If you only focus on reports from our lazy media organizations, you might be tempted to view "gayborhoods" in places like Chelsea, West Hollywood, Chicago, San Francisco, or South Beach as havens of depravity. Nothing but rich white men hopelessly addicted to various drugs and spreading sexually transmitted-diseases from warm body to warm body.
Of course, real gay communities are far from that outrageous. Many gays and lesbians move to "gay" cities or neighborhoods, spend time with gay friends, form gay sporting teams and clubs, because they want to feel safe. They are sick of being outsiders, they are sick of being assaulted on myriad levels. They just want to be themselves, without fear or repercussion. To do such scandalous things as hold their partner's hand in public without fear of bodily harm. These are not people who want to be the poster children for Pat Robertson. They are honest, hardworking, decent human beings who help make these cities better and more vibrant. I don't begrudge them. But I do question the assumption among many gay and straight Americans that the only place for gays to end up is in a gay ghetto. That this is our ideal.
More than once people have told me that there is no reason a gay man should live in a red city or a red state. That I should move where I will have an easier time, where I will not have to be afraid, where I can be myself. It's a very tempting idea, to find a city that is tolerant of GLBT citizens and to be free to be whatever you are. Maybe if I had the financial resources and if I had no restrictions or family, I would move to a better place. I can't blame anyone who does so. They have earned their money, they've had hard lives, they want some peace.
Unfortunately, regardless of how safe you think your area may be, we all live in the same country run by the same man and the same political party. You can't legislate support for gays and lesbians. Your actions speak louder than your words. I wasn't and will never be a big fan of President Clinton. But I can't deny that his general demeanor in public, in his speeches, in most of his political campaigns, was of tolerance for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans. For the most part, he did not stir up hostility towards us for political gain. President Bush is a different story. Bush has never called for the public to beat or kill homosexuals, and he doesn't deserve all the blame for violence towards gays and lesbians. These types of things happen no matter who is in the White House. But Bush has repeatedly singled us out as being different. As being a threat to tradition, to the family. He has ostracized us and stigmatized us and he has supported and enabled politicians and evangelists who have used extreme, divisive, and sometimes dangerous language against us (Tom Coburn, Rick Santorum, James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, and so on). The Republican Party seized on same-sex marriage to help shield the mess they have made of this country, and while I will never believe that Bush won the election because of equal marriage rights (he won because of 'the war on terror'), it was successfully used as a tool to distract the media and to disorient and fire up the public.
Many people do not understand that these attacks are not about marriage. Marriage is a smokescreen for various zealots to rally against tolerance of the very existence of a gay person. We are supposed to hide away, deeply ashamed, or to "go straight" before we go to hell. These nationally televised, widely circulated, rarely questioned attacks and lies and false statistics against gays are having an effect.
Hate crimes against gays up 32% in NYC.
The last one has a comment that sums this situation up for me:
Zablotny said he loves living in South Beach “because it’s such a diverse place.” But he said lately “there has been more anti-gay verbal harassment happening.”
If you think these are isolated incidents, keep in mind that many GLBT citizens do not report harrassment or violence, because they think they will draw attention to themselves and the police won't help them. Also keep in mind that these are supposed to be tolerant and accepting areas for gays. For the most part, I'm sure they are, but these beatings and assaults just prove that you cannot flee from homophobia. The idea that all you have to do to live a happy life is move to a liberal city or supportive state is increasingly naive. Aside from fear for your life, your basic civil rights can easily be stripped away. In "liberal" California, there is a very likely chance that domestic partnerships and co-parent adoption will be banned through the ballot box. You think that can't happen in California? Just think to yourself how many people will get in that booth and believe that all they are doing is "protecting marriage." They will have no idea what they are truly destroying, and the media will only encourage their ignorance.
My point is not to attack these cities or states, or to claim that their tolerance is a facade. And if you are living in a situation where you are constantly harrassed, taunted, or beaten, then you should get the hell out as soon as you can. My point is that I think it is time for gays and lesbians to stop buying into the fantasy that we should all move to gay ghettoes and everything will always be alright. I think that kind of delusion is one of the major reasons so many GLBT citizens don't bother to vote. They assume that as long as they have their friends, or their local clubs, or supportive local laws, nothing that happens outside of their circle jerk will seriously affect them. I think that more gay Americans should consider staying in purple and red states, consider moving back to purple or red cities and states, and fighting at the local level to repeal restrictive laws and elect supportive people. You may not be able to come out to everyone, but you can probably find people you can trust and slowly break down the barriers of prejudice. People who will truly look out for you instead of just tolerating you because you have money to spend and then spitting as soon as you leave the room. You may not be able to get someone in office who supports equal marriage rights, or even anti-discrimination laws, but if you can replace some lunatic who thinks all gays are pedophiles who will burn in hell, then it's worth it. If you do want to stay in a blue city or a blue state, I think you should at the very least take a close look at your comfort zone to gauge just how comfortable it really is. At the very least, become more involved in the progressive community in your area, if there is one, and see whether there is a community who are devoted to fighting hateful legislation, instead of merely a group of egomaniacs who are fighting over official titles and can't be trusted with the money.
