because of this. If you cannot see that sexual orientation and ethnicity are are a valid comparison,then I suggest you re-asess what black people fought for..which is equality not only for themselves but for everyone who is oppressed. Those are the facts.

Your argument that "with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual" makes us sound like we can change at will. Certain species of tropical fish can change their sex if there is a shortage of one or the other; if there is a shortage of the opposite sex around, will I choose to enter into a relationship with them?

A wise black woman by the name of Melissa Harris-Lacewell once told us that "Black is the old black and the gay is the old gay. But civil rights are civil rights."

While it may not be correct to equate the experiences of these two groups exactly, it is certainly fair enough to say that both groups have long been the target of discrimination, abusive hate crime and murders. Just as the black community is protected against discrimination under the law, so should any minority group, including the gay community, whose lives and wellbeing are endangered by the majority.

"I cannot change myself from being black to another ethnicity while, with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual."

Ms. Keaton,

This sole sentence proves that you are an ignorant. Please inform yourself before writing for a newspaper. With this kind of stuff, you are not only misinforming hundreds of readers, but you are also stressing the type of bigoted falsehoods used by those who oppose human dignity and equality under the law. YOU CANNOT CHOOSE YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

"No race, social class, or orientation will EVER go through the same struggles blacks went through."

Right. No one else.

Ever.

Not the Japanese.
Who we locked up.

Not women.
Who will soon be able to celebrate one hundred years of voting.

Not the Jews.
Who were slaughtered millions upon millions.

Not the Native Americans.
Whose land we took, and killed thousands.

Not Muslims.
Who, ahem, randomly get pulled out of line at airports.

Not the gays.
Who have been killed for being gay, have been kicked off properties for--gasp!--kissing their significant other in public.

No. No other racial group, social class, or orientation will ever go through what black people went through. Ever.

Let me take a minute and give you some full disclosure: I am a white, heterosexual, Protestant Christian male, from an uppermiddle class family. I'll make it through all right. I can't relate--in the slightest--to the discrimination of any of these oppressed group. If I try the closest I can possibly get is, "Yeah, like, when I was in high school, a girl didn't call me back 'cause I liked Star Trek." Very similar. Here's the thing, though, I don't try too. I'll never be able to identify with the worldview of a minority group. Never. Because I am the majority, I am the man. And I'm sorry. Sorry about the actions carried out in the name of my religion. In the name of my country. In the name of white people everywhere. Because I don't care who got it worse, I'm just pissed they got it at all.

So here's a patronizing, holier than thou, white-man-knows-best handing out some free advice you never asked for: what's the point?

Seriously? What's the point?

What's the point of arguing which minority group has had the most depressing existence ever? Who gets the most in reparations, apologies, and sympathy? The point isn't who has it worse, because everyone has it bad, but what can we do change it? How can we work together to change minds, hearts, and attitudes about equality? What arguments need to be made and actions to be done to get everyone on an equal footing? Not, we had it worse so fight your damn battles.

Oh, and check your data, homosexuality isn't a choice. Either is being black. Or Japanese. Or a Native American. Or a Jew.

Wow i can't believe some of the arguements that i just read on here. Whetether or not u can change being gay or not is not a valid arguement for this topic.. this topic is simply about the recent comparison that gay IS the new black.. there will NEVER be a "new" black! no race, social class, or orientation will EVER go through the same struggles that blacks went through. I agree that gay bashing is a civil rights issue that needs to be addressed but the comparison is rediculous. No gay person will ever have a shotgun put in there face for entering a straight only restaraunt, nor will a gay person ever be told that they are not allowed to use the straight only public restroom or drink from the straight only water fountain.. gays can sit where they want, eat where they want, and get an education wherever they want.

Personal sexuality is a complex issue, in part because of how it is created in each of us, both through nature(body chemistry) and nurture(culture). However in both cases, discrimination based on sexual orientation is inexcusable and wrong.

LGBT individuals are a broad and diverse people, coming from all walks of life, in all shapes and forms. However for many, only one word is necessary to describe anyone with that set of characteristics: gay. In that same way, "black" is used as a blanket term for those with African descent. Because both communities can be prejudged solely off of their physical appearance, sexual discrimination is somewhat like ethnically-based prejudice.

As for those who see this as a "choice" to be one persuasion or another, consider the following argument: What other personal preferences should one need to change in order to avoid discrimination? Should you change your political views in order to dine at a certain restaurant? Would speaking a certain language be enough to let someone walk down a street at night without fear of assault? If I knew practicing in my religion openly would put me in danger, should I abandon it for fear of my well being?

I agree, discrimination based upon aspects of one's self that one was born with is absolutely wrong. However, should people have to set their personal beliefs to the list of those that a cultural majority finds acceptable?

We all saw Michael Jackson change from a black man into a white man. Your suggestion that gay people can switch orientation implies it can be done at a whim. Studies again and again show it is vanishingly rare that sexual orientation would change. Many would say any who can choose are actually bisexual. Orientation is an inherent internal and unchosen aspect to a person. We have reliable treatments to bleach or indeed darken skin but none which in any way have any proof can change sexual orientation. Your argument is flawed and belittles gay men and women. The seeming inability to see this shows your inherent bias against gay people.

..."sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual."
This is a falsehood.

"I cannot change myself from being black to another ethnicity while, with homosexuality, sometimes people can choose to become heterosexual"

Wow, CM-Life. As a heterosexual white woman, I am appalled that you would actually publish this ignorance. Have you been under a rock all this time that gay equality has been being fought for. People CANNOT choose. Shame on you.