Kevin Marshall's America
Protestors chant at homosexuals during Capital Pride 2011. (Photo: Philip Kamrass, Albany Times Union)
Yesterday was Capital Pride 2011, Albany’s annual showcase for its gay community to show its unity and strength in the face of what is, despite what many insist to the contrary, the last acceptable form of discrimination.
Naturally the parade drew its protestors. They came last year and they will be there next year, espousing their rhetoric and quoting passages that they believe justifies their insecurities and hate. They’re small in number and marchers are encouraged to ignore their voices and instead embrace the many, many more who are there to cheer them on and encourage them to be who they are: gay, bisexual, transgender, or as I was in last year’s march, a heterosexual ally.
Yet our efforts to dismiss them underscore a very salient point that their presence makes: in the United States, and even in liberal New York, it’s okay to hate gays.
Many will point to increased scrutiny and say otherwise. The last few years have seen an uptick in sensitivity in sports, entertainment, and media towards the homosexual community, with major stars like the NBA’s Kobe Bryant having to apologize for shouting a homosexual slur during a game. Still, it’s not enough evidence to state conclusively that we’re anywhere near where we need to be when it comes to embracing and accepting homosexuals. For every person that accepted Kobe Bryant’s apology, there were many more crying foul and accusing people of being overly sensitive. Many of these detractors cite common use of the word as their defense and state that the meaning isn’t to disparage homosexuals per se, as if that makes calling someone “f*****” any more acceptable than using the word “n*****” as a perjorative.
Words, however, don’t speak nearly as much to our shortcomings as actions, and the protestors at Capital Pride 2011 displayed that. Call them a small handful of kooks if you must, but their presence and the degree to which they are tolerated speaks volumes. Imagine, if you will, a white supremacist group demonstrating at a visible portion of the Puerto Rican Day Parade in New York City yesterday.
Now tell me they don’t matter.
As New York finds itself in the waning days of the legislative session, it has a chance to make history but, more importantly, can help steer us away from discrimination that’s been perpetuated by thousands of years of abuse, torture, and oppression of homosexuals. They can pass, if they have the courage to stand up to bigots like Ruben Diaz who dresses his hatred in scripture and calls it concern, a bill that will legalize gay marriage.
Sadly, part of me thinks that it won’t happen. I have met too many Assembly and Senate members who are afraid to upset one of their own on minor issues to say with certainty that this will happen. There aren’t enough selfless individuals, and not enough courage, for them to do the right thing. On the other hand, I do believe that it’s possible, but only withincreased external pressure.
Which is why in these last few days we need to contact our represenetatives in the Assembly and the Senate – particularly those that are “undecided” – and urge them to get this on the floor and pass it. Tell them that when it comes to civil rights, “not yet” is not only inexcusable, but indistinguishable from “never will.”
Share it!
21 Responses to A matter of Pride: Bigotry and discrimination still on display, and embraced, in Albany
Leave a Reply to Michelle Cancel reply
STALK ME
Well done. There will always be bigotry, but we need to keep pushing it to the margins.
Can’t let the crazies win.
Great post, Kevin! Well said. One note – the bill has historically strong support in the Assembly and has passed every session since it was introduced. The Senate is our problem.
Ms. Take – Doy! My bad and fixed (I need to stop writing these during my lunch breaks).
What it should underscore is that it’s okay in this country and state to disagree with each other… without being branded as something or subject to name calling.
Call your representative and speak your mind not what someone wants you to say… and if that means changing the present law/legal definition of marriage, ten so be it, because that what it will take to make it so.
Damm, if I could only write like you! Thanks for writing what some of want to say, but don’t have the skills.
Sure…there were idiots their to embrace and worship their own prejudice and bigotry. But they are not who you have to worry about. The REAL cause for concern is the much much larger group who agree with them but are NOT idiots and have too much class and respect to parade (for lack of a better term) their hatred in the face of the hated. See, it’s those folks…the ones who smile and shake your hand while the fire burns in the back of their eyes…they’re the ones keeping the precious bill from passing…not the kooks with nothing better to do on a Sunday afternoon.
Said it before and I’ll say it again…give it up, gays. Quit trying to lower yourselves to our level and, instead, show us up by having mature, committed relationships without the benefit of marriage. Take the high road. `Cause you can’t win this one yet.
