Seats at the table for gays and other minorities

[Behind the Aegis]

Someone else started a very good thread about whether Blacks had a place at the table in the progressive movement. It made me wonder about the place gays have at this imaginary table. We have a group who are for equal rights for all people, then we have the more vocal group, in my opinion, that want gays to forgo equal rights, until a future date, still to be determined.

Then I thought, what about other minorities, like Jews, Muslims, the disabled, etc. What roles do members of these groups play? What about people who share multiple identities that are getting pulled in many directions? Is it really more important to set aside rights for one group at the expense of others? Where do we draw the line?

Thoughts?

On edit: This is not a "who has it worse" thread or "bash white people" thread. Just a discussion about groups that are sometimes lower on the ladder (this can include women's issues).

[Dookus]

1. for now

gays aren't at the table as much as they serve as the cater waiters :)

Actually, I feel that both parties give their constituencies just enough to keep them from revolting. That means all minority groups tend to get very little.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Good point

But as in the other thread, if you read it, might gays feel the same as some African-Americans? Meaning, we are tired of lip-service, either put up or we are taking our votes elsewhere or no where. I remember how disappointed I was when I saw reactions to the election and how gays and, in a small part, other minorities were BLAMED for the loss.

Your first line, about the cater waiters, was a HOOT! Made me smile! :) Thanks!

[Dookus]

3. well

the problem is, and always is, that unless the other party's offering us more, there's nowhere to go. And I don't think the republicans are about to get in a bidding war with the Dems over gay rights.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Very true!!

But what if a viable third party (or fourth) started to gain ground support? All the people that say Democrats will leave if we don't adopt a more 'conservative' stance, don't realize that the same move could cause a huge number of Democrats to leave the party. Has it really become a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation?

I guess I am just really frustrated at this point with the Party.

[Dookus]

6. our system

simply doesn't allow for the rise of third or fourth parties.

In winner-take-all elections, there will be two parties. If, say, the Green's were ascendent and got 10 percent of the vote, then Republicans would hold every seat.

You cannot split one side and win any seats.

It *IS* possible for a centrist third-party to gain some control, but I doubt a centrist party would be terribly concerned with gay rights issues.

[xchrom]

4. there's no ground swell for an equal rights movement

in the general population.{there should be -- just noting the landscape}

the seats at the table and the level of active importance given to them has to resonate with the activity ''in the streets''.

i.e. during the sixties -- african americans moved their own agenda forward through mass mobilization.
hard for a politician to turn that down if they are thinking of capitalizing on it.

of course african americans weren't taking no for an answer either -- and that helped a lot.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Perhaps that is what we need!

We need a good strong progressive leader, in all of the communities in question. Then, perhaps we will see some real changes!

[jdots]

7. I believe that the table contains all the above.

I don't know about rural areas but citys have a good full table.I sure would like to see some younger people at the table .After this stolen election there was some finger pointing that no one seems to be able to trace back to the roots,not saying it was implanted but it sure was timed poorly when all of us felt so hurt.
Since that time alot of people here have become very sensitive and there has been some infiltration to disrupt the common spirit.