There is no true safe haven for gays and lesbians in America. There are beacons of tolerance in the ugliest state and chalk marks on the sidewalks of the most liberal paradise. We cannot garner equality simply by flocking in droves to New York or California or Washington. We cannot expect Florida to stop its steady march to the theocrats solely because some of us go to South Beach or Wilton Manors and spend money. We can't forget about the gays and lesbians we are leaving behind in Tennessee, Mississippi, South Dakota, Idaho, Alabama, Arkansas, on and on, who do their best to organize and to fight back in spite of next to no money or support. We have to win our rights one state at a time, in every state. Maybe that's a pipe dream, but the alternative is to continune the path of apathy, infighting, and increasing intolerance that seems to be taking over in bigger cities, all while ignoring the many places where we could make a difference if we just had more to work with. It's time to stop being either/or, time to stop assuming that all gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender citizens can or will end up in one or two big cities. We are everywhere, and it's time that America admitted it.
Important point, James.
Not really a comment on--just a comment. But one of my favorite places to live was in SLC, UT (yup). Sure, it was wingnuttia incarnate and I had to threaten the missionaries every once in a while. But on any given Sunday I'd have an entire mountain to myself. More importantly, I found the community around 9th and 9th (which included the gay community, but also many of the straight non-mormon progressives) really warm. I found the people at 9th and 9th in many ways more active in protecting their rights (and the rights of UT--this was when Clinton was fighting with Leavit over Southern UT) than the people I had just lived with in SF. And the folks there--again, gay and straight--were always a lot better about matching their words and their deeds to protect/support others in the community.
Posted by: emptywheel | July 18, 2005 at 15:21
I've heard a lot of good things about Salt Lake City and their mayor. Some bad things to of course (their city council recently rejected a domestic partner plan), but many good things.
Posted by: James | July 18, 2005 at 16:07
You make an important point. There is a good tactical reason for gay people to stay in "Red" America: I have read that people who claim to actually know a gay person are much more likely to support gay rights, no matter what their usual politics are. However, I think it is a big thing to ask people who are being mentally, physically, or legislatively abused to stand and fight, put themselves and their happiness at greater risk, when there are relatively safer and more friendly places they could go. Even downtown Salt Lake City is better than some godforsaken small town. People who stay and fight (as opposed to stay and stay hidden in the closet) are true heroes, but you're right . . . we could stall stand to be more heroic, no matter where we are.
Posted by: David | July 18, 2005 at 20:33
David, that's why I said that people who are in serious danger should leave. But my point was that more and more in America there is no safe haven. For instance, if the amendment passes in California next year, gay couples will have no more legal protections in California than they do in Kentucky. Meanwhile, there are many states like Idaho that are torn between being moderate and being overtaken by lunatic theocrats, and every dollar or vote could help make a difference.
I think that when gay men or lesbians move to a big city some of them assume they will become happier and more fulfilled, and that is sometimes not the case. There is so much class warfare, peer pressure, rejection based on appearance or on race, etc. If someone is moving to a big city because of a great job, because they have found love, because their lives are in danger, then I can't blame them for going. If they are going because they think moving to a big gay ghetto will automatically give them happiness or be safe, then I think they may be setting themselves up for disappointment.
Posted by: James | July 18, 2005 at 21:23
As usual, another thoughtful, thought full post James.
I do have to say that, as I say to my oldest friend from life, going back to kindergarten, who is gay in Dallas - are you an IDIOT??
But then one remembers that only two years ago a gay man in West Hollywood was beaten with baseball bats so badly his acting career is gone and he now has to depend on his family for care and a place to live. And the Los Angeles Jury deadlocked on hate crimes charges. So the "gay ghettos" aren't all that safe.
Four years ago, my writing partner and I (both straight, he's been married to the same woman for 30 years now) went out to an Italian restaurant while his wife was traveling on business. As with any good restaurant, it's run by gays in a neighborhood of LA that is "tolerant." As we walked out to go to our car, a carload of teenage morons from San Bernardino (Red California) drove past and gave us some "anti-gay verbal abuse". We were laughing/sad/outraged at the same time. Laughing that they were such white trash morons, sad that it was happening in our part of town which should be a "no-go" zone to those morons, outraged that this bullshit was happening to friends of ours.
The little dipshits were lucky the light changed when it did, so the rock I threw only bounced off the trunk rather than going through the rear window.
How I would have loved to kick the ass of whichever one of the morons had gotten out.
I guess my story pretty much proves the accuracy of everything you said.
Posted by: TCinLA | July 19, 2005 at 02:40
A very thoughtful post (as always), James. As one of those queer folks living in a Purplish state (NC), I live in a very Blue, progressive city and love it. You are right, where there is an out gay community in these states in flux, the tolerance begins to fan out into the suburbs, out into the counties. Having lived in NYC and Durham, I find a sense of community here that is more relaxed and personally open; it's a Southern thing.
You have to win people over one at a time, on a personal level. That is the only way to counter what these people hear in bigoted churches, and in local watering holes, and in the right-wing media. It's a constant political battle though, working to keep allies in office and the balance of wingnuts in check. Inattention to voting and the issues by gay folks and their allies can mean the difference between a marriage amendment/adoption rights bill/domestic partners legislation (name your civil rights issue) passing or not.
In a deep Red state, however, I really don't know what to advise people; there's only so much open hostility you can take. My wife Kate is from Alabama, and that state is definitely not going to turn purple any time soon. I visited Birmingham recently, and that a good portion of that queer population is scared, closeted and know they are marginalized. And that's a city multiple times larger than Durham, NC. (See my post, Is Alabama really the worst place to be a gay person in Bush's America?)
Posted by: pamindurham | July 19, 2005 at 08:12