To Move or Not to Move?

  • metta

    Posts: 39168

    Feb 25, 2013 3:23 AM GMT
    To Move or Not to Move?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/Amelia/to-move-or-not-to-move_b_2717431.html
  • Lukehiker

    Posts: 161

    Feb 25, 2013 6:47 AM GMT
    Not to Move. Stay; teach your community that you are human too and their bigotry is no better than what the KKK and Neo Nazi's do.

    I grew up 2 miles from a KKK cross; every time they tried to bring to light their beliefs, they were shouted out and given what was coming. Now we need to do the same for groups like the NOM.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2013 10:33 AM GMT
    It depends on the situation. I live in the south for 43 years. Birmingham, al....to be exact. I was the son of a black baptist civil right leader/pastor. Married/divorced father of two....gainfully employed, openly gay and partnered with a white guy. It was hard, but it was my life, and when it was time for me to move on , I left.....it has to be right for you. Yo should never run, but you should never stay to prove a point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2013 12:58 PM GMT
    The article is about their "kids" and LGBT discrimination mostly in school, but does it establish what their ages are? It's one thing for us adults to tough it out in the face of right-wing bigots, and wave the gay flag in hostile communities, but kids are different.

    I think they deserve a friendly and nurturing environment as they're growing up, not conflict, tensions & hate directed against them. Let them return to such communities as adults to reform them if they choose, but as children they will have greater happiness and develop more normally in a supportive & loving community.

    After all, straight parents often choose communities based on the rating of the school system and the overall quality of life there. I see no reason why the parents of LGBT children shouldn't include the issue of gay community acceptance, too. Fighting the good fight against discrimination is a noble adult pursuit, but try to leave the LGBT children out of it. Their own adult turn will come soon enough. For now, protect them from traumatizing, and even dangerous encounters with religious & political homophobes and their adherents.
  • metta

    Posts: 39168

    Feb 25, 2013 4:09 PM GMT
    ^
    her son came out at age 7 last year so he is probably 8 years old. There is a link in the article to the previous article.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/Amelia/when-your-7-year-old-son-announces-im-gay_b_1277910.html
  • Lukehiker

    Posts: 161

    Feb 25, 2013 9:37 PM GMT
    ART_DECO saidI think they deserve a friendly and nurturing environment as they're growing up, not conflict, tensions & hate directed against them. Let them return to such communities as adults to reform them if they choose, but as children they will have greater happiness and develop more normally in a supportive & loving community.


    I agree; but there is also an underlying message: we are letting you get away with it. As well, it will provide evidence, after a while, that "no gays are here." A major part of the campaign is explaining that gay men and women are everywhere, every walk of life, every community, every religion. Its part of the humanizing aspect here; they are right next to you and they are just like you.

    Similar things have been tried for other groups: blacks and Muslims where I grew up. One town was downright NASTY to some blacks, so they moved away, and now that town is worse. In my own hometown, our Muslim population(a not insignificant 1000+) was being denied a permit to build a mosque, and many lost jobs in the fight over it and left; the impression around town was "we won and drove those 'people' out" always with the same inflection on "people."

    The fight for equality as it is right now is aimed at proving that: yes, we ARE people. Running away doesn't help anyone, least of all the children. What about the Next child who is gay in that school? Or the next? Is it truly better to shoulder that burden onto another, who may be unable to properly respond if anything happens? If you have the money to move away, why do so if you can use that money to protect your child And future children?