Don’t give me the “you didn’t say that to Martin Luther King” crap either. `Cause there were dudes like Dr. King in 1890 and 1920 and 1940. And they WERE told that. And, sadly, it was right. Point is…people eventually do realize their personal failings as humans. Just takes time…
As someone that went to catholic school for many MANY years, i find it strange that these people use religion to justify their hate.. maybe its just me but i dont remember ever learning that it was ok to hate people in such a way.. I was always taught you are suposed to treat ALL people with kindness.. I dont think God or Jesus would really approve of the way that these people are behaving.. If your gonna hate someone stop hiding behind things like religion and just admitt to the real reason. Sure, everyone has an opinion but lets stop with the excuses already..
I don’t have a bone to pick with your general sentiments here, but this sentence troubles me: “degree to which they are tolerated speaks volumes” – you think political toleration is a bad thing?
ggiliano…I think hate speech is not free speech or anything that should be allowed in the name of “political tolerance”. I listened to these freaks at the rally yesterday and they were not just espousing a point of view in a civilized manner. they were calling for the “death of sodomites”, and shouting all manner of invective with a portable loud speaker. I agree with Kevin, this is not an exercise in free speech, it is nothing more than pure unbridled hatred wrapped in a religious veneer. These people are nothing more than a local version of the westboro baptist crowd and honestly, even if I were straight I would have found them sickening.
Who defines what is unacceptable speech?
Thank you Kevin. Well said.
10. – Who defines what is unacceptable speech? The Supreme Court, remember them? They said you can scream all sorts of sexist obscenities at soldiers’ funerals courtesy of the Westboro Baptist Church. Go America!
Good post Kevin. You articulate the views of many who couldn’t show their support or don’t have a forum to speak.
Good job in drawing a link to public expressions of bigotry and the issue of same-sex marriage. As long as any group is denied the rights that the rest of the population enjoys, the less reprehensible society views singling out that group for public derision. Worse, hate crimes can be more commonplace against a group that society considers “second-class citizens” and thus lesser human beings than the rest of us. The fight isn’t over with legalizing gay marriage in New York, though; DOMA prevents any would-be NY gay couple from enjoying recognition of those rights on the federal level.
I don’t necessarily feel as if the struggles of the gay community equate to the struggles of minorities before, during, and shortly after the Civil Rights movement. I agree that there should be equality for all. And it does upset me when I see minorities speak out against equal rights for all. After all, it wasn’t too long ago when interracial marriages were illegal. But I feel as if comparing these struggles to those of the past is like “Apples to Oranges”.
I have to say I was dismayed when the guy with the bullhorn and his homosexuality created STD’s sign (what? last I checked straight people and even faithfully married people contracted STD’s-from unfaithful or drug abusing partners but I digress-twas not their sin that brought the disease) ANYWAY bullhorn dude picked on a kid in our group of walkers. By kid I mean still in highschool kid and bullhorn man started shouted horrible things specifically to him about how he was going to burn in hell blah blah blah. It was really hard not to flip him the bird. I found it entirely un-christian. Anyway I hope to secure those last two votes and have done with this non-sense about marraige equality.
Sorry GetReal, but you may want to read a bit more about the treatment of gay people over the years in this society. Incarceration, institutionalization, horrendous medical/psychiatric “treatment”, estrangement from families, and yes murder. I am not one that feels the need to quantify oppression, but disregarding this horrendous treatment historically and currently is very dangerous. Hate crimes resulting in severe injury and death have risen dramatically over the past two years. Violence against any group based on physical realities, skin color, orientation, gender is wrong. Sanctioning second class status to those groups is equally wrong and sorry, rises to the level of civil rights.
MMA: No
Gay Marriage: Yes
Only in NY.
Jeffrey, I understand that there have been unspeakable crimes and actions carried out against gay people. But I just don’t think it’s on level with what native americans and african americans in this country were put through. I’m not trying to mitigate any tragic events. It’s just my $.o2.
I firmly believe there should be equal rights for all. Plain and simple. I find it appalling that our elected officials find it necessary and acceptable to determine what two consenting adults can do.
None you’re right about that NY thing… although I’m wonder if they really say no to anything, other than cutting back on spending, ethics reform, etc etc etc..
Whether or not you are ranking the injustices suffered of one minority group against another, injustice is injustice. The arguments against LGBT equality are erroneous in much the same way the arguments against racial minority equality and women’s equality were(are) erroneous.
In all cases, those arguments are almost always based in misunderstanding, misplaced fear, and prejudice.
It’s all a matter of civil rights, no matter what minority group you are talking about, and regardless of how you might compare their levels of persecution.
Victoria, nice post, but it’s a matter of LAW and if they don’t change the LAW, it’s a moot